►
From YouTube: August 9, 2018 Zoning & Planning Committee
Description
Minneapolis Zoning & Planning Committee Meeting
A
Good
morning,
I'm
gonna
call
to
order
the
regular
meeting
of
the
zoning
and
planning
committee
for
Thursday
August
9th.
My
name
is
Jeremy
Schrader
and
I'm.
The
chair
of
the
committee
with
me
at
the
Dyess,
our
council
member,
Ellison,
Reich
and
Goodman,
and
we're
also
joined
by
councilmember
Fletcher.
Let
the
record
reflect
that
we
have
a
quorum.
We
have
10
items
on
the
agenda
today,
including
two
quasi
judicial
hearings.
A
Five
through
seven
are
their
pre
approving
of
the
rezoning
applications
at
3421,
Westlake
Street,
the
1400
block
of
Nicollet
Avenue
and
30:41
Holmes
Avenue
south
respectively
item
8
is
the
denying
of
a
rezoning
application
at
5,400,
34th
Avenue
south
by
an
and
item
9
is
the
approving
of
a
Street
vacation
application
submitted
by
central
Lutheran
Church
for
a
portion
of
East
15th
Street
between
3rd
Avenue,
South
and
Clinton
Avenue
and
4th
Avenue
south.
Are
there
any
questions
or
comments
from
committee
members
on
any
of
these
items?
B
Thank
You
chair
Schrader
committee
members,
miss
Wallace.
The
staff
person
on
this
project
is
out
of
the
office
today,
I'll
be
pen
shedding.
This
is
an
appeal
filed
by
the
Abdulla
property
for
lots
located
at
415
and
417
Taylor
Street
northeast
the
are
to
be
zoned.
Properties
are,
as
you
can
see,
map
uniquely
shaped.
They
have
frontage
on
three
streets
and
are
also
adjacent
to
a
railroad
corridor.
B
B
E
B
The
applicant
proposes
six
dwelling
units
on
the
site,
all
detached,
because
some
of
the
Lots
on
the
on
the
property
are
proposed
for
the
property
would
not
have
frontage
on
a
street.
The
project
has
to
be
developed
as
a
cluster
development
which
allows
for
flexibility
from
the
street
frontage
requirement,
as
well
as
some
other
standards
in
the
zoning
code.
B
B
Again,
the
appeal
is
related
to
the
garages,
including
conditions
of
approval
recommended
by
a
staff
and
largely
accepted
by
the
Planning
Commission.
That
would
limit
the
extent
to
which
garages
could
extend
toward
the
street
in
front
of
the
habitable
portion
of
the
structures,
as
well
as
limit
how
much
of
the
street
frontage
those
garages
could
could
take
up
to.
B
Commission
granted
some
significant
alternative
compliance
for
several
aspects
of
the
proposal.
The
garage
the
garage
proposals
as
designed
would
need
both
flexibility
from
a
single
family
home
standards
if
these
were
being
developed
as
single-family
homes,
as
well
as
the
cycle
interview
standards
there
that
are
applicable
to
cluster
developments.
The
Planning
Commission
did
recognize
that
a
couple
of
the
structures
are
facing
a
railroad
corridor
and
again
do
not
have
Street
frontage,
so
they
exempted
those
from
the
standards.
F
B
A
D
In
question,
so
just
to
kind
of
with
to
give
you
to
give
you
a
little
bit
of
a
background
for
this
lot
in
question.
This
property
has
been
vacant
for
over
close
to
30
years.
Well,
over
20
years
it's
been
acquired
by
the
city,
I
want
to
say,
1988
and
then
89
was
demolished,
and
so
the
property's
been
vacant
since
1989,
and
it
would
be
a
really
good
property
for
our
family
for
multi-generational
family
that
we
want
to
built
for
this
property
and
make
it
our
final
home
destination
for
our
family
and
for
our
kids.
G
G
G
G
We're
asking
the
city
to
need
zoning,
a
Planning
Commission
to
allows
us
to
keep
the
proposed
garages
as
we
proposed
it
and
to
remove
conditions.
2
&
4
from
the
permitting
we're
very
excited
to
build
our
first
homes
here
in
the
Atlas,
and
we
feel
that
our
design
it
will
not
cause
any
harm
or
disharmony
in
the
neighborhood
and
that
we
have
the
full
support
of
the
Neighborhood
Association.
G
Actually,
one
of
the
one
of
our
future
neighbors
is
here
today
and
he's
here
to
support
our
design
and
the
neighborhood.
We
had
a
letter
sent
to
us
and
the
person
that's
the
head
of
the
Neighborhood
Association
was
going
to
be
here
today,
but
he
could
make
it
so
we're
really
excited
and
we
appreciate
your
support.
Thank
you.
D
Why
we
wanted
to
propose
this
type
of
design
is
that
we
want
to
take
advantage
of
the
city's
encouragement
of
wanting
to
increase
minority
public.
You
know
minority
owned
home
owners
and
you
know
take
advantage
of
that
and
also
the
uniqueness
of
this
lot
itself.
It
would
be
really
good
fit
for
our
family,
our
unique
family
size
as
well,
because
we
are
like
a
dimension.
We
want
to
build
a
multi-generational
homes
for
our
parents
as
well.
That's
going
to
be
part
of
this
residence
here
and
also
the
large
need
for
our
family.
D
We've
been
here
in
the
state
of
Minnesota
for
about
25
years.
