►
From YouTube: April 9, 2020 Zoning Board of Adjustment
Description
Minneapolis Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov/
A
To
this
live
broadcast
of
a
virtual
meeting
of
the
Zoning
Board
of
adjustments,
this
meeting
is
being
conducted
in
a
virtual
format
where
members
are
participating
via
telephone
or
other
electronic
means,
as
authorized
under
Minnesota
state
statutes.
Section
13,
D
point
0
to
1
due
to
the
declared
local
health
pandemic,
will
now
introduce
chair
Perry
to
convene
this
meeting.
B
Thank
you,
ms
blood
furred
I,
want
to
thank
everyone
for
joining
us
today
and
welcome
everyone
to
this
meeting
for
the
record.
My
name
is
Matt
Perry
I'm,
chair
of
this
board
and
the
board
is
the
Zoning
Board
of
Adjustment
I'll.
Call
this
meeting
order
and
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
roll
so
that
you
may
verify
the
presence
of
quorum.
A
B
B
A
E
B
B
I
Chair
Perry
members
of
the
board,
I
guess
there
is
there's
one
communication
I'd
like
to
address.
We
will
have
a
full
complement
of
board
members
with
the
April
23rd
hearing.
We
will
have
to
work
on
it'll,
be
kind
of
interesting
being
on
a
new
board
member
in
a
virtual
environment,
but
we
will
do
our
best.
Thank
you
all.
B
B
Consent
items
are
those
items
that
will
be
passed
without
discussion
by
the
board.
We
will
be
adhering
to
the
staff
recommendation
found
on
the
agenda
under
the
items
recommended
motion.
Section
importantly,
any
applicable
conditions
will
be
listed
in
the
same
section.
If
you
agree
with
this
recommendation,
including
any
applicable
conditions,
you
need
to
do
nothing
and
the
board
will
pass
it
as
recommended
after
the
item
is
passed
and
consent.
B
B
When
we
ask
people
who
have
called
in
whether
they'd
like
to
speak
against
the
item
and
we'll
put
it
on
the
discussion
agenda,
continuance
or
withdrawals,
we
have
a
continuance
request
and
these
are
items
that
will
be
hold
held
over
until
a
future
meeting
of
the
Zoning
Board
of
adjustment,
and
if
it's
continued,
I
will
be
stating
to
what
date.
The
item
is
being
recommended
to
be
continued
to
discussion
items.
These
are
items
that
will
the
board
will
take
public
testimony
deliberate
on
and
make
a
decision
after
the
public.
B
Testimony
has
been
heard
from
each
particular
discussion
item
I
will
close
the
public
hearing
for
that
agenda
item
once
I
close
the
public
hearing
for
an
item,
no
additional
public
testimony
will
be
taken,
but
staff
may
be
asked
to
address
board
questions
after
the
public
hearing.
For
an
item
is
closed.
Board
members
will
then
discuss
and
act
on
motions
and
for
these
land-use
requests,
the
chair
only
votes.
In
the
case
of
a
time.
Let's
go
through
our
land
use
request
agenda
number
five
is
1955
drew
Avenue.
South
staff
is
recommending
this
item
for
consent.
J
J
A
Sorry
we
were
working
through
that,
so
yes
and
I
apologize
if
I
mispronounce
name,
but
the
applicant
is
in
the
queue,
but
they
have
said
they
don't
need
to
speak.
If
the
item
is
on
consent,
it
was
I
apologize
if
I
mispronounce
name
Zayed
Nahas
is
in
the
queue,
but
again
should
not
just
requested
not
to
speak.
If
it's
on
consent.
Okay,.
B
B
B
K
B
So
I'm,
looking
at
this,
looked
at
the
practical
difficulties
of
this
item
and
it
seems
like
the
the
thrust
of
the
argument-
is
simply
that
there's
not
enough
space
because
of
require
yards
to
have
the
item
in
the
distance
between
the
accessory
dwelling
unit
in
the
in
the
primary
dwelling
unit.
So
because
there
isn't
enough
space,
that's
a
practical
difficulty,
but
those
distances
were
put
in
place
for
a
reason
and
I.
Think
if
we
use
that
logic,
basically
a
if
I
follow
that
logic,
then
an
ad
you
could
be
put
in
and
every
property.
K
Of
the
issues,
if
you
look
at
the
site
plan,
is
that
the
site
itself
as
compared
to
the
neighbor
neighboring
sites,
is
a
little
bit
more
shallow
than
the
other
than
the
adjacent
sites
and
so
I.
We
also
viewed
that
as
a
practical
difficulty
that
they
would
have
had
more
room
if
they're,
if
their
lot
was
the
same
depth
as
the
neighboring
Lots.
Okay,.
K
B
B
J
B
F
N
A
B
Agenda
item
number:
nine
is
56:45
Dupont
Avenue
south
the
applicant
is
asking
this
item
be
continued
until
our
April
20
meeting,
which
is
one
cycle-
and
we
can
discuss
this
more.
When
we
review
requested
continuances
content
item
number.
Ten
is
1,500.
West
56th
Street
staff
is
recommending
this
item.
It's
not
is
there
anyone
here
to
speak
in
the
queue
again.
B
B
L
B
B
B
N
N
P
B
N
N
B
B
J
N
N
B
A
Yes,
so
the
folks
who
are
on
the
line
to
discuss
or
recommended
or
pardon
me,
the
folks
who
called
in
to
say
that
they
wanted
to
participate
in
the
public
hearing
for
item
number
13.
We
worked
out
what
item
mr.
chair
Perry
has
just
said
that
we
will
have
that
one
on
discussion
will
have
a
public
hearing
for
that
shortly.
If
you
would
just
be
willing
to
hang
tight
and
we'll
let
you
know
when
that
item
is
up
for
discussion.
Thank
you
all.
Yes
thank.
B
You
mr.
Blandford,
for
that
clarification.
So
what
we'll
do
is
go
through
the
discussion
items.
We
first
have
to
go
through
our
items
for
consent
and
then
we'll
move
on
to
the
items
that
are
discussion
items.
So,
let's
review
the
items
on
the
agenda
for
consent.
They
are
5,
6,
7,
8
and
10.
Is
there
a
motion
to
adopt
these
items
on
consent?
Mr.
Hutchins.
H
B
And
so,
if
you
were
here
for
agenda
items,
number
five,
six,
seven,
eight
or
ten,
your
land
use,
two
requests
are
approved.
Good
luck
with
your
projects,
we
have
an
item
for
continuance,
request
for
continuance,
and
so
we
need
to
go
through
a
little
bit
of
a
procedure
for
that.
So
those
who
are
waiting
for
the
discussion
items
please
be
patient
with
us.
