Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-12-2022 HPC PacketAg enda Heritage Preservation Commission City Of E dina, Minnesota E dina Public Wor ks Tuesday, April 12, 2022 7:00 PM I.Ca ll To Ord er II.Roll Ca ll III.Approva l Of Meeting Agenda IV.Approva l Of Meeting Min u tes A.Min u tes: March 8, 2022 V.Com m u n ity Com m ent 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. G enerally 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.Rep orts/Recom m en d ation s A.COA: H-22-1 4615 Moorland Aven u e-Cha n ges to a Street Fa cin g Facade B.2022 E d ina Heritage Aw ard C.Prop osed I-494 Im p rovem en ts Dra ft Sec. 106 Program m a tic Agreem ent D.An n u al E lection s VII.Cha ir An d Mem ber Com m ents VIII.Sta3 Com m ents IX.Adjournm en t 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 ampli6cation, an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Date: April 12, 2022 Agenda Item #: I V.A. To:Heritage P reservation C ommission Item Type: Minutes F rom:Emily Bodeker, As s is tant C ity P lanner Item Activity: Subject:Minutes : March 8, 2022 Ac tion C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED: Approve the March 8th Heritage P reservation C ommission minutes. I N TR O D U C TI O N: AT TAC HME N T S: Description March 8, 2022 HPC Minutes Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Minutes City of Edina, Minnesota Heritage Preservation Commission Tuesday, March 8, 2022 I. Call to Order Chair Schilling called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. II. Roll Call Answering roll call were Chair Schilling, Commissioners, Everson, Nymo, Knudsen, Kmetz-Sheehy and student member Maheshwari. Staff present: HPC Staff Liaison Emily Bodeker III. Approval of Meeting Agenda Motion made by Nymo seconded by Knudsen to approve the meeting agenda as presented. All voted aye. The motion carried. IV. Approval of Meeting Minutes Motion made by Nymo seconded by Knudsen to approve the February 8, 2022, meeting minutes with the addition of noting Commissioner Knudsen in attendance. All voted aye. The motion carried. V. Community Comment: None VI. Reports/Recommendations A. 2022 Work Plan Updates Commissioners discussed progress on the 2022 work plan items including nominations for the 2022 Heritage Award. B. Annual Elections Motion Nymo seconded by Everson to move the annual elections to the April Heritage Preservation Commission meeting. All voted aye. The motion carried. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: VII. Chair and Member Comments: The Commission welcomed new commissioner Andrea Kmetz-Sheehy. VIII. Staff Comments: Heritage Award nominations are due by April 4th at 4:30 pm. The joint work session meeting with City Council is scheduled for June 21, 2022. IX. Adjournment Motion made by Nymo seconded by Knudsen to adjourn the meeting at 7:35 pm. All voted aye. The motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Emily Bodeker Date: April 12, 2022 Agenda Item #: VI.A. To:Heritage P reservation C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:Emily Bodeker, As s is tant C ity P lanner Item Activity: Subject:C O A: H-22-1 4615 Moorland Avenue-C hanges to a S treet F ac ing F ac ade Ac tion C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED: Approve the certificate of appropriateness as requested. I N TR O D U C TI O N: T he subject property, 4615 M oorland Avenue is located on the east side of M oorland Avenue, south of Bridge S treet and north of C ountry Club Road. T he existing home on the property is a two-story colonial revival style home built in 1940. T he Certificate of Appropriateness request includes changes to the street facing façade associated with an interior remodel project at 4615 Moorland Avenue. P roposed changes to the street façade include changes to an existing dormer over the garage on the east elevation. T he C O A request would raise the height of the dormer and extend it to the north. AT TAC HME N T S: Description Applicant Submittal Staff Report Consultant Vogel Memo Aerial Map 4615 Moorland Avenue | Proposed change to street façade The proposed change to the street façade adheres to Edina’s Historic Country Club District’s Plan of Treatment as it will maintain the historic character of the home. The roof of the garage dormer is being raised and extended to the north to allow for better consistent head height and function within, and to cover the entire length of the bathroom. The current ceiling height at the window is 6’-2” and our proposed height is 7’-7”. The existing dormer wall location facing the street will remain, while the north wall will be extended 10” and the new roof eave will be raised 1’- 6” to align with an existing fascia. The new window will be similar in size, match the jamb width of the existing window, but will have a higher head height that better fits the scale of the taller dormer face. This new dormer roof and walls will match both the materiality and details of the current home. This proposed change does not alter the existing building footprint of the home, nor does it alter any other portion of the existing roof, roofing materials, and wall materials. 0 2 4 8 1 WEST ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0" on 24x36 1/8" = 1'-0" on 11x17 NEW DORMER FASCIA TO ALIGN WITH EXISTING FASCIA CEDAR SHAKE ROOF TO MATCH EXISTING NEW FIXED CASEMENT WINDOW SIMILAR IN SIZE TO EXISTING WINDOW WINDOW TRIM TO MATCH EXISTING WOOD SHAKE SIDING TO MATCH EXISTING EXISTING CEDAR SHAKE ROOF EXISTING WOOD SHAKE SIDING EXISTING COPPER ROOF EXISTING STONE SIDING 0 2 4 8 2 NORTH ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0" on 24x36 1/8" = 1'-0" on 11x17 NEW DORMER FASCIA TO ALIGN WITH EXISTING FASCIA CEDAR SHAKE ROOF TO MATCH EXISTING WOOD SHAKE SIDING TO MATCH EXISTING EXISTING BRICK SIDING EXISTING WOOD SHAKE SIDING EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS JRL, TKBREHKAMP LARSON ARCHITECTS INC.2732 West 43rd Street, Mpls, MN 55410Tel. 612-285-7275DRAWN BY: ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: PROJECT NUMBER:Reissner Ferreira4615 Moorland AvenueEdina, MN 55424March 25, 2022 COA APPLICATION 20-034 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 0 2 4 8 1 EAST ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0" on 24x36 1/8" = 1'-0" on 11x17 0 2 4 8 2 SOUTH ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0" on 24x36 1/8" = 1'-0" on 11x17 NO CHANGES TO