►
From YouTube: April 24, 2017 City Planning Commission
Description
Minneapolis City Planning Commission
A
A
Our
first
item
of
business
is
to
approve
the
actions
from
the
April
temp
meeting.
They
have
a
motion
to
approve
those.
Actually
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
all
in
favor
and
that
motion
carries.
Our
next
item
is
a
business
is
to
approve
the
agenda.
You
can
find
hard
copies
of
the
agenda
in
the
hallway
will
determine
which
item
we
will
discuss,
which
will
be
continued
and
which
will
be
considered
on
consent.
So
starting
at
the
top
of
the
agenda
item.
A
One
is
the
HCMC
ambulatory
outpatients
specialty
center
signage
at
80
1
through
8
29
park,
avenue,
7
15
through
721,
South,
eighth
Street
and
816
Chicago
Avenue
at
the
variance
related
to
signs.
As
anyone
wishing
to
speak
in
opposition
to
or
modify
the
staff
recommendation
on
item
one
see,
no
one
will
put
that
on
consent.
Item
two:
is
it
1721
como
avenue
southeast
several
applications
for
a
new
mixed-use
building,
they're
standing
on
wishing
to
speak
in
opposition
to
or
modify
the
staff
recommendation
on
items
to
see?
A
No
one
will
put
item
two
on
consent
item
three
is
1000
third
at
1000
nor
third
Street,
several
applications
for
an
office
building.
There
will
continue
item
32,
the
May
twenty
second
meeting
at
the
request
of
the
applicant.
So
if
there's
any
one
year
for
that,
we
will
consider
it
on
the
twenty-second
item.
4
is
the
CAC
kappa
sigma
fraternity
at
1000
fifth
street
southeast
several
applications
for
a
fraternity
house?
There
is
anyone
wishing
to
speak
in
opposition
to
or
modify
the
staff
recommendation
on
item
4c?
No
one
will
click
item
4
on
consent.
A
No
one
will
put
item
five
on
consent
and
finally
item
six
is
the
Malcolm
yards
comprehensive
plan
amendment
at
518,
Malcolm
avenue,
southeast
501,
Malcolm
avenue,
southeast
445,
Malcolm
avenue,
southeast
5
o-130
as
avenue
southeast
for
nineteen,
twenty
ninth
avenue
southeast
and
50?
For
twenty
ninth
avenue
southeast?
We
will
discuss
item
six.
That's
a
comprehensive
plan
amendment.
So
if
you
were
wishing
to
speak
on
that,
we
will
discuss
that
in
a
moment.
So
our
agenda
as
amended,
is
as
follows:
items
1,
2,
4,
&
5,
will
be
on
consent.
A
A
B
B
Item
number:
two
is
a
land
acquisition
at
2822
emerson,
avenue
north
item
three
was
a
land
acquisition
at
35,
44,
30,
fourth
avenue
south
and
item
for
was
a
location
and
design
review
for
the
property
and
evidence
warehouse.
Based
on
the
presentation.
The
recommended
motion
from
the
Planning
Commission
was
to
approve
the
staff
report
that
each
of
those
items
was
consistent
with
the
Minneapolis
plan
for
sustainable
growth.
All
right.
A
We'll
take
that
as
a
motion
to
find
those
items
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan.
Is
there
a
second,
you
have
a
motion
and
a
second
all
in
favor
and
that
motion
carries
sex
may
have
a
motion
to
continue
item
32,
the
May
20
second
meeting
motion
and
the
second
all
in
favor,
and
that
motion
carries
next
we'll
move
on
to
the
public
hearing
portion
of
the
meeting
and
at
this
time,
I'll
open
the
public
hearing
for
the
items
on
the
consent
agenda.
Again,
that
is
items
1,
2,
4,
&
5.
A
D
D
So
the
item
before
us
is
a
comprehensive
plan.
Amendment
for
the
Malcolm
yards
area
I'll
give
a
little
bit
of
context
for
this
discussion.
So
the
map
shows
the
larger
semi
southeast
minneapolis
industrial
employment
district.
That's
in
black,
the
area
that
we're
looking
at-
oh
I'm-
sorry,
yes,
Bettis!
So
it's
almost
414
acres.
The
area
that
we're
looking
at
is
the
area
in
red
for
the
comprehensive
plan
amendment
it's
at
the
southern
edge
of
the
southeast
minneapolis
industrial
employment
district,
as
identified
in
the
mini
a
plan
for
sustainable
growth.
D
So
this
is
just
an
aerial
of
the
area.
So
what
we
have
here
is
on
the
far
styles.
You
can
see
the
university
Minnesota
transitway
kind
of
in
the
left
corner.
You
can
see
toward
the
upper
part
of
the
photo.
You
can
see
the
rail
yards
and
the
rail
corridors
and
we
also
have
the
solid
waste
transfer
station
area
here.
So
this
is
the
facility
that
the
city
uses
for
our
solid
waste,
and
so
we
have
a
lot
of
trucks
coming
up
and
down
melt
them
in
order
to
get
to
that
facility.
D
So
the
requests
we
have
in
front
of
us
is
to
remove
9
acres
from
the
semi
industrial
employment
district,
as
identified
in
our
comprehensive
plan,
and
let
me
just
point
out
really
quickly
where
you'll
hear
us
talking
about
the
fact
that
we're
undergoing
a
comprehensive
plan
update
right
now,
/
met
council's
requirements
again,
though
comprehensive
plan
that
we're
working
under
their
existing
comprehensive
plan.
The
Minneapolis
plan
for
sustainable
growth
in
order
to
this
is
what
is
proposed
to
be
updated.
So
it's
nine
acres
of
21
acres
owned
by
wall
development.
D
The
nine
acres
is
in
blue
and
this
is
what's
being
proposed
to
be
taken
out
of
the
industrial
employment
district.
Just
south
of
that
you
have
University,
Avenue
I'll
show
you
a
little
bit
more
context
as
well.
So
in
purple
you
have
the
semi
industrial
employment
district
area.
The
blue
is
a
representation
in
our
future
land
use
map
for
basically
University
of
Minnesota
properties.
That's
the
blue
represents
public
and
institutional
in
our
future
land
use
map.
You
can
see
the
stadium
in
for
the
University
of
Minnesota.
D
We
are
also
just
in
the
prospect
park
station
area
as
well
and,
of
course,
the
proper
that
we're
talking
about
is
in
red
in
the
far
corner.
Again,
this
is
a
little
closer.
You
can
see
the
university
Minnesota
transitway
and
the
properties
that
we're
talking
about
that
are
proposed
to
be
taken
out
of
the
industrial
employment
district.
D
So
here's
some
more
detail
on
why
we're?
Actually
this
decision
is
before
us,
so
the
request
again
is
to
take
nine
acres
out
of
the
industrial
employment
district.
That
is
removing
the
boundary.
So
it
doesn't
include
these
nine
acres,
but
it's
also
proposing
to
change
the
future
land
use
designation
from
industrial
to
transitional
industrial,
to
allow
more
effective
flexibility
for
assumingly
to
allow
more
flexibility
for
future
land
uses.
In
this
honest,
9
acres,
how
comp
plan
amendments
usually
happen?
There's
two
ways
that
they
happen.
D
We
are
in
a
unique
position
now,
because
this
is
a
developer
initiated
comprehensive
plan
amendment.
We
have
not
seen
one
of
these
previously.
The
way
that
comprehensive
plan
usually
is
amended
is
it's
initiated
by
the
city
related
to
the
adoption
of
a
small
area
plan
or
a
topical
plan
or
another
policy
document
that
it
gets
approved
through
you
in
the
City
Council,
and
then
we
go
through
the
process
of
applying
to
the
Metropolitan
Council
to
amend
that
to
our
comprehensive
plan.
That's
how
it
happened
over
the
last
10
years.
D
This
is
again
the
first
time
that
there's
been
a
developer
initiated
conference.
The
plan
amendment
there
is
a
application
that
was
created
ten
years
at
almost
ten
years
ago,
with
the
update
to
our
last
comprehensive
plan.
It
just
hasn't
been
used
up
until
this
point,
and
I
just
want
to
point
out
that
a
comprehensive
plan
amendment
is
not
about
the
development
concept.
It
is
about
the
specific
request
to
change
the
comprehensive
plan.
So
it's
not
about
short-term
market,
it's
not
about
development
concept.
D
It's
about
the
long-range
vision
in
this
area,
for
whether
that
should
be
industrial
or
something
besides
industrial.
So
right
now
it's
the
industrial
employment
district
is
dedicated
to
industrial,
and
so
that's
the
question
before
us
now,
so
it's
removing
the
boundaries
and
also
changing
that
future
land
use
designation.
So
it's
not
about
what
might
happen
on
this
site.
Specifically,
that's
not
the
point
of
discussion
today.
E
I've
talked
about
some
of
the
site
context.
What
the
request
is
taking
this
property
out
of
the
industrial
employment
district
and
changing
the
underlying
future
land-use
guidance
from
industrial
transitional
industrial,
and
she
also
mentioned
the
important
fact
that
this
is
the
first
such
request
that
we've
received
under
this
current
comprehensive
plan.
That
was
proof
in
2009,
so
it's
unfamiliar
process
to
the
Commission
and,
frankly
to
staff.
So
what
you're
going
to
see?
E
The
process
concerns
that
we
have
staff
have
today
I'm
going
to
go
through
each
of
those
seven
and
explain
the
staff
analysis
and
recommendation.
So
the
first
factor
for
consideration
for
a
comprehensive
plan.
Amendment
application
is
the
extent
to
which
the
change
would
be
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan,
goals
and
policies.
Now,
first
read:
this
might
seem
a
little
silly.
Well,
isn't
this
an
application
to
change
those
policies
and
change?
What's
on
the
map?
E
Well,
this
is
about
considering
the
request
for
this
property
or
properties
in
the
context
of
the
whole
plan,
which
covers
the
entire
city
and
covers
a
wide
range
of
topics
and
the
topic
that's
at
hand.
Today
is
that
of
industrial
lands
and
how
we
deal
with
them
in
policy
and
regulation
as
a
city.
So
if
you
go
back
to
the
mid
2000s,
there
was-
and
we
talked
about
of
the
comater
hold
for
those
of
you
who
were
there.
E
This
will
be
a
little
bit
of
a
repeat
thought,
but
not
everybody
was
there
something
to
go
over
it
again.
We
were
in
the
midst
of
a
mini
housing
boom
ahead
of
the
recession.
There
was
a
lot
of
multifamily
housing
being
built
in
the
city
nut.
Not
a
more
durable
were
seeing
today,
not
not
that
much,
but
there
was
a
lot
happening,
and
some
of
that
was
happening
in
areas
that
had
traditionally
done
industrial
areas
and
there
was
concern
at
the
time
about
well.
E
Are
we
going
to
lose
we're
starting
to
lose
lamb
that
we
need
for
jobs,
and
we
need
to
sort
that
out?
The
second
was,
you
know,
as
is
always
the
case.
The
nature
of
industrial,
employment
and
industrial
employment
in
general
was
evolving
and
we
needed
to
take
a
step
back
as
a
city
and
take
a
look
at
that
and
how
we
deal
with
industrial
lands
and
employment
in
the
city.
E
So
we
said
on
the
course
of
developing
that
policy
through
the
industrial
land
use
and
employment
policy
plan
that
was
approved
by
the
City
Council
in
2006,
and
it
set
aside
these
areas
for
continued
job
growth
into
the
future
and
warehousing
would
not
be
allowed,
and
that
was
carried
forward,
approved
again
by
the
City
Council
in
2009
incorporated
those
boundaries
of
the
industrial
employment
districts
into
the
comprehensive
plan.
