►
From YouTube: August 19, 2019 Minneapolis City Planning Commission
Description
Minneapolis City Planning Commission Meeting
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
A
All
right
it
is
4:31
I
will
call
together
the
call
to
order
the
August
19th
2019
Minneapolis
City
Planning
Commission
hearing.
My
name
is
Sam
Rockwell
I
served
as
president
of
the
Planning
Commission
I'm
joined
today
by
a
full
house:
commissioners,
Allison
Brown,
kögel,
Coleman,
Sweezey,
Lukey,
Pierre,
trader
Olsen
and
cron
sir.
Our
first
order
of
business
is
to
approve
the
actions
from
the
August
5th
2019
City
Planning
Commission
meeting
commissioners
do
I
have
a
motion.
A
B
A
Good
I
will
take
that
as
a
motion
to
approve
that
item
number
one
commissioners
do
I
have
a
second
we've
motion
and
a
second
all
in
favor.
Any
opposed
motion
carries
next.
We
will
adopt
work
through
the
agenda
for
today's
hearing,
for
those
of
you
in
the
audience
I'm
going
to
walk
through
the
full
agenda.
If
you
wish
to
testify
against
an
item,
a
staff
recommendation
for
an
item
or
two
to
change
that
staff
recommendation,
please
raise
your
hand
make
yourself
known.
Otherwise
we
will
be
placing
many
of
these
items
on
the
consent
agenda.
A
A
A
We
do
have
one
hand.
Someone
is
here
to
speak.
I'm
dancing
bear
yes
all
right.
We
will
discuss
item
number
two
dancing
bear
item.
Number
three
is
off
Shaughnessy
distillery
parking
lot
at
600,
Malcolm
Avenue
southeast
in
Ward,
2,
conditional
use,
permit
site
plan,
review,
preliminary
and
final
plans.
Anyone
here
to
speak
on
item
number
three
seeing
none
I
will
place
item
number
three
on
consent.
A
Item
number
four
is
also
a
Shaughnessy
distillery.
600
Malcolm
Avenue
southeast
in
Ward
2
for
the
site
plan
review.
Is
anybody
here
to
speak
on
item
number
four
see?
No
one
will
place
item
number
four
on
consent.
Item
number
five
is
2201
Jefferson
Street
northeast
in
Ward,
one
site
plan
review.
Is
anyone
here
to
speak
on
item
number
five
see?
No
one
will
place
item
number
five
on
consent.
A
A
Item
number
six
is
the
lower
46
registered
land
survey
at
4601,
Snelling
Avenue,
39:39,
46th,
Street
East
in
Ward,
12
preliminary
and
final
registered
land
survey?
Is
anybody
here
to
speak
on
item
number
six,
seeing
no
one
I'll
place
act.
Number
six
on
consent!
Item
number:
seven
is
a
marathon
signage,
17,
1700,
Lake
Street
in
war.
Denying
non-conforming
use
is
anybody
here,
I
just
become
the
height
of
number
seven
see.
No
one
will
play
seven
number:
seven,
a
consent
item
number:
eight,
the
Minnehaha
mall
addition
at
2852,
26th,
Avenue,
South
and
work
nine.
A
A
Item
number
11
is
the
timber
project
at
103rd,
Avenue
North
in
Ward
3
site
plan
review.
There
is
anybody
here
to
speak
on
item
number
11.
We
have
one
item
instead.
I
would
ask
that
if
you
are
here
to
testify
that
you
testified
with
new
information,
as
we
heard
you
last
hearing
very
good
I
will
place
item
number
two,
and
do
you
have
new
new
information
for
that?
A
Okay,
the
will
play
set
of
number
11
on
the
discussion
agenda
item
number
12,
28,
24,
28
28
and
28
32
Girard
Avenue
South
in
Ward
10,
a
variety
of
applications
for
a
residential
building.
There
is
anyone
here
to
speak
on
item
number
12,
seeing
no
one
will
place
item
number,
12,
consent,
item
number,
13,
32:24,
32,
36,
Girard,
Avenue,
south
on
Ward
10,
a
variety
of
items
for
a
residential
building.
A
There
is
anybody
here,
speak
on
item
number
13,
seeing
no
place
item
number
13
on
consent;
item
number
14
27th
in
Girard
apartments,
2701,
2707,
2709,
2715,
Girard,
Avenue
South
in
Ward
10,
as
anybody
here
to
testify.
We
have
a
couple
here
for
out
of
number
14.
We
placed
that
on
our
discussion
agenda
item
number
15
is
the
Main
Street
Apartments
East
10
11
to
10
27
Main,
Street,
10
10
to
10
16.
Second,
2nd
Street
northeast
in
Ward
3.
Is
anyone
here
to
testify
item
number
15,
a
few
people
on
item
number
15?
A
Commissioners
could
I
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
agenda
as
amended.
I
have
a
motion
and
a
second
all
in
favor
any
opposed
all
right.
That
motion
carries
next.
We
will
open
the
public
hearing
on
the
consent
agenda.
Anybody
who
wishes
to
comment
on
any
of
the
items
on
consent.
If
you
wish
please
come
to
the
microphone.
If
anybody
wishes,
there's
no
obligation.
D
Address
for
the
record
Thank
You,
Matthew
Ralston,
four,
four:
four:
zero
victory:
we
live
less
than
a
thousand
feet
from
dancing
bear
chocolate.
The
proposed
location
additionally
I'm,
a
member
of
the
victory
board
of
directors
as
well
as
the
Business
Committee.
The
Business
Committee
has
been
working
tirelessly
to
find
willing
businesses,
small
businesses,
businesses
that
are
good
for
the
community
to
come
into
the
community,
and
we
believe
this
is
just
one
of
the
many
businesses
that
will
come
forth.
D
A
A
Is
just
for
items
on
the
consent
agenda
which
are
being
approved
or
not?
Yes,
not
discussed
all
right,
so
you,
no
one
else.
I
will
close
the
consent
agenda.
Commissioners
could
I
have
a
motion
to
approve
items
on
the
consent
agenda,
a
motion
and
a
second
all
in
favor.
Any
opposed
that
motion
carries
all
right.
Moving
on
to
our
discussion
items,
I
will
start
our
discussion
items
with
item
number,
eight
Minnehaha
mall
edition
22:52
26th,
Avenue,
South,
Peter
Crandall.
The
floor
is
yours.
F
Good
evening,
commissioners,
the
project
before
you
is
located
at
28:52
26th
Avenue
South
known
as
the
Minnehaha
mall.
The
project
is
seeking
a
conditional
use
permit
for,
in
addition
to
an
existing
shopping
center
that
addition
is
subject
to
site
plan
review.
It's
a
4,500
square
foot
addition
to
an
existing
109,000
472
square
foot
shopping
center.
As
you
can
see
in
the
zoning
map
here,
it's
a
somewhat
uniquely
shaped
parcel.
