►
From YouTube: September 18, 2017 City Planning Commission
Description
Minneapolis City Planning Commission Meeting
A
Good
afternoon,
I
will
call
to
order
the
September
18th
meeting
the
Minneapolis
City
Planning
Commission.
My
name
is
Matt
Brown
I
serve
as
president
of
the
Commission
I'm
joined
today
by
commissioners,
Gagnon
Magri,
no
slack,
Lukey,
Pierre,
real
and
and
Rockwell
I'll.
Ask
that
you
silence
any
mobile
devices
and
we
can
move
on
with
our
agenda.
Our
first
item
for
consideration
today
is
to
approve
the
actions
from
the
August
28th
meeting.
Commissioners
may
have
a
motion
to
approve
those
actions.
A
We
have
a
motion
and
a
second
all
in
favor,
and
that
motion
carries
our
next
item.
Business
is
to
sort
the
agenda
you
can
find
hard
copies
of
the
agenda
in
the
hallway
will
determine
which
items
we
will
discuss,
which
will
be
considered
on
consent
on
those
that
will
be
withdrawn
or
continued.
So
starting
at
the
top
of
the
agenda
item
number
one
is
a
vacation
and
Ally
vacation
and
the
vicinity
of
Garfield
Avenue
south.
Is
anyone
wishing
to
speak
in
opposition
to
or
modify
the
staff
recommendation
on
item
1?
A
A
So
if
anyone
is
here
for
item
2
it'll
be
considered
on
October
of
16th
item
3
is
at
1500
Nicollet
11
West
15th
Street
1515
10
15,
18
1538
and
15
44
Nicollet
Avenue.
That
is
a
plat.
Is
anyone
wishing
to
speak
in
opposition
to
or
modify
the
staff
recommendation
on
item
3?
Seeing
no
one
will
put
that
on
consent.
Item
4
is
an
Islamic
Center
at
28
24
13th
Avenue
South.
Those
applications
have
been
withdrawn.
A
So
if
anyone
is
here
for
that
we'll
be
accepting
the
withdrawal
of
those
applications
item,
5
is
30th
Street
Station
phase,
1
3752
Hiawatha
Avenue,
29
22
and
29
2014
3
8
street
and
3733
through
3805
28
Avenue
South,
several
applications
for
a
new
Planned
Unit
development.
There
we'll
discuss
item
5.
Is
anyone
here
to
speak
on
item
5
other
than
the
applicant?
So
we
do
have
a
few
people
here
for
item.
5
also
note
that
there
is
a
floor
area
ratio.
A
Variance
that
was
not
listed
on
the
agenda
was
noticed
and
is
referenced
in
the
staff
report,
so
we'll
be
considering
that
Wow
item
6
is
the
3,100
Lake
Street
apartments
of
3,100
West
Lake
streets,
several
applications
for
a
new
residential
building
there,
we'll
discuss,
item
6
and
just
so
I
have
a
sense.
How
many
of
you
are
here
to
speak
on
item
6,
so
there
are
a
few
of
you
here
and
I
might
suggest
two.
We
would
discuss
item
six
before
we
would
discuss
item
five
since
there
are
a
few
people
here
for
that
item.
A
Seven
is
a
target
field
station
mixed-use
project
at
505,
6th
Avenue
North,
several
applications
for
a
new
commercial
building
there
that
application
will
be
continued
to
the
October
2nd
meeting.
So
we'll
consider
that
on
October
2nd
item
8
is
the
zoning
code
text.
Amendment
related
to
telecommunications
antennas?
Is
anyone
wishing
to
speak
in
opposition
to
or
modify
the
staff
recommendation
on
item
8c?
No
one
will
put
item
8
on
consent,
uh-oh
we
do
have
someone
I
I
should
note
too,
and
we
can
certainly
discuss
the
item.
A
It's
come
to
my
attention
that
there
have
been
a
version
of
that
text,
amendment
that
related
to
burial
of
the
base,
equipment
and
I
understand
that
was
removed.
So
if
that
was
what
you
were
concerned
about,
that's
not
part
of
this
version,
but
we
can
certainly
discuss
it
if
you
had
other
things,
you'd
like
to
discuss
so.
A
Okay:
okay:
okay,
if
that's
the
case,
we
can
just
consider
that
item
on
consent,
then
all
right
so
item
eight
will
be
on
consent.
Item
nine,
also,
a
zoning
code
text,
amendment
related
to
off
premise,
signs
and
we'll
discuss.
Item
nine.
Finally,
item
ten,
also
a
zoning
code
text,
amendment
that
relates
to
exterior
building
materials
and
we
will
discuss
item
ten.
So
our
agenda
as
amended,
is
as
follows:
items
one
three
and
eight
will
be
on
consent,
we'll
discuss
items.
Five,
six,
nine
and
ten
item
four
has
been
withdrawn.
A
Item
two
will
be
continued
to
October
sixteenth,
an
item.
Seven
will
be
continued
to
the
October.
2Nd
leading
commissioners
may
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
agenda
as
amended
all
in
favor,
and
that
motion
carries
next.
We
can
move
on
to
our
committee
of
the
whole
consent
agenda
and
vice
president
slack,
could
you
give
us
an
update
Thank.
B
You
president
Brown
at
the
August
30th
2017
committee,
the
whole
we
heard
three
items.
The
first
was
a
land
sale
at
314,
36th,
Avenue,
north
and
1610
Oak
Park,
Avenue
North.
The
second
was
a
land
sale
at
42,
38,
Fremont,
Avenue,
north
and
then
the
third
was
a
land
sale
at
34,
31,
Colfax,
Avenue
North.
The
recommended
motion
for
each
of
the
three
items
was
to
approve
the
staff
recommendation
that
the
each
item
was
consistent
with
the
Minneapolis
plan
for
sustainable
growth.
All.
A
A
We
have
a
motion
and
a
second
all
in
favor,
and
that
motion
carries
next
may
have
motion
to
continue
item
2
to
the
October
16th
meeting.
We
have
a
motion
and
a
second
all
in
favor
and
finally
may
I
have
a
motion
to
continue
item
7
to
the
October
2nd
meeting.
You
have
a
motion
and
a
second
all
in
favor,
and
that
motion
carries
next
we'll
move
on
to
the
public
hearing
portion
of
our
meeting
and
at
this
time,
I'll
open
the
public
hearing
for
the
items
on
the
consent
agenda.
A
C
Thank
You
mr.
president,
I
just
before
the
meeting
Commissioner
Rockwell
had
asked
a
series
of
questions
to
staff
on
item
number
one.
So
just
perhaps
Rockwell
would
want
to
chime
in
or
staff
about
those
questions
which
were
related
to
the
overall
goal
of
having
a
pedestrian
space
that
was
continuous
along
the
eastern
portion
of
where
29th
Street
would
have
normally
gone
across
and
making
sure
that
this
motion
or
movement
today
doesn't
preclude
us
in
the
future
from
realizing
that
vision.
D
Commissioners,
one
thing
that
makes
this
situation
a
little
difficult
and
different
than
the
projects
we
had
to
the
east.
The
two
blocks
to
the
east
was
that
we
had
redevelopment
projects
on
both
of
those
blocks
that
allowed
us
to
negotiate
east-west
connections
from
those
streets,
as
called
for
in
the
small
area
plan.
In
this
case,
we
don't
have
a
redevelopment
proposal
and
probably
would
not
have
the
ability
to
require
an
east-west
connection
in
exchange
for
vacating
a
north-south
alley.
D
Hopefully,
in
the
future,
we
will
have
a
willing
property
owner
if
and
when
there
is
a
redevelopment
of
the
property,
but
it
is
correct
to
be
cautious
about
a
situation
where
we
would
be
vacating
at
least
the
north
tip
of
this
alley.
If,
if
we
think
that
we
would
ever
be
seeking
public
access
across
that
in
the
future,.
E
Commissioner,
to
speak
to
that
as
well,
since
I
was
the
one
that
brought
this
up.
You
know
I,
think
that
this
raises
a
question
for
me
on
a
little
bit
on
how
this
the
city
operates.
My
question
was,
you
know,
you
know
if
these
were
to
private
entities,
I
wasn't
suggesting
that
we
could
require
a
swap,
but
if
these
were
to
private
entities
we
would
be.
E
C
Thank
You
mr.
chair
I
wondered:
if
is
there
a
time
sensitivity
to
acting
on
this
today
or
might
we
postpone
it
one
cycle
so
that
we
have
time
to
work
with
the
property
owner
when
I
was
here
and
I
know,
it's
been
working
kind
of
toward
this
vision,
so
I
imagine
is
supportive,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
again
that
we
don't
take
action
today
without
sort
of
considering
this
long-term
vision
for
the
community.
G
A
A
E
I
just
want
to
briefly
say:
you
know:
I
hesitated
plug
ins
from
consent,
because
I
think
the
use
and
the
alley
vacation
requests
are
reasonable
and
so
I
think
that
my
intent
and
second
thing
this
is-
is
that
we
just
talked
about
what
this
land
is
going
forward,
long
term
and
figure
out
how
to
best
accomplish
that.
But
but
that
I
would
support
the
idea.
A
C
Chair,
just
echoing
I,
also
don't
anticipate
there
being
any
issues,
but
you
know:
we've
had
so
many
instances
in
the
past
where
the
city
has
given
up
land,
that's
ours
and
I.
Think
before
we
do
that,
we
should
make
sure
any
questions
aren't
answered
because
we
can't
get
it
back
or
when
we
do
it's
very
difficult,
and
so
just
before
we
take
that
action
want
to
make
sure
all
of
the
questions
are
answered.
Thanks
all.
A
A
What
is
that
seven
in
favor,
so
that
motion
carries
so
we
can
move
back
to
our
public
hearing
that
has
been
open
for
the
items
on
the
consent
agenda.
Is
there
anyone
else
wishing
to
speak
items
three
or
eight
seem
knowing
I'll
close
public
hearing
and
commissioners
may
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
consent
agenda
and
that
motion
carries
next
we'll
move
on
to
our
items
for
a
discussion.
Our
first
item
for
discussion
will
be
item.
Six
3100
Westlake
streets.
F
Proposing
to
put
the
son
consent
actually
I'm,
but
I
know
there
are
members
of
the
public
that
want
to
speak
tonight.
So
I
will
just
give
a
very
the
project.
This
has
been
to
Camilla
pool
I'm
in
the
past,
and
so
this
is
the
3100
West
Lakes
Apartments
project.
This
is
currently
a
Planned
Unit
development
that
was
created
back
in
2005
with
proposed
at
that
time,
163
unit
residential
building
and
then
maintain
the
existing
office.
F
Building
that
today
is
proposed
to
be
demolished,
and
then
the
applicant
is
proposing
to
construct
a
200
unit,
residential
building
on
the
the
current
site
plan
or
the
proposed
site
plan.
I
should
say
as
I
apologize.
This
is
slightly
grainy.
This
is
that
existing
163
unit
residential
building
and
then
this
is
the
proposed
200
unit
building.
It
would
be
up
towards
West,
Lake
Street
on
the
south
end
of
the
property
and
the
property
does
have
this
access
road
or
the
successor.
I've.
F
Excuse
me
out
to
this
street,
and
so
all
of
all
traffic
coming
into
and
out
of
the
site
for
both
buildings
will
come
in
off
of
Lake
Street
and
they
can
exit
the
lake
straighter
than
exit
two
and
then
the
name
of
the
street
is
oh,
is
Dean,
Parkway
excuse
me
and
so
they're
proposing
to
demolish
the
office
building
and
then
construct
an
eight-story
residential
building
on
the
site,
the
applications
that
the
conditional
use
permit
to
amend
or
modify
the
existing
planning
and
development
and
site
plan
review.
F
They
are
meeting
all
standards
of
site
plan
review
and
there's
an
alternative
compliance
being
requested
for
the
Planned
Unit
development
application.
They
are
requesting
alternatives
to
the
maximum
height.
This
is
locating
the
shoreland
overlay
district,
so
it
is
subject
to
the
two
and
a
half
stories
or
35
feet,
and
they
have
requested
reductions
in
the
dimensions
of
yards
between
the
two
buildings
on
the
north
end
and
then
on
the
front
yard.
Property
along
lyon.
Excuse
me,
along
west
lake
street,
for
a
total
of
15
points
is
what
they're
required.
F
The
points
that
they're
proposing
then
are
the
amenities
that
they're
proposing
then
to
meet
those
that
15-point
requirement
is
the
underground
parking,
a
reflective
roof,
the
texercise
area
and
then
the
recycling
storage
area,
and
they
do
meet
all
of
those
standards,
and
we
are
recommending
approval
of
that
application.
I
will
conclude
there
unless
there
are
any
specific
questions
from
staff
all.
H
Thank
You
commissioners
for
this
opportunity
to
present
our
design
for
the
3,100
Lake
Street
apartment
project.
Tonight
my
name
is
Jeff.
Das
and
I
represent
the
project's
development
team.
We're
excited
to
be
here
and
look
forward
to
your
comments
and
feedback
this
evening.
As
you
know,
our
team
has
been
working
for
well
over
a
year
with
signa
councilmember
Goodman,
our
adjacent
neighbors
and
the
city's
planning
staff
to
get
to
this
hearing.
H
Since
early
2016,
our
team
has
hosted
at
least
a
dozen
Design
Review
meetings
with
signa
cydnus
land
use
committee
and
representatives
from
the
adjacent
HOA
orit's.
We've
held
multiple
meetings
with
councilmember
Goodman
to
neighborhood,
open
houses,
a
meeting
with
Sidney's
board
and,
finally,
a
meeting
with
your
committee
of
the
whole
back
in
April.
As
you
can
tell
from
this
list,
our
neighborhood
outreach
effort
has
been
comprehensive
and
extremely
thorough.
Needless
to
say,
it
has
been
a
long
road
to
get
here,
but
we're
extremely
pleased
with
the
final
results
over
a
period
of
three
months.
