HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-14-17 Meeting PacketDraft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
Minutes
City Of Edina, Minnesota
Heritage Preservation Commission
Edina City Hall
Tuesday, October 10, 2017 at 7:00 p.m.
I. Call To Order
Vice Chair Loving called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. Roll Call
Answering roll call was Vice Chair Loving and members Moore, Sussman, Kelly, Nymo, Blake,
Mondry, and student member Seeley. Absent were members Birdman and student member Sipes.
Staff Liaison, Emily Bodeker, and Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel were also in attendance.
III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda
Motion was made by Moore and seconded by Blake to approve the meeting agenda. All
voted aye. The Motion carried.
IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes
Motion was made by Sussman and seconded by Kelly to approve the minutes from the
September 12th, 2017 Heritage Preservation Commission meeting. All voted aye. The
motion carried.
V. Community Comment: None
VI. Reports/Recommendations
A. Certificate of Appropriateness: 4622 Edgebrook Place
Staff Liason Bodeker explained that the Certificate of Appropriateness requested included changes to
the front entry area. The proposal included replacing the front door, adding a transom window, add
brackets on either side of the entry and removing the existing columns on either side of the existing
garage and replacing them with brackets to match the entry. She provided detail of the proposal,
pointing out that altered front entry will not have an adverse effect on the historic significance and
integrity of the subject property or surrounding homes.
Applicant Present- Annie Bishop
Motion was made by Sussman and seconded by Kelly to approve the Certificate of
Appropriateness request for changes to the front entry subject to the plans presented. All
voted aye. The motion carried.
B. Grandview Green Project Presentation
Katie Clark Sieben presented the Grandview Green project concept. She went through her project
presentation and answered the HPC’s questions.
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
C. Comprehensive Plan-Commission Tool Kit
Staff liaison Bodeker presented the Comprehensive Plan tool kit. She asked the Commission to go
through the information and come to the November meeting ready to discuss and ready to start filling
out the spreadsheet with updated goals and policies for the updated Comprehensive Plan.
D. 2017 Certified Local Government (CLG) Annual Report
Staff liaison Bodeker introduced the 2017 CLG Annual Report. She reminded the Commission that
because Edina is a Certified Local Government city, the HPC is required to submit an annual report to
the Minnesota Historical Society. Bodeker let the Commission know that she would send in the signed
report this week.
E. Westgate Theater-4500 France Avenue
Preservation Consultant Vogel explained that the Westgate Theater property is within the scope of the
44th & France small area plan. The Westgate Theater property was surveyed at the reconnaissance level a
few years ago but there was not enough information at the time for the Board to make a finding of
heritage landmark eligibility. Consultant Vogel asked the Commission to direct him to complete an
intensive survey of the property.
Motion was made by Nymo and seconded by Blake to direct Preservation Consultant Vogel
to complete an intensive Survey of the Westgate Theater property, 4500 France Avenue.
All voted aye. The motion carried.
VII. Correspondence And Petitions: None
VIII. Chair And Member Comments: None
IX. Staff Comments: October 13th the Urban Land Institute is holding UrbanPlan for Public
Officials program. Bodeker explained that the event is full but people are able to stop by to
observe. The event is taking place at Braemar Golf Course from 8:00 am to 4:00 pm.
Bodeker also gave the Commission an overview of her experience at the State Preservation
Conference and the Open Streets event.
X. Adjournment: 8:30 p.m.
Motion made by Nymo to adjourn the October 10th, 2017 meeting at 8:10 p.m. Motion
seconded by Blake. Motion carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Emily BodekerEmily BodekerEmily BodekerEmily Bodeker
Comprehensive Plan: Chapter Assessment Tool
Chapter Title: Heritage Preservation
Commission Name: Heritage Preservation Commission
1 Adopt a Heritage Preservation Plan.
2 Integrate heritage preservation planning with other city planning for community development.
3 The City will develop strategies and establish priorities for the restoration and rehabilitation of City-owned heritage resources.
4 Participate in the federal-state-local government heritage preservation partnership.
a The City Council will adopt and maintain a Heritage Preservation Plan as part of the city's Comprehensive Plan.
b All preservation program activities will be carried out in a manner consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
c The City will use the Hertiage Preservation Plan to establish policies, procedures, and plans for managing the preservation, protection, and use of
significant heritage resources.
d
The HPB will conduct research to augment, refine, and revise the thematic study units outlined in the 1999 historic context study. The Heritage
Preservation Plan will establish local historic contexts and the Heritage Preservation Commission will undertake research to revise and update
these study units.
e Heritage preservation planning will be integrated with other city planning for community development. [See planning goals.]
f The City will provide the HPC with the resources needed to prepare and implement the comprehensive Heritage Preservation Plan.
g Because comprehensive planning is a continuous cycle, the HPC will periodically review and update the Heritatge Preservation Plan.
h The City will continue to participate in the Certified Local Government (CLG) program and cooperate with neighboring cities in other communities
in developing their heritage preservation plans.
1 Identify significant heritage resources worthy of consideration in community planning.
a The HPC will carry out a comprehensive survey of heritage resources within the City limits and maintain and inventory of all properties recorded.
b The City will create heritage resources survey plans that advance the goals and priorities of the historic contexts. The HPC will establish survey
goals and priorities based on historic contexts.
c All of the information gathered on each property surveyed will be placed in the permanent records of the Heritage Preservation Board. The
results of the surveys will be systematically gathered, recorded, and made available to those responsible for heritage preservation planning.
d
Update the information in the heritage resources inventory and convert it to electronic form so that it can be manipulated, used, and retrieved
quickly. In addition, the inventory should be made adaptable for Geographic Information System (GIS) users. Provide greater access to the
information generated by the heritage resources survey by investing in the techological infrastructure that will bring the informaiton to all users
who obtain information through the Internet.
e Make the heritage resources inventory data adaptable for Geographic Information Systems (GIS) users and map the location of heritage resouces
and their relationship to other layers of information.
f All surveys will be prepared by personnel who meet the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards (or other applicable
qualification standards) with in their professional field.
Program Area III: Evaluation of Heritage Resources
Goals
Policies
Goals
Policies
Program Area I: Preservation Planning
Program Area II: Identification of Heritage Resources
Goals
1
The HPB will evaluate all properties identified by the ongoing Heritage Resouces Survey and issue a finding of significance for those properties
that meet defined crieteria. All heritage resources identified by survey will be evaluated for heritage landmakr eligibility using established criteria
applied within historic contexts.
2 The HPC will maintain an accurate up-to-date inventory and map depicting the heritage resources evaluated as significant, including all properties
designated or determined eligible as heritage landmarks.
a
For each property evaluated as eligible for heritage landmark designation the HPC will issue a finding of significance with a report documenting its
location, ownership, date of consctruction, the relevant historic context and property type, and the criteria on which the finding of significance
was based.
b HPC determinations of landmark eligibility may be provisional and it may be necessary for the HPC to conduct additional studies prior to initiating
the landmark nomination process.
1 Significant heritage resources will be rezoned as designated Edina Heritage Landmarks or Landmark Districts.
a The HPC will norminate historic properties and districts for designation as Heritage Landmarks or Landmark Districts by the City Council.
b A landmark nomination study will be completed for each property nominated; the nomination study will located and identify the subject
property, explain how it meets one or more of the landmark eligibilty criteria, and make the case for historic significance and integrity.
c Each landmark nomination study will include a Plan of Treatment that will develop recommend property-specific approaches to design review
and treatment.
d Except in extraordinanry circumstances, the HPC will not conimate a property for landmark designation without the consent of the owner.
e The City may, upon recommendation by the HPC, nominate properties for listing in the National Register of Historic Places.
1 Protect Heritage Landmarks and Landmark Designation Districts through design review and compliance with heritage preservation standards.
2 Carry out public facilities maintenance and construction projects in such a manner that significant heritage preservation resources are preserved
and protected.
3 Encourage voluntary compliance with historic preservation treatment standards.
a The City will take all necessary steps to ensure that no significant heritage preservation resources is destroyed or damaged as a result of any
project for which a Certificate of Appropriateness has been issued by the HPC.
b The City will cooperate develop partnerships with property owners in to 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.
c The HPC will work with the Planning Commission and other citizen advisory boards and commisisons to ensure that heritage resource
management issues are taken into account in planning for residential, commercial, and industrial development projects.
d
Every application for a preliminary plat, rezoning, conditional use permit, or variance from the zoning code that may affect an Edina Herigate
Landmark or Landmark District will be reviewed by the HPC, which will advise the Planning Commission whether or not the requested action will
have an adverse effect on a significant heritage preservation resource.
e
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 Resources, Landmark District or Historic Building heritage resource to another location, recording it
prior to demolition, or by salvaging architectural elements or archaeological data for reuse or curation.
Policies
Program Area IV: Designation of Heritage Landmarks
Goals
Policies
Program Area V: Design Review and Compliance
Goals
Policies
f In cases involving permits that are not subject to design review, a reasonable effort will be made to preserve and protect important historical,
architectural, archaeological, and cultural features.
g
The HPC 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 heritage preservation resources are taken into account in
project planning.
h The HPC and its staff will review voluntary requests for design review of work that would not ordinarily be subject to regulation under the
heritage preservation ordinance and issue Certificates of Appropriateness for projects that meet preservation treatment standards.
i The City will consider development of financial incentives for the preservation, rehabilitation, and adaptive use of heritage resources, such as
including but not limited to tax incentives, grants, loans, easements, and subsidies.
j The HPC and its staff will help project planners identify the historical, cultural, aesthetic and visual relationships between heritage landmarks and
their surroundings.
1 The City will Provide the public with information on about heritage preservation resources and public history education activities. in the city.
a The HPC will design and maintain a high-quality heritage preservation page on the City's website.
b The City HPC will develop facilities and programs that interpret heritage resources for the public.
c
The HPC will make a special effort to reach out to and involve partner with the Edina Historical Society, neighborhood groups, and other
community organizations with shared particular interests in the preservation, protection, and use of historic properties or community
development to develop effective public education and outreach programs.
d All current heritage resource survey reports and other studies carried out under the auspices of the HPC will be published or made available to
the public through other appropriate media surch as the City's website.
***New language is underlined; text found in the 2008 plan that should be deleted is indicated by strikethrough***
Policies
Program Area VI: Public Education and Outreach
Goals
1
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION
REVISED HERITAGE PRESERVATION PLAN
PREPARED BY ROBERT C. VOGEL
PRESERVATION PLANNING CONSULTANT
JUNE 1, 2017
This document outlines the goals and policies recommended for inclusion in the 2018
Comprehensive Plan Update. The recommendations are organized by the six program areas:
preservation planning, identification of heritage resources, evaluation of heritage resources,
designation of heritage landmarks, design review and compliance, and public education and
outreach. Most of the goals/policies have been adapted from the Heritage Preservation chapter
contained in the 2008 Comprehensive Plan, where they were presented as goals, policies, and
“action” items. They have been reorganized to reflect the Secretary of the Interior’s standards
and guidelines for historic preservation as well as current professional practices in heritage
preservation planning New language is underlined; text found in the 2008 plan that should be
deleted is indicated by strikethrough.
Program Area I: Preservation Planning
Goals:
1. Adopt a Heritage Preservation Plan.
2. Integrate heritage preservation planning with other city planning for community
development.
3. The City will develop strategies and establish priorities for the restoration and
rehabilitation of City-owned heritage resources.
4. Participate in the federal-state-local government heritage preservation partnership.
Policies:
a) The City Council will adopt and maintain a Heritage Preservation Plan as part of the
city’s Comprehensive Plan.
b) All preservation program activities will be carried out in a manner consistent with the
comprehensive plan.
c) The City will use the Heritage Preservation Plan to establish policies, procedures, and
plans for managing the preservation, protection, and use of significant heritage resources.
2
d) The HPB will conduct research to augment, refine, and revise the thematic study units
outlined in the 1999 historic context study. The Heritage Preservation Plan will establish
local historic contexts and the Heritage Preservation Commission will undertake research
to revise and update these study units.
e) Heritage preservation planning will be integrated with other city planning for community
development. [see planning goals]
f) The City will provide the HPC with the resources needed to prepare and implement the
comprehensive heritage preservation plan.
g) Because comprehensive planning is a continuous cycle, the HPC will periodically review
and update the Heritage Preservation Plan.
h) The City will continue to participate in the Certified Local Government (CLG) program
and cooperate with neighboring cities and other communities in development their
heritage preservation programs.
Program Area II: Identification of Heritage Resources
Goals:
1. Identify significant heritage resources worthy of consideration in community planning.
Policies:
a) The HPC will carry out a comprehensive survey of heritage resources within the city
limits and maintain an inventory of all properties recorded.
b) The City will create heritage resource survey plans that advance the goals and priorities
of the historic contexts. The HPC will establish survey goals and priorities based on
historic contexts.
c) All of the information gathered on each property surveyed will be placed in the
permanent records of the Heritage Preservation Board. The results of surveys will be
systematically gathered, recorded, and made available to those responsible for heritage
preservation planning.
d) Update the information in the heritage resources inventory and convert it to electronic
form so that it can be manipulated, used, and retrieved quickly. In addition, the inventory
should be made adaptable for Geographic Information Systsem (GIS) users. Provide
greater access to the information generated by the heritage resources survey by investing
in the technological infrastructure that will bring the information to all users who obtain
information through the Internet.
3
e) Make the heritage resources inventory data adaptable for Geographic Information
Systems (GIS) users and map the location of heritage resources and their relationship to
other layers of information.
f) All surveys will be prepared by personnel who meet the Secretary of the Interior’s
Professional Qualifications Standards (or other applicable qualification standards) within
their professional field.
