►
From YouTube: September 21, 2020 City Planning Commission
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
E
E
E
D
B
Very
good
confirms
we
do
have
quora
quorum
of
five.
Our
next
orders
of
business
are
to
accept
the
minutes
of
the
september
10
2020
planning,
commission
committee
of
the
whole,
and
to
approve
the
consent
agenda
for
the
committee
of
the
hall
on
september
10th,
and
that
should
be
acceptance
of
the
minutes
of
our
prior
hearing.
B
September
10th,
there
is
a
typo
in
our
agenda.
I
don't
have
an
actual
calendar
in
front
of
me,
but
both
the
committee
of
the
whole
and
the
menace
are
slated
are
listed
as
the
tenth.
I
thought
I
wasn't
just
confirming
the
hearing.
The
minute
should
be
from
the
eighth,
I
believe,
and
so
that
is
a
typo
in
the
minutes.
So
perhaps
I
would
look
for
a
motion
to
approve
the
minutes
adjusting
the
date
of
our
prior,
the
eighth.
B
All
right
question:
in
a
second
with
the
amendment
of
changing
that
date
to
the
eighth
date
of
the
hearing.
Please
call
the.
D
Role:
it's
miley
aye
lipke,
pierre
hi,
marwa,
meyer,
olsen,
hi
trader
hi,.
B
That
motion
carries
next
to
look
for
a
motion
to
approve
the
consent
agenda
from
the
committee.
The
whole
item
number
four
on
the
agenda.
Do
I
have
a
motion.
G
B
Very
good
that
motion
carries
our
next
order
of
business
is
to
organize
the
agenda
for
today's
hearing.
B
For
those
of
you
listening
from
members
of
the
public
listening,
the
agenda
is
at
on
limbslim.citymini
or
minneapolismn.gov,
and
I
will
walk
through
the
agenda
if
you
are
on
the
line
of
members
of
the
public
or
on
the
line
wishing
to
testify
against
a
staff
recommendation
or
or
to
amend
that
staff
recommendation.
Please
make
your
presence
known
and
we
will
discuss
that
item.
Otherwise,
we
will
approve
items
on
our
consent
agenda
unless
otherwise
noted
so
agenda.
B
Item
number
five
is
the
north,
mississippi
regional
park
improvement
at
4900,
mississippi
court
200
and
201
48th
avenue,
north
4856,
2nd
streets,
north
48,
60,
pacific
street
and
5100
514
5120
5122
5128,
5130,
5144,
5148,
5156,
5204,
5208,
52,
12,
52,
16,
52,
22,
52,
24,
52,
28,
52,
44
and
5250
glendale
avenue
north.
A
B
Ward
3.
is
anyone
on
the
line
to
testify
against
staff
recommendation
to
allow
structure
in
the
flood
plain
there.
B
All
right,
we
will
place
item
number
five
on
consent.
Item
number:
six
is
2100
fairmont
street
in
ward
2..
That
item
will
be
continued
to
the
october
5th
2020
planning.
Commission.
Hearing
item
number:
seven
is
2025
west
river
road
in
in
ward
5,
and
there
are
a
number
of
applications
there.
We
will
be
discussing
item
number.
Seven
item
number.
Eight
is
curry
commons
at
187,
humboldt
avenue
north
in
ward
5,
a
number
of
applications
related
to
for
number.
B
We
we
will
be
discussing
that.
We
know
that
there
are
a
lot
of
people
here
who
want
to
speak,
so
it
is
on
our
discussion
agenda.
Thank
you.
I
B
Number
eight
is
query:
commons,
187,
humboldt
avenue,
north
and
ward
five
number
of
applications
related
to
a
development.
There
is
anybody.
C
B
B
B
Item
number
nine,
the
hiawatha
holiday
station
stores
rebuild
at
4601
hiawatha
avenue
in
ward
12..
I
will
discuss
item
number
nine
item
number
10
is
the
guest
domain,
lutheran
church
food
shelf
at
4656,
colfax
avenue
north
number
of
applications
related
to
that
fruit
shop
is.
J
G
B
2413
first
avenue
south
in
ward
10..
I
believe
we
have
one
person
wishing
to
testify
against
staff's
recommendation
on
this
item.
But
could
you
please
confirm,
I
believe,
paul
smith
on
the
line
for
star
six
to
unmute?
Let
us
know
if
you
wish
to
testify
on
this.
I
B
South
I
heard
that
there
is
paul
smith
on
the
line,
but
we're
not
hearing
you
we'll
place
that
item
on
consent,
but
if
you
wish
to
testify,
let
us
know
before
we
finish:
organizing
the
agenda
star
6
upon
mutes
item
number
12
is
2911
grand
street
northeast
in
ward
number
of
applications.
B
B
B
I
B
L
B
Correct:
okay,
very
good:
okay:
we
will
we
will
get
to
that
in
a
little
bit.
Then,
okay,.
A
I
B
Agenda
is
amended
as
follows:
we
have
on
our
discussion
agenda
items
number,
seven,
nine,
eleven
and
twelve
on
our
consent,
agenda
items
number
five,
eight
and
ten
and
we'll
continue
item
number
six
to
the
october
fifth
planning
commission
hearing.
Could
I
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
agenda
as
amended,
commissioner
smiley.
J
D
Olsen,
I'm.
N
D
O
B
Very
good,
thank
you
all
right
next
step.
Could
I
have
a
motion
to
continue
item
number
six
to
the
october
5th.
D
B
J
P
B
B
B
Here,
nobody,
I
will
close
the
consent
agenda
and,
commissioner
olsen,
I
believe
you
wanted
to
recuse
yourself
from
item
number
five
correct.
C
D
B
Very
good
we
will
now
move
on
to
our
discussion
agenda.
First
item
is
item
number
seven,
which
is
2025
west
river
road
staff
is
melee
rightly
floor
is
yours.
Q
Hi
good
evening-
and
this
is
2025
west
river
road-
next
next
slide-
please.
D
Q
Q
Okay,
perfect,
thank
you
very
much.
So
here's
an
aerial
of
the
site
it's
located
just
along
the
mississippi
river
along
west
river,
road
and
west
broadway
avenue.
The
current
site
contains
a
one-story
restaurant
that
that
is
broadway
pizza
right
now.
It's
surrounded
by
a
surface
parking
area
and
then
to
the
north
is
the
park
board
office
to
the
west
of
the
site
is
a
railroad
track
and
an
industrial
use
next
slide
please.
Q
Q
Q
Q
And
here
is
a
site
plan
showing
the
layout
of
the
building,
so
the
applicant
has
the
all
the
parking
being
accessed
from
the
northeast
corner
of
the
site
off
of
west
river
road.
So
that's
the
surface
parking
area
and
then
it
would
lead
to
an
underground
parking
area
built
into
the
grade
so
that
it
would
there
would
be
it
would
not
be
exposed
from
the
street
level.
Q
Q
Q
Thank
you.
So
this
shows
the
south
elevation
on
top
and
the
east
elevation
facing
the
river
on
the
bottom,
and
I
just
wanted
to
point
out
how
we're
measuring
height
so
in
the
shoreline.
There's
some
extra
strict
rules
about
how
we
measure
height,
so
here
we're
actually
measuring
all
the
way
to
the
top
of
the
the
elevator
overrun.
