Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
08-11-2022 HPC Packet
Ag enda Heritage Preservation Commission City Of E dina, Minnesota Mayor's Conference R oom-E dina City Hall Thursday, August 11, 2022 6:00 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: Ju ly 12, 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-22-5 4505 Drexel Ave- Front Door Overha n g (continued from July 12) B.Up d ate to COA H-21-6 4633 Ard en Aven u e-Upda te to b u ild ing m aterials, a d d ition of new secon d 4oor w indow, a n d ch anges to the fron t d orm er (continued from Ju ly 12) C.Ad visory Com m u n ication : Su b com m ittee Recom m en d ation s D.2023 W ork Pla n Bra instorm VII.Cha ir An d Mem ber Com m ents A.Centu ry Hom es W ork Pla n Upda te VIII.Sta9 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 ampli=cation, an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Date: August 11, 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 : July 12, 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 J uly 12, 2022 minutes of the H eritage P reservation Commission. I N TR O D U C TI O N: AT TAC HME N T S: Description July 12, 2022 HPC Minutes Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Minutes City of Edina, Minnesota Heritage Preservation Commission Tuesday, July 12, 2022 I. Call to Order Chair Schilling called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. II. Roll Call Answering roll call were Chair Schilling, Commissioners, Cundy, Everson, Pollock (7:05), Nymo, Lonnquist, Knudsen, and Kmetz-Sheehy (7:10). Staff present: HPC Staff Liaison Emily Bodeker, Building Official David Fisher, City Manager Scott Neal III. Approval of Meeting Agenda Motion made by Cundy, seconded by Pollock to approve the meeting agenda as presented, moving the City Council Work Session Follow up to the first item under Reports/Recommendations. All voted aye. The motion carried. IV. Approval of Meeting Minutes Motion made by Lonnquist, seconded by Knudsen to approve the May 10, 2022, meeting minutes. All voted aye. The motion carried. V. Community Comment: Dan Dulas, 4609 Brue Avenue expressed concerns on the timeline of construction and projects sitting dormant. He also expressed concern for the loss of historic resources after façade alterations by a certain contractor. VI. Reports/Recommendations Motion by Cundy, seconded by Nymo to table the City Manager’s presentation to after the COA items on the agenda. Commissioners Cundy, Everson, Pollock, Nymo, Lonnquist and Knudsen voted aye. Commissioner Kmetz-Sheehy voted nay. The motion passed. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: B. COA H-22-7, 4707 Sunnyside Road-Change of Garage Doors Liaison Bodeker introduced the COA request to for changes to a street facing façade garage door. Motion made by Lonnquist seconded by Nymo to approve the COA as requested with the condition that all roofs, exterior walls, doors, and windows are required to be kept weather tight through the construction process to protect the integrity of the structure. All voted aye. The motion carried. C. COA H-22-6 4914 Bruce Ave-New Detached Garage. Liaison Bodeker introduced the proposed COA for a new garage at 4914 Bruce Avenue. Staff also noted that the new garage requires a front yard setback variance, which will be heard by the Planning Commission. Motion by Cundy seconded by Lonnquist to approve the new garage as presented with the conditions of 10 foot or smaller garage door widths, an architectural detail added to the north wall and a date plaque installed on the exterior of the new garage. All voted yes. The motion passed. D. COA H-22-5 4505 Drexel Ave-New Detached Garage and Front Door Overhang Liaison Bodeker introduced the proposed COA for a new detached garage and front door overhang. Motion made by Cundy seconded by Nymo to split the discussion items and discuss the garage and overhang separately. All voted aye. The motion carried. Motion made by Cundy seconded by Lonnquist to table the front door overhang portion of the COA application to the August HPC meeting. All voted yes. The motion carried. Motion made by Lonnquist seconded by Cundy to approve the COA for the detached garage with the condition that an as built date plaque be installed on the exterior of the new garage. All voted aye. The motion carried. E. Update to COA H-21-6 4633 Arden Avenue-Update to Building Materials Liaison Bodeker introduced the update to COA H-21-6 which included the building materials and an additional window on the second floor of the street facing façade. Motion made by Cundy seconded by Knudsen to deny the proposed changes including the materials presented and including the second-floor window. The motion was withdrawn because Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: the applicant was agreeable to be tabled to the August HPC meeting. The commission was clear all proposed changes to the original COA should be included in. Motion made by Cundy seconded by Pollock to table the Update to COA H-21-6 to the August HPC meeting. All voted aye. The motion carried. A. City Council Work Session Follow Up City Manager Neal presented to the Commission. The HPC and staff discussed steps moving forward. The Commission decided to create a sub-committee of the HPC to get together to answer some of the questions outlined in the staff memo from Assistant Manager Schaeffer. Community Engagement Manager Lamon offered to help the group with steps moving forward and bringing Commission Correspondence to the City Council. F. 2023 Work Plan Brainstorm Staff Liaison Bodeker asked the Commission to send her work plan items to bring to the HPC meeting in August. VII. Chair and Member Comments: Chair Schilling mentioned the Cake Walk Tour from Hennepin County History Museum was happening this weekend. Commissioner Everson mentioned to the HPC that he is working on an old Victorian house in White Bear Lake-the oldest house he has worked on. IX. Staff Comments: None X. Adjournment Motion made by Nymo seconded by Lonnquist to adjourn the meeting at 10:30 pm. All voted aye. The motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Emily Bodeker Date: August 11, 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-22-5 4505 Drexel Ave- F ront Door O verhang (continued from July 12) 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 continued from July 12 for a front door overhang at 4505 D rexel Avenue as submitted. I N TR O D U C TI O N: T he subject property, 4505 Drexel Avenue is located on the east side of D rexel Avenue, south of Sunnyside Road and north of B ridge Street. T he original house is