While
we
attend
to
this
continuance
item
its
agenda
item
number
956,
45,
DuPont,
Avenue
South,
the
applicant
is
requesting.
Q
Thank
You,
chair
Perry
and
members
of
the
board.
This
item
is
under
request
for
continuance,
because
the
applicant
has
indicated
that
she
would
like
to
revise
her
plans
and
modify
them
in
a
way
that
could
impact
the
analysis
of
the
various
requests.
And
so
the
request
for
continuance
is
to
give
staff
more
time
to
see
the
revised
plans
and
conduct
new
analysis.
Q
B
B
A
B
P
C
R
R
I
think
if
you
could
move
on
to
this,
the
next
slide.
So
in
terms
of
the
practical
difficulties
staff
finds,
the
practical
difficulties
do
not
exist
on
this
site.
That
would
make
it
difficult
to
prevent
compliance
with
the
floor
area
ratio
requirement.
Yes,
the
lot
is
substandard,
but,
as
I
mentioned
before,
substandard
Lots
are
still
allowed
2500
square
feet
of
gross
floor
area
building.
R
The
lot
is
very
flat
by
Minneapolis
standards
a
lot
of
times
when
we
get
requests
for
a
floor
area
ratio
that
relates
to
basement
exposure.
It's
it's
due
to
some
some
matter
of
grade
on
the
site.
That's
not
the
case
for
this
lot,
there's
just
over
a
foot
of
total
elevation
change
over
the
entirety
of
a
lot,
so
staff
finds
that
there
are
not
unique
circumstances
that
the
request
is
based
on
economic
considerations
due
to
construction
error.
R
With
regards
to
the
second
finding
staff
finds
that
the
request
is
not
in
keeping
with
the
spirit
and
intent
of
the
ordinance.
The
spirit
and
intent
of
the
ordinance
is
to
regulate
the
size
of
buildings,
especially
as
they
appear
from
the
public
right-of-way.
Given
that
this
house
is
on
a
highly
visible
corner,
it
does
have
a
significant
visual
impact.
It
appears
to
be
much
larger
than
would
be
allowed.
The
proposal,
however,
doesn't
meet
the
guidance
of
the
comprehensive
plan,
as
outlined
in
that
table.
R
R
H
My
understanding
is
that
the
variance
does
not
include
height
or
bulk
dimensions
or
distance
too
lot
lines,
but
is
only
related
to
the
level
of
the
first
floor.
I
guess
my
question
is:
if
the
basement
had
been
dug,
20
inches
deeper
at
one
point:
seven
feet
deeper
and
the
first
floor
was
lowered
with
a
higher
ceiling.
What
that
structures
still
be
permitted.
A
R
Thank
You
chair
very
important
member
Sandburg,
the
relationship
between
the
finished
first
floor
elevation
and
the
bulk
of
the
building
they're
functionally
the
same
thing
so
due
to
the
elevation
of
the
first
floor
that
causes
the
basement
to
be
included
in
the
FAO
slurry
and
measurement
as
originally
proposed.
The
house
was
lower
into
the
ground
if
you
will
I'm
not
sure
if
the
ceiling
height
of
the
basement
changed.
R
B
R
S
B
B
I
see
none.
Thank
you.
Miss
Brent
is
so,
let's
open
up
the
public
hearing,
I
understand
we
have
three
people
in
and
the
way
it
works
is
we
take
the
people
who
are
speaking
for
the
application
first
and
then
people
who
are
speaking
against
the
application
after
that
so
yeah
can't
I
understand
the
applicant
is
online
and
would
like
to
speak.
What's
her
name.
F
H
T
F
F
T
We
believe
that
the
city
ish
several
permits
after
it
should
have
been
flagged
and
basically
all
the
permits
allowed
the
shell
of
the
house
to
be
built
all
the
mechanicals
to
be
built,
and
we
basically
have
an
entirely
framed
house
that
there's
no
good
way
to
lower
that
foot
without
deconstructing
the
entire
house
or
hitting
the
basement
from
an
eight-foot
hole
to
a
six
foot
level
were
suspending
the
house
and
redoing
the
entire
foundation,
which
is
really
a
problem.
Since
the
house
has
already
been
built.
T
Unfortunately,
now
you
know
in
the
time
of
pandemic,
I
can't
even
come
to
a
meeting
and
faith.
This
case
in
person
so
I
feel
that
a
huge
disadvantage,
because
staff
has
been
against
any
solution
that
I've
been
that
anything
I've
come
up
to
potentially
solve
this
without
deconstructing.
The
entire
house
I
just
been
that
with
a
series
of
Noah's
and
I
believe
that
the
city
really
needs
to
have
a
sequence
of
how
these
are
permitted
so
that
this
isn't
allowed
to
happen.
T
I
think
we
should
have
been
notified
farm
sooner
than
the
entire
framing
the
house.
If
you
read
my
narrative
from
five
to
eleven
permit
through
issued
and
approved
Noah,
never
flagged
the
top.
A
block
report
first
floor
elevation
until
that
we've
been
at
standstill
for
over
a
year
and
really
all
we
did
was
set
out
to
renovate
a
substandard
house
and
because
the
house
was
so
substandard
and
didn't
do
a
new
build
project.
T
The
house
is
on
the
end
of
the
block
and
I
believe
a
new
house
is
going
to
be
bigger
than
the
existing
houses
and
that's
Jay.
The
way
it
generally
is,
and
since
across
the
street
is
Minnehaha
cata
be
in
an
open
area.
I,
don't
think
the
house
blocks
anybody's
light
or
it
creates
an
eyesore
or
creates
any
problems.
So
we
believe
strongly
that
the
variance
request
is
in
harmony
with
the
general
purposes
and
intent
of
the
code,
the
it
can
it's
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan.
T
E
T
So
that's
my
belief
and
I
would
respectfully
ask
that
the
board
consider
seriously
this
request,
so
we
can
actually
get
a
house
completed
and
have
another
livable
unit
in
the
city,
rather
than
have
to
have
this
suspended
and
deconstructed
and
reconstructed,
which
is
going
to
take
an
enormous
amount
of
time
and
effort,
especially
now
that
there's
really
not
even
freedom
of
movement.
Thank
you
very
much.
L
O
O
U
A
U
So
it
is
our
understanding
that
the
contractor
responsible
for
the
building
mistakes
may
no
longer
be
involved
with
this
project.
It
sort
of
seems,
like
the
ownership,
wants
you
to
consider
the
mistakes
made
by
previous
contractors
that
they
have
hired
as
part
of
the
problem
and
a
reason
that
they
should
be
allowed
to
continue
with
this
project.
As
is,
we
would
like
you
to
kind
of
remember
that
the
current
ownership
has
not
changed
and
they
are
ultimately
responsible
for
the
work
of
their
contractors.
