►
From YouTube: March 11, 2019 City Planning Commission
Description
Minneapolis City Planning Commission Meeting
A
Good
afternoon
called
order,
the
March
11th
meeting
the
Minneapolis
City
Planning
Commission.
My
name
is
Matt
Brown
I
serve
as
president
of
the
Commission
I'm
joined
today
by
commissioners,
Kron
Zuri,
Lukey,
Pierce,
Weezy,
Coleman,
Rockwell
and
Schrader.
At
this
time,
I'll
se
silence
any
mobile
devices
and
we
can
get
started
with
our
meeting.
First
item
of
business
is
to
approve
the
actions
from
the
February
25th
meeting.
Commissioners
may
have
a
motion
to
approve
those
actions.
B
A
Have
motion
and
a
second
all
in
favor
that
motion
carries
next.
We
will
organize
the
agenda.
You
can
find
hard
copies
of
the
agenda
in
the
hallway
will
determine
which
items
will
be
considered
on
consent
which
we'll
discuss
and
which
will
be
continued
to
another
meeting.
So
starting
at
the
top
of
the
agenda
item.
One
is
the
Ramsey
Street
northeast
vacation.
A
A
Item
3
is
at
30
1730
21
and
30
25
East
Calhoun
Parkway
several
applications
for
a
new
multi-family
building
at
that
location.
That
item
will
be
continued
to
the
March
25th
meeting.
If
anyone
is
here
for
that
that
will
be
considered
on
March
25th
item
4
is
tiara
and
cantata
Hiawatha
at
4012
and
40:16
Minnehaha
Avenue
conditional
use,
permit
variance
site
plan
review
for
a
childcare
facility.
Is
anyone
wishing
to
speak
in
opposition
to
or
modify
the
staff
recommendation
on
item
4?
We
have
someone
here
so
we'll
discuss.
A
Item
for
item
5
is
the
1501
Johnson
Street
Apartments
at
1501
and
Johnson
Street
northeast.
We
will
discuss
item
5
if
anyone
is
here
for
that
item.
Six
is
block
one
residential
at
740,
South
4th
Street
few
applications
for
a
new
residential
building
at
that
location.
So
anyone
wishing
to
speak
in
opposition
to
our
modify
the
staff
recommendation
on
item
six.
So
we
have
someone
here
for
that.
So
we
can
discuss
item
six
and
item.
A
7
is
onh
station
phase,
two,
a
20
to
25
East
Lake
Street,
several
applications
for
multifamily
buildings
at
that
location
Center
in
here
to
speak
in
opposition
to
or
modify
the
staff
recommendation
on
item
7
item
7
is
anyone
here
see
no
one
will
put
item
7
on
consent,
so
our
agenda
as
amended,
is
as
follows:
items
2,
&
7
will
be
considered
on
consent.
We
will
discuss
items
4,
5,
&,
6
item
1
will
be
continued
to
the
April
29th
meeting
item.
3
will
be
continued
to
the
March
25th
meeting.
C
D
A
Have
a
motion
and
a
second,
we
have
motion
a
second
to
continue
item
1
to
April
29th
all
in
favor,
and
that
motion
carries
next
may
have
motion
to
continue
item
3
to
the
March
25th
meeting
a
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
2
&,
7
I'm
here
for
either
item
2
or
7c,
knowing
I'll
close
the
public
hearing
and
may
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
consent
agenda.
A
E
Good
evening,
commissioners,
the
site
before
you
is
forty,
twelve
and
forty
sixteen
Minnehaha
this
area
is
located
south
of
40th
and
along
Minnehaha.
The
site
itself
is
zoned
commercial
and
is
occupied
by
a
single
family
home
in
a
vacant
lot,
which
has
been
used
as
a
urban
firm,
and
there
is
commercial
zoning
on
either
side
and
an
alley
to
the
west.
E
Here's
the
site
the
applicant
has
proposed
to
construct
a
new
three-story
commercial
building
that
would
be
used
as
a
childcare
center.
The
childcare
center
would
contain
approximately
15,000
square
feet
of
gross
floor
area,
although
it
would
also
contain
a
basement
level
and
there
would
be
approximately
17
classrooms
to
enroll
260
students.
E
The
applicant
is
proposed
for
off
street
parking
spaces
that
would
be
accessed
off
the
alley:
childcare
center,
the
size
of
have
a
requirement
for
30
parking
spaces,
so
the
applicant
has
applied
for
both
a
variance
to
reduce
the
number
of
parking
spaces
and
a
maneuvering
variance
to
allow
maneuvering
in
the
alley.
Although
that
parking
would
be
first
staff
only.
E
There
are
some
significant
constraints
to
the
site
which
are
worth
noting,
so
my
site
itself
is
12,000
square
feet.
The
building
has
a
5,000
square
foot
footprint.
The
state
has
certain
requirements
for
size
of
players
that
are
required,
so
the
minimum
size
is
2500
square
feet
in
the
applicant
is
proposing
3,300
Square
feet
and
then,
in
order
to
provide
basically,
the
site
would
not
be,
does
not
have
enough
space
to
both
provide
the
required
parking
and
the
play
yard
and
to
have
a
building
on
a
suitable
size.
E
So
the
applicant
has
indicated
this
is
a
Spanish
immersion,
childcare
center
and
many
of
the
staff
for
the
childcare
centre
live
within
the
city
limits
in
Minneapolis.
This
site
is
very
well
connected
to
public
transit,
its
within
half
a
mile
of
the
blue
line,
light
rail
station
and
is
on
three
bus
routes,
including
seven,
nine
and
twenty
three.
The
applicant
has
another
site
in
Northeast
Minneapolis.
That
is
the
similar
size
and
configuration
with
four
off-street
parking
spaces
and
has
indicated
that
that
works
well
on
that
site.
E
They
would
be
applying
for
two
off
street
drop-off
locations
along
Minnehaha
Avenue
and
we've
begun.
The
preliminary
conversation
with
Public
Works
about
that,
but
it
seems
like
that,
would
be
supported
by
Public
Works
staff,
the
building
itself.
If
you
look
closely
at
the
upper
left-hand
corner
of
this
screen
there,
some
of
the
renderings
aren't
very
clear,
but
the
applicant
has
provided
these
photos
to
show
the
proposed
exterior
materials
which
would
be
brick
metal
panel
and
a
like
a
wood,
a
wood
panel
siding.
E
Staff
is
recommending
approval
of
all
the
applications
with
several
conditions,
including
ensuring
that
the
parking
is
for
staff.
Only
some
changes
to
the
facade
that
would
allow
the
building
to
better
meet
site
plan
review
standards,
especially
in
terms
of
the
vertical
orientation
of
windows
and
the
building,
is
showing
a
facism
material
for
the
cornice
element.
E
The
applicant
has
provided
this
five
foot
tall
parapet
wall,
which
is
they
have
indicated,
as
is
because
of
concerns
about
snow
drifting
on
neighboring
buildings,
although
it
is
not
a
requirement
of
the
building
code
and
staff
had
encouraged
them
to
put
in
a
cornice
type
element
and,
and
that
is
proposed
to
be
efis
on
the
plan.
