Welcome everybody to the January 27th Heritage Preservation Commission meeting.

Before we call to order, we start each meeting with a 15-minute public open comment period.

This is an opportunity for the public to comment to the commission regarding items that do not have a public hearing on today's agenda.

Each speaker has up to four minutes.

The commission will not discuss or respond to any comments made during this time.

Please be concise and mindful of your time during your remarks so that everyone wishing to speak has the opportunity to do so.

Will the first speaker please step forward and state your name?

It's nice to see a full house.

We haven't had every single member Steve in a while.

It's nice to see everybody.

Number one, uh before the next HPC meeting, uh there's going to be uh a city council study session, at least it's on the agenda that way, where they're going to discuss the downtown historic district study, the one that the consultant was hired to uh work on.

So because that's going to occur before the next HPC meeting, which I would like to sort of hear you find out in this meeting what it what that's going to involve, like what exactly it will be presented to the council during that.

And in the future, I would hope that they would present it to you and the public before it goes to the city council so they can get your input before they act on it, not afterwards.

So again, I there that's coming up the Monday before your next meeting.

Uh the historical downtown um historic district um study report by the uh consultant.

Um also I I'm hoping that you can work a little on the um all of the pending properties in in the inventory.

Um this has been around for nine years now, undone.

It's all all of the all of the we we originally had a list nine years ago of of different properties that we thought were going to be potentially historic.

A lot of them are unworked on.

Some of them were over the years, and you see that on our list, but a lot of them haven't been, and it's been a very a big disappointment to all of us because it's been the they've been there for so many years uh undone.

So I'm hoping that you can have prioritize which ones you want to work on.

Um, there's so many of them, Cavalry at um Episcopal Church, the Charles H.

Mayo residence, the um the Great Western Depot, which is now the porch and cellar restaurant, the Dairy Queen, the Falwell School, IBM property.

Already the City Council is talking about IBM for the future and looking at that site.

I think it it calls for landmarking sooner rather than whether or not it's going to be landmarked sooner rather than later.

Mayo Ballfield, St.

Francis of Assisi, uh the Cali Grands, the Sisi Heights, um the uh uh all of the other ones, the IBI IBM, the Stone Silo, there's so many of these properties that have to be done.

I was just giving you a scattering of them uh and uh smattering of them.

And I I just think you you you should work on it.

So I also was hoping you'd work on the awards.

The awards are supposed to be theoretically, if you do, are given out in um uh the heritage preservation month, which is May.

So you don't have that much time.

It really should be started now rather than if you wait till uh May, you're gonna have to wait a whole year.

And again, it pushes things back.

And I'm just hoping for uh not a great amount of productivity, but a little productivity this year, so that we can actually get some of this stuff out.

And with that, I'll I'll I'll leave.

And I I wish you a good term and hopefully enjoy being on the HPC.

I as everyone knows I was on it.

Faith you have loved every minute of it, and hopefully you will too.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr.

Skolnick.

Will the next speaker please step forward and state your name for the into the microphone?

Barry forgot his stuff.

Hi, I'm Barb Hudson, and uh I'd like to talk a little bit about uh your agenda this evening.

You're gonna be talking about uh priorities and what your roles and responsibilities are.

Uh I can uh appreciate both both uh being on the dais myself and then being in the public.

I represent a lot of people who feel that there is no point in showing up in front of the heritage preservation commission because nothing happens, we're losing our properties and our heritage all the time, especially as Mayo's going.

Now, you heard Barry mention that Assisi Heights is on our inventory list.

Well, Mayo has just bought Assisi Heights, and so our likelihood of landmarking that is slim to none at this point.

So I would encourage you as you talk about your roles and responsibilities and your priorities, that you have a plan.

And that means not just yes, we need to list priorities.

I hear this every year in January, that you're gonna make a list of priorities, but you never do.

And when you do decide that you're going to have a priority such as Indian Heights Park, which was last year's priority in January, nothing happened because we had Peel Hill, because we had the uh the downtown historic district had some challenges, and we're still not getting to what your main objective is is to preserve the heritage and uh history of Rochester.

So I would encourage you to have committees, perhaps, on the awards uh that you would give out for people who want to take care of our uh historic uh preservation.

Uh that would be part of your role as uh public education and information that would go a long ways to get to um identify that.

And if you're gonna make priorities, have a group if if you can't decide at your meetings here uh during the monthly meetings, perhaps have a committee for that as well.

So there's a lot of things that can be done.

You can't just have a goal without a plan to get to that goal, and that's what I'm asking for you tonight, not for myself, but for the people of Rochester.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

Hudson.

Well, the next speaker please step forward and state your name into the microphone.

John Creasel.

Um bless you.

Uh without uh reiterating uh what uh Barry said and Barb said, I can say that I stand firm with them as it relates to uh establishing priorities.

Um your part of the preservation commission.

Um putting myself in your position, uh, I might suggest uh as priorities, because that's a large bandwidth.

Um, maybe trying to establish which ones are very possibly most in harm's way.

Um I think it's very important that uh uh Sissy Heights that Barb brought up.

Uh I'm not trying to be cynical here, but there's uh there's been an argument over the years that if people have said, I didn't know that this building uh was historical, uh whether it was the Oddfellows or whether there are any other buildings, um that argument then uh gets beaten to death, and it's really an embarrassing to even bring it up.

Um but that said, I'm assuming that uh Assis Heights uh that certainly the clinic knows that it was historical.

Uh that said, uh, along with those other priorities.

Let's talk about the items that are in harm's way.

It could be could be Mayo Ballfield.

Um certainly uh Oddfellows uh maybe portions of soldiers field.

Um I don't think the UMR is completely played their cards yet as to where facilities are gonna be uh put, but that certainly will be putting historical facilities uh potentially in uh uh uh in harm's way.

Uh uh Barry, I believe uh uh brought to your attention of a study session that's coming up at the City of Rocher, if I'm not mistaken.

Um portion of that discussion has to do with trying to hold.

I'm just gonna say simply put, uh, Mayo's feet to the fire as it relates to artifacts that were promised to be utilized uh in the neighborhood at Leward's High School, where there is going to be a let's call it a park, and they're trying to back away from their obligations thus far.

Uh and what was promised to the neighborhood, which would is not a way to develop trust.

I think more than ever we need to develop trust without talking about our political environment in Minnesota.

Trust is earned, not deserved.

So I feel it's very important that a historic preservation commission, like Barry had brought up, um is uh consulted with uh because uh you are the commission to be consulted with to give input to the to the uh elected officials of our city government that said on the priority list.

I would like to see some action take place on a sissy heights.

Uh uh it's certainly uh I would imagine there are many developers' eyes on it.

Uh there's will be a development on the old criminal property uh that would affect um uh Assissi Heights and let's say visual entities dependent upon the height of a facility.

Uh I'd also like to see some uh action as to items such as the firehouse clock or China Hall or Hollywood or uh the Weber and Judd clock downtown as being designated as landmarks and and I don't know uh what to hold up on that is.

I I think people would uh regard the firehouse clock as a landmark, so therefore there's an open door to discuss the other items that are still in this community.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr.

Creasel.

Is there anyone else wishing to speak for open comment?

Okay, hearing none, we will close the open comment period before I formally gavel us into order.