U
So
we
are
in
agreement
with
all
of
the
staff
reports
recommendations,
in
particular
in
regards
to
practical
difficulties
and
unique
circumstances.
The
kind
of
willful
ignorance
to
the
requirement
of
submitting
the
type
of
foundation
survey
before
continuous,
continuing
with
construction
of
the
house.
That
kind
of
seemed
to
be
pretty
ridiculous
to
us
and
should
definitely
be
considered.
U
And
in
regards
to
keeping
with
the
spirit
and
intent
of
the
ordinance
and
and
altering
the
essential
character
of
the
locality,
we
would
like
to
note
that
the
current
structure
towers
over
our
two-story
home
going
forward.
We
are
hopeful
that
the
owners
of
the
property
and
their
contractors
would
put
more
effort
into
building
the
house
within
the
guidelines
set
forth
by
the
city
and,
ideally
in
a
timely
manner.
U
We
hope
that
the
city
will
closely
monitor
this
project.
That
is
been
as
it
has
been
ongoing
for
three
years
now,
personally,
we've
been
attempting
to
install
a
fence
in
our
backyard
for
the
past
two
years
and
have
not
been
able
to
due
to
the
demolition
that
they
completed
in
June
2018
cutting
into
our
property
line
a
little
bit.
U
We
also
hope
that
they
will
make
an
effort
to
complete
the
project
responsibly,
taking
into
consideration
the
protect
our
property
as
they
build.
We
haven't
really
seen
any
evidence
of
this
so
far,
nor
have
we
ever
been
notified
of
any
major
work
to
be
done
before
it
occurred,
including
the
demolition
of
the
original
house.
Thank
you
for
your
time
and
considering
our
comments.
U
B
E
E
R
E
Okay,
thank
you,
so,
even
even
if
we
denied
a
variance
and
they
lower
the
basement
so
and
the
first
floor
elevation
to
get
it
within
the
legal
height,
so
you
don't
include
the
square
footage
total.
They
could
still
build
their
roof
exactly
as
tall
as
it
is
now,
and
it
would
not
need
a
variance
correct
for
expanded.
Welcome.
Thank
you
appreciate
that.
M
V
O
V
Neighbor,
who
I
will
introduce
myself
to
and
I
have
an
opportunity
on
site
their
comments.
I
would
make
would
be
that
kitty-corner
directly
to
the
northwest.
That
house
when
compared
to
the
house
at
3201,
would
have
actually
be
existing
a
little
higher.
However,
it
was
constructed
some
time
ago,
back
in
1911
at
a
much
higher
elevation
that
does
not
conform
to
the
current
codes
and
ordinances
that
the
city
currently
has,
and
it
would
be
less
than
the
height
of
that
particular
home.
V
So
when
considering
you
know
the
neighborhood
and
the
surrounding
homes,
that
would
be
a
comparable
home.
That
I
would
say,
falls
at
a
point:
that's
higher
with
a
higher
fire
and
a
higher
roof
peak
line
from
top
a
block
and
or
top
of
roof
line
on
any
survey
that
would
be
compared
to
the
existing
subject:
property
at
3201.
So
that's
my
first
comment.
V
Entry
points
in
a
ingress
points
is
that
is
that
a
possibility
that
we
can
look
at
without
having
to
look
the
house
excavate
the
existing
foundation
and
lower
the
grade
in
the
basement,
along
with
all
the
utilities
depths
to
be
able
to
leave
it
as
is,
and
just
simply
modify
the
existing
structure,
and
with
that
I
conclude
and
I.
Thank
everybody
for
for
taking
the
time
to
listen,
make.
R
You,
chair
Perry,
with
regards
to
the
question
of
whether
adding
additional
units
would
sort
of
solve
this
issue.
Single
family
homes
to
family
homes
and
three
family
homes
are
all
subject
to
the
same
set
of
regulations.
So
if
this
you
know
were
to
come
in
on
as
a
two-family
dwelling,
we
would
still
have
the
same
set
of
floor
area
ratio
and
finished
first
floor
elevation
requirements.
So
no
it
would
not
solve
the
issue.
Okay,.
E
When
it
comes
to
the
practical
difficulty
of
the
house,
I
do
find.
There
is
a
little
bit
of
a
practical
difficulty
there
to
jack
up
the
house
and
excavate
the
existing
foundation,
not
to
say
that
it
couldn't
be
done.
But
from
an
economic
standpoint
and
from
a
practicality
and
timeline
standpoint,
I
can
see
that
being
a
practical
difficulty,
I'd
like
to
hear
what
the
other
board
members
have
to
say
about
it,
but
that's
kind
of
where
I'm
at
right
now.
B
B
The
board
has
denied
a
request
similar
to
this
in
the
past,
and
the
property
owner
did
lift
the
house
up
and
remove
some
levels
of
block
and
the
ceiling
of
the
the
height
of
the
cellar
or
the
basement
was
not
as
high,
but
they
that
was
the
result.
It
can
be
done
and
our
our
rulings
have
to
not
take
into
solely
into
consideration
economic
considerations.
F
R
H
Okay,
Thank
You
mr.
chair
I,
don't
think
I
can
come
up
with
findings
different
from
what
staff
found,
but
I
do
have
a
few
comments
on
this
particular
situation.
That
might
be
mitigating
circumstances.
If
we
could
find
findings
that
would
make
me
feel
better
about
it.
One
is
that
it's
on
the
north
side
of
a
block
and
it's
not
creating
shading,
essentially
on
the
adjacent
house.
H
Essentially
so
I
guess
I
don't
have
any
problems
with
staff
findings,
but
if
we
were
to
consider
other
circumstances,
it
might
be
the
fact
that
it
is
on
the
north
side
of
a
block
it's
across
the
street
from
a
large
open
area,
so
it
is
affecting
the
neighborhood,
the
neighbors
less
than
it
might.
Otherwise,
thanks.
G
B
M
Thank
You,
chair
Perry,
essentially
looking
at
this.
The
only
difficulty
that
seems
to
have
been
presented
to
us
was
a
contractor
error
and
afoot
is
not
a
small
amount
when
building
a
basement
foundation
to
be
an
error.
We're
not
talking
about
an
inch
off
or
a
small.
A
small
amount
of
distance
here.
I
realized
that
as
you
as
you
add
this
around
the
entire
perimeter
of
this
space
that
that
it
does
dramatically
affect
the
house
as
a
whole
in
its
appearance.
So
agreeing
with
my
fellow
board
members,
Johanneson
and
softly,
and
supporting
staff
Arctic's.
B
G
B
X
A
B
B
Q
Thank
You,
chair
pairing
and
members
of
the
board
and
a
thank
you
to
IT.
Could
we
actually
start
on
the
second
slide
of
the
set
that
I
provided
start
talking
a
little
bit
about
the
project?