This
was
a
really
vision
of
our
mother.
When
we
came
here
first
in
early
nineteen
nineteen
nineties
and
just
to
see
that
that
actually
could
happen,
it's
really
an
amazing
opportunity
for
her
to
be
partaking
in
that
interest.
To
you
know,
she's,
given
up
a
lot
of
her
life
and
her
time
for
us
to
you,
know,
make
something
of
ourselves
and
go
to
school,
and
you
know
do
all
that
stuff.
So
we
would
love
to
really
give
her
that
gift
to
be
able
to.
D
You
know
see
how
her
dreams
come
through
and
then
the
other
thing
that
I
want
to
mention
in
to
let
you
guys
know
is
that
I
know
there's
been
a
lot
of
mention
above
the
the
uniqueness
of
this
lot
and
then
the
family,
and
you
know
it's.
We
are
such
a
large
family,
each
house,
it
is
yes,
they
are
a
little
bit
bigger
than
as
mentioned,
but
reasons
why
there
are
beards
because
of
the
need
of
the
size
of
the
family.
For
many
years
we
ended
up.
D
You
know,
usually
one
thing
like
two
different
apartments
just
to
house
the
family
size.
You
know,
so
some
of
us
have
at
least
five
six
kids
and,
as
you
can
see
you
don't
you
need
space
on
that
and
you
need
space
for
storage
and
for
this
property
doesn't
really
give
us
much
of
just
the
uniqueness
of
it
and
the
shape
of
it
doesn't
really
give
us
much
of
a
space
for
storage
since
there's
no
alley
back
there
to
do.
You
know
to
park
your
car,
but
also
to
do
your.
D
You
know
your
recycle,
abandon
your
bicycles
and
all
the
things
that
you
also
will
need
to
you
know
to
at
the
house
for
that.
So
that's
why
we
are
asking
we
did.
Try
played
with
so
many
different
styles
of
redesigning
it
and
is
here
today
chicken
answer
some
questions
that
you
know
some
of
the
designs.
Why
couldn't
work?
We
didn't
really
try
to
work
with
the
city
and
the
zoning
and
try
to
come
up
a
different
way
without
losing
so
much
of
the
space
that
we
need
for
their
family
to
accomplish.
A
We'll
be
opening
the
public
hearing
two
in
a
second,
so
I
think,
okay,
you
can
wait
one
second,
if
that's
great,
no
I
I,
remember
that,
so
there
are
no
questions.
I'm
going
to
now
open
the
hearing
to
the
public.
Please
limit
comments
to
two
minutes
per
person,
which
will
be
tracked
by
the
timer
by
the
clerk.
If
you
want
to
come
on
up.
H
I've
been
going
to
Bell
Tommy
meetings
and
the
council
meetings
for
years
and
I've
seen
many
projects
come
and
go
for
this
property
and
they've
always
ended
up
to
be
much
ado
about
nothing
and
I.
I
think
we're
very
lucky
to
have
a
quality
family
like
the
race-blind
to
build
her
I
want
to
thank
the
abilities
for
hanging
in
there.
I
know
it's
been
over
a
year
and
I
would
like
to
also
thank
city
staff.
I
know
they
work
hard
and
it's
been
a
thankless
job
for
them.
H
I'm
proud
to
live
in
Minneapolis
I
think
it's
one
of
the
best
one
cities
in
North,
America
and
I
admire
the
rules
and
regulations
that
make
the
city
what
what
it
is,
but
I
I
think
there's
a
time
for
even
excellent
rules
and
regulations
to
relax
a
little.
If
there's
a
greater
good
and
I
think
this
is
a
greater
good.
The
abilities
would
make
any
neighborhood
a
better
place.
Everybody
and
the
council
in
the
neighborhood
wants
them
even
jacob
frye
when
he
was
council.
H
I
You,
mr.
chair,
so
we
sold
this
property
to
the
Abdullah's
a
year
ago
and
they
had
a
very
large
group
of
family
members
in
front
of
the
Community
Development
Committee
at
that
time,
and
we
knew
that
this
property
had
been
on
the
market
for
30
years
and
we
knew
they
had
a
large
family
and
we
knew
they
wanted
to
do
a
cluster
development.
So
these
are
all
things
that
came
into
play
and
were
discussed
at
the
time
we
sold
them
the
land,
and
so
given
that
this
is
a
unique
parcel.
I
That
also
has
some
that
don't
have
front
yards,
others
that
do
I
think
there
are
circumstances
unique
to
the
property
that
would
allow
us
to
grant
their
appeal.
So
I'm
gonna
move
to
grant
their
appeal
and
direct
staff
to
issue
findings.
Should
they
be
needed
based
on
the
fact
that
this
property
is
unique
in
the
way
it
is
configured.
I
J
Thank
you
very
much
thanks
for
giving
me
the
opportunity
to
speak
mr.
chair
I
just
want
to
thank
the
Abdullah
family
for
their
persistence.
Councilmember
Goodman,
really,
you
know
really
said
it
right
that
this
was
a
project
that
came
to
us
with
a
really
creative
idea
for
a
really
challenging
site.
Some,
you
know
it's
we're
very
lucky:
I,
think
that
that
you've
come
in
and
and
seen
the
potential
in
this
site
for
your
family
and
and
found
a
creative
way
to
to
make
this
location
work.
