HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015 07-14 HPB Meeting Minutes RegularAGENDA
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
EDINA CITY HALL, 4801 W. 50TH STREET
TUESDAY, JULY 14, 2015, 7:00 P.M.
1. CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA
IV. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: June 9, 2015
V. COMMUNITY COMMENT
During "Community Comment' the Heritage Preservation Board will invite residents to share new issues or concerns that
haven't been considered in the past 30 days by the Board or which aren't slated for future consideration. 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. Generally speaking, items that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment.
Individuals should not expect the Chair or Board to respond to their comments. Instead, the Board might refer the matter to
staff for consideration at a future meeting.
VI. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
A. Certificates of Appropriateness:
1. H-15-8 4902 Bruce Avenue - New Detached Garage
2. H-15-9 4621 Browndale Avenue - Changes to Street Facing Facade
VII. OTHER BUSINESS
A. Cahill School & Grange Hall - Painting and Door Replacement
B. Board & Commission Bylaw Changes
VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS
XIII. CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS
XIV. STAFF COMMENTS
XV. NEXT MEETING DATE: August 11, 2015
July 21, 2015 - Summer Walking Tour, Adath Yeshurun Cemetery
5605 France Avenue
XVI. 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
Regular Meeting of the
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Edina City Hall — Community Room
Tuesday, July 14, 2015
7:00 p.m.
I. CALL TO ORDER 7:05 P.M.
11. ROLL CALL
Answering roll call was Chair Weber and Members, Moore, McLellan, Sussman, Christiaansen,
O'Brien, Birdman, Kelly, Pearson and Student Members Otness and Druckman. Staff present
was Senior Planner, Joyce Repya.
III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA
Member O'Brien moved to approve the meeting agenda. Member Pearson seconded the
motion. All voted aye. The motion carried.
IV. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES June 8, 2015
Member Kelly moved approval of the minutes from the June 8`h meeting. Member McLellan
seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried.
V. COMMUNITY COMMENT - None
VI. REPORTS & RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. H-15-8 4902 Bruce Avenue - New Detached Garage
Planner Repya explained that the subject property is located on the west side of the 4900 block
of Bruce Avenue. The existing home, a Colonial Revival style constructed in 1936, currently has
a 2 -car attached garage, with a sun porch/deck above; accessed by a driveway on the south side
of the property.
The Certificate of Appropriateness request entails the construction of a new 528 square foot
detached garage in the southwest corner of the rear yard, and converting the attached garage
to living space. The footprint of the existing attached garage conversion will be reduced in
order to accommodate the additional square footage of the new detached garage and stay
within the square footage allowed by city code. Access into the garage will be obtained on the
east elevation from the existing driveway.
Ms. Repya pointed out that the design of the structure is proposed to compliment the Colonial
Revival style of the home with Hardi Plank lap siding, and Timberland asphalt shingled roof. On
the east elevation attention to detail is provided with 2 -paneled entry doors with dentil molding
above. A service door and window are provided on the north elevation; and the rear west
elevation will have a window in the gable area to provide some architectural detailing. Shutters
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Minutes
July 14, 2015
are provided alongside the 3 windows. She pointed out that no windows or architectural
detailing has been provided for south side elevation since it abuts a privacy hedge.
Furthermore, all dimensions proposed for the structure are consistent with the surrounding
detached garages and new garages previously approved by the HPB through the Certificate of
Appropriateness process.
Ms. Repya also noted that plans for the conversion of the attached garage to living space at the
rear of the home have been provided for the Board's information. The foot print of the
conversion has been reduced by approximately 144 square feet to accommodate the proposed
detached garage on the lot.
Preservation Vogel evaluated the proposal and determined that detached garages are common
in the Country Club neighborhood and the district plan of treatment recognizes construction
of new garages as appropriate, provided the new garage is compatible in scale, size, massing,
building materials, and texture with the historic house and other buildings in the neighborhood.
The plans submitted indicate the new garage will match the Colonial Revival style of the house
and will be architecturally compatible with other historic residences in the neighborhood. The
south elevation is shown as an undecorated wall, which will be screened from the adjoining
property by a hedge, thus not necessitating additional architectural detailing. The design also
appears to be consistent with the height and scale of the garages on adjacent properties. The
essential character of the subject property and the district as a whole will be preserved intact.
Ms. Repya concluded that Staff was in agreement with Consultant Vogel's evaluation, thus
recommended approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness request.
Findings supporting the recommendation include:
• The plans provided with subject request clearly illustrate the scale and scope of the
proposed projects.
• The proposed detached garage will complement the architectural style of the home and not
be detrimental to the adjacent historic structures.
0 The information provided supporting the subject Certificate of Appropriateness meets the
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and the Country Club District Plan of Treatment.