Q
So
it's
not
just
the
roof
line
of
the
building
and
it's
also
taking
the
most
strict
measurement,
as
as
you
can
see
in
the
corner
of
the
site,
the
grade
dips
down
a
little
bit
so
that
building
is
exposed
more
so
that's
the
height
of
83
feet,
11
and
a
half
inches
that
we're
getting
so
from
the
bottom
of
that
grade
to
the
top
of
the
elevator
overrun.
Q
Q
Sorry,
there's
an
echo,
so
I
just
want
to
go
through
some
of
these
conditional
use
findings
for
height,
so
they've.
There
have
been
a
number
of
comments
sent
in
as
part
of
the
staff
report
and
also
included
in
the
packets
tonight
that
were
forwarded
by
the
clerk,
because
we
just
keep
receiving
comments,
and
I
just
wanted
to
go
through
what
we're
actually
looking
at
when
we're
evaluating
a
development
against
the
conditional
use.
Q
Permit
findings
specifically
how
they
relate
to
the
shoreline
and
mississippi
river
area,
since
it's
kind
of
a
unique
area,
so
as
of
right,
you're
allowed
to
build
two
and
a
half
stories
for
a
given
building
in
these
districts
without
a
conditional
use
permit,
but
additional
height
is
allowed
if
the.
If
the
planning
commission
finds
that
specific
findings
are
met
and
those
are
outlined
in
the
staff
report
and
I'll
kind
of
summarize
them
here.
Q
So
the
proposed
building
is,
as
I
have
mentioned,
is
seven
stories
at
its
tallest
point
at
the
corner,
and
that
includes
all
rooftop
structures.
However,
the
building
has
been
designed
so
that
it
appears
more
like
a
five
to
six
story.
Building
due
to
the
due
to
the
grade
change
the
natural
grade,
change
on
the
site
staff
finds
that
the
block
does
not
have
a
cons.
The
block
that
the
site
is
on
does
not
have
a
consistent
character
or
scale
they're,
mostly
industrial
zoning,
districts
and
properties.
Q
Q
Q
This,
the
shadow
study
demonstrates
that
and
that's
in
the
staff
report
attachments
as
well
and
as
a
result,
there's
also
more
limited
visibility
from
the
river,
as
opposed
to
a
continuous
building
wall,
which
would
be
more
visible.
So
we
find
that
those
those
impacts
do
have
a
positive
result
in
evaluating
the
cup,
also
as
viewed
from
the
mississippi
river,
which
is
between
175
and
345
feet
to
the
east.
Q
Furthermore,
I
wanted
to
point
out,
so
this
is
in
the
corridor.
Six
built
form
category
of
the
com
comprehensive
plan
and
that
that
policy
guides
new
development
for
between
two
and
six
stories
for
a
maximum
of
84
feet
unless
the
additional
height
is
justified
through
a
reasonable
means
to
achieving
a
comprehensive
plan
goals.
Next
slide,
please.
Q
So
the
goals
that
are
called
out
in
the
staff
report
are,
namely
these
and
so
100.
All
the
163
dwelling
units
would
be
affordable,
and
this
advances
the
city's
goals
for
providing
additional,
affordable
housing
throughout
the
city
goal
number
six
is,
is
how
it
relates
to
having
a
high
quality
and
distinctive
physical
environment
in
all
parts
of
the
city.
So
these
residents
would
have
great
access
to
the
river
and
the
downtown
area
and
jobs,
and
that
mix
makes
it
a
really
uniquely
situated
site,
and
that
also
has
to
do
with
goal
number
nine
complete
neighborhoods.
Q
All
residents
would
have
access
to
employment,
retail
food
parks
and
other
daily
needs
next
slide.
Please-
and
I
wanted
to
clarify
some
of
the
the
ways
that
we're
evaluating
the
mississippi
river
corridor
critical
area
plan,
and
this
is
kind
of
a
new.
This
might
be
new
information
for
some
of
us
just
because
the
comprehensive
plan
was
adopted,
and
this
is
one
of
the
first
plans.
Q
So
it's
in
the
appendix
right
now
we're
in
the
process
of
adopting
a
draft
ordinance
that
that
codifies
the
recommendations
in
the
appendix
of
the
comprehensive
plan,
and
so
this
plan
says
that
this
site
is
urban
mixed.
It's
called
the
urban
mix
district
area
of
the
plan
and
they're
calling
for
a
maximum
height
of
65
feet
unless
increased
by
cup
and
provided
that
there
is
tiering
and
it
meets
other
criteria
in
the
plan
and
there's
extensive
language
on
this
and
the
language
you
know
does
say
that
there
should
be
development.
Q
There
should
be
a
way
to
allow
for
future
growth
and
development
in
this
area
as
long
as
you're
looking
at
things
like
not
negatively
affecting
public
river
corridor
views
and
protecting
the
bluffs
and
floodplains
next
slide.
Please.
Q
Here
are
the
findings
that
this
specific
district
looks
to
when
assessing
whether
development
can
be
taller
than
65
feet,
and
most
of
them
have
to
do
with
the
public
river
corridor
views
and
I'll
get
to
that
in
a
second
but
so
number.
One
assessment
of
the
visual
impact
of
the
proposed
building
on
public
river
corridor
views,
including
view
from
other
communities
number
two
identification
and
application
of
techniques
to
minimize
the
perceived
bulk
of
the
proposed
building
number
three
identification
of
techniques
for
preservation
of
those
view,
corridors
identified
in
the
government's
plan
and
opportunities
for.
Q
I
can't
see
this.
To
be
honest,
I
can't
actually,
anyway,
opportunities
for
creation
or
enhancement
of
public
river
corridor
abuse.
Next
slide.
Please.
Q
And
so
what
are
public
river
corridor
views?
There's
actually
a
very
specific
definition
of
this,
as
defined
in
the
in
the
mississippi
river
critical
area
plan
guidelines,
and
it
doesn't
just
relate
to
any
view
or
views
from
the
opposite
side
of
the
river
and
they've
identified
three
specific
views
in
this
area
and
I've
included
snapshots
of
the
plan
just
to
clarify
what
we're
talking
about
next
slide,
please.
Q
So,
if
we're
looking
at
number
seven,
so
there
are
only
three
that
I'm
going
to
go
through
that
are
even
in
the
area
of
this
site,
so
you
can
see
the
subject
site.
You
know
just
above
the
bridge
in
the
south
portion
of
that
picture
on
the
left.
Q
So
we're
looking
to
see
you
know
is
the
building
going
to
block
any
of
the
views
from
the
the
26th
avenue
north
riverbank
area,
and,
as
you
can
see
it
would
not
be.
It
would
not
be
affecting
the
view
from
the
park
to
the
river
in
that
area.
Next
slide,
please,
the
second
public
river
corridor
view
is
olsen
park
again,
the
site
is,
is
removed
from
the
public
corridor
view
area
next
slide.
Q
Q
So
the
mississippi
river
corridor
critical
area
plan
also
has
those
standards
to
that.
Make
sure
that
the
building
is
achieving
a
minimal
is
reducing
the
impact
of
the
perceived
bulk
in
the
most
the
most
effective
way
possible.
And
so
in
this
case
the
proposed
building
would
have
two
wings
that
are
perpendicular
to
the
mississippi
river,
as
opposed
to
a
continuous
building
wall.
The
applicants
designed
it
so
that
the
facade
is
stepping
back
from
the
wall
and
and
they
have
increased
setbacks
from
the
river
and
the
tiering
requirement.
