Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019_10_7_MeetingAgenda Heritage Preservation Commission City Of Edina, Minnesota Community Room Monday, October 7, 2019 7:00 PM I.Call To Order II.Roll Call III.Approval Of Meeting Agenda IV.Approval Of Meeting Minutes A.Minutes: July 9, 2019 B.August 13, 2019 HPC Meeting Notes C.September 10, 2019 Meeting Notes D.Minutes: September 17, 2019 V.Community Comment During "Community Comment," the Board/Commission will invite residents to share relevant issues or concerns. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Chair may limit the number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and topic. Generally speaking, items that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals should not expect the Chair or Board/Commission Members to respond to their comments tonight. Instead, the Board/Commission might refer the matter to sta% for consideration at a future meeting. VI.Reports/Recommendations A.Sketch Plan-4600 Browndale Avenue B.Morningside Community Church Landmark Eligibility VII.Chair And Member Comments A.Preserve MN Conference 2019 VIII.Sta6 Comments IX.Adjournment The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing ampli9cation, an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Date: October 7, 2019 Agenda Item #: IV.A. To:Heritage Preservation Commission Item Type: Minutes From:Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner Item Activity: Subject:Minutes: July 9, 2019 Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve the July 9, 2019 Heritage Preservation Commission meeting minutes. INTRODUCTION: ATTACHMENTS: Description Minutes: July 9, 2019 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Heritage Preservation Commission Edina City Hall Tuesday, July 9, 2019 I. Call To Order Chair Birdman called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. II. Roll Call Answering roll call was Chair Birdman and members, Aderhold, Schilling, Davis, Widmoyer, Nymo, and Mondry. Student Commissioner Venell, Staff Liaison, Emily Bodeker and Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel were also in attendance. III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda Motion was made by Aderhold seconded by Schilling to approve the meeting agenda as presented. All voted aye. The motion carried. IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes Motion by Davis seconded by Widmoyer to amend the proposed minutes as suggested by Commissioner Lonnquist via email. All voted aye. The motion carried. Motion by Nymo seconded by Davis to approve the amended meeting minutes. All voted aye. The motion carried. V. Community Comment: None VI. Reports/Recommendations A. Certificate of Appropriateness: 4531 Bruce Avenue Staff Liaison Bodeker explained that the COA request for 4531 Bruce Avenue was for changes that were proposed on the secondary (Bridge Street façade) elevation of the home. The subject property is a two-story colonial revival style built in 1934. One of the proposed additions was on the second floor above an existing first floor porch and the second proposed addition is a garage addition. Consultant Vogel reviewed the plan and had a positive evaluation of the COA. Staff agreed with Consultant Vogel and recommended approval of the COA. Commissioners asked questions related to the construction of the roof of the proposed second floor addition. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date Liaison Bodeker mentioned that staff had received and sent one piece of correspondence from a neighbor to the commission. Motion made by Schilling seconded by Davis to approval the COA at 4531 Bruce Avenue as submitted, all voted aye. The motion carried. B. 2020 Work Plan Staff Liaison introduced the item and explained that the Commission has the next few meetings to brainstorm and finalize their 2020 Work Plan before their meeting with City Council. Staff asked the Commission to start brainstorming what they would like to work on in 2020 outside of their standard work plan items such as COA applications and nominating historic properties. Commissioners brainstormed ideas and asked Liaison Bodeker to summarize those ideas for the August HPC meeting. VII. Chair and Member Comments: None. VIII. Staff Comments: None. IX. Adjournment Motion made by Davis to adjourn the July 9, 2019 meeting at 8:15 p.m. Motion seconded by Nymo. Motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Emily BodekerEmily BodekerEmily BodekerEmily Bodeker Date: October 7, 2019 Agenda Item #: IV.B. To:Heritage Preservation Commission Item Type: Report and Recommendation From:Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner Item Activity: Subject:August 13, 2019 HPC Meeting Notes Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve the meeting notes from the August 13, 2019 HPC Meeting. INTRODUCTION: ATTACHMENTS: Description August 13, 2019 Meeting Notes Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Heritage Preservation Commission Edina City Hall Tuesday, September 4, 2018 I. Call To Order Vice chair Nymo called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. II. Roll Call Answering roll call was vice chair Nymo and members Schilling, Lonnquist, Blake and student member Venell. Emily Bodeker, staff Liaison was also in attendance. There was not a quorum at the meeting, no formal action was taken. III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda No Quorum IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes No Quorum V. Community Comment: None VI. Reports/Recommendations A. 2020 Work Plan Commission members who were present discussed items to be placed on the 2020 work plan. Discussion involved Preservation Month, an interactive map, and educational opportunities. Staff Liaison Bodeker explained she will finish the draft 2020 work plan and present it to the commission at the September meeting. VII. Chair and Member Comments: Commissioner Blake asked if any of the commissioners knew about the home at ____________. She mentioned the tenants stated they believed it was of the oldest homes in Edina. VIII. Staff Comments: None. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: IX. Adjournment The meeting ended at 7:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Emily BodekerEmily BodekerEmily BodekerEmily Bodeker Date: October 7, 2019 Agenda Item #: IV.C. To:Heritage Preservation Commission Item Type: Minutes, Other From:Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner Item Activity: Subject:September 10, 2019 Meeting Notes Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Review and approve the meeting notes from September 10, 2019. INTRODUCTION: ATTACHMENTS: Description September 10, 2019 Meeting Notes Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Heritage Preservation Commission Edina City Hall Tuesday, September10, 2019 I. Call To Order Chair Birdman called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. II. Roll Call Answering roll call was members Lonnquist, Schilling, Widmoyer, chair Birdman and student members Maheshwari and Bowles. Emily Bodeker, staff liaison and Robert Vogel, preservation consultant were also in attendance. The Commission welcomed new student commissioner, Amelia Bowles. There was not a quorum at the meeting, no formal action was taken. III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda No Quorum IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes No Quorum V. Community Comment: None VI. Reports/Recommendations Staff Member Bodeker explained each of the below items. The Commission didn’t take action on any items due to the lack of quorum. A. Morningside Community Church-Landmark Designation B. COA Update 4531 Bruce C. 2020 Work Plan VII. Chair and Member Comments: Chair Birdman reiterated the importance of notifying staff when you aren’t able to attend a meeting. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Student member Maheshwari informed the Commission he will be giving a presentation on the history of Edina to the Human Rights and Relations Commission. VIII. Staff Comments: Liaison Bodeker told the Commission she would look into the possibility of having a special meeting after the City Council check-in meeting next week. She told the Commission she would send out an email to ask for the Commission’s availability. IX. Adjournment The meeting ended at 7:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Emily BodekerEmily BodekerEmily BodekerEmily Bodeker Date: October 7, 2019 Agenda Item #: IV.D. To:Heritage Preservation Commission Item Type: Minutes From:Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner Item Activity: Subject:Minutes: September 17, 2019 Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve the September 17, 2019 Meeting Minutes. INTRODUCTION: ATTACHMENTS: Description September 17, 2019 Meeting Minutes Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Heritage Preservation Commission Edina City Hall Tuesday, September17, 2019 I. Call To Order Chair Birdman called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. II. Roll Call Answering roll call was members Lonnquist, Schilling, Nymo, Blake, Mondry and chair Birdman. Emily Bodeker, staff liaison was also in attendance. III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda Motion made by Blake seconded by Lonnquist to approve the meeting agenda as submitted. All voted aye. The motion carried. IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes: None V. Community Comment: None VI. Reports/Recommendations A. COA Update 4531 Bruce Avenue Staff Liaison Bodeker explained that the applicant is removing a window from the project at 4531 Bruce Avenue that had previously received a COA. COA’s require that any changes be brought back to the Heritage Preservation Commission for approval. Motion by Lonnquist second by Schilling to approve the update to the COA at 4531 Bruce Avenue. B. Morningside Community Church-Landmark Designation Bodeker explained to the Commission that she and consultant Vogel had been meeting with Morningside Community Church on designating the church property. Staff received notice that the church would like to move forward and she asked that the Commission make a motion to request consultant Vogel begin the landmark nomination study for Morningside Community Church. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Motion by Blake seconded by Nymo to direct consultant Vogel to begin the landmark nomination study for Morningside Community Church. All voted aye. The motion carried. C. 2020 Work Plan Chair Birdman and the Commissioners who attended the Council work session filled in the rest of the members in attendance on comments and questions the Council had. Based on that discussion, the Commission added an item to review the Country Club Plan of Treatment and administrative process to identify recommendations for improvement and to add in the continuation of the 2019 resurvey of the Country Club District. Motion Nymo seconded by Blake to approve the draft 2020 Work Plan for the Heritage Preservation Commission. All voted aye. The motion carried. VII. Chair and Member Comments: Chair Birdman reiterated the importance of notifying staff when you aren’t able to attend a meeting. Member Nymo informed the Commission that the AIA Architects Tour is September 20-22. VIII. Staff Comments: None IX. Adjournment The meeting ended at 7:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Emily BodekerEmily BodekerEmily BodekerEmily Bodeker Date: October 7, 2019 Agenda Item #: VI.A. To:Heritage Preservation Commission Item Type: Other From:Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner Item Activity: Subject:Sketch Plan-4600 Browndale Avenue Discussion CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Sketch Plan Review: Prior to filling a complete application, an applicant may request to meet with the Heritage Preservation Commission for an informal exchange when the HPC can review the basic concept of a proposed project and offer suggestions to a potential applicant. The purpose of this review is to provide assistance in resolving problems or meeting requirements if the potential applicant decides to proceed with the COA process. The HPC may provide preliminary, non-binding guidance on the suitability of the project. Sketch plan review does not require formal notices to neighboring properties. INTRODUCTION: ATTACHMENTS: Description Applicant Sketch Plan Submittal Country Club District Plan of Treatment Aerial Map Charles 2300 Minneapolis T: 612.729.5333 Levin Milwaukee Minnesota F: 612.729.8351 Architects Avenue 55404-3150 E: chuck@clevin.com 1581 Wyrobek Residence Edina HPC informal review request Page 1 of 1 9/20/19 TRANSMITTAL Project: Wyrobek Residence, 4600 Browndale, Edina, MN Project No. 1581 Date: September 20, 2019 Subject: Certificate of Appropriateness Sketch Plan Review The property at 4600 Browndale Ave. was recently purchased by the Wyrobek family. The house located on the property—now nearly 100 years old — requires extensive repair and alterations to meet the requirements of a modern family. The property is located within Edina’s Historic Country Club District. Of primary importance to the new owners is relocating the 2-car garage from the basement level (accessed from the back yard) to a location that accesses the main level of the house and which houses 3 cars. This makes access to the garage and the house significantly more convenient and safe. It also frees up the creek-side back yard for functions free of the driveway. Four options for a new garage location are submitted to you here for your review and comment. Determining an acceptable garage placement is the key to planning the entire project. Of course, the primary challenge in bringing the garage to the front or side of the house is doing so in a sensitive manner that preserves a significant portion of the existing house. Each option proposed can accomplish the requirements demanded of this historical district while providing the opportunity to further enhance the Tudor Revival styling of the house. Option 1 inserts the garage into the existing, featured front gable wall of the house. The main level of this wall and the main level itself would be reconstructed to accept the garage. Most of the remaining street facing wall surfaces remain. A new driveway would be cut through the front yard, requiring modifications to the sidewalk, boulevard, and curb. This option eliminates the awkward existing curb cut (which enters the intersection at 45°±) and places it in a more common, and perhaps