THIS ELEVATION NO CHANGES TO THIS ELEVATION EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS JRL, TKBREHKAMP LARSON ARCHITECTS INC.2732 West 43rd Street, Mpls, MN 55410Tel. 612-285-7275DRAWN BY: ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: PROJECT NUMBER:Reissner Ferreira4615 Moorland AvenueEdina, MN 55424March 25, 2022 COA APPLICATION 20-034 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS JRL, TKBREHKAMP LARSON ARCHITECTS INC.2732 West 43rd Street, Mpls, MN 55410Tel. 612-285-7275DRAWN BY: ISSUE DATE: PROJECT PHASE: PROJECT NUMBER:Reissner Ferreira4615 Moorland AvenueEdina, MN 55424March 25, 2022 COA APPLICATION 20-034 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONEXISTING WEST ELEVATION --EXISTING CEILING AT DORMER EXISTING CEILING AT DORMER April 12, 2022 Heritage Preservation Commission Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner Certificate of Appropriateness: 4615 Moorland Avenue-Changes to Street Facing Facade Information / Background: The subject property, 4615 Moorland Avenue is located on the east side of Moorland Avenue, south of Bridge Street and north of Country Club Road. The existing home on the property is a two-story colonial revival style home built in 1940. The Certificate of Appropriateness request includes changes to the street facing façade associated with an interior remodel project at 4615 Moorland Avenue. Proposed changes to the street façade include changes to an existing dormer over the garage on the east elevation. The COA request would raise the height of the dormer and extend it to the north. Primary Issues: There are proposed changes to the street facing façade which is why the proposed project requires a Certificate of Appropriateness. Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel’s Comments: “I have reviewed the plans and project narrative provided with the COA application for alteration of the street facing façade of the house located at 4615 Moorland Avenue in the Country Club District. The subject property is a 2-story residence constructed in 1940. For preservation planning purposes, it is classified as an example of the Colonial Revival style. It is not individually eligible for heritage landmark designation (its significance was evaluated as “complementary” in the 1980 National Register of Historic Places nomination form); however, because it was constructed during the Country Club District’s period of historical significance (1924-1944), it is considered a contributing heritage preservation resource for COA review purposes. The owner proposes to construct an addition to the existing front-loading garage that will match the exterior detailing found on the older parts of the house. STAFF REPORT Page 2 In my opinion, the proposed work will not have an adverse effect on the historic character of the house or the integrity of the district as a whole and will require minimal alteration of the existing structure (which has already been altered from its as-built appearance). The Secretary of the Interior’s standards for rehabilitation (which are the required basis for COA decisions) do not require restoration to accurately recover the original form and details of the property as it appeared during the district’s period of significance. No significant architectural character defining features will be destroyed or damaged by the proposed work and, based on the architect’s plans submitted with the COA application form, the new construction appears to be compatible with the size, scale, proportions, and materials of the original house. I recommend approval of the COA.” Staff Recommendation & Findings: Staff concurs with Consultant Vogel’s evaluation of the proposed plans at 4615 Moorland Avenue, also recommending approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness request. Findings supporting the recommendation include:  The information provided supporting the subject Certificate of Appropriateness is consistent with the Country Club District Plan of Treatment.  The proposed Certificate of Appropriateness meets the Secretary of the Interior’s standards for rehabilitation. MEMORANDUM TO: Joyce Repya, Senior Planner FROM: Robert Vogel, Preservation Planning Consultant DATE: March 28, 2022 SUBJECT: COA for 4615 Moorland Avenue I have reviewed the plans and project narrative provided with the COA application for alteration of the street facing façade of the house located at 4615 Moorland Avenue in the Country Club District. The subject property is a 2-story residence constructed in 1940. For preservation planning purposes, it is classified as an example of the Colonial Revival style. It is not individually eligible for heritage landmark designation (its significance was evaluated as “complementary” in the 1980 National Register of Historic Places nomination form); however, because it was constructed during the Country Club District’s period of historical significance (1924-1944), it is considered a contributing heritage preservation resource for COA review purposes. The owner proposes to construct an addition to the existing front-loading garage that will match the exterior detailing found on the older parts of the house. In my opinion, the proposed work will not have an adverse effect on the historic character of the house or the integrity of the district as a whole and will require minimal alteration of the existing structure (which has already been altered from its as-built appearance). The Secretary of the Interior’s standards for rehabilitation (which are the required basis for COA decisions) do not require restoration to accurately recover the original form and details of the property as it appeared during the district’s period of significance. No significant architectural character defining features will be destroyed or damaged by the proposed work and, based on the architect’s plans submitted with the COA application form, the new construction appears to be compatible with the size, scale, proportions, and materials of the original house. I recommend approval of the COA. Date: April 12, 2022 Agenda Item #: VI.B. To:Heritage P reservation C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:Emily Bodeker, As s is tant C ity P lanner Item Activity: Subject:2022 Edina Heritage Award Ac tion C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED: Award the 2022 Edina H eritage Award. I N TR O D U C TI O N: T he E dina Heritage Award is given to an individual, family, company or organization that has contributed to the historic fabric of the community and made an outstanding contribution to the preservation, rehabilitation, restoration and use of E dina’s heritage resource. T he heritage resource must be located in the City of E dina. AT TAC HME N T S: Description Town Hall Station Date: April 12, 2022 Agenda Item #: VI.C . To:Heritage P reservation C ommission Item Type: O ther F rom:R obert Vogel, P res ervation C onsultant Item Activity: Subject:P ropos ed I-494 Improvements Draft S ec . 