So
that
would
have
to
be
changed
and
I.
Think
that's
about
it,
and
I
will
stand
for
questions
all
right.
Commissioner.
F
B
F
E
F
E
F
E
I
had
not
been
aware
of
that,
but
I
will
show
you
the
site
plan
that
this
building
immediately
to
the
north
four
thousand
eight
Minnehaha
is
also
owned
by
the
same
applicant,
so
that
currently
has
a
retail
space
on
the
ground
floor.
But
the
intention
is,
for
that
whole
that
whole
building
to
be
used
as
administrative
offices
there's
also
a
garage
and
parking
in
the
back
that
would
potentially
be
used
in
concurrence
with
the
site.
Thank
you.
Any.
A
Further
questions
of
staff
hearing
none
I'll
open
the
public
hearing
on
this
item,
I'd
like
that
the
applicant
or
at
least
give
the
applicant
an
opportunity
to
speak
first.
If
anyone
is
here
on
behalf
of
the
applicant
see
if
there's
anything
you'd
like
to
add
to
the
staff
presentation,
please
come
to
the
microphone
and
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record.
G
A
Commissioners,
are
there
any
questions
of
the
applicant
Commissioner
Sweezey?
Did
you
have
a
question?
Oh
no,
all
right,
I,
don't
think
we
have
any
questions
at
the
moment.
So
if
that's
the
case,
we
can
move
on
to
some
other
speakers
and
I
know.
We
have
at
least
one
person
who
would
like
to
speak
on
this
item.
So
please
come
to
the
microphone
state.
Your
name
and
address
for
the
record.
H
Hi,
my
name
is
Ellen
Schmitz
and
my
address
is
34:15
East
40th,
Street
I
live
right
around
the
corner
from
the
proposed
site
of
the
building
and
I
just
want
to
say:
I,
don't
have
a
concern
that
a
daycare
is
going
in
there.
I
do
have
a
concern,
however,
as
do
some
of
my
other
neighbors,
who
have
emailed
in
with
the
size
of
the
daycare.
H
We
are
now
in
an
area
that
has
been
inundated
with
really
awesome,
new
restaurants
and
and
shopping,
and
that
has
caused
an
influx
of
people
parking
problems
with
parking
on
40th
Street
itself.
I
am
concerned
about
the
size
of
this
because,
as
you
know,
260
proposed
children
and
the
Minnesota
State
law
related
to
children
to
teacher
ratio.
Do
not
equal
four
parking
spots.
That
would
mean
to
me
that
the
staff
would
have
to
park
somewhere.
H
The
children's
parents
would
have
to
park
somewhere
and
so
there's
a
concern
amongst
all
of
the
neighbors
that
live
on
40th
Street,
that
that
has
not
been
duly
addressed
by
the
city
of
Minneapolis,
with
the
plans
to
bring
in
all
this
great
vitalization
revitalization
to
this
neighborhood.
So
that
is
my
primary
concern
and
additionally,
the
size
for
three
stories
is
kind
of
a
massive
size
for
building
going
on,
that
block
it
and
looking
at
the
design
of
it,
it
doesn't
fit
in
with
the
design
of
this
neighborhood
and
I
know.
H
If
we're
accommodating
these
larger
places
that
provide
lots
of
people
with
some
kind
of
entertainment
or
some
sort
of
place
for
their
child
to
go
to
school,
we
need
to
be
considered
as
well.
This
is
the
neighborhood
that
I
personally
have
lived
in
for
25
years.
My
husband's
been
here
for
33
years,
and
you
know,
we've
taken
good
care
of
our
neighborhood
and
we
like
the
city
to
respect
that
as
well.
H
B
I
My
name
is
Doug
Weber
I
live
at
40/29
Cinelli,
which
is
directly
across
the
alley
from
the
proposed
development
I
just
like
to
echo
my
neighbors
concerns
about
the
parking
situation,
while
Snelling
Avenue
seems
to
have
readily
available
parking
on
it.
I
am
a
bit
worried
about
the
size
of
the
building,
with
only
four
spaces
available
when
30
is
what's
required.
So
if
anything
I
think
maybe
a
little
bit
more
discussion
on
the
whole
situation
with
the
four
parking
spaces,
which
would
be
directly
across
the
alley
from
our
garage.
I
J
C
B
K
My
name
is
Heather
Whelan
I
live
at
4012
Snelling
Avenue
directly.
One
block
behind
the
proposed
site,
echo
the
concerns
and
my
neighbors,
but
I
also
wanted
to
add
that
there's
a
lot
of
traffic
on
Minnehaha
and
the
drop-off.
The
two
drop-off
spots,
which
I
assume
would
be
primarily
for
parent
drop-off
and
pickup
and
I,
know
what
it's
like
to
get
a
child
out
of
daycare,
especially
in
infants
and
load
them
back
into
the
car.
K
It's
not
really
a
brief
drop-off
and
if
there's
only
two
spots,
I
just
really
can
see
that
there
would
be
a
lot
of
additional
cars
kind
of
circling
the
block
and
backing
up,
but
also,
hopefully,
there's
pedestrian,
drop-off
and
pickup,
which
we
do
see
at
other
daycares
nearby.
But
those
of
us
that
need
to
use
our
vehicle
from
time
to
time
are
not
going
to
be
ready
for
the
extra
pedestrian
traffic
too.
So
I
think.
Maybe
that's
if
there
are
a
few
more
drop-off
spots
or
a
little
bit
more.
That
would
be
helpful
for
safety.
K
F
Question
so
is
the
architect
for
the
building
available
at
all.
Is
there
present?
No,
you
can.
Maybe
you
can
answer
the
question.
So
the
question
that
I
have
is
related
to
I.
Just
it's
been
a
while
since
I've
had
to
do
with
educational
design,
but
it
seems
to
me
as
though
it's
a
building
sprinklered
and
have
a
full
fire
panel.
Good,
that's
gonna
be
provided
or
okay.
J
A
F
F
So
that
was
just
wondering:
I'm
not
used
to
seeing
daycares
with
children
on
a
third
floor,
but
I
think
that
that
would
be
a
lot
of.
Hopefully,
your
architects
looked
into
that
in
terms
of
not
being
on
the
level
of
discharge
for
egress
in
case
of
a
fire
emergency,
so
just
wanted
to
check
and
see
if
that
was
even
even
a
possibility.
Yeah.
G
Thank
you,
okay
and
could
I
just
something
about
the
parking
we
have
a
location
in
the
Windham
neighborhood,
where
there's
the
building
is
similar
to
what
we're
proposing
for
Minnehaha.
It's
also
a
well
it's
a
two-story
building,
aware
about
210
children,
attending
Lee.
So
and
initially
there
was
a
concern
about
parking
and
a
lot
of
traffic,
but
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
it
hasn't
been
that
we've
never
gotten
complaints
from
neighborhoods
about
them
not
being
able
to
access
their
homes
or
or-
or
things
like
that.