Conditions for approval:
• Subject to the plans presented and
• Placement of a year built plaque on the exterior of the new detached garage.
Applicant/Owner: Gus & Michele Thompson, 4902 Bruce Avenue
The Thompsons were present to address questions from the board - there were none.
Board Member Comments:
Member Kelly commented that she visited the site and found the proposed plan to be nice
remediation for the hardship the homeowners' are experiencing with the current attached garage.
2
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Minutes
July 14, 2015
Motion: Following a brief discussion, Member Birdman moved approval of the COA
subject to the plans presented and a year built plaque to be installed on the exterior of the new
garage. Member Kelly seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried.
B. B-15-9 4621 Browndale Avenue - Changes to Street Facing Fa4ade
Planner Repya explained that the subject property, located on the east side of the 4600 block of
Browndale Avenue consists of a Tudor Revival/English Cottage stile home constructed in 1926.
The proposed Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) request includes reducing the width of the
former single stall attached garage on the north side of the home to provide a wider driveway
and access to the rear yard; window and door replacement; and removal of architectural
elements that were not part of the original construction. An addition to the rear of the home is
also proposed.
She pointed out that the home has undergone many changes to the exterior over the years as
evidenced in the photos that were provided from 1958, 1980, 1992, and current day.
Ms. Repya introduced the proposed changes to the home which included:
• Remove half-timbering on front elevation (not original to home)
• Add divided light windows, decorative corbels and metal roof accents
• Replace existing front and rear entry doors
• Add limestone window and door accents
• Add cedar shake roofing; and
• Rebuild the north side of the house to reduce the mass and enlarge the driveway to
provide access to the rear yard.
Additionally, the plans call for removal of the stone arch (south side) and stone around the
front entry door which are not original to the home; as well as replacing the brick chimney with
a larger chimney clad in the same stucco as the home.
Ms. Repya pointed out that an addition is also proposed to the rear of the home to enlarge the
kitchen/great room area on the main level and a bedroom/bathroom on the second story.
While not subject to the COA review, plans for the addition to the home were provided for
the board's information.
As with all COA applications, Consultant Vogel provided an evaluation of the proposal where
he pointed out that it is important to recognize that this particular house is not regarded as
historic because of its Tudor/Cottage style design characteristics—its heritage resource value is
primarily the product of its historical association with the development of the Country Club
District as a planned suburban neighborhood. Like most houses in the district, it embodies
some of the general characteristics of early 20`h century "period revival" aesthetic, but it is not
an authentic expression of any particular academic style; in this case, the "Tudor" design
elements are little more than skin-deep embellishments of a standardized suburban house. The
house has also been substantially altered from its original, as -built appearance. While removal
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Minutes
July 14, 2015
of later work and replacement of missing architectural features may be technically feasible, as a
matter of policy the city has determined that restoration (defined as the process of accurately
recovering the original form and details of a property) is not required by the district plan of
treatment.
Mr. Vogel pointed out that the existing half-timbering which is proposed to be removed could
be seen as evidence of the history of the house but should not be considered a distinguishing
architectural feature (it seems to have been applied after the district's period of historical
significance). Therefore, removal of the wood members would be appropriate. The faux half-
timbering could be reintroduced in the future without damaging the essential form and integrity
of the facade.
He added that the proposed divided light windows, decorative corbels, metal roof accents,
decorative stonework, and cedar shake roofing are minor details that require relatively little
alteration of the building. While they have little or no historical basis, no distinguishing, historic
character defining architectural details will be lost or obscured as a result of their introduction,
and the alterations themselves are reversible. From a technical standpoint, these alterations
would be considered examples of contemporary design (which the standards for rehabilitation
do not discourage) that do not compromise the property's historical integrity.
Mr. Vogel also observed that the applicant has provided information on the current condition
of the existing. windows and front/rear entry doors which provides justification for their
replacement. The existing windows do not appear to be original, although the pattern of
fenestration (the physical arrangement of the windows and doors) is more or less in -tact. The
proposed replacement strategy will provide for a more energy efficient home and will not
compromise the property's historical integrity.
Mr. Vogel summarized his evaluation by noting that that the proposed changes to the home will
be visually compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood, will not detract
from the historic significance and integrity of the district as a whole, and appear to be
compatible with the character of the home, thus approval of the COA was recommended.
Planner Repya agreed with Consultant Vogel's evaluation, recommending approval of the COA
subject to the plans presented.
Findings supporting the recommendation included:
• The plans provided with subject request clearly illustrate the scale and scope of the
proposed projects.
• The proposed changes to the front facade will not significantly alter the scale or detract
from the historic character.
• The new work has been designed so that the remodeled house will be compatible in size,
scale, color, and texture with other Tudor/Cottage style homes in the district.
• The information provided supporting the subject Certificate of Appropriateness meets the
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and the Country Club District Plan of Treatment.
