Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-06-10 HPC Meeting Packet Meeting location: Edina City Hall Mayor's Conference Room 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting Agenda Tuesday, June 10, 2025 7:00 PM Accessibility Support: The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Meeting Agenda 4. Approval of Meeting Minutes 4.1. Minutes: April 8, 2025 5. Community Comment During "Community Comment," the Board/Commission will invite residents to share issues or concerns that are not scheduled for a future public hearing. Items that are on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. 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. 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 staff for consideration at a future meeting. 6. Reports/Recommendations 6.1. COA: 4623 Wooddale Avenue-Covered Entry 6.2. Century Home Signs 6.3. 2026 Work Plan Discussion Follow Up 7. Chair and Member Comments 7.1. 2025 Work Plan Updates Page 1 of 56 8. Staff Comments 9. Adjournment Page 2 of 56 BOARD & COMMISSION ITEM REPORT Date: June 10, 2025 Item Activity: Approve Meeting: Heritage Preservation Commission Agenda Number: 4.1 Prepared By: Emily Dalrymple, Assistant City Planner Item Type: Minutes Department: Item Title: Minutes: April 8, 2025 Action Requested: Provide the action requested. Information/Background: Approve the April 8, 2025, Heritage Preservation Commission minutes. Supporting Documentation: 1. HPC 04-08-2025 Minutes Page 3 of 56 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: X/XX/25 Minutes City of Edina, Minnesota Heritage Preservation Commission Tuesday, April 8, 2025 I. Call to Order Chair Everson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. Roll Call Answering roll call were Chair Everson, Commissioners Pope, Breiter, Waggoner, Olson, Jarvinen, Farrell- Straus. Staff present: HPC Staff Liaison Emily Dalrymple, Preservation Consultants Elizabeth Gales and Rachel Peterson. III. Approval of Meeting Agenda Motion made by Commissioner Pope, seconded by Commissioner Olson, to approve the meeting agenda as submitted. All voted aye. The motion carried. IV. Approval of Meeting Minutes A. March 11, 2025 Motion made by Breiter seconded by Pope, to approve the March 11, 2025, meeting minutes. All voted aye. The motion carried. V. Community Comment: None VI. Reports/Recommendations A. COA H-25-6, 4619 Edina Boulevard-Covered Front Entry Liaison Dalrymple stated the property is located on the east side of Edina Boulevard, just north of the intersection of Edina Boulevard, Country Club Road, and Moorland Avenue. The existing home on the lot is a two-story Mediterranean-style house built in 1928. The applicant is requesting a certificate of appropriateness for the installation of a new covered entrance over the existing front door. The applicant is proposing to add a shed roof overhang supported by columns above the front door. The roof of the new shed roof will match the existing clay tile roofing on the main house and the columns will be painted to match the stucco of the house. The structure will be anchored and supported to a new interior structure to minimize impacts to the historic façade. The project also includes the removal of a historic metal railing. Page 4 of 56 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: X/XX/25 Liaison Dalrymple stated that Hess Roise reviewed the application and provided a memo with a recommendation to approve the COA for the proposed changes to the addition of a covered entrance at 4619 Edina Boulevard Avenue. Staff agrees with this recommendation, which is based on the fact that the proposed changes will not affect major character-defining features of the home, the design of the new covered entry is compatible with the historic character of the property and matches existing materials, the proposed covered entry addition is reversible and if it were to be removed in the future, the façade could be returned to its historic configuration, and the proposed changes meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards of Rehabilitation and the Country Club Plan of Treatment. She noted the only conditions of approval are that any change to the approved elevations or materials will need to be submitted for review, and the applicant should keep the historic metal railing/grille and store it on-site after removal. Commissioner Jarvinen asked what would happen to the rail if removed, since it is an original feature. Liaison Dalrymple stated that the recommendation is to store it, but the applicant is present for questions. The applicant stated that they have a storage room where they can store it. The applicant answered the Commission’s questions related to the proposed additions. Additional discussion ensued. Motion made by Commissioner Jarvinen, seconded by Commissioner Breiter, to approve COA: 4619 Edina Boulevard, as submitted for a new covered entrance over the existing front door based on the four findings of fact and two conditions of approval. All voted aye. The motion carried. B. COA H-25-7, 4401 Country Club Road, Changes to Street Facing Façade & Entry Liaison Dalrymple stated the property is located on the south side of Country Club Road, south of the intersection of Country Club Road and Wooddale Avenue. The existing home on the lot is a story-and- a-half American Colonial-style home built in 1939. The applicant is requesting a certificate of appropriateness for a covered entry, an expanded dormer on the second floor, and window changes on the street-facing façade. Liaison Dalrymple stated that Hess Roise reviewed the application and provided a memo with a recommendation to deny the portion of the COA requesting changes to the windows on the front façade and proposed shed-roof dormer at 4401 Country Club Road. Staff agrees with this recommendation for denial, which is based on the fact that the proposed alterations to the windows would remove historic features, alter the spatial relationships of fenestration on the primary façade, and would further reduce the amount of historic fenestration on the primary façade, and the construction of a shed roof dormer for symmetry does not outweigh the loss of the only remaining historic dormer on the primary façade. Liaison Dalrymple stated that the Hess Roise recommendation is to approve the proposed door overhang/covered entry portion of the COA request at 4401 Country Club Road. Staff agrees with this Page 5 of 56 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: X/XX/25 recommendation for approval based on the fact that the proposed covered entry will not affect major character defining features of the home, the proposed covered entry addition is reversible and if it were to be removed in the future, the façade could be returned to its historic configuration, and the proposed changes meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards of Rehabilitation and the Country Club Plan of Treatment. Liaison Dalrymple noted the only conditions of approval are that any change to the approved elevations or materials will need to be submitted for review. Liaison Dalrymple made comments related to pictures of the plan. The applicant gave a presentation related to the application. Commissioner Waggoner noted that she appreciates the symmetry of the proposal and the way it matches the house. Additional discussion ensued. Motion made by Commissioner Jarvinen, seconded by Commissioner Waggoner, to approve COA: 4401 Country Club Road, as submitted for the proposed door overhang/covered entry portion of the COA request based on three findings of fact and one condition of approval. All voted aye. Commissioner Olson noted that he supports the approval of the one window on the bottom but would like a recommendation to add roofing to the side. Motion made by Commissioner Olson, seconded by Pope, to approve COA: 4401 Country Club Road, as submitted for the changes to the windows on the front façade and proposed shed-roof dormer portion of the COA request based on the two findings of fact with one recommendation. 