G
L
M
L
G
For
the
location
where
I'm
at
Davi
Wentworth
Avenue,
it
tends
to
be
a
business
street
too,
because
there's
the
school,
the
elementary
school
Windham
just
across
from
us,
so
parents
usually
Park
on
the
street
and
do
a
quick
drop
off
and
same
thing
for
a
pickup.
So
it's
an
I
would
say:
parents
mostly
don't
use
a
parking
lot,
although
we
have
one
and
they're
okay
to
use
it.
It
smoothly
is
mainly
of
up
street
parking
that
they
use
to
do
the
drop-off
and
pickup
and.
G
L
E
The
minimum
parking
requirement
for
a
child
care
center
is
based
on
the
number
of
classrooms,
which
is
the
30
spaces
that
we
discussed
earlier,
plus
2
drop-off
spaces,
so
that's
kind
of
the
baseline
for
for
childcare
centers.
It's
also
the
for
like
an
adult
daycare
center.
You
know
the
to
drop-off.
Spaces
is
what
is
typically
in
the
zoning
code
for
these
types
of
uses.
Thank
You.
N
A
O
Actually,
to
follow
up
on
that,
it's
if
we're
reducing
how
much
parking
is
there
for
parents
I
would
assume
some
of
that
would
be
used
for
drop-off
I'm,
familiar
with
their
place
on
Wentworth
and
that's
kind
of
a
constant
turnover.
Was
there
some
consideration,
if
you
always
have
to
have
to
but
you're
getting
rid
of
the
other
parking
that
there
would
be
more
drop-off
or
how
is
that
kind
of
factored
in.
E
So
the
applicant
had
indicated
that
a
lot
of
their
staff
is
local
and
is
likely
to
be
taking
public
transit
and
with
the
constraints
of
the
site.
Staff
was
particularly
concerned
about
drop-off
pickup
being
located
off
in
the
alley
and
potential
impacts
of
that
on
neighboring
residents,
and
so
the
only
other
option
for
them
to
have
drop-off
on
site
that
wasn't
accessed
off
of
the
alley
would
be
on
street.
F
We'll
keep
here
so
we
got
along
those
lines
as
well,
because
I
think
remember,
speakers
points
was
well
taken
and
that
the
staff
ratios
alone
will
eat
up
all
that's
even
local
teachers.
It's
still
gonna
be
more
that's
why
soon
they're
gonna
be
parking
on
the
street.
We're
just
really
fine,
but
I'm
wondering
is
there?
Is
it
the
applicants
illness
to
go
to
public
verse
and
maybe
suggest
more
drop-off
spaces,
and
then
are
the
drop-off
spaces
just
for
certain
hours,
I
assume
they're,
not
24/7.
These
two
spaces
are
sacrosanct
to
the
facility.
E
F
Good
I
guess
I
would
I
would
be
inclined
to
suggest
to
the
applicant
that
they
pursue
maybe
if
more
than
two
I
mean
I,
think
anyone
dropping
off
any
more
babies.
Gonna
soak
up
at
least
twenty
minutes,
and
one
of
those
spots
I
mean
I'm,
just
speaking
from
experience,
so
I
just
haven't
encouraged
I
just
to
keep
people
from
double
parking
in
the
neighbors
from
being
I.
F
A
Are
there
any
further
questions
and
I
know
the
public
hearing
is
still
open,
so
if
there's
no
one
else
who
wants
to
speak,
I
will
close
the
public
hearing
and
commissioners
we
have
several
a
a
total
of
four
applications
before
us,
starting
with
the
conditional
use.
Permit
there
any
further
questions,
or
would
someone
like
to
start
things
off
with
emotion,.
P
A
J
Q
Sweezey,
thank
you
just
wanted
to
comment
on
this
I'll
be
voting
against
this
variance.
It
seems
to
me
when
I
look
at
the
justification
for
it
and
as
offered
as
circumstances
unique
to
the
property,
it's
that
this
is
too
big
of
a
thing
for
the
space,
which
is
a
condition
of
created
by
the
use
of
it.
That
says
that
the
state
of
Minnesota
requires
a
play
yard
such
size
and
all
those
kinds
of
things-
and
it
looks
to
me
like
this-
is
not
it's
not
something.
That's
unique
to
the
property.
Q
It's
just
that,
probably
something
this
large
really
does
need
to
go
somewhere
else,
but
I
think
that
the
parking
concerns
are
real
and
that
I
don't
think
that
the
basis
is
here
for
a
finding
that
the
reason
for
the
variants
are
the
circumstances
relating
to
the
property.
To
me,
it
seems
to
be
what
what
what
they
want
to
put
on
the
property.
It
sounds
like
a
great
project
but
I'm.
Just
not
sure
this
is
the
right
spot.
B
N
E
The
way
that
we
typically
do,
it
is
because
the
drop-off
spaces
are
not
being
allowed
on
site,
they're
kind
of
rolled
into
the
parking
variance
and
saying
that
they
don't
have
to
be
allowed
on
site,
which
is
why
then,
there's
a
condition
that
the
applicant
should
apply
with
Public
Works
for
the
drop-off
location.
That's
on
the
street,
but.
E
A
I
think
what
you're
saying,
though,
too,
is
if
we
approve
this
variance,
as
is
with
the
condition
worded
the
way
it
is,
they
could
apply
for
four
spaces,
we're
only
requiring
that
they
apply
for
two,
but
it
would
be
possible
or
not
we're
not
limiting
them
to
two
spaces.
I.
Think
commitment,
Rockwell's,
is
that.
N
E
N
She
changed
the
wording
of
the
recommended
motion
from
to
allow
to
drop
off
spaces
to
allow
for
drop
off
spaces,
and
then
the
condition
change
from
the
option
shall
apply
it
with
public
courts
to
allow
for
drop
off
spaces
that
doesn't
require
them
to
actually
achieve
those,
but
it
allows
them.
It
requires
them
to
apply
for
more
so
I
think
the
points
by
my
fellow
commissioners
are
well
taken
on
the
drama.
I
think
I'm,
convinced
on
me.
Yeah
all.
A
A
F
Just
had
a
question
for
pusher,
Rockville
and
Christian
cons
are
just.
Are
we
then
fine
if
the
Apple
can't
applies,
but
then
give
tonight
for
all,
for
that
said,
does
that
have
any
impact
on
the
variance
that
we
were
pending
approval
of
these
right
now,
like
it
was
pointed
out,
we
could
they
could
apply
and
public
worship
say
no
to
all
four
and
then
we
would
me
every
time
with
Emily
I
before
practice.
We
this
is
my
Commissioner.
N
F
N
I
defer
to
the
actual
kind
of
traffic
decisions
and
traffic
pattern
into
public
works
because
I,
don't
really
know
I
want
the
applicant
to
be
applying
for
more
and
then
public
works
being
able
to
executed
traffic's
a
parking
study
to
determine
kind
of
the
right
amount
there,
but
I
think
that
it's
the
right
amount
us
more
having
them
applied.
For
that
is
a
good
thing.
