The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2023-01-12 HPC AgendaAGENDA CITY OF MAPLEWOOD HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION Thursday, January 12, 2023 7:OOPM City Council Chambers, Maplewood City Hall A. ROLL CALL B. APPROVAL OF AGENDA C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. December, 2022 D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Review of founding documents 2. 106 Review for Purple Line Project 3. Review and discuss goals for 2023 4. Review and discuss possible preservation properties E. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Demo application(s) • 1855 White Bear Ave • Others TBD 2. New board member recruitment 3. Heritage Preservation Award Nominations Maplewoodmn.gov/HeritageAward F. VISITORPRESENTATIONS 1. Maplewood Area Historical Society Update G. ADJOURNMENT RULES OF CIVILITYFOR THE CITY COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND OUR COMMUNITY Following are rules of civility the City of Maplewood expects of everyone appearing at Commission Meetings - ele officials, staff and citizens. It is hoped that by following these simple rules, everyone's opinions can be heard and understood in a reasonable manner. We appreciate the fact that when appearing at Commission meetings, it is understood that everyone will follow these principles: • Speak only for yourself, not for other Commission members or citizens - unless specifically tasked by your colleagues to speak for the group or for citizens in the form of a petition. • Show respect during comments and/or discussions, listen actively and do not interrupt or talk amongst each other. • Be respectful of the process, keeping order and decorum. Do not be critical of Commission members, staff or others in public. • Be respectful of each other's time keeping remarks brief, to the point and non -repetitive. MINUTES CITY OF MAPLEWOOD HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION Thursday, December 8, 2022 7:OOPM City Council Chambers, Maplewood City Hall A. ROLL CALL Chair Bob Cardinal Present Vice Chair Richard Currie Present Commissioner John Gaspar Present Commissioner David Hughes Present Commissioner Barbara Kearn Present Commissioner Laura Koski Present Councilmember Villavicencio Absent Staff: Joe Sheeran, Comms Mgr Present B. APPROVAL OF AGENDA • J. Gaspar motion, Currie 2nd (pass with no objection on voice vote) C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES %L 1. November, 2022 • D. Hughes motion, J. Gaspar 2nd (pass with no objection on voice vote) D. NEW BUSINESS 'W 1. Review of founding documents 2. 106 Review for Purple Line Project 3. Update on Ramsey County Poor Farm Water Tower E. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Demo application (TBD) 2. New board member recruitment update (Replacing J. DeMoe) F. VISITORPRESENTATIONS 1. Maplewood Area Historical Society Update G. ADJOURNMENT ORDINANCE 755 ORDINANCE FOR MAPLEWOOD HISTORICAL ADVISORY COMMISSION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD DOES HEREIN ORDAIN: Article IV, Secs. 2-87 to 2-99 is hereby added to read as follows: DIVISION 4. HISTORICAL COMMISSION Sec. 2-87 Established There is hereby established for the City a Historical Commission as an independent board to the City Council, as provided in Minnesota Statutes Annotated Sections 471.93 and 138.51. Sec. 2-88. Statement of public policy and purpose. It is hereby declared by the City Council that it is the public policy of the City to engage in a comprehensive program of historic preservation and to promote the use and conservation of historic properties for the education, inspiration, pleasure, and enrichment of the citizens of this Area. The purpose of this division creating the Historical Commission is to secure for all citizens the opportunity to preserve and disseminate knowledge of the area's history. Sec. 2-89. Advisory body: All actions of the Historical Commission shall be in the nature of recommendations to the City Council, and said Commission shall have no final authority with reference to any matters, except as the Council may lawfully delegate authority to it. Sec. 2-90. Composition; Appointment; Qualifications; Terms (a) The Historical Commission shall be composed of 7 members appointed by the City Council, who shall be residents of the City, and shall be selected to assure that the Commission is representative of the various areas of the City and responsive to the needs of the people. The unexpired portion of the year in which the appointments are made shall be considered as one year. All terms shall expire on December 31 of the year in which the appointment terminates. As the terms expire, all appointments thereafter shall be for a term of 3 years, and a member may only be reappointed for one additional term. The first board appointed by the Council shall serve as follows: three members for three years and four members for two-year terms. After the two-year terms expire, all appointments shall be three-year appointments. Sec. 2-91. Officers Generally. The chairperson and vice -chairperson of the Historical Commission shall be elected by the Historical Commission at the first meeting in January of each year from among the members of the Historical Commission. The chairperson shall be responsible for calling and presiding over all meetings and shall be entitled to an equal vote with other members of the Commission. Sec. 2-92. Vacancies. (a) Any of the following may cause the office of a Historical Commissioner to become vacated: (1) Death or removal from the City; (2) Disability or failure to serve, as shown by failure to attend four (4) meetings in any year, may be cause for removal by the 101X1a]I01/\01[NW&V Council majority, unless good cause can be shown to the Council. (3) Resignation in writing. (4) Taking of public office in the City. Sec. 2-93. Officers, Meetings, Rules of Procedure; Public Attendance; etc. (a) The Historical Commission shall establish meeting times and adopt its own Rules of Procedure to be reviewed and approved by the City Council. (b) All meetings of this Commission shall be open to the public and shall be housed in such manner as to permit public attendance. Sec. 2.94. Powers. The powers of the Historical Commission shall be as follows: (1) Recommend districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that are of historical, archeological, engineering or cultural significance. (2) Accept donations, funds and property on behalf of the City. (3) Assist in the establishment of a non-profit Maplewood Area Historical Society. No power shall be exercised by the Commission which is contrary to a State law or denied by the City by its charter or law. The powers of the Commission shall be exercised only in a manner prescribed by ordinance and no action of a Commission shall contravene any provision of the City's zoning or planning ordinance unless expressly authorized by an ordinance. Sec. 2-95. Duties and Responsibilities. The duties of the Historical Commission shall be as follows: (1) To discover and collect any and all material which may establish or illustrate the history of the City. (2) The Commission may publish any and all materials which may bear upon this history. (3) To provide for the guidelines for any and all material necessary to fulfill its purpose. Sec. 2-96. Compensation, expenses. All members of the Historical Commission shall serve without compensation. Sec. 2-97. Staff - Director of Commission responsible for correspondence, docket, minutes, records, files, etc. Subject to the direction of the Historical Commission and its chairperson, the City Manager's designated person shall conduct all correspondence of the Commission, send out all notices required, attend all meetings and hearings of the Commission, keep the docket and minutes of the Commission's proceedings, compile all required records, and maintain the necessary files and indexes of the Commission. Sec. 2-98. City Attorney and Other City Employees. (a) The services of the City Attorney shall be available to the Historical Commission. Sec.2-99. Sunset (a) The Historical Commission shall sunset December 31, 2000. Passed by the City Council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, on the 13th day of May, 1996 101X1a]I01/\01[NW&V f. Councilmember Rossbach Seconded by Councilmember Koppen H. AWARD OF BIDS NONE I. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Ayes - al 1 1. Historical Advisory Commission/Historical Society Ordinance - Second Reading a. Manager McGuire presented the staff report. b. City Attorney Kelly presented the history and details of the proposed Ordinance creating the History Commission. c. Councilmember Carlson introduced the following Ordinance for second reading and moved its adoption: ORDINANCE NO. 755 ORDINANCE FOR MAPLEWOOD HISTORICAL ADVISORY COMMISSION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD DOES HEREIN ORDAIN: Article IV, Secs. 2-87 to 2-99 is hereby added to read as follows: DIVISION 4. HISTORICAL COMMISSION Sec. 2-87 Established There is hereby established for the City a Historical Commission as an advisory board to the City Council, as provided in Minnesota Statutes Annotated Sections 471.93 and 138.51. Sec. 2.88. Statement of public policy and purpose. It is hereby declared by the City Council that it is the public policy of the City to engage in a comprehensive program of historic preservation and to promote the use and conservation of historic properties for the education, inspiration, pleasure, and enrichment of the citizens of the Maplewood area. Sec. 2-89. Advisory body: All actions of the Historical Commission shall be in the nature of recommendations to the City Council, and said Commission shall have no final authority with reference to any matters, except as the Council may lawfully delegate authority to it. 5-13-96 20 Sec. 2-90. Composition; Appointment; Qualifications; Terms (a) The Historical Commission shall be composed of 7 members appointed by the City Council, who shall be residents of,the City, and shall be selected to assure that the Commission is representative of the various areas of the City and responsive to the needs of the City.. The unexpired portion of the year in which the appointments are made shall be considered as one year. All terms shall expire on December 31 of the year in which the appointment terminates. As the terms expire, all appointments thereafter shall be for a term of 3 years, and a member may only be reappointed for one additional term. The first board appointed by the Council shall serve as fol 1 ows : three members for three years and four members for two-year terms. After the two-year terms expire, all appointments shall be three-year appointments. Sec. 2-91. Officers Generally. The chairperson and vice -chairperson of the Historical Commission shall be elected by the Historical Commission at the first meeting in January of each year from among the members of the Historical Commission. The chairperson shall be responsible for calling and presiding over all meetings and shall be entitled to an equal vote with other members of the Commission. Sec. 2-92. Vacancies. (a) Any of the following may cause the office of a Historical Commissioner to become vacated: (1) Death or removal from the City: (2) Disability or failure to serve, as shown by failure to attend four (4) meetings in any year, may be cause for removal by the Council majority, unless good cause can be shown to the Council. (3) Resignation in writing. (4) Taking of public office in the City. Sec. 2-93. Officers, Meetings, Rules of Procedure; Public Attendance; etc. (a) The Historical Commission shall establish meeting times and adopt its own Rules of Procedure to be reviewed and approved by the City Council. (b) All meetings of this Commission shall -be open to the public and shall be housed in such manner as to permit public attendance. Sec. 2.94. Powers. The powers of the Historical Commission shall be as follows: (1) Recommend districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that are of historical, archeological, engineering or cultural significance. (2) Accept donations, funds and property on behalf of the City. (3) Assist in the establishment of a non-profit Maplewood Area Historical Society. No power shall be exercised by the Commission which is contrary to a State law or denied by the City by its charter or law. The powers of the Commission shall be exercised only in a manner prescribed by ordinance and no action of a Commission shall contravene any provision of the City's zoning or planning ordinance unless expressly authorized by an ordinance. 5-13-96 21 Sec. 2-95. Duties and Responsibilities. The duties of the Historical Commission shall be as follows: (1) To discover and collect any and all material which may establish or illustrate the history of the City. (2) The Commission may publish any and all materials which may bear upon this history. (3) To provide for the guidelines for any and all material necessary to fulfill its purpose. Sec. 2-96. Compensation, expenses. All members of the Historical Commission shall serve without compensation. Sec. 2-97. Staff - Director of Commission responsible for correspondence, docket, minutes, records, files, etc. Subject to the direction of the Historical Commission and its chairperson, the City Manager's designated person shall conduct all correspondence of the Commission, send out all notices required, attend all meetings and hearings of the Commission, keep the docket and minutes of the Commission's proceedings, compile all required records, and maintain the necessary files and indexes of the Commission. Sec. 2-98. City Attorney and Other City Employees. (a) The services of the City Attorney shall be available to the Historical Commission. Sec. 2-99. Sunset (a) The Historical Commission shall sunset on December 31, -Wool Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes - all J. NEW BUSINESS 1. Stop Sign Requests a. Manager McGuire presented the staff report. b. Director of Public Works Haider presented the specifics of the report. c. Mayor Bastian asked if anyone wished to speak before the Council. regarding this matter. The following were heard: Bill Daley, 907 Lakewood Court - In favor of stop signs Read letter from Diane & Rick Sherwood, 885 Schaller Drive - In favor Scott Samuelson, 2420 Hillwood Drive - In favor, also suggested "Curve" and or "Children at Play" signs. Brian Fitzgerald, 870 Lakewood Drive - In favor Debbie Daley, 907 Lakewood Court - In favor d. Councilmember-Rossbach moved to approve the requests for stop signs at Hillwood Drive and Marnie Street and. -At Schaller Drive and Lakewood Seconded by Mayor Bastian Ayes - all 5-13-96 22 ORDINANCE 845 ORDINANCE FOR MAPLEWOOD HISTORICAL PRESERVATION COMMISSION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD DOES HEREIN ORDAIN: Article IV. Secs. 2-87 to 2-99 is hereby added to read as follows: DIVISION 4. HISTORICAL PRESERVATION COMMISSION ("Commission") Section 2-87. Authority for Establishment There is hereby established for the City a Historical Preservation Commission as an independent board to the City Council, as provided in Minnesota Statutes Annotated Sections 471.193 and 138.51. Section 2-88. Statement of public policy and purpose. It is hereby declared by the City Council that it is the public policy of the City to engage in a comprehensive program of historic preservation and to promote the use and conservation of historic properties for the education, inspiration, pleasure and enrichment of the citizens of this Area. The purpose of this division creating the Commission is to secure for all citizens of Maplewood the opportunity to preserve and promote its historic resources through the dissemination of knowledge about the area's history. Section 2-89. Advisory body. All actions of the Commission shall be in the nature of recommendations to the City Council, and said Commission shall have no final authority with reference to any matters, except as the Council may lawfully delegate authority to it. Section 2-90. Composition; Appointment; Qualifications; Terms. (a) The Historical Commission shall be composed of 7 members appointed by the City Council, who shall be residents of the City, and shall be selected to assure that the Commission is representative of the various areas of the City and responsive to the needs of the people. Commission membership shall be drawn from persons with demonstrated interest and/or expertise in historic preservation. If available in the community, at least two members of the Commission shall be preservation -related professionals (including the professions of history, architecture, architectural history, archeology, planning, real estate, design, building trades, landscape architecture, or law). If available, one member of the Commission must be a designated representative of the Ramsey County Historical Society, or the City will pay for a membership for the Commission Chairperson. Specific disciplines and professional qualifications must be represented on the Commission (or professional expertise must be sought) when the Commission is considering nominations to the National Register of Historic Places (see Section X=XX, part x, for the nomination process) and other actions that will impact properties which are normally evaluated by a professional in such a discipline. The City of Maplewood will advertise for nominations to fill vacancies on the Commission. The Commission members will interview nominees and recommend new members to the City Council based on the following factors: (1) interest and/or experience in history and historic preservation; (2) if possible, a resident from an area of the city (West, North/Central, South) that has a vacancy on the Commission; otherwise, an "at large" member; (3) if possible, a resident who represents specific disciplines or professional qualifications (as noted above) if such vacancies exist on the Commission. The unexpired portion of the year in which appointments are made shall be considered as one year. All terms shall expire on December 31 of the year in which the appointment terminates. As the terms expire, all appointments thereafter shall be for a term of 3 years. After the terms of the current members expire, all appointments and reappointments shall be three- year appointments. Section. 2-91. Officers Generally. The chairperson and vice -chairperson of the Commission shall be elected by the Commission at the first meeting in January of each year from among the members of the Commission. The Chairperson shall be responsible for calling and presiding over all meetings and shall be entitled to an equal vote with other members of the Commission. If the Chairperson is unable to attend a meeting, the vice -chairperson shall conduct the meeting. Passed by the Maplewood City Council December 22, 2003. Seconded by Councilmember Wasiluk Ayes -Mayor Cardinal, Councilmembers Juenemann and Wasiluk Nays-Councilmember Koppen Abstain-Councilmember Collins Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve consent agenda item 4 as presented. Seconded by Councilmember Koppen H. PUBLIC HEARINGS None I. AWARD OF BIDS None J. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Ayes -All 1. Code Amendment --Historical Commission (Second Reading) a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report. b. Assistant City Manager Coleman presented specifics from the report. Councilmember Collins moved to approve the amendment to the Historical Commission Code. Editing format: . Proposed additions of new language. ORDINANCE NO. 845 ORDINANCE FOR MAPLEWOOD HISTORICAL ADVISORY V PRESERVATION COMMISSION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD DOES HEREIN ORDAIN: Article IV. Secs. 2-87 to 2-99 is hereby added to read as follows: DIVISION 4. HISTORICAL PRESERVATION COMMISSION ([]Commission[]) Section 2-87 Authority for Establishedment There is hereby established for the City a Historical Preservation Commission as an independent board to the City Council, as provided in Minnesota Statutes Annotated Sections 471.193 and 138.51. Section 2-88. Statement of public policy and purpose. It is hereby declared by the City Council that it is the public policy of the City to engage in a City Council Meeting 12-22-03 5 comprehensive program of historic preservation and to promote the use and conservation of historic properties for the education, inspiration, pleasure and enrichment of the citizens of this Area. The purpose of this division creating the 14islor4eal Commission is to secure for all citizens of Maplewood the opportunity to preserve and promote its historic resources through the disseminateion of knowledge of about the area[] s history. Section 2.89. Advisory body. All actions of the u:nl Commission shall be in the nature of recommendations to the City Council, and said Commission shall have no final authority with reference to any matters, except as the Council may lawfully delegate authority to it. Section 2-90. Composition; Appointment; Qualifications; Terms. (a) The Historical Commission shall be composed of 7 members appointed by the City Council, who shall be residents of the City, and shall be selected to assure that the Commission is representative of the various areas of the City and responsive to the needs of the people. Commission membership shall be drawn from persons with demonstrated interest and/or expertise in historic preservation. If available in the community, at least two members of the Commission shall be preservation -related professionals (including the professions of history, architecture, architectural history, archeology, planning, real estate, design, building trades, landscape architecture, or law). If available, one member of the Commission must be a designated representative of the Ramsey County Historical Society, or the City will pay for a membership for the Commission Chairperson. Specific disciplines and professional qualifications must be represented on the Commission (or professional expertise must be sought) when the Commission is considering nominations to the National Register of Historic Places (see Section X—XX, part x, for the nomination process) and other actions that will impact properties which are normally evaluated by a professional in such a discipline. The City of Maplewood will advertise for nominations to fill vacancies on the Commission. The Commission members will interview nominees and recommend new members to the City Council based on the following factors: (1) interest and/or experience in history and historic preservation; (2) if possible, a resident from an area of the city (West, North/Central, South) that has a vacancy on the Commission, otherwise, an El at large El member; (3) if possible, a resident who represents specific disciplines or professional qualifications (as noted above) if such vacancies exist on the Commission. (c-) The unexpired portion of the year in which appointments are made shall be considered as one year. All terms shall expire on December 31 of the year in which the appointment terminates As the terms expire, all appointments thereafter shall be for a term of 3 years. —and a �-@M- ,o.- m a, follows: three meffibef:s f6f: thfee yeafs wid fetif members fgr- two year- . After the two yew terms of the current members expire, all appointments and reaftpointments shall be three-year appointments. City Council Meeting 12-22-03 6 Section. 2-91. Officers Generally. The chairperson and vice -chairperson of the urea Commission shall be elected by the u: eA Commission nos at the first meeting in January of each year from among the members of the u; Al Commission. The Chairperson shall be responsible for calling and presiding over all meetings and shall be entitled to an equal vote with other members of the Commission. If the Chairperson is unable to attend a meeting, the vice -chairperson shall conduct the meeting. Seconded by Councilmember Wasiluk Ayes -All K. NEW BUSINESS Communications Center Staffing a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report. b. Fire Chief Lukin and Police Chief Thomalla presented specifics from the report. Councilmember Wasiluk moved to approve the hiring of a ninth dispatcher. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes -All 2. McKnight Road and Lower Afton Road Intersection Improvements, City Project 02- 13 . Approve Agreement with Ramsey County for Maintenance and Construction of Traffic Control Signals and EVP System a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report. b. City Engineer Ahl presented specifics from the report. Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the agreement with Ramsey County for the Maintenance and Construction of Traffic Control Signals and EVP Svstem at the McKnight Road and Lower Afton Road intersection, authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the agreements; and authorize the finance director to establish a project budget of $9,925 to be reimbursed from the CL's Municipal State Aid Street (MSAS) Fund. Seconded by Councilmember Collins Ayes -All 3. County Road D Realignment (TH 61 to Southlawn), City Project 02-07--Approve Right of Way and Easement Acquisition Agreements: a. Keith Venburg for Property at 2990 Highway 61 b. Premises Lease with Mercon Corporation, dlbla Venburg Tire C. Mercon Corporation, d/b/a Relocation Agreement d. Gulden Roadhouse, Inc. a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report. b. City Engineer Ahl presented specifics from the report. City Council 12-22-03 7 AMENDMENT ORDINANCE 905 THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION ORDINANCE Section 1 This amendment revises Sections 2-87 to 2-91 DIVISION 4 HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION ("Commission") Section 2-87 Authority for Establishment There is hereby established for the City a Heritage Preservation Commission as an independent commission to the City Council, as provided in Minnesota Statutes Annotated Sections 471.193 and 138.51. Section 2-88 Statement of public policy and purpose The City Council hereby declares as a matter of public policy that the protection, preservation, perpetuation and use of places, areas, buildings, structures and other objects having a special historical, community or aesthetic interest or value is a public necessity and is required in the interest of the people. The purpose of this Chapter is to: (a) Safeguard the cultural resources of the City by preserving sites, structures, districts and landmarks which reflect elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history; (b) Protect and enhance the City's attractions to residents and visitors; (c) Foster civic pride in the beauty and notable achievements of the past; (d) Enhance the visual and aesthetic character, diversity and interest of the City; and (e) Promote the use and preservation of historic sites and landmarks for the education and general welfare of the people of the City. Section 2-89 Advisory body All actions of the Commission shall be in the nature of recommendations to the City Council, and said Commission shall have no final authority with reference to any matters, except as the Council may lawfully delegate authority to it. Section 2-90 Composition; Appointment; Qualifications; Terms (a) The Heritage Commission shall be composed of seven (7) members appointed by the City Council, who shall be residents of the City, and shall be selected to assure that the Commission is representative of the various areas of the City and responsive to the needs of the people. Commission membership shall be drawn from persons with demonstrated interest and/or expertise in historic preservation. If available in the community, at least two members of the Commission shall be heritage preservation -related professionals (e.g. the professions of history, architecture, architectural history, archeology, planning, real estate, design, building trades, landscape architecture, or law). A member of the Maplewood Heritage Preservation Commission is required to be a representative to the Ramsey County Historical Society. The City shall pay for the membership of the Commission or designee. (c) The members of the heritage preservation commission shall serve staggered terms. All appointments shall be assigned by the city council for a term of three years. Section 2-91 Officers Generally The chairperson and vice -chairperson of the Commission shall be elected by the Commission at the first meeting in January of each year from among the members of the Commission. The Chairperson shall be responsible for calling and presiding over all meetings and shall be entitled to an equal vote with other members of the Commission. If the Chairperson is unable to attend a meeting, the vice -chairperson shall conduct the meeting. Section 2-92 Designation of historic sites and landmarks (a) Procedures: The City Council, upon the request of the Commission, may by resolution designate an historic site, landmark, or district. Prior to such designation, the city council shall hold a public hearing, notice of which shall be published at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the hearing. Notice of the hearing shall also be mailed to all owners of property which is proposed to be designated as an historic site, landmark or district and to all property owners within five hundred (500) feet of the boundary of the area to be designated. Every nomination shall be forwarded to the Minnesota Historical Society for review and comment within sixty (60) days of the Commission's request. (b) Eligibility criteria: In considering the designation of any area, site, place, district, building or structure in the city as an historic site, landmark, or district the Commission shall consider the following factors with respect to eligibility: (1) Its character, interest or value as part of the history or cultural heritage of the City, the State or the United States; (2) Its association with persons or events that have made a significant contribution to the cultural heritage of the City; (3) Its potential to yield information important in history or prehistory; (4) Its embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of architectural type or style, or elements of design, detail materials or craftsmanship; and (5) Its unique location or singular physical appearance representing an established or familiar visual feature of a neighborhood or community of the City. Section 2-93 Alterations to landmarks, sites or districts; review (a) Review and recommendations generally: The Commission shall review and make recommendations to the Council concerning proposed alterations to an historic site, landmark or district. (b) Land use permit: Every application for a land use permit which may result in the alteration of a designated historic site, landmark or district in the City shall be reviewed by the Commission; thereafter, the Commission shall make a recommendation and may recommend conditions regarding approval to the City Council concerning the proposed permit. (c) Other building permits: The Commission shall review and make recommendations to the Council concerning the issuance of building permits to do any of the following in a historic district or State designated historic site: (1) New construction — New building or new addition to an existing building (2) Remodel — Alter, change or modify building or site (3) Move a building — Building or structure moved into the city. (4) Excavation — Dig out materials from the ground. (5) Demolition — Destroy, remove or raze — completely tear down (d) Factors considered: The Commission, upon receipt of the permit application and plans, shall determine if the work to be performed adversely affects the designated historic site, landmark or district. In determining whether or not there is an adverse effect to the historic site, landmark, or district the Commission shall consider the following factors: (1) Whether the work will significantly alter the appearance of the building or structure so as to remove the features which distinguish the historic site, landmark or district as a significant cultural resource. (2) Whether the use of the property will destroy, disturb or endanger a known or suspected archaeological feature site. (e) Standards and guidelines: The Comprehensive Plan adopted by the City shall be the authoritative guide to reviewing permits in relation to designated historic sites, landmarks and historic districts. (f) Appeals: Any party aggrieved by a decision of the Commission shall within ten (10) days of the Commission's action recommending denying the issuance of a building permit within a historic district have a right to appeal such decision to the City Council. The Commission in recommending denial of a building permit shall advise the applicant of his/her right to appeal to the City Council. The aggrieved party shall file with the Building Official a written notice requesting Council review of the action taken by the Commission. Section 2-94 Maintenance of records and documents The Commission shall conduct a continuing survey of cultural resources in the City which the Commission has reason to believe are or will be eligible for designation as historic sites, landmarks or districts. The Commission shall also prepare and maintain a Comprehensive map and survey. (a) Register of Historic Sites and Landmarks: The City shall maintain a register of historic sites and landmarks. (b) Repository for Documents: The office of the Building Official is designated as the repository for all studies, surveys, reports, programs, and designations of historic sites and landmarks. Section 2-95 Violation It shall be a misdemeanor to alter, disturb, deface or materially change the appearance or use of a designated historic site, landmark, or district without a permit. This Historical Preservation Commission recommended approval of this ordinance. This ordinance shall take effect after publishing in the official newspaper. The Maplewood City Council approved this ordinance on June 28, 2010. Affidavit ®f Publication State of ;Minnesota l SS County of Ramsey 1} ANNE THILLEN being duly sworn, on oath, says that he/she is the publisher or authorized agent and employee of the publisher of the newspaper known as MAPLEWOOD REVIEW and has full knowledge of the facts which are stated below: (A) The newspaper has complied with all of the requirements constituting qualification as a qualified newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as amended. (B) The printed ORDINANCE 905 which is attached was cut from the columns of said newspaper, and was printed and published once each week, for 1 successive weeks; it was first published on WEDNESDAY , the NTH day of JULY 20 10 , and was thereafter printed and published on every to and including , the day of , 20 ; and printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both inclusive, which is hereby acknowledged as being the size and kind of type used in the composition and publication of the notice: 'ABCDEFGHIJKLMN OPQRSTUVW XYZ 'ABCDEFGH IJKLMNOPQRSTUVW XYZ ' abcd efghij klm nopq rstuvwxyz Subscribed and sworn to before me on TH t s day of JULY 20 10 Notary Public BY: /// / 6 6� tOi I TITLE LEGAL COORDINATOR 'Alphabet should be in the same size and kind of type as the notice. TONYA R. WHITEHEAD RATE INFORMATION Notary Public -Minnesota My Cpnrniasion Eoms Jan 31, 2015 (1) owes classi ied rate paid by commercial users for comparable space ...................................... (2) Maximum rate allowed by law for the above matter ..................... (3) Rate actually charged for the above matter 1/10 $25.00 per col. inch $25.00 per col. inch $ per col. inch CITY OF MAPLEWOOD AMENDMENT ORDINANCE 905 THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION ORDINANCE Section 1 This amendment revises Sections 2-87 to 2-91 of Ordinance 845 (additions are underlined and deletions are stricken): DIVISION 4 HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION ("Commission") Section 247 Authority for Establishment There is hereby established for the City a Heritage Preservation Commission as an independent commission to the City Council, as provided in Minnesota Statutes Annotated Sections 471.193 and 138.51. Section 2-88 Statement of public policy and purpose The City Council hereby declares as a matter of public policy that the protection, preservation, perpetuation and use of places, areas, buildings, strictures and other objects having a special historical, community or aesthetic interest or value is a public necessity and is required in the interest of the people. The purpose of this Chapter Is to: (a) Safeguard the cultural resources of the City by preserving sites, structures, districts and landmarks which reflect elements of the Cityrs Cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history; (b) Protect and enhance the Ciity's attractions to residents and visitors; (c) Foster civic pride in the beauty and notable achievements of the past; (d) Enhance the visual and aesthetic character, diversity and interest of the City; and (e) Promote the use and preservation of historic sites and landmarks for the education and general welfare of the people of the City. Section 2-89 Advisory body Ali actions of the Commission shall be in the nature of recommendations to the City Council, and said Commission shall have no final