H
H
H
Ultimately,
the
goal
of
our
neighborhood
engagement
effort
was
to
collect
feedback
from
stakeholders
to
help
us
craft
the
final
buildings
form
and
site
plan.
During
the
design
process,
we
explored
a
number
of
options
for
shorter
buildings
that
spread
out
across
more
of
the
site
an
alternatively,
we
looked
at
taller
building
forums
that
had
smaller
footprints
but
greater
visual
impacts
on
her
neighbors.
Finally,
after
following
councilmember
Goodman's
recommendations,
we
reached
the
best
possible
design
solution.
H
The
proposal
in
front
of
you
tonight
we're
very
pleased
that
cydnus
board
city
staff
and
your
committee
of
the
whole
agreed
with
us
as
well.
We
are
confident
this
new
building
will
be
a
positive
addition
to
the
neighborhood
and
we
want
to
reiterate.
We
are
committed
to
working
with
our
neighbors
as
a
project
moves
forward
and
plan
to
use
the
best
possible
construction
processes
for
everyone
involved.
H
We
appreciate
staff,
detailed
presentation
of
our
proposal
and
the
comments
we
received
from
the
committee
of
the
whole
in
mid-april
we've
developed
the
site
and
landscape
plans
extensively
since
then,
and
have
our
landscape
architect,
Jessie
Simic,
a
whatz
from
Damon
Ferber,
our
civil
engineer,
Trisha
C
from
Kim
Lee
horn
and
her
traffic
engineer,
Edie
Tara
har,
from
link
here
to
help
answer
any
additional
questions
you
may
have
this
evening.
Finally,
we
also
have
Erin,
Rosyth
and
Gretchen
camp
from
ESG
here
tonight
to
answer
your
questions
about
the
business
building
design.
H
A
Right,
thank
you,
commissioners.
Are
there
any
questions
of
the
applicants?
If
there
are
none,
we
can
move
on
to
some
other
speakers.
I
know
we
have
at
least
a
few
people
here.
I
would
like
to
speak
on
this
item,
so
you
can
kind
of
decide
among
yourselves
who
would
like
to
go
first
and
come
to
the
microphone
and
state
your
yeah
go
Rick
go
right
ahead,
say
your
name
and
address
for
the
record.
I
The
purpose
for
the
Luke
Calhoun
really
getting
engaged
with
this
project
was
primarily
because
of
damage
that
happened
from
the
foundry
Trammell
crow
project
at
30,
30,
118,
West,
Lake
Street,
our
building
sustained
about
1.8
million
dollars
worth
of
damage
damage
that
the
parties
we've
been
in
litigation,
the
damage
that
the
parties
have
accepted
responsibility
for
due
to
vibratory
construction
methods.
Our
opposition
to
the
project
is
documented
in
letters
that
we
submitted
with
the
Sydney
resolutions.
I
At
the
end,
both
a
letter
to
CID
note
and
also
a
letter
to
the
Brookstone
group
I
just
want
to
say
that
I
think
brickstone
did
make
a
very
good
effort
to
work
with
the
community.
There's
a
lot
of
different
stakeholders,
just
adjacent
property
owners
and
Cigna
as
a
whole,
both
high-density
condo
owners,
single-family
homeowners,
commercial
corridor,
so
I
don't
think
their
job
was
easy.
I
That
being
said,
our
concerns
in
our
opposition
is
not
with
the
design
of
the
project.
I
think
the
design
or
the
project
which
I
know
is
primarily
the
issue
that
that
this
committee,
oversees
type
1
construction,
could
actually
be
a
very
positive
thing
for
the
neighborhood.
Our
issue
is
with
the
potential
for
more
damage
to
happen
on
the
eastern
part
of
our
property.
The
the
negotiation
and
our
involvement
with
Brookstone
was
to
seek
a
construction
agreement
with
formal
commitments
for
nine
vibratory
construction
methods
and.
I
Monitoring
during
construction
and
also
specific
conditions
for
what
would
happen
if
the
loop
building
was
damaged,
what
they
would
do
during
the
construction,
whether
they
would
stop
re
revisit
their
projects,
similar
to
what
Tremec,
roted
and
also
obviously
provide
the
loop
with
some
sort
of
mechanism
for
financial
compensation.
If
they
were
to
damage
a
building.
I
Unfortunately,
we
were
not
able
to
reach
an
agreement
between
the
two
of
us.
You
know
that
being
said,
I
do
think
that
the
best
thing
that
can
happen
is
brickstone
builds
a
project
that
doesn't
damage
the
loop.
We
certainly
I
think
do
share
in
an
interest
to
not
wanting
to
engage
in
further
litigation.
We
don't
want
our
building
to
be
damaged.
We
don't
want
to
sue
them.
I,
don't
think
that
they
want
to
be
sued,
but
as
it
currently
stands.
I
Unfortunately,
we
don't
have
anything
that
really
gives
our
homeowners
122
homeowners,
the
comfort
that
what
and
with
Trammell
crow
won't
happen
again.
I
think
that
the
commitments
that
the
group
that
the
Brookstone
group
has
made
were
well-intentioned,
that
being
said,
they're
informal,
a
letter
of
intent.
There
were
a
lot
of
conditions
and
there
are
things
that
could
change.
J
G
Commissioners,
my
name
is
Bob
cork,
I'm,
chair
of
the
signal
and
use
committee,
I
reside
at
28:16,
West
Lake
of
the
Isles
Parkway
Sydnor
has
voted
not
to
oppose
this
project.
The
design
we've
been.
We
were
pretty
pleased
with
the
design.
In
the
end,
we
worked
quite
closely
with
the
developer
for
many
months.
Probably
more
meetings
and
Jeff
even
alluded
to
there
were.
G
Are
non
opposition,
however,
was
conditioned
on
on
two
items
that
we
were
quite
concerned
about,
and
one
of
them
relates
to
what
Leah
was
speaking
of,
which
is
an
effort
to
by
the
developer,
to
have
construction
methods.
Would
that
would
not
cause
damage
and,
as
as
jeff
has
referred
to,
we
were
able
to
work
with
the
developer
to
come
to
some
agreement
on
construction
methods
such
as
lay
back
of
the
dirt
and
in
helical
drilling
methods
that
well
not
legally
binding
obligation
by
the
developer.
G
They
certainly
it
seems
that
the
intent
here
is
it's
quite
quite
focused,
and
the
developer
does
not
want
to
cause
any
damage
to
the
loop.
However,
it
is
not
a
contractual
agreement,
and
that
was
little
oops
problem
and
I
am
totally.
The
incident
totally
understands
that
issue,
so
one
of
our
conditions
was
that
reasonable
construction
methods
be
used
and
we're
putting
were
putting
our
trust
and
the
developers,
hands
and
I
think
that
we
would
like
to
have
this
as
a
matter
of
record
in
this
approval.
G
Should
you
go
forward
that
that
we're
counting
on
the
developer
to
use
construction
methods
that
will
not
damage
their
neighbors?
The
second
concern
we
had
was
tapped
with
traffic
during
construction,
and
we
were.
This
is
a
very
busy
area,
as
you
probably
all
know,
40,000
cars
a
day
and
we
did
not
want
any
lanes
closed
unnecessarily.
In
fact,
it
would
be.
G
So
the
other
thing
that
I
want
to
talk
about
briefly
today
was
was
maybe
it's
a
policy
issue.
You'll
note
that
our
concerns,
our
two
concerns
are
not
part
of
this
formal
submission.
Now
we
did,
we
did
certainly
submit
our
resolution
with
that
information
in
it,
and
that
was
attached
and
you
can
read
it,
but
it
we
were
told
many
times
by
lawyers
and
staff
and
others
that
it
is
not
the
purview
of
the
Planning
Commission
or
the
city
to
be
getting
into
getting
into
these.
G
G
This
kind
of
density
has
an
impact
on
the
neighborhood,
and
it
has
it
in
terms
of
you
as
you've
seen
potential
damage
during
construction,
and
it
also
has
impact
in
terms
of
construction
activity
and
traffic,
and
it
seems
that
the
city
process
and
the
city
ordinance
does
not
give
the
neighborhood's
a
lot
of
very
much
voice
in
this
on
the
on
these
kinds
of
issues,
and
so
I
think
that
we
would
would
like
you
to
hear
that
we've
we've
been
very
collaborative
with
developers.
G
But
these
issues
we
bring
up
of
traffic
during
construction
and
construction
methods
do
not
seem
to
be
addressed
real
well
in
the
process
and
here's.
This
is
the
only
public
hearing.
For
example,
that
we
have,
even
though
we're
told
that
these
issues
are
not
relevant
to
you,
so
we
would
like
to
have
our
voice
heard
on
that,
and
the
other
point
I'd
like
to
make
on
that
is
is:
is
the
question
of
submissions
of
these
projects?
So
the
bricks
don't
put
a
lot
of
effort
in
with
us
on
many
meetings,
but
the
final
proposal.
G
You
know
the
developer
did
does
not
have
is
not
required,
as
the
process
does
not
require
the
developer.
To
give
us
give
Sydney
a
formal
look
at
the
Sidon
aboard
a
formal
look
at
it,
and-
and
in
this
case,
even
though
we
had
many
meetings,
the
actual
final
proposal
was
not
approved
by
setting
up
the
signal
board
until
after
the
deal
was
submitted
and
so
to
me,
that's.
J
G
A
K
I'm
Daniel
Rosen
80
southeast
street
Minneapolis
I'm,
a
lawyer
for
the
loop,
Calhoun
homeowners
association
and,
as
you
heard,
Mr
Jabez
insky.
It
doesn't
actually
need
a
lawyer
to
speak
for
him
and
I'm
here
just
to
put
a
finer
point
on
on
one
particular
issue
and,
as
you
heard
from
the
the
the
signal
representative
here,
what
our
concern
really
is
is
that
where
you
have
a
lack
of
binding
commitment,
you
have
a
lack
of
commitment
at
all
and
where
you
have
a
party
and
I.
K
Remember
we're
talking
about
very,
very
minimum
commitments
that
that
that
demonstrate
neighborliness
minimum
commitments
that
demonstrate
that
you're
prepared
to
do
those
things
that
ought
to
then
get
you
the
type
of
consideration
that
you're
looking
for
in
return
and
to
the
extent
that
this
developer
is
coming
forth
before
the
Commission
and
asking
any
for
anything
to
which
it
may
not
actually
be
entitled.
We
want
the
Commission
to
be
aware
that
a
lack
of
certain
commitments
of
not
binding
yourself
not
to
do
damage
to
your
neighbor.
K
You
know
these
are
things
that
we
think
ought
to
be
minimum
considerations
that
this
commission
and
ultimately
the
City
Council
after
you
will
have
in
mind,
and
we
would
encourage
you
to
examine
more
deeply
whether
or
not
the
demonstrations
and
the
pre
and
the
statements
of
desire
to
be
working
with
neighbors
are
actually
really
being
met
by
the
minimum
indicator
and
to
us,
the
minimum,
and
that
minimum
indicator
is
binding
themselves
and
we
entrust
those
considerations
to
the
Commission.
Thank
you
all.
K
L
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
Michael:
Wilson
I
live
at
349,
st.
Louis
Avenue
and
the
cedar
Isles
Deane
neighborhood
I,
am
a
member
of
the
Sigma
Board
I've
also
served
on
the
cinder
land
use
and
development
committee
with
Bob
cork.
I
think
this
is
the
fourth
project
that
I've
been
a
part
of
the
committee
to
consider
and
I'd
like
to
make
a
few
comments
about
this
process,
which
has
been
pretty
arduous.
It
has
gone
on
for
a
year
and
there,
as
Bob
said
Bob
Berg
said
there
have
been
more
meetings,
I
think,
probably
than
mr.
L
L
3,100
Westlake
Street
into
the
two
buildings
that
have
stood
on
the
site
before,
starting
with
a
mansion
built
in
1907
by
a
lawyer
who
served
13
years
on
the
school
board,
among
other
things,
and
the
current
building,
which
is
there,
which
was
built
in
1953,
there's
a
cornerstone
in
that
building
with
a
metal
box
inside
which
contains
historical
documents.
According
to
the
Star
Tribune,
the
developer
has
agreed
to
host
a
cornerstone
opening
party
when
it
gets
to
that
point.
So
we'll
see
what
was
considered
historically
relevant
in
1953.
L
The
developer
also
wants
to
include
history
of
the
site
in
this
building
when
it
is
built.
There
certainly
is
an
issue
of
traffic
of
a
long,
Westlake
Street,
which
is
not
part
of
this
particular
process,
but
Bob
Corrick
mention
it
in
terms
of
the
density
that
we
are
saying,
and
there
certainly
is
more
density
to
come
in
this
particular
area.
These
are
county
roads.
This
is
not
within
the
city.
L
That
has
helped
somewhat,
but
we
have
an
issue
with
increasing
traffic
along
West
Lake
Street,
which
is
the
county's
issue
and
I
hope
the
county
steps
up
to
the
plate
and
does
something
about
it
at
some
point,
I'd
like
to
give
in
particular
excuse
me
particular
thank
thanks
to
a
Commissioner
of
real
n'd,
who
has
been
really
has
spoken
forcefully
about
the
shore
land
overlay
ordinance,
which
came
about.
Of
course.
L
In
1988
we
had
a
project
that
came
before
the
Committee
on
the
whole
of
this
board
about
eight
months
ago
and
Commissioner
Phelan
spoke
strongly
in
support
of
enforcing
the
shoreland
overlay,
ordinance
requirements
or
guidelines
on
this
particular
project.
This
particular
project,
also,
as
you
heard
before,
is
within
the
shoreland
overlay
district.
There
have
been
other
projects
that
have
been
built
since
the
district
was
created,
and
obviously
this
does
not
meet
those
requirements.
L
However,
looking
at
the
project
in
context
with
the
ones
next
to
it,
the
one
behind
it,
it
seems
to
meet
a
pleasing
ensemble.
It's
taken
us
a
lot
of
work
to
get
here
and
I
hope
that
they
can
be
approved
by
this
board,
even
though
it
does
exceed
those
of
those
guidelines.