Uh, with today being the first meeting of the year and having a new commissioner joining us, we'll take a brief minute uh to welcome Commissioner Tater.

And Commissioner Tater, if you'll take a minute to introduce yourself, your interest in heritage preservation, or any other short information to help us get to know you a little bit.

Um and really quickly, uh, make sure that you have a green light on on your microphone, and there's a push button on the little black box down there.

Can you hear me now?

Yes.

Okay, we're great.

Uh Ryan Tater, I'm a Texan native.

Actually, I moved here in 1992.

I've slowly been shaking off my accent since I got here.

Um came here as a little religious baseball player, and suddenly I'm a hockey player now.

So thanks for having me and changing those habits.

Um I love history.

That was kind of one of the reasons why I wanted to join this commission.

Um I work in the restaurant industry, but a lot of times after I go home, I find myself watching history channels.

So I'm always uh have a deep respect for um for our past.

So that was kind of one of the things that I decided I wanted to volunteer in Rochester, and that was something that had grabbed my eye with the uh opportunity to work with history in the way we're doing here and and preservation.

So if that suffices, everyone, that's a little bit about me.

Excellent.

Welcome to the commission.

Um, now very briefly, just for the benefit of our newer commissioners.

Um, if we could just go down the line, we can start from the right to left.

Uh just state your your name as a commissioner and how long you've been on the commission.

Go ahead, Commissioner Bodeker.

Good evening, Chad Bedaker.

Uh let's see, I believe June last year.

Yes.

Okay, we'll go with that.

June last year.

Uh, I'm Melissa Muchler, and I've been on the commission for a year.

Hi, Juan Connell.

Uh, been on a commission for a year.

Hi, Jennifer Shable, and I'm in my second term as commissioner.

Uh Chairs Astro, I have been on the commission for two years and about two months as I filled a vacancy right at the end of a year.

Uh Vice Chair uh Poyer, I've been on the commission for two years.

We nagandi.

This is my second year.

Elida Kessler, this is my second meeting.

All right.

Welcome everybody.

Thank you for that.

Um now uh this meeting of the Rochester Heritage Preservation Commission is called to order on January 27th, 2025 at 515 p.m.

Um, I'll now call the roll.

Commissioner Baedaker.

Present.

Commissioner Connell.

Present.

Commissioner Gandhi.

Present.

Commissioner Kessler.

Present.

Commissioner Muchler.

Present.

Commissioner Poyer?

Here.

Commissioner Schable.

Present.

Commissioner Tater.

Here.

Commissioner Wasmer?

Here.

And uh Chairs Astros present.

And that reminds me, Commissioner Wasmer, we missed you down there.

Do you want to go ahead and just introduce yourself to the new commissioners as well?

Uh my name is Valerie Wasmer, and I am the executive director at the History Center.

So I'm a non-voting member, but I'm here on behalf of the History Center to offer any input that I can.

Excellent.

Thank you.

Okay, moving on to item uh number three, the order of the agenda.

It is on the screen and was included in your packets.

Are there any objections to the order of the agenda as presented in your packets?

Are there any objections to the order of the agenda as presented in your packets?

Hearing none, the order of the agenda is approved by unanimous consent.

Moving on to agenda item four.

Um, this is the consent agenda.

The minutes from the December 16th meeting, a Roberts Rules quick sheet, and a 2026 meeting calendar were included in your packet.

These items may be approved in a block, but the elections listed in item 4D will need to be done separately.

So at this point, I would invite a motion to block and approve items 4A through 4C, after which we will address item 4D.

So moved.

We have a motion to approve.

Uh will you will you state, please?

Uh, I would like a motion to approve.

Uh I'd like to make a motion to approve the consent agenda, which includes the minutes of the last meeting, Roberts rules of parliamentary procedure, and the HBC calendar adoption for 2026.

Okay, we have a motion to block and approve items 4A through 4C.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Okay.

Moved by Commissioner Poyer, seconded by Commissioner Kessler.

Um, is there any discussion?

All right, we can move to a vote.

All in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

And I should have mentioned we will accept an abstention if you did not uh attend or view the minutes if anyone would like to abstain.

Are there any abstentions?

Okay, approved unanimously.

Moving on to the item 4D, the 2026 elections of HPC officers.

Um for this item, I will take nominations from the floor for each position before moving to a vote.

You may simply state your nomination for this process.

No second is needed, but seconding a nomination is not out of order.

I will call out three times for any nominations for each position before closing the nomination for that seat and moving to the vote.

The process will start with the chair, then the vice chair, and finally the secretary.

Secretary.

Anyone may nominate themselves or another commissioner.

If you are nominated and do not wish to serve, please inform the chair and the commission before we vote.

Uh if there is more than one nominee received, we will hold a roll call vote with a majority needed to win.

Uh so before I start, are there any questions about the voting process, Commissioners?

Okay, so at this point, I will accept nominations for chair of the heritage preservation commission.

I'd like to nominate Commissioners Astro for chair.

Thank you.

I accept.

Are there any other nominations for chair of the Heritage Preservation Commission?

Final time.

Are there any other nominations for chair of the Heritage Preservation Commission?

Hearing none, uh Commissioner Zastro is the nominee before us.

Do I have a motion to approve?

I uh I'd like to make a motion to approve uh Commissioners Astro being elected chair.

Okay, we have a motion to approve Commissioner Zastro.

Do we have a second?

I second.

Okay, moved by Commissioner Poyer, seconded by Commissioner Gandhi.

Um, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Okay.

It passes unanimously.

At this point, I will take nominations for vice chair of the Heritage Preservation Commission.

Commissioner Schable nominates uh Commissioner Poyer as Vice Chair.

All right, Commissioner Schapel has nominated Commissioner Poyer.

And while there is no second, I will agree that uh I would also second that.

Commissioner Poyer.

Accept.

Okay.

Do we have any other nominations for vice chair of the Heritage Preservation Commission?

Final call.

Do we have any other nominations for vice chair of the Heritage Preservation Commission?

Hearing none, I would invite a motion to approve Commissioner Poyer as vice chair of the Heritage Preservation Commission for 2026.

I will make a motion to approve Commissioner Poyer as the vice chair for the 2026 term.

Okay.

Commissioner Schable has moved to approve Commissioner Poyer as vice chair.

Do we have a second?

I'll second.

Okay.

Moved by Commissioner Schable.

Seconded by Commissioner Connell.

Um, all in favor of approving Commissioner Poyer as vice chair of the Heritage Preservation Commission.

Say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Okay.

Approved unanimously.

Thank you.

At this point, I will open nominations for Secretary of the Heritage Preservation Commission.

And I will nominate Secretary Shable for another term.

Aye.

Accept the nomination.

Do we have any other nominations for Secretary of the Heritage Preservation Commission?

Final call.

Any other nominations for Secretary of the Heritage Preservation Commission?

Hearing none, I would invite a motion to approve Secretary Shable as Secretary of the Heritage Preservation Commission.

I make a motion to approve uh Secretary Schable for the 26 2026 term as Secretary of the HBC.

Okay.

We have a motion by Commissioner Poyer to approve Commissioner Schable to the 2026 term of the Heritage Preservation Commission.

Second.

I'll second.

Okay.

Beat out just quickly here, a second by Commissioner Kessler.

So move by Commissioner Poyer, seconded by Commissioner Kessler.