Future
land
use
map-
and
you
know
all
of
you
know
that
we
in
see
that
are
very
prolific
and
planning.
We
do
a
lot
of
planning.
E
This
is
the
these:
are
the
areas
in
gray
where
the
comprehensive
plan
has
small
area
plans
amended
into
it,
and
a
lot
of
those
planning
processes.
So
small
area
plans
geographically
overlap
with
all
or
a
portion
of
these
industrial
employment
districts,
and
a
lot
of
those
have
happened
since
the
adoption
of
the
industrial
employment
districts
in
2006
and
again
in
2009,.
F
E
Meanwhile
is
Beth
said,
of
course,
the
comprehensive,
the
larger
citywide
Comprehensive
Plan
Update
is
underway
right
now,
and
it
is
staffs
contention
that
it's
important
to
consider
industrial
land
use
policy
for
the
entire
city,
not
just
in
one
one
area.
The
goals,
policies
in
geography
associated
with
industrial
land
in
general,
and
industrial
employments
in
particular,
of
course,
are
part
of
this
update
effort
and
will
be
the
subject
and
have
them
a
subject
of
community
engagements.
So
we
leave
them
out,
of
course,
talking
with
people
in
the
community
over
the
course.
E
The
last
several
months
is
part
of
this
update.
One
of
the
things
that
we've
heard
consistently
is
that
there
are
a
lot
of
people
in
our
city
who
really
need
jobs,
need
better
jobs,
better
paying
jobs,
and
it's
a
it's
a
priority
of
this
planning
process
to
lay
out
a
policy
framework
for
making
that
happen,
and
this
guy
is
very
closely
to
the
six
values
of
the
count
has
adopted
for
the
comprehensive
plan
chief
among
them,
equity
and
racial
equity
in
particular,
especially
in
the
face
of
persistent
employment.
F
E
Between
white
people
or
people
of
health,
okay,
so
number
one.
The
staff
analysis
is
that
the
proposed
change
would
not
be
consistent
with
the
existing
comprehensive
plan
goals
and
policies,
and
we
would
be
premature,
given
the
critical
conversation
and
analysis
are
currently
underway
regarding
employment
and
employment
disparities
as
part
of
the
citywide
conferences
and
apathy.
The
second
factor
for
consideration
evidence
demonstrating
the
reason
or
reasons
that
the
plan
should
be
changed,
including,
but
not
limited
to
whether
new
information
has
become
available.
E
Now,
as
I
said,
it's
only
been
five
years
since
the
council
last
reaffirmed
the
boundary
of
the
semi
industrial
employment
district
through
the
small
area
plan,
the
shaking
village
small
area
plan
now
since
that
time,
just
in
the
last
year
or
so
see,
Pat
has
commissioned
a
study
of
the
city's
industrial
buildings
back
to
his
sets,
its
suitability
for
key
industrial
sectors
Steve
had
staff
is
using
this
information
to
inform
draft
changes
to
industrial
land
use
policy
citywide
as
card
over
20
apples
2040.
The
comp
plan
update
process
that
is
currently
underway.
E
C
E
On
the
right,
the
third
consideration,
whether
or
not
the
change
is
needed
to
allow
reasonable
development
of
the
site.
Okay,
so
I'm
going
to
read
from
a
staff
report.
Please
forgive
me,
but
this
is
what
a
staff
report
said.
The
most
reasonable
development
is
allowed
under
the
current
land
use
policy
and
with
the
existing
classifications
for
the
subject
property.
The
existing
zoning
of
i2
is
consistent
with
the
policies
associated
with
an
industrial
employment
district,
allowing
a
wide
range
of
industrial
uses
in
addition
to
office
and
limited
commercial.
So
does
it.
E
E
It's
clear
that
looking
long-term
to
say,
2040
to
pick
a
year.
We
need
to
be
planning
for
the
industries
of
the
future
or,
at
the
very
least,
the
present,
so
that
the
city's
the
way
the
city's
policies
and
regulations
handle
industrial
uses
today
may
not
be
exactly
right
for
long-term
future
and
we're
being
pushed.
We
establish
an
apartment
and
we
as
a
city
are
being
pushed
to
think
differently
about
industrial
land
uses,
and
rightly
so.
This
bush
is
coming
from
a
number
of
directions.
E
So
in
your
in
your
packet,
you
probably
read
the
mou
between
prospect
park
and
the
property
owner.
It's
all
about
working
toward
a
more
positive
future
for
the
area
working
together
and
a
part
of
that
is
thinking
more
creatively
about
what
to
do
with
industrial
lamp
at
the
same
thing
is
true
for
the
innovation
district,
the
City
Council
approved
a
couple
of
years
ago
for
this
area.
It
specifically
directs
that
to
quote
consider
changes
to
city
policies
and
practices
that
allow
for
experimentation
and
innovation,
and
that's
what
we're.
E
This
request
is
to
move
the
boundary
of
the
of
the
district
and
change
the
underlying
future
land
use
that,
if
that
were
to
happen,
it
would
begin
the
context
of
the
existing
comp
plan
and
set
of
zoning
regulations
which
doesn't
have
all
this
new
innovative
stuff.
Anything.
It
doesn't
buy
itself,
introduce
new
policy
and
regulatory
tools
to
use
on
either
side
of
that
dock.
E
E
E
Alright,
so
here's
our
city,
it
is
54
square
miles
and
in
these
two
shades
of
purple
are
the
places
where
the
City
Council
has
chosen
to
protect
industrial
lands
for
future
employment
growth.
This
is
about
seven
percent
to
the
city's
surface
area
in
total.
Actually,
these
are
there
is
a
rather
so,
but
we,
what
we
see
here
is
in
the
dark
purple.
E
Log
industrial
employment
district
in
the
in
the
lighter
shade
of
purple
are
what's
called
transitional
industrial,
the
air
areas
where,
at
the
time
that
the
comp
plan
was
adopted
in
2009,
existing
industrial
zoning
and
land
uses
existed,
but
the
policy
going
forward
is
that
they
could
they
may
transition
to
something
other
than
industrial.
So
this
is
what
we're
left
with
assuming
all
of
those
do
transition
to
something
else.
This
represents
seven
percent
of
the
city
surface
area.
Now
we're
expecting
thirty,
three
thousand
new.
F
E
Between
now
and
20
40,
according
excuse
me
according
to
met
council
projections,
and
these
are
the
only
areas
we
have
left
for.
Industrial
employment
or
whatever
industrial
employment
becomes
in
the
future.
Sure
some
job
growth
will
happen,
downtown
as
it
should
in
another
parts
of
the
city.
But
there
are
certain
industries
that
are
really
only
appropriate
in
these
industrial
areas
that
we
have
set
aside,
and
it's
important
that
we
have
that
full
array
of
possibilities
for
employment
for
our
residents.
E
So
staff
analysis
on
this
factor
is
the
supply
and
demand
for
industrial
land
uses
is
a
citywide
issue
that
is
being
addressed
in
the
update,
the
comp
plan,
which
is
currently
underway.
The
proposed
change
for
the
subject
properties
is
premature,
given
the
citywide
analysis
of
doing
hi.
The
demonstration
that
the
proposed
amendment
has
merits
beyond
the
interests
of
the
applicant,
so
certainly
redevelopment
of
these
properties
is
in
the
interest
of
both
the
city
and
the
applicant.
E
Generally
speaking,
these
are
underutilized
properties
that
one
redeveloped
will
do
lots
of
good
things,
so
add
activity
to
the
transit
station
area,
employment,
activity
of
the
transit
stationary
employment
for
our
residents
and
tax
base
to
improve
the
city's
physical
well-being.
It's
our
contention
of
staff
that
this
can
all
occur
under
the
existing
policy,
praying
framework
for
the
industrial
employment
district
and
the
existing
zoning.
As
I
said
before,
we
hope
to
have
new.
E
We
will
have
new
innovations
and
the
policies
and
regulations
in
the
future,
but
for
the
time
being,
these
opportunities
exist
where
the
current
framework,
under
the
policy
to
the
current
comprehensive
plan,
which
has
been
reaffirmed
multiple
times.
It
is
an
additive
city's
interest
for
redevelopment
of
lands
who
used
for
uses
other
than
industrial
or
number.
E
Six
is
about
the
possible
impacts
of
the
amendment
on,
along
with
developments
that
really
get
to
the
Metropolitan
systems
that
the
Metropolitan
Council
is
responsible
for
under
statute,
and
if
we
were
to
submit
an
application
to
the
Metropolitan
Council
to
amend
the
comprehensive
plan
related
to
this
property.
There
would
be
some
analysis
that
would
need
to
be
done
to.
E
E
It's
also
importantly,
it
has
not
yet
been
determined
whether
an
environmental
assessment
might
be
necessary
for
the
Metropolitan
Council
to
consider
a
comprehensive
plan,
amendments
and
finally
consideration
the
impact
of
the
proposed
amendment
upon
current
and
future
special
assessments
and
utility
area
charges,
future
property,
tax
assessments
or
other
fiscal
impacts
on
the
city
Minneapolis.
This
is
not
a
argument
that
we
are
hanging.
Your
hat
on
staff
is
not
aware.
E
Impacts
related
to
those
considerations,
so
in
closing
just
to
bring
it
back
to
the
two
to
the
boil
down
to
the
two
concerns
that
we
have
staff
have
about
this
request:
one
is
the
substantive,
preserving
land
for
industrial
development
for
industrial
employment.
However
imperfectly
defined
today
in
the
comp
plan,
it's
critical
to
meeting
the
employment
needs
our
residents
over
the
long
term
and
to
the
process
concern
the
issue
of
industrial.
Employment
really
needs
to
be
considered
at
a
citywide
level,
and
it.
E
A
C
Two
quick
questions:
one
is
what
was
the
last
time
this
area
was
last
used
for
active
industrial
and
what
were
those
uses
one
of
those
end
and
then
what
policies
do
it?
Well,
not
what
policies,
what
what
other
tools
are
use
the
city
using
to
try
to
encourage
industrial
employment
here?
So
we've
got
this
zoning
district,
but
do
we
have
money
on
the
table?
We
have
support.
What
else
is
going
on
Cristiano.
E
Rockwell
for
the
second
question,
I'll
ask
David
Frank
the
economic
development
director
to
come
forward.
If
he
wouldn't
mind
the
first
question
regarding
the
history
of
the
site
David
my
heads
of
insights
into
that
I'm
sure
that
will
be
talked
about
when
the
applications
for
might
be
a
good
time
to
ask.
I
C
I
Understood,
thank
you
so,
for
starters,
I
will
say
this.
We
believe
this
is
a
very
attractive
area
for
development.
I
see
some
colleagues
in
the
audience,
so
I'm
sure
will
testify
that
the
public
has
invested
a
great
deal
of
money
in
the
form
of
the
light
rail
system.
It
has
a
tremendous
location
near
both
downtown
minneapolis,
downtown,
st.
Paul,
it's
in
the
middle
surrounded
by
attractive
neighborhoods,
so
there's
infrastructure
investment,
we're
about
to
make
additional
infrastructure
investments
south
of
the
transitway
north
of
the
transitway
has
been
a
much
more
hands-off.
I
We've
we've
worked
with
businesses
who
want
to
locate
an
area.
We
have
worked
with
this
developer
somewhat
and
other
developers
to
to
help
them
locate,
businesses
there
and
locate
employment
there,
but
we
do
not.
If
this
is
your
question,
we
do
not
have
a
specific
financing
program
that
says,
if
you
develop
this
site
in
this
location,
only
we
have
this
this
program
for
you,
the
council,
as
was
mentioned,
passed
an
innovation
district
resolution
recognizing
this,
these
first
innovation
district.
