WEBVTT

METADATA
Video-Count: 1
Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=Zcdg-0XueSE

Part: 1

1
00:00:08.400 --> 00:00:24.400
Good afternoon. I call to order the April 28th regular meeting of the Minneapolis Heritage Preservation Commission. For the record, my name is Marie Bjornberg and I serve as chair of the commission. Before we begin the meeting, I want to offer a reminder to silence your cell phones and other

2
00:00:24.400 --> 00:00:39.760
electronic devices. These meetings are broadcast live to enable greater public participation and include real time captioning as a method to increase the accessibility of our proceedings to the community. Therefore, all speakers need

3
00:00:39.760 --> 00:00:54.640
to be mindful of the rate of their speech so that captioners can fully capture and trans transcribe all comments for the broadcast. We ask all speakers to moderate the speed and clarity of their comments and please speak clearly into the microphone when

4
00:00:54.640 --> 00:01:09.760
speaking at the dis or giving testimony. Would the clerk please call the role so we may verify the presence of a quorum? >> Commissioner Alexander >> present. >> Booty is absent.

5
00:01:09.760 --> 00:01:26.880
>> Curado is absent. Melbum >> present. >> Rodriguez >> present. Smith >> present. >> Thomas >> present. >> Wallace >> present. >> Vice Chair Masten >> present. >> Chair Bjornberg >> present.

6
00:01:26.880 --> 00:01:43.280
>> There are eight members present. >> Let the record reflect that we do have quorum and that commissioners Booty and Curado provided proper notice that they have a conflict this afternoon. Next, we are going to organize the agenda for this meeting. Agendas are available by the clerk. We'll discuss in a public

7
00:01:43.280 --> 00:01:59.840
hearing item number four, 504 University Avenue Southeast, Ward 3. May I have a motion to approve the agenda? >> Masten so moves. >> Thank you, Commissioner Masten. Is there a second? >> Wallace seconds. >> Thank you, Commissioner Wallace. Any

8
00:01:59.840 --> 00:02:15.120
discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say I. >> I. I. >> Those opposed say nay. >> The agenda is approved. Our next order of business will be to approve the minutes from our April 14th, 2026

9
00:02:15.120 --> 00:02:29.840
meeting. May I have a motion to approve those minutes? >> Thomas so moves. >> Thank you, Commissioner Thomas. Is there a second? >> Melbourne seconds. >> Thank you, Commissioner Melb. Any discussion?

10
00:02:29.840 --> 00:02:46.080
Seeing none, all in favor say I. >> I. >> Those opposed say nay. Any abstensions? The minutes are approved. Before I open the hearing to public comments, let me summarize the process for conducting the public hearing.

11
00:02:46.080 --> 00:03:02.720
First, planning staff will present its report and commissioners may ask questions of staff. Then, I will open the public hearing and we will hear from the applicant and commissioners may ask questions of the applicant. After that, we will invite public comment. If you wish to speak, please be sure to

12
00:03:02.720 --> 00:03:19.280
sign up on the sheet over by the clerk. If you haven't done this already, you can do so afterwards. When you come up to testify, please state your name for the record. After public comments are complete, I will close the hearing and commissioners will deliberate and act upon the

13
00:03:19.280 --> 00:03:34.319
application before us. Our first item is item number four, 504 University Avenue Southeast Wr 3. This application is for a commission preservation application and the staff report is presented by

14
00:03:34.319 --> 00:03:54.640
Aaron K. Good afternoon, Chair Bjornberg and commissioners. My name is Aaron Kay and I am a senior city planner in the historic preservation subsection of the Department of Community Planning and Economic Development or CPED. I'm here today to present a commission preservation application for the

15
00:03:54.640 --> 00:04:10.799
property located at 504 University Avenue Southeast in the St. Anthony Falls Historic District. Before getting into the project, I'd like to make you and the clerk aware of a small typo in the applicant's name. The applicant is Lance Sher Seth and his last name should

16
00:04:10.799 --> 00:04:29.919
be corrected to SJ UR T in the meeting minutes. Here is an aerial view of the property's location. The historic district boundary runs along University Avenue southeast uh to the north of the property. So the south side of this block is in the

17
00:04:29.919 --> 00:04:47.680
historic district. The property is a duplex that was built in 1908 to 1909 by August Cedar Strand and Company. It is a contributing resource to the St. Anthony Falls Historic District. The applicant is proposing several tasks to rehabilitate

18
00:04:47.680 --> 00:05:03.199
the property and add bedrooms to the third floor so it can be used again as a rental property. I will give you a highle summary and analysis of each task for its compliance with the design guidelines and the secretary of the interior's standards for rehabilitation.

19
00:05:03.199 --> 00:05:20.400
The first part of the scope is to rehabilitate the twostory front porch that you see here. As you can see from the 1979 photo on the left, the porch was historically open. It was then enclosed with non-historic Masonite sighting and

20
00:05:20.400 --> 00:05:35.680
screen windows which the applicant would like to remove. This complies with the guidelines and standards. The existing wood railings shown at right do not meet current building code requirements for height. The applicant believes the railings are deteriorated and would like

21
00:05:35.680 --> 00:05:51.919
to remove them and install a taller simple picketed wood railing. Based on the information we've been presented so far, staff do not believe the railings are deteriorated beyond repair. So, in order to comply with the guidelines and standards, staff are recommending a condition of approval to retain the

22
00:05:51.919 --> 00:06:11.680
historic wood railings and install a new railing behind that meets code requirements. Here's an example on the left of what that could look like. Recognizing this is a photo of an interior railing um that has elevation changes, which would not be the case here. Um, should a new

23
00:06:11.680 --> 00:06:27.199
railing be installed, the proposed design of the railing from the applicant is compliant. If the applicant can provide further evidence that the existing railings are deteriorated beyond repair, then replacement is appropriate. Another alternative that staff discussed but did not uh