This
is
a
variance
request
to
reduce
the
required
interior
side
yard
on
the
northwest
side,
from
six
feet
to
five
point:
eight
five
feet
or
construction
of
a
new
single-family
dwelling
on
the
existing
foundation.
The
picture
you
can
see
here
is
the
existing
house.
Q
Q
This
is
another
photo
provided
by
the
applicant
taken
from
the
rear
yard
of
the
subject.
Property
in
the
house
on
the
right
is:
is
the
house
in
question?
The
fence
that
you
see
here
runs
right
along
the
property
line.
You
can
see
that
the
house
is
relatively
close
to
their
property
line
and
it's
again
located
5.85
feet.
We
continue
to
the
next
slide,
please.
Q
This
is
again
an
applicant
provided
by
the
survey
and
I'm
calling
out
that
that
existing
setback
requirement
again.
The
request
in
this
case
is
to
demolish
that
existing
dwelling
and
construct
a
new
two-story
single-family
dwelling
using
the
existing
foundation.
Can
we
continue
to
the
next
slide?
Please,
and
so
here
you
can
see
in
a
concept
drawing
showing
a
design
of
that
proposed
structure,
as
well
as
the
proposed
site
plan,
which
looks
similar
to
the
which
looks
similar
to
the
existing
site
plan.
Q
Only
changes
are,
you
know,
a
front
porch
and
a
rear,
porch
or
deck
that
would
be
added,
but
otherwise
the
footprint
of
the
structure
is
the
same
as
what
is
now
again.
The
existing
house
is
non
conforming
to
that
northwest
side
setback
and
the
applicants
are
requesting
a
variance
to
reduce
that
for
construction.
The
new
dwelling
on
the
existing
foundation,
I'll
transition,
they're
talking
about
the
findings,
the
first
finding
required
finding
regarding
practical
difficulties
due
to
circumstances
unique
to
the
property
and
not
created
by
the
applicant
staff,
finds
that
this
isn't
it.
Q
The
property
was
plaited
and
developed
as
a
single-family
dwelling
in
compliance
with
all
applicable
zoning
regulations
at
the
time
of
its
construction,
and
this
included
the-
and
this
is
prior
to
the
city's
current
zoning
ordinance,
which
includes
an
increased
setback
requirement
of
six
feet
in
in
this
case.
These
conditions
were
not
created
by
the
applicant
and
are
not
economic
in
nature.
Q
The
second
required
finding
regarding
the
reasonable
use
of
the
property,
in
keeping
with
the
spirit
and
intent
of
the
ordinance
and
the
Comprehensive
Plan
staff
finds
that
this
is
met
as
well.
The
spirit
and
intent
of
the
ordinance
regarding
required
yards
as
to
promote
orderly
development
and
ensure
access
to
light
air
in
open
space
and
provide
separation
between
uses
and
structures,
and
in
this
case
it
is
a
graduated
setback
requirement.
Resulting
you
know,
a
six
foot
requirement
and
the
spirit
and
intent
of
those
ordinances
are
specifically
to
promote
real
yards.
Q
It's
a
primary
open
space
on
a
property
and
under
the
presumption
of
larger
structures
being
built
on
a
larger
property
to
require
larger
setbacks
for
those
structures.
The
proposed
design
that's
been
provided
by
the
applicant
is
not
substantially
larger
than
what
we
would
expect
to
see
on
a
smaller
or
average
sized
residential
property.
Even
though
this
is
a
little
bit
larger
and
we
can
actually
stay
on
on
this
slide
is
okay.
Q
Staff
finds
that
this
is
met
as
well.
Again,
they
generally
use
to
the
property
as
a
single-family
dwelling
would
not
change
as
part
of
this
project,
and
they
proposed
setback
on
the
northwest
side,
which
is
non-conforming
would
match
that
of
the
existing
structure,
when
this
is
sufficient
for
compliance
with
building
code
requirements
that
and
that
would
apply
for
separation
of
structures
in
this
case.
Q
Finally,
other
dwellings
in
the
area
appear
to
have
similar
non-conformities
to
their
minimum
interior
side
yard
setbacks,
including
the
houses
directly
adjacent
to
this
property
on
either
side.
So
this
situation
is
not
unusual
in
this.
Witness
would
not
be
unusual
for
the
immediate
area.
In
conclusion,
staff
recommends
approval
of
the
requested
variance
again
to
reduce
the
required
minimum
interior
side
yard
on
the
north
west
side
from
6
feet
to
5
point
8
5
feet
for
construction
of
the
new
single-family
dwelling
on
the
existing
foundation,
subject
to
conditions
that
are
listed
in
the
staff
report.
B
Q
The
increased
setback
requirement
for
for
six
feet
and
the
the
proposal
to
demolish
the
house
is
again
different
than
if
they
were
just
doing
in
addition
to
the
existing
structure,
for
example,
a
rear
addition
or
a
second-story
addition,
which
would
both
be
permitted
to
maintain
that
existing
non-conforming
setback,
as
opposed
to
a
total
wrecking
of
all
the
structures,
including
the
foundation,
because
it
is
not
as
extreme
of
a
demolition
and
I
think
has
informed
staff.
Thinking
in
this
case,
okay,.
B
B
O
Right,
my
name
is
Eric
Gustafson,
my
wife,
Kamara
and
I
are
longtime
Minneapolis
residents
who
working
public
policy
and
public
health.
We
moved
to
the
neighborhood
a
few
years
ago
to
be
close
to
our
aging
parents
and
our
jobs,
to
raise
a
family
and
to
establish
a
home
for
our
growing
family
to
live
in
long
into
the
future.
We
love
the
people
and
small
businesses
and
street
life
in
this
neighborhood,
its
public
schools
and
it's
parks,
and
this
amazing
stretch
of
the
Mississippi
River.
O
We
purchased
this
property,
as
is
from
a
large
group
of
descendants
of
the
original
owner.
We
plan
to
replace
a
modest
one-story
single-family
home
with
a
modest
two-story
single-family
home,
as
our
new
next-door
neighbor
to
the
South
pointed
out
in
his
supportive
April
sixth
email,
the
city
staff.
We
have
taken
our
time
to
determine
how
best
to
utilize
the
existing
footprint
and
foundation
and
to
determine
how
much
of
the
existing
structure
we
can
feasibly
utilize
to
create
a
resilience
and
efficient
home
that
blends
into
the
scale,
form
and
diversity
of
the
established
block.
O
Our
project
team
includes
an
architect
who
works
in
the
neighborhood
and
a
small
family-owned
builder,
we've
hired,
better
futures
to
deconstruct
by
hand
the
remaining
structure
with
the
goal
of
recycling
as
much
as
possible
and
minimizing
the
disruption
to
the
neighborhood.