I
F
E
Commissioners,
we
did
another
good
question
at
the
time
that
we
were
updating
the
comprehensive
plan
last
time
leading
up
to
the
2009
adoption
of
Minneapolis
plan
for
sustainable
growth,
one
of
the
new
features
of
that
comprehensive
plan
that
we
are
operating
under
now.
It
is
a
parcel
specific
future
land
use
map
where
every
parcel
in
the
city
has
a
future
land
use
designation.
E
That
was
not
the
case
and
the
plan
that
preceded
that
and
the
second
important
difference
that
there
were
more
boundaries
drawn
or
policy
boundaries
drawn
like
the
industrial
employment
districts,
whereas
in
that
example,
before
the
industrial
employment
districts,
there
were
dots
on
the
map.
That
said,
you
know
generally,
where
we
want
industrial
jobs
where
there
weren't
specific
boundaries.
So
we
felt
it
was
important
to
at
least
offer
that
opportunity
for
applicants
to
propose
changing
those
boundaries
and
changing
those
partial,
specific
designation.
K
L
K
E
Commissioner
better
on
the
first
question,
I'm
understanding
the
question
right.
I
think
my
response
would
be
that
as
far
as
the
timing
is
concerned,
there's
there's
20
think
potential
avenues
as
it
relates
to
this
property
owner
in
applicants.
One
possible
outcome
is
that
the
changes
and
innovations
to
industrial
land
use
of
employment
policy
that
come
out
of
the
comp
plan
might
achieve
what
they
want
to
do
here,
and
they
can
just
to
do
what
do
that
after
the
plan
is
adopted.
E
F
E
L
K
Understanding
from
talking
the
council
office
about
this
was
that
one
of
the
challenges
of
using
the
site
today
is
the
lack
of
roadway
connection
screw
the
site
and
even
up
into
the
rest
of
the
land
area.
That's
a
900
acres,
so
I
was
interested
in
the
infrastructure
plans.
You
know
currently,
if
we
expected
to
stay
industrial-
or
you
know
in
this
new
project,
right.
E
Okay,
thank
you
for
Commission,
been
earthy.
You
know
that
there
were
a
couple
of
key
infrastructure
as
far
as
the
street
network
is
concerned,
key
infrastructure
recommendations
that
have
been
in
many
plans-
one
is
the
granary,
road
connection
between
280
and
35
w,
which
is
about
primarily,
as
I
understand
it,
about
a
truck
movement
and
connectivity
to
the
area.
The
the
other
is
the
so-called
missing
link'
of
grand
rounds
and
getting
a
bridge
over
the
rail
yard
to
complete
that,
and
there.
E
Connections
that
need
to
be
made
for
internal
circulation,
regardless
of
what
the
land
uses
are.
You
know
and
there's
an
ongoing
debate
about
50
across
Transitway
with
history
or
that
street,
but
those
issues
remain
regardless
of
what
the
land
uses
are
and
I
should
say
to
the
part
of
that
the
pieces
of
that
network
have
been
completed
in
recently
in
recent
years.
Malcolm
avenue
north
of
the
transitway,
if
you're,
driving
or
walking
or
biking
so
surly,
then
is
the
new
Malcolm
Avenue
25th
is
another
one.
That's
been
done
recently,
so
these
are
all
in
process.
H
H
E
E
Of
the
rail
yard,
a
functioning
rail
yard,
but
there
are,
you,
know,
there's
a
spur
line
south
of
that
there
are
all
sorts
of
actually.
There
was
more
than
one
source
for
a
line
south
of
that,
and
there
are
all
sorts
of
remnant,
railroad
parcels
interspersed
throughout
this
entire
area
and
make
it
very
complex
to
do
the
infrastructure
projects
that
we
were
just
talking
with
them.
Sure.
H
E
F
H
E
Commissioner
crumbs,
are
you
know,
the
intent
of
showing
this
slide
was
simply
to
say
that
this
is
important
information
among
other
information,
that
staff
are
using
and
the
development
of
draft
policies
for
the
Comprehensive
Plan,
acknowledging
that
that
existing
industrial
policy
does
need
a
refresh
I
can't
tell
you
by
looking
at
it
at
this
level,
whether
any
of
those
dots
are
in
this
immediate
vicinity
or
not.
What's
clear?
Is
that
the
property
that
we're
talking
about
what
the
exception
of
the
Harris
machinery
building
doesn't
have
buildings
of
it?
Yeah.
H
E
B
Just
had
a
follow-up
question
to
mr.
Frank
and
I
think
this
is
coming
from
the
from
the
first
question
asked
by
Commissioner
Rockwell.
But
do
we
do
active
marketing
for
our
industrial
lands,
I
sort
of
heard
that
it's
it's
sort
of
a
when
somebody
in
choirs?
We
respond
and
work
with
them,
but
are
we
actively
out
their
marketing
and
would
that
be
something
that
we
want
to
consider
as
part
of
this
conference?
B
Plan
Update
a
policy
around
active
marketing,
because
I
think
one
of
the
things
that
really
stood
out
at
the
cowl
meeting
when
we
heard
a
presentation
on
this
was
how
long
the
landowners
been
sitting
on
this
land.
How
nothing
has
happened,
however,
there
seems
to
be
no
activity
being
generated
whatsoever
and.
N
I
I
B
I
Great
question,
so
when
you
say
the
part
of
the
problem
is
when
you
say
our
I
mean
yes,
yes,
there
are,
there
are
trade
associations,
there
are
real
estate
broker.
Get-Togethers
there
are
marketing
tours.
There
are
all
of
those
we
are
involved.
We,
the
city
ourselves,
are
involved
sometimes
to
market
our
own
property.
We
do
own
a
very,
very
small
number
of
industrial
properties
and
we
do
market
those.
Sometimes
through
those
venues
and
in
those
methods
we
don't
usually.
Sometimes
we
can
participate
in
broker
events
to
market
private
property
for
understandable
reasons,.
O
Have
a
question
for
Paul:
oh,
this
is
a
new
process.
Obviously,
but
what
are
there
I'm,
comparing
this
process
to
a
rezoning
application
and
I'm
wondering
if
you
have
any
insight
into
why
this
is
the
route
that's
being
gone
versus
a
rezoning?
It
is
there
something
that's
achieved
that
can't
be
achieved,
but
through
rezoning
I
mean.
Is
there?
Is
there
some?
It
seems
like
there's
a
lot
of
overlap
between
the
current
zoning
versus
what
the
compound
amendment
would
be
so
I'm
just
kind
of
wondering
why
the.
E
Commissioner
looked
appear:
one
of
the
brighter
lines
in
the
current
comprehensive
plan
is
that
policy
that
says
on
one
side
of
this
purple
line.
You
can
only
do
in
you
know:
employment-related
uses
with
some.
You
know.
Hence
allari
commercial
uses,
an
office
and
not
housing,
and
on
the
other
side
of
that
line,
you
can
do
that
and
that
that's
that's
presumably,
and
it
would
be
a
good
question
for
the
applicant,
presumably
one
of
the
primary
drivers
behind
this
request.
O
E
O
E
Plan
amendments,
which
is
what
we
would
be
doing
in
the
case
that
the
Planning
Commission
and
the
council
asked
us
to
move
this
forward.
That
I
believe
it's
june
of
next
year,
which
is
probably
a
different
question
from
when
just
process
wise
and
good
good
process
wise.
Does
it
to
the
make
sense
to
stop
doing
that?
I?
Don't.
C
So
I
guess
my
question
is
why
why
don't
we
have
I
when
I
look
at
the
current
comprehensive
plan,
I
see
they
can
be
read
a
number
of
different
ways
right.
We've
got
a
couple
different
ways
in
the
staff
report
here,
because
we
have
direction
around
economic
development
say
after
around
transit
areas,
climate
initiative
sound
so
forth.
We
did
see
fit
under
the
current
plan
to
designate
this
an
innovation
district
right,
and
so
what
is
the?
C
We
would
be
premature
to
put
in
place
regulations
that
could
effectively
regulate
this
plan
toward
our
future
goals,
and
yet
we
and
so
I
guess.
My
question
is:
why
can't
we
put
regulations
in
underneath
the
current
comprehensive
plan,
which
I
think
this
commission
is
seen,
has
a
lot
of
flexibility
to
be
interpreted
in
a
number
of
different
ways
and-
and
you
know,
we've
seen
instances
where,
for
example,
we
put
the
pedestrian
overlay.
C
E
I
did
I,
got
it
yeah,
so
Commissioner
rock
well
I.
Certainly
the
Commission
does
and
could
you
know,
take
action
to
amend
current
policy
to
introduce
new
zoning
tools
and
has
and
will
continue
to
do,
that.
The
request
before
you
right
now
is
simply
about
these
properties
and
moving
the
line
and
the
underlying
land
use
guidance
and
it
wouldn't
change
any
of
that
it
would
you
know
the
existing
policies
and
ham.
Zoning
map
and
text
would
would
continue
to
apply.
M
Yeah,
just
I
think
a
pretty
basic
one.
I
did
miss
committee
the
whole
couple
weeks
ago,
so
this
is
very
interesting
conversation
and
I'm,
enjoying
having
it
I
think
I
saw
on
the
zoning
and
planning
agenda
a
couple
months
ago,
a
small
area
plan
because
for
Logan
Park
that
we
didn't
exactly
adopt,
we
sort
of
just
received
it
and
I
think
filed
it.
So
I'm
not
exactly
sure
what
the
terminology
is
so
have.
M
E
A
All
right,
then,
we'll
we'll
have
an
opportunity
to
ask
more
questions
in
the
minute,
but
at
this
time,
I'll
open
the
public
hearing
on
this
item
and
I'd
like
to
ask
the
applicant
to
speak
first
and
just
so,
I
have
a
sense.
How
many
of
you
are
here
to
speak
on
this
item
or
coming
to
be
with
because
of
several
people,
so
well
have
the
applicant
to
speak
first
Paul.
If.
E
E
P
Thank
You
commissioners
bro
here
in
our
case
my
name,
is
I
Jeff,
Barnhart
and
I'm
with
prospect
park,
properties,
I'm
partnered
with
john
wall
wall
companies,
an
applicant
on
this
site.
I
can
finally
say
that
this
isn't
my
first
rodeo,
and
I
think
you
should
note
that,
because
all
the
other
rodeos
have
taken
place
literally
right
across
the
street
I
could
throw
a
baseball
from
all
the
other
projects.
I
brought
before
you
guys
and
I
can
land
it
on
this
site.
If
the
winds
with
me,
I'll,
say
it
again,
I
always
say
it.
P
I
will
never
come
for
city
Minneapolis
with
a
project
unless
I
have
poor
neighborhood
support,
and
this
project
is
no
different.
I've
engaged
with
the
community
more
this
time
and
other
effects
stakeholders
more
than
any
other
other
projects
I've
brought
for
than
on
this
one,
and
in
the
past
three
years
on
fewer
than
ten
acres
of
facilitated
or
developments
that
are
in
various
stages
of
the
development
process,
decree
what
that
will
create
more
than
200
jobs,
hotel
grocery
store
apartment,
senior,
living,
an
affordable
housing
all
while
helping
to
fulfill
other
stakeholders.
P
Aspirations
like
the
green
for
three,
which
is
the
green
space
artery
runyon,
adjacent
salvia,
above-mentioned
district
stormwater
and
anna
park
on
both
the
district
stormwater
and
the
park,
are
on
property
the
property
zones
and
is
helping
give
it
for
the
public
good.