All in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Passes unanimously.

Congratulations to all officers for 2026.

Moving on to agenda item five, reports and recommendations.

Item 5A is a certificate of appropriateness for 822 4th Street Northwest.

Coordinator Patterson Lungren, I'll turn it over to you.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Yeah.

So good evening, members of the Heritage Preservation Commission.

One of the items, one of the tasks that you are assigned in city code in our unified development code, is to review proposed alterations to properties that are designated landmarks.

For those of you who are a little bit newer to the commission, this could include individual buildings, structures such as the Corn on the Cobb Water Tower.

It could include objects that have been designated, and it includes properties that are within historic districts.

The property that we're looking tonight is eight.

This residence is a contributing property to the historic district.

So we treat those very much like we do individual historic landmarks.

If you've taken a look through the design guidelines that were adopted some years ago by the commission, you'll see that one of the things that we start with when we look at uh approving alterations to historic properties is to understand a little bit about what that historic property is and why its significance.

What is it about this house that makes it contributing to the historic district?

In this case, um the home is considered an American four square, which is a particular type of um building form, a design, architectural design of a property.

Um, and it's typical of that period of time of when the Pill Hill district was being was being built.

So um, so it is contributing to the district.

The proposal um is to replace one of the windows, and it is one of the windows um that is a character-defining feature of the house.

So the larger uh picture windows, individual, non-movable, um, kind of non-operable windows with the leaded glass, and I'll have a close-up here, which you've which you've also seen in your packet.

Um is one of the features of the home that is mentioned uh in the the study when the when the district was um designated by the city council.

So that is something to be aware of.

Um and on the screen now, um, and for those of you who don't have the screen um showing up on your lap on your screen, um, I just ask that you look on with your neighbors.

I apologize that um that's not working tonight for everybody.

Um, so the individual window that we're looking at, um, the proposal is to remove that bottom portion and to replace it with two operable windows, crank out um what are called casement windows.

Um, in the packet and on the screen, you'll see that um it's a fairly, in my opinion, and I'm you know, proposing to you that it's a fairly minimal change.

Uh the actual upper part, the leaded glass transom window area would be maintained, it would be kept on the property, only the bottom part would be removed and replaced.

So the applicant is asking for approval to do this.

Um, and you know, based on the material material that I've given you with um uh looking at the Secretary of Interior Standards, and I've gone through each of these, and I think the next um slide I have will actually go into this in more detail.

And I've gone through each of these, and I think the next slide I have will actually go into this in more detail.

I'm proposing that it's really a minimal alteration.

It is preserving the distinctive leaded grass glass trans window.

It's preserving the existing opening.

Sometimes you'll see in older buildings where they block off part of the window, they decrease the size, they open it up, and you kind of see those scars on the outside of a building.

In this case, they're maintaining the existing opening.

That's one of the things that's important to do.

And then the other part of that is that it is a secondary facade.

Well, the windows are mentioned as character-defining features.

And uh the material that I gave you in terms of um what are character-defining features of the home.

Um, it didn't specify it, it talked about that front facade and the windows and the porch.

So this is one of those areas where, you know, you make the decision, right?

You make the decision as to how to read um the historic significance of the house.

And is this alteration minor enough for you to be comfortable with approving?

So recommendation is to approve the alteration as proposed.

Um, and I'm suggesting that it does indeed meet the Secretary of Interior standards.

In particular, uh Secretary of Interior Standard One, it's minimal changes um to materials uh and the features spaces and spatial relationships.

Again, it's not moving a window, it's not closing it off.

Um, it's a fairly minimal change just to that one opening.

Um, distinctive leaded glass transom window will remain in place.

Um, the new window is compatible to materials features and size and scale of the existing.

And I think one of the other things that um causes me to recommend approval of this is that this is a fairly easy thing that could be um returned to one single window in the future if a property owner, a new property owner or the existing property owner wanted to change it back.

So those are all reasons why I'm recommending that you prove this tonight.

And with that, I will give it back to the chair.

And if there's any questions that you have of me.

Thank you, coordinator Patterson Lundgren.

Uh, commissioners, any questions for staff?

Commissioner Schable.

Do we know if this was done for maybe I just need to get closer?

There we go.

Uh do we know if the applicant uh was doing this for just desirability of having an open window or was it intentional to have an additional means of egress from the property?

Yep.

Yeah, it actually is an additional means of egress.

Um the property uh owner would like to use.

And um, it is a rental, and so code requirements are to have an accessible um egress window for bedrooms.

Thank you.

Commissioner Poyer.

So if the historic nature and the egress requirements of a bedroom conflicted, would we I'm not saying that happens here, but would we then we lean towards egress in that situation or would that depend?

Yeah, I think that's that's kind of where the the line is that you have to make a determination.

Um, I think that my recommendation to you is to focus on whether or not you think it meets the Secretary of Interior standards and our design guidelines that have been adopted.

Um, we do talk about looking at um allowing things for code compliance.

Um, that would be a rental code compliance.

So, you know, they do have a choice of of not using it as a bedroom, but um, but I think that would be sort of one one side on one kind of point on that side of the scale.

Okay, so just to follow up, just for my kind of curiosity going forward, how does this um cross over to major enough that it needs approval from us as opposed to approved at the staff level?

What's the distinction?

Yeah.

So um when the application came in, I looked at it and also talked to actually the community development director who, you know, under the UDC has the um has the say in interpreting kind of the initial um uh review.

And we felt that so first of all, it is a contributing property to a designated historic landmark district.

So that's the first thing.

Um, the second thing is that it did require, it does require a building permit.

So there's a permit required.

And then we look at it and we say, is this a is this a um uh historically um kind of contributing feature to the home?

Thank you.

Uh Commissioner Kessler um have we had a chance to talk with the applicant about the materials I know in the packet it says that the exterior would be a vinyl clad and then the interior would be all wood.

Have they explored all wood options?

I have not had that conversation with them.

So um yeah I can I cannot answer that question.

Thank you.

Commissioners any other questions for staff.

Okay at this point I would invite a motion on the item.

I'll make a motion to approve the alteration as proposed as it meets adopted design guidelines and the Secretary of Interior standards for rehabilitation.

I'll second that okay a motion to approve as uh stated by Commissioner Poyer and seconded by Commissioner Bodeker.

Um Commissioner Poyer any discussion?

Nothing further okay Commissioner Bodeker nothing.

All right any other commissioners all right um all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed say nay any abstentions okay passes unanimous.

All right moving on there are no public hearings tonight.

So we are on agenda item 7A historic landmarks and inventory lists I will pass it back to you coordinator Patterson Longren.

Thank you, Commissioner uh Chair Zastro.

Um yes I really just wanted to um periodically get out updated lists of the landmark properties and of the historic inventory.

So um I try to do that after there have been major changes or once a year or at you know at least as we get new people on.

So um so that is in your possession and it's um uh available online uh well a couple places but it's available online now through the um the meeting website um if somebody is looking at HPC packets so it's available a couple different ways um I certainly am open to questions if you have any questions on it it's something that we'll probably be talking about um in the next few meetings and um even on the the final agenda item I might refer to it.

So if anybody has questions about what's on the list.

Okay Commissioner Poyer, go ahead.

Thank you, Chair Sastro.