J
The
city
council
was
actually
pulling
everybody
together
to
try
to
talk
about
this
project,
and
you
know
at
that
time
we
really
I
think
we
ran
into
some
real
challenges
with
the
way
we've
defined
cluster
developments
and
and
the
way
the
family
wanted
to
use
the
site
and
I
want
to
really
thank
city
staff
for
coming
as
far
as
they
have
in
really
figuring
out
ways
to
solve
these
problems.
I
think
we've
actually
gotten
to
a
very
good
place,
and
this
is
the
very
last
little
step
here
so
I'm
excited
to
see
this
come
through.
J
A
Great,
thank
you.
No
one
else
has
anything
sad
I'd
like
to
kind
of
chime
in
and
I
also
want
to
thank
the
Abdullah
family
kind
of
for
the
for
your
patience
and
for
coming
to
bring
this
back.
As
you
know,
I
voted
against
this
and
the
Planning
Commission
and
today
I'll
be
reversing
that
I
appreciate
I,
think
the
concern
when
we
looked
at
this
in
Planning
Commission.
The
idea
was
really
you
know
this.
This
is
a
great
project
we
want
to
go
through.
City
staff
has
worked
really
hard.
A
The
families
worked
really
hard,
but
there's
just
issues
with
it
being
a
cluster
development
and
also
kiddie.
We
almost
look
like
a
sent
single
family
home
and
with
the
the
garages,
and
we
did.
We
have
to
think
about
the
whole
city
about
what
precedents
were
setting
but
through
through
the
work
of
the
family
through
the
work
of
councilmember
Fletcher,
as
well
as
the
city
staff.
This
truly
is
a
unique
property
and
those
well.
What
will
be
said
here
will
be
truly
unique
to
that
property.
A
So
I'm
happy
to
be
voting
in
favor
I'll,
be
supporting
councilmember
Goodman's
motion
as
well.
Thank
you
with
that.
Councilmember
Gooden
Goodman's
motion
is
before
this
all
those
in
favor
and
this
is
to
make
sure
to
grant
the
appeal
all
those
in
favor
say:
aye
aye,
all
those
opposed
with
that
the
motion
carries.
K
This
project
came
before
the
City
Planning
Commission
on
July
16th
and
sought
several
land
use
application
approvals
at
that
time,
including
a
rezoning
for
all
parcels
to
the
c3a
which
will
be
before
you
today.
Additionally,
the
project
was
seeking
a
conditional
use
permit
to
increase
the
maximum
building
height,
as
well
as
several
variances,
including
a
variance
to
increase
the
maximum
floor
area
ratio
and
a
variance
to
reduce
the
minimum
side
yard
along
the
north
interior
property
line.
K
As
a
result
of
that
concern,
staff
recommended
denial
of
the
project
at
the
City
Planning
Commission
meeting
the
City
Planning
Commission,
notwithstanding
staff
recommendation
approved
all
of
the
applications,
with
the
exception
of
a
variance
to
increase
the
maximum
height
of
a
fence
along
the
north
property
line.
That
application
was
denied
the
City
Planning
Commission
additionally
attached
several
conditions
of
approval,
both
to
the
conditional
use,
permit
application
and
the
site
plan
review
application,
and
that
is
the
subject
of
the
appeal
this
morning.
K
So
the
first
are
one
of
the
conditions
of
approval
that
was
placed
on
the
project
by
the
City
Planning
Commission
is
regarding
the
access
to
the
parking,
the
enclosed
parking
structure
at
grade.
The
project
was
proposing
parking
access
off
of
both
Harriet
Avenue
South
and
the
adjoining
alley
to
the
east.
K
The
Planning
Commission
imposed
a
condition
that
the
project
remove
the
parking
access
along
the
Harriet
Avenue
entrance
and
replace
that
with
walk-up
residential
units,
which
are
proposed
just
to
the
south
of
that
parking
entrance
city
staff
have
conferred
I
have
conferred
with
Public
Works
on
that
issue,
and
we
do
feel
like
that
would
be
problematic
for
the
operations
of
the
projects.
Given
the
conditions
of
bed
joining
alley,
it's
a
very
narrow
alley
and
feel
that
that
appeal
is
reasonable.
K
Considering
the
operations
of
the
project,
the
father
appeal
that
or
the
other
application
that
was
recommended
for
denial
at
the
City
Planning
Commission
regards
a
fence,
height
location
along
the
north
property
line.
The
proposed
fence
is
six
feet.
The
maximum
height
of
that
fence
is
four
feet,
and
that
has
to
do
with
how
close
the
adjoining
residential
property
is.
To
that
north
property
line,
there's
a
two-story
four
unit
apartment
building,
located
about
three
feet
from
that
adjoining
property
line
on
the
north.
K
As
a
result
of
that
concern,
the
City
Planning
Commission
recommended
a
condition
of
approval
that
the
project
setback
the
upper
storey
by
10
feet
along
the
North
property
line
to
allow
for
additional
solar
access
to
some
of
those
properties
immediately
to
the
north
that
are
of
a
much
lower
scale.
I
should
note
that
staff
also
expressed
concern
in
the
site
plan,
review
analysis
and
conditional
use
permit
in
the
staff
report
that
I
think
led
to
this
condition
by
the
City
Planning
Commission.
So
we
are
supportive
of
that.
K
Another
conditional
approval
placed
on
the
site
plan
review
is
dealing
with
the
amount
of
fiber
cement
along
the
North
elevation.