Q
That's
required
to
increase
height
for
lots
of
different
options,
and
it's
very
site-specific.
So
this
allows
for
a
lot
of
flexibility,
and
it
includes
having
robust
landscaping
and
staff
finds
that
the
landscaping
that's
proposed
is
robust
and
would
meet
those
criteria
and
just
as
an
overall
point,
the
height
limits
that
are
defined
in
the
critical
area
plan
are
not
meant
to
be
six
strict
limits
that
prohibit
any
increase.
Q
That's
why
there
are
these
outlets
that
are
allowed
for
through
the
conditional
use,
permit
and
criteria
against
which
staff
can
evaluate
these
things,
so
we're
just
looking
at
all
the
criteria,
we're
looking
at
the
comprehensive
plan
goals,
the
mississippi
river
plan
goals
and
also
the
site
specific
situation
next
slide.
Please.
Q
B
For
all
the
contacts
staff
are
there
any
sorry,
commissioners
early.
B
All
right
seeing
none,
I
will
open
the
public
hearing
and
ask
the
applicant
to
introduce
themselves
and
add
any
further
context.
That's
needed.
H
Hi,
this
is
susan
vixie,.
B
Sir,
are
you
with
the
with
the
applicant
team.
B
Yes,
we're
going
to
have
the
applicant
present
first
and
then.
B
That's
all
right,
that's
all
right!
We
will
we'll
open
it
up
in
a
little
bit
and
we've
actually
got
people's
names
here.
R
B
On
the
line,
I
think
it's
keith.
B
S
Yep,
I
am
here
this
is
katie
anthony,
I'm
director
of
development
with
shaffer
richardson.
Thank
you,
chair
rockwell
and
commissioners
for
taking
up
our
application
today.
S
Building
on
building
on
what
mayling
was
presenting
can.
S
So
we
recognize
the
opportunity
potential
in
redeveloping
the
sites
and
we
evaluated
a
few
different
options
before
landing.
On
the
current
proposal,
this
plan
has
evolved
and
we've
received
feedback
from
the
neighborhood
association
commissioners,
other
residents
in
the
neighborhood
and
others,
and
the
project
presented
today,
has
really
benefited
from
the
thoughtful
feedback
from
those
stakeholders.
S
T
S
Hundred
thousand
dollars,
so
sixty
percent
of
the
area
median
income
is
about
forty,
two
thousand
dollars
for
a
single
person
household
and
sixty
thousand
dollars
for
a
family
of
four.
So
an
individual
making
earning
twenty
dollars
an
hour
at
a
full-time
job
earns
about
42
000
a
year,
and
that
could
be
you
know
many
working-class
jobs
that
including
home
health
care,
aides,
office,
workers,
restaurant
workers,
retail
workers,
etc.
S
Room
club
room
on-site
management,
secure
bicycle
storage,
outdoor
amenities,
like
a
pet
run
and
patios,
and
a
playground,
and
will
be
managed
by
the
same
management
company
that
manages
all
of
our
residential
buildings.
Both
affordable
and
market
rates.
We'll
have
three
full-time
staff
people
on
site.
We
will
have
on-site
caretakers
who
live
in
the
building
as
well.
S
This
project
is
in
the
north
side
green
zone
and
we
will
be
designing
the
building
with
sustainable
features
like
including
energy
efficiency
and
water,
efficient
measures,
healthy
indoor
building
materials,
we're
intending
it
to
be
solar,
ready
and
we'll
evaluate
the
feasibility
of
installing
solar,
rooftop
solar
as
well,
and
we're
evaluating
pursuing
a
green
building
certification
for
the
project.
S
We
feel
that
this
project
fills
a
niche
that
doesn't
exist
in
the
neighborhood.
Currently,
it's
a
new
building.
It's
going
to
be
high
quality,
that's
going
to
provide
a
safe
place
for
working
class
families
to
live,
and
it's
along
the
riverfront
and
having
access
to
the
riverfront
is
for
affordable.
Housing
is
something
that
doesn't
exist
in
many
places
in
the
city.
S
I
also
wanted
to
touch
on
a
item
in
our
plan
that
I'm
not
sure
called
out
very
clearly.
We
have
added
a
2
000
square
foot
space
along
broadway
that
is
intended
to
be
publicly
facing
space
and
not
building
amenity.
I
don't
know
mailing
or
commissioner
rockwell
if
it's
possible
to
put
up
the
first
floor
plan
or
not
so
that
this
can
be
viewed
in
context.
S
We
are
hoping
to
lease
that
out
to
a
third
party
that
would
be
a
public
publicly
available
space
like
many
of
our
projects.
At
this
stage
we
have
not
landed
on
what
that
specific
use
or
user
will
be,
but
there
are
a
wide
range
of
uses
that
are
allowed
in
the
c3a
zone,
and
we
would
you
know,
look
at
finding
a
user
for
that
space.
That
would
be
a
good
fit
for
the
neighborhood
and
a
good
fit
for
that
location.
S
We've
heard
desires
to
have
a
commercial
use
and
we're
striving
to
do
that.
Creativity
creatively,
while
working
within
the
constraints
of
this
particular
site
and
the
financing,
the
design
that
we
have
in
our
plan,
is
intended
to
be
flexible,
particularly
given
the
context
and
the
reality
of
the
commercial
market
today
and
the
evolution
the
evolution
of
this
neighborhood
and
this
particular
node
in
the
near
and
long-term
future.
S
B
Very
good
david,
if
you
want
to
just
star
six
to
unmute,
then
go
ahead.
U
U
V
B
Very
good,
commissioner:
do
we
have
any
questions
of
the
applicant
commissioner
with
the
peer?
You
do
not
have
any
questions
all
right.
Any
questions
of
the
app
can
at
this.
B
Time
all
right
hearing
none,
we
will
open
up
to
public
testimony
and
susan
vixxy.
Sorry,
sorry
if
I'm
pronouncing
your
name
wrong.
So
first,
please
press
star
six
to
unmute.
H
I
don't
think
that
it
complies
with
the
above
the
falls
plan,
the
critical
area
plan
or
the
comprehensive
plan
in
the
critical
area
plan.
It
is
our
understanding-
and
I
got
this
from
friends
of
the
mississippi
river-
that
the
building
height
limit
will
be
42
feet,
not
65,
so
it
will
go
from
35
to
42
feet
and
so
to
approve
this
requested
height.
H
Well,
in
the
immediate
neighborhood,
it
will
stand
out.
The
tallest
building
in
the
area
life
source,
which
is
a
beautiful
building,
is
40
feet.
Next
to
it
is
the
park
board
couple
stories,
then
you
have
one
story,
doyle,
security,
and
then
you
have
29
town
homes
and
I'm
wondering
if
they're,
comparing
this
with
the
urban
core.
H
H
They
also
state
that
it
meets
the
complete
neighborhood
goal,
but
it
does
because
it
provides
access
to
employment,
retail
services
or
healthy
food.
This
has
nothing
to
do
with
the
increased
height
of
the
building.
The
location
of
the
site
does
provide
access
to
parks,
walking
and
biting
and
biking,
but
has
nothing
to
do
with
the
height.
The
building
could
be
one
story
or
three,
and
that
would
remain
the
same.