6-1 (Nay Jarvinen). C. 2025 Edina Heritage Award Liaison Dalrymple reported that the HPC received two nominations, the book Urban Sanctuary: The Life of Minnehaha Creek, and Boos Cabin, 5017 Oak Bend Lane. She shared the reason for the nominations. Liaison Dalrymple displayed pictures of the Boos Cabin. She shared the history of the cabin. Additional discussion ensued regarding the Boos Cabin and its location. Commissioner Jarvinen noted that he is very impressed with the heritage of the cabin. The Commission discussed the nominations. Chair Everson suggested promoting the book differently, but the cabin would be a great recipient of the award. The Commission discussed excluding the address from the award for the privacy of the owners. Page 6 of 56 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: X/XX/25 Motion made by Jarvinen, seconded by Breiter, to approve the 2025 Edina Heritage Award to Boos Cabin, 5017 Oak Bend Lane. All voted aye. VII. Chair and Member Comments: A. Century Home Signs Liaison Dalrymple presented feedback from the City’s Communications Department. She described what the sign may look like based on the budget. Liaison Dalrymple noted the Communications Department is asking the HPC to respond to questions to help design the signage. She explained the details of the century home program and the signage for the homes. She noted that the signs will be given to the homes that are interested. Discussion ensued regarding the plaques and the signage for homes. Liaison explained that the City doesn’t do the research for the homes in the program. She noted that the people who apply will provide the background information. Commissioner Breiter gave some design suggestions for the signs. Additional discussion ensued relating to the design layout and design features of the sign. Liaison Dalrymple summarized the features the Commission would like on the sign. B. 2025 Work Plan Updates Commissioner Pope asked if the Heritage Award will be presented in May. Liaison Dalrymple explained that the award will be presented at one of the City Council meetings in May. VIII. Staff Comments: None. IX. Adjournment Motion made by Commissioner Waggoner, seconded by Pope, to adjourn the meeting at 8:19 pm. All voted aye. The motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Emily Dalrymple Page 7 of 56 BOARD & COMMISSION ITEM REPORT Date: June 10, 2025 Item Activity: Approve Meeting: Heritage Preservation Commission Agenda Number: 6.1 Prepared By: Emily Dalrymple, Assistant City Planner Item Type: Report & Recommendation Department: Community Development Item Title: COA: 4623 Wooddale Avenue-Covered Entry Action Requested: Approve the certificate of appropriateness request as submitted. Information/Background: The subject property, 4623 Wooddale Avenue, is located on the east side of Wooddale Avenue, north of Country Club Road. The existing home on the lot is a two-story Colonial Revival home built in 1936. The applicant’s proposal is for a certificate of appropriateness for a new covered entry with a new front-gable roof and fascia. In 2015, the property owner received a certificate of appropriateness for a flat roof covered entry. The flat roof covered entry was removed and replaced with the proposed covered entry without a building permit or COA. Staff contacted the contractor and informed them they needed both a certificate of appropriateness and a building permit for the project. Better Together Supporting Documentation: 1. Applicant Submittal 2. Staff Report 3. Consultant Memo 4. Current Site Photo 5. Assessing File 6. 2015 COA Info Page 8 of 56 Narrative : Project Description The proposed project involves the replacement of an existing 4' x 8' portico on the front façade of a contributing home within the Edina Country Club District. The new portico will maintain the same dimensions and footprint, but will feature a historically appropriate pitched roof design that is compatible with the home's architectural style and the period of construction. The existing flat roof has major maintenance problems and continues to cause poor water management. The proposed materials are wood framed roof with matching asphalt shingles as the house, Azek facia board and tongue and groove cedar ceiling. The new portico will match those found throughout the district and on at least 15 other homes with similar portico designs. Compliance with the Plan of Treatment This project aligns with the Plan of Treatment for the Country Club District in the following ways: • Rehabilitation Focus: The work constitutes a rehabilitation project, as defined by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, making possible a compatible use while preserving the home’s historic features and character. • Retention of Historic Character: The new portico will respect the existing spatial relationship and rhythm of the front façade, retaining the historic character of the property as outlined in Standard (b). • Compatible Design: In accordance with Standards (i) and (j), the replacement portico will not destroy historic materials or features and will be differentiated through its pitched roof while remaining compatible in terms of scale, proportion, and materials. • Architectural Compatibility: The design reflects the architectural vocabulary of the district and draws directly from other homes built during the original development period, thereby reinforcing the historic streetscape. • Minimal Visual Impact: The proposed change is modest in scope, maintains the same footprint, and will enhance the façade without altering the size or massing of the home. In summary, this portico replacement is a preservation-minded improvement that aligns with both the spirit and the letter of the Country Club District’s Plan of Treatment and design guidelines. It preserves the historical integrity of the property while enhancing architectural consistency within the district. Page 9 of 56 Page 10 of 56 Page 11 of 56 Page 12 of 56 Page 13 of 56 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION JOB NO. BOOK/PAGE SHEET 1" = 10'DATE CME 288-21 1 of 1 172/52 SCALE DRAWN REFERENCE REVISIONS REMARKS 4623 Wooddale Ave. Edina, MN 55424 SITE ADDRESS BENCHMARKT.N.H. near northwest corner of subject property. Elevation = 897.52. Lot 12, Block 9, COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT BROWN SECTION, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 06-17-2021 Woodrow A. Brown, R.L.S. MN REG 15230 W. BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC. Dated:EMAIL: INFO@WBROWNLANDSURVEYING.COM W. BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC. 8030 Cedar Avenue So., Suite 228.W B Bus: (952) 854-4055 Fax: (952) 854-4268 Bloomington, MN 55425 EXISTING CONDITION SURVEY for: ROB AMUNDSON SCALE IN FEET 10010 20 N LEGEND Page 14 of 56 Page 15 of 56 Page 16 of 56 June 10, 2025 Heritage Preservation Commission Emily Dalrymple, Assistant City Planner COA H-25-8, 4623 Wooddale Avenue, Covered Front Entry Information / Background: The subject property, 4623 Wooddale Avenue, is located on the east side of Wooddale Avenue, north of Country Club Road. The existing home on the lot is a two-story Colonial Revival home built in 1936. The applicant’s proposal is for a certificate of appropriateness for a new covered entry with a new front-gable roof and fascia. In 2015, the property owner received a certificate of appropriateness for a flat roof covered entry. The flat roof covered entry was removed and replaced with the proposed covered entry without a building permit or COA. Staff contacted the contractor and informed them they needed both a certificate of appropriateness and a building permit for the project. Consultant Memo: See attached memo from Elizabeth Gales and Rachel Peterson, Hess, Roise and Company. Recommendation & Findings: The recommendation is to approve the certificate of appropriateness request for the overhang/covered entry at 4623 Wooddale Avenue. The recommendation for approval is based on the following: •The proposed covered entry will not alter major character defining features of the home. •The proposed covered entry addition is reversible and if it were to be removed in the future, the façade could be returned to its historic configuration. •The proposed changes meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards of Rehabilitation and the Page 17 of 56 STAFF REPORT Page 2 Country Club Plan of Treatment. Conditions of approval: •Any change to the approved elevations or materials will need to be submitted for review. Page 18 of 56 Page 1 MEMO Date: 06/03/2025 To: Emily Dalrymple, City of Edina From: Rachel Peterson and Elizabeth Gales, Hess, Roise and Company Re: Certificate of Appropriateness Review – 4623 Wooddale Avenue Hess Roise has reviewed the Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) application for 4623 Wooddale Avenue in the Country Club Historic District using “Edina’s Historic Country Club District Plan of Treatment.” House The house has elements of the Colonial Revival style and is a contributing resource to the historic district. Character-defining features of 4623 Wooddale Avenue include: • Two-story building with side-gable roof and front-gable bays and dormers. • Lap siding. • Multi-light, double-hung