authority with reference to any matters, except as the Council may lawfully delegate authority to it. Section 2-li0 Composition; Appointment; Qualifications; Terms (a) The Heritage Commission shall be composed of seven (7) members appointed by the City Council, who shall be residents of the City, and shall be selected to assure that the Commission is representative of the various areas of the City and responsive to the needs of the people. characteristics of architectural type or style, or elements of design, detail materials or craftsmanship; and (5) Its unique location or singular physical appearance representing an established or familiar visual feature of a neighborhood or community of the City. Section 2-93 Alterations to landmarks, sites or districts; review (a) Review and recommendations generally: The Commission shall review and make recommendations to the Council concerning proposed alterations to an historic site, landmark or district. (b) Land use permit: Every application for a land use permit which may result in the alteration of a designated historic she, landmark or district in the City shall be reviewed by the Commission; thereafter, the Commission shall make a recommendation and may recommend conditions regarding approval to the City Council concerning the proposed permit. (c) Other building permits: The Commission shall review and make recommendations to the Council conceming the issuance of building permits to do any of the following in a historic district or State designated historic she: (1) New construction — New building or new addition to an existing building (2) Remodel —Alter, change or modify building or she (3) Move a building — Building or structure moved into the city. (4) Excavation — Dig out materials from the ground. (5) Demolition — Destroy, remove or raze — completely tear down (d) Factors considered: The Commission, upon receipt of the permit application and plans, shall determine if the work to be performed adversely affects the designated historic site, landmark or district. In determining whether or not there is an adverse effect to the historic she, landmark, or district the Commission shall Consider the following factors: (1) Whether the work will significantly alter the appearance of the building or structure so as to remove the features which distinguish the historic site, landmark or district as a significant cultural resource. (2) Whether the use of the property will destroy, disturb or endanger a known or suspected archaeological feature she. (e) Standards and guidelines: The Comprehensive Plan adopted by the City shell be the authoritative guide to reviewing permits in relation to designated historic sites, landmarks and historic districts. (f) Appeals: Any party aggrieved by a decision of the Commission shall within ten (10) days of the Commission's action recommending denying the i issuance of a building permit within a historic district have a right to appeal such decision to the City Council. The Commission in recommending denial of a building permit shall advise the applicant of his/her right to appeal to the City Council. The aggrieved party shall file with the Building Official a written notice. requesting Council review of the action taken by the Commission. (4 ;,. _ (W Commission membership shall be Irawn from persons with demonstrated verest and/or expertise in historic )reservation. if available in the *mmunity, at least two members of the ;ommission shall be heritage )reservation -related professionals (e-g. he protessione of history, architecture, architectural history, archeology, planning, real estate, design, building trades, landscape architecture, or law). A otember � /hen Maplewood Heritage Preservation Commission is required to be a representative to the Ramsey County Historical Society. The City shall pay for the membership of the Commission or designee. (c) The members of the heritage preservation commission shall serve staggered terns. All appointments shall be assigned by the city council for a term of three years. Section 2-91 Officers Generally The chairperson and vice -chairperson of the Commission shall be elected by the Commission at the first meeting in January of each year from among the members of the Commission. The Chairperson shall be responsible for calling and presiding over all meetings and shall be entitled to an equal vote with other members of the Commission. If the Chairperson is unable to attend a meeting, the vice -chairperson shall conduct the meeting. Section 2-92 Designation of historic sites and landmarks (a) Procedures: The City Council, upon the request of the Commission, may by resolution designate an historic site, landmark, or district. Prior to such designation, the city council shall hold a public hearing, notice of which shall be published at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the hearing. Notice of the hearing shall also be mailed to all owners of property which is proposed to be designated as an historic site, landmark or district and to all property owners within five hundred (500) feet of the boundary of the area to be designated. Every nomination shall be forwarded to the Minnesota Historical Society for review and comment within sixty (60) days of the Commission's request. (b) Eligibility criteria: In considering the designation of any area, site, place, district, building or structure in the city as an historic site, landmark, or district the Commission shall consider the following factors with respect to eligibility: (1) Its character, interest or value as part of the history or cultural heritage of the City, the State or the United States; (2) Its association with persons or events that. have made a slVilicant contribution to the cultural Mirage of the City; (3) Its potential to yleldl jrdorn ation Important in history or prehigtory; (4) its embodiment of towmft Section 2-04 Mallttenance of racoraa and documents The Commission shall cgaduct a continuing survey of cultural resources in the City which the Commission has reason to believe are or will be e6gI* for designation as historic sites, landmarks or districts. The Commission shall also prepare and maintain a Comprehensive map and survey. (a) Register of Historic Sites and Landmarks: The City shall maintain a register of historic sites and landmarks. (b) Repository for Documents: The office of the Building. Official is designated as the repository for all studies, surveys, reports, programs, and designations of historic sftes and landmarks. Section 2-95 Violation It shall be a misdemeanor to after, disturb, deface or majerially change the appearance or use of a designated historic site, landmark, or district without a permit. This Historical Preservation Commission recommended approval of this ordinance. This ordinance shall take effect after publishing in the official newspaper. The Maplewood City Council approved this ordinance on June 28, 2010. Will Rossbach, Mayor Attest: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk (Review: July 7, 2010) MEMORANDUM TO: Historical Preservation Commission FROM: David Fisher, Building Official SUBJECT: Proposed Historical Preservation Commission Ordinance Amendment DATE: July 9, 2009 for the July 16, 2009 HPC Meeting INTRODUCTION At the May 21, 2009, Historical Preservation Commission (HPC) meeting the HPC reviewed the proposed HPC Ordinance amendment and requested staff review the ordinance with Mike Koop at the Minnesota Historical Society (MNHS). DISCUSSION Mr. Koop reviewed the proposed HPC Ordinance amendment and had the following comments or suggestions: Change Historical to Heritage throughout the document. This is something the MNHS is trying to do throughout the state. Define in more detail the following underlined terms in Section 2-93 (c), other building permits: The Commission shall review and make recommendations to the Council concerning the issuance of building permits to do any of the following in a historic district or state designated historic site: (1) New construction (2) Move a building (3) Excavation (4) Demolition Modify Section 2-92 (e) Standards and guidelines - as follows: "The Comprehensive Cultural Resource Management Plan adopted by.the City shall be the authoritative guide to reviewing permits in relation to designated historic sites, landmarks and historic districts. The Standards and Guidelines for AFGheglo Historic Preservation shall be the required basis For Permit Used to review `�r�lvv� historic provert . Staff has reviewed these proposed modifications and finds them reasonable. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the HPC review the revised proposed HPC Ordinance amendment and offer feedback and direction. PAHPC Memo July 9 2009 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MAPLEWOOD HISTORICAL HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION The Maplewood City Council approves the following changes to the Maplewood Code of Ordinances: Section 1. This amendment revises Sections 2-87 to 2-91 (HisteFisal Herd Preservation Commission) (additions are underlined and deletions are stricken): DIVISION 4. HISTORICAL- HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION ("Commission") Section 2-87 Authority for Establishment. There is hereby established for the City a H'StWiGal Heritage Preservation Commission as an independent board to the City Council, as provided in Minnesota Statutes Annotated Sections 471.193 and 138.51. Section 2-88. Statement of public policy and purpose. — e -"=TW22111X— -•., .. -r - ..� - - - w _ -MM • - 1-1 10 .. 51 . . The CitV Council hereby declares as a matter of public policy that the protection, Preservation, perpetuation and use of places, areas buildings, structures and other ob'ects having a special historical community or aesthetic interest or value is a public necessity and is required in the interest of the people. The purpose of this Chapter is to: (a) Safeguard the cultural resources of the City by preservingsites structures districts and landmarks which reflect elements of the Cit 's cultural social economic political or architectural history1 Protect and enhance the Cit 's attractions to residents and visitors Lcl Foster civic pride in the beauty and notable achievements of thepast; jqq Enhance the visual and aesthetic character, diversitv and interest of the City; and fg� Promote the use and preservation of historic sites and landmarks for the education and general welfare of the people of the Cit . Section 2.89. Advisory body. All actions of the Commission shall be in the nature of recommendations to the City Council, and said Commission shall have no final authority with reference to any matters, except as the Council may lawfully delegate authority to it. Section 2-90. Composition; Appointment; Qualifications; Terms. (a) The #isterica-I Heritage Commission shall be composed of seven (7) members appointed by the City Council, who shall be residents of the City, and shall be selected to assure that the Commission is representative of the various areas of the City and responsive to the needs of the people. (b) Commission membership shall be drawn from persons with demonstrated interest and/or expertise in historic preservation. If available in the community, at least two members of the Commission shall be preservation -related professionals (including the professions of history, architecture, architectural history, archeology, planning, real estate, design, building trades, landscape architecture, or law). If available, one member of the Commission must be a designated representative of the Ramsey County Historical Society, or the City will pay for a membership for the Commission Chairperson. (c) Specific disciplines and professional qualifications must be represented on the Commission (or professional expertise must be sought) when the Commission is considering nominations to the National Register of Historic Places (see SeG io - and other actions that will impact properties which are normally evaluated by a professional in such a discipline. (d) The City of Maplewood will advertise for nominations to fill vacancies on the Commission. The City Council will interview nominees and recommend new members to the City COURGil ba6ed on the following factors: (1) Interest and/or experience in history and historic preservation; (2) 4 If possible, a resident from an area of the city (West, NorthlCentral, South) that has a vacancy on the Commission; otherwise, an "at large" member; (3) elf possible, a resident who represents specific disciplines or professional qualifications (as noted above) if such vacancies exist on 4 the Commission. (e) The unexpired portion of the year in which appointments are made shall be considered as one year. All terms shall expire on December 31 of the year in which the appointment terminates. As the terms expire, all appointments thereafter shall be for a term of 3 years. After the terms of the current members expire, all appointments and reappointments shall be three-year appointments. Section. 2-91.. Officers Generally. The chairperson and vice -chairperson of the Commission shall be elected by the Commission at the first meeting in January of each year from among the members of the Commission. The Chairperson shall be responsible for calling and presiding over all meetings and shall be entitled to an equal vote with other members of the Commission. If the Chairperson is unable to attend a meeting, the vice -chairperson shall conduct the meeting. Section 2-92. Designation of historic sites and landmarks. I Procedures: The CitV Council upon the request of the Commission may b resolution designate an historic site landmark or district. Prior to such desi nation the city council shall hold a public hearing, notice of which shall be published at least ten 10 days prior to the date of the hearing. Notice of the hearing shall also be mailed to all owners of propertV which is proposed to be designated as an historic site landmark or district and to all property owners within five hundred 500 feet of the bounds of the area to be designated.. Every nomination shall be forwarded to the Minnesota Historical Society for review and comment within sixty (60) days of the Commission's request. Eligibility.criteria: In considering the designation of any area site lace district building or structure in the city as an historic site landmark or district the Commission shall consider the following factors with respect to ell ibilit : 01 Its character, interest or value as part of the historV or cultural heritage of the City, the State or the United States; Its association with persons or events that have made a significant contribution to the cultural heritage of the Cit Its potential to yield information important in histofy or rehisto Its embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of architectural type or st le or elements of design, detail materials or craftsmanship; and Its uni ue location or singular physical appearance representing an established or familiar visual feature of a neighborhood or community 3 of the City. Section 2-93. Alterations to landmarks, sites or districts; review. (a) Review and recommendations generally. The Commission shall review and make recommendations to the Council concerning proposed alterations to an historic site landmark or district. Lb I Land use permit: Every application for a land use permit which may result in the alteration of a designated historic site landmark or district in the City shall be reviewed by the Commission; thereafter, the Commission shall make a recommendation and may recommend conditions regarding approval to the Cit Council concerning the proposed permit. Lc Other building permits: The Commission shall review and make recommendations to the Council concerning the issuance of building permits to do any of the following in a historic district or State designated historic site: New construction. Move a building Excavation. Demolition. Lqj Factors considered: The Commission upon receipt of the permit application and plans, shall determine if the work to be performed adverseIV affects the designated historic site landmark or district. In determining whether or not there is an adverse effect to the historic site landmark or district the Commission shall consider the following factors: fL Whether the work will significantly alter the appearance of the building or structure so as to remove the features which distinguish the historic site landmark or district as a significant cultural resource. Whether the use of the property will destroy, disturb or endanger a known or suspected archaeological feature site. (e) Standards andguidelines: The Comprehensive Cultural Resource Management Plan adopted bV the City shall be the authoritative guide to reviewin permits in relation to designated historic sites landmarks and historic districts. The SeGretary of the Standards and Guidelines for Historic Preservation shall be used to review doas historic property, (f Appeals:. Any partyaggrieved by a decision of the Commission shall within ten 10 days of the Commission's action approving or denying the issuance of a building permit within a historic district have a right to appeal such decision to the City Council. The Commission in denying a building permit shall advise the applicant of his/her right to appeal to the City Council. The aggrieved party shall file with the Building Official a written notice requesting Council review of the action taken by the Commission. Section 2.93. Maintenance of records and documents. The Commission shall conduct a continuing survey of cultural resources in the City which the Commission has reason to believe are or will be eligible for designation as historic sites landmarks or districts. The Commission shall also prepare and maintain a Comprehensive map and survey. (a) Register of Historic Sites and Landmarks: The City shall maintain a re ister of historic sites and landmarks. Lb I Re osito for Documents: The office of the Building Official is designated at the re osito for all studies surveys, reports, programs, and designations of historic sites and landmarks. Section 2.94. Violation. It shall be a misdemeanor to alter, disturb deface or materially change the appearance or use of a designated historic site landmark or district without a permit. Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect after the city publishes it in the official newspaper. This Historical Preservation Commission recommended approval of this ordinance on The City Council approved this ordinance on Attest: City Clerk Mayor should be included in the revised ordinance. It was agreed that guidelines are needed to encourage preservation without being so restrictive as to cause people to refuse to follow the guidelines for registration as a historic building or site. Ron said he felt that, ideally, the ordinance and the list would be structured in such a way that it would be an advantage to be on the list rather than a detriment and possibly be able to obtain some assistance with their preservation. Pete restated that the two main guidelines for identifying properties are 50 years or older and architecturally significant. Dave commented that the owners of some of the houses on the current list may want their historic status maintained or to be upgraded to the higher portion of the list because it could increase the property value and/or help ensure preservation of the property or about it. Pete said the third big requirement is that the building is unaltered, so each Commissioner should check the sites in their area and verify which, if any meet the criteria of age and lack of alteration, and narrow the list as much as possible. Ron said owners of properties on the list of what we have now should be sent a letter explaining what the Commission is trying to do and ask if they are interested in being considered for historical status. Bob indicated that he would nominate 1099 Lakewood Drive, which he owns and is his homestead. It was built in 1912 and is unaltered. It was built by a local builder (Bartells) who built an identical house across the street and another at McKnight and Maryland as well as others. Ron asked everyone to work on their list during the coming month and bring the information to the next meeting. Dave asked that information about changes to the list be consolidated and given to him next month for preparation of a new map which will be distributed to the Commission when printed. Discussion followed about an ordinance proposed at the HRA meeting regarding possible demolition of vacant houses. At this point it has been tabled and it is not likely it will come up again anytime soon. b. Proposed Historical Preservation Ordinance Amendment The request from Mike Koop at Minnesota Historical Society about changing the title of the Commission from Historical Preservation Commission to Heritage Preservation Commission was discussed. Pete moved to request Council to change the name of the Commission from Historical Preservation Commission to Heritage Preservation Commission. Caleb seconded the motion, ayes - all. In the proposed ordinance amendment, presented and amended at the July meeting, a correction was needed to the last sentence of Section 2-90. Composition; Terms. (c) Caleb suggested: If ayai e, one no member of the Commission nest be is a designated representative of the Ramsey County Historical Society, or the City will pay for a membership for the Commission Chairperson or designee. If no member of the Commission is a designated representative of the Ramsey County Historical Society, the City will pay for a membership for the Commission Chairperson or designee." Dave will make sure the sentence is right and bring it back to the next meeting for approval. c. Time Capsule Dave said he asked for assistance with the staff report for this item, which had to be ready in time for the 8/24 Council Agenda and received information from Lois which he incorporated into the report to accompany the proclamation. It is on the Agenda for Monday and at least one Commissioner should be there. Ron displayed the previous and new time capsule and mentioned the items which were submitted by residents, organizations and the city to be sealed until 2057. Some of those items are DVDs of recent and current activities such as the 50th Anniversary celebrations, information about the Bruentrup Heritage Farm; written histories and letters from residents. The Capsules will be presented to the City Council on Monday. Dave asked if anyone knew that Maplewood was the first city in the State to have a woman as a building exempt: a. Water line flushing performed by a government agency, other potable water sources such as landscape irrigation or lawn watering, diverted stream flows, rising ground water, ground water infiltration to storm drains, uncontaminated pumped ground water, foundation or footing drains (not including active groundwater dewatering systems), crawl space pumps, air conditioning condensation, springs, natural riparian habitat or wetland flows, and any other water source not containing pollutants. b. Discharges or flows from fire fighting, and other discharges specified in writing by the city as being necessary to protect public health and safety. 7. Coal Tar Sealants. The use of coal tar sealers on asphalt driveways is a common practice. Coal tar sealant products contain polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), which are a group of organic chemicals formed during the incomplete burning of coal, oil, gas, or other organic substances. Scientific studies have demonstrated a relationship between the use of these products on stormwater runoff and certain health and environmental concerns. The coal tar sealer section of the ordinance will prohibit any person from applying this material to any driveway, parking lot, or other surface in the city. Asphalt -based driveway sealers are still permitted as an alternative to coal tar sealants, which are not harmful on the environment. The purpose of the coal tar sealant ban is to protect, restore, and preserve the quality of our waters. The stormwater management ordinance goes into effect after publication. An official copy of the stormwater management ordinance is on file in the office of the Maplewood Community Development and Parks and Public Works Departments or can be obtained on the city's website at www.ci.maplewood.mn.us/stormwater. Questions regarding this ordinance should be directed to Michael Thompson, City Engineer at (651) 249-2403 or he can be reached by email at michael.thompson(a_ci.maplewood.mn.us. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann. Ayes — All The motion passed. 3. Historical Preservation Ordinance Amendments —Second Reading a. Environmental Planner, Shann Finwall gave the report and answered questions of the council. Councilmember Wasiluk moved to approve the (second reading) of the historical preservation ordinance amendments. AMENDMENT ORDINANCE 905 THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION ORDINANCE Section 1 This amendment revises Sections 2-87 to 2-91 of Ordinance 845 (additions are underlined and deletions are stricken): DIVISION 4 HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION ("Commission") Section 2-87 Authority for Establishment June 28, 2010 30 City Council Meeting Minutes There is hereby established for the City a Heritage Preservation Commission as an independent commission to the City Council, as provided in Minnesota Statutes Annotated Sections 471.193 and 138.51. Section 2-88 Statement of public policy and purpose The City Council hereby declares as a matter of public policy that the protection, preservation, perpetuation and use of places, areas, buildings, structures and other objects having a special historical, community or aesthetic interest or value is a public necessity and is required in the interest of the people. The purpose of this Chapter is to: (a) Safeguard the cultural resources of the City by preserving sites, structures, districts and landmarks which reflect elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history; (b) Protect and enhance the City's attractions to residents and visitors; (c) Foster civic pride in the beauty and notable achievements of the past; (d) Enhance the visual and aesthetic character, diversity and interest of the City; and (e) Promote the use and preservation of historic sites and landmarks for the education and general welfare of the people of the City. Section 2-89 Advisory body All actions of the Commission shall be in the nature of recommendations to the City Council, and said Commission shall have no final authority with reference to any matters, except as the Council may lawfully delegate authority to it. Section 2-90 Composition; Appointment; Qualifications; Terms (a) The Heritage Commission shall be composed of seven (7) members appointed by the City Council, who shall be residents of the City, and shall be selected to assure that the Commission is representative of the various areas of the City and responsive to the needs of the people. u Commission membership shall be drawn from persons with demonstrated interest and/or expertise in historic preservation. If available in the community, at least two members of the Commission shall be heritage preservation -related professionals (e.g. the professions of history, architecture, architectural history, archeology, planning, real estate, design, building trades, landscape architecture, or law). A member of the Maplewood Heritage Preservation Commission is required to be a representative to the Ramsey County Historical Society. The City shall pay for the membership of the Commission or designee. (c) The members of the heritage preservation commission shall serve staggered terms. All appointments shall be assigned by the city council for a term of three years. Section 2-91 Officers Generally The chairperson and vice -chairperson of the Commission shall be elected by the Commission at the first meeting in January of each year from among the members of the Commission. The Chairperson shall be responsible for calling and presiding over all meetings and shall be entitled to an equal vote with other members of the Commission. If the Chairperson is unable to attend a meeting, the vice - chairperson shall conduct the meeting. June 28, 2010 31 City Council Meeting Minutes Section 2-92 Designation of historic sites and landmarks (a) Procedures: The City Council, upon the request of the Commission, may by resolution designate an historic site, landmark, or district. Prior to such designation, the city council shall hold a public hearing, notice of which shall be published at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the hearing. Notice of the hearing shall also be mailed to all owners of property which is proposed to be designated as an historic site, landmark or district and to all property owners within five hundred (500) feet of the boundary of the area to be designated. Every nomination shall be forwarded to the Minnesota Historical Society for review and comment within sixty (60) days of the Commission's request. (b) Eligibility criteria: In considering the designation of any area, site, place, district, building or structure in the city as an historic site, landmark, or district the Commission shall consider the following factors with respect to eligibility: (1) Its character, interest or value as part of the history or cultural heritage of the City, the State or the United States; (2) Its association with persons or events that have made a significant contribution to the cultural heritage of the City; (3) Its potential to yield information important in history or prehistory; (4) Its embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of architectural type or style, or elements of design, detail materials or craftsmanship; and (5) Its unique location or singular physical appearance representing an established or familiar visual feature of a neighborhood or community of the City. Section 2-93 Alterations to landmarks, sites or districts; review (a) Review and recommendations generally: The Commission shall review and make recommendations to the Council concerning proposed alterations to an historic site, landmark or district. (b) Land use permit: Every application for a land use permit which may result in the alteration of a designated historic site, landmark or district in the City shall be reviewed by the Commission; thereafter, the Commission shall make a recommendation and may recommend conditions regarding approval to the City Council concerning the proposed permit. (c) Other building permits: The Commission shall review and make recommendations to the Council concerning the issuance of building permits to do any of the following in a historic district or State designated historic site: (1) New construction — New building or new addition to an existing building (2) Remodel — Alter, change or modify building or site (3) Move a building — Building or structure moved into the city. (4) Excavation — Dig out materials from the ground. (5) Demolition — Destroy, remove or raze — completely tear down (d) Factors considered: The Commission, upon receipt of the permit application and plans, shall determine if the work to be performed adversely affects the designated historic site, landmark or district. In determining whether or not there is an adverse effect to the historic site, landmark, or district the Commission shall consider the following factors: (1) Whether the work will significantly alter the appearance of the building or structure so as to remove the features which distinguish the historic site, landmark or district as a significant cultural resource. June 28, 2010 32 City Council Meeting Minutes (2) Whether the use of the property will destroy, disturb or endanger a known or suspected archaeological feature site. (e) Standards and guidelines: The Comprehensive Plan adopted by the City shall be the authoritative guide to reviewing permits in relation to designated historic sites, landmarks and historic districts. (f) Appeals: Any party aggrieved by a decision of the Commission shall within ten (10) days of the Commission's action recommending denying the issuance of a building permit within a historic district have a right to appeal such decision to the City Council. The Commission in recommending denial of a building permit shall advise the applicant of his/her right to appeal to the City Council. The aggrieved party shall file with the Building Official a written notice requesting Council review of the action taken by the Commission. Section 2-94 Maintenance of records and documents The Commission shall conduct a continuing survey of cultural resources in the City which the Commission has reason to believe are or will be eligible for designation as historic sites, landmarks or districts. The Commission shall also prepare and maintain a Comprehensive map and survey. (a) Register of Historic Sites and Landmarks: The City shall maintain a register of historic sites and landmarks. (b) Repository for Documents: The office of the Building Official is designated as the repository for all studies, surveys, reports, programs, and designations of historic sites and landmarks. Section 2-95 Violation It shall be a misdemeanor to alter, disturb, deface or materially change the appearance or use of a designated historic site, landmark, or district without a permit. This ordinance shall take effect after the city publishes it in the official newspaper. This Historical Preservation Commission recommended approval of this ordinance. The City Council approved this ordinance on June 28, 2010. Attest: Mayor City Clerk Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann. Ayes — All The motion passed. The city council took a 10-minute break The city council reconvened at 9:04 p.m. J. NEW BUSINESS June 28, 2010 33 City Council Meeting Minutes Goodwill — Design Review, Parking Waiver, Wetland Buffer Variances and Lot Combination, 2580 and 2582 White Bear Avenue a. Senior Planner, Tom Ekstrand gave the report and answered questions of the council. b. Environmental Planner, Shann Finwall answered questions of the council. c. City Attorney, Alan Kantrud answered questions of the council. d. Ginny Yingling, Environmental and Natural Resources Commission member addressed the council. e. Jim Kellison, Kelco Services, LLC, 1935 West County Road B2, Suite 68, Roseville, representing Mogren Properties addressed the council. Mayor Rossbach moved to approve combining the two lots currently addressed as 2580 and 2582 White Bear Avenue into one legally -described property. The applicant shall provide evidence that these lots have been combined as one before petting a building permit. Seconded by Councilmember Wasiluk. Ayes — All The motion passed. Councilmember Nephew moved to approve the Parking Waiver for Goodwill allowing the applicant to provide eight fewer parking spaces than the city code requires. Seconded by Councilmember Wasiluk. Ayes — All The motion passed. Councilmember Nephew moved to approve the Wetland Buffer Variance Resolution for Goodwill. VARIANCE RESOLUTION 10-06-422 WHEREAS, James Kellison, of Kelco Services, LLC, applied for a variance from the wetland protection ordinance. WHEREAS, this variance applies to property located at 2580 and 2582 White Bear Avenue. The property identification numbers for these properties are: 11-29-22-21-0060 and 11-29-22-21-0061 WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 895, the Environmental Protection and Critical Area Ordinance dealing with Wetlands, requires a wetland protection buffer of 100 feet in width adjacent to creeks and a wetland protection buffer of 50 feet in width adjacent to Manage C wetlands. WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing wetland protection buffers of 30 feet, requiring a variance of 70 feet, from the creek and a wetland protection buffer of 35 feet from the Manage C wetland, requiring a variance of 35 feet. WHEREAS, the history of this variance is as follows: On June 15, 2010, the planning commission held a public hearing to review this proposal. City staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners as required by law. The planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning commission also June 28, 2010 34 City Council Meeting Minutes MEMORANDUM Agenda Item G16 TO: James Antonen, City Manager FROM: Chuck Ahl, Assistant City Manager David Fisher, Building Official SUBJECT: Request Approval to Apply for Certified Local Government Status DATE: November 23, 2010 for the December 13, 2010 City Council Meeting INTRODUCTION The City of Maplewood is ready to apply for Certified Local Government Status (CLGS) from the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). The Minnesota Certified Local Government procedures manual requires the Mayor to make the request. The SHPO will respond to the Mayor within 60 days of receipt of the written request. If the city meets the criteria for the certification, the SHPO will prepare a written certification agreement between the SHPO and the city. BACKGROUND The number one 2010 goal for the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) is to obtain Certified Local Government Status (CLGS) for the City of Maplewood. This would make the city more eligible for Federal grants. The first step in achieving this goal was to amend the Heritage Preservation Ordinance. The second reading was approved June 28, 2010, by the city council. The next step was to obtain the resumes from the HPC, list the designated sites and submit the request to the SHPO. DISCUSSION As a Certified Local Government the City of Maplewood will be required to do the following: - Provide copy of the HPC ordinance to the State Historic Preservation Officer. - Provide HPC's resumes and contact information to the State Historic Preservation Officer. - Provide survey list and the addresses of the two properties that meet the criteria for historical sites. - Enforce appropriate state and local legislation for the designation and protection of historic properties. The CLG will conduct design review of the designated properties. This would only affect two properties at this time: the Bruentrup Heritage Farm and the Ramsey County Poor Farm. - Establish and maintain HPC by State or local legislation. - Maintain a system for the survey and inventory of historic properties. - Provide for adequate public participation in the local historic preservation program, including the process of recommending properties for nomination to the National Register. - Provide annual report to the State Historic Preservation Officer. - Comply with the CLG handbook. - Agree to indemnify and save and hold the Society, its agents, contractors and employees harmless from any and all claims or causes of action arising from the CLGS agreement. The purpose of achieving CLGS is to strengthen existing local preservation programs and promote the development of new programs. Cities that have CLGS are eligible to apply annually for grants administered through the State Historical Preservation Society from a designated federal pass -through allocation. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends the city council approve the City of Maplewood apply for Certified Local Government Status with the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office. P:\com-dev\HPC CLG12-13 -10 City Council meeting Attachments: 1. Cover letter for Mayor's signature 2. Minnesota Certified Local Government Procedures Manual Packet Page Number 153 of 312 Attachment 1 November 18, 2010 Minnesota Historical Society Attention: Mike Koop, Historic Preservation Specialist 345 West Kellogg BLVD St. Paul, MN 55102-1906 Dear Mr. Koop; The City of Maplewood is requesting to become a Certified Local Government (CLG) by the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office. The City's Historical Preservation Commission, recently renamed the Heritage Preservation Commission, has existed since 1998 and has been working to obtain the CLG designation for about two years. The Heritage Preservation Commission Ordinance was updated to meet the requirements for Certified Local Government. The City of Maplewood has two Heritage sites, the Bruentrup Heritage Farm and the Ramsey County Poor Farm, which would meet the criteria for a survey of properties for CLG. The Commission has been working with the Maplewood Area Historical Society in a collaborative effort to educate the public and the preserve heritage of Maplewood. Please find enclosed the contact information for all of the Heritage Preservation Commission members and their resumes for your review. Thank you for the opportunity to become a Certified Local Government . If you have any questions please contact me at 612-363-6832 or by email at Will. Rossbacho_ci.maplewood.mn.us or the Heritage Preservation Commission Liaison, David Fisher at 651-249-2320 or email at dave.fisherna ci.maalewood.mn.us. Sincerely, Will Rossbach Mayor City of Maplewood P HPC Will Letter for CLG Packet Page Number 154 of 312 Attachment 2 MINNESOTA CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROCEDURES MANUAL MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE 345 KELLOGG BOULEVARD WEST SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102-1906 651/296-5451 www.mnhs.org SEPTEMBER 2002 Packet Page Number 155 of 312 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 2 I. Purpose of the CLG Program 2 II. Eligibility 3 III. Requirements for Certification of Local Governments 3 IV. Process for Certification of CLGs 9 V. Process for Monitoring and Decertifying CLGs 10 VI. Process for Allocating CLG Grant Pass -Through Funds to CLGs 10 Appendix A — Federal Professional Qualifications Standards 12 Appendix B — Minnesota Statutes 471.193 14 Appendix C — Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Treatment of 16 Historic Properties Appendix D — Model Local Government Certification Agreement 17 Upon request, this publication can be made available in alternative formats — audiotape, large print, or computer disk. This program receives Federal funds from the National Park Service. Under Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the U.S. Department of the Interior strictly prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, or disability in its federally assisted programs. If you believe you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility operated by a recipient of federal assistance, or if you desire further information, please write to: Director, Equal Opportunity Program, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, National Park Service, P.O. Box 37127, Washington, D.C. 20013-7127. Minnesota CLG Procedures Manual, page 1 State Historic Preservation Office Issued September 2002 Packet Page Number 156 of 312 INTRODUCTION Since its initial enactment in 1966 and through several amendments, the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), has provided the statutory framework for the national historic preservation partnership. Federal, State, Tribal and local governments have well-defined and significant roles in the identification, evaluation, designation and protection of historic and prehistoric properties. The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) develops and administers a comprehensive preservation program which in Minnesota, is housed at the Minnesota Historical Society. The success of the federal -state relationship prompted Congress to expand the partnership to include local governments in 1980. Local units of government were given the opportunity to participate in the national preservation program by becoming a Certified Local Government (CLG). The role of CLGs in the partnership includes the responsibilities of administering local preservation ordinances, maintaining systems for survey of historic resources, and participating in the National Register of Historic Places program. In order to become certified, a local government must meet several requirements, chief of which are to have enacted an historic preservation ordinance and appointed a qualified Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC). The federal act directs the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the Secretary of the Interior to certify local governments to participate in the partnership. The Certified Local Government program is the primary way through which qualified and interested local governments participate in the national historic preservation partnership. This handbook describes how the CLG program operates in Minnesota. L PURPOSE OF THE CLG PROGRAM The CLG program seeks to encourage and expand local involvement in preservation issues through a partnership between the CLG and the SHPO. To strengthen existing local preservation programs and to promote the development of new ones, CLGs are eligible to apply annually for grants administered by the SHPO from a designated federal CLG pass -through allocation (see Section VI. Process for Allocating CLG Grant Pass -Through Funds to CLGs). CLGs assume a leadership role by identifying, evaluating and protecting historic resources within their communities; receiving technical advisory services from the SHPO; and having a formal role in the National Register process. CLGs can choose to assume other responsibilities such as participating in the review of federal projects, reviewing state tax credit projects and administering covenants. The primary goal of participating in the CLG program is to strengthen the historic preservation program at the local level. The CLG program ensures that historic preservation issues are understood and addressed at the local level and are integrated into the local planning and decision -making process at the earliest possible opportunity. Historic preservation should be considered equally with other planning issues in a CLG and not be viewed as superfluous to decision -making. CLG status can bring pride and official recognition to a community that is committed to historic preservation. Minnesota CLG Procedures Manual, page 2 State Historic Preservation Office Issued September 2002 Packet Page Number 157 of 312 II. ELIGIBILITY Any general purpose subdivision of the state, such as a city, town or county, which meets the criteria set forth in this document is eligible to apply for certification. III. REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTIFICATION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS Five broad federal standards, all of which must be met by a local government seeking certification, are amplified by the specific Minnesota CLG requirements. A. The local government must enforce appropriate state or local legislation for the designation and protection of historic properties. The local government must adopt a municipal heritage preservation ordinance under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 471.193 (Appendix B). The purpose of the ordinance must be clearly stated and be in conformance with definitions set forth in Section 101 (c) (4) of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, and 36 CFR 61.6. For the purpose of the CLG program, the Act defines: "Designation" as "the identification and registration of properties for protection that meet criteria established by the State or the locality for significant historic and pre- historic resources within the jurisdiction of a local government." Designation includes the identification and registration of resources according to State or local criteria which must be consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Identification and Registration. "Protection" as "a local review process under State or local law for proposed demolition of, changes to, or other action that may affect historic properties designated pursuant to" a local government becoming a Certified Local Government. The CLG's local protection review process of the Act applies only to properties designated pursuant to State or local laws and procedures. This would not include properties listed on or determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places unless such properties also were designated under the appropriate local process. 2. The ordinance must contain a clearly defined process for the survey, designation and protection of individual properties and/or districts of historic, architectural or archaeological significance. Both the criteria for determining significant properties and the procedure for designating those properties must be defined, either within the ordinance or in other procedures adopted by the local government. The process shall include forwarding all proposed designations to the Minnesota SHPO for comment before final local designation is made, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 471.193 Subd. 6. Properties shall not be removed from designated status except in cases where there has been a procedural or professional error in the designation process or where the property has been destroyed or radically altered. The process for local designation must provide for public comment. Minnesota CLG Procedures Manual, page 3 State Historic Preservation Office Issued September 2002 Packet Page Number 158 of 312 The ordinance must contain a clearly defined process for the review of all proposed alterations, relocations, demolition, or new construction within the boundaries of locally designated properties and/or districts. Both the criteria to be utilized in the evaluation of proposed actions and the procedure for reviewing those actions must be clearly stated, either within the ordinance or in other procedures adopted by the local government. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties should be utilized in developing the review criteria (Appendix Q. The process of permit review must provide for public comment. 4. The UPC must adhere to Minnesota Statutes 138.17 and the procedures of the State Archives Department, Minnesota Historical Society regarding commission records (www.mnhs.org/preserve/records/infoleaf9.pdf). Local governments should consult 36 CFR 67.8 to insure that local ordinances meet the certification criteria pursuant to the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 and the Tax Reform Act of 1976. Note that certification of a local government under the CLG procedures does nat constitute certification of a commission under the preservation tax incentives process. B. The local government must establish an adequate and qualified historic preservation commission by State or local legislation. The local government shall create a heritage preservation commission (HPC) to carry out the provisions of the ordinance. 2. All commission members must have a demonstrated interest, competence or knowledge in historic preservation. If available in the community, at least two members of the UPC shall be drawn from professionals in architecture, history, architectural history, planning, prehistoric and historic archaeology, folklore, cultural anthropology, curation, conservation, and landscape architecture or related disciplines. Other related professions might include the building trades, real estate or law. For the purposes of commission membership as described in this section, the professional standards stipulated in Appendix A need not be met. One member of the UPC must be a designated representative of the county historical society in which the commission is located, if available, pursuant to the Minnesota Statutes, 471.193 Subd. 5. Specific disciplines and professional qualifications must be represented on the commission (or professional expertise must be sought) when considering National Register nominations (see III.B.4.) and other actions that will impact properties which are normally evaluated by a professional in such a discipline. Minnesota CLG Procedures Manual, page 4 State Historic Preservation Office Issued September 2002 Packet Page Number 159 of 312 Regarding conflicts of interest, it is federal policy that no person shall participate in the selection, award, or administration of any HPF-assisted program activity, subgrant, contract, or subcontract if a conflict of interest, real or apparent, exists. By definition, "person" includes CLG commission members, agents, or staff. Commissions are encouraged to adopt procedures for a conflict of interest situation. The SHPO can provide examples of the conflict of interest statements used by its boards and committees. The HPC shall meet as often as is necessary to complete the workload in a timely fashion. 4. The HPC's responsibilities regarding local designation of properties and building permit review are mentioned in III.A.2. and III.A.3. above. Federal law prescribes that the commission participate in the National Register nomination process as follows: a. Before a property within the jurisdiction of the Certified Local Government may be considered by the State to be nominated to the Keeper of the National Register for inclusion on the National Register, the SHPO shall notify the owner, the applicable chief local elected official, and the local HPC. The HPC, after reasonable opportunity for public comment, shall prepare a report as to whether or not such property, in its opinion, meets the criteria of the National Register. Within sixty days of notice from the SHPO, the chief local elected official shall transmit the report of the commission and his/her recommendation to the SHPO. Except as provided below, after receipt of such report and recommendation, or if no such report and recommendation are received within sixty days, the State shall make the nomination pursuant to established procedures. The state may expedite such process with the concurrence of the certified local government. If the HPC chooses to initiate the nomination of a property to the National Register and submits that nomination to the SHPO, the HPC may include the comments of the chief local elected official and the HPC with the initial submittal to the SHPO, along with a request that the 60 day comment period for CLGs be waived. In such cases, the SHPO will give the standard required 30 days notice to both the property owners (s) and the local government of the State Review Board meeting. The required 60 day CLG review period may thus be waived. b. If both the commission and the chief local elected official recommend that property not be nominated to the National Register, the SHPO shall take no further action, unless within thirty days of the receipt of such recommendation by the SHPO an appeal is filed with the State. If such an appeal is filed, the State shall follow the procedures for making nomination pursuant to established procedures. Any report and recommendations made under this section shall be included with any nomination submitted by the State to the Keeper of the National Register. Minnesota CLG Procedures Manual, page 5 State Historic Preservation Office Issued September 2002 Packet Page Number 160 of 312 C. All nominations, when sent by the SHPO to the CLG for comment, will be classified as primarily historic, archaeological, and/or architectural in nature. If an UPC does not have professional expertise in accordance with the necessary federal qualifications in the appropriate area(s)i (see Appendix A), the UPC can 1) choose not to comment on that nomination through the CLG review process (in which case it should advise the SHPO of that choice), or 2) obtain the opinion(s) of a qualified professional or qualified professionals in the subject area and consider the opinion(s) in their recommendation. Under 2), both the credentials and the opinion(s) of the consulted professional(s) should be submitted to the SHPO with the CLG recommendation. Even if the UPC chooses not to comment under the CLG process outlined above (e.g., when professional expertise is not available), comments on a nomination may be submitted to the SHPO in as much as any interested party may submit comments. The provisions of 3.b. above, however, would not apply in such cases. The SHPO can provide assistance in locating qualified professionals. 5. Federal guidelines also require that the unit of government and the HPC possess certain financial qualifications in order to receive federal pass -through funds. These will be explained in Section VI. 6. The functions of the UPC must be complimentary to and carried out in coordination with the responsibilities of the SHPO as defined in 36 CFR 61. 7. The SHPO shall make available to HPCs orientation materials and training workshops designed to provide a working knowledge of the roles and operations of federal, state and local preservation programs and historic preservation in general. C. The local government must maintain a system for the survey and inventory of historic properties. The local government must maintain an ongoing process to survey and inventory all buildings, structures, sites and districts within the local jurisdiction. This survey information must be clearly organized and accessible to the public (excluding restrictions on locations of archaeological sites). The SHPO should be consulted in the initial development of such a system, and the inventory forms of the SHPO should be used or, alternatively, local inventory forms should be approved by the SHPO. The local inventory should clearly indicate those 1 For an architectural nomination, the commission must have a member who qualifies under the federal architectural history or historic architecture standards. For a history nomination, the commission must have a member who qualifies under the federal history standards. For an archaeological nomination, the commission must have a member who qualifies under the federal archaeology standards. If a nomination is classified in more than one area, the commission must have expertise in all appropriate areas in order to comment through the CLG comment process. Minnesota CLG Procedures Manual, page 6 State Historic Preservation Office Issued September 2002 Packet Page Number 161 of 312 properties that have been designated locally as well as those listed in the National Register of Historic Places. All surveys should be conducted according to the Guidelines for SHPO Architecture/History Projects. The local government must submit a copy of the local inventory form for each locally designated property and district to the SHPO. 2. The local government must advise the SHPO on the status of the local inventory on an annual basis (see E.2.e). The local survey information submitted to the SHPO will be integrated into the statewide inventory. The SHPO may request additional survey and inventory data from the local government as part of the development of the state's comprehensive planning process. D. The local government shall provide for adequate public participation in local historic preservation programs, including the process of recommending properties for nomination to the National Register. All meetings of the commission shall adhere to the Minnesota Open Meeting Law (Minnesota Statutes 471.705). 2. All National Register nominations on which the commission chooses to comment (as outlined under III.B.4. above) must be considered at an open meeting of the commission, with opportunity for public comment. Both the local designation process and the building permit review process (see III.A.2. and III.A.3.) must contain a provision for public comment on proposed actions. 4. Minutes of all commission decisions and actions, including the reasons for making those decisions, must be kept on file and available for public inspection. E. The local government shall satisfactorily perform the responsibilities listed in points A-D above and those specifically delegated to it under the Act by the Minnesota SHPO. The local government will demonstrate performance of the responsibilities listed in points A-D in an annual report to be submitted to the SHPO by October 30 for each preceding year (October 1 - September 30). 2. This report must demonstrate an active commitment of the UPC to an effective community preservation program. It should contain, at minimum, the following information: a. Number, names, and dates of local designations made during the year. (Inventory forms on these sites should have been submitted to the SHPO during the year as part of the local designation process - see III.A.2.). Minnesota CLG Procedures Manual, page 7 State Historic Preservation Office Issued September 2002 Packet Page Number 162 of 312 b. Number of building permits reviewed during the year, and a summary of findings of the UPC on those reviewed. C. Listing of members and officers of the UPC including preferred mailing address, phone number and e-mail address, resumes for any new members, and an indication of the commissioner who represents the county historical society. d. Listing of 1) National Register nominations on which the UPC has commented, and 2) National Register nominations submitted to the State Historic Preservation Office for nomination, during the year. e. A summary of available inventory information currently included in the local in inventory. This might be done with a simple listing of inventoried property addresses. Maps and other material may also be useful. The location of the inventory records should also be indicated. f. Assurances that the UPC has adhered to 1) the public participation provisions as stipulated under Section III.D. and 2) the procedures of the State Archives Department, Minnesota Historical Society, regarding commission records. g. Descriptions of other activities, publications or events undertaken by the UPC during the previous year and planned by the UPC for the coming year. The performance standards for the items listed in III.E.2., above, will be as follows: a. The UPC must demonstrate an ongoing process of local designation with a mini- mum of one designation a year. (In situations where this may not be possible, as in very small cities where the entire area of jurisdiction is designated, the city should explain the reasons for a lack of action.) b. The HPC must show that all permits related to designated properties are being reviewed, according to the procedure set forth in the ordinance. C. The requirements of Section III.B.2 must be met. d. (No minimum.) e. The inventory should be shown to be clearly organized and accessible to the public. f (No minimum.) g. (No minimum.) Minnesota CLG Procedures Manual, page 8 State Historic Preservation Office Issued September 2002 Packet Page Number 163 of 312 4. At least one member of the UPC must attend SHPO-sponsored training each year. (If attendance at a statewide workshop or conference is not possible, the SHPO should be consulted for an alternate means of meeting this training requirement.) Technical and other information for commissions is available from the SHPO. IV. PROCESS FOR CERTIFICATION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS A. The chief elected official of the local government shall request certification from the Minnesota SHPO. The request for certification shall include the following: 1. A copy of the local historic preservation ordinance. 2. Copies of local inventory forms for all sites and districts locally designated, and a summary of available inventory information on properties not locally designated (property addresses, maps, etc.). Resumes for each of the members of the historic preservation commission. These resumes must clearly show that all members have a demonstrated interest, competence or knowledge in historic preservation, and that at least two members are preservation - related professionals (see III.B.2.). (If these professionals are unavailable, an explanation should be attached.) The resumes should also indicate expertise in the areas of archi- tectural history, archaeology, and history, for the purpose of establishing expertise to review National Register nominations (see III.B.3.c.) B. SHPO and National Park Service Review The SHPO will respond to the chief elected official within 60 working days of the receipt of an adequately documented written request. If the local government meets the criteria for certification, the SHPO will prepare a written certification agreement that lists the specific responsibilities of the local government when certified and forward that agreement to the local government for signature (see Appendix D for model agreement). When the signed agreement is returned to the SHPO the request and agreement will then be forwarded to the National Park Service for review with a request for concurrence. If the NPS does not take exception to the request within 15 working days of receipt, the local government shall be regarded as Certified. A Certification Agreement is not effective until it is signed by the chief elected official and the SHPO, and concurred with in writing by NPS. The effective date of certification is the date of NPS concurrence. When NPS concurs with the SHPO recommendation for certification, NPS will notify the SHPO in writing, and send a copy of that letter to the CLG. Minnesota CLG Procedures Manual, page 9 State Historic Preservation Office Issued September 2002 Packet Page Number 164 of 312 V. PROCESS FOR MONITORING AND DECERTIFYING CLGS A. The SHPO will review the annual reports submitted by certified local governments, records of the administration of funds allocated from the Historic Preservation Fund, and other documents as necessary, to assure that each government is fulfilling the required standards. Other review and monitoring may be conducted as necessary. B. If the SHPO evaluation indicates that the performance of a CLG is inadequate, the SHPO shall document that assessment and delineate for the local government ways to improve performance. The CLG shall have a period of not less than 30, nor more than 180 days to implement improvements. If the SHPO determines that sufficient improvement has not occurred, the SHPO will recommend decertification of the local government to the Secretary of the Interior citing specific reasons for the recommendation. C. If the local government is decertified, the SHPO will conduct financial assistance closeout procedures as specified in the HPF Grants Manual. VI. PROCESS FOR ALLOCATING CLG GRANT PASS -THROUGH FUNDS TO CLGs The Minnesota SHPO administers the CLG Grant program and produces and distributes a CLG Grants manual each year that describes the application process, matching requirements and priorities for the given year. Under this program, in accordance with the Department of the Interior requirements for the Historic Preservation Fund programs, at least ten (10) percent of Minnesota's annual HPF appropriation is designated as pass -through funding to Certified Local Governments (CLGs) each year. This pass - through grant program has assisted CLGs across the state of Minnesota build and strengthen their local preservation programs. The CLG Grants Manual includes information on General Grant Conditions, Eligible Program Activities and Priorities for Projects, the Application Process, Instructions for Completing Application Forms, and Project Administration and Reporting. Application Forms, a sample CLG Grant Agreement and sample Project Description (Attachment A), a CLG Request for Reimbursement Form, Supplemental Infor- mation on Allowable Costs, and forms for fiscal documentation are also included. Because federal funds are used for CLG grants, numerous federal regulations apply. Federal regulations will be enforced, and failure on the part of a CLG to meet them will result in the cancellation of a grant project. All work accomplished under these grants must meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. Providing matching funds may be an annual prerequisite and is one of the selection criterion for CLG grants. Applicants are encouraged to provide a match that exceeds the minimum requirement. Matching funds may be cash, in -kind and/or donated services or materials contributed to the project or a combination of the three. Minnesota CLG Procedures Manual, page 10 State Historic Preservation Office Issued September 2002 Packet Page Number 165 of 312 There are six areas of eligible program activity for CLG grants: (A) Comprehensive Planning; (B) Survey; (C) Evaluation; (D) Local Designation Forms; (E) National Register Nomination Forms; and (F) Public Education. The CLG Grants Manual provides guidance and examples for each category. Projects receive special priority are those that: reflect the goals and strategies in the statewide preserva- tion plan; promote sound preservation planning through historic context development and the comple- tion of historic and archaeological surveys; result in local designations; and involve properties associ- ated with the history of heretofore under -documented groups or communities (ethnic or racial minorities for example, but also other groups defining themselves as communities. Projects will be evaluated on the following criteria (total points available 100): 1. How well the applicant addresses questions for each category in the CLG Grants Manual (0- 25 points); 2. How well the annual priorities and criteria outlined in the CLG Grants Manual are addressed and how well the project is related to the state preservation plan (0-15 points); 3. Clearly stated measurable goals that can be realistically attained within the funding period (0 to 15 points); 4. Demonstrated community support and leveraged funds (0 to 15 points); 5. Products and past performance of previously administered CLG grants (0 to 15 points); 6. Quality and practicality of the budget (0 to 15 points). The CLG Grants Manual is available by contacting the Grants Office at the Minnesota Historical Society, 345 Kellogg Boulevard West, St. Paul, MN 55102-1906; telephone (651) 296-5478. Minnesota CLG Procedures Manual, page 11 State Historic Preservation Office Issued September 2002 Packet Page Number 166 of 312 APPENDIX A PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS STANDARDS The following requirements are those used by the National Park Service, and have been previously published in the Code of Federal Regulations, 36 CFR 61. The qualifications define minimum education and experience required to perform identification, evaluation, registration, and treatment activities. In some cases, additional areas or levels of expertise may be needed, depending on the complexity of the task and the nature of the historic properties involved. In the following definitions, a year of full-time professional experience need not consist of a continuous year of full-time work, but may be made up of discontinuous periods of full-time or part-time work adding up to the equivalent of a year of full-time experience. History The minimum professional qualifications in history are a graduate degree in history or closely related field; or a bachelor's degree in history or closely related field plus one of the following: At least two years of full-time experience in research, writing, teaching, interpretation, or other demonstrable professional activity with an academic institution, historic organization or agency, museum, or other professional institution; or 2. Substantial contribution through research and publication to the body of scholarly knowledge in the field of history. Archaeology The minimum professional qualifications in archaeology are a graduate degree in archaeology, anthropology, or closely related field plus: At least one year of full-time professional experience or equivalent specialized training in archaeological research, administration or management; 2. At least four months of supervised field and analytic experience in general North American archaeology; and 3. Demonstrated ability to carry research to completion. In addition to these minimum qualifications, a professional in prehistoric archaeology shall have at least one year of full-time professional experience at a supervisory level in the study of archaeological resources of the prehistoric period. A professional in historic archaeology shall have at least one year of full-time professional experience at a supervisory level in the study of archaeological resources of the historic period. Minnesota CLG Procedures Manual, page 12 State Historic Preservation Office Issued September 2002 Packet Page Number 167 of 312 Architectural History The minimum professional qualifications in architectural history are a graduate degree in architectural history, art history, historic preservation, or closely related field, with course work in American architectural history; or a bachelor's degree in architectural history, art history, historic preservation or closely related field plus one of the following: At least two years of full-time experience in research, writing, or teaching in American architectural history or restoration architecture with an academic institution, historic organization or agency, museum, or other professional institution; or 2. Substantial contribution through research and publication to the body of scholarly knowledge in the field of American architectural history. Architecture The minimum professional qualifications in architecture are a professional degree in architecture plus at least two years of full-time experience in architecture; or a State license to practice architecture. Historic Architecture The minimum professional qualifications in historic architecture are a professional degree in architecture or a State license to practice architecture, plus one of the following: At least one year of graduate study in architectural history, preservation planning, or closely related field; or 2. At least one year of full-time professional experience on historic preservation projects. Such graduate study or experience shall include detailed investigations of historic structures, preparation of historic structures research reports, and preparation of plans and specifications for preservation proj ects. Minnesota CLG Procedures Manual, page 13 State Historic Preservation Office Issued September 2002 Packet Page Number 168 of 312 APPENDIX B State Enabling Legislation for Heritage Preservation Commissions (from 2001 Minnesota Statutes) 471.193 MUNICIPAL HERITAGE PRESERVATION. Subdivision 1. Policy. The legislature finds that the historical, architectural, archaeological, engineering, and cultural heritage of this state is among its most important assets. Therefore, the purpose of this section is to authorize local governing bodies to engage in a comprehensive program of historic preservation, and to promote the use and conservation of historic properties for the education, inspiration, pleasure, and enrichment of the citizens of this state. Subd. 2. Heritage preservation commissions. The governing body of a statutory or home rule charter city, county, or town as described in section 368.01, subdivisions 1 and la may establish a heritage preservation commission to preserve and promote its historic resources according to this section. Subd. 3. Powers. The powers and duties of any commission established pursuant to this section may include any power possessed by the political subdivision creating the commission, but shall be those delegated or assigned by the ordinance establishing the commission. These powers may include: (1) the survey and designation of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that are of historical, architectural, archaeological, engineering, or cultural significance; (2) the enactment of rules governing construction, alteration, demolition, and use including the review of building permits, and the adoption of other measures appropriate for the preservation, protection, and perpetuation of designated properties and areas; (3) the acquisition by purchase, gift or bequest, of a fee or lesser interest, including preservation restrictions, in designated properties and adjacent or associated lands which are important for the preservation and use of the designated properties; (4) requests to the political subdivision to use its power to eminent domain to maintain or preserve designated properties and adjacent or associated lands; (5) the sale or lease of air rights; (6) the granting of use variations to a zoning ordinance; (7) participating in the conduct of land use, urban renewal, and other planning processes undertaken by the political subdivision creating the commission; and (8) the removal of blighting influences, including signs, unsightly structures, and debris, incompatible with the physical well-being of designated properties or areas. Minnesota CLG Procedures Manual, page 14 State Historic Preservation Office Issued September 2002 Packet Page Number 169 of 312 No power shall be exercised by a commission which in contrary to state law or denied a political subdivision by its charter or by law. Powers of a commission shall be exercised only in the manner prescribed by an ordinance and no action of an ordinance unless expressly authorized by the ordinance. Subd. 4. Exclusion. If a commission is established by the city of St. Paul, it shall for the purpose of this section exclude any jurisdiction over the capitol area as defined in section 15.50, subdivision 2. Subd. 5. Commission members. Commission members must be persons with demonstrated interest and expertise in historic preservation and must reside within the political subdivision regulated by the ordinance establishing the commission. Every commission shall include, if available, a member of a county historical society of a county in which the municipality is located. Subd. 6. Communication with the state historic preservation officer. Proposed site designations and design guidelines must be sent to the state historic preservation officer at the Minnesota Historical Society, who shall review and comment on the proposal within 60 days. By October 31 of each year, each commission shall submit an annual report to the state historic preservation officer. The report must summarize the commission's activities, including designations, reviews, and other activities during the previous 12 months. Minnesota CLG Procedures Manual, page 15 State Historic Preservation Office Issued September 2002 Packet Page Number 170 of 312 APPENDIX C SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARDS FOR TREATMENT OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES Preservation is defined as the act or process of applying measures necessary to sustain the existing form, integrity, and materials of an historic property. Work, including preliminary measures to protect and stabilize the property, generally focuses upon the ongoing maintenance and repair of historic materials and features rather than extensive replacement and new construction. New exterior additions are not within the scope of this treatment; however, the limited and sensitive upgrading of mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems and other code -required work to make properties functional is appropriate within a preservation project. 