In
closing,
we
are
grateful.
Our
local
and
state
governments
are
supporting
the
livelihoods
of
our
project
team
during
this
peacetime
emergency.
Thank
you
for
your
time
and
consideration.
B
L
L
N
Was
just
wanting
to
put
my
comments
in
because
they
lost
my
internet
connection,
so
I
couldn't
get
my
comments
to
Alex
and
then,
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
there
were
several
other
neighbors
that
wanted
to
get
their
comments
in,
but
they
never
got
a
confirmation
or
telephone
numbers.
So
I
don't
know
how
you
want
to
handle
that.
But
I
will
go
ahead
with
my
few
little
comments
and
I
had
mentioned
earlier.
That
I
wanted
to
deny
the
variance
I'm
saying
that
if
they
does,
this
Team
Foundation
violates
to
set
back
at
six
feet.
N
N
N
Also,
just
for
the
record,
the
house
was
built
in
67
964,
as
Eric
stated.
He
also
mentioned
I
bit,
wasn't
sure
what
he
meant
by
the
proposed
project,
bringing
the
house
up
to
existing
codes
for
the
safety
of
the
family.
The
house
is,
or
what's
left
of,
it
was
up
to
code
and
also
it's
nice
to
know
that
the
Gustafson's
will
be
getting
the
tax
deduction
for
destroying
the
home,
and
one
more
thing
word
on
the
street
is
that
there
was
no
permit
for
the
demo.
N
The
demo
started
on
March
30th
and,
as
the
31st
there
was
no
permit
status
days
later
was
told
that
the
application
was
made,
but
somebody
could
forgot
to
pay
for
it.
The
city
is
still
awaiting
payment.
That's
why
there's
no
posting
of
the
permit
is
not
posted
on
the
house
just
wondering
if
somebody
can
check
into
that
and
then
also.
If
the
Gustafson
wanted
a
bigger
house,
they
should
have
bought
a
bigger
house.
B
B
B
B
Y
Y
I'm
directly
impacted
by
what
happens
when
they
build
a
two
and
a
half
story
house
that
close
to
my
property
and
the
impact
I'm
going
to
feel
the
most
will
be.
The
fact
that
I
have
six
full-size
windows
on
the
south
of
my
house,
and
one
of
the
nice
features
of
the
home
is
the
fact
that
it
is
very,
very
nice
natural
light
which
would
be
gone.
Y
B
Thanks
for
your
comments,
I'll
just
note
that
the
question
of
the
height
is
not
under
consideration.
Here.
They
are
building
it
to
a
height
that
they
have
the
ability
to
do
by
right
of
ordinance.
I
understand
what
you're,
saying
and
I
appreciate
you
giving
your
testimony,
but
I'll
just
say
regardless,
where
the
house
was
built,
the
height
of
the
structure
is
being
done
by
right.
They
have
that
legal
right
to
build
it,
that
honey.
N
B
V
B
L
Z
L
Z
My
name
is
joel
marsh.
I
am
the
Builder
for
the
gustin's
on
this
project.
Just
wanted
to
comment
on
the
process
of
our
demo
permits
that
was
done
in
a
timely
manner
and
the
permit
was
pulled
before
we
started
deconstruction.
We
have
the
check
had
cleared
and
everything
we
had
went
through
the
process
that
we
were
required
to
do
so.
I
want.
J
Z
B
G
Joe
Perry
I
just
want
to
I
want
to
I
support
staff
findings.
If
we
really
look
at
this
point,
one
five
feet
is
really
one
point:
eight
inches
I
just
want
to
clarify
that
and
I
feel
like
from
what
it
looks
like
it'd,
actually
be
an
asset
to
the
community
and
I
know
the
neighbors
feel
differently,
but
there
are
much
larger
homes
around.
They
could
have
built
a
larger
home
and
they're
sticking
to
the
existing
foundation.
So
I
support
the
staff
in
this
one.
Thanks.
H
B
B
Motion
passes
to
the
applicant
good
luck
with
your
project
and
those
who
called
in
to
speak
against.
As
I
said,
you
can
talk
to
staff
about
what
your
options
are.
Regarding
things
like
an
appeal,
and
let's
move
on
to
the
last
item
today
to
hear
so
if
we
have
people
who
have
been
in
the
queue
waiting.
Thank
you
very
much
for
waiting
as
long
as
you
have
it's
500,
Nicollet,
Mall
I
think
we
have
mr.
Liske,
so
you
present.
AA
Thank
You
chair
Oh
everyone
again,
this
variance
request
is
located
at
500,
Nicollet
Mall.
This
may
be
familiar
to
some
of
you.
A
similar
request
was
made
here
several
months
ago.
The
applicant
is
seeking
to
vary
the
Nicollet
Mall
overlay
district
standards
regarding
ground
floor
uses
code
requires
that
60%
of
the
gross
floor
area
be
food
beverage
used
retail
sales
and
services
the
applicant
instead
of
meeting
that
60%
is
seeking
a
variance
to
reduce
that
60
to
30
to
the
frontage
along
Nicollet.
Mall
is
also
required
to
be
60%.
AA
AA
AA
With
that,
it
does
lack
a
loading
dock,
the
lack
of
a
loading
dock
and
proximity
on
Nicollet
Mall
and
on
Fifth
Street
does
present
a
practical
difficulty
in
meeting
some
of
the
uses
that
require
greater
loading
such
as
those
food
and
beverage
uses
again.
That
in
and
of
itself
is
a
practical
difficulty
as
far
as
subtracting
those
food
and
beverage
juices.
Although
those
uses
are
not
the
only
uses
that
would
be
permitted
here
in
this
location,.
AA
A
large
office
use
the
lobby,
those
are
not
keeping
with
the
spirit
and
intent
of
the
ordinance
last.
The
proposed
variants
could
alter
the
essential
character
of
the
area,
granting
the
variance
could
result
in
street-level
uses
along
Nicollet
Mall
that
lack
that
vibrancy
activity,
foot
traffic,
everything
that
the
niccola
mall
overlay
is
striving
towards.
AA
B
AA
G
G
B
AB
L
AB
Why
didn't
I
turn
down
the
audio
from
the
video?
It's
so
good.
Can
everybody
hear
me?
Okay,
yes,
chairman
Perry
members
of
the
board,
thanks
for
taking
the
time
today,
I
know
it's
a
got
to
be
challenging
for
you
all
on
the
given
the
current
circumstances,
I'll
jump
right
into
it
and
what
I
want
to
start
with
is
a
brief
history.
You
touched
on
the
fact
that
we
were
before
the
board
before,
but
let
me
just
start
with
the
fact
that
my
my
client
Renaissance,
where
owner
LLC
is
a
joint
venture.