The
shopping
center
has
a
large
surface
parking
lot
that
is
shared
with
the
grocery
store
immediately
to
the
east.
F
The
first
condition
has
to
do
with
the
site
plan
review
requirements
for
landscaping
and
screening
along
the
public
right-of-way,
so
on
the
eastern
edge
of
the
parcel
along
26th
Avenue
South.
There's
a
landscaped
buffer.
The
site
plan
review
requirements
have
a
standard
that
there'd
be
one
canopy
tree
per
25
linear
feet
along
the
street
frontage.
There
are
some
gaps
in
that
and
the
existing
conditions
on
the
site,
and
so
a
ct/pet
is
recommending
that
the
applicant
comply
with
that
by
planting
additional
trees.
F
In
that
location,
we're
also
recommending
a
condition
of
approval
related
to
the
building
design
itself,
and
this
has
to
do
with
the
visual
interest
standards
in
the
site
plan
review
that
buildings
provide
some
kind
of
visual
interest
in
their
elevations,
either
through
materials
or
windows,
setbacks,
recesses
productions,
etc.
The
elevation
which
you
can
see
here
shows
the
addition
on
the
right
side,
which
will
be
clad
in
stucco
and
then
the
existing
building
on
the
left,
which
has
two
horizontal
brick
bands
and
one
stucco
band.
F
The
condition
of
approval
recommends
that
the
applicant
continue
the
brick
banding
around
the
addition,
such
that
it
is
compatible
with
the
existing
structure
and
meets
the
site
plan
review
standard
that
buildings
are
similar
to
and
compatible
with
the
front,
rear
and
sides
of
the
entire
building.
I
think
the
applicant
is
here
to
discuss
at
least
one
of
those
conditions,
but
I
can
take
any
questions
before
we
move
forward
measures.
A
G
G
So
the
staff
report
says
they're
recommending
the
brick
primarily
because
to
be
consistent
with
the
existing
elevations
of
the
building
so
I'm.
Finding
that
a
little
deceiving
in
the
fact
that
if
you
take
a
look
at
the
site
plan
that
little
section
on
the
north
end
of
the
building
is
the
only
one
that
has
brick
in
this
entire
building
even
target
does
not
have
brick.
G
It
has
painted
precast
panels
and
some
painted
EFS
panels
on
it,
so
the
owner
is
kind
of
wondering
why
we're
dressing
this
thing
up
to
appeal
to
the
back
of
the
building,
which
no
one
can
really
see.
It's.
It's
elevated,
Hiawatha,
Avenue
there.
So
even
the
people
driving
across
can't
see
the
back
of
this
building
and
most
of
it
faces.
Like
I,
said
the
power
station.
That's
right
there
in
the
corner.
So
that's
really
what
the
owner
is
wondering.
Why
we're
I
appreciate
the
standard?
I
know
why
it's
there.
G
It's
there
for
new
developments
is
there
for
significant
additions,
but
this
is
actually
adding
above
less
than
four
percent
to
the
mall
piece
and
if
you
count
target
it's
less
than
two
percent
of
the
square
footage
of
the
mall,
so
we
really
thought
we
were
going
to
get
potentially
a
administrative
approval
on
this,
and
then
we
were
told
anything.
That's
under
a
conditional
use
permit
now
has
to
go
through
the
full
process.
G
So
that's
why
we're
here
and
the
only
thing
we're
questioning
all
the
other
staff
recommendations
seem
to
be
makes
sense
to
us
we're
just
asking
for
a
little
more
common
sense
when
it
comes
to
the
scope
of
this
edition
and
what
we're
being
required
to
do
there.
So
that's
really
all
we're
asking,
and
we
appreciate
your
consideration
any
other
questions.
Thank.
A
F
Peter
I
might
just
add
one
thing,
which
is
that,
under
the
current
elevation
plan,
the
applicant
is
proposing
to
do
a
color
differential
that
matches
the
banding
and
I
can
be
correct,
that
that's
not
right,
but
that
would
you
know
kind
of
continue
the
spirit
of
that
existing
North
elevation
in
design,
but
potentially
not
material.
So
that's
something
to
consider
in
waiting
outcomes
could.
A
F
B
Have
a
question
for
staff
hi
Peter,
so
it
just
real
quick,
the
material
requirements
that
you're
have
honest,
that
condition
number
seven
on
the
site
interview.
How
does
that
gel
with
the
normal
percentage
of
building
material
quirements?
Do
we
request,
as
opposed
to
be
like
FS
or
another
material,
like
every
area,
exceeding
what
we
would
normally
request
on
the
back
of
the
building?
So.
F
B
Are
you
seeing
that
way?
This
was
I'm
kind
of
so
this
was
any
other
building,
not
just
the
back
of
a
store
mall,
but
any
other
new
addition.
Would
we
require
them
to
have
a
certain
material,
a
level
of
material
to
your
material
on
that
facade
as
well
or
would
we
say
that
the
rest
of
it
is
is
meeting
the
percentage?
Therefore,
this
doesn't.
F
The
standard
that
we're
looking
at
has
more
to
do
with
the
visual
interest
and
compatibility
standard
than
with
exterior
building
materials,
percentages
and
durability
standard
it.
It
would
be
meeting
that
if
it
were,
you
know,
built
new,
the
entire
thing
or
if
it
were
just
the
addition
that
we're
being
evaluated
okay.
G
We're
actually
proposing
to
continue
the
band
as
Peter
was
saying,
with
two
different
colors
of
stucco,
one
being
a
darker
Brown
to
kind
of
mimic
the
hue
of
the
brick.
The
brick
itself
is
a
blended
brick
that
was
done
in
the
70s.
So
even
if
we
maintain
that
trying
to
match
it
would
be
very,
very
difficult
because
there's
four
different
colors
and
there
it's
about
the
ratios,
what
colors
go
where
are.
B
G
G
G
I
J
A
B
Those
are
the
additions
in
line
with
the
existing
wall
of
the
north
wall,
which,
in
which
case
I
feel
like
the
north
wall
Alicia's
be
of
the
same
material
just
so
it's
not
so
disjointed
that
it'll
be
two
very
different
things
right
side
by
side
in
the
same
plane,
but
as
for
the
West
elevation
I'm
fine,
if
it's
switching
materials,
because
it's
on
a
completely
different
elevation,
so
I
guess
that
would
be
my
perception
just
so
it
doesn't.
It
doesn't
look
so
disjointed.
A
I
A
K
K
The
Heritage
Preservation
Commission
in
May
unanimously
approved
the
shift
key
of
appropriateness
for
this
building
in
the
historic
districts,
so
the
applicant
has
looked
to
meet
all
the
standards
and
only
needs
the
the
required
application
of
cyclin
review
because
the
chapter
5:30
standards
we
see
this
building
fitting
in
with
the
current
comp
plan
guidance
and
the
smaller
plan,
as
it
is
a
mixed-use
building
in
this
area.