1. A property will be used as it was historically, or be given a new use that maximizes the retention of distinctive materials, features, spaces and spatial relationships. Where a treatment and use have not been identified, a property will be protected and, if necessary, stabilized until additional work may be undertaken. 2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The replacement of intact or repairable historic materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. 3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Work needed to stabilize, consolidate, and conserve existing historic materials and features will be physically and visually compatible, identifiable upon close inspection, and properly documented for future research. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. 6. The existing condition of historic features will be evaluated to determine the appropriate level of intervention needed. Where the severity of deterioration requires repair or limited replacement of a distinctive feature, the new material will match the old in composition, design, color, and texture. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. 8. Archaeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. Minnesota CLG Procedures Manual, page 16 State Historic Preservation Office Issued September 2002 Packet Page Number 171 of 312 APPENDIX D MODEL LOCAL GOVERNMENT CERTIFICATION AGREEMENT This agreement is made between the of [insert proper name of local government] and the Minnesota Historical Society. 1. As a Certified Local Government (CLG) established under the provisions of the "Minnesota Certified Local Government Handbook" and of 36 CFR 61.5 and 36 CFR 61.7, made a part of this agreement by reference, the of agrees to: A. Enforce appropriate state and local legislation for the designation and protection of historic properties. The CLG will conduct design review of designated properties according to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. B. Maintain an adequate and qualified historic preservation review commission by State and Local legislation. C. Maintain a system for the survey and inventory of historic properties. D. Provide for adequate public participation in the local historic preservation program, including the process of recommending properties for nomination to the National Register. E. Satisfactorily perform the responsibilities listed in points A-D above and those specifically delegated to it under the Act by the State Historic Preservation officer (SHPO). 2. The specified obligations of the CLG under each of the above areas are outlined in the document "Minnesota Certified Local Government Handbook." Performance of these responsibilities will be demonstrated in the annual report submitted by the CLG to the SHPO by November I of each year (See Section I.E. of the Handbook). Failure to report or unsatisfactory performance may be grounds for potential decertification as described in Section III of the Handbook. 3. It is mutually understood that upon final execution of this agreement, the Local Government will achieve, subject to final review by the Secretary of the Interior, Certified Local Government status. Transference of funds pursuant to said status will require compliance with this Handbook, and the current CLG Grants Manual. 4. The Certified Local Government agrees to indemnify and save and hold the SOCIETY, its agents, contractors, and employees harmless from any and all claims or causes of action arising from the CLG's performance of this agreement. 5. The Certified Local Government will comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; Public Law 88-352 (78 Stat. 241; 42 U.S.C. 2000d) which prohibits discrimination and is made a part of this agreement by reference. MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY State Historic Preservation Officer Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer LOCAL GOVERNMENT Date Mayor Date Date Chair, Heritage Date Preservation Commission Print Name: Contracting Officer Date Minnesota CLG Procedures Manual, page 17 State Historic Preservation Office Issued September 2002 Packet Page Number 172 of 312 ORDINANCE 905 THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION ORDINANCE Section 1 This amendment revises Sections 2-87 to 2-91 DIVISION 4 HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION ("Commission") Section 2-87 Authority for Establishment There is hereby established for the City a Heritage Preservation Commission as an independent commission to the City Council, as provided in Minnesota Statutes Annotated Sections 471.193 and 138.51. Section 2-88 Statement of public policy and purpose The City Council hereby declares as a matter of public policy that the protection, preservation, perpetuation and use of places, areas, buildings, structures and other objects having a special historical, community or aesthetic interest or value is a public necessity and is required in the interest of the people. The purpose of this Chapter is to: (a) Safeguard the cultural resources of the City by preserving sites, structures, districts and landmarks which reflect elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history; (b) Protect and enhance the City's attractions to residents and visitors; (c) Foster civic pride in the beauty and notable achievements of the past; (d) Enhance the visual and aesthetic character, diversity and interest of the City; and (e) Promote the use and preservation of historic sites and landmarks for the education and general welfare of the people of the City. Section 2-89 Advisory body All actions of the Commission shall be in the nature of recommendations to the City Council, and said Commission shall have no final authority with reference to any matters, except as the Council may lawfully delegate authority to it. Section 2-90 Composition; Appointment; Qualifications; Terms (a) The Heritage Preservation Commission shall be composed of seven (7) members appointed by the City Council, who shall be residents of the City, and shall be selected to assure that the Commission is representative of the various areas of the City and responsive to the needs of the people. (b) Commission membership shall be drawn from persons with demonstrated interest and/or expertise in historic preservation. If available in the community, at least two members of the Commission shall be heritage preservation -related professionals (e.g. the professions of history, architecture, architectural history, archeology, planning, real estate, design, building trades, landscape architecture, or law). A member of the Maplewood Heritage Preservation Commission is required to be a representative to the Ramsey County Historical Society. The City shall pay for the membership of the Commission or designee. (c) The members of the Heritage Preservation Commission shall serve staggered terms. All appointments shall be assigned by the city council for a term of three years. Section 2-91 Officers Generally The chairperson and vice -chairperson of the Commission shall be elected by the Commission at the first meeting in May of each year from among the members of the Commission. The Chairperson shall be responsible for calling and presiding over all meetings and shall be entitled to an equal vote with other members of the Commission. If the Chairperson is unable to attend a meeting, the vice -chairperson shall conduct the meeting. Section 2-92 Designation of historic sites and landmarks (a) Procedures: The City Council, upon the request of the Commission, may by resolution designate an historic site, landmark, or district. Prior to such designation, the city council shall hold a public hearing, notice of which shall be published at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the hearing. Notice of the hearing shall also be mailed to all owners of property which is proposed to be designated as an historic site, landmark or district and to all property owners within five hundred (500) feet of the boundary of the area to be designated. Every nomination shall be forwarded to the Minnesota Historical Society for review and comment within sixty (60) days of the Commission's request. (b) Eligibility criteria: In considering the designation of any area, site, place, district, building or structure in the city as an historic site, landmark, or district the Commission shall consider the following factors with respect to eligibility: (1) Its character, interest or value as part of the history or cultural heritage of the City, the State or the United States; (2) Its association with persons or events that have made a significant contribution to the cultural heritage of the City; (3) Its potential to yield information important in history or prehistory; (4) Its embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of architectural type or style, or elements of design, detail materials or craftsmanship; and (5) Its unique location or singular physical appearance representing an established or familiar visual feature of a neighborhood or community of the City. Section 2-93 Alterations to landmarks, sites or districts; review (a) Review and recommendations generally: The Commission shall review and make recommendations to the Council concerning proposed alterations to an historic site, landmark or district. (b) Land use permit: Every application for a land use permit which may result in the alteration of a designated historic site, landmark or district in the City shall be reviewed by the Commission; thereafter, the Commission shall make a recommendation and may recommend conditions regarding approval to the City Council concerning the proposed permit. (c) Other building permits: The Commission shall review and make recommendations to the Council concerning the issuance of building permits to do any of the following in a historic district or State designated historic site: (1) New construction — New building or new addition to an existing building (2) Remodel — Alter, change or modify building or site (3) Move a building — Building or structure moved into the city. (4) Excavation — Dig out materials from the ground. (5) Demolition — Destroy, remove or raze — completely tear down (d) Factors considered: The Commission, upon receipt of the permit application and plans, shall determine if the work to be performed adversely affects the designated historic site, landmark or district. In determining whether or not there is an adverse effect to the historic site, landmark, or district the Commission shall consider the following factors: (1) Whether the work will significantly alter the appearance of the building or structure so as to remove the features which distinguish the historic site, landmark or district as a significant cultural resource. (2) Whether the use of the property will destroy, disturb or endanger a known or suspected archaeological feature site. (e) Standards and guidelines: The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (listed below) shall be required basis for permit review decisions. 1. The Comprehensive Plan adopted by the City shall be the authoritative guide to reviewing permits in relation to designated historic sites, landmarks and historic districts. 2. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. 3. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. 4. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. 5. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 6. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved. 7. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. 8. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. 9. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. 10. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. 1 1. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. (f) Appeals: Any party aggrieved by a decision of the Commission shall within ten (10) days of the Commission's action recommending denying the issuance of a building permit within a historic district have a right to appeal such decision to the City Council. The Commission in recommending denial of a building permit shall advise the applicant of his/her right to appeal to the City Council. The aggrieved party shall file with the Building Official a written notice requesting Council review of the action taken by the Commission. Section 2-94 Maintenance of records and documents The Commission shall conduct a continuing survey of cultural resources in the City which the Commission has reason to believe are or will be eligible for designation as historic sites, landmarks or districts. The Commission shall also prepare and maintain a Comprehensive map and survey. (a) Register of Historic Sites and Landmarks: The City shall maintain a register of historic sites and landmarks. (b) Repository for Documents: The office of the Building Official is designated as the repository for all studies, surveys, reports, programs, and designations of historic sites and landmarks. Section 2-95 Violation It shall be a misdemeanor to alter, disturb, deface or materially change the appearance or use of a designated historic site, landmark, or district without a permit. This ordinance shall take effect after publishing in the official newspaper. The Maplewood City Council approved this ordinance on July 11, 2011. Affidavit of Publication State of Minnesota SS County of Ramsey ANNE THILLEN , being duly sworn, on oath, says that he/she is the publisher or authorized agent and employee of the publisher of the newspaper known as MAPLEWOOD REVIEW and has full knowledge of the facts which are stated below: (A) The newspaper has complied with all of the requirements constituting qualification as a qualified newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as amended. (B) The printed ORDINANCE 905 a i71(, I k j k;,i,L which is attached was cut from the columns of said newspaper, and was printed and published once each week, for 1 successive weeks; it was first published on WEDNESDAY , the 27TH day of JULY 20 11 , and was thereafter printed and published on every to and including , the day of , 20 ; and printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both inclusive, which is hereby acknowledged as being the size and kind of type used in the composition and publication of the notice: 'ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPaRSTUVWXYZ 'ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPaRSTUVWXYZ 'abcdefg h ijklmnopq rstuvwxyz Subscribed and sworn to before me on t 's 27 THday of JULY 20 11 notary Public 'Alphabet should be in the same size and kind of type as the notice. www w T®NYA R. WHITEHEAD s Notary Public -Minnesota RATE INFORMATION .`,., My Ccxnm. a , Jan 31, 2015 V1/V1NWy ,/y�vW V' (1) Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for comparable space ......................................... (2) Maximum rate allowed by law for the above matter.... (3) Rate actually charged for the above matter BY: TITLE LEGAL COORDINATOR .$25.00 per col. inch ..........................................$25.00 per col. inch ............................ I ............. $ per col. inch by the Commission; thereafter, the Commission shall make a recommendation and may recommend conditions regarding approval to the City Council concerning the proposed permit. (c) Other building permits: The Commission shall review and make recommendations to the Council concerning the issuance of building ORDINANCE 905 permits to do any of the following in THE HERBAGE PRESERVATION a historic district or State designated COMMISSION ORDINANCE historic site: Section 1 This amendment (1) New construction — New revises Sections 2-87 to 2-91 building or new addition to an DIVISION 4 HERITAGE existing butkting PRESERVATION COMMISSION (2) Remodel — Alter, change or ("Commission") modify bulkiing or site Section 2-87 Authority for (3) Move a building — Building or Establishment stricture moved into the city. There is hereby established for the (4) Excavation — Dig out materials Ctty a Heritage Preservation from the ground. Commission as an independent (5) Demolition — Destroy, remove or commission to the City Council, as raze — completely tear down provided in Minnesota Statutes (d) Factors considered: The Annotated Sections 471.193 and Commission, upon receipt of the 138.51. permit application and plane, shall Section 2-88 Statement of public determine if the work to be policy and purpose performed adversely affects the The City Council hereby declares designated historic site, landmark or as a matter of public policy that the district. In detem**V whether or not protection, preservation, there is an adverse effect to the perpetuation and use of places, historic site, landmark, or district the areas, buildings, structures and Commission shall consider the other objects having a special following factors: historical, community or aesthetic (1) Whether the work will interest or value is a public necessity signi icantiy after the appearance of and is required in the interest of the the building or stricture so as, to People. The purpose of this Chapter remove the features which is to: distinguish the historic site, landmark (a) Safeguard the cultural or district as a significant cultural resources of the City by preserving resource. sites, structures, districts and (2) Whether the use of the property landmarks which reflect elements of will destroy, disturb or endanger a the City's cultural, social, economic, known or suspected arc himwlogicai political or architectural history; feature she. (b) Protect and enhance the City's (e) Standards and guidelines: The attractions to residents and visitors; Secretary of the Interior's Standards (e) Foster civic pride in the beauty for the Treatment of Historic and notable achievements of the Properties (listed below) shall be past; required basis for permit review (d) Enhance the visual and deCtons. aesthetic character, diversity and 1. The Comprehensive Plan interest of the City; and adopted by the City shall be the (e) Promote the use and authoritative guide to reviewing preservation of historic sites and permits in relation to designated landmarks for the education and historic sites, landmarks and historic general welfare of the people of the districts. City. 2. A property shall be used for its Section 2-89 Advisory body historic purpose or be placed in a All actions of the Commission shall new use that requires minimal be in the nature of recommendations change to the defining to the City Council, and said characteristics of the building and its Commission shall have no final site and environment. authority with reference to any 3. The historic character of a matters, except as the Council may property shall be retained and lawfully delegate authority to it. preserved. The removal of historic Section 2-90 Composition; materials or afteration of features Appointment; Ouallficatlons; and spaces that characterize a Terms property shall be avoided. (a) The Heritage. Preservation 4. Each property shall be Commission shall be composed of recognized as a physical record of its seven (7) members appointed by the time, piece, and use. Changes that City Council, who shall be residents create a false sense of historical of the City, and shall be selected to development, such as adding assure that the Commission is conjectural features or architectural representative of the various areas elements from other buildings, shall of the City and responsive to the not be undertaken. needs of the people. 5. Most properties change over (b) Commission membership shall time; those changes that have be drawn from persons with acquired historic significance In their demonstrated interest and/or own right shall be retained and expertise in historic preservation. If preserved• available in the community, at least 8. Distinctive features, finishes, two members of the Commission and construction techniques or shall be heritage preservation- examples of craftamen>ship, that related professionals.-. (*4 the chafactartze a historic Pro t ow professions of history, architecture, be preserved. architectural history, archeology, 7. Deteriorated historic features planning, real estate, design, shall be repaired rather than building trades, landscape replaced. Where the severity of architecture, or law). A member of deterioration requires replacement of the Maplewood Heritage a distinctive feature, the new feature Preservation Commission is required shall match the old in design, color, to be a representative to the Ramsey texture, and other visual quaNties County Historical Society, The City and, where possible, materials. sW per W title ffAr4btip0*v#+4hs Replacement of t AOV featurua G?MF*#kn4t& ty The members of the Heritage documentary, physical, Qr Pictorial Preservation, Commission shall evidence. serve staggered terms. All 6• Chemical or physical appointments shall be assigned by treatments, such as sandblasting, the city council for a tens of three that cause damage to historic years, materials shag not be used. The Section 2-91 Officers Generally surface cleaning of structures, if The chairperson and vice- appropriate, shall be undertaken chairperson of the Commission shall using the gentlest means possible. be elected by the Commission at the 9. Significant archeological first meeting in May of each year resources affected by a project shag from among the members of the be protected and preserved. If such Commission. The Chairperson shag resources must be disturbed, be responsible for calling and mitigation measures shall be presiding over all meetings and shag undertaken. be entitled to an equal vote with 10. New additions, exterior other members of the Commission. If alterations, or related new the Chairperson is unable to attend a construction shall not destroy historic meeting, the vice -chairperson shall materials that characterize the conduct the meeting. property. The 'new W0tk shag %6 Section 2-92 Designation of differentiated from the old and shag historic aftse and landmarks be compatible with the massing, (a) Procedures: The City Council, size, scale, and architectural upon the request of the Commission, features to protect the historic may by resolution designate an integrity of the property and its historic site, landmark, or district. environment. Prior to such designation, the city 11. New addftions and adjacent Or council shall hold a public hearing, related new construction shag be notice of which shall be published at undertaken in such a manner that it least ten (10) days prior to the date removed in the future, the essential of fhe hearing. Notice of the hearing form and integrity of the historic -shall also be mailed to all owners of Property and Its environment would Property which is proposed to be be unimpaired. designated as an historic site, M Appeals: Any Party aggrieved by landmark 'or district and to all a decision of .the Commission shag Prop" owners within five hundred within tent (10) days of the (500) feet of the boundary of the Commission's ac1kh rec o mnerx tit area to be designated. Every denying the issuance of a building nomination shall be forwarded to the permit within a historic district have a Minnesota Historical Society for right to appeal such decision to the review and comment within sixty (60) City Council. The Commission in days of the Commission's request. recommending denial of a building (b) Eligibility criteria: In considering peril shall advise the applicant of the designation of any area, site, his/her right to appeal to the City place, district, building or structure in Council. The aggrieved party shag the city as an historic site, landmark, file with the Building Official a written or district the Commission shall notice requesting Council review of consider the following factors with the action taken by the Commission. respad to etlgbfRty: Section 2-94 Maintenance of (1) Its character, Interest or value as records and documents Pan of the history or cultural heritage The Commission shall conduct a of the Cfty, the State or the United continuing survey; of cultural Stags; resources in the -City which the (2) its association with persons or Commission has reason to believe events that have made a significant are or will be eligible for designation contribution to the cultural heritage of as historic Sites, landmarks or the City; districts. The Commission shall also (3) Its potential to yield information Prepare and maintain a important in history or prehistory; Comprehensw map and survey (4) Its embodiment of distinguishing (a) Register of Historic Sites and characteristics of architectural type Landmarks: The City shag maintain a or style or elements of design, detail register of historic sites and materials or craftsmanship; and landmarks. (5) Its unique k)cation or singular (b) Repository for Documents: The Physical appearance representing office of the Building Official Is an established or familiar visual designated as the repository for an feature of a neighborhood or sees, surveys, reports, programs, community of the city. and of historic sites and Section 2-93 Alterations to d� landmarks, sites or districts; Section 2-95 Violation review It shall be a misdemeanor to alter, (a) Review and recommendations disturb, deface or materially change geherally; The Commission shall the appearance or use of. a review and make recommendations designated historic aft, teutdritark, or to the Council crorxreming proposed district without a permit. alterations to -an historic site, This ordinance shall take effect Wdrnark or district. after pubgsMng in the ofhciai . "(6) L.snd ' ifbe PGM*- Every " -Tt* application for a land use permit Council approved this ordinance on which may result in the akeretion of a Jutyl l , 2011. designated bWoria a#*, Pik or (Review: July 27, 2011) district in the f;`gy &W be err d _ Agenda Item H1 MEMORANDUM TO: James Antonen, City Manager FROM: David Fisher, Building Official Chuck Ahl, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Heritage Preservation Commission Ordinance Amendments — Consider Approval of the First Reading DATE: June 20, 2011, for the June 27, 2011, City Council Meeting INTRODUCTION The Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) Ordinance Amendments are being considered tonight for approval. This is the first reading. The purpose of these amendments is to clarify the criteria for reviewing applications of historical sites, landmarks and buildings. The goal is to obtain approval from the city council and resubmit the ordinance to the Minnesota State Historical Preservation Society Office (MSHPSO) for Certified Local Government Status (CLGS). BACKGROUND Over the past two years the HPC has been reviewing the HPC Ordinance so the city can achieve CLGS. The purpose of achieving CLGS is to strengthen existing local preservation programs and promote the development of new programs. Cities that have CLGS are eligible to apply annually for grants administered through the State Historical Preservation Society from a designated federal pass -through allocation. The current HPC Ordinance was adopted by the city council on June 28, 2010. The HPC was established as an independent advisory commission to the city council. The HPC Ordinance was adopted to engage the city in a comprehensive program of historic preservation and promote the use and conservation of historic properties for the education, inspiration, pleasure and enrichment of the community. DISCUSSION The HPC Ordinance needs to be amended for the second time. The updated HPC Ordinance was submitted to the MSHPO in December of 2010. On February 8, 2011, the MSHPO replied to the submittal and found some items that were overlooked in the previous HPC Ordinance amendment. The HPC Ordinance has been amended with the recommendations from the MSHPO. In Section 2-90(a) the word "Preservation" was added. In Section 2-93(e) 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,and11 language was added to clarify the standards and guidelines that are used when reviewing historic sites, properties or project permits. RECOMMENDATIONS Approve the first reading of the Heritage Preservation Commission Ordinance amendments. P:\com-dev\HPC\ memo first reading June 27, 2011 CCmeeting Attachment: 1. Amendment Ordinance 905 Heritage Preservation Commission Ordinance AMENDMENT ORDINANCE 905 THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION ORDINANCE Section 1 This amendment revises Sections 2-87 to 2-91 DIVISION 4 HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION ("Commission") Section 2-87 Authority for Establishment There is hereby established for the City a Heritage Preservation Commission as an independent commission to the City Council, as provided in Minnesota Statutes Annotated Sections 471.193 and 138.51. Section 2-88 Statement of public policy and purpose The City Council hereby declares as a matter of public policy that the protection, preservation, perpetuation and use of places, areas, buildings, structures and other objects having a special historical, community or aesthetic interest or value is a public necessity and is required in the interest of the people. The purpose of this Chapter is to: (a) Safeguard the cultural resources of the City by preserving sites, structures, districts and landmarks which reflect elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history; (b) Protect and enhance the City's attractions to residents and visitors; (c) Foster civic pride in the beauty and notable achievements of the past; (d) Enhance the visual and aesthetic character, diversity and interest of the City; and (e) Promote the use and preservation of historic sites and landmarks for the education and general welfare of the people of the City. Section 2-89 Advisory body All actions of the Commission shall be in the nature of recommendations to the City Council, and said Commission shall have no final authority with reference to any matters, except as the Council may lawfully delegate authority to it. Section 2-90 Composition; Appointment; Qualifications; Terms (a) The Heritage Preservation Commission shall be composed of seven (7) members appointed by the City Council, who shall be residents of the City, and shall be selected to assure that the Commission is representative of the various areas of the City and responsive to the needs of the people. Commission membership shall be drawn from persons with demonstrated interest and/or expertise in historic preservation. If available in the community, at least two members of the Commission shall be heritage preservation -related professionals (e.g. the professions of history, architecture, architectural history, archeology, planning, real estate, design, building trades, landscape architecture, or law). A member of the Maplewood Heritage Preservation Commission is required to be a representative to the Ramsey County Historical Society. The City shall pay for the membership of the Commission or designee. (c) The members of the Heritage Preservation Commission shall serve staggered terms. All appointments shall be assigned by the city council for a term of three years. Section 2-91 Officers Generally The chairperson and vice -chairperson of the Commission shall be elected by the Commission at the first meeting in jaRuary May of each year from among the members of the Commission. The Chairperson shall be responsible for calling and presiding over all meetings and shall be entitled to an equal vote with other members of the Commission. If the Chairperson is unable to attend a meeting, the vice -chairperson shall conduct the meeting. Section 2-92 Designation of historic sites and landmarks (a) Procedures: The City Council, upon the request of the Commission, may by resolution designate an historic site, landmark, or district. Prior to such designation, the city council shall hold a public hearing, notice of which shall be published at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the hearing. Notice of the hearing shall also be mailed to all owners of property which is proposed to be designated as an historic site, landmark or district and to all property owners within five hundred (500) feet of the boundary of the area to be designated. Every nomination shall be forwarded to the Minnesota Historical Society for review and comment within sixty (60) days of the Commission's request. (b) Eligibility criteria: In considering the designation of any area, site, place, district, building or structure in the city as an historic site, landmark, or district the Commission shall consider the following factors with respect to eligibility: (1) Its character, interest or value as part of the history or cultural heritage of the City, the State or the United States; (2) Its association with persons or events that have made a significant contribution to the cultural heritage of the City; (3) Its potential to yield information important in history or prehistory; (4) Its embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of architectural type or style, or elements of design, detail materials or craftsmanship; and (5) Its unique location or singular physical appearance representing an established or familiar visual feature of a neighborhood or community of the City. Section 2-93 Alterations to landmarks, sites or districts; review (a) Review and recommendations generally: The Commission shall review and make recommendations to the Council concerning proposed alterations to an historic site, landmark or district. (b) Land use permit: Every application for a land use permit which may result in the alteration of a designated historic site, landmark or district in the City shall be reviewed by the Commission; thereafter, the Commission shall make a recommendation and may recommend conditions regarding approval to the City Council concerning the proposed permit. (c) Other building permits: The Commission shall review and make recommendations to the Council concerning the issuance of building permits to do any of the following in a historic district or State designated historic site: (1) New construction — New building or new addition to an existing building (2) Remodel — Alter, change or modify building or site (3) Move a building — Building or structure moved into the city. (4) Excavation — Dig out materials from the ground. (5) Demolition — Destroy, remove or raze — completely tear down (d) Factors considered: The Commission, upon receipt of the permit application and plans, shall determine if the work to be performed adversely affects the designated historic site, landmark or district. In determining whether or not there is an adverse effect to the historic site, landmark, or district the Commission shall consider the following factors: (1) Whether the work will significantly alter the appearance of the building or structure so as to remove the features which distinguish the historic site, landmark or district as a significant cultural resource. (2) Whether the use of the property will destroy, disturb or endanger a known or suspected archaeological feature site. (e) Standards and guidelines: The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (listed below) shall be required basis for permit review decisions. 