AB
They
acquired
the
property
back
in
2017
and
shortly
after
acquiring
at
they
embarked
upon
a
a
major
renovation
which
include
the
lobbies,
spaces
and
did
extensive
work
on
the
window
lines
and
those
codes
on
Iran
and
mr.
wizkid
brought
up.
This
is
and
by
the
way
before
I.
After
that,
there
are
a
number
of
before-and-after
photos
that
are
available,
that
I
uploaded
onto
the
onto
the
website,
but
is
mr.
as
mr.
Luscombe
brought
up.
This
is
one
of
the
oldest
buildings
out
Nicollet
Mall,
and
what
my
clients
found
out
short.
You
know.
AB
After
doing
this,
major
renovation
and
putting
it
out
to
lease
is
that
there
were
a
number
of
unique
impediments
that
cause
by
the
way
the
configuration
this
building
and
I'll
go
into
that
a
little
bit.
One
of
the
columns
are
particularly
large
and
placed
in
such
a
way
that
it's
difficult
to
sum
to
chop
up
the
space
for
uses
I
for
retail
uses
and
restaurant
uses
in
particular.
AB
There
is
also
this
happens
to
be
a
particularly
deep
building.
Most
buildings
on
Nicollet
Mall
are
shallower
and,
as
a
result,
it's
a
lot
it's
easier
to
meet
the
60%
rule
that
is
required
by
the
overlay
district
and,
as
mr.
liska
also
spoke
about,
so
that
was
there
were
us
also
a
number
of
other
factors
it
was.
It
was
brought
up.
There
is
no
loading
dock.
There
is
it's
difficult,
if
not
impossible,
they
have
any
type
of
valet
service,
so
that
wouldn't
work
well
with
the
restaurant,
as
mr.
Liska
brought
up
as
well.
AB
There's
some
ass
access
issues
and
in
this
corner
is,
is
not
an
easy
corner
is
mentioned
in
the
materials
that
I
distributed
there
there.
This
corner
is
sat
vacant
for
15
years
and
it's
it's
been
a
true
challenge:
leasing.
In
fact,
my
client
engaged
two
different
brokers
to
try
and
leased
this
space
they
in
one
local
and
one
national
trying
pulling
out
all
stops,
and
that
brings
us
to
when
we
can
view
the
last
time
around.
AB
So
when
we
were
getting
no
traction
with
restaurants
or
retailers,
we
we
came
to
back
last
August
and
came
to
came
to
the
board
with
our
really
to
ask
the
question:
how
can
you
help
us?
We
are
having
incredible
challenges:
leasing.
We
were
thinking
of
possibly
expanding
the
pool
of
potential
tenants
to
include
co-working
users
or
other
active
uses
on
the
mall
that
may
not
fit
neatly
within
the
definition
of
retailer
or
service.
So
we
we
sat
and
we
listened
and
we
presented
and
that
kind
of
gets
to
I
mean
I.
AB
B
AB
And
I
mean
I
touched
on
really.
The
first
is
just
an
introduction
side.
I
covered
the
background,
which
is
the
second
slide.
The
third
slide
just
lays
out
the
60%
rule,
which
I
mentioned
is,
is
particularly
challenged
and
challenging,
and
uniquely
challenging
for
for
this
building
be
Andrus
and
now
I'd
like
to
go
to
the
fourth
slide.
If
you,
if
you
can.
AB
That's
been
vacant
for
well
over
a
decade,
the
first
one
which
is
not
really
the
subject
of
this
discussion,
but
it's
important
to
know
and
I.
Think
there's
some
synergies
is
the
first
one
is
a
new
retail
concept.
That's
akin
to
a
urban
grocery
store.
It's
an
essential
use
under
the
I.
Bring
that
up,
just
because
of
the
the
unfortunate
circumstances
we're
in
with
coltd
19,
but
it
will
bring
some
essential
products
to
a
corner.
AB
That's
been
dead,
the
other
use
which
is
which
is
next
to
the
corner
between
the
corner
and
the
lobby
is
an
Innovation
Center.
That
would
be
its
it
Innovation
Center
that
would
be
for
Xcel
Energy
and
the
thought
would
be
for
Excel
to
use
this
space
for
brainstorming
in
a
number
of
other
uses
and
I'm
going
to
let
somebody
else.
AB
AB
So
for
everybody
to
see,
we
yeah,
you
know,
maybe
maybe
but
I
before
I
close
out
and
take
questions
it
may.
What
I'd
like
to
do
is
have
David
Serrano,
who
is
with
our
SP
architects,
talk
a
little
bit
about
excels
use
and
then,
if
it
works
for
the
board
and
then
I
will
make
a
quick
closing
statement,
we
can
open
things
up
to
keep.
B
Things
especially
given
this
format
to
keep
things
the
regular
process
to
keep
things
going
smoothly
and
streamlined.
We
have
each
person
speak
then
be
asked
questions
and
then
the
next
speaker
come
on
so
well.
I
appreciate
your
desire
to
want
to
give
a
closing
statement.
I
think
you'll
have
to
do
that
as
part
of
your
testimony.
Right
now
in
board,
members
then
ask
your
questions.
B
Z
AB
AB
That's
brought
by
both
kind
of
a
lot
greater
than
there
is
now
where
there's
none
in
that.
Along
with
that
comes
safety,
as
I
mentioned
before
we
have
the
full
support
of
the
Neighborhood
Association,
which
is
is
different
and
and
then
I
mean,
which
is
different
than
before
and
I.
That's
a
I
think
that's
an
important
fact
to
consider
and
and
last
I'd
say
that
you
know.
Nicollet
Mall
has
been
a
challenge,
as
we
all
know,
there's
been
challenges
up
and
down
the
mall
in
terms
of
leasing
and
closings
of
restaurants
and
others.
L
B
B
AC
Great
well,
we
had
well
I
have
the
good
fortune
of
actually
having
excel
as
a
client,
as
well
as
the
owners
of
this
of
the
Andrus
and
when
the
two
kind
of
converged
that
that
it
was
pretty
pretty
gonna
fortuitous
opportunity
just
to
expound
a
little
bit
on
the
programmatic
use
of
what
Excel
would
like
to
do
with
it.
It
is
a
customer
innervation
group
that
occupying
that
won't
intend
to
occupy
the
space
as
an
Innovation
Lab.
AC
The
space
is
being
designed
right
now
to
be
kind
of
have
a
kind
of
ante
room
that
paces
the
street
and
then
have
kind
of
an
Innovation
Lab
hub,
scrum
area.
That
will
will
be
a
think
tank
for
you
know.
Alternative
energy
uses
customer
engagement,
things
like
home-home
car,
plug-in
electric
car
plug-in
station,
other
other
alternative
energies
that
that
Excel
wants
to
celebrate
and
educate.
