►
From YouTube: October 2, 2017 City Planning Commission
Description
Minneapolis City Planning Commission Meeting
A
A
Our
first
item
of
business
is
to
approve
the
actions
from
the
September
18th
meeting.
They
have
a
motion
to
approve
those
actions.
You
have
a
motion
and
is
there
a
second
motion
and
a
second
all
in
favor,
and
that
motion
carries
next.
We
will
sort
the
agenda
you
can
find
hard
copies
of
the
agenda
in
the
hallway
will
determine
which
items
will
be
considered
on
the
consent
agenda
and
which
items
we
will
discuss
so
starting
at
the
top
of
the
agenda
item.
1
is
a
vacation
and
the
vicinity
of
Garfield
Avenue
South.
A
Is
there
anyone
wishing
to
speak
in
opposition
to
or
modify
the
staff
recommendation
on
item
1?
Seeing
no
one
will
put
item
1
on
consent.
Item
2
is
at
5:04
29th
Avenue,
southeast
501
and
518
Malcolm
Avenue
southeast.
That
is
a
registered
land
survey.
So
anyone
wishing
to
speak
in
opposition
to
or
modify
the
staff
recommendation
on
item
2,
seeing
no
one
will
put
that
on
consent.
Item
3
is
the
target
field
station
mixed-use
project,
a
505
sixth
Avenue
North.
Several
applications
there
for
a
mixed-use
building.
A
Is
anyone
wishing
to
speak
in
opposition
to
or
modify
the
staff
recommendation
on
item
3c?
No
one
will
put
that
on
consent.
Item
four
is
a
401
University
Avenue
South
East
several
applications
for
a
new
multi-family
building
at
that
location,
I
understand
we
have
a
few
people
who
would
like
to
speak
on
that
who
will
discuss.
A
Item
for
item
5
is
at
3000
4th
Street
southeast
30:24
4th
Street
southeast
and
3033
University
Avenue
South
East
several
applications
for
a
new
mixed-use
building
about
look,
and
is
anyone
wishing
to
speak
in
opposition
to
or
modify
the
staff
recommendation
on
item
five,
seeing
no
one
will
put
item
five
on
consent,
so
our
agenda
as
amended,
is
as
follows:
items
one
two
three
and
five
will
be
on
consent
and
we
will
discuss
item
four.
They
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
agenda
as
amended.
A
B
You
president
Brown
at
the
September
19
2017,
we
heard
two
items.
The
first
was
a
lion
sale
at
1314,
James,
Avenue
North.
The
recommended
motion
from
the
Planning
Commission
was
that
the
item
is
not
consistent
with
many
of
those
planned
personal
growth
and
the
second
item
was
a
series
of
land
sales
at
29,
16,
14th,
Avenue,
north
and
1124
24th
Avenue
north
and
the
recommended
motion
there
was
to
approve
the
staff
report
that
the
item
was
consistent
or
is
consistent
with
the
Minneapolis
plan
for
sustainable
growth.
All.
A
Right,
thank
you
and
may
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
consent
agenda.
We
have
a
motion
and
a
second
finding
that
those
two
items
are
well
I
should
clarify
again
item.
One
we
found
is
not
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan
item
two:
the
sales
in
that
item
we
found
were
consistent,
so
we
have
motion
and
a
second
all
in
favor
and
that
motion
carries
next.
I
will
open
the
public
hearing
for
the
items
on
the
consent
agenda.
Again,
that's
items
1,
2,
3
and
5.
A
A
A
C
Good
evening,
commissioners,
so
this
is
401
University,
Avenue,
South,
East,
it's
located
in
the
r5,
multiple
family
district
and
also
the
UA
University
area
overlay
district.
It
is
across
from
the
general
mill
site,
which
is
also
located
within
the
East
head
of
an
activity.
Center
University
Avenue
is
a
community
corridor.
In
this
location.
The
surrounding
uses
are
varied.
There's
an
apartment
building
to
the
east
of
the
site,
there's
a
church
to
the
north,
and
then
there
are
mix
of
residential
densities
near
the
site.