That's
my
rationale.
There
I,
don't
miss
your
answer.
A
A
I
A
N
Just
briefly
on
the
34,
since
a
few
folks
came
out
for
that,
you
know
I
I,
you
know
I
do
think
this
is
in
a
good
transit,
accessible
place.
I
know
that
that
that
there
may
be
more
than
for
people
who
drive,
but
but
I
think
it's
like
I'm
convinced
that
a
lot
of
people
will
take
transit,
particularly
if
it's
harder
to
park
in
terms
of
permanent.
B
N
A
J
N
B
A
B
A
F
E
Zoom
in
on
this,
you
can
see
that
there's
I
think
six
proposed
on
the
south
side
of
the
property
line
and
four
proposed
on
the
north
side
on
the
property.
That's
co-owned
it
at
four
thousand
eight.
So
it's
a
total
of
six
bike
parking
spaces.
Well,
ten
total
that
will
be
available
to
folks
dropping
off
their
kids
at
the
bigger
I.
F
E
F
A
A
Any
opposed
motion
carries
moving
back
to
the
original
motion,
so
we
have
a
motion
to
approve
Adam
d,
the
site
plan
review
the
eleven
stated
conditions
and
amendment
to
condition
nine
related
to
requiring
at
least
ten,
that
bicycle
parking
stalls.
Is
there
any
further
discussion
hearing
none
clerk,
please
call
the
roll.
P
N
A
R
Good
evening,
president
Brown
commissioners,
this
site
is
15:1,
Johnson,
Street
northeast,
and
there
are
two
additional
attachments
that
were
distribute
tonight
under
item
number
six,
and
that
was
a
mistake.
This
is
agenda
item
number
five.
So
this
is
the
site.
It
is
just
to
the
southwest
of
the
quarry
shopping
center
across
from
Jim
loop,
Ian's
Park
in
Northeast
Park,
and
then
it's
also
adjacent
to
the
interstate
35w
on-ramp.
So
it's
a
really
unusual
sight.
R
There's
an
some
additional
public
right-of-way
in
front
of
it
that
the
Apple
cane,
at
the
time
of
the
Committee
of
the
Whole
meeting,
thought
that
they
were
going
to
vacate
it
and
they
have
since
decided
to
not
vacate
that
area.
It's
industrially
zoned,
I
one
and
it
has
a
one-story
industrial
building
on
the
site
right
now.
R
So
here's
the
zoning
classification
map
they're,
proposing
164
dwelling
units-
and
this
requires
rezoning
to
add
the
necessary
living
overlay
district
to
allow
dwelling
units
also
conditional
use
for
it
to
increase
the
maximum
height
to
a
tall
six
stories
at
the
tallest
point
of
the
building.
The
building
is
actually
between
five
and
six
storeys
conditional
use
for
it
to
allow
dwellings
in
site
plan
review.
So
there
have
been
a
few
changes
since
the
community
of
the
whole
meeting
on
November
27th.
R
So
there
was
some
feedback
that
you
wanted
to
see
a
taller
building,
so
a
portion
of
it
is
six
storeys.
Now
they've
added
$9
units
they've
also
eliminated
53
parking
spaces,
someone
in
conjunction
with
the
elimination
of
that
right-of-way
vacation
application.
So
now
they
have
168
parking
spaces
for
164
dwelling
units,
most
of
that
is
below
grade,
but
there
is
other
surface
parking
surrounding
the
site.
They've
also
changed
the
materials
and
landscaping
and
they've
all
added
crosswalks
to
the
middle
of
the
site
and
at
the
south
end
of
the
site.
R
So
this
is
so
the
north
would
be
on
the
left
side
of
the
page.
So
you
can
see
that
there
are
two
access
points.
The
northernmost
access
point
would
be
ingress
and
egress
from
the
drop-off
area,
but
it
would
lead
to
a
parking
area.
That's
one
way,
and
it
circulates
throughout
the
site-
and
there
is
right
here
right
here-
is
where
the
low-grade
parking
could
be
accessed
as
one
of
the
access
points,
there's
also
an
access
point
off
of
the
southernmost
curb
cut.
R
Here's
their
landscaping
plan,
so
they've
been
in
communication
with
Public
Works
about
ensuring
that
there
is
a
tree
planting
plan
and
sidewalk
plan.
The
sidewalk
does
not
continue
north
of
the
Kirk
cut
so
in
lieu
of
that
they're
proposing
two
crosswalks.
So
one
would
be
at
the
mid,
mid
block
point
which
leads
to
the
park
and
also
at
the
south
end
of
the
of
the
site.
Where
there's
a
bus,
stop
there's
a
little
great
parking
plan,
there's
also
a
ground
floor
patio,
as
you
can
see,
that's
on
the
35w
ramp
side
of
the
site.
R
R
R
So
they
need
alternative
compliance
for
that
and
also
to
have
parking
located
between
the
building
in
the
front
lot
line-
and
this
is
probably
one
of
the
items
at
the
would
like
to
discuss
tonight-
is
retaining
some
of
the
surface
parking
closest
to
the
drop-off
area
and
we're
very
quite
requiring
as
a
recommended
condition
of
approval
that
those
six
spaces
be
eliminated
and
that
the
drop-off
area
be
paved
in
some
other
material
other
than
asphalt.
So
some
some
kind
of
decorative
paver
that
comes
still
complies
with
our
surfacing
requirements.
R
The
principal
entrance
currently
faces
the
drop-off
area,
rather
than
Johnson
so
we'd
like
to
see
either
an
additional
entrance
or
removing
the
entrance
so
that
there
is
an
entrance
facing
Johnson
directly
and
then
also
a
walkway
that
directly
connects
right.
Now,
it's
not
a
completely
direct
connection.
It's
a
little
bit
indirectly
and
then
there
there
is
a
substantial
grade,
change
on
the
site
and
because
of
the
below
grade
parking,
accommodations,
they're
below
their
men,
Windham
in
minimum
window
requirement
on
the
East
elevation
and
also
the
South
elevation.
R
That
faces
the
parking
lot
and
we
recommend
granting
alternative
compliance.
We'd
like
them
to
add
a
walkway
for
the
northernmost
row
of
parking
to
a
building
entrance
right.
Now
there
is
none
and
we'd
like
to
see
them
comply
with
a
minimum
tree
and
shrub
requirement,
not
just
for
the
overall
site,
but
also
in
the
corners
of
the
parking
areas
which
may
require
reducing
additional
parking.
R
And
then
we
want
to
see
a
minimum
7
foot
buffer
and
3
foot
screen
actually
we'd
like
to
recommend
granting
alternative
compliance
for
the
7
foot
buffer,
because
there
are
some
areas
where
there's
actually
a
40
foot
buffer.
But
it's
all
right
away.
So
we
find
that
to
be
reasonable
as
long
as
they
can
meet
the
3
foot
screening
requirement
along
the
parking
and
loading
frontages
linear
tree
requirement.
They
they
are
amenable
to
this
condition,
complying
with
that
and
then
the
the
minimum
50-foot
tree
requirement.