The
other
project
that
I
talked
about
when
that
comes
back
before
the
board,
that's
a
different
issue
and
we'll
speak
to
it
in
a
different
way.
So
I
think
it's
going
to
be
an
attractive
project.
L
It's
been
quite
an
experience
as
a
citizen
to
be
on
the
land
use
and
Development
Committee.
You
hear
from
land
use
and
development
committee
chairs
from
all
over
the
city,
all
72
or
78
neighborhoods
that
have
land
use
committees,
so
I
may
be
wrong,
but
in
my
view,
I
think
mr.
Corin
sets
the
standard
for
professional,
proactive
chairmanship
of
share
a
ship
of
a
Land
Use
Committee
I've
learned
a
great
deal
and
I
think
we
have
a
project
that
is
going
to
fit
well
into
the
neighborhood
and
I
hope
it
will
win
your
support.
A
N
Would
like
to
speak
about
the
sure
land
overlay
district,
and
this
is
a
building
that
does
have
some
context
with
its
neighbors
and
other
tall
buildings.
But
I
really
want
to
remind
folks
that
the
the
shoreland
overlay
district
is
an
important
piece
of
our
city
being
as
great
as
it
is,
and
it
was
the
protection
of
our
Lakes
from
really
tall
buildings.
N
So
the
visual
context
of
our
lakes
and
this
great
resource
of
having
the
organization
that
I
represent
the
Minneapolis,
Park
and
Recreation
Board
have
so
much
protected.
Shoreline
of
our
lakes
and
River
is
really
important
to
this
city's
history
and
future
and
I'm
disappointed
that
the
projects
that
this
is
next
to
and
in
context
with
work,
further
away
and
shorter
and
I
will
be
voting
against
this
and
I
urge.
N
My
commissioners
to
consider
the
shore
land
overlay
district
is
something
that
is
important
and
meaningful,
and
and
if
it's
something
that
you
are
convinced
that
there
are
mitigating
circumstances,
that
those
be
really
critically
spelled
out
and
not
just
overlooked,
because
there
is
a
development
that
is
popular
for
a
good.
Looking.
Building
that
folks
want
I've,
supported,
increased
density,
I've
supported
the
work
of
this
Planning
Commission
I
think
it's
important
to
to
look
at
at
the
overlay
districts,
because
they
really
they
do
have
some
meaning
and
I
just
wanted.
N
E
E
E
You
know
where
we
are
in
urban
city
and
I
think
we
we
want
those
places
in
the
city
where
we
can
get
some
repose,
and
we
also
want
to
embrace
our
urban
myths
and
Lake
Calhoun
to
me,
like
parts
of
the
downtown
Minneapolis
riverfront
or
like
the
area
around
Loring
Park
and
yes,
the
pond
in
Loring
Park
triggers
the
shoreline
overlay
district.
It
is
a
it's
an
urban
place.
You
know,
I
lived
in
Brooklyn
for
a
long
time
and
I
go
to
the
beach
it
Lake
Calhoun,
because
it
reminds
me
of
Coney
Island.
E
So
it's
a
mishmash
of
people.
It's
an
urban
place,
it's
a
place
to
be
out
and
people
watching
in
the
city,
and
so
since
commissioner
Breeland
called
for
very
specific
reasons
to
to
overlook
the
shoreland
overlay
or
make
an
exception
out
to
the
shoreline
overlay
district.
In
this
case,
I
wanted
to
take
them
up
on
that
offer
and
make
that
fit
all
right.
E
A
Discussion,
I'll
just
touch
on
I
know.
Obviously
the
residents
of
the
neighboring
building
have
raised
some
concerns
about
kind
of
construction,
behavior,
construction
methods
and
I.
Think
that
is
something
important
to
consider
as
we
consider
our
zoning
related
approvals,
that's
not
really
something
we
can
necessarily
condition
and
approval
on
so
I
certainly
encourage
that
conversation
to
continue,
but
at
least
for
today's
actions
we're
not
really
able
to
do
anything
specifically
related
to
that.
So
if
there
is
no
further
discussion,
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
clerk.
Please
call
the
roll.
A
Q
Good
evening,
president
Brown
and
commissioners,
the
applicant
is
the
lander
group
and
the
property
the
properties
are
listed
before
you
here.
It's
located
at
the
intersection
of
Hiawatha
and
East
38th
Street
right
adjacent
to
the
light
rail
transit
station,
30th,
Street
Station,
the
existing
zoning
classifications
for
the
property
are
the
c1,
r4
and
r5
districts,
so
the
entire
site
does
occupy
a
portion
of
a
block
and
also
to
the
south
of
38th
Street
that
would
be
included
in
the
entire
site
for
the
Planned
Unit
development.
Q
Q
Q
Q
The
site
plan
is
here
and
the
mixed-use
this
is
mixed-use
building.
So
this
is
the
commercial
building.
That's
proposed
as
part
of
this
current
phase,
there's
also
a
plaza
proposed
between
the
the
building
and
38th
Street.
The
site
would
also
include
a
new
public
street.
That's
an
extension
of
30th
Avenue
South,
so,
as
you
can
see,
traffic
would
circulate
from
38th
Street
going
north.
This
is
where
the
bus
bays
would
be
located.
They're
three
bus
bays
next
to
the
proposed
building
they
would
circulate
to
the
west
and
then
exit
out
on
29th
Avenue
South.
Q
The
applicant
is
also
proposing
numerous
streets
to
escape
improvements
as
part
of
the
application,
and
future
phases
would
include
about
160,
164
dwelling
units
and
18,000
additional
square
feet
of
commercial
space
and
210
parking
spots,
but
those
are
not
included
in
today's
review.
Here
are
the
floor.
Plans
for
the
proposed
building,
so
the
ground
floor
would
be
entirely
retail
five
thousand
square
feet
and
the
second
floor
would
be
office,
and
the
third
floor
would
also
be
office.
It'd
just
be
a
little
mezzanine
area.
Q
Here
are
the
elevations
for
the
building.
So
it's
mostly
brick.
There
are
metal
panel
and
fiber
cement
accents
as
well.
The
East
elevation
that
faces
the
light
rail
state
has
a
696
square
foot
mural
the
West
elevation,
which
is
highlighted,
faces
30th,
Avenue
South,
the
proposed
30th
Avenue
South,
and
that's
the
one
that
requires
a
variance
for
the
minimum
window
requirement.
The
North
elevation
is
in
is
in
the
lower
left-hand
corner
of
the
page,
and
that
is
just
like
a
tiny
portion
of
the
building.
Q
Next
to
this
elevation,
the
minimum
winner
requirement
again
is
40%
and
the
applicant
is
proposing
nine
percent,
and
part
of
this
has
to
do
with
the
way
that
windows
are
calculated
in
the
pedestrian
oriented
overlay
district.
So
we
only
accounts
a
window
if
it's,
if
it's
the
bottom
portion
of
it
is
at
least
two
feet
above,
is
within
two
feet
above
the
adjacent
grade.
Q
Q
So,
as
part
of
the
plan
unit
development,
the
applicant
is
required
to
provide
15
points,
total
worth
of
amenities
based
on
the
building
placement
and
I,
which
qualifies
for
five
points,
and
then
the
ten
points
just
to
establish,
establish
the
plan
unit
development
and
then
they're
also
requesting
an
alternative
for
off
street
parking
and
loading.
But
they
are
not
required
to
provide
points
for
that.
So
a
total
of
fifteen
points
are
required.
Q
The
the
pewdie
analysis
goes
into
a
lot
of
detail
about
how
the
plaza
dozen
does
not
comply
with
the
plaza
standards
and
how
certain
conditions
of
approval
could
be
attached
to
the
plan
unit
development
to
require
compliance,
because
otherwise
there
would
be
a
variance
required
for
not
meeting
these
plazas
standards
and
also
the
amenity
points
would
not
be
awarded
for
the
plaza.
So
that's
where
the
conditions
of
approval
are
coming
from
it's
to
meet
the
the
letter
of
the
law
and
the
plaza
ordinance
and
then
just
to
go
over
one.
Q
In
particular,
is
the
the
pedestrian
access,
through
the
plaza,
so
there
are
some
references
in
the
site
plan
to
a
fence
that
would
be
located
here
and
here.
The
applicant
is
not
proposing
a
fence
at
this
time,
but
we
do
want
to
require
just
to
specify
that
offense
would
not
be
placed
between
the
building
and
the
plaza
to
make
sure
that
it
isn't
as
as
open
as
possible.
Also,
staff
has
concerns
about
the
way
that
pedestrian
and
bicycle
access
would
work
in
the
plaza
because
of
the
placement
of
some
existing
mechanical
equipment
here.
Q
Q
This
is
also
the
water
feature
that
is
proposed,
and
then
you
can
see
that
the
applicant
is
proposing
a
variety
of
paper
materials
within
the
plaza
area,
and
then
this
landscaping
design
so
I'm
just
going
to
read
from
the
Plaza
ordinance
to
to
show
where
staff
is
coming
from.
So
plazas
shall
be
designed
to
allow
for
pedestrian
bicycle
access
through
and
or
around
the
plaza.
Multiple
access
points
shall
be
provided
for
each
plaza
with
one
access
point
being
connected
to
a
public
street
public,
sidewalk
or
public
pathway.
Q
So
staff
finds
that,
because
there
is
no
predictable
path
provided
with
the
current
design
for
pedestrians,
especially
those
coming
from
the
southernmost
bus
Bay
and
who
want
to
access
the
light
rail
transit
station
or
just
simply
cross,
the
plaza
staff
is
requiring
that
at
least
a
four
foot.
Minimum
walkway
unobstructed
would
be
provided
and
that
the
the
plan
be
amended
to
reflect
that.
Q
And
these
are
some
of
the
conditions,
as
I
have
already
mentioned.
Some
of
them
have
to
do
with
just
maintaining
the
plaza
and
the
value
of
the
art
feature
and
the
fencing,
and
also
providing
that
4-foot
walkway,
also
providing
the
minimum
amount
of
seating
and
trash
receptacles
and
then
also
requiring
it
that
the
plaza
shall
be
open
to
the
public
during
daylight
hours.
So
all
of
these
conditions
would
make
the
plaza
in
compliance
with
the
zoning
code
and
also
qualify
for
the
amenity
points.
Q
Staff
is
also
recommending
a
number
of
site
plan
review
conditions
of
approval,
and
a
lot
of
these
have
to
do
with
alternative
compliance,
as
explained
in
the
staff
report.
So
one
is
that
lighting
shall
be
provided
all
building
entrances,
so
we
that
would
just
require
a
few
updates
to
their
elevations.
Q
At
least
one
principal
entrance
she'll
be
defined
by
an
architectural
feature,
so
the
ground
floor
level
as
again
is
all
retail,
so
having
at
least
one
defined
entrance
would
help
guide
people
to
the
retail
space,
also
recommending
that
the
East
elevation
be
mitigated
or
be
revised
so
that
there
are
no
blank
walls
exceeding
25
feet.
In
length
and
also
requiring
that
all
windows
be
visit,
be
transparent
between
4
and
7
feet
above
the
adjacent
grade,
and
this
goes
hand-in-hand
with
the
window
variance
request.
Q
Staff
is
also
recommending
that
all
refuse
recycling
and
compost
containers
be
indicated
on
the
site.
So
right
now
the
floor
plans
and
site
plans,
don't
show
where
those
would
be
located
and
we,
if
they're
on
the
exterior
of
the
building,
they
should
be
fully
screened
and
finally,
staff
is
recommending
that
the
site
plan
be
revised
to
comply
with
the
minimum
minimum
bicycle
parking
requirements
for
the
office
and
commercial
spaces,
and
again
staff
is
recommending
approval
with
these
conditions,
except
for
the
window.
Q
Variance
we've
received
a
handful
of
comments
that
should
be
in
your
packets
that
they
vary
between
expressing
support
for
the
project
and
also
there
are
some
concerns
about
traffic.
In
particular.
There
is
some
concern
that
the
bus
exiting
on
29th
Avenue
South
is
going
to
cause
a
lot
of
concerns
for
those
residential
uses
nearby.
It
also
is
going
to
require
taking
out
parking
on
the
entire
west
side
of
that
block,
so
some
business
owners
are
concerned
about
the
impacts
of
that
to
their
properties
and
I'm.
Happy
to
answer
any
questions.
Thank.
N
Q
Q
E
Really,
can
you
tell
us
what
the
percentage
of
glass
is
on
the
on
the
building
on
me?
I
guess
it
would
be
the
Western
building
face
so
they're
hitting
nine
percent
of
the
window
requirement,
but
on
a
technicality
so,
what's
and
I
understand
how
high
up
are
the?
How
high
up
is
the
bottom
of
the
window
as
designed
and
what
percentage
of
the
building
face
is
glass?
Thank.
Q
You
that's
a
good
question,
I
believe
in
the
applets
materials
they're
showing
it's
30%,
but
staff
has
not
done
that
exact
calculation
because
it
was
not
required
for
the
site
plan
review
or
for
the
for
the
variance
we're
just
looking
at
what
meets
the
variance
or
not
but
I
believe
it's
about.
30
percent.
E
A
Q
E
Could
the
pathway
could
change
from
day
to
day
as
people
move
their
chairs
and
tables
or
like
what
is
I
guess,
I,
you
know
I,
guess
I
think
if
I'd
watch
your
Plaza
and
it
might
be
a
little
bit
messy
and
that's
like
maybe
okay,
particularly
if
there's
a
sidewalk
going
around
it
or
or
or
not,
I,
don't
know
like
if
I'm
asking
what
your
take
is.
The.
Q
Intent
is
that
there
currently
is
no
predictable
path.
That
would
integrate
the
transit
stop
so
right
now,
for
instance,
the
paving
materials
don't
really
lead
you
through
a
certain
way.
If
you
were
visually
impaired
you,
you
might
have
a
lot
of
trouble
crossing
the
site
so
to
Hiawatha.
So
that's
where
staff
is
coming
from.
Okay,.