C
C
The
project
that
is
proposed
is
a
five-story
apartment,
building
with
$43
units
and
18
enclosed
parking
spaces
that
would
be
accessed
off
of
4th
Avenue
southeast.
There
are
a
number
of
applications
are
required,
so
the
first
is
a
conditional
use
permit
to
increase
the
maximum
height
in
story.
So
the
maximum
in
our
five
is
four
stories
56
feet
and
the
applicant
is
proposing
five
stories.
52
feet,
four
inches
so
in
feet.
It's
it's
slightly
shorter
than
the
maximum
permitted
height
in
r5
they're.
C
Also,
numerous
variances
for
front
corner
and
side
yard
setbacks
which
are
listed
in
the
application.
In
the
staff
report.
There
is
a
variance
to
increase
the
maximum
floor
area
ratio
from
2.4
to
2.9,
though
out
the
application
does
qualify
for
one
density,
bonus
for
enclosed
parking
and
then
there's
also
a
variance
to
reduce
the
parking
requirement
from
21
spaces
to
18
spaces
and
to
increase
the
maximum
percentage
of
parking
spaces
that
can
be
provided
as
compact
spaces
rather
than
standard.
C
C
C
Part
of
that
is
because
the
applicant
is
also
reduced,
the
number
of
units
that
they
were
proposing,
it
committee
of
the
whole
from
51
to
43
units
and
then
floors
2
through
4,
look
like
the
image
on
the
right
as
a
reminder,
so
all
of
the
doling
units
would
have
one
bedrooms
or
they
would
be
efficiencies
and
then
4
or
5.
You
can
see
there's
a
deck
at
the
corner
of
the
intersection.
The
primary
exterior
materials
are
burnished
blocker
on
along
the
ground
floor,
fiber,
cement,
lap,
siding
and
also
a
metal
panel.
C
Here
is
a
run
in
context
of
the
surrounding
uses.
You
can
see
the
residential,
the
apartment
building
to
the
east
of
the
proposed
site.
Here's
the
view
from
forth,
so
I'm
just
gonna
focus
on
the
bulk
applications
today.
Just
because
that's
what
we've
received
the
most
comments
and
interest
on,
so
the
conditional
use
permit
from
height
again
is
to
increase
from
four
stories
to
five
stories.
That's
permitted
staff
finds
that
it's
consistent
with
the
56
foot
height
limit
it
permitted
in
the
r5
district.
C
C
The
bulk
is
also
concentrated
on
the
site
more
towards
the
intersection
and
a
little
bit
more
away
from
the
nearby
residential
uses
to
the
north
and
east.
In
fact,
the
building
would
increase
the
amount
of
distance
between
the
existing
buildings
and
the
neighboring
buildings,
so
along
the
East
Side,
the
nearest
residential
property
would
be
13
feet
away
and
then
the
church
would
be
increased
to
22
feet
along
the
north
side,
where.
D
C
C
However,
the
master
plan,
like
most
small
area
plans,
does
not
have
a
site
specification,
so
I
finds
that
the
other
aspects
of
the
plan
that
look
at
whether
there
is
safe
pedestrian
access
and
bike
access
and
adequate
landscaping
and
transitioning
to
lower
density
residential
uses.
Those
aspects
of
the
small
area
plan
are
met
with
this
application
and
then
increasing
the
floor
area
ratio
from
2.4
to
2.9.
C
Again
this
is
a
site.
That's
uniquely
situated.
It
has
there's
a
community
corridor
along
University,
Avenue
southeast,
and
there
are
many
amenities,
including
transit
and
bicycle
access
in
the
area.
The
the
six
is
the
six
and
the
ten
are
high
frequency
transit
routes
that
are
within
a
quarter.
Mile
of
this
development,
the
and
then
staff
would
also
note
that
they're
active
ground
floor
uses
along
University
Avenue,
while
alternative
compliance
is
requested
on
4th.
