Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting Date: September 2, 2026
To: Members of the Heritage Preservation Commission
From: Mathias Hughey, AICP, Interim City Planner
Title
Discussion of Historic Variances and Amendments to Local Historic Site Designations
Body
Action Requested:
The Heritage Preservation Comision (HPC) is asked to discuss and provide direction related to potential policy and/or process changes in the Land Development Code.
Summary Report:
The City of Northfield is in the process of updated the Land Development Code following the adoption of the 2045 Comprehensive Plan. This process provides the opportunity to review and update policies and processes to add clarity, adjust to changing conditions and technologies, and ensure alignment with goals.
The Comp Plan identifies Environment, Economics, and Equity and core principals guiding the actions of the City. Preservation can often inadvertently perpetuate historic inequities. The stories we tell, the ways we determine significance, the standards we apply in evaluating historic resources and especially the processes we use in preservation are often thought of as neutral. However, they reflect our values and failure to critically reflect on which stories are being told and why, which events and people are considered significant, and who or what is not, risks perpetuating values that are not our own.
With any zoning code, there is also a balance between competing priorities. The standards and requirements that apply to new construction may at time conflict with preserving historic structures. When buildings must be modified for new uses, such modifications may compromise historic integrity if they are required to comply with underlying zoning requirements. Providing clarity around navigating these conflicts is an important element balancing preservation and new development in Northfield.
Staff are proposing the introduction of two additional processes under the purview of the HPC.
Heritage Site Designation Amendment
The first is a process for amending local heritage site designations. This would allow for expanded historical documentation that would better reflect contemporary values, allowing for us to tell fuller, more complete stories within the official record that could honor the contributions of previously overlooked individuals, address less flattering aspects where individuals may be considered problematic by today’s standards, remove properties that have been destroyed, or make amendments to accommodate the passage of time including expanded periods of significance.
Contributions of entire groups of people were often overlooked. This is reflected in the way historic buildings are named, typically for the original male resident or business owner. The craftspeople who built the structure go unmentioned, and other residents or owners, including woman, may receive only cursory mention in the designation forms.
The City of Minneapolis includes the following policy:
599.750. - Designation amendments.
(a)Amendments to designations. Amendments to designations may be considered as provided in this section.
(b) Amendment to the period of significance and criteria of significance of a landmark or historic district. The planning director may determine the criteria of significance and period of significance for a landmark or historic district, based on necessary research and evaluation, when such information is not included in designations existing on the effective date of this ordinance. For landmarks and historic districts with designations that include a period of significance and criteria of significance, amendments shall be submitted and considered as a nomination for historic designation, according to the procedures set forth in Article VI of this chapter.
(c) Amendment to the contributing or non-contributing status of a landmark or property in a historic district. The planning director may determine whether resources or properties are contributing or non-contributing to landmarks or historic districts when such information is not included in a designation existing on the effective date of this ordinance. Amendments to the contributing or non-contributing status of designated resources may be completed by the planning director with necessary research and evaluation.
(d) Amendment to boundaries of a landmark or historic district. The boundaries of a landmark or historic district may be expanded through an amendment, but not reduced. Amendments to expand the boundaries of a landmark or historic district shall be submitted and considered as a nomination for historic designation, according to the procedures set forth in Article VI of this chapter.
(e) Removing a landmark from designation. The planning director may propose the removal of a landmark from designation if such landmark has been destroyed by fire or other peril. For each landmark proposed for removal from designation, the planning director shall prepare a report including all relevant supporting materials and make a recommendation to the heritage preservation commission. The heritage preservation commission shall hold a public hearing pursuant to section 599.310 <https://library.municode.com/mn/minneapolis/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=MICOOR_TIT23HEPR_CH599HEPRRE_ARTIIIGEAPPRFE_599.310PUHE> regarding the removal and make a recommendation to the city council. The city council shall consider the heritage preservation commission's recommendation and take final action.
A link to the Los Angeles Women’s Landmarks Project is included to provide some additional context for the type of research that would be furthered by the adoption of an amendment process.
Staff would like general direction, questions or concerns from the HPC to guide additional exploration of including this process in the LDC update. Questions from staff include:
- Whether additional criteria for local significance should be considered/added.
- Does the text from Minneapolis seem appropriate?
Historic Variance
The second is an historic variance process. Where designated historic structures may require a variance from typical zoning regulations in order to be put to new use, the HPC could be granted some authority to either grant or participate in the variance process when a designated property is involved.
Minneapolis includes the following Historic Variance Provision:
In order to promote the use and conservation of historic properties, the heritage preservation commission may grant variances from the provisions of this zoning ordinance to locally designated historic properties, as provided in Chapter 599 <https://library.municode.com/mn/minneapolis/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=MICOOR_TIT23HEPR_CH599HEPRRE> of the Minneapolis Code of Ordinances, Heritage Preservation Regulations.
This provision applies to their general planning and zoning applications. Northfield currently has limited designated heritage preservation sites outside of the downtown historic district, but there is variety in the buildings within the district, which increases the likelihood that site design requirements may not be universally applicable. For example, several existing buildings do not meet the 0-foot front lot line setback, or they do not fill the entire width of the lot. Additions or modifications to those buildings may not be able to feasibly meet those requirements, or in doing so, may destroy the character/integrity of the building. A variance would then be required.
Staff would like general direction, questions, or concerns from the HPC to guide potential exploration of such an process. One primary question is if the HPC would like to advise the Zoning Board of Appeals on such an application, authorize that the variance is necessary to meet preservation standards, or authorize the variance in its entirety. Each option will have pros and cons.
City Plans & Policies Relevance:
NA
Alternative Options:
NA
Financial Impacts:
NA
Tentative Timelines:
NA