sash windows. The city’s file on the property shows that changes have been made to the primary facade over time, and most changes appear to have happened after the end of the period of significance for the historic district. The house has had periods of time with and without shutters on the windows. A broken pediment was historically located above the entrance as part of a classically inspired door surround. It was modified over time and removed in 2015 and replaced with the current, non-historic 4′ by 8′ flat-roofed portico, which is topped by a balustrade and supported by classically-inspired posts. Proposed Work The following alteration to the primary facade are under review by the Heritage Preservation Commission: • Replace the flat roof and balustrade of the non-historic portico with a new front-gable roof and fascia. The flat roof and balustrade will be removed, and the classically inspired posts will remain and be reused. The new front-gable roof will have a 7:12 pitch and the peak of the roof will be 13′-4″ above grade. The applicant has noted in a request for more information that the roof structure will be wood frame and clad in asphalt shingles that match the shingles on the house. A fascia with a segmental arch will front the portico and will be made out of a composite material by Azek, The ceiling of the portico will be tongue-and-groove cedar. The Plan of Treatment includes ten guidelines. The following are considered the most relevant to the proposed work. Page 19 of 56 Page 2 B. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. I. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. J. New additions and adjacent new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment will be unimpaired. Recommendation The proposed change to the roof of the non-historic portico on the front facade appears to meet guidelines B, I, and J. The major character-defining features (massing, siding, and windows) will not be altered by the proposed project. No historic materials will be removed for the construction of the new portico roof. The design of the new roof on the non-historic portico is identifiably modern, but it is also compatible with the historic character of the property and uses similar materials and details. The proposed entrance portico is also reversible, and if it were to be removed in the future, the front facade would be returned to its historic configuration. Hess Roise recommends approval of the proposed new roof on the non-historic portico. Page 20 of 56 Page 21 of 56 Garage Open Porch 1/0 11.0' Deck/Gar 19.0' 1/0 28.0' 14.0' p 0) 17.0' 2/B Lc? City of Edina PID: 18-028-24-24-0011 Residential Field Card Property Address: 4623 Wooddale Ave Printed: 06/13/2007 Lot / Block: 012 / 009 Assessment Year: 2007 Addition: Country Club District, Brown Version: 2 District: 03 Model: 009-004-120 Neighborhood: 0114 Property Type: R - Residential Zoning: R-1 Dwelling Type: Single Family Owner(s): Jeffrey J Ruehl Cathy L Ruehl 18-028-24-24-0011 Sketch by Apex IV" Page 22 of 56 PID: Property Address: Lot / Block: Addition: District: Neighborhood: 18-028-24-24-0011 4623 Wooddale Ave 012 / 009 Country Club District, Brown 03 0114 City of Edina Residential Field Card Printed: 06/13/2007 Assessment Year: 2007 Version: 2 Model: 009-004-120 Land Zoning: R-1 Area Rating: Very Good Site Rating: Good Land Quality: Contamination: Flood Plain Map Ref: PUD Ref: Allowable Units: Excess Land (SqFt): Zoning Variance: N Frontage: 70 Left Side: Rear Side: Right Side: Effective Width: 70 Effective Depth: 124 Effective Water: 0 Property Area (SqFt): 8,652 Acreage: Park: Park Quality: On Lake: Lake Quality: On River: River Quality: Landscape Quality: Average Attributes Curbs Gas Gutter Paved Street Sewer Available Sidewalk Water Available Influences Thru Street Exterior Partial Const (%): Model: Dwelling Type: Adjacent Property: View: Arch./Appeal: Quality: Shape: Style: Construction: Exterior Walls: Exterior Trim: Roof Type: Roof Cover: Window Type I: Window Type 2: Air Conditioning: Dormer Length: Dormer Quality: Patio Doors: Exterior 2 Garage #1 Placement: # of Cars: Floor Area: Condition: Exterior Walls: Garage #2 Placement: of Cars: Floor Area: Condition: Exterior Walls: Porch Glazed Area: Quality: Screened Area: Quality: Open Area: Quality: Patio Patio 1 Area: Quality: Patio 2 Area: Quality: Deck Deck 1 Area: Quality: Deck 2 Area: Quality: 009-004-120 Single Family Equal Negative Average A07 Square Two Story Wood Frame Vinyl Gable Shingles Double Hung Central Attached 2 380 Average Metal 36 Average 95 Average Pool Pool 1 Area: Quality: Pool 2 Area: Quality: Amenities Basement Area (SqFt): 1,255 Type: Regular Finished (%): 40 Quality: Average # of Fireplaces: 1 Fplc. Quality: Average Avg. Clear. Height: Elec. Svc: Standard Htg. Svc: Forced air, gas fired W.O. Type: W.O. Quality: Basement Baths (#/Qual.) Spa: Dlx: Full: 3/4: 1/2: Basement Room Count Bedrooms: Baths: Family: Kitchen: Other: Total Rooms: 1 1st Floor Kitchen Rating: Very Good Interior: Plaster Trim: Painted Floor: Wood Avg. Clear. Height: # of Fireplaces: 1 Fplc. Quality: Average Total Rooms Dimensions Length Width Sq Ft Bedrooms: 3 0 0 0 Baths: 3 0 0 0 Family: 2 0 0 0 Living: 1 0 0 0 Dining: 1 0 0 0 Kitchen: 1 0 0 0 Other: 0 0 0 0 Total: 8 Last Sale Date: Price: Code: Desc: 12/01/2001 $729,900 00 Good Sale Last Inspection Appraiser ID: Appraisal Date: Reason: Result: Current Inspection Appraiser Ill: Appraisal Date: Reason: Result: Left Tag: Yes / No Flat Value Value: Desc: RCN 08/22/2006 Quintile Review Left Tag Property Type: Zoning: Dwelling Type: Owner(s): 1st Baths (#/Quality) Spa: Dlx: Full: 3/4: 1/2: 1 / Average 1st Room Count Bedrooms: Baths: Family: Living: Dining: Kitchen: Other: Total Rooms: 2nd Floor Interior: Plaster Trim: Painted Floor: Wood Avg. Clear. Height: of Fireplaces: Fplc. Quality: 2nd Baths (#(Quality) Spa: Dlx: Full: 1 / Average 3/4: 1 / Average 1/2: 2nd Room Count Bedrooms: 3 Baths: 2 Other: Total Rooms: 3 Comments R - Residential R-1 Single Family Jeffrey J Ruehl Cathy L Ruehl 3rd Floor Interior: Trim: Floor: Avg. Clear. Height: # of Fireplaces: Fplc. Quality: 3rd Baths (#/Quality) Spa: Dlx: Full: 3/4: 1/2: 3rd Room Count Bedrooms: Baths: Other: Total Rooms: Totals Res. Cond: Average Int. Layout: Standard Manual Assess: N Actual Age: 1937 Effective Age: 1980 Renovated Age: Functional %: Economic %: Building Areas Unfin. 1st GBA: Unfin. 2nd GBA: Unfin. 3rd GBA: Unfin. GBA: 1st Floor Area: 1,405 2nd Floor Area: 1,187 3rd Floor Area: Total GBA: 2,592 Page 23 of 56 19.0' a) rn cB (9 7.0' 17.0' 1/0 Mech -C to 1 LO CO Rec Room 28.0' T4.0 SKETCH/AREA TABLE ADDENDUM Case No 03240011 ( Property Address 4623 WOODDALE AVE City Borrower Lender/Client Appraiser Name DEK State 18-028-24-24-0011 KENNETH J. FEINBERG LORI A. FEINBERG 4623 WOODDALE AVE EDINA MN 55424 Scale: 1 = 15 Area AREA CALCULATIONS SUMMARY Name of Area Size Totals GLA1 First Floor 1339.00 1339.00 GLA2 Second Floor 1187.00 1187.00 BSMT Basement 1255.00 1255.00 GAR Garage 380.00 380.00 0TH BSMT FINISH 448.00 448.00 TOTAL LIVABLE (rounded) 2526 APEX SOFTVVARE 800-8513-9958 LIVING AREA BREAKDOWN Breakdown Subtotals First Floor 14.0 x 35.0 490.00 21.0 x 30.0 630.00 7.0 x 29.0 203.00 4.0 x 4.0 16.00 Second Floor 14.0 x 35.0 490.00 21.0 x 30.0 630.00 3.0 x 17.0 51.00 4.0 x 4.0 16.00 8 Areas Total (rounded) 2 Page 24 of 56 CITY ASSESSOR - REAL ESTATE DATA BASEMENT I Bsmt. Area 1sT FLOOR Kit. Rating 2" FLOOR • e Actual / q Unfinished GBA Unfin. l'' GBA . D. Number Dwl. Type -68 -, 4/- al Lii- OW/ Sq Ft . - , _, Excellent I i../ Effective 1 CI Neighborhood Zoning 3 Very Good 2 Functional % Unfin. 2" GBA Property Address / , ,_, ___, '474"& -.;1--i It) cro 13 D A-Li.:=-- Crawl/Slab Standard 3 Economic % Finished Bsmt. Substandard 4 Manual Unfin. GBA Model % 2 c.o./ No %.