106 P rogrammatic Agreement Information C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED: None. I N TR O D U C TI O N: AT TAC HME N T S: Description Proposed I-494 Improvements Draft-Programmatic Agreement I-494: Airport to Highway 169 Project 1 REVIEW DRAFT 1 54 USC 306108 Programmatic Agreement PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION AND THE MINNESOTA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE REGARDING THE INTERSTATE 494: AIRPORT TO HIGHWAY 169 PROJECT, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA Whereas, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) plans to provide Federal-Aid Highway Program funds to the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) to carry out improvements to Interstate 494 (I-494) in the cities of Edina, Bloomington, and Richfield, including replacement of six Interstate bridges, reconstruction of interchanges, installation of noise and retaining walls, construction of lanes and a pedestrian bridge, and reconfiguration of several access ramps and adjacent frontage roads, and this project is known as the I-494: Airport to Highway 169 Project (I-494 PROJECT); and Whereas, MnDOT is developing a hybrid Environmental Assessment for the purposes of compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) that will address the entire I-494 PROJECT corridor from approximately 24th Avenue to West Bush Lake Road/78th Street (see I- 494 PROJECT Footprint in Appendix A), including the currently funded improvements from approximately East Bush Lake Road to 12th Avenue (First Construction Project [S.P. 2785-424]), as well as subsequent construction projects as they are developed; and Whereas, review of the I-494 PROJECT has been conducted under the terms of the Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration; the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office; the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation; the Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District; and the Minnesota Department of Transportation Regarding Implementation of the Federal-Aid Highway Program in Minnesota (as amended) (Statewide Agreement), various stipulations of which are incorporated by reference, and the MnDOT Cultural Resources Unit (CRU) has conducted the review on behalf of FHWA pursuant to their delegation of authority described in Stipulation 2.I of the Statewide Agreement; and Whereas, MnDOT CRU has determined that the I-494 PROJECT, including the First Construction Project (S.P. 2785-424) and subsequent construction projects, is an FHWA undertaking that has the potential to affect historic properties listed in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) and is therefore subject to review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (54 USC 306108) and its implementing regulations at 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 800, as well as under the terms of the Statewide Agreement; and I-494: Airport to Highway 169 Project 2 REVIEW DRAFT 1 54 USC 306108 Programmatic Agreement Whereas, MnDOT CRU, pursuant to its responsibilities under Stipulation 3.C of the Statewide Agreement, and in consultation with the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (MnSHPO), has defined the First Construction Project’s (S.P. 2785-424) Area of Potential Effects (APE) as depicted in Appendix B.1 and this agreement allows for delineation of APEs for subsequent construction projects; and Whereas, under the terms of the Exemption Regarding Historic Preservation Review Process for the Interstate Highway System (70 Federal Register [FR] 11928-11931, March 10, 2005), FHWA does not need to consider the effects of its undertaking on components essential to the operation of the Interstate Highway System, including but not limited to the Interstate roadbed, engineering features, bridges, tunnels, rest stops, interchanges, off-ramps, and on-ramps; and no Interstate components within the I-494 PROJECT Footprint were included on Minnesota’s list of exceptions to the exemption; and Whereas, FHWA and MnDOT CRU, in consultation with MnSHPO and pursuant to 36 CFR 800.14(b)(1)(ii) and 36 CFR 800.14(b)(3), have elected to execute this project-specific Programmatic Agreement (Project PA) because project-specific circumstances warrant a departure from the normal Section 106 process and the consultation process described in the Statewide Agreement; and Whereas, due to the nature of the hybrid Environmental Assessment and consideration of alternatives, FHWA and MnDOT CRU must phase identification and evaluation of historic properties and application of the criteria of adverse effects in accordance with 36 CFR 800.4(b)(2) and 36 CFR 800.5(a)(3), respectively, and this Project PA outlines a process for identification and evaluation of historic properties, assessment of effects, and resolution of adverse effects for each construction project within the I-494 PROJECT footprint; and Whereas, FHWA recognizes it has a unique legal relationship with Federally recognized American Indian tribes (Tribes) set forth in the Constitution of the United States, treaties, statutes, and court decisions, and that consultation with Tribes must, therefore, recognize the government-to-government relationship between the Federal government and the Tribes; and Whereas, pursuant to 36 CFR 800.2(c)(2)(ii) and the agreements in effect between FHWA and certain Tribes, upon initiation of the Section 106 consultation for the I-494 PROJECT, MnDOT CRU, on behalf of FHWA, has notified the following Tribes and invited their participation in consultation for the I-494 PROJECT: Fort Peck Tribes, Lower Sioux Indian Community, Prairie Island Indian Community, Santee Sioux Nation, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate of the Lake Traverse Reservation, Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa, and