safer, position. Option 2 adds the garage to the north wing of the house. Most of the remaining street facing existing walls of the house would remain—with alterations. Option 3 places the garage on the north side of the house, divided into a double and a single, separated by a mud room. Most of the existing second level wall surfaces remain (with alterations). Option 4 also moves the garage on the north side of the house. Alterations resulting from this option can be accomplished while preserving a significant portion of the street facing existing wall structure, including the prominent chimney. We look forward to discussing these ideas with you. Chuck Levin, AIA Submitted on Behalf of Nico and Kris Wyrobek NEW ENTRY EXISTING NORTH WING TO REMAIN (WITH ALTERATIONS) 1 2 3 SOUTH WING ALTERED AS NEEDED FOR NEW GARAGE AND AND RELOCATED KITCHEN FACE OF ORIGINAL WALL NEW WALLS BUILT ON EXISTING FOUNDATION AREA OF BLDG. FOOTPRINT: 2,850 S.F. MAIN FLOOR PLAN: OPTION 1Lot area: 20,750 s.f. House Area: 2,750 s.f. Front stoop area: 75 s.f. Total House coverage: 2,825 s.f. = 13.8% lot coverage NEW ADDITION EXISTING SECOND FLOOR WALLS REMAIN SLOPE SIDE WALK AND LAWN ON EACH SIDE OF NEW DRIVEWAY TO MEET RAMP. RETAIN LAWN ALONG DRIVEWAY CUT AS NECESSARY. SL O P E U P SL O P E U P CHARLES LEVIN ARCHITECTS 2300 Milwaukee Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55404 612.729.5333 Wyrobek Residence 4600 Browndale Avenue Edina, MN NEW ENTRY EXISTING DWELLING TO REMAIN (WITH ALTERATIONS) 1 2 3 8'-0"9'-0"8'-0"AREA OF BLDG. FOOTPRINT: 3,060 S.F. MAIN FLOOR PLAN: OPTION 2 Lot area: 20,750 s.f. House Area: 2,950 s.f. Front stoop area: 75 s.f. Porch area: 110 s.f. Deck area: 325 s.f. Deck allowance: -150 s.f. Total House coverage: 3,310 s.f. = 16.0% lot coverage DECKPORCHFIRST AND SECOND FLOOR WALLS REMAIN EXISTING DWELLING TO REMAIN (WITH ALTERATIONS) NEW ADDITION CHARLES LEVIN ARCHITECTS 2300 Milwaukee Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55404 612.729.5333 Option1-092019Option1-092019 Wyrobek Residence 4600 Browndale Avenue Edina, MN NEW ENTRY EXISTING STRUCTURE TO REMAIN (WITH ALTERATIONS) 1 2 3 DECK EXISTING NORTH WING (NOT SHOWN) DEMOLISHED FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION MAIN FLOOR PLAN: OPTION 310'-0" MINNEW ADDITION AREA OF BLDG. FOOTPRINT: 2,820 S.F. Lot area: 20,750 s.f. House Area: 2,820 s.f. Front stoop area: 75 s.f. Deck: 250 s.f. Deck allowance: -150 s.f. Total House coverage: 2,995 s.f. = 14.3% lot coverage CHARLES LEVIN ARCHITECTS 2300 Milwaukee Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55404 612.729.5333 Wyrobek Residence 4600 Browndale Avenue Edina, MN 123 PORCH EXISTING STRUCTURE BE REMOVED AREA OF BLDG. FOOTPRINT: 2950 S.F. NEW ENTRY MAIN FLOOR PLAN: OPTION 4 Lot area: 20,750 s.f. House Area: 2,565 s.f. Front stoop area: 75 s.f. Deck: 150 s.f. Porch: 275 s.f. Deck allowance: -150 s.f. Total House coverage: 2,950 s.f. = 14.0% lot coverage CHARLES LEVIN ARCHITECTS 2300 Milwaukee Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55404 612.729.5333 Wyrobek Residence 4600 Browndale Avenue Edina, MN DECK 32.8' 30.2' 35.00'28.90 ' 42.40' 35.1' LOTS 5 & 6 4604 BROWNDALE LOT 4 4602 BROWNDALE LOT 3 4600 BROWNDALE LOT 7 4610 BROWNDALE AVERAGE SETBACK DIMENSION (OF 4 DIMENSIONS ON 4 ADJACENT PROPERTIES)NORTHINFORMATION USED TO SUPPORT THIS DRAWING COMES FROM SURVEY DRAWINGS OF EACH INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY AS LISTED BELOW. THIS DIAGRAM IS DRAWN TO SCALE AND THE DIMENSIONS SHOWN COME DIRECTLY FROM THE SURVEYOR'S DRAWINGS. LOT 7, 4610 BROWNDALE AVE.: EGAN, FIELD & NOWAK, INC. O1/28/16, REVISED 05/31/16 LOTS 5 & 6, 4604 BROWNDALE AVE.: THE GREGORY GROUP, INC. (D.B.A. LOT SURVEYS COMPANY). O5/19/19 LOTS 4, 4602 BROWNDALE AVE.: THE GREGORY GROUP, INC. (D.B.A. LOT SURVEYS COMPANY). O6/27/17 LOT 3, 4600 BROWNDALE AVE.: W. BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC., 04/17/17 SCALE: 1"=60' THE AVERAGE SETBACK DIMENSION WAS CALCULATED ACCORDING TO THE ZONING CODE, CITY OF EDINA, SECTION 36-439 (1), SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS. 9/20/19BROWNDALE AVENUEMI N E H A HA C R E E K BRIDGE STREET EDGEBROOK PLACE PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONEXISTING CONDITION SURVEY FOR:KUHL DESIGN + BUILDSHEETBOOK/ PAGEJOB NO.DRAWNSCALEREFERENCEDATEREMARKSREVISIONSBENCHMARKSITE ADDRESSW. BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC.Woodrow A. Brown, R.L.S. MN REG 1523004-17-2017Dated:SCALE IN FEETBl oom ingt on, MN 55425EMAIL: WBLANDSURVEY@AOL.COMBus: (952) 854-4055Fax: (952) 854-4268W. BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC.8030 Cedar Avenue So., Suite 228.WBNLegend 1 EDINA’S HISTORIC COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT PLAN OF TREATMENT PLANNING OBJECTIVE The primary objective of the Country Club Heritage Landmark District