A
Right
any
other
questions
of
staff,
if
well,
we'll
open
the
public
hearing
in
a
moment,
so
you'll
have
an
opportunity
to
speak
or
ask
any
questions
of
us,
but
if
the
Commission
doesn't
have
any
further
questions
of
staff,
I
will
open
the
public
hearing
and
I'd
like
to
ask
the
applicant
to
speak.
First,
though,
and
if
you
wouldn't
mind
responding
to
the
window
variances
and
some
of
the
other
outstanding
issues,
that'd
be
good
good.
R
Afternoon,
when
it's
Michael
Lander
and
with
the
lander
group,
the
developer
I've
got
my
very
capable
design
team
with
me
who's
going
to
address
the
building
questions,
I'm
gonna
address
the
public
realm
and
the
plaza
issues
that
came
up
I
could,
first
of
all
we're
very
excited
to
be
here.
One
could
argue
this
is
the
culmination
of
a
vision
that
started
20-some
years
ago
with
the
idea
of
adding
a
light
rail
line
to
Minneapolis
and
the
idea
of
building
transit
oriented
development
around
it.
R
And
yet
here
we
are
2017
with
a
large
surface
parking
lot
for
the
bus
turnaround,
so
we're
very
excited
to
be
able
to
bring
this
idea
forward.
That
was
talked
about
for
so
long,
very
well,
captured
in
the
Minneapolis
comprehensive
plan
in
the
early
2000s
captured
again
in
2007
and
this
area
plan.
So
there's
been
a
lot
of
people
talking
about.
We
want
this
to
happen,
so
we're
thrilled
to
be
part
of
the
process
to
make
it
happen
and,
as
was
shown,
we
think
there's
tremendous
amount
of
amenities
in
this
area
already
a
great
opportunity.
R
The
single-family
housing
stock,
we
think,
would
be
very
attractive.
The
Millennials
are
filling
up
all
of
our
apartments
when
they
have
their
children
and
yet
there's
really.
No
there
there
there's
a
highly
degraded
public
realm.
You've
got
telephone
poles
right
in
the
middle
of
sidewalks.
You've
got
not
a
very
attractive
pedestrian
environment,
so
our
project
seeks
to
address
those
things
to
add
amenities
and
services
and
housing
options
to
the
area
to
make
significant
improvements
to
the
public
realm
in
the
process.
R
We
are
just
completing
our
first
building
in
this
district,
a
block
to
the
West
that
we
were
in
front
of
you
with
a
year
ago,
3828.
We
call
it
and
as
part
of
that
project,
we're
doing
about
a
block
and
a
half
of
the
streetscape
on
38th
Street,
because
we
think
that
the
principal
public
place
for
this
district
is
38th
Street
and
we
want
it
to
be
a
great
Street,
so
we're
gonna
end
up
rebuilding
it
all
the
way
from
27th
to
Hiawatha.
R
R
That's
in
the
plan
again
beautiful,
broad
sidewalks,
they're
landscaped,
a
public
street,
not
a
bus
lane,
and
we
really
work
hard
to
get
that
design
right,
working
with
met
transit
on
the
bus
operations
and
then
the
last
two
pieces
are
what
are
both
a
north
and
south
plaza
in
the
interest
of
time.
I
won't
flash
up
all
the
designs
again,
but
to
the
north
side
of
our
building.
That's
under
review
today
is
an
area
that's
owned
by
met
transit
that
we're
making,
supposing
substantial
enhancements
to
to
really.
R
R
I
want
to
address
that
a
little
bit
more
carefully,
because
I
think,
frankly,
there's
sort
of
a
misunderstanding
about
our
intentions
here
that
entire
area,
all
the
way
out
to
the
public
right-of-way
on
38th
Street,
is
private
property
that
we're
leasing
at
an
area
and
you're
released
from
that
transit,
and
we
could
have
proposed
a
building
all
the
way
up
to
38th
Street,
we
elected
to
create
a
public
space.
We
approached
the
various
public
entities
about,
could
it
be
a
public
space
and
no
one
wanted
it?
R
So
we
are
bringing
it
forward
as
a
privately
owned
public
space.
Honestly
and
as
we
went
about
so
we
decided
that
we
wanted
a
nice
20-foot,
dining
area
and
while
we
don't
have
a
tenant
security.
Yet
for
that
space,
we're
hopeful
that
we'll
get
a
food
users
would
really
be
able
to
activate
that
southern
that
northern
edge
of
the
plaza.
And
then
we
had
a
40-foot
dimension
from
the
north
edge
of
the
plaza
to
the
sidewalk,
and
actually
the
plaza
is
only
40
feet
by
a
hundred
feet.
R
It
fits
inside
the
public
sidewalk
system,
the
sidewalk
on
new
30th
and
the
sidewalk
of
38th
they're,
actually
part
of
the
street
and
sidewalk
system,
not
the
plaza,
so
the
plaza
is
just
at
a
terior
area
and
we
had
that
40
by
100
to
work
with,
and
we
knew
that
the
private
seating
for
the
restaurant
by
regulation
would
require
a
barrier
there.
So
we
elected
to
use
the
planters
that
are
along
the
north
edge
there
to
create
that
barrier,
leaving
the
maximum
other
area
available.
In
the
plaza
itself.
R
We
looked
at
before
the
staffs
rec
concerns
and
after
the
staff
concerns
about
adding
a
pedestrian
way
on
the
north
side
there,
but
we
felt
like
that
space
was
much
better
served
inside
the
plaza.
We
could
slide
those
planters
four
feet
down
and
we
would
meet
the
staffs
recommendation.
We
think
this
is
a
better
design.
I
failed
to
mention
Bob
close
our
Landscape
Architect
isn't
able
to
be
here
today
that
to
make
this
case
well,
we
looked
at
both
of
those
options
and
we
think
there's
tremendous.
R
You
know
much
enhanced
pedestrian
movements
there,
the
plaza
itself,
we
worked
with
met,
transit
very
carefully
with
an
elaborate
diagram.
We
don't
have
for
you
today
that
shows
the
pedestrian
movements
across
the
plaza
and
then
there's
also
the
beautifully
new
landscape,
38th
Street
sidewalk.
So
there's
lots
of
ways
to
move
east
and
west
on
that
site,
just
not
one
more
path.
R
On
the
north
side
of
the
plaza
we
felt
like
that
was
superfluous,
that
wasn't
the
chosen
path,
I'd
rather
move
across
the
plaza
if
I
was
coming
there
or
all
the
way
out
to
the
sidewalk.
We
think
that
provides
a
very
nice
arrangement
for
any
of
you
that
scene
of
our
project
at
the
end
of
the
Lake
Street
West
River
Commons,
we
have
Longfellow
grill.
R
We
have
the
exact
condition
there,
where
we
have
a
quasi
public
space
with
public
art
that
invites
people
to
come
and
enjoy
the
place
without
spending
any
money,
but
it
is
segregated
from
the
private
seating
that
it
joins
it
with
the
same
kind
of
landscape
treatment.
So
we've
really
used
that
landscape
wall
to
create
that
barrier
there.
So
we
would
like
to
ask
the
staff
to
approve
the
project
as
proposed.
We
think
it's
got
tremendous
circulation,
these
happy
to
answer
any
questions
about
that
or
bring
back
diagrams.
R
A
S
Yeah,
so
how
tall
does
that
perforated
screening
end
up
being
I'm?
Sorry,
I'm,
sorry,
how
tall
does
the
perforated
screen
eight
feet
and
because
it
looks
quite
large
in
comparison
to
the
Plaza
on
the
plan,
but
do
you
have
any
concerns
about
septet
or
Public
Safety,
just
as
a
obstruction
to
seeing
what's
coming
ahead?
Well,.
R
We
have
this.
This
shroud
that
we've
created
around
is
about
a
set
about
a
foot
off.
We've
worked
with
a
variety
of
Engineers
about
any
danger
issues
associated
with
that
you
can
walk
up
and
touch
it
right
now.
Actually,
so
we
were,
we
did
not
well.
We
did
not
prioritize
the
several
hundred
thousand
dollars
to
try
to
move.
That,
actually
is
what
we
did.
R
A
T
Evening,
Kimbra
Thames
with
lhb
I
in
response
to
Commissioner
Rockwell's
questions
related
to
the
porosity.
The
issue
isn't
so
much
Trent
the
percentage
of
glass
we
are
at
40
percent
of
glass.
The
problem
is
how
you
measure
it
for
the
code.
The
sills
are
designed
at
being
three
feet:
item
D.
Six
on
the
agenda
indicates
that
the
space
is
retail,
use,
it's
really
more
for
dining
and
beverage
service.
We
feel
the
appropriate
cell
height
along
that
wall
is
three
feet
to
accommodate
seating
drop
it
directly
against
the
wall
without
displaying
table
or
counter
edges.
T
Way
that
that
space
could
work
is
this
illustrates
a
potential
restaurant
use
with
tables
or
buffet
space
along
that
west
wall
and
the
challenge
of
providing
seating
up
against
the
wall.
In
this
awkward
Flatiron
shaped
building
really
by
keeping
the
windowsills
up
at
three
feet,
maintains
flexibility
and
for
use
of
the
building.
So
we
think
three
feet
is
the
appropriate
cell
height
on
a
commercial
application
rather
than
two
feet,
which
might
be
appropriate
for
window
boxes
on
a
regular
retail
display.
T
You
cannot
count
any
of
that
window
area
unless
the
window
is
at
two
feet
or
lower,
so
we
recommend
and
would
argue
in
favor
of
the
variance,
whether
that's
deemed
by
either
the
9%
reflecting
the
window
that
were
showing
or
by
interpreting
the
code
measurement
as
being
measured
from
three
feet
and
above
rather
than
two
feet
or
be
alone
in
relation
to
a
couple
of
the
other
conditions.
I'd
like
to
address
a
few
of
them.
T
We
in
gree
agree
with
most
of
the
conditions
we
just
have
a
few
that
we'd
like
to
get
clarified
and
adjusted
item
D
six,
just
references,
the
retail
space.
This
is
really
more
for
dining
and
a
beverage
type
use
in
this
building.
You
know
item
and
so,
along
that
line
I
and
because
of
the
unique
configuration
we
will
be
incorporating
architectural
feature
indoor
element
along
the
west
side,
but
we
need
to
see
and
work
with
a
final
vendor
and
have
the
flexibility
to
work.
T
The
final
resolution
of
how
that
would
occur
along
the
West
elevation
on
item
D
8.
We
also
will
work
towards
and
achieve
the
25-foot
maximum
on
uninterrupted
wall
and
in
conjunction
with
that,
will
resolve
item
D
11
and
include
the
refuse
recycling
and
compost
containers
within
the
building
rather
than
outside.
The
building
item.
D
10
is
the
item
that
is,
that
I
initially
addressed
in
relation
to
the
variance
and
how
we
count
the
window
opening
we
do
expect
and
intend
to
exceed
the
40%
window
area
along
that
side.
But
the
issue
is
how
we
counted.
T
Finally,
we
failed
in
accurately
depicting
the
bike
parking
count
in
item
d12.
I
would
just
say
that
the
current
bike
parking
for
the
entire
station
is
16.
The
required
bike
parking
for
the
entire
development
as
proposed
would
be
a
hundred
and
nine.
We
are
currently
proposing
275.
The
challenge
is
that
the
initial
phase
includes
16,
exterior
ones
and
51
that
are
counted
inside
the
transit
bike
station
focused
bike
parking
facility,
so
the
way
that
the
count
works
currently
in
we
think
is
more
than
offset
by
what
we're
providing
in
other
ways
throughout
the
development.
T
The
other
item
that
we've
discussed
is
item
b7,
where
the
developer
we'd
prefer
to
keep
references
to
the
very
various
types
of
seating
provided
in
the
plaza
to
the
horizontal
seating
in
the
fixed
elements,
with
a
variety
of
seating,
movable
seating,
including
seating,
with
backs
provided
in
the
flexible
seating
rather
than
the
built
built-in
seating.
We
think
that
works
towards
the
issue
of
porosity
and
visibility,
rather
than
intrusion
of
introduction
of
vertical
backs
within
the
fixed,
plaza
development.
T
S
T
T
In
condition,
D
7
I
believe
the
staff
is
recommending
that
the
fixed
seating
have
both
bench
type,
seating
and
seating,
with
backs
in
the
fixed
elements,
and
that's
the
case
where
we
would
prefer
to
not
have
backs
on
the
fixed
seating.
The
bench
type,
seating
and
they're
retaining
walls
around
the
plantings
got.
B
This
may
be
a
question
again
for
the
applicant
going
back
to
the
to
the
design
of
the
plaza.
You
know:
I
I
struggle
a
little
bit
with
circulation
through
the
space
and
unfortunately,
you
do
have
this.
This
large-scale
infrastructure
piece
that
you're
trying
to
work
around,
which
is
in
you
know
in
your
position,
I,
probably
wouldn't
move
it
either
wondering
if
so
you
have
that,
and
then
you
have
a
vertical
sign
for
Metro
Transit,
which
is
more
out
basically
on
the
sidewalk
edge,
which
I'm
guessing
is
as
a
tall
structure
as
well.
B
Another
idea
could
be,
instead
of
being
so
rigid
with
the
with
the
screening,
which
sounds
really
nice.
Maybe
it's
more
of
an
oval
or
something
something
that's
allows,
maybe
more
visual
flow
into
the
space
that
might
help
a
little
bit
I,
just
kind
of
struggle
with
with
seeing
that
as
a
space
that
people
want
to
access
it.
At
least
from
that
side.
From
the
other
side,
yeah
I
can
see
that
and
much
like
the
other
space
that
you
talked
about
your
other
development,
it
will
get
used.
B
R
Those
comments,
I
think
it's
easiest
as
a
design
team
to
kind
of
as
much
as
possible
to
respond
to
kind
of
criteria.
So
these
same
issues
were
raised
by
met,
transit
and
I'm.
Sorry,
we
didn't
bring
it
today,
but
we
did
it
actually
quite
a
graphic
and
we
said
well
what
are
you
looking
for
it
uninstructed
path.