a two-story home that was built in 1930 with an attached garage and is classified as a Tudor R evival S tyle. AT TAC HME N T S: Description Staff Report Updated Applicant Submittal Consultant Vogel Memo-August Consultant Vogel Memo- July Aerial Map August 11, 2022 Heritage Preservation Commission Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner Certificate of Appropriateness: 4505 Drexel Avenue- Front Door Overhang Information / Background: The subject property, 4505 Drexel Avenue is located on the east side of Drexel Avenue, south of Sunnyside Road and north of Bridge Street. The original house is a two-story home that was built in 1930 with an attached garage and is classified as a Tudor Revival Style. The original Certificate of Appropriateness request included the construction of a new detached garage and the construction of a front door overhang. The COA for a detached garage was approved at the July 12th meeting of the Heritage Preservation Commission. The front door overhang portion of the COA request was continued to the August 11th meeting. Primary Issues: The continued request is for the front door overhang that is proposed at the subject property. The objective of the Country Club Landmark District is preservation of the existing historic house facades and streetscapes. The city has adopted the Secretary of the Interior’s standards for rehabilitation when reviewing certificate of appropriateness applications. Staff believes the following standards of rehabilitation are pertinent to the review of the certificate of appropriateness: Distinctive features, finishes and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historical materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. STAFF REPORT Page 2 New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Preservation Consultant Vogel reviewed the updated application and does not have additional comments. He noted the proposed façade alteration meets applicable preservation standards. Staff Recommendation & Findings: Staff recommends approval of the continued certificate of appropriateness request for a front door overhang at 4505 Drexel Avenue as submitted by the applicant. 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. Conditions for approval: All roofs, exterior walls, doors, and windows are required to be kept weather tight through the construction process. This is to protect the integrity of the structure. 9'-3"3'-10"Roofing to match existing 12 12 Front Portico Elevation 3'-3"3'-6"2'-4" 12 12 Side Elevation DWN REV Applicable on Arch B Paper DATE BY BY SCALE SEE VIEWDESIGNED FORKen Heyda Design, LLC 612 Highway 55 Medina, MN 55340 Lic# BC634662 Ken Heyda Design, LLC 612-221-6995 kenheyda@comcast.net SHEET # A9 DATE POPE DWN REV Applicable on Arch B Paper DATE BY BY SCALE SEE VIEWDESIGNED FORKen Heyda Design, LLC 612 Highway 55 Medina, MN 55340 Lic# BC634662 Ken Heyda Design, LLC 612-221-6995 kenheyda@comcast.net SHEET # A10 DATE POPE DWN REV Applicable on Arch B Paper DATE BY BY SCALE SEE VIEWDESIGNED FORKen Heyda Design, LLC 612 Highway 55 Medina, MN 55340 Lic# BC634662 Ken Heyda Design, LLC 612-221-6995 kenheyda@comcast.net SHEET # A11 DATE POPE if you have any questions or suggestions, and when the next meeting will be. Thanks so much! Karen Kelly Sent from my iPhone MEMORANDUM TO: Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner FROM: Robert Vogel, Preservation Planning Consultant DATE: June 29, 2022 SUBJECT: COA for 4505 Drexel Avenue I have reviewed the plans and supporting documents submitted in relation to the COA application for construction of a new detached garage and the addition of a “bracketed portico” above the front entry of the house at 4505 Drexel Avenue in the Country Club District. The applicant proposes to convert the existing attached garage to living space. Built in 1930, the subject property is classified as an example of the Tudor Revival style. It is not individually eligible for landmark designation but is considered a contributing heritage preservation resource within the Country Club District. Therefore, a Certificate of Appropriateness is required for construction of the new detached garage. The district plan of treatment includes design guidelines for garages based on the Secretary of the Interior’s standards for rehabilitation. Homes with attached garages are common within the district boundaries (roughly one-third of the homes built between 1924 and 1944 had attached garages). The conversion of attached garages to living space, necessitating construction of new detached accessory structures, has also become a frequent occurrence. Historically, the city has not discouraged this practice. Numerous projects similar to the one proposed for 4505 Drexel have been certified as appropriate by the HPC since the current preservation ordinance was adopted in 2002. In my professional opinion, the plans for the new garage are consistent with the goals of the Country Club District plan of treatment and the standards for rehabilitation. The new construction matches the architectural character of the house and is compatible with surrounding properties. No historic features or materials will be destroyed and the essential historic character defining features of the house will not be substantially altered. Therefore, I recommend approval of the COA (with the usual conditions for new construction projects). Regarding the proposed portico or overhang above the front door, the district plan of treatment does not address these kinds of minor façade alterations—a COA is only required for demolition of specific architectural features (porches, vestibules, dormers, chimneys, attached garages ). In my professional opinion, the new entry is well designed and meets applicable standards for rehabilitation. No historically important architectural details will be destroyed or obscured by the proposed work and the changes to the façade will be minimal. From a streetscape perspective, the new work will be compatible with the house’s original design and with surrounding properties in terms of architectural style and materials. (Contextually, historic homes in the Country Club District which have been classified as “Tudor” often incorporate design elements borrowed from other popular period revival styles—therefore, the arched portico is not out of place in a neighborhood where the majority of the houses are architectural hybrids.) Ed ina, Hennep in, MetroG IS, © WSB & Asso ciates 2013 4505 Drexel Ave July 5, 2 022 1 in = 35 f t / Date: August 11, 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:Update to C O A H-21-6 4633 Arden