‘....1 eft, ../ Obsolete 5 Yes I Owner - /-\e5/11N/ e'174- 0,1- LOQ/ fr-- --'(-5-1W a c - _ , - - 7z 4 Interior Interior Condition Dimensions Bsmt. Quality/Class Plaster 1 i7 Plaster I Excellent 1 x Legal L_ 1 -7-- e) - CI 1 thru I ,..3 Sheetrock 2 Sheetrock 2 Good 2 Paneling 3 Paneling 3 Average 3 x Neighborhood Rating/ Dormers Deck Baths Trim Trim Fair 4 Very Good 1 V Length 1 Area Spa Hardwood I 4/ Hardwood I Substandard 5 x Good 2 Finish 2 Deluxe Softwood 2 Softwood 2 Average 3 Construction Quality 1 -5 I Full Painted 3 Painted 3 IV House Room Count x = Fair 4 Wood Frame 1 / Patio 3/4 Other 4 Other 4 Total Rooms Substandard 5 Masonry Walls 2 Area 1/2 Floor Floor Bedrooms x = Site Rating Other 3 Bath Rating Wood I / Wood I V Family Very Good 1 Quality 1- 5 I Quality 1- 5 Carpet 2 Carpet 2 Living x Good 2 V Exterior Walls/Trim Porch Tile 3 Other 3 Dining Fair 3 Stone I Glazed Area Fireplace Concrete 4 Kitchen x = Minimum 4 Brick 2 4 of None __, Baths Baths Other Adj. Prop. Influence Stucco 3 Quality I - 5 I Spa Spa Total Baths Is' Fl Area '2 n -_,I ..D -1 Positive 1 / Wood 4 17- Screened Area Quality I - 5 I Deluxe Deluxe # of Equal 2 Metal 5 Elec. Service Full Full /1',13 -1:. I Sales 2"`I Fl Area ,,-,, r7 , 6 Negative 3 Masonite 6 Quality 1 - 5 I Standard I X" 1/4 3/4 Pi-0 (o 1 I - Date a -49 View Other 7 Open Area Substandard 2 v, i '/ 1 - Price 6,0 0 00 S, - -- G.B. Area . „ i _ • 2 JD dif( la Positive I 8 Heating Bath Rating Bath Rating Equal 2 /Vinyl Quality I - 5 I Hot Water I Quality 1 - 5 3 Quality 1 - 5 3 1 - Code Partial Const. Int ' nsp. Negative 3 , Roof Type Garage #1 Forced Air 2 2-1 2 - Date Yes 1 es Arch./Appeal Gable 1 / Floor Area S P _.,.. Electric 3 Fireplace Fireplace 2 - Price o 2 Excellent I z Hip 2 Gravity 4 4 of None / 4 of None Left Tag: Yes No Very Good 2 V Mansard 3 Ext. Walls Other 5 2 - Code Flat Charge Average 3 Gambrel 4 Number Cars 0--- Quality 1 - 5 I 3 Quality 1 - 5 3 - Date Add Fair 4 Fl at 5 Condition 3 Bsmt. Room Count I' Room Count 2" Room Count 3 - Price Substandard 5 Roof Cover „ Attached 1 Total Rooms Total Rooms Total Rooms Sub Quali /Cl ss Shingles 1 V Detached 2 Bedrooms Bedrooms Bedrooms/ I i i 1 3 - Code Shakes 2 Tuckunder 3 Family I Family I Other Inspection Information D i Wood P& G 3 Built-In 4 Kitchen Living I Appr. No. 12 y. Permit Date Shape Slate Tile 4 Garage #2 Other Dining / A - 0 1 7 Windows Floor Area Kitchen / INT. LAYOUT Standard 1 _ , Appr. Date q i q q Last Int. Insp. B- L 2 Casement I Other C - U 3 Dbl. Hung 2 C Ext. Walls Non-Standard 2 Land Characteristics D - Irreg. 4 Gliders 3 Number Cars Paved Street 1 Frontage Style Awning 4 Condition Curbs 2 Left 1 Story I Patio Doors Attached I Noks Sidewalk 3 Rear SE/SF 2 # of I Detached 2 . 4 - 0 17 -C" i isJ fa Z 2 . - . - fi'. tz, ,C - . Loi Sewer Avail. 4 Right Split Level 3 Walkout Tuckunder 3 Pla-ry 4.1.._ - 6...!,;,' 6 — Water Avail 5 Eff. Width 1 1/4 4 Quality I - 5 0 Built-In 4 QCT 4t-A- - c.«...w, ). 6-, LAJLLAIA 7 6 e.se, Gas 6 Eff. Depth I 'A 5 Pool ' .1-i / Oilw-i4i. , i e/P1 . Buried Elec. 7 Area 1 3/4 6 Air Conditionin Area i/C,i •-/ _.. Alley 8 Irreg Shape 2 Story 7 / Yes 1 4 14,44_, - aX.AAO pub, On River 9 On Lake Other 1 8 No 2 Quality 1 - 5 I ,T.- River Rating 10 Lake Rating Other 2 9 Gparoa, Wooded 11 Landscape Other 3 10 =3 4 t i r.-..) /0-10tV ...1 r0 Influences 12 Acreage Other 4 11 Print Date: Page 25 of 56 Above 4 Single-Family! Owner Occupied 1937 2,499 Full / None FHA - Gas / Yes AC SF: 450 4 2 18-028-24-24-0011 PIN Deed Contract Address 4623 WOODDALE AVE Map Area 3 Country Club Route Number 009-004-120 Legal 0012 0009 74820 Land Basis 1 Front Rear Side 1 Side 2 R. Lot SF Acres FF Main Sub Total 70.00 70.00 124.00 124.00 0.00 8,680.00 0.199 Grand Total* 17,360.00 0.399 Plat Map City of Edina Assessor pun HBO r a/1/1999 Vies,000 28 B FR (MAIN) :35 [1165] 2 Ttl Rms 9 Below Att Frame 380 SF 'Includes all land areas Residential Dwelling Occupancy Year Built Ttl Living Area Bsmt/Attic Heat/AC Bsmt Finish Ttl Bdrms Ttl Fireplaces Full Bath 3/4 Bath 1/2 Bath 18 FR GAR 20 [380] 6 19 18 17 4 F Plumbing (More) Sale Date Recording 17 Sketch 1 of 1 Fri, July, 12, 2002 7:48 AM Page 1 Inc 13 Garage 12 7 5 28 9 Page 26 of 56 CITY ASSESSOR REAL ESTATE DATA BASEMENT I Bsmt. Area I" FLOOR Kit. Rating 2" FLOOR . Ae Actual Unfinished GBA Unfin. l" GBA I. D. Number Dwl. Type a_ 0 ZS' - ,l' y_ .24/- aa// SF Sq Ft 42SO Excellent I 1/' Effective /.2,0 Neighborhood Zoning Very Good 2 Functional % Unfin. 2"d GBA Property Addreu ,-, 9' Z3 e /(7‘,.. Crawl/Slab I Standard 3 Economic % Finished Bsmt. Substandard 4 Manual Unfin. GBA Model % 4/0 No Obsolete 5 Yes I Owner Interior Interior Condition Dimensions Bsmt. Quality/Class Plaster I V.. Plaster I I/ Excellent I x Legal I thru I 3 Sheetrock 2 Sheetrock 2 Good 2 Paneling 3 Paneling 3 Average 3 1,/ x Neighborhood Rating Dormers Deck Baths _ Trim Trim Fair 4 Very Good 1 Length I Area //</ Spa Hardwood I Hardwood I Substandard 5 x = Good 2 I/ Finish 2 Deluxe Softwood 2 Softwood 2 Average 3 Construction , Quality I -5 I V Full Painted 3 / Painted 3 V House Room Count x = Fair 4 Wood Frame 1 tr Patio 3/4 Other 4 Other 4 Total Rooms Substandard 5 Masonry Walls 2 Area 1/4 Floor Floor Bedrooms x = Site Rating Other 3 Bath Rating Wood I t/ Wood 1 Family Very Good 1 Quality 1 - 5 I Quality 1- 5 Carpet 2 Carpet 2 %/- Living x Good 2 ‘Z Exterior Walls/Trim Porch Tile 3 Other 3 Dining Fair 3 Stone 1 Glazed Area Fireplace Concrete 4 Kitchen x Minimum 4 Brick 2 # of / None Baths Baths Other Adj. Prop. Influence Stucco 3 Quality I - 5 1 Spa Spa Total Baths l" Fl Area /, -?.? 5/ Positive 1 Wood 4 17 Screened Area Quality 1 - 5 I .2 Deluxe Deluxe # of Equal 2 J Metal 5 Elec. Service r" Full Full 33 c2 / Sales 2" Fl Area /, /6 5 Negative 3 Masonite 6 Quality 1 - 5 1 Standard 1 i., % „. 3/4 I I - Date View Other 7 Open Area Substandard 2 1/2 1," 1/4 I - Price G.B. Area 2 v99 Positive 1 Vinyl 8 Heating Bath Rating Bath Rating Equal 2 Quality 1 - 5 I Hot Water 1 Quality 1 - 5 -4 , Quality 1 - 5 ..f , I - Code Partial Const. Interior Insp./ Negative 3 1/ Roof Type Garage #1 Forced Air 2 V 2 - Date Yes 1 Yes I Arch./Appeal Gable 1 Floor Area 3rd Electric 3 Fireplace Fireplace 2 - Price No 2 Excellent 1 Hip 2 Gravity 4 # of None / 14 of None Left Tag: Yes No Very Good 2 , Mansard 3 Ext. Walls S Other s 2 - Code Flat Charge Average 3 t7 Gambrel 4 Number Cars 2 Quality I - 5 1 3 Quality 1 - 5 3 - Date Add Fair 4 Flat 5 Condition 3 Bsmt. Room Count 1" Room Count 2"`I Room Count 3 - Price Substandard 5 Roof Cover , Attached 1 t/ Total Rooms / Total Rooms .51 Total Rooms 3 Sub Qualit /Class Shingles 1 17 Detached 2 Bedrooms Bedrooms Bedrooms 3 3 - Code 1 , S ol Wood Shakes 2 Tuckunder 3 Family / Family `'.., Other Inspection Information P & G 3 Built-In 4 Kitchen Living J Appr. No. A cte/1) Permit Date Shape Slate Tile 4 Garage #2 Other Dining J.. A - 0 1 V Windows Floor Area 4,1,....i,l, =sr Kitchen J.. INT. LAYOUT Appr. Date 0")/ZAZ Last Int. Insp. B- L 2 Casement I OtDer Standard 1 C - U 3 Dbl. Hung 2 V Ext. Walls V.I4ZZ•c4, Ape., Non-Standard 2 Lanl Characteristics D - Irreg. 4 Gliders 3 Number Cars Paved Street I IV Frontage Style Awning 4 Condition Curbs 2 IV. Left I Story 1 Patio Doors Attached 1 Sidewalk 3 IV Rear SE/SF 2 8 of Detached 2 N4147-Aetes isa/40-)/4-Pog ci72" oliai.r44/ Sewer Avail. 4 ir Right Split Level 3 Walkout Tuckunder 3 Water Avail 5 ‘./. Eff. Width I '/. 4 Quality I- 5 Built-In 4 Gas 6 1./°- Eff. Depth 1 1/2 5 Pool Buried Elec. 7 Area 1 'A 6 Air Conditioning , V Area Alley 8 Irreg Shape 2 Story 7 1/ Yes I On River 9 On Lake Other 1 8 No 2 Quality I - 5 I River Rating 10 Lake Rating Other 2 9 Wooded 11 Landscape Other 3 10 Influences 12 61 Acreage Other 4 11 Print Date: Page 27 of 56 RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY RECORD AND APPRAISAL CARD STREET ADDRESS 4623 Wooddale Avenue ASSESSMENT DIST. SCHOOL DIST. NO. 17 LOT 12 BLOCK 9 ADD. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT BROWN SECTION PLAT NO. 74820 PARCEL NO. BUILDING PERMIT RECORD Date Number Amount Purpose /I-IT fjA — Net SiT g - URBAN LOT RECORD Parcels covered by same homestead. List parcel numbers. IMPROVEMENTS STREETS Asphalt Concrete Brick Sidewalks Curb & Gutter City Water TOPOGRAPHY Level High Low Gravel Sanitary Sewer DRAINAGE Good-Fair-Poor LOCATION Corner Lot Inside Lot Storm Sewer Nat'l Gas Residential Dbl. Bung. ZONING OR USE Dirt with alley Commercial Industrial Multi-Family General Desirability: Good Fair Poor Other: tnMCN I 3UPilfv,,,krk I LAND VALUE COMPUTATIONS Frontage Figured Average Depth Unit Price Unit Percent Front. Ft. Price Top. Intl. i YEAR. Valuation changes to be entered on nest line. Indicate year and outhorty — Assessor, Final Equalized k.ba• emcnt e etc. EAR MARKET VALUE OF LAND MARKET VALUE OF STRUCTURES TOTAL MARKET VALUE FULL VALUE OF LAND FULL VALUE OF STRUCTURES TOTAL VALUE HOME- OF LAND STEAD AND STRUCTURES Yes No HOMESTEAD REMAINDER 25% 6) 40% ASSESSED VALUES TOTAL V • liqt 1993 ' Pig! /6,241-oz, 1 7.,-/73(g) 1-3,197061 to2-4A z47 13497o0 , 1024441 26 /3oO 1363761 II II II II II I SALE Date Consideration Kind of Inst. Remarks s--lo L. ,__, .-i,(-)c (.-' 0 /.?`:?' O.f.:70'?'> .'. i I Contract for Deed held by: 89-f 10240011 291.Fino b742efr9 /(419qs' 102:40 299.666 I4o2 1996 i 1024y)11 3(13445 I 406oce ty97 1_02.5W _3239co 14-26361 jorf 199A 162/.64! 4_52a111447 641 /al 199? I genal 3198c 114g1 Fi/vo 1 II /q16. 