Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014 12-17 HPB Meeting Minutes SepcialAGENDA EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD SPECIAL MEETING EDINA CITY HALL, 4801 W. SOT" STREET WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 17,2014,7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT: A. Evaluation of Policy 13 B. Clarifying Plan of Treatment C. Notification for Events of an Extraordinary Circumstances IV. DAVID FISHER, CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL: Discuss Role of Building Inspections Relative to Managing the Plan of Treatment V. HOW TO ADDRESS BLOG SITES ENCOURAGING CONSTRUCTION OF NEW HOMES IN THE COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT VI. ADJOURNMENT The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861, 72 hours in advance of the meeting. MINUTES Special Meeting of the Edina Heritage Preservation Board Edina City Hall — Mayor's Conference Room Wednesday, December 17, 2014 7:00 p.m. I. Call to Order 7:00 P.M. 11. Roll Call Answering roll call was Chair Weber and Members, Moore, Sussman, McLellan, Mellom, O'Brien, and Student Member Otness. Absent were members Christiaansen and Student Member Druckman. Staff present was Senior Planner, Joyce Repya, and Chief Building Official, David Fisher. Ill. Country Club District: Policy 13 - Clarifying Plan of Treatment and Requiring HPB Notification for Events of an Extraordinary Circumstance involving Threats to Public Health or Safety so as to Necessitate Demolition Chair Weber explained that there were several reasons he called for a special meeting of the board: 1. The complete demolition of the home at 4505 Arden Avenue took the HPB by surprise. 2. The HPB expressed the need to establish a notification process to alert the board and surrounding neighbors when a change to an approved COA occurs. 3. The builder of 4505 Arden Avenue had wanted to tear down the home since 2010, and he is now advertising on a blog that he can work through the system to get a house torn down, making way for new construction in the Country Club District. Mr. Weber pointed out that the board recognizes there are homes in the district with deficiencies, and after the miscommunication with 4505 Arden Avenue, now is a good time to establish policies to address potential problems in the future. Member O'Brien opined that it is important for the HPB to immediately establish a policy that provides a process for notification of the board prior an activity occurring that does not comply with that which was approved through the COA process. He added that a comment was made that the issue with 4505 Arden Avenue home was an anomaly; however he disagreed, pointing out that a home is for sale on Bruce Avenue that could easily fall prey to a contractor that will be looking for a way to justify its demolition. Especially since the 4505 Arden contractor is touting his ability on a blog site to work through the District's Plan of Treatment process to provide for new construction. Member O'Brien then presented the following amended Policy #13 that was revised from the Draft policy adopted at the December 9th HPB meeting: Edina Heritage Preservation Board Special Meeting Minutes December 17, 2014 Policy 13: Country Club Heritage Landmark District i;ky a. The Country Club is designated and zoned as the Country Club Heritage Landmark District ("Landmark District"). Pursuant to the applicable plan of treatment, homes within the Landmark District which were built from 1924 to 1944 are heritage preservation resources ("Heritage Resources"). b. The applicable pian of treatment provides, among other things, that: The primary purpose of the Landmark District is the preservation of the existing historic house facades and streetscapes. The preferred treatment for Heritage Resources in the Landmark District is rehabilitation defined as the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alteration, and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey it's historical, cultural, or architectural values. One of the stated standards for rehabilitation is that deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Certificate of Appropriateness The city mandates that no COA will be approved for demolition, in whole or in part, of any Heritage Resources unless the applicant can show: a. The property is not a heritage preservation resource; or b. The property no longer contributes to the historical significance of the Landmark District because its historic integrity has been compromised by deterioration, damage, or by inappropriate addition or alteration. The city additionally mandates that a certificate of appropriateness (COA) be issued before any city permit is issued for demolition and new construction of any principal dwelling or detached garage within the Landmark District. The city defines demolition to include the physical alteration of a building that requires a city permit under circumstances where: a. 50% or more of the surface of all exterior walls in the aggregate are removed; or b. 50% or more of the principal roof structure is removed changing its shape, pitch or height. Actions I . In the absence of extraordinary circumstances involving threats to public safety, which circumstances result in an order to demolish by the city building official, no demolition, in whole or in part, of any Heritage Resource shall proceed. 