They
said
we
want
at
least
a
six
foot,
clear,
unobstructed
path
and
they
said
well.
R
We
have
14
feet
in
the
plaza,
so
it
seemed
like
we
exceeded
that
requirement
by
a
dramatic
amount
between
that
shroud
and
the
planter.
So
I
really
appreciate
the
concerns
about
that
not
wanting
to
neck
down
not
wanting
to
feel
privatized
or
in
any
way
keep
you
from
flowing
through
there.
I
would
argue.
The
difficulty
is
getting
it
at
the
right
scale,
understanding
the
actual
dimensions
and
really
responding
the
specific
design,
because
that
issue
of
porosity
I
think
is
important
to
everybody.
R
We
were
going
for
the
tightest
smallest
enclosing
that
we
could
create,
so
any
shapes
would
tend
to
increase
that
size
there,
for
some
of
the
same
reasons,
to
try
to
minimize
that
impact
and
again
I
think
we
might
have
been
helpful
to
have
the
existing
conditions
there
to
see
what
people
are
dealing
with
now,
because
this
is
just
so
dramatically
improved
on
what
they're
experiencing
there.
But
again
we
went
around
down
to
in
terms
of
loss
circulation.
Let's
talk
about
that
in
terms
of
dimensions.
What
kind
of
a
free
clear
path
are
we
looking
for?
R
Let's
be
sure
we
have
that,
and
we
went
through
that
whole
drill
with
med
transit
and
satisfy
their
concerns.
I
think
are
the
same
ones
that
you
folks
are
raising
so
and
again
happy
to
do
more
work
with
you
or
the
staff
on
really
getting
down
on
the
minutiae
of
that.
But
we
have
been
through
that
with
net
transit,
so.
A
J
Evening,
Jennifer
halter
I
live
at
38,
20
29th,
Avenue,
South
and
I'm,
representing
the
homeowners
from
29th
Avenue
south
south
of
38th
Street,
who
are
most
impacted
by
the
proposal
for
rezoning
the
property
at
3805,
29th
Avenue
South
from
c1
to
c3
a
the
länder
group
is
proposing
a
four-story
building
at
3805
29th
Avenue
South,
which
is
inconsistent
with
the
rest
of
the
buildings
on
the
block
and
inconsistent
with
the
aesthetic
of
South
Minneapolis.
The
property
is
already
zoned
for
mixed
retail
and
housing,
but
is
limited
to
no
more
than
two
and
a
half
stories.
J
J
Yes,
there
are
large
buildings
in
the
area,
but
they
are
only
a
recent
unfortunate
trend
west
of
Hiawatha
and
were
opposed
by
residents
when
these
large
buildings
were
proposed,
they
were
opposed
because
they
are
immediately
adjacent
to
much
smaller
buildings
on
the
block.
There
is
nothing
unique
about
a
four-story
building
among
the
same
kind
of
four-story
buildings
been
built
along
the
light
rail
route.
We're
asking
that
you
retain
the
two-story
trend
south
of
38th
Street,
consistent
with
every
other
building
on
the
south
side
of
38th
Street
between
29th
and
30th
avenues.
J
The
proposed
four-story
building
at
3805,
29th
Avenue
South
injures
the
property
owner
immediately
adjacent
to
the
south
by
put
in
the
existence
of
a
large
shared
shade
tree
in
peril
and
interferes
with
the
enjoyment
of
the
homeowner
and
the
neighbors.
The
proposed
four-story
building
would
interfere
with
the
natural
light
through
the
second-floor
window
is
on
the
north
side
of
the
farmhouse
and
gives
the
rest
of
the
block
of
view
of
a
sheer
four-story
wall
instead
of
trees.
J
Additionally,
a
four-story
building
at
the
corner
of
3805
29th
Avenue
shades
the
street
potentially
contributing
to
an
icy
intersection.
During
winter
months,
a
four-story
mixed-use
building
will
create
greater
congestion
at
3805
29th
Avenue
South.
There
is
no
parking
on
38th
Street
side
of
that
property,
as
it's
a
traffic
lane
and
the
traffic
patterns
are
such
that
the
traffic
entering
at
this
location
is
difficult
and
risky
already.
J
Furthermore,
29th
Avenue,
29th
and
30th
avenues
are
critical
parking
areas
and
if
previous
light
rail
platform
area
development
is
considered,
it
will
be
difficult
to
find
a
retailer
for
building
3.
According
to
the
developers
plan
due
to
parking
limitations,
for
example,
it
took
three
years
to
locate
a
tenant
for
the
46th
Street
transit
node
due
to
the
limited
parking
it's
my
understanding
from
conversations
with
my
council
representative,
the
46th
Street
neighbors
had
to
make
concessions
to
their
critical
parking
to
fill
the
vacant
retail
space.
J
The
residents
on
29th
Avenue
south
of
38th
Street
are
not
amenable
to
changing
the
critical
parking
status.
Please
reference
page
37
of
the
CPD
reviewed
document
and
note
the
majority
of
the
properties
in
this
area
are
one
and
a
half
story.
Two
two-story
structures
approving
AC
3,
a
zoning
for
3805
29th
Avenue,
is
extraordinarily
inconsistent
with
the
rest
of
the
structures
on
the
south
side
of
38th
Street
and
is
not
consistent
with
the
aesthetic
of
South
Minneapolis
and
this
specific
block
and
is
not
supported
by
previous
and
current
neighboring
homeowners.
J
The
current
zoning
ordinance
is
c1.
We
ask
this
body
to
support
the
current
ordinance
for
c1
zoning
at
3805,
29th,
Avenue
South,
and,
if
you
doubt
my
representation
I
ask
you
to
suspend
a
rezoning
decision
today
for
3805
29th
Avenue
South
and
provide
a
threshold
for
the
number
of
neighbor
signatures.
I
need
to
collect
to
demonstrate
the
neighborhood
opposition
to
rezoning
this
parcel.
Thank.
V
Good
evening
my
name
is
Caroline:
smart
I
own
the
house
at
38,
15,
29th
Avenue,
and
you
know
I'm,
concerned
again
about
the
congestion.
I've
been
doing
a
lot
of
landscaping
out
front
this
summer
and
I
see
high
rate
of
speed
traffic
coming
down
that
Street.
Actually,
there's
a
speed
sign
there
right
now.
That's
you
know
monitoring
what
goes
on
that.
The
people
that
live
to
the
south
of
us
in
the
east.
They
use
29th
Avenue
to
access
38th
Street
that
it's
very
busy
walking
street,
because
we've
got
the
high
school
right
there.
V
So
I'm
concerned
about
that.
I'm
also
very
concerned
about
the
parking
I'm
actually
residing
in
a
condo
at
37th
and
Snelling,
just
two
short
blocks
away.
It's
a
26
unit
building
that
every
single
person
has
a
car
in
that
building.
Many
of
the
people
are
flight
attendants
and
they
walk
right
over
to
the
light
rail
station.
There
are
two
apartment
buildings
directly
across
the
alley
from
me
on
37th
in
Minnehaha.
Many
of
those
tenants
are
also
parking
their
cars,
their
second
cars
on
on
snowing
that
they
don't
have
enough
parking
in
their
parking
lots.
V
V
W
To
Sano
I
live
right
across
the
street
from
I
guess
this
is
not
on
there,
but
I
live
across
the
street
from
3805.
The
proposed
four
storey
building
by
the
Landers
group
I
just
wanted
to
come
here
today
to
appeal
to
you
guys,
I,
basically
as
a
neighbor,
Jennifer
halter.
Actually
it
was
very
well
spoken
about
the
situation
with
you
know.
W
W
My
point
is
that
and
that's
16
units
and
I
believe
this
development
is
a
180
units.
So
you
put
that
much
pressure
on
a
very
small
area
and
also
I'm
really
concerned
about
is,
as
far
as
the
parking
but
I'm
pointing
it
here.
But
is
there
a
way
to
put
that
up
there?
I
don't
know?
Oh,
that's:
okay,
yeah,
just
the
site
plan.
W
One
thing
that
wasn't
was
briefly
touched
on
earlier
was
basically
along
29th
Avenue
north
of
38th
Street,
I.
Guess
what
I
understand
as
of
tonight
is
that
that
the
bus
is
going
to
come
down,
29th
Avenue
and
because
it's
a
Gennaro
area,
you're
gonna,
have
to
eliminate
parking
there
as
well
so
and
I'm
just
wondering
where
all
these
cars
are
gonna
go.
W
I've
lived
in
this
in
my
place
for
17
years
and
I've
noticed
you
know,
since
the
light
rail,
which
I
think
is
a
great
thing
it's
just
on
but
I
know,
there's
gonna
be
development
I'm,
not
against
development,
but
it
seems
over
and
over
people
disregard
the
people
that
live
in
those
neighborhoods
already
that
have
made
those
neighborhoods
very
you
know
like
decent,
solid
neighborhoods.
W
That's
why
people
are
developing
there
is
that
you
know
they
say
over
and
over
the
lanter
group
says
they
want
to
be
a
good
neighbor
to
the
people
that
already
live
there.
But
I
haven't
really
seen
that
from
the
Landers
group
we
went
to
a
meeting
may
10th
to
talk
about
these
plans
and
no
one
mentioned
the
change
of
Zoning
to
the
commercial
to
a
two-story
commercial
to
the.
What
the
the
new
zoning
that
they're
going
for
you
know
this
evening.
W
So
I
find
a
little
disingenuous
because
we
were
there
as
concerned
neighbors,
to
find
out
what
the
deal
is
with
parking
you
know,
and
in
this
building
and
now
it
seems
to
be
they
kind
of
changed
their
plans,
but
anyway,
I
just
kind
of
urge.
You
guys
to
look
at
the
critical
parking.
We
have
a
high
school
two
blocks
away
as
Caroline
mention
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
students
flying
through
that
29th,
Avenue,
Street
and
now
it
seems
you'll
have
buses
coming
through
the
29th
Avenue.
W
It's
just
it's
a
tremendous
amount
of
traffic,
there's
tons
of
foot
traffic
as
well,
because
it's
a
light
rail,
so
I
guess
I.
Just
would
urge
you
guys
to
to
really
look
at
having
the
Landers
group
either
provide
more
parking
to
try
to
offset
some
we're
all
that
I
just
don't
know
where
all
these
cars
are
gonna
go
any
Vikings
game
or
Twins
game
people
park
in
front
of
Ted
cooks
barbecue,
which
is
supposed
to
be
one
hour
parking.
That's
part
solid,
all
the
way
down
to
27th
Avenue.
So
it's
it's
parking
is
already.
W
We
already
have
critical
parking,
it's
a
huge
issue
and
I
think
this
is
going
to
compound
it
exponentially
with
the
amount
of
units
they
have.
One
last
thing,
I
had
to
say
about
the
3805
building.
I
live
right
across
the
street
and
I
agree
with
Jennifer
halter
and
the
fact
that
we've
had
many
City
Planning
groups
with
Cena
and-
and
you
know,
basically
that
really
goes
against
the
other
houses
in
the
in
the
area.
Mines,
one
and
a
half
story,
there's
no
structures
that
are
over
two
stories.
So
it
seems
like
a
big.
W
You
know,
Colossus
next
to
a
lot
of
small
houses
and
it
would
be
nice
if
there
were
some.
You
know
a
lower
to
lower
that
that
building
and
there's
no
setbacks
it'll
either
it's
just
a
sheer
face
of
from
what
we
discussed
with
a
lander
group.
Apparently
there
are
setbacks
in
the
larger
unit,
but
there's
not
in
in
the
one:
that's
right
next
to
the
houses
right
next
door
on
the
3805.
W
So
anyway,
I've
just
urge
you
to
look
at
the
details,
and
hopefully
you
know
try
to
consider
the
people
that
live
in
the
neighborhood,
because
it
seems,
though,
that
the
Landers
group
have
kind
of
kind
of
kind
of
disregarded
some
of
the
neighbors
that
live
there.
So
thank
you
right.
A
M
I
am
Sam
Newburgh
I
live
at
39,
13,
29th,
Avenue,
south
I
do
support
the
länder
group
38th
Street
Station
plan,
as
proposed.
It
represents
the
type
of
development
that
I
hope
to
see
when
my
wife
and
I
moved
into
a
home
within
a
five-minute
walk
in
the
38th
Street
Station
more
than
a
dozen
years
ago.
M
Specifically,
it
creates
a
new
urban
street
and
Plaza
that
in
vastly
improved
public
realm
overall
and
the
tension
given
to
how
those
new
buildings
relate
to
the
public
realm,
the
länder
group
specifically
improves
on
the
original
station
area
plan
approved
by
the
city
ten
years
ago.
Thank
you
thank.
X
Good
evening
my
name
is
Yvette:
Roberts
I
live
at
37,
25,
29th,
Avenue,
South
Minneapolis,
and
what
I'd
like
to
mention
is
that
I
live
at
basically
the
top
of
the
triangle
here.
I
am
completely
impacted
by
this
proposal.
In
that
I
live
on,
29th
I
am
facing
the
light
rail
I
take
the
light
rail
everyday
I
walk
by
Cardinal
bar
I
stand
at
the
bus
stops.
There
are
four
bus
stops
in
that
station
with
light
rail
and
I
walk
by
those
seven
homes
that
are
on
29th.
That
will
be
resolved.
X
I
mention
all
of
these
things,
because
there
are
things
I
see
in
this
proposal
that
are
nice.
I
major
composter.
So
just
the
fact
that
you
even
mentioned
recycling
and
composting
is
wonderful
and
I
understand
the
public
area
to
have
the
plaza,
but,
as
has
been
by
and
I'm
going
to
get
names
wrong
by
the
Jennifer
in
Caroline
and
another
gentleman
traffic
here
is
already
bad
in
this
situation,
that's
being
described
will
require.
X
X
This
as
its
design,
is
going
to
bring
the
bus
traffic
right
through
the
neighborhood,
the
neighborhood
which,
by
the
way,
needs
more
lighting
at
night,
because
it's
very
poorly
lit-
and
maybe
that
will
improve
with
something
like
this.