is preservation of the existing historic house facades and streetscapes. Certificates of Appropriateness from the Heritage Preservation Board will be required for demolition, moving buildings, and new construction within the district. In fulfillment of this responsibility, the City has adopted the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties as the basis for the Board’s design review decisions. The preferred treatment for heritage preservation resources in the Country Club District is rehabilitation, which is defined as the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey its historical, cultural, or architectural values. SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS The Secretary of the Interior’s standards for rehabilitation are neither technical nor prescriptive, but are intended to promote responsible preservation practices. They are regulatory only with respect to Certificates of Appropriateness for demolition and new construction; for work that is not subject to design review, they are advisory. The standards for rehabilitation are: a) A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. b) The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. c) Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken. d) Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved. e) Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. f) Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. g) Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. h) Archaeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. i) New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. 2 j) New additions and adjacent new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment will be unimpaired. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS A Certificate of Appropriateness will be required before any City permit is issued for the demolition and new construction of any principal dwelling or detached garage within the district boundaries. Definitions: Demolition - For purposes of design review and compliance with City Code §850.20 subd. 10, demolition shall mean the physical alteration of a building that requires a city permit and where: (a) 50% or more of the surface area of all exterior walls, in the aggregate, are removed; or (b) 50% or more of the principal roof structure is removed, changing its shape, pitch, or height; or (c) A front porch, side porch, vestibule, dormer, chimney, attached garage, or porte-cochere is removed or destroyed. This definition does not include removal of existing siding, roofing, trim, fascia, soffit, eave moldings, windows, and doors. Heritage Preservation Resource or Historic Building – Any building, site, structure, or object that has been so designated by the Heritage Preservation Board on the basis of its historic associations or historic architectural qualities which add to the significance of the district as a whole. Heritage preservation resources may lack individual distinction but must possess historic significance and integrity of those features necessary to convey their heritage preservation value. An updated inventory of heritage preservation resources in the Country Club District is maintained by the City Planner. Heritage preservation resources include those homes built from 1924 – 1944, the period when the developer enforced rigid architectural standards on new home construction through restrictive covenants.  No Certificate of Appropriateness will be approved for the demolition, in whole or in part, of any heritage preservation resource in the district unless the applicant can show that the subject property is not a heritage preservation resource, or no longer contributes to the historical significance of the district because its historic integrity has been compromised by deterioration, damage, or by inappropriate additions or alterations.  Except in extraordinary circumstances involving threats to public health or safety, no Certificate of Appropriateness will be issued for the demolition of an existing heritage preservation resource in the district without an approved design plan for new construction. DESIGN REVIEW GUIDELINES New home construction will be limited to existing residential lots and their design will be compatible with the original (1924-1944) Country Club District deed restrictions relating to architecture. The following guidelines generally reflect the principles of the deed restrictions and will be applied by the Heritage Preservation Board to design review of plans for new houses:  Size, Scale & Massing - New homes should be compatible in size, scale, massing, orientation, setback, color, and texture with historic buildings in the district constructed prior to 1945. Facades should be architecturally similar to existing historic homes and visually relate to the historic facades of nearby homes; radically contrasting façade designs will not be allowed. Entrances, porches, and other projections should relate to the pattern of existing adjacent historic homes and respect the rhythm and continuity of similar features along the street. Roof forms should be consistent with typical roof forms 3 of existing historic homes in terms of pitch, orientation, and complexity. New homes should be constructed to a height compatible with existing adjacent historic homes, and the maximum height of new construction should be within 10% of the average height of existing homes on adjacent lots, or the average of the block measured from the original surface grade to the highest part of the roof.  