The
project
is
in
excess
of
the
maximum
30
percent.
On
that
elevation
and
another
site
plan
review
condition
of
approval
concerned
the
amount
of
windows
along
the
Harriet
Avenue
ground
floor
elevation.
The
project
is
required
to
provide
30%
windows
along
that
elevation
and
they
are
not
meeting
that.
I
should
note
that
that
is
a
standard
that
we
rarely
see.
K
Projects
have
trouble
meeting,
so
staff
is
supportive
of
that
condition
of
approval
as
well,
and
then,
lastly
and
I'm.
Sorry
I,
don't
have
an
image
of
this,
but
the
Planning
Commission
also
imposed
a
site
plan,
review
condition
of
approval
regarding
the
ground
floor
elevation
along
the
alley
and
that
the
applicant
implement
windows
along
that
elevation
to
alleviate
a
blank
wall,
condition
and.
A
You
are
there
any
questions
well,
just
to
clarify
a
little
bit.
I
just
want
to
say
that
your
mr.
Crandall,
you
are
exactly
right
that
at
least
at
least
for
myself
and
other
members
that
it
is
a
big
deal
to
go
against
the
vote
of
the
city
staff
recommendation
and
the
conditions
we
imposed.
Specifically
the
10-foot
setback
was
a
big
deal
was
a
way
to
try
and
hope.
What
we
see
is
a
good
project
that
just
isn't
there
yet
hopefully
get
there.
A
So
I
think
that
that's
and
I'm,
basically
just
saying
that
for
my
colleagues
benefit
but
and
to
clarify
that
that
is
where
we
were
going
with,
that
there
are
no
other
questions,
I'm
going
to
give
the
applicant
a
chance
to
speak.
Is
there
someone
here,
if
you
can
say
your
name
and
address
for
the
other
record,
please.
C
L
C
And
the
design
implementation
we
feel
indulge
me
mr.
chair
a
very
quick
background.
As
mr.
Crandall
pointed
out,
we
have
111
units
100%,
affordable
in
a
neighborhood
that
has
not
seen
much
affordable
in
the
last
ten
years.
Most
of
what's
been
on,
the
Greenway
near
Bonn
has
been
market
right
in
highmarket
rate.
This
will
be
ultimately
the
first
of
two
phases.
We
now
have
control
of
both
sides
of
Harriet
and
that
bears
on
the
history
of
the
project.
C
But
for
this
specific
location,
we
are
going
to
be
providing
nine
supportive
units
at
30%
AMI
with
a
target
toward
homeless
veterans,
and
that
will
be
the
same
in
both
sides
so
phase.
One
of
these
two
will
serve
18
homeless
veterans
if
the
implementation
is
provided.
Each
of
our
projects,
as
is
typical
with
our
developments,
will
have
the
usual
lead
type
amenities
in
this
particular
design.
We
have
two
green
roofs,
one
on
the
upper
deck
and
one
on
the
first
floor
above
the
ground
floor
units
and
the
common
areas.
C
We
have
hope
for
a
40
kW
solar
system.
We
are
one
of
the
few
developers
in
the
country
that
have
actually
figured
out
how
to
do
a
tax
credit
solar
system
in
an
affordable
project.
They
were
actually
conflicting
tax
credits
and
we
have
figured
out
a
structure
to
do
it.
This
will
be
our
fourth
such
solar
project.
If
we're
able
to
do
it,
we
also
have
the
usual
energy-efficient
amenities.
We
run
through
Excel
energy
programs,
and
we,
though
we
don't
put
a
lead
stamp
on
it,
we
do
everything
that
is
typically
required.
C
We
just
don't
need
the
plaque
on
the
wall
on
the
extra
quarter
million
dollars
of
expense
that
goes
with
it
all
of
our
buildings,
market
rate
or
affordable
have
no
difference
in
our
amenity
package.
We
just
don't
believe
in
doing
amenities
differently.
So
it's
for
us.
It's
important
to
have
community
room
fitness
room
business
center,
all
the
amenities
in
a
affordable
building
that
a
market
rate
building
should
have,
and
that's
what
we
think
is
one
of
the
issues
at
risk.
F
C
When
we
talk
about
the
setback
that
the
Planning
Commission
put
on
the
project,
the
history
with
the
neighborhood
is,
we
actually
started
a
design
in
January
of
2016,
so
we've
had
30
months
of
community
review.
We
actually
were
starting
on
the
west
side
of
Harriet,
with
a
130
that
flew
over
the
alley.
Councilmember
Penner
didn't
like
that
design
or
did
the
neighborhood,
so
we
scaled
it
back
for
two
blocks
under
contract
and
are
now
before
you
with
two
separate
phases
to
reduce
the
massing
on
Lake
Street.
C
It's
important
to
note
that,
along
that
30
month,
discussion
with
neighborhood
groups,
we
made
a
significant
number
of
amenity
and
changes
to
the
design
that
list
includes
and
it's
in
your
packet
from
our
public
hearing,
we
put
a
transit,
shelter
integrated
into
the
building
along
Lake
Street.
We
revised
the
streetscape
and
a
landscape
plan
to
meet
the
Lynn
Lake
Business
Association
standard
plan.
We
put
a
retail
component
in
the
site,
even
though
it's
ideally
not
perfect.
In
an
affordable
housing
project,
we
did
fit
a
retail
component
in.
We
were
able
to
get
Whittier
alliances.
C
Support
for
this
project.