Um I I would just like to piggyback on the all three of our public commenters um about Assis Heights um when we had this conversation a year ago that's what I indicated as a priority and I I know um there are probably other things ahead of it such as Indian Heights and also the state hospital but is that somewhere on the priority list of properties that we could consider you know it seems like it does have increased importance now with the purchase by Mayo Clinic.

Yeah I think that the commission can indicate that that's a priority um either now or at a later time like if you wanted to ask that um we have an agenda item in the future where you actually make a decision at a future meeting um we could do that uh and I guess I really you know put that on you as a commission if you want to like make a formal statement about that um I think in terms of kind of the lift that it would be to to do an evaluation on that that will take some time um and some resources to to do that um that one is not on my kind of radar right now for this next year um but again as we talk about priorities in the next agenda item um I'm open to hearing that from you yeah I mean I'm I'm just one commissioner but that that would be high on my priority list.

Okay thank you.

Commissioner Kessler Yeah so looking at the list and kind of taking in some of the feedback that we've heard and how this is historically gone I noticed that we don't have necessarily any sort of triaging within the list itself um wondering if that's something that we could potentially work on to that we have a clear list of expectations of okay we've got 68 on there are and you know one through 68 what we're looking to do.

list of expectations of okay we've got 68 on there are and you know one through 68 what we're looking to do um just a curiosity of course I'm new I don't know what work has been done there and I don't want to assume that that hasn't been done internally yet some ex to some extent but I think having it with the list might be helpful sure um too okay so um yes we are limited by uh the the staff resources um however we as a commission can um if we wanted to do that we could do that um that would probably be something we break out into committee for so we took a lot of time over the past year exploring what a committee would look like how to do that I think we've gotten there um but really it would depend on if that's what the commission wants to do as a whole um and if we took a vote to do something like that by prioritizing the properties um kind of in depth and triaging it I I don't believe that's something in coordinator Patterson Lundrin you can speak this I don't believe staff has the capacity right now to to take something like that on it would that be correct I would say yes that's correct um and I will tell you sort of how we have approached the triage as we go through we've put on last year we put um on Pill Hill and Central Park which actually got bumped um that wasn't on our list in January when we looked at priorities but it was brought forward um and that happened instead of the hospital and um Indian Heights um we'll talk about Indian Heights on the next agenda item too but I think um one of the ways we've looked at triage is you know what level of information do we already have on the property so that's one of the things that um the committee that's been formed to um further develop historic context is going to help continue to gather information that we can you that can then be used in evaluations for individual properties.

And we say individual properties that could be individual buildings, districts sites, right?

So um so what level of information do we have that's accessible to um to myself or a consultant to start to develop an eligibility study for property.

If there is a property owner who is supportive and actually requesting it that has helped bring um bring the property to the top of the list we did have an application a couple of years ago the good friend house um which is in Pill Hill that was an application where the property owner requested landmark um so those are two things and then I think the other part is um you know sort of what um as we're going through and um talking about um I guess it's kind of the support right not just the property owner but are there properties that um that we have had more discussion about that are in play kind of in you know in the community and that was downtown in particular um it took several years for us to actually get that designated the downtown district um but that was continually discussed and and brought up and um and we worked through some issues with multiple property owners in that case and did a lot of work with them to make them more comfortable um not completely but more comfortable when city council ultimately designated that so those are that's been kind of our triage um we have and it's been a few years now we have had everybody look at the list and sort of rank you know which ones they think are most important um and I would say that that that hasn't been that successful because somebody will pick something that they think is really important and yet we don't have remaining about the properties so that isn't necessarily the best one to put to the top um we've approached it from the other direction and that might be a good thing to do this year.

Are there properties that are sort of easy to pick and say you know what those maybe those ones aren't appropriate to continue to look at um so I think that would be another way that I would say to approach and that might be we haven't done that for a couple years.

We haven't removed properties from the list without moving them onto the landmark um so that's that would be my answer to yeah no I appreciate all that information thank you absolutely yeah commissioners yes go ahead commissioner shable uh and either other commissioners who are part of the committee can speak to this or Molly you can share updates uh as well uh it would be my personal preference to focus on landmarking properties while it may there may be some low-hanging fruits to remove properties off the inventory in my opinion if those properties are just sitting there and there's not a concern from the property owner uh our time is better spent uh moving properties off the list to landmark where they have more protections and we can show as a commission that the the heritage of the community is important to us and so we want to specifically recognize those historic properties uh my understanding of the committees was that something it would be something to the effect of picking some of those properties and gathering information and resources so that uh those more properties could potentially come to us and it may be that we discover they're not landmark eligible and so of course in that case we would remove them for the list uh but I'd like I'd rather see a movement towards

And so we want to specifically recognize those historic properties.

Uh my understanding of the committees was that something it would be something to the effect of picking some of those properties and gathering information and resources so that uh those more properties could potentially come to us.

And it may be that we discover they're not landmark eligible.

And if so, of course, in that case, we would remove them for the list.

Uh but I'd like I'd rather see a movement towards landmarking rather than just clearing properties off the list.

Uh and then second part, Molly, I'm interested to hear your experience in working with Mayo Clinic in the past.

I'm hearing concerns uh of uh, you know, Mayo Clinic properties and uh you know, influence by the clinic on possibly not landmarking those properties so that they're more readily available for development or whatever other purposes the clinic has.

What's been your experience working with the clinic?

Is the CC Heights an option where there could be some collaborative effort to move forward with landmarking that particular property?

If I may, very quickly, I think we're bleeding over into agenda item 7b.

Um, could we formally close just the the um let's see, going back here.

It is a little of both.

Um, but I guess specifically any question on the list.

If I think if you could hold your question, we're really getting into the priorities, and I think you have some some information yet to present on that.

Um so are there any any other uh formal questions on the actual lists themselves?

Okay, if not, I just want to say I think it's great.

Thank you for sharing that.

Um it's very helpful to be able to just quickly look what is on the inventory and what is landmarked, what's in the district, so on.

So thank you for that.

Now, um, item seven B HPC roles and responsibilities and 2026 priorities.

Yep.

Yep.

Yes, and um, Commissioner Schable, I will answer your question here as we go through, make sure that um that I get that answered tonight.

So um I'm sharing with you um a little bit more on some things that um we talked a little bit about last month.

And um, I just like to have us start with um when we talk about the HPC's roles and responsibilities, um, that we start with what is in the unified development code.

The unified development code um primarily includes our zoning ordinance, um, but also our subdivision ordinance.

So it addresses um rules and requirements for um use of property, modifications to property, um, development, new developments, um, new neighborhoods, right?

Um, reuse of existing buildings.

And there are sections within the UDC that specifically um address the work that you do, the work that I do in heritage preservation here in the community.

So pardon me.

Um, section 6200 040 C is the heritage preservation overlay.

That is an overlay zoning district, and that includes both our landmark properties as well as properties on our historic inventory.

So if you have somebody who is doing a development, doing something, buying property, oftentimes they will consult our mapping system, and that layer will pop up and will show them that that is an overlay zoning district.

We made that change back in uh 2023 when the Unified Development Code was adopted, and we rolled in the heritage preservation program into the UDC, um, really so that people who are doing projects out there can be more aware of our program and of the requirements.

Um when we did that, um, we also rolled in sort of the other tasks that the heritage preservation um also is held responsible for, the other responsibilities that you have.