19g/ 1796' imuci v ioe:400 11,9(31_0 II At 1-4cx) 62 400 I I A4mO II 246400 iI 20670 I127t111c li diesoo II 32o9 oo I I I I I I II II II II II II ' cleb( Page 28 of 56 RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY RECORD AND APP,RAISAL CARD ADDRESS --4a 3 • PLAT NO 72-/Z3Z0 DESCRIPTION OF PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE OTHER STRUC i ., .E DWLG. Yr. Built /9 Grade V No. of Stories_ ...-- Const. Cost GARAGE Grade Yr. Built , 'I. DWLG. Observed Physical Condition: Good Normal 4-‘," Fair Poor Mo. Rental _ . Found. Floor Roof_ Finish Overhead Door Z NDATION ROOF PLUMBING ROOMS WIRING to Flat City Water / Living Room BX CABLE BREEZEWAY Describe: "te..- ,4:11 Blk. ,- Gable s, Well & Pump Dining ,-- Rigid Conduit ' f/1 Cf: .,._ lj /4.--...C7 , Hip Sewer .- Kitchen BUILT-INS '-j1 - /1-L 4- C-,441, Irregular • -- Septic Tank Bedrooms Breakfast Nook U (.... 7 ERIOR WALLS Shingle, Asphalt Cesspool Den or Study Bookcases YARD IMPROVEMENTS Driveways, Fences, Ret. .ant6Sheatios- Shingle, Wood i.....- Baths (3 Fixt.) Rec. Room China Closet Shakes Slate Half Bath (2 Fixt.) Utility Extra Kit. Cabts. Describe: Patios, Swimming Pools, sition Shakes Tile Single Fixtures Refrigerator • ad Roll, Composition Hot W.—Flet.—za-os— (._ - fei9i, 74,1 /6...›, jrAl Range Cr Oven Shakes Water Softner k../ INTERIOR FINISH Dishwasher r Veneer Tar and Gravel Hdwd. Floors Garbage Disp. or Rug. Insulated HEATING Softwood Floors OUT BUILDINGS Sheds, Cabins, Boathouses, SI or Face Fireplaces Inside ,l, Concrete Floors TILING (Sq. Ft.) BASEMENT Fireplaces Outside Linoleum Floors Cer. r Plas. Describe: None Full Hot Air: Pipeless Carpeted Floors Bath Hall led Yes • No Partial % Piped (Gravity) Hardwood Trim ' Kitchen CHES Unfinished Forced Circul'tn Softwood Trim BUILDING DIAGRAM AN I: Partitioned Steam -- Plastered Int. MISCELLANEOUS Finished , % ....-H. Water or Vapor Drywall Int. Incinerator Draw to scale and sh Walkout % Radiant Concealed Laminated Swim. Pool Oil— Coal— es— ,' Appraisal By: ---- Interior Inspected Yes 1.- No of STRUCTURAL VALUE COMPUTATIONS STRUCTURES -- DIMENSIONS AREA SQ. FT. RATE/S.F DEP. Cr OBS. % OFF NET RATE/S.F MARKET VALUE E X :\D \ 4 Li me__ Charges -. • . _- ..- of V _..,"1 Rept Cost I / -7/ --71/.C...1 L I//ALS' 2 dql :%. '72 1,4" Page 29 of 56 PROPERTY SURVEY INFORMATION This information is not required, but, you may include any comments you wish to have considered for the property survey. Attach additional sheets if needed. John P. Sieff 4623 Wooddale Avenue 1. YEAR BUILT 2. YEAR PURCHASED 3. PURCHASE PRICE N37 4. COMMENTS ON DESIRABILITY OF: (a) NEIGHBORHOOD . . (b) YOUR LOT . . . 6,,,,-,( 41 (c) YOUR HOME . . . 0 5. COMMENTS ON CONDITION OF YOUR HOME: -- ,e,e4i2 cia444e, 6. OTHER COMMENTS: We su -,,::;ect you include any comments you feel pertinent on this enclosure as the person inspecting your home will be listing information only and not making conclusions at that time. Thank you for your co-operation. Page 30 of 56 Status within District: Pivotal Complementary X Intrusion Photographs Roll#: 0 Frame#: Surveyor: Lynne VanBrocklin Spaeth, Heritage Preservation Associates, Inc. Date: Summer, 1980 Page 31 of 56 Edina Country Club District: Historic and Architectural Survey Form Summer, 1980 Address: PIN#:k'S Parcel#: Lot: ti Block: Owner: Occupant: Use: Condition: Date of Construction: c.-C"?.>k Original Owner: Architect/Builder: Subsequent Owners: Original Use: Historical Infoiivation (if available): Style: Definitive Style Features: Number of Stories: Setback from Sidewalk: Roof Shape & Roofing Materials: Building Materials & Building Colors: Additions/Alterations: Scale: or. Size & Spacing of Windows:v,,, Size & Spacing of Doors: Garage/Outbuildings: Distinctive Landscape Features: Comments: Page 32 of 56 /pi is" Wed. ctiz 5 11 /1:0(4:21' Oct- actt nazi LOGIS - Property Data System - City of Edina Property ID House# Street Name A1118-028-24-24:901 Addres 14623 Single PID 1 Parcel Sear 1 2 Clear Wo od dale Ave 3 Print 4 View Photo Public Property Summary 4k, Zoom Photo c Zoom Sketch Photo II. 4 Sketch ► This information is a summary of available data and is not guaranteed to be complete Parch 1B-1M-24-24-0011 oaay-s nate: Wit Pr:dense- 7 05 07R Logged on user .IRFPYA Plannim Parcel Status: AC- Menu 1:f1-.C3 Parcel Administration [s EJ Property Characteristic [t] Reports and Inquiries Hennepin County Hennepin Property Public Property Simi Residential Property PID #: 18-028-24-24-0011 Property Address: 4623 Wooddale Aye Edina. MN 55424 Multiple Address: No Lot/Block 0121009 Addition: Country Club District,Brown Legal(120): Owner(s): Jeffrey J Ruehl Cathy L Ruehl Property Classification: Residential - Homestead 2015 EMV: 843,000 2014 EMV: 834,000 2013 EMV: 948,200 Last Sale: 121112001 - 729.900 - Conventiona Lot Size: 3,652 Sq,Ft / Acres Zoning: R-1 Dwelling Type: Single Family Style: Two Story Bedrooms: 4 Baths: 3 Actual Year Built: 1937 Gross Building Area: 2.592 Basement Area: 1„255 Bsmt Finished %: 40 Garage #1: 2 Car Attached Garage #2: None Page 33 of 56 HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda # VI. A. Joyce Repya October 13, 2015 H-15-11 Senior Planner APPLICANT: Jeff & Cathy Ruehl LOCATION: 4623 Wooddale Avenue PROPOSAL: Certificate of Appropriateness to add a front entry portico RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the Certificate of Appropriateness Request Subject to Conditions INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND: The subject property is located on the east side of the 4600 block of Wooddale Avenue. The existing home, a Colonial Revival style, was constructed in 1936. The Certificate of Appropriateness request is for the addition of a new front entry portico. New Front Entry Portico The proposed 26.25 square foot (7' x 3'9") front entry canopy requires a COA because it is a structural change to the street facing façade of the home. The new portico is designed to provide protection from the elements at the front entry; and is proportional to the front façade of the home. The plans depict a flat roof with a cedar balustrade (2x2 rails) above; and 2- 8x8 cedar posts. The portico is proposed to cover the existing stoop. CONSULTANT VOGEL'S OPINION: Consultant Vogel reviewed the plans and observed that the subject property is not individually eligible for designation as an Edina Heritage Landmark. However, is considered a contributing heritage preservation resource in the context of the Country Club Historic District. Although somewhat altered from its as-built appearance, it is a representative example of a Colonial Revival style dwelling that was built in 1936 during the district's period of historical significance (1924-1944) and reflects the architectural design standards imposed by the developer on new homes constructed in the Country Club District. The COA is required because the front door entrance to the house is the focal point of the façade and an important historic character defining element of the Colonial Revival aesthetic. The proposed new front porch meets the standards for rehabilitation of historic properties and the district plan of treatment, which do not require restoration of Page 34 of 56 H-15-1 4623 Wooddale Avenue October 13, 2015 the original front entrance. As built, the main entrance to the house featured a classical (broken triangular) pediment and pilasters; but this feature was altered by an earlier remodeling project. No historic fabric will be lost as a result of the work being proposed; what remains of the original front entry moldings will be preserved intact; the new portico has been designed to complement the architectural character of the house; and the proposed work would be entirely reversible without causing damage to the rest of the historic façade. Small front entry porticoes with square columns are a common characteristic of Colonial Revival style homes; the porch roof, with its open balustrade and square balusters, is also consistent with early twentieth century Colonial Revival houses. Therefore, I recommend approval of the COA. STAFF RECOMMENDATION & FINDINGS: Staff agrees with Consultant Vogel's evaluation of the proposed COA application and too recommends approval of the plans for the front entry portico. Findings supporting the recommendation include: • No significant character defining details will be destroyed; • there will be no substantial loss of historic fabric; • The new porch will be compatible with the scale and proportions of the historic façade; • The details of the new portico are characteristic of the Colonial Revival aesthetic; and • The new work is reversible (if it was to be removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the house