►
From YouTube: April 18, 2023 Heritage Preservation Commission
Description
Additional information at:
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
Submit written comments about agenda items to: councilcomment@minneapolismn.gov or https://www.minneapolismn.gov/government/meetings/public-comment/online-comment
A
I
call
to
order
the
April
18
2023
regular
meeting
of
the
Minneapolis
Heritage
preservation
commission.
For
the
record,
my
name
is
Barbara
Howard
and
I
serve
as
chair
of
the
commission.
Just
a
reminder
to
please
silence
your
cell
phones
and
any
other
electronic
devices
and
to
speak
clearly
into
the
microphone,
whether
you're
speaking
at
the
diocese
or,
if
you're,
giving
testimony
would
the
clerk.
Please
call
the
rules
so
that
we
may
verify
the
presence
of
a
quorum.
B
A
Thank
you.
Let
the
record
reflect
we
do
have
Quorum
and
that
commissioner
Vander
Ike
provided
proper
notice
that
they
have
a
conflict
this
afternoon
and
their
absence
is
excused.
Our
first
order
of
business
is
to
adopt
an
agenda
for
this
meeting.
We'll
work
from
the
agendas
that
are
available
over
by
the
clerk
I'll
go
through
the
agenda
and
sort
out
any
items
to
be
withdrawn,
continued
to
a
future
meeting
discussed
or
put
on
the
consent
agenda
to
be
approved,
as
recommended
by
staff
item
number
four
107
3rd
Avenue,
North,
ward
3.
A
This
application
is
for
a
certificate
of
appropriateness.
Item
number
four
will
be
discussed
this
afternoon.
Item
number
five
2415
Colfax
Avenue
South,
Ward
10..
This
application
is
for
a
certificate
of
appropriateness.
Item
number
four
will
be
on
consent.
Unless
someone
wants
to
speak
in
opposition
to
or
modify
the
staff
recommendation
item
number
six
Trail
naming
requests
from
the
Minneapolis
Park
and
Recreation
board.
A
Okay,
I
need
to
be
clear,
I'll
start
over
if
I,
if
I
missed
set
it
item
number
four
107
3rd
Avenue,
northward
three
certificate
of
appropriateness
will
be
discussed.
Item
number
five
2415
Colfax
Avenue
South,
Ward
10.
This
application
is
for
a
certificate
of
appropriateness.
This
item
number
five
will
be
on
consent:
item
number,
six
Trail
naming
requests
from
the
Minneapolis
Park
and
Recreation
board.
This
is
just
an
item
for
discussion.
Item
number
six
will
be
discussed
so
the
proposed
agenda.
The
consent
agenda
will
include
item
number
five
2415
Colfax
Avenue
South
Ward
10.
A
Hearing
no
opposition
to
placing
item
number
five
on
consent.
We
will
approve
it
in
one
motion
at
the
start
of
the
meeting.
The
following
items
will
have
staff
presentation,
public
comments
and
commission
discussion
in
action
item
number:
four
107
3rd
Avenue,
North
ward,
3
and
the
following
item
will
have
staff
presentation
and
commission
discussion
without
a
public
hearing
item
number
six
Trail
naming
requests
from
the
Minneapolis
Park
and
Recreation
board.
Commissioners
may
I
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
proposed
agenda.
A
A
A
A
Thank
you,
the
commissioner.
The
the
minutes
are
approved
before
I
open
the
public
hearing
to
public
comments.
Let
me
summarize
the
process
for
conducting
the
hearing.
First,
we
will
act
on
the
consent
agenda
that
we
just
set
once
items
on
the
consent
agenda
are
approved.
The
commission
is
done
with
those
items.
Applicants
may
contact
the
planning
staff
tomorrow,
but
next
steps
after
the
consent
agenda
item
is
approved.
We
will
take
each
of
the
remaining
agenda
items
in
order
planning
staff
will
present
its
report
and
Commissioners
may
ask
questions
of
Staff.
A
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
do
wish
to
speak,
we
need
you
to
do
two
things,
please
be
sure
to
sign
up
in
the
sheet
over
by
the
clerk
you
have.
If
you
haven't
done
this
already,
you
can
do
this
so
afterwards
and
when
you
come
up
to
testify,
make
sure
you
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Please
keep
your
comments
specific
to
the
application
before
us
today.