You
see,
I'm
a
lucky
guy,
I'm
standing
here
today
is
probably
my
fifth
or
sixth
project
and
I
have
the
opportunity
to
be
around
the
community
and
partners
with
the
real
vision.
P
P
So,
if
it
all
flops,
you
can
blame
me
why?
Because
this
area
needs
a
core
and
infrastructure
to
attract
all
the
industry
and
other
uses.
We
all
want
to
see
here.
You
see
the
prospect
park,
neighborhood
itself
of
university
avenue
with
the
thin
block
of
commercial
separating
the
single-family
home
from
university
avenue
university
is
the
only
east
to
west
artery
split
down
the
center
by
the
LRT
green
line
as
good
as
the
LRT.
Is
it's
not
very
conducive
for
pedestrian
travel
back
and
forth
north.
P
So,
on
the
north
side
of
university
avenue,
you
got
maybe
two
blocks
of
more
commercial
to
the
north
of
hodgepodge
collection
of
single-family
homes,
office,
buildings
and
then
the
four
block
area
that
I
was
talking
about
above
that
I'm
helping
develop
I'll
surrounding
the
29th
Avenue
light
rail
station.
Then
there
is
the
U
of
M
transit
way.
I
call
that
no
man's
land,
the
grass
isn't
greener.
On
that
side,
the
grass
doesn't
need
a
girl
because
it's
been
neglected
for
so
long.
There's,
there's
no
infrastructure,
there's
nothing
there,
and
even
the
role
that
is
there.
P
Melkam
Avenue
is
full
of
trucks
and
the
utilities
are
tapped,
I'm
trying
to
work
on
another
project
and
there's
not
even
capacity
to
put
storm
in
that
Street.
So
the
infrastructure
is
pretty
pretty
seriously
missing
here.
So
we
need
a
core
and
we
need
the
infrastructure
and
we're
in
the
process
of
creating
that.
But
we
need
your
help.
P
The
other
side
that
is
under
development
is
good,
but
we
need
more
and
we're
asking
for
9
over
21
acres
to
allow
for
some
housing,
so
we
can,
or
or
just
a
more
flexible
zoning
you.
So
we
can
go
after
the
market
and
be
able
to
afford
the
green
space,
the
repurposing
of
the
Harris
building
that
was
built
in
eighteen.
Eighty,
six
that
we're
trying
to
turn
into
a
food
hall
and
to
leverage
the
infrastructure
with
the
roads.
Again
there
are
no
roads
leading
to
the
side.
P
Many
of
us
have
worked
tirelessly
for
several
years
facility
in
the
development
in
this
area.
The
timing
is
perfect
right
now.
Three
of
the
projects
that
I
mentioned
are
either
under
construction
or
will
be
in
construction
by
the
fall.
Green
fourth
street
is
going
to
be
being
built
this
summer,
we've
already
gotten
the
district
storm
water
phase,
one
in
and
MW
Moyes
already
completed
a
feasibility
study
for
the
storm
water
on
Phase
two,
which
would
be
on
this
milk.
P
We
got
a
good
plan
with
a
lot
of
Merit
here
and,
and
that
wasn't
really
even
accounted
for.
They
don't
consider
the
past
efforts
to
attract
those
uses.
They
don't
consider
how
the
light
rail
has
changed
the
landscape
and
they
really
it's
not
considering
a
new
type
of
industry
and
how
industry
has
changed.
Our
plan
considers
way
more
cities,
goals
and
a
contradicts,
because
a
public
grown
component,
sustainability
density
for
sure,
walkability
and
repurposing
old,
historical,
historically
significant
buildings
all
well
leveraging
the
infrastructure.
P
With
our
current
plan,
other
cities
and
neighborhoods
would
be
jealous
if
they
saw
the
amount
of
community
engagement.
Us
developers
are
doing
with
this
neighborhood
and
here's
the
best
part.
After
that
column.
Meeting
I
did
a
little
research,
and
if
you
book
on
that
math,
you
got
skb
just
left
the
melkam
to
the
north
side
of
the
railroad
yard,
and
then
those
private
cargo
containers
are
on
another
nine
acres,
that
is
private
property
on
17
acres
right
there,
just
so
many
jobs
or
I
called
the
owners
there's
so
many
1818
jobs
on
17
acres.
P
At
one
point,
05
e,
eight
jobs
per
acre
I
have
20
Xing
that
and
I'm
not
even
trying
to
on
the
south
side
University.
So
if
you
be
my
guest
and
help
us
on
change
this
usage
here-
and
we
can
finish
creating
the
core
and
leveraging
the
infrastructure,
I
bet
you
I
can
get
a
50x
on
that
and
we're
preserving,
which
we
want
industry.
We
want
to
surround
the
core
with
industry.
So
guess
with
that,
thank
you
and
Kira.
L
Good
evening,
commissioners,
we
are
asking
you
to
recommend
to
the
City
Council
that
one
aspect
of
the
city's
land-use
policy
be
amended
applicable
to
those
nine
plus
acre
site.
We
are
not
asking
to
change
the
IED
policies
or
goals
themselves.
The
application
simply
seeks
to
remove
9.4
acres,
not
even
all
of
mr.
F
L
Much
council
does
not
feel
that
a
comprehensive
plan
amendments
need
to
be
cut
off
until
June
of
2018.
We
don't
feel
this
is
premature
or
the
reasons
also
that
Jeff
noted
in
terms
of
the
momentum
of
development
and
opportunities
in
this
area
we're
moving
a
small
area
from
the
edge
of
the
semi
industrial
employment
district
will
not
impede
staffs
or
the
Commission's
of
the
City
Council's
ability
to
do
a
reanalysis
and
a
continuing
analysis
of
citywide
industrial
land
use
policy
as
part
of
the
2040
Comprehensive
Plan
Update.
L
Moreover,
we
believe
strongly
that
allowing
mixed-use
development
that
include
housing
on
both
sides
of
the
transitway,
not
the
entire
semi
area,
but
just
some
area
to
the
north
of
this
transit
way,
will
actually
serve
to
catalyze
the
development
that
is
being
sought,
and
that
is
the
core
goal
of
the
employment
district
with
higher
density
employment
uses.
One
comment
about
the
review
factors
that
Paul
went
through
with
you.
These
are
factors
for
consideration.
They
are
not
required
findings,
so
it's
similar
to
rezone.
If
things
for
you
to
consider
and
you're
not
limited
to
those
considerations.
L
A
little
bit
more
on
the
planning
history
for
the
semi
area,
we
began
decades
adult
the
first
plan
that
we
are
that's
noted
in
our
application
materials
and
referred
to
as
a
semi
area
master
plan.
This
was
adopted
in
2001
as
part
of
that
plan
that,
in
this
wider
semi
area,
they
identified
three
areas
for
potentially
development.
L
They
called
one
the
self
redevelopment
area,
and
that
includes
the
area
from
the
rail
yards
to
University
and
even
some
south
of
university,
a
central
and
a
North
redevelopment
area
and
the
area
we're
talking
about
for
amendment
is
in
this
south
redevelopment
area.
As
part
of
that
semi
plan,
it
had
a
much
broader
and
I
know.
You
can't
read
this,
so
I
will
read
it
to
you.
It
had
a
much
broader
vision
or
the
mix
of
uses
that
should
be
allowed
to
promote
the
semi
and
it
was
still
southeast
minneapolis
industrial
area.
L
The
next
was
the
industrial
andrews
study
and
that
was
adopted
in
2006
and
formalized
policies
for
those
ied
areas
and
boundaries.
The
one
note
I
want
to
make
about
that
policy
is
that
it
did
not
identify
the
location
of
or
discuss
the
relevance
of
existing
or
planned
light
rail
transit
stations
to
its
policy,
so
where
it
was
near
future
light
rail
transit
station.
It
did
not
account
for
whether
that
you
know
how
that
should
impact,
whether
the
boundary
should
be
where
it
is
or
what
uses
should
be
allowed
near
there.
L
The
iud
boundaries
were
then
adopted
into
the
comprehensive
plan,
and
what
I
wanted
to
note
for
you
is
that
when
it
was
adopted
in
when
these
future
land
use
maps
were
adopted
in
2009,
this
is
the
ied
boundary
for
semi.
It's
purple
line,
that's
the
Transitway,
but
even
at
that
time,
because
of
the
ongoing
relevance
of
the
southeast
minneapolis
semi
master
plan,
this
area,
where
the
amendment
is
being
proposed
for
guided
mixed
use.
L
That
was
not
changed
until
adoption
of
stadium
village
plan,
at
which
point
a
small
area
plan
which
point
staff
and
the
plan
says.
The
change
is
considered
a
clarification,
but
I
also
want
to
point
out
with
respective
stadium
village
plan.
It
states
specifically
that
it
just
affirms
previously
adopted
policy
in
the
semi
master
plan
and
other
documents.
L
It
did
not
study
the
semi
area,
so
it
did
not
evaluate,
or
we
evaluate
the
guidance
for
that
that
area
most
recently,
the
innovation
district
policy
was
adopted
by
the
City
Council
and
all
they'd
show
you
the
map
for
this
area.
It
is
the
self
semi
area,
but
a
substantial
areas
of
land
south
of
university.
It
is
not
simply
an
industrial
policy.
L
You
should
not
be
confused
with
the
name
innovation
district
with
some
the
word
Minnesota
innovation
park
with
Minneapolis
innovation
park
that
had
been
used
in
the
past
to
promote
the
idea
of
a
research
and
development
area
in
semi
their
different
innovations,
the
prospect
park,
communities,
planning
engagement
was
central
to
the
adoption
of
this
city
council
policy.
This
innovation
district
now
known
as
color
side
and
their
engagement
has
not
ended
with
either
the
small
area
plan
or
the
adoption
of
this
innovation
district.
L
There
are
others
here
to
speak
in
more
detail
to
that
community
engagement
and
what
the
innovation
district
is
all
about.
I
just
wanted
to
point
out
two
of
the
resolutions,
two
of
the
points
in
the
resolution,
and
that
was
that
the
City
Council
directed
see
ped
to
continue
to
participate
in
planning
around
this
innovation
district
area.
I,
don't
think
they
put
a
limit.
L
That
said,
except
when
you're
doing
the
comprehensive
plan
updates,
which
takes
several
years-
and
they
also
said,
as
has
been
noted-
that
the
city
should
consider
changes
in
city
policies
and
practices
to
promote
experimentation
and
innovation
consistent
with
City
goals
and
our
position
is
that
what
we
are
proposing?
He
is
consistent
with
20
City
goals
and
with
just
that
boundary
change.
As
was
explained,
you
haven't
seen
comprehensive
plan
amendment
applications
before
because
in
general,
the
conference
plan
is
very
flexible,
but
with
respect
to
the
IED
it
is
not.
L
It
is
rigid
with
respect
to
housing,
other
plans
and
policies
that
apply
to
this
site
that
we've
gone
through
contemplate
a
wider
variety
of
uses
and
the
most
recent
policy
statement
by
the
city
in
the
innovation
district
actually
encourages
reevaluation
of
existing
policies
and
regulatory
flexibility.
So
we
hope
that
you
agree
that
what
we
are
proposing
is
a
minor
amendment
to
an
IED
boundary
is
consistent
with
those
policies
and
that
you
will
recommend
approval.
Q
We
approached
the
University
got
their
support,
they're
their
encouragement
to
pursue
this
idea.
We
join
the
Association
of
University
of
research
parks
who
knew
there
was
such
a
thing,
but
anyway
joined
travel
to
annual
conventions
all
over
the
country
and
participated
in
their
training.
We
worked
with
the
city
of
Minneapolis
for
redevelopment
of
Malcolm
Avenue.