would be unimpaired). Conditions associated with the approval recommendation include: • Subject to the plans presented. Deadline for City Action: November 25, 2015 2 Page 35 of 56 Requested Front Entry change for 4623 Wooddale Ave My wife Cathy and I have lived at 4623 Wooddale for almost 14 years. During that time we have slowly been restoring our home, always with an eye towards keeping the original character intact, both inside and out. The history of our neighborhood is important to us. My wife grew up in a similar neighborhood outside Detroit and I have always been fascinated by history. In fact, the picture of our home we supplied was taken with one of my vintage cameras, a Rolleiflex Twin lens Reflex camera from the 1950's. In researching our option we spent time walking the neighborhood getting ideas we could incorporate in our design. We feel the design is very consistent with architecture of the home and the neighborhood. Our plan is to remove the current front entry over hang, which is not original to the house and is in very poor condition. And replace it with a small porch roof that will offer more protection from the weather and will add to the curb appeal of the home. We will be using cedar and it will be painted white to match the rest of the home. We will be keeping the existing front step and door surround. Thank You Jeff and Cathy Ruehl Page 36 of 56 Wooddal e,ave pra.g, Woo Page 37 of 56 n•••11.1.101••nn••n.•-• 1143 Wirodcitli Ave.. r Currett pi7o-to zors" Page 38 of 56 01 1111111111111 2.6 CEDAR FASCIA 2x6 CEDAR FLAT CAP AXE CEDAR POST- ----- ---2x2 CEDAR RAILS - 611 O.C. 2x4 CEDAR FLAT BOTTOM RAIL 2 CEDAR COVE BOARD Ix10 CEDAR WRAP BOARD__ 3/4. CEDAR RAIL TRIM CEDAR TRIM BOARD__ 3/4 CEDAR RAIL TRIM__ EXISTING ROOFING Sx8 CEDAR POST - lx10 CEDAR WRAP BOARD- ------ 1.3 CEDAR TRIM BOARD EXISTING FRONT STOOP AND STEP EXISTING NOUSE, SIDING AND TRIM WEST ELEVATION SCALE 1/4" l'-0" EXISTING ROOFING 46023 UJooddale Avenue 2.6 CEDAR FLAT CAP E.x6 CEDAR POST 2.2 CEDAR RAILS - D.C. 2x4 CEDAR FLAT BOTTOM RAIL 2x6 CEDAR FASCIA _44--- _„-..--.- __,n-,F--,- ____J-11- -,--1-1-.n -. ---, , -1-,-.-___ -,---, 2' CEDAR COVE BOARD 5,10 CEDAR WRAP BOARD 3/4' CEDAR RAIL TRIM 1.3 CEDAR TRIM BOARD 3/4" CEDAR RAIL TRIM TCO DESIGN riqdt,rg trd hose d5e'w ES.13 CEDAR POST WO CEDAR WRAP BOARD 5,3 CEDAR TRIM BOARD Design tco201586 EXISTING FRONT STOOP AND STEP EXISTING HOUSE, SIDING AND TRIM SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE 1/4" s l'-0" /A1 OF 1 TCO DESIGN awl hems else en MO bro.. Avarua North 13.00kyl Pe. 11111 53444 Office 5,3424-3E16 Coil 952.144.81'b dadlutIon to excal'arca Preptred by Todd Ofethun Ogles 163-424-M1 TEl 152-1444216 loOdficadasice.rat Al TCO DESIGN deel,rg dr4 1.bre Page 39 of 56 October 14, 2015 Jeff and Cathy Ruehl 4623 Wooddale Avenue Edina, MN 55424 Re: File # H-15-11 Certificate of Appropriateness - Changes to street facing facade Dear Mr. and Mrs. Ruehl: I am sending you the Certificate of Appropriateness approved by the Heritage Preservation Board for the addition of a front entry portico to your home. Be advised that approval is subject to the conditions outlined in the certificate. Any changes to what was approved must be brought back to the Heritage Preservation Board for review. Furthermore, there is a 10 day appeal period during which the decision can be appealed to the City Council. I encourage you to wait until the appeal period has passed to begin your project. I thank you for your cooperation with the Certificate of Appropriateness process. Once the construction is complete, please have your contractor arrange a final inspection with me. I wish you the best of luck with your project, and feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Joyce Repya Senior Planner 952-826-0462 jrepya@EdinaMN.Gov Enclosure Page 40 of 56 EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS Pursuant to the requirements of Section 36-722 of the City Code of the City of Edina, no owner or contractor shall demolish any building in whole or in part; move a building or structure to another location; excavate archeological features, grade or move earth in areas believed to contain significant buried heritage resources, or commence new construction on any property designated as an Edina Heritage Landmark without a Certificate of Appropriateness. The Heritage Preservation Board reviews applications for City permits in relation to designated heritage landmarks. Criteria and guidelines used in reviewing applications for Certificate of Appropriateness are contained in Section 36-722 (a - f) of the City Code. Issuance of this Certificate of Appropriateness is subject to the plans approved. Any change in the scope of work will require a new Certificate of Appropriateness. A final inspection by the City Planner is required when the work is completed. File #: H-15-11 Historic Property: 4623 Wooddale Avenue Property Owner: Jeff and Cathy Ruehl Proposed Work: Certificate of Appropriateness for a new front entry portico Decision: Approved Conditions: Subject to: The plans presented Date: October 13, 2015 Joyce Repya Senior Planner Page 41 of 56 BOARD & COMMISSION ITEM REPORT Date: June 10, 2025 Item Activity: Discussion Meeting: Heritage Preservation Commission Agenda Number: 6.2 Prepared By: Emily Dalrymple, Assistant City Planner Item Type: Other Department: Community Development Item Title: Century Home Signs Action Requested: Review sign designs from the Communications Department. Information/Background: The HPC is working on Century Home signage with the Communications Department. The Communications Department provided a few designs for the HPC's review. Supporting Documentation: 1. Century Home Yard Sign Options Page 42 of 56 This House is 100 Years Old! Edina Centur y Homes Page 43 of 56 Edina Centur y Homes Page 44 of 56 Hey, I’m100!Edina Centur y Homes Page 45 of 56 Hey, I’m 100 Edina Centur y Homes Page 46 of 56 Hey, I’m 100! Edina Centur y Homes Page 47 of 56 Hey, I ’m 100! Edina Centur y Homes Page 48 of 56 This house is 100 years old! Edina Centur y Homes Page 49 of 56 BOARD & COMMISSION ITEM REPORT Date: June 10, 2025 Item Activity: Discussion Meeting: Heritage Preservation Commission Agenda Number: 6.3 Prepared By: Emily Dalrymple, Assistant City Planner Item Type: Report & Recommendation Department: Community Development Item Title: 2026 Work Plan Discussion Follow Up Action Requested: Discuss the City Council work session and the 2026 HPC work plan draft. Information/Background: Follow up discussion from City Council work session 6/3/25. Supporting Documentation: 1. Council Memo_HPC-PC Joint Work Session Page 50 of 56 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 All City Council members present. Work Session kickoff by City Manager Neal. Manager Neal reminds City Council about the new protocol for two-year work planning with boards and commissions to better align and sync up with budget processes and other organizational work planning. Previous board and commission work plans were developed and meant to be implemented annually. Manager Neal mentions the City of Edina’s long history with boards and commissions, and that City Council members often originate from these volunteer board or commission positions. Manager Neal hands off meeting facilitation to Special Projects & Engagement Manager, MJ Lamon. Lamon reiterates the structure and dynamics of previous joint work sessions between boards/commissions and City Council wherein volunteers were simply updating the City Council on how the work plan activities were or were not progressing. The two-year adjusted work plan process takes a step back and asks volunteers and City Council to utilize joint work sessions for dialogue between these two groups (commissioners and City Council) to better align priorities and initiatives with one another in hopes for those priorities and initiatives to be better received and find more success. Lamon offers a generic goal of having four to five work plan items on each board/commission work plan to help ensure there are not overloaded capacities for volunteers. This capacity consideration (as well as other important takeaways) was lifted from commissioner feedback received from the board/commission experience survey. Lamon mentions the reason this process is beginning with the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) and Planning Commission (PC) because much of their scope is carved out in state statute. Lamon hands it over to HPC Chair Thomas Everson and Vice-Chair Katie Pope to begin conversation with City Council on developing their work plan for 2026-2027. Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) discussion Chair Everson began by overviewing the current work plan items included on their 2025 work plan (Edina Heritage Landmarks, Certificate of Appropriateness Applications, Heritage Preservation Award, Administration & Community Development EdinaMN.gov Date:June 3, 2025 To:Mayor and City Council From:Zoe Johnson, City Management Fellow MJ Lamon, Special Projects & Engagement Manager Cary Teague, Director of Community Development Emily Dalrymple, Assistant City Planner Subject:Heritage Preservation Commission & Planning Commission 2026-2027 Commission Work Plan Development Joint Work Session Minutes Page 51 of 56 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Century Home program outreach, and public outreach for ordinance and Country Club Plan of Treatment changes) to help frame the conversation for the next, two-year work plan for 2026-2027. CM Jackson asks about the workload and reasoning behind multiple awards, and if they are complimentary to one another. Chair Everson responds by saying the Heritage Preservation Award (dedicated to those who contributed to the historic fabric of the community and made an outstanding contribution to the preservation, rehabilitation, restoration and use of Edina’s heritage resource) is one that they have been trying to get better community outreach for, as submission typically comes from within the HPC. While there was a fantastic external nomination that came late this year, this is not the traditional norm. To gain more awareness of the Heritage Preservation Award, HPC has been working on the incorporation of yard signs to better signify the award program to hopefully attract more engagement from the community. Century Homes is a program dedicated to homes in Edina over 100 years old, and again, the commission is focused on targeting different audiences better to find more success and awareness with the program, but that this has been a difficult endeavor. CM Jackson reflects on these items and says that it sounds like a lot of work for city Communications staff and if this is reasonable for them to take on. Manager Neal asserts that these two awards do not add too much to their pretty consistent workloads, but that CM Jackson’s question is important to reflect on. Chair Everson thinks that the awards are in a good place right now and that the HPC feels we just need to focus on outreach and communication with more community groups, but that they are thinking about how they as a volunteer group better ebb and flow with capacities. CM Risser asks if the HPC has a presence at the Edina Art Fair and any other community events to help raise awareness. While this may be even more work with limited success attributed to it, CM Risser thought the HPC should consider that in a future meeting although this is her processing in real time and just an initial reaction. CM Agnew asks if the HPC is thinking that less work is needed and if volunteers are having a hard time keeping up with what we’ve got going on. CM Agnew reflects that it may be better to think about how to incorporate capacity for larger strategic items like zoning code and comprehensive plan updates. Chair reflects that the zoning code update and comprehensive plan update may be too much to add to the HPC given workload. Chair Everson asks if the HPC should consider holding off on presenting new awards to new people/places and focus on celebrating existing winners instead so the HPC doesn’t feel like we are forcing an award on something not as merited as others. CM Pierce joins the conversation to say that it seems to him that the scope of work is relatively the same given a few tweaks to the work plan here and there. CM Pierce did not have additional questions or ideas but wanted to let the HPC know that if they start getting into an initiative and struggle to find success to let the City Council know. CM Risser asks if there is anything on the HPC’s mind that concerns them and they believe it is something that City Council should know, reach out and get it on our radar. CM Risser asks if they have any concerns as a commission at the moment. Chair Everson reports that the HPC doesn’t have any concerns currently, but that the new hired consultants have been great to work with and while there has been a lot of turnover within the HPC recently the onboarding process (between existing commissioners, staff and hired consultants) has been great for relating everything back to the “greener” members to ensure Page 52 of 56 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 we’re all on the same page regardless of individual backgrounds and expertise areas. CM Jackson says that we are just saying some of this stuff because we want you all to have a good experience and feel like a job well done as you carry out these items. Mayor Hovland agrees and says that your work is a lot like ours: responsibility to focus on the here and now but also keep watch on the future and what is coming next, always keeping a strategic mindset. He also thought that the HPC should be thinking about the comprehensive plan a bit. Mayor Hovland reflected that a lot of the HPC’s work ends in -tion (preservation, communication, education, etc.) and that carving out our own identity as a community in the metro is not easy, especially as a first-ring suburb. HPC helps us find and celebrate our identity, and people enjoy and appreciate that. Chair Everson says that keeping one eye to the future and trying to better leverage how we work with the Planning Commission to figure out how our work relates to the comprehensive plan is something they will chat more about as a commission. Mayor Hovland worries about the burden we are setting up for the average resident who is just trying to find a quality home with Plan of Treatment financing considerations. He thinks that the HPC’s flexibility to revisit historic homes and properties to ensure they do not sit vacant would be a great project for the commission. CM Agnew mentions that last Thursday, the City Council and staff had a conversation on Affordable Housing in Edina. CM Agnew asked what we can do about the tear down homes, and wonders if we can expand the definition of different things to help prevent tear downs from existing real estate in Edina. Manager Neal says that unless we can show we have a group of these homes with some architectural uniqueness that is associated with the geographical area, this is really difficult to do. Chair Everson stated that someone came in during community comment and asked the same thing: what can we do to protect the rest of these houses from being torn down and forgotten. Manager Neal says that there are other actions we can take to slow that process down but that affects our community’s economics and you will undoubtedly hear from those families if we try to do that. CM Risser wonders if some kind of recognition for mid-century modern home could be a baby step for us – maybe “mid-century home of the year" but there are already a lot of awards the HPC facilitates. She then asks about perhaps every other year. Staff liaison Dalrymple informs the group that there was a mid-century modern home recognized as one of those awards this year. CM Risser asks if that was a standalone award for mid-century homes, and staff and HPC answer no. An HPC member asks if there is a way to educate the community and residents to think about all of the possibilities outside of tearing down homes; can we educate or entice buyers and builders to think about these alternatives because oftentimes people tend not to see things unless its right in front of them. CM Risser loves this idea. Vice-Chair Pope asks if the HPC could ever partner with different associations or groups to help with this education – perhaps there could be something resident driven where we coordinate a nice, mid-century modern tour in the community where residents can speak about their homes, and educate others on why its important to retain the current housing portfolio, etc. CM Risser really loves this idea. CM Pierce says that we are doing now what we said we wouldn't do at the beginning of this work session (creating a bigger workload for volunteer commissioners). CM Pierce says that he does not have an issue with this, but that he wants the Page 53 of 56 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 commission to think about this idea and assess the merit behind it and then come back later and let us know what you have decided on it. Mayor Hovland says that he is looking forward to hearing back from all of you. Planning Commission (PC) discussion Chair Bennett begins the conversation with City Council