Exterior Finishes - Traditional materials and exterior finishes (horizontal lap siding, stucco, brick, false half-timbering, wood shakes, stone) are recommended for use on facades which are visible from the street. The use of non-traditional materials (such as Hardi-Plank siding and steel roofing) should be considered on a case-by-case basis; imitative wood or masonry finishes should duplicate the size, shape, color, and texture of materials historically used in the District. Aluminum and vinyl siding are not appropriate for street facades.  Accessory Mechanical Equipment - Mechanical equipment, solar panels, air conditioners, satellite dishes, and antennae should be concealed whenever possible or placed in an inconspicuous location so as not to intrude or detract from historic facades and streetscapes.  Decks & Accessory Structures - Contemporary designs are acceptable for decks and accessory structures so long as they are not visible from the street.  Landscaping Elements - Landscaping such as retaining walls, planters, fences, planting beds, and walkways, should be visually compatible with the historic character of the district in size, scale, material, texture, and color. Retaining walls should follow the grade of the lot and blend with the historic streetscape.  Impervious Surfaces - Construction of large areas of impervious surface for driveways, patios, and off-street parking should be discouraged in favor of permeable pavement systems and other “green” alternatives to solid concrete, brick, or bituminous paving.  Building Code Requirements - Building code requirements should be complied with in such a manner that the architectural character of the new home is compatible with the historic character of the neighborhood.  Year Built Identification - New homes should be clearly identified as such by means of a plaque or inscription (to be placed on an exterior surface) bearing the year of construction. GARAGES Modernistic designs for new detached garages will be discouraged. New detached garages should match the architectural style of the house on the same lot as well as the historic character of the neighborhood. The following guidelines will be applied to design review of plans for new garages:  The new garage should be subordinate to the house. The preferred placement is at the rear of the lot or set back from the front of the house to minimize the visual impact on adjacent homes and streetscapes. Front facing attached garages are discouraged. No new detached garage should be taller, longer, or wider than the house on the same lot. The roofline should have a maximum height within 10% of the average height of existing detached garages on adjacent lots, or the average of the block.  Undecorated exterior walls longer than 16 feet should be avoided on elevations visible from the street or adjacent properties.  New garages should be clearly identified as such by means of a plaque or inscription (to be placed on an exterior surface) bearing the year of construction. 4 DRIVEWAYS  Driveways should be compatible in width and material with historic driveways in the district and should be designed in such a manner that they do not radically change, obscure, or destroy the historic character-defining spatial organization and landscape features of residential lots, yards, and streetscapes. New curb-cuts should be avoided whenever possible. CITY RESPONSIBILITIES  The City will develop and implement plans for the preservation, maintenance, and replacement of all public infrastructure within the district, including streets, trees, sidewalks, street lighting, signs, parks, and open space areas that give the neighborhood its distinguishing character.  The distinguishing original qualities and historic character of the district will not be damaged or destroyed as a result of any undertaking funded or assisted by the City. The removal or alteration of any historic building or landscape feature should be avoided whenever possible. VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE  The City will promote voluntary compliance with historic preservation standards for the rehabilitation of individual historic properties by encouraging repairs, additions, or alterations which make possible an efficient contemporary use of older homes in the district while preserving those features that are historically and architecturally significant.  