Avenue-Update to building materials, addition of new s econd floor window, and changes to the front dormer (continued from July 12) 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: A case could be made for approval and denial of the proposed building material. T he staff report offers options for the H eritage P reservation Commission to consider. Approve of the addition of a second floor window and changes to the second floor dormer as presented by the applicant. I N TR O D U C TI O N: T he subject property, 4633 Arden Avenue is located on the east side of Arden Avenue, just north of the intersection of Arden Avenue and Country C lub R oad. T he existing home on the subject property was built in 1938 and is identified as an example of E nglish Cottage style but classified as an American C olonial Cottage in the C ountry Club N ational Register nomination documents. A certificate of appropriateness was approved on April 13, 2022 for the construction of a detached garage and a second floor addition that is visible from the street facing façade, changes to an existing dormer and changes to the entryway. T he original C O A noted that the existing brick was to remain on the front of the house and reused for the garage. T he property owner removed the brick without notifying the city. Staff notified the contractor that the building material would need to come back to the H P C for approval. T he building official placed a stop work order on the site on M ay 17, 2022. T he contractor had permission with the stop work order to install house wrap to protect sheathing. T hey were also notified all windows need to be kept closed or weathertight. T he request includes the approval of building materials and the addition of a second-floor window as shown on the updated proposed elevations. AT TAC HME N T S: Description Staff Report Updated Applicant Submittal Additional Email from Applicant Consultant Vogel Memo-August Aerial Map August 11, 2022 Heritage Preservation Commission Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner Amendment to COA H-21-6, 4633 Arden Avenue-building materials, addition of a second-floor window and changes to street facing dormer Information / Background: The subject property, 4633 Arden Avenue is located on the east side of Arden Avenue, just north of the intersection of Arden Avenue and Country Club Road. The existing home on the subject property was built in 1938 and is identified as an example of English Cottage style but classified as an American Colonial Cottage in the Country Club National Register nomination documents. A certificate of appropriateness was approved on April 13, 2021, for the construction of a detached garage and a second-floor addition that is visible from the street facing façade, changes to an existing dormer and changes to the entryway. The original COA noted that the existing brick was to remain on the front of the house and reused for the garage. The property owner removed the brick without notifying the city. Staff notified the contractor that the building material would need to come back to the HPC for approval. The building official placed a stop work order on the site on May 17, 2022. The contractor had permission with the stop work order to install house wrap to protect sheathing. They were also notified all windows need to be kept closed or weathertight. The request includes the approval of building materials, the addition of a second-floor window and changes to the size of a street facing dormer, including window size, as shown on the updated proposed elevations. Primary Issues: The request is for the HPC to approve the replacement brick material, approve the placement of a new second story window, and approve the changes to a street facing dormer (including window sizes). The applicant removed the brick from the house without notifying or getting approvals from STAFF REPORT Page 2 city staff. The commission is asked to review the proposed materials. The objective of the Country Club Landmark District is preservation of the existing historic house facades and streetscapes. The city has adopted the Secretary of the Interior’s standards for rehabilitation when reviewing certificate of appropriateness applications. Staff believes the following standards of rehabilitation are pertinent to the review of the certificate of appropriateness: The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. Distinctive features, finishes and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historical materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. Preservation Consultant Vogel reviewed the updated application and has written a memo that is attached in the heritage preservation commission packet. Staff Recommendation & Findings: A case could be made for approval or denial of the proposed replacement brick material. Below provides options for the heritage preservation commission to consider: Approval (brick, window and dormer) Approve the amendment to COA H-21-6 approving the updated building material (Tundrabrick, Modular Winter Mist, or Welshire Tumbled Brick with a painted finish) approval of the addition of a second-floor window and approval of the change in size of the dormer, including the size of the windows. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed brick material meets the intent of the Secretary of the Interior’s standards for rehabilitation and the Country Club Plan of Treatment. 2. The replacement brick is appropriate for rehabilitation projects in the country club district. 3. The replacement material would match the original brick material in size, composition, design, color, texture, and other visual qualities. 4. The visual impact of the additional window and changes to the dormer is minimal and STAFF REPORT Page 3 compatible with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and the Country Club Plan of Treatment. Denial for Brick (approval for window and changes to the dormer) Deny the proposed replacement brick material, approve the addition of a second-floor window, and approve changes to the street facing façade: 1. The existing brick was a distinguishing feature of the home. Tundabrick does not match the features of the original brick in size, composition, design, color, texture, or other visual qualities. 2. The visual impact of the proposed window is minimal and compatible with the house’s original design. 