Program Area III: Evaluation of Heritage Resources
Goals:
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;
All heritage resources identified by survey will be evaluated for heritage landmark
eligibility using established criteria applied within historic contexts.
2. The HPC will maintain an accurate, up-to-date inventory and map depicting the heritage
resources evaluated as significant, including all properties designated or determined
eligible for designation as heritage landmarks.
Policies:
a) For each property evaluated as eligible for heritage landmark designation the HPC 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.
b) HPC determinations of landmark eligibility may be provisional and it may be necessary
for the HPC to conduct additional studies prior to initiating the landmark nomination
process.
Program Area IV: Designation of Heritage Landmarks
Goals:
1. Significant heritage resources will be rezoned as designated Edina Heritage Landmarks
or Landmark Districts.
Policies:
a) The HPC will nominate significant historic properties and districts for designation as
Heritage Landmarks or Landmark Districts by the City Council.
4
b) 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.
c) Each landmark nomination study will include a Plan of Treatment that will develop
recommend property-specific approaches to design review and treatment.
d) Except in extraordinary circumstances, the HPC will not nominate a property for
landmark designation without the consent of the owner.
e) The City may, upon recommendation by the HPC, nominate properties for listing in the
National Register of Historic Places.
Program Area V: Design Review and Compliance
Goals:
1. Protect Heritage Landmarks and Landmark Districts through design review and
compliance with heritage preservation standards.
2. Carry out public facilities maintenance and construction projects in such a manner that
significant heritage preservation resources are preserved and protected.
3. Encourage voluntary compliance with historic preservation treatment standards.
Policies:
a) 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 HPC.
b) The City will cooperate develop partnerships with property owners in to developing plans
for their properties, advise them about approached used in similar preservation projects,
and provide technical assistance in historic property rehabilitation and restoration
treatments.
c) The HPC will work with the Planning Commission and other citizen advisory boards and
commissions to ensure that heritage resource management issues are taken into account
in planning for residential, commercial, and industrial development projects.
d) 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 HPC, which will advise the Planning Commission whether or not
the requested action will have an adverse effect on a significant heritage preservation
resource.
5
e) 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 heritage resource to
another location, recording it prior to demolition, or by salvaging architectural elements
or archaeological data for reuse or curation.
f) In cases involving permits that are not subject to design review, a reasonable effort will
be made to preserve and protect important historical, architectural, archaeological, and
cultural features.
g) The HPC 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 heritage preservation
resources are taken into account in project planning.
h) The HPC and its staff will review voluntary requests for design review of work that
would not ordinarily be subject to regulation under the heritage preservation ordinance
and issue Certificates of Appropriateness for projects that meet preservation treatment
standards.
i) The City will consider development of financial incentives for the preservation,
rehabilitation, and adaptive use of heritage resources, such as including but not limited to
tax incentives, grants, loans, easements, and subsidies.
j) The HPC and its staff will help project planners identify the historical, cultural, aesthetic,
and visual relationships between heritage landmarks and their surroundings.
Program Area VI: Public Education and Outreach
Goals:
1. The City will Provide the public with information on about heritage preservation
resources and public history education activities in the city.
Policies:
a) The HPC will design and maintain a high-quality heritage preservation page on the City’s
website.
b) The City HPC will develop facilities and programs that interpret heritage resources for
the public.
c) The HPC will make a special effort to reach out to and involve partner with the Edina
Historical Society, neighborhood groups, and other community organizations with shared
6
particular interests in the preservation, protection, and use of historic properties or
community development to develop effective public education and outreach programs.
d) All current heritage resource survey reports and other studies carried out under the
auspices of the HPC will be published or made available to the public through other
appropriate media such as the City’s website.
Preserving America’s Heritage
ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION
Protecting Historic Properties:
A CITIZEN’S GUIDE TO
SECTION 106 REVIEW
g ppProtecting Historic Properties
WWW.ACHP.GOV
Protecting Historic Properties 1
Th e mission of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
(ACHP) is to promote the preservation, enhancement, and
productive use of the nation’s historic resources and advise the
President and Congress on national historic preservation policy.
Th e ACHP, an independent federal agency, also provides a
forum for infl uencing federal activities, programs, and policies
that aff ect historic properties. In addition, the ACHP has a key
role in carrying out the Preserve America program.
Th e 23-member council is supported by a professional staff in
Washington, D.C. For more information contact:
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 803
Washington, D.C. 20004
(202) 606-8503
www.achp.gov
CONTENTS
4 What is Section 106 Review?
5 Understanding Section 106 Review
8 Determining Federal Involvement
12 Working with Federal Agencies
14 Infl uencing Project Outcomes
18 How the ACHP Can Help
20 When Agencies Don’t Follow the Rules
21 Following Through
22 Contact Information
About the ACHP
COVER PHOTOS:
Clockwise, from top left: Historic Downtown Louisville,
Kentucky; Section 106 consultation at Medicine Lake,
California; bighorn sheep petroglyph in Nine Mile Canyon,
Utah (photo courtesy Jerry D. Spangler); Worthington
Farm, Monocacy Battlefi eld National Historic Landmark,
Maryland (photo courtesy Maryland State Highway
Administration).
2 ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION Protecting Historic Properties 3
Proud of your heritage? Value the places that refl ect your
community’s history? You should know about Section 106
review, an important tool you can use to infl uence federal
decisions regarding historic properties. By law, you have a voice
when a project involving federal action, approval, or funding
may aff ect properties that qualify for the National Register of
Historic Places, the nation’s offi cial list of historic properties.
Th is guide from the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
(ACHP), the agency charged with historic preservation
leadership within federal government, explains how your voice
can be heard.
Each year, the federal government is involved with many projects
that aff ect historic properties. For example, the Federal Highway
Administration works with states on road improvements, the
Department of Housing and Urban Development grants funds
to cities to rebuild communities, and the General Services
Administration builds and leases federal offi ce space.
Agencies like the Forest Service, the National Park Service, the
Bureau of Land Management, the Department of Veterans
Aff airs, and the Department of Defense make decisions daily
Introduction
Dust from vehicles may
affect historic sites in
Nine Mile Canyon, Utah.
(photo courtesy Jerry D.
Spangler, Colorado Plateau
Archaeological Alliance)
about the management of federal buildings, parks, forests, and
lands. Th ese decisions may aff ect historic properties, including
those that are of traditional religious and cultural signifi cance
to federally recognized Indian tribes and Native Hawaiian
organizations.
Projects with less obvious federal involvement can also
have repercussions on historic properties. For example, the
construction of a boat dock or a housing development that
aff ects wetlands may also impact fragile archaeological sites and
require a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit. Likewise, the
construction of a cellular tower may require a license from the
Federal Communications Commission and might compromise
historic or culturally signifi cant landscapes or properties
valued by Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations for
traditional religious and cultural practices.
Th ese and other projects with federal involvement can harm
historic properties. Th e Section 106 review process gives you
the opportunity to alert the federal government to the historic
properties you value and infl uence decisions about projects that
aff ect them.
Public Involvement Matters
4 ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION Protecting Historic Properties 5
In the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA),
Congress established a comprehensive program to preserve
the historical and cultural foundations of the nation as a
living part of community life. Section 106 of the NHPA is
crucial to that program because it requires consideration of
historic preservation in the multitude of projects with federal
involvement that take place across the nation every day.
Section 106 requires federal agencies to consider the eff ects of
projects they carry out, approve, or fund on historic properties.
Additionally, federal agencies must provide the ACHP an
opportunity to comment on such projects prior to the agency’s
decision on them.
Section 106 review encourages, but does not mandate,
preservation. Sometimes there is no way for a needed project to
proceed without harming historic properties. Section 106 review
does ensure that preservation values are factored into federal
agency planning and decisions. Because of Section 106, federal
agencies must assume responsibility for the consequences of the
projects they carry out, approve, or fund on historic properties
and be publicly accountable for their decisions.
What is Section 106 Review?
Regulations issued by the ACHP spell out the Section 106
review process, specifying actions federal agencies must take to
meet their legal obligations. Th e regulations are published in the
Code of Federal Regulations at 36 CFR Part 800, “Protection of
Historic Properties,” and can be found on the ACHP’s Web site
at www.achp.gov.
Federal agencies are responsible for initiating Section 106 review,
most of which takes place between the agency and state and
tribal or Native Hawaiian organization offi cials. Appointed by
the governor, the State Historic Preservation Offi cer (SHPO)
coordinates the state’s historic preservation program and consults
with agencies during Section 106 review.
Agencies also consult with offi cials of federally recognized Indian
tribes when the projects have the potential to aff ect historic
properties on tribal lands or historic properties of signifi cance
to such tribes located off tribal lands. Some tribes have offi cially
designated Tribal Historic Preservation Offi cers (THPOs),
while others designate representatives to consult with agencies
as needed. In Hawaii, agencies consult with Native Hawaiian
organizations (NHOs) when historic properties of religious and
cultural signifi cance to them may be aff ected.
To successfully complete Section 106 review,
federal agencies must do the following:
gather information to decide which properties in the
area that may be aff ected by the project are listed, or are
eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic
Places (referred to as “historic properties”);
determine how those historic properties might be aff ected;
explore measures to avoid or reduce harm (“adverse
eff ect”) to historic properties; and
reach agreement with the SHPO/THPO (and the
ACHP in some cases) on such measures to resolve any
adverse eff ects or, failing that, obtain advisory comments
from the ACHP, which are sent to the head of the agency.
Understanding
Section 106 Review
The National Soldiers Monument (1877) at Dayton
(Ohio) National Cemetery was cleaned and
conserved in 2009 as part of a program funded
by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
(photo courtesy Department of Veterans Affairs)
Conservation
6 ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION Protecting Historic Properties 7
What are Historic Properties?
In the Section 106 process, a historic property is a prehistoric
or historic district, site, building, structure, or object included
in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places. Th is term includes artifacts, records, and remains
that are related to and located within these National Register
properties. Th e term also includes properties of traditional
religious and cultural importance to an Indian tribe or Native
Hawaiian organization, so long as that property also meets the
criteria for listing in the National Register.
Th e National Register of Historic Places
Th e National Register of Historic Places is the nation’s offi cial
list of properties recognized for their signifi cance in American
history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture. It
is administered by the National Park Service, which is part of
the Department of the Interior. Th e Secretary of the Interior
has established the criteria for evaluating the eligibility of
properties for the National Register. In short, the property
must be signifi cant, be of a certain age, and have integrity:
Signifi cance . Is the property associated with events,
activities, or developments that were important in the
past? With the lives of people who were historically
important? With distinctive architectural history,
landscape history, or engineering achievements? Does it
have the potential to yield important information through
archaeological investigation about our past?
Age and Integrity . Is the property old enough to be
considered historic (generally at least 50 years old) and
does it still look much the way it did in the past?
During a Section 106 review, the federal agency evaluates
properties against the National Register criteria and seeks the
consensus of the SHPO/THPO/tribe regarding eligibility. A
historic property need not be formally listed in the National
Register in order to be considered under the Section 106
process. Simply coming to a consensus determination that a
property is eligible for listing is adequate to move forward with
Section 106 review. (For more information, visit the National
Register Web site at www.cr.nps.gov/nr).
When historic properties may be harmed, Section 106 review
usually ends with a legally binding agreement that establishes
how the federal agency will avoid, minimize, or mitigate the
adverse eff ects. In the very few cases where this does not occur,
the ACHP issues advisory comments to the head of the agency
who must then consider these comments in making a fi nal
decision about whether the project will proceed.
Section 106 reviews ensure federal agencies fully consider
historic preservation issues and the views of the public during
project planning. Section 106 reviews do not mandate the
approval or denial of projects.
SECTION 106: WHAT IS AN
ADVERSE EFFECT?
If a project may alter characteristics that qualify a
specifi c property for inclusion in the National Register
in a manner that would diminish the integrity of
the property, that project is considered to have an
adverse effect. Integrity is the ability of a property to
convey its signifi cance, based on its location, design,
setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association.
Adverse effects can be direct or indirect and
include the following:
physical destruction or damage
alteration inconsistent with the Secretary of the
Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties
relocation of the property
change in the character of the property’s use or
setting
introduction of incompatible visual, atmospheric,
or audible elements
neglect and deterioration
transfer, lease, or sale of a historic property
out of federal control without adequate
preservation restrictions
8 ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION Protecting Historic Properties 9
If you are concerned about a proposed project and wondering
whether Section 106 applies, you should fi rst determine
whether the federal government is involved. Will a federal
agency fund or carry out the project? Is a federal permit,
license, or approval needed? Section 106 applies only if a
federal agency is carrying out the project, approving it, or
funding it, so confi rming federal involvement is critical.
Determining Federal
Involvement
IS THERE FEDERAL
INVOLVEMENT? CONSIDER
THE POSSIBILITIES:
Is a federally owned or federally controlled
property involved, such as a military base,
park, forest, offi ce building, post offi ce, or
courthouse? Is the agency proposing a project on
its land, or would it have to provide a right-of-way
or other approval to a private company for a project
such as a pipeline or mine?
Is the project receiving federal funds,
grants, or loans? If it is a transportation project,
frequent sources of funds are the Federal Highway
Administration, the Federal Transit Administration,
and the Federal Railroad Administration. Many
local government projects receive funds from the
Department of Housing and Urban Development.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency
provides funds for disaster relief.
Does the project require a federal permit,
license, or other approval? Often housing
developments impact wetlands, so a U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers permit may be required. Airport
projects frequently require approvals from the
Federal Aviation Administration.