C
C
Has
requested
three
items
for
alternative
compliance
and
I've
listed
the
staff
recommended
conditions
of
approval
that
correspond
with
those.
So
first,
the
landscaping
that's
shown
on
the
landscaping
plan
is
a
little
bit
different
from
what
you've
seen
on
elevation.
So
staff
just
wants
that
to
match
up
a
little
bit
better.
So
we
want
to
see
a
lot
more
diversity
and
seasonal
interest
and
also
make
sure
that
there
are
active
living
walls.
I
should
say
along
the
elevation
facing
4th
Avenue
southeast.
C
That
would
also
help
to
mitigate
the
ground
floor,
active
functions
that
are
lacking
and
then,
regarding
the
exterior
materials.
There
is
an
excess
of
fiber
cement,
so
in
excess
of
30
percent
maximum
along
the
east
and
the
west
staff
recommends
approval
this.
However,
we
want
to
make
sure
that
there's
at
least
a
six-inch
relief
between
the
two,
the
two
different
material,
so
that
it
does
help
to
break
up
the
massing
staff
does
recommend
approval
of
all
applications
before
you
with
those
conditions
of
approval.
C
We've
received
a
handful
of
comments
from
the
neighborhood
group
and
from
neighbors.
The
neighborhood
group
does
not
recommend
approval
of
the
project,
as
proposed
with
the
five
storeys
because
of
the
FA,
our
request
as
well
and
I,
but
they
said
that
they'd
be
open
to
recommending
approval
for
a
slightly
different
scale
of
a
project
and
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
All.
E
Good
afternoon,
members
of
the
Planning
Commission,
my
name
is
Scott
Nelson
from
DJ
architecture
at
333,
Washington,
Avenue,
north
and
I
would
just
like
to
say
that,
on
behalf
of
the
developer
and
an
applicant,
we
would
accept
all
the
conditions
recommended
by
the
staff
report
mailee
and
thank
them
for
mailing,
as
well
as
Janelle,
who
initially
started
working
on
this
project
with
us.
Some
time
ago.
E
I,
don't
think
they
got
all
of
the
last
changes
that
we
wanted
to
include
on
both
the
fronts
that
are
shown
on
our
renderings,
and
we
very
much
would
intend
to
work
with
staff
to
provide
those
in
addition
to
the
two
sections
of
live
law
that
was
shown
on
the
part
of
the
West
elevation.
That
is
his
garage
and
when
the
plan
that
we
showed
at
the
committee,
the
hall
we
increased,
the
active
uses
along
the
4th
Avenue
side
from
I
think
what
was
23%
to
approximately
50%.
E
That
was
something
that
was
important
to
the
committee
when
we,
when
we
presented
at
that
time,
we
also
reduced
the
number
of
units
from
from
51
to
43.
That
was
helps
both
the
parking
variance
as
well
so
I'm
available
for
questions
of
dental
approval
from
CPM
development
this
year
as
well.
If
you
have
any
questions
for
us,
Commissioner.
F
E
G
Good
afternoon
president
Brown
and
commissioners,
my
name
is
Ted
Tucker,
319,
fifth
Street
southeast
in
Minneapolis
I'm
here
representing
the
Marcy
homes,
Neighborhood
Association,
you
saw
our
letter
in
your
packet,
which
pretty
much
says
what
were
our
objections
are
and
staff
characterized
it
correctly.
The
main
problem
with
this
project
is
it's
one
story
too
much
v
is
inappropriate
for
the
north
side
of
University
Avenue,
which,
in
the
2014
Marcy
Holmes
master
plan,
is
a
medium
density
area
in
transition
from
a
higher
density
area.
G
So
we
ask
you
to
deny
the
Cu
p45
stories
and
we
believe
by
doing
so,
you'll
also
eliminate
many
of
our
other
objections
to
this
project.
I
can
briefly
go
through
the
evaluation
that
the
Land
Use
Committee
went
through.
On
height,
the
Marcy
home
standard
is
three
stories
to
fit
in
with
a
context
on
the
north
side
of
University
Avenue
southeast
code
is
four
stories
of
right.