3. The addition of the window and changes to the dormer meet the intent of the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and the Country Club Plan of Treatment. Date: July 27, 2022 To: Emily Bodeker – City of Edina From: Scott Busyn Subject: 4633 Arden Avenue Amendment to COA: Material Selection , Adding Window, and Adjusting Size of Shed Dormer Hi Emily, During the process of preparing the home for renovation, we realized that the existing brick was deteriorated and that there was an insufficient weather barrier to maintain a drainage plane behind the existing brick. The one layer of building paper was crumbling and brittle. The paper had insufficient coverage as it was not lapped properly in a waterfall fashion (reverse lapped in several areas). The paper was not nailed sufficiently and had nail holes. There was also no flashing over the windows. We are planning to install a code -complaint weather barrier and replace the brick with a similar tumbled brick. We are proposing to use either: 1) Tundrabrick, 2) Modular Winter Mist, 3) Welshire Tumbled Brick with a painted finish. We have photographic documentation of the original brick details on the home for the mason to match with the new product. We would also like to add a small window to the street facing façade to bring light into a kids playroom on the second floor and expand the shed dormer. The origin al size of the dormer on the drawing submitted for COA was 13.5’ x 5’. After doing the structural engineering and insulation requirements for permit,the dormer expanded slightly to 15’ x 5’. Approved COA Elevation: Existing Home Existing Weather Barrier Photos Proposed Material 1) Tundra Brick (Brick Veneer) Tundrabrick with mortar Tundrabrick on similar home 2) Modular Winter Mist (Full Brick) 3) 4) Welshire Tumbled Brick with Painted Finish 1 Emily Bodeker From:Scott Busyn <scott@greatneighborhoodhomes.com> Sent:Thursday, July 28, 2022 3:26 PM To:Emily Bodeker Cc:Cary Teague; David Fisher Subject:Re: 4633 Arden COA EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Emily, The windows on the COA sketch were approximately 24 x 48. The windows on the updated dormer I sent are approximately 24”w x 36” to 42"h. We want to maintain the 4/12 dormer pitch we submitted for the COA. Due to structural header requirements and keeping the bottoms of the window trim above the flashing on the roof below the dormer, these windows will be approximately 24”w x 36-42h.” We will measure for the final window size once we complete framing and understand existing conditions in the existing roof/dormer framing. Thanks, SCOTT BUSYN President 3939 West 50th Street, Suite 103A, Edina, MN 55424 Direct: 952.807.8765 | Fax: 952.926.1168 scott@greatneighborhoodhomes.com | greatneighborhoodhomes.com On Jul 28, 2022, at 10:44 AM, Emily Bodeker <EBodeker@EdinaMN.gov> wrote: Scott, Did the windows on the dormer change size from what was originally submitted with the COA? Please clarify. Please also plan to bring examples of the brick to the HPC meeting on Thursday, August 11th at 6:00. Thank you, <image001.gif> Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner 952-826-0462 | Fax 952-826-0389 4801 W. 50th St. | Edina, MN 55424 EBodeker@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov MEMORANDUM TO: Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner FROM: Robert Vogel, Preservation Planning Consultant DATE: August 1, 2022 SUBJECT: Comments on COA Amendment for House at 4633 Arden Avenue I have reviewed the materials submitted with the request to amend the COA previously issued for renovation of the existing house located at 4633 Arden Avenue in the Country Club District. The applicant proposes to add a window and enlarge the size of the shed-roof dormer shown in the original remodeling plan; both features are located on the subject property’s primary (street facing) elevation. In my professional opinion, the proposed façade alterations are minimal and compatible with the house’s original design. Attic windows and shed-roofed dormers are characteristic of homes inspired by the American Arts and Crafts Movement, which lasted from the 1880s until the 1920s. This type of dormer is actually quite common in the Country Club neighborhood, where it occurs as a minor decorative feature on both “period revival” (Colonial, Tudor and Mediterranean) and “mid-century modern” (Minimal Traditional, Neocolonial, and Ranch) style homes. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation allow for façade alterations on heritage resources so long as the new work preserves the features which are significant to the property’s historical, architectural and cultural values. Because no historic character defining architectural features will be destro yed or obscured by the new construction, the new window and enlarged dormer should be considered appropriate. Regarding replacement of the historic brick wall cladding, the Secretary of the Interior’s standards for rehabilitation state that deteriorated architectural features should be repaired, rather than replaced, “whenever possible”; however, if replacement is necessary, “the new material should match the material being replaced in composition, design, color, texture and other visual qualities.” The best practice for replacing old brick is to use new brick that duplicates the old as closely as possible—this assumes that the actual historic brick used in the original construction is no longer available. It is unlikely that the face brick used in 1938 is still being manufactured. As I noted previously, the best approach for design review would be for the applicant to provide the HPC with one or two of the old bricks along with samples of the proposed replacement brick so that the commissioners could make a side-by-side comparison. (It is hard for most people to judge the visual qualities of different construction materials based on photographs.) Ed ina, Hennep in, MetroG IS, © WSB & Asso ciates 2013 4633 A rden Avenue July 5, 2 022 1 in = 40 f t / Date: August 11, 2022 Agenda Item #: VI.C . To:Heritage P reservation C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation, O ther F rom:Emily Bodeker, As s is tant C ity P lanner Item Activity: Subject:Advisory C ommunic ation: S ubcommittee R ecommendations 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: Approve the advisory communication for C ity C ouncil's consideration. I N TR O D U C TI O N: T he H eritage P reservation Commission had a work session with C ity C ouncil on June 21st. T he H P C identified a number of concerns they wanted Council or staff to address. Assistant City Manager, Lisa S chaefer, wrote a memo summarizing the requests made by the Commission as a whole and individual commissioners who emailed city council/staff separately. City Manager, S cott N eal, and C ommunity E ngagement Manager, M