Loading...
Heritage Preservation - 04/16/2007 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MONDAY,APRIL 16, 2007 7:00 P.M. Heritage Room I 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS Betsy Adams, Chairperson; Ann Higgins, Vice Chairperson; Richard Akerlund, Nina Mackay, Mark McPherson,Ed Muehlberg, Jane Plaza STUDENT REPRESENTATIVES Kaitlin Robinson, Claire Lukens, Lauren Bentz COMMISSION STAFF John Gertz, Historic Preservation Specialist Peggy Rasmussen, Recorder I. ROLL CALL Adams called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Commissioner Mackay and Student Representative Lukens were excused. Student Representatives Robinson and Bentz were absent. Also attending the meeting were Robert Vogel from Pathfinder, CRM; Dave Lindahl, Manager of Economic Development; Dennis Gimmestad from the SHPO; and Liz Abel from MnDOT. Adams welcomed Mark McPherson as a new Commissioner. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Higgins moved, seconded by Muehlberg, to approve the agenda as published. Motion carried 6-0. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES —MARCH 19, 2007 MOTION: Muehlberg moved, seconded by Higgins, to approve the minutes of the Heritage Preservation Commission, held on March 19, 2007 as published. Motion carried 5-0. IV. REPORTS OF COMMISSION AND STAFF Gertz reported that the Boards and Commissions Banquet would be held on Wednesday, May 9. Invitations are being mailed this week to the Commissioners. V. PUBLIC MEETING: A. PIONEER TRAIL (CSAH 1) CONSTRUCTION EFFECTS ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER'S LISTED J.R. CUMMINS PROPERTY Adams opened the public meeting and explained its purpose. Gertz made a Power Point presentation that showed aerial views of the Cummins property, as well as a number of proposed site plans produced by the County, showing how widening Pioneer Trail to four lanes would affect the Cummins property. Gertz said the HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES April 16, 2007 Page 2 project would have significant impact. The road will be widened to the north, causing a loss of 60— to 70 feet along the front of the property and the loss of many trees. In addition, parking for the ball fields would be relocated to the north side of the Cummins house that would provide parking for 99 cars. Future parking for the house is a concern. Construction of Pioneer Trail is scheduled for 2008-2009. Of the various proposed site plans, the SHPO recommends consideration of Site Plans 4 and 5. Existing overhead power lines would be placed underground below the 8-foot bituminous trail. The shagbark hickory tree would be preserved. A boulder retaining wall would be provided to eliminate impact on trees. Dennis Gimmestad from the SHPO said his role was to represent historic preservation. He has engaged in two years of discussion on this project. He has a high degree of concern about the project because of its double effect on the historic resource, first to the infringement on the property by the widening of the road and then the rearrangement of the ball fields that result in relocating the parking. His interest is to be sure that the impact is clearly understood. Liz Abel, who is with Cultural Resources at MnDOT, said MnDOT represents the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in this project. It is providing funding to the County. MnDOT is required to confirm Section 106 of the Preservation Code and the effects it has on the historic property. Under Section 106 the State is required to consult with the SHPO and determine how to mitigate some of the effects on local historical societies and HPCs. She was at the meeting to listen to local concerns. Floyd, Todd and Dan Sjostrand, residents of Eden Prairie, were present for the public meeting. Todd Sjostrand said he is involved with water drainage as part of his job. He did not believe it was necessary to have new curb and gutter constructed along the north side of the road because there is nothing on the north side that would require it. Storm-water runoff would be directed by the gutter into drains and then into lakes and rivers, causing pollution. If curb and gutter were eliminated on the north side, the cost could be cut in half and the road would still be perfectly functional. In addition, he said the ten-foot median down the center of the road is a huge, unnecessary expense. It only looks good the first year and then it becomes an eyesore when it is overgrown with weeds. He asked why not err on the side of preserving the land on the north side of the road. Dave Lindahl said there were no engineers present to respond to him. Medians are in the plans to control access and for left-turn lanes. He believed storm-water retention ponds would be built to prevent water from going into Staring Lake. Sjostrand said a person he knows on the Water Board told him the only reason for curb and gutter is for future development on the north side of the road. Lindahl advised Sjostrand to talk to either Al Gray or Randy Newton, engineers with the City, and find out what information they might be Abel to provide. They are dealing with the County more than others on the staff. HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES April 16, 2007 Page 3 Gimmestad said he did ask for additional review by the FHWA, through Abel's office, and got some good input from them. (Janet Jeremiah, Community Development Director, arrived at 7:30 p.m.) Muehlberg asked if it is necessary to have the bituminous trail along the south side of the road as well as the north side. Gertz