24
00:06:27.199 --> 00:06:42.880
ultimately put in the staff report was adding a simple rail above the historic railing to achieve the required height as shown on the right in three different examples. However, we weren't sure of the structural condition of the railing and if this was feasible. Uh, the

25
00:06:42.880 --> 00:06:58.240
applicant would like to discuss this item with you further. A lead-based paint assessment was completed in 2022 on the property with positive results on the wood trim around the porch. The wood trim needs to be replaced. So, staff are recommending a

26
00:06:58.240 --> 00:07:13.759
condition of approval to require inkind replacement with wood. The porch, deck, and columns also tested positive for lead and need to be refinished, which is appropriate. And finally, in order to meet code requirements, a simple metal handrail needs to be added to the front steps, which also meets the guidelines

27
00:07:13.759 --> 00:07:31.680
and standards. Moving to the back of a house, the rear wood steps are rotted and are proposed to be replaced in kind, which is appropriate. The applicant would also like to remove the seller door in the top right uh because access is no longer needed. They would backfill and grade

28
00:07:31.680 --> 00:07:48.880
the area and install new HVAC systems in this location. As this does not appear to be a character-defining feature of the property and it is minimally visible from the public rideway, removal is appropriate. This is also an ideal location for exterior HVAC units on this property. The applicant would also like

29
00:07:48.880 --> 00:08:05.120
to replace existing downspouts with properly sized units. One example of an existing downspout is shown here at left. Um, this approach is appropriate to better handle water at the property. The last task is to replace all of the windows on the property. When the

30
00:08:05.120 --> 00:08:22.000
leadbased paint assessment was completed in 2022, the inspector tested much of the property, but was unable to access most of the first floor. The results indicated that at least 35 windows needed to be repaired or replaced due to positive lead results. We would assume that similar results would be found on

31
00:08:22.000 --> 00:08:39.440
the first floor as well based on the age of the house. Staff recognize that lead remediation via repair is possible but also time and resource intensive. The applicant is proposing to replace the sashes for 63 windows in total using aluminum wrapped wood windows. They will

32
00:08:39.440 --> 00:08:54.640
retain the existing operation with a handful of exceptions that I will go over. They will also remove, clean, and install the existing and reinstall the existing aluminum storm windows. Generally, the approach to window replacement complies with the guidelines and standards with a couple of

33
00:08:54.640 --> 00:09:13.519
exceptions for which staff recommend conditions of approval to address. On the northwest elevation, which faces a street, windows would be replaced in kind except in three places. On the basement level, there are two wood awning windows. Uh I think both of them

34
00:09:13.519 --> 00:09:30.240
are currently boarded up that the applicant would like to replace with glass block windows. However, due to visibility, staff recommend that these be replaced in kind instead. On the third floor, one window needs to have egress to comply with the building code. Uh, since they are adding bedrooms, the

35
00:09:30.240 --> 00:09:45.279
applicant would like to replace the center window of the three with a casement window. To help the replacement window resemble a double hung window, staff recommend conditioning either true divided lights or an internal and external mutton, which would comply with

36
00:09:45.279 --> 00:10:03.080
our guidelines. After conferring with our building code reviewer, uh we did determine that it would need to be an internal and external mutton instead of a true division in order to meet the egress requirements for that window. So, as written, the recommended condition would allow for either option.

37
00:10:03.760 --> 00:10:19.760
On the southwest elevation, windows would be replaced in kind except in two places. On the basement level, again, there are two wood awning windows that the applicant would like to replace with glass block windows. As this is not a primary elevation, this would be appropriate. Uh you can see an existing

38
00:10:19.760 --> 00:10:36.000
glass block window in this photo which will remain. Additionally, the third floor windows on this elevation appear to be 40 over one as you can see on the right side. Staff recommend a condition that this light division remain in the replacement windows either through true division or

39
00:10:36.000 --> 00:10:54.720
internal and external mountains on the southeast elevation. Uh the glass block windows that you can see here won't be replaced. Uh but the rest of the windows would be replaced in kind except in four places. Again on the basement level we have two wood awning windows that the applicant would like to

40
00:10:54.720 --> 00:11:11.600
replace with glass block windows as this is not a primary elevation. This is appropriate. On the third floor again there's a group of three windows. One of which needs to have egress to comply with the building code. And so the applicant would like to replace the center window with a casement window. Again, staff would like

41
00:11:11.600 --> 00:11:26.880
this casement window to resemble a double hung window by having an internal external mton. The third floor also has a non-historic sliding window that is not visible here um and appears to be vinyl. Replacing it with an aluminum wrapped sliding window to match the

42
00:11:26.880 --> 00:11:44.640
remaining windows would be appropriate if that is needed. Back to the northeast or front elevation, windows would be replaced in kind except on the third floor. Uh, one window needs to have egress to comply with the building code. In the applicant's opinion, it might look odd

43
00:11:44.640 --> 00:11:59.680
to have a double hung window paired with a casement window. So, they are proposing to change both windows to casement windows. In staff's opinion, only one casement window is needed for egress. And so, to better replicate the historic window operation, staff recommend that only one casement window

44
00:11:59.680 --> 00:12:15.760
should be installed and it can have an internal and external mutton to resemble a double hung window. The applicant would also like to discuss this item with you further. Staff recommend that the HBC adopt staff findings and approve the commission preservation application subject to the

45
00:12:15.760 --> 00:12:31.760
following conditions. Number one, existing wood railings on the front porch shall not be removed without evidence that they are deteriorated beyond repair. To meet code requirements, a simple wood railing of an appropriate height shall be installed behind the existing wood railing.