G
We
oppose
five
stories
and
accept
the
four
stories
as
a
right
and
again
this
goes
to
that
transition
from
high
rise,
high
density
to
the
low
density
area
and
just
because
there's
a
taller
building
on
the
other
side
doesn't
necessarily
mean
that
the
north
side
needs
to
have
a
tall
building.
I
know
we
have
someone
here
led
the
masterplan
can
maybe
talk
more
about
the
thinking
of
the
neighborhood
on
that
parking.
G
I
know
that's
a
particular
standard,
because
it's
in
the
university
area,
if
the
building
were
reduced
to
four
storeys
I,
think
the
parking
variance
would
go
away
floor
area
ratio
same
thing.
Without
that
fifth
floor,
the
floor
area
ratio
would
go
away.
I
would
like
to
comment
that
I
seem
to
recall
years
ago
when
we
eliminated
the
minimum
lot
area,
that
we
looked
to
the
floor
area
ratio
as
a
control
on
the
bulk
of
a
building,
and
this
is
proposed
at
two
point.
G
Nine
one
where
two
point
four
is:
is
the
standard,
so
I
I
would
look
to
you
to
use
FA
R
as
the
control
for
minimum
lot
area
that
that
we
eliminated
several
years
ago
materials
we
just,
we
would
prefer
more
brick.
We
see
lots
of
brick
on
the
in
that
neighborhood
and
certainly
would
ask
you
that
add,
as
a
condition
to
the
site
plan
review
that
at
least
the
corner
at
fourth
Avenue
and
University
Avenue,
be
the
brick
the
first
floor
frontage,
particularly
on
the
west
side.
G
We
must
give
credit
to
the
proposer
who
did
modify
that
greatly
to
make
it
a
much
more
pedestrian
friendly
ground
floor.
The
unit
mix
I
it's
a
lot
of
one
bedrooms
which
I
think
will
fit
the
population
likely
to
live
in
this
part
of
the
neighborhood.
So
we
applaud
that
and
are
glad
to
see.
We
hope
the
end
of
those
four
bedroom,
rooming
house
type
apartments
that
are
all
around
Dinkytown.
G
So,
in
conclusion,
ask
you
to
deny
the
Cu
p45
stories.
I
think
that
would
also
deny
the
parking
variance
the
FA,
our
variance,
but
it's
it's
all
dependent
on
that
five
story.
I
think
I
would
want
to
note
that
the
CPM
came
to
the
Land
Use
Committee
numerous
times
and
were
very
good
about
answering
our
questions
and
modifying,
as
they
saw
they
could
to
bake
this.
A
better
project
for
the
neighborhood
and
you'll
see
this
particularly
on
the
ground
floor.
So
our
thanks
to
them
for
being
sincere,
engages
with
the
community.
G
E
H
Name
is
Arlen
Abel
and
I
own
and
have
owned
for
25
years,
the
property
that's
building,
and
you
have
some
handouts
from
me
to
try
to
make
more
brief.
What
I
have
to
say
and
I'm
asking
you
the
Commission,
also
to
deny
the
conditional
use
permit
to
allow
the
five
storeys
my
principal
motive
in
doing
that
is
there's
four
storeys.
H
H
Want
to
just
correct
I
think,
there's
an
error
in
the
staff
report.
It
states
that
the
conditional
permit
would
not
injure
the
enjoyment
of
other
property
in
the
area.
If
anybody
had
been
in
maybe
seven
or
eight
of
my
units,
they
would
immediately
be
able
to
recognize
that
there
would
be
a
big
difference
in
light
in
visual
right
now.
Eight
units
can
see
all
the
way
over
the
fourth
Street,
with
the
building.
It's
18
feet
away
and
conceivably.
