Loading...
Heritage Preservation - 08/18/2014 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MONDAY,AUGUST 18, 2014 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER Prairie Rooms A & B 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: Ed Muehlberg (Chair), Cindy Cofer Evert (Vice Chair), Steve Olson, JoAnn McGuire, Pamela Spera, Mark Freiberg, Deb Paulson STAFF: Robert Vogel, Pathfinder CRM, LLC Lori Creamer, Staff Liaison Heidi Wojahn, Recording Secretary I. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Chair Muehlberg called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Cofer Evert added Items VII. C. BYERLY'S UPDATE and VII. D. EDEN PRAIRIE ORAL HISTORY PROJECT to the agenda. Creamer added Item VII. E. CITYWIDE OPEN HOUSE to the agenda. MOTION: Olson moved, seconded by Paulson, to approve the agenda as amended. Motion carried 7-0. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 16, 2014 MOTION: Cofer Evert moved, seconded by Olson, to approve the June 16, 2014 minutes. Motion carried 5-0-2 with Muehlberg and Freiberg abstaining. B. COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 21,2014 Cofer Evert changed the second-to-last statement under Item L D. to read as follows: "Cofer Evert noted that she would like to see pictures after the panels are cleaned." MOTION: Freiberg moved, seconded by McGuire, to approve the July 21, 2014 minutes as amended. Motion carried 5-0-2 with Muehlberg and Paulson abstaining. HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES August 18, 2014 Page 2 IV. REPORTS OF COMMISSION AND STAFF A. REVIEW RFPs FOR 2014 CLG GRANT Creamer reported receiving one Request for Proposal (RFP) in response to three specific inquiries for a kiosk and four panels at the Riley Jacques (RJ) site. The grants office has left it to the HPC's discretion to pursue additional proposals. Cofer Evert asked about obtaining others for price comparison purposes. Creamer said using Bluestem Heritage Group (BHG) would keep the two phases of the project cohesive. Much of the research has already been done. Paulson agreed. There is no valid reason to switch and doing so may send the wrong message. Freiberg said BHG has been easy to work with and has a good track record with us. Muehlberg stated the balance of the work is proportionate with the cost. Spera said it depends on whether we are going for the same or a different look. Cofer Evert said uniformity is desirable as these panels are going on the same property. Cofer Evert questioned aspects of the timeline. Ample time is needed for writing, revising, and editing before the graphic design phase. She noted the absence of January and February and suggested extending Phase 1 into October or November and changing Phase 2 to run from November to January. Vogel said he did not think scheduling details should play a part in approving the vendor. Cofer Evert disagreed. While dates are not cast in stone, approving the proposal as is indicates the timeframe is acceptable. In order to realistically accommodate two contents and two review passes, more time is needed. The front end is the critical stage, and this will give us an extra cushion. Muehlberg said he sees both sides but agrees adequate review time per the HPC's meeting schedule is needed. Spera suggested an initial inquiry be made into what BHG's intention was for January and February. Olson said it is important to contact BHG about this. Feedback early on has proven beneficial. Cofer Evert said if those months are available, Phase 2 can extend into January and tweaking/editing can take place in February. Cofer Evert inquired if additional graphic design changes will be billed at the same hourly rate as additional meetings or a different graphic design rate. Discussion ensued about the number of meetings budgeted. Creamer will follow up with BHG regarding the timeline and rates. MOTION: Freiberg moved, seconded by Olson, to accept BHG's proposal with schedule review and hourly rate clarification. Motion carried 7-0. B. GREEN ACRES PARKING LOT REVIEW - COA Creamer stated Green Acres is seeking an additional 55 parking spaces. Currently 15 spots are available with additional offsite parking. Vogel said he reviewed the project narrative and plans and this was anticipated. It is a simple and straight- forward Cultural Resource Management(CRM) issue. The recommendations are cautionary but no mitigation is required. There is no reason to deny approval,but he recommends holding off on issuing the Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) until the permit application has been submitted. HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES August 18, 2014 Page 3 Olson asked if a setback was in order. Vogel said there is no need. The building will not be directly affected. This is a unique situation in that all of the character- defining features making it historically significant are embedded within the building itself. While the presence of cars changes the character of the property, removing them means removing the preservation, too. The number of spots is reasonable but is also probably the outer limit as no more space is available. Creamer said the plan was sent to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), the Metropolitan Airport Commission (MAC), and the County. No feedback has been received. There is a Conditional Use Permit(CUP) on the property which will need to be amended. She will advise commissioners of any changes. Vogel said no action is needed at this time unless the HPC sees any issues with it. Olson stated it would be appropriate to have the designation and Best Management Practices (BMP) documents in hand when the COA comes through for review. Vogel said policy and guidelines should be developed for the COA process. The HPC should only issue a COA when there is activity requiring a city building permit. Cofer Evert asked if we should not be concerned about non- permit alterations. Vogel said it would be impossible to monitor. The few properties we protect are primarily city-owned so we are just policing ourselves. For those privately owned, it needs to be spelled out in more detail in the CUP. Creamer said