And there's seven different um kind of aspects that uh are pointed to here.

Um I also am showing you um just a snippet of the table that is sort of the short version of okay, if somebody right at the bottom designation or removal of landmark properties, all of the requirements and how that fits into a zoning process or a development process, something that somebody would need to know if they were going through that.

So that shows that ultimately um the city council has the final decision.

Um, and then the heritage preservation commission makes the recommendation.

I don't expect any of you to um memorize this, even know how to use this.

Um, but I want you to know that this is where your authority comes from.

And I want you to know that if certainly if you want to look further into it, you can and you're aware that it's there.

And you can reach out to me and ask questions if you want more specifics now or for any project that's coming up in the future.

Okay.

Because that's a fairly large document, and there's a lot of cross-references in it.

We've taken all of the different aspects of what the Heritage Preservation Commission and really the Heritage Preservation Program does.

And I've broken it into four different areas: research and documentation, landmark designation or heritage preservation overlay.

And I use landmark designation a little more broadly when we're talking about these categories, economic development and sustainability, and then public engagement and education.

Again, these images, many of you have seen before.

If you really would like more discussion about it, I can actually refer you to a meeting back in 2024.

If you want to listen to a little bit more discussion about that.

And it's a process that starts with developing historic context as part of understanding the history of your community and building on that, identifying properties that you think may have potential to be designated under your program.

The evaluation process happens here locally when we are looking at a process a property and we do an eligibility study.

It requires that somebody who meets some of the professional standards actually does that eligibility study.

And then the designation is the formal process.

And then the final step in that process is looking at alterations and applying standards to those alterations.

That's what we just did earlier tonight when we approved that certificate of appropriateness.

So as you go through the year, you're going to have different things come at you.

And it feels like maybe it's a one-off, or it feels like it's disconnected from other things that you're doing or that I'm doing.

And so I created these kind of charts and image images to sort of help you understand how it all fits together.

So those are really kind of the quick version of what your roles and responsibilities are.

And sorry, jumped.

And so I'm just going to share with you what was already on my radar for this year and which categories they fit in, and then open it up for discussion about what other, you know, things that you want to talk about and try and get on for this year.

So the research and documentation, really the historic context committee, Chairs Zastro, Commissioner Mutchler, and I have met a couple of different times.

We're testing out some things where we're sharing documents through a web-based cloud-based program.

And we're um we're starting that work and we're kind of testing it before we bring on additional volunteers.

The historic context, I think one of the things that we talked about, and one of the reasons why we wanted to start the committee, kind of our first committee with that was that again, as I mentioned, with actually looking at eligibility for landmarks, we really we do require somebody who has some professional uh background in that.

Um, but this gives those of you who are just interested in history or um it gives you a chance to really kind of home, you know, hone that too, to um to develop more skills in that if you want to.

Um and I'm really looking forward to continuing that process.

So that's that's on my radar for this year.

In terms of the historic landmark or the HPO kind of category out of the four categories, um, Indian Heights, I've brought back, and I'm gonna give you an update on that here in a minute.

Um, and the Rochester State Hospital.

A couple of years ago, we were able to get a grant um to do an in-depth condext stuff, context study of the hospital.

So we have a lot of information.

That's why that continues to be a higher priority.

As I mentioned, when we get a chance to um to to develop historic information, um, and when we have that historic information, that helps to rise that property to the top for us to look at for landmark designation.

So that's why the hospital cemetery is on that.

Objects, and there's at least a couple of them on the historic inventory.

Some of them were mentioned by a member of the public tonight that aren't even on there.

And I think there was some uh desire at the last meeting to have some discussion about historic objects and how do we review those, how do we um evaluate them for landmark eligibility as opposed to something like a building.

Um it's gonna it's gonna be a little bit different, and um we can have that discussion here within the next couple months based on what I hear from you.

Um, and then the certificates of appropriateness.

Remember that as we are designating, the more that we designate, the more we will have projects that you need to review, and that is a big that's a big part of your role.

Um if we get an application for a certificate of appropriateness that falls under some requirements that the state has, where if a city receives an application, we have a time period that we need to make a decision.

Um, if that is a decision that rests with the HPC, I need to make sure that I get that on the agenda, that um that I get the uh evaluation done and that we get that process started within a time period um to meet that law.

So that always has to be a priority for you.

Um economic development and sustainability and public engagement and education right now.

I didn't put anything in those.

Um really the economic development um has been taking my time in terms of the programs that we've created for the downtown historic district, and those continue.

Um the HPC supported that when we first got it started and actually not only supported it, but really continued to call for that and ask the council to establish a program of that nature.

Um and then public in engagement and education.

Um I really see the historic context development being able to be used to do more education for the general public.

So I think that is one thing, and actually, even engagement, right?

If we have individuals, and I know we have some folks who um who attend our meetings who are here in the room who have said that they have an interest in helping us with that um too.

So um often kind of the corner here, I've got the preservation awards, um, and that is still on my list.

I think it probably falls under public engagement and education.

We briefly talked about that last month.

I've had um two of you on the the commission reach out um and have done some research.

So um I might ask that we can get an update from those individuals.

Um, but before we do the downtown historic district vision plan, that's actually on my next agenda item, which is upcoming meetings.

Um, and I will do a presentation to you, um, and I'll talk a little bit about that right before we adjourn, but that it will be on your February meeting.

So other things, um maybe a CC Heights, maybe now is a good time to answer that question.

And I apologize, maybe if I can ask you.

Commissioner Shable, would you like to restate your question?

Uh sure.

I am curious as to your experience, the city's experience working with Mayo Clinic now that they are the new owners of a CC Heights and there's been some concern expressed about uh what Mayo Clinic's interest in the property will be, and whether there should be a concern uh that if it's not designated sooner rather than later, that there could be alterations to the property.

So curious about your past uh experience working with them and if there'd be opportunity to collaborate with them landmark.

Yeah, so there's a couple of things that I can tell you.

Um I I was actually really surprised to hear, because that was a new story that I heard was that um the clinic had acquired a CC Heights.

And I recall several years ago where they where I think they already had an interest of some kind and they were actually listed as owner on the tax roles.

So I was a little confused about how that happened, and it seems like maybe there was some ownership going back and forth, or maybe there's different levels of ownership and who gets who gets listed on the tax roles.

And the reason I know that is because they actually uh requested a certificate of appropriateness for some changes to windows, right?

And and it was the clinic who I was working with at that time.

Um, so it was a little, I'm not sure kind of what exactly happened there, but um yes, it does appear that they are now the owners of a CC Heights.

And in particular, anybody who's a business, unless their business is, you know, has a mission of historic preservation, they aren't necessarily going to have that as their top concern, right?

So as with any business, um, you know, they approach me and say, what is it that we're responsible for?

What um, you know, what what's our process?

Is this going to slow me down if I have a project?

Is this something that is going to cost me more money?

Um, just like we heard from individual property owners in the historic, you know, downtown district um over the years.

So it's a very similar thing that I hear from any property owner, um, you know, whose property has been designated or has been identified on the on the inventory.

Um, in terms of working with them, absolutely.

Um I love the idea of coming up with adaptive reuses.

And um, yeah, I think I think you know, if there's I don't know what their plan is for for a CC Heights.

Thank you.

Uh Commissioner Wasmer.