But
at
this
moment
it's
all
very
poorly
lit
all
the
way
along
38th
passenger
3828
and
it's
been
poorly
lit
for
years,
and
we've
requested
new
lights
and
not
gotten
them
having
the
buses
come
through.
It
is
an
existing
narrow
street
29th
right
now.
The
parking
on
29th
is
permitted.
X
X
There's
a
part
of
me
that
says
we
don't
have
space
for
the
scale
of
building
that
you're,
proposing
38:28
I'm,
not
sure
is
going
to
have
parking,
but
I
know
for
sure
is
cutting
non-existent
parking
down
even
further
and
as
someone
who
doesn't
even
drive
the
fact
that
that's
going
to
be
a
problem,
we
already
have
that
problem.
We
already
have
people
parking
all
along
places
that
they're
not
supposed
to
park
because
we
are
50
feet
from
the
light
rail
the
bus
is
coming
through
is
going
to
really
impact
the
neighborhood
in
a
very
strong.
X
A
You
for
a
thank
you
is
there.
Anyone
else
would
like
to
speak
on
this
item.
C
no
and
I
will
close
the
public
hearing
and
commissioners.
We
have
several
applications
before
us.
I'll
also
mention
that
we
do
have
the
floor
area
ratio
of
variance
as
well.
That's
not
listed
on
the
agenda
so
we'll
need
to
take
action
on
that.
Are
there
any
further
questions?
It's
only
like
to
start
things
off
with
the
motion.
A
A
A
That
motion
carries
next.
We
have
played
be
the
conditional
use
permit
for
Planned
Unit
development.
E
I
would
move
approval
of
condition
of
item
B
a
conditional
use
permit
for
Planned
Unit
development
with
the
following
changes
eliminate
condition.
Number
four
I
can
explain
that
if
I
have
a
second
and
a
men
item
number
seven
to
read
a
minimum
of
126
linear
feet
of
seating
shall
be
provided
within
the
plaza,
including
a
minimum
of
25
linear
feet
of
fixed
seats,
a
minimum
of
25
linear
feet
of
seats
with
backs
which
may
be
fixed
or
movable,
and
a
minimum
of
32
linear
feet
of
movable
chairs,
etc,
etc.
A
Q
Q
I
would
say
for
condition:
number
7,
I,
don't
I
would
not
say
that.
That
is
something
that
can
be
revised,
because
otherwise
a
variance
would
be
required
for
the
plaza
standards.
The
difference
being
that
this
is
completely
quantitative
versus
item
number.
Four
you
could.
Maybe
the
Planning
Commission
can
make
the
argument
that
that
has
been
met,
that
the
intent
of
the
plaza
sentence
has
been
met
and
it's
okay,
but
7
its
it's
a
matter
of
numbers
and
we
can't
do
it
without
a
variance
and.
E
E
Q
No,
you
know
what
I
agree
with
you.
I
agree
with
you,
so.
E
Yeah,
so
I'm
not
changing
any
of
linear
fee.
I
was
clarifying
that
that
those
particular
25
feet
with
backs
I,
that
we
will
have
25
feet
with
backs,
but
that
those
may
be
fixed
or
they
may
be
movable,
but
it,
but
they
would,
but
they
must
provide
25
linear
feet
of
seating
with
backs.
Q
E
E
Would
maybe
we
should
say
the
seats
may
be
fixed
or
movable
rather
than
the
backs
may
be
fixed
in
a
lottery?
You
know
we
can
get
into
drafting
the
intent.
There
is
that
we
can
have
25
linear
feet
of
seating
with
backs,
and
it
doesn't
really
matter
to
me
whether
that
is
screwed
to
the
ground
or
can
be
shoveled
to
the
side.
As
long
as
someone
has
someone
something
to
lean
on
which
I
assume
is
the
intent,
oh
the
code,
but
it
looks
like
Jason.
Did
you
pull
it
up?
E
I
C
You
mr.
chair
I
just
wanted
to
note
that
in
this
motion
item
three
remains,
which
is
that
the
applicant
must
submit
a
pause
upon
that
plan,
that
that
meets
the
requirements,
and
so
that
includes
ad
a
accessibility
and
the
details
of
these
plaza
seats
and
everything.
So,
first
of
all,
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we're
all
clear
that
that's
what's
happening.
It
sounds
like
anything
aside
from
that
would
really
need
a
variance
anyway.
A
C
E
You
know
I
think
having
organic
movement
without
it
necessarily
a
straight
line
is
is
attractive
to
me
from
a
public
realm
standpoint,
and
we
know
that
there
is
enough
capacity
on
the
sidewalk
to
handle
the
train
trips,
because
that's
what
happens
today,
and
so
that's
just
my
thinking
there
and
how
I'm
interpreting
that
and
I
think
that
it
is.
We
can
eliminate
that
condition
well
being
consistent
with
the
plots
of
standards.
O
S
Yeah
before
I
make
a
motion.
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
I
amplifies
that
it's
an
eating,
establishment
and
I
mean
when
I
provide
seating.
Although
I
ain't
had
plenty
of
restaurants
where
the
window
I
just
below
the
table,
but
I
would
note
that
the
standard
table
height
is
30
inches.
So
perhaps
a
compromise
could
be
reached
that
if
they
lowered
their
their
window,
sill
height
to
a
thirty
inch
height
that
it
would
be
allowed
in
this
instance
to
be
to
be
counted
at
that
point
and
and
not
to
the
full
24
inches
for
example.
S
So
it's
a
it's
splitting
literally
that
one
foot
difference
by
6,
inches,
otherwise
I
think
I
would
be
inclined
to
deny
it
because
I
know
we've
had
a
discussion
back
when
we
crafted
this
particular
requirement
and
I
know.
Commissioner
Connor
was
particularly
adamant
about
it
about
the
the
two
feet,
because
it
does
block
three
feets.
Surprisingly
high.
It
doesn't
seem
high,
but
it
is
surprisingly
high
for
somebody
perusing
and
who
knows
if
it
will
be
a
restaurant
in
the
long
run
or
commercial
retail
or
something
that
we
want
more
visibility
anyway
and
I.
B
S
A
E
A
G
A
O
A
A
A
S
I
mean
I,
I
did
wanna
I,
don't
know,
that's
my
condition
this,
but
I
did
want
to
encourage
the
applicant
to
take
another
look
at
that
perforated
screening
and
the
signage.
It
seems
to
me
there's
a
reason
we
don't
Roxy
there's
a
reason.
S
We
we
usually
require
engineers
and
architects
on
a
building
of
this
scale,
and
one
is
because
there's
a
technical
box
to
be
checked
and
yes
technically,
there's
enough
room
for
people
to
walk
through,
and
it
might
seem
fine,
but
I
would
argue
that
there
is
a
certain
impassive,
psychological
element
and
and
something
that
should
be
taken
into
account
in
terms
of
how
people
feel
do
they
do.
They
feel
I
saw
something
that
was
8
feet,
tall
and
I.
S
Don't
know
how
big
that
sinus,
but
it's
awfully
large
and
cast
quite
a
shadow
on
your
computer,
rendering
would
would
I
really
human
being
feel
welcome
or
not
even
a
human
being.
Would
a
would
a
young
woman
feel
comfortable
walking
there
at
9
p.m.
at
night
I,
don't
know
if
I
would
so
where
there
is,
although
it
needs
technical
aspects
of
12
feet,
is
fine
I.
S
Do
wonder
if
the
suggestions
are
making
it
more
curved
or
making
it
more
perforated
in
terms
of
sight
lines,
and
just
seeing
seem
more
welcoming,
is
something
that
I
would
encourage
you
to
explore.
Not
now
because
it's
failing
some
code
issue
per
se,
but
just
mainly
because
there's
an
artistic
element
that
I
think
would
benefit
all
human
beings
who
have
to
interact
in
the
site
as
a
pedestrian
as
a
part
of
the
bike.
S
A
A
O
O
A
That
motion
carries.
That
concludes
our
discussion
on
item
5.
Our
next
item
for
a
discussion
is
item.
9
staff
is
mr.
for
Commissioner
Rockwell
I
know
you
had
a
question
about
this.
Was
it?
Was
there
a
specific
question
you
had
of
of
staff,
or
should
we
ask
them
to
just
provide
a
brief
presentation?
Yeah
I
didn't.
P
P
P
The
downtown
entertain
that
billboard
district
was
created
in
2009.
It
was
meant
to
kind
of
augment
Target
Center,
quite
frankly,
around
the
Target
Center,
and
that
Blackie
Blackie
had
its
own
special
rules
or
under
an
old
PUD
about
very
generous
sign
regulations.
So,
at
the
time
they
in
2009
there
was
worth
to
kind
of
expand
this
district
thinking
that
this
is
a
regional
Sports
Center.
P
It
had
been
just
byway,
Target
Center
had
originally
been
approved
for
14,500
square
feet
of
signage
by
right
in
the
district
when
it
when
the
1990
code
was
revised,
that
was
inadvertently
pulled
out
so
with
the
downtown
entertainment.
Billboard
district
was
in
some
sense
to
go
back
and
make
a
regional
SportsCenter
hole.
It
was
always
the
intent
for
regional
sports
centers
to
have
generous
advertising.
It
was
then
in
mind
that
around
those
centers
there
would
be
additional
signage,
particularly
around
off-premise
advertising.
It
would
be
allowed.
P
So
now
we
have
a
US
Bank
Stadium,
that's
gone
online
and
that
was
to
some
degree
some
Baptists
back
in
July,
and
so
when
you
look
at
the
district
as
proposed
and
again,
this
is
different
than
what's
at
the
committee
of
the
whole.
What
we
see
is
that
we've
really
picked
up
across
the
street
to
Portland
and
then
along
the
other
side
of
sixth.
P
These
signs
are
intended
to
read,
frankly,
towards
the
plaza
not
towards
the
Commons
and
and
they
are
not
required
to
do
any
of
the
cap
and
please
trade
in
so
these
are
allowed
by
right
there.
They
are
not
part
of
a
cap
and
replaced
system
that
exists
on
the
freeways
and
other
parts
of
downtown.
That's
also
consistent
with
the
other,
the
other
node,
if
you
will,
the
downtown
entertainment,
billboard
district
and
that's
kind
of
the
hallmark,
is
that
it's
a
more
generous
district.
It
allows
for
larger
signs.
P
P
P
Frankly,
even
for
a
staff
person
who
was
around
then
it's
kind
of
muddled,
as
you
know
why
that
was
put
in
we've
talked
to
some
of
the
city
attorney.
It
was
I,
think
toe
council
member
dovi
Renee
that
put
it
in
there
and
I.
Don't
know
what
exactly
what
the
concerns
on
the
City
Council
were
at
that
time.
I
do
know
the
city
does
get
involved
with
limited
interest
in
off-premise
advertising
under
the
franchise
agreement
for
bus,
shelters
or
price
benches,
for
instance.
P
So
this
is
scene
of
kind
of
a
housekeeping,
it's
kind
of
an
odd
ordinance
to
be
residing
in
there.
So
one
of
the
things
we're
doing
here
is
to
kind
of
eliminate
that
prohibition-
it's
it's
not
seem
to
have
any
effect.
Currently
I,
don't
have
much
to
add
at
this
point
about
that,
but
I
am
open
to
questions
and
I
did
appreciate
the
feedback
of
the
committee
of
the
whole
zone.
Sharon.
S
P
S
P
Would
typically
be
mounted
yes,
they
could
be
mounted
freestanding
is
typically
what
you
see.
The
roof
would
be
there's
certain
limits
on
the
roof.
Sign.
I
think
these
would
generally
be
freestanding
signs.
Let
me
just
say
when
you
get
a
sign
that
large
you
get
into
structural
issues
too,
as
well,
so
I
think
the
idea
behind
it
isn't
what
we've
seen
is
really
that
these
are
signs
either
mounted
on
the
superstructure
of
a
building.
I
mean
Target
Center,
even
when
they've
redone
it.
It's
had
to
really
have
steel
superstructure.
P
Y
P
P
We've
been,
as
we've
been
told
to
referred
to,
it
is
not
subject
to
strict
adherence
to
the
Economist
advertising
regulations.
Now
that
is,
there
was
an
agreement
between
attache
who
is
in
the
enabling
legislation.
So
we,
whether
it
was
the
plaza
or
signage
they
are
not
under
strict
adherence
to
those
rules.
The
old
Metrodome
had
rules
that
applied
for
regional
sports
centers.
P
This
ordinance
encompass
this
encompasses
the
stadium.
In
the
sense
we
don't
want
to
create
a
doughnut,
and
that
agreement
was
really
an
enabling
legislation
for
the
stadium.
They
have
still
come
to
us
for
advice.
They
have.
We
have
reviewed
things,
but
they
are
not
subject
to
strict
adherence.
So
in
effect,
one
of
the
unique
things
about
the
ordinance
is
the
existing.
P
The
existing
district
here
is
almost
irrelevant
because
they're
exempt
from
it,
and
so
in
effect,
we're
putting
this
here,
which
does
kind
of
lay
groundwork
in
the
future.
If
there
is
a
change
under
that
agreement,
if
there's
different
legislation,
there
is
a
regulatory
framework
that
undergirds
that
property-
okay,
no,
that
was
responsive
or
not,
but
no
it's
good
right.
A
A
Z
Good
evening,
commissioners,
my
name
is
Matthew
I'm
with
Clear
Channel
tour
I
pleasure
to
be
here
tonight.
I
just
want
to
speak
in
support
of
the
ordinance.
Amendment
started
this
process
about
a
year
ago
with
council
member
or
saw
me
and
city
staff.
Certainly
like
this.
Thank
your
city
staff
they've,
been
a
pleasure
to
work
with,
especially
Steve
port,
certainly
agree
with
their
recommendation
to
expand
the
down
on
billboard
entertainment
district.
This
is,
but
is
mainly
what
we're
looking
for
in
the
expansion
is
an
opportunity
to
upgrade
in
what
we
have
in
the
area.