Those
of
you
who
have
some
history
in
the
council
know
Whittier
has
never
really
embraced
putting
more
affordable
in
their
neighborhood.
They
feel
they're
over
concentrated
to
get
their
support.
We
work
very
hard
to
get
there
at
the
public
hearing,
we
had
the
Lynn
Lake
Business
Association,
some
owners
of
the
property
and
the
VFW
here
to
testify
in
support
their
testimony
is
in
your
record.
C
Overall,
we've
had
12
different
community
meetings
and
met
with
12
different
public
officials
over
the
last
30
months
to
get
to
the
project
where
we're
at
the
CEO
piece
set
back
I'd
like
to
talk
briefly
about
that
and
I
just
want
to
put
this
comment
on
the
record.
If
we
want
or
affordable
housing
we're
going
to
have
to
embrace
how
we
build
affordably,
that's
really.
C
Issue
and
councilmember
Goodman,
you
have
four
years
when
I've
come
before
you
in
Sidi
committee
asks
how
do
I
get
my
cost
per
point
lower
than
some
of
the
other
projects
that
you've
seen
and
this
this
point
of
discussion
will
reveal
some
of
our
trade
secrets.
We
pay
attention
to
things
like
units
that
stack.
C
We
pay
attention
and
not
having
to
alter
Ruth's
lines
and
water
proofing
so
that
they
become
expensive.
The
10-foot
setback
in
this
particular
scenario
costs
us
anywhere
from
two
to
four
units.
Depending
upon
the
reconfiguration,
that's
about
three
hundred
and
seventy-five
thousand
dollars
of
hit
to
my
net
operating
income.
It
cost.
F
C
150
thousand
for
rerouting
plumbing
for
units
and
now
do
not
stack
correctly,
the
cost
of
another
150
thousand
for
Ruth,
terminations
and
waterproofing.
That
now
has
to
be
customized
on
that
setback
and
I
lose
either
the
green
roof
or
the
solar
system,
because
I
don't
have
enough
room
to
meet
the
oceans
to
get
around
either
one
or
the
other.
So
that's
you
know
a
small
$75,000.
C
F
I
just
want
to
walk
through
quickly
the
diagrams
we
have
on
the
screen
and
they're,
also
in
the
public
record
with
the
clerk.
This
is
the
proposed
six
story,
so
you
see
the
terrace
here,
a
club
room,
the
saw
facing
the
north
property
line
unit
here
stacks
below
all
these
units
are
stacking
with
the
floors
below.
If
you
look
at
this
next
diagram,
which
shows
the
10-foot
setback,
Steve
had
pointed
all
of
these
things
out,
waterproofing
this
area
losing
that
roof
on
the
upper
level
and
then
reconfiguring
all
these
spaces.
C
F
On
the
screen,
you'll
see
the
proposed
building.
These
three
images
are
from
the
original
proposed
building
on
here,
you'll
see
the
10-foot
setback
and
the
red
line
is
showing
the
extents
of
where
the
shadow
Cass,
so
that
the
10-foot
setback
I
mean
it's
basically
unnoticeable,
where
the
shadow
falls
with
it
with
the
proposed
project
and
with
the
templates
that
back.
C
Mr.
chairman
I'll
just
point
out:
we've
been
through
two
committees
of
the
whole
with
the
staff
and
the
Planning
Commission
before
we
got
to
the
formal
public
hearing,
and
so
if
these
issues
had
been
articulated
in
greater
detail
to
us
during
committee
of
the
whole,
we
you
know,
maybe
we
would
have
made
a
different
orientation
develop,
but
we
did
and
put
into
the
record
six
mitigating
issues
with
regard
to
the
set
back
into
the
record
and
Commission
didn't
take
any
of
those
into
consideration
which
I
regret.
C
We
don't
want
to
lose
the
community
room
and
we
don't
want
to
lose
the
deck
amenity.
I
think
that's
an
important
part
of
an
affordable
housing
project.
They
should
have
the
same
amenities
as
our
market
right-tail
does,
and
all
of
the
Lake
Street
in
the
2040
plan
is
guided
for
six
storeys
and
so
I
think.
What's
what
is
going
to
happen?
Is
these
duplexes
between
Lake
Street
and
29.if
they're
all
going
to
become
part
of
a
redevelopment
effort?
Otherwise
why
would
you
have
put
six
storey
height
up
and
down
the
lake
street
corner?
C
And
so
that's
my
point
about
the
CEP
I'll
talk
briefly
about
the
variance
for
the
height
on
the
fence.
We
think
there
was
our.
There
are
three
elements
on
the
north
side
of
the
building
that
are
worth
screening.
There's
an
emergency
elevator
generator,
there's
an
electrical
transformer
and
there's
a
dog
run.
Now
we're
happy
to
work
with
the
sea
pet
staff
to
come
up
with
a
different
fence
material,
that's
more
opaque,
but
I
think
we're
we're
hurting
the
neighbor
by
not
screening
some
of
those
less
attractive
items.
C
C
F
F
We
have
39%
but
as
you'll
see
for
all
three
other
elevations,
we
have
far
less
material
of
this
fiber
cement,
so
we're
asking
for
alternative
compliance
because
we
see
this
project
as
not
a
math
exercise
of
how
much
you
know
percentage
you
have
on
each
elevation,
but
what
material
composition
works
for
the
design,
intent
the
projections
and
a
massing
of
the
project.