You
may
recall
you
know
that
it
was
a
dirt
path
when
we
bought
the
property
and
for
the
better
part
of
the
first
ten
years
we
owned
it.
Q
There
was
no
pavement
on
Malcolm
Avenue
I,
hired
a
full-time
employee
to
work
simply
on
praying
customers
or
tenants
to
us
for
this
benefit
of
Minnesota
innovation
park,
which
we
called
it.
I
worked
with
three
university
presidents
and
to
university
vice
presidents
of
research,
I
work
with
area
and
now
Prospect
Park
Association.
Q
F
Q
Life-Science
alley
to
promote
this
idea,
we
worked
with
the
city
on
building
trying
to
build
a
granary
road
project.
We
hired
a
pro
courage
company
to
help
us
market,
the
proc,
the
property,
to
bring
jobs.
We
pitched
jobs
E,
which
was
brought
to
us
by
project
Z,
which
was
brought
to
us
by
greater
MSP,
which
was
a
national
piyo
tech
headquarters.
Q
He
pitched
feet
a
match
to
be
on
the
site,
but
frankly,
I
thought
it
would
have
been
a
better
spot
for
them
them
and
where
they
are
now
he
pitched
Fairview
central
labs
and
a
host
of
other
companies.
We
tried
to
bring
to
this
site
I
resisted.
For
the
most
part,
the
urge
to
accommodate
people
to
want
to
do
outside
storage
for
truck
trailers
been
our
most
popular
phone
calls
people
wanting
to
store
stuff
outdoors,
we've
done
numerous
master
plans.
Q
We
have
finally
now
negotiated
a
memorandum
of
understanding
with
the
neighborhood
to
support
the
vision
we
have
for
the
site.
We've
helped
promote
the
state's
first
innovation,
strict
our
cybers
pass
by
the
city,
and
now
we're
recording
some
users
that
are
interested,
but
they
need
the
infrastructure
to
get
them
in
this
plan
will
still
pursue
I
want
to
be
clear.
We
still
have
a
tureen
I
still
have
the
dream
of
bringing
research
type
people
to
this
area.
Q
Q
We're
creating
some
park
space.
You
mentioned
the
food
all
very
excited
about
the
food,
all
my
wife's
involved
in
that
and
it's
going
to
be
a
wonderful
place,
making
peace,
we
do
need
the
infrastructure
and
we
believe
that
this
plan
will
bring
more
jobs
and
more
taxes
in
just
industrial
alone.
Please
don't
waste
this
opportunity
to
bring
these
jobs
in
the
tax
base
to
our
city.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
I
stand
for
questions.
If.
A
R
Thank
you
very
much
gibran
and
members
of
the
Commission.
My
name
is
Richard
Gilliard
with
a
194
Malcolm
evidence.
Lt's
I've
been
a
member
of
the
prospect
board
of
directors
for
at
least
a
decade,
but
in
the
chair
of
the
master
planning
committee
and
one
of
the
principles
in
the
prospect
park,
2020,
Community,
Development,
Corporation
and
one
of
the
founders
of
the
prospect
North.
Note
oversight.
Partnership
appreciate
this
opportunity
to
talk
about
our
vision
for
this
district
and
to
support
the
change
in
zoning.
The
experience.
R
Identified
parcels
from
industrial
to
transitional
industrial
I'm
here
down
to
score
today,
the
overwhelming
community
support
that
has
been
developed
for
this
specific
proposal
and
what
the
law
companies
are
proposing
and
just
as
important.
Oh,
this
parcel
and
the
proposed
uses
fit
within
the
endorsed
vision
for
the
tower
site.
Innovation
district
and
will
have
approved,
provide
the
energy
momentum
to
drive
the
redevelopment
that
this
asset
rich
location
deserves.
R
F
R
T
R
F
F
F
R
The
arts
and
culture
as
arts
and
culture
we
determined
it-
could
provide
a
catalytic
environment
with
the
potential
for
2,500
to
3,000
to
residential
units
for
Workforce,
affordable,
special
needs,
senior
artists,
a
broad
spectrum
serving
all
levels
of
ability
and
resources.
Our
research
determined
that
it
could
provide
or
could
accommodate
several
hundred
thousand
square
feet
of
learning.
R
Specialties
offices
and
studios
and
could
provide
space
for
five
to
six
thousand
new
jobs
all
in
it
together
by
a
connecting
public
realm
and
just
as
important.
We
envisioned
that
this
place
could
be
a
replicable
model
of
a
sustainable
regenerative
development,
a
community
that
is
diverse,
inviting
healthy
and
beautiful
and
today,
through
the
imagination
of
the
community,
the
hard
work
of
the
land
owners
and
developers,
the
cooperation,
support
of
the
city
and
of
accounting,
the
Mississippi
watershed
management
organization,
the
university
met
council
and
the
funding
of
McKnight
Blue,
Cross,
Blue,
Shield
and
others.
F
R
R
Major
sheet
metal
site
to
the
base
of
the
United
crushers
elevators,
this
part
means
eyes
on
the
park.
A
district
stormwater
system
is
in
place
and
a
district
energy
system
is
being
planned
and
there
I
say
there
is
none
of
the
boards
that
we
believe
a
workable
plan
for
the
mythical
granary
corridor
as
well.
R
R
R
This
this
concept
is
sort
of
strongly
supported
by
this
community.
The
tower
site,
innovation,
innovation,
district
preserves
and,
in
fact,
demands
the
implementation
of
this
bold
vision.
The
Prospect
Park
Association
understands
that
neighborhoods
do
not
build
cities,
neighborhoods
and
cities
are
built
by
developers,
and
it
is
our
good
fortune
to
have
land
owners
and
developers
who
share
our
vision
and
our
ideals.
R
If
this
high
intensity
mix
of
uses,
building
types
open
spaces
and
people
engaged
in
reinforcing
activities
as
value
to
the
city,
the
purpose
of
the
innovation
district
is
to
be
applied
to
this
request
and,
if
the
community,
and
if
the
work
of
the
community
seeking
this
high
level
of
development
respected
important,
we
believe
now
is
the
time
to
move
forward.
Thank
you.
K
Yeah,
thank
you
a
couple
questions
thank
you
for
being
here
and
so
I
think
typically
I
think
we
would
have
a
maybe
not
favorable
perspective
on
a
developer
asking
for
this
amount
of
significant
significant
policy
change
just
for
one
site.
So
I
think
that
the
work
that
the
community
has
done
around
planning
this
area
is
is
significant
and
how
I'm
thinking
about
this
decision.
So
I
wanted
to
ask
you
some
questions
about
how
this
parcel
fits
into
that
context.
K
Are
we
to
then
expect
that
we
would
have
a
lot
more
developers
coming
in
with
similar
applications,
while
we're
in
the
process
of
doing
this,
bigger
citywide
plan,
update
and
so
I
thought
I'd
be
helpful
for
you
to
offer
your
perspective
as
someone
who's
been
involved
in
that
community
planning
effort
on
those
two
questions.
Thank.
R
You
I'll
try.
We
think
this
site
and
this
request
is
really
important,
because
is
that
the
core
of
the
of
the
district?
It's
at
the
it's
at
the
prospect
park
station,
the
entire
district
that
we're
talking
about
can
be
seen
from
the
drop
prospect
park,
light
rail
station.
It
runs
to
the
base
of
the
elevators
I
believe
that
the
vision
has
already
attracted
the
development
that
we
have
a
green.
R
I
think
the
developers
have
invested
in
that
because
they
see
it's
real
we'd
like
to
be
able
to
extend
that
I.
Think
we've
been
very
very
lucky:
we've
had
land
owners
willing
to
people
at
the
time
and
the
dollars
to
participate
in
a
district
system
that
the
payoff
is
long-term,
but
getting
this
first
piece
right
at
the
heart
of
the
district
that
involves
the
blank
site
for
development
involves
the
park.
It
involves.
N
R
That
the
opportunity
is
now
that
we
don't
want
to
miss
it.
The
second
is
our
others
going
to
request
this.
They
may
I
think
we
maybe
need
to
figure
out
really
what
it
means
to
have
an
innovation
district,
and
how
are
we
going
to?
What
are
the
rules
and
how
do
we
I
think
we'd
love
to
be
supporting
the
rule?
R
If
we
knew
them,
we
were
happy
to
get
the
designation
innovation
district,
hoping
we
could
kind
of
figure
it
out
along
the
way
when
I
describe
this
I
say
that
we're
going
to
take
living,
working,
learning,
discovery
and
sort
of
mush
it
all
together,
not
exactly
a
technical
term
for
zoning.
How
do
we
do
that
order.
R
U
Am
Vince
denson
the
president
of
the
prospect
park
near
Burt,
Association,
elevate,
important
and
here
just
to
express,
on
behalf
of
the
neighborhood
association,
our
support
for
this
plan
and
this
change
we're
usually
seen
as
a
neighborhood
that
says
know
where
the
Republic
of
prospect
Clark
and
we
we
stand
in
the
way
of
some
things.
We
have
a
historic
district,
the
largest
in
the
state
because
of
the
activism
that
we
have
in
the
neighborhood.
U
So
at
the
moment
we
have
the
right
developer,
the
right
landowner,
the
right
plan,
the
right
community
partnership
between
us
and
50b
2020,
and
it's
our
third
innovation
district,
and
it
is
a
moment
we'd
hate
to
have
to
lose
over
something
as
simple
as
a
regulatory,
a
request,
one
else,
one
piece
I
add.
Sometimes
our
neighborhoods
stretches
from
Oak
Street
at
the
university
Minnesota.
All
the
way
to
the
southeast
come
walk
through
the
middle
of
the
railroad
yards,
all
the
way
south
to
the
river
gorge.
U
Even
our
own
board
sometimes
forgets
how
big
and
diverse
prospect
park
is
that
we've
been
a
lot
of
reform
lately
and
plastic
part
to
open
doors
and
be
a
lot
more
community
voices.
Our
meetings
are
very
well
attended.
Our
zoning
and
planning
meeting
has
overflow
seating.
We
are,
unlike
some
other
neighborhood
organizations
where
they
get
surprised
by
developers
or
they
haven't
heard,
or
things
happen
to
them.
We.
U
H
G
Sisters,
my
name
is
lanique
McKenzie
I'm,
the
director
of
campus
and
capital
planning
at
the
University
of
Minnesota,
a
number
of
residents
and
city
Minneapolis.
Thank
you.
I
just
wanted
to
speak
today,
not
about
your
procedural
challenge
that
you
have
in
front
of
you.
It's
certainly
a
dense
one,
but
I
wanted
to
do
a
little
more
information
about
the
impacts
that
we
are
really
the
only
impacted
party
for
this
very
exciting
move
into
our
site:
innovation,
which
is
development
land
that
was
traditionally
seen
as
industrial,
we're.
G
So
I
what
I
do
want
to
pay
for
stuff
that
we've
been
working
extensively
with
this
specific
developer
and,
of
course,
the
neighborhood
association.
On
the
core
question
we
have
in
front
of
us
which
is-
and
someone
said
it
earlier-
that
the
transitway
used
to
be
no
man's
land
nothing's
happened
order
and
now
lots
is
happening
over
there.
G
This
transitway
was
designed
and
operated
in
the
late
1990s
as
a
fixed
guideway,
dedicated
transit
corridors
2.3
miles
in
length
it
links,
are
many
episodes
involve
campuses,
the
right
of
way
that
we
are
holding
ranges
from
60
to
100
feet
in
width.
Generally
speaking,
that
means
we
can
accommodate
two
lanes
of
traffic
and
a
shared
cyclist
and
pedestrian
path.
What's
interesting
as
an
anecdote
in
an
exciting
way,
particularly
in
the
segment.