46
00:12:31.760 --> 00:12:47.200
Number two, deteriorated porch trim shall be replaced in kind with wood trim of the same profile and dimensions. Number three, replacement double hung windows shall match the sash dimensions of the existing double hung windows and retain the asymmetry where applicable.

47
00:12:47.200 --> 00:13:03.440
Uh I didn't mention this in detail before, but because some of the windows have larger lower sashes than upper sashes, staff would like to see this historic design retained in the replacement windows, which also allows the rooms to have sufficient egress through those windows. Number four, glass block windows in the

48
00:13:03.440 --> 00:13:18.560
basement shall be allowed on the secondary elevations southwest and southeast. Awning windows on the primary elevation northwest shall be replaced with wood or aluminum wrapped wood awning windows. Number five, casement windows on the third story that are needed for egress

49
00:13:18.560 --> 00:13:34.800
shall have two lights to match the appearance of a double hung window. If true divided lights are not possible, applied mountains on both sides of the glass with an interstitial spacer shall be allowed. Okay. Number six, on the third story of the northeast elevation, only one window shall change operation

50
00:13:34.800 --> 00:13:50.000
from double hung to casement. And number seven, existing double hung windows that have divided lights shall be replaced with windows that maintain the historic light division and are true divided lights. If true divided lights are not possible, applied mountains on both sides of the glass with an interstitial

51
00:13:50.000 --> 00:14:06.880
spacer are allowed. The applicant is here and would like to make a pres a presentation. Although I don't speak for them, I believe they may want to discuss conditions one and six and possibly number five. Uh staff have not received any public comments on this project. This concludes my presentation and I'm

52
00:14:06.880 --> 00:14:26.480
happy to stay for questions. >> Thank you for that report. Commissioners, are there any questions for staff? >> Commissioner Melb. >> Thank you, Chair Bjornberg. Um, Miss K, are there ever, assuming that the glass

53
00:14:26.480 --> 00:14:43.199
block windows that would be at the basement level are being sought for security, do we have any precedents where we've allowed those to be um, glass block windows facing uh, being on the primary facade.

54
00:14:43.199 --> 00:14:59.920
>> Chair Bjornberg, Commissioner Malbum, uh, I don't have a specific address in mind for you where that has been allowed. Uh when staff discussed this project, we thought of a recent example that's in the University of Minnesota Greek letter chapter house historic district and I

55
00:14:59.920 --> 00:15:15.680
don't have the specific address on me um where we recommended uh a similar treatment to preserve the historic style of the windows on the primary elevations. I don't recall off the top of my head um how you all decided on

56
00:15:15.680 --> 00:15:33.519
that. And I'll uh not sure if Andrea Burke can can recall either. >> Thank you. Um Chair Buremberg and Commissioner Melbum, if if I recall, and I I could try to look it up here, but I think it would take a little bit too much time. If I understand right, I

57
00:15:33.519 --> 00:15:51.519
believe either the HPC did strike a condition about those glass black windows. Um because I do know for sure staff recommended that as just as Erin described or HBC held with approved staff recommendation as written

58
00:15:51.519 --> 00:16:08.160
and then I think the applicant appealed it is actually what I think happened is my memory is starting to jog back to me now. I'm pretty sure the applicant appealed it and then they were granted the appeal at uh the BIS committee of the city council. Thank you. Other

59
00:16:08.160 --> 00:16:23.440
questions for staff? Commissioner Alexander. >> Uh thank you. Um do we have any documentation that confirms whether that basement level uh wood awning window is original? Um

60
00:16:23.440 --> 00:16:40.639
considering all of the other basement windows seem to have the glass block. >> Chair Bjornberg. Uh Commissioner Alexander. Um, I did not show any photos in my presentation today, but your staff report does include a photo from the

61
00:16:40.639 --> 00:16:55.680
applicant of I think just about every basement window. I believe six of the windows are awning. One had already become glass block and then there's two pairs of double hung windows. Um, we don't know for certain that the the wood

62
00:16:55.680 --> 00:17:10.640
awning windows are historic. Generally, when we see those still in a in a basement, we tend to air on the side of caution and anticipate that they um either are historic or they reflect what would have been there historically.

63
00:17:10.640 --> 00:17:28.000
>> Thank you, >> Commissioner Wallace. Thank you, and thank you for your presentation. Um, quick question about the San Antonio Falls historic district guidelines. Is there anything in specifically in those guidelines about either the porch

64
00:17:28.000 --> 00:17:46.160
railing or the replacement of basement windows for the either primary elevation or the facade? Is there anything specific like that in the guidelines? Chair Bjornbury, Commissioner Wallace. Um there is a specific guideline about

65
00:17:46.160 --> 00:18:03.360
when uh portrailing does not meet height requirements and unfortunately I don't have my staff report in front of me, but I do know it was in the staff report. Um if it would be helpful, I can take a look at it uh during the applicant's presentation and if you still have the question I can I can bring up the

66
00:18:03.360 --> 00:18:18.559
official wording for you. But the gist of what I remember is that it understands that historic railings often fall short literally uh with those building code requirements. Um I'm not recalling that there was a specific

67
00:18:18.559 --> 00:18:38.720
treatment recommended, but rather just allowing for changes to be made when code requirements are needed. Right on. Yeah. Thank you. >> Any other questions for staff? Okay. Thank you.

68
00:18:38.720 --> 00:18:56.720
And I understand that the applicant is here and would like to speak. Please come to the microphone and state your name for the record. >> Hello everyone. Thank you for the time, commissioners. Um my name is Lance Sherith with SCS Builders and Remodelers. Um

69
00:18:56.720 --> 00:19:12.799
yeah, I do have a couple of points of contention on uh on five and six. So me and Aaron have already discussed some of this. Um I don't think it would be historically accurate or look correct to um basically

70
00:19:12.799 --> 00:19:28.000
put a rail behind a rail. Uh the existing wood railings um here I'm going to share some pictures with you. Do you have the are deteriorated beyond repair and we can show you that here that it wouldn't

71
00:19:28.000 --> 00:19:44.720
be a very feasible remedy to try to repair these. Uh I'm not sure do you know how to is there a way to share over here? >> I have you. >> Okay.