H
It
doesn't
meet
the
goals
of
the
above
the
falls
plan,
and
this
has
been
developed
over
20
years
by
the
park
board,
cped
and
the
minneapolis
department
of
health
and
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
volunteers
me
being
one
of
them.
H
The
plan
does
not
the
above.
The
false
plan
does
not
support
concentrating
new,
affordable
housing
in
areas
with
high
poverty
rates,
and
it
specifically
cites
the
hawthorne
neighborhood,
which
currently
has
a
poverty
rate
of
35
percent,
the
door
t
twin
cities,
multi-family
market
study
of
2017-2018
report
looked
at
seven
minneapolis
neighborhoods
and
the
number
of
new
units
developed
for
market
rate
and
affordable
housing
of
those
seven
neighborhoods
near
north
is
the
only
neighborhood
without
market
rate
housing.
H
H
I
don't
know
18
wheelers
turned
from
broadway
onto
the
river
road,
but
they
also
turned
from
the
river
road
onto
broadway
many
barely
making
the
turn.
Now
when
a
traffic
study
was
completed,
it
was
conducted
during
a
pandemic
pandemic.
I
walk
bike
and
drive
that
corner
almost
every
day,
and
I
can
tell
you
the
traffic
is
substantially
less
than
pre
pandemic.
H
H
Now
the
new
development
would
add
more
residents
to
north
minneapolis
and
that's
a
good
thing,
but
without
mixed
income,
it's
not
going
to
give
us
the
income
diversity
needed
to
begin
to
build
economic
prosperity
for
the
area
and
without
mixed
use,
real
mixed
use.
It
will
not
give
us
the
public
amenity
that
we're
losing
we're
losing
the
the
broadway
pizza,
and
that
has
been
a
decades-long
gathering
place
for
the
community.
B
Thank
you
very
much.
Next
up
is
tim
baylor,
please
unmute,
star
six
and
state
your
name
and
address
for
the.
W
Mr
chair
and
commissioner
baylor,
my
address
is
2305
river
point
circle
and
I'm
not
sure
that
I
can
add
more
to
the
concerns
than
susan
just
demonstrated,
but
just
for
the
record,
I,
I
am
a
former
planning
commissioner
from
1992
to
2001..
W
W
W
Now,
regarding
this
project,
I
don't
have
any
design
concerns.
I'm
sure
that
the
design
team
and
the
developers
worked
hard
to
do
the
best
that
they
could,
but
the
reality
is
you've
got
163
units
planned
for
this
site,
which
means
that
there'll
be
at
least
300
people
on
this
very,
very
busy
intersection.
W
W
I
don't
really
think
so.
It
is
my
understanding
also
that
the
developer
says
that
the
project
cannot
support
retail
or
restaurant.
On
the
first
floor,
it's
almost
laughable
if
it
wasn't
so
insidious,
this
broadway
pizza
location
happens
to
be
the
flagship.
That
means
the
busiest
location
in
their
entire
restaurant
chain.
X
W
B
Thank
you
very
much.
Next
up
is
colleen
o'connor
toberman,
please
unneutral!
Stop
by
hitting
star
six
state,
your
name
and
address
for
the
robbery.
E
E
Okay-
here
I
am,
my
name-
is
colleen
o'connor
toberman.
I
live
at
2316,
saint
anthony
parkway
in
minneapolis,
and
I'm
here
representing
friends
of
the
mississippi
river.
We
submitted
comments
that
you
already
have
in
front
of
you
in
both
may
and
then
updated
with
this
final
application.
So
I
won't
belabor
all
of
the
points
in
them,
but
I
do
want
to
point
out
a
couple
of
things
that
concern
us
about
this
project.
We're
concerned
about
the
building
height,
not
from
a
density
perspective,
but
from
a
question
of
good
urban
design
along
the
riverfront.
E
You
know
this
building
is
nearly
twice
what
the
new
market
district
overlay
proposes
for
building
heights
and
we're
concerned
that
that
doesn't
account
for
the
potential
for
river
oriented
redevelopment
in
the
surrounding
neighborhood
and
doesn't
really
make
the
best
use
of
the
relationship
between
the
river
and
the
neighborhood
and
in
exchange
for
the
for
the
excessive
height.
It's
not
really
delivering
on
what
we've
heard
community
members
ask
for,
namely
that
lack
of
commercial
activity.
I
think
that's
a
real
tremendous
loss
for
the
neighborhood.
E
The
site
really
calls
for
and
deserves
some
kind
of
public
gathering
space.
Some
kind
of
mixed-use
development
that
can
serve
residents
of
both
north
and
northeast
minneapolis
and
help
encourage
kind
of
continuous
travel
and
commercial
activity
along
the
entire
broadway
corridor.
E
That
sets
a
lot
of
precedence,
and
you
know
when,
when
is
the
time
to
have
great
community
design
and
great
amenities
along
the
north,
minneapolis
riverfront,
if
not
now
I'll
also
mention
you
know
that
that,
should
the
cup
be
granted
for
building,
that
is
this
excessively
tall.
I
would
really
like
to
see
the
commission
require
bird,
safe
building
materials
and
design
as
a
condition
of
approval
as
a
way
to
balance.
E
You
know
kind
of
the
the
density
of
the
site,
and
you
know
the
desire
to
have
a
high
density
neighborhood
with
the
fact
that
this
is
on
the
mississippi
river
flyway
and
it's
an
easy
way
to
sort
of
better
co-exist
with
the
wildlife
around
us.
Those
are
all
my
comments.
Thank
you.
B
T
And
commissioners,
my
name
is
mary
jamin
mcguire.
I
live
at
2641
marshall
street
northeast
and
I'm
speaking
today
on
behalf
of
the
above,
the
falls
community
advisory
committee
commonly
known
as
afcac,
and
you
should
have
our
letter
in
front
of
you.
But
I'll
go
over
some
of
the
particular
points.
We
do
have
some
positive
comments
about
this
proposal.
We
have
no
problem
with
the
variants
to
allow
development
within
the
40-foot
slope
because
of
the
unique
aspect
of
the
site.
T
We
also
support
the
variants
for
the
for
the
building
to
be
more
than
eight
feet
from
the
front
lot
adjacent
to
west
river
road
and
we
support
the
increased
size
of
the
kennel
as
long
as
there
are
some
conditions.
Along
with
that.
However,
we
also
have
some
concerns
which
seem
to
echo
those
that
you've
already
heard
here
today.
We
are
especially
concerned
about
the
height.
T
T
T
T
This
project
is
not
exceptional
or
notable,
especially
considering
its
relationship
to
the
mississippi
river
and
again
increasing
height
will
not
achieve
that
goal,
and
then
all
minneapolis
residents
will
have
access
to
employment,
retail
services,
healthy
food
parks
and
other
daily
needs
via
walking
biking
and
public
transit,
except
for
the
adjacent
viking
walking
paths
along
the
mississippi
river
with
their
connection
to
the
above,
the
falls
regional
park
system.
This
neighborhood
lacks
these
amenities
within
a
short
walk.
It
also
lacks
safe
bike
lanes
to
access
retail
along
west
broadway
and
there's
very
limited
transit
access.
T
T
We
also
recommend
that
the
bird,
safe,
glass
and
dark
sky
lighting
be
included
because
of
the
important
bird
migration
route
here
and
we're
we're
asking
for
an
affordable
and
accessible
rooftop
amenity
for
the
tenants
and
the
community.