Although not ordinarily subject to Certificates of Appropriateness, small additions or minor alterations should be done in such a manner that they do not destroy historically significant architectural features. New additions should be differentiated from historic architecture and designed to be compatible with the size, scale, color, material, and character of the property. NATURAL DISASTERS  When historic properties are impacted by man-made or natural disasters, every reasonable effort will be made to avoid total loss. If demolition must occur, historic buildings should be recorded so that a body of information about them (photographs, drawings, and written data) will be preserved for the benefit of the public. DISTRICT RE-SURVEY  The City will arrange for a re-survey of the Edina Country Club District every ten years to document changes in the appearance and historic integrity of historic properties; to revise the list of heritage preservation resources and non-heritage preservation resources present within the district boundaries; and to revise the district plan of treatment as needed. The next re-survey will take place circa 2017. Resolution No. 2008-41 Adopted: 4-15-2008 Edina, Hennepin, MetroGIS | © WSB & Associates 2013, © WSB & Associates2013 4600 Browndale Ave September 23, 2019 Map Powered by DataLink from WSB & Associates 1 in = 35 ft / Date: October 7, 2019 Agenda Item #: VI.B. To:Heritage Preservation Commission Item Type: Report and Recommendation From:Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner Item Activity: Subject:Morningside Community Church Landmark Eligibility Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve a motion making an official determination of eligibility for the Morningside Community Church property. INTRODUCTION: See memo attached. ATTACHMENTS: Description Landmark Eligibility Memo MEMORANDUM TO: Heritage Preservation Commission FROM: Robert Vogel, Preservation Planning Consultant DATE: October 2, 2019 SUBJECT: Heritage Landmark Eligibility, Edina-Morningside Community Church, 4201 Morningside Road The Edina Heritage Landmark program is the official registry of buildings, districts, sites, structures, and objects deemed worthy of preservation on the basis of their historical, architectural, archaeological, and cultural values. The program is administered as a form of overlay zoning under Article IX of the city’s zoning code. Nominations for designation as heritage landmarks originate with the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC). For a property to qualify for designation as an heritage landmark, it must meet at least one of the four eligibility criteria set forth in City Code sec. 36-714 by being associated with an important historic context and retaining historic integrity of those physical features necessary to convey its significance. The policies and procedures for identifying, evaluating, designating, and managing heritage landmarks are described in the heritage preservation chapter of the Edina Comprehensive Plan. Located at 4201 Morningside Road, the Edina-Morningside Community Church was built in 1922 to replace the original Morningside Congregational Church that was founded in 1907, shortly after the Morningside subdivision was laid out. The 1907 chapel was converted to residential use and is still standing at 4003 Morningside Road. Designed by Harry Wild Jones (1859-1935), a prominent Minneapolis architect, the 1922 church is a well preserved example of early-20th century religious architecture showing the influence of the Late Gothic Revival aesthetic. During Preservation Month in 2008, the church received an Edina Heritage Award for “excellence in preservation.” For landmark registration purposes, the primary significance of the Edina-Morningside Community Church is the product of its association with the broad themes of early suburban development in Edina and the history and development of the Morningside neighborhood. The relevant historic context is “Morningside, 1905-1966,” as delineated in the comprehensive plan. From the time of its founding down to the present day, the church has been a focus of community life and played a significant role in the development of community social services (health, education, recreation and culture) and the creation of a distinctive neighborhood identity. The property also has important historical associations with events and trends that helped shape the broad patterns of mid-20th century suburban life in Edina and neighboring communities. Although it has been slightly altered from its as-built appearance, the stone church retains all of its original, historic character-defining