H
H
I
don't
even
have
a
space
for
myself,
I
parked
by
the
dumpster
when
I
come
to
work
on
the
building,
and
so
there
is
not
a
movement
away
from
a
need
for
a
less
parking,
but
there's
a
need
for
more
parking,
and
it
gets
into
the
question
of
guess
that
my
tenants
may
come
and
I'm
here
on
behalf
of
my
tenants
by
the
way,
that's
my
principle
motive
here:
Marcy
homeschool
it
just
across
the
street.
They
have
a
staff
of
70
people.
H
H
There
are
two
other
properties
that
are
mentioned
in
the
staff
report.
One
is
one
is
cozy
flats,
which
is
two
blocks
to
the
east,
closer
to
the
University
and
the
Elysian.
I
can't
speak
to
the
Elysium,
but
I
can
speak
to
cozy
flats.
I
did
a
little
field
research
this
afternoon
and
I
talked
to
the
person
who
answered
the
phone.
Cosi
flats
is
four
storeys
just
built
a
few
years
ago.
H
I
can't
verify
that.
But
that's
what
I
was
told,
which
is
a
significantly
higher
ratio
of
parking
to
spaces
we're
just
in
October.
At
the
end
of
the
lease
up
season
for
the
University
they
do
have
vacancies.
I
can
rent
there,
but
they're
parking
spaces
are
all
used
up,
but
I
could
be
put
on
a
parking.
H
I
could
be
put
on
a
waiting
list
and
I
suggest
that
that's
simply
an
indication
of
what
people
want
in
the
area
and
what
401,
but
probably
experience
as
well
so
ID
I
would
anticipate
a
lot
of
using
public
the
street
parking
and
I.
Don't
think
that
you
know,
because
there's
such
a
generous
allocation
of
bicycle
space,
that's
necessarily
going
to
change
tenants
habits
in
my
own
case.
H
People
who
don't
have
a
car
or
people
who
can't
afford
it,
low-income
workers,
downtown
and
I,
don't
think
those
will
be
the
people
who
will
be
occupying
401.
So
that's
I
just
have
one
more
point:
I'm
concerned
about
I'm
eighteen
feet
away
and
I'm
concerned
about
drainage,
or
if
you
look,
this
is
what
I
you
have.
This
take
a
look
at
that
that
the
white
is
my
building
here
and
the
roof
is
a
the
half
of
the
roof
drains
to
the
east
and
the
other
half
drains
to
the
west.
H
I
have
force
coppers
on
the
west
side
of
the
building
that
come
down
and
in
the
past,
as
you
can
see,
the
north
part
all
drained
to
fourth
Street,
because
it
was
a
parking
lot.
I
can't
do
that
anymore
and
I'm
gonna
have
to
this.
It's
about
3,000
square
feet
of
roof
space.
That's
going
to
have
to
be
drained
between
these
two
buildings
and
so
I'm
very
concerned
that
that
and
I
have
garden
level
apartments
along
that
side,
and
so
I
have
to
be
really
careful
about
drainage.
A
I
Yes,
hello,
my
name
is
grandson.
My
name
is
grant
Simon's
I'm
at
1,
1
2,
7,
4th
Street,
southeast
I'm,
representing
neighbors
former
neighbors,
as
well
as
the
Minnesota
Student
Association.
At
the
event,
main
reason,
I'm
speaking
in
favor
of
this
project,
is
that
we
are
below
3%
vacancy
rate
right
now
in
the
entire
city.
The
need
for
housing
is
getting
towards
kind
of
one
of
the
highest
points
that
we've
ever
seen.
Student
housing
is
also
reaching
one
of
the
higher
points.
Having
access
to
just
more
units
in
general
would
be
great.
I
That
is
a
good
example
here
at
401
in
the
past
five
years,
but
I've
started
to
see
that
change
after
elysian
and
bridges
and
412
lofts
and
lots
of
other
apartments
that
are
much
smaller
than
this
have
already
made
a
big
impact
and
I
really
don't
see
a
big
difference
between
five
or
four
stories.
I
think
the
argument
that
you
know
the
north
side
and
the
south
side
are
our
major
difference
and
that
the
north
side
needs
to
step
down
and
I
think
is
a
little
bit
silly
with
no
offense
I.