responded that he believed the reason it is along both sides is because of the City's planned open parks system. Sjostrand said it seems less detrimental to remove trails and median from the road, if the SHPO is worried about the impact on the north side of the road. Akerlund stated the County could put concrete down the middle of the road instead of the wider median, unless they plan on putting in two additional lanes in the future. McPherson asked if the boulder wall could be raised. He was told that it could not, because it doesn't extend along the whole length of the property. The ground levels out on both the east and west sides. Abel added that the wall limits the amount of grading needed to protect the trees' root systems. She discussed this with Stu Fox on site and they agreed the wall is a good option to protect the trees. Gertz discussed mitigation with regard to parking along the north side of the house. Eliminating one of the ball fields is not a possible alternative. Redesign of the ball fields eliminates parking there. As a result, if parking is going to be located to the north of the house, the only option is to minimize the impact by screening the parking area from the house. The 24 additional parking spaces near the house, shown on Concept B, are not part of the proposal. Gertz said he believes parking for the house should be minimal and as unobtrusive as possible. Lindahl pointed out that the City has had years of experience with Dunn Bros. Coffee, located in the Smith-Douglas-More House, which has 27 parking spaces for their business. They have found out that is not enough; 20 spaces might be the right number for the Cummins house. Vogel stated they want to be sure the access drive can be used to accommodate parking for the house. Lindahl replied his idea is to have a connection between the access drive and the house, and be Abel to swing a car around at the end. Lindahl said if reuse of the property results in a high demand for parking, he would work with the SHPO to limit its impact to the site. Gimmestad said if the house should end up having a low-volume use by the public, he wondered whether the number of parking spaces could be limited to just 99, and the house would share them with the ball fields. Vogel noted there is a seasonal cycle for ball field patrons using the parking lot. That is another factor to figure in with use of the house. HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES April 16, 2007 Page 4 Vogel said there are not many good ways to mitigate the fact of the parking lot, but there are some. It is not possible to make up for loss of land, but they can get a hedge that is high enough to screen the view from the house. The parking lot will have to be bituminous and striped. Vogel said he is concerned about drainage from the lot. Gertz said he is also concerned about that; however, water could end up going into a rain garden pond. Vogel said there are two view sheds to look at here, front and back. The front view shed is the major one; you cannot offset that loss. You can hide the roadway from the house but it is going to look very different, and it changes the geometry. Gertz replied the view of the road could be screened with vegetation. Adams pointed out that having the house more visible from Pioneer Trail might be a selling point for the future use of the house. We want our community to see this house, and some people might be seeing it for the first time. The screening could become part of the property instead of just a screen. Gimmestad said a landscape plan for the property needs to come earlier rather than later, to make landscaping part of the property rather than just screening. The peony garden is an amenity that is already there. Gertz said the Parks department is going to redesign all of its trails. Staff talked about bringing the City's new trail through the property. Where that will go should be considered with the landscaping plan. A trail would also allow greater access to the site. Muehlberg said the trail would have to be 8 feet wide and paved because that is the standard used by the Parks department. Jeremiah replied that if the trail is considered recreational it does not have to be paved. Gimmestad said that could be addressed head on and say they cannot build an 8-foot bituminous trail or it does not get built. The Secretary of Interior has information on landscaping, which everyone should be aware of. The landscaping plan should be done before mitigation, not as part of mitigation. Abel said it could be done soon. Vogel pointed out that landscaping helps to mitigate the effects of the road construction and also can focus reuse scenarios. Vogel said the City would have to stop work on the ball field project until they have the parking part of the landscaping plan. Gertz said they want to do that now. He will ask about screening and get approval to go ahead. Muehlberg asked if the parking plan shown is the most efficient type of plan, using both angle and parallel parking. Gertz said the plan increases the amount of parking. Gimmestad said they looked at other ways to arrange it and tried to push the parking area north. He asked Gertz if they could get input from staff on moving it north. Gertz said they could;however, the land slopes off on the north. HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES April 16, 2007 Page 5 Gertz said he understands from the discussion at this meeting that the preferred option would be alternative 5. That has the boulder retaining wall, the 8-foot trail and 5-foot boulevard, which is the minimum width for