R
R
P
R
So
this
has
been
a
subject
of
discussion.
There
is
a
tdmp,
that's
in
progress
right
now,
so
we
have
received
a
draft.
We
have
not
fully
reviewed
it,
but
in
our
preliminary
discussions
with
Public
Works,
because
the
because
the
intersection
at
the
northernmost
point
of
this
site
is
actually
being
studied
right
now
by
Amanda
they're,
actively
studying
it
and
they
expect
to
have
some
improvements
done
within
the
next
five
to
ten
years.
R
They
Public
Works
is
comfortable
with
the
applicant
delaying
this
because
there
might
be
a
different
plan
that
MnDOT
implements
or
MnDOT,
and
the
city
implements
so
rather
than
requiring
the
applicant
to,
for
instance,
put
in
a
sidewalk
and
a
cross.
Look
at
that
intersection.
They
felt
that
the
the
crosswalk
with
flashers
mid-block
would
be
appropriate
for
getting
residents
from
this
site
across
to
the
sidewalk
that's
currently
in
place.
And
then,
if
you
wanted
to
go
to
the
quarry,
for
instance,
you
would
be
able
to
use
the
intersection
that's
more
north,
but
north
of
Johnson.
What's.
P
The
public
works
with
what
we
see
in
front
of
us,
they're,
supportive
of
they're
comfortable
with
it
as
Public
Works,
constructing
those
or
is
the
applicant
concerned.
The
applicant
would
be
constructing
these.
These
amenities.
Okay,
second
question
is
that,
where
is
the
entrance?
Now
that's
into
the
lobby
office
space
I
see
one
door.
That
in
swings
is
that
the
location
of
the
proposed
entrance.
R
S
R
A
T
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
Linc
Wilson
I'm,
the
architect
for
the
project.
Also
with
me,
is
Steve
Dunbar
from
Ivey
development,
we're
both
working
with
the
property
owner.
My
address
is
1301
American
Boulevard
in
Bloomington.
I
want
to
be
very
brief,
but
at
the
same
time
I
do
want
to.
You
know,
take
a
minute
to
thank
staff
for
a
phenomenal
job.
Mailing
has
been
terrific
to
work
with
everybody
at
Public
Works.
This
is
an
extremely
complicated
site,
and
so
we've
appreciated
everybody's
patience
as
well.
T
T
Subsequent
to
that
committee,
the
whole
meeting,
which
I
think
improved
the
project
greatly
I,
think
that
anytime,
that
you
have
a
site
like
this
and
I'll
just
point
to
it.
That
is
extremely
odd
in
nature,
fish-shaped
site
for
a
better
term.
It
has
significant
grade
changes
as
we
move
from
south
to
north
about
eight
feet
and
then
anytime,
that
you're
on
an
urban
edge
or
an
edge
between
two
disparate
pieces
of
a
community
you're
going
to
have
some
type
of
request
for
variants.
T
I,
don't
think
it's
just
me
as
an
architect
that
always
asks
for
some
type
of
leeway,
but
in
in
the
in
the
blue
packet.
Really
what
I
want
to
focus
in
on
tonight
or
just
items?
Seven,
eight.
We
are
in
complete
agreement
with
everything
else
in
the
report
and
we'll
make
all
staff
changes
in
recommendations.
T
See
here
go
to
the
next
slide:
I
just
wanted
to
reinforce
what
this
site
is.
Currently
today,
it's
a
warehouse.
It's
it's
not
very
it's!
It's
very
unsightly,
I
think
the
neighborhood
is
really
trending
in
a
positive
direction
and
I
just
don't
see
that
this
site
is
reflecting
where
the
neighborhood
is
going.
We
hope
that
you
feel
that
our
proposal
is,
but
we're
certainly
looking
forward
to
changes
on
on
this
site.
So
again,
just
as
mei-ling
had
showed
we've
rotated
the
site.
The
previous
view
was
north
up.
T
This
view
is
north
to
to
the
left
and
I
wanted
to
comment.
Commissioner
Cron's,
or
you
know,
on
that,
Sidewalk
and
and
I
want
to
make
it
really
clear
that
we
are
committed
to
building
a
sidewalk
that
does
connect
to
the
chorion,
so
that
I
would
ask
that
you
make
that
a
condition
of
tonight's
approval.
If
it's
not
clear,
we're
absolutely
committed
it's
just
that
we
we
need
to
continue
to
work
with
MnDOT
that
owns
this
property.
T
They
are
in
a
gateway
study
period
right
now,
we're
hoping
that
they
complete
their
study
soon
and
then
continue
to
work
with
Public
Works
I'll.
Go
to
the
next
side
slide
and
then
come
back
because
I
think
it's
really
important
to
understand
that
all
of
these
trees
that
you
see
here
they're
existing
and
we
want
to
preserve
all
those
trees,
because
we
think
that
it
creates
a
great
buffer,
a
great
connection
to
the
park.
T
T
Just
a
little
bit
of
background,
just
as
mei-ling
had
stated,
we
see
the
primary
entrance
to
the
site
on
the
north
side
of
the
entrance
and
then
one-way
underground
parking
way
of
164,
underground
parking
stalls
or
I'm
apologize,
146,
underground
parking,
stalled,
164,
total
apartment
units
and
then
the
site
Drive
goes
around
the
site.
One
way
until
we
get
just
to
the
south
side.
T
And
so
really
item
7
from
the
blue
sheet
here
or
I'm.
Sorry
item
8,
where
we
have
a
little
difference
of
opinion
with
staff,
is
that
we
would
like
for
any
move
in
move
out
to
happen
on
the
south
end
of
the
site.
It
is
true
that
we
have
elevators
here
at
the
center
side
of
the
site,
but
our
experience
has
been
that
you
can
park
a
semi
here,
but
probably
that's
only
going
to
happen
one
or
two
times
a
year.
T
Usually
it's
going
to
be
a
smaller
vehicle,
there's
room
for
a
semi
or
a
smaller
vehicle,
they'll
use
the
garage
door
or
even
the
person
door.
That's
there
and
then
wheel
their
belongings
to
two
elevators
there
that
are
at
the
center
of
the
building
along
the
MnDOT
property
were
completely
aligned
with
staff
about
how
to
treat
that
we
have
a
very,
very
large
outdoor
recreation
space,
I
think
we're
aligned
with
that
and
then
at
the
main
entrance.
T
That's
two
storeys
and
that's
our
entrance
lobby
that
faces
out
on
to
Johnson
and
then
we
just
because
of
the
interior
we'd
like
to
see
that
entrance
backed
off
of
that
enter
off
of
that
activity.
Space
it'll
be
lit
at
night
activated
connected
to
the
park,
but
it's
also
a
place
where
you
could
pick
up
over
lift
right
at
that
location
and
we're
absolutely
committed
to
making
a
change
to
change
the
material
right
now
we
show
asphalt
right
here,
we're
committed
to
make
a
change
to
a
colored,
concrete
or
paver
at
that
location.