Upper Sioux Community, and none responded with any concerns or requested to participate in consultation; and Whereas, although no Tribes have requested to participate in the Section 106 consultation for the I-494 PROJECT, FHWA will reinitiate consultation with Tribes that may attach religious I-494: Airport to Highway 169 Project 3 REVIEW DRAFT 1 54 USC 306108 Programmatic Agreement and/or cultural significance to historic properties that may be identified under the terms of this Project PA, as appropriate; and Whereas, on *ADD DATE and in accordance with 36 CFR 800.6(a)(1)(i)(C), FHWA notified the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) of its intent to enter into this Project PA, and the ACHP has *ADD CHOSEN TO OR CHOSEN NOT TO participate in the consultation pursuant to 36 CFR 800.6(a)(1)(iii); and Whereas, due to the anticipated environmental impacts, confluence of jurisdictional boundaries, anticipated need for permits and approvals, and expected interest in the I-494 PROJECT, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) became a cooperating agency in the NEPA process and, pursuant to 36 CFR 800.2(a)(2), invited FHWA to become the lead Federal agency for the I-494 PROJECT, fulfilling their collective responsibilities under the Section 106 process; and FHWA accepted lead Federal agency designation on August 31, 2021, agreeing to include FTA as an Invited Signatory to this Project PA pursuant to 36 CFR 800.6(c)(2); and Whereas, the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) may issue permits to construct the I-494 PROJECT pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344) or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 USC 403), has determined that this is an undertaking subject to the requirements of Section 106 and 36 CFR Part 800, and recognizes FHWA as the lead Federal agency for the purpose of Section 106 compliance on Federal-Aid Highway Program undertakings pursuant to the Statewide Agreement; and FHWA has invited them to sign this Project PA as an Invited Signatory pursuant to 36 CFR 800.6(c)(2); and Whereas, MnDOT CRU and FHWA have invited the City of Bloomington, the Edina Heritage Preservation Commission, and the Richfield Historical Society to consult on the I-494 PROJECT pursuant to 36 CFR 800.2(c)(5), and both the Edina Heritage Preservation Commission and the Richfield Historical Society have accepted; and FHWA has invited each to sign this Project PA as a Concurring Party pursuant to 36 CFR 800.6(c)(3); and Whereas, because MnDOT CRU assumes certain responsibilities under this Project PA, FHWA has invited MnDOT to become an Invited Signatory to this Project PA pursuant to 36 CFR 800.6(c)(2); and Whereas, this Project PA was developed with appropriate public involvement pursuant to Stipulation 3.A.ii of the Statewide Agreement, 36 CFR 800.2(d), and 36 CFR 800.6(a)(4); and the public involvement has been coordinated with the public review and comment conducted by FHWA and MnDOT to comply with NEPA, as amended, pursuant to 36 CFR 800.8(a); and Whereas, the Signatories, Invited Signatories, and Concurring Parties are all considered Consulting Parties pursuant to 36 CFR 800.2(c) and their roles described herein are consistent with those described in 36 CFR 800.6(c)(1), (2), and (3), respectively; and I-494: Airport to Highway 169 Project 4 REVIEW DRAFT 1 54 USC 306108 Programmatic Agreement Whereas, MnDOT will implement the I-494 PROJECT and, with the assistance of MnDOT CRU, will complete the stipulations of this Project PA, and FHWA will be responsible for ensuring that implementation of the I-494 PROJECT meets the terms of this Project PA; and Now, therefore, FHWA and MnSHPO agree that the I-494 PROJECT will be implemented in accordance with the following stipulations in order to take into account the effects of the I-494 PROJECT on historic properties. Stipulations FHWA, with the assistance of MnDOT CRU, will ensure the following measures are carried out: I. Applicability A. If MnDOT applies for additional funding or approvals for the I-494 PROJECT from a Federal agency that is not party to this Project PA, the Federal agency may remain individually responsible for their undertaking under 36 CFR Part 800. Alternatively, if the undertaking as described herein remains unchanged, such funding or approving Federal agency may request in writing to FHWA of their desire to designate FHWA as lead Federal agency for the undertaking pursuant to 36 CFR 800.2(a)(2) and to become a Consulting Party to this Project PA pursuant to Paragraph B of this Stipulation. B. If during the implementation of this Project PA, FHWA identifies other agencies, Tribes, individuals, and organizations with a demonstrated interest in the undertaking due to the nature of their legal or economic relation to the I-494 PROJECT or affected properties, or due to their concern with the I-494 PROJECT’S effects on historic properties, FHWA may offer such entities Consulting Party status pursuant to 36 CFR 800.2(c) and/or invite them to become a party to this Project PA, with notification to the other Consulting Parties. i. If FHWA invites an entity to become an Invited Signatory, the party may accept this status by agreeing in writing to the terms of this Project PA and so notifying FHWA. If the entity agrees to become an Invited Signatory and MnSHPO, FTA, and USACE have no objections, FHWA will follow Stipulation XI: Amendments to amend this Project PA. ii. If FHWA invites an entity to become a Concurring Party, the entity may accept this status by agreeing in writing to the terms of this Project PA and so notifying FHWA. Because Concurring Parties have no responsibility for implementation of this Project PA, FHWA may add such parties to the consultation process without formal amendment of this Project PA. FHWA will notify the Consulting Parties of any entities who agree to become a Concurring Party. I-494: Airport to Highway 169 Project 5 REVIEW DRAFT 1 54 USC 306108 Programmatic Agreement C. The I-494 PROJECT is expected to have more than one construction project within the Project Footprint, beginning with the First Construction Project (S.P. 2785-424) and followed by subsequent construction projects. Each construction project will be considered independently for the purposes of consultation pursuant to this Project PA. In these instances, the status of any individual construction project (e.g., design stage or construction) may be considered specific to the individual construction project without applying to the entire I-494 PROJECT. Active construction activities include, but may not be limited to, demolition activities, earthwork, staging, and construction of infrastructure and related improvements. II. Standards A. All work carried out pursuant to this Project PA will meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Archaeology and Historic Preservation (48 FR 44716) and/or the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (36 CFR Part 68), as applicable (individually or collectively, SOI Standards). Documentation for determinations of eligibility and findings of effect will meet 36 CFR 800.11, Stipulation 4 of the Statewide Agreement, the SOI Standards, the National Park Service’s Bulletins, MnSHPO survey and reporting guidance, and MnDOT CRU survey and reporting guidance, as appropriate. Documentation of historic properties for the purposes of resolving Adverse Effects under Stipulation VII: Consultation to Resolve Adverse Effects, may follow either the SOI Standards or another appropriate documentation standard that is agreed upon in writing by both FHWA and MnSHPO. B. FHWA will ensure all activities carried out pursuant to this Project PA are done by, or under the direct supervision of, historic preservation professional(s) who meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards (48 FR 44738-44739) in the appropriate field(s) for the activity (SOI-Qualified Professionals). C. FHWA acknowledges Tribes possess special expertise in assessing the National Register eligibility of properties with religious and cultural significance to their Tribe(s). If a Tribe requests, or if FHWA otherwise offers and the Tribe accepts, Consulting Party status under this Project PA, FHWA will seek input from the Tribe on whether an identified property has potential religious or cultural significance to the Tribe under National Register criteria. III. Deliverables and Consulting Party Review Procedures A. To facilitate review, submittals to Consulting Parties may be limited to the portions of the construction plan set that illustrate the way the I-494 PROJECT may affect historic properties. Additional portions of the plan set or additional information requested by one or more Consulting Parties will be provided to all Consulting Parties. I-494: Airport to Highway 169 Project 6 REVIEW DRAFT 1 54 USC 306108 Programmatic Agreement B. The Consulting Parties have thirty (30) calendar days to review and provide comments on all findings, determinations, documents, and deliverables, unless otherwise specified in this Project PA. C. For all findings, determinations, documents, and deliverables submitted during construction and directly related to construction activities, the Consulting Parties have ten (10) calendar days to review and provide comments, unless otherwise specified in this Project PA. D. If the deliverable is a draft document, any written comments provided within the review and comment period will be considered in the preparation of the final document. If there are any comments that are not feasible to address in the final document, FHWA will provide an explanation to the Consulting Parties as part of issuing the final document. If no comments on a draft document are provided within the specified review timeframe, FHWA, at its discretion, may consider the draft document final with notification to Consulting Parties. E. If FHWA and MnSHPO are unable to reach agreement on eligibility determinations, findings of effect, or resolution of Adverse Effects, FHWA will consult with MnSHPO to resolve the disagreement in accordance with Stipulation X: Dispute Resolution. F. All review timeframes may be extended by mutual consent between FHWA and MnSHPO with notification to the other Consulting Parties. Failure of any Consulting Party to respond within the specified timeframe will not preclude FHWA from proceeding to the next step of any process under this Project PA. IV. Delineation and Revisions to the APE A. MnDOT CRU, pursuant to its responsibilities under Stipulation 3.C of the Statewide PA, and in consultation with MnSHPO and other Consulting Parties, will develop an APE for individual construction projects within the Project Footprint and incorporate each construction project’s APE into Appendix B. i. MnDOT CRU, in consultation with MnSHPO and other Consulting Parties, has delineated the First Construction Project’s (S.P. 2785-424) APE as shown in Appendix B.1. As subsequent construction projects are developed, MnDOT CRU will submit the draft and final APE for the individual construction project, along with any supporting documentation to MnSHPO and other Consulting Parties for review and comment pursuant to Stipulation III: Deliverables and Consulting Party Review Process. Once it has considered any comments received, MnDOT CRU’s determination on the individual construction project’s APE will be final. ii. Incorporation of individual construction project APEs into this Project PA do not require a formal amendment. If delineated by MnDOT CRU pursuant to Subparagraph A.i of this Stipulation, then the APE will be incorporated into I-494: Airport to Highway 169 Project 7 REVIEW DRAFT 1 54 USC 306108 Programmatic Agreement Appendix B, distributed to all Consulting Parties, filed with the ACHP, and used throughout the remainder of the I-494 PROJECT unless further revisions to the APE are necessary due to modifications to project scope. B. Throughout the design process, and as needed during construction, MnDOT CRU will determine if revisions to APEs for individual construction projects are necessary. i. If MnDOT CRU determines an APE for an individual construction project requires revision, it will submit the draft and final APE, along with any supporting documentation, to MnSHPO and other Consulting Parties for review and comment pursuant to Stipulation III: Deliverables and Consulting Party Review Process. Once it has considered any comments received, MnDOT CRU’s determination on the revised APE will be final. ii. Revisions to APEs for individual construction projects do not require a formal amendment to this Project PA. If revised and documented by MnDOT CRU pursuant to Subparagraph B.i of this Stipulation, then the revised APE will replace the applicable APE in Appendix B, distributed to all Consulting