State: Incomplete info with West Hills

A letter to Owatonna’s city administrator indicates the city council’s decision to deny a request for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet was made with incomplete – and possibly misleading – information.

The State Historic Preservation Office sent the correspondence to Jenna Tuma; it is dated April 14. Also addressed in the letter is Chris Ziemer, identified as a business development executive for ICS – the project developer for the proposed public safety facilities in Owatonna.

According to SHPO, the project – which would see a new fire hall and a new police station built – “meets the criteria that require consultation with our office.”

Owatonna residents filed a petition request for an EAW – which was denied at the Owatonna City Council meeting on March 17, via a resolution.

One line in the resolution, specifically, drew the attention of SHPO: WHEREAS, additionally, City staff and consultants have consulted with the State Historic Preservation Office and the State Archeologist about the Project;

“This statement does not accurately reflect the status of consultation,” the letter from SHPO says.

In fact, it says, the organization “only received a formal request for consultation for the police facility construction on March 17,” which provided very little time for anything to be done by the time the council met that night, much less a full consultation.

Additionally, the attachments for the consultation request were not received from Wold Architects and Engineers until March 19 – two days after the meeting.

Finally, a request for the fire station consultation was not included – nor had SHPO received it as of April 10.

The State Archeologist had not received a request on either facility, again, as of April 10.

Tuma did not respond to a request for comment.

The letter comes as the city determines how to handle a reverse referendum, also driven by residents, requesting a public vote on the project. As of April 27, a meeting had not been scheduled to discuss the options.

The March 17 resolution approved by the city council also cited a memo from Design Tree Engineering and Land Surveying which noted the site “is not located in an environmentally sensitive area …” and therefore, “is not subject to a mandatory EAW.”

The new facilities, which have an estimated price tag of more than $61 million, have been a lightning rod for community activism in the past six months – four years after discussions began, and nearly two years after planning began in earnest.

In addition to the cost, residents oppose the location of the new police station: On the West Hills Campus, which is a National Register of Historic Places designated district, and is owned by the city.

The grounds are the site of the former Minnesota State Public School for Dependent and Neglected Children. From 1886 to 1945, more than 10,000 children were sent to the facility that was once the third-largest institution of its kind in the nation.

It now houses a State School museum; the school’s cemetery; the Owatonna Arts Center; Little Theatre of Owatonna, City Hall and more.

The five-page letter to Tuma and Ziemer goes on to say that “the placement of the new police facility is likely to adversely affect characteristics of the State Public School that qualify it for listing in the National Register, in ways that diminish its integrity.”

While much of the debate has centered around the new police station, the 1906 fire hall is also on the radar for SHPO:

“Construction of the new fire station potentially will result in change of use, vacancy, loss of original materials and neglect of the Owatonna City and Firemen’s Hall.”

It, too, is listed in the National Register, as well as being a contributing building within the National Register-listed Commercial Historic District in Owatonna.

The West Hills Commission has gone on record with its objection to the location of the police station on the campus.

When contacted for comment, Jan Tippett, chair of the commission, said the collective opinion of the commissioners has not changed.

Of particular note for SHPO is the possibility that Cottage No. 4 was “at or near the location of the proposed police station.”

The cottages were designed to house 20 to 30 children in a “family-like” setting, supervised by a matron and assistants. Cottage 4 was a girls’ cottage.

The site “may be irreversibly damaged by new construction,” the letter says, prompting SHPO to recommend that a Phase 1 archaeological survey be completed.

Finally, the state agency requested additional documentation from the city in order to continue its review of the project, including:

• Information regarding any other options considered, such as alternative locations, rehabilitation of existing police and fire facilities, construction of additions to existing facilities, etc.;
• A summary of any public or advisory group participation during the decision-making process;
• Confirmation that the consulting archaeologist has submitted the archaeological survey report to the Office of the State Archaeologist;
• The full archaeology report title, author and report date;
• A description of the fire station construction component;
• A description of the undertaking’s anticipated effects on the historic properties;
• An explanation of plans and timeline for the fire hall, once fire safety operation vacates it;
• Any assessment studies/reports that led to the siting decision for the new police station and for vacating the current fire hall.