T
So
I
think
we're
a
line
of
staff.
I
think
where
we
have
just
a
difference
of
operational
opinion.
You
can
see
that
turn
around
and
drop
off
here.
We
have
two
accessible
parking
spaces
that
are
closest
to
the
door.
We've
presented
this
four
times
actually
to
two
different
neighborhood
committees:
I
think
that
we
have
full
support
from
neighborhood,
but
one
of
those
supporting
supporters.
T
Actually
two
of
them
were
emphatic
that
they
wanted
to
see
accessible
parking
stalls
and
so
two
of
those
six
stalls
are
accessible
and
really
for
security.
The
building
we
like
to
have
some
parking
right
at
the
front,
but
also
just
operationally
to
lease
up
there's
an
advantage
to
having
at
least
a
few
stalls,
but
also
there's
no
street
parking
on
Johnson,
and
so
again
this
is
not
on
an
urban
core.
T
It's
an
urban
edge
I'm,
the
architect
ER
record
for
the
Grove
London
Loring
Park
for
the
Paxson,
which
is
on
1st
Avenue
north
both
of
those
projects.
We
have
absolutely
no
street
front
street
parking
in
front
and
those
work
in
those
urban
core
areas.
Both
of
those
projects,
though,
have
almost
the
exact
loading
locations
on
the
back
side
of
the
building
as
we're
proposing
today
and
so
really
in
closing
and
I
and
all
the
3d
drawings
were
shown
previously.
T
But
you
know
I
think
that
we've
tried
as
best
we
can
to
preserve
all
of
the
trees
along
the
front,
they're
screening,
those
six
stalls
but
operationally.
We
feel
that
we
need
them
and
then
addressing
the
street
by
tree
preservation
and
facade
change
on
the
perch
side
and
I.
Think
with
that
I'll
just
leave
it
for
questions
that
you
may
have
made.
F
T
Question,
commissioner,
we're
not
opposed
to
changing
the
width
at
all,
so
it's
really
just
the
second
part
of
the
st..
The
sentence
shall
be
relocated
to
an
area
of
the
site,
we'd
like
to
maintain
that
location,
but
we're
willing
to
make
it
more
narrow
and
the
reason
why
is
we
have
two
ways
for
cars
to
get
in
and
out.
So
if
that
is
blocked
during
a
move
in
then
people
can
use
the
northern
car
entrance
so.
T
T
We
have
two
bus
stops
that
are
at
the
south
side
of
the
site,
but
we
have
no
street
parking
and
so
we're
trying
to
from
a
vehicular
standpoint,
be
very
self-contained
and
to
be
able
to
have
tremendous
tree
preservation,
but
also
to
have
23
site
stalls,
as
opposed
to
we've
lose
six
on
the
front.
It'd
be
17
site
stalls
or
then
again,
move
move
in
to
eliminate
more
site
stalls.
T
T
T
S
S
T
You
can
enter
and
exit
both
of
those,
but
it's
really
a
one-way
looking
at
it's
better
just
to
use
this
this
image,
so
you
could
come
in
circle
around
and
come
back
out,
but
once
you
start
to
drive
north,
then
you're
gonna
drive
all
the
way
around
the
building
to
get
out
and
then
the
same
way
at
the
south
end,
it's
24
feet
wide
so
that
you
know
you
could
come
into
the
underground
garage
and
you
could
leave
the
underground
garage.
So
there's
you
know
kind
of
a
two-way.
S
T
S
T
T
We
like
that
tall,
two-story
space
and
then
being
able
to
you,
know,
walk
past
it
and
have
offices
to
your
left,
but
then
this
really
large
lounge
to
your
right.
So
now
just
functionally
we're
having
people
just
walk
through
that.
You
know
coffee
space
that
we've
created
for
morning
or
kind
of
lounge
space
at
night.
B
P
T
T
We
get
past
these
six
stalls
that
we're
requesting
and
then
it
starts
to
go
down.
That
gets
you
to
the
underground
parking
so
that
then,
when
we're
this
access
drive
and
that's
why
we
liked
it
that
way
that
when
I'm
on
first
floor
and
I'm
looking
out,
those
parking
stalls
are
yeah.
You
know
nine
people
only
and
my
duck
so.
M
T
Not
sure
that
it's
that
it's
clear
right
now
and
so
I
think
to
make
that
a
third
condition
that
you
know
this
development
team
is
committed
to
find
a
way
working
with
Public
Works
and,
ultimately,
with
men
died
right
now,
I'm
in
dot.
They,
we
can't
even
have
a
conversation
with
them
because
they
say
well
we're
in
we're
in
our
study
period,
but
I
would
recommend
making
making
that
addition
and.
F
You
just
add
a
couple
things
real,
quick,
so
I
was
looking
at
the
lobby
where
the
entrance
is
kind
of
coming
in
off
the
lobby,
not
necessary
the
office
anyway
and
I'm.
Wondering
I.
Think
your
point
about
ubers
and
lyft's,
and
all
that
people
dropping
off
is
great
for
that
door.
You
have
there,
but
I,
don't
see
we're
having
a
second
door
set
of
doors
off
that
same.
You
know,
circulation
path,
right
at
the
northern
side.
That
Lobby
is
necessarily
being
precluded
through
the
plan.
So
I'm
wondering
is
it?
Is
it
a
situation?
F
T
F
Then
my
second
question
really
quick
was
in
looking
at
the
site
plan
as
opposed
to
this
I.
Think
this
rendering
illustrates
it
really
well.
Is
it
wasn't
clearing
okay,
this
one?
It's
actually
illustrating
the
other
thing
so
right
where
the
sidewalk
runs
into
that
curvy
sidewalk.
That
leave
right
here.
F
So
if
I
was
walking
along
Johnson
and
I
got
to
there
and
he
wanted
to
cross
I'm
I
was
wondering
if
it
shows
on
the
rendering
the
sidewalk
at
least
continuing
through
that
curb
cuts
right
there
too,
at
least
I
know
you're
not
doing
the
rest
of
the
sidewalk
on
the
other
side,
but
just
so
you're
not
tearing
up
curb
cuts
later.
Would
you
be
willing
to
just
put
those
understood.
B
F
A
A
U
Neal
Scott
and
we're
on
15th
and
Johnson
were
probably
the
closest
house
to
the
project
and
I
just
wanted
to
say
we're
excited
about
it.
That
I
think
it's.
You
know
this
is
a
neighborhood.
That's
been
struggling,
both
my
life
for
the
last
60
years.
It's
really
going
upward
as
as
the
gentleman
said
it's
on
the
uptick
now
and
this
kind
of
indicates
that
and
I
think
it's
a
real
plus
to
put
a
something
like
this
in
the
neighborhood.
It's
gonna,
you
know
it
says
you're
coming
back.
So
that's
my
only
comment.
All.
A
Right,
thank
you.
Thank
you,
and
is
there
anyone
else
who
would
like
to
speak,
see
knowing
I'll
close
the
public
hearing
and
commissioners?
We
have
a
total
of
four
applications
before
us.