So
again,
if
we
really
needed
to
distribute
nine
percent,
we
could,
but
we
just
feel
like
the
project
does
comply
overall.
So
that's
regarding
the
material
percentages.
F
Mr.
Crandall
briefly
touched
upon
the
axis
on
Harriet
as
you'll.
Probably
remember,
Harriet
is
a
one-way
north
and
then
we
have
a
very
narrow
alley.
So
what
commissioners
were
asking
us
to
do
was
to
get
rid
of
these
stalls
here,
which
we
felt
was
was
problematic,
limiting
more
parking
and
then
put
all
of
the
vehicular
traffic
on
the
alley
and,
as
mr.
Crandall
pointed
out,
public
works
is
not
in
support
of
that.
We
will
be
able
to
meet
the
requirement
for
glazing
along
Harriet's,
even
with
keeping
the
garage
entrance.
F
So
in
the
red
there
you'll
see
again
we
we
had
a
long
conversation
and
came
to
this
I
guess
conclusion
that
we
would
put
murals
along
a
lien
and
work
with
the
neighborhood
to
do
that,
and
this
site
plan
item
is
really
about
aesthetics
and
articulation
and
not
about
seeing
into
the
garage
into
the
parking
ramp.
So
we'd
ask
that
we
are
able
to
provide
articulation
and
interest
along
the
alley
with
these
murals
I.
Think
that's
our
last
item
right.
C
But
sure
I'll,
just
close
to
the
point
that
Gretchen
just
made
in
the
alley
the
murals
was
a
concession
to
the
neighborhood
group,
I'm
happy
to
put
glass
block
there
I'm
just
concerned
open
or
windows.
Looking
in
in
a
parking
garage,
it's
not
a
safe
condition,
but
have
to
be
if,
if
it's,
if
it's
a
design.
F
C
Like
Gretchen
offered,
which
I
think
this
really
is
all
about
glass
block,
we've
done
in
several
other
buildings,
but
I
think
the
murals
would
be
interesting.
They
were
done
in
line
two
blocks
away
and
we'll
find
a
local
artist
to
do
it.
I
just
like
to
offer
and
close.
We
are
really
excited
about
doing
an
affordable
project
in
this
community.
We're
way
more
excited
about
doing
two
phases
than
just
one
and
we're
particularly
proud
of
the
partnership
that
we
have
with
the
balance.
C
I
can
VFW,
we've
entered
into
a
Memorandum
of
Understanding
with
them
to
help
us
locate
and
tie
into
the
community,
these
homeless
veterans
and
it's
a
pilot
program
for
this
project,
we'll
duplicate
it
across
the
street,
but
we're
also
talking
with
them
about
doing
it
on
our
snowing
Yards
project
in
Hiawatha
corridor,
very
close
to
the
VA,
so
we're
anxious
to
get
that
in
the
ground
and
we
hope
you'll
support
this
project
so
that
we
have
that
the
economic
tools
to
get
it
into
the
ground
and
spring.
Thank
you
thank.
A
You
are
there
any
questions
or
comments
for
the
applicant
I've
got
a
couple.
Just
a
you'd
mention
a
lot
about
the.
What
would
happen
in
Planning
Commission
like
to
address
some
of
that,
like
first,
the
setback
I
part
of
the
we
very
much
understand
very
much
want
an
affordable
project
there
to
go
through
and
understand
the
the
financial
hit
you'll
be
taking
with
asking
for
this
setback.
A
Part
of
that
was
why
we
asked
one
of
the
other
conditions
was
to
have
to
reduce
the
parking
that
was
needed
and
the
idea
that
you
could
put
more
units
down
there
that
you
can
continue
your
stacking.
You
could
continue
to
do
everything
that
you've
talked
about,
but
be
able
to
make
up
that
some
of
that
finances
there.
That
doesn't
help
you
on
the
waterproofing,
but
it
is
some
way
that
I
think
the
Planning
Commission
was
really
trying
to
make
sure
that
this
goes
through
still
and
still
address
the
the
bigger
issue.
A
How
you
talk
about
the
shadowing
and
also
brought
up
the
comp
plan,
and
the
reality
is
that
it's
not
2040.
You
know
this
plan
is
420
you're,
not
building.
Next
to
a
five-story
building,
you're,
not
building
next
to
a
four-story
building,
you're
building
next
to
a
two-story
building
and
that's
the
big
part
of
it,
and
so
we
have
to
think
about
how
we
grow
and
I
think
for
myself
and
others
on
the
Planning
Commission.
That
was
a
big
factor
in
that
I.
Don't
know
if
I
would
I'll
give
you
the
opportunity
to
address
well.
C
Mr.
chairman,
it's
an
interesting
point.
Unfortunately,
the
walk-up
unit
add-on,
when
you
have
a
correction,
if
you
could
put
the
william
configuration
back
up
so
the
loss
of
the
three
parking
space
is
not
withstanding.
If
you
put
the
units,
let's
say
that
the
in
determine
alignment
now
you've
got
a
real
circulation
problem
within
the
first
floor
parking
and
it
makes
for
a
really
challenging
turn
to
get
to
the
lower
level
or
the
majority.
C
The
parking
is
plus
state
code
requires
no
greater
than
75
feet
of
exit
path
for
every
door,
and
so
we
don't
have
it
completely
joining,
but
you
can
see
there's
a
corridor
that
serves
those
three
units.