72
00:19:44.720 --> 00:20:01.600
So, we can rotate through the pictures here of the railing and the connections points to the columns and we can see that they're pulling apart. So, they're not really a safe railing. On top of that, in 2022, there was a child lead poisoning at this property, a child with elevated lead levels. Um, the railings

73
00:20:01.600 --> 00:20:18.160
are uh elevated lead levels and you can see how badly they're chipping in these pictures. We can show you some other pictures here. So leaving this hazard here for a temporary fix because abatement really means an encapsulant paint that temporarily holds up and then

74
00:20:18.160 --> 00:20:34.799
the deteriorated dry rotted wood underneath is going to end up letting that basically become a lead hazard in the future again potentially poisoning another child. So, I really would rather mitigate and get rid of that railing and replicate it and maintain the aesthetic

75
00:20:34.799 --> 00:20:49.919
that way, especially with how many points are pulling away and then how low the railing is. You can see my knee just below the railing. That's not really safe. If we open that up, I don't want to create a hazard here. I want to create a safe property for the client.

76
00:20:49.919 --> 00:21:04.960
So, that was one of my points of contention. I don't know if it's I I probably didn't give you word for word for my response, but I mean that's the summary of it. Um I I don't I don't really feel like we're meeting a historical aesthetic by putting a

77
00:21:04.960 --> 00:21:21.280
railing behind a railing or putting a a a guardrail at the height of the railing. But if we have to maintain those existing railings, I would rather do a built-up railing and build on top of it rather than But like I said, the lead hazard is still there. There was

78
00:21:21.280 --> 00:21:37.360
already a child le poisoning in 2022 there. I I' I'd really like to, you know, get rid of this hazard. And like I said, we can recreate the railing. It's just going to be 36 in tall instead of 27 in.

79
00:21:37.360 --> 00:21:52.080
So that would be my point that I would like to be be struck um from the conditions. And then I'm in agreement with number two. I'm in agreement with number three. I'm in agreement with number four. I'm fine with the awning windows in the basement. I'm fine with

80
00:21:52.080 --> 00:22:08.880
most of the recommendations of the preservation. Um, on number five, it looks like they are looking to do a case, let's see, is this the casement on the third story? It looks like they're looking to do one casement window

81
00:22:08.880 --> 00:22:25.039
instead of two casement windows with uh exterior and interior muttons and then an integrated separator. uh they call it an inter sessional se spacer. Well, the problem is is there's a building code

82
00:22:25.039 --> 00:22:42.880
reference here that I don't know if that would actually meet uh having the spacer. I do not believe uh meets compliance for egress which is a life safety issue which I would think takes precedence over

83
00:22:42.880 --> 00:23:02.000
over the historical preservation because we got to we have to follow building code. We have to make anything that we do follow building code. Um let me see here. It was Yep. is right below the diagram.

84
00:23:02.000 --> 00:23:19.520
We can see bars, grills, grates, similar may be installed on emergency escape windows, doors, and windows. It it it also says that they have to be easily removable. So, we can't have that spacer in between the glass because

85
00:23:19.520 --> 00:23:36.000
that's not removable. uh fireman needs to be able to get through that window fully clothed with all his equipment, a 200lb fireman in order to be able to get somebody out if there was a fire. So that that's just that's why the egress has clear glass opening, 5.7 square ft

86
00:23:36.000 --> 00:23:50.960
of clear glass opening. So that's more of a life safety issue. Now, regarding the aesthetic that one window can be casement versus one window can be uh uh double hung. Well, if we go back to the p if we go to the picture, can you find

87
00:23:50.960 --> 00:24:08.000
the picture of the front of the house, the proximity of the windows to each other on the front elevation of the house, the northeast elevation of the house, they're right by each other. So, if you put one window that has uh mutton

88
00:24:08.000 --> 00:24:24.480
and then you have one window that has two sashes that are inch and a half thick that are offset, that's going to be visible from the ground. The sidewalk's not very far away. It's going to basically say, "Hey, look at that. Look at me. I'm different. Something's not right. Something's not historically accurate because you're you have two

89
00:24:24.480 --> 00:24:39.679
things that are different right by each other on the front elevation of the house." And I would say the same about the railing. You you're you're not meeting any historic preservation by doing this. You're you're actually making it look worse. So, I I guess that those are the points

90
00:24:39.679 --> 00:24:54.159
of contention. Everything else I'm in agreement and and happy to comply with. I think that we should look at striking number one, look at striking the intersectional spacers from number five and

91
00:24:54.159 --> 00:25:11.440
allowing both windows to be casements because like I said, you have one window right by the other window and you can see the proximity of each window. So, it really doesn't make sense to have two different windows right by each other on the front elevation of the house. Um,

92
00:25:11.440 --> 00:25:27.120
when we can replicate it, if it's not right by another window, that's it's it's not going to be noticeably different. But if it's right by another window, like I said, literally 5 in apart, it's going to be noticeable that it's different, and I think it's going to create a bad aesthetic for the for

93
00:25:27.120 --> 00:25:43.760
the property. The other points I'm in agreement with and like I said, I think we could move forward with them as as recommended by the heritage. Are there any questions? Thank you for your presentation.

94
00:25:43.760 --> 00:25:59.600
Commissioners, are there questions for the applicant? Commissioner Thomas. Hi, thanks for your presentation. Um, I just wanted to get some clarification on what on number five. An interstitial spacer is essentially the the air gap between the two panes of glass.