I
I
Think
that
you
know
what's
what's
going
on
here
and
what's
going
to
go
on
in
the
future,
is
that
you
know
a
lot
of
these
buildings
that
are
on
the
north
side
of
forestry
earth,
yeah
north
side
of
force
or
university
are
starting
to
age
and
we're
gonna
maybe
see
some
tear
downs
in
the
future
so
having
a
balance
along
that
Street
is
it's
possibly
good
for
the
future
I'm?
The
last
point
that
I
make
in
favor
of
kind
of
more
bike
bike
parking
stalls
unless
car
parking
is
that
there
is
a
future.
I
You
know
parking
protected
bike
lane.
It's
gonna
go
down
for
Street
in
University,
there's
potential
for
university
and
forestry
to
have
BRT
stretching
beyond
the
river
down
from
Hennepin
as
well
as
kind
of
future
projects
with
the
university
extending
transit
along
the
way.
So
I'm
asking
for
your
support
today
at
this
project.
Thank
you
right.
A
J
My
name
is
Eric
Wonderlic
I
live
at
413,
fifth
Street
southeast
in
the
Marcy
Holmes
neighborhood
and
I'm,
also
on
the
Marcy
Holmes
Land
Use
Committee,
but
I'm
speaking
here
on
behalf
of
myself
as
a
neighbor
and
I
have
some
comments
I
prepared
here,
but
I
would
like
to
address
the
question
about
parking.
There's
this
thinking
that
by
somehow
by
not
providing
parking,
we're
going
to
force
people
onto
their
bikes
and
I
want
to
point
out
the
building
behind
me
at
419.
Sixth
Street
southeast
has
recently
been
going
through
a
renovation.
J
It
was
naturally
occurring
occurring,
affordable
housing,
primarily
one-bedroom
units
and
generally
low
income.
Working-Class
people
that
lived
there,
probably
some
TAS
and
some
people
that
work
at
the
University
they've
been
renovating
these
apartments,
the
developer
or
the
owner
of
the
building
told
us
that
he
was
bringing
in
a
quote
better
class
of
tenant.
It's
now
primarily
undergraduate
students
and
every
one
of
them
has
a
car.
J
The
parking
lot
has
probably
about
35
spaces,
and
we
would
see
on
average,
maybe
six
or
eight
cars
in
that
parking
lot
over
the
past
couple
of
years,
and
now,
just
in
the
past
four
months,
it's
got
20-plus
cars
and
the
buildings
only
half
rented
up.
So
this
idea
that
students
aren't
going
to
bring
cars
and
they're
gonna
ride
their
bikes,
just
isn't
what's
happening
in
the
neighborhood.
J
So
I
just
had
a
couple
of
observations
about
C
peds
review
on
this.
The
housing
on
this
stretch
of
University
Avenue
between
central
and
the
freeway
has
made
up
primarily
of
early
twentieth-century
duplex,
triplex
gable,
drew
of
small
apartment
buildings
plus
an
assortment
of
1960s
era.
Three-Story
apartment
buildings
situated
on
large
lots,
lots
of
open
green
space
and
that's
in
keeping
with
the
area's
designation
of
this
area
as
medium-density.
J
The
particular
block
that
this
building
is
proposed
has
two
1960's
three-story
apartment
buildings,
a
duplex
and
the
only
single
family
home
on
university
between
northeast
and
Prospect.
Park,
again,
that's
you
know
low
to
medium
density,
medium
density,
as
the
neighborhood
plan
calls
for
a
five-story
lot,
lined
a
lot
line.
43
unit
high-density
apartment
building
just
isn't
compatible
with
that
particular
bro
with
that
particular
block.
J
And
furthermore,
while
the
development
is
two
blocks
from
the
business
node
at
six
than
University,
it's
also
also
three
blocks
to
the
much
busier
intersection
of
University
and
central,
and
from
that
perspective,
it's
actually
right
in
the
middle
of
and
at
the
lowest
point
of
density
along
that
stretch
again,
just
like
the
residential
feel
that
the
neighborhood
plan
calls
for
maintaining
in
that
area.