Parties, filed with the ACHP, and used throughout the remainder of the I-494 PROJECT unless further revisions to the APE are necessary due to modifications to project scope. C. If any new, previously unsurveyed, areas are added to an APE for an individual construction project, the procedures in Stipulation V: Survey and Evaluation will be followed to identify historic properties that may be affected. V. Survey and Evaluation A. MnDOT CRU, pursuant to its responsibilities under Stipulations 3.D and 3.E of the Statewide Agreement, and in consultation with MnSHPO and other Consulting Parties, will conduct surveys and evaluation of properties in the APE for individual construction projects. i. Surveys and evaluation will be conducted and reviewed in phases, beginning with the First Construction Project (S.P. 2785-424), and continuing with each subsequent construction project as it is developed. ii. Surveys and evaluation may be updated when necessary to account for any areas added to the APE through revisions made under Stipulation IV: Delineation and Revisions to the APE or the receipt of additional information about known or suspected historic properties in the APE. iii. Under the terms of the Exemption Regarding Historic Preservation Review Process for the Interstate Highway System (70 FR 11928-11931, March 10, 2005), FHWA does not need to consider the effects of its undertaking on components I-494: Airport to Highway 169 Project 8 REVIEW DRAFT 1 54 USC 306108 Programmatic Agreement essential to the operation of I-494 and I-35W, including but not limited to the Interstate roadbed, engineering features, bridges, tunnels, rest stops, interchanges, off-ramps, and on-ramps. No Interstate components within the APE were included on Minnesota’s list of exceptions to the exemption. B. Survey and evaluation will be performed by SOI-Qualified Professionals appropriate to the resource type(s) being identified and evaluated and will meet the requirements of Stipulation II: Standards. In any instance where a property cannot be fully evaluated prior to the initiation of construction or the resumption of construction activities in the vicinity of the property when identified pursuant to Stipulation VIII: Unanticipated Discoveries and Treatment of Human Remains, the property may be treated as though it is eligible for inclusion in the National Register for the purpose of the Section 106 review for the I-494 PROJECT only. In these instances, and in addition to providing a justification for not performing a full evaluation, MnDOT CRU will document the National Register criterion or criteria, potential area(s) and period(s) of significance, and boundaries used to assume the property’s eligibility so that this information can be used to assess effects on the historic property pursuant to Stipulation VI: Assessments of Effects. C. MnDOT CRU will submit its National Register eligibility determinations to MnSHPO and other Consulting Parties for review and comment pursuant to Stipulation III: Deliverables and Consulting Party Review Process. Subject to the confidentiality requirements in Section 304 of the National Historic Preservation Act (54 USC 307103) and 36 CFR 800.11(c), MnDOT CRU will post the survey results on the I-494 PROJECT website, or other means as appropriate, in order to obtain public input and will share any comments received from the public with the Consulting Parties. i. If MnSHPO does not respond during the applicable review period or if MnSHPO concurs, MnDOT CRU’s eligibility determinations will become final and effects to any historic properties identified will be assessed pursuant to Stipulation VI: Assessments of Effects. ii. If MnDOT CRU and MnSHPO do not agree on the National Register-eligibility of a property, or if MnDOT CRU and a Tribe that attaches religious and cultural significance to a property do not agree on National Register-eligibility, MnDOT CRU will resolve the disagreement pursuant to Stipulation X: Dispute Resolution. VI. Assessments of Effects A. MnDOT CRU, pursuant to its responsibilities under Stipulations 3.F, 3.G., and 3.H of the Statewide PA, will make a finding of effect for historic properties identified through Stipulation V: Survey and Evaluation. I-494: Airport to Highway 169 Project 9 REVIEW DRAFT 1 54 USC 306108 Programmatic Agreement i. Effects will be assessed and reviewed in phases, beginning with the First Construction Project (S.P. 2785-424), and continuing with each subsequent construction project as it is developed. ii. Findings may be updated when necessary to account for any changes in design or the receipt of additional information that may result in newly identified historic properties, changes in the finding of effect for a historic property, or unanticipated effects (e.g., damage) to historic properties. iii. As part of the finding of effect, MnDOT CRU may impose conditions on the individual construction project to ensure an Adverse Effect to a historic property is avoided and/or minimized. iv. If MnDOT CRU makes a finding of Adverse Effect on a National Historic Landmark, MnDOT CRU will notify FHWA. Pursuant to 36 CFR 800.10, 54 USC 306107, and Stipulation 3.H of the Statewide Agreement, FHWA will invite the ACHP and the Secretary of the Interior to participate in consultation to resolve the Adverse Effect. B. Pursuant to Stipulation 3.F of the Statewide Agreement, findings of No Historic Properties Affected do not need to be submitted to MnSHPO or other Consulting Parties. If a finding of No Historic Properties Affected is made, MnDOT CRU will notify Consulting Parties through the reporting process outlined in Stipulation IX: Reports on Agreement Implementation. C. Pursuant to Stipulations 3.G and 3.H of the Statewide Agreement, findings of No Adverse Effect and Adverse Effect must be submitted to MnSHPO and other Consulting Parties for review and comment. MnDOT CRU will submit the finding of effect, supported by documentation that meets the requirements of Stipulation II: Standards, to MnSHPO and other Consulting Parties pursuant to Stipulation III: Deliverables and Consulting Party Review Process. i. If MnDOT CRU makes a finding of No Adverse Effect and MnSHPO and other Consulting Parties agree, no further consultation is required pending implementation of any conditions upon which the finding is based. Implementation of conditions will be tracked by MnDOT CRU as part of the reporting outlined