Many communications activities, including cellular
tower construction, are licensed by the Federal
Communications Commission. Hydropower and
pipeline development requires approval from the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Creation of
new bank branches must be approved by the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Falls of Clyde, in Honolulu, Hawaii, is the last surviving
iron-hulled, four-masted full rigged ship, and the only
remaining sail-driven oil tanker. (photo courtesy
Bishop Museum Maritime Center)
Historic
10 ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION Protecting Historic Properties 11
Interstate 70 at the Georgetown-Silver Plume
National Historic Landmark, Colorado (photo
courtesy J.F. Sato & Associates)
Federal Funds
Sometimes federal involvement is obvious. Often, involvement
is not immediately apparent. If you have a question, contact the
project sponsor to obtain additional information and to inquire
about federal involvement. All federal agencies have Web sites.
Many list regional or local contacts and information on major
projects. Th e SHPO/THPO/tribe, state or local planning
commissions, or statewide historic preservation organizations
may also have project information.
Once you have identifi ed the responsible federal agency, write
to the agency to request a project description and inquire about
the status of project planning. Ask how the agency plans to
comply with Section 106, and voice your concerns. Keep the
SHPO/THPO/tribe advised of your interest and contacts
with the federal agency.
MONITORING FEDERAL
ACTIONS
The sooner you learn about proposed projects
with federal involvement, the greater your chance of
infl uencing the outcome of Section 106 review.
Learn more about the history of your neighborhood,
city, or state. Join a local or statewide preservation,
historical, or archaeological organization. These
organizations are often the ones fi rst contacted by
federal agencies when projects commence.
If there is a clearinghouse that distributes information
about local, state, tribal, and federal projects, make
sure you or your organization is on its mailing list.
Make the SHPO/THPO/tribe aware of your interest.
Become more involved in state and local decision
making. Ask about the applicability of Section 106 to
projects under state, tribal, or local review. Does your
state, tribe, or community have preservation laws in
place? If so, become knowledgeable about and active
in the implementation of these laws.
Review the local newspaper for notices about
projects being reviewed under other federal
statutes, especially the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA). Under NEPA, a federal agency
must determine if its proposed major actions will
signifi cantly impact the environment. Usually, if
an agency is preparing an Environmental Impact
Statement under NEPA, it must also complete a
Section 106 review for the project.
12 ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION Protecting Historic Properties 13
Th roughout the Section 106 review process, federal agencies
must consider the views of the public. Th is is particularly
important when an agency is trying to identify historic
properties that might be aff ected by a project and is considering
ways to avoid, minimize, or mitigate harm to them.
Agencies must give the public a chance to learn about the
project and provide their views. How agencies publicize
projects depends on the nature and complexity of the particular
project and the agency’s public involvement procedures.
Public meetings are often noted in local newspapers and on
television and radio. A daily government publication, the
Federal Register (available at many public libraries and online at
www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html), has notices concerning
projects, including those being reviewed under NEPA. Federal
agencies often use NEPA for purposes of public outreach
under Section 106 review.
Federal agencies also frequently contact local museums and
historical societies directly to learn about historic properties
and community concerns. In addition, organizations like
the National Trust for Historic Preservation (NTHP) are
actively engaged in a number of Section 106 consultations on
projects around the country. Th e NTHP is a private, non-
profi t membership organization dedicated to saving historic
places and revitalizing America’s communities. Organizations
Working with Federal Agencies
like the NTHP and your state and local historical societies
and preservation interest groups can be valuable sources of
information. Let them know of your interest.
When the agency provides you with information, let the
agency know if you disagree with its fi ndings regarding what
properties are eligible for the National Register of Historic
Places or how the proposed project may aff ect them. Tell the
agency—in writing—about any important properties that you
think have been overlooked or incorrectly evaluated. Be sure to
provide documentation to support your views.
When the federal agency releases information about project
alternatives under consideration, make it aware of the options
you believe would be most benefi cial. To support alternatives
that would preserve historic properties, be prepared to discuss
costs and how well your preferred alternatives would meet
project needs. Sharing success stories about the treatment or
reuse of similar resources can also be helpful.
Applicants for federal assistance or permits, and their
consultants, often undertake research and analyses on behalf of
a federal agency. Be prepared to make your interests and views
known to them, as well. But remember the federal agency is
ultimately responsible for completing Section 106 review, so
make sure you also convey your concerns directly to it.
Hangar 1, a historic dirigible
hangar at Moffett Field at
NASA Ames Research
Center, California
Learn About the Projectjjj
14 ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION Protecting Historic Properties 15
In addition to seeking the views of the public, federal agencies
must actively consult with certain organizations and individuals
during review. Th is interactive consultation is at the heart of
Section 106 review.
Consultation does not mandate a specifi c outcome. Rather, it
is the process of seeking, discussing, and considering the views
of consulting parties about how project eff ects on historic
properties should be handled.
To infl uence project outcomes, you may work through the
consulting parties, particularly those who represent your
interests. For instance, if you live within the local jurisdiction
where a project is taking place, make sure to express your views
on historic preservation issues to the local government offi cials
who participate in consultation.
Infl uencing Project Outcomes
You or your organization may want to take a more active
role in Section 106 review, especially if you have a legal or
economic interest in the project or the aff ected properties. You
might also have an interest in the eff ects of the project as an
individual, a business owner, or a member of a neighborhood
association, preservation group, or other organization. Under
these circumstances, you or your organization may write to the
federal agency asking to become a consulting party.
WHO ARE
CONSULTING PARTIES?
The following parties are entitled to participate as
consulting parties during Section 106 review:
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation;
State Historic Preservation Offi cers;
Federally recognized Indian tribes/THPOs;
Native Hawaiian organizations;
Local governments; and
Applicants for federal assistance, permits,
licenses, and other approvals.
Other individuals and organizations with a
demonstrated interest in the project may participate
in Section 106 review as consulting parties “due to
the nature of their legal or economic relation to the
undertaking or affected properties, or their concern
with the undertaking’s effects on historic properties.”
Their participation is subject to approval by the
responsible federal agency.
Residents in the Lower Mid-City Historic District
in New Orleans express their opinions about
the proposed acquisition and demolition of their
properties for the planned new Department of
Veterans Affairs and Louisiana State University
medical centers which would replace the facilities
damaged as a result of Hurricane Katrina.
ppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp ppppppppppppppppSpeak Uppp
16 ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION Protecting Historic Properties 17
When requesting consulting party status, explain in a letter to
the federal agency why you believe your participation would be
important to successful resolution. Since the SHPO/THPO
or tribe will assist the federal agency in deciding who will
participate in the consultation, be sure to provide the SHPO/
THPO or tribe with a copy of your letter. Make sure to
emphasize your relationship with the project and demonstrate
how your connection will inform the agency’s decision making.
If you are denied consulting party status, you may ask the
ACHP to review the denial and make recommendations to
the federal agency regarding your participation. However, the
federal agency makes the ultimate decision on the matter.
Consulting party status entitles you to share your views, receive
and review pertinent information, off er ideas, and consider
possible solutions together with the federal agency and other
consulting parties. It is up to you to decide how actively you
want to participate in consultation.
MAKING THE MOST OF
CONSULTATION
Consultation will vary depending on the federal
agency’s planning process and the nature of the project
and its effects.
Often consultation involves participants with a wide
variety of concerns and goals. While the focus of some
may be preservation, the focus of others may be time,
cost, and the purpose to be served by the project.
Effective consultation occurs when you:
keep an open mind;
state your interests clearly;
acknowledge that others have legitimate
interests, and seek to understand and
accommodate them;
consider a wide range of options;
identify shared goals and seek options that allow
mutual gain; and
bring forward solutions that meet the agency’s
needs.
Creative ideas about alternatives—not complaints—
are the hallmarks of effective consultation.
Section 106 consultation with an Indian tribe
GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGet InvolvedG
18 ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION Protecting Historic Properties 19
Under Section 106 review, most harmful eff ects are addressed
successfully by the federal agency and the consulting parties
without participation by the ACHP. So, your fi rst points
of contact should always be the federal agency and/or the
SHPO/THPO.
When there is signifi cant public controversy, or if the
project will have substantial eff ects on important historic
properties, the ACHP may elect to participate directly in the
consultation. Th e ACHP may also get involved if important
policy questions are raised, procedural problems arise, or if
there are issues of concern to Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian
organizations.
Whether or not the ACHP becomes involved in consultation,
you may contact the ACHP to express your views or to request
guidance, advice, or technical assistance. Regardless of the
How the ACHP Can Help
scale of the project or the magnitude of its eff ects, the ACHP
is available to assist with dispute resolution and advise on the
Section 106 review process.
If you cannot resolve disagreements with the federal agency
regarding which historic properties are aff ected by a project
or how they will be impacted, contact the ACHP. Th e ACHP
may then advise the federal agency to reconsider its fi ndings.
CONTACTING THE ACHP:
A CHECKLIST
When you contact the ACHP, try to have the
following information available:
the name of the responsible federal agency and
how it is involved;
a description of the project;
the historic properties involved; and
a clear statement of your concerns about the
project and its effect on historic properties.
If you suspect federal involvement but have been
unable to verify it, or if you believe the federal agency
or one of the other participants in review has not
fulfi lled its responsibilities under the Section 106
regulations, you can ask the ACHP to investigate. In
either case, be as specifi c as possible.
A panel of ACHP members listen to comments
during a public meeting.
Collecting Commentsggggggg
20 ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION Protecting Historic Properties 21
A federal agency must conclude Section 106 review before
making a decision to approve a project, or fund or issue a
permit that may aff ect a historic property. Agencies should not
make obligations or take other actions that would preclude
consideration of the full range of alternatives to avoid or
minimize harm to historic properties before Section 106
review is complete.
If the agency acts without properly completing Section 106
review, the ACHP can issue a fi nding that the agency has
prevented meaningful review of the project. Th is means that,
in the ACHP’s opinion, the agency has failed to comply with
Section 106 and therefore has not met the requirements of
federal law.
A vigilant public helps ensure federal agencies comply fully
with Section 106. In response to requests, the ACHP can
investigate questionable actions and advise agencies to take
corrective action. As a last resort, preservation groups or
individuals can litigate in order to enforce Section 106.
If you are involved in a project and it seems to be getting off
track, contact the agency to voice your concern. Call the SHPO
or THPO to make sure they understand the issue. Call the
ACHP if you feel your concerns have not been heard.
When Agencies Don’t
Follow the Rules
After agreements are signed, the public may still play a role in
the Section 106 process by keeping abreast of the agreements
that were signed and making sure they are properly carried out.
Th e public may also request status reports from the agency.
Designed to accommodate project needs and historic values,
Section 106 review relies on strong public participation.
Section 106 review provides the public with an opportunity to
infl uence how projects with federal involvement aff ect historic
properties. By keeping informed of federal involvement,
participating in consultation, and knowing when and whom to
ask for help, you can play an active role in deciding the future of
historic properties in your community.
Section 106 review gives you a chance to weigh in when
projects with federal involvement may aff ect historic properties
you care about. Seize that chance, and make a diff erence!
Following Th rough
Milton Madison Bridge over the Ohio River between
Kentucky and Indiana (photo courtesy Wilbur Smith
Associates/Michael Baker Engineers)
Stay Informedyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyffffffffffffffffffffffffffffyf
22 ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION Protecting Historic Properties 23
Contact Information
National Park Service
Heritage Preservation Services
1849 C Street, NW (2255)
Washington, D.C. 20240
E-mail: NPS_HPS-info@nps.gov
Web site: www.nps.gov/history/hps
National Register of Historic Places
1201 Eye Street, NW (2280)
Washington, D.C. 20005
Phone: (202) 354-2211
Fax: (202) 371-6447
E-mail: nr_info@nps.gov
Web site: www.nps.gov/history/nr
National Trust for Historic Preservation
1785 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20036-2117
Phone: (800) 944-6847 or (202) 588-6000
Fax: (202) 588-6038
Web site: www.preservationnation.org
The National Trust has regional offi ces in San Francisco, Denver,
Fort Worth, Chicago, Boston, and Charleston, as well as fi eld
offi ces in Philadelphia and Washington, D.C.
Offi ce of Hawaiian Affairs
711 Kapi`olani Boulevard, Suite 500
Honolulu, HI 96813
Phone: (808) 594-1835
Fax: (808) 594-1865
E-mail: info@oha.org
Web site: www.oha.org
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Offi ce of Federal Agency Programs
1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 803
Washington, D.C. 20004
Phone: (202) 606-8503
Fax: (202) 606-8647
E-mail: achp@achp.gov
Web site: www.achp.gov
The ACHP’s Web site includes more information about working
with Section 106 and contact information for federal agencies,
SHPOs, and THPOs.
National Association of Tribal Historic
Preservation Offi cers
P.O. Box 19189
Washington, D.C. 20036-9189
Phone: (202) 628-8476
Fax: (202) 628-2241
E-mail: info@nathpo.org
Web site: www.nathpo.org
National Conference of State Historic
Preservation Offi cers
444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 342
Washington, D.C. 20001
Phone: (202) 624-5465
Fax: (202) 624-5419
Web site: www.ncshpo.org
For the SHPO in your state, see www.ncshpo.org/fi nd/index.htm
24 ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION Protecting Historic Properties 25
Beneath the Surfacefffffffffffffffffffff
Ohio Department of Transportation
workers made an unanticipated
archaeological discovery while working just
north of Chillicothe along state Route 104.