That's
calling
for
that
and
the
number
of
pedestrian
improvements
and
up
being
a
well-designed
building
that
is
similar
on
all
four
sides
in
the
staff
report.
K
A
L
Seemingly
developer
of
timber
21:45
Windsong
Lane
in
that
Chanhassen,
Minnesota
and
I,
don't
actually
have
a
whole
lot
to
add.
Besides
we're
really
excited
about
the
project
we
weren't
here
a
couple
weeks
ago,
because
I
had
some
pricing
issues
that
happened
had
to
kind
of
come
to
terms
with
with
the
with
the
subcontractors
which
actually
finally
fell
in
line
after
I
said:
I
wasn't
going
to
build
it
and
now
I'm
really
excited
to
to
get
things
moving
and
move
ahead.
So
I
appreciate
the
working
with
that
Erin
from
the
city
and
appreciate
your
time
tonight.
A
M
Welcome
Ron's
lewinsky
1
1
1
4th
Avenue
North
a
unit
403.
That's
the
Rock,
Island
condominiums
and
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
speak
with
you
at
your
last
meeting
and
point
out
a
couple
of
inconsistencies
between
the
2000
Minneapolis
master
plan,
the
2010
North
Loop
small
area
plan
and
the
2020
Minneapolis
master
planning,
and
the
zoning
of
this
particular
parcel
in
the
old
warehouse
district.
M
You've
received
the
report
that
we
provided
with
the
Heritage
Preservation
Committee
and
I'm
disappointed
that
that
committee
didn't
take
into
account
all
of
the
information
that
was
provided
to
them
in
regards
to
opposition
to
this
project.
Their
significant
neighborhood
opposition,
there's
over
62
members
of
The
Rock,
Island,
condominium
association,
the
Fifth
Avenue
condominium
association
and
members
of
the
river
I'm,
not
sure
what
it
is
a
little
place
right
by
the
river,
the
condominiums
that
are
down
in
that
area
too.
M
You've
had
a
chance
to
look
at
the
report
and
we've
referenced
the
Minnesota
state
law
that
we
don't
believe
that
council
has
followed
in
bringing
zoning
into
compliance,
and
nor
has
anyone
ever
asked
this
developer
other
than
ourselves.
We
have
not
received
the
reply
why
those
long-term
planning
documents
were
not
considered
in
planning
this
project.
We
believe
a
six-story
project
is
consistent
with
all
of
the
Minneapolis
and
North
Loop
planning
processes,
and
never
once
was
that
address
why
this
isn't
a
six
story
project
instead
of
a
10
story.
M
Project
I'd
also
like
to
point
out
that
not
only
is
the
site
context
not
meeting
the
criteria
of
the
Minneapolis
master
planning
district,
but
the
land-use
planning
section.
One
point
two
point:
one
talks
about
scale
and
that
are
consistent
with
the
context
of
the
surrounding
area
and
all
the
surrounding
area
is
five
stories
or
less
also
the
urban
design
policy.
Ten
point
six
point:
three
talks
about
preservation,
enhancement
of
view,
corridors
that
focus
attention
on
the
downtown
skyline.
This
dramatically
interrupts
those
view
corridors
for
many
of
the
buildings
in
the
North
Loop
area.
M
Also,
ten
point
eleven
point:
three:
that
that,
through
master
planning
and
zoning
regulation,
that
should
be
the
guidance
that
the
citizenship
of
the
city
relies
on
to
move
their
interest
forward,
and
we
don't
believe
this
project
does
that
at
the
scale.
Every
other
criteria
we're
very
much
in
support
of
this
project.
We
just
believe
the
scale
is
wrong
at
ten
storeys
thanks
for
listening
to
us.
Thank.
A
N
A
I
O
Good
evening,
commissioners,
this
is
27th
and
drier
departments.
You
saw
this
at
a
gene
Committee
of
the
Whole
meeting
at
that
can
be
the
whole
meeting.
This
was
a
six
story,
building
with
many
applications
that
were
required.
They
took
your
feedback,
they
went
back
and
talked
to
the
neighborhood
as
well,
and
they
have
come
in
with
a
four-story
building
tonight.
O
They
still
do
require
several
applications.
However,
not
as
many
in
the
building
is
much
more
an
align
with
the
guidance
of
the
current
zoning
and
then
the
future
comp
plan,
which
had
been
part
of
our
conversation
at
the
Kamiya
the
whole
meeting,
so
they
do
require
several
applications.
The
project
is
an
85
unit,
four-story
residential
building,
with
50
underground
underground
parking
spaces.
Those
parking
spaces
are
all
accessed
from
a
single
vehicle
door
along
the
alley.
O
They
have
immense
amenities,
spaces
for
the
residents
on
the
ground
floor
and
then
up
on
the
fourth
floor
and
up
on
that
fourth
floor,
they
have
pulled
that
southwest
corner
of
the
building
back
to
allow
for
that
rooftop
deck.
The
materials
that
are
on
the
building
is
a
brick
primarily
brick.
Building
with
some
burnished
block
along
the
alley
and
then
three
different
colors
of
metal
panel,
the
building
is
uniform.
It
doesn't
meet
all
of
our
site
plan,
review
standards
and
so
I
won't
be
touching
on
any
of
those
has
no
alternative.
Compliance
is
required.
O
O
They
are
two
blocks
from
the
Uptown
Transit
Center
and
then
else
in
the
Midtown
Greenway.
All
of
these
land
use
features
in
our
current
comp
plan,
called
from
medium
to
high
density
housing
and
to
achieve
that
density,
they
are
asking
for
the
fer
variance
and
we
are
supporting
that
tonight.
They
do
have
to
require
a
variance
of
lot
coverage
from
seventy
to
seventy
eight
percent.
It
is
a
difference
in
this
case
of
two
thousand
eleven
square
feet
to
maximize
the
footprint
of
the
building.
O
To
achieve
those
fifty
parking
spaces
in
the
required
in
maneuvering
area,
they
have
increased
the
footprint
and
asked
for
that
variance,
and
we
are
supportive
of
that
variance
as
well.
They
do
have
yard
variances
on
all
four
sides,
three
of
which
are
for
the
building.
One
is
for
a
transformer.
This
is
Girard
Avenue
on
your
site
plan
27th
is
north,
some
North
is
up.
They
have
a
variance
of
this
front
yard.
Setback
from.
O
Sorry
from
23
feet
to
the
what
the
building
our
setback
is:
sorry,
I'm,
reducing
I'm,
sorry,
this
structure,
27:17,
is
23
feet
back,
the
district
setback
is
15,
and
so
they
are
asking
to
reduce
that
setback
to
eat
feets
in
this
corner
to
here,
and
then
the
doors
at
this
end
come
into
ten,
so
that
set
back
along
Gerrard
varies
in
and
out,
and
then
there
is
also
a
patio
that
goes
up
2-0
feet
and
the
stack
of
balconies
that
sits
over
that
main
entrance.