95
00:25:59.600 --> 00:26:16.400
>> Um my understanding is it's the spacer inside the glass. If I'm incorrect about that, then >> it is inside the glass, but it just separates the two panes of glass and it's usually at the bottom of the window. >> Oh, I my understanding was there's actually So there's inter intersectional mullions. So that was my understanding

96
00:26:16.400 --> 00:26:32.799
that it's a mullion in between the glass and then a inside and outside mullion or mutton. Yeah, I think what they're >> if I'm incorrect then then I'm okay with that. >> Maybe staff can confirm, but I'm pretty sure it's just the air gap and then they you could apply the muttons on the outside and the inside. >> Yes. And I'm and I'm okay with that. I'm

97
00:26:32.799 --> 00:26:48.960
okay with that. >> Okay. >> So, >> okay. Just want to clarify. >> So, if that was a misunderstanding on my part, I apologize. >> It happens all the words people confuse and bullion all the time. So >> well and and the historic uh is different terminology than a lot of the

98
00:26:48.960 --> 00:27:05.440
regular terminology that's thrown around in my industry. So >> okay, any other questions? >> Are there other questions? Uh Commissioner Masten, >> I think I just maybe do want to clarify with Andrea on that item because I think sometimes the interstitial spacer is

99
00:27:05.440 --> 00:27:20.880
actually like a grill that's between the two planes of glass. Is that correct? Is that what this request is? >> Um, Cher B and Commissioner Masten, I'll call up Aaron Kay to to to confirm. I mean, I I have my own thing, but I know

100
00:27:20.880 --> 00:27:38.320
she's the most familiar with what what this project was. And then I also, if um I would also like to add just a point for Aaron to clarify when it's when it's appropriate to clarify the item about the building code. Um because Aaron did talk with a member of our construction

101
00:27:38.320 --> 00:27:54.640
code services about the egress and what is possible in that respect. Okay. Thank you. >> Did we did we show all of the pictures of the deteriorated railing connections? I think we should. And then um like I said, if it's not feasible to do a new railing, I guess our preference we can

102
00:27:54.640 --> 00:28:11.120
show you would be to build up the to do a built-up railing on the existing. Um so we can show you that as well. So, this would be an example of a built-up railing system is where you add to the add a a graspable handrail or or a a top

103
00:28:11.120 --> 00:28:27.120
rail and then build up every every three or four feet for a picket that goes through. Um, there's here's another example of it on a on a diagram, but and like I said to to me, I I've

104
00:28:27.120 --> 00:28:43.919
been around a lot of railings and I wouldn't want I wouldn't want my kids leaning against this railing and I wouldn't want them anywhere near it because of the elevated lead levels and I don't think anybody would. So, I I just feel like it's a hazard that needs to be removed from the property and like I said, we can replicate it. We can

105
00:28:43.919 --> 00:29:01.919
replicate it to the same aesthetic. Um, if you want to go through the remainder of the other pictures there. >> I do appreciate all your time. I don't I don't have anything else to add at this point unless you guys have any additional questions. I That ends my >> Do commissioners have any other

106
00:29:01.919 --> 00:29:18.799
questions for the applicant. Also, please let the record reflect that uh Commissioner Curado is here. Commissioner Masten, >> I'm much more familiar with uh a commercial building code than I am residential, but I think if this was a

107
00:29:18.799 --> 00:29:34.640
commercial property, you would need to have a 42 in railing. Is this >> residential is 36. >> Okay. Just wanted to confirm for >> and we've already had the conversation via Zoom call with the inspector that's going through plan review. >> Got it. Thank you. Are there any other questions from commissioners for the

108
00:29:34.640 --> 00:29:50.559
applicant? >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you very much, >> Commissioner Thomas. Sorry, this isn't really a question for you. Um, I just wanted to share my love of old historic windows and that I understand the need to replace them, especially because of

109
00:29:50.559 --> 00:30:06.320
the lead. It's very difficult to remediate. Um, but I want you to always consider fixing windows instead of replacing them. Um, replacement windows, you'll probably throw them in the trash by the time you make up any energy savings from them and replace them again. and those wood windows could last

110
00:30:06.320 --> 00:30:23.360
another hundred years. Um, so, um, I thought those windows were in great shape for the most part. Um, and this is nothing for your application. I just, you know, have to advocate for the historic old windows. So, >> no, I I completely understand and I I respect it. Like I said, we're trying to

111
00:30:23.360 --> 00:30:38.720
still maintain the historical aesthetic and and keep with the wood sashes and uh hopefully when we're done with the project that it can be something that the everybody on this council can look at and be proud of and be happy that it's preserved in a way that um keep

112
00:30:38.720 --> 00:31:00.240
keeps the historic um historic character alive. >> I appreciate it, guys. Thank you so much. Thank you. Chair Bjornberg and Commissioner Masten, I think that's where the question came from. There's a question about um an

113
00:31:00.240 --> 00:31:16.960
interstitial spacer. Um we use that language because it is in a lot of our design guidelines and I will um of course admit I am not a I do not build windows. I'm not a window contractor in particular. Um the the point is to create a gap, but I do think that

114
00:31:16.960 --> 00:31:31.440
something is needed to create the gap. And now I I don't feel qualified enough to know if that has to happen right in the mountain or or the the bottom. Um I think we understand that in this particular case, of course, the whole point of having to add these casement

115
00:31:31.440 --> 00:31:50.000
windows is to create egress. Um and so we don't want to put a condition on this that would um uh affect it. um our building code reviewer and I had a brief conversation. She shared the requirements that Lance read um that

116
00:31:50.000 --> 00:32:06.000
that does allow grills. Um but again, the key point is to make sure there's enough clearance with the clear glass that um fire safety can can occur with that. So um I don't know that I fully answer your question, but that that is

117
00:32:06.000 --> 00:32:21.600
what I can provide at this point. Um, I do have information to address Commissioner Wallace's previous question if you'd like me to answer that. Okay. >> Yes, please. >> So, Commissioner Wallace, you had asked previously about the guideline related to railings. So, this is 8.52.

