Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-11-13 HPC Packet MAPLEWOOD HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS –CITY HALL November 13, 2014–7:00 PM 1.Call to Order 2.Roll Call 3.Approval of Agenda 4.Approval of Minutes a.October 9, 2014HPCMeeting 5.New Business a.Nominations for the Maplewood Heritage Award b.Report on Annual Conference (Rudberg and Gaynor, no memo) 6.Old Business a.Local Designations b.Historic Context Study 7.Visitor Presentations 8.Maplewood Area Historical Society Update 9.Commission Presentations 10.Staff Presentations a.Upcoming Program: Nature Center History b.December 11, 2014 HPC Meeting 11.Adjournment MINUTES MAPLEWOOD HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION 7:00p.m., Thursday,October 9,2014 Council Chambers, City Hall 1.CALL TO ORDER A meeting of the Heritage PreservationCommission was held in the City Hall Council Chambers and called to order byChair Boulayat 7:07p.m. 2.ROLL CALL Commissioners Chairperson Peter BoulayPresent Commissioner Robert CreagerAbsent Commissioner Richard CurriePresent CommissionerJohn GasparPresent Commissioner Frank GilbertsonPresent Commissioner Leonard HughesAbsent Commissioner Brenda RudbergAbsent Staff Natural Resources Coordinator, Ginny GaynorPresent 3.APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Chair Boulay requested to delete agenda item 9a. Commissioner Gaspar moved to approve the agendaas amended. Seconded by CommissionerCurrieAyes–All The motion passed. 4.APPROVAL OF MINUTES a.September 11,2014HPC Meeting Commissioner Gaspermovedto approve the September 11, 2014minutes. Seconded by CommissionerGilbertsonAyes–All The motion passed. 5.NEW BUSINESS a.Clarification of When Projects go to HPC for Review Natural Resources Coordinator, Ginny Gaynor explainedthe types ofprojects that go to the HPC for review and took questions from the commission. Thursday, October 9, 2014 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes b.Repairs of the Assalam Mosque Natural Resources Coordinator, Ginny Gaynor discussedthe repairs of the Assalam Mosque with the commission. c.CLG Annual Report Natural Resources Coordinator, Ginny Gaynor presentedthe draft CLG Annual Report and discussed it with the commission. d.Nomination Process for Annual Heritage Award Natural Resources Coordinator, Ginny Gaynor discussed the nomination process for the Annual Heritage Award with the commission. 6.OLD BUSINESS a.Review 2014 Goals Natural Resources Coordinator, Ginny Gaynor, provided an update onthe 2014 goalsand answered questions of the commission. b.Historic Context Study Natural Resources Coordinator, Ginny Gaynor, discussed the Historic Context Study with the Commission. c.Park System Master Plan Natural Resources Coordinator, Ginny Gaynor discussed the Park System Plan andrequested input from the commission. 7.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS a. 8.MAPLEWOOD AREA HISTORICAL SOCIETY UPDATE Presidentof Maplewood Area Historical Society (MAHS), Bob Jensen, presented upcoming events and MAHS news. 9.COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS a. 10.STAFF PRESENTATIONS a.Gladstone Phase II Update Natural Resources Coordinator, Ginny Gaynor discussed the Gladstone Phase II Update and answered questions of the commission. b.Lookout Park Natural Resources Coordinator, Ginny Gaynor updated the commission on Lookout Park. Staff answered discussed and answered questions of the commission. Thursday, October 9, 2014 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes 11.ADJOURNMENT CommissionerCurrie movedto adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Commissioner GilbertsonAyes –All The motion passed. The meeting was adjournedat 8:20PM. Next meeting is November 13, 2014. Thursday, October 9, 2014 Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes MEMORANDUM TO:Heritage Preservation Commission FROM:Ginny Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator DATE:November 5, 2014 for November 13, 2014Meeting SUBJECT:2014 Maplewood Heritage AwardNomination INTRODUCTION The Maplewood Heritage Award is an annual award recognizing an individual who has positively influenced Maplewood’spast or significantly contributed tothe preservation of the city’s history. DISCUSSION Each year the Heritage Preservation Commission(HPC)recommends to City Councilarecipientfor the annual Maplewood Heritage Award. Past recipients of the award include:George Rossbach (2010), Char Wasiluk (2011), Ann Fosburgh (2012), and Bob Jensen (2013). At the October 2014 HPC meeting, commissioners decided that they would submitnominationsfor the 2014 awardfor inclusion in the November meeting packet.Staff has received two nominations. Carolyn Peterson–Carolyn has done many things to support historical preservation in Maplewood. She was one of the people who literallywent to the capital almost every day to champion saving the Bruentrup Farm. Untilquite recently she was very active in the Maplewood Area Historical Society(MAHS). She was the"go to" person if someonehadto work with the city, coordinating reserving the Community Center for the Hoedown, etc. Pete Boulay –Pete has a great knowledge of Maplewood history. He wrote “The Lost City of Gladstone,” a document which has been the key resource for people wanting to learnthe basics about Maplewood history. Pete has served many years on the Heritage Preservation Commission, often serving as Chair. He has enthusiastically led historic tours in Maplewood, championed preservation of Maplewood history, and provided historic information to city staff andto MAHS. RECOMMENDATION If there are no further nominations, staff recommends that the HPC makes a recommendation on the recipient of the 2014 Heritage Award. MEMORANDUM TO:Heritage Preservation Commission