Here
we
are
recommending
approval.
O
The
two
buildings
to
the
south
of
the
on
this
block
are
outliers
on
the
block,
all
the
other
buildings,
all
of
the
other
multi-family
residential
buildings
are
located
up
to
Gerrard,
and
so
these
two
buildings
are
kind
of
a
pocket.
If
you
will
inside
of
that
block,
they
are
asking
for
a
corner
side
yard
setback
along
27th.
There
is
a
single-family
house
that
sits
on
the
block
to
the
east.
O
That
house
is
located
approximately
five
feet
from
that
corner
side:
property
line.
They
do
have
a
six-foot
fence
that
encloses
the
entire
rear
yard
that
is
located
up
to,
or
maybe
over
that
from
that
corner
side
property
line,
and
we
are
recommending
approval
of
that
variance.
They
do
then
have
a
variance
of
this
south
and
tarry
property
line
for
the
transformer
from
five
down
to
two
feet.
This
is
a
parking
area
and
this
neighborly
house
there
is
approximately
35
feet
between
the
house
and
where
that
transformer
is
located,
we
are
recommending
approval
of
that
variance.
O
Now
you
do
have
a
variance
along
the
alley
from
eleven
feet
down
to
between
eight
and
eleven
feet,
for
the
building
that
portion
of
the
building
that
is
closer
than
eleven
feet
is
that
portion
where
that
underground
garage
sits.
On
top
of
that
garage
is
green
space
and
then
individual
patio
is
very
small
patios
for
those
first
floor
dwelling
units
along
the
alley.
O
They
do
also
then
need
variances
for
some
stacks
of
balconies
that
they
have
along
the
alley,
but
we
are
also
supporting
that
those
balconies
are
at
least
five
feet
in
depth,
which
we
have
heard
is
a
good
depth
for
balconies.
So
we
are
supporting
all
of
those
applications
and
I
will
stand
for
any
questions.
Commissioners.
N
O
O
Q
Good
afternoon
she'll
de
Burgh,
with
DJ
architecture,
333
Washington,
Avenue,
North
I,
think
Hilary
covered
the
vast
majority
items.
I,
probably
reiterate
that
through
some
meetings
with,
obviously
the
committee
the
whole
and
with
the
neighborhood
we
had
reduced
the
size
of
the
project
from
six
to
four.
The
project
that
you
had
before
you
is
a
is
I
think
our
our
best
efforts
in
terms
of
meeting
the
guy
or
the
goals
of
the
comprehensive
plan,
as
well
as
meeting
the
context
of
the
neighboring
buildings
up
and
down
on
both
Girard
and
27th
uh-huh.
A
R
Michael
kappahd
check
I'm
on
the
building
at
27:22
gerard.
I
just
like
to
say
that
I
don't
think
it's
proper
that
we
changed
all
of
our
setbacks
for
the
building.
I
don't
think
that
fifty
parking
spaces
for
85
units
is
enough
and
I'm
afraid
that,
while
they're
building
it
and
after
they're
building
it,
I'm
gonna
lose
renter's
of
my
triplex
that
I've
kept
up
to
code
for
almost
four
years
now.
R
So
I
think
we
should
really
sit
down
and
take
a
good
look
of
what
we're
doing
whether
we
really
even
need
this
building
the
buildings
along
that
Street
are
100
to
140
years
old,
we're
throwing
away
pieces
of
history.
Here
we
got
plenty
of
room
up
in
the
inner
corridor
for
those
monster
buildings.
We
don't
need
it.
There.
S
My
remarks,
because
this
is
funny-
is
he
doing
this?
My
name
is
Margaret
Reinhardt,
also
known
as
Peggy
I
live
at
27:33
Girard
Avenue
south
on
the
same
block
as
this
proposed
apartment
building
I've
lived
there
for
over
19
years
and
I've
been
an
advocate
for
affordable
housing.
For
many
more
years,
a
retired
from
General,
Mills
and
I
have
been
a
literacy
tutor
at
Jefferson
Elementary
School,
which
is
one
block
from
this
proposed
housing.
Some
children
there
are
bused
to
Jefferson
from
homeless
shelters.
S
S
Some
people
have
lived
there
at
the
entire
time
and
it's
full
I've
known
for
some
time
that
these
four
Lots
would
be
developed
and
I'm
glad
to
see
more
housing,
but
I'm
disappointed
that
the
developer
has
apparently
turned
down
city's
incentive
to
make
some
units
affordable
a
certain
percent
of
them
and
it
does
not
meet
our
city's
needs
for
family
and
senior
housing.
I.
S
Doubt
that
children
were
in
the
minds
of
the
developers,
I
know
that
today's
hearing
is
about
legal,
finding
facts,
so
I'll
simply
say:
I
object
too
many
variances,
but
affordable
housing
still
remains
a
concern.
Our
city's
mission
is
to
serve
all
the
public,
not
just
the
demographics
targeted
by
developers.
You
know
that
better
than
I,
but
that
means
housing
for
people
with
less
money.
Children,
disabled
elderly,
so
I
really
would
state
I'm
for
more
housing,
but
it
needs
to
be
affordable.
Thank
you
for
your
attention.
A
T
Name
is
Melissa
Chien
I
live
at
271
v,
Girard
Avenue,
South
I
am
one
of
the
houses
they're
proposing
to
remove
as
part
of
this
new
development.
I
have
checked.
Obviously
it's
a
beautiful
house
I
rent
it,
so
they
obviously
own
it
it's
over
a
hundred
years
old,
the
amount
of
stained
glass.
That's
in
the
house
is
beautiful.
T
In
addition,
perking
in
that
area,
it's
terrible
right
now
and
it's
just
the
four
houses
and
then
you
might
want
to
add
an
apartment
complex
on
top
of
that,
I
understand
that
we're
getting
we're
gonna
be
more
towards
biking,
and
you
know
public
transportation
and
I'm
all
for
that.
But
right
now
we
need
to
think
about.
You
know
there.
There
is
no
parking.
27Th
is
crowded.
You
can't
get
down
the
street
in
the
winter,
especially
back
alley.
T
A
U
U
A
U
U
What
are
you
gonna
do
completely
destroy
the
character
of
that
that
area
in
there
now
we've
owned
that,
like
I,
said,
we've
owned
that
even
it
fur
it's
a
triplex,
I
rent
it
out
as
a
duplex,
because
I
don't
want
the
traffic
there
for
approximately
twenty
some
years
now.
I
know
there's
a
demand
for
for
housing
in
that
area,
but
a
long
lyndale
of
long
lake
street.
That's
all
hosing
there.
Can
anybody
tell
me
what
the
average
cost
of
the
unit
is
going
to
be
for
rent.
U
A
U
A
B
I,
just
don't
had
a
family
question
for
the
last
speaker,
but
just
so
you're
aware
of
the
things
that
we
can
and
can't
take
into
consideration
in
our
quasi
judicial
nature
of
this.