A
If
you
happen
to
have
materials
to
hand
out,
please
also
give
those
to
the
clerk
so
that
they
can
be
distributed
to
the
commission
and
entered
into
the
public
record
after
the
public
comments
are
complete,
I
will
close.
The
hearing
and
Commissioners
will
deliberate
and
act
on
the
applications
before
us.
A
A
Seeing
none
are
there
any
members
of
the
public
who
oppose
the
staff
recommendation
for
this
item,
seeing
that
I
will
now
close
the
public
hearing
on
the
consent
agenda
items
may
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
staff
findings
and
recommendations
for
the
item
Nystrom,
so
moves.
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Nystrom.
Is
there
a
second
Sam
bolt
seconds?
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Sambolt
any
discussion
seeing
none
all
in
favor,
say
aye.
A
E
E
The
painted
aluminum
double
doors
proposed
to
be
installed
in
the
center
of
the
non-historic
north
storefront
Bay,
which
you
can
see
highlighted
in
pink
here.
Excuse
me
we'll
match
the
color
of
the
existing
painted
wood
storefront,
the
existing
Center
door
will
be
fixed,
shut,
November,
2022
certificate
of
no
change
application
approved
a
new
entrance
in
the
same
Bay,
immediately
adjacent
to
the
existing
Center
door,
but
the
project
team
realized
that
this
configuration
of
exterior
doors
would
not
align
with
interior
vestibuild
doors,
creating
an
awkward
entry
for
patrons
and
tenants.
E
The
proposed
3x13
canopy,
which
you
can
see
here,
highlighted
in
pink,
will
attach
to
the
historic
brick
facade
via
six
inch
square
bolted
plates
and
cable
hangers
installed
through
mortar
joints.
The
steel
structure
of
the
canopy
will
be
painted
black
to
match
the
storefront,
and
the
underside
of
the
canopy
will
have
wood
cladding
electrical
LED
wall,
sconces,
which
you
can
see
on
the
building
here,
were
previously
approved
in
terms
of
findings
required
by
the
city's
Heritage
preservation
regulations
for
the
certificate
of
appropriateness,
application
staff
finds
that
the
entrance,
but
not
the
canopy,
meets
those
findings.
E
In
particular,
Warehouse
historic
district
design.
Guideline
2.49
states
that
if
an
original
storefront
has
been
altered,
the
preferred
treatment
is
to
restore
them
to
their
original
condition,
based
on
historic
photos
or
other
evidence,
and
guideline
2.50
States,
when
the
original
design
is
not
available
through
historic
plans
or
photos
for
the
replacement
of
a
storefront,
a
contemporary
profile
will
be
considered,
but
existing
original
storefronts
in
the
district
should
be
as
a
reference
for
materials,
size,
sorry
scale,
size
of
members
and
proportion.
E
The
proposed
steel
and
wood
Canopy
is
not
in
keeping
with
that
character
is
not
compatible
with
the
warehouse,
historic
District's
character
in
their
application.
The
applicant
team
provides
photographic
evidence
of
a
wide
variety
of
awnings
canopies
signs
and
fire
escapes
on
the
front
facades
of
buildings
in
the
subject,
historic
districts,
and
they
assert
that
the
proposed
awning
is
consistent
with
these
examples
and
in
keeping
with
the
building's
fenestration
pattern.
E
For
this
reason,
staff
recommends
that
the
Heritage
preservation
Commission
approve
the
project,
subject
to
the
condition
that
a
contemporary
fabric
awning,
not
a
metal
and
wood
Canopy
over
the
storefront
opening
on
this
building
be
approved
in
compliance
with
the
Minneapolis
Heritage
preservation,
commission's
design,
guidelines
for
on-premise
signs
and
awnings,
which
permit
fabric
covered
awnings,
but
not
metal
and
wood.
Canopies
I'm
available
for
any
questions
you
may
have
and
I
know
the
applicant
is
here
as
well.
F
E
Madam
chair,
commissioner
melb.
No,
the
applicant
did
not
having
said
that.
Their
plants
specifically
indicate
that
no,
that
that
the
canopy
will
be
attached
through
the
mortar
joints-
and
you
know,
based
upon
our
experience
with
these
sorts
of
canopies
and
signs
in
the
past,
were
fairly
confident.
Given
the
fact
that
these
joints
in
the
building
aren't
butter
joints.
So
there's
a
bit
more
of
a
substantial,
a
more
robust.
You
know,
width
to
the
mortar
joints,
we're
fairly
competent
that
this
can
be
accomplished.