The
community
on
Excel
is
intending
the
street
facing
side
of
the
kind
of
a
two
chamber:
Innovation
Lab,
to
be
engaging
customer
engagement,
areas
to
have
video
walls
to
have
educational.
AC
AC
You
know
kind
of
tenant
spaces
or
office
spaces
that
are
not
engaged
on
the
street,
so
they
see
this
street
activation
as
there
is
a
huge
asset
for
their
educational
component
to
this
innovation
hub.
So
my
client
and
conversations
in
this
programming
is
trying
to
get
things
as
as
much
as
actually
having
charging
stations
put
into
this
area
that
can
show
and
demonstrate
how
these
things
work.
AC
Exciting
components
that
are
that
are
beyond
sort
of
just
a
beyond
the
fact
that
it
is
an
innovation
think
tank.
It's
not
just
people
sitting
in
work
stations,
it's
an
active
kind
of
Laboratory
of
sort
of
thought
and
leadership
and
then
compounded
by
the
fact
that
there's
there's
this
customer
and
client
and
street
engagement
that
they
tend
to
actively
have
going
to
to
celebrate
and
message
to
the
public.
All.
L
X
My
name
is
Dan
Charlo
and
I.
My
address
is
81
South,
9th
Street
Suite
260
I'm,
the
director
of
urban
design,
with
the
Minneapolis
downtown
Improvement
Districts,
the
the
deity
has
a
long-standing
connection
to
Nicola.
Mall
were
actually
the
successor
organization
to
the
Nicollet
Mall
Advisory
Board,
which
used
to
be
the
private
partner
to
the
city
and
making
sure
that
Nicola
does
everything
that
we
want
it
to
be,
and
now
that's
our
job.
X
So
we
were
the
private
partner
in
the
public-private
partnership
that
raised
the
fifty
million
dollars
to
redo
Nicholas,
and
we
now
maintain
the
enhanced
streetscape
on
Nicholas.
So
I'm
going
to
keep
this
brief,
but
the
retail
space
is
a
long
Nicollet
are
and
the
storefronts
long-.
Let
are
very
important
to
our
work.
X
We
have
dedicated
staff
that
work
on
making
sure
the
Nicollet
is
an
active
and
inviting
pedestrian
environment,
and
likewise
we
have
a
team
working
on
making
sure
the
Nicollet
is
safe
and
the
having
the
tenant
spaces
the
storefronts
longneck
would
be
occupied
is
is
critically
important
to
the
safety
of
the
street.
As
we
all
know.
X
So
there
been
several
references
made
to
the
purpose
of
the
nickel
mall
overlay
district
I
won't
belabor
that
point,
but
I
will
say
that,
from
the
vantage
point
of
the
downtown
Improvement
District,
we
believe
that
the
application
is
in
keeping
with
the
spirit
and
intent
of
the
ordinance.
We
agree
with
the
downtown
Minneapolis
Neighborhood
Association
on
that
point
and
I've
been
working
downtown
for
a
long
time.
X
It's
also
clear
more
generally
that
it
is
unclear
how
well
the
ratios
and
provisions
in
the
ordinance
accomplish
the
stated
purpose.
It's
worth
noting
that,
right
now
the
space
is
in
compliance.
One
large
full
floor
retail
space
is
is
not
a
problem
part
of
what
this
proposal
application
accomplishes
is
breaking
up,
that
large
space
into
a
series
of
smaller
spaces,
adding
more
doors
on
Nicollet
and
having
a
mix
of
tenants.
X
X
It's
our
financial
district
and
it's
a
retail
corridor,
and
we
have
a
lot
of
building
lobbies
I.
Think
that
there's
a
lot
of
good
work
done
by
city
staff
and
by
others
to
make
sure
that
we
have
visual
interest
to
make
sure
that
building
lobbies
don't
dominate
the
corridor,
but
they
are
important
as
ways
to
get
up
to
the
upper
floors.
X
It's
also
worth
noting
that,
in
terms
of
a
space
that
is
according
to
the
letter
of
the
law,
not
a
retail
space
would
be
occupied
by
Excel,
which
is
already
a
major
stakeholder
on
Nicollet
that
has
their
headquarters.
There
are
fortune
100
company
and
they
have
a
one
and
a
half
blocks
of
frontage
on
Nicollet
already
and
we're
very
glad
to
have
them
so
that,
combined
with
the
fact
that,
as
mr.
X
Katz
mentioned,
the
question
of
kind
of
what
what
kind
of
uses
are
possible
now,
what
will
the
market
there
I
think
the
work
that
they've
done
to
try
to
test?
That
question
has
been
done
in
good
faith
and
it's
clear
that
it
will
be
hard
and
the
future
defines
tenants
that
can
permanently
occupied
spaces
that
are
as
large
as
this
one
9,000
square
feet
at
this
important
corner,
so
in
for
Nicola
to
evolve
as
a
combination,
hybrid
corridor
of
of
headquarters
and
retail
I.
Think
we
need
to
look
at
creative
solutions
like
this.
X
I
also
want
to
note
that
the
application
satisfies
many
of
the
other
requirements
in
the
overlay
district
really
well
in
terms
of
architectural
detail
and
level
of
glazing.
So
I
know
that
I've
taken
more
than
my
two
minutes
and
I
will
be
done
in
about
30
seconds.
It's
also
worth
noting.
There
was
a
reference
made
of
the
comprehensive
plan.
X
Nicollet
is
zoned
as
destination
mixed-use,
we're
already
in
dialogue
with
the
leadership
at
C
Pett
about
what
that
means
and
how
we
can
evolve
our
understanding
of
what
what
retail
is
going
to
be
over
the
next
decades
to
come,
and
we
fully
intend
to
engage
with
the
city
step
further
on
that,
because
definitions
and
standards
are
existing
definitions
and
standards
around
retail
are
are
not
working.
There's
a
lot
of
ground
for
vacancies
in
the
core
of
downtown
and
we
need
to
work
together
to
figure
out
what
is
possible.
X
So
in
closing
the
downtown
Improvement
District
supports
the
application,
because
we
believe
it's
in
keeping
with
the
spirit
intent
of
the
ordinance,
and
we
ask
you
to
make
an
exception
to
the
specific
requirements
of
the
overlay
district,
because
this
application
fills
the
vacancy
on
a
key
gateway
intersection
on
our
most
important
pedestrian
streets.
It
subdivide
the
large
space
and
it
is.
It
provides
a
large
retail
space,
frontage
fronting
on
a
key
side,
streets
of
downtown
ancestry.
All.
J
AD
B
AD
Great
okay
I
just
like
to
confirm
what
we
said
earlier,
that
and
add
slightly,
and
that
we
have
taken
the
heart
very
much
the
spirit
and
the
intention
of
the
rules
for
the
street.