4
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Minutes
ti
July 14, 2015
Ms. Repya also suggested that approval of the COA be subject to the plans presented.
Applicant/Owner Representative: Jon Linde, Refined Remodeling Inc.
Mr. Linde responded to questions and comments from the board.
Board Member Questions/Comments:
Member Christiaansen questioned why the wall on the north side of the front elevation was
flared at the bottom rather than having a clean/straight line. Mr. Linde responded that the
flared wall mimics the existing wall on the rear of the home. Ms. Christiaansen also commented
that since the subject home would not qualify for landmark status; the same way a single tree
contributes to a forest, the proposed changes to this home will contribute to its blending well
with the surrounding homes.
Member McLellan questioned the material proposed for the metal roofing in several areas
above the windows, as well as the use of the limestone caps. Mr. Linde explained that the
metal roofing will be aluminum painted a medium brown color. Also, the limestone caps will be
one solid piece when possible, and of a consistent color. Mr. McLellan also observed that in the
past, when reviewing COA's the issue of maintaining the historic facade of the home has been a
sticking point. However, since this home has undergone so many changes over the years, the
facade changes don't appear to alter the historic integrity of the home.
Member Weber observed that the plans demonstrate that all of the windows will be
replaced, and many of the window openings will be enlarged. Mr. Linde commented that the
homeowner wishes to increase the amount of daylight flowing into the home, thus the enlarged
window openings. That being said, Mr. Linde pointed out that the placement of the windows
and doors remains consistent with the original home. He added that the windows proposed will
be casement style which have the appearance of double hung divided light windows.
Member Kelly pointed out that she has lived in the Country Club District for many years, and
knows that the subject home has had a sad history with changes made that definitely
compromised the historic integrity of the structure. She also commended the current owner
for proposing a plan that attempts to correct prior mistakes.
Member Pearson echoed Member Kelly's comments noting that she too resides in the
Country Club District and finds that the proposed plan will enhance the historic integrity of the
home.
5
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Minutes
July 14, 2015
Member Sussman stated he would be in favor of approving the proposal, but wondered if in
doing so, precedence could be set for future front fagade change requests. He added that he
did not think this proposal would be precedence setting due to the considerable changes the
home has undergone over time; considerable historic documentation was provided; and the
fact that the essential character of the home will be maintained.
Motion: Following a brief discussion, Member Birdman moved approval of the COA subject to
the plans presented with the following findings:
. A thorough history of the home was provided documenting the evolution of numerous
front facade changes which have occurred from 1958 to current day;
2. The proposed changes to the front facade will not significantly alter the scale or detract
from the home's historic character; and
3. The new work has been designed so that the remodeled house will be compatible in
size, scale, color, and texture with other Tudor/Cottage style homes in the district.
Member Kelly seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried.
VII. OTHER BUSINESS
A. Cahill School & Grange Hall - Painting & Door Replacement
Planner Repya reported that currently, the Cahill School and Grange Hall are in the midst of a
repainting of the exteriors as was planned last fall. Also, the main entry doors for both buildings
are warped and in need of replacement. The city's park maintenance staff is in the midst of
evaluating vendors familiar with historic buildings to proceed with obtaining replacement
estimates.
Ms. Repya pointed out that typically, Edina's heritage landmark properties do not require HPB
review of general maintenance (painting) and window/door replacement. However, because
the Cahill School and Grange Hall are owned by the City of Edina, it has been standard practice
to keep the HPB advised of maintenance issues as they arise. Ms. Repya concluded her
explanation by commending HPB member Bob Moore who has been championing the
maintenance of these buildings.
Board members appreciated the update on the painting, and discussed the warped condition of
the entry doors - questioning how changes to the entryway and threshold to accommodate the
new doors would affect the accessibility to the buildings as required by the ADA. Planner Repya
agreed to discuss the board's ADA concerns with Brian Olson, the City's public works
director, and keep the board advised.
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Minutes
July 14, 2015
B. Board & Commission Bylaw Changes
Planner Repya provided the board with information from MJ Lamon the city's project
coordinator, explaining that the city's board and commission bylaws are undergoing changes,
and the HPB will have until August 7, 2015 to provide feedback. Most of the changes are merely
minor edits with the exception Section 5. Paragraph I. which will require all boards and
commissions to hold their annual meetings with board elections at the February meeting each
year. The board briefly discussed the proposed changes, but had no feedback to provide.
VIII. CORRESPONDENCE & PETITIONS - None
IX. CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS - None
X. STAFF COMMENTS
A. Oskam House, 6901 Dakota Trail - Proposed EHL Designation Update
Planner Repya reported that since the last HPB meeting, Mrs. Oskam asked to include the
protection of interior features of the home to the Plan of Treatment (POT) which has been
provided for under item #1 under the POT. On July 8th the Planning Commission considered
the landmark designation of the property, and voted unanimously to support the landmark
designation. The Council will hold the public hearing on August 5`h. Ms. Repya added that Mrs.