It is a remnant of an Ohio & Erie Canal
viaduct. (photo courtesy Bruce W. Aument,
Staff Archaeologist, ODOT/Offi ce of
Environmental Services)
TO LEARN MORE
For detailed information about the ACHP, Section 106 review
process, and our other activities, visit us at www.achp.gov or
contact us at:
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 803
Washington, D.C. 20004
Phone: (202) 606-8503
Fax: (202) 606-8647
E-mail: achp@achp.gov
Preserving America’s HeritageWWW.ACHP.GOV
Printed on paper made with an average of 100% recycled fi ber and
an average of 60% post-consumer waste
GrandView District Development FrameworkEdina, MinnesotaDecember 7, 2011Revised January 17, 2012Revised January 25, 2012Revised January 31, 2012Revised March 27, 2012Revised April 5, 2012
24/05/12Ken Potts Kim Melin Randy Halvorson Chris Rofi dal Steve Buss Gene Persha Richard Borland Larry Chestler Laura Giertsen Ellen Jones Terry Ahlstrum Dick Ward Bill Neuendorf Tim McIlwain Bright Dornblaser Andy Brown Suzanne Davison Greg Domke Sandy Fox Dick Crockett Arne Cook Tom Bonneville Kim Montgomery Tim Murphy Th omas RaeuchleTom RuppertPeter Sussman Lisa Diehl Bob Kojetin David Davison Bernie Beaver Mike Platteter Peyton Robb Dan Gieseke Diane Reinhart James Justice Darcy Winter Paul Nelson David Novak Linda Urban Tom Mattison Ken and Adele Floren Michael Schroeder Jim SmithKevin Staunton, ChairMichael Fischer Brett Johnson Collin Bredeson Deron Lindquist Eric Bredesen Jim BaischSteering CommitteeConsultant TeamCuningham Group Architecture, PAClose Landscape ArchitectureHR GreenCommunity Design GroupSpringsted Inc.Table of ContentsExecutive Summary 31. Hope for Change 52. Thoughts and Interactions 63. Patterns for a Neighborhood Center 94. Moving Forward with a Purpose 455. Appendix 57
34/05/122. Completely rethink and reorganize the District’s transportation infrastructure to:• Make the District accessible and inviting to pedestrians and cyclists;• Create connections between the diff erent parts of the District;• Maintain automobile-friendly access to convenience retail; • Create separate pathways for “pass-through” and “destination” automobile traffi c; and• Preserve future transit opportunities provided by the rail corridor in a way that ensures that the kinds of opportunities pursued in the future are consistent with the character we envision for the District and provide benefi t to the surrounding neighborhood.3. Leverage public resources to make incremental value-creating changes that enhance the public realm and encourage voluntary private redevelopment consistent with the vision that improves the quality of the neighborhood for residents, businesses, and property owners. Th is Development Framework makes substantial progress in charting the path to be followed in redeveloping the GrandView District. By creating a vision that meets the seven Guiding Principles, it provides guidance to city offi cials, residents, business and property owners, and developers as opportunities for change emerge in the District. To ensure that the future redevelopment of the District is consistent with the vision articulated in this Framework, we recommend that it become part of the City’s Comprehensive Plan.Executive SummaryTh e Development Framework presented here is part of a small area planning process required by Edina’s Comprehensive Plan for those parts of our community (like the GrandView District) designated as Potential Areas of Change. It follows the 2010 GrandView District Small Area Guide Plan process. Th at process – led by a group of community residents and business and property owners – resulted in adoption by the Edina City Council of seven Guiding Principles for the redevelopment of the GrandView District.Th e process of crafting this Development Framework has been led by a 52-member Steering Committee made up of residents of the community and owners of area businesses and properties. Th e 52 members of the Steering Committee have dedicated countless hours since April of 2011 listening to community members, considering options, and debating alternatives for the future of the District. Th anks to a grant from the Metropolitan Council, we have had the good fortune to be supported in our eff orts by a talented group of consulting experts. We have also been fortunate to have the patient support of City staff throughout the process.Our objective in creating this Development Framework is to build upon the seven Guiding Principles adopted by the City Council. In the pages that follow, we share a vision of how to bring those Guiding Principles to life. While there are many details essential to fulfi lling that vision, our goals can be summarized as eff orts to:1. Create a place with a unique identity announced by signature elements like:• A central commons on the Public Works site with indoor and outdoor public space that connects the civic cornerstones of the District and serves the neighborhood and community needs;• A “gateway” at Highway 100 that announces the District as a special place, using elements like an iconic pedestrian and bicycle bridge spanning Highway 100; and• An innovative, cutting-edge approach to 21st-century sustainability.
44/05/12We want to be clear, however, that we recognize that the Framework (like the Comprehensive Plan) provides broad direction rather than detailed requirements. Th is Framework is intended to be a vision of the future rather than a blueprint. Achieving the vision will require, among other things:• A feasibility study that examines the costs and resources available to bear those costs;• An examination of the height and density necessary to make the vision fi nancially feasible while ensuring that it results in the human scale and neighborhood character that is the essential to the Framework;• Developing a strategy to allow for a vibrant business and residential community by managing the mix of retail, offi ce, residential, and public uses of land while maintaining the currently successful neighborhood service and convenience character;• A determination of a range of possible housing choices that support the character and experience of the District.• A community building/public green programming group should work to determine appropriate program and uses.We discuss these and other “next steps” in the Implementation section. Consistent with the “community-led” spirit of the initial stages of this process, we recommend that these “next steps” include active participation by community members, support of staff , and leadership from the City Council. Study Area Location
4/05/121. Hope for Change
64/05/121. Hope for ChangeIntroductionHope for Change has been the driving vision since the very beginning of this process that is now well into its second year of perspiration, participation, and planning. Th ousands of volunteer hours, countless meetings, and hundreds of discussions (large and small) have demonstrated that a committed group of citizen stakeholders, business leaders and owners, and elected and appointed offi cials believe that hope for change must be proactive, progressive, and promoted. Th e result will be not just be change for the sake of change, but directed energy, policy, and investment that will deliver a place for people to live, work, shop, and play in sustainable, memorable ways.Concept Diagram from the Small Area Guide Plan Process, December 2010
74/05/121. Hope for Change1. Leverage publicly-owned parcels and civic presence to create a vibrant and connected District that serves as a catalyst for high quality, integrated public and private development.2. Enhance the District’s economic viability as a neighborhood center with regional connections, recognizing that meeting the needs of both businesses and residents will make the District a good place to do business.3. Turn perceived barriers into opportunities. Consider layering development over supporting infrastructure and taking advantage of the natural topography of the area.4. Design for the present and the future by pursuing logical increments of change using key parcels as stepping stones to a more vibrant, walkable, functional, attractive, and life-fi lled place.5. Organize parking as an eff ective resource for the District by linking community parking to public and private destinations while also providing parking that is convenient for businesses and customers. 6. Improve movement within and access to the District for people of all ages by facilitating multiple modes of transportation, and preserve future transit opportunities provided by the rail corridor.7. Create an identity and unique sense of place that incorporates natural spaces into a high quality and sustainable development refl ecting Edina’s innovative development heritage.The Seven Guiding PrinciplesGuiding PrinciplesPrinciples Related to the Concept Diagram1. Leverage publicly owned parcels2. Meet the needs of businesses and residents3. Turn barriers into opportunities4. Pursue logical increments; make vibrant walkable and attractive5. Organize parking; provide convenience6. Improve movement for all ages; facilitate multiple modes of movement7. Identity and unique sense of place; be sustainable and innovative161226374457
84/05/121. Hope for ChangeHistoryBefore Edina became a village almost 125 years ago, a country market road crossed Minnehaha Creek at Edina Mills. Headed westward to the high ground, it branched out as Eden Prairie Road and Hopkins Road. In 1869, the Yancey family moved from Ohio and purchased 127 acres of land including that high ground and most of the present GrandView District. Civil War veteran Beverly C., his wife Ellen and their seven children were to become the most prominent pioneer black family of Edina over several decades and left a legacy of civic involvement. An observer described early Edina as an agricultural village, “where there is a post offi ce, a mill, and a store, and proudly aspires to the dignity of a trading town. Th e numerous farms are well-cultivated, and are occupied by intelligent people who appreciate education, and surround themselves with the accessories of a refi ned society.”A center of the early community was Minnehaha Grange No. 398, organized in 1873. Th e Grange Hall originated in a meeting at the Yancey family home in 1879 with a “considerable number of persons desirous to form an association to build and own a hall building near Edina Mills.” In 1888, the name Edina was voted upon in that building, which also served as the village hall until 1942. When moved for construction of St. Stephen’s Church in 1935, a member of the Yancey family donated the new site. In 1970, the Grange Hall was moved to the present Frank Tupa Park in the GrandView District, later joined by the historic Cahill School.Changes in the district have been ongoing including transportation and services. Members of the Yancey family platted Grand View Heights in 1910 and Tingdale Brother’s Brookside in 1916. In 1913, the Dan Patch Line was cut through the high ground east of Brookside Avenue, providing passenger service to Minneapolis from 1915 to 1942. In 1927, new highway 169/212 (current Vernon Avenue) was cut through the District. Grading and paving businesses such as J. A. Danens and Son located to serve the growth, joined by motels and restaurants. Th e District expanded rapidly with western Edina following World War II. Th e Edina directory of 1953 listed six of ten businesses in the District as including “Grandview” in their names: a cafe, market, two service station, hardware, and seed Sources: 1. R. J. Baldwin, in Isaac Atwater, History of Minneapolis and Hennepin County (Munsell, 1895), p. 1263 as quoted in Paul D. Hesterman, From Settlement to Suburb: Th e History of Edina, Minnesota (Burgess Publishing,1998) Edina Historical Society, p. 29.2. Meeting minutes dated March 7, 1879. Copy in the Edina Historical Society fi les.Historic GrandView Heights Platand garden supply store. In 1947, Jerry Paulsen opened a meat counter in one of the local groceries, a modest beginning to Jerry’s Enterprises, a longtime prominent presence in the District.It is encouraged to look to the history of the District in naming the proposed public amenities and new streets. Th e Yancey family in particular, due to their early ownership of the District and legacy of civic engagement, merits that honor at a prominent location such as the commons.
4/05/122. Thoughts and Interactions
104/05/122. Thoughts and InteractionsProject Schedule and ProcessSept Oct Nov DecPart IDiscussion and DiscoveryCommunity Workshop #1Part IIIdeas and OptionsCommunity Workshop #2Part IIIDecide and DeliverCommunity Workshop #3DeliverablesProject/Community Meetings Sept Oct Nov DecSteering CommitteeStaff CoordinationExecutive Team MeetingCommunity WorkshopWork Group MeetingsPlan Commission/CouncilProject Update#1 #2 #3Part I: Discussion and DiscoveryPart I is about learning from and listening to the Steering Committee, Work Groups, and other stakeholders; analyzing the study area and understanding the work done to-date; appreciating the larger dynamics of the area; and clearly defi ning the opportunities. An initial Community Workshop is held to conduct work group discussions/downloads, and a public meeting/presentation is hosted by the Steering Committee and the Consulting Team. Part II: Ideas and OptionsPart II focuses on developing ideas and options that address the specifi c issues raised by the Steering Committee, stakeholders, and the public process. The Consulting Team conducts a three-day Community Workshop (to be held in the study area) that will include Steering Committee meetings, focus group meetings, stakeholder interviews, team work sessions, and conclude with a public meeting/presentation.Part III: Decide and DeliverPart III consolidates all the comments, ideas, and options into a preferred direction. This part includes a third Community Workshop and public meeting. The Consulting Team prepares a summary document that may be widely distributed via a variety of sources (i.e., print, web, etc.) and a Sketch-up 3D model of the area with preferred options.Project Schedule: Th e project schedule was organized around three community workshops.
11Th e Steering Committee and Executive Committee have worked closely with the Consulting Team to facilitate a process that focused on key issues, opportunities, and recommendations. Th e process worked with the Steering Committee that met on a regular basis to guide the Consulting Team. A sub-committee of Work Groups addressed Land Use/Community Design, Community Needs/Public Realm, Transportation/Infrastructure and Real Estate/Finance. Th ese groups put an incredible amount of eff ort into initial background information and research, defi nition of issues, and discussion about ideas and options. A key component of the project was a series of Community Workshops held in September, October and November, 2011, that hosted a range of community stakeholders either in interviews, focus groups, program meetings and at public meetings.Th e community participation process included these primary groups of participants: Steering Committee, Executive Committee, work groups, City staff , focus groups (land owners, neighborhoods, public offi cials, schooldistrict, institutions, city departments, business operators, and others as identifi ed during the process), Plan Commission members, City Council members and the Mayor.4/05/122. Thoughts and InteractionsSummary of Participation ProcessThe Public Participation Process: Th e public participation process included Steering Committee meetings, work group meetings, public meetings, focus groups meetings, and program groups meetings throughout the fall of 2011.