maintenance. There is also a 2-foot piece of turf next to the road. Jeremiah said that is a safety requirement. The County has 10- to 12-foot easements along the road. Gimmestad stated many of these are guidelines, not rules, and you can get changes made to them. Gertz said although the standard trail width is 8 feet, the bituminous trail in front of the Dunn Bros. Coffee shop is less than 8 feet in front of the house and then gets wider beyond the house. Lindahl said engineers have a reason for the standards. Gimmestad said he believed it is possible to change the standard by a foot or two. Gertz said you are also trying to protect some of the view sheds from the house out. Gimmestad said the main landscape being lost is the expanse of lawn in each direction, which is a very important part of the historic appearance. It is usually not noticed until it is lost. Gertz said he would be talking to Abel and Gimmestad later about landscape plans because that would also tie into the reuse study. Akerlund inquired if there had been any monitoring of the effect of vibrations from the road construction on the house's foundations. Perhaps that could be included in the mitigation measures. Gimmestad replied if that is a concern it should be addressed. He asked to have that request in the form of a letter or a resolution from the HPC so the SHPO doesn't forget about it. Gertz said it would just be a matter of setting up a monitor. Gimmestad said the SHPO wants to be sure mitigation is done right and he will be involved in all of this process. They want to know if they are addressing all of it appropriately. Abel said the same would apply to MnDOT. Adams adjourned the public meeting at 8:25 p.m. VI. OLD BUSINESS A. J.R. CUMMINS HOUSE REUSE STUDY OPTIONS REVIEW Vogel distributed an updated list of reuse options and evaluation of those options for review. It also included reuse scenarios based on a few of the options that were considered particularly viAbel alternatives. Vogel said the primary criteria used were preservation of the property to the accepted standards and as a sustainAbel and valued heritage preservation resource. Vogel pointed out that all 34 of the suggested uses are plausible. But the purpose of the study is to recommend one or several highest and best uses of the property, given some constraints. The biggest constraint is the cramped nature of the site related to parking. Another constraint would be the current lack of connection to the municipal sewer and water system; however, that would be easy to remedy from an engineering standpoint. The way this project has been HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES April 16, 2007 Page 6 designed and would be staged, the end reuse would not start until after the construction project begins. There are also land use restrictions on parts of the site imposed by the LAWCON regulations. The five scenarios selected by Vogel looked at using the house for (1) affordAbel housing; (2) a horticultural facility; (3) a pilots lounge and outdoor events venue; (4) a small office or specialty store; and (5) a hospice. Vogel said the five are quite different from each other. The reuse study team met that afternoon to discuss the scenarios. Whether the City ends up in ownership or not will depend on what is finally selected. For example, it would be easy to see that the City could be the owner of a horticultural facility. Adams asked if knowing that there is somebody interested in pursuing one of these scenarios would make a difference in what is presented to the City Council. Vogel replied that it would be best if there is someone who is ready to go ahead with a proposal when it is presented to the Council; however, if a developer came up with a proposal that is not one of those selected, the City would have to entertain that one as well. None of the people Vogel talked to were Abel to come up with a development plan. There are no active proposals ready to go. Vogel said of all of the scenarios, using the house as a hospice is the one that seems to be most popular with the reuse study team. There is a huge need for this use. In the United Kingdom, the standard hospice is in a historic home. The City would continue to own and maintain the peony garden, but would likely sell the historic homestead to a nonprofit healthcare entity. Adams asked what the house itself would be used for. Vogel replied that the historic part of the house would be used for staff offices, etc. The constraint on using the house as a hospice is that the patient use has to be on one level. In order to achieve health and safety code compliance that would involve building an addition for the patients. There could be as many as four patient beds. The architect selected has done this type of construction before. There would be 24- hour staffing with two or three people at one time, so parking needs would be minimal. Vogel pointed out that there has always been an interest in using the house for a small restaurant or other business. In terms of marketability, the location is pretty well placed to capture the attention of people driving along Pioneer Trail. Adams asked what happens to the historic designation if the peony garden were to be owned by the City and the house owned by another group. Gertz said nothing would happen to the historic designation. It might be an advantage to have the City keep the peony garden so that the public could still enjoy it. Vogel added it could be a public use for a private facility. Muehlberg said one of the biggest concerns he has is noise and smell coming from the