by saying that unlike prior years when PC is debating between seven or eight items, we are going for something simpler because one item is enormous and takes most of our capacity. Currently, PC has bimonthly meetings, the zoning code update (which includes almost everything from the PC’s “parking lot”), and zoning code update delivery that is complimentary to the comprehensive plan update. Chair Bennett focuses on some key feedback from PC lifted from the board/commission experience survey and shared those takeaways with the Council to say that the PC is always thinking about how we can improve the process. A lot of the conversations between commissioners and residents dovetail into former conversations surrounding process and engagement. Chair Bennett asserted that PC wants discussion around this because it is such a hugely important part of our job to share advisory information with you and so PC is hoping to get your reactions. Our takeaways were: 1. Length of meetings and quantity of meetings (duplicates) 2. Reduce commissioners 3. Lack of unity between outcomes and recommendations from City Council 4. Managing meetings more effectively with conduct/conflict 5. Getting questions to staff earlier 6. Combining question and answer period so staff and residents can ask questions altogether 7. Tension between quality/quantity with engagement opportunities (providing opportunities for engagement while understanding that we need to be strategic how and when this is, and duplicate meetings are a ton of work for staff Chair Bennett asks City Council to wait and think about this on your own time to reflect and get back to us on what you think. CM Risser liked the way Chair Bennett presented things and how you are thinking about being resourceful and efficient, and continued to explain her issues with the Edina zoning code and it’s processes. Mayor Hovland delivers a cautionary note by saying that the PC may get guidance from the City Council and while individual comments are important they are not the direction of the entire City Council. He continues by saying even if it is the direction of the entire elected body, that direction is not something “found in the ten commandments”. Collective decisions of the Council are especially important in this context because some people on the Council and in the community really don't agree with them. Commissioner Felt added that we (PC and City Council) live in a town with a lot of people and a lot of opinions and limiting what people bring to us isn't our role as commissioners. CM Jackson said that she would be interested in a summary of the experiences of different commissioners with regarding small area plans including how these small area plans work in reality (especially the Southdale plan) because they have a lot of impact on the community. “How did that process feel? Can we make it more efficient and less contentious, or is that just the nature of the work?” Chair Bennett said that seems like it would naturally happen with the leg work for the comprehensive plan update. CM Jackson asks about PC training and how it is going. Staff liaison Teague says that the PC all tries to carry out training at least once per year. Chair Bennett feels this training is incredibly useful and helpful, Page 54 of 56 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 although not all commissioners participate. He adds that because you are relying on us to be stewards and advisory to you, we are really focused on all things technical (not political). CM Jackson says that anyone interested in more training is something she would support. Mayor Hovland asks about the PC’s intentions with aligning recommendations with the zoning code update and comprehensive plan update. Chair Bennett affirmed that PC is dedicated to that strategic alignment and that is the direction everyone is excited about. CM Pierce joins in by saying that the real challenge is we don't know what the consequences are of that alignment…will it be better or worse? He thinks we must figure out a way that we can better flesh out if this could be successful. CM Pierce said from an affordable housing perspective, he often feels we try to control the market. He thinks what we really need to do is have a zoning code and comprehensive plan that encourages the kind of housing that we are supportive of naturally occurring in the community that gets to the affordability/attainability concerns we have. He feels the City kind of needs to shift and think about how we carry out the zoning code and comprehensive plan in a way that better encourages these types of housing opportunities for community, and that we can't wait to have the conversation of "what housing types do we want in the community?". CM Pierce understands everyone on PC wants to express their opinion, but making it a point while serving on the PC to have a culture of not restating points previously made by other commissioners might alleviate the pontification on the dais. CM Pierce also talked about alignment of PC and City Council decisions by saying he is unsure if our decisions should align. He said that he is trying to convince myself that the zoning code and comprehensive plan, if we collectively agree with these items then yes, we are aligned but unless the PC is bringing up any potential code or plan violations during PC meetings, he is not going to feel comfortable executing those aspects of the PC’s work. CM Agnew stated that as we are going through this zoning code overhaul and language cleanup, we should continue to work with consultants but also try to leverage artificial intelligence (AI) as much as we can to be efficient in this work. She said that then the PC should use their own intelligence to review and make it make sense, but using both resources would provide a good lens. CM Agnew does not suggest using it in a silo, but as a complimentary tool. The PC asked about what City Council is curious about or has preliminary feedback for pain points as they work through the zoning code update. CM Risser mentions incorporating caps or limits to zoning code variants. CM Pierce asks what this means. CM Risser said other cities operate with variant caps based on some kind of percentage model that backs us into understanding what plan proposed would have more substantial variants. The PC asks if this means capping within the PUD itself, by district, or what she means by this. CM Pierce said that this seems arbitrary to him which is why I asked the question of what that means, so he thinks we need to start with the outcome we are going for - again, if we are interested in more of these products in our community housing portfolio, then we need to start with how we can reach that. Mayor Hovland said the PC could even go a step back further and think about legislature issues with local control and land use…how can Edina’s community address those issues effectively and within our purview? Commissioner Felt said that there are some things that come before us that shouldn't be in our purview. Commissioner Daye felt that limiting what comes before the PC would help make serving less complicated. CM Pierce said that sure, but we shouldn’t change something if you don't know why we had that it that way in the first place; context is power and understanding outcomes we want is really helpful to move forward effectively. CM Jackson reported she is interested in minimum lot size analysis to understand how we could adjust this to better reach our Page 55 of 56 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 goals of affordable housing. She also mentioned some communities making efforts to revitalize industrial areas by making components of these different industries have some kind of tourism component. Allowing the public to come in and participate to watch industrialists in real time is a national trend she thinks would be welcomed, not controversial. CM Risser wonders how we move forward on different projects in a way that is consistent with our zoning code and compliant without pushing the edge of fairness, accountability and what is in our purviews. Chair Bennett said that he thinks by successfully addressing the zoning code and comprehensive plan will address much of CM Risser’s concerns, but we need to better start with how we can make things efficient for us, you and the residents (hopefully by collecting an aggregate of process and culture items that affect us). CM Jackson last asks if the PC could take a look into sign size as it relates to highway 100 in an effort to make Edina more competitive (or just uniform) with neighboring community signage on major thoroughfares. Page 56 of 56