4/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood Center
134/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterConcept DiagramsIntroduction Create “go to” and “stay at” uses Connect throughoutEasy to get to; easy to get aroundPrinciple #2 in the GrandView District Small Area Guide Plan is about “enhanc(ing) the District’s economic viability as a neighborhood center with regional connections.”Th e Guide Plan also suggests that “Th e District serves primarily as a neighborhood (rather than regional) center.” Based on Steering Committee and Public input, this idea has broad appeal. But what do we mean by neighborhood center and how does that fi t with specifi c expectations and outcomes for the GrandView District?“Neighborhood feel,” “pedestrian friendly,” and “safe and connected” describe the desired character for the District. But the basis for these words lies in a clear vision for the key elements, or systems, that defi ne place...and further set the framework for future and ongoing development at GrandView. Th ese elements include Land Use, Transportation and Movement, the Public Realm and Sustainability, and will be described and illustrated in more detail in this chapter.Neighborhood Center
144/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterHighway 100 and the rail corridor. Arcadia is seen as a more residential street with a range of condo, apartments, and multi-level townhouse types. Mixed-use and offi ce buildings are anticipated and may be oriented to Vernon and/or south toward Eden and the Our Lady of Grace (OLG) fi elds, a signifi cant open space that is a visual amenity to the greater district.Vernon is assumed to remain more convenience-and service-oriented with improved pedestrian sidewalks/connections, safer street crossings (especially to the adjacent neighborhood), bike lanes, and better organized/managed traffi c fl ow and parking. Both Eden and Vernon are anticipated to employ Complete/Living Street principles that emphasize the place-qualities of streets.Across Highway 100 to the east, the Vernon/50th/Eden alignment culminates with City Hall; long term uses are assumed to accommodate a greater civic/community presence when/if the Highway 100 interchange is reconfi gured as a split-diamond facility.Goals• Develop and improve the district as three smaller “villages” that are connected physically and by a signature character and identity.• Recognize the need for a range of housing types and choices and address those markets that also reinforce the District vision.Land UseLand use in the District is currently focused on convenience retail and service uses that are visible from Vernon Avenue. Th e majority of these uses are auto-oriented and are accessible from Vernon and Gus Young Lane. Th e exception is the GrandView Square development that includes residential, offi ce, and civic uses organized around a central green space. Th e Comprehensive Plan identifi es the GrandView Heights District as a mixed-use center character area, a potential “area of change” and guides future land as a mixed-use center. Th e Comprehensive Plan also says that “the District is in the process of evolving from a somewhat scattered auto-oriented district to a more integrated mixed of uses.”Th e over-arching concept is to support the “go-to” uses (auto-oriented) while anticipating more “stay-at” uses (pedestrian-oriented), and to improve future use and built form around three key civic “centers”: • City Hall• Library• Community Commons (civic building and green space)Th e future land use plan proposes a broader mix of uses arranged around a new central green space (GrandView Green) located on the public works site and fronting Arcadia. Th e plan emphasizes a mixed-use sub-area between Vernon/Eden/• Emphasize the connection to Minnehaha Creek.• Create a recognized, visible arts identity and provide space/place for greater community arts users and producers.• Address needs of underserved populations (teens, singles, seniors, etc.).• Establish a community commons as a multi-purpose facility for a wide audience (e.g., whole body, whole life, health and wellness) and as a focal point and central gathering place that connects City Hall to the east with the Library to the southwest. • Celebrate the “Birthplace” of Edina, the Mill, and record the oral history of GrandView Heights; tell the stories.• Emphasize a pedestrian-oriented sense of place that produces an appropriate scale and function, and preserves surrounding views. • Support economic growth and community stability by providing accessible and effi cient connections between home, school, work, recreation, and business destinations through improved pedestrian and vehicular environments throughout the area.
154/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterLand Use Land Use PlanVernon AveEden AveArcadia AveHwy 100Public Neighborhood Commercial Mixed-use CenterOffi ceMedium/High Density Residential
164/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterLand Use Vernon AveEden AveArcadia AveHwy 100Illustrative Master PlanExisting BuildingsPotential DevelopmentProposed Civic Community Buildings
174/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterLand Use Potential Build-OutVernon AveEden AveArcadia AveLibraryHwy 100City Hall
184/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterLand Use Arcadia Avenue Looking North
194/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterPublic Works SiteLand UseDevelopment3.6 acres Site28,000 SF Public Green24 units Condominium42 units Apartments50,000 SF Community/Civic16 units TownhousesParking200 spaces Park and Ride200 spaces Community Use158 spaces Multi-familyTh e public works site is located in a central point of the District and is seen as the “commons” for how the District vision will be realized. Uses proposed include the community green space located on top of a parking garage that supports area businesses, civic uses, and serves as a Metro Transit park and ride structure; a community/civic building anchoring the green; and a variety of residential uses including condominiums, apartments, and townhouse building types. Townhouse units are envisioned to front Arcadia as a building type that can incrementally “step-up” the hill, providing a character unique to the District.Public GreenCommunity CenterCondominiumsApartmentsTownhousesTownhousesArcadia AvePublic Works SitePublic GreenCommunity CenterCondominiumsApartmentsTownhousesEden AveArcadia AveEden AveA form-based code can guide desired building use and frontage.
203. Patterns for a Neighborhood Center4/05/12Land UsePublic Works Site Looking SoutheastGrandView CrossingArcadia AveEden AveHwy 100
214/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterProposed North-South SectionProposed East -West SectionLand UsePublic Works SiteGrandView Green Space on top of Parking StructureGrandView Green on top of Parking StructureNew frontage road on west side of Hwy 100ArcadiaOLGHwy 100Rail ROW Existing City RampJerry’sCommunity CenterCondominiumsTownhousesParkingEden AveGrandView Crossing
224/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterBus Garage SiteLand UseEden Ave5,000 SF Retail42,000 SF Offi ce175 spaces ParkingDue to the elevation change, this site lends itself to supporting a number of commercial and retail uses by adding a small, one level parking structure contiguous to and south of Jerry’s. Th is structure would work with the existing topography to allow better access to the Jerry’s loading area and to provide additional parking to support the grocery and needed parking at grade. Th is site could also accommodate a drive-thru use such as a small community bank, cleaners, or coff ee shop.ParkingRetailOffi ce/RetailOffi ceParkingEden AveJerry’s
233. Patterns for a Neighborhood Center4/05/12Bus Garage Site Looking NortheastLand UseEden AveJerry’s
244/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterLand UsePhase 1From a land use perspective, a number of immediate steps can be taken to set the stage for new investment in the District. Th ese include: • Policy changes to the Comprehensive Plan (the Small Area Plan is intended to update the Comprehensive Plan).• Potential zoning revisions that could include a form-based code to regulate desired public realm, building frontages, and building height.• Identifi cation of Eden and Vernon as early candidates for application of Living Streets principles.• Policy direction that guides overall sustainability of the District, including consolidated reuse/recycling, stormwater management, etc.• Policy direction that guides how new public and private investment may be supported with a variety of fi nancing tools.Th e public works site (public green space and a community/civic building) and the bus garage site are the two key parcels that can “jump-start” the redevelopment process. In particular, the ability of the public works site to provide a fee simple, unencumbered asset will allow civic/community and private and public realm uses to be realized early, and will demonstrate the leverage identifi ed in the Guiding Principles to support a variety of next steps. Th is could include a Metro Transit park and ride facility as a way to provide a parking structure that would also serve as the GrandView Commons (community/civic building/public green).In similar fashion, the bus garage can be a major pivot point for how a number of land use decisions may play out and will act as a land use “connector” along Eden. Th is site may need to be readied for development sooner than the public works site in order to accommodate a series of land use transitions that will help the larger District vision implementation. A third component of an early phase would be the development of the Wanner site currently owned by Our Lady of Grace as potential residential, offi ce, or retail uses.In support of these anticipated land use changes, new street confi gurations/alignments, circulation patterns, and streetscape/pedestrian improvements along Eden will complete a bike and pedestrian network and support the anticipated land use changes with improved automobile circulation and management.12637451. Public Works2. School Bus Garage3. New Bridge/Street4. Wanner Site5. Jerry’s Site6. Jerry’s Site7. City Ramp Access
254/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterLand UsePhase 1Hwy 100Eden AveArcadia AvePhase 1 DiagramA. Public Works Site• Community Commons: GrandView Crossing (street) GrandView Green Community/Civic building• Arcadia steps• Community/Civic building• Variety of residential building types• Structured parking• Park and ride structureB. Bus Garage Site• Multi-level parking• Retail/service/offi ce useACBEDVernon AveCommunity Green Space on top of Parking StructureHousingWanner/OLG PropertyTh e following chapter on Implementation is included as one example of anticipating an initial, or Phase 1, increment and associated preliminary range of costs. Th ese numbers are not detailed costs but represent one possible range of expenditures that are included here to illustrate levels of funding (and investment) of various components. Th e Phase 1 diagram and following spreadsheets for the public works site, the bus garage site, and local street improvements will vary depending on actual funding sources, timing, program, and other factors (e.g., cost of materials and labor) that cannot be determined at this time. See Appendix.C. Wanner Site• Townhouses fronting OLG open spaceD. Eden Avenue Streetscape• Bus stop integrated• Boulevard organizes intersection alignmentsE. Jerry’s Streetscape• Pedestrian enhancements• Streetscape• Stormwater treatment
264/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterPublic RealmPublic realm refers to all land and area under the ownership of the city. Th is includes city streets and rights-of-way (ROW), parks and open space, and parcels of land or other assets that are used to provide individual and collective benefi t and amenity to all residents and the general public. Th e greater value and power of the public realm is its ability to connect neighborhoods, businesses, schools, and parks and open space into a larger whole greater than the sum of the individual elements. Streets and ROW make up a major (and connected) portion of the public realm and represent a signifi cant opportunity to enhance and connect the community. It is critical to view streets, then, not as just conveyors for automobiles but also as multi-modal facilities that provide democratic accessibility for all and as form-givers and green space that increase the livability of the community. Th e result should be a greater sense of green throughout the District.Goals• Acknowledge “no net loss,” yet aggressively seek new public space.• Improve the bike and pedestrian environment: make it safe and friendly, and include adequate parking area for bikes.• Create a community/civic building connected to GrandView Green (an outdoor public green space) that connects east and west and serves as an indoor/outdoor gathering space.• Create a prominent public realm of connected parks, green space, paths, plazas, and private open space – a legible green framework as the primary form giver.• Provide views within the District and maintain important viewsheds (such as the “grand view”) for public use.• Plan for a safe, comfortable pedestrian environment that links public and private destinations north-south (neighborhoods, library, businesses) and east-west (neighborhoods, businesses, commons, City Hall).Images (top to bottom): Osaka, Japan; Montreal, Canada; and New York, New York.
274/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterPublic RealmA. GrandView CommonsB. GrandView StepsC. GrandView CrossingD. Arcadia StreetscapeE. Gus Young StreetscapeF. Arcade ConnectionG. Vernon StreetscapeH. Eden StreetscapeABCDFHHGEVernon AveEden AveArcadia AveHwy 100HankersonSummitSunnyslopeW Frontage RdSherwoodBrooksideDale DrE. Frontage Rd52nd St51st StPublic Realm / Open Space Diagram
284/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterPublic RealmGrandView Commons For GrandView, the public works site provides a unique and singular opportunity to create a major new public realm amenity that will add interest to the area for all stakeholders, value to real estate, and provide a signature gathering place in the heart of the District. Beyond that, an even greater opportunity exists then to continuously link the businesses and destinations within the District to the surrounding neighborhoods and the city in general. Th is can begin immediately by simply investing in a safe and connected public sidewalk network, increment by increment. Th e larger vision of the public realm includes a community/civic building and GrandView Green, a connected network of public parks, public and private plazas, a new street (GrandView Crossing), sidewalk and streetscape improvements, and bike and pedestrian facilities. Th is should include bridge enhancements on Eden over Highway 100, a pedestrian and bike bridge connecting the Commons with City Hall, and the potential to connect Eden and Brookside with local a bike path within the Canada Pacifi c Rail ROW.Montreal public green: Th is public green suggests the appropriate scale and character of GrandView Green.
294/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterPublic RealmGrandView Commons: GrandView Commons includes GrandView Crossing, GrandView Green, and a new community/civic building.Social InteractionExercise and FitnessClassroomTeen ActivityBanquet and ReceptionHistory / InterpretivePerforming and Visual ArtsMeetingsFood Prep / Community Oven Retail / IncubatorGrandView Crossing Pedestrian BridgeGrandView GreenCivic BuildingArcadia AveHwy 100GrandView Community Commons DiagramWhat / Who Populates the Commons?