Well
now,
I
actually
have
to
build
a
corridor
all
the
way
to
the
end
and
I'm,
not
sure
that
by
the
time
I'm
done
with
that
I
haven't
lost
five
spaces.
C
So
I
understand
that
the
desire
but
design
on
the
fly
is
you
know
too
many
cooks
in
the
kitchen
and
I
I'm
going
to
ignore
the
sausage
reference
about
governing.
But
let's
just
say:
that's
why
we
go
to
committee
the
whole
and
that
wasn't
brought
up
then,
and
it's
not
good
to
work
with
it
on
the
fly
for
all
these
technical
reasons
that
are
in
the
building
code.
A
A
I
A
We
do
have
not
had
a
lot
of
clarity.
I.
Think
that,
to
answer
your
question,
we
did
not
had
a
lot
of
clarity
on
that.
I
think
that
there
was
very
supportive
of
the
project
as
myself,
I'm
very
supportive
of
the
project,
but
I
was
looking
for
other
things
to
be
able
to
make
this
project
work,
to
have
some
kind
of
way
to
have
this
design
work.
So
it's
not
doesn't
feel
like
a
two-story
next
to
a
six-story
and
I.
N
So
I'm
a
little
bit
confused
about
what
the
best
approach
to
take
here
is
I,
heard
staff
saying
they
were
recommending
that
we
don't
close
off
the
other
exit
entrance
from
the
parking
ramp
and
then
it
also
that
feels
like
it
would
be
so
on
my
inclination
based
on
that,
was
to
grant
that
appeal.
Then
it
looks
like
there
is
kind
of
a
domino
effect,
because
I
think
the
last
picture
we
shot
saw
showed
the
Planning
Commission
strategy
was
to
allow
some
more
units
down
there.
N
Obviously,
if
we,
if
I
supported
granting
that
appeal,
it
would
have
an
impact
in
terms
of
those
units
that
would
go
down
there
couldn't
go
down
there,
any
more
and
so
I'm,
not
sure
whether
that
would
even
if
we
asked
a
Planning
Commission
again
about
that
what
they
would
say.
So
my
inclination
was
to
move
that
we
we
did,
support
staff
kind
of
coming
back
and
recommending
that
we
open
up
that
exit
again,
but
beyond
that
I
hadn't
figured
it
all
out.
N
So
I
was
hoping
so
my
colleagues
on
the
committee
with
a
bigger
picture
solution
to
it
I,
don't
mind
stepping
back
buildings
at
all,
but
I
also
really
appreciate
all
the
affordable
units
that
are
going
in
here
and
all
the
amenities
so
I
relating
to
arguments
on
that
side
of
it
as
well.
So
that
I'm,
sorry
I,
don't
have
a
motion
prepared,
but
at
least
expressed
my
opinion
and
it
might
help
if
more
of
us
weigh
in
and
we
might
find
a.
M
L
Thank
You
mr.
chair
yeah
I've
not
had
any
communication
with
the
representative
one
way
or
the
other.
You
know
I
understand
the
motivation
to
try
to
mitigate
the
size
differential
from
the
lake
street
frontage
and
then
the
residential
to
the
north.
However,
what
I'm
not
seeing
is
really
much
of
a
difference,
except
for
the
impacts
that
it
has.
The
development
I
mean
if
it
was
a
very
significant
step
down
from
six
to
four
or
six
to
five,
even
with
maybe
a
terrorist,
then
I
would
say
all
right.
L
We're
really
given
a
real,
significant
nod
that
would
get
that
outcome
and
then
you'd
have
to
weigh
it
against
the
impacts
of
the
project
and
what
it's
trying
to
achieve
and
given
what
it's
trying
to
achieve.
Energy
efficiency.
Affordability
for
extreme
populations
is
a
pretty
significant
factor
in
my
calculation
and
also,
if
we're
not
going
to
build
six
storey
buildings
where
they're
accounted
for
in
our
planning
and
on
high
frequency
transit
corridors
with
commercial
activity
like
Lake
Street.
You
know
where,
where
do
we
put
them
and
so
I'm?
A
K
So
staff
is
supportive
of
the
appeal
of
the
condition
to
remove
the
excess
off
of
Harriet,
so
we
would
support
granting
that
appeal
of
that
condition.
That
condition
was
attached
to
the
conditional
use
permit
with
regard
to
the
height
and
setback
issue.
I
would
just
point
out
that
this
project
is
seeking
an
OPS
owning
their
qualifying
four
to
twenty
five
percent
density
bonuses
on
top
of
that
and
they
are
exceeding
the
maximum
recommended
density,
which
is
a
hundred
and
twenty
Welling
units
per
acre.
K
That's
the
high
density
land
use
classification
for
this
property
in
the
comp
plan
going
to
two
hundred
and
thirteen
dwelling
units
per
acre.
So
that's
perspective
on
that
is
that
the
loss
of
three
units
is
not,
as
consequential
as
to
the
benefits
that
that
setback
would
deliver
in
terms
of
mitigating
the
bulk
of
the
project.
Well,.
I
You
mr.
chair,
but
mr.
Crandall,
what
doesn't
make
sense
to
me
is
there's
not
a
single
person
here
objecting
to
it,
I
think,
usually,
and
and
almost
always,
when
there
is
more
density
than
what's
allowed
being
proposed,
the
room
is
filled
with
people
who
are
very
upset,
and
in
this
case,
perhaps
because
of
the
affordable
nature
of
the
project,
perhaps
because
of
the
partnership
with
the
VFW
people,
understand
the
trade-offs
between
affordable
housing
and
density.