In
its
small
area
plan,
the
only
other
five-story
apartment
building
on
that
stretch,
each
stretch
of
university
is
at
600
University
at
1960.
J
Building,
a
lot
that
that
building
is
on
is
almost
twice
the
sizes
of
the
lot
at
4:01.
It's
surrounded
by
at
least
35
parking
spaces,
and
that
is
in
an
area
that's
designated
as
high-density
in
the
neighborhood
plan
and
it's
directly
adjacent
to
an
industrial
property.
So
again,
I.
Don't
think
that
that's
fair
to
compare
that
building
to
what's
happening
on
the
other
side
of
university.
J
It
really
is
a
different
feel
one
side
to
the
other
of
university,
and
it
is
the
defining
corridor
in
the
neighborhood
small
area
plan
and
again
I
serve
on
the
Land
Use
Committee.
The
developer
did
come
to
our
meetings
regularly.
We
offered
all
kinds
of
feedback
about
changes
that
he
could
make
to
that
building.
That
would
be
acceptable
to
the
neighborhood,
the
that
there's
nothing
particularly
unique
about
this
lot.
That
would
necessitate
granting
the
variance
for
a
five-story
building
other
than
the
numbers.
J
Don't
work
that
to
me
speaks
that
it's
an
economic
consideration
which
isn't
really
what
the
conditional
use
permit
is
all
about
that
that
was
completely
evident
either
the
building's
too
big
or
the
Lots
too
small
it
just
it
doesn't
fit.
So,
on
the
other
hand,
has
been
mentioned
here
by
reducing
by
reducing
the
building
to
four
storeys,
it
kind
of
boots,
the
other
questions
about
parking
in
the
floor
area
ratio.
So
I
would
ask
that
you
deny
the
conditional
use
for
the
four
for
the
five
storeys.
Thank
you
all
right.
Thank.
A
C
K
K
K
L
K
Density,
if
you
could
just
talk
through
that
again
and
and
what
I
am
wondering
is
you
know,
this
is
a
building
of
of
one
bedrooms
and
studios
and
I
want
to
just
understand
how
the
density
is
measured
for
purposes
of
the
plan
and
how
that
relates
to
the
actual
occupancy
for
building.
So,
for
example,
of
all
these
are
two
bedrooms
and
there
were
theory,
theoretically
the
same
occupancy
for
the
building,
but
I
don't
know
forty
percent
fewer
units.
How
would
that
change
the
equation?.
C
Well,
so
for
in
terms
of
density
for
the
small
area
plan
and
also
for
the
zoning
code,
we're
just
looking
strictly
at
dwelling
units
per
acre,
so
doesn't
get
it
occupancy
at
all.
So
presumably
it
would
be
one
maybe
two
people
per
unit,
but
we're
really
not
looking
at
that.
So
the
small
area
plan
does
call
for
medium
density
in
this
area.
This
qualifies
as
very
high
density
because
there's
smaller
smaller
units,
then
maybe
otherwise
would
be
looked
at
for
medium
density,
housing
and.
C
M
M
C
C
M
C
A
M
I
just
want
to
know
if
I
can
make
it
friendly
amendment
to
condition
number
two
to
increase
the
number
of
bicycle
parking
spaces.
It
seems
like
we're
having
I'm
building
with
this
many
units,
and
the
idea
is
that
there'll
be
a
bike.
Lane
going
nearby
I'd
be
nice
if
it
was
a
higher
number
of
people
that
could
visit
tenants
of
this
I'm
wondering
if
we
could
possibly
just
say
you
know,
for
example,
16
bicycle
parking
spaces
along
the
public
right
away.
You
know
I'm,
indifferent
as
to
where,
but
as
long
as
they're
accessible
I'll.
K
A
All
right,
so
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
to
amend,
condition,
number
two
to
increase
the
number
of
bike:
bicycle
parking
spaces
and
Commissioner
Lukey
P,
or
how
many
were
you
proposing
to
increase
okay
16?