304/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterPublic RealmVernon , Eden, Sherwood, LibraryEden AveEden AveLibraryTh e plan here is to focus on improving pedestrian connections between the Library/Senior Center and Jerry’s, via a more street-like character that extends north from GrandView Square Street, including a well-defi ned pedestrian crossing at Eden. Sherwood is shown as a conversion for additional parking and may still allow movement through the area, though at a very reduced rate of speed. Th is conversion allows a small green space to connect the Library to Vernon.1. Conversion of Eden Avenue would provide 50 additional parking spaces.2. A small green space connects the Library to Vernon giving the civic building an “address” on Vernon.3. Pedestrian crossings are created or enhanced to provide safe and visible locations (51st, 52nd, and 53rd Streets) on Vernon and to the west of the bus garage site on Link to cross the street.4. Th e GrandView Square area is connected to Jerry’s and beyond through the use of a streetscape that provides a well-defi ned pedestrian system as well as a more organized parking and circulation pattern.5. Any additional street and block improvements (including curb cuts and /or traffi c signals) should be considered after improvements have been made to Vernon and appropriate traffi c and parking studies have been completed (also refer to potential alternatives in the appendix)1123334Vernon AveGrandView SquareSherwoodBrookside52nd St53rd St5Link
314/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterPublic RealmEden AveLibraryGrandView SquareVernon AveLibrary Site Looking East
324/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterArcadia AveVernon AveGus Young LnJerry’sGrandView CrossingPublic RealmVernon, Gus Young, Interlachen Interl
ac
h
e
n
Th e plan recommends a number of street and traffi c improvements that will provide greater predictability for the management of traffi c, thereby creating a safer environment for bikes and pedestrians. Th is is made possible by building a new street (GrandView Crossing) and bridge (over the CP Rail corridor) that will connect Vernon east to Arcadia and then paired with Gus Young to create a one-way street pattern. Anchoring the public realm is the GrandView Green, an approximately one-half + acre public space located on the north end of the public works site.1. New street and bridge connection (GrandView Crossing).2. GrandView Green public space and outdoor gathering area.3. Gus Young (westbound)and GrandView Crossing (eastbound) are combined to create a one-way street pair.4. Left turns from southbound Vernon to Gus Young are removed.5. Improved pedestrian crossings on Vernon.6. Complete Streets principles application would transfer Vernon into a 3-lane section with bike lanes and pedestrian improvements.7. Pedestrian plaza/bridgehead and future bike/pedestrian bridge connection over Highway 100.8. Public steps of Arcadia.1233455678SummitCommunity / Civic BuildingCity Parking Ramp
334/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterCity HallPublic RealmVernon AveEden AveCity HallHwy 100Sunnyslope RdDale DrWith the future addition of the split-diamond interchange for Highway 100, the east side could see some signifi cant changes with the public realm, land use, and improved pedestrian/bike environments.1. Frontage road associated with the split-diamond interchange.2. Excess land from Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) could be used for underground parking (with a green roof deck) and future community/civic use.3. Strategy would provide an improved/expanded Frank Tupa Park and setting for the historic Cahill School and Grange Hall.4. Grange Road alignment is “rationalized” to provide a more effi cient parking layout and allow for a small civic green (5) in front of City Hall.5. Pedestrian/bike bridge connects to west side of Highway 100.6. Eden is shown as a “parking” street to provide additional supply for City Hall.2456314
344/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterTransportationTh e GrandView area street and movement network is primarily composed of Vernon/50th Street (reliever/augmenter arterial), Eden (local street, state-aid facility) and the multiple ingress/egress ramp system of Highway 100 (designated a principal arterial). Th ere are other local streets, but most provide limited service (such as Summit Avenue) or access that dead ends (such as Brookside off Eden). Th e highway interchange has several on and off ramps that, according to MnDOT, are redundant and/or unsafe. Vernon is a county facility that, south of Interlachen, has seen a reduction of average daily traffi c over the past 10 years. Eden provides a secondary connection within the District east and west over Highway 100. Eden is designated the primary bike route through the District; Vernon and Interlachen are designated as secondary routes.Th ere are two major recommendations that support the overall movement and transportation goals of the plan. First, the Framework proposes that the Highway 100 interchange be reconfi gured into a split-diamond interchange to better manage through-traffi c and to provide improved local access/circulation via frontage roads east and west of the highway. Over time, this would provide a more connected local system (i.e., more local streets) with direct access to Highway 100 via the frontage roads. Second, the Framework proposes a new east-west street along the north half of the public works site (spanning the CP Rail corridor) connecting to Arcadia from Vernon, that would be paired with Gus Young Lane to provide a one-way circulation pattern. It would operate as one-way in (eastbound) from Vernon on the new GrandView Crossing, and one-way out (westbound) to Vernon/Interlachen on Gus Young Lane. Th is pattern would eliminate the left hand turn from Vernon (southbound) to Gus Young Lane.Bike improvements would focus on more lane area and identifi cation along Vernon and Eden, consistent with Living and Complete Streets principles. Over the long term, east-west bike and pedestrian access would be improved by adding a new bridge over Highway 100 that would connect the GrandView Commons to Tupa Park, City Hall, and the Minnehaha Creek mill area. In addition to more bike parking facilities in the District, the plan recommends an off -road option within the District: an at-grade bike path alongside the CP Rail ROW from Eden connecting to Brookside.Functional Class • Highway 100: Principal Arterial.• 50th Street: A Minor Augmenter.• Vernon Avenue: B Minor Connector.• Interlachen Boulevard: Major Collector.• Eden Avenue: Local Street.Traffi c Volume• 13,000-23,000 AADT along West 50th Street/Vernon Avenue.• 4000-8000 AADT along Eden Avenue.Goals • Support a more effi cient, compact, and safe interchange access to Highway 100 from Vernon and Eden.• Create a more bike and pedestrian friendly environment by applying Complete Streets and Living Streets principles to Vernon, Eden, and the local street network.• Create an improved circulation and access network between public streets/parcels and private development/destinations.• Create an enhanced parking environment that, in part, depends on shared, centrally-located District parking supplies.• Partner with Metro Transit to implement a community-scale Park and Ride and bus turnaround loop in the area.• Complete the historical transition of Vernon from old Highway 169 to a local District street.• Identify and implement a demonstration project for “Complete/Living” streets principles.• Provide additional auto, bike, and pedestrian connections east and west in the District.• Maintain and improve parking, access, and circulation in the short term for convenience, retail, and service uses.• Complete the pedestrian and bike system. Make bikes and pedestrians a priority and allow for a safe crossing over Highway 100.• Take a leadership role related to the Highway 100 interchange. Build the “reason platform” for multi-modal access and gateways.• Preserve the CP Rail corridor for future, possible public transit, and non-motorized movement/connection in the District.• Reduce congestion by providing safe travel choices that encourage non-motorized transportation options, increasing the overall capacity of the transportation network.
354/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterComplete/Living Streets improvementsPrivate streetscapesSplit diamond interchangeNew / improved bridgesTransportationVernon AveEden AveArcadia AveHwy 100District Street FrameworkTh e movement framework for the District begins with addressing policy issues like the adoption of the Living Streets principles and applying Hennepin County’s Complete Streets policy, as well as considering larger and more long term ideas like reconstructing the Highway 100 interchange using a “split diamond” confi guration. Th is approach accomplishes a number of objectives that meet the District Principles and provides an incremental approach to addressing change over time. Th e existing slip ramp location off the southbound ingress ramp would be retained but would be combined with an additional connection to Gus Young as part of the one way frontage road system. Traffi c would be controlled at four signalized intersections. In the short term, there is an opportunity to begin implementing streetscape, bike, and pedestrian improvements. Another important recommendation is to implement the GrandView Crossing/Gus Young one-way street pair that will help manage traffi c access and circulation in the upper core of the District.
364/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterTransportationDistrict Street FrameworkExistingProposed
374/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterTransportation Highway 100 and West Frontage Road Looking WestVernon AveEden AveHwy 100
384/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterTransportationParking• Consider the use of the current city parking ramp (located behind Jerry’s) to accommodate future park and ride patrons and general parking district supply; increase the capacity of this structure in the future if economically possible/practical.• Th e public works site should be considered as a location for a Metro Transit park and ride facility as a way to provide parking to weekly commuters and to provide parking for a community/civic building, public green, residences and other uses. In addition, the top level (deck) of this structure is intended to serve as the GrandView Green, the major public realm amenity in the district.• Additional parking (structure) is proposed to the south and contiguous to Jerry’s grocery store to provide better service access to the loading area and provide additional parking supply.Parking beneath buildingsNew access to existingSurface lotsExisting rampDirection of traffi cVernon AveEden AveArcadia AveHwy 100PP
394/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterTransportationPark and Ride OptionsABCLocation Spaces NotesA Use existing ramp 244 Access issuesC New ramp in “cloverleaf” n/a Long termB New ramp on public works site 200 Fee simple587 Express RouteExisting bus stopsVernon AveEden AveArcadia AveHwy 100Metro Transit operates the #587 Express route through the GrandView District before turning north on Highway 100 to downtown. Th ey have a well documented market that they serve in southwest Edina, and board riders on a daily basis who are parking in front of the library, in the city ramp, and in front of a number of businesses. Th ey are highly motivated to locate a “community” scale park and ride facility that would accommodate no more than 200 cars. At least two sites have the potential to serve this need: the existing city ramp and a potential structure on the public works site. Th e existing city ramp is currently undergoing a construction project (new water treatment plant on the ground fl oor) and according to the city, this would make adding additional levels problematic. Access will also be an issue as well when the new GrandView Crossing is built. Th e city does think additional parking could be located over Brookside behind and east of Jerry’s.Under the right conditions and with some minor improvements, the public works site could be converted into a park and ride lot tomorrow. Th is would be an interim solution (a similar scenario involving the site as an interim use for the Edina bus garage could also be considered). Th e advantage of locating a park and ride on the public works site is that it is a fee simple site that could be used with little change to existing conditions. In general, a park and ride could provide a surplus of parking during nights and weekends, and serve overfl ow parking in the District as well.
404/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterTransportationVernon Avenue Right-SizingSouth of the Interlachen intersection, Vernon Avenue would be reconfi gured into a three lane, divided section that would better accommodate local traffi c movement, provide a dedicated bike lane, and capture some of the ROW for pedestrian improvements and street crossings.sidewalk8’sidewalk8’boulevard6’boulevard6’bike lane6’bike lane6’drive lane12’medianvariesdrive lane12’Proposed Section for Vernon AvenueExisting Section for Vernon Avenuedrive lane drive lane12’ 12’drive lane drive lane12’ 12’Vernon Avenue Looking South: A new three lane section would allow additional space for bikes and pedestrians, and provide controlled left turn lanes.
414/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterHighway 100 ImprovementsTransportationShort Term Improvements Long Term ImprovementsNew rampsEliminated rampsSignalA major proposal involves the short term and long term confi guration of the Highway 100 interchange. Th e plan proposes a “split-diamond” arrangement that would manage access on and off the highway at signalized intersections. Th ese intersections would be at Vernon and Eden, and would connect with parallel, one-way frontage roads. Th is confi guration would allow regional traffi c to clearly and safely access the highway and still move into the District with predictability and safety. Long term prospects might include the transfer of unused MnDOT ROW for local and community uses such as civic building sites, future bus rapid transit support, parking, and open space.
424/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterBicycle ImprovementsTransportationPrimary bike routesSecondary bike routesTrail (on CP ROW)Vernon AveEden AveArcadia AveHwy 100Bike lanes are shown for Vernon, a secondary bike route, and Eden, a primary bike route, through the District. Th e lanes are shown with enhanced paint and striping as well as additional lane area. A potential bike facility using the CP Rail right-of-way or adjacent land could connect Eden, at grade, to Brookside, thereby providing an off -road option to move through the District.
434/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterTransportationBicycle ImprovementsEden AvenueVernon between Eden and Interlachen Vernon south of EdenExistingExisting ExistingProposedProposed ProposedPrecedentPrecedent
444/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterSustainabilityOne dictionary defi nes sustainability as:• Th e ability to be sustained, supported, upheld, or confi rmed. • Th e quality of not being harmful to the environment or depleting natural resources, and thereby supporting long term ecological balance.For GrandView, sustainability is about how the natural and manmade environments coexist in a way that limits and/or prohibits harmful impact on the environment now and for generations to come. But it also has meaning for how the community and businesses will be sustained, supported, and upheld. One is not isolated or independent from the other; a comprehensive, long term defi nition of sustainability should guide how the District and the community move forward with goals, recommendations, and actions.Recent Activities Sustainability is a broad and deep subject that is constantly being refi ned from principles and policies to products and practices to fi nancing and implementation—perhaps so much so that it may seem diffi cult to determine where to begin and what next steps should be taken. For GrandView, it seems practical to review some of the recent decisions and actions the city has taken that will provide a foundation for how the District will grow, change, and redevelop.• Edina Energy & Environment Commission: Solar/wind ordinance amendments task force. City staff is reviewing proposed ordinance. • PACE Financing: Th e Edina City Council unanimously adopted the Edina Emerald Energy Program November 15, 2011, making it the fi rst Minnesota city to take advantage of Property-Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) legislation. PACE, which was approved by the state Legislature in 2010, allows property owners to have the cost of energy effi ciency and conservation improvements assessed to their property and paid alongside property taxes. GrandView Tire & Auto, 5415 70th Street West, used the tool for the necessary fi nancing to install a 27-kilowatt solar panel system on the already green auto shop’s roof.• New Public Works Facility: Th e public works building was built with sustainability in mind. It has geothermal heating and cooling and used recycled materials, and its landscape was designed to minimize the development’s impact on the environment. A rain garden at the corner of 74th and Metro Boulevard holds and infi ltrates water from sloping parking lots with curb cuts to direct the water to native grasses and plants.• City Hall: Installation of solar panel project in Fall of 2011.• City Council Living Streets policy: Recommendation of the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) to establish a comprehensive Living Streets Policy that integrated all modes of transportation and addressed issues such as traffi c calming, stormwater management, promoting active living, community feel, improving walking and biking, and enhancing urban forests. If approved by the Council, the ETC would work in collaboration with staff to prepare the policy for the Council’s future consideration. Mr. Sullivan reported a $15,000 grant was available to initiate the creation of this policy, which may cost $60,000-$100,000 to complete. • Adoption of MinesotaGreenStep Cities program, 2011: On January 18, 2011, Edina passed a council resolution to become a member of the Minnesota GreenStep Cities program. Minnesota GreenStep Cities is a voluntary challenge, assistance, and recognition program to help cities achieve their sustainability goals through implementation of 28 best practices. Each best practice can be implemented by completing one or more specifi c actions from a list of four to eight actions. Th ese actions are tailored to all Minnesota cities, focus on cost savings and energy use reduction, and encourage innovation.