118
00:32:21.600 --> 00:32:38.880
Um, when the current building code requires a taller railing height, consider providing a second railing above the historic one to achieve achieve a greater overall height without changing the appearance of the original. Um so that is the I would say equivalent to the the builtup version that is being

119
00:32:38.880 --> 00:32:56.840
suggested keeping in mind that the the language is consider um it's not necessarily a strict requirement. Thank you. >> Thank you for that. Uh do staff have additional comments.

120
00:32:57.039 --> 00:33:13.840
Yes. Go for it. >> Thank you for that permission. Um just adding a little bit on what um Aaron K had said about the interstitial spacer. It is a gap between the panes of glass. It can be a component which is a physical component. It can be gas. It

121
00:33:13.840 --> 00:33:29.679
can be air. It can be whatever. But normally how we see it and how it's incorporated into our design guidelines is an actual physical component that happens between the glass. Um sometimes it can extend the whole way, sometimes it doesn't, but it's basically to con to

122
00:33:29.679 --> 00:33:46.320
maintain that separation. and then muttons can be applied on the exterior or the interior to be removed in the event of an egress situation. However, um I think I think Aaron had said this, but I just if just I guess clarifying is

123
00:33:46.320 --> 00:34:02.320
that when it comes to the egress, I believe the building reviewer had said that the the purpose is to be able to break the pane of glass in one pane. So that you know because we had initially had discussed um true divided lights and

124
00:34:02.320 --> 00:34:18.560
that is not uh egress compliant because you would have to break individual panes and then that's when you get the grid and that doesn't work in terms of an egress situation. But my understanding from the code reviewer is that be able to would have to break to be able to

125
00:34:18.560 --> 00:34:35.159
break the pane of glass in one pane so that it comes out and people can escape. But if that um hoping that provides just more information and answers to help you make your decision. Thank you. Thank you for that.

126
00:34:37.440 --> 00:34:55.839
Okay. Um there not being any others, um I'll close the public hearing. Commissioners, let's discuss. Are there any comments on the proposed application? Commissioner Malbum. Yeah, I'll just add um so you can put different types of

127
00:34:55.839 --> 00:35:12.640
windows. Some of them have external attachments for mullions and some of them have a piece also that goes on the inside. You can do one or the other. You can do both. Often people if you're trying to make something look as historic as possible, you will do the

128
00:35:12.640 --> 00:35:28.400
pieces on the outside and the inside because then it looks integral. Um, but it's not because it's one big piece of glass that the firemen can break the whole thing. The interior piece is

129
00:35:28.400 --> 00:35:44.320
negligible. In fact, it's sometimes it's just foam. So, it's negligible resistance. So, having that interior piece does not affect the ability of the window to act as a fire window, a fire

130
00:35:44.320 --> 00:36:07.040
egress window. Thank you for that. Other comments from commissioners on any of these items? I'll say uh I I in terms of the railing, the sort of first condition, I do agree

131
00:36:07.040 --> 00:36:22.560
that a like builtup railing visually I think would look better. Um, I I think that if it were to get completely removed and rebuilt, it would need to have the design that it currently has. I I think that that's a really nice um feature.

132
00:36:22.560 --> 00:36:39.599
And so I would not really be for removing that feature and just having like a a plain um picketed railing. Anyone? Uh, Commissioner Smith and then Curado. >> Thank you. Um, I I guess I do have a

133
00:36:39.599 --> 00:36:54.480
question with regards to the railing. Should it be rebuilt? Uh, would it be permissible instead of doing a built-up railing to do a redesign of the current railing at a scale that is that meets code? Um, I don't know if that's something that would fall under that

134
00:36:54.480 --> 00:37:10.000
particular neighborhood's guidelines. U, but I just wanted to raise that. >> Yeah, I appreciate that question. I do not know. I did also think about that but um happy to hear other people's comments and Commissioner Curado is next. >> Yeah.

135
00:37:10.000 --> 00:37:27.119
>> Um I guess my concern would be the columns have a specific design and the design of the railing speaks to the design of the column particularly where it's wider versus where it tapers. Um so my concern with a design that perhaps

136
00:37:27.119 --> 00:37:42.880
meets the current regulation is that it's disproportionate and that the heavier sort of current um railing should remain at that height and then the additional to required to the required code height ought to be lighter

137
00:37:42.880 --> 00:38:01.680
in visual appearance I guess. Other thoughts on the railing, Commissioner Thomas and then Wallace? Um, I I I would love them to be able to keep as much of the original railing as possible, keep it the same height. I do

138
00:38:01.680 --> 00:38:18.400
think a railing behind it would look a little weird. Um, I would prefer to see a builtup railing instead. Um, and also I know I've seen this isn't applicable to the state, but I'm sure there are other code compliance I've seen where they can do like a really dark wire that you can barely even see that meets code

139
00:38:18.400 --> 00:38:34.640
requirements but doesn't visually distract from the existing railing. And I don't know if that could meet code as well, but just something that I thought we could consider. Commissioner Wallace, >> I'm actually concerned about the

140
00:38:34.640 --> 00:38:50.720
condition of the railing. I think that I mean I agree with you on the design pieces. I fully understand all of that, but I think the condition of the railing is concerning both for the lead abatement and just for the rotting wood. Um, and if something could be constructed, I mean, we started to get

141
00:38:50.720 --> 00:39:06.720
into some of these design questions, but I think that it sounds like there's willingness from the applicant to rebuild it even if it maintains the exact design and height of the original plus the builtup piece. I think that might be the best compromise. It's sort