The
views
of
the
mississippi
river
and
downtown
from
this
site
are
incredible.
T
We
also
note
that
this
has
been
done
at
the
a
mill
which
is
also
highly
subsidized
and
includes
affordable
units.
Someone
who
would
put
a
restaurant
on
the
roof
of
this
building,
I
would
imagine,
would
would
be
quite
successful,
so
hopefully
somebody
could
make
some
money
and
there'd
be
some
employment
as
well.
T
I
think
I
mentioned
that
we
oppose
the
plan
for
this
development
to
include
only
affordable
units.
We
recommend
that
there
be
a
wide
range
of
p
of
incomes
represented
in
this
community,
so
that
people
in
different
stages
of
their
life
and
different
financial
stages
can
can
live
in
this
building
and
those
those
are
found
to
be
the
most
stable
and
and
successful
communities
based
on
in
intensive
research.
T
Let
me
see
I'm
not
going
in
order
here.
T
We
also
support
increase
landscaping
and
oh,
we
also
we're
also
concerned
about
the
lack
of
metro,
transit
and
bus
lane
near
this
development
and
recommend
that
the
developer
collaborate
with
metro
transit
to
add
a
bus,
stop
at
this
location
and
a
bus,
shelter
again,
perhaps
designed
by
a
north
minneapolis
artist
and
they
collaborate
to
add
protected
bike
lanes
along
west
broadway
and
then
finally,
we
have
some
concerns
about
the
cantilevered
rooftop.
T
I
B
Up
is
ryan
strep.
Please
hit
star
six
to
unmute
yourself
and
state
your
name
and
address
for
the.
B
B
B
We
will
circle
back
to
ryan's
dress.
Is
there
a
samuel
westland
on
the
line.
R
X
Perfect,
thank
you
hi.
My
name
is
sam
westland,
I'm
a
resident
of
north
minneapolis
at
2226
dupont,
avenue
north.
I
have
a
couple
of
comments
today.
I
think
my
my
biggest
one
is
is
the
concern
that
currently
on
on
the
river,
our
neighborhood
has
no
representative
residential
areas.
There
is
one
smaller
town,
home
and
possibly
apartments.
X
I
don't
know
much
about
this
area,
but
I
do
know
just
with
some
probably
five
minutes
of
googling
that
to
to
be
in
one
of
those
homes,
you
will
be
paying
anywhere
from
300
000
to
600,
000
or
mortgaging
that
amount
of
money.
X
That's
that's
not
costly
that
I
mean
yes,
that
these
are
obviously
members
of
our
community,
but
but
when
we
talk
about
hawthorne
it,
it
is
a
much
poorer
community
than
these
residences,
and
I
think
I
think
it's
very
worthwhile
to
open
up
the
riverfront
to
people
who
don't
make
that
kind
of
money.
The
river
is
for
everyone
and
we
need
to
make
it
that
way,
and
on
top
of
that,
it's
a
beautiful
building,
I've.
X
I
have
been
able
to
look
at
the
plans
a
little
bit
and
we
we
need
more
beautiful
buildings
on
the
riverfront.
The
all
of
the
town
homes
are
fairly
dated
and,
and
the
rest
is
commercial,
I'm
sorry,
not
commercial.
Well,
I
guess
there
might
be
some
commercial,
but
primarily
industrial,
and
we
we
need
hawthorne
residents
to
have
access
to
the
river
and
the
beautiful
spaces
along
west
river
road.
X
X
B
Very
good,
thank
you
very
much
is
ryan
stressed
unmute
yourself
at
this
point.
B
B
In
the
meantime,
auntie
hold
on
please
unmute
yourself,
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record.
F
Good
evening
it's
nancy
hilden,
I'm
going
to
defer
to
my
colleague
natalia
rodriguez,
who
is
able
to
speak
on
behalf
of
riverview
townhomes
tonight,
because
her
law
school
class
doesn't
start
until
six.
So
I'm
just
gonna
defer
to
natalia.
B
All
right,
pre-class,
natalia
rodriguez,
please
get
your
name
and
address
for
the
record.
V
Perfect,
natalia
madriga,
hilton
advocacy
and
law
address,
310,
4th
avenue,
south
minneapolis,
minnesota
55415
and
just
want
to
echo
and
support
the
statements
of
miss
dixie
and
mr
baylor,
and
just
ask
for
the
commission,
oppose
the
project
that's
currently
planned
and
that
we
can
work
to
continue
with
the
residence
and
hawthorne
to
make
this
the
right
project
and
right
size
it.
For
this.
B
I
will.
If
ryan's
draft
gets,
gets
off,
mute
then
go
ahead
and
just
speak
up
in
the
meantime.
Is
there
anybody
else
on
the
line
wishing
to
testify
on
this
item
2025
west
river
road?
If
there
is
please
unmute
yourself
and
let
us
know
you're
here
and
you
can
speak
yes,.
B
Very
good,
thank
you.
L
B
All
right,
hopefully,
keith
ulstead,
will
be
able
to
rejoin
us
and
testify.
Is
there
anybody
else
on
the
line
wishing
to
sfi.
B
B
All
right
with
that
looks
like
mr
keith
ulstead
has
left
the
meeting,
so
we
will,
if
folks
are
able
to
rejoin,
we
can
reopen
the
public
hearing
to
hear
from
folks
who
had
technical
difficulties
in
the
meantime,
I'll
close
the
public
hearing.
Commissioners,
we
have
five
applications
before
us.
Y
Hi
my
question
is
for
the
applicant.
We
had
talked
at
committee
of
the
whole
about
kind
of
flex
commercial
space,
so
looking
at,
I
know
that
it
came
up
in
the
neighborhood
comments
as
well
about
the
lack
of
commercial
space
and
the
losing
out
of
broadway
pizza
and
what
that
meant
for
the
neighborhood.
But
I
know
there
was
just
discussion
about
that
and
I
wanted
to
hear
an
update.
Is
that
space
still
being
included?
What's
the
kind
of
the
plan
for
that
space?
Y
How
would
that
be
rented
or
programmed
just
to
to
understand?
Is
there
still
going
to
be
some
kind
of
a
you
know,
pop-up
restaurant
space
in
that
building?
Thank
you.
S
Okay,
so
I
think
thank
you
for
that
question,
commissioner.
I
mentioned
earlier
that
it's
not
very
clear,
but
we
do
have
a
couple
2
000
square
feet
of
space
along
broadway.
That
is
intended
to
be
that
publicly
facing
space
we'd
like
to
lease
it
out
to
a
third
party.
We
typically
don't
have
those
those
you
know
whatever
it
is.
S
The
use
is
identified
ahead
of
time
at
this
early
in
a
project,
but
it
is
our
intention
to
have
some
sort
of
non-amenity
non-resident
space
along
broadway,
and
I
think
it
shows
up
I'm
not
sure
what
it's
labeled
in
the
plan.
It
may
be
called
multi-purpose
space,
but
it
is,
it
has
its
own
entrance
off
of
broadway
and
you
know
its
own
storefront
and
it's
it's
its
own
space
without
connection
to
to
the
residential
space
other
than
you
know,
fire
exits
and
and
such.
B
Very
good,
thank
you
and,
while
you're
still
on
the
line,
we
have
a
follow-up
question
from
commissioner
luke
here.
Z
Yes,
I
just
a
quick
follow-up
question
of
that.