Are
there
any
further
questions,
or
would
someone
like
to
start
things
off
with
the
motion
with
a
motion
Commissioner
Luppi
Peter,
you.
V
A
F
M
F
A
J
A
P
I'd
like
to
add
a
friend,
an
amendment
to
amend,
condition,
number
Commission,
condition,
number
five
I'm
related
to
the
main
entry
and
I'll
leave
that
for
your
consideration.
The
principal
entry
shall
be
sorry.
The
conditional
entry
into
the
ground
floor
lobby
lounge
shall
be
moved
to
the
west
side
of
the
building
facing
Johnson
Street
northeast
the
principal
insurance
shall
be
connected
to
the
public
walk
in
the
drop-off
area,
with
a
small
hardscape
Plaza.
P
Just
just
really
the
notion
that
I
think
I
think
we
should
orient
this
building
towards
the
street
and
the
crosswalks
and
the
bus
stops.
It's
still
allowing
that
that
automobile
connection,
but
really
making
sure
that
K
the
for
bus
is
here
and
I
could
hop
on
that
be
in
downtown
in
ten
minutes.
So
I
think
that's
a
small
thing.
I
think
the
interior
space
you
could
work
through
and
get
that
resolved.
Just
fine,
but
I
think
that's
a
really
important
step
on
this
project.
So.
F
P
A
We
have
a
motion
and
a
second
any
discussion
on
that
amendment.
Hearing
none
all
in
favor
of
the
amendment
any
opposed
and
that
motion
carries
unanimously
going
back
to
the
original
motion.
Is
there
any
further
discussion
on
that
hearing?
None.
We
have
a
motion
and
a
second
to
approve
item
d,
the
site
plan
review
with
some
changes
to
condition
8
related
to
the
location
of
the
loading
space,
an
amendment
to
condition
5
regarding
the
principal
entrance
of
the
building,
and
if
there's
no
discussion,
no
further
discussion
clerk,
please
call
the
roll.
N
N
A
W
Good
evening,
commissioners,
this
is
for
the
block
1
residential
development.
This
is
the
fifth
and
I
believe
the
final
phase
of
the
Downtown
East
project
that
started
a
number
of
years
ago,
and
most
of
you
were
here,
I
think
for
all
iterations
of
the
project,
and
this
is
the
last
undeveloped
parcel,
and
this
is
going
to
be
a
342
unit,
residential
building,
there's
a
conditional
use
permit
to
amend
the
plan,
gene
development
site
plan
review
and
then
a
registered
land
survey.
W
This
is
on
the
corner
of
4th
Street
South
and
Park
Avenue.
This
has
been
a
Committee
of
the
Whole
meeting
in
the
past.
As
I
had
indicated,
it
was
342
units,
it's
25
stories,
tall,
there's
128
parking
spaces
in
the
building
access
to
the
park.
He
knows
from
three
different
means
of
egress:
one
is
off
of
4th
Street
one
is
off
of
Park
Avenue
and
then
the
other
one
is
from
the
existing
parking
garage
that
currently
exists
on
the
block.
W
The
access
here
at
the
4th
Street
is
to
the
loading
space
and
then
also
some
at
great
parking
spaces.
Access
to
the
exit
or
the
access
off
of
Park
Avenue
goes
leads
to
underground
parking
and
then
access
to
the
garages
through
the
garage
mm-hmm
they
do
have
amenity
deck
over
the
parking
garage,
so
they
own
the
air
rights
over
that
parking
garage
and
they
are
going
to
exercise
their
rights
to
develop
a
portion
of
the
it's
over
the
parking
garage
into
an
amenity
space
for
the
residents
of
the
building
the
ground
floor.
W
This
is
that
first
floor
floor
plan.
One
item
in
that
head
that
we
had
that
committee.
The
whole
long
conversation
that
we
had
it
come
in
the
hall.
Excuse
me
it
was
to
activate
the
ground
floor
and
if
you
recall
there
have
been
parking
spaces
in
this
area
with
a
narrow,
walkway
I
would
say
a
narrow
space
in
that
area
they
have
Hillerman.
Can
you
move
that
up
slightly?
Oh.
W
I'm
going
to
just
show
you
the
images
of
the
building,
they
do
have
two
items
of
alternative
compliance
that
are
needed.
One
is
a
portion
of
the
building.
The
main
entrance
to
the
building
is
located
further
than
8th
Street
eight
feet.
Excuse
me
from
first
Street
of
that
front
property
line
in
order
to
get
a
larger
canopy
at
the
building,
a
setback
for
weather
protection,
and
then
the
amount
of
active
function
on
Park
Avenue
is
less
than
the
78th
at
68%.
W
All
of
that
frontage
is
dedicated
to
active
space,
except
for
the
driveway
or
the
garage
way,
which
is
her
garage
door.
Excuse
me,
which
is
23
feet.
We
are
recommending
that
you
grant
alternate
compliance
for
both
of
those
items
and
then
here
are
the
images
these
were
provided
in
your
packets,
I
apologize.
W
The
coloring
is
a
little
darker,
maybe
it's
my
shadow
I'm,
so
the
that
is
going
when
you're
looking
from
the
Commons.
This
is
an
image
of
the
building
when
looking
from
the
in
southwest
we're
looking
from
the
Northeast,
and
then
this
is
a
building
when
you're
looking
east
on
Forest
Street
and
then
just
to
show
you
the
elevations
of
the
building
which
are
also
in
the
packets.
So
that
is
the
building
on
4th
Street
and
then
this
is
your
Park
Avenue
elevation.
W
This
is
the
allegation
that
is
on
the
river
side
of
the
building
or
the
north
side
of
the
building,
and
then
the
parking
garages
in
the
foreground.
And
then
this
is
your
elevation.
If
you're
on
the
east
side,
we're
recommending
approval
of
all
three
applications
before
you
subject
to
standard
conditions,
I
would
say
to
put
the
conditional
use
from
it
for
number
two
highlights
and
adds
as
conditions
the
amenities
that
they
are
proposed
in
through
the
PUD
and
I
will
stand
for
any
questions.
Commissioners.
A
M
Tonie
Barranco
4439,
Fremont,
Avenue,
South
and
Minneapolis
president
Brown
members
of
the
Planning
Commission
I'll.
Be
very
brief.
With
my
comments.
As
Hillary
said,
this
is
the
last
phase.
Our
fifth
phase
of
the
Downtown
East
development
very
excited
about
finishing
up
this
last
piece.
This
piece
is
an
18,000
square
foot
I,
don't
want
to
call
it
remnant
piece.
M
It's
always
been
an
important
part
of
the
project,
but
the
parking
ramp
that
was
built
for
the
MS
FA
was
an
urgent
matter
that
was
part
of
the
delivery
of
the
overall
stadium
condition,
and
when
we
built
the
ramp,
we
were
required
to
reinforce
the
ramp
in
preparation
for
a
building,
and
so
what
you
see
as
planned
has
always
been
planned
as
part
of
the
project.