142
00:39:06.720 --> 00:39:24.480
of it's a little messy, but it it might hit all the all the pieces we're talking about here. >> Yeah, thanks for that, Commissioner Walls. I I agree with that. I I do um think that the photos did help um make that condition case. Um

143
00:39:24.480 --> 00:39:41.040
Commissioner Melb. Yeah, I'll I'll add my voice and I agree because that's what I was thinking was that it looks unsafe just because it's pulled away and it's just going to keep getting worse over time. So, my thought would be just to replace it exactly as

144
00:39:41.040 --> 00:39:56.640
it is but with new wood and then to build it up so that it actually meets um code. The other thing that I would that kind of jumps out out of all of this with me would be to allow them to do um

145
00:39:56.640 --> 00:40:18.480
glass block basement windows because I think it's a safety issue um on the side of the the facade facing the side street. >> Thank you, Commissioner Melbourne. Other thoughts on that glass block window conversation

146
00:40:18.480 --> 00:40:33.040
from commissioners? I feel like I do remember the the the U of M campus conversation. I don't remember what um we ended up sort of saying. I I do want to say that it was

147
00:40:33.040 --> 00:40:50.160
that it got um appealed because and I know that they had continued like actual having um security incidents like they were always having broken glass as you can assume in uh basement window on campus. Um so I know that that was a a

148
00:40:50.160 --> 00:41:09.599
challenging conversation. Commissioner Wallace. Yeah, I had a similar thought to Commissioner Melbam about at least on the secondary elevation. I understand that it's visible from the right away, so I understand the recommendation, but um I think the profile especially I mean you

149
00:41:09.599 --> 00:41:33.760
can see in the winter you can barely see the the windows like I think there's there's some flexibility potentially on that um the side elevation. Other thoughts on that item from commissioners? Okay. Any thoughts on the Commissioner

150
00:41:33.760 --> 00:41:48.960
Thomas? I just wanted to bring up um condition number um six um on that third elevation where they want one window to be casement and

151
00:41:48.960 --> 00:42:04.079
one to be double hung. While I am a big advocate for keeping the old windows and keeping them the same, I have to agree with the applicant that the two windows next to each other would look better and more accurate um if they matched. I could see somebody really eyeing those a

152
00:42:04.079 --> 00:42:21.440
lot more if they didn't match. So, Commissioner Alexander, >> just to clarify, both of those would be new replacement windows, right? We're not saving a window in in either situation. >> So, I I would agree. I think it would be better if they they match and they are

153
00:42:21.440 --> 00:42:41.200
the same and we're not drawing attention to the mismatch there. Other comments from commissioners on on that >> Andrea. Thank you. Um just wanted to Andrea

154
00:42:41.200 --> 00:42:56.480
Burke again. Um thank you chair Bernber. Just wanted to I did look up what that project was. It was 1100 Fourth Street Southeast. The first um application to bring that project through was denied by the HPC. it does not appear that it was appealed and then it was brought back

155
00:42:56.480 --> 00:43:15.920
almost a year later with a different scope of work um to repair and replace some windows and that was approved with conditions. So, thank you. Thank you for that clarification. Other thoughts on this application? I

156
00:43:15.920 --> 00:43:37.760
know Commissioner Malbum is doing some word smithing it looks like. Yeah, it's a hefty one. Commissioner Curado. >> Yeah, I guess on the commentary on the the Mullians, the mountains, um I did

157
00:43:37.760 --> 00:43:54.640
sell windows at one point. >> The simulated dividers are just so that they look like they're separate panes of glass, but they're not meant to be structural. It's it's really a cost savings thing and also sort of a current technology sort uh thing for

158
00:43:54.640 --> 00:44:10.400
installation. So um it should not I don't think that's what's meant by the code sort of grill and removable. That's more of a security grill issue when it's hard to get in and out. Um those windows do get broken in transit sometimes and they're very easy to

159
00:44:10.400 --> 00:44:32.319
remove from my me memory. >> Thank you Commissioner Curado. Other comments from commissioners at all? Commissioner Melbam. >> Okay. So, hearing no other comments,

160
00:44:32.319 --> 00:44:49.200
I'm going to make a motion that the Heritage Preservation Commission approves the Commission Preservation Application to rehabilitate front porch and replace windows on the property listed or excuse me, located at 504 University Avenue Southeast in the St. Anthony Falls Historic Historic

161
00:44:49.200 --> 00:45:04.160
District, excuse me, subject to the following conditions. Um, so this would be modifying condition number one. Existing wood railings on the front porch shall be

162
00:45:04.160 --> 00:45:22.319
replaced to match existing railing and added to to make code compliant. And then keeping condition two and three, striking condition four, keeping

163
00:45:22.319 --> 00:45:44.720
condition five, striking condition six, and keeping condition seven. >> Thank you, Commissioner Melbam. I'm going to look at the clerk to make sure that they got that. Okay. Thank you. Um, is there a second or any questions

164
00:45:44.720 --> 00:46:08.800
on that? >> Mast seconds. >> Any further discussion? >> Okay, seeing none, will the clerk call the role? >> Commissioner Alexander, >> I. Curado >> I

165
00:46:08.800 --> 00:46:23.119
>> Melbourne >> I >> Rodriguez >> I >> Smith >> I >> Thomas >> I >> Wallace >> I >> Vice Chair Masten >> I >> chair Bjornberg >> I >> There are nine eyes's

166
00:46:23.119 --> 00:46:39.839
>> Thank you. That motion passes. That concludes our public hearing items. Do staff have any announcements? >> Thank you. Um, Chair Bjornberg, I'm Andrea Burke and I'm the supervisor for the historic preservation team in CPAD.