I
was
wondering
if
the
commercial
space
that's
been
allocated
on
the
first
floor,
then,
is
that
designed
as
such
to
be
conducive
to
restaurant
conversion
easily,
or
is
that
a
big
aftermarket
retrofit,
which
will
prohibit
any
small
business
from
actually
opening
a
restaurant?
I'm
just
wondering
how
what
the
likelihood
of
that
happening
really
really
is.
S
Yep
the
the
depth
of
that
space
is,
I
don't
have
the
dimensions
in
front
of
me,
but
maybe.
S
Yep
24
feet,
so
it
depends
on
the
restaurant
use.
It's
in
terms
of
kind
of
a
back
of
house
front
of
house.
S
It
would
be
limited
in
terms
of
having
us
like
a
full
kitchen
and
sit
down
space,
but
certainly
there
are
other
other
food
type
uses
or
beverage
type
uses
that
could
fit
in
that
space.
B
Thank
you,
and
it
looks
like
keith
ulstead
may
be
back
on
the
line
if
you're
back
on
the
line
go
ahead
and
unbeat
yourself,
and
I
will
reopen
the
public
hearing
for
that.
Testimony.
L
However,
I
serve
as
board
chair
for
the
audubon
chapter
of
minneapolis,
and
in
line
with
that
work,
I
offer
an
additional
perspective
to
this
discussion
with
two
of
our
allies.
Our
audubon
chapter
has
submitted
a
fuller
statement
to
you
earlier,
distributed
to
you
earlier
by
miling
smith,
and
I
commend
that
statement
to
you.
It
highlights
our
grave
concerns
about
granting
the
conditional
use
permit
for
the
height
of
the
proposed
2025
west
river
road
project
and
for
the
excessively
large
dog
run.
It
also
provides
you
numerous
links
with
more
detailed
information
to
back
up
our
concerns.
L
For
now,
I
want
to
focus
on
a
larger
issue.
Our
city
sits
in
the
middle
of
one
of
the
greatest
bird
migration
flyways
in
the
world,
literally
millions
of
birds
pass
through
our
area
every
spring
and
fall
given
our
strategically
central
location
in
the
mississippi
flyway.
Our
recent
neglect
of
migration
dynamics
is
scandalous.
L
Our
chapter
has
been
a
strong
advocate
for
bird-friendly
building
design,
including
appropriate,
building,
siting
and
glass.
So
I
was
relieved
to
hear
reference
from
the
applicant
about
bird,
safe
glass,
but
I'd
like
to
know
more
about
what
particularly
is
being
proposed,
but
also
adherence
to
international
dark
sky
guidelines.
L
We
want
to
work
with
city
leaders
to
rebuild
our
reputation
as
a
city
that
so
values
the
health
and
well-being
of
its
citizens,
that
it
nurtures
and
defends
a
natural
environment
where
all
things
can
thrive.
So
please
reject
the
exceptions
proposed
for
the
2025
project
and
insist
on
development
that
honors
our
natural
world
again.
Please
study
our
full
statement
and
thank
you
for
your
consideration.
B
Thank
you
very
much.
I
will
reclose
public
hearing
and
commissioners
again
we
have
five
applications
before
us.
Commissioner,
livke.
Z
Yes,
I
had
a
question
for
mr
alstead.
I
just
wondered
if
he
could
elaborate
a
little
more
about
his
objections
to
the
dog
run
since
it's
on
the
ground
level,
I'm
just
wondering
if
he
could
maybe
articulate
that
a
bit
more.
I
understand
the
bird
once,
but
I'm
a
little
confused
about
the
dog
run
issue.
B
C
Thank
you.
I
have
some
mixed
feelings
about
this
project.
First,
I
I
feel
like
there's
way
too
much
surface
parking.
You
know
so
close
to
the
river
wish.
We
would
ban
that.
C
I'm
also
disappointed
to
not
have
a
full-service
restaurant
at
that
location.
I
would
really
like
to
see
that
there
I
don't
have
any
objection
to
the
density
or
you
know
to
the
the
affordability
levels,
I'm
you
know
kind
of
surprised
to
see
the
number
of
emails
that
I've
gotten
going
in
conflicting
directions.
On
that
I
have
people
telling
me
both.
You
know
we
have
too
much
affordable
already
here.
C
We
don't
want
any
more
and
then
I
have
other
people
telling
me
that
this
is
gonna,
be
wealthy
people
gentrifying
the
neighborhood
I
mean
the
truth
is
in
the
middle
that
it's.
This
is
middle-class
housing
and
I
believe
our
our
city
needs
more
of
that
and
it's
a
good
thing,
former
people
to
have
access
to
the
river
for
the
building
itself.
You
know
this
is
an
entry
point
into
minneapolis
and
I'm
kind
of
meh
about
it.
I
think
it
could
be
better
if
it's
not
not
terrible.
C
C
Z
So,
thank
you,
I'm
a
little
conflicted
as
well.
I,
as
somebody
who
lived
in
hawthorne
for
13
years,
and
I
loved
my
time
there
and
I'm
still
a
north
sider.
I
I
read
I
I
saw
this
project
and
I
am
I'm.
I
was
really
happy
with
the
strides
that
the
design
team
made
in
response
to
our
feedback
from
the
first
command
the
whole.
So
I'm
really
conflicted,
though,
because
I
I
do
think
the
building's
come
a
long
way.
I
think
it's
a
solid
design.
Z
I
I
do
take
issue
a
little
bit
still
with
that
gateway
feature
at
the
corner
right.
The
eyebrow
thing
at
the
top.
Doesn't
do
it
for
me
when
the
rest
of
that
corner
seems
kind
of,
I
think
commissioner
meyer's
words
meh,
but
but
as
a
project
I
felt
they
were
responsive.
I
on
one
hand
I
like
the
idea
that
we
can
have
affordable
housing
along
the
riverfront.
Z
At
the
same
time,
I
do
take
issue
with
further
concentrating
poverty
in
north
minneapolis,
and
I
think
that
the
callers
that
called
in
I
think
touched
on
this
a
little
bit
given
just
how
many
affordable
units
were
getting
built
without
a
single
marker
rate
unit
among
them.
Z
I
think
that
that's
a
little
bit,
we
just
went
through
a
massive
comp
plan
where
we
talked
about
the
impact
of
redlining
and
how
people
were
concentrated
in
certain
areas
of
the
city,
and
it
seems
as
though
as
a
city
when
we're
complicit
in
concentrating
poverty
in
just
a
few
pockets
of
a
city
and
not
instead
encouraging
affordable
housing
everywhere
throughout
the
city.
Z
It
kind
of
makes
you
wonder
whether
we
really
learned
anything
from
all
that
research
into
redlining
as
a
city
or
not
so
I
I'm
torn,
I
want
more
affordable
housing.
Do
we
need
to
have
all
affordable
housing
and
not
any
market
rate
in
an
area
that
has
over
a
third
of
its
residents,
are
living
in
poverty?
Z
I
don't
know
I
mean
I
I
don't
know,
and
so
I
I
look
at
it
and
I
think
that
the
question
that
some
of
the
speakers
brought
up
about
if
we're
going
to
be
considered
part
of
of
the
urban
core.
If
there's
all
these
exceptions,
if
it
should
be
taller
because
of
this,
it
should
be
whatever.