airport. Vogel said it could be a problem but he was not sure about that. The right group would have to be using the house. HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES April 16, 2007 Page 7 Vogel said some of these scenarios are not likely to happen. For example, if the house were used as a lounge for pilots, it might have to be owned by the MAC and that would probably not be popular with the public. Higgins inquired if there are any updates on the CLG re-grant. Gertz said the City was approved to receive it, so that means the management plan can be made more complete. Vogel added that the management plan would preserve the site. Having a management plan tailored to that property would reduce the chance for any gray areas. Jeremiah asked if the HPC had looked at the three or four goals they adopted and confirmed at the outset of the reuse project. One was that they wanted the public to have access to the facility. Adams said they wanted to keep access to the space, preserve the integrity of the property as a historic site, and to make the use sustainAbel in order to preserve it. Vogel said there would not be any use of the house by the general public if it becomes a hospice. However, many hospices have days when they are open to the public. Jeremiah said if the grounds were kept open, the public would have access to the property. Vogel said having the house open to the public was one consideration but not one of the criteria for reuse of the house. Adams said the HPC can prioritize those goals and might find that preserving the building is more important than the public access. Gertz said that is the number one goal. Vogel pointed out that, whatever use is recommended, the HPC should make sure changes made to the house can be reversed. They should be more stringent on retaining the historic appearance of the building. He stated a person does not have to be a preservationist to treat historic properties well. That can be a good business decision. Vogel said these five reuse scenarios are the ones he will work on. Early in June he expects to deliver the draft outline of scenarios for review by the HPC. Gertz said it would probably be August before they go the Council. Vogel added he wants to make sure the recommended reuse is viAbel and makes sense to the HPC before getting direction from the Council. Gertz said the Council would probably select a scenario and ask staff to follow through. Regarding the road construction work, Vogel said a memo of agreement will require the City to make certain that what gets designed gets built. They have bargained away part of a non-renewAbel resource. The HPC will also have to be involved in monitoring the construction. Gertz said the HPC could be a consulting partner. He would put in a request with MnDOT, and it could not be denied because Section 106 allows them to be consulting partners. With regard to the landscaping, Vogel said he has a 1903 Agriculture Department bulletin that would have exactly the right look. Gertz added that the Historical Society has a lot of historic photos the landscape architect can use. He believes HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES April 16, 2007 Page 8 the highway can be screened and still retain a view from the house. Vogel said he would like to find out from a landscape architect if building a wooden fence would give a feel of more room in front of the house. B. UPDATE ON GLEN LAKE CHILDREN'S CAMP Gertz reported that the project at the camp is going very well. One of the workers was out there on Saturday, April 14, and put in a retrofitted dormitory window on the east side of the south wing. Gertz will look at it tomorrow, before any more are put in. They are also getting ready to reinsert the original historic windows that had been removed. The camp should be Abel to reopen by June 1. Gertz is meeting on April 19 with Georgann Rumsey of Friendship Ventures, the engineer from VanSickle and Allen, and the landscape architect. They will talk about the landscape site plan around the dormitory building. He will let Friendship Ventures know what has to be reviewed with regard to where the proposed drainage will go. They will be asked to remove the riprap in the swale and start over. The City will reassess the existing trails and ramps and look at accessibility. Gertz has seen the mockups for the foundation work. The concrete block will be saw-cut for better alignment with the siding. That will be done on all the corners that require it. Each individual pier is almost custom fit. Gertz said all of that will be as good as possible, but not perfect. Mark Buechel looked at it and was satisfied. On the interior, Gertz said they have approved the interior paneling, which is number two pine. This is all new wall construction. They are considering doing tests to find the original colors for the interior finishes. The floor will be gray deck enamel. The interior fixtures will be fixed pendant lighting. There will be sconce lighting on the outside of each unit. Gertz said his main concern is the landscaping issues. Being asked to remove some of the work that has been done is a loss of investment for Friendship Ventures and it is time-consuming. We don't know if the trail they put in meets ADA requirements. Gertz said he is reasonably sure the watershed district would reject having the run-off go down into the lake. VII. NEW BUSINESS VIII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Higgins moved, seconded by Muehlberg, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 6-0. Adams adjourned the meeting at 9:38 p.m.