That's
a
little
marker
on
your
image.
There
we're
seriously
leading
up
to
the
surly
site.
G
Our
pedestrian
and
cyclist
traffic
on
the
Transitway
has
become
much
heavier
and
if
we
could
find
another
place
to
put
a
second
path,
so
we
didn't
have
to
mix
cyclists
and
pedestrians
we'd
be
doing
that
as
soon
as
we
could.
The
service
levels
on
this
transit
way
is
really
what
I
want
to
bring
to
mind
for
you,
as
you
consider
how
much
you
need
to
know
about
these
land
use
changes
and
the
impacts
that
will
build
to
build
out
infrastructure.
I
also
want
to
flag
the
issue
of
pedestrian
and
cyclist
safety
right
now.
G
The
travel
time
on
that
transit
way
is
about
eight
minutes
between
kobo
Avenue
in
st.
Paul
and
twenty
third
Avenue
in
Minneapolis.
The
settings
of
travel
speed
for
our
University
buses
is
between
30
and
40
miles,
an
hour
which
is
not
an
ideal
condition
for
any
transit
vehicle
in
a
developing
or
more
developed
urban
environment.
However,
those
speeds
and
those
travel
times
are
based
on
the
idea
that
students
do
in
actual
fact,
transfer
between
classes
of
the
east
bank
and
the
st.
Paul
campus.
They
have
ten
minutes
to
transfer
between
classes.
G
I
would
say
most
students
don't
make
every
single
class
change
in
that
time
frame.
It
would
be
exhausting,
but
I
think
we
discovered
the
other
day
that
we
have
about
two-thirds
of
our
students
taking
at
least
one
class
a
week
on
the
st.
Paul
campus.
That's
very
true
and
me
earlier
years,
usually
other
undergraduate
experience
and
they
start
to
specialize
later
what
that
means
from
a
head
time.
Prospera
I'm.
Sorry
at
the
time
frame,
are
hot
headway
perspective.
G
Is
we
have
buses
travelling,
particularly
in
this
sort
of
intensified
area,
every
five
minutes,
which
means
the
bus
in
each
direction
every
two
and
a
half
minutes
so
in
terms
of
how
we
think
about
crossings
high
speed,
in
my
opinion,
in
terms
of
an
urban
condition,
transit,
increasing
bike
and
ped
traffic,
especially
this
is
the
prime
bike
route
to
st.
Paul
make
for
some
conditions
that
we
all
want
to
be
very
cognizant
about
as
development
goes
forward
so
really
today,
I
just
want
to
highlight
a
few
specific
impact.
They
are
not
germane
to
your
question.
G
They
do.
They
are
considerations
under
the
staff
report.
Item
number
six.
The
bottom
of
that
page.
Seven
in
the
staff
report
notes
that,
regardless
of
the
decision
you
make
about
land
use,
these
needs
have
to
be
addressed.
That
part
of
the
city
will
change.
It's
essentially
the
last
part
of
without
adequate
infrastructure
to
support
any
kind
of
land
use.
So
these
are
all
things
that
we'll
all
have
to
wrangle
with
the
cost
will
be
considerable
I
those
things
in
the
ground
today
can't
support
or
things
just
don't
exist.
G
A
couple
things,
though,
to
think
about
trying
to
get
the
scale
a
little
more
focused
on
how
individuals
to
hold
land
today
can
advance.
There
are
issues
right
in
front
of
us
Malcolm's
in
the
transit
way.
We
need
a
traffic
signal
we
have
about
one
to
two
dear
mrs.
a
week
between
our
transit
drivers
and
somebody,
either
in
a
vehicle
or
on
bikes
or
on
foot,
may
be
coming
from
surly.
Just
saying:
try
to
pop
and
there's
a
curb,
so
the
transit
drivers
need
to
be
very
alert
and
anticipate.
G
We've
done
some
things
taken:
landscape
out,
try
to
adjust
sight
lines
paid
things
better,
but
everyone
at
the
university
is
concerned
about
a
bad
situation.
Second
point
again:
this
is
not
to
arrange
your
business,
but
really
important
for
landowners.
In
particular,
the
public
right-of-way
on
Malcolm
Avenue
is
consistently
used
by
those
landowners
in
the
yard
north.
So
you
saw
the
aerial
image
with
the
container
yard,
their
yard
I
think
it's
been
sufficient,
probably
for
their
operation.
So
what
happens?
G
Is
trucks
back
in
Malcolm
Avenue,
which
means
the
west
side
of
Malcolm
Avenue
tech
get
the
access
it
needs
to
a
public
street,
so
active
management.
Your
city
ordinance
says
there
shall
be
no
private
use
of
the
right
away
respecting
for
queuing
for
maneuvering.
That
could
really
alleviate
some
of
the
challenges
the
university
has
planned
for
a
future
crossing
at
twenty
seventh
Avenue
in
the
transit
way.
That's
consistent
with
the
Grand
Rounds
plan,
which
is
beloved
and
ambitious,
but
it's
certainly
a
plan
at
the
university
has
recorded
in
its
own
documents.
G
You've
all
referenced
the
need
for
a
local
street
north
of
the
transitway.
That's
just
the
cost
of
that
land,
changing
no
matter
how
it
changes,
but
it
will
be
significant.
The
only
way
to
get
across
the
Transitway
today
without
conflicts
from
the
Transitway
service
providers.
Point
of
view
is
to
get
to
Malcolm
to
get
to
a
future
27th
crossing
or
to
get
to
25th.
The
last
two
points
I
just
want
to
mention
here
are
really
about
that:
pedestrian
movement,
the
excitement
and
the
that's
tasked
by
our
side.
G
Innovation
is
about
a
new
way
to
build
a
city.
I
mean
it's
not
new
for
all
the
proponents,
but
it's
new
in
our
generation,
which
is
not
Kyra
focused.
You
know
its
veteran
traveler
cyclists,
how
we
can
ensure,
until
there
isn't
a
transit
service
in
that
corridor,
that
those
crossings
are
safely
made,
that
their
intuitive
they're
attractive
is
really
essential,
especially
with
exciting
new
use
prospects
like
a
food
hall
and
in
the
last
point
which
again
is
about
permitting
for
the
future.
G
But
the
university
will
continue
to
be
interested
in
how
properties
that
are
adjacent
to
the
Transitway.
What
design
is
specified
for
the
edge
that
fronts,
the
Transitway,
because
we
don't
want
at
those
crossings
predominantly
really
for
that
safety
issue?
So
that's
a
little
too
much
detail
typically
heard
I
would
expect
at
a
permitting
question
which
is
not
what's
in
front
of
you
but
I.
Thank
you
for
your
time
today.
Thank.
T
T
Utilizing
the
research
intellectual
property
that
we
were
developing.
We
are,
as
others
have
said,
we're
one
of
the
largest
none
of
the
largest
research
universities,
but
we're
usually
in
the
top
ten
of
all
research
universities
in
the
country.
In
terms
of
the
amount
of
research.
We
do
we're
also
one
of
the
only
research
universities
without
an
accompanying
research
park
adjacent
to
it,
and
so
we,
as
a
region,
have
put
all
of
our
rd
intensive
companies
out
of
the
edges.
We
don't
have
anything
close
to
the
University.
T
So
from
the
academic
side,
we
see
this
area
as
absolutely
crucial
for
us
to
fully
leverage
the
research
coming
out
of
the
University
to
develop
a
new
kinds
of
jobs
that
are
suited
for
a
21st
century
economy.
As
we
talk
to
colleagues
who
were
leaving
uel
the
kinds
of
space
they
wanted,
wasn't
simply
industrial
space.
T
This
is
an
area
that
is
scheduled
if
we
get
accepted
by
the
Bureau
of
international
exhibitions
for
the
expo
2020
three
worlds,
exposition
which
we
will
hear
about
in
November,
and
so
it
is
currently
anticipated
to
be
north
of
the
transitway,
which
would
be
a
world
exposition,
attracting
millions
of
people
in
2023
and
so
again,
as
think
about
the
opportunities
north
of
the
Transitway
I.
Just
encourage
you
all
to
be
thinking
about
all
of
that
other
kind
of
activity.
So
all.
R
T
R
J
I'm
bad
and
clean
up,
my
name
is
John
Kerry.
I
live
at
169
Malcolm
avenue
southeast
in
Minneapolis.
I
am
currently
a
board
member
of
PPA,
I'm
also
on
the
Land
Use
Committee,
which
does
project
review
and
Zoning
I
am
chair
of
pp
2020,
but
in
my
past,
I
was
the
prospect
park,
10
prospect,
park's
members
on
the
semi
land
use
and
planning
committee
back
in
the
late
80s
and
into
the
90s.
J
There
are
three
points
that
I
want
to
make.
One
relates
to
the
need
for
waiting
for
the
20
40.
Can
the
next
is
what
is
the
appropriate
zoning
for
this
nine
acre
area?
And
then
the
third
is
what
I
would
say
is
respect
for
the
community
engagement
and
planning
process
that
we've
gone
through
in
terms
of
the
20
40
update
in
my
professional
life,
I
was
a
planner
for
the
Metropolitan
Council
I
specialized
in
growth
management,
land
use
and
transportation.
J
I
was
a
part
of
the
14
1973
happy
before
most
of
you
were
born
that
led
to
the
first
development
framework
that
led
to
the
planning
metropolitan
land
planning
act,
that
is
the
origin
of
regional
plans.
Local
comprehensive
plans
and
that
communication
back
and
forth
and
the
major
pieces
that
we
did
at
that
time
was
really
try
to
look
at
growth
at
the
edges:
eating
suburban
growth
under
some
sort
of
Vantage
control
in
the
mid-1990s
I.
J
Let
a
staff
group
that
looked
at
making
legislative
changes
to
the
Planning,
Act
and
two
of
those
pieces,
I
think
are
particularly
relevant.
One
of
them
was
the
update
process,
which
was
to
put
it
on
an
annual
for
a
10-year
cycle.
Previously,
there
was
no
requirement
for
once
a
plan
had
been
approved
by
the
council
that
council
that
communities
needed
to
update
it,
except
in
response
to
changes
in
one
of
the
major
regional
systems.
J
The
vision
and
plan
should
lead
zoning,
previously
a
number
of
communities
at
zoning
pre-empting
planning
when
it
came
to
what
was
in
control.
The
law
was
changed
in
so
that
the
zoning
had
to
reflect
the
vision
for
the
community
and
the
plan
for
the
community.
In
light
of
that,
upon
several
things,
I'd
like
to
say,
one
in
terms
of
the
update
updates
are
normal
under
the
land
planning
process,
and
they
can
be
done
in
response
to
demographic
changes,
economic
changes
and
also
in
infrastructure.
J
In
the
plan
for
this
area,
we
have,
at
the
neighborhood
I'll,
come
up
with
a
development
plan,
vision
concept
for
the
stationary,
and
that
will
be
I
assume
incorporated
into
the
2040
plan,
but
it
really
hasn't
been
officially
a
part
of
it.
So
what
we're
really
saying
is
if
this
could
be
a
logical,
normal
part
of
the
land
planning
act
process
for
updating
the
last
plan
and
doesn't
have
to
wait
until
you
go
through
this
next
process.
J
The
next
part
is
that
when
we
were
doing
the
semi-planned,
many
of
us
were
looking
at
industrial
jobs,
as
we
would
remember
what
they
were
25
and
30
years
ago.
That
is
no
longer
case.
What
we
see
is
that
companies
who
are
really
trying
to
employ
Millennials
are
looking
at
vertical
rather
than
a
horizontal
buildings.
They
want
next
use,
rather
than
single
use
and
they're.