Where
are
the
amenities
to
go
along
with
it?
Z
I
mean
anywhere
else
in
the
city
for
every
other,
commissioner,
you
can
walk
somewhere
in
your
community
or
drive
to
any
number
of
restaurants
in
your
neighborhood.
I
can't
think
of
a
single
other
sit-down
restaurant
in
hawthorne
at
all
off
the
top
of
my
head,
much
less,
none
in
within
walking
distance
of
this.
So
the
fact
that
it's
taking
away
a
restaurant
that's
been
there
for
longer
than
I've
been
in
existence
and
then
not
putting
a
restaurant
in
but
kind
of
this
vague
community-ish
public
space.
Z
I'm
not
really
on
board
with
it
that,
coupled
with
the
fact
that
it
is
one
of
the
most
spectacular
views
of
the
downtown
you're
going
to
get
along
the
river,
it
does
seem
like
it's
a
missed
opportunity
and
while
we
might
look
at
the
existing
townhomes
that
are
located
north
of
this
and
say
this
is
not
enough
population
density
to
support
commercial
or
retail
or
restaurant.
We
are
adding
like
we
said
about
163
units,
that's
a
mixture
of
different
unit
sizes.
I
I
think
the
speaker
was
right.
Z
I'm
saying
that's
over
300
people
being
added
to
one
parcel
of
land
there.
Surely
they've
got
to
eat
somewhere
there's.
I
do
think
that
we
are
not.
We
aren't
meeting
the
comp
plan
requirements
for
complete
neighborhoods
at
all.
I
actually
was
when
I
was
taking
notes
during
the
presentation
I
was.
I
was
kind
of
wondering
you
know,
there's
no
access
to
jobs.
There
I
mean
it's
near
industrial,
which
has
the
lowest
number
of
jobs
per
acre
of
any
use
in
the
city.
Z
There's
no
other
job,
there's
no
bus
that
stops
there,
there's
no
restaurants
to
eat
at.
I.
The
only
thing
that
we've
got
going
for
is
near
the
river
in
the
parks,
which
is
a
great
amenity,
but
that's
not
a
complete
neighborhood.
So
I
I
don't.
I
don't
think
it's
supportive
in
the
comp
plan.
I
I
think
that
a
building
at
this
location,
possibly
of
similar
shape
size
height,
massing
whatever,
maybe
with
slightly
less
surface
parking.
Z
I
wouldn't
necessarily
have
a
problem
with,
but
I
do
think
that
we
have
to
ask
ourselves
whether
we
really
learned
anything
from
that
whole
redlining
discussion,
because
I
I
think
that
one
of
the
biggest
problems
in
the
city
is
we
don't
push
back
enough
to
kind
of
make
sure
that
people
have
choices
and
if
the
only
choice
is
that
you
have
to
live
in
certain
neighborhoods
that
you
don't
have
an
option
to
live
in
other
neighbors
that
have
amenities
that
are
complete.
What
does
that
say
about
our
commitment
to
equity?
Z
And
so
morally?
I
just
I'm
not
sure
I
can
support
this,
despite
the
fact
that
it's
a
well-designed
project
and
a
lot
of
positive
features
to
it,
and
I
really
appreciate
that
they
were
going
in
the
right
direction.
I
just
I'm,
I'm
not
sure
I
can
support
this
at
this
time
without
including
amenities
that
everyone
should
have
access
to,
regardless
of
income
level
and
and
maybe
making
it
more
of
a
income
diverse
project,
although
I
still
think
heavy
on
affordability
is
appropriate.
Z
I
just
I
just
think
that
it's
it's
it's
not
it's
not
what
a
complete
neighborhood
is,
and
it's
not
what
people
deserve
to
live
in
when
there's
no
amenities
around
that
they
can
enjoy
like
any
other
area.
The
city
would
thank
you.
B
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Loopkeeper
next
up
is
commissioner
sweetie.
AA
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Rockwell
just
wanted
to
chime
in
on
this
also
with
similar,
but
different,
conflicting
feelings
about
the
project.
AA
I'm
reminded
of
the
project
on
plymouth
on
the
river
that
was
approved
a
few
years
ago,
and
I
think,
is
complete
now
that
apartment
complex,
which
is
market
rate
closer
to
the
north
loop
and
one
of
the
things
a
number
of
us
said
at
the
time
that
we
we
thought
that
was
a
missed
opportunity
because
it
wasn't
taller
and
it
came
in
at
the
six
stories
or
whatever,
and
a
number
of
us
thought
that
things
should
be
more
ambitious
on,
including
me.
AA
I
was
one
of
those
people
who
thought
that
things
on
the
riverfront
should
be
more
ambitious
than
that,
and
now
we
go
further
north
to
broadway,
where
kind
of
up
until
the
economic
downturn
here
in
this
year's
unforeseen
events
it
looked
like
there
were
going
to
be
some
things
happening
on
washington
near
broadway.
I
remember
there
was
one
project
where
a
guy
was
going
to
put
in.
It
was
going
to
be
a
storage
facility,
but
he
was
real,
amen,
real
amenable
to
some
other
things.
AA
It
looked
like
some
property
was
changing
hands
over
there,
and
particularly
in
the
area
on
broadway
between
washington
and
the
river.
It
started
to
look
like.
Maybe
there
were
some
glimmers
of
hope,
and
I
know
that
you
know
nobody
is
personally
responsible
for
what's
happened
to
the
economy
and
other
things
since
then,
but
I
too,
for
some
different
reasons
feel
like
this
is
probably
a
step
in
the
wrong
direction
and
I
haven't
decided
yet
whether
I'm
going
to
vote
for
it.
AA
I
mean
everybody,
loves,
broadway
pizza
and
wants
it
to
stay
or
those
of
us
who
do
want
it
to
stay.
But
you
know
the
reality.
Is
we
can't
force
restaurants
to
stay
in
business
or
people
to
not
sell
their
property
for
development
when
they
own
it
and
they
have
every
right
to
do
so.
So
you
know
we
sort
of
have
to
accept
the
fact
that
things
are
going
to
change
with
this
parcel.
AA
But
the
question
is
whether
this
is
the
right
thing
to
do
or
not,
and
I
don't
I
agree-
I
don't
think
it's
close
to
transit.
I
don't
think
it's
close
to
jobs,
I'm
very
sensitive
to
commissioner
lupke
piers
comments
about
not
having
sit-down
restaurants
and
things
like
that
and
again
we
can't
force
that,
but
we
can
build
and
sort
of
expect
projects
that
that
foster
it
and
don't
close
it
out
as
a
possibility
and
obviously
affordable.
AA
As
I
understand
it,
the
whole
point
of
the
comp
plan,
all
this
business
with
density
and
everything
was
to
spread
it
out
a
little
bit-
and
here
we
are,
you,
know
nine
months
in
and
we're
talking
about
putting
an
all-affordable
unit
on
the
river
and
that's
great,
but
I
I'm
very
persuaded
by
the
the
statements
of
members
of
the
community
and
others
that
that
a
more
mixed
use
or
mixed
income
property
might
help
propel
some
of
this
other
economic
development
that
has
just
absolutely
been
lacking
in
this
in
this
particular
pocket
and
again
I'm
talking
about
between
washington
and
the
river.