Z
We
think
what
we
do
adds
vibrancy
and
energy.
It's
an
opportunity
to
continue
to
with
the
excellent
redevelopment.
That's
going
on
in
the
area.
I
think
it's
a
reasonable
request.
It's
an
appropriate
location
just
expand
that
district
got
a
little
bit.
We
think
will
add
a
lot
to
the
district,
so
I.
Thank
you
for
your
consideration
in
the
request.
I
might.
A
O
Z
Z
So
this
is
right
across
the
street
from
Stadium,
which
is
now
Eric
the
Red.
We
currently
have
on
premise
honor,
offering
the
signs
there
now
that
are
called
printed
signs
that
existed
and
will
continue
exist.
I
only
plan
is
with
the
reason,
for
the
ordinance
request
is
to
be
able
to
convert
this
to
new
new
technology
to
go
to
the
LED
billboards.
Much
like
we
did
on
Mayo
square
around
the
Target
Center,
it's
as
an
upgrading
in
in
technology
infrastructure,
new
columns,
be
it
landlord.
We
have
there
with
Eric
the
red
and
state
partners.
Z
They've
invested
in
building
parking
lots
new
landscaping.
The
whole
block
is
being
redeveloped,
there'll,
be
an
affordable
housing
project
going
on
the
back
side
of
this
project.
We
work
with
the
neighbors
to
come
up
with
an
overall
redevelopment
plans,
we're
all
investing
in
that
block.
You
know
it's
a
real
important
intersection
in
the
city,
especially
being
right
across
from
the
stadium,
and
we
think
we're
gonna
really
add
to
what
it'll
look
like
I
got
one
more
drawing.
Z
Z
Y
A
J
AA
Good
evening
my
name
is
Tom:
McCarver
I
represent
Blue
Ox
media
group
and
in
a
former
life,
I
had
Matt's
job
I
worked
with
Clear
Channel
for
16
years
prior
and
then
a
another
outdoor
advertising
company
nationally
for
four
years,
so
I've
been
dealing
with
a
lot
of
these
issues
with
Steve
and
others
for
the
last
20
or
so
years.
So
I've
seen
a
lot
of
these
iterations
and
we
are
also
in
support
as
Clear
Channel
is
of
an
expansion
here.
We're
coming
at
this
a
little
differently
because
we
are
a
small
company,
three
people.
AA
So
we
can
make
use
of
those
types
of
spaces
and
we're
a
niche
business.
We
we
take
a
look
at
things
like
that
and
say
here's
what
it
is
today.
What
can
we
make
it
tomorrow
without
having
to
put
in
massive
structures
and
things
of
that
nature,
so
things
that
we
would
be
looking
at
are
not
ground-based.
These
are
making
use
of
the
space
that
currently
exists
during
the
committee
of
the
whole,
we
also
were
looking
at
an
ordinance
that
was
a
little
more
robust
than
this
talking
about
Washington
Avenue
in
parts
of
Hennepin.
AA
So
we
would
encourage
that
discussion
to
continue
today
and
and
moving
forward
to
Z
and
P
as
well.
That's
something
that
seems
to
be
supported
by
the
people
in
the
in
the
area
and
council
members.
So
another
area
where,
if
you
want
to
signs
here
and
there
could
go
up
on
large
brick
walls
and
again,
wall
signs
by
their
nature
in
many
ways
are
somewhat
temporary.
So
one
goes
up.
One
comes
down
because
some
of
these
buildings
that
come
up
apartment
buildings
that
are
six
storeys
tall
block
of
all
that
for
years
was
open.
AA
A
E
Rockwell
I'm
happy
to
start
off
with
a
motion
and
then
explain:
I
would
move
to
approve
staff
recommendation
in
terms
of
approving
amendments
to
section
five,
forty
four
point,
one
to
zero
as
written,
which
relates
to
the
city
financing
of
billboard
advertising
and
to
not
to
approve
amendments
to
section
five.
Forty
four
point:
nine:
zero
related
to
expansion
of
the
billboard
district,
all.
A
S
S
It's
just
adding
more
space
for
billboards
to
be
plunked
down
in
parking
lots
or
on
top
of
buildings
or
on
it's.
Not
it's.
Not
it's
not
an
attribute
or
a
feature
to
edit
a
downtown
I.
Don't
really
know
what
it's
adding
a
lot
to
the
district
of
except
commercial
money
to
a
few
identities
that
are
lucky
enough
to
get
stuff
punked
on
the
side
of
the
building.
If
the
rest
of
us
have
to
drive
by
so
I
fail
to
see
any
public
benefit,
therefore,
I
will
be
supporting
this
motion.
E
Know
just
to
echo
Commissioner
loop
here,
this
part
of
downtown
is
really
evolving.
It's
it's
evolving
and
there's
been
a
lot
of
investment
in
public
and
private
in
housing,
an
office
basin
and
retail
and
the
park.
And
you
know
this
is
our
city
goals
or
to
grow
the
population
and
to
have
people
living
downtown.
And
yes,
the
comments.
Park
is
a
destination
park,
but
it
is
also
serves
the
neighborhoods
there.
E
This
really
impacts
our
ability
to
to
develop
this
part
of
our
city,
for
you
know
a
fair
price
and-
and
we
do
have
housing
going
up
right
next
to
these
billboards,
I
me
was
just
pointed
out
that
affordable
housing
going
up
right
next
to
the
existing
billboard
tonight,
I,
don't
think
I'd
want
to
look
out
on
the
billboards
and
I
know
they're
facing
the
other
way,
but
you
know
the
lights
definitely
going
to
be
coming
around.
So
that's
well.
I
got
alright.
Y
There
is
potentially
something
that
would
be
distracting
to
drivers
and
a
safety
hazard,
especially
considering
how
many
people
are
kind
of
navigating
this
area,
potentially
not
often
and
maybe
they're
in
town
for
a
Vikings
game
and
there's
a
whole
bunch
of
video
advertising
playing
on
the
street
and
there's
people
walking
around
after
a
football
game
and
just
seems
like
essentially
a
safety
hazard
to
be
adding
those
here
in
this
specific
area.
Any.
A
Further
discussion,
I'll
just
add,
I,
am
somewhat
intrigued
by
the
idea
of
looking
at
different
types
of
off-premise
advertising
in
this
general
area.
You
know,
for
instance,
some
of
the
advertising
that
exists
on
the
parking
garage
and
the
stadium
itself,
while
those
facilities
are
exempt.
You
know
canons
always
add
to
the
vibrancy
of
an
area,
add
to
kind
of
that
temporary
vibrancy
where
we
have
blank
walls
where
you
know
years
ago,
wasn't
envisioned
that
this
would
be
a
particularly
vibrant
or
residential
part
of
the
city.
A
So
you
know
I'm
open
to
considering
some
of
those
changes.
I
do
have
some
bigger
concerns
if
we're
really
opening
up
the
door
on
freestanding
or
roof-mounted
billboards
in
an
area
like
this
I
think
you
know,
we've
seen
a
huge
number
of
development
proposals
within
blocks
of
here
within
the
last
five
years
or
so
and
I.
You
know
hope
that
will
continue
and
I
do
think.
A
If
we're
adding
a
lot
of
really
large
kind
of
permanently
mounted
billboards
that
can
almost
be
a
barrier
to
new
development
and
in
an
area
where
I
think
all
of
our
policies
suggest
that
we'd
like
to
see
it.
So
with
that
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
clerk.
Please
call
the
roll
commissioner
Breeland
go
ahead.
A
A
U
Good
evening,
Peter
Crandall
senior
city
planner
with
cpad
land
use
before
you
tonight
is
a
proposed
zoning
code
text.
Amendment
introduced
by
a
councilmember
bender
that
explicitly
deals
with
exterior
building
material
standards
captured
under
the
site
plan
review
chapter
of
the
zoning
code.
What
I'm
gonna
do
is
just
provide
a
little
bit
of
the
context
around
how
this
amendment
came
to
be
go
into
a
brief
account
of
some
of
the
details.
U
So
this
amendment
is
growing
out
of
a
period
of
significant
growth
and
development
in
the
city
we've
seen
over
1
billion
dollars,
1
billion
dollars
in
permits
issued
in
the
last
five
years.
This
represents
a
significant
investment
in
the
city's
public
public
realm
and
built
environment,
and
part
of
the
effort
behind
this
is
to
ensure
that
that
investment
is
a
lasting
one
and
a
quality
one.
U
We've
conducted
several
meetings
with
industry
experts,
manufacturers,
members
of
the
affordable
housing
community
members
of
the
architectural
and
design
community,
and
have
kind
of
developed
this
evaluation
criteria
for
how
we
measure
material
quality
and
compatibility
as
a
part
of
the
zoning
code
text,
amendment
one
being
material
composition.
What
is
the
material
made
of
obviously
an
important
component
in
evaluating
the
quality
and
appropriateness
of
any
material
application
method?
So
how
is
the
material
typically
apply
to
the
building
material
thickness
and
density?
U
There's
a
great
variety
of
different
product,
thicknesses
and
densities
available
in
particular
sectors
of
this
market,
notably
fiber
cement
and
then
appearance
and
compatibility.
So
how
does
the
building
material
look?
How
compatible
is
it
with
historic
building
infrastructure
in
the
city
and
with
adjacent
properties
was
a
lot
of
language
in
the
comprehensive
plan
and
adopted
small
area
plans
dealing
with
that
particular
issue.
U
We
have
also
identified
particular
differences
within
categories
that
were
previously
just
one
category
so
metal
panel,
for
example,
has
been
broken
down
into
some
more
specific
classifications,
as
has
fiber
cements,
and
then
this
classification
is
proposed
to
be
applied
based
on
a
calculation
of
the
area
of
particular
building
elevations.
This
is
similar
to
how
we
apply
the
current
guidelines.
U
S
Peter
I
just
had
two
quick
questions.
One
was
under
the
residential
uses
under
Anderson's
widows
and
active
functions.
It
states
that
20%
of
walls
in
the
first
floor
and
10%
of
walls
on
each
floor
above
the
first
that
face
a
public
street,
etc,
etc.
Hefty
windows.
What
about
sides
of
the
building
that
don't
face
a
public
street
public
sidewalk,
public
pathway
or
on-site
parking
lot,
or
do
we
have
our
percentage
requirement
for
there?
I
know
that
in
the
past
there
has
been
at
least
four
single-family
homes.
Is
there
a
standard
for
that?
J
S
That
was
my
my
one
concern
there
and
the
only
other
question
I
had
was
just
in
regards
who,
let's
see,
would
be
oh,
it's
under
roof
lines.
The
foreman
pitch
have
refined
to
be
similar
to
surrounding
buildings.
I
just
want
to
know
if
there's
any
levity
within
the
staff
to
address.
U
A
C
C
You
know
higher
quality
materials
than
in
other
neighborhoods,
and
so
anyway,
that's
a
little
bit
on
the
intention.
I
wanted
to
ask
you
a
question
about
the
kind
of
balance
that
we're
seeking
here
with
supporting
affordability
of
housing.
We've
made
a
lot
of
changes
in
this
Planning
Commission
and
council
term
that
really
worked
to
support
more
affordable
housing.
More
flexibility,
we've
reformed
the
zoning
code
in
many
ways
to
make
it
easier
to
build
more
affordable,
small-scale
projects
and
neighborhoods
across
the
city
and
I
know.
C
U
Yeah,
specifically
with
regard
to
the
affordability
issue,
we
did
meet
with
several
members
of
the
affordable
housing
community
in
the
development
community,
specifically
who
expressed,
as
you
mentioned,
some
some
significant
concerns
over
implementing
increasingly
restrictive
guidance
about
things
that
would
potentially
increase
costs
to
projects,
and
we
responded
to
that
by
creating
additional
flexibility
into
this
proposed
ordinance.
There
was,
as
you'll
recall,
a
much
stricter
original
proposal
that
would
have
required
a
higher
percentage
of
what
under
this
would
be
considered.
U
S
I
just
want
to
touch
on
that
a
little
bit,
because
I'm
really
obviously
concerned
about
affordable
housing
in
our
city
and
not
only
the
quantity
which
we
all
know
we
need
more
of
it,
but
also
the
quality
and
I
think
that
this
current
proposal
has
struck
a
really
good
balance.
I
think
that
there
are
options,
especially
when
we
kind
of
negotiated
with
a
lot
of
developers
about
how
could
we
make
this
something?
S
That's
not
creating
a
barrier
to
affordable
housing
and
having
it
be
scaled
to
different
sizes
of
development,
but
also
taking
into
consideration
the
variance
ordinances
and
policy
changes
over
the
last
few
years
that
have
actually
helped
reduce
costs
to
development.
So
I
think
that
that
gets
balanced
with
the
desire
to
see
quality
construction,
regardless
of
whether
it's
affordable
or
not,
and
I.
I.
S
Think
that
the
concern
that
I
know
I
had
initially
with
some
of
the
of
the
questions
put
forth,
was
that
we
were
that
we
take
care
not
to
create
a
substandard
group
of
housing
just
because
people
do
not
have
the
means
of
which
to
invest
in
higher
quality.
So
I
think
that
this
has
prevented
that
stratification
from
taking
place
where
all
some
areas
of
the
city
that
are
more
affordable,
housing
than
others
might
be
inundated
with
a
number
of
housing
units
that
are
not
held
to
the
same
standard
as
other
developments
around
the
city.
S
So
I
think
that
this
is
a
really
good
balance
and
that
and
then
it
keeps
affordable
housing
possible
while
at
the
same
time
holding
it
to
the
same
high
standards
of
other
communities,
so
we're
not
holding
neighbors
down
so
I
applaud.
Actually,
this
is
a
really
good
compromise
to
that
that
really
difficult
problem.
A
AB
Thank
You
mr.
chairman
and
distinguished
councilmembers,
my
name
is
Marcus
Kaizen
good
and
I
represented
James
Hardie,
building
products
out
of
Chicago
Illinois
James
Hardie.