1. The Comprehensive Plan adopted by the City shall be the authoritative guide to reviewing permits in relation to designated historic sites, landmarks and historic districts. 2. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. 3. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. 4. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. 5. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 6. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanshi that characterize a historic property shall be preserved. 7. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. 8. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. 9. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. 10. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. 11. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic Property and its environment would be unimpaired. (f) Appeals: Any party aggrieved by a decision of the Commission shall within ten (10) days of the Commission's action recommending denying the issuance of a building permit within a historic district have a right to appeal such decision to the City Council. The Commission in recommending denial of a building permit shall advise the applicant of his/her right to appeal to the City Council. The aggrieved party shall file with the Building Official a written notice requesting Council review of the action taken by the Commission. Section 2-94 Maintenance of records and documents The Commission shall conduct a continuing survey of cultural resources in the City which the Commission has reason to believe are or will be eligible for designation as historic sites, landmarks or districts. The Commission shall also prepare and maintain a Comprehensive map and survey. (a) Register of Historic Sites and Landmarks: The City shall maintain a register of historic sites and landmarks. (b) Repository for Documents: The office of the Building Official is designated as the repository for all studies, surveys, reports, programs, and designations of historic sites and landmarks. Section 2-95 Violation It shall be a misdemeanor to alter, disturb, deface or materially change the appearance or use of a designated historic site, landmark, or district without a permit. This Heritage Preservation Commission recommended approval of this ordinance. This ordinance shall take effect after publishing in the official newspaper. The Maplewood City Council approved this ordinance. Will Rossbach, Mayor Attest: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk J. Agenda Item E2 For each residential site the fee for a permit is as may be imposed, set, established and fixed by the City Council, by resolution, from time to time. Sec. 10-486. Term. The permit period under this section shall expire one (1) year from the date the permit is issued. Sec. 10-487. Revocation. The city manager may revoke any permit issued under this ordinance if the person holding the permit refuses or fails to comply with this ordinance, with any regulations promulgated by the city council pursuant to this ordinance, or with any state or local law governing cruelty to animals or the keeping of animals. Any person whose permit is revoked shall, within ten (10) days thereafter, humanely dispose of all chickens being owned, kept or harbored by such person, and no part of the permit fee shall be refunded. Seconded by Councilmember Nephew Ayes — Mayor Rossbach, Councilmembers Koppen, Llanas, Nephew Nays — Councilmember Juenemann The motion passed. Couniclmember Koppen moved to set the Chicken Permit fee of $75 for initial application and $50 for renewals. Seconded by Mayor Rossbach Ayes — Mayor Rossbach, Councilmembers Koppen, Llanas, Nephew Nays — Councilmember Juenemann The motion passed. 3. Heritage Preservation Ordinance Amendments — Consider Approval of the Second Reading Councilmember Nephew moved to approve the Second Reading of the Heritage Preservation Ordinance Amendments. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes — All The motion passed. NEW BUSINESS Conditional Use Permit / Parking Lot Setback Violation, Merit Chevrolet, 2695 Brookview Drive Assistant City Manager Ahl presented the report informing the council that Merit Chevrolet has agreed to all of the changes requested by staff that brings them into compliance of the conditional use permit. 2. Consider Resolution Opposing County -Wide Taxes to Support Stadium Proposal Councilmember Nephew moved to approve the Resolution Opposing County -Wide Taxes to Support Stadium Proposal as submitted. July 11, 2011 City Council Meeting Minutes 15 Sec. 2-301. -Authority for establishment. There is hereby established for the city a heritage preservation commission as an independent commission to the city council, as provided in Minn. Stats. §§ 471.193 and 138.51. (Ord. No. 905, § 1, 6-28-2010; Ord. No. 905(Rev.), § 1(2-87), 7-11-2011) Sec. 2-302. - Statement of public policy and purpose. The city council hereby declares as a matter of public policy that the protection, preservation, perpetuation and use of places, areas, buildings, structures and other objects having a special historical, community or aesthetic interest or value is a public necessity and is required in the interest of the people. The purpose of this division is to: (1) Safeguard the cultural resources of the city by preserving sites, structures, districts and landmarks which reflect elements of the city's cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history; (2) Protect and enhance the city's attractions to residents and visitors; (3) Foster civic pride in the beauty and notable achievements of the past; (4) Enhance the visual and aesthetic character, diversity and interest of the city; and (5) Promote the use and preservation of historic sites and landmarks for the education and general welfare of the people of the city. (Ord. No. 905, § 1, 6-28-2010; Ord. No. 905(Rev.), § 1(2-88), 7-11-2011) Sec. 2-303. - Advisory body. All actions of the commission shall be in the nature of recommendations to the city council, and said commission shall have no final authority with reference to any matters, except as the council may lawfully delegate authority to it. (Ord. No. 905, § 1, 6-28-2010; Ord. No. 905(Rev.), § 1(2-89), 7-11-2011) Sec. 2-304. - Composition; appointment; qualifications; terms. (a) The heritage preservation commission shall be composed of seven members appointed by the city council, who shall be residents of the city, and shall be selected to assure that the commission is representative of the various areas of the city and responsive to the needs of the people. (b) Commission membership shall be drawn from persons with demonstrated interest and/or expertise in historic preservation. If available in the community, at least two members of the commission shall be heritage preservation -related professionals (e.g., the professions of history, architecture, architectural history, archeology, planning, real estate, design, building trades, landscape architecture, or law). A member of the Maplewood Heritage Preservation Commission is required to be a representative to the Ramsey County Historical Society. The city shall pay for the membership of the commission or designee. (c) The members of the heritage preservation commission shall serve staggered terms. All appointments shall be assigned by the city council for a term of three years. (Ord. No. 905, § 1, 6-28-2010; Ord. No. 905(Rev.), § 1(2-90), 7-11-2011) Sec. 2-305. - Officers; generally. The chairperson and vice -chairperson of the commission shall be elected by the commission at the first meeting in May of each year from among the members of the commission. The chairperson shall be responsible for calling and presiding over all meetings and shall be entitled to an equal vote with other members of the commission. If the chairperson is unable to attend a meeting, the vice -chairperson shall conduct the meeting. (Ord. No. 905, § 1, 6-28-2010; Ord. No. 905(Rev.), § 1(2-91), 7-11-2011) Sec. 2-306. - Designation of historic sites and landmarks. (a) Procedures. The city council, upon the request of the commission, may by resolution designate an historic site, landmark, or district. Prior to such designation, the city council shall hold a public hearing, notice of which shall be published at least ten days prior to the date of the hearing. Notice of the hearing shall also be mailed to all owners of property which is proposed to be designated as an historic site, landmark or district and to all property owners within 500 feet of the boundary of the area to be designated. Every nomination shall be forwarded to the Minnesota Historical Society for review and comment within 60 days of the commission's request. (b) Eligibility criteria. In considering the designation of any area, site, place, district, building or structure in the city as an historic site, landmark, or district, the commission shall consider the following factors with respect to eligibility: (1) Its character, interest or value as part of the history or cultural heritage of the city, the state or the United States; (2) Its association with persons or events that have made a significant contribution to the cultural heritage of the city; (3) Its potential to yield information important in history or prehistory; (4) Its embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of architectural type or style, or elements of design, detail materials or craftsmanship; and (5) Its unique location or singular physical appearance representing an established or familiar visual feature of a neighborhood or community of the city. (Ord. No. 905, § 1, 6-28-2010; Ord. No. 905(Rev.), § 1(2-92), 7-11-2011) Sec. 2-307. - Alterations to landmarks, sites or districts; review. (a) Review and recommendations generally. The commission shall review and make recommendations to the council concerning proposed alterations to an historic site, landmark or district. (b) Land use permit. Every application for a land use permit which may result in the alteration of a designated historic site, landmark or district in the city shall be reviewed by the commission; thereafter, the commission shall make a recommendation and may recommend conditions regarding approval to the city council concerning the proposed permit. (c) Other building permits. The commission shall review and make recommendations to the council concerning the issuance of building permits to do any of the following in a historic district or state designated historic site: (1) New construction - New building or new addition to an existing building. (2) Remodel - Alter, change or modify building or site. (3) Move a building - Building or structure moved into the city. (4) Excavation - Dig out materials from the ground. (5) Demolition - Destroy, remove or raze - completely tear down. (d) Factors considered. The commission, upon receipt of the permit application and plans, shall determine if the work to be performed adversely affects the designated historic site, landmark or district. In determining whether or not there is an adverse effect to the historic site, landmark, or district the commission shall consider the following factors: (1) Whether the work will significantly alter the appearance of the building or structure so as to remove the features which distinguish the historic site, landmark or district as a significant cultural resource. (2) Whether the use of the property will destroy, disturb or endanger a known or suspected archaeological feature site. (e) Standards and guidelines. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (listed below) shall be required basis for permit review decisions: (1) The comprehensive plan adopted by the city shall be the authoritative guide to reviewing permits in relation to designated historic sites, landmarks and historic districts. (2) A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. (3) The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. (4) Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. (5) Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. (6) Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved. (7) Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. (8) Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. (9) Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. (10) New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. (11) New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. (f) Appeals. Any party aggrieved by a decision of the commission shall within ten days of the commission's action recommending denying the issuance of a building permit within a historic district have a right to appeal such decision to the city council. The commission in recommending denial of a building permit shall advise the applicant of his/her right to appeal to the city council. The aggrieved party shall file with the building official a written notice requesting council review of the action taken by the commission. (Ord. No. 905, § 1, 6-28-2010; Ord. No. 905(Rev.), § 1(2-93), 7-11-2011) Sec. 2-308. - Maintenance of records and documents. The commission shall conduct a continuing survey of cultural resources in the city which the commission has reason to believe are or will be eligible for designation as historic sites, landmarks or districts. The commission shall also prepare and maintain a comprehensive map and survey. (1) Register of historic sites and landmarks. The city shall maintain a register of historic sites and landmarks. (2) Repository for documents. The office of the building official is designated as the repository for all studies, surveys, reports, programs, and designations of historic sites and landmarks. (Ord. No. 905, § 1, 6-28-2010; Ord. No. 905(Rev.), § 1(2-94), 7-11-2011) Sec. 2-309. - Violation. It shall be a misdemeanor to alter, disturb, deface or materially change the appearance or use of a designated historic site, landmark, or district without a permit. (Ord. No. 905, § 1, 6-28-2010; Ord. No. 905(Rev.), § 1(2-95), 7-11-2011) Sec. 2-310. - Reserved. United States Department of the Interior NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 1849 C Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20240 H36(2256) Mr. Michael Loop i'', 2 2 2012 Minnesota Historical Society 'r' 345 Kellogg Boulevard West Saint Paul, MN 55102-1906 Dear Mr, Koop: Thank you for forwarding the necessary documentation concerning the City of Maplewood's application for participation in the Certified Local Government (CLG) Program. I have reviewed your submission and am pleased to concur in your recommendation that Maplewood be certified under the provision of Section 101(c) of the National Historic Preservation Act. The date of certification will be recorded as the date of this letter. We are also providing a copy of this letter to the City of Maplewood. If you have any questions about this letter, please feel free to contact me by phone at 202-354-2062, or by email at megan_brown@nps.gov. Sincerely, Megan . Brown Certified Local Government Program Coordinator cc: David Fisher, City of Maplewood HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION 2020 ANNUAL REPORT Purpose The Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) is charged with preserving significant historic resources in Maplewood. It pursues this by recommending to City Council sites to designate as historic landmarks and by providing design review for designated sites. ftke .-- - r *' 1 The HPC worked with City staff to create history videos MaplewoodRr _ Commissioners hosted staff from St. Paul Water McCarron VVTP Project: Comi de rat ions The HPC created a sign for Lookout Park HPC - (left to right) Steve Lukin, Jason DeMoe, John Gaspar, Bob Cardinal, Richard Currie, Margaret Fett, and City Council liasion Nikki Villavicencios Preservation Programs National Register of Historic Places Ramsey County Poor Farm Barn Owner: Ramsey County Maplewood Heritage Landmarks Bruentrup Heritage Farm Owner: City of Maplewood Gladstone Savanna Neighborhood Preserve Owner: City of Maplewood Century Homes There are 136 homes over 100 years old in Maplewood. Bruentrup Heritage Farm Maplewood M 1 N 11 E 5 0 1 A 2020 Review and Accomplishments 1. Maintained MN Certified Local Government (CLG) status by meeting the requirements listed in the MN CLG Procedures Manual. 2. 2018 Maplewood Heritage Award. Prepared nominations and recommended Ronald Cockriel receive the 2018 Maplewood Heritage Award. 3. 2019 Maplewood Heritage Award. Prepared nominations and recommended Gary Bastian receive the 2019 Maplewood Heritage Award. 4. Met with representatives from Ramsey County regarding renovations and ramp demolition of exterior stairway of the Poor Farm Barn S. Gladstone Savanna Event. Partnered with the Parks Department and Maplewood Area Historical Society on A Trip Through Time, the August 2nd event celebrating Gladstone Savanna. 6. Lookout Park Signage. Installed interpretive sign honoring Lookout Park - the smallest park in the City of Maplewood. 7. Hazelwood Fire Station. Gathered historic photos and information on Hazelwood Fire Station 8. Reviewed following projects: a. Historical Resources Chapter of 2040 Comprehensive Plan. b. Preliminary Section 106 information for Gold Line Bus Rapid Transit. 9. Recognized the following buildings that were demolished in 2019: a. 190S Radatz Avenue East, house b. 1844 PHALEN PL N, house C. 2780 MAPLEWOOD DR N, Morries Mercedes Benz d. 497 CENTURY AVE N, house fire e. 1448 COUNTY ROAD C E, First Evangelical Free Church, building f. 671 FERNDALE ST N, breezeway g. 2732 MAPLEWOOD DR N, Don't Paint and Collision Center 10. Commissioner Boulay and Leon Axtman represented the commission at meetings discussing the Rush Line Bus Rapid Transit stations. 11. Documented oral history of the Hazelwood Fire Station with an in-depth interview with Steve Lukin http://vod.maplewoodmn.gov/CablecastPublicSite/show/97S?channel=1 12. Review St. Paul Regional Water Services McCarron Plant renovation 13. Reviewed Rush Line 1868 Rail Bed as part of the Section 106 Review of the project. Proposed Historical Documentation Efforts: St. Paul Regional Water Services v •IL ' {'r 1 rw Coffee Table Book -- Photos and writing covering the history of the facility (copies potentially provided to local libraries) Video Documentary -- Interviews with former/current staff, photos, Ken Burns style narration Opportunities to partner with local historical groups Possible partnership with professional firms (corporate historians, etc.) At 61 JLI J,W 7P I 2020 HPC Commission Goals Preservation and Planning 1. Complete work on local designation for Ramsey County Cemetery. 2. Prepare application and designate one new historic site. 3. Submit grant and begin additional survey work on historic sites and structures. Research and Documentation 4. Document history of important buildings in the Gladstone Area. 5. Take photos of buildings that are likely to be removed. Research and Documentation 6. Make recommendation for 2021 Heritage Award. 7. Support Maplewood Communications team with historic information as needed for videos. 8. Partner with Maplewood Area Historical Society to develop an auto tour or walking tour of significant historic sites. 9. Put out a call for photos on various topics or time periods. n L ' The historic LS&M Rail Corridor traveled within the right-of-way that was later purchased by Ramsey County for future use and is currently in use as the Bruce Vento Trail. The Corridor is listed in the National Register of Historic Places, as a first and direct rail connection between St. Paul and Duluth. The proposed Rush Line BRT Project would share the Ramsey County rail right-of-way with the Bruce Vento Trail. Photo courtesy of the Maplewood Historical Society Wakefield Park -- 1960s s � * ` _.ml ; Purpose The Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) is charged with preserving significant historic re- sources in Maplewood. It pursues this by recom- mending to City Council sites to designate as his- toric landmarks and by providing design review for designated sites. Ramsey County Poor Farm 2020 White Bear Ave, Maplewood, MN Minnesota's first poor farm was founded by pioneer landholders in Ramsey County in 1854, making it one of the first residential facilities in Minnesota Territory. Accomplishments: Two new members joined Commission Both are retired history teachers whose credentials fill the needs of our History member requirement. Recruitment Actively recruiting for someone from a diverse community or who has one of the profes- sional credentials required by SHPO. Training The Commission Chair, Commission member, and Staff Liaison attended Preserve MN Con- ference in Duluth, September 2022. 106 Reviews: St. Paul Regional Water Service plant upgrade -- The historically significant structure couldn't be saved. As a way to commemorate the site, there are plans for a coffee table book and video documentary. The American Coop at Lake Phalen (1875 East Shore Drive North), a Senior Housing development. No historic properties nor recorded archeological sites were found within the area of potential effect. Awards: While the Commission continued to meet virtually during the pan- demic and nominate and award people for the annual Maplewood Heritage Award, we were not able to have an official in -person cere- mony. We were able to recognize those people at an April City Coun- cil Meeting. Awardees include: 2019: Gary Bastion for his efforts to preserve land and open space as a former mayor. His work led to the dedication of the Gladstone Savanah, which housed the old rail road shops. 2020: Janice Quick for her efforts to collect and share Maplewood's history, which include books, magazine contributions, lectures and walking tours. 2021: Pete Boulay for his on -going volunteerism to the commission and his efforts to collect and share Maplewood's history, which include books, magazine contributions, and lectures. Documenting Properties Documented with photos and drone video the decommissioned Londin Fire Station (2501 Londin Ln E.) before its demolition. Documented with photos and drone video Moose Lodge (1946 English St) prior to the City preparing to put it on the market. Documented with photos and drone video the old Menards (2280 Maplewood Dr E,) before demolition to re -build a new Menards on the site. Documented with photos and drone video the Gladstone House (1373 Frost Ave) prior to its tentative sale. Established Preservation Programs National Register of Historic Places Ramsey County Poor Farm Barn Owner: Ramsey County Maplewood Heritage Locally Designated Landmarks Bruentrup Heritage Farm Owner: City of Maplewood Gladstone Savanna Neighborhood Preserve Owner: City of Maplewood Century Homes More than 130 homes over 100 years old The Bruentrup Heritage farm was estab- lished in 1891. William Bruentrup married Ida Wagner and the bride's family gave them 40 acres of land along White Bear Avenue as a wedding present. They added land until it reached 175 acres. Four generations of the family have farmed there. The farmhouse was somewhat modernized in 1912. Over the years the surrounding land was be- ing developed. A large part of the Bruentrup property had been sold, including the many acres where Maplewood Mall is now located. � In 1997 the developers offered the Bruentrup family a very good price for their land. The x. , Bruentrup's offered the City of Maplewood the first chance to buy it. The City sent out a questionnaire to the citizens of Maplewood. The responses were very positive to the idea of saving the farm in that location. December 2, 2022 Sarah Beimers, Environmental Review Program Manager Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office Administration Building 50 Sherburne Avenue, 9203 St. Paul, MN 55155-1402 RE: METRO Purple Line (formerly Rush Line) Bus Rapid Transit, Ramsey County, Minnesota; 30% Plan Review, SHPO 42019-0958 Dear Ms. Beimers, The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) is writing to continue consultation for the Purple (formerly Rush) Line Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project (Project). Under delegation from FTA and as per the terms of the Project's Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), Metropolitan Council's Preservation Lead staff meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards (48 FR 44738-44739) reviewed project plans at the 30% design stage (per Stipulation VI.C.) in order to: ... recommend to FTA whether revisions are necessary to the Project's APE, whether any Project design changes may result in a change to FTA's finding of effect, whether the design requirements of Stipulation V have been met, and whether the plans incorporate commitments made to the Consulting Parties through consultation under Stipulations VI and XII. The 30% plans do not extend north beyond Beam Avenue as the Project's northern terminus is being redesigned. In March 2022, the City of White Bear Lake passed a resolution asking that the project not enter White Bear Lake; therefore, the corridor design north of Beam Avenue to the end of the corridor has been excluded from the 30% Volume A submittal due to the ongoing Route Modification Study. With the final Corridor Management Committee direction anticipated in Quarter 1 of 2023, the design advancement of the remaining corridor will occur afterwards and will be submitted in a separate 30% Volume B submittal. The 30% plans for the area north of Beam Avenue are anticipated to be submitted at the same time as the 60% plans for the corridor south of Beam Avenue, currently expected to be in Quarter 2 of 2023. Consultation will occur with consulting parties between the 30% and 60% plan development north of Beam Avenue, once available, as required by the Project MOA. The Preservations Lead's analysis, outlined in the attached report, is based on the Project's 30% Plans (Volume A) dated September 23, 2022. 30% Plan Review The Preservation Lead has reviewed the Project's 30% plans and recommend the following. • Most project changes between the 15% and 30% plans were within the same LODs at the 15% stage. There were several locations that extended beyond the LOD at the 15% plan stage; however, based on the project methodology as detailed in the 2020 archaeology report, all appear to have low potential for containing intact, significant archaeological sites due to previous residential, commercial, and/or railroad and roadway development. Therefore, no additional archaeological fieldwork is recommended. METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project, SHPO #2019-0958 30% Plan Review December 2, 2022 Page 2 of 3 • No change to the Project APE is recommended since all the changes and their potential to affect the character or use of historic properties, if any are present, are sufficiently accounted for in the previous APE boundaries. • As per Stipulation VI.C, it is recommended that the proposed Johnson Parkway Bridge meets the SOI Standards and that commitment is completed, pending the receipt of consulting parties' comments and the consideration of such comments, as per Stipulations VI; and continued review by the Preservation Lead should occur to determine if design changes warrant reinitiating consultation. • As per Stipulation VII, it is recommended that no Construction Protection Plans for Historic Properties (CPPHPs) are needed and that other means of notifying the contractor of the presence of historic properties can be used pending the receipt of consulting parties' comments and the consideration of such comments. • While the finding of effect for the project has not changed, an additional project activity was identified that will add to the adverse effect to the LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District. The planned replacement of the Bridge R0438 (McAfee Bridge) constitutes the loss of original historic fabric from the LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District. FTA should consult with consulting parties per Stipulation XII on determining if additional mitigation will be required, or if the minimization efforts in other locations, namely the Arlington Bridge crossing, make the current mitigation commitment commensurate with the effects to the historic district overall. As per the terms of Stipulation XII, the new bridge should be designed in accordance with the SOI Standards to the extent possible to minimize additional effects. Next Steps FTA and Mead & Hunt will hold a consultation meeting with your office and the parties copied below in January 2023 (date to be determined). The purpose of this meeting is to review the 30% design review memo and answer any questions from consulting parties prior to your issuing written comments. FTA requests that MnSHPO and the consulting parties copied below provide comments on the 30% design review for the proposed Project within 60 calendar days of receipt of this letter, which is January 31, 2022. If you have any questions, please contact William Wheeler at (312) 353-2639 and William.Wheeler@dot.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, Jay M. Ciavarella Director, Office of Planning and Program Development Enclosures: Technical Memorandum: 30% Plan Review (November 2022) cc (via email): William Wheeler, Federal Transit Administration Elizabeth Breiseth, Federal Transit Administration Nancy Komulainen-Dillenburg, United States Army Corps of Engineers Melissa Jenny, United States Army Corps of Engineers METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project, SHPO #2019-0958 30% Plan Review December 2, 2022 Page 3 of 3 Philip Forst, Federal Highway Administration Joe Campbell, Federal Highway Administration Lisa Elliott, Purple Line Project Office Craig Lamothe, Purple Line Project Office Melissa Lawrence, City of Gem Lake Michael Martin, City of Maplewood Maplewood Historical Society Joe Sheeran, Maplewood Heritage Preservation Commission Stephen Smith, Ramsey County Bill Dermody, City of St. Paul George Gause, St. Paul Heritage Preservation Commission Nolan Wall, City of Vadnais Heights Anne Kane, City of White Bear Lake Sara Hanson, White Bear Lake Historical Society Pat Christopherson, White Bear Lake Township () METRO Technical Memorandum: 30% Plan Review As required by the Section 106 Purple (Rush) Line Bus Rapid Transit Project Memorandum of Agreement To: William Wheeler and Jay Ciavarella, Federal Transit Administration Region 5 From: Kristen Zschomler, historian and RPA-Registered archaeologist; Christina Slattery, historian; and Valerie Reiss, historian; Mead & Hunt, Inc. — Preservation Lead 11/29/2022 0 MetmTransit METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project TABLE OF CONTENTS Listof Acronyms................................................................................................................................. iii 1. Introduction.................................................................................................................................... 4 2. Stipulation IV: FTA Review of Project Plans - Review of 30% Plans ............................................ 5 2.1. Removed Design Elements................................................................................................................6 2.2. Overall Design Advancements/Changes..........................................................................................7 2.3. Station and Area -specific Design Changes......................................................................................8 2.3.1. 14th Street Station...............................................................................................................................8 2.3.2. Mt. Airy Street Station.........................................................................................................................8 2.3.3. Olive Street Station..............................................................................................................................9 2.3.4. Cayuga Street Station.......................................................................................................................10 2.3.5. Payne Avenue Station........................................................................................................................11 2.3.6. Arcade Street Station........................................................................................................................11 2.3.7. Between the Arcade and Cook Avenue Stations...............................................................................17 2.3.8. Cook Avenue Station..........................................................................................................................17 2.3.9. Between the Cook Avenue Station and Johnson Parkway Bridge....................................................17 2.3.10. Johnson Parkway Bridge....................................................................................................................18 2.3.11. Maryland Avenue Station..................................................................................................................19 2.3.12. McAfee Bridge (Bridge R0438)..........................................................................................................20 2.3.13. Arlington Avenue Area.......................................................................................................................21 2.3.14. Pedestrian Connection to Nebraska Avenue.....................................................................................22 2.3.15. Larpenteur and Frost Avenue Stations..............................................................................................22 2.3.16. Gateway Overpass.............................................................................................................................22 2.3.17. Trail Adjustment near Weaver Elementary School............................................................................23 2.3.18. Highway 36 Station........................................................................................................................... 24 2.3.19. Harvest Park Area.............................................................................................................................. 24 2.3.20. Between County Road C and Beam Avenue......................................................................................25 3. Stipulation V: Design Requirements............................................................................................ 26 3.1. Stipulation V.A.ii: Trail Design in Phalen Park and Johnson Parkway..........................................26 3.2. Other Stipulation V.A. Design Reviews...........................................................................................26 4. Stipulation VI: Consulting Party Review of Certain Project Elements under the SOI Standards..................................................................................................................................... 