J Lamon, attended the J uly H P C meeting to discuss the memo and provide the H P C with direction on how to draft advisory communication to C ouncil. At that meeting, the H P C chose a subcommittee of Commissioners Schililng, Lonnquist and N ymo to work on a draft document. City staff met with the subcommittee to go over a draft of the advisory communication and provided feedback. T he draft document was updated and staff then sent additional comments to make the requests to council clear. A draft of the advisory communication and a decision tree draft provided by the subcommittee is attached. S taff also included a draft escrow fee policy to inform/discuss with the commission. I f the commission approves the advisory communication, it will be sent for staff review and provided to C ouncil at their September 7 C ity C ouncil meeting. AT TAC HME N T S: Description Advis ory Communication: Subcommittee Recommendations _DRAFT COA Decision Tree-Draft DRAFT Escrow Fee Policy Heritage Preservation Commission Advisory Communication For Review at August, 2022 Meeting Situation At the Heritage Preservation Commission’s (HPC) last two joint meetings with Council, we raised concerns about our perceived lack of staff response to an aggressive developer violating the City’s rules for the Country Club District, an Edina Heritage Landmark. Our ongoing efforts to insist on enforcement of the City’s stated preservation policies led us to discover inconsistencies in the Plan of Treatment (POT), city code, and current practices for issuing Certificates of Appropriateness (COAs). While only two houses triggered this situation, the implications extend to preservation efforts throughout the city and into the future. Background The Country Club District is one of Edina’s eleven Heritage Landmark resources and is also listed on the National Register of Historic Places.The district is made up of 555 homes, roughly 88% of which are currently deemed contributing resources, having been built between 1924 and 1944 and maintaining sufficient historic integrity.A significant responsibility for the HPC is reviewing all COAs in the Country Club District, using the Plan of Treatment (POT) adopted by Council in 2008 following a one-year moratorium on major construction while the original 2003 POT was revised. The primary objective of this Heritage Landmark District is preservation of the existing historic house facades and streetscape. The preferred treatment for heritage preservation resources in the district is rehabilitation, which updates properties through repair, alteration, and additions while preserving the portions that convey historic and architectural values. The HPC approved a COA in September of 2020 and as a result of the developer ’s actions and the city’s lack of enforcement, a historic property in the Country Club District is no longer a contributing heritage resource. Another property purchased by the same developer is currently seeking an amendment to its original COA, approved in April of 2021. In both situations, the properties had exterior surfaces removed without proper permitting or consultation with city staff, leaving the home open to the elements for eight and five months respectively and waiting roughly a year to begin construction. (Detailed timelines for both projects are available if useful for Council’s consideration.) These two projects are not representative of Country Club, where voluntary compliance with the Secretary of the Interior ’s standards for rehabilitation is the standard practice and the POT has been a largely effective tool. They do, however, provide a template for future developers who may wish to alter or deteriorate a home to such a degree that it is no longer a contributing resource and therefore may be demolished and rebuilt. These two properties created significant resident comments about violations, lack of enforcement, and extensive periods of inactivity. HPC members repeatedly raised concerns with staff and one member exceeded typical commissioner conduct, doing extensive documentation, research, and outreach in an effort to urge enforcement. The HPC views this commissioner ’s efforts as largely necessary to prompt action and enforcement by staff. The HPC acknowledges the significant time staff has also spent addressing these problematic properties and considering ways to avoid similar situations in the future. For example, staff has already adopted one new condition suggested by the HPC, ensuring that homes are kept weathertight throughout construction. Staff has also stated its support for revising the documents used by the HPC to ensure consistency.Currently, city code dictates COAs are needed in the District if a permit is required for any demolition (in whole or part) or new construction. The POT requires COAs if its definition of demolition is met, although it also prohibits demolition, in whole or part, for any contributing resource. The POT is clear that COAs are needed for new homes (replacing non-contributing resources) or garages. It does not specify that COAs are needed for changes to street facing facades, although that has been the practice for many years and is outlined in the current checklists. In addition, the comprehensive plan has language about when a COA is required. Assessment The challenges presented by a developer with two concurrent construction projects in the Country Club District have revealed three main areas of vulnerability: staff enforcement of violations, inconsistencies between the city documents, and lack of tools to avoid and penalize similar situations in the future. It also highlights opportunities to build educational tools so that current and future HPC volunteers receive clear training to guide their deliberations. This communication was drafted by a subcommittee, revised after staff input, [and approved by the full commission]. We are committed to ongoing collaboration with staff and Council to ensure that the city’s stated preservation objectives are upheld fairly and consistently. Recommendations Goal:Recommendations: Prevent the loss of contributing heritage resources in the Country Club District. 1. Ask planning staff to work with the building department to issue stop work orders in a timely manner when a COA is violated. 2. Continue the creation of the construction escrow fee policy so the city has leverage to enforce penalties and correct violations. The HPC will be shown the draft and will review and comment, per 2022 work plan. 3. Staff draft legally valid conditions to attach to COAs and present to HPC to discuss their utility and feasibility: a.engagement of Building Inspector in COA deliberations for major home renovations, b.requirement that new owners review an approved COA with staff if it hasn’t been built, c.potential penalties for excessive delay and inactivity if warranted by past projects. 