But
we've
had
to
deal
with
some
really
tight
conditions
within
the
project
itself
very
excited
to
be
bringing
forward
a
residential
tower.
M
We
think
it
is
going
to
be
a
signature
showpiece
to
the
end
of
the
Commons
and
obviously
fitting
in
with
the
light
rail
line
and
the
amenities
that
are
rich
in
that
part
of
the
neighborhood.
The
other
thing
about
it.
We've
been
really
thoughtful
about
not
over
building
parking
being
on
the
fact
that
we
were
literally
interconnected
with
a
sixteen
hundred
and
fourteen
stall,
a
public
parking
ramp.
M
We
wanted
to
best
leverage
the
benefits
of
that
ramp
in
light
of
the
fact
that
we
had
a
building
building
adjacent
to
an
abutting
that
that
piece,
so
our
building
really
comes
straight
out
of
that
18,000
square
foot,
corner
piece
and
we'd
be
thrilled
to
answer
any
questions
that
you
might
have
joining
me
tonight.
I've
got
Josh
extra
and
from
the
architecture
team
I've
got
Tom
Rae
Walt
from
our
civil
team
and
my
co
developer
and
colleague,
Joe
Paris
is
here
so
we've
got
you
covered
on
all
fronts,
thanks.
P
The
ground
floor,
commercial
space
there
seems
to
be
stairs
ramp,
connecting
it
to
the
lobby
of
a
building.
Is
that
a
requirement
to
have
those
connected
in
your
mind
or
that
commercial
Statesboro
without
those
rampant
stairs
in
that
location,
seems
like
that
takes
a
lot
of
restate
up?
That's
just
getting
people
up
I
think
people
could
walk
outside
get
into
that
retail
space
if
they
needed
to
president.
M
You
go
from
plan
West
if
you
consider
Park
is
west
to
east
and
Chicago
and
we
need
to
make
upgrade
as
we
go
from
east
to
west,
and
so
we've
been
trying
to
balance
both
the
maximization
of
that
retail
space
with
making
up
that
grade
as
we
go
and
finding
that
balance
has
been
hard
for
us
to
do,
and
so
in
that
sense,
I
think
we've
got
a
small,
great
change
that
we've
accommodated
the
best
way
we
can,
while
still
making
a
market
old
piece
of
retail
space
kind
of
in
the
mid
block
there.
I.
P
Have
one
other
question:
could
you
go
to
the
rendering
from
the
east
there's
a
really
picky,
but
since
you're
standing
here,
I
thought
it
asked
to
take
30
seconds
so
other
side?
That's
the
West,
the
other
east.
Looking
looking
from
the
east
the
way
the
the
east
elevation.
Look,
though,
the
pre-cast's
the
light
stone
and
it
stops
those
two
piers
at
the
corner
seem
like
they're
hanging
out
there.
If
you
could
send
that
back
to
your
your
team
and
look
to
see
if
you
could
connect
that
list
or
do
something
and
it
just.
P
A
D
Everyone,
my
name,
is
Sean
billig
and
I.
Look
at
250,
Park
Avenue,
which
is
a
couple
blocks
from
this
development.
I
would
like
to
say
that
I'm
really
happy
to
see
that
this
is
happening.
I'm,
really
happy
to
see
that
it's
residential
rather
than
commercial,
but
I'd
like
to
ask
the
Commission
to
consider
a
couple
things.
One
is
the
the
some
architectural
elements,
the
rendering
that
was
released
by
Ryan
I,
think
it
was
late,
November
or
so
I
had
some
real
nice
depth
to
it.
So
there
was
a
cornice
type
of
the
building.
D
D
D
Is
after
I
think
the
earlier
rendering
is
quite
a
bit
nice
you're,
looking
personally
at
the
particularly
here
in
the
top
very
flat
ugly
personal
opinion,
I'm
also
a
bit
concerned
about
the
curb
cut
on
I
guess
the
two
curb
cuts
in
the
Park
Avenue
side
gets
a
lot
of
foot
traffic,
particularly
after
events.
We
already
have
a
huge
curb
cut
for
the
the
parking
ramp
that
this
building
is
connected
to.
D
It
would
be
really
nice
if
we
could
just
make
use
of
that
eliminate
the
additional
cut
that
would
potentially
also
allow
the
retail
space
to
move
to
the
corner
closest
to
the
park,
which
I
think
would
be
a
huge
improvement
for
that
location
and
that
retail
space
could
potentially
be
a
bit
larger
to
move.
That's
all
right.
A
B
F
V
Think
that
there's
the
depth
actually
hasn't
changed
in
the
relationship
between
I,
don't
have
a
reference
to
point
two,
but
a
between
the
main
plain
of
the
kind
of
glass
box
that
goes
up
and
over
the
top
and
the
front
face
of
the
precast.
What
has
changed
is
the
relationship
of
the
balconies
within
that
to
the
front
face.
V
Originally
we
were
looking
to
do
recessed
balconies
and
have
those
stay
behind
it
and
as
we
look
through
that
and
thought
more
about
how
the
units
were
gonna
be
impacted
by
that
it
actually
became
concerning
for
both
unit
light
entering
into
them.
We
have
several
neural
units
that
get
very
dark
at
the
back
of
them.
If
we
have
the
balconies
fully
recessed,
you
just
don't
put
enough
light
into
them
and
it
limits
the
amount
of
views
that
you
get
out
of
the
unit
both
from
with
in
the
unit
and
out
on
the
balcony.
F
You're
saying
there's
more
square
footage
in
the
unit's,
because
you
pulled
the
balconies
out
a
little
so
that
plane
that
we're
talking
about
hasn't
changed.
It's
at
the
location
of
the
balcony
within
the
plane
is
moved
forward.
That
is
correct
and
then
just
a
follow
up
real
quick
on
the
facades
for
those
buff-colored
elements.
Are
they
flush
with
the
glazing?
That's
next
to
it,
or
are
they
actually
proud
by
that
some
sort
of
six
inches
10
inches
I?
Don't
something
to
make
some
sort
of
shadow
liner
indicate
materiality.
V
All
right
so
try
to
point
to
the
plains
as
fairly
as
I
can
so
this
plane
is
proud
of
the
primary
glazing
plant
that
runs
behind
it
and
the
precast
in
these
vertical
columns
that
are
separated
by
the
balconies
is
about
16
inches.
Proud
of
that.
So
that's
how
those
balconies
are
partially
recessed
from
that.
So
it's
a
little
bit
hard
to
see
at
this
scale,
but
not
a.
B
F
V
The
reasoning
for
the
two
curb
cuts,
so
the
limitations
of
the
site
are
such
that
we
can't
get
parking
on
the
first
floor
and
have
access
below
grade
from
one
curb
cut,
and
the
curb
cut
on
Park
actually
exists
today
that
was
put
in
as
part
of
the
original
development.
So
it's
they're
just
not
going
anywhere
currently.
So
we
would
use
that
one
again,
so
we're
really
asking
for
one
additional
curb
cut
off
the
fourth
which
allows
us
to
do
the
off
street
loading
within
the
building
footprint.