FROM:Ginny Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator/HPC Liaison DATE:November 5for November 13, 2014 Meeting SUBJECT:Local Designation INTRODUCTION One of the Heritage Preservation Commission’s (HPC) 2014 goals is todevelop a local designation program for historic sites and structures. At the November meeting commissioners will review preliminary recommendations. DISCUSSION At the February 2014 HPCmeeting, commissioners appointed a committee to develop criteria for local designation of historic sites and structures. Committee members include Commissioners Gaspar and Gilbertson and staff member Gaynor. The committee met once in spring to review programs from other communitiesand again in October. Below are recommendationsfrom the committee. Purpose.The local designation programrecognizeshistorically significant structures and sites in theCity of Maplewood. Context.It isimportant to understand how thelocal designation program fits in with other programs. Attachment 1 summarizes threeprograms:the Century Homes Program, Local Designation, and the National Register. Eligibility criteria. Local designation should be reserved for sites that are historically significant. Asite’s age alone does not make it historically significant. The committee reviewed and compared historic designation eligibility criteria from the followingentities: National Register, Stateof Minnesota, Maplewood ordinance, and local designation programs for St. Paul, Minneapolis, andWinona. These programsusedfrom four to seven criteria. The committeerecommendsusing at least sevencriteria because we believe it will be easier for applicants to identify the criteria that fittheir situation. The eligibility criteria we recommendare attached (see Attachment 2). Someof the entries are taken verbatim from other communities; some have had minor editing. Age and type of structure. The committee recommends that properties be a minimum of 50 years old to be eligible. This is a commonly used threshold. In addition, we recommend that structures, sites, and districts be eligible. A structure would include buildings, bridges, tunnels, etc.The committee does not recommend including objects since our ordinance does not give us that authority. Integrity.Integrity is “the ability of a property to convey its significance.” National Register applications must address seven aspects ofintegrity: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. A summary of these is presented in Attachment 3. The committee recommends that we use these definitions and require that applicants for local designation address each element. A designated property should haveseveral of the aspects, but would not berequired to haveall of them. Safety and condition of structure.The committee discussed whether structures that are unsafe or unusable due to deterioratingcondition should be eligible for designation.One could argue there is no use in designating something that is crumbing into ruin. However, if something is designated, it could make it eligible for restoration programs and grant funding. One way to address this issue is to request informationabout the property’s condition but not make any set requirements. The HPC should review each recommended criterioninAttachment 2. In doing so, pleasetest historic sites that you are familiar with against the criteria. Next steps in developing the local designation program include: 1.HPC provides input on these recommendations(at November 2014 meeting) 2.Staff drafts procedures, brochure and application form 3.HPC reviews materials 4.HPC launchesprogram RECOMMENDATION HPC will discussand provide input onthe eligibility criteria and the aspects of integrity. Attachments: 1.Overview of programs 2.Recommended eligibility criteria 3.Aspects of Integrity Attachment 1 Overview of Historic Designation Programs Program Eligibility Benefits Restrictions on Alterations Maplewood’s Maplewood house Honors a houseNone Century Homes 100 years old or Certificate Program more Local Designation Structure, site, Honors a historic Alterations to property must district property meet preservation guidelines that follow Secretary of Minimum 50 years Certificate or plaque Interior Standards. old Highly significant Maplewood ordinance Must be historically properties may receive requires that alterations go significant – meets at support in applying for before HPC for review. least one of the grant to research eligibility criteria property for eligibility for National Register National Register Minimum 50 years Honors a structure, site, Program is administered by National Park Service through old district SHPO. Meets one of four Is eligible for grants for eligibility criteria rehabilitation projects Alterations that use federal or state funding must be Detailed application Eligible for 20% Federal reviewed by SHPO. completed by Rehabilitation Tax qualified person Credit Maplewood ordinance requires that alterations for Eligible for 20% MN historic sites go before HPC Historic Structure for review.* Rehabilitation Tax Credit An EAW is required before a registered structure is demolished. *Maplewood ordinance indicates alterations of historic sites shall be reviewed by HPC. However it does not specifically mention National Register sites in this context. Our ordinance language on this should be clarified sometime. Attachment 2 Local Designation- Draft Eligibility Criteria 1.The property is associated with significant events or period that exemplifies broad patterns of cultural, political, economic or social history. 2.The property is associated with a person or group that has significantly contributed to the history, culture or development of the city, state, or nation. 3.The property’s character, interest or value is part of the history or cultural heritage of the city, state, or nation. 