27 4.1. Stipulation VI.A.i: Cayuga Street Station Area...............................................................................27 TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project 4.2. Stipulation VI.A.ii: Barriers at Forest Street Bridge........................................................................27 4.3. Stipulation VI.A.iii: Johnson Parkway Bridge Area........................................................................27 4.4. Stipulation VI.A.iv: Weaver Trail Underpass Area.........................................................................37 4.5. Stipulation VI.A.v: Dedicated Guideway and Fitch/Barclay Trail Underpass..............................37 5. Stipulation VII: Construction Protection Plan for Historic Properties (CPPHP)........................ 38 6. Stipulation Vill: Mitigation for Adverse Effects to the LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District.......................................................................................................................................... 39 7. Stipulation IX: Changes to the Area of Potential Effects (APE) ................................................. 40 8. Section X: Additional Survey and Evaluation............................................................................. 41 9. Stipulation XI: Additional Assessment of Effects and Stipulation XII: Consultation to ResolveAdditional Adverse Effects............................................................................................ 42 9.1. StPS&TF/Omaha Road Railroad Corridor Historic District............................................................42 9.2. LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District........................................................................................42 10. Recommendations.......................................................................................................................44 FIGURES Figure 1. Boundary of St PS&TF/Omaha Road Railroad Corridor Historic District in blue near the Arcade Street Ramp................................................................................................................................................................................12 Figure 2. Arcade Street Station alternative options........................................................................................................13 Figure 3. Arcade Street Station Alternative Option A......................................................................................................14 Figure 4. Arcade Street Station Alternative Option B......................................................................................................15 Figure 5. Arcade Street Station Alternative Option C......................................................................................................16 Figure 6. Proposed design for the Weaver Trail Underpass............................................................................................23 Figure 7. Plan view of proposed Purple Line BRT Bridge over Johnson Parkway...........................................................30 Figure 8. Earl Street Bridge over Phalen Boulevard, which is the precedent design for the proposed Purple Line Bridgeover Johnson Parkway..........................................................................................................................................31 Figure 9. Earl Street Bridge over Phalen Boulevard, which is the precedent design for the proposed Purple Line Bridgeover Johnson Parkway..........................................................................................................................................32 Figure 10. 1940 (left) and 2020 (right) aerial photographs of the northern segment of Johnson Parkway. Note the removal of the railroad and replacement with Phalen Parkway in the southwest quadrant (solid yellow line), removal of the triangle interchange and replacement with a four-way intersection (yellow circles), and alteration of the eastern arm of the parkway (yellow dashed line showing previous roadway versus solid yellow line representing the roadway today).............................................................................................................................33 Figure 11. Detail of Johnson Parkway, 1940 (top) and 2020 (bottom). Note the trees lining the railroad corridor (yellow dashed line) and the original railroad bridge crossing (yellow arrow) in the 1940 aerial. Based on a review of historic aerials, by 1991, all original vegetation along Johnson Parkway was removed and by 2008, all the trees along the railroad corridor were removed. The planted line of trees (see yellow arrow) first appears in the2011 aerial..................................................................................................................................................................34 TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project LIST OF ACRONYMS ADA Americans with Disabilities Act APE Area of Potential Effects BMP Best Management Practices BRT Bus Rapid Transit CPPHP Construction Protection Plan for Historic Properties Corps United States Army Corps of Engineers Council Metropolitan Council DART Design Area and Refinement Team EA Environmental Assessment FHWA Federal Highway Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration LOD Limits of Disturbance LS&M Lake Superior & Mississippi Railroad MnDOT Minnesota Department of Transportation MnDOT CRU Minnesota Department of Transportation Cultural Resources Unit MOA Memorandum of Agreement National Register National Register of Historic Places PA Programmatic Agreement PLPO Purple Line Project Office Project Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project RCRRA Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority ROW Right-of-way Section 106 Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended SHPO State Historic Preservation Office SOI Standards Secretary of the Interior's Standards St PS&TF Saint Paul, Stillwater & Taylors Falls Railroad TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project 1. INTRODUCTION This memorandum has been prepared based on the requirements of the Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project (Project) Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), signed by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), and Metropolitan Council (Council). The MOA codifies the steps by which Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (Section 106) review for the Project is to be completed as Project plans are developed by the Purple Line Project Office (PLPO). The Project's Section 106 finding of effects to historic properties (i.e., those eligible for or listed in the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) as defined at 36 CFR § 800.16(I)(1)) was based on the 15% Project plans, resulting in a finding of Adverse Effect to the Lake Superior & Mississippi (LS&M) Railroad Corridor Historic District: Saint Paul to White Bear Lake (XX-RRD-NPR001), herein referred to as the LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District; three individually eligible 1868 Alignments of the LS&M (XX- RRD-NPR002, XX-RRD-NPR003, and XX-RRD-NPR004); and the LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District: White Bear Lake to Hugo (XX-RRD-NPR005). In addition, conditions were placed on several historic properties to avoid or minimize effects to them: Lowertown Historic District (RA-SPC-4580); Saint Paul Union Depot (RA-SPC-5225 and RA-SPC-6907); Great Northern Railroad Corridor Historic District (RA- SPC-5918); Westminster Junction (RA-SPC-5618); Saint Paul, Stillwater & Taylors Falls (St PS&TF)/Omaha Road Railroad Corridor Historic District (XX-RRD-CNW001); Johnson Parkway (RA-SPC-8497 and RA- SPC-5685); Phalen Park (RA-SPC-10850); Moose Lodge 963 (RA-MWC-0134); and Madeline L. Weaver Elementary School (RA-MWC-0031). This memo includes detailed documentation of required review elements based on the Project's 30% plan status, supported as per the requirements of Stipulation III: Deliverables and Consulting Party Review Procedures. See the Purple Line Quarterly Report No. 4 for Quarter 3 (July 1 — September 30, 2022) for other stipulation updates (distributed to consulting parties on November 28, 2022). TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project 2. STIPULATION IV: FTA REVIEW OF PROJECT PLANS - REVIEW OF 30% PLANS The MOA requires the Project's Preservation Lead to review project plans at the 30%, 60%, 90%, and 100% design stages, as well as any modifications made to the 100% plans (Stipulation VI.C.) in order to: ... recommend to FTA whether revisions are necessary to the Project's APE, whether any Project design changes may result in a change to FTA's finding of effect, whether the design requirements of Stipulation V have been met, and whether the plans incorporate commitments made to the Consulting Parties through consultation under Stipulations VI and XII. Mead & Hunt, Inc. (Mead & Hunt), as Project Preservation Lead, reviewed the Project's 30% plans (attached) and compared them to the limits of disturbance (LOD) on the 15% plans, the archaeological study and survey areas, and the Project Area of Potential Effects (APE) (all previously distributed) to determine if there are changes between the 15% and 30% design that would result in the items listed above. Changes to LODs are described below and images from the archaeological survey limits are compared with the LOD at the 30% plan stage as shown on the Project Layout sheets (attached). For changes from the 15% LOD, the change is described and the 30% plan sheet number is provided in the text for reference and ease of finding, but no comparison image is provided. The results of this review are summarized here and documented below. • There are minor changes to the proposed work within the 15% LODs and/or minor changes that extend beyond the 15% LOD. Where expanded LOD boundaries were noted, RPA-registered archaeologist Kristen Zschomler compared the area with the previously reviewed and approved archaeological methodology as documented in the 2020 report by Vicki L. Twinde-Javner of the Mississippi Valley Archaeology Center, Phase IA Literature Review, Phase I Archaeological Investigations and Phase II Archaeological Investigations of 21RA82 for the Rush Line BRT Project, Ramsey County, Minnesota (2020 archaeology report). Based on an application of the established and previously reviewed methodology in that report, no areas in the expanded LOD are recommended for further archaeological work, as documented below. • No change to the Project APE is recommended since all the changes and their potential to affect the character or use of historic properties, if any are present, are sufficiently accounted for in the previous APE boundary. This includes the change from an at -grade to a grade -separated crossing at Arlington Avenue, as documented below. • The commitment for the Johnson Parkway Bridge and project elements proximate to Madeline L. Weaver Elementary School to be designed in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards (SOI Standards) to the extent feasible as per Stipulation V has been met, pending consulting party comments under Stipulations VI and continued review by the Preservation Lead as plans advance. • Recommendation that alternative methods to the use of Construction Protection Plans for Historic Properties (CPPHPs) be used. TECH MEMO: 30% SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project • While the finding of effect for the project has not changed, an additional project activity was identified that will add to the adverse effect to the LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District through the removal and replacement of Bridge R0438 (former railroad bridge now pedestrian path connecting McAfee Street to East Shore Drive [RA-SPC-11140]), a contributing element. Other effects to the historic district have been minimized, mainly through the reduction of railroad bed removal at the Arlington Avenue crossing. 2.1. Removed Design Elements • The 30% plans do not extend beyond Beam Avenue as the Project's northern termini is being redesigned. In March 2022, the City of White Bear Lake passed a resolution asking that the project not enter White Bear Lake; therefore, the corridor design north of Beam Avenue to the end of the corridor has been excluded from the 30% Volume A submittal due to the ongoing Route Modification Study. With the final Corridor Management Committee direction anticipated in Quarter 1 of 2023, the design advancement of the remaining corridor will occur afterwards and will be submitted in a separate 30% Volume B submittal. The 30% plans for the area north of Beam Avenue are anticipated to be submitted at the same time as the 60% plans for the corridor south of Beam Avenue, currently expected to be in Quarter 2 of 2023. Consultation will occur with consulting parties between the 30% and 60% plan development north of Beam Avenue, once available, as required by the Project MOA. • Robert Street — reduction of the turn radius from 6th Street to northbound Robert Street. • Fourteen retaining walls were removed from the project by refining grades of stations, bridges, and trails. o RTW-202 — Johnson Parkway Bridge Approach o RTW-206 — Maryland Avenue Station o RTW-211 — Maryland Avenue Station o RTW-236 — Gateway Trail Overpass Approach o RTW-237 — Gateway Trail Overpass Approach o RTW-240 — Weaver Elementary Area o RTW-241 — Changed to bridge wing walls over Weaver Trail o RTW-242 — Changed to bridge wing walls over Weaver Trail o RTW-243 — Changed to bridge wing walls over Weaver Trail o RTW-244 — Changed to bridge wing walls over Weaver Trail o RTW-257 — Bridge Over Highway 36 TECH MEMO: 30% SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 6 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project o RTW-280 — Trail south of Beam Avenue o RTW-282 — Trail south of Beam Avenue o RTW-284 — Trail south of Beam Avenue 2.2. Overall Design Advancements/Changes Overall advancement of elements included roadway alignments, profiles, grading limits, BMP locations (best management practice water management systems), traffic signal design, maintenance vehicle pull - offs, and right-of-way (ROW). Significant advancement of grading design occurred, including steepening of side slopes where appropriate. None of the proposed changes require a change to the Project APE and no further survey work is recommended. • Architecture o Typical platform plans are included in the 30% plans. Architecture plans for Maplewood Mall Transit Center and station platforms/shelters will be included in the 60% submittal. Fencing is shown in the construction plans. Further proposed landscape/urban design elements will be shown in the 60% plans. • Civil o Civil notes, typical sections, and construction plan and profile sheets are included in the 30% submittal that show proposed guideway, roadway, trail, sidewalk, platforms, and alignment and profile geometry. The 60% plans will include civil details, alignment plans and tabulations, paving and jointing, superelevation, intersection details, grading, and cross sections. • Drainage o Stormwater BMP locations are shown in the 30% construction plans. Drainage plans showing proposed storm structures and pipes will be included in the 60% plans. • Lighting o Proposed light pole locations are shown in the 30% construction plans. Lighting plans will be included in the 60% submittal. • Signing and striping o Signing and striping is not included in the 30% submittal. The construction plans include traffic directional arrows, and the traffic signal plans show proposed striping at signalized intersections. Signing and striping plans will be included in the 60% submittal. • Soil erosion and sediment control o Soil erosion and sediment control plans will be part of the 90% submittal. TECH MEMO: 30% SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 7 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project • Structural o Bridge plans are included at the end of the 30% plan set for reference. Preliminary bridge plans were submitted separately to MnDOT for review. A retaining walls table is included in the 30% plans and retaining wall locations are shown in the construction plans. • Systems o Fiber network overview, block diagrams, and select details have been included in the 30% plans. More detailed systems plans that include further systemwide details, station communications details, and proposed conduits will be included in the 60% submittal. • Traffic signals o Traffic signal plans are included in the 30% submittal that show proposed signal system layouts. Further detail will be included in the 60% plans. • Utilities o The 30% plans include existing utility plans. Proposed utilities will be shown in the 60% plans. 2.3. Station and Area -specific Design Changes 2.3.1. 14th Street Station The 30% plans include sidewalk improvements of 6-8 feet wider than shown in the 15% plans. The 30% plans show a walk -behind platform, curb and sidewalk replacement for the entire block, removal of parking spaces in adjacent lot, and new sidewalks (Plan Sheet 79). The wider LOD was included in the archaeology study area; therefore, no additional archaeological work is recommended. 2.3.2. Mt. Airy Street Station A raised median was incorporated between platforms to prevent vehicles from passing buses stopped at BRT platforms. This treatment is like the proposed treatment on B Line and the decision was made through the Design Area and Refinement Team (DART). Bicycle lanes and the retaining pond seen in the 15% plans have been removed. The limits of existing roadway reconstruction were extended to the north (Plan Sheet 82). There is a small area not previously included in the archaeological study area boundaries for new sidewalks (see red circle on layout sheet below); however, the area is located within areas of previous disturbance from roadway and residential development. According to the 2020 archaeology report, the area at the proposed Mt. Airy Street Station "will generally use existing roadway and work is expected to be within the road ROW; station area heavily disturbed, ROW heavily disturbed; no survey recommended (page 76)." Therefore, the expanded LOD are unlikely to contain intact, significant archaeological deposits and no additional fieldwork is recommended. TECH MEMO: 30% SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 8 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project Archaeology study area map, page 2 2.3.3. Olive Street Station Project Layout Sheet 6 - - _4 15 alb yryno✓l i I I -NIX The southbound station platform was shifted approximately 30 feet further south. The City of Saint Paul requested the platform be shifted to allow for the trail crossing of Health Partners Drive to mimic what exists today. In addition, wider pedestrian ramps were included, construction limits on the south side of Phalen Boulevard were extended to the back of the parking lot curb, and a maintenance vehicle pull -off pad was added (Plan Sheets 86-87). There is a very small area not previously included in the archaeological study area boundaries (see red circle on layout sheet below). The 2020 archaeology report stated that along Phalen Boulevard the Project "will generally use existing roadway to Arcade, then RCRRA ROW to Johnson Parkway; station area heavily disturbed, ROW heavily disturbed; no survey recommended (page 77)." The small additional area within the 30% LOD is located within areas of previous disturbance from roadway and residential development. It is unlikely to contain intact, significant archaeological deposits and no additional archaeological fieldwork is recommended. TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 9 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project Archaeology study area map, page 3 Olive Street 1 N 2.3.4. Cayuga Street Station Project Layout Sheet 8 � F { The northbound station was changed from a far side condition to a near side condition. The City of Saint Paul requested this change to eliminate a long second crosswalk on the east side of Cayuga Street and Phalen Boulevard. The City was concerned the signal timing required for pedestrians would significantly impact the existing traffic volumes. The decision was made through the DART. The southbound station shifted farther away from the intersection to allow crosswalks to work as they do today. In addition, retaining wall limits were refined and a maintenance vehicle pull -off was added (Plan Sheets 89-90). There is a small area not previously included in the archaeological study area boundaries (see red circle on layout sheet below). According to the 2020 archaeology report "station areas heavily disturbed; area along Payne Avenue heavily disturbed. Visual reconnaissance indicates locations of nine former railroad buildings at Cayuga Street; East St. Paul Station; E. St. Paul Roundhouse; and CStPM&O Roundhouse have been heavily disturbed by construction of Payne Avenue, modern buildings and installation of utilities. Low potential for intact deposits. No reconsideration per the Supplement to the [National Register Multiple Property Documentation Form] for Railroads in Minnesota, 1861-1956 (draft) warranted (Page 77)." The small additional area within the 30% LOD is located within areas of previous disturbance from roadway and residential development. It is unlikely to contain intact, significant archaeological deposits and no additional archaeological fieldwork is recommended. TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 10 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project Archaeology study area map, page 3 Project Layout Sheet 10 3yuga Streetown- - 2.3.5. Payne Avenue Station The extents of trail reconstruction were extended to Edgerton for complete street reconstruction (Sheet 93). The left -turn lane for westbound Phalen Boulevard to southbound Payne Avenue was shortened to eliminate work on the existing bridge (Plan Sheet 94). In addition, the limits of full reconstruction versus mill and overlay were refined, bump outs and a maintenance vehicle pull -off pad were added, and BMP locations removed (Plan Sheets 93-94). All changes are within the previous LOD and archaeological survey area; therefore, no further archaeological work is recommended. 2.3.6. Arcade Street Station Three locations are now under consideration by the DART for the Arcade Street Station (see Figure 1 through Figure 5). Alternative location options were requested to mitigate concern of pedestrians/cyclists using the dedicated guideway ramp to access the Bruce Vento Trail from Arcade Street, and concern about winter maintenance of the grade of the ramp connection. Option A is the same proposed station location in the 15% Plans and includes minor realignment of the Phalen Boulevard ramp and pedestrian connections to the Bruce Vento Trail (Figure 3). Option B is in the open area north of Phalen Boulevard, west of Arcade Street, and east and south of Neid Lane (Figure 4). Option C is at Wells Street on the north side of Phalen Boulevard (Figure 5). All three options are located within the Project APE; therefore, no further architecture/history survey work is needed. The Options B and C are slightly outside of the LOD on the 15% plans. The 2020 archaeology report stated that along Phalen Boulevard, the Project "will generally use existing roadway to Arcade, then RCRRA ROW to Johnson Parkway; station area heavily disturbed, ROW heavily disturbed; no survey recommended (page 77)." The small additional area within the 30% LOD is located within areas of previous disturbance from roadway, railroad, and commercial development. The small areas are unlikely to contain intact, significant archaeological deposits and no additional archaeological fieldwork is recommended. See Stipulation XI: Additional Assessment of Effect for the StPS&TF/Omaha Road Railroad Corridor Historic District for the recommended assessment of effects of the proposed station location options. TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 11 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project Further advancement of this station will occur in the 60% design phase. To receive consulting party comments on the new possible locations as per the MOA, which requires design considerations in relation to the StPS&TF/Omaha Road Railroad Historic District, the three proposed alternatives are included in this submittal and will be discussed at the consulting parties meeting to inform the 60% details (see Figure 1 through Figure 5). FIGURE 1. BOUNDARY OF STPS&TF/OMAHA ROAD RAILROAD CORRIDOR HISTORIC DISTRICT IN BLUE NEAR THE ARCADE STREET RAMP. TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 12 N W ix D 0 LL s lot yyrµ 1► W _ I z f A 0 �.• '� At, d r.'trrrL4.,.,' 0 i, W a' a----Fog + ' W l� LL � a t pss 7 f4 i` y wpp - [ii mill W rW� rM4-iT/^]OY]W-�IXI-AC-4f1KKILr/�1�r�1Mk.-A w W O rl Z O r V w v) 0 p m N w p N o) 2 o) V W -i F H W LL I 1 � � 4 Warcx - rwc 'w wsw a.o.-i�.r-arnaa.-wm-nwiabcsiwA�M�M1a I LU a Q H W 3, .J rl E0 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project 2.3.7. Between the Arcade and Cook Avenue Stations The trail route was bumped out in two locations for BMP and a pedestrian crossing was added, though these bump outs are within the previous LOD and archaeology study area (Plan Sheets 99-101). The 30% LOD at Forest Street were slightly extended to the west (see red circle on layout sheet below). The 2020 archaeology report stated that along Phalen Boulevard, the Project "will generally use existing roadway to Arcade, then RCRRA ROW to Johnson Parkway; station area heavily disturbed, ROW heavily disturbed; no survey recommended (page 77)." The small additional area within the 30% LOD is located within areas of previous disturbance from roadway and residential development. It is unlikely to contain intact, significant archaeological deposits and no additional archaeological fieldwork is recommended. Archaeology study area map, page 5 Project Layout Sheet 14 l�� 2.3.8. Cook Avenue Station F+ e y i� y N µ. i A retaining wall was added between the parking lot and trail due to grading constraints and to protect the parking lot. The station platforms were staggered, and the roadway section was revised to allow for enough space to incorporate access ramps between the stations and for pedestrians to have a single lane crossing. Pedestrian connection to Hmong Village was revised to be Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant and a maintenance pad pull -off added (Plan Sheet 107). The southern pedestrian connection to Magnolia was redesigned to save space and be more functional (Plan Sheet 109). Trail connection to the north was modified. However, all changes are within the previous LOD and archaeology pedestrian survey area; therefore, no further archaeological work is recommended. 2.3.9. Between the Cook Avenue Station and Johnson Parkway Bridge The 30% LOD at Earl Street were slightly extended to the west (see red circle on layout sheet below). The 2020 archaeology report stated that along Phalen Boulevard, the Project "will generally use existing TECH MEMO: 30% SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 17 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project roadway to Arcade, then RCRRA ROW to Johnson Parkway; station area heavily disturbed, ROW heavily disturbed; no survey recommended (page 77)." The small additional area within the 30% LOD is located within areas of previous disturbance from roadway and residential development. It is unlikely to contain intact, significant archaeological deposits and no additional archaeological fieldwork is recommended. Archaeology study area map, page 5 2.3.10. Johnson Parkway Bridge Project Layout Sheet 15 RCS �FPdt A The Johnson Parkway Bridge profile was altered to meet 40 mph design speed and maintain critical clearance. A new trail connection on the north side of Johnson Parkway is slightly outside the 15% LODs and an existing retaining wall will be removed (see red circle below on Layout Sheet 18; Plan Sheet 110). According to the 2020 Archaeology Report "rail connection to Phalen Park on St. Paul Park property - this area was originally part of Lake Phalen; fill deposited to fill in lake; no potential for prehistoric surficial deposits. No survey recommended." It is unlikely to contain intact, significant archaeological deposits; therefore, no additional archaeological fieldwork is recommended. See Stipulation V.A.ii: Trail Design in Phalen Park discussion below on the trail design. A design concept for the bridge has been develop, as discussed under Stipulation VI.A.iii: Johnson Parkway Bridge Area below for recommendation on if the proposed design meets the SOI Standards. TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 18 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project Archaeology study area map, page 6 T N 2.3.11. Maryland Avenue Station Project Layout Sheet 18 4�s The Maryland Avenue Station platforms were moved back from the intersection to allow for improved grading and ADA design. The bus pads on Maryland Avenue have been lengthened for local bus queueing. A maintenance pad pull -off was added (Plan Sheet 110). There is a small area not previously included in the archaeological study area boundaries for the extended bus pads (see red circle on layout sheet below). The bus extension areas are located within previously disturbed roadways and the area is unlikely to contain intact, significant archaeological deposits. The area within the yellow circle is located outside the 15% LOD. Based on the 2020 archaeological report and historic aerial (1940), the area "was originally part of Lake Phalen; fill deposited to fill in lake; no potential for prehistoric surficial deposits. No survey recommended (Page 77)." It is unlikely to contain intact, significant archaeological deposits; therefore, no additional archaeological fieldwork is recommended. TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 19 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project Archaeology study area map, page 6 aryiand Avenue f➢ 10 2.3.12. McAfee Bridge (Bridge R0438) Project Layout Sheet 19 The McAfee Bridge was proposed to be rehabilitated at the 15% plan stage but is now proposed to be replaced. As a non -reinforced -concrete bridge for which no plan sets exist, it is problematic for engineers to determine the bridge's load -carrying capacity for the Purple Line BRT, which would run on top of it. As such, there is no demonstrable way to repair the bridge with sufficient documentation that it meets load requirements. In addition, the revised typical section includes a wall between guideway and trail (Plan Sheets 111-112). All changes are within the previous LOD and archaeology study area; therefore, no further archaeological fieldwork is recommended. The decision was made through the DART. See the Stipulation XI: Additional Assessment of Effects discussion below for review of this change for additional adverse effects to the LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District. TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 20 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project 2.3.13. Arlington Avenue Area A BRT bridge over Arlington Avenue was added to separate guideway conflicts from the local system and improve travel times. In the 15% plans, the crossing is shown as at -grade; however, due to traffic and safety modeling, the Project now proposes a bridge approximately 33 feet wide that is 20 feet high to meet 14-feet, 6-inch clearance and 5-foot structure depth. Fill will be added and retaining walls will be needed, likely concrete walls or MSE (Mechanically Stabilized Earth) walls. The change to a bridge crossing also resulted in the rerouting of the trail (Plan Sheet 114-115). The design details for both the bridge and the trail will be included in the 60% plans and will be discussed at the consulting parties meeting to inform the 60% details. While the bridge introduces a new visual element, the Project APE in this area is large enough to not require adjustment. There are no additional architecture/history properties in the area for which to assess effects from the proposed bridge. For the LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District, the proposed change will reestablish a bridge where historically one was located and a bridge requires less of the LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District railbed to be removed compared to the at -grade options, which would need to be cut back extensively to taper it to grade. This change helps to minimize effects to the district overall, though not enough to remove the overall adverse effect finding. The LOD were expanded slightly from the 15% plans, namely closing the gap between the southern bump - out and the triangle as shown below in the yellow circles. Since the entirety of the LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District was pedestrian surveyed and the circle area was immediately adjacent, any notable features associated with the railroad line would have been identified. Further, the area was originally part of Lake Phalen, which has been filled to create the shoreline, the railroad, and parkway. Finally, this area does not coincide with the original 1868 alignment of the LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District, which was the focus of the previous archaeological investigations. The area is unlikely to contain intact, significant archaeological deposits; therefore, no additional archaeological fieldwork is recommended. TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 21 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project Archaeology study area map page 7 k�?brsko A.�nua East s Arlington A_anue East Hi i"N Project Layout Sheets 20-21 2.3.14. Pedestrian Connection to Nebraska Avenue 7TT A potential pedestrian connection to Nebraska Avenue was removed from the design due to grading constraints from the new bridge (Plan Sheet 115). All changes are within the previous LOD and archaeology study area; therefore, no further archaeological work is recommended. 2.3.15. Larpenteur and Frost Avenue Stations A maintenance vehicle pull -off area was added to both stations (Plan Sheet 118 and Sheet 122, respectively). All changes are within the previous LOD and archaeology study area; therefore, no further archaeological work is recommended. 2.3.16. Gateway Overpass The BRT alignment over the Gateway Trail was straightened, causing the abutments to become skewed and retaining walls lengthened. This was done to allow for better sight lines and bike routing, as well as a clearer BRT travel path (Plan Sheet 123). All changes are within the previous LOD and archaeology study area; therefore, no further archaeological work is recommended. TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 22 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project 2.3.17. Trail Adjustment near Weaver Elementary School Space has been added between the proposed trail and guideway (Plan Sheet 124) to attempt to avoid the 1868 LS&M railroad alignment (berms), which are individually eligible. Project Designers and the Preservation Lead are still working to determine if the Project can fully avoid the remnant berms, and the status of that decision will be discussed at the consulting party meeting between the 30% and 60% plans. In addition, a bridge type has been selected (see Figure 6 and Plan Sheet B7 of B10) for the pedestrian underpass at Weaver Trail. The concrete beam bridge will have wingwalls instead of abutments, which minimizes physical elements in the space and allows for more vegetation, helping to avoid visual intrusion in the school's viewshed. All changes are within the previous LOD and archaeology study area; therefore, no further archaeological fieldwork is recommended. See Stipulation VI.A.iv: Weaver Trail Underpass Area for discussion on if the proposed work meets the SOI Standards. FIGURE 6. PROPOSED DESIGN FOR THE WEAVER TRAIL UNDERPASS. 1+ DRAFT • WORK IN PROCESS VISUAL QUALITY - Underpass at Gateway, Weaver, & Kohlman Trails Q METRE] Plan at Weaver Elementary Trail Kimley>>>Horn MF-FRONXITAN July 13, 2022 ° I n `- ' L TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 23 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project 2.3.18. Highway 36 Station The park -and -ride at the Highway 36 station was changed from a parking structure as shown in the 15% plans to a surface parking lot. The 30% plans show updated path connection to existing paths, and the BRT crossing was raised to reduce earthwork. This rippled into rebuilding a portion of Gervais Avenue due to revised grades. The Project proposes to no longer incorporate bus pads on Gervais Avenue and to the reconfigured area to allow for ADA access. A maintenance pad pull -off was also added (Plan Sheet 130 and Sheet 140). All changes are within the previous LOD and archaeology study area; therefore, no further archaeological fieldwork is recommended. 