HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990 06-26 HPB Meeting Minutes RegularA G E N D A
REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA
HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, JUNE 26, 1990, AT 7:30 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES:
May 22, 1990
II. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Plan Review: Proposed Dwelling _
4209 Country Club Road
(B-90-11)
III. NEW BUSINESS:
A. Minnesota Statute 471.193, Municipal Heritage Preservation
IV. OTHER BUSINESS:
V. NEXT MEETING DATE:
July 24, 1990
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, JUNE 26, 1990, AT 7:30 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman, Gary Nyberg, David Gepner, Lois Wilder and
Walter Sandison
MEMBERS ABSENT: Marilyn Curtis, Cy Stuppy and Donald Wray
STAFF PRESENT: Joyce Repya
OTHERS PRESENT: Art Bartels, Paul Curran and Kathy Curran
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES:
David Gepner moved for approval of the minutes from the May 22, 1990, meeting.
Lois Wilder seconded the motion. All voted aye; the motion carried.
II. OLD BUSINESS:
- Plan Review: Proposed Dwelling - 4209 Country Club Road
(B-90-11)
Chairman Nyberg reminded the Board that the subject proposal had been continued
from the May 22, 1990, to afford the architect an opportunity to draft final
plans for the home.
Mr. Art Bartels architect for the proponents, Mr. and Mrs Paul Curran, reviewed
the history of the proposal, reminding the Board that the subject lot was the
product of a lot division of the Thomas Vennum property at 4209 Country Club
Road. A five foot side yard variance was approved by the Board of Appeals and
Adjustments in May to allow for construction of the home on the lot which
measures 70 feet in width (5 feet less than the 75 foot lot width minimum
allowed by ordinance).
A condition of the variance approval was for the Heritage Preservation Board to
review and approve the design plans. Moving on to the presentation of the
proposed dwelling, Mr. Bartels pointed out that the house is proposed to be an
American Colonial.
The body of the house will be primarily brick with a small portion of the upper
story rear to have siding. Some highlights of the home include the following:
stone keystones, brick Lintels, brick sills, low arch windows, a palladin window
picking up a two story foyer, and Copper down spouts and gutters. Mr. Bartels
added that all materials are indicative of the area and in keeping with the
streescape. A brick and wood attached garage is proposed for the site measuring
1
24' X 22' sited 12 feet from the rear lot line and 6 feet from the east lot
line.
Mr. Bartels, addressing the Board's request from its May meeting to research the
possibility of constructing an attached garage, explained that alternatives were
explored to site the garage more attached and behind the house, however that
plan resulted in more pavement area in the back yard space. It was felt that
neither neighbor would appreciate the excessive pavement. Now, with the
proposed siting for the garage, the rear will be screened with a hedge and
impact to easterly neighbor will be much less intense.
Concluding his presentation, Mr. Bartels added that the Board has also expressed
concern about the extent of siding vs. brick to be used on the home. Initially,
only a brick front facade was proposed, however, now all but a small potion of
the upper level in the rear will be brick. The proposed materials will be a
blended brick with most likely a flemish bond with a nice tooled joint, to be
more decorative and pick up the character of the neighborhood.
Chairman Nyberg, complimented Mr. Bartels on the attention to detail and the
care taken to blend the home into the neighborhood. Mr. Nyberg added that both
garages ( 1) for the proposed dwelling and 2) the new garage to be built for
4209 Country Club Road to replace the tuckunder garage which must be removed)
tie in very nicely to each home site.
General discussion ensued among Board Members, all expressing complements for
the proposal.
Mr. Nyberg asked Mr. Curran, the owner if his intention was to reside in the
home or simply building for speculation.
Mr. Curran responded that he and his wife most definitely intend on residing in
the home. He also pointed out that the process he has encountered has been a
long one -seven meetings, which is nothing he would have pursued for a "spec"
home.
Lois Wilder then moved for approval of the proposed plans as presented. Walter
Sandison seconded the motion. All voted aye; the motion carried.
II. NEW BUSINESS:
- Minnesota Statute 471.193, Municipal Heritage Preservation
Ms. Repya advised the Board that the City Attorney, Tom Erickson had been
reviewing the subject ordinance and asked if the City was abiding by all the
regulations. She explained that to the best of her knowledge, the City was in
compliance with the exception of Subd. 6 which instructs the Board to submit an
annual report to the State Historic Preservation Officer, summarizing the
Commission activities during the previous 12 month period.
Ms. Repya pointed out that the City's Heritage Preservation Ordinance No. 802-A2
does not refer to the requirement of an annual report to the state, nor has she
found any evidence that an annual report has every been submitted. However,
4
Ordinance 802-A2 was passed in 1975, perhaps subdivision 6 of the state statute
was enacted after 1975.
In closing, Ms. Repya explained that Mr. Erickson had indicated there doesn't
appear to be a penalty involved for not submitting an annual report to the
state, however, he recommended that the Board be informed of the State Statute
and decide what action, if any, should be taken in the future.
The Board asked if the City has ever been approached by the state with "Where's
your annual report?" questions. Ms. Repya replied that no such correspondence
has ever been received.
David Gepner stated that in his opinion, the Board should continue as they have
for the past fifteen years and not submit an annual report to the state.
Gary Nyberg agreed with Mr. Gepner asking what the reasoning would be for
submitting an annual report.
Discussion ensued relative to the necessity and justification for submitting the
reports. The Board agreed that it would be interesting to find out if our
neighboring communities are submitted reports to the state. Ms. Repya offered
to poll the Heritage Preservation Commissions from surrounding communities to
see if they report to the state, and then report her findings back to the Board.
No further action was taken.
VI. OTHER BUSINESS:
A. Country Club Tour
David Gepner asked if the Board was still interested in touring the Country Club
District. Board members agreed that a tour would be not only interesting, but
very timely considering the most recent issues of massing and design review
questions which have surfaced as of late. It was agreed that September would be
a good month to plan a tour which could also include all the historic sites in
the City as well. No action taken.
B. Country Club Photographs
Chairman Nyberg presented the Board copies of the original promotional
literature used for marketing the Country Club back in the 1920's. He explained
that his firm Smiley Glotter Associates was known as Liebenberg and Kaplan when
they designed the eight model homes for the Country Club District.
Mr. Nyberg added that he was fortunate to have had a meeting with Mr. Liebenberg
several years ago, prior to his death, at which time Mr. Liebenberg conveyed
very interesting stories about the development of the district.
Board Members thanked Mr. N yberg for the brochures which included the original
drawings of the homes as well as photographs. Ms. Repya added that the
information will be a real asset to the Country Club files.
3
C. St. Patrick's Church - 7000 Cahill
Ms. Repya explained that she has toured the old St. Patrick's church site with
representatives from Ron Clark Construction Co., the prospective developers of
the site. It was determined that the visible foundation from the 1924
reconstruction of the church was concrete block and poured concrete walls. Once
the demolition of the church has begun, the architect of the interpretive
center, Larry Kollmeyer, will determine what, if any original (1888) foundation
is salvageable for use in the Center.
Ms. Repya further stated that she would keep the Board posted on the demolition
progress. General discussion ensued with no action taken.
V. NEXT MEETING DATE: July 24, 1990
The Board discussed postponing the next meet'ng date until the regular September
meeting due to summertime conflicts. Lois ilder made a motion to forego July
and Augusts regularly scheduled meetings, (unless of course, business which must
be dealt with during the summer crops up) and schedule the next meeting for
September when the Board can consider taking a tour of historic Edina. David
Gepner seconded the notion. All voted aye; motion carried.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
8:45 P.M.
Joyce Repya
4