It's
there's
a
number
of
variances.
In
order
for
us
to
consider
the
variances
and
go
against
staff
recommendation,
we
have
to
determine
the
practical
difficulties.
B
A
A
N
Any
discussion,
Commissioner
Krister,
just
one
comment
with
the
lighting
plan
to
make
sure
that
the
step
lights
and
the
things
you
have
along
the
sidewalk
that
are
downcast
and
not
not
shining
out,
I'm,
not
sure
exactly
like
fixture.
You
have
in
there,
but
having
downcast
lights,
really
help
keep
glare
down
to
a
minimum,
acute
visibility
for
safety
reasons.
So
thank
you.
N
A
Other
discussion,
I
will
say
before
taking
the
vote
on
this.
You
know
so
in
terms
of
the
parking
issue.
As
let's
be
fair
pointed
out,
we
do
not
have
jurisdiction
over
that.
That's
not
a
variance
required
and
there
is
strong
push
in
the
city
from
a
policy
perspective
to
encourage
and
support
biking
walking,
transit
use.
A
There
are
policies
in
the
works
at
the
city
to
strengthen
our
inclusionary
housing
policies,
which
would
place
a
higher
requirement
that
currently
exists
for
affordable
housing,
and
so
that's
something
you're
concerned
about
that's
an
avenue
of
to
to
get
involved
and
and
then
give
this
commission
and
less
City
Council
greater
authority
over
those
issues.
With
that
I.
B
Given
the
tools
we
are
allowed
to
utilize
in
this
venue,
so
I
will
be
supporting
the
site
plan
review,
but
I
just
want.
You
know
that
it's
it's
not
out
of
our
awareness,
that
this
is
a
resource,
a
limited
resource,
that's
potentially
going
to
waste
for
nothing,
so
I
would
say,
encouraging
to
the
applicant
to
look
into
that.
I
can't
condition
it
to
currently.
A
R
I
A
F
F
F
There's
two
projects
that
we're
gonna
discuss
tonight
back
to
back
that
are
located
across
the
street
from
each
other
across
Main
Street
in
the
same
neighborhood.
This
one
concerns
the
East
project,
which
is
on
the
right-hand
side
of
this
slide,
highlighted
in
yellow.
You
can
see
some
of
the
adjoining
land
use
features
in
this
map.
Both
projects
are
kind
of
wrapped
on
the
north
and
west
side
by
the
Greenbelt
activity
center,
and
then
there
are
at
least
two
relevant
community
corridors,
Second
Street,
northeast
and
Broadway
Avenue
that
a
join
both
of
the
sites.
F
F
If
you
look
at
the
site
plan,
the
applicant
is
also
requesting
some
yard
variances.
The
variance
along
Main
Street
is
from
24
feet
to
8
feet.
It's
worth
noting
that
the
setback
and
that
pation
varies
from
the
north
to
the
south
along
the
south
part
of
the
main
street
elevation.
The
building
is
set
back
20
feet
to
respond
to
the
existing
established
front
yards
of
single-family
residences
immediately
to
the
south
of
the
property,
and
then
that
taper
is
closer
to
the
property
property
line.
F
The
project
actually
has
two
front
yards,
someone
along
Main
Street,
and
what
along
2nd
Street
northeast
until
the
variance
along
second
is
to
reduce
the
requirement
from
19
feet
to
1
foot
that
19
feet
is
a
reference
to
the
established
front
yard
at
the
adjacent
residential
property.
Again
on
this
elevation,
the
applicant
is
proposing
a
more
significant
setback
along
the
south
part
of
the
2nd
Street
elevation
to
respond
to
that
existing
residential
context.
F
There's
also
a
variance
to
reduce
the
minimum
loading
requirement
from
one
small
space
for
a
residential
building
that
has
more
than
100
units
to
0
spaces.
The
applicant
has
provided
a
narrative
in
their
application
about
how
they
intend
to
handle
moving
in
and
moving
out,
which
is
the
primary
loading
requirement
of
residential,
only
property
and
then
there's
a
variance
to
increase
the
maximum
lot
coverage
from
70%
to
76%.
F
B
Peter
I
do
question
on
the
East
elevation
North,
2nd
Street.
There
are
a
reason
why
there's
a
really
long
blank
wall
on
the
side
of
the
three
parking
spaces
that
would
face.
Second,
because
it
looks
as
though
there's
not
that
mints
on
the
first
floor
and
it's
not
that
far
from
the
street
and
I
would
think
that
it
would
be
funny
would
ordinarily
overlook.
B
F
F
That
wall
is
facing
the
interior
of
a
parking
garage
and
I
believe
that
there
would
be
landscaping
along
that
in
particular
to
screen
the
mechanical
equipment
there.
That
might
have
secured
that
elevation,
but
I
guess
I
would
defer
to
the
applicant
if
they
have
other
thoughts
about
how
to
meet
that.
A
X
Well,
I'm
Jason
Lord
from
Solheim
companies,
I
live
at
35,
32,
really
not
happening,
and
thanks
Peter
for
the
presentation.
I
just
have
a
couple
quick
remarks
and
that'll
be
a
resource
for
any
questions
that
you
have.
The
the
site
is
and
our
building
is
designed
to
serve
as
a
transition
from
the
really
high
frequency
arterial
Street
of
Broadway
to
the
single-family
neighborhood
homes
to
the
south.
So
it's
a
design
problem
that
we've
worked
hard
to
solve.
X
We've
met
with
the
neighborhood
group
a
couple
times
and
a
lot
of
the
street
frontage
along
Broadway
is
designed
to
really
engage
the
street.
We
enforce
the
urban
wall,
it's
the
exact
same
height
as
the
building
across
the
street.
That
was
built
maybe
a
decade
ago,
and
some
of
the
variances
are
to
engage
the
corners
of
Broadway
to
help
assist
in
natural
traffic
calming
and
activate
the
intersections
of
the
street.
And
then
we
have
stepped
back
to
match
all
existing
front
yards
with
four
story.
X
Brick
ends
in
the
building
to
serve
as
that
transition
towards
a
single-family
houses.
This
site
was
designated
in
the
st.
Anthony
West
small
area
plan
as
an
area
to
be
redeveloped
as
high-density
housing
and
to
really
build
the
site
into
the
neighborhood
we've
designed
a
public
pocket
park
along
Broadway
right
now.
The
conditions
are
really
harsh,
and
this
we've
seen
is
enhanced
the
landscaping
and
pedestrian
activity
and
to
perform
a
break
from
the
street.
We're
also
provided
proposing
Boulevard
trees
as
well.
X
A
lot
of
Broadway
and
we've
really
focused
the
landscaping
to
heavily
blend
the
building
into
the
neighborhood.