J
The
next
part
is
that,
in
response
to
major
regional
infrastructure,
the
Planning
Act
really
says
that
you
can
update
your
plan
or
should,
if
there's
no
infrastructure
but
profit
Park
station
and
the
Green
Line
has
been
a
major
room
to
the
types
of
redevelopment
along
the
whole
Avenue,
but
particularly
in
Prospect
Park,
a
question
that
mr.
bender
raised.
J
What
is
this
area
north?
Well
right
now?
It
looks
like
if
you
view
it
as
a
circle.
The
southern
half
we've
done
a
lot
of
housing.
We
have
new
green
forth
as
a
greenway
going
through
it.
We
have
a
park
that
is
being
planned.
We
have
a
district
stormwater
system,
we
have
a
grocery
store
coming
and
we
have
a
variety
of
housing
types.
We
have
higher
cost
luxury
apartments.
We
have
market-rate
apartments.
J
We
have
affordable
apartments,
we're
looking
at
getting
significant
subsidy
for
family
workforce
housing
by
a
on,
and
we
have
senior
housing
coming
in
a
book
which
would
be
normal
senior
housing,
assisted
living
and
memory
care.
We
will
have
the
type
of
housing
that
the
community
said
that
they
wanted
a
variety
of
incomes
in
a
variety
of
energy.
J
What
we're
looking
at
is:
how
do
we
take
the
next
tab,
which
is
this
area
north?
That
is
the
wall
and
Prospect
Park
properties
and
integrated
in?
We
think
moving
the
zoning
to
this
transitional
zone.
Industrial
Classification
would
allow
it
to
be
better
integrated
to
what
we're
doing
on
the
south
side,
and
it
really
is
in
keeping
with
the
jobs
focus
that
we
had
in
a
semi,
and
we
tried
to
work
with
developers
and
others
to
get
in
the
dust
real
jobs
there
in
a
mr.
wall
set.
It
just
didn't
work
very
well.
J
What
we
need
to
do
is
to
build
on
what
infrastructure
we
have
the
light
rail
system
and
the
energy
that's
in
the
market
right
now
and
take
advantage
of
that
and
I
think
the
small
exchange
is
is
worthwhile.
So
in
conclusion,
I
would
say
that
we
don't
need
to
wait.
The
zoning
should
be
is
transitional.
Industrial
and
the
community
has
had
a
lot
of
input
into
this.
It
is
very
excited
about
the
type
of
community
that
we're
creating
north
of
university
avenue
and
hopefully
now
north
the
Transitway.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
A
S
We
need
more
customers,
we
need
more
papers,
we
need
more
people
to
pay
tax
base
and
jobs
and
such
and
bicyclists
and
car
people
and
all
that
kind
of
stuff.
So
what
I'm
hearing
I
wissen
here
the
whole
time
and
I
think
you
guys
are
a
little
concern
to
make
a
pre-emptive
move,
which
I
believe
quite
frankly,
you're
going
to
make
anyways
in
a
few
months
or
a
year,
or
something
like
that.
It's
going
to
be
it's
going
to
be
hands
down.
What
you're
going
to
do,
anyways
so
I.
S
Don't
think
this
is
a
nature
or
a
defensive
move,
or
anything
like
that.
I
think
it's
something
that
you're
going
to
end
up
doing
anyways.
So
from
my
point
of
view
on
the
ground.
Also,
all
this
development
I've
seen
a
lot
less
crime.
Everyone
feels
a
lot
safer.
The
tension
is
way
down
in
the
neighborhood.
The
construction
guys
are
great
and
everyone's
kind
of
really
getting
along.
So
that's
my
two
cents.
Thanks.
R
E
E
B
Within
this
industrial
employment
district,
how
much
is
still
available
for
development?
Obviously,
there's
development
on
maybe
five
percent
of
it
say.
So
how
much
does
that
actually
leave
for
future
industrial
uses
and
say
over
the
last
five
years,
just
thought
that
might
how
much
how
much
is
actively
being
redeveloped
or
how
much
inquiries
have
we
gotten
on
on
what.
B
E
E
Of
real
in
the
city
as
a
whole
is
this
54
square
mile,
so
the
land
dedicated
to
and
industrial
deployment
districts
is
a
small
percentage
of
that
seven
percent
of
that
or
four
square
miles
in
the
report.
Oh,
oh,
thank
you.
The
number
isn't
important.
Thank
you
for
setting
my
own
work
yeah
force
per
month.
I
want
to
answer
part
of
your
question,
a
commissioners
like
them
and
turn
over
the
jack
who
has
more
Florida
to
provide.
E
We
do
know
that
there's
been
a
consistent
trend
in
recent
years,
going
back
to
the
time
that
the
industrial
land
you
study
was
adopted
that
we're
losing
consistently
we're
losing
to
squirt
building
square
footage
devoted
to
industrial
uses
and
land
area
devoted
to
industrial
uses
amazone.
That
number
had
been
a
continuous
drop
for
quite
a
long
time.
I
don't
have
a
specific
numbers
in
front
of
me:
Jack
bynars
long-range
planning
manager,
who
are
the
atoms.
E
N
Commissioners,
well,
I,
don't
have
exact
numbers
for
you.
There
is
where
we're
thinking
about
it
as
unmentioned,
we're
studying
it.
You
don't
have
all
of
the
answers
yet,
but
we
are
thinking
about
it,
and
so
there
is
a
proportional
concern
that
we
have
when
you
think
about
all
of
that
land
in
industrial
employment
districts.
N
Is
there
working
with
potential
folks
who
want
to
move
to
the
city,
bring
jobs
to
the
city
and
they
can't
find
tracts
of
land
large
enough
and
the
land
has
been
chopped
up
over
the
years
or
I.
Don't
have
to
tell
all
of
you
that
the
use
code
tables
in
the
zoning
code
have
gotten
quite
industrial,
or
it
quite
sorry,
liberal,
so
that
you
can
have
things
like
and
I
can't
name
them
off
the
top
of
my
head.
N
But
you
can
have
charter
schools,
you
can
have
religious
institutions,
you
can
have
doggie
daycares
and
all
sorts
of
things
that
aren't
any
kind
of
truck
parking,
all
kinds
of
things
that
aren't
really
about
making
things
and
giving
people
jobs.
So
what
we're
trying
to
understand
in
the
study
that
we're
doing
is
how
much
land
is
actually
available
of
all
of
that
land.
How
much
land
is
actually
available
for
folks
who
want
to
come
in
and
do
some
kind
of
industrial
development?
N
And
then,
on
top
of
that,
I
think
the
the
other
concern
that
we're
really
trying
to
think
through
is
that
none
of
this
land
is
clean.
So
all
of
it
needs
resources
and
that's
a
resource
question
that
we're
working
on
not
only
for
the
city
but
obviously
with
our
institutional
partners
and
with
developers
as
well.
So
it's
a
long
way
of
saying
that
there's
very
of
that
land
in
them
on
the
map,
that's
in
purple
very.
F
A
O
I
should
have
a
question
for
Carol
Lansing
to
the
project
contact
on
this,
so
in
understanding
all
the
testimony
and
compelling
and
husband,
but
concern
and
the
thing
they
keep
I
keep
going
back
to
is.
Can
you
explain
to
me
how
this
won't
set
precedent,
because
I
think
a
concern
that
we
have
isn't
is
looking
at?
We
have
a
finite
amount
of
industrial
zone
land
for
future.
O
So
whether
or
not
it's
in
demand
today
or
been
sitting
dormant
for
15
years,
we
have
to
look
20
50
years
down
the
road,
whether
or
not
industrial
is
what
it
was
or
whether
it
means
something
different.
Our
concern
is:
is
this
going
to
open
the
floodgates
if
every
developer
now
has
a
president
saying
this
lands
not
being
used?
We
can't
get
anyone
to
build
a
factory
on
it.
O
Therefore,
let's
do
makes
you,
sir,
just
out
of
the
other,
because
I
can
certainly
think
of
certain
areas
being
more
appealing
for
that,
leaving
other
areas
of
the
city
that
are
already
experiencing
hardship
to
be
stuck
with
10
of
the
drinks,
so
I'm
just
kind
of
wondering.
How
do
we
from
your
perspective?
O
L
I
think
this
is
the
most
highly
discretionary
decision
that
had
come
before
you.
It
is
pure
policy,
and
so
you
know
all
zoning
is
case-by-case,
but
if
anything
has
less
presidential
force
or
requirement
if
its
policy
decisions
like
comprehensive
plan
amendments
also,
this
is
a
particular.
This
is
a
unique
situation.
It
is
a
industrial
area
near
a
transit
station,
but
also
in
an
area
where
the
community
has
been
highly
engaged
in
planning
and
development
activities
and
supports
this
also
the
tower
side.
L
Innovation
district
is
unique
to
this
location,
so
there's
one
other
industrial
employment
district
near
a
transit
station,
that's
like
in
Hiawatha,
and
that
area
is
actually
developed
and
functioning
industrial
land
and
that
this
is
vacant.
And
while
you
hear
that
there
are
users
who
can't
find
large
enough
tracts
of
land,
they
haven't
wanted
to
go
here.
I
think,
there's
you
know
a
lot
of
today
and,
and
that's
another
unique
factor,
I
think,
is
the
need
for
the
infrastructure.
The
need
for
the
road
connections
is
as
a
mr.
L
wall
and
Jeff
by
heart
have
said:
they're
not
against
that
they're
going
to
keep
looking
for
industrial
office
users,
and
they
have
a
lot
of
land.
That's
there
to
put
it
on,
but
bridging
the
transitway
and
creating
a
destination
location
with
the
parks
and
the
and
the
connections
is
what
they
need
to
to
catalyze.
That
so
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
unique
factors,
and
it's
a
highly
you
know
you
are
not
bound
by
having
granted
it
to
one
said
anybody
could
say
when
I
used
appendices.
M
Question
first
staff:
so
if
we
were
to
adopt
the
changes
recommended
by
the
applicant
today,
so
it's
going
to
go
to
City
Council
for
approval
and
then
to
the
Met
Council
and
then
is
that
then
come
back
to
us.
If
they
have
any
concerns
or
questions
about
it
may
I
guess.
My
question
is
so
if
we
were
to
without
this
is
probably
going
to
take
some
amount
of
time.
M
E
Which
would
agree?
No,
yes,
it
would
go
to
the
City
Council.
It
is
the
same
route.
You
know.
Any
other
request
would
would
take
a
little
bit
of
zoning
planning
committee
on
the
full
City
Council.
If
the
City
Council
were
to
approve
the
application,
then
it
would
be
staffs
responsibility
to
put
together
the
application.
Let
my
counsels
requirements
was
submitted
to
them.
They
would
the
Met
Council,
then
that
would
be
on,
according
to
our
opinion,
from
the
city
attorney,
would
be
on
the
same
61
day,
60
120
day
clock
as
a
development
application.
E
K
K
K
Be
helpful,
I
think
so
I
guess
my
bigger
question
is
you
be
helpful
to
know
the
differences
between
these
two
Landy's
applications
and
I
was
also
reflecting
here
and
would
like
your
answer
to
so.
If
we
did
support
the
change
in
the
land
use
classification,
that's
like
step
one
of
any
sort
of
development
proposal
that
would
come
forward,
and
so
there
would
likely
need
to
be
rezoning
and
other
changes.
K
So,
for
example,
the
applicant
brought
forward
if
any
applicant
brought
forward
a
proposal
for
this
site
in
the
future,
and
it
didn't
have
enough
industrial
use
in
it
or
something
it
seems
like.
Maybe
there's
some
leeway
in
terms
of
what
the
rezoning
would
be,
but
I'm
not
sure
how
the
land
uses
lining
up
to
what
the
underlying
zoning.