2. In the event of an extraordinary circumstance involving threats to public health or safety so as to necessitate demolition, in whole or in part, of a Heritage Resource, the Edina Heritage Preservation Board Special Meeting Minutes ® December 17, 2014 applicant shall immediately notify the city and the HPB. The HPB staff liaison/planner, in turn, shall thereafter notify the HPB and surrounding neighbors of the applicant's notice and shall also immediately further notify the HPB and surrounding neighbors of any mandate of the city building official pertaining to demolition of the Heritage Resource. 3. In the absence of extraordinary circumstances involving threats to public health or safety, any change in the scope or amount of work to be performed on a Heritage Resource, shall require submittal of an application for a new COA in accordance with all governing provisions. 4. Neither the HPB staff liaison/planner nor the preservation planning consultant for the HPB/city is authorized to deviate from this policy. Mr. O'Brien pointed out that the proposed policy focuses on the plan of treatment, and restates the language addressing demolitions in the District. He added that he believed it to be incumbent to clearly define the board's stance relative to demolitions. Member McLellan agreed with Member O'Brien, but stated that he would like to see more detail regarding notifications with reference to the timing of the notice prior to a demolition. Mr. McLellan also wondered if an education process between the building official and the HPB could be initiated to help the board better understand facts surrounding a potential decision affecting a property in the district. Member Sussman provided the board with a draft Policy #13 he created entitled "Clarifications Related to Existing Conditions" which included six actions he found lacking in the draft policy adopted on 12-9-14. Mr. Sussman pointed out that Member O'Brien had done a good job of using the plan of treatment as a guide for the policy he was proposing. However, he cautioned that the policy's reference to "no demolition in whole or in part" could become problematic when compared to how the plan of treatment has been interpreted. He also pointed out that it is important the policy not contradict decisions required by the building official. Member Weber agreed with Member Sussman, pointing out that with Member O'Brien's proposed policy, one could interpret the "no demolition in whole or in part" to infer that a window could not be replaced, or a roof may not be replaced, and that was not the intent of the City Council when the plan of treatment was adopted in 2008. He added that he finds the plan of treatment to be contradictory, because while it references that "no demolition in whole or in part" would be allowed, it also provides for removal of existing siding, roofing, trim, fascia, soffit, eave, moldings, windows, and doors which would all be classified as "demolition". Discussion ensued regarding the responsibility of the HPB to interpret the plan of treatment. Board members recognized a need to better define the term "demolition in whole and in part" i:? Edina Heritage Preservation Board Special Meeting Minutes December 17, 2014 so as not to contradict the portion of the plan that allows for partial demolition of a building's elements without a COA was discussed. Member Moore opined that the plans approved for 4505 Arden Avenue set up a situation that became a slippery slope due to the changes that were allowed on the front facade. He explained that by allowing the front entrance and chimney to be moved, that change became problematic when the foundation too needed to be replaced. Member O'Brien observed that it appears that there are additional issues regarding the details of the notification and definitions that need further discussion. However, he encouraged the board to adopt his proposed Policy #13 which sets out the language from the Plan o Treatment and includes the requirement for HPB and neighbor notification in the event there is a change to an approved COA. The board agreed that although further work relative to the notification details and definition of terms would be helpful, those issues were too involved to be addressed during the special mParino Planner ReDva suggested that a committee of HPB members be formed to take on the task of fine tuning the notification details, definition of terms and consideration of Member Sussman's recommendations for "Clarifications Related to Existing Conditions". Following a brief discussion, Member Moore moved for form a committee to work through the details of the notification process and provide clarity for the definition of "demolition in whole or in part" and "existing conditions". Member McLellan seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. Members Sussman, Mellom, McLellan and Student Member Otness agreed to serve on the committee. Member McLellan was chosen to serve as the committee's chair. Getting back to the Policy #13 proposed by Member O'Brien, Member Sussman raised concerns that the policy does not follow the format of the previous policies; and as the discussion has shown does not address all of the existing concerns. He pointed out that the board has an opportunity to clearly state the policies, but it needs to be done carefully and not in haste. Member O'Brien observed he believed not taking action on the policy was shirking responsibility, since there are other properties in the district that may be in a similar state of neglected maintenance as 4505 Arden; and potential targets for demolition. 