COAs serve as a record of what was done. Vogel compared it to the Good Housekeeping seal of approval and said as property stewards, we should do it. Freiberg commented on our good working relationship with the Eden Prairie Historical Society (EPHS). It makes sense to leave that process in place - it serves as a good cross check for the Cummins Grill house (CG). Creamer solicited feedback. Cofer Evert said she is confident in the quality of the project based on the owner's passion and commitment for the property and the work done and personal financial investment made so far. Olson said he thinks the setting is influenced. He is unable to determine if the integrity is being compromised without first looking at the nomination paperwork. Muehlberg said based on the current information,he does not see anything adverse. Cofer Evert reiterated the staff recommendation of approval based on the plans. Olson said it would be a good exercise for the HPC to determine what would be the point of adverse effect. Vogel said the management planning document should address that. Creamer confirmed she will get the nomination form and BMP when we are ready to move forward. C. UPDATE ON HISTORIC SITES The fence is up at the Smith Douglas More House (SDM), and the Hosta Society has started planting. Facilities is looking at getting bids for the roof. Getting SDM on the national register could make us eligible for grants. Vogel said the roof would likely not qualify for legacy funding as it is considered maintenance. Cofer Evert said she was under the impression most of the work for designation had HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES August 18, 2014 Page 4 already been completed. Vogel said designation is a lengthy, detailed process and won't be done quickly enough to access state funds this budget year regardless. It would be easier to just pay for the roof outright. Cofer Evert asked about the status of the wet basement at the Dorenkemper (DK) House. Creamer said she will get an update but the last she heard they were working on putting in drain tile. V. OLD BUSINESS A. 2013 CLG GRANT UPDATE—RILEY JACOUES FARMSTEAD INTERPRETIVE PANELS —Creamer The final panels are complete but there has been a delay in getting the stands. Creamer has been checking regularly for delivery updates. She will work on getting installation scheduled. The DK sign will go by the DK House. The four- paneled kiosk will be erected by the parking lot/water fountain area. Discussion followed about placement of the Riley Jacques (RJ) orientation sign. Cofer Evert said it would be nice by the barn parking area. If by the granary,people are not likely to head up there to see it. Muehlberg agreed this was a good spot for an introduction to the site. Vogel said it ought to go where people naturally pause. Paulson said her understanding was BHG had a specific idea about where to position this sign. There has been extensive discussion about traffic flow, how to use the entire property including the farmstead, and how to draw more people to it. We can project where it should go, but BHG would know. Creamer said she will check on their recommendation. Cofer Evert requested Creamer find out why, if BHG does not suggest posting it by the barn. Paulson shared additional ideas considered for the property. Creamer said she has learned the community gardens at Flying Cloud are going away and may be implemented at Riley in a fashion similar to what is at the senior center. B. HISTORIC PLAQUE PROGRAM UPDATE —Cofer Evert Cofer Evert distributed copies of an 8.5 x 11-inch locked-border template she created using a prairie-grass graphic. If approved by the City, editable content can be added to the body. The surveys and letters are ready for mailing. The goal is to send them out by month end and also put them on the website. Cofer Evert noted some difficulty with finding historic properties on the website. Navigation may need tweaking. Other plans include getting program coverage in the local paper and stocking an acrylic holder near Creamer's work station with program information. Easels displaying the two types of available signs could be placed nearby. City-owned properties will be self-inventoried. Vogel asked for current program numbers and goals. The number of signs already issued and the number of properties eligible and identified was discussed. Vogel explained there are 200-300 additional properties and hundreds of archaeology sites identified in the CRM system. Using the arbitrary criteria of properties over HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES August 18, 2014 Page 5 50 years, this could easily reach a saturation point. We are obliged to consider setting a limit and devising a plan to recycle worn signs. If the program becomes too big, it could create an additional maintenance problem. Although a great idea, we don't want it to become unmanageable. Cofer Evert stated it was part of the Commission's work plan to do this inventory and address the results. This plan accomplishes that. The question is from which list to work. McGuire said she anticipated Cofer Evert's current list of approximately 50 properties would not be problematic. Muehlberg said those listed have been pre-approved for signs. Cofer Evert said the City has signs in stock so they may as well be placed on sites. It is also a point of pride for the owners. Vogel recommended creating a Geographic Information System (GIS) layer on a city street map for the website. Muehlberg said private-property owners may need to grant permission first. Vogel suggested putting the signs in the right-of-way. Cofer Evert said we are not erecting the signs. The owners purchase and post their own signs with no other requirements. We are only acting as stewards of a program already in place by making the signs available to them. McGuire said this falls under the purview of educating the community and promoting heritage preservation. It is encompassed within the HPC's goals/mission. Spera said it is important to determine if the property owner or community is benefitting. If the goal is community-based, what is the reason for charging the owner? Creamer said it is