architecture features and is in an excellent state of preservation. By ordinance (see Sec. 36-715), the HPC is required to issue a determination of eligibility before nominating a property for designation as a heritage landmark. The Edina-Morningside Community Church was included in the earliest heritage preservation survey conducted for the City of Edina in 1980 and has apparently been regarded as historically significant ever since. Although it has been listed as a potential landmark property in the HPC’s inventory of heritage resources since the early 2000s, I was unable to find any kind of written “determination of eligibility” (as defined in Sec. 36-715) in the HPC records. Therefore, I recommend that the HPC issue an official determination of eligibility at its meeting on October 7—this action customarily takes the form of a simple motion adopted by majority vote (no city council action is required) and does not require any outside review. Once we have the HPC’s determination of eligibility in hand, I will complete the heritage landmark nomination study that identifies and locates the heritage resource, explains how it meets one or more of the landmark eligibility criteria, makes the case for historic significance and integrity, and outlines a plan of treatment. A preliminary draft version of the nomination study should be ready by the HPC’s November meeting. Once the nomination study, including the plan of treatment, is approved by the HPC (in consultation with the owner and with input from other interested parties), it will need to be sent to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) for review and comment; the city’s preservation ordinance (sec. 36-717) also requires review by the Edina Planning Commission. Following the 60-day review and comment period, the city council is required to hold a public hearing to consider the proposed landmark designation (sec. 36-719). Edina Heritage Landmarks are created by city council resolution and the designated property is placed on the official city zoning map. Date: October 7, 2019 Agenda Item #: VII.A. To:Heritage Preservation Commission Item Type: Other From:Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner Item Activity: Subject:Preserve MN Conference 2019 Discussion, Information CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: None. INTRODUCTION: Commissioner Lonnquist will recap her trip to the 2019 Preserve MN Conference in St. Cloud. ATTACHMENTS: Description Preserve MN Conference 2019 Preserve MN Conference 2019 Notes from a rainy trip to St. Cloud Keynote Notes: In PA, new state historic tax credit yielded: -Lower foreclosure rate -Stronger real estate markets In VA, historic properties outperform others for: -Population/acre -Taxes/acre -Water-Sewer Cost/Unit In MD, rehabilitating an old warehouse vs. building a new one yielded huge reductions in: -CO2 generated -Waste sent to landfill -Vehicles and infrastructure wear Preservation Has Many Benefits! •City population regrowth is typically driven by care of historic areas •Environmental impacts are great -116 tons not sent to landfill when a house is saved •Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH) “You can’t build new and rent cheap.” “The Benefits of a State Historic Tax Credit Program” •35 states have; MN’s will sunset in 2021 •The 20% state with 20% fed credit is enticing! •Federal program gets 120 -125% ROI For income-generating properties; must be on the National Register; SHPO can help that process. “Your HPC: More Than Just Regulations” Tools: FAQ Handouts, Owner Benefits Neglect policies for deliberate demise Century Homes Program Training: Realtor Seminar for CE Credit Homeowner Resources e.g. Rethos: Wood Window Workshop Education/Outreach: Going Downtown History Hunt History Tours on YouTube & iTunes “Constant Marketing and Storytelling” Takeaway: HPC Composition? Each city has its own ordinance, generally following SHPO language. Edina’s is: •(a) Commission membership.The commission shall consist of nine regular and two student members. Members shall have a demonstrated interest, knowledge, ability or expertise in heritage preservation. At least one member shall be a qualified professional historian, architect, architectural historian, archeologist, planner or the owner of a heritage landmark property. •(b) City historical society membership.A member of the commission shall be a member of the city historical society. •(c) County historical society membership.A member of the commission shall be a member of the county historical society. Thoughts on future recruiting, selection efforts? Resources: •Rethos (Preservation Alliance of Minn. Reimagined) •Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office •Main Street America & Urban Main •Minneapolis HPC -with new & consolidated staff A Minnesota Moment at the Paramount Theater…