Next
to
the
adjacent
lot
lines
that
came
up
were
dense
landscaping
in
trees
too,
as
alternative
compliance
for
the
parking
garage
which
is
exposed
as
the
building
shifts
from
2nd
Street,
which
is
a
story
higher
than
Main
Street
on
site.
X
And
this
we
met
with
the
standard
neighborhood
we're
continuing
to
meet
with
them
for
historic
monument
for
the
history
of
the
neighborhood,
on
the
intersection
of
Main
and
11th,
we're
also
meeting
with
traffic
to
see
what
we
can
do
with
that
intersection,
because
it's
a
remnant
from
when
Main
Street
was
closed
off,
maybe
50
years
ago,
and
we've
we've
also
gotten
neighborhood
support
from
the
Sante
neighborhood.
They
did
vote
to
support
the
variances
6
to
5
last
week
and
all
over
our
buildings,
we've
really
tried
to
blend
and
incorporate
into
the
city
neighborhoods.
A
Y
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
Shi
limpia
aunt
I
live
at
71,
Main
Street
northeast
I've
lived
in
the
st.
Anthony
West
neighborhood
for
over
30
years.
My
question,
I
guess,
is
as
a
Planning
Commission.
Do
you
have
a
specific
guidelines
for
how
many
new
units
can
be
built
on
each
block
in
each
neighborhood?
Is
that
part
of
your
that's
nothing?
You
don't
I
noticed.
You
talked
about
the
fact
that
it
have
had
down
375
units
to
do
an
impact
study
is
that
in
one
building?
Y
Well,
that's
kind
of
sad,
because
there
are
now
four
buildings
right
in
a
row.
We've
got
the
Giulia,
which
is
98
units.
We've
got
the.
We
will
have
these
other
two
buildings
which
is
175
and
113,
and
then
we
have
the
69
Catholic
elder
care
units
and
they're
all
in
a
row,
and
it's
kind
of
like
a
big
tunnel,
because
it's
gonna
take
up
pretty
much
all
of
Broadway.
Y
I
really
think
it's
important
to
think
of
that
as
a
total
amount
of
space
I
I
just
did
some
math
too,
on
how
many
more
new
units
are
in
the
area.
We
have
over
1,000
96
units
in
this
area
and
it
doesn't
take
into
consideration.
These
are
mostly
apartment.
Buildings
takes
into
consideration
no
duplexes,
no
triplexes,
no
perplexes
which
this
working-class
neighborhood
has
always
had,
and
they
met
a
great
effort
to
keep
it
working
class
to
make
it
affordable
for
people
and
these
apartment
buildings.
Y
I
can
tell
you
it's
1,100
for
a
studio,
it's
13
to
1500
for
a
one-bedroom
and
it's
16,
it's
probably
16
to
18
hundred
for
a
two-bedroom.
Our
board
did
vote
5
to
6
that
isn't
a
winning
victory,
so
I
just
want
to
say
enough
is
enough.
We
really
need
to
start
thinking
about
our
neighborhoods
I
know
that
Heather
Worthington
said
we
really
want
to
examine
and
recognize
the
relationship
between
built
form
in
the
city
and
the
social
fabric
of
the
community.
This
is
destroying
the
fabric
of
our
community.
Y
The
2040
plan
says
that
developers
of
large
residential
buildings
have
to
have
a
certain
percentage
of
units
affordable.
Our
neighborhood
requested
that
we
have
eight
affordable
units
to
replace
the
eight
houses
being
torn
down
those
single-family
houses.
We
have
families
in
the
neighborhood
who
would
love
to
do
nothing
better
than
to
move
into
them,
but
they
can't
because
they're
going
to
be
developed.
Our
developers
here
admitted
they
would
not
be
doing
either
project
if
they
had
to
follow
the
guidelines
of
the
2040
plan.
I.
Y
Guess
I
just
want
to
say
I
think
we
are
hitting
a
tipping
point.
I
think
we
have
hit
a
tipping
point,
I
hear
about
density
and
I,
hear
I,
see
I
hear
about
all
these
different
projects
being
done.
All
these
different
neighborhoods
and
the
suburbs
is
Minneapolis,
doing
anything
to
coordinate
with
those
suburbs,
how
much
we're
building
and
how
much
we
need
I
mean
really.
It
is
a
conglomerate
number
that
we
have
to
take
into
consideration
just
not
here,
and
there
and
Minneapolis
doesn't
have
to
do
it
all
on
its
own.
Y
A
Z
And
I
would
have
done
a
PowerPoint,
but
our
neighborhood
meeting
area
doesn't
have
all
this
nice
setup.
So
I
had
to
do
a
little
bit
more
crafty
work
today,
I'm
Emily,
Scott
I
work
at
me.
Ireland
live
at
Main,
Street,
bungalows,
eight
one
four
Main
Street
and
I'm
the
president
of
our
association,
she's
on
Cathy
back
they're,
both
with
my
neighbors.
We
were
both
against
both
of
these
projects.
Z
I
know,
you
said
earlier
about
the
parking
so
I'm,
not
gonna,
even
bring
it
up
and
mostly
I,
want
to
bring
up
the
aesthetics
of
the
building
and
how
it
they're
trying
to
say
that
it
looks
and
has
a
feel
of
a
neighborhood
there's
a
lot
of
studios
in
that
apartment.
That's
a
lot
of
transient
neighbors!
That's
a
lot
of
people
that
move
in
and
move
out.
They're
not
gonna
stay,
there's
no
room
to
have
kids
in
a
385
foot
square
foot,
studio
apartment!
Z
We
have
a
gentleman
on
our
neighborhood
council
meeting,
he's
he's,
got
three
kids
and
a
single
dad
and
he's
irate
and
I'm.
Sorry
that
he's
not
here
today,
because
he
was
he
said
he
would
never
be
able
to
afford
that
and
one
of
the
developer
said
well,
maybe
we
can
make
a
deal
for
you
like
giving
him
a
handout.
He
wasn't
asking
for
a
handout.
We're
asking
for
some
affordable
quality
housing
and
I
was
very
insulted
by
them.
Z
Z
Z
AA
Diane
Huff
said
60m.
Ramsey
I
am
speaking
today
in
opposition
of
this
housing
project.
For
all
the
reasons
that
have
been
stated
from
my
neighbors,
but
I
particularly
want
to
emphasize
the
lack
of
parking,
the
conflict
within
transit
and
the
infrastructure.
We
have
an
old
infrastructure
in
a
in
an
old,
historic,
neighborhood
and
I'm
concerned
that
we
haven't
paid
attention
to
that.
The
question
I'm
asking
for
all
of
you,
I,
would
imagine
some
of
you
are
parents.
I
know
you
are
I
is
where
will
children
play?
AA
What
kind
of
experience
will
they
have
living
in
this
building?
Will
they
run
up
and
down
the
halls
up
and
down
the
streets?
Where
are
they
going
and
you'll
say
what
they're
going
to
our
parks?