167
00:46:39.839 --> 00:46:56.160
I do have a few announcements this evening. This is a reminder that the HPC special meeting or retreat as we call it is next week on Thursday, May 7th. It starts at 3:00 p.m. and we have booked it till approximately 6 p.m. But, um,

168
00:46:56.160 --> 00:47:11.200
very highlight chance it will end sooner than that. Um, room change than we had of it in previous years. It actually will be held down the hall here in the overflow room from this um boards and commissions chamber. So I think on the

169
00:47:11.200 --> 00:47:28.319
door it says room 338, but technically it is part of room 350, which is what this room is. So um because the meeting is open to the public, that's uh the reason for the change in the room. Um so please go to that room. Um,

170
00:47:28.319 --> 00:47:43.839
also an update on the Cook House demolition which went back to the business housing and zoning committee today of the city council that was forwarded without recommendation to the city council meeting next week which is on Thursday morning, May 7th. So that is

171
00:47:43.839 --> 00:47:58.800
the latest update on that project. Um, if you had noticed I was taking a few photos tonight. Um we will share further what these are for, but wanted to get some um pictures of the HPC

172
00:47:58.800 --> 00:48:15.599
more or less in action um for a future um event. Um and then um also wanted to reach out as we are moving forward and beginning to come into the closing months before the National Alliance of

173
00:48:15.599 --> 00:48:31.359
Preservation Commission's forum conference. Um I will be asking and asking now to begin to put the the seed in your head about volunteers um for uh this conference if you have capacity. I know I've reached out to

174
00:48:31.359 --> 00:48:48.640
everybody about registration, but if you have capacity or you are interested or if you are available, um we will need lots of volunteers for either registration help, people to help um corral tours, whether they are room monitors or special events, um we will

175
00:48:48.640 --> 00:49:04.319
have lots of opportunities. So, if it's not you or if you know somebody who would be interested in volunteering, um please reach out to Aaron or myself and we can add that name to an a list of interested people that are um willing to

176
00:49:04.319 --> 00:49:20.400
help out at this because we will need lots of volunteers for this. Um there is a bit of a you know if you are a volunteer for so many hours in specific it's four hours that day you can attend the rest of the sessions without a registration. So if it happens to be

177
00:49:20.400 --> 00:49:36.319
somebody who's interested in that or not, that is fine too. Um also just I will provide more info but wanted to give an update. So as part of this conference we are organizing an event where it's a meet the heritage preservation commission and I will need

178
00:49:36.319 --> 00:49:53.440
to probably talk with the clerks but my hope is not to have enough for a quorum where we would need to notice for it. Um, but it is uh the event is specific to meeting the HPC of past and and present. So, I'll be reaching out to more HPC commissioners who no longer are

179
00:49:53.440 --> 00:50:10.720
currently um serving. But, if you are interested, I would love to have a few current HPC members there um to meet individuals. Um I do know the date. It's on July 23rd. It's from 3:00 to 5:00 p.m. It'll be held at the forum cafeteria space um that's being opened

180
00:50:10.720 --> 00:50:26.960
for this specifically. So, would really love to have a few volunteers and I will send out a reminder to to ask for those um volunteers. So, that is I'm just checking my list here. That concludes my updates for this evening. Thank you.

181
00:50:26.960 --> 00:50:42.400
Thank you. Do commissioners have any updates? >> Oh, uh Commissioner Wallace, >> just a question for you. Um are there So, I will be out of town during the conference. Are there any um volunteer opportunities for before the conference

182
00:50:42.400 --> 00:50:58.319
or I could reach out to you separately but if there are that just wondering for the good of the order. >> Yeah, Chair Bjornberg and Commissioner Walls. I'm sure there will be. Um this is a very large event that will need a lot of people to and we are having a lot

183
00:50:58.319 --> 00:51:14.559
of people to to help bring it together. So um please reach out. I can also I'll just add your name to my many lists that are going on for this event. um to see if um you or anybody else may be interested in helping out beforehand. So, thank you for that.

184
00:51:14.559 --> 00:51:31.920
>> Commissioner Curado >> related question are call for volunteers going out to like professional allied professions. >> Chair B and Commissioner Carado, can you explain further? >> Oh, like the AIA is is the call for volunteers going out to that organization?

185
00:51:31.920 --> 00:51:47.680
>> Commissioner Caro, I know the AIA has been reached out to. I would assume it's for volunteers, but I I can't be for sure. I know they've been reached out to on other aspects, but um I can follow up on that and or check in about that at our next local planning committee

186
00:51:47.680 --> 00:52:05.760
meeting. >> Thank you, Commissioner Thomas. Um just a general announcement that Rethos will be hosting, this is our fourth year hosting Doors Open Minneapolis. It'll be May 9th and 10th. The event is free to attend. We have

187
00:52:05.760 --> 00:52:22.400
probably about 75 venues that will be opening their doors for people to come and see. Several tour opportunities as well. Um, we also need volunteers. So, if you wanted to sign up for, I believe it's a 4-hour shift, you'll get a free t-shirt and you can skip the line at all the other venues when you go. Some of

188
00:52:22.400 --> 00:52:39.920
those venues get long lines, so it's usually worth it. Um, and there's usually some volunteer afterparties and things as well. And um one of the unique things this year is we are the week prior to doors open we are hosting city stories. So it's a week-l long um

189
00:52:39.920 --> 00:52:54.559
celebration of architecture and history. There are several events throughout the week um that will be open for tickets. Some are some are free but I think most of them are ticketed. We have sold out a lot of them but there are still some that are open. So please look up Doors

190
00:52:54.559 --> 00:53:10.960
Open Minneapolis. Um hope we can check you out. You can check it out on May 9th and 10th and hopefully you can volunteer too. >> Thank you, Commissioner Thomas. Any other Commissioner announcements? Okay, with that, we've completed all

191
00:53:10.960 --> 00:53:24.440
items on the agenda for this meeting. And there being no other business and without objection, I'll declare the meeting adjourned. Next regular meeting is May 7th. Thank you.