So
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
to
increase
the
number
of
bicycle
parking
spaces.
Just
16.
Is
there
any
further
discussion
on
that
amendment?
A
A
M
A
L
A
To
approve
the
conditional
use
permit
is
there
any
further
discussion
on
that?
I
can
add,
since
a
few
of
the
speakers
talked
about
that,
I
do
think
you
know
five
stories
in
this
location,
particularly
as
Commissioner
Rockwell
pointed
out.
The
actual
height
of
the
building
is
about
four
feet
less
than
the
maximum
height
in
feet.
That's
allowed.
The
reason
for
the
triggering
the
conditional
use
permit
has
to
do
with
with
the
number
of
storeys
I
think
at
this
location,
since
it
is
directly
adjacent
to
an
activity
center.
A
Five
storeys
is
generally
consistent
with
the
character
of
the
area,
particularly
when
you
look
at
the
surrounding
types
of
structures.
As
one
of
the
speakers
pointed
out,
there
is
a
proposal
for
much
more
dense
development
just
across
the
street
from
here.
So
I
think
we
do
have
the
policy
direction
to
to
support
a
building
of
this
height
at
this
location.
So
if
there
is
no
further
discussion,
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
clerk.
Please
call
the
roll
Dignan.
F
M
A
A
B
A
E
L
E
What
is
left
for
the
site
on
the
setback
on
the
east
side
that
was
brought
back
to
the
the
true
setback.
We
wouldn't
be
able
to
have
two
rows
of
compact
parking
in
a
in
and
the
required
aisle.
Well
one
of
the
differences
if
it
was
a
four-story
building
which
actually
we
would
be
under
the
height,
we
would
would
only
need
an
11
foot
setback,
but
that's
why
we
need
that
additional
footing.
That.
A
D
F
A
A
F
A
K
Very
briefly,
you
know,
I
just
would
echo
chair
Browns
comments
on
the
the
Cu
P,
where
you
know,
I
think
this
is
a
weird
part
of
our
zoning
code
that
we
have
both
a
height
in
stories
and
a
height
in
feet
and
I
think
that
it
causes
unnecessary
distress
and
I
hope
that
we
move
away
from
that
in
our
policy
guidance
in
the
next
comprehensive
plan.
But
you
know
this
this
well.
This
is
a
an
increase
in
density.
The
box
is
essentially
as
a
right
in
zoning
code.
If
we're
measuring
the
feet.
A
B
A
A
N
K
There
are
multiple
buses
that
take
you
to
multiple
parts
of
the
city
and
it's
also
a
really
walkable
neighborhood
and
as
we
move
towards
thinking
long-term
about
the
future
I,
you
know
we
do
need
to
start
utilizing
those
other
forms
of
transportation
in
this
city
more
and
as
we
think
about
our
impacts
on
climate.
You
know
at
our
last
committee
the
whole
meeting.
L
A
A
A
M
Don't
think
that
that's
necessarily
a
good
thing,
especially
given
the
concerns
of
the
neighborhood
about
massing
in
bulk.
The
neighborhood
itself
has
mentioned
on
at
least
in
the
letter
and
in
testimony
about
wanting
brick
I'm
not
going
to
mandate
brick,
but
I
do
think,
though,
there's
a
matter
of
at
least
holding
him
to
the
minimum
standard.
We
would
require
for
quality
of
materials
in
the
built
environment.
So
that
would
be
my
finding
so.
A
C
C
L
C
A
Right
so
we
can,
we
can
clarify
the
original
motion.
Then
we
can
say
was
to
approve
the
site
plan
review
with
a
modification
to
condition
9,
stating
that
the
maximum
percentage
of
fiber
cement
siding
on
the
east
elevation
shall
not
exceed
30%
and
the
maximum
percentage
of
fiber
emits
fiber
cement.
Siding
on
the
west
house.
Asians
should
not
exceed
30%
all
right.
Is
there
any
further
discussion
hearing.