Maybe
is
that
within
eyes
view
of
their
family
I
I
find
it
ironic
that
we
were
talking
about
him.
How
important,
affordable
housing
is,
and
we
agree
in
our
neighborhood.
We've
worked
really
really
hard
to
have
affordable
housing
and
we're
removing
affordable
housing.
AA
It
doesn't
make
any
sense
in
the
Mississippi
watershed
in
the
area.
That's
critical
to
our
parks,
to
our
water,
to
our
environment
and
in
the
Mississippi
flyover
zone,
where
a
half-a-million
birds
and
insects
fly
I'm
glad
they
would
have
a
high
building
to
land
on
I.
Just
hope
you
take
this
into
account
when
you're
making
recommendations.
So
what
do
we
need?
We
need
more
green
space.
These
guys
have
done
buildings.
They
know
how
to
do
this.
They
can
provide
more
green
space.
They
can
design
a
building
that
is
in
character
of
a
neighborhood.
AA
AB
I'm
Kathy
Heidelberg
I
live
at
channel
8
Main
Street
North
East,
which
is
two
doors
down
from
the
West
building
that
I'm
not
happy
about.
I
lived
in
my
neighborhood
in
my
house
for
over
32
years
and
now
I'm
worried
about
the
four
of
us
that
owned
our
own
houses.
We
have
nothing
anymore.
We
have
no
privacy,
we
have
no
parking.
We
have
nothing
so
I
want
to
know
what
we
get
out
of
this,
which
is
nothing.
My
biggest
concern
is
the
affordable
housing,
of
course,
like
everybody
else,
but
I'm
also
worried
about
eminent
domain.
AB
E
Hi,
my
name
is
Luna
I
got
her
set
him
at
two
to
four
third
Avenue
Northeast
I
live
in
Saint,
Anthony
West
as
well.
I
mean
favor
of
the
proposed
development,
Main
Street
departments,
East
and
West,
which
I
know,
is
kind
of
a
separate
item.
Thought
in
both
I'm
I'm
excited
to
see
more
neighbors
added
to
my
neighborhood
I.
Think
the
site
is
good
for
multi-unit
at
this
scale
because
of
sneer,
high
frequency,
transit
lines
and
I.
E
E
I
think
that
one
of
the
things
I
like
about
the
design
is
that
it's
going
to
improve
the
walkability
along
Broadway
that
borders,
the
property,
which
I
think
is
a
good
thing,
I-
think
that
adding
more
homes
can
take
some
pressure
off
the
housing
market
and
can
be
one
piece
of
what
helps
make
housing
more
affordable
in
the
city
and
for
all
those
reasons,
I
like
the
project
and
I'm
in
favor.
Thanks
your
time.
Thank.
A
A
B
I
just
wanted
to
just
adjust
a
couple
of
things:
I
heard
about
affordability
and
concerns
about
him
in
the
domain
just
really
quickly.
We,
although
2040,
is
very
much
in
favor
of
increasing,
affordable
housing.
Unfortunately,
none
of
the
policies-
in
fact
it
hasn't
formally
been
adopted.
So
we
are
not
even
acting
under
2040,
yet
as
a
Planning
Commission,
but
when
it
does
that
want
that
component
won't
take
effect
until
the
inclusionary
zoning
policies
been
written
and
adopted
by
council,
which
probably
won't
happen
till
six
months
from
now,
maybe
ish.
B
So
it's
coming,
unfortunately,
not
a
tool
we
have
in
our
toolbox
right
now,
but
but
it
is
in
theory,
coming
on
the
eminent
domain.
I'm,
not
a
lawyer,
but
I
can
tell
you
that
when
we've
discussed
the
topic
with
staff
and
with
the
city
attorneys
that
represent
all
land
use,
it's
not
a
tool
that
is
very
easy,
very
offer
anymore,
it's
much
more
restricted
than
it
has
been
in
decades
past.
Even
so,
do
have
peace
of
mind
that
that's
not
something
that
I,
I
least
I
in
my
experiences
will
be
on
the
horizon.
B
P
J
A
AC
Just
wanted
to
say
something
to
the
neighbors
who
spoke
against
this
and
I.
Don't
know
if
this
will
make
you
feel
any
better
or
not
I'm
sure
it
won't,
but
you
it's
not
lost
on
me.
I
know
how
close
this
was
at
your
Neighborhood
Association.
You
know
just
barely
squeaking
through
and
I
think
this
is
happening
in
so
many
areas
of
the
city.
AC
If
you
were
here
to
hear
the
one
in
Uptown
just
before
this,
and
one
thing
I
usually
say
to
people
and
parking,
isn't
our
thing,
we
don't
get
to
decide
that,
but
at
least
it
has
some
many
many
projects
that
we
approve
have
none
at
all
and
I
do
think
that
your
neighborhood
has
had
more
than
its
fair
share
of
these
really
escalated.
Projects
coming
through
I
would
put
I
bet
the
marcy
homes.
People
might
beg
to
differ
and
think
that
they've
had
the
brunt
of
it.
But
it's
not
lost
on
me
that
that's
happening.
B
I
wanted
to
ask
if
it's
okay,
that
a
friendly
amendment
at
a
condition,
eight
to
site
plan,
review,
instructing
the
applicant
to
work
with
staff
to
add
elements
to
bring
the
East
elevation
along
North
East,
second
Street
in
a
compliant
for
their
bright
blank
wall
provision,
because
it
wasn't
addressed
in
the
alternative
compliance
and
since
it
faces
a
front,
Street
I
think
it's
important
that
that
be
dealt
with
more
than
just
with
landscaping.
So
it
has
to
be
slinging
beyond
that.
If
that's
all
right.
J
P
A
H
It's
last
not
lost
on
me
the
struggles
that
the
neighborhood
is
going
for,
what
I
have
a
hard
time?
I
don't
know
personally,
accepting
is
in
six
months
in
a
year.
This
would
not
be
allowed
in
this
neighborhood
based
on
the
2040
review.
I
think
I'll
be
staining
from
this.
I
know
what
it
falls
within
the
plan
currently
set
out
by
the
city,
but
I
think
I'll
be
up
staining
from
this
phone.
A
F
And
item
number
16
is
located
at
1018
through
1024
Main
Street
northeast.
This
is
directly
across
the
street
from
the
previous
proposal
that
we
were
looking
at.
The
proposal
incorporates
three
existing
parcels.
That
again
today
contains
single
and
two
family
homes.
The
applicant
is
proposing
to
demolish
the
existing
structures
in
order
to
construct
a
new
five-story
residential
building
with
113
dwelling
units
on
the
site.
F
This
site
has
frontage
on
11th
Avenue,
North
East,
as
well
as
Main
Street
northeast,
and
it
does
have
a
shared
Ally
with
the
other
properties
on
the
site
again
showing
the
adjacent
land
use
context.