4. Staff explore and explain the option of COA’s expiring prior to building permit issuance. Clarify the discrepancies in city documents as to when a COA is required in CCD. 5. Staff will seek initial input from the HPC and subcommittee on unifying the instruction provided by code, POT, planning checklists, and comprehensive plan. Staff will explain the process for making these corrections and seek review and comment of changes. Improve the application process. 6. Staff review and update the application checklist and the HPC will review and comment. a.Add this requirement for street facing facade change COAs:Existing exterior elevations (or photos) of street facing facades, to scale. 7. Staff will hold applications for COAs until all required information has been submitted, including sufficient detail on COA amendment applications for HPC to make an informed decision on alignment with the POT. 8. Remove the 45-day COA timeline requirement and default to the state’s 60-day rule. With the 60-day rule, the HPC will have to review and act on COA applications within 60 days of a complete application. Build education tools that clarify and illustrate appropriate rehabilitation. [Note: both 9 and 10 are proposed work plan items under consideration.] 9. Create a decision tree schematic showing what types of construction work in the Country Club District trigger a COA. This would be utilized to educate HPC members, the public and developers. 10. Solicit consultant support to create training materials using photos of homes built during 1924-1944 that are no longer contributing heritage resources and explaining why (i.e. excessive or inappropriate changes), as recommended in 2019 Country Club Re-Survey Report. givS-I.giv\•-~, DRAFT EDINA LANDMARK PROPERTY& DISTRICT ESCROW FEE POLICY The construction on this site will follow normal industry and City accepted construction methods for a project of this type and, if applicable, will follow the approved certificate of appropriateness approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission. Specific items of concern will be addressed as noted below. Any references to start date or duration of specific items are estimated and included only for reference. The undersigned hereby acknowledges that they are responsible for complying with the below conditions. __________________________________________ ________________ Signature of Contractor Date Site Contractor: __________________________ Address: _______________________________ Phone:_________________________________ Email Address: __________________________ The estimated construction start date is _________________________. The estimated completion date is ______________________________. Project Description: . Was a Certificate of Appropriateness Required? Yes COA#________ No ADD TO ARTICLE IV. AFTER SECTION 10-110? (Draft Language) Permit Requirements for Heritage Landmark Properties or Properties within a Heritage Landmark District The applicant must furnish the City a cash escrow of Fifteen Thousand ($15,000) Dollars for a building permit that includes exterior work with a project valuation greater than One-Hundred Thousand ($100,000) Dollars for Edina Landmark properties or properties within an Edina Landmark District. The City may draw on the cash escrow to keep structures weather tight and protected, to comply with other city ordinances, and reinspection fees. If the City draws on the cash escrow, upon the City’s demand the permit holder must deposit in escrow additional funds to restore the escrowed amount to Fifteen Thousand ($15,000) Dollars. The cash escrow must remain in place until the work under the permit for which the escrow was made has been completed. Sec. 10-112. Stop Work Orders. (EXISTING CODE LANGUAGE) Project Name & Site Address Number (For Office Use Only) Permit Number Draft If the Building Official finds any work being performed in a dangerous or unsafe manner or that is in violation of the provisions of the permit, City Code or the State Building Code, the Building Official may issue a stop work order. The stop work order must be in writing and issued to the pe rmit holder or the person doing the work. Upon issuance of a stop work order, the cited work must immediately cease. The stop work order must state the reason for the order and the conditions under which the cited work will be permitted to resume. Sec. 36-722. - Review of permits. (EXISTING CODE LANGUAGE) Subd. 1 To protect significant heritage resources, the herita ge preservation board shall review all appli cations for city permits for the following types of work in relation to a designated heritage landmark: (1) Demolition of any building or structure, in whole or in part; (2) Moving a building or structure to anot her location; (3) Excavation of archeologica l features, grading or earth moving in are as believed to contain significant buried heritage resources; and (4) New construction. Subd. 2 No city permits for the types of work described in subsection (a) of thi s section will be issued without a certificate of appropriatene ss signed by the city planner and approved by the heritage preservation board evidencing compliance with the comprehensiv e heritage preservation plan. Applications for a certificate of appropriateness shall be made on forms provided by the planning department and shall be accompa nied by the fee set forth in section 2-724. The application shall be accompanied by plans and drawings to scale, which clearly illustrate, to the satisfaction of the planner, the work to be undertaken if the permit is granted. Certificates of app ropriateness may be granted subject to conditions Subd. 3 Permit review decisions shall be based on the Secretary of the Interior 's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, the comprehensive heritage preservation plan an d the heritage landmark preservation study, for each designated property. Subd. 4 The city planner and the heritage preservation board shall complete thei r review of applications for city permits requiring certificates of appropriateness within 45 days of the date of application. Subd. 5 The city planner and the heritage preservation board may issue certificates of appropriateness for work projects submitted voluntarily by owners of heritage resources. Subd. 6 To ensure compliance with the goals and policies of the com prehensive