E
Commissioner
meander
I'll
try
to
sort
that
out
so
the
existing
future
land
use
games
and
we're
talking
about
a
parcel
specific
feature,
wendys
guidance.
So
there's
the
two
layers
that
we
were
talking
about
before
one
layer
is
that
the
industrial
employment
district
and
the
associated
boundary,
and
then
the
other
layer
below
that
is
the
parcels
to
the
guidance.
I.
Think
your
question,
commissioners,
about
the
persons
that
guidance
with
difference
between
industrial
and
invisible.
E
So
in
industrial
I'm,
just
going
to
read
the
definition
from
the
comprehensive
plan
includes
areas
suited
for
industrial
development
and
limited
supporting
commercial
uses
generally
found
with
an
industrial
employment
districts
with
a
high
level
of
policy
protection
and
an
emphasis
on
job
retention
and
creation.
Industrial
uses
have
primacy
over
other
uses.
It's
a
great
word
transitional
industrial.
We
have
this
in
the
report.
Only
we
leave.
I
E
On
page
five
is
following
along
under
amendment
request:
the
transitional
industrial
definition,
dustrial
areas
located
outside
of
industrial
employment
districts
will
be
labeled
transitional,
since
they
may
eventually
evolve
to
other
uses
compatible
with
surrounding
developments.
Although
they
may
remain
industrial
for
some
time,
they
will
not
have
the
same
level
of
policy
protection
as
areas
within
industrial
districts.
So
this
definition,
you
know
if
you're
thinking
about
the
word
transitional,
it's
a
couple
ways
you
can
think
about
it.
You
can
think
of
it
spatially,
transitioning
from
one
land
use
to
other.
E
You
can
think
about
temporally
over
time,
changing
from
one
use
to
another.
This
definition
emphasizes
the
ladder,
the
temporal
change
and
to
your
second
question.
So
as
that
said
at
the
very
beginning
of
all
this,
so
if
that
change,
introduces
more
flexibility
in
terms
of
land
uses
would
be
supported
by
policy.
You'll
notice
that
this
definition
of
transitional
industrial
doesn't
name
those
land
uses,
it
just
says,
may
evolve
to
other
users
compatible
with
surrounding
developed.
Okay.
E
Okay,
so
you
can't
build
like
a
brand
new
grocery
store,
but
you
could
put
today
a
retail
use
into
an
existing
building.
A
really
important
point
about
this
is
that
that
just
allows
all
of
those
things
and
doesn't
dictate
in
any
way
shape
or
form
what
the
percentage
of
any
particular
use
can
be
within
a
particular
property
or
district
okay,
so
they're
just
all
allowed
if
you
can
fit
them
even
door.
K
Maybe
a
follow-up,
then
we've
had
this
project
with
conceptual
project
described
to
us,
but
we
don't
have
a
landing
application
for
a
specific
project
in
front
of
it,
but
so
from
what
I
understand
it
sounds
like
we
would
be.
Then,
if
this
kind
of
project
people
were
looking
at
a
rezoning
from
industrial
to
a
commercial
land,
use
classification
or
something
to
allow
for
the
project,
that's
being
described
that
and
where
this
would
be
heading
in
the
future.
Yeah.
E
Me
Fisher
Brenner
I
hesitate
to
speculate
exactly
what
applications
might
come
before
you
from
the
property
owner.
You
know
after
this,
but
you
know:
there's
there's
reference
to
housing
in
the
application,
certainly
that
would
require
a
rezoning
to
either
the
industrial
living
overlay
district
or
some
other
district
there's
reference
to
a
grocery
store,
which
would
require
a
rezoning
and
so
there's
a
number
of
different
applications
that
would
that
would
be
required
to
achieve
what's
laid
out
on
the
development
concept.
E
U
K
Unusual
again,
to
have
kind
of
a
very
specific
concept
in
our
minds,
as
we're
thinking
is
through,
but
I'm,
reminding
myself
that
this
is
really
a
policy
decision
about
whether
or
not
we
want
to
consider
allowing
for
uses
that
are
in
the
transitional
industrial
classification
rather
than
than
Anna
purely
industrial
classification.
But
that
doesn't
mean
we
would
have
to
so
like
this
decision.
K
H
Really
cool
question:
you
know.
One
of
my
concerns
is
about
additional
public
pressure
pressure
on
the
public
dollar
to
build
additional
every
structure
that
doesn't
exist
here.
Has
there
been
any
discussion
about
how
additional
infrastructures
are
consumers,
water,
mains?
How
that
would
be
paid
for
with
this
proposal.
E
Krishna
krauser
I
think
that
it
would
be
best
simo,
Commissioner,
better
made
the
the
appropriate
point.
Just
now
that
you
know
really
what's
what's
before
you
is.
This
policy
decision
is
relates
to
the
comprehensive
plan
and
is
less
about
the
specific
proposal
that
is
laid
out
in
concept
in
the
in
the
application.
I
believe
there
is
some
reference
in
the
application
to
to
that
question
about
paying
for
the
for
the
infrastructure.
A
I
have
a
question
and
again
this
may
be
it
somewhat
tangential
and
obviously
there
are
some
older
structures
on
the
site.
Is
there
any
indication
of
the
significance
of
any
historic
resources
or
what
what
you
know
about
those?
Obviously
we
have
a
process
for
if
someone
were
to
come
in
and
and
propose
demolishing
everything
and
building
a
new
building,
but
what
what
information
does
the
city
of
currently
have
so.
E
President
brown
I
want
to
make
a
couple
things
clear
about
that.
One
is
so
the
larger
property
that
the
applicant
owns
includes.
You
know
what's
referred
to
as
the
United
crushers
elevator.
That
is
not
within
the
area
subject
to
this
amendment.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
this
mental
request
want
to
make
sure
that's
clear.
P
M
M
M
That's
and
put
into
this,
and
the
site
has
changed
a
great
deal.
Since
we
adopted
the
comprehensive
plan,
and
even
since
the
stationary
at
plan,
it
does
appear
that
there's
policy
support
forward
as
well.
The
applicant
went
through
that
in
the
resolution
from
2015
encouraging
us
to
think
of
you
know
innovative
and
creative
ways
to
use
plan
like
this
in
the
city
and
I.
C
C
Testimony
words
and-
and
you
know,
I-
think
we're
seeing
on
the
south
side
of
the
transitway,
we're
seeing
almost
all
a
residential
and
makes
it
residential
and
on
the
north
side
of
the
Transitway,
were
we're
pushing
for
exclusively
industrial,
and
you
know
I
think
that
we,
it
would
behoove
the
city,
and
I
know
we
have
Robin
garwood
from
km
Gordon's
office
area
and
cast
member
/
Commissioner
Lisa,
vendor
behoove
the
city,
to
think
about
how
we
could
consider
a
policy
framework
that
does
look
at
pushing
it
together
in
the
entire
area.
I.
C
You
know,
I
understand
the
timing
question,
but
that
feels
dangerous
to
me.
We
just
saw
you
know
it's
not
at
all
the
same,
but
it
makes
me
think
of
Merrick
garland
I
think
that
this
we
have
a
tool.
Those
is
here
for
a
reason
and
if
we
don't
think
that
this
kind
of
tool
should
be
used
on,
we
should
give
it
as
a
tool,
but
this
seems
like
it
fits
precisely.
C
This
application
seems
like
fits
nicely
within
what
that
tool
is
designed
to
do
and
I
think
there
has
been
a
lot
of
change
in
this
area,
and
it
has
a
lot
of
work
from
the
community
and
I
know
that
the
various
delegations
from
the
city
have
been
involved
in
this
planning
process
over
the
last
many
years
as
well.
So
I
just
wanted
to
reflect
on
a
couple
of
those
pieces
at
since
I
was
a
second
to
the
motion
there,
but
I
think
this
doesn't
feel
like,
like
the
timing
is
often
it
does
feel
like.
C
This
is
an
area
where
there's
there's
a
lot
going
on
where
this.
This
kind
of
idea
fits
with
the
vision
and
it's
a
particular
note
of
Commissioner
benders,
a
point
that
we
have
an
underlying
zoning
and
we
have
industrial
guidance
that
will
remain
in
the
comprehensive
plan
and
and
I
would
expect
that
we
would.
You
know
it
particularly
with
with
seafood
staffs
take
on
us
that
we
would
really
push
for
something
extraordinary
and
something
that
does
involve
jobs
and
an
industry,
and
we
have
tools
to
do
that.
All.
A
Right
and
I
might
just
clarify
with
staff-
obviously,
with
this
type
of
application,
we
have
a
little
bit
more
latitude
than
some
of
the
other
type
of
applications
we
see.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
the
type
of
statements
and
I
can
summarize
at
the
end,
but
are
the
types
of
statements
you're
hearing
acceptable
as
backup
for
provided?
This
motion
carries
president.
E
Brown,
as
has
been
stated
a
few
times,
this
is
indeed
a
legislative
and
a
policy
decision.
I.
Think
it's
important
to
note.
Regardless
of
all
you
come
down
on
this,
that
the
seven
factors
for
consideration
that
are
included
in
the
application
and
in
the
staff
report
are
those
are
not
in
ordinance
or
in
the
comprehensive
plan
itself.
They
are
simply
factors
for
consideration.
E
H
B
A
A
Obviously,
city
policy,
including
all
of
the
small
area
plans
for
this
area
of
the
employment
in
industrial
district
study
from
10
or
so
years
ago,
really
designate
that
trans
away
is
this
kind
of
a
hard
and
fast
boundary,
and
so
there
certainly
is
a
lot
of
policy
support
for
for
keeping
that
designation.
The
way
it
is
I.
Think,
though,
you
know,
like
the
commissioner
said
that
this
some
of
those
studies
are
several
years
old,
and
this
area
has
certainly
changed
and
I.
A
Think
one
of
the
most
significant
changes
is
the
opening
of
the
prospect
park
LRT
station
and
in
that
vicinity
we've
seen
very
significant
development
interest
in
that
area,
transform
very
rapidly,
in
fact,
I
think
even
more
development
interest
of
many
of
us
expected
and
as
Fisher
crimes
are
pointed
out.
You
know
this
entire
site.
A
Nine
acre
site
is
within
a
pretty
easy
walking
distance,
particularly
if
additional
infrastructure
is
constructed
on
that
station
and
our
comprehensive
plan
does
have
a
policy
of
promoting
higher
density
development
in
in
close
proximity
to
transit
stations,
and
certainly
you
know
if
someone
as
the
applicant
said,
I
use
this
site
to
simply
park
trailers
outside.
That's,
that's
not
a
very
intense
or
very
good.
J
A
Of
land
in
that
type
of
location,
I'm
also
kind
of
convinced
by
the
historic
preservation
argument,
I
realized
that
there
are
uses
of
this
property
that
are
allowed,
and
even
some
of
those
that
the
applicant
is
proposing
that
you
know
would
be
allowed
under
the
current
comprehensive
plan
designation
under
the
current
zoning
and
some
opportunity
for
that
structure
to
be
preserved.
I.
A
I
can't
necessarily
speak
for
the
city,
but
it
doesn't
seem
like
there's
a
lot
of
interest
in
the
city,
facilitating
construction
of
new
streets
in
this
area
and
if
more
intense
development
is
to
occur,
I
think
it's
probably
use
the
case
that
some
other
types
of
uses
might
need
to
be
allowed
to
to
support
that
and
make
that
more
feasible.
So
is
there
any
further
discussion
if
there
is
none?
We
have
a
motion
and
a
second
to
approve
the
comprehensive
plan.
Amendment
and
clerk,
please
call
the
roll.