Um, excuse me.

So at the History Center, we work pretty closely with Mayo Clinic because they in fact uh purchase and paid to basically save historic Mayo Wood Mansion.

Um, and so we get we have a very unique situation in that they own the home and we own the artifacts or the collection.

So and it's worked out very nicely.

Um, and so I've had occasion to work with almost everybody on that historic preservation part council uh department.

Um, and I'm I'm just sort of throwing my hat in there if there's any way that I can help or assist or be part of that, having worked with a lot of those people already.

I'm I'm I'm very happy to do so.

For me, this is a definite priority.

So whatever I can do to assist in my role, knowing a lot of those people, I'm I'm happy to be tapped to work with that.

I share your concerns, but I also know wonderful things can be done if so persuaded.

That's all.

Thank you, Commissioner Wasser.

Does anyone else have questions um concerning what coordinator Patterson Lungren presented?

I threw a lot at you there in one slide.

Um Commissioner Motchler.

Um, so from the um public comment, there's um things discussing the awards, and I was one of the commissioners that reached out to um I reached out to the city of um Red Wing and the City of Eden Prairie to see what their process was.

And for Red Wing, they have a committee of three of the seven HPC members that looks at nominations and then recommends them for full HPC approval.

Um they typically get nominations from their building planning and building inspectors, and some years they have a few awards, some years they have more, and then they have a document of like what the criteria is of the building or what was being um uh done preserved.

Um, and then for Eden Prairie, they um asked for nominations in early March, and then it's open for a month, and then the city communications division puts out um information kind of asking for people to be nominated, and they also notify the historical society.

Um, and then in the April meeting, they review the nominations and select the winner.

So that's just what other um places have done for the award.

Excellent.

Thank you, Commissioner Mutchler.

Yeah, and I apologize.

Commissioner Mutchler was the only one who reached out to me and indicated that um she had reached out.

I think there was somebody else who um indicated they had an interest in pursuing some of the awards um information, but yeah, just I think I said a couple, but it was just Commissioner Mutchler.

Excellent.

Well, oh yeah, Commissioner Bodeker.

Uh just a question on the uh page 38 and 39.

Um it says uh historic data preliminarily supports designation, but possibly meets the historic significance.

And the majority of these are listed here as uh February of 2017.

How is this compiled?

I apologize.

I'm looking at your packet and you indicated which pages 38 and 39.

I have January 1st of 2026.

Um are you looking at the packet from that I sent out?

Okay.

Okay.

So, and I apologize.

Um I must have grabbed the wrong PDF.

Okay.

In that initial packet that I sent you.

Um, and it has been updated.

And the only change is um, sorry, can you give me the date again?

Sure, the majority on here are listed uh as 222 2017.

Oh, yes.

Yep.

So um, so this is our historic inventory that we're talking about.

And um they it was initially created in one um in one action by the heritage preservation commission at that time, they sent it to the city council who actually ratified the list of historic inventory properties.

And um, that was in 2017.

There were some changes made to the requirements in um in the city code and the ordinance.

And um, it was determined that only the HPC needed to make the decision about placing properties on the inventory.

So some of the later ones are were just placed there by the HPC.

Is that answering your question, Commissioner Bodecker?

Well, it just says it's uh and I'm just trying to get clarification so I understand better.

So it says historic data preliminarily supports designation, but it possibly meets historic significance.

Yep.

So how was that determined?

Right.

So I'm gonna actually go back a couple of slides so that you can kind of see get a sense of where this is um in our process.

And um if you can see, and I apologize.

Oh, yep, I can use the mouse.

Um, if you look in the upper left-hand corner, the research and documentation, um, phase one reports.

So for I believe now all of the properties that are on the inventory for a while we had a couple that didn't have phase one reports.

A phase one report um is a form that is a couple of pages.

There's a photo of the property.

Um, there's some just very initial evaluation.

It was done by a consultant back in um oh, I think 2014, no, later.

Um I'll have to look.

Some I think it was 2016-2017.

I apologize, I don't have that date.

Um, but it's what was what we refer to as a phase one report.

The Heritage Preservation Commission at that time um took those reports and determined which of those properties would go on the historic inventory, what we called the potential list at that point and adopted the initial list with all of the properties.

Um there were some properties that also got added through other means that didn't have um individual phase one reports.

Um and we later did some kind of catch-up work on that.

Um, we've done some updating.

Um during the pandemic, we were able to get some funds, and I was able to um have the history center help us do some additional research and some updating.

So we've got that information.

Um, it's a lot of material, and that's why it's been really hard to get out and have available.

Typically, if somebody is requesting, for example, to be removed from that list, that is what I bring to you and give you as you know, this is this is why it's on the list.

Um and I think as we near as we get kind of um a smaller and smaller list, I feel like maybe we can get that information out, or if there's properties in particular that you want to get to, um, I can get that information out in packets.

I'm open to other ideas as well.

Um, but yeah, so that's what you're looking at is what we call our historic inventory, what we used to refer to as the potential landmark list.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Okay.

Commissioners, any other questions about what's been presented?

Commissioner Schable, go ahead.

So following up on the uh historic context committee and their role and then our uh general priorities.

Uh do you believe that based on the list that we have?

If some additional historic contexts are built out, you would be able, Molly, to review the inventory list and maybe come up with you know, here's five, here's 10 properties that I think we can move forward as a priority.

We've got the background information, you know, we have this initial review of the properties.

What um I'm interested in your suggestions of how best we can come up with a list of priorities as opposed to members picking them properties out.

Right.

Well, I want to be really careful here and not um give an indication that somehow this is like a magic bullet, if you will, right?

That having people help with to further develop the historic context is going to immediately get us to designating these properties.

Um definitely if we don't have historic context that's developed, it is uh um it's a barrier to to moving forward.

Um, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it equates to moving more quickly in terms of getting designation studies done.

Um those take like a lot of time on my part, mostly because I don't do that as a regular, you know, job.

People who are doing this as consultants have a more streamline um process that they that they use and they have access to different databases that um you know that they're subscribing to and that type of thing.

Um this is where it's become this is where it's been a been sort of a problem with moving forward is that and this was a couple of years ago.

We were quoted at about um, I think it was like 10,000 per property, if I'm if I'm not mistaken.

Um it takes a lot of effort to get those eligibility studies completed.

Um, and that's where you know, a couple a year are probably realistic.

Sorry, having issues with my microphone button.

Um I appreciate that.

And uh for the newer commission uh commissioners, this is an ongoing conversation we have about limited staff resources uh and how we can move properties along.

Um uh Molly has done a fantastic job moving through the properties and providing us with information.

She just only has so much time.

Uh could the uh committee provide regular updates to the commission?

I'm not asking for necessarily every month, but at least every two to three months on what you found interesting things and and how things are being developed.

I can speak to that.

That is the plan.

Um, we just barely got started.

Um, I don't know how many of you got wiped out by that cold early January, but uh I was one of them.

So that really set me back for a few weeks.

Um, but the plan is to, once we get things rolling, be able to, you know, give an update every couple months, two or three months.

Uh, do you have anything further to further to add?

I really don't.

Um, so at this point, I guess I would uh like to see, I guess, some discussion.

We've we've heard we've kind of uh had some things expressed.

What are some priorities that commissioners are sitting with right now?