E
Having
said
that,
if,
in
the
course
of
the
application
the
applicant
determines
or
their
contractor
determines
that
the
the
tapcons
or
the
mortar
anchors
need
to
be
a
little
thicker
than
the
mortar
joints,
we
would
work
for
them
to
ensure
that
only
one
brick
or
as
few
historic
bricks
as
possible
or
damaged
in
the
installation
of
this,
to
make
it
as
reversible
as
possible.
A
G
G
G
So
as
staff
went
over
and
I
I
won't
repeat,
the
proposed
canopy
will
be
over
this
new
entrance
Bay.
Unlike
a
lot
of
the
entrances
in
the
warehouse,
historic
district,
this
current
storefront
configuration
is
pretty
flush
to
the
front
facade
there.
Isn't
that
deep
recess
that
provides
a
natural
Sheltering
for
the
entrance.
So
this
is
pretty
exposed
for
users.
The
proposed
canopy
is
three
feet
deep,
so
it
really
works
with
the
proportion
of
this
smaller
commercial
storefront
and
the
proposed
installation
location
above
the
the
lintel
over
the
entrance.
G
Bay
works
with
the
existing
design
of
the
building
and
doesn't
obscure
or
contradict
the
historic
building
at
all,
and
we
are
proposing
to
use
you
know:
wood
and
steel
materials
that
are
very
appropriate
for
a
warehouse,
historic
district.
G
The
project
team
did
consider
a
fabric
awning
and
decided
to
go
with
a
canopy
for
a
couple
of
reasons,
primarily
durability
fabric
onings
tend
to
show
their
their
wear
and
their
age
a
lot
faster
and
sometimes
I
did
a
little
walking
tour
of
the
historic
district.
You
end
up
with
these
skeletons
when
people
take
down
the
fabric
and
so
for
kind
of
consistency
and
consistency
of
appearance.
Over
a
longer
period
of
time
we
decided
to
to
propose
the
canopy
configuration.
G
There
is
a
lot
of
precedent
for
canopies
like
this
in
the
warehouse
historic
district,
520
Washington,
Avenue
North
is
on
the
left
there
in
606,
Washington
Avenue
is
on
the
right
both
of
those
were
approved
in
2020.,
so
this
proposed
canopy
really
does
use
the
existing
vocabulary
of
the
historic
district
and
is
identifiably
modern,
some
more
examples
there,
they're
just
all
over
and
in
the
staff
report.
It
does
note
that
canopies
are
a
character
defining
feature
of
the
historic
district.
G
Those
are
typically
found
over
loading
docks,
and
these
canopies
are
a
much
different
scale,
they're
much
larger
than
what
we're
proposing
here.
They
have
a
very
distinct
pitch
to
them
that
we
are
not
proposing
we're
having
proposing
a
flat
canopy,
so
those
key
points
of
differentiation.
We
feel
really
mark
this
proposed
canopy
as
a
a
modern
Edition
to
shelter.
This
entrance
Bay.
G
A
I'll
start
out
I'm
a
I
I
agree
with
staff.
Findings
on
this
I
am
a
little
concerned
that
if
we
were
to
approve
the
canopy
as
designed,
we
don't
have
a
whole
lot
of
design
on
it.
So
that's
one
of
my
concerns.
We
just
have
an
elevation
of
it
and
I
do
I.
Do
worry
about
creating
that
false
sense
of
history,
but
I
know
that
canopies
are
are
used
throughout
this
District
I.
Think
the
other
ones
that
were
shown
in
in
the
presentation
were
very
much.
You
could
tell
that
they
were
modern
editions.
A
F
A
That's
that's
my
concern
that
we
have
no
way
of
telling
from
that,
drawing
that
it
will
look
like
a
modern
canopy
as
opposed
to
something
trying
to
mimic
something
historic.
We
have
one
drawing
with
some
notes
on
it
and
I.
Don't
think
that
that's
enough
to
be
able
to
turn
over
staff
findings,
especially
considering
the
guidance
that
we
have
in
the
awnings
and
sign
guidelines,
since
our
district
guidelines
aren't
quite
as
clear
as
we
would
like
them
to
be
possibly
yeah.
That's
my
concern.
F
A
I,
don't
know
that
I
would
leave
it
to
City
staff
to
have
to
have
those
discussions
since
we're
overturning
staff
decision.
If
that's
the
route
we
go
at
this
point,
I'm
feeling
like
I,
should
agree
with
with
staff
on
this
one.