2.3.19. Harvest Park Area The pedestrian trails near Harvest Park were realigned and regraded to minimize disturbance to the historic rail bed. The northern pedestrian connection was moved farther north to avoid historic rail bed and connected better with existing paths in Harvest Park (Plan Sheets 131-133). The decision was made through the DART. A small extension of the trail connection extends beyond the archaeological study area (see red circle below). The area has been heavily disturbed by previous railroad and park construction development; therefore, no further archaeological fieldwork is recommended. Archaeology study area map, page 10 Project Layout Sheet 28 o- a� Vv d 1 TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 24 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project 2.3.20. Between County Road C and Beam Avenue A cul-de-sac proposed for replacement has been removed from the plans and retaining walls and trail reconstruction eliminated due to BRT alignment shift and design advancement (Plan Sheet 135). All changes are within the previous LOD and archaeology study area; therefore, no further archaeological fieldwork is recommended. TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 25 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project 3. STIPULATION V: DESIGN REQUIREMENTS The MOA requires, under Stipulation V: Design Requirements, the following: A. In order to minimize and/or avoid adverse effects to the Lowertown Historic District, Saint Paul Union Depot, Great Northern Railroad Corridor Historic District, Westminster Junction, St PS&TF/Omaha Road Railroad Corridor Historic District, Johnson Parkway, Phalen Park, Moose Lodge 963, and Madeline L. Weaver Elementary School, the Metropolitan Council, with the assistance of the Metropolitan Council's Preservation Lead and input from Consulting Parties, as necessary, shall follow these design requirements to the extent feasible while still meeting the Project's purpose and needs: 3.1. Stipulation V.A.ii: Trail Design in Phalen Park and Johnson Parkway Based on the 30% plans, the proposed design of the trail connection to the noncontributing Bruce Vento Regional Trail in Phalen Park blends visually and materially in Phalen Park through mimicking the profile and appearance of the existing bituminous trail (Plan Sheet 189). Therefore, this design requirement is met. The Preservation Lead will continue to monitor the trail design in Phalen Park throughout plan development and will notify FTA if there is a modification that changes this recommendation. 3.2. Other Stipulation V.A. Design Reviews The design requirements for Stipulation V.A.i: Lowertown Historic District and Union Depot, V.A.iii: Moose Lodge 963, and V.A.iv: vegetative screening along the StPS&TF/Omaha Road Railroad Corridor Historic District, Johnson Parkway, and Phalen Park are under development and will be assessed at the 60% design stage, following input from consulting parties between the 30% and 60% plans. TECH MEMO: 30% SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 26 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project 4. STIPULATION VI: CONSULTING PARTY REVIEW OF CERTAIN PROJECT ELEMENTS UNDER THE SOI STANDARDS 4.1. Stipulation VLAJ: Cayuga Street Station Area The Purple Line Project's MOA states under Stipulation VI.A.i Consulting Party Review of Certain Project Elements under the SOI Standards: The Cayuga Street Station, which abuts the StPS&TF/Omaha Road Railroad Corridor Historic District and is located near the Great Northern Railroad Corridor Historic District and Westminster Junction, including but not limited to Business Access and Transit (BAT) lanes, retaining walls, station platforms and amenities, trail connections, sidewalks, station vegetation, and stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs). The Metropolitan Council should consider the mass, scale, and overall design of the Project elements. Vegetative screening shall be preserved or reestablished between the Project elements and the historic property where possible. Consulting Parties shall review Project elements within an area that extends approximately 800 feet southwest and approximately 200 feet northeast of the centerline of Cayuga Street. In the 30% plans, there are two stormwater BMPs and a retaining wall within the review area around the Cayuga Street Station (Plan Sheets 89 and 90). The retaining wall is a soldier pile cantilever wall type with metal railing on top. The design of the Cayuga Street Station Area is under development and will be assessed at the 60% design stage, following input from consulting parties between the 30% and 60% plans. 4.2. Stipulation VI.A.ii: Barriers at Forest Street Bridge The Purple Line Project's MOA states under Stipulation VI.A.ii Consulting Party Review of Certain Project Elements under the SOI Standards: Barriers at Forest Street Bridge: Physical barriers, if used, under or near the Forest Street Bridge (Bridge No. 5962), a contributing resource to the St PS&TF/Omaha Road Railroad Corridor Historic District. Consulting Parties shall review Project elements within an area that extends approximately 200 feet on either side of the point at which the dedicated guideway crosses the centerline of Forest Street North. A concrete barrier is included in the 30% plans within 200 feet on either side of Forest Street Bridge (Plan Sheet 100). The design of the barriers under and near the Forest Street Bridge is under development and will be assessed at the 60% design stage, following input from consulting parties between the 30% and 60% plans. 4.3. Stipulation VI.A.iii: Johnson Parkway Bridge Area The Purple Line Project's MOA states under Stipulation VI.A.iii Consulting Party Review of Certain Project Elements under the SOI Standards: TECH MEMO: 30% SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project In order to minimize and/or avoid adverse effects to ... Johnson Parkway [and] Phalen Park..., the Metropolitan Council shall, with the assistance of the Metropolitan Council's Preservation Lead and input from Consulting Parties, design the below -referenced Project elements in accordance with SOI Standards to the extent feasible while still meeting the Project's purpose and need. If a City has officially designated the affected historic property for heritage preservation, the design shall also take into consideration, as feasible, any applicable design guidelines adopted by the City's HPC for the historic property. Johnson Parkway Bridge Area: The Johnson Parkway Bridge, which passes over Johnson Parkway and is located near Phalen Park, and associated Project elements, including but not limited to retaining walls, trail connections, sidewalks, and BMPs. The Metropolitan Council should consider the mass, scale, and overall design of the bridge span, piers, railings, and abutments, and incorporate plantings in keeping with the park -like setting of the historic parkway and Saint Paul's Grand Round. Consulting Parties shall review Project elements within an area that extends approximately 700 feet south and approximately 500 feet north of the point at which the bridge crosses the centerline of Johnson Parkway. If appropriately designed, the Johnson Parkway Bridge ... may have minimal effect on the overall integrity of the [LS&M Railroad Corridor] historic district; however, construction would impact intact historic roadways in these areas and change the vertical alignment of the roadbed. Reviewing all of the proposed bridges for design in accordance with the SOI Standards and developing construction protection measures to avoid unintended damage from construction activities may minimize impacts to historic properties. However, these conditions would be unlikely to avoid adverse effects entirely. There are three retaining walls and a concrete barrier in the designated review area near Johnson Park Bridge (see Plan Sheets 108-109). The plan view of the proposed Purple Line BRT Bridge over Johnson Parkway is shown in Figure 7. The bridge type and aesthetics is proposed to be similar to the Earl Street Bridge over Phalen Boulevard, which is the precedent design for the proposed Purple Line Bridge over Johnson Parkway (see Figure 7 through Figure 9 and Plan Sheets B1-B5 of B10). The City of Saint Paul has not officially designated Johnson Parkway, Phalen Park, or the LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District for heritage preservation; therefore, there are no applicable City design guidelines. Below is the evaluation of the proposed Johnson Parkway bridge as per the SOI Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties: Rehabilitation Standards.' Since it is such a large element of the Project and is proximate to three historic properties —Johnson Parkway, Phalen Park, and the LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District —an assessment of the design against each of the ten standards is discussed below. 'Johnson Parkway (RA-SPC-5685 and RA-SPC-8497) was last evaluated by The 106 Group in 2017 under the inventory number RA-SPC- 8497 for the proposed Gateway/Gold Line Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project. It was recommended eligible, and the Federal Transit Authority (FTA) determined, and the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) concurred it was eligible for listing on the National Register. The FTA adopted the determination of eligibility made under the Gold Line BRT project for the purposes of the proposed Rush/Purple Line BRT project, including the period of significance for the historic property of 1914-1945. The SHPO coded Johnson Parkway as a "certified eligible finding" or "CEF", in their inventory database, meaning that it is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places for the purposes of the Gold Line BRT Project but that if it was to be listed, additional evaluation of the property would be needed. TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 28 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project 1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. The Project meets Standard 1 since Johnson Parkway and Phalen Park will continue to be used for its historic purpose as a parkway. The BRT corridor was abandoned for railroad use decades ago, so the Project's conversion of the railroad bed into a BRT is appropriate since it helps in maintaining the transportation use of the corridor. TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 29 N W ix D LL i L CL a ' 0 6 b •^ s W 1 r� �w Or % v r� O m m LU LU O Z O F U w N O M 2 N w O 2 O U04 w li rH LU LU 0 z O F- v W w 0 m m O N LU N W O 04 x O1 v W H METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. The Project meets Standard 2 because it will not remove or alter any historic materials, features, or spaces along Johnson Parkway. This area of the parkway was completely reconstructed in the early 2000s as part of a major road project so no historic material, features, or spaces from the period of significance (1914 to 1945) remain (see Figure 10). The Project will restore a crossing and bridge where there was one historically, meaning the character of the space will be maintained for the LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District (see Figure 11). No physical work will occur within the boundaries of Phalen Park. FIGURE 3.0. 3.940 (LEFT) AND 2020 (RIGHT) AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE NORTHERN SEGMENT OF JOHNSON PARKWAY. NOTE THE REMOVAL OF THE RAILROAD AND REPLACEMENT WITH PHALEN PARKWAY IN THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT (SOLID YELLOW LINE), REMOVAL OF THE TRIANGLE INTERCHANGE AND REPLACEMENT WITH A FOUR-WAY INTERSECTION (YELLOW CIRCLES), AND ALTERATION OF THE EASTERN ARM OF THE PARKWAY (YELLOW DASHED LINE SHOWING PREVIOUS ROADWAY VERSUS SOLID YELLOW LINE REPRESENTING THE ROADWAY TODAY). I � ram.. � � F, • . -. L��''1,1'e,'. e TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 33 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project FIGURE 11. DETAIL OF JOHNSON PARKWAY, 1940 (TOP) AND 2020 (BOTTOM). NOTE THE TREES LINING THE RAILROAD CORRIDOR (YELLOW DASHED LINE) AND THE ORIGINAL RAILROAD BRIDGE CROSSING (YELLOW ARROW) IN THE 1940 AERIAL. BASED ON A REVIEW OF HISTORIC AERIALS, BY 1991, ALL ORIGINAL VEGETATION ALONG JOHNSON PARKWAY WAS REMOVED AND BY 2008, ALL THE TREES ALONG THE RAILROAD CORRIDOR WERE REMOVED. THE PLANTED LINE OF TREES (SEE YELLOW ARROW) FIRST APPEARS IN THE 2011 AERIAL. Find address or place `. MRa 1297 1355 4355 A 5 1,355 1297 �55` 1. 5 11 E1118 711 a1,35�5 f�iJ35 1 55� 13559 11250 242 a� I 1089, i A112 TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 34 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. The Project proposes to restore a crossing where historically one crossed over Johnson Parkway from the LS&M railroad line; however, the Project is not attempting to replace the original bridge as a missing historical feature. Rather, the Project proposes building a new bridge to provide a safe crossing, which constitutes a compatible use and maintains the spatial features of both Johnson Parkway and the LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District. The bridge will be a new element that does not create a false sense of historical development or alterations to the circulation patterns historically seen in either property. The bridge is following the design precedent extensively used throughout the city of Saint Paul, including nearby over Phalen Boulevard (see Figures 7 and 8). This continuity of design between new bridges throughout the city and specifically over Phalen Boulevard will help distinguish it as new construction. Since the Project does not propose adding conjectural features and there are no other architectural elements in Johnson Parkway or the LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District to reference, it is unlikely the Project will create a false sense of historical development through the construction of the bridge. The proposed Johnson Parkway Bridge meets Standard 3. 4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. The changes made to the LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District after the railroad was abandoned in the 1990s and to Johnson Parkway were completed in the early 2000s and those changes have not acquired historic significance in their own right; therefore, they do not need to be retained or preserved. No physical work will occur within the boundaries of Phalen Park. The proposed bridge meets Standard 4. 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved. As documented above, there is no remaining historic material of the parkway from the period of significance for Johnson Parkway and there is no proposed construction in Phalen Park. While minor effects will occur to the LS&M railroad berm to tie in the new bridge and approaches, this adverse effect has already been accounted for in the original finding of effects. The proposed bridge meets Standard 5. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. As documented above, there is no remaining historic material from the period of significance for Johnson Parkway so there are no features to repair. Further, the Project is not trying to replace the railroad bridge but rather to use the crossing for a new transportation purpose, so the replacement consideration outlined in Standard 6 is not relevant to the Project. No physical work will occur within the boundaries of Phalen Park. The proposed bridge meets Standard 6. TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 35 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. No chemical or physical treatments are proposed to any historic materials. The proposed bridge meets Standard 7. 8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. An archaeological survey was conducted previously, and no significant archaeological sites were identified; therefore, Standard 8 is not applicable. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. As documented above, there is no remaining historic material from the period of significance; therefore, the Project will not destroy historic materials that characterize Johnson Parkway. The proposed bridge will be differentiated from the old, since the new bridge is not a railroad bridge and will not look like the original railroad bridge crossing. As discussed under Standard 3, the proposed bridge is following the design precedent extensively used throughout the city of Saint Paul, including over Phalen Boulevard at Earl Street (see Figure 8). This continuity of design between new bridges throughout the city and specifically over Phalen Boulevard will help distinguish it as new construction. Johnson Parkway is a very large, linear corridor that extends for miles, so the addition of one bridge over a small portion of the roadway is in keeping with the massing, size, and scale for the overall parkway. Further, the new bridge was designed to have no center pier. While the bridge is highly skewed and would typically be constructed with a center pier, the Project designers determined a means to not need one, placing the piers on either side of the road and the abutments at a distance from the road to keep the parkway's roadway free of piers and to minimize the visual intrusion of the structure on Johnson Parkway (see Figures 7-9). To protect the historic integrity of Johnson Parkway and its environment, the Project proposes planting trees to screen the new bridge and to be in keeping with the park -like setting of the parkway. This design element will help to continue the parkway character and helps the new bridge be compatible in the environment. The Johnson Parkway Bridge may be partially visible from the very southern end of Phalen Park; however, the scale and massing of the bridge is such that it will not create any visual effects to the historic property and its environment. The proposed bridge meets Standard 9. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. The bridge and guideway could be removed in the future, and the essential form and integrity of Johnson Parkway and Phalen Park and their environment would be unimpaired. The proposed bridge meets Standard 10. TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 36 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project The proposed Johnson Parkway Bridge meets the SOI standards. The design of the retaining walls and concrete barrier near the Johnson Parkway Bridge Area is under development and will be assessed at the 60% design stage, following input from consulting parties between the 30% and 60% plans. 4.4. Stipulation VI.A.iv: Weaver Trail Underpass Area The Purple Line Project's MCA states under Stipulation VI.A.iv Consulting Party Review of Certain Project Elements under the SOI Standards: Project elements near Madeline L. Weaver Elementary School, including but not limited to the Weaver Trail Underpass, trails, vegetation, and stormwater BMPs. The Metropolitan Council should consider the structure's mass, scale, and overall design of the bridge span, piers, railings, and abutments, and its visibility within the historic property's viewshed. Vegetative screening shall be preserved or reestablished between the Project elements and historic properties where possible. Consulting Parties shall review Project elements within an area that extends approximately 400 feet south and approximately 800 feet north of the centerline of the proposed Weaver Trail Underpass. A concrete beam bridge with wingwalls is proposed to avoid the use of piers and abutments and to maximize the presence of vegetation at the crossing in the side slopes. (see Figure 6 and Plan Sheet B7 of B10). The plan sheet shows concrete wingwalls with limestone pattern. The Preservation Lead is working with the DART to on a simpler design for the concrete wingwalls in which they will be plain concrete with no design or pattern. Based on the 30% plans, there are two proposed retaining walls and a concrete barrier (Plan Sheet 125-126) in the defined review area. There are no stormwater BMPs in the defined review area. The design of the underpass and retaining walls and concrete barrier near the Weaver Trail Underpass Area is under development and will be assessed at the 60% design stage, following input from consulting parties between the 30% and 60% plans. 4.5. Stipulation VI.A.v: Dedicated Guideway and Fitch/Barclay Trail Underpass See Stipulation VI II summary below for information about the Dedicated Guideway and Fitch/Barclay Trail Underpass: Project elements near the 1868 railroad roadway remnants between Kohlman Avenue and Beam Avenue (XX-RRD-NPR002) and/or between Gervais Avenue and County Road C (XX-RRD-NPR003). TECH MEMO: 30% SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 37 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project 5. STIPULATION VII: CONSTRUCTION PROTECTION PLAN FOR HISTORIC PROPERTIES (CPPHP) It is recommended that CPPHPs are not needed. As demonstrated by the Section 106 review for a similar project, the Gold Line BRT from Woodbury to Saint Paul, it was recommended by the Preservation Lead, the Cultural Resources Unit (CRU) in MnDOT, that while the Gold Line Project Programmatic Agreement (PA) required CPPHPs, FTA, SHPO, and other consulting parties determined it was preferable to notify the construction contractor of the location of historic properties and possibly potential means and methods of construction. Ideally, contractors are held responsible for determining the best construction means and methods, and that if notified that there are protected historic properties present, they can be tasked with providing the Preservation Lead a summary of their construction plan proximate to the historic properties of concern. Further, since CPPHPs are not part of a formal bid package, they are not contractually enforceable; therefore, putting notification in the plans and contract of the properties can be more effective. It is therefore recommended that the following historic properties, which are outside of the Project construction limits, do not require a CPPHP: East Shore Drive, contributing to Phalen Park; the Great Northern Railroad Corridor Historic District; Westminster Junction; and the StPS&TF/Omaha Road Railroad Corridor Historic District. A CPPHP is also not recommend for Madeline L. Weaver Elementary School as limited project activity will occur on the far northern end of the boundary of the property, as detailed above, and most will be on an existing non -historic trail. The active railroad lines or roadways are not likely to experience physical effects from the Projects and most contractors are cognizant to avoid entering active railroad lines or roadways. Nonetheless, it is proposed that, like the Gold Line Project, in lieu of CPPHPs, final plans will document the location of sensitive historic properties and will be identified as "do not disturb areas," meaning no staging, equipment storage, or any other related project activities can occur in those areas. No plan can ensure that accidents will not happen, and it is recommended that using the recommendations presented herein will meet the intent that the contractor take care of historic properties proximate to or slightly within the Project's construction limits. This recommendation will be discussed at the consultation meeting to solicit input from the consulting parties and if all parties agree in writing, the MCA does not need to be modified. Consulting parties should discuss the need for a CPPHP for the 1868 railroad roadway remnants between Kohlman Avenue and Beam Avenue and between Gervais Avenue and County Road C if it is determined through Stipulation VIII.A in the future that it is prudent and feasible for the Project to avoid one or both of the historic properties. If they can be avoided, it is recommended that inclusion of measures in the construction documents and/or the notification to the contractor to provide the means and measures for avoidance be used. TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 38 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project 6. STIPULATION VIII: MITIGATION FOR ADVERSE EFFECTS TO THE LS&M RAILROAD CORRIDOR HISTORIC DISTRICT Avoidance through design of the 1868 railroad roadway remnants between Kohlman Avenue and Beam Avenue and between Gervais Avenue and County Road C is in process and updates to avoid or minimize effects will be identified with the 60% plans. TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 39 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project 7. STIPULATION IX: CHANGES TO THE AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS (APE) Based on 30% design review as documented above under Stipulation IV, no changes are proposed to the Project APE. TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 40 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project 8. SECTION X: ADDITIONAL SURVEY AND EVALUATION Based on 30% design review as document above under Stipulation IV, no additional survey or evaluation is recommended. TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 41 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project 9. STIPULATION XI: ADDITIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS AND STIPULATION XII: CONSULTATION TO RESOLVE ADDITIONAL ADVERSE EFFECTS 9.1. StPS&TF/Omaha Road Railroad Corridor Historic District The three alternative locations for the Arcade Street Station are recommended to have No Adverse Effect to the St PS&TF/Omaha Road Railroad Corridor Historic District. Although construction of the Project would introduce temporary and permanent visual effects within the viewshed of the StPS&TF/Omaha Road Railroad Corridor Historic District, the proposed conditions help to avoid or minimize alteration to any of the characteristics that qualify the historic property for inclusion in the National Register or diminish its integrity of setting, feeling, or association. The recommended finding of No Adverse Effect is dependent upon the following conditions being placed on the Project: As part of design development along the northern edge of the historic property, vegetative screening will be reestablished wherever possible between Project elements and the StPS&TF/Omaha Road Railroad Corridor Historic District. • To minimize visual effects and maximize compatibility with the StPS&TF/Omaha Road Railroad Corridor Historic District while still meeting the Project's Purpose and Need, the design of the Arcade Street Station, whether it is in location Option A, B, or C, will be reviewed according to the SOI Standards at the Project's 60%, 90%, and 100% Plans, with a consultation meeting prior to finalization of 60% design. 9.2. LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District Additional analysis between the 15% and 30% plans led to the determination by the Project designers that Bridge R0438 (McAfee Bridge) is so deteriorated that its condition precludes repair, and it will be replaced. As a contributing element to the LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District, the action of removing the original bridge constitutes an additional element contributing to the adverse effect to the historic district. Since the 30% plans include a modification from the 15% plans to a known historic property, the Project MOA requires: The FTA, with the assistance of the Metropolitan Council's Preservation Lead, shall make a finding of effect to account for any changes in Project design or the receipt of additional information that may result in newly identified historic properties, changes in the finding of effect for a historic property, or unanticipated effects (e.g., damage) to historic properties. The Metropolitan Council's Preservation Lead shall assess effects of the Project on historic properties in accordance with the criteria of adverse effect as described in 36 CFR § 800.5(a)(1) and make a recommendation to FTA, supported by documentation that meets the requirements of Stipulation II.A. The Metropolitan Council's Preservation Lead shall also recommend to FTA potential measures for avoiding, minimizing, and/or mitigating any adverse effect(s). TECH MEMO: 30% SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 42 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project As per the terms of Stipulation XII, the new bridge should be designed in accordance with the SOI Standards to the extent possible to minimize additional effects. The 30% plans also reduce the LOD to other portions to the LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District, namely at the Arlington bridge crossing, which will allow for more of the railroad bed to remain intact. TECH MEMO: 30%SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 43 METRO Purple Line Bus Rapid Transit Project 10. RECOMMENDATIONS RPA-Registered archaeologist and historian Kristen Zschomler and historians Christina Slattery and Valerie Reiss have reviewed the Project's 30% plans and recommend the following. • Most project changes between the 15% and 30% plans were within the same LODs at the 15% stage. There were several locations that extended beyond the LOD at the 15% plan stage; however, based on the project methodology as detailed in the 2020 archaeology report, all appear to have low potential for containing intact, significant archaeological sites due to previous residential, commercial, and/or railroad and roadway development. Therefore, no additional archaeological fieldwork is recommended. • No change to the Project APE is recommended since all the changes and their potential to affect the character or use of historic properties, if any are present, are sufficiently accounted for in the previous APE boundaries. • As per Stipulation VI.C, it is recommended that the proposed Johnson Parkway Bridge meets the SOI Standards and that commitment is completed, pending the receipt of consulting parties' comments and the consideration of such comments, as per Stipulations Vl; and continued review by the Preservation Lead should occur to determine if design changes warrant reinitiating consultation. • As per Stipulation VII, it is recommended that no CPPHPs are needed and that other means of notifying the contractor of the presence of historic properties as documented above be used, pending the receipt of consulting parties' comments and the consideration of such comments. The planned replacement of Bridge R0438 (also known as the McAfee Bridge) constitutes the loss of original historic fabric from the LS&M Railroad Corridor Historic District. FTA should consult with consulting parties per Stipulation XII on determining if additional mitigation will be required, or if the minimization efforts in other locations, namely the Arlington Bridge crossing, makes the current mitigation commitment commensurate with the effects to the historic district overall. As per the terms of Stipulation XII, the new bridge should be designed in accordance with the SOI Standards to the extent possible to minimize additional effects. TECH MEMO: 30% SECTION 106 REVIEW 11/29/2022 44 2022 Goals and tactics: 1. Support MAHS with Spring/Summer display at the farm: Team members: Gaspar, DeMoe, Villavicencio Outcomes Tactics Timeline Significant Coordinate with MAHS to find out what the exhibit will Spring 2022 attendance of feature. the MAHS summer display Coordinate with City Communications staff to assist with digital marketing. Use city channels and commissioner contacts to promote exhibit. Significant Communicate with educators Summer/Fall attendance from 2023 Pre-K - 12 community Help with acquiring with history cloths and artifacts On -going 2. Create interactive website highlighting Maplewood historical documents, maps, oral history, market to schools and community. Team members: Hughes, Villavicencio Outcomes Tactics Timeline Generate Create small team to research key Maplewood history. Summer timeline as a ■ Start with city website: 60 Stories, historical 2022 base for the context study, other city material project. ■ Expand to MAHS: 3M Exhibit, Barn, other material ■ Expand to Ramsey and MN Historical Society --work with communications to create and implement site. Ensure Creating marketing plan to pitch via social and traditional Fall 2022 multiple media. weekly hits to site. Ensure there is a plan in place to update site and incorporate new elements of Maplewood history Ensure at least Reach out and build relationships with educators in 622 2022-2023 two schools and 623. School year use the site for a project. 3. Oral history of recent community members: Team members: Hughes, Kearn Outcomes Tactics Timeline At least three Create team to identify people to interview Spring -Fall 2022 oral histories (Tentative: Barbara/Hughes) recorded ■ Recent ■ Long-time Work with historian to craft questions/script Summer/Fall 2022 Conduct interviews Incorporate Communications will facilitate oral histories in interactive website Items to be aware of: • Hmong are refugees (not immigrants) • Need to build connections with individuals and family • Interview intergenerational (first generation though today) • Honor the stories (need a depth of interview) 4. Study/evaluate historic significance of key Maplewood properties/locations Team members: Cardinal, Currie, Fett Outcomes Tactics Timeline Cemeteries at Poor Farm • Designate team to walk the land, find Spring 2022 or Forrest Lawn unmarked graves. • Research who might be in these plots. • Identify next steps KSTP Building on 61 • Designate a team to begin researching Feb 2022 — Gladstone House each location. Dec 2022 Monastery • Identify history and significance Lookout park (by Phalen) Team will determine next action steps on each property/site 5. Historic designation marker for LS&M Rail Road Team members: Cardinal, Currie Outcomes Tactics Timeline Signage along BRT Connect internally with Public Works Director Steve Rush Line Love, city liaison to project. commemorating the significance of former Work with Metro Transit -- lead on Rush Line BRT rail line and County construction -- to determine its plan for stop signage. Road D Bridge Form a team to decided what type of signage would be Or alternate location appropriate. Team researches and recommends designs for proposed signage. Historic Places: List of Potential Historic Structures and Sites Designated Historic Sites The properties in this category are federal or locally designated sites. These sites have been evaluated and met requirements for Department of Interior criteria for historic significance and for historic integrity. Alterations to these that require a permit must go before the Maplewood Heritage Preservation Commission for review. National Register of Historic Places • Ramsey County Poor Farm Barn Maplewood Heritage Landmarks (local designation) • Bruentrup Heritage Farm • Gladstone Savanna Neighborhood Preserve Century Homes Maplewood's Century Homes Program recognizes houses over 100 years old. In 2016, there were 136 Century Homes in Maplewood. Owners receive a Certificate from the City if they request one. The structure does not have to have historic significance or integrity. These properties are not subject to review by the Heritage Preservation Commission. Potential Historic Structure and Sites Properties over 50 years may be considered historic. There are many of these in Maplewood. As a city, Maplewood is interested in identifying sites that have historic significance. To determine that, a structure or site must meet Department of Interior criteria for historic significance and for historic integrity. The list below includes sites that may have historic significance and should be considered for historic evaluation. Alteration of these sites are not required to undergo review by the Heritage Preservation Commission. 