Um, I think it would be helpful just to get that on the table, uh, just to at least for the room uh understand where we're at.

I don't know that we necessarily are ready for a formal action on any of these, but just to express it.

Um, would any commissioner like to share their thoughts starting off?

I have a couple of questions.

Okay, Commissioner Kessler, go ahead.

And I apologize if these are something that need to be discussed offline.

Um, but one of the questions that I came up with was we're hearing that it's about 10k per site for that evaluation.

We've got a list of 68.

And if we're only doing two a year, I mean, I'll be retired by the time we are through this list.

Um, has there been any discussion or is there the possibility of bringing this up to city council either for additional staffing resources or additional funds for the this commission group to um be able to outsource those evaluations?

Um the answer is yes.

And that would require a decision package brought forward by uh staff requesting funds for staff um more staffing council would then vote on that when they're discussing the budget.

Um right now we are seeing them slim down the budget rather than add to it.

So I don't have a whole lot to add, but it's not a priority right now with the current council we have to add staffing for heritage preservation.

So the short answer is um it has been done, but it's not something that the council's you know really looking to do right now.

Um as far as other options, I know coordinator Patterson Lungren has shared with I believe it was Indian Heights possibly last year that there were some grants you were looking at, and I know there are some options there.

Could you maybe to help answer Commissioner Kessler's question fill us in a little more on what some of those options look like?

Thank you for asking that because I was thinking, oh, I want to make sure I give you an update specifically about Indian Heights.

And um when we last spoke, um, I had submitted what's called a questionnaire um to the state preservation office.

The state preservation office um is the department.

Well, they're at the state level, they work directly with the federal level on national register properties um and secretary of interior standard requirements um and do some other things.

They actually also um so they oversee the the national register properties.

Um there is a grant that's available, and it's through the Minnesota Historical Society.

Um those organizations used to be combined.

So I um you'll have to excuse me because when I started, I was gonna say they offer a grant, but it's actually the Minnesota Historical Society that offers the grant.

Um I got a reply on our questionnaire.

And um, because this is kind of a new thing, they didn't used to do these questionnaires that was just you know, have conversations with them or submit an eligibility study.

Um, I had to talk to, I had to reach out and ask them sort of what their reply meant and get sort of a little more information.

Um, and what um so the individual who reviewed our questionnaire and also um read through the historic um the indigenous ethnographic study that was completed, I believe last year or the year before, um, indicated that he thought that there was a good possibility that it has um national register um eligibility.

Okay.

So pardon me.

The reason that I'm talking about national register eligibility right now is that the grant that's offered through the Minnesota Historical Society, um, you can get those to do national register eligibility studies, but not local studies.

So what we've done in the past is we have gotten that grant and had a consultant do a national register eligibility study, and then I can use that material to do the local evaluation under our local um criteria.

So he indicated that he thought there was something here.

He thought that there was um he he encouraged us to do an eligibility study.

Um what that tells me is that we can now use that if we choose to go forward and request a grant um to fund that project.

And um, I haven't gotten to the point where I've asked, you know, is that an official like um sort of plus, you know, side for us, but I tend to think that having a reply from the SHIPO state preservation office saying, like, yep, they're encouraging us to do this, that that will um, you know, bump up our application.

The next application is due in April.

So that's kind of a nice timing too.

I think that's something that's really doable.

Um, the project would start um early summer if if we were to get that.

May I follow up on that?

Are there any other um properties you're aware of that would be received similarly?

Or I mean, have you not even begun the process?

Um, you know, we were able to get the grant to do the state hospital.

Um, that's one of the reasons that's on the list, because we were able to make the case for the state hospital.

Um, you know, it's it's pretty tough to come forward and say, here's this individual, you know, Queen Anne House.

Um, how is that different than across the rest of the state?

You know, hundreds of others.

Um, they're looking for projects that um sort of expand what they're covering, what they're um putting research out for.

Um, Commissioner Wasner maybe has some other thoughts like because she works in the same area and with the same grant program.

I don't know if yeah, um, Minnesota Historical Society is one of the best in the country and they have uh a really wide berth of grants that that you can apply for.

The smaller 10,000 dollar grants, I don't want to say they're easy to get, but but they're they're easily accessible.

And I would be happy to help with some of those.

A lot of times when we're trying, if you're looking at like national register, um a lot of times they're looking for the story, the larger context, who lived there, what kind of things were done there.

So it goes beyond architecture or things like that.

So if we can apply the contextual stuff about people that live there or what happened there, um I'm certainly happy to assist with that.

Um is Assissi Heights not on the national register?

It is not.

Oh, I would think that would be very easy.

I mean, it probably just jinxed it.

But um giving it's kind given its context, I mean the whole story with uh Sister Alfred Moes and the Mayo Clinic and we I'll help work on that because there are there are grants out there um and we're just very lucky to live in a state that really embraces our history.

And so we can we can talk and I'm happy to assist with that.

I think um what I do want to put a caveat on that, and I appreciate that.

And I think that um, yeah, that's a good point, right?

What is it that we think, you know, because then you have to sort of switch hats or sort of change your approach and say, okay, maybe it's not what we think is important locally, but what do we think we can get the funding to support a study for, right?

And that was the case of the state hospital cemetery.

Um I think that the other thing to be aware of is that um I personally want to be really strategic so that we're not um throwing our hat in the ring when it's to go up against the history center, right?

We're partners in this.

I would hate for you know, the people who are reviewing the grants to say, well, Rochester's only gonna get one this round, right?

So I think we want to be strategic about that.

Okay.

So one of the great um grants that they offer is a partnership grant.

Yep.

So one of the things that we could look into doing is the history center can co-write with the city um the opportunity we choose a property or whatever the group decides, whether it's a CC Heights or any of the other things that we decide upon.

And I would be very happy to sit and we can do a partner grant together, and it would just stipulate, you know, what the history center would um provide, which would be archival research and stuff, and then how we could work together.

So that's one, and we don't have any of those in the in the process in the work.

So um I would be happy to work with Molly.

We can sit down.

Sorry, Commissioner Patterson, we can we can work together on and a partner grant.

That's a pretty, I don't want to say easy thing, but again, we could definitely uh green gain some traction with that.

Absolutely.

Okay.

Thank you.

Are there any other questions um regarding the priorities or what was presented?

Um, I guess I'll I'll express them too.

Um, I would love to see us get to these, and and I would support specifically ones that have some sort of um grant available or something that can expedite that work.

So I I'll list specifically, I would love to see us this year address Indian Heights, the state hospital, uh potentially uh a Sissy Heights with a partner grant.

Um and then a little more kind of laid back.

I would like to see if we could get to discussions on um the sorry, where is it here?

Uh just the objects.

Uh so I don't I don't know that we necessarily will have action on those, but I would like us to at least crack open that conversation this year and have some discussion on what is out there, what actions could we be taking and what that would look like.

Um I would love to then also over to the awards.

It sounds like we have at least one commissioner who's really taking initiative.

Um, I would love for us to be ready to maybe even take a vote on something like that and form a committee next month.

Um, those are my thoughts, but I would love to hear if any other commissioners have thoughts on top of that.

Yes, Commissioner Poyer.

I'll just keep this short and just say I concur with what Chair Sastro just said.

So I support um those priorities.

Okay.

Um any other thoughts.

If not, um, but it's kind of out of the box.