heritage preservation plan, the heritage preservation board shall review every application for a preliminary plat, conditional use permit, variance or rezoning, in relation to a designated heritage landmark; and the city planning commission shal l give the heritage preservation board a reasonable opportunity to comment on such projects before making its recommendation to the council. Draft Sec. 36-724. - Violation. (EXISTING CODE LANGUAGE) Violations of the provisions of this chapter or the conditions of approval granted thereunder shall be a misdemeanor. This chapter may also be enforced by injunc tion, abatement or any other appropriate remedy, in any court of comp etent jurisdiction. Sec. 36-725. - Maintenance of heritage landmark properties. (EXISTING CODE LANGUAGE) Every owner or person in possession of a desig nated heritage landmark shall keep the property in good repair. Date: August 11, 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:2023 Work P lan Brains torm Dis cus s ion 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: Discuss ideas for the 2023 work plan. I N TR O D U C TI O N: AT TAC HME N T S: Description Augus t Draft-2023 Work Plan Template Updated 2021.06.08 Commission: Heritage Preservation Commission 2023 Annual Work Plan Proposal-AUGUST DRAFT Initiative # 1 Initiative Type ☐ Project ☒ Ongoing / Annual ☐ Event Council Charge ☐ 1 (Study & Report) ☐ 2 (Review & Comment) ☐ 3 (Review & Recommend) ☒ 4 (Review & Decide) Initiative Title Review Certificates of Appropriateness applications Deliverable COAs Leads-All Commission Target Completion Date Ongoing All Commission Budget Required: (Completed by staff) Are there funds available for this project? If there are not funds available, explain the impact of Council approving this initiative. Staff Support Required (Completed by staff): How many hours of support by the staff liaison? Communications / marketing support? Liaison Comments: City Manager Comments: Progress Q1: Progress Q2: Progress Q3: Progress Q4: Template Updated 2021.06.08 Initiative # 2 Initiative Type ☐ Project ☒ Ongoing / Annual ☐ Event Council Charge ☐ 1 (Study & Report) ☐ 2 (Review & Comment) ☐ 3 (Review & Recommend) ☒ 4 (Review & Decide) Initiative Title Recruit nominees and award and promote the 2023 Heritage Preservation Award during Preservation Month in May Deliverable Award the 2023 Heritage Award, post nomination form and award winner on Edina social media Leads Target Completion Date May Sub-Committee Budget Required: (Completed by staff) Are there funds available for this project? If there are not funds available, explain the impact of Council approving this initiative. Staff Support Required (Completed by staff): How many hours of support by the staff liaison? Communications / marketing support? Liaison Comments: City Manager Comments: Progress Q1: Progress Q2: Progress Q3: Progress Q4: Initiative # 3 Initiative Type ☐ Project ☒ Ongoing / Annual ☐ Event Council Charge ☐ 1 (Study & Report) ☐ 2 (Review & Comment) ☒ 3 (Review & Recommend) ☐ 4 (Review & Decide) Initiative Title Based on owner interest, nominate eligible properties as Edina Heritage Landmarks and add additional properties to the eligible property list. Deliverable Add to eligible property list Designate additional Edina Heritage Landmark properties Leads-All Commission Target Completion Date Ongoing All Commission Budget Required: (Completed by staff) Are there funds available for this project? If there are not funds available, explain the impact of Council approving this initiative. Staff Support Required (Completed by staff): How many hours of support by the staff liaison? Communications / marketing support? Liaison Comments: City Manager Comments: Progress Q1: Progress Q2: Progress Q3: Progress Q4: Template Updated 2021.06.08 Initiative # 4 Initiative Type ☐ Project ☐ Ongoing / Annual ☐ Event Council Charge ☐ 1 (Study & Report) ☐ 2 (Review & Comment) ☐ 3 (Review & Recommend) ☐ 4 (Review & Decide) Initiative Title Create a decision tree schematic explaining what work in the Country Club District triggers a COA for use educating the HPC and homeowners. Deliverable Leads Target Completion Date Sub-Committee or Working Group Budget Required: (Completed by staff) Are there funds available for this project? If there are not funds available, explain the impact of Council approving this initiative. Staff Support Required (Completed by staff): How many hours of support by the staff liaison? Communications / marketing support? Liaison Comments: City Manager Comments: Progress Q1: Progress Q2: Progress Q3: Progress Q4: Template Updated 2021.06.08 Initiative # 5 Initiative Type ☐ Project ☐ Ongoing / Annual ☐ Event Council Charge ☐ 1 (Study & Report) ☐ 2 (Review & Comment) ☐ 3 (Review & Recommend) ☐ 4 (Review & Decide) Initiative Title Improve decision-making using a consultant-led review of homes in the Country Club District built during 1924-1944 that are no longer contributing heritage resources due to excessive or inappropriate changes. Deliverable Leads Target Completion Date Sub-Committee or Working Group Budget Required: (Completed by staff) Are there funds available for this project? If there are not funds available, explain the impact of Council approving this initiative. Staff Support Required (Completed by staff): How many hours of support by the staff liaison? Communications / marketing support? Liaison Comments: City Manager Comments: Progress Q1: Progress Q2: Progress Q3: Progress Q4: Parking Lot: (These items have been considered by the BC, but not proposed as part of this year’s work plan. If the BC decides they would like to work on them in the current year, it would need to be approved by Council.) Date: August 11, 2022 Agenda Item #: VI I.A. 