We
bought
the
building
knowing
those
rules.
At
the
same
time
as
a
speaker
prior
to
me
mentioned,
the
rules
have
been
enforced
of
roughly
about
90
years.
They
came
into
force
after
the
building
was
built
and
going
back
to
what
was
mentioned
there
there,
although
they
were
crafted
and
intended
for
very
good
public
purposes.
AD
B
W
You,
chair
Perry
and
mr.
Lipson.
Thank
you
for
your
testimony.
I
have
a
question
that
relates
to
your
tenant
mix,
and
you
mentioned
how
important
it
is
that
you
have
these
two
potential
tenants
simultaneously
and
I'd
like
to
know
what
your
plan
is
when
one
or
both
tenants
decide
to
move
out
of
that
building.
AD
W
AD
Have
a
10-year
lease
with
renewal
options
for
the
6,000
foot
tenant
and
we
have
a
5-year
lease
with
Excel,
with
renewal
options,
this
being
a
new
concept
for
them,
but
they
have
a
long
term
presence
at
the
corner
and
they
they
seem
very
committed
to
the
use
and
that
those
are
you
know
very
common
terms.
These
days
and
10
years,
especially,
is
getting
to
be
long
now
for
a
downtown
retailer
without
a
right
of
cancellation
on
either.
W
AD
If
we
remain
the
owner
of
the
building
at
that
time-
and
you
know
it's
possible-
you
know
it's
hard
to
know
whether
we
will
be,
but
we
would
redouble
our
efforts
to
do
what
we
did
in
this
case
and
seek
to
comply
with
all
applicable
rules.
Ordinances
engage
with
the
community
groups,
engage
with
the
city
and,
depending
on
you
know
what
rules
are
in
place
at
that
time.
Do
everything
we
can
to,
as
we
did
here
to
comply
with
them,
and
you
know
we.
AD
We
have
gone
to
a
lot
of
fun,
but
I
know
expenses
out
issues
so
we'll
just
say:
we've
been
we've
persevered
in
difficult
circumstances
to
deliver.
What
we
believe
is
the
closest
we
can
come
to
the
black
letter
of
the
ordnance.
You
know
within
reason,
so
we
would
do
that
again.
That's
how
we
operate.
We're
not
seeking
to
you
know,
get
a
special
break
from
anyone
and
you're.
Quite
the
contrary.
W
W
AD
B
W
B
B
H
Yeah
thanks
mr.
chair
I
think
this
proposal
is
very
different
from
what
we
heard
last
August,
which
was
general
office
space
and
I'm
very
pleased
to
see
that
the
retail
space
wraps
around
the
5th
Street
side.
I,
would
say.
One
of
the
unique
characteristics
of
this
building
is
that
it
presents
a
similar
frontage
on
Nicklin
and
5th
Street
and
almost
can
be
perceived
as
the
same
frontage
when
you
look
at
the
building
from
especially
the
north
or
eastern
end
of
the
of
Nicollet,
and
especially
because
there's
a
pause
across
the
street.
H
That
side
of
the
building
is
very
much
open
to
view
from
Nicollet,
so
I
think
that's
a
unique
characters
characteristic
of
this
building,
which
would
certainly
support
changing
its
its
Nicollet
frontage
requirements.
I
think
the
other
unique
characteristics
about
the
pillars
inside
and
the
structural
constraints
also
present
a
challenge
to
make
it
entirely
retail.
So
I
I
certainly
support
the
applicants
position
in
those
cases
and
I'd
like
to
hear
from
other
board
members
great.
B
Thank
you.
I
have
a
question
of
staff,
maybe
to
just
push
this
conversation
along
a
little
bit.
Mr.,
let's
go,
could
you
remind
us
what
other
uses
might
be
considered
by
the
applicant
clearly
they're
facing
some
challenges
in
trying
to
find
lease
holders
so
I'm
wondering
what
the
city
is
is
thinking
about
in
terms
of
filling
the
space
if
they
were
not
to
get
the
variants
that
they're
requesting
sure.
M
B
AA
AA
G
Thank
you.
Thanks
for
your
presentation,
I
just
want
to
say,
I
support
staff
findings.
Here,
I,
don't
feel
like
we're
in
a
position
to
change
the
policy.
Some
of
the
please
we've
heard
today
certainly
seem
like
a
policy.
Change
could
be
something
that
is
looked
at
by
the
city,
but
I
don't
feel
like
setting
a
precedent
now
because,
what's
happening
to
this
building
in
this
location,
I
think
a
lot
of
it
is
the
location.
B
B
G
Enforcement
but
I
agree
I,
think
that
if
there's
there's
a
need
like
this,
you
know
we
have
been
seen
other
facilities
or
buildings
along
the
mall
repeatedly
asked
for
this
and
that
maybe
add
some
to
the
site
itself,
but
I've
been
in
the
building.
It
is
different,
it's
challenging,
but
it
could
be
served.
In
my
opinion.
Okay,.
M
Thank
You,
chair,
Perry
I,
actually
disagree
with
the
comments
made
by
board
member
Johanneson
in
looking
at
this.
I
do
believe
that
there
are
practical
difficulties
that
reside
with
this
space.
I
do
not
believe
those
are
caused
by
the
applicant
and
and
I
think
there's
a
number
of
things
that
can
that
can
be
put
in
there.
You
know
looking
at
the
age
of
the
building
at
the
physical
setup
of
that,
including
the
depths
of
the
space,
making
it
difficult
to
comply
with
a
60%
ratio.
M
M
I
also
believe
that
it's
reasonable
use
to
look
at
this
from
a
standpoint
of
being
mixed-use
to
have
a
for
sale
product
from
a
retail
standpoint
on
the
corner,
as
well
as
a
combination
of
office
space
that
would
bring
additional
foot
traffic
to
that
area.
I
think
of
the
targets
further
south
down
nickel
it'd
be
as
I
think
it's
sung
and
she
called
the
target
playground
that
was
added
across
from
Target
headquarters
as
being
something
that
was
an
exception
of
this
rule
that
allowed
for
non
retail
use,
but
still
activating
storefronts
and
keeping
previously
closed.
M
Storefronts
open
on
Nicollet
Mall
is
something
that
children
being
reasonable
and
then
finally,
I
think
it
keeps
in
the
spirit
of
the
ordinance
it
actually
improves
the
safety
and
character
of
the
building
or
of
the
end
of
the
corner
by
having
that
occupied
by
both
office
additional
office
and
retail
use,
so
I
think
it
actually
improves
that
character
and
would
be
standing
within
the
ordinance.
So
those
are
those
are
my
points
of
view
on
the
three
findings
that
we
would
have
to
make.
Should
we
choose
to
look
positively
upon
this
variant.