454/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterSustainabilityGreenstep’s 28 Best PracticesBuildings and Lighting1. Effi cient Existing Public Buildings: Work with utilities and others to assess and fi nance energy and sustainability improvements of existing structures.2. Effi cient Existing Private Buildings: Work with utilities and others to assess and fi nance energy and sustainability improvements of existing structures.3. New Green Buildings: Construct new buildings to meet or qualify for a green building standard.4. Effi cient Building & Street Lighting and Signals: Improve the effi ciency of public and private lighting and signals.5. Building Reuse: Create economic and regulatory incentives for redeveloping and repurposing existing buildings before building new.Land Use6. Comprehensive Plan and Implementation: Adopt a Comprehensive Plan and tie regulatory ordinances to it.7. Effi cient City Growth: Promote fi nancial and environmental sustainability by enabling and encouraging higher density housing and commercial land use.8. Mixed Uses: Develop effi cient and healthy land patterns.9. Effi cient Highway-Oriented Development:Adopt commercial development and design standards for highway road corridors.10. Conservation Design: Adopt development ordinances or processes that protect natural systems.Transportation11. Complete Green Streets: Create a network of multi-modal green streets.12. Mobility Options: Promote active living and alternatives to single-occupancy car travel.13. Effi cient City Fleets: Implement a city fl eet investment, operations, and maintenance plan.14. Demand-Side Travel Planning: Implement Travel Demand Management and Transit-Oriented Design.Environmental Management15. Purchasing: Adopt environmentally preferable purchasing policies and practices.16. Urban Forests: Increase city tree and plant cover.17. Ecologic Stormwater Management: Minimize the volume of and pollutants in rainwater runoff .18. Parks and Trails: Enhance the city’s green infrastructure.19. Surface Water Quality: Improve local water bodies.20. Effi cient Water and Wastewater Facilities: Assess and improve drinking water and wastewater facilities.21. Septic Systems: Implement an eff ective management program for decentralized wastewater treatment systems.22. Solid Waste Reduction: Increase waste reduction, reuse and recycling.23. Local Air Quality: Prevent generation of local air contaminants.Economic and Community Development24. Benchmarks & Community Engagement: Adopt outcome measures for GreenStep and other city sustainability eff orts, and engage community members in ongoing education, dialogue, and campaigns.25. Green Business Development: Document the use of assistance programs for green business and job development.26. Renewable Energy: Remove barriers to and encourage installation of renewable energy generation capacity.27. Local Food: Strengthen local food and fi ber production and access.28. Business Synergies: Network/cluster businesses to achieve better energy, economic, and environmental outcomes.
464/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterSustainability Goals• Take a position on sustainability; be a model for city wide sustainability.• Defi ne incentives to attract “Best-in-Class” development that deliver highest levels of sustainable design.• Take advantage of “free” resources: wind, rain, and sun.• Reduce heat island eff ect and create a pedestrian environment that is pleasant, shaded, and visually interesting.• Address stormwater runoff in all phases and facets of the District.• Build on existing infrastructure.• Take advantage of available partnerships/funding.• Create District (not separate site) solutions.• Apply GreenStep Best Practices.RecommendationsA number of recommendations should be considered for the District and emerge from what is being done by the City Council, Energy & Environment Commission, Transportation Commission, Planning Commission, other boards/commissions, and various stakeholders. Th e GreenStep Cities best practices are an obvious start to how these apply to the District. Beyond that, it will be important to defi ne the District in an organizational manner so that roles and responsibilities can be defi ned and actions coordinated. A good example would be how a District committee on sustainability could begin to defi ne the “GrandView Works”—a sustainable practices approach for how water, waste, and energy are addressed from a District point of view.For GrandView, there are three levels of approach and opportunity that build from what is being done today in the District (in some cases by individual businesses or owners) and lay the groundwork for a sustainable strategy:1. Work from existing strengths and build the foundation• Respond to existing plans, policies, and best practices already in place (local, county, and regional policies).• Educate District stakeholders about best practices, case studies, etc.• Establish a general communications structure and forum for what is being done.• Consider new policy to focus on redevelopment areas like GrandView with sustainability guidelines.• Stormwater management policy at the District level (works with both watersheds).• Pilot project(s) for solar light installation (pedestrian and parking areas).2. District Systems• Stormwater strategy under parking collection/storage/treatment/reuse.• Recycle/reuse building materials (after demolition).• Grey water use.• Trash collection and recycling within the District beyond what is currently required by the city.• Consolidated organic recycling focused on restaurants in the area.• Generate alternative power for specifi c uses/needs.• Green and white roofs.3. Closed Loops• Recycled stormwater into drinking water supply.• Recycled grey water into drinking water supply.• Off -the-grid.• Green buildings—zero carbon.
474/05/123. Patterns for a Neighborhood CenterSustainability
4/05/124. Moving Forward with a Purpose
494/05/124. Moving Forward with a PurposeImplementation Strategy1. Adopt the framework as a part of the Comprehensive Plan.As a policy document, the Comprehensive Plan off ers the ability to guide future development in the GrandView District even in the absence of more defi nitive plans. Once adopted, the framework provides signifi cant context for determining further directions and actions in the GrandView District.2. Establish an Implementation Steering Committee using citizen volunteers to guide the eff ort, including providing direction for key remaining areas of the framework, with working groups as needed to support the work of the Implementation Steering Committee.An over-riding objective of the GrandView District planning process is to utilize local citizens as experts in defi ning directions for an area identifi ed in the Comprehensive Plan as a location where the potential for change exists. With signifi cant investment of time, talent, and energy, in addition to the local knowledge that has been developed through the Small Area Guide process and the Small Area Plan process, it is logical that the process of planning using local citizens to guide the process should continue. Th e process to be pursued should, as in past eff orts leading to the framework, be defi ned by the citizen volunteers.5. Set a plan for the evolution of the District.Th e planning process was established with the understanding that the GrandView District would redevelop incrementally in concert with a vision defi ned by the community. A key aspect of the plan, and one that can be best defi ned once several of the decision points in Step 4 (above) have been advanced, is to determine a logical, sustainable, and reasonably defi nitive plan for its evolution.6. Provide regular updates to the City Council.A Steering Committee charged with guiding the further development of a plan for the GrandView District cannot act independently of other actions of the city, just as the area itself cannot evolve independent of the rest of the Edina community. With regular updates, the evolving plan can be assured that it aligns with other policies of the city.3. Evaluate the GrandView District small area planning process as a means of engaging citizens in local planning.As indicated in the Comprehensive Plan, several areas of potential change remain in the community. An objective review of the GrandView process will allow the city to determine whether it should be replicated, modifi ed, or abandoned as a local planning tool. 4. Initiate a process led by the Implementation Steering Committee to provide direction for key remaining areas of the framework.Remaining key decision points, many of which are interrelated but all of which must be defi ned in terms of the approved framework, include:• Transportation elements• Density and height• Housing aff ordability• Financing• Design and development guidelines• Community Building
504/05/124. Moving Forward with a PurposeImplementation1-5 years5-10 years10+ yearsVernon AveEden AveHwy 100Generalized Phasing PlanA generalized phasing plan is shown that organizes phasing into three simplifi ed increments with the understanding that a variety of conditions will infl uence actual investment and implementation.1. Policy and RegulationTh is Framework recommends (consistent with the Comprehensive Plan) that the District evolve from a Community Commercial Node (pg. 4-31 Comprehensive Plan) into a mixed-use center. However, the Plan also suggests a vision that may not be completely consistent with current zoning including how use, built form, and parking may be regulated. Concurrent with other implementation activities, zoning revisions, including the potential use of a form-based code and design guidelines will be addressed by the Implementation Steering Committee after approval of the Framework by the City Council. 2. Phasing, Development & FinanceTh e following graphic begins the discussion about how to best arrange and prioritize the public land parcels (public works site and school bus garage site) so that new investment and redevelopment can occur in a timely manner and in response to market and community forces. Central in this discussion is the school bus garage site which, when a new garage site can be found, can include new commercial/offi ce uses, replacement of existing uses, expansion of businesses in the district currently in need of more space (such as the municipal liquor store), and parking. Th is could help set the stage for how next steps could be accomplished including initial investment on the public works site, parking and circulation enhancements/additions, and Eden Avenue improvements. In addition, a community building / public green programming group should work during this phase to determine appropriate program and uses.
514/05/124. Moving Forward with a PurposeImplementation Immediate < 1 year1 Development Framework approval2 Policy for implementation/fi nance3 Create Implementation Committee4. Implementation Committee should address programming of community / civic building5 Create sustainability guide from GreenStep6 TIF District7A Design Guidelines7 Form-based code for mixed use center8 Green building standards required for district9 Prepare Phase 1 Master Plan10 Address Lifecycle and aff ordable housing1-5 YearsLand Use11 Bus Garage site redevelopment12 Townhouse units on public works site13 Residential on Warner site/OLG14 Community / Civic buildingPublic Realm15 GrandView Green over parking structure16 Arcadia Steps/and streetscape17 CP Rail bike path from Eden to Brookside18 Add tree lined streetscape and monument signs into Richmond Hills neighborhoodTransportation/Infrastructure19 Park n ride structure/green roof@public works site20 Additional parking south of Jerry’s21 GrandView Crossing bridge & street22 Eden Living Streets/streetscape /3 lane section23 Eden Living Streets/Arcadia/Normandale24 New access from Eden to city ramp parking25 Jerry’s parking Streetscape26 Implement one-way pairs/remove left to G. Young27 Reservation on public works site for rail transit use Sustainability28 GrandView Works/Organics recycling center 29 Stormwater reuse & management policy30 Solar pilot project for public lightingMajor Recommendations
524/05/124. Moving Forward with a PurposeImplementation5-10 YearsLand Use31 Arcadia site redevelopment/include pocket park32 Apt/condo units on public works site33 Residential on Warner site/OLG/Phase 2Public Realm34 Small civic green at City Hall35 Arcadia streetscape improvementsTransportation/Infrastructure36 Vernon Living Streets/streetscape/3 lane section37 Dedicate right turn from Vernon to Interlachen38 Reconfi gure Eden as parking street@City Hall39 Eden bridge pedestrian/bike enhancements40 Vernon as primary bike route to GrandView Crossing41 Consider ‘turn-back’ of Vernon from County42 Complete Streets: Library green space fronting Vernon 43 Reconfi gure Eden as parking streetSustainability44 Stormwater collection/treatment system45 Grey water reuse/irrigation, etc.46 GrandView Works/geothermal at OLG fi elds10+ YearsLand Use47 East frontage road site redevelopment48 Civic development on excess MNDOT landPublic Realm49 Hwy 100 pedestrian/bike bridge50 Green roof/space over underground parking51 Add green space to Tupa Park52 Include gateway walls/landscape w/interchangeTransportation/Infrastructure53 Hwy 110 split diamond interchange54 Realignment of Grange Rd/Eden55 Add Gus Young extension to frontage roadSustainability56 Closed loop water supply system57 GrandView Works/Alternative energy sourcesMajor Recommendations
534/05/124. Moving Forward with a PurposeImplementation1DC - Downtown Core StandardsSide(2) Siting(3) Heightat the front of the lot: a minimum of 75% of build-ing facade shall be placed within 5 feet of the front lot line. This requirement applies to the building’s fi rst two storeys and to all parts of the lot that abut a street or sidewalk 5’see Height Overlay District for minimum and maximum heights and upper storey stepbacksat the rear of the lot: 10’ setback required for load-ing areas, none if adjacent to street or alley.parking setback line30’at the side of the lot: none required. One side of build-inmg must be placed at the side lot line. Also refer to Neighborhood Compatibility requirements 10’commerceresidentialfi nished fl oor height: avg 3 feet above sidewalkfi nished fl oor height: maximum 18 inches above sidewalkA. Building Height i. Th e buildings shall be at least 2 storeys in height but no greater than the heights as designated on map____. Upper storey step backs are also designated on map____.B. Ground Storey Height: Commerce Uses i. Th e average ground storey fl oor elevation within 30 feet of the front property line shall be 1.Not lower than the front sidewalk elevation. 2.Not higher than 18 inches above the sidewalk. ii. Th e ground storey shall have at least 15 feet of clear interior height contiguous to the front property line for a minimum depth of 25 feet. iii. Th e maximum ground storey height is 22 feet, measured from the sidewalk to the second storey fl oor. C. Ground Storey Height (residential uses) i. Th e average fi nished fl oor elevation shall be no less than 3 feet above the sidewalk at the front property line ii. Th e ground storey shall have an interior clear height of at least 9 feet and a maximum sidewalk to second storey fl oor height of 22 feet. d. Upper storey height i. Th e maximum clear height (fl oor to ceiling) for upper storeys is 12 feet. ii. At least 80% of each upper storey shall have an interior clear height (fl oor to ceiling) of at least 9 feet. A. Façadei. On each lot the building façade shall be built to within 5 feet of the front property line for at least 75% of it’s length. Th is requirement applies to the building’s fi rst two storeys and to all parts of the lot that abut a street and public sidewalk. ii. Within 10 feet of a block corner, the ground storey façade may be pulled away to form a corner entry. B. Usable Open Spacei. A minimum of 40 square feet per residential unit shall be pro-vided. Th is space may be shared among units, or may take the form of balconies, roof decks, usable portions of green roofs or other above ground amenities. ii. Open space created infront of the building shall be designed as semi-public space, used as a forecourt, outdoor seating or other semi-public uses. C. Garage and Parkingi. Parking garage openings visible from the sidewalk shall have a clear maximum height of 16 feet and a maximum width of 22 feet. ii. Parking shall be located behind the parking setback lineMin 9ftMax 12ft clear (typ) max 22 ft (typ) (typ) (typ) PropertiesMinimum HeightMaximum HeightPublic realm / Private realmResultA form based approach is organized to code development that defi nes the public realm.Example of form-based code standards for a downtown setting.