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:C entury Homes Work P lan Update Dis cus s ion, 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: I N TR O D U C TI O N: C entury Homes workplan update from C ommissioners Lonnquist, Maheshwari, and H assenstab AT TAC HME N T S: Description Century Home Workplan Update Century Homes Workplan UpdateJane LonnquistAshwin MaheshwariMark Hassenstab HPC Work Plan Initiative #5HPC Work Plan Initiative #5HPC Work Plan Initiative #5HPC Work Plan Initiative #51. Historic Awareness2. Community Connection3. Environmental ImpactOpportunity StatementOpportunity StatementOpportunity StatementOpportunity Statement Timing ImplicationsTiming ImplicationsTiming ImplicationsTiming ImplicationsBacklog and coming years:219| Homes already 100 years old18| Turning 100 in 202335| Turning 100 in 202477| Turning 100 in 2025Develop effective public education and outreach programs which promote the preservation, protection, and use of historic properties.City Map: Examples from other CitiesExamples from other CitiesExamples from other CitiesExamples from other CitiesCity Managed By Timing Recognition Application Fee Special NoteSt. Cloud City + HPC Annual Bronze Plaque $230 More than 85 homes to dateHastings City + HPC Annual Painted Aluminum Plaque$150 Facebook Users’ favorite gets plaque fee waivedSaint Louis Park Historical Society Ongoing Bronze Plaque $350 Great home research resources listedMinneapolis City Ongoing Bronze Plaque $410 For any significant buildingHopkins Historical Society Ongoing Certificate None On hold for staffingLake City City + HPC Annual Bronze Plaque $180 Online list and summary lives on city webpagePlaque SuggestionsPlaque SuggestionsPlaque SuggestionsPlaque Suggestions No Interest House Novel Plaque•Inventory•Follow up on cyclical basis•Innovative option•Willing and able partner•Traditional option•Timeless and establishedExamples from other CitiesExamples from other CitiesExamples from other CitiesExamples from other Cities HouseNovelHouseNovelHouseNovelHouseNovel Application ProcessApplication ProcessApplication ProcessApplication Process Primary Partners•Edina Historical Society – going to bring it up at next board meeting•HouseNovel – use Edina as template for national rollout•Other state historical preservation offices•Other local optionsSecondary Partners•Edina Rotary club•Edina Public schools•Community EducationPossible PartnersPossible PartnersPossible PartnersPossible Partners Process FlowProcess FlowProcess FlowProcess FlowOngoing Marketing and public awarenessHome is nearing 100 yearsTargeted outreach to ownersAccept on rolling basisRouted to appropriate selection avenueYESNOTry again laterAnnual splash for May “National Preservation Month” TimelineTimelineTimelineTimelineTimeline Action Item2022202220222022JanuaryJanuaryJanuaryJanuary Work Plan item: “Define resources needed to manage a potential program”OngoingOngoingOngoingOngoing Gathering best practice ideas from existing Century Home programs in MNAugustAugustAugustAugust Input from HPC, House Novel partnership conversation, submit 2023 work planSeptemberSeptemberSeptemberSeptember Finalize input from Edina Historical SocietyOctoberOctoberOctoberOctober Submit deliverables for Council consideration: “information and a recommendation for a future century home program in Edina.”Define expense categories needed for 2023 work plan if 2022 moves forward.2023202320232023JanuaryJanuaryJanuaryJanuary Potential Work Plan Initiative: Prepare all elements needed for a successfulFebruaryFebruaryFebruaryFebruary Conduct mailing to 219 Edina homes built in 1922 or earlier to explore potentialinterest and receive input on program designMarchMarchMarchMarchCommittee compiles community input and submits draft materials to staffAugustAugustAugustAugustSubmit deliverables for Council consideration and FY24 Work Plan Initiative2024202420242024JanuaryJanuaryJanuaryJanuary Potential Ongoing Work Plan Initiative “Review and approve applications to theCentury Home program when submitted, with annual community announcementand website update each May during National Preservation Month. Appendix Green light to continue defining resources needed to manage the program•Staff support•Website update•Outreach materials•Plaque design•Process feedback / approvalWhat are we asking Edina City to do?What are we asking Edina City to do?What are we asking Edina City to do?What are we asking Edina City to do? Century Homes Program Proposal – Working DraftHeritage Preservation Commission, 2022 Work Plan Item #5:Explore the development of a century home recognition program in Edina based on programs in other cities; define the resources needed to manage a potential program in the future.Opportunity StatementCities across the country have established Century Homes Recognition Programs in order to recognize and celebrate homes that are at least 100 years old. The benefits to these programs include:Historic Awareness: Interested applicants conduct and submit their own research of their home, including past applicants, architectural and construction details, historic photos, and other interesting facts. By merely suggesting resources such as the city and county historical societies, these programs encourage hyper-local history research and build a repository for sharing this information with the community. The program can also direct interested homeowners to additional resources, such as a training session with local “house detective” Kathleen Kullberg or use of the HouseNovel platform co-founded by an Edina native.Community Connection: The placards displayed for this honorary award prompt curiosity and interest within the communities where they exist. Opportunities for creating self-guided walking tours or other outreach programs featuring century homes have been utilized in other cities to build engagement and pride in a community and its past. Adopting a program similar to those used in other towns would advance the mission of the Heritage Preservation Commission, whose stated mission in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan is “to preserve the City’s historically significant resources (sites, districts, buildings, and objects) and ensure that they will be available for future generations to provide a sense of identity and continuity in a rapidly-changing world. It is the belief of the Commission that these things reflect and shape values and aspirations and thereby contribute to the City’s identity.”Environmental Impact: While the construction industry often portrays older homes as energy inefficient, new understanding documents how older buildings are often the greenest. The Architecture 2030 and Zero Net Carbon Collaborations quantified that buildings are the world’s largest source of carbon emissions at 39%, followed by industry (30%), transportation (22%), and other (9%). Building carbon emissions comprise 28% from operations and 11% from materials and construction. Property owner efforts that seek to reduce emissions from both areas, through rehabilitation and maintenance, can result in a 70-85% reduction in embodied carbon emissions compared to new construction.Source: "Building Reuse is Climate Action" Starts 44:25 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1TlrrA_2mYOpportunity Statement ExpandedOpportunity Statement ExpandedOpportunity Statement ExpandedOpportunity Statement Expanded HouseNovelHouseNovelHouseNovelHouseNovel PartnershipPartnershipPartnershipPartnership