0 4 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Special Meeting Minutes December 17, 2014 Student Member Otness stated that he understood the reason for the special meeting was to address a lacking notification requirement in the plan of treatment. He added that he did not see a need to rush to a decision on Policy #13 since the "Actions" set out in Policy #5 clearly define that a demolition will not take place in the district unless the HPB has considered a proposal through the COA process. Reviewing the language provided in the proposed policy, Planner Repya suggested that under "Action" 2, the requirement that the applicant notify the city and surrounding neighbors regarding in event of extraordinary circumstances be changed to only require notifying the city - the city will then notify the neighbors. Member O'Brien agreed with that suggested change. Member Weber questioned "Action" #1, pointing out that the language lacked the exact reference from the plan of treatment which provided for a demolition in the absence of extraordinary circumstances and could be misinterpreted. He suggested that as stated in the plan of treatment, "unless the applicant has previously shown that the property has been compromised by deterioration, damage, or by inappropriate additions or alterations" be added to the end of the statement - otherwise the statement would flatly not allow demolitions regardless of circumstances. Member O'Brien agreed to include all of the language from the plan of treatment as proposed by Member Weber. Following a brief discussion Member O'Brien moved approval of the proposed Policy #13 to include the changes proposed by Planner Repya and Member Weber, and to replace the Draft Policy #13 adopted at the December 9, 2014 HPB meeting. Member McLellan seconded the motion. Members Mellom, Moore, McLellan and O'Brien voted aye. Members Sussman and Weber voted nay. The motion carried. (A copy of the approved Policy # 13 is included at the end of these minutes.) IV. David Fisher, Chief Building Official - Discuss Role of Building Inspections relative to managing the Country Club District's Plan of Treatment David Fisher explained that among his many duties, he is responsible to ensure that all structures in the City of Edina meet the life and safety requirements of the building code. Relative to the home at 4505 Arden Avenue, he received a structural engineer's report citing that the home's foundation and footings were inadequately constructed, performing poorly, and required full replacement. Prior to making a decision, a site visit was performed which proved the validity of the engineer's report. A letter was then provided to the contractor confirming that the footings and foundation needed to be replaced. The contractor responded that it was his intention to remove what was to have remained of the original framing of the home, which was authorized because the COA approved plans for the rebuilt home were not changing. Edina Heritage Preservation Board Special Meeting Minutes December 17, 2014 A discussion ensued regarding the chief building official's responsibilities as they pertain to the work of the HPB. Several board members opined that even though the plans for the rebuilt home weren't changing, the treatment of the original home was affected, warranting in -put from the HPB. Member Sussman pointed out that he understands that ultimately the HPB must adhere to the chief building official's decisions, however he hoped that in the future a conversation between the board and building official will take place which may not change a decision, but provide the board with an understanding prior to an action such as a demolition takes place. Mr. Fisher agreed that better transparency between his office and the HPB when decisions affecting properties in the Country Club District occur is one of the lessons that can come from this project. He believed that -the -decision he made relative to the home at 4505 Arden Avenue was a sound one, however he also understands why the HPB would want to be aware of such decisions so they aren't surprised and put in a reactionary mode. Board members thanked Mr. Fisher for attending the meeting and informing them about the chief building official's responsibilities regarding life and safety issues. They also appreciated his understanding their need to be informed when changes to a building permit occur with a Country Club District home subject to an approved COA; and stressed that they looked forward to working more closely with him in the future. V. Address a Contractor's Blog Site Encouraging Construction of New Homes in the Country Club District Chair Weber observed that since the tear down of the home at 4505 Arden Avenue, the contractor has now created a blog site inviting people interested in building a new home in the Country