4.The property embodies distinctive characteristics of an architectural or engineering type or style, or elements of design, detail materials, method of construction, or craftsmanship. 5.The property exemplifies the work of master builders, engineers, designers, artists, craftsmen or architects. 6.The property has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. 7.The property’s unique location or physical characteristic represents an established or familiar visual feature of a neighborhood or community. 8.The property exemplifies a landscape design or development pattern distinguished by innovation, rarity, uniqueness or quality of design or detail. \[This was only in Minneapolis’ criteria. Should we include it for Maplewood?\] Attachment 3 Department of Interior’sExplanation of Integrity as relates to sites on the National Register (Text from www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15/nrb15_8.htm) 1.Locationis the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred.The relationship between the property and its location is often important to understanding why the property was created or why something happened. The actual location of a historic property, complemented by its setting, is particularly important in recapturing the sense of historic events and persons. Except in rare cases, the relationship between a property and its historic associations is destroyed ifthe property is moved. (See Criteria Consideration B in Part VII:How to Apply the Criteria Considerations, for the conditions under which a moved property can be eligible.) 2.Designis the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property.It results from conscious decisions made during the original conception and planning of a property (or its significant alteration) and applies to activities as diverse as community planning, engineering, architecture, and landscape architecture. Design includes such elements as organization of space, proportion, scale, technology, ornamentation, and materials. A property's design reflects historic functions and technologies as well as aesthetics. It includes such considerations as the structural system; massing; arrangement of spaces; pattern of fenestration; textures and colors of surface materials; type, amount, and style of ornamental detailing; and arrangement and type of plantings in a designed landscape. Design can also apply to districts, whether they are important primarily for historic association, architectural value, information potential, or a combination thereof. For districts significant primarily for historic association or architectural value, design concerns more than just the individual buildings or structures located within the boundaries. It also applies to the way in which buildings, sites, or structures are related: for example, spatial relationships between major features; visual rhythms in a streetscape or landscape plantings; the layout and materials of walkways and roads; and the relationship of other features, such as statues, water fountains, and archeological sites. 3.Settingis the physical environment of a historic property.Whereas location refers to the specific place where a property was built or an event occurred, setting refers to the character of the place in which the property played its historical role. It involves how, not just where, the property is situated and its relationship to surrounding features and open space. Setting often reflects the basic physical conditions under which a property was built and the functions it was intended to serve. In addition, the way in which a property is positioned in its environment can reflect the designer's concept of nature and aesthetic preferences. The physical features that constitute the setting of a historic property can be either natural or manmade, including such elements as: Topographic features (a gorge or the crest of a hill); Vegetation; Simple manmade features (paths or fences); and Relationships between buildings and other features or open space. These features and their relationships should be examined not only within the exact boundaries of the property, but also between the property and its surroundings. This is particularly important for districts. 4.Materialsare the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property.The choice and combination of materials reveal the preferences of those who created the property and indicate the availability of particular types of materials and technologies. Indigenous materials are often the focus of regional building traditions and thereby help define an area's sense of time and place. A property must retain the key exterior materials dating from the period of its historic significance. If the property has been rehabilitated, the historic materials and significant features must have been preserved. The property must also be an actual historic resource, not a recreation; a recent structure fabricated to look historic is not eligible. Likewise, a property whose historic features and materials have been lost and then reconstructed is usually not eligible. (See Criteria Consideration E in Part VII:How to Apply the Criteria Considerations for the conditions under which a reconstructed property can be eligible.) 