Oskam is very pleased, and looking forward to the Council approving the proposed landmark
designation.
B. HPB Report to Planning Commission - July 8, 2015
At the July 8th Planning Commission meeting, Planner Repya provided the Planning Commission
with a history of the HPB and shared with them some of the important issues the board has
addressed in the past, as well as those identified for the future. She concluded that the HPB is
looking forward to working with the Planning Commission on updating the heritage
preservation element of the Comprehensive Plan, noting the heritage preservation is one of the
important links in the land use element for the city.
C. September I, 2015 Work Session with City Council - Reminder
Planner Repya reminded the board that the work session with the City Council to update them
on the status of the 2015 Work Plan is scheduled for Tuesday, September I't at 5:00 p.m.
7
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Minutes
July 14, 2015
XI. NEXT MEETING DATE August 11, 2015
XII, ADIOURNMENT
8:05 p.m. Member McLellan seconded the motion.
Member Birdman moved for adjournment at
All voted aye. The motion carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Joyce Repya
Liaisons: Report attendance monthly and attach this report to the Commission minutes for the packet.
Do not enter numbers into the last two columns. Meeting numbers & attendance percentages will calculate automatically.
INSTRUCTIONS:
Regular Meeting w/Quorum
Counted as Meeting Held (ON MEETINGS' LINE) Attendance Recorded (ON MEMBER'S LINE)
Type "1" under the month on the meetings' line. Type "1" under the month for each attending member.
Regular Meeting w/o Quorum Type "1" under the month on the meetings' line. Type "1" under the month for each attending member.
Joint Work Session Type "1" under "Work Session" on the meetings' line. Type "1" under "Work Session" for each attending member.
Rescheduled Meeting" Type "1" under the month on the meetings' line. Type "1" under the month for each attending member.
Cancelled Meeting Type "1" under the month on the meetings' line. Type "1" under the month for ALL members.
Special Meeting There is no number typed on the meetings' line. There is no number typed on the members' lines.
*A rescheduled meeting occurs when members are notified of a new meeting date/time at a prior meeting. If shorter notice is
given, the previously -scheduled meeting is considered to have been cancelled and replaced with a special meeting.
401 0
HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
J
I F1
MI
A
MI
JI
JI AlS1 O N D Work Session
Work Session # of Mtgs. Attendance
Meetings/Work Sessions I
1
1
11 11
1
1
1
1
7
100%
6 NAME I
TERM
(Enter Date)
(Enter Date)
Weber, Ryan
2/1/2016
1
1 1
1
1
1
1
7
100%
O'Brien, Tim
2/1/2016
1
1
1
11 1 1 1 1 1
4
57%
Christiaansen, Jennifer
Mellom, Joyce
3/1/2018
3/1/2018
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
1
86%
14%
Moore, Bob
3/1/20181
1
1 1
1
1
1
1
7
100%
Sussman, Peter
3/1/2018
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
86%
McLellan, Bruce
2/1/2017
1
1 1
1
1
1
1
7
100%
Birdman, Michael
3/1/2016
1
1
1
1
4
80%
Kelly, Karen
3/1/2016
1
11
1
1
4
80%
Pearson, Colleen
3/1/2018
1
1
1
1
1
5
100%
Druckman, Joe
9/1/2015
1
1
1
1
1
5
71%
Otness, Peter
9/1/2015
11
11 11
1
1
1
1
7
100%
Liaisons: Report attendance monthly and attach this report to the Commission minutes for the packet.
Do not enter numbers into the last two columns. Meeting numbers & attendance percentages will calculate automatically.
INSTRUCTIONS:
Regular Meeting w/Quorum
Counted as Meeting Held (ON MEETINGS' LINE) Attendance Recorded (ON MEMBER'S LINE)
Type "1" under the month on the meetings' line. Type "1" under the month for each attending member.
Regular Meeting w/o Quorum Type "1" under the month on the meetings' line. Type "1" under the month for each attending member.
Joint Work Session Type "1" under "Work Session" on the meetings' line. Type "1" under "Work Session" for each attending member.
Rescheduled Meeting" Type "1" under the month on the meetings' line. Type "1" under the month for each attending member.
Cancelled Meeting Type "1" under the month on the meetings' line. Type "1" under the month for ALL members.
Special Meeting There is no number typed on the meetings' line. There is no number typed on the members' lines.
*A rescheduled meeting occurs when members are notified of a new meeting date/time at a prior meeting. If shorter notice is
given, the previously -scheduled meeting is considered to have been cancelled and replaced with a special meeting.
401 0