So.
C
I,
just
thank
you
chair
Howard.
Are
we
overturning
staff
findings
I
believe
they
just
conditioned
it
with
the
fabric
awning,
so
it
would
be
like
if
we
approved
it
with
the
conditions
as
approved.
It
would
be
that
theoretically,
we
could
also
add
a
condition,
as
commissioner
Melbourne
was
suggesting,
to
work
with
City
staff
or
I.
C
Guess
that's
what
I
I
I
I
do
agree
with
like
I
was
looking
for
pictures
and
I
didn't
see
any
pictures,
so
that's
kind
of
where
I'm
leaning
as
well
of
you
know,
I,
don't
have
enough
information
to
go
off
of
the
photos
that
were
shown
in
the
presentation
by
the
applicant.
Were
you
know,
I
believe
that
they,
you
know,
were
great
designs
as
well
and
are
fit
with
the
distinction
between
historic
and
modern,
but
based
off
the
application.
A
A
H
To
her
Howard
I
would
to
to
clarify,
let
me
start
I'm
Andrea
Burke
I
serve
as
the
supervisor
for
the
historic
preservation
team
in
the
community
planning
and
economic
development
department.
I
wanted
to
make
a
clarification
to
some
of
the
discussion
that
I
heard.
The
recommendation
is
to
approve
the
project,
which
is
an
additional
part
about
the
entrance
to
the
storefront.
It's
not
just
the
canopy
staff
has
conditioned
it
to
for
a
fabric
awning
as
opposed
to
a
canopy.
H
C
A
So
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
on
the
table
that
the
Heritage
preservation
commission
approved
the
certificate
of
appropriateness
to
install
the
entrance
with
a
canopy
at
107
3rd
Avenue
North
in
the
warehouse
in
St,
Anthony,
Falls,
historic
districts,
subject
to
the
conditions
number
two
and
three,
as
provided
by
staff
and
the
one
that's
Vice
chair
sample,
just
stated
any
further
discussion.
C
F
A
I
Afternoon,
chair
Howard
and
Commissioners
I
am
Aaron
K
city
planner
in
the
historic
preservation
section
of
cped
and
I'm
here
to
present
two
Trail
naming
requests
from
the
Minneapolis
Park
and
Recreation
board
for
your
review
and
comment.
This
is
coming
before
you,
pursuant
to
the
Minneapolis,
Park
and
Recreation
board's
policies
and
procedure
for
naming
parks
and
park
facilities.
It's
part
of
their
engagement
process
when
these
requests
come
before
them
that
the
Minneapolis
Heritage
preservation
commission
gets
to
comment.
I
staff.
Did
cursory
desktop
analysis
about
the
two
honorees
for
these
naming
requests
and
did
not
uncover
any
information
that
raised
any
concerns
about
these
naming
opportunities
and
any
comments
that
you
have
we'd
be
happy
to
relay
back
to
the
Minneapolis
Park
and
Recreation
board?
So
that
concludes
my
presentation
and
I
can
stand
for
questions.
I
Chair
Howard,
commissioner
strothers.
Thank
you
for
that
question.
I
will
admit.
I
am
not
well
versed
in
the
history
of
naming
requests
from
the
park
board.
I
know
they
come
up
relatively
rarely,
but
I
am
under
the
impression
that
if
someone
wishes
to
name
a
portion
of
the
park
system
or
a
trail
after
someone,
they
just
need
to
follow
the
process
for
this,
and
then
it's
considered
by
the
park
board.
After
the
conclusion
of
the
necessary
engagement
period,
I
can
ask
Andrea
Burke
if
she
has
any
precedent
to
share.
H
D
F
My
name
is
Kate.
Thank
you.
Are
there?
I
I
was
going
through
my
mind
when
I
read
through
this
the
other
day
and
I'm
going
through
it
again,
I,
don't
think
I've
ever
seen
anything
on
a
trail.
That's
ever
marked
it
as
being
dedicated
to
any
specific
person.
Are
there
any
instances
that
you
can
think
of
or
that
you
can
recall,
or
maybe
any
of
the
other
commissioners
where
there
is
a
trail
actually
named
a
portion
of
a
trail
named
for
somebody.
I
Chair
Howard,
commissioner
Medlin.
Thank
you
for
that
question.
I
am
not
aware
of
specific
Trail
segments.
Thinking
back
into
recent
history
of
naming
requests
that
have
come
before
the
park
board.