5.Workmanshipis the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory.It is the evidence of artisans' labor and skill in constructing or altering a building, structure, object, or site. Workmanship can apply to the property asa whole or to its individual components. It can be expressed in vernacular methods of construction and plain finishes or in highly sophisticated configurations and ornamental detailing. It can be based on common traditions or innovative period techniques. Workmanship is important because it can furnish evidence of the technology of a craft, illustrate the aesthetic principles of a historic or prehistoric period, and reveal individual, local, regional, or national applications of both technological practices and aesthetic principles. Examples of workmanship in historic buildings include tooling, carving, painting, graining, turning, and joinery. Examples of workmanship in prehistoric contexts include Paleo-Indian clovis projectile points; Archaic period beveled adzes; Hopewellian birdstone pipes; copper earspools and worked bone pendants; and Iroquoian effigy pipes. 6.Feelingis a property's expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time.It results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the property's historic character. For example, a rural historic district retaining original design, materials, workmanship, and setting will relate the feeling of agricultural life in the 19th century. A grouping ofprehistoric petroglyphs, unmarred by graffiti and intrusions and located on its original isolated bluff, can evoke a sense of tribal spiritual life. 7.Associationis the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property.Aproperty retains association if it is the place where the event or activity occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer. Like feeling, association requires the presence of physical features that convey a property's historic character. For example, a Revolutionary War battlefield whose natural and manmade elements have remained intact since the 18th century will retain its quality of association with the battle. Because feeling and association depend on individual perceptions, their retention aloneis never sufficient to support eligibility of a property for the National Register. MEMORANDUM TO:Heritage Preservation Commission FROM:Ginny Gaynor,Natural Resources Coordinator/HPC Liaison DATE:November 5, 2014 for November 13, 2014 Meeting SUBJECT:Historic Context Study Maplewood City Council approved the Historic ContextStudy on September 8, 2014. At the October 9, 2014 Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC)meeting, commissioners decided to review chapters one-by-one at the next several meetings. At the November HPC meeting, commissioners will review the first chapter: Context 1-Native American and Early Settlement. Commissioner Gilbertson volunteeredto facilitate discussion of the first chapter.To prepare for the discussion, please read Context 1 (pages 7-11). Commissioners have received copies of the study and it is also available online at: www.ci.maplewood.mn.us/DocumentCenter/View/11374.As you’re reviewing this chapter, please make note of things that are particularly interesting to you. During our discussion, we will review and prioritize recommendationsfor this context. A sheet to help you prioritize the recommendations is attached (Attachment 1). Prior to the meeting, please identify the two recommendations that you think arethe most important. Attachments: 1.Context Study Recommendations Attachment 1 Context 1 –Native American and Early Settlement Recommendations from Context Study 1.Please add any additional recommendations related to Context 1 2.Please markthe two most important recommendations to work on in the next few years. PriorityRecommendation Maplewood should pay special attention to archeological investigations of any remaining Native American sites —most notably the publically-owned Fish Creek site. A brief archeological survey of the area was completed in 2005 as a pre-development effort. Now that the land is publically owned and presumably more accessible, ideally, a full Phase II archeological survey should be completed; minimally the area should be protected and surveyed as possible. It is the Consultant’s understanding that this is a potential future project. The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) could advise and assist on this matter. Most other Native American sites have been lost due to public development (such as roads and even parks) and private development (farms and homes). However, many Maplewood- area residents have stories of finding artifacts such as arrowheads and serving implements. The HPC should work with the Maplewood Area Historical Society on accessing and interpreting these resources as they become available. Interpretation of public spaces, such as trails and parks, should include reference to Native American settlement and even to the pre-settlement natural conditions. Several of the conservation plans for area nature preserves already do this well and could serve as a model. Concurrently, the city may desire to pay special attention to any early settlement resources, such as the former Gladstone Shops and townsite. Ideally, a larger full archeological survey would again be completed, perhaps as part of future development of the area. A Cultural Resources Assessment of the area, conducted in 2005 by the 106 Group, is an excellent resource for this. Pete Boulay’s “Walking Tour of Old Gladstone” is similarly evocative. The Consultants specifically recommend a greater consideration of the Gladstone Shops site, as detailed later in the study. The Consultants recommend further study of the original Town Hall building (as moved and altered), to determine historic integrity and the possibility of its preservation. Any remaining original settler sites should be preserved. Maplewood stands in contrast to many Minnesota communities in that often Native American resources are lost while late 1800s settlement is very prevalent. This can appear to weigh a community’s history toward the later period. In Maplewood’s case where many resources throughout time have been lost, this contrast is far less evident, which in some ironic way may provide more historic continuity.