solely to recoup the cost of the city-purchased signs. Cofer Evert emphasized that participation is optional. Muehlberg said we should move forward, see what happens, and then consider what the next step is in terms of soliciting others. Cofer Evert requested a copy of the list Vogel referenced. Vogel said he had just sent it to Creamer but noted the list is outdated and in need of reassessment. Creamer said she will mail the survey materials by the end of August. Spera commented positively on the template. C. WORK PLAN REVIEW Vogel said he reviewed the work plan and has some changes in mind. Since the HPC is in an outcome-oriented business, expectations must be defined as a means of measuring success. What goes on the web has a huge impact on how information is disseminated to citizens and colleagues. It is vital to look at this strategically as well as to routinely measure it. The work plan should more closely align with the Commission's job description. There is a disproportionate amount of funds going towards heritage preservation compared to the number of historic resources. The work plan should be ordinance and federal/state law-based, and then discretionary projects can be added. Cofer Evert asked for specifics. Vogel said the Commission's first responsibility is to know where the resources are and what they are, and to evaluate the ones worth preserving. The status of resources on record at SHPO is unclear. One is unable to discern,just by looking at the files, determination of eligibility for a number of properties. The HPC needs to refocus its efforts on the core functions HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES August 18, 2014 Page 6 of planning, identification (survey), evaluation,registration (designation), treatment(via design review), and education. All six functions need to be done all the time and at the same time. The criteria need to be applied within a relevant historic context so properties can be considered worthy of preservation. Resources must meet at least one of the criteria and must retain the seven aspects of integrity (authenticity) meaning they must be what were there when they became historically important. The Commission has additionally been taking on responsibilities which should fall to other entities. McGuire asked if Vogel could provide a model work plan and if the remainder of 2014 work plan items needs revising. Vogel responded we should get back to the core mission beginning with the 2015 work plan and post it on the website. Vogel noted Eden Prairie is protecting a few agricultural sites, but there are other significant sites needing attention. We are also relying too much on our federal partners. We need to intervene at the beginning and dominate the process. There are areas in Eden Prairie being targeted for redevelopment. He has concerns we are not prepared to respond swiftly enough. Paulson noted commissioners were lacking the education and information necessary to do so. Vogel said the first step is for the HPC to get set up with a workable management system for inventory. This is a service Pathfinder can provide. The City's public relations department can decide how to package and share this information with the public, with the exception of burial sites which need to be kept anonymous for protection. Discussion ensued about the ability to intervene with seemingly powerful agencies. Vogel said we are approaching a big comprehensive plan mandated by state law which includes future planning. Plan contents are virtually the same as ordinance. Development should be shaped around pivotal heritage resources. Comprehensive plans give HPCs a leg to stand on because courts will back them up. They are beneficial in that they force people to look 10-20 years into the future. Historic preservation is all about the future whereas historical societies are about memories. Vogel stated MAC should be paying to restore the overlook site. While it is true it cannot be opened to public use, it is their responsibility under state and federal law to protect the site. He is astonished by the current condition. Much stabilization needs to be done. Cofer Evert asked about current work plan items in relation to the core functions. Vogel recommended moving forward with the designation of The Consolidated School. DK should also be done but is not a high priority given it is city-owned. Paulson suggested the 2015 work plan be the bulk of next month's meeting agenda. Vogel agreed. The timing is right with the budget planning schedule. Cofer Evert requested Vogel bring an appropriate sample work plan from another city as a point of reference. Creamer noted we have a mission statement but no job description. Vogel said our ordinance lays out the responsibilities and duties. HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES August 18, 2014 Page 7 McGuire volunteered to draft a work plan if she had time. Creamer said she will send commissioners a copy of the ordinance. VI. NEW BUSINESS A. 2015 WORK PLAN BRAINSTORM Tabled. VII. FYI ITEMS A. AASLH ANNUAL MEETING/CONFERENCE - Creamer No report. B. FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ASSESSMENT - Creamer A wrecking permit was recently approved for a 1950s structure at Flying Cloud airport. C. BYERLY'S UPDATE Cofer Evert met the new manager at Byerly's. It will be months before a historical photo display will be considered but she will maintain contact. D. EDEN PRAIRIE ORAL HISTORY PROJECT Cofer Evert reported she has been trained as a volunteer for the oral history project. She will be interviewing two senior citizens in the community. E. CITYWIDE OPEN HOUSE A citywide open house will be held Saturday, October 11, 11 a.m.-2 p.m. Commissions are invited to have a booth. Volunteers will receive a City logo polo shirt. Vogel said this is a great way for the Commission to expand its visibility. VIII. FUTURE MEETINGS/EVENTS The next HPC meeting will be Monday, September 15, 2014, 7 p.m. at City Center, Prairie Rooms A & B. XI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Freiberg moved, seconded by Paulson, to adjourn. Motion carried 7-0. Chair Muehlberg adjourned the meeting at 9:21 p.m.