I
So
I
guess
I
would,
as
someone
who
has
to
work
on
financing,
affordable
housing
as
this
councilmember
Gordon
I
hate,
to
see
a
situation
where,
as
a
result
of
us
removing
these
units,
they
come
back.
Ask
us
for
more
money.
That's
my
fear
is
that
they're,
probably
this
is
probably
a
tax
credit
project,
so
I
would
guess
it
might
even
be
it
not.
Is
it
a
9%
tax
credit
project?
So
it's
a
4%
tax
credit
project,
so
they're
gonna
ask
us
for
more
money
with
tax
credits.
I
They'll
probably
have
to
ask
us
for
more
money
for
the
affordable
housing
trust
fund.
So
we
would
make
sense
for
us
to
pay
a
little
bit
of
attention
to
the
fact
that
we're
kind
of
a
financing
partner
in
the
project
and
if
we
really
want
affordable
in
this
location,
we
want
them
to
stack
these
you
appropriately,
so
that
we
can
get
lower
cost
per
unit.
That's
something,
as
you
know,
we've
been
complaining
about
a
lot
counsel,
Maurice,
Rader
and
I
in
particular.
I
I
think
cost
containments
is
a
big
issue
and
I
believe
this
is
a
project
that's
under
250,
maybe
even
under
200
per
unit,
which
is
unheard
of
for
affordable
housing
projects.
So
I
think
we
should.
If
we
want
an
affordable
project
in
this
kind
of
non
impacted
location,
we
should
be
conscious
of
that.
I
N
K
N
N
E
K
That
was
a
condition
proposed
by
the
Planning
Commission
with
regard
to
the
alleyway.
There's
no
minimum
window
requirement
on
that
location,
but
they
wanted
to
create
additional
visibility
between
the
enclosed
parking
garage
and
the
alley
and
to
create
more
visual
interest
along
that
wall
being
kind
of
a
blank
ball.
I
don't
have
particularly
strong
feelings
about
that
condition.
Remaining
so
I.
N
Could
see
always
could
create
a
sense
of
safety,
maybe
if
you're
walking
down
the
alley
in
that
two
things
just
think.
There's
a
little
more
opening,
so
I
could
appreciate
it.
But
I
was
curious
about
your
view
on
that
I
I'm,
looking
at
it
and
I'm
thinking,
there
might
be
a
way
that
we
could
grant
the
appeal
on
one
in
five
and
maybe
deny
it
on
the
others.
N
It
sounds
like
councilmember
Reich,
it's
interested
in
granting
it
on
all
the
items
and
I'm
not
sure
about
councilmember
Goodman,
but
maybe
that
it
seems
to
me
at
least
my
theory
about
the.
If
you
open
up
the
access
to
the
garage
with
five
and
also
I'm
sympathetic
to
having
at
more
units
and
I'm,
also
sympathetic
to
the
argument
that
the
set
the
step
back
doesn't
really
bring
that
many
benefits,
because
you
know
in
terms
of
that
shadowing,
but
also
how
it's
gonna.
N
A
A
I
You
mr.
chair
I'm,
fine
with
that
I
just
want
us
to
discuss
this
fence
thing
a
little
bit
more.
If
it
were
me
and
I
was
looking
next
door,
I
want
a
decorative
fence.
I
would
not
want
it
to
be
I.
Would
we're
asking
people
to
screen
garbage
we're
asking
them
to
screen
recycling
I
would
want
that
they
probably
save
money
by
not
building
a
bigger
fence,
but
if
I
lived
next
door
or
even
in
the
area,
I
would
probably
want
that
so
I
just
want
to
chime
in
on
that.
A
A
E
A
A
N
C
I
Just
want
to
clarify
that
I
agree
with
counsel
regarding
on
the
windows,
and
it
sounds
like
there's
some
unanimity
and
also
on
the
fiber
cement.
You
know
no
harm,
no
foul
redesign
it
so
that
it
meets
the
Planning
Commission's
criteria,
so
that
would
eliminate
three
and
four
so
I
understand
councilmember
Gordon's
motion
to
be
approving
the
appeal
on
one
to
five
and
six
and
I
would
suggest
if
the
chair
wanted.
You
could
just
take
them
all
individually.
I
think.
A
All
right
that
motion
passes
we'll
move
on
number
two
clerk,
the
caller
and
actually
I
am
going
to.
Maybe
we
could
take
two
through
six,
all
together
and
I.
Think
we
probably
it
sounds
like
we
have
unanimity
unless
I
see,
otherwise,
all
those
in
favor
say
aye
aye,
all
those
opposed
the
ice
habit
and
the
motion
carries
so.
I
A
N
A
A
Sure
I'm
three
into
four,
then:
let's
the
motion
is
to
deny
three
and
four
all
those
in
favor
aye,
all
those
opposed,
say,
nay,
the
eyes
have
it
and
three
for
tonight
with
that
we
are
going
to
move
on
to
our
final
item,
which
is
the
discussion
of
rezoning
at
the
Lake
Street
Apartments.
Now
this
is
the
same
application
we've
been
talking
about
if
we
could
have
kind
of
a
I,
don't
know
that
we
need
a
staff
presentation
unless
I
see
otherwise
from
anyone
with
that
I'm.