in Stipulation IX: Reports on Agreement Implementation. FHWA will ensure the specified conditions are met. ii. If MnDOT CRU makes a finding of Adverse Effect and MnSHPO and other Consulting Parties agree, the Adverse Effect will be resolved through Stipulation VII: Consultation to Resolve Adverse Effects. iii. If MnSHPO objects to MnDOT CRU’s finding of effect or if other Consulting Parties do not agree with the finding, they will provide comments to FHWA I-494: Airport to Highway 169 Project 10 REVIEW DRAFT 1 54 USC 306108 Programmatic Agreement specifying the reasons for their disagreement. FHWA and MnDOT CRU will consult with MnSHPO and other Consulting Parties to resolve the disagreement in accordance with Stipulation X: Dispute Resolution. VII. Consultation to Resolve Adverse Effects A. If MnDOT CRU makes a finding of Adverse Effect pursuant to Stipulation VI: Assessments of Effects, FHWA and MnDOT CRU will consult with MnSHPO, other Consulting Parties, and the owner of the historic property, when applicable, to seek and consider other measures to avoid, minimize, and/or mitigate the Adverse Effect(s). Consultation may take whatever form is appropriate based on the significance, character, and use of the historic property and the nature and scale of the project elements causing the Adverse Effect(s). The consultation must include an opportunity for the public to express their views in resolving the Adverse Effect(s). If, through consultation, it is determined the Adverse Effect(s) cannot be avoided entirely, a Mitigation Plan will be prepared under Paragraph B of this Stipulation. B. MnDOT CRU will develop a Mitigation Plan(s) to document the measures identified through consultation under Paragraph A of this Stipulation to avoid, minimize, and/or mitigate Adverse Effects. Mitigation Plan(s) may be prepared for the I-494 PROJECT as a whole, for individual and/or multiple construction projects, and/or for individual or groups of historic properties, as needed. The Mitigation Plan must be finalized before construction activities on the individual construction project begin or, in the case of properties identified under Stipulation VIII: Unanticipated Discoveries and Treatment of Human Remains, the Mitigation Plan must be finalized before resuming construction activities in proximity to the historic property. i. When applicable, deliverables required by a Mitigation Plan will be prepared in accordance with the requirements of Stipulation II: Standards and will be submitted and reviewed pursuant to the timeline(s) and process outlined in Stipulation III: Deliverables and Consulting Party Review Process, or as otherwise specified in the Mitigation Plan. ii. Upon completion of consultation, MnDOT CRU will submit a draft and final Mitigation Plan to the Consulting Parties and the property owner, if applicable, pursuant to Stipulation III: Deliverables and Consulting Party Review Process. The Mitigation Plan will be considered final following agreement in writing by FHWA and MnSHPO. In lieu of amending this Project PA, FHWA will ensure that the final Mitigation Plan is attached to the Project PA in the FHWA and MnDOT CRU administrative records, distributed to all Consulting Parties, and filed with the ACHP. Implementation of the Mitigation Plan will be tracked by MnDOT CRU as part of the reporting outlined in Stipulation IX: Reports on Agreement I-494: Airport to Highway 169 Project 11 REVIEW DRAFT 1 54 USC 306108 Programmatic Agreement Implementation. FHWA will ensure the Mitigation Plan provisions are carried out. C. If FHWA and MnSHPO fail to agree on how to resolve the Adverse Effect(s), FHWA and MnDOT CRU will consult with MnSHPO and other Consulting Parties to resolve the disagreement in accordance with Stipulation X: Dispute Resolution. D. If required by a Mitigation Plan, construction activities may not begin or resume in the vicinity of the historic property until after the completion of the associated field work or implementation of protection measures outlined in the Mitigation Plan. VIII. Unanticipated Discoveries and Treatment of Human Remains A. If an individual construction project affects a previously unidentified property that may be historic or a known historic property in an unanticipated manner, MnDOT CRU and FHWA will ensure the process outlined in Stipulation 5 of the Statewide Agreement is followed. B. If human burials or artifacts associated with mortuary features are found during construction of an individual construction project, MnDOT CRU and FHWA will ensure the process outlined in Stipulation 6 of the Statewide Agreement is followed. IX. Reports on Agreement Implementation A. Every six (6) months following the execution of this Agreement and until it expires or is terminated, the MnDOT CRU, on behalf of FHWA, will provide all the Consulting Parties a summary report detailing work undertaken pursuant to its terms via email. Subject to the confidentiality requirements in 54 USC 307103 and 36 CFR 800.11(c), each report will include an itemized listing of all measures required to implement the terms of this Project PA. B. The Consulting Parties will review the reports pursuant to the timelines established in Stipulation III: Deliverables and Consulting Party Review Procedures. At its own discretion, or at the request of any Signatory, FHWA may convene a meeting to facilitate review and comment on the reports, and to resolve any questions about their content and/or to resolve objections or concerns. X. Dispute Resolution A. Any party to this Project PA may object to its terms or the implementation of its terms by providing written objection to FHWA. FHWA will ensure the process outlined in Stipulation 7 of the Statewide Agreement is followed. E. FHWA’s responsibility to carry out all other actions subject to the terms of this Project PA that are not the subject of the dispute remains unchanged. I-494: Airport to Highway 169 Project 12 REVIEW DRAFT 1 54 USC 306108 Programmatic Agreement XI. Amendments A. Any Signatory or Invited Signatory may request an amendment to this Project PA by making a written request to FHWA. This Project PA may be amended when such an amendment is agreed to in writing by all Signatories and Invited Signatories. The amendment will be effective on the date of the final signature by the Signatories and Invited Signatories. B. FHWA will provide copies of any amendments to all Consulting