2014 Historic Context Study suggested following as potential sites for National Register listing • Forest Lawn Cemetery Mausoleum, 1800 Edgerton • Seaholm P. Gottfried House, 1800 East Shore Drive (Moderne design) • KSTP, 2792 Highway 61 (Art Deco/Moderne) • Former Edgerton School (residence at 1745 Edgerton) • Former Carver Lake School (residence at 2684 Highwood • JWS Frost House, 1889 Clarence • Former St. Paul's Monastery (now Tubman Center), 2675 Larpenteur 2018 Gold Line Bus Rapid Transit Study reviewed 3M Campus for National Register listing • 3M Campus. The study indicated 3M campus is eligible as a Historic District for National Register listing under Criterion A: History in the areas of Commerce and Invention. Public Ownership or Utility • Aldrich Arena • Fish Creek site • Gladstone Savanna site (demolished RR shops) • Former Maplewood Municipal Building (now Philippine Center, 1380 Frost, 1965) • Keller Creek dam • Keller Golf Course (site, not structures) • Moose Lodge (Frost and English) • Ramsey County Poor Farm Cemetery • Ramsey County Corrections • Soo Line Bridge (by Keller Creek, 1936 by WPA) • Northern Pacific Bridge #7 (over County Road D) • Cow Access Tunnel under prosperity Avenue • Gladstone Community Center (on Frost 1950's) • St. Paul Water Works (1869 and later expansions) • Spoon Lak historic grove Non -Profit • Old Betsy Fire Truck • St. Paul's Monastery (now Tubman Center) • St. Paul Ski Club Ski Jump Churches and Cemeteries • First Evangelical Free Church (Hazelwood near County C, was Hazelwood School)) • St. Jerome's (Roselawn and Mcmenemy) (Examined 2022 — nothing appears significant) • Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary (Kennard & Larpenteur, 1966, Garden of Mary remnants from 1948) • Cross Lutheran Church (Frost & Prosperity, 1958) • Union Cemetery (on Minnehaha, 1889) • Forest Lawn Cemetery and Mausoleum • Mt. Zion Cemetery (Payne & Larpenteur, 1889) • Holy Redeemer Church (story) • Islamic Center (former branch library) Private • Former Parkside Fire station (1958) • Former East County Line Fire Station (on Century, 1947) • Henning's Cabins (on Hwy 61) • Maplewood Mall (1974) • Saints North Roller Skating Rink (on Gervais Court, 1973) • Schoeder's Dairy • Carver General Repair Garage • Pink Castle or Chicken Shack (2720 Maplewood Drive) • The Plaza Theater (Larpenteur & White Bear Avenue) • Hillside School (private childcare, 1709 McKnight, 1940's) • Soo Line Section House (now private residence at 1467 Frost near Barclay) • Former Carver Lake Tavern (now private residence) • Carver Lake School (private home at 2684 Highwood Avenue, 1894) • Mike's LP Gas (Clarence & Frost) • Origination • Older/significant homes — many on list Farmhouse 1765 Gurney house 1928 Barclay St. N house 1964 Barclay Ave. St. N farmhouse 2410 Carver Ave. E Ledo House 2510 Carver Ave. E Julius and Tina Schroer House (Sundgaard House) 1865 Clarence St. N Lost structures or lost history • Indian settlements • Old roadway — stage coach lines — train tracks — native paths • Indian mounds • Londin Lane Fire Station (1979) (Demolished 2022) • Maple Leaf Drive -In theater • Minnehaha Drive -In Theater • St. Paul Tourist Cabins • Kennel Club at Joy Park • Keller Golf Club House • Keller Creek falls • Plow Works • Northern Aire Sign • Tourist Cabins (Sign is at MHS) • Lakeview Lutheran (County Road C and Hwy 61) (new building now) • Hennings Cabins (on Highway 61) • Cocktail Sign City Parks and Preserves The only city park or preserve with historic designation and subject to review by Heritage Preservation Commission is Gladstone Savanna Neighborhood Preserve. Several parks have interesting histories to document. Vadnais r i d )Ko h l rd an Hazelwood Park rzn>w�ua raw Gervais Lake Lake _ Keller 61 \Lake / A / II . — Edgerton Park ) r i 6rk e d Lake / �) '6j Phalen�, Historical Properties •1 M 1350 Frog Ave Mikes LP Gas (Former Keller Grocery Store) 2 M 1900 Rice St St Paul Water Works&Old house -removed y rs ago d.play at Water Works 3 M 2080 Rice St Shraede, Milk 4 M 380 Ros.lawn Ave St Jerome Church 5 M 1320 County ROO Hillc,.st MimalHospital-it was,.modeled&expanded 6 M 1765 MCM.n.my St Was a house and is now the St Pual Hmong Alliance Church • ] M 2170 County Road O The New Lorstion of the B,u.ntmp Farm (Moved in 1999) • 8 M 741 County Read B East House 9 M 1800 Edgerton Shed Forest Lawn Cemetery Mausoleum 10 M 1&10 Shore O,ve Seahohn P Gottfried House 11 M 2166 Maplewood On- Keller Golf Clubhouse 12 13 M 2M Hgbway 61 M 2020 Whde Bear Ave KSfPT,an M. Ransey Count Poor Farm Milkhous.,Garage &Smokestack O14 M 1741 Arcade Street St Paul Tourist Cahn Sign & House 15 M NO Frost Ave Original St Paul Tourist Cabns 16 M 1865 Clarence Street Sundgamd Hous.(G.,dies-Son 10p) 1] U 1]80 Clarence Street House 18 19 U 18250esot. Sheet U 19150esoto Street C-U notfindi may bew,ong aM,- H.. (Masbski 199Z) 20 M 1745 Edgerton Shed H.. (Fins) Egdedon School bullding) (RG 1807) 21 M 2684Hghwood Ave Was the Cover Lake School 22 U 2150 Rice St H.. 23 M . County Rd C House 24 M 1534 County Rd House(Owner 1%7 mail to 26r6 English St 551 Nh 25 26 M 1559 County Rd C M 16 2 County Rd C H.. H.. ( Kohl.) 27 U 1655 County Rd O In 1997 the Owner estimates age at 125 yrs or more (RC 1888) 28 U 1700 County Rd O Old Hajic.k Farm Sd. 29 M 1960 Edgerton St House Ong. 30 M 900 Kohlman Lane 31 32 M 2200 English Sheet M 1467 County Road B Huse H.. BW7 RC 1888) 33 M 2155 P,osperdy Rd HouseB%7 mail to 1910 Burns Ave#126, UPaul, MN 55119 93]) 34 M 1490 Frog Ave House 35 M 1.3 F,o9 Ave House (Holmberg) 36 M 1. Birmingham Street House -(May he=the working class homes built for Gladstm. workers 37 M 1821 M.M. Street House ( May be one of working class hares in Glad9on. BuIA in 1890) 38 M 1.0 F,isbi. Ave House (Maya wmkingclashomes lin1890f.,GlaSton.wo,kers 39 40 M 1254 Fnisnie Ave M 1933Anrad. Street H..(Maya working class homes buni n, 1890fo, Gla,N1.n.wo,kers House 41 M 1. Bradley Sheet Huse 42 M 1.5 Edgerton Shed House 43 M 1T 0 Sylvan Shed H.. (Add— edh., 173o or 1830) 44 M 1741 MCM.nemy St House 45 M 2UO Minn.haha Ave House 46 47 M 1480 St.,hng Street M 1889 Gh—ce Steet H.. (J oh. Ledo)(Hom. razed 12196)(2002 Edna Ledo had photo) H.. (Fno9, Schr-,, Rxkenwald) (RC 1911 - P.B.n) 48 M 21700ay Road Horse (G.d.n) 49 M 923 Century Ave Horse 50 51 M .2 Hgbwood Ave M 1.4 Manton Street Hors° ( Kf &LR oven 100 yrs per Bruce Espeeenm - p.v. Owners son Hors° 52 M 1.4 Birmingham Street House 53 M 1851 Gh.nc. Street H..B%7 Center was 1T.—sNool hn-ed there) 54 M 1. English Street Horse 55 M 12Z9 Ripley Ave House % 57 M 1.5 Ripley Ave M 1]6MCM.nemy St Hors° In 1997the owner does not think the houseis 100 years old yet 58 M 1768 MCM.nemy St 59 M .1 Khg9on Ave H..60 M 2410 Coven Ave House (RC records 1892) 61 M 1.0 Mydl.Ave House 62 U .4 Maplewood O, _ 63 U 2483 Maplewood On House(Zu.,che,)ON7 mail to 26865th Ave E N. SI Paul 55109-9312) 64 65 U 3 .Maplewood O, U C.unty Rd C&Hazelwood Was the Hochmuth House H.. 66 M 1890 Birmingham Street House 67 M 1895 Manton St House 68 M 1. Ripley Ave H..(WakeBeld) 69 M 20Z1 English St Hause(199]W.M Wet. know ex ad age of house-aba,.d 1900) 70 M 1.0 English 5l H..(199]mai1 to2152 P,osperdy Rd(Shan. Hmuse)Inhna,.stm.d 71 ]2 M 1685 English 51 M 1.0 Edgerton St Horse B W7 Henry Schadbilling) H.. (Owne, saw very did photo at Heritage Center) 73 U 1750 MCM.nemy St Horse 74 M 1] 5MCKn UM Rd 75 M 1'7 Edgerton St House 76 T/ M 1.3 Parkway O, M ,0 Maryland Ave House (199] House was being,.no✓ated) Horse 78 M 2MH Stillwater Rd House- 1997 Renovation done 79 M 2510 Carver Ave House (Ledo) 80 U 1501 Henry Ln H..(Schlomka) 81 M 250Tnoll Ci, House-R.modeled'� 82 M 1.8 Clarence St Oiplex- Onginally a boarding house 83 M 1928 Barclay St House O84 U 2020 Whde Bean Ave Rans.y County Poo, Farm Barn • 85 M 1900 Glh.nc.Street Fist Maplewood Ullage HalVGlad9on. Fire Station 86 M 1249 F,og Ave S and Maplewood Vllage l City Hall 87 M 1380 F,o9 Ave Old Maplewood Cdy Hall 88 U Fist Maplewood Library Building Q89 U Gladstm. Shop Ruins 90 U Ramsey County Cemetery 91 U Pm, Farm Cow Tunnel at Wakened 92 U Touist Cabins Sign 93 U Phi. Theater(OMed thean— MapW.nd) 94 95 U U Nodhernnn. Motel (OMest Motel in Maplewood) WPAdam on Kell., Creek 96 M 2301 MCKnght Rd 3M 101 BLOG (The Fist 3M Building in Mapl-w ) White Bear Lake Playcrmr Parl Maplewood HegM1u Park Hall pus _ C dHlb Caen. Pa�dY Puk Beaver Lake e � O hr P,n Silver Lake Carver Lake c k�oien 7 S;V n msM1 6C�e Newport , - , Minnesota Multiple Property Inventory Form MINNESOTA HISTORICAL Please refer to the Historic and Architectural Surrey Manual before completing this form. SOCIETY Must use Adobe Acrobat Reader to complete and save this form. Adobe Acrobat Reader can be downloaded at: httos:ll9et.adobe.com/reader)?promoid=KLXME General Information Historic Name: 3M Center Other Names: 3M Center Historic District Inventory No.: RA-MWC-0010 Multiple Property Category: District Multiple Property Category (if other): New or Updated Form: New Extant: Yes Survey Type: Intensive (Phase 2) Location Information Review and Compliance No.: 2014-0398 Agency Proj. No.: Grant No.: Street Address: 2,mc nig Rc N" .Z 15 1. o C"" A j, E County: Ramsey City/Twp: Maplewood If Multiple, List All Counties: If Multiple, List All Cities/Townships: Total Acres: 411 USGS 7.5 Quad Name(s): Lake Elmo, MN 1993 Township: 29 Range:22 EIW: Section: 36 QtrQtrQtr: QtrQtr: Qtr: Township: Range: EIW: W Section: QtrQtrQtr: QtrQtr: Qtr: Urban: Subdivision: NIA Block(s): NIA Lot(s): NIA Property Identification Numbers (PINS): 123-362922240005:123-362922230002 UTM Coordinates: Datum: UTM Zone 15T 15T 15T 1FT Nl 15T 15T 15T 15T 15T 15T 1Z;T If more space is needed for location information, please submit on a separate sheet. f 5 1 Previous Determinations ❑ National Register Listed ❑ NPS DOE ❑ State Register Listed ❑ CEF ❑ SEF ❑ Locally Designated ❑ Not Eligible District Name: NAD 1983 Easting 499841 500370 r,nn179 DuuaaZI 500558 500505 500507 501182 501064 Rnm77 -+aav-+O 499626 499750 Northing 4978827 AQ7RRin M.-U19 .: 4978415 4978114 4978111 4978066 4977999 4977384 4977280 4977478 4978477 4978618 Page 1 of 3 (December 2017 Form Version) G isrofilc Sues Survey' Historical Society Saint Paul Heritage preservation Comnlir"4011 Ramsey County 1. Street Address/ - 2792 N. Hi hwa 61 r=- Location: name:KSTP AN Transmitter 2, 3. common District/village: !O1" 5, original. use :_radio tr nsm - - r.tr, �. 4. Historic name: AM Transmitter invited A No 1 'J m 6. Present Use: radio transmitter station 7. Access: Yes 0 V- Parlor of construction: 1939 W 9. Style: 'Li za moderne _ - B. h i il. of stories: 1 12. Roof style: flat w lo, o£'bayst s.. not visible 14. Dormer style & 0, none o `r 13. Roof covering:_ 1 exterior endwall brick 15. chimney style, material, location & = fenestration: rectangular maw paned fixed - 16. Type of Type Type Of foundation: not visible frame: clapboard shingle j$ood ^ n m 18. Structural system/main exterior wall covering: American band header bond _&_ Brick:Stretcher bond ashlar V _aluminum _asbestos random rubble coursed rubble _random ashlar coursed b � Stone: k Other bonding pattern: bro Type of stone/bric or Stucco Concrete block Cast concrete �i�rra Gotta C`.axtain wall 'lass/metal _other: 19. other significant details: Blockish brick building flanked by brick wings with attached brick garage on soutlg side. Concrete coping at roofline steps up at center of facade over large raised. letters KSTP. Entrance and flanking windows are surrounded by concrete rectangulat e accentuated by slightly projecting vertical bands. (#28) panel, corners of which ar 20. Integrity of Design: X basically intact & unaltered altered slightly _ _alterations & additions more apparent than original _original design not :apparent" Fair Poor —Deteriorated 21, Physical condition of building: Excellent _} Good d alterations: 22. Additions an m :2 M 23. If a corner lut, describe: Ps+d NE Sg SSW corner of _` _ - --- -- ^ cross ,treat. -- " 24. Side of street: East ndustrial �suburhaa to 25. Setting: acricuitural residential commerciali R �Y 26. Significant site and landscape features: m 27. Threats to 28. Additional comments: two large roun ee doc[�n�ona]-f�windowpab (019) Flanking_,joot are ltabuverds�ot aorglla concrete overhang with wide fluting. KSTP, with "3"Vy haott� with raised letters reading } is rectangular concrete panel. of raised concrete. q 29. Date(s) of Site visit:s};4/7/82 30. Negative file numl)eris): 301/141/44 31. map location coa'rif"411'p1iCab lt�):� j 3.3. Architect/engineer: Liebenberg and--- 34. Builder/contractor: 36. Date built: 1939 •,�T..._�. 35 Present owner: KSTP v 37. Rate source: rlr. Hubbard. __, Address' - Mr. Brown_ 38. Legal Description: 39. Building Permit A: 40. Location of architect's drawings:Hamnel, Greene-, and Abrahamson resent KSTP architect%__ 41. on National Register? Yes x No 42. National Register potential? _X_ Yes No Yes X No 44. Local designation potential?Np_,__Yes _—No �a3. HPG/local historic site? 45o in historic. district? -Yes X No 46, Historic.district potential? Yes __x_No If yes, explain rationale: Nhich? 47, Historical background: KSTP radio was established ca. 1928 and first located in a building about six miles south of the Mendota bridge called "Radio center". in ca, 1936 the facility moved to a building on N. Snelling Avenue which,it occupied for about 3 years. In 1939 this radio transmitter station was constructed on Highway 61. It was designed by Minneapolis architects Liebenberg and Kap� Ian, who designed some of the most sophisticated Act Deco buildings in the Twin Cities- Ian, Level of significance: x Local —State National 49. Statement of significance: This building is architecturally significant as a classic example of an Art Deco zigzag de- sign on a small scale. The building is one of two known Liebenberg and Kaplan buildings in sign on {the other is the Piinnehaha Drive In at 2260 Minnehaha Ave., 1949), The building Haplis also important to the history of radio in the Twin Cities. 50. Sources of information: Conversation with Ray Brown, KSTP employee, August, i982. Conversation with Mr, Hubbard, KSTP owner, August, 1982. Polk's St. Paul Suburban Directory, 1956. t Historic s es Survey rci tec an ontractor File. photographs .m-_ ..,. �, i"c�m;•''- `�'� . , i -� •- � ax,4 -. . _.�:. :.�i'ee� r`°¢u� �.""ix:'S�"':^�}'q?98.�: �'°`."may .. . NPS Fbrm 10.900 OMB No,1024-OOfB Exp. 10-31-84 United States Department of the Interior w" National Park Servipe For NPS use only National Register of Historic Places received Inventory —Nomination Form date entered See Instructions In How to Complete National Register Forms Type all entries --complete applicable sections 1. Name historic Forest L-n. Cemetery Mausoleum andior common 2. Location street & number 1800 N. Edgerton Street not for publication ,town Maplewood vicinity of state Minnesota e code a� county R Ramsey -- code 423 3. Classification _'� „ Category Ownership Status Present Use district public X —Xoccupied --- agriculture museum building(s) X private — unoccupied — commercial _ park — structure both — work in progress — educational private residence site Public Acquisition Accessible entertainment religious object in process X yes: restricted government _ scientific being considered yes: u y unrestricted industrial .__._, transportation no X other: cemetery ills ' 4. owner of Property r..military ! Forest Lawn Cemetery name street & number 1800 N. Edgerton Street Maplewood Minnesota city, town _vicinity of state 5. Location of Legal Description courthouse, registry of deeds, etc. Ramsey County Courthouse street & number 15 W. Kellogg Boulevared city, ern St. Paul state Minnesota 6. Representation in Existing surveys Historic STtes Survey of 7. Paul title and Ramsey County has this property been determined eligible? — yes X no date 12/ 19$0-12/ 1982 federal —state X county � f local depository for survey records Ramsey County Historical Society, 75 W. 5th Street ,town St. Paul state Minnesota 7. Description Condition Check one Check one — excellent deteriorated unaltered X, original site _-X _ good ruins X altered moved date _— fair unexposed Describe the present and original )it known) physical appearance Forest Lawn Description a' The Forst Laen Cemetery Mausoleum is located at 1800 N. Edgerton Street ff within .th'e acre Forest Lawn Cemetery in suburban The southern portion of the cemetery is surrounded.by an ornate cast icon fence and the cemetery is situated in a mixed residential and light industrial area. The xlkgxmxx mausoleum, which was completed in November of 1918, was designed �6k. by Chicago architect Cecile Bryoy� and constructed by thex�cx Keysbbnemaaxm�C Mausoleum Company of F/ranklin, Pennsylvania (q�reAlsor to of the St. Paul Mauso- PO leum Company) The one.,story Beaux Arts inspired building was constructed at an estimated cost of $197,866 of smoothly dressed coursed athlar white Bethel granitex -�.✓//)f4ij,•!,�/.�" l siS�l='rats%i' "��jhlil�fj1�l' produced by the Woodbury Granite Company of Vermont. The mausoleum has three bay design, with .Acent al gable roofed temple front with a < pediment supported by C �g columns. The typpanum is decorated with a stone relief sculpture of the Last Supper and the words "Forest Cemetery Mausoleum" are incised in the frieze. The temple,front is flanked byprojectin 113r- wings with pedimented pavilions at t'h` RR�xx outer ends.n g The buildin` has I.a rectangular windowe openings,4sever'a-l—bf which are filled with stained glass,, The interior of the building is faced withAlaskaGray marbdA from the Ver- mont Marble Company of Chicago. The interior features, c a t L' Y ioe��t4.6 �, a ,1' Ii'1c ? e l,,� t„ jf-.�`'t P"1 :' � ` z. `� i �-:'s :4 �5'1; � c±: The Forest Lawn Cemetery Mausoleum is°in good condtion and basically intact. Exterior alterations have included a 0- rear addition , the installation of glass block in the basement level windowsx, and the installation_ of newt✓`��`� doors on then: 4 j d=ide of _Edgertoni) 8. 'Significance Period Areas of Significance —Check and justify below prehistoric archeology -prehistoric _ community planning _ landscape architecture— religion — 1400-1499 archeology -historic conservation _ law science 1500-1599 agriculture economics _ literature sculpture — 1600-1699 X architecture education military social/ — 1700-1799 ____ art engineering music humanitarian 1800-1899 — commerce exploration/settlement philosophy theater X 1900- — communications industry — politics/government — transportation Invention — other (specify) Specific dates 1918 Builder/Architect Cecile Bryoy), architect Statement of Significance (in one paragraph) Keystone Mouaoleum Company, builder a forest lawn significance The Forest i2pp Cemetery Mausoleum, built in 1918 and located within Forest Lawn�6-emata�ry in suburban Maplewood, is significant as a sophisticated Beaux Arts style buildng whch is one of the two most architecturally important cemetery structures in Ramsey County, and ax is one of the county's baxt fem examples of a Beaux Arts inspired design constructed on,a large scale. tl to The Forest Ln Cemetery Maus6/_l/euml wi(/t/hin Forest Lawn Cem��&ny,(I /sJtandts 9 f. t d ,: 4 f' f , %/✓ �irc. �'�' G-: :., x=l/: 7.", f,� _'� 7? �3 L'. i" 9�.'\r �(J�i �/.%�'S f--,fify.} V ,F. established in 1894 At the time theit was putted, the cemetery was to ated 0 --'° in a largely rural area north of the St. Paul city limits. The cemetery was accessible to tesidents of the city hyx via the Wisconsin Central Ra6lroad . line (now the Soo Line) and the Payne Avenue streetcar line, both of thich C txa ran neary the cemetery boundaries. The mausoleum, which was completed in >� 1918, predates nearly all surrounding buidings, withz the exception of a " small cluster of thrn of the century hosses located between DeSoto and A";•.. Ma w. Edgerton Streets just north of Larpenla Avenue. This group of houses was a northern extension of St. Paul's Payne Avenue neighborhood.ka Most of ; ' theAbuildngs so neighboring the cemetery were constructed after World War II. 5 4 G he cemetery now standsin the municipality of Maplewood, whcih was incorporated4 „ in 1957. M _y .� The Forest Lawn Cemetery Mausoleum was designed by Chicago architect y Cecile o and constructed by the Keystone Mausoleum Company of Franklin, Br c; ._, Pennsylvania, which later became the St. Paul Mausoleum Company. It was built for an e3x,�imated $197,866 of granite and marble acquired from companies in s` Vermont and Chicago. The mausoleum was the most expensive cemetery building I constructed in Ramsey County/� It was included in a two year historicH sites survey of over 5,000 historically and architecturally significant buildings ii �l .S !3, significance, p.2 in St. Paul and Ramsey County conducted by the Ramsey County Historical Society and the St. Paul Heritage Preservation Commission in 1981-82. The survey identified the building as being one of the two most architecturally significant cemetery structures in Ramsey County. The m1kHrxhmiflinox significant cemetery hmi-di.,iRg. site identified by the survey was the fir^ -Av style Rose lawn Cemetery Chapel and Office in Roseville, built in 1903 and designed by Cass Gilbert andrr►sYiE _ for. The survey found other bemetery structures in the county to be much ie more modeet in deiign and scale than the Forest Lawn or Roselawn buildings. The historic sites survey also ffifflikgg the Forest Lawn Cemetery Mausoleum ax4eih one oftho Ike Ramsey County's best examples.of the Beaux Arts Ramsey County's other significant wxapmles of the�tyle include the monumental Minnesota State Capitol (l`, Ini}, the St. Paul Public Library (1914-17), and three smaller branch lmbraries built in St. Pau1,1916. & Additional Beaux Arts style buildings in the county include several banks, scho6ls, and office builidogs, most of which were built on a smaller scale. 9.1. Major Bibliographical References Forest Lawn Cemetery Records Historic Sites Survey of St. Paul and Ramsey Society, St. Paul, Minnesota. RL L. Polk's St. Paul City Directory, 1894. 10. Geographical Data Acreage of nominated property Quadrangle name_ UT M References Al i I Zone Easting Northing G W 1111 IL11 III III E WW [_III 1111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 G W1 11 I 1 1111 i- 1 1 1 III Verbal boundary description and justification r;' . t. . �: C E 1 My') A) ) 1 &"Y' , nty, 1981-82". Ramse County Historical Quadrangle scale BI Zone Easting Northing F LW_1L11LI�I�� I HLJ L1_i I iL I. i t W List all states and counties for properties overlapping state or county boundaries state code county code state code county code 11. Form Prepared By name/title Susan Granger/Historic Sites Survey of St. Paul and Ramsey Bounty Ramsey County Historical Society _-- � organization date Maft--A 1984 street rt, number 75 W. 5th Street telephone (612) 222_0701 city or town St. paul state Minnesota 55102 12. state Historic Preservation Officer Certification The evaluated significance of this property within the state is: — national —_ state _._ local As the designated State Historic Preservation Officer for the stational Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (Public Law 89- 665), 1 hereby nominate this property for Inclusion in the National Register and certify that it has been evaluated according to the criteria and procedures set forth by the National Park Service. State Historic Preservation Officer signature title date For NPS use only I hereby certify that this property is included in the National Register Keeper of the National Register date Attest: Chief of Registration date gjistoelc sites SuCveyo Historical Society Saint Pau} Heritage Preservation Commission 1. RantseyCounty Street Address/ et �_�._ 1800 N. Edgerton Stre Forest Lawn Cemetery m w- Location: _„��. a 101 3. Common name: a ,Q 2. District/village: — 5. Original use: r p r � 4. historic name: Forest Cemeter Limited Yes No }� w n b. Present ilse;� u,,^Ma.,solleum------- -----m 7. Access: Classical Revival Q n rr 8. Period of construction: 1918 9. Style: 3 ll. Of stories: 1 12. Roof style': Gabled 10. k o? nays: Not visible 14. Dormer style & None 13• Roof covering: 1 inferior concrete location & : 15. Chimney styles material, Rectangular fixed stained lass a 16. Type of fenestration: M 17. Not visible Type of foundation: clapboard shingle Vlood frame: r Y.°sn °� 18. Structural system/main exterior wall covering: bond header bond ` Brick- stretcher bond American IW aluminum asbestos _ rubble ashlar ]Ccoursed ashlar }� X _random rubble coursed _random Stone: --- Smoothl dressed Bethel w o Type of stone/brick or other bonding patterns Curtain wall x Concrete block _ Cast concrete StuccoTerra cotta lass/metal Other: 19. otiler significant details: with temple front building with symmetrical projectingwings Cemetery P Central gable roofed Relief of Last Supper in tying F (Apedimented pavillions at ends. supported by stout round columns without 0 Mausoleum" incised in frieze, entablature stained glass windows. �* bases. Tiffany -like 20. integrity of Design: _basically intact & unaltered altered slightly _ than original original design not apparent alterations & additions more apparent llent }( Good 21. Physical condition of building: ExceFair Poor Deteriorated 22. Additions and alterations: Rear addition. Glass block windows in basement, new west W doors. m . � rr O $E-SS•j corner of - lot, describe: Ntq cross street p Z3, It a corner 24. Side of street: last industrial suburban --- 25. Setting: _acxicultura] , residential pommercia]. ri Otlle6 In sorest Lawn Cemeter 2{ye Significant -site anti landscape features:. an is surrounded by an ornate cast iron fence in Southern portion cemetery itself excellent cOndition. 27. Threats to 28. Additional co;('nents: o x� n ' o n 0 N n m ' n ro s 0 3/15/81 m m--�-- .-..--•-e—N og syic� Jityitif}s _ sia r}ativs: il.it: �sttlnbr.x t"i : 36G/10l _ 3 294 10__ - 3U. ]la't7ap 1oc x?»i�>n iff r rxtq f .s1.i)licable} t _^.,, _„�. ,m� — - 32. N xmo of firldwoxir_rs 5. Grnn cr4 �� —w- o 33. Architect/engineer: Cecile Br or Chica o 34, Builder/contractor; Keystone yausoleun Co. Franklin PA later becgpg St. Paul " .) 35. Present Owner: 35. Date built: 1918 Address: 37. Date source: ores L Cemtery Records 38. Legal Description: 39. Building Permit #: 40. Location of architect's drawings: 41. On National Register? _Yes X No 42. National Register potential? - _ Yes _NO 43. HPC/local historic site? _Yes X No 44. Local designation potential? Yes No 45. In historic district? _Yes X No 46. Historic district gatential? Yes )L—No Which? if yes, explain rationale: 47. Historical background: The Forest La:rn Cemetery mausoleum was designed by Chicago architect Cecile Bryor. The mausoleum, under construction for over III years, was completed {n November 1918 at a cost of $197,866. The exterior is faced irith Bethel Uhite granite fro= the Woodbury Granite Company of Vermont. The interior features Alaska Gray marble from the Vermont Marble Company of Chicago. She mausoleum is owned and operated by the Forest Lawn Cemetery, which Was formed in 1894. 48. Level of significance: X Local State National 49. Statement of significance: A monumental stone Classical Revival mausoleum which is one of the most architecturally significant cemetery buildings.in Ramsey County and stands as a focal point in this residential and light industrial portion of Napleuuod. 50. sources of information: R. L. Polk°s St. Paul City Directory, 1894. Forest Lawn Cemetery Records. Phot• Minnesota Historical Society J-4\ 000 SITE SURVEY FILE REPORT � q Contact sheet .# (D Photographer: k Site Name: Site Address:� J Print # View/Direction I Date: County: I j GHiSt0i1C Sites Sut'vey County Historical Soeietv Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Clurnmissio" u Ramsey 1: Street Address/ 380 E. Roselawn Avenue-- w Location:� 3. Co n n��iae: Church of St. Jerome 101 _ 3 2. District/village: Church W_ Church of St. Jerome 5. original Ilse: w•n F; N- 4. Historic name: l{ LimitedPi eta rr Church 7. Access _Yes' J m ~ 6. Present Use' 1941-42 9, styles Revival n g. Period of constructions Jerkinhead 1 11, k of stories: 1'g 12. Roof style: -,- 10. k of bays: - -� 6 triangular vents, 3 hi ed Q asphalt shingles 14. Dormer style - �-, 13. Roof covering: 1 interior endwall brick and stone S. Chimney style, material, location & 1 = � rectangular fixed stained glass^^.,-r 16. Type of fenestration: not visible 17. Type of foundation: clayboard wood frame: _shingle Is. Structural system/main exterior wall covering: header bond bond m . aluminum asbestos Brick: stretcher bond American � ashlar' random rubble Coursed rubble randon ashlar coursed. _� rockfaced limestone and sandstone o _stone: or other bonding pattern: Type of stone/brick" -`-" wall st concrete x Stucco erra cotta G�rr.�a black Ca -- �-- �" Concrete � class/metal other: tP to 19. other significant details: Open hipped roof entrance porch with square stone columns. 1SutCxesses divide hays of has additional JC side walls. Paired windows have sandstone lintels and sills, north side end of short transept arm. Stucco covered 4 entrance and statue of Our lady of Fatima at has 8/8 windows. Steeple at transept crossing has wooden r- rectory wing at east end ventilator base. 2.0. Integrity of Design: _lrasicaY17 intact & unaltered X altered slightly apparent not apP alterations &additions more appare than original ori.ginal.design Deteriorated _nt condition of building: Excellent SGood Fait Poor 21. Physical 22, Additions and alterations: Rectory addition. N" zn 0 corner (if �h4d !+£ S6 T -, 23. If a corner lot, describe: - —SW c_r,�ss street - 24. Side of street: south r2ib r.srl�ar± C X residential commercial 25. Setting: acricultural _'n<l:cstraa X rvr 26. Significant site and landscape features, Jerome's school, rr- Adjacent to ca. 1960 St. M . none n 27. Threats to sites 28. Additional comments:-` about $60,000. 7'1�c stainer$ ,,i:n:,r, s �aa !�inci+xaKs carol l<,c,_afurnishings ft47. at a cost of wlllsliof`�Fatrlm"i on 'the financed through .gifts. The present hell. Of c)9s`�r;14`r were r10 is� in 1945, was formerly rased on.a Navy ship. The shrint - y north groonds of the church was cor.pleted in 1949- 0 . c� rf 29. DateW of site visitis) : 3/i� �/91 � u 30, 1:egativo file numberis1, 295/101/13 _ 31. %,ap location code(if aPplicable): 32.. Name of fieldkorkeri_ 33. Architect/engineer: 34. Builder/contractor: 35. Present owner:___ Address: 38. Legal Description J. C. Niemeyer peter 0. Nosvik 36. Date built: 1941--42 37. Date source: Church of St. Jerome booklet 39. Building Permit 40. Location of architect's drawings:- 41. 0n National Register? Yes X No 42. National Register potential? Yes XNo 43. HPC/local historic site? _Yes X No 44. Local designation potential? _Yes _Z_No 45. 1n historic district? _Yes X No 46. Historic district potential? Yes _X No Which? if yes, explain rationale:, 47. Historical background.: -Me parish of St. Jerome was organized in the summer of 1940 to serve residents of the northern edge of St. Paul and rural Ramsey County. Services were first held in Edgerton School, in April of 1941 the present 5 acre site, formerly part of the Mooney farm, was purchased and the cornerstone of the new church was laid in June of 1941. The new church designed by J, C. Niemeyer, was dedicated Match 22, 1942. Father J. Wilson Brady was the first parish priest. Brick and yellow limestone used in the construction of the church were salvaged from a demolished high school in Stillwater, Minnesota. The finished church was designed to seat 300 people and the church and attached rectory were constructed (928) 48. Level of significance: Local State National 49. Statement of significance: A nice stone Gothic Revival church that was constructed using old building materials and therefore appears older than it is. 50. Sources of information: Church of St. Jerome 1940-L950. Commemorative brochure published Tenth Anniversar in 1950. Photographs Historic Inventory Inventory Number RA-MWC-0050 I PIN: County: Ramsey City/Township: Maplewood Property Name: St. Paul's Priory Address: 2625 LarpenteurAve. Category: Religion Type: monastery NRHP: CEF Y DOE SEF ❑ CNEF CNEF ©ate: Historic Context: Photos: Survey Date: Location Confidence: 1 Acreage: 40 Entry Date: 1/11/2007" Update Date: 9/2112010 ❑ Need Form Contact: Date Requested: ❑ File in Archives ❑Tax Project Comments: Style architects nventory Number RA-MWC-O ArchBuifdEng Name JIV11chelson, Val architect W Builder ❑ Engineer ❑ Construction ❑ Addition ❑ Alteration ❑ Inventory Number RAWWC-005 Property date: 1955 Construction W Demolition ❑ Addition ❑ Move ❑ Major Alteration ❑ Original Date �� Circa ❑ Pre ❑ Post ❑ inventory Number. RA MWC 0050 Building: TRS Township 29 Range 22 EastANest Section 13 Quarter Sections SE -SE Quad Lake Elmo UTM UTM Zone FT Easting j Northing 4982060 Datum 1927 Reviews Reports t w N C, 00 5 Roth, Susan From: Roth, Susan Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 7:59 AM To: Charlene Roise (roise@hessroise.com); Stephanie K. Atwood (atwood@hessroise.com); Pate, Linda Subject: Priory Visit Charlene and Stephanie Remarkable building. We have to give the good nuns credit. Or good sisters as they preferred to be called. The boundary for this type of property can be fussy. Nuns seem to like a buffer. My skills at reading a landscape are not well developed so I can't tell if the presence of what looks to be glacial drumlins and eskers are natural or designed features. I also don't have much of a sense on what is on the other side of the road that you pointed out near the end of the tour. What acreage was in place when the complex as we see it today was completed? Let's hope that the Michelson papers and the order's archives provide some answers. The proposed kitchen troubles me, particularly when a perfectly usable kitchen is available. The present kitchen may be large, but since when is a kitchen ever been faulted for being too big? (They can start by using half and in two months find they need the other half). Unless the proposed room is tiled (like the present kitchen) food handling is going to be complicated. The holiday promises to be warm with Mother Nature throwing in a few fireworks on Sunday. Two good reasons to let Mother Nature provide the entertainment this long weekend. Susan Roth, Susan From: Charlene Roise [noise@hessroise.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 10:04 AM To: Roth, Susan Cc: Pate, Linda, 'Stephanie Atwood` Subject: RE: Priory Visit Attachments: 100_2342.JPG Susan That's great! Thanks for inviting Linda to join us. I had showed Natascha some photos of the building this morning and briefly described some of the rehab issues, so she will be a little familiar with it too. There are good directions at http•//www.stpauIsmonastery.org/9-finding-us/map-directions.htm1. We'll be going to the "Tubman Building." The parking lot is to the left as you drive towards the building. (The building is pretty unmistakable; see attached photo; ignore snow.) Take the wood stairs from the parking lot down to the main entry, which is in the lower building adjacent to the housing tower, below the porte cochere. If you have any trouble finding it, my cell phone is 612-747-3040. Stephanie and I will see you there tomorrow at 1:30— Charlene From: Roth, Susan [ma ilto:Susan. Roth@MNHS.ORG] Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 9:50 AM To: Charlene Roise Cc: Pate, Linda Subject: Priory Visit Hello Charlene Sometimes these site visits produce more rehab questions than I feel comfortable handling, so Linda will be joining the tour. Can we meet about 1:30 on Thursday, July 15Y? Are there special instructions as to directions and parking? In fact, neither of us are too sure of its location. Susan St. Paul's Monastery I St. Paul, Minnesota Page 1 of 2 Ministwyof W firn�dicti►►e Retmat �'i:5bauttls Vorafioan, [?Mates :De<eiaprnent �uererstE�e►►ts Mnilrrrssi►ann� ;#Loirrerc►n�Cer►tew #I-LU141tN�iRt= �i►�dingUs;.. Colebtra the Light LPARN MORE Finding Us > Map and Directions a Contact Information Calendar Pray With Us Home St. Paul's Monastery (north side) 2675 Benet Rd St. Paul, MN 55109 651.777,8181 FINDING US Map & Directions ................... Tubman Building (south side) 1725 Monastery Way St. Paul, MN 55109 St. Paul's Monastery moved to a new location in Feb. 2009. There are four sets of buildings on the campus of St. Paul's Monastery near the corner of Larpenteur and Century Avenues. Events and retreats are hosted at both the new St. Paul's Monastery and Tubman, the Sisters' former monastery. Please be sure to check your destination. Trail's Edge (east side) along Century Maple Tree Childcare (northwest side) 2625 Benet Rd St. Paul, MN 55109 651.770.0766 Note: these addresses are new as of 211/09 and may not yet work with online direction services. The old address for St. Paul's Monastery will get you to Tubman and the Monastery's campus: 2675 Larpenteur Ave E. From 1-94 Take Century Ave (also called Division) exit. Go North 3 miles to Larpenteur Avenue. Turn left. Monastery Way is the first right. Go straight to get to St. Paul's Monastery, take an immediate left to reach the Tubman building. From 1-694 Take Century Avenue (Hwy 120) exit. Go South 4 miles to Benet Road, just before the light at Larpenteur Avenue. Turn right. St. Paul's Monastery is visible on the right. Turn left onto Monastery Way for the Tubman building. Take the second right off of Monastery Way to enter the Tubman parking lot. From Hwy 36 Take Century Avenue (Hwy 120) exit. Go South 3 miles to Benet Road. Turn right. St. Paul's Monastery is on the right. Turn left onto Monastery Way for Tubman. Take the last right on Monastery Way to enter the Tubman parking lot. Parking and Entering the Building St. Paul's Monastery http://www.stpauismonastery.org/9-finding-us/map-directions.html 6/30/2010 i 1. Seniorate: Ground Floor, - Guest and Senior Bed Rooms -- Archives _ First Seniors' Bed Rooms Second Infirmaryitemporary) Third " - High School Faculty Bed Rooms' Fourth. " : - Temporary Jtiniorate . Fifth Temporary 'Juni.orate 2. Administration Wind Ground Floor Parlors First " - !Administration offices Second' '� - Chapel(iemporaxy) 3. Lobby: Ground Floor -- Fntrance First u - Library (temporary) Second " Library (balcony) 4. Refectory Wing Ground Floor" - . General Storage First Floor, - Dining Rooms, Serving Room, General Supply Second Floor Refectory and Recreation,Room . 5. Kitchen C Ground Floor Mechanical and. ElectricaLl Equipment - Storage s 'Firs t+ u - Kitchen storage; 'Vegetable Pr`eparati.onj Dock Second " - Kitchen - Postulant. Is, Dining, Rood ' t' & Postulanty , Ground Floor -- Classrooms, study'room. First Postulants', Dormitories Second " - Recreation for Novices and Postulants Third ". - Study Area.' Sewing Roam Fourth Novices' Dormitories ?. Laundry 8, Present .Power House i` m J N �• N O O r� N ,--� CONSTRUCTION 1964/65 Seninrate Wing 50, 206 sq. ft. Administration Wing 12, 375 sq. ft. Refectory Wing 50, 744 sq. ft. Total area 113,405 sq. ft. General Contract $1, 945, 045 Mechanical Contract 359,450 Electrical Contract 161,410 41. All ED # E "t $T. PAUL'S PRIORY 0 MAPLE WOOD MN Im N g w o ono aoo aoo � s A NO POW fa i 6 .4 r L. I ° 0 Fi J L m a { Lal w m z E z E w d) E CLy F-d G r.� G? i S� C? N L.. 49 U7 0 0 t= .in E E 21. c En 0 o � W in o C O 4, sh { G w Q5 f] CA Oi U ID N � - m E LU C 0 IZ w H cd z