That
included
renaming
clubhouses
at
two
golf
courses
in
the
system,
so
I
think
it
can
vary
based
on
what
who
is
being
honored
and
what
place
perhaps
reflects
that
and
for
the
the
trail
to
be
named
after
a
brick
record.
I
This
was
a
request
that
that
he
made
prior
to
his
passing
and
his
based
on
the
correspondence
his
son
is
trying
to
fulfill
that
request
and
also
I
believe,
is
providing
the
funds
to
update
any
way
finding
as
needed
to
to
reflect
the
new
name.
D
And
commissioner
sample
yeah
this
commissioner
sampled
in
response
to
commissioner
Mel
Bloom's
question
I,
do
know
of
a
portion
of
a
trail
along
the
Mississippi
River
happens
to
be
near
my
house
that
is
named
the
Winchell
Trail
I
know
that's
named
after
a
person
who
enjoyed
and
helped
maintain
sections
of
the
trail.
So
that's
that's
a
precedent.
I
am
aware
of
there's
not
much
for
signage
about
it.
There's
like
one
small
sign
that
I
know
of
that
marks
it
as
such.
A
The
only
comment
I
had
is
I
generally
disagree
with
naming
anything
after
people
in
general,
but
I
don't
see
any
reason
why
these
things
shouldn't
be
named
after
these
two
people.
I
would
like
to
see
more
interpretation
of
what
Cleveland
did
for
the
the
park
system
here,
but
I
don't
see
any
reason
to
to
object
to
these
two
individuals
being
honored.
In
this
way,
commissioner
strothers.
J
A
K
Go
ahead,
commissioner:
Dreyer
I'm,
just
noting
that
the
park
naming
guidelines
call
for
requiring
quote
significant,
enduring
Park
contributions
for
renaming
and
also
direct
that
it
should
be
not
undertaken
lightly.
A
I
A
H
Thank
you,
chair,
Howard,
again
for
the
record.
I
am
Andrea
Burke
and
I
serve
as
supervisor
for
the
historic
preservation
team
in
cped.
I
have
three
announcements
updates
to
give
to
the
commission
this
evening.
One
is
that
316
4th
Avenue
Southeast,
the
Holy
Trinity
Episcopal
Church,
was
formally
designated
by
City
Council
on
April
13th,
so
we
now
have
190
I'm.
Looking
at
Aaron
100
195
landmarks
in
the
City
of
Minneapolis.
H
We
also
were
notified
by
the
state
historic
preservation
office
that
we
received
a
certified
local
government
grant
to
undertake
The
Fifth
Street
Southeast
resurvey.
So
we
will
begin
planning
and
project
management
for
that
project
in
the
2023
and
2024
year.
But
yes,
and
then
the
last
announcement
is
that
our
final
Community
engagement
meeting
for
the
Washburn
Fair
Oaks
design
guidelines
update,
will
occur
on
April
29th
from
11
A.M
to
1pm,
and
it
will
be
at
the
city
of
lakes,
Waldorf
School.
H
It
will
be
more
of
a
presentation,
style
format
for
those
who
wish
to
join
us
where
we
will
be
going
over
while
the
consultant
will
be
going
over
some
of
the
changes
in
the
layout
to
the
design
guidelines,
which
is
the
certified
local
government
project
that
we
have
been
working
on
this
year
and
I
have
no
further
updates.
Thank.
C
Yes,
I
wanted
to
draw
some
attention
to
an
upcoming
event
on
May,
13th
and
14th
in
our
city,
doors,
open
Minneapolis.
On
behalf
of
my
employer,
rethos.
We
are
helping
to
produce
the
event
and
we
are
in
need
of
some
volunteers
if
anyone
is
interested
in
volunteering,
I
believe
a
few
of
our
landmarks
and
buildings
and
our
districts
will
be
participating
as
venues
and
they'll
be
open
up
to
the
public
for
people
to
come
tour
and
do
behind
the
scenes
access.
C
A
A
Seeing
not,
we
have
completed
all
items
on
the
agenda
for
this
meeting.
I
will
ask
members
and
staff
one
more
time
if
there
are
any
matters
to
come
before
this
meeting
there
being
no
other
business
to
come
before
the
meeting
and
without
objection.
I'll
declare
the
meeting
adjourned.
The
next
regular
meeting
of
the
Heritage
preservation
commission
is
Tuesday,
May,
2nd
2023.