We'll see how out of the box it is.

Go ahead and give it a shot, Commissioner Kessler.

All right.

Um, just looking at how we have done districts and whatnot, have we had the consideration of trying to work with Mayo to do like a I don't want to say a Mayo district because it would be, you know, wherever their properties are, but there are a number of them that are on our list.

Um maybe grouping them together as a project and potentially reaching out to Mayo to see if they would have any interest in helping with the funding for the evaluations.

Um I haven't heard that discussed.

I think that's a great idea, but um coordinator Patterson Lungren, has anything like that been discussed over the years that you're aware of?

Um not from, you know, not with Mayo being supportive of that.

Okay.

Um of the things that I will sometimes mention, and where you might have a direct role in some projects.

Um there's something called uh sometimes we do environmental reviews if there's, for example, federal funds or um a federal permit involved.

And then it requires that we look at the impact that it has to cultural resources.

And um, so there are some studies that have been done um that I do have in my um in my files um related to the link rapid transit line, and they looked at um how it might or might not impact um buildings along that entire route.

And it did um it did look more deep in more detailed at some of the Mayo buildings.

So we do have some studies that look at those.

Um Mayo actually did some studies several years ago.

Um when we had somebody from Mayo on this um commission who actually represented Mayo on this commission.

Um, they shared those with me.

Um, but as of at this point, I really haven't um in my discussions with them, they haven't been supportive of that.

So thank you.

Okay.

With um do you have any other slides to share regarding that 7B?

Um well, I think it's just down to um our future meeting.

Okay, go ahead.

Coming up.

So um I always like to end the meeting um talking a little bit about what's coming up next month.

If I have things that I'm planning on bringing to you, um, and next month I do plan to bring to you that our meetings on February 24th.

Um, the downtown historic district um vision plan.

Um some of you participated in that um along with other stakeholders in the downtown property owners, um, business owners, um, people who live work in the downtown.

And um we had some um some meetings over the summer, and um we've had a consultant who has been working on drafting that document.

They will actually be presenting the evening before your meeting on the 24th, um, at a city council study session.

So what you want to be aware of is with the city council's study session is that they don't make decisions at those meetings.

That really allows for um the study study sessions allow for one or two agenda items for them to really hear more in depth about a project or a process that that we're doing.

Um, so they will be the night before you meet, they will be listening to the consultants.

Um by all means, I invite any of you to attend that if you're able to.

It is during the day, so it is kind of tough to get to, but they are recorded, so you can possibly listen to it um, you know, afterwards and watch the video.

And then um then I will be bringing the document to you.

You'll be getting it in your packet.

Um, and we'll be going over it the next night um and seeing if you're ready to either make a recommendation to the city council um or if you know you need more time if we need time to look at it.

Um we haven't set a meeting, um, a city council meeting where we'll actually bring it back to them yet for for them to adopt it, for them to approve it.

This is just for them to get the presentation.

So um we're allowing enough time for you to read it and give um a response, recommendation, um, feedback, whatever it is you choose to do um at that meeting.

So um that's probably going to be the bulk of what we have unless we get applications.

If we get applications, especially if they have to meet that timeline, um, we definitely also um need to be aware of that.

And you might get other things at that meeting, but um yeah, just depends on what we get for applications.

Um that's all I have for tonight.

Really quickly question.

So then uh to be ready for the award um committee.

Is that something that we would do on our own as a motion and discussion, or is that something you would bring a staff report like recommendation based on what we've discussed in December in past meetings?

Sure.

To actually form the committee.

To form the committee based on the education um authority laid out in the UDC.

Yeah.

Um I think we can um yeah, let's get it on the agenda in February.

I think we can do that and just, you know, as you and I are back and forth and making sure that when I ask you to what did I forget?

Um, let's get that on the agenda and you can take that action in February.

Does that sound like I think that would be good?

Um, that's you know, assuming we approve it, that would give um commissioners interested in in taking that on time to as a committee, get that done before heritage preservation month in May.

Yes.

And then I think what I heard you ask me is if I would put together sort of what we've discussed, like, you know, what why are we doing this?

Um, some of the material that uh Commissioner Mochler has um got from other cities, um, compile something so you actually have something that you can take an action on in February.

Yes, that's that would be great.

Yep.

Thank you.

Let's plan on that.

Okay.

Um other questions uh on item 7C.

Okay, moving on.

I have a very quick announcement, housekeeping just for commissioners.

We have some new ones.

A reminder that throughout the year, uh please notify the chair and staff of any absences beforehand.

Um if you know you're gonna be gone or if you're sick or something happens, um, you're required to notify the chair and staff.

Uh just copy us in on an email, let us know, hey, I was sick or I'm sick or I won't be able to make it, whatever.

Um, and then that's counted as an excused absence.

Uh it's not really a high bar, just let us know.

Uh if you have three unexcused absences in a year, um, where you didn't notify us, then I would be uh probably reaching out to the mayor's office at the point at that point.

I'll probably reach out to you first.

But just to avoid that, uh just shoot us an email.

So that's just a quick housekeeping heads up for the year.

Um with that then, the last thing is the history fact of the month.

And I brought something to share.

And this was handed to me by an older gentleman in my neighborhood who um was a German teacher.

And so he he specifically sought me out at a city park one day, and he had been waiting for months to get me this.

And it's very simple, but it's uh he it says the story of the 1883 tornado on 7th Street Northwest was written by a survivor survivor, Mrs.

Esther Forsberg, who lived at 113th Northwest and asked me to translate her father's account of the tornado.

The diary of her father, Mr.

Uh Quaiser, was written in German.

Ms.

Queiser's family lived in the house off Broadway.

This section of town, Lower Town, had many German immigrants who worked in the flower mills near Cascade Creek.

Many millers suffered from emphysema from the flower dust.

According to Mr.

Quiser's account, the tornado destroyed his house, barn, and fence.

His house was rebuilt at the original site.

The greenhouse still stands at 107 7th Street Northwest.

Mrs.

Esther Forsberg and her husband Paul lived in a big square house next to her parents' house.

Her house was torn down to build Samaritan Bethany nursing home.

Her next door neighbor was Herman Buske, who lived at 317th Street Northwest.

He was also the son of German immigrants.

When Herman died, the Samaritan home bought his house and tore it down.

It was located near the site of the parking ramp of of the Samaritan.

The only house standing uh near the tornado site is the greenhouse at 107th Street Northwest.

And I'm sharing that um because this man specifically sought me out, and he knew uh a woman who survived.

So I imagine she was probably his age uh when she met him, and and he was much older when he met me.

But it just goes to show you that we are really only a couple handshakes away from these incidents and and these um historic moments.

So when we think about our history or neighborhoods, uh just know that if you look, you can find those threads that you are one handshake or two handshakes, maybe or two hugs away from some of these really monumental events.

Uh so I just wanted to share that because he really went to great lengths um at his age to get me this, and it's not terribly um in-depth, but I just thought it was a really beautiful um gesture of community and connection to our past.

So with that, we only have one thing left on the agenda, and that is a motion to adjourn.

I would accept a motion to adjourn.

I'll move to adjourn.

Moved by Commissioner Poyer.

Seconded by Commissioner Bodeker.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All opposed, nay.

Okay, we are adjourned.

It's very possible, yes.

Yeah.