Club District to contract with his company because he can make it happen. The blog includes much of the language from the plan of treatment; however it also provides the contractor's personal interpretation of the plan of treatment which includes misleading and incorrect information. Board members discussed their concern with the inaccurate information encouraging people to look to the Country Club District if interested in building a new home in Edina. Some wondered how the HPB should respond. Planner Repya suggested that responding to the blog directly was not a good idea. However, she suggested that the board create an article for the "The Advisor", a blog of the boards and commissions on the city's web site which could be linked to the Country Club -District's -page -on the -HPB site In the blogarticle, the board would have aft excellent opportunity to educate the public by ciar iijii�g . 0 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Special Meeting Minutes December 17, 2014 Actions In the absence of extraordinary circumstances involving threats to public safety, which circumstances result in an order to demolish by the city building official, no demolition, in whole or in part, of any Heritage Resource shall proceed, unless the applicant has previously shown that the property has been compromised by deterioration, damage, or by inappropriate additions or alterations. 2. In the event of an extraordinary circumstance involving threats to public health or safety so as to necessitate demolition, in whole or in part, of a Heritage Resource, the applicant shall immediately notify the city. The HPB staff liaison/planner, in turn, shall thereafter notify the HPB and surrounding neighbors of the applicant's notice and shall also immediately further notify the HPB and surrounding neighbors of any mandate of the city building official pertaining to demolition of the Heritage Resource. 3. In the absence of extraordinary circumstances involving threats to public health or safety, any change in the scope or amount of work to be performed on a Heritage Resource, shall require submittal of an application for a new COA in accordance with all governing provisions. 4. Neither the HPB staff liaison/planner nor the preservation planning consultant for the HPB/city is authorized to deviate from this policy. Adopted at a special meeting of the Heritage Preservation Board on December 17, 2014. Edina Heritage Preservation Board Special Meeting Minutes December 17, 2014 regulations which provide for the construction of new homes for non -historic resources (built after 1944) or for properties identified by professional documentation as being "compromised buy deterioration, damage, or by inappropriate additions or alterations". Board members agreed that education was an appropriate approach. Chair Weber and Student Member Otness offered to write an article explaining the regulations controlling the construction of new homes in the Country Club District which he would have staff and the HPB review prior to posting. The board thanked Members Weber and Otness for taking on the task. VI. ADJOURNMENT 9:10 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ,Joyce Repya 7 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Special Meeting Minutes December 17, 2014 Policy 13: Country Club Heritage Landmark District City c. The Country Club is designated and zoned as the Country Club Heritage Landmark District ("Landmark District"). Pursuant to the applicable plan of treatment, homes within the Landmark District which were built from 1924 to 1944 are heritage - - -tiu» prefer vCLL1V111G5V U1GGJ l 11G1110.�'G 1\GJV UlI'VJ J. d. The applicable plan of treatment provides, among other things, that: iii. The primary purpose of the Landmark District is the preservation of the existing historic house facades and streetscapes. The preferred treatment -for Heritage Reso rrPc in the Landmark District is rehabilitation defined as the act or process of making possible a compatible use - - for a property through repair, alteration, and additio^� «�.��===1eprese vin those portions or features which convey it's historical, cultural, or architectural values. One of the stated standards for rehabilitation is that deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Certificate of Appropriateness The city mandates that no COA will be approved for demolition, in whole or in part, of any Heritage Resources unless the applicant can show: c. The property is not a heritage preservation resource; or d. The property no longer contributes to the historical significance of the Landmark District because its historic integrity has been compromised by deterioration, damage, or by inappropriate addition or alteration. The city additionally mandates that a certificate of appropriateness (COA) be issued before any city permit is issued for demolition and new construction of any principal dwelling or detached garage within the Landmark District. The city defines demolition to include the physical alteration of a building that requires a city permit under circumstances where: c. 50% or more of the surface of all exterior walls in the aggregate are removed; or d. 50% or more of the principal roof structure is removed changing its shape, pitch or height. 0