Parties and to the ACHP. XII. Duration A. This Project PA will remain in effect from the date of execution for a period not to exceed ten (10) years. If FHWA anticipates that the terms of this Project PA cannot be completed within this timeframe, it will notify the Consulting Parties in writing at least sixty (60) calendar days prior to the expiration date. This Project PA may be extended by the written concurrence of the Signatories and Invited Signatories. B. FHWA will ensure the Project PA is extended if all the Stipulations have not been completed. If this Project PA expires and FHWA elects to continue with the undertaking, FHWA will reinitiate Section 106 consultation in accordance with 36 CFR Part 800. C. If, prior to the expiration date, FHWA determines all the activities subject to this Project PA are completed, then FHWA may terminate this Project PA pursuant to Stipulation XIII: Termination. XIII. Termination A. If all terms of this Project PA have been completed prior to the expiration date, FHWA may terminate the Project PA with notification to Signatories, Invited Signatories, and Concurring Parties that the terms of the Project PA have been completed. If a Consulting Party feels Project PA termination is premature, or that the terms of the Project PA have not been met, they will respond within the timeframes outlined in Stipulation III: Deliverables and Consulting Party Review Procedures. B. Any Signatory or Invited Signatory may terminate this Project PA by providing at least thirty (30) calendar days’ notice to all Consulting Parties. FHWA will consult with the Signatories and Invited Signatories during the thirty (30) calendar day notice period in an attempt to seek agreement on amendments or other actions that would avoid termination. In the event of termination, FHWA will reinitiate review of the undertaking in accordance with 36 CFR 800, the Statewide Agreement, and any active agreements FHWA has with federally recognized tribes. Any Federal agencies I-494: Airport to Highway 169 Project 13 REVIEW DRAFT 1 54 USC 306108 Programmatic Agreement invited to be a Consulting Party under Stipulation I: Applicability will comply with 36 CFR 800.3-800.13 for their undertaking, when applicable. XIV. Execution A. This Project PA may be executed in counterparts, with a separate page for each Consulting Party. This Project PA will become effective on the date of the final signature by the Signatories and Invited Signatories. The refusal of any party invited to concur with this Project PA does not invalidate this Project PA. FHWA will ensure each Consulting Party is provided with a fully executed copy of this Project PA and that the final Project PA, updates to appendices, and any amendments are filed with the ACHP. B. Execution of this Project PA by FHWA and MnSHPO, and implementation of its terms is evidence that FHWA has taken into account the effects of its undertaking on historic properties and has afforded the ACHP an opportunity to comment, pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. SIGNATURE PAGE PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION AND THE MINNESOTA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE REGARDING THE INTERSTATE 494: AIRPORT TO HIGHWAY 169 PROJECT, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA SIGNATORY FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION (FHWA) By: Date: Wendell L. Meyer, Division Administrator SIGNATURE PAGE PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION AND THE MINNESOTA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE REGARDING THE INTERSTATE 494: AIRPORT TO HIGHWAY 169 PROJECT, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA SIGNATORY MINNESOTA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE (SHPO) By: Date: Amy Spong, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer SIGNATURE PAGE PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION AND THE MINNESOTA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE REGARDING THE INTERSTATE 494: AIRPORT TO HIGHWAY 169 PROJECT, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA INVITED SIGNATORY MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (MnDOT) By: Date: Nancy Daubenberger, Interim Commissioner SIGNATURE PAGE PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION AND THE MINNESOTA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE REGARDING THE INTERSTATE 494: AIRPORT TO HIGHWAY 169 PROJECT, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA INVITED SIGNATORY FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION (FTA) By: Date: *ADD NAME, *ADD TITLE SIGNATURE PAGE PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION AND THE MINNESOTA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE REGARDING THE INTERSTATE 494: AIRPORT TO HIGHWAY 169 PROJECT, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA INVITED SIGNATORY UNITED STATES ARMY, CORPS OF ENGINEERS, SAINT PAUL DISTRICT By: Date: *ADD NAME, *ADD TITLE SIGNATURE PAGE PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION AND THE MINNESOTA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE REGARDING THE INTERSTATE 494: AIRPORT TO HIGHWAY 169 PROJECT, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA CONCURRING PARTY CITY OF EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION By: Date: *ADD NAME, *ADD TITLE Appendix A: I-494 Project Footprint Appendix A: I-494 Project Footprint Appendix A: I-494 Project Footprint Appendix A: I-494 Project Footprint Appendix B: Area of Potential Effects (APE) Appendix B.1: APE for First Construction Project (S.P. 2785-424) Additional APEs to be developed for each construction project and numbered according to project number (i.e., Second Construction Project would be B.2). Appendix B.1: First Construction Project (S.P. 2785-424) Appendix B.1: First Construction Project (S.P. 2785-424) Appendix B.1: First Construction Project (S.P. 2785-424) Appendix B.1: First Construction Project (S.P. 2785-424) Date: April 12, 2022 Agenda Item #: VI.D. To:Heritage P reservation C ommission Item Type: O ther F rom:Emily Bodeker, As s is tant C ity P lanner Item Activity: Subject:Annual Elections Action C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED: Elect the Chair and Vice C hair of the Heritage P reservation C ommission. I N TR O D U C TI O N: Annual elections of C hair and Vice Chair of the H eritage P reservation Commission.