If
you,
if
you're,
not
aware
of
manufactures
fiber
cement
cladding,
which
is
the
subject
of
one
of
the
material
restric
requirements
in
the
proposal,
James
Harvey
has
been
making
fibrous
nuts
in
the
United
States
for
over
25
years,
we've
manufactured
close
to
18
billion
square
feet
of
material.
That's
found
on
commercial
buildings
and
residential
buildings
all
across
the
u.s.
AB
Our
material
could
not
be
used
more
than
30%
on
any
of
the
on
the
exterior
for
any
of
the
elevations,
and
so
when
we
learned
that
the
Planning
Department
was
going
to
update
the
the
ordinance
new
information,
we
took
that
as
an
opportunity
to
provide
some
industry
experience
and
expertise
on
the
material
fiber
cement.
Specifically,
we
tried
to
do
that
as
a
new
full
party
we
weren't,
advocating
for
Harvey,
specifically
as
I
think
mr.
Crandall
will
attest
when
we
met
with
the
planning
department.
AB
We
also
talked
about
other
fiber
cement
materials
not
just
around
and
how
those
would
fit
in.
So
what
we
saw.
It
was
a
fair
and
level
playing
field
with
respect
to
evaluating
fibrous
materials
and,
unfortunately,
when
we
saw
the
the
latest
version
of
this,
we
thought
the
standard
was
anything
but
that
we
thought
the
selection
and
demarcation
of
fiber
cement
materials
based
on
thickness
and
density
was
arbitrarily
chosen.
AB
It's
based
on
factual
errors
as
set
forth
in
the
supporting
documentation,
and
it
has
a
bias
against
gene
sorry
products
specifically
and
ultimately,
if
the
intent
of
the
regulation
was
to
provide
clarity
around
quality
and
durability,
it
fall
short.
So
what
do
I
need?
I
mean
about
arbitrary
standards.
So
let's
talk
specifically
about
the
density
and
thickness
components:
I
don't
know
if
you
can
flip
back
to
that
on
the
screen
or
not
I,
don't
know,
I.
Think.
AB
Actually,
the
class
1
standard-
sorry,
yes,
there
we
go
so,
as
you
may
be
able
to
see,
it's
fine
print
class
1
is
demarcated
by
having
a
material
thickness
of
greater
than
5/8
of
an
inch
and
again
sensibly
class
1.
The
reason
this
is
there
is
that
it's
a
defining
characteristic
of
durability
well,
logically
and
scientifically
thickness,
has
no
relation
to
durability.
There
are
thin
materials
that
are
durable
and
there
are
thick
materials
that
are
durable.
AB
The
other
aspect
of
thickness
that
was
proposed
or
herbs
stated
in
the
proposed
ordinance,
was
that
thicker
materials
tend
to
be
used
upon
rain
screens.
More
often-
and
that's
not
true,
there
are-
are,
there
are
thick
materials
that
are
there
also
thin
materials
that
are
used
on
rain
screens.
Rain
screen
is
a
is
a
function
of
a
building
practice.
That
is,
we
we
actually
like.
We,
we
specify
in
our
applications
that
are
highly
exposed
to
be
placed
on
top
of
rain
screens.
AB
However,
we're
not
five-eighths
of
an
inch
thick
so
thickness
really
has
no
bearing
on
the
use
of
a
rain
screen
or
not,
and
that
is
one
of
the
factual
errors
that
underlie
we
believe
the
thickness
specification.
The
other
arbitrary
dimension
is
density,
so
the
density
also
has
no
relationship
to
durability.
There
are
some
products
that
are
dense
that
are
durable
and
they're,
also
low
density
products
that
are
durable.
AB
In
fact,
one
of
the
products
on
one
of
the
buildings
here
in
Minneapolis,
the
apartment
building
at
800
North
3rd
Street,
is
a
has
a
density
well
below
1.75
I
believe
it's
about
1.25
and
but
for
the
thickness
requirement
it
would
not
qualify.
So
here
you
have
ia
what
appears
to
be
an
arbitrary
selection
of
factors
of
attributes
that
are
used
to
justify
fiber
cement
as
class
1.
AB
Excuse
me,
if
my
voice
is
cracking
I
need
some
water,
so
anyway,
the
standard
but
but
for
the
but
for
the,
but
for
that
thickness
requirement
that
material,
that's
on
800,
North
3rd
Street
would
not
qualify
for
a
class
1
and
it's
already
been
approved
by
the
Planning
Department.
So
what
is
a
level
playing
field?
I
stated
what's
wrong,
what
is
right?
AB
What's
right
and
what
we've
advocated
to
the
Planning
Department
is
the
industry
accepted
standard
for
fiber
cement,
which
is
ASTM
C
of
lady
C
1186
type,
a
which
is
for
exterior
products
grade
2
or
better
in
the
standard,
which
is
a
comprehensive
material
standard
dresses
not
while
while
thickness,
and
it
has
standards
around
thickness
and
density,
what
it
has
are
performance
tests?
How
does
the
material
perform
in
freestyle
conditions?
How
does
the
material
perform
in
wetting
and
drying
conditions
over
time
and
on
tests
that
are
accepted
by
the
industry
and
not
just
manufacturing?
AB
Industry
STM,
as
you
may
know,
is
a
is
a
is
a
consensus
standard
that
incorporates
not
only
manufacturers
but
academics
professionals,
architects,
other
interested
parties,
government
officials
as
well.
So
what
we
have
advocated
is
the
adoption
replacing
those
thickness
requirements
and
that's
the
requirements
with
ASTM
1186
type,
a
grade
2.
AB
That
would
be
our
proposal
the
and
we
think
that
would
give
a
level
playing
field
for
all
fiber
cement
manufacturers.
They
have
to
meet
that
requirement.
Now,
there's
some
that
don't
those
are
and
the
ones
that
don't
are
considered
to
be
type
B
they're
only
suitable
for
interior
products,
for
example
our
Hardiebacker
product,
which
is
used
under
tile.
It
is
a
type
of
B
product
and
not
suitable
for
external
environments,
exterior
environments,
so
the
other.
AB
James
Hardy
makes
its
fibers
in
that
in
the
US
and
as
far
as
an
option
of
a
fiber
cement
is
very
durable.
We
all
we
meet
the
same
standard
as
the
as
the
imported
products
under
this
ASTM
standard,
and
we
are,
with
25
years
of
experience
across
the
nation,
very
durable
and
proven
to
be
durable.
The
other
aspect
I'd
like
to
touch
on
is
how
Hardy
products
fit
the
criteria
that
have
been
established,
so
so
material
composition.
The
rationale
behind
the
the
rationale
behind
the
the
proposed
standards
are
on
material
composition.
AB
Specifically,
the
Planning
Department
has
called
out
the
use
of
proven
and
natural
materials,
for
example,
Portland
cement,
James,
Hardie
products
are
made
out
of
90%
Portland
cement
and
sand
or
quartz
with
a
cellulose
fiber
reinforcement
that
allows
it
to
be
tough
and
flexible
and
can
be
used
with
standard
woodworking
tools
that
are
used
to
install
other
things.
So
one
of
our
attributes
that
we
have
over
higher
density
materials
is
that
you
can
work
our
products
more
easily
and
install
them
at
less
cost.
AB
AB
The
Planning
Department
has
mentioned
that
prefinished
materials
should
be
class
1
because
of
the
lower
maintenance,
a
factory
applied
finish.
I'm
can
be
applied
under
control
conditions.
It's
not
subject
to
the
vagaries
of
the
environment
when
you're
painting
it
and
indeed
those
materials
are
usually
warranted
longer
as
our
arts.
So
what
we
would
propose
is
yes,
class
1
should
be
pre
finished
and
we
make
we've
been
making
prefinished
fiber
cement
since
2002.
S
AB
Enough,
it's
really.
The
sort
of
grading
in
that
standard
is
related
more
to
bending
strength,
how
the
lower
grades
are
weaker
and
bending
strength
and
that
doesn't
impact
their
ability
as
much
as
it
impacts
fastening
schedule.
So
how
many
fasteners
do
you
have
to
have
between
spans
and
how
much
of
a
span
between
framing
members
can
you
have
with
your
panels?
So
we
are
Class
two.
There
are
others
that
are
that
are
lower,
but.
S
And
then
you
mentioned
rainscreen,
which
I,
which
I
think
is
really
awesome,
and
you
say
that
yours
is
the
specification
calls
for
to
be
applied
in
in
certain
situations,
but
I'm
wondering
if,
if
are
you
suggesting
that
perhaps
they
have
a
performance
criterion
class
one
where,
if
I
percent
boards
applied
on
a
rein
stream
would
be
considered
a
class
one
regardless
of
density
or
thickness?
Or
would
you
still
say
that
the
thickness
and
density
have
to
be
adjusted
as
well?
I
mean
if
there
was
no
rainscreen
I
mean?
S
AB
I
understand
your
question:
I,
don't
think
it's
a
trade-off
between
rainscreen
or
thickness
and
density.
The
rainscreen
is
a
building
practice,
that's
used
to
manage
moisture
and
it's
it's
often
relegated
to
building
code.
So
if
you
know
the
building
code
might
require
the
rain
screen,
we
require
a
rain
screen
in
areas
that
are
highly
exposed
when
it's
a
highly
exposed,
there's,
maybe
no
overhang.
You.
O
S
But
given
its
a
concrete
product
and
this
susceptible
to
capillary
action
and
then
just
thus
falling
of
the
paint,
would
you
think
that
your
product,
if
it
didn't
meet
the
class
1
requirements
being
allowed
to
meet
it?
If
the
architect
designed
it
to
be
installed
on
a
rain
screen?
Would
you
say
that
that
would
be
a
good
balance,
because
I
think
we're
looking
at
how
it
performs
over
time
and
whether
or
not
it
becomes
a
maintenance
issue
and
whether
certain
things
are
getting
maintained
in
the
overall
maintenance
in
appearance
and
quality
list
of
the
city?
S
So
the
question
is:
if
your
product
were
applied,
regardless
of
whether
and
it's
a
high
impact
area
or
just
you
know,
on
the
front
of
a
commercial
building,
that's
2
storeys
tall.
It
has
a
really
nice
cute
awning
or
something
do
you
think
that
that
wouldn't
make
you
guys
happy
I
mean
I'm,
just
wondering
if
that
would
still
make
the
credit,
because
then
technically,
your
product
could
be
allowed
under
the
class
one
with
that
performance
criteria.
S
AB
It
were
installed
on
a
range
screen.
It
would
certainly
we
think
it
would
be
fine
without
it.
In
fact,
it
there's
our
there's.
Certainly
many
instances
around
the
country
where
it
has
been
installed
without
a
rain
screen,
it's
performing
just
fine,
so
it
is
in
terms
of
building
longevity
of
rain.
No
a
rain
screen
in
this
type
of
environment
is
better
than
none.
S
A
N
U
U
We
staff
consider
all
of
these
things
together
and
determining
where
our
material
falls
on
the
classification.
So
it's
not
just
the
thickness.
It's
not
just
the
density
is
not
just
the
application.
It's
kind
of
we
had
to
submerge
ourselves
in
the
industry
in
a
bit
and
learn
about
what
different
product
manufacturers
require
and
implement
on
various
available
systems
and
developed
the
about
the
criteria
for
classification
based
on
that
knowledge.
U
So,
for
example,
the
five-eighths
inch
dimension,
the
primary
manufacturer
of
5/8
inch,
fiber
cements
requires
that
their
product
be
implemented
with
a
rain
screen
system
and
that
system
is
integrated
with
the
delivery
of
the
product
itself.
It's
a
back
fastening
system,
so
there
are
no
actual
punctures
through
the
material
from
the
front
of
the
building
which
could
potentially
further
compromised
that
material
to
moisture
infiltration
or
installer
error.
U
The
7/16
inch
fiber
cement
panel
refers
specifically
to
a
product
that
James
Hardie
manufactures.
They
manufacture
a
17
7/16
inch
fiber
cement.
That
is
also
required
to
be
installed
with
a
rain
screen
and
comes
with
an
integrated
facade
attachment
system,
thus
eliminating
some
of
the
potential
pitfalls
that
befall
fiber
cement
when
it
is
not
appropriately
mitigated
from
moisture.
U
U
So
on
some
of
these
lower
scale,
residential
buildings
were
potentially
going
to
be
allowing
a
greater
degree
of
fiber
cement
cladding
than
we
have
up
to
this
point
or
over
the
last
few
years
anyway,
and
we
just
are
trying
to
make
sure
that
all
of
these
factors
get
considered
in
allowing
for
certain
percentages
of
certain
materials
on
each
elevation.
So
that's
kind
of.
N
U
U
S
S
S
A
Y
Thanks
for
your
work
on
this,
this
is
actually
something
that
I
was
a
little
bit
hesitant
about
when
we
were
talking
about
it
at
committee.
The
whole
a
couple
times
just
with
an
eye
towards
potentially
making
some
projects
be
financially
unviable,
but
I
think
that
staff
did
leave
a
lot
of
wiggle
room
with
the
alternative
compliance
when
they
were
writing.
The
ordinance
I
still
think
it's
a
little
bit
silly
to
require.
O
C
You
mr.
chair
I
just
wanted
to
thank
stop
so
much.
This
started
out
again
earlier.
This
term
was
the
very
beginning,
I
guess
of
2014,
when
we
started
looking
at
the
advisory
material
guidelines
that
we
have
been
using
over
the
past
almost
four
years,
but
then
really
RIBA
Gann.
This
work
as
an
ordinance
after
we
reformed
parking
a
couple
of
years
ago.
C
So
we
didn't
want
to
create
any
new
barriers
to
that.
It
would
have
been
open
to
any
changes.
Of
course,
and
I
know,
staff
has
been
working
to
get
more
feedback
from
planning,
commissioners
and
the
public
and
stakeholders
and
developers.
So
I'm
you
know
I.
Just
there
was
a
lot
of
back-and-forth
and
tweaking
of
this
and
I'm
grateful
for
all
of
the
work
that
went
into
it
all.