The
project
that
we're
considering
now
is
the
yellow,
highlighted
project
to
the
at
the
center
of
the
slide
and
then
an
image
of
the
proposed
project
for
this
proposal.
The
project
requires
a
conditional
use
permit
to
exceed
the
maximum
building
height
in
the
r5
district,
to
go
from
4
storeys
56
feet
to
50
stories.
80
feet.
F
The
applicant
is
also
seeking
several
variances
variance
to
increase
the
maximum
floor
area
ratio
from
2.4
to
2.99
the
variance
to
reduce
the
minimum
front
yard
requirement
along
Main
Street
southeast
from
15
feet
to
8
feet
again.
This
is
responding
to
some
of
the
established
urban
contexts.
The
established
yard
of
structures
immediately
to
the
south
is
somewhat
closer
to
the
property
line
than
the
minimum
friend
requirement
and
the
underlying
zoning
district.
F
The
11th
Avenue
Northeast
elevation
faces
a
commercial
property
and
as
adjacent
to
the
Greenbelt
activity
center,
which
has
a
more
urban
character
than
some
of
the
residential
properties
immediately
to
the
south.
There's
also
a
variance
to
reduce
the
minimum
interior
side
ever
permit,
along
with
South
property
line
for
balconies.
We
are
returning
that
variance
as
the
applicant
has
agreed
to
modify
the
design
of
the
balconies
such
that
they
do
not
encroach
into
the
yard
or
exceed
the
maximum
height.
F
I'll,
let
the
applicant
speak
to
some
of
the
more
specific
design
qualities
of
the
building.
It's
worth,
noting
that
on
this
project.
As
on
the
previous
project,
the
building
steps
down
from
5
storeys
to
4
storeys
along
the
South
elevation
such
that
along
that
property
line,
it
meets
the
maximum
height
requirement
in
the
RFI
of
district
to
respond
to
some
of
the
lower
scale
residential
uses.
I
can
take
any
questions
if
there
are
any
questions.
A
X
Jason
Lord
35
32,
Fremont,
Avenue
Minneapolis.
Thank
you
Peter
for
the
presentation,
similar
design
considerations
in
this
project,
but
a
very
unique
sight
and
circumstance
where
Main
Street
does
not
connect
with
Broadway,
so
it
loops
around
it
becomes
11th
Street.
So
really,
the
corner
of
this
project
was
designed
to
anchor
a
very
active
intersection
on
the
corner
of
an
activity
district.
It
really
doesn't
exist
that
is
more
sort
of
an
interstate
slip
turn
and
we're
working
with
the
city
of
Minneapolis
to
add
crosswalks
to
really
pedestrian
eyes
that
intersection.
X
But
this
building
we
wanted
to
have
activity
on
that
intersection
for
maximum
security
eyes
on
the
street,
to
really
make
it
engaging
with
the
urban
district,
and
then
we
wanted
to
blend
with
the
residences
down
the
block,
so
the
building
transitions
from
a
modern
form.
That's
all
glass
common
areas
at
that
intersection
to
a
traditional
brick
form.
That's
four
stories
with
brick
detailing
to
rillette,
relate
to
other
brick.
Details
in
the
neighborhood
and
I'll,
be
here
for
any
questions.
A
Y
Shelagh
Bjorn
at
7:01,
Main,
Street,
Northeast,
Minneapolis
I,
just
had
a
minor
addition
that
1096
units
that
I
talked
to
you
about
earlier.
That
does
not
include
these
288
units
going
in
so
we're
actually
looking
at
around
1300
units
in
that
area
and
then
I
keep
hearing.
This
is
just
to
comment.
I
keep
hearing
more
eyes
on
the
street
I'm
just
wondering
we're
getting
more
and
more
dense,
but
I
don't
feel
like
we
are
getting
safer.
So
that's
just
my
comment
to
go
along
with
that.
Thank
you.
Thank.
Z
So
we've
asked
them
put
a
gate
on
the
alley
so
that
it's
not
a
walk
through
because
there
is
a
bar
right
across
the
street
right
across
the
alley
from
that,
and
I've
also
asked
them
to
shuttle
their
drop
their
workers
in
and
lease
a
parking
lot
someplace,
because
I
live
where
I
live.
There's
enough,
there's
an
apartment
building
that
one
of
their
friends
owns.
That's
been
under
construction
for
a
year
and
a
half
and
it's
ridiculous.
They
get
to
park,
they've
cut
off.
Z
B
Z
Yeah
right
at
the
bottom,
where
you
can
see,
there's
a
house
right
at
the
bottom
yeah
and
then
there's
a
walkway,
and
that
goes
into
the
alley.
So,
where
I
live
as
a
six
unit
condominium
complex,
we
was
actually
too
condemned
homes
that
were
done
10
years
ago
or
so
or
12
years
ago.
Now,
and
we
haven't
really
nice
like
a
common
area
that
people
like
liked
to
walk
through.
So
we
had
to
put
a
gate
on
the
alley,
so
people
would
stop
doing
that.
So.
Z
I
Z
A
AA
Diane
hafsa
at
6:10,
Ramsey
I'm,
just
going
to
be
consistent
with
the
people
who
opposed
this
for
the
same
reason
that
they've
opposed
and
I
encourage
all
of
you
to
look
at
ways
in
which
this
project
could
be
a
better
project,
more
consistent
with
the
neighborhood
and
the
traditions
of
the
neighborhood
and
and,
of
course,
the
idea
of
not
having
the
gate.
Not
even
a
walkway
is
consistent
with
another
project
that
was
done
can
be
actually
across
the
street
from
the
Greenbelt
brewery.
So
there
was
president.
Thank
you.
Thank.
AB
Heidelberg
1008
Main
Street
northeast
my
I
have
the
same
thing
that
says
two
doors
down
from
me:
the
one
right
next
door
and
I'm
right
next
door
to
the
other
one
I'm
I
used
to
know
my
neighbors
I
used
to
know
everything
or
one
of
my
neighbors
on
the
two
blocks.
There
are
only
four
of
us
now
that
owned
our
houses.
A
X
And
that
would
so
the
walkway
is
really
for
pet
owners
or
for
the
the
units
themselves
too.
It's
not
the
primary
entrance,
it's
the
secondary
entrance
to
the
patio,
and
it
also
does
we
find
those
walk-up
units
make
it
much
connects
the
units
more
towards
the
neighborhood
I.
Think
a
gate
is
something
that
we
would
could
certainly
consider,
adding
or
eliminating
the
end
connection
of
the
patio,
so
that
only
works
forward
to
me.
X
B
X
B
X
I
think
one
of
the
good
concerns,
as
we
are
next
to
a
bar
and
we've
taken,
that
into
account
with
the
design
of
it.
So
I
think
you
know
better
than
a
gate
would
be
to
stop
that
patio
from
connecting
to
the
to
the
alley
space.
So
we'd
certainly
consider
that
as
an
amendment
or
adding
a
gate
along
Main,
Street
I
mean.