544/05/124. Moving Forward with a PurposeImplementation Financial FeasibilityFeasibility of fi nancing would include: (1) projections of anticipated costs associated with an initial Phase 1 plan and (2) options for revenues to pay those costs. Th is includes items such as street improvements, streetscape improvements, parking infrastructure, property acquisition (i.e., the bus garage), and community space (both potential “commons” or “public realm” space and “programming” or “community/civic center” space). At this point six potential pools or “buckets” of revenue have been identifi ed:1. TIF, Abatement, and other statutory economic development tools;2. Special Assessments;3. Enhanced Property Tax revenues generated by private property development;4. Other Public Sources of funds;5. Non-Profi t or Philanthropic Fundraising; and6. City Tax Revenues.1. TIF, Abatement, and Other Statutory Economic Development Tools.Access some portion of existing TIF Funds; there may be an opportunity to use existing TIF funds. Determine the circumstances under which that is possible and the consequences of doing so.Create a new TIF district. TIF and Abatement tools provide opportunities to “capture” increased value and use it to fi nance some parts of redevelopment. Determine a sense of the potential numbers associated with these options and any limits on how the funds generated by these mechanisms can be spent.2. Special Assessments and Related Tools. Th e City may assess properties that “benefi t” from public improvements for the costs of these improvements up to the value of the benefi t conferred by the improvements. Determine what types of costs are eligible to be recovered using this tool and on related tools that permit the creation of special districts to spread the ongoing costs of maintenance or other improvements. Th e 50th and France area may provide a model for this. 3. Enhanced Property Tax Revenues Generated by Private Development. Th is idea overlaps to a certain extent with #1 above (to the extent the enhanced value will be “captured” via TIF or Abatement). Obviously, the greatest increase of this type would be new development on parcels (like the Public Works and School Bus Garage sites). And consider the prospect of enhanced value emanating from redevelopment of sites (e.g., CSM, Eden 100, etc.) that are already on the tax rolls; having some models of what is reasonable to expect in this category is important.4. Other Public Sources of Funds. Consider the potential partnerships with other public entities that might be able to help with funding. Th e planning activities in this phase of the process have been funded by the Met Council; there might be a prospect of additional funds as planning and implementation move forward. Met Council representatives have also been clear in expressing interest in park and ride facilities. In addition to the Met Council, there are prospects for partnership with MnDOT (related to Highway 100) and Hennepin County (related to Vernon Avenue). To the extent that housing is a part of future redevelopment, there may be Regional, State, and/or Federal funds available to support those eff orts. Th ese any other prospective sources of “Other Public Funds” should be summarized and estimated. 5. Non-Profi t and Philanthropic Fundraising.Consider that private contributions could help with funding. Th ese potential sources of revenue fall into two categories: (1) funds from existing non-profi t organizations interested in supporting particular development initiatives (e.g., housing, arts, etc.) and (2) fundraising campaigns created specifi cally for this eff ort. Determine what is reasonable to expect from each “bucket” and be able to determine whether the “gap” remaining after all other “buckets” are utilized can be fi lled by some kind of capital campaign.6. City Tax Revenues. Th e other way to fi ll any remaining gap is with City tax revenues. Obviously, this is a decision for the City Council to make. It will be important to identify the size of the gap (if any) that will likely need to be fi lled by such funding.
554/05/124. Moving Forward with a PurposeImplementationPossible Staging Questions1. Interim use. Designation of City parking ramp for park and ride?2. Disposition of School Bus Garage Site. Can City negotiate control? If so, when and what are the next steps? RFI? RFP? Negotiate existing user in the District to acquire and invest. 3. How can public works site be best utilized in the interim? As temporary (2-3 year) school bus garage operations? As surface park and ride until structure is built? RFI? RFP? Interim use could allow time for community building use/need to be determined. 4. How to leverage adjacent parcels with timing of bus garage site redevelopment?5. What is timing/feasibility of west side frontage road/southbound ramp confi guration? How to advance that agenda in the short term (1-5 years).6. Eden could / should be programmed for Living Streets improvements consistent with initial phases of development. 7. Feasibility of timing of street, bridge, and deck improvements. 24617365Vernon AveEden AveHwy 100
4/05/125. Appendix
574/05/125. AppendixImplementationHwy 100Eden AveArcadia AvePhase 1ACBEDVernon AveCommunity Green Space on top of Parking StructureHousingWagner / OLG PropertyTh e following Implementation section is included as one example of anticipating an initial, or phase 1, increment and associated preliminary range of costs. Th ese numbers are not detailed costs but represent one possible range of expenditures that are included here to illustrate levels of funding (and investment) of various components. Th e Phase 1 diagram and following spreadsheets for the public works site, the bus garage site and local street improvements will vary depending on actual funding sources, timing, program, and other factors (e.g., cost of materials and labor) that cannot be determined at this time.Phase 1A. Public Works Site• Community Commons: GrandView Crossing (street) GrandView Green Community/Civic Building• Arcadia Steps• Community Civic building• Variety of residential building types• Structured parking• Park and ride structureB. Bus Garage Site• Multi-level parking• Retail / service offi ce use• Possible drive - thru useC. Warner Site• Townhouses fronting the OLG open spaceD. Eden Avenue Streetscape• Bus stop integrated• Boulevard organizes intersection alignmentsE. Jerry’s Streetscape• Pedestrian enhancements• Streetscape• Stormwater treatment
584/05/125. AppendixImplementation GrandViewSmallAreaPlanDevelopmentProgramͲBusGarageSiteSF Ac LF Units PrkSpaces Const$Mkt$Tax$sf/$ unit/sfNonͲresidentialcommercial 5,000 950,000.00$190.00$office 42,000 7,980,000.00$190.00$rampparking 75 937,500.00$12,500.00$surfaceparking 75 112,500.00$1,500.00$47,000 150 9,980,000.00$
594/05/125. AppendixImplementationGrandViewSmallAreaPlanDevelopmentProgramͲPublicWorksSiteSF Ac LF Units PrkSpaces Const$Mkt$Tax$sf/$ unit/sf unitcostResidentialtownhouse 16 46 8,832,000.00$160 1200 192000smallhouse 0 150 1200 180000apartment 42 64 6,426,000.00$170 900 153000condo 24 48 5,472,000.00$190 1200 228000Total 82 158 20,730,000.00$NonͲresidentialcommercial150office150community 50,000 10,000,000.00$200parking200 3,500,000.00$17,500parknride 200 3,500,000.00$17,500Total 400 17,000,000.00$
604/05/125. AppendixImplementationGrandViewSmallAreaPlanDevelopmentProgramͲInfrastructureandStreetsLF Ac PrkSpaces Const$Mkt$Tax$sf/$ unit/sf unitcostInfrastructureVernon(*) 950 332,500.00$350crosswalk 5 25,000.00$5000roadway 1,500,000.00$EdenWest(*) 385 134,750.00$350EdenEast 200 70,000.00$350crosswalk 3 15,000.00$5000roadway 1,500,000.00$Jerrysstreet 875 306,250$350$GusYoungext(*) 150 52,500$350$OLGroad 150 52,500.00$350Bridges(EST)eachGͲViewCrossing 750,000.00$estCPRail 750,000.00$estsubtotal 5,488,500.00$HWY100Splitdiamond(est) $10,000,000Ped/Bike(est) 1,500,000.00$(*)ͲDoesnotincludebudgetsforroadwayimprovements/updgrades/reconstructionͲbudgetsareforlandscape/streetscapeonly
614/05/125. AppendixVernon and InterchangeTransportation
624/05/125. AppendixVernonTransportation
634/05/125. AppendixTransportationSplit Diamond
644/05/125. AppendixTransportationSplit Diamond
654/05/125. AppendixDesign AlternativesLibrary / Eden / LinkProposed Illustrative Plan (p.16)Alternative 1Alternative 2Alternative 3: Streetscape improvements
664/05/125. AppendixDesign AlternativesArcadia and Gus YoungProposed Illustrative Plan (p. 16) Alternative 1 Alternative 2
TO: Heritage Preservation Board
FROM: Robert Vogel, Preservation Planning Consultant
DATE: June 9, 2009
SUBJECT: Heritage Preservation Resources - Minnehaha Creek
In 2005 the Heritage Preservation Board directed me to carry out a reconnaissance-level survey of
Minnehaha Creek to identify and gather information about potential heritage preservation sites.
The survey was intended to be a "once over lightly" inspection of the creek and the lands adjacent
to it with the goal of characterizing the heritage landmark potential of various structures and areas.
To be considered eligible for designation as an Edina Heritage Landmark, a property must meet at
least one of the criteria for eligibility by being associated with an important historic context and
retaining integrity of those physical features needed to convey its significance. The eligibility
criteria recognize four general categories of preservation value: association with significant events
(criterion A), important persons (criterion B), design or construction (criterion C), or information
value (criterion D). The relevant historic context, delineated in 1999 and referenced in the city's
comprehensive plan, is "Minnehaha Creek: From Wilderness Stream to Urban Waterway, 10,000
BC to AD 1974." Resources covered by this historic context include buildings, transportation and
engineering structures, archaeological sites, natural features and landscape architecture. The
relevant aspects of integrity are location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and
association.
The following inventory lists the heritage resources of the creek and my preliminary evaluation of
each property's potential landmark eligibility. Resources are listed in geographical order,
proceeding from the Edina-St. Louis Park boundary downstream.
1) West 44th Street Bridge. Concrete slab bridge built in 1985. Not considered a heritage
preservation resource.
2) State Highway 100. Originally designated State Trunk Highway 5, the beltline highway
was constructed in 1935-1936 as a New Deal work relief project and was originally known
as the Lilac Highway. The six-lane bridge, which spans the upper end of the mill pond,
dates from 1970 and is not considered a heritage resource.
3) Mill Pond. The pond was formed when the creek was dammed in 1857 for the Waterville
Mill; after the closure of the Edina Mill it became a wetland or slough. In 1933 the Village
of Edina used federal funds under the Civil Works Administration to line the banks and bed
of the mill pond with a clay sealer to help maintain a constant pool of water. The project
included a water feature (see below) which pumped well water into the mill pond.
4) Cascade. The reinforced concrete "cascade" was built as a Village of Edina-sponsored
Civil Works Administration/Works Progress Administration project in 1933-1934. Its
purpose was to pump water from a public well into the Mill Pond, to make it more
attractive. The structure has not been functional for many years but appears to be in fairly
good condition. More intensive survey is needed to assess its rehabilitation potential.
5) Brown Farm. Minneapolis lumberman Henry Francis Brown 1841-1912) established a
country estate in Edina in 1872; Brown Farm became famous for its Shorthorn cattle. The
Brown farm yard and barns are believed to have been located between the creek and what
is now Edgebrook Place. This area would seem to have little potential for the preservation
of intact archaeological remains.
6) Edina Mill Dam. The original 1857 mill dam was replaced several times. The present
concrete weir dates from around 1900 and its sole function is to maintain a minimum water
depth in the Mill pond. More research is needed to fully evaluate its heritage preservation
value.
7) Browndale Bridge. Concrete arch bridge built in 1902 to carry a local road over the creek
at the Edina Mills community. The bridge was designated an Edina Heritage Landmark in
2006.
8) Edina Mill Archaeological Site. The first water-powered grist mill was built on this site in
1857 and the mill was not demolished until 1934. The site was listed in the National
Register in 1976 and was partially excavated in 1977. It was designated an Edina
Heritage Landmark in 2006.
9) West 50th Street Bridge. This 4-lane, single-span concrete girder type bridge was built in
1926 and later extensively remodeled. Its historic integrity has been compromised by the
remodeling.
10) Wooddale Avenue Bridge. Single-span stone and steel culvert built in 1936 as a Works
Progress Administration (WPA) federal relief project. The HPB determined the bridge
eligible for landmark designation in 2008 because of its design characteristics and
association with the WPA.
11) St. Stephen's Episcopal Church. The Gothic Revival style stone church was built in 1938
on land donated by Thorpe Realty as part of its master plan for the Country Club District.
A heritage landmark determination of eligibility is recommended on the basis of its
architectural significance.
12) Minnehaha Grange Hall Site. The original site of the grange hall (built in 1879, moved to
Tupa Park in 1970) is preserved in the form of some foundation ruins alongside the creek
on the grounds of St. Stephen's Episcopal Church. More research is needed to fully
assesses the site's potential to yield important archaeological data.
13) West 54th Street Bridge. Single-span, steel stringer type bridge built in 1935. More
information is necessary to fully evaluate the historical significance of this structure.
14) Arden Park. The village acquired this property around 1935 as part of its first municipal
park plan; it may have been partially developed as a WPA project. It may be significant
within the historic context "Country Clubs and Parks: The Heritage of Recreation, Leisure
and Sport (1910-1974)."
15) West 56th Street Bridge. Built in 1954, this two-lane, single-span bridge is typical of
modern bridge construction.
16) France Avenue Culvert. A foot long corrugated steel culvert built in 1958. Not a heritage
preservation resource.
17) Adath Jeshuran Cemetery. The city does not have an historic context for burial grounds.
This site has potential for preservation as a designed historic landscape; more research is
needed to document its history.
No Native American artifacts have been reported from along Minnehaha Creek, which is somewhat
surprising. The shores of Lake Minnetonka and the Mississippi River gorge in the Twin Cities are
filled with prehistoric archaeological sites. The Dakota Sioux regarded Lake Minnetonka as one of
their most sacred places--in fact, they kept its location a secret from Euroamericans until 1850,
despite the fact that Minnehaha Creek had been "discovered" by two teenagers from Fort Snelling
in 1822. The physical context for well preserved archaeological sites is not particularly good
anywhere along the creek in Edina because of stream bank erosion and channelization work.