AA
So
I
guess
I'm
leaning
toward
not
supporting
it,
because
I
can
find
I
mean
I
can
read
the
staff
report
and
see
that
some
of
those
goals
of
the
comp
plan
support
it
and
there's
you
know
a
basis
in
here
to
approve
this,
but
I
think
you
can
find
as
many
comp
plan
goals
that
are
absolutely
not
supported
by
this
project
and
could
support
a
no
vote.
AA
C
Thank
you,
so
I
I
really
want
to
push
back
on
the
affordability,
because
again
this
is
you
know
middle
income.
Here
the
the
poverty
rate
is
like
what
thirteen
thousand
dollars
for
for
an
individual,
like
you
know
more
than
that
for
a
family,
but
I
I
don't
think
that
would
be
a
good
reason
to
reject
this
project.
C
I
I
think
the
restaurant
you
know
would
be.
I
think
that
if
we
wanted
to
to
push
on
that
like
if
the
developer
was
willing
to
put.
C
I
would
be
willing
to
support
the
project
as
it
is
with
that
edition,
but
I
really
if,
if
it's
going
to
be
rejected,
I
really
really
would
want
to
send
the
right
message
to
the
developer
about
what
to
come
back
with,
and
I
I
don't
want
to
send
the
message
that
you
know
we
don't
want
more
middle-income
housing
and
then
I
guess
one
thing
that
that
hasn't
been
noted
is
that
the
hawthorne
neighborhood
association
did
send
a
letter
in
favor
of
this
project,
and
you
know
they
presumably
have
had
a
lot
of
conversations
about
it
and
are
probably
more
reflective
of
the
overall
neighborhood
attitude
than
any
particular
commenter
yeah.
C
So
I
guess
where
I'm
at
is.
If
people
want
to
want
to
push
on
on
the
commercial
space,
then
then
I
would
agree
to
push
on
that,
but
otherwise
I
I
would
approve
the
project
because
I
don't
want
to
reject
more
middle-income
housing
here.
O
Y
Hi,
I
think
my
statements
basically
echo
what
commissioner
meyer
was
saying.
I
agree
wholeheartedly.
I
the
density
does
not
bother
me.
I
run
this
corridor
very
often
I
feel
like.
I
know
this
site
in
the
site
is
primed
for
a
denser
real
estate
development.
So
I
I'm
in
favor
of
it
middle
income.
Housing
is
definitely
lacking.
It's
really.
I
mean
it's
super
easily
connected
to
the
north
loop
and
anywhere
else
along
the
corridor,
so
I'm
in
favor
of
the
building.
Y
As
for
those
reasons,
but
my
confusion
is
also
the
losing
of
a
prime
wheels
prime
commercial
real
estate
corner
right
there
we
talked
about
how
that's
a
gate
race
site
coming
across
the
bridge
and
how
that,
having
that
corner,
not
activated
just
seems
like
a
really
lost
potential
for
an
area,
that's
severely,
lacking
and
and
dining
also.
So
I
I
mean.
Is
there
a
way
considering
what
commissioner
meyer
was
saying?
If
is
there
like?
Is
there
some
kind
of
a
oh
you're
legal?
Y
M
So
this
is
kimberly.
I
would
advise
against
a
condition
of
approval
that
specifically
requires
a
restaurant
in
that
space.
M
M
B
Then
commissioners,
are
there
any
further
comments
or
would
commissioners
keep
here.
J
Z
I
just
I
wanted
to
ask
the
applicant
specifically
the
developer,
about
what
their
thoughts
were
upon.
Hearing
the
community
talk
about
restaurant
space,
not
just,
as
you
know,
small
whatever
could
fit
in
the
basically
parking
spot
depth
plus
a
couple
feet,
but
but
the
comments
specifically
are
related
to
like
up,
for
example,
the
rooftop
restaurant.
It
is
true
if
you,
if
you
build
that,
I
I
can't
imagine
that
there
isn't
some
restaurant
that's
going
to
want
to
be
there.
Z
I
mean
we
don't
have
anything
like
that
if
they
could
comment
on
what
the
likelihood
of
maybe
considering
that
as
as
a
feature
to
this
building,
considering
its
unique
location
and
amenities.
S
Yes,
yes,
thank
you,
commissioner,
for
for
the
question
I
I
do
feel
like
commercial
is
an
amenity
to
the
building
here
and
would
be,
and
generally
I
think,
people
as
heard
tonight.
People
like
to
see
mixed-use
buildings,
the
the
question
about,
I
think
the
challenge
is
we
build
mixed-use
buildings.
Sometimes
we
build
just
multi-family
buildings
and
sometimes
and
oftentimes.
The
challenge
is
leasing
those
buildings
and
so
those
spaces.
S
So
you
know
an
example
of
the
redwell
was
brought
up
that
building
is
opening
this
month
and
we
have
at
this
point
in
time
ten
thousand
square
feet
without
any
tenant,
so
that
will
be
grounds
for
commercial
space
that
when
the
building
opens
will
be
vacant,
the
same
is
true
for
some
of
our
projects
in
northeast.
So
it's
not
not
the
location
specific.
S
I
think
there
are
a
lot
of
food
and
beverage
related
uses
that
can
operate
in
that
space,
but
I'm
hesitant
to
say
that
it
will
be
a
restaurant
or
it
will
be
this
or
it
will
be
that
because
we
are
really
it's
about
finding
the
right
user
for
the
space
who's
interested
in
the
space
can
afford
the
space
and
and
fits
in
the
space,
and
I'm
not
sure
if
that
answered
your
question.
S
But
I
do
if
the
question
was:
do
I
view
commercial
as
an
amenity
and
what
could
happen
here
as
an
amenity
to
the
building?
I
do
if
we
get
the
right
tenant
and
it's
not
just
vacant
space.
Well,.
Z
Actually,
my
question
was
more
along
and
I
think
you
touched
on
a
little
bit
that
you
said
the
right
user
for
the
in
the
right
size
space
and
I'm
just
wondering
I
feel
as
though
the
the
commercial
space
you're
providing
it
is
an
amenity
I'll
hand
you
that,
but
my
my
comment
was:
is
it
too
underwhelming
or
are?
Are
you-
and
this
is
not
just
you
simply,
but
in
terms
of
when
developers
approach
north
minneapolis?
Are
you
under
valuing
what
you
you
have
and
that
that
location
specifically
with
its
views
and
everything
I
mean?
Z
I
really
think
quite
frankly,
if
you
had
that
same
square
footage
on
the
the
top
floor
as
a
restaurant,
you
would,
you
would
probably
see
a
lot
different
interest
from
the
from
a
commercial
tenant
or
restaurant
or
whoever
it
is
you
know
than
than
having
it
just
be
that
little
shoehorn
space
on
the
ground
floor.
So
I'm
wondering
if
you
know
when
you
said
the
right
user
with
the
right
space,
I'm
wondering
do
you?
Are
you
putting
it
in
the
right
space.
S
O
Thank
you,
president
rockwell.
I
I
want
to
address
a
couple
points.
First,
I
would
caution,
commissioners
and
those
of
us
in
general
that
and
just
to
give
you
some
context
about
the
the
how
difficult
it
is
to
secure
a
tenant
and
secure
commercial
space.
It's
something
the
city
deals
with
all
the
time
like
we
very
much
encourage.
We
want
retail.
We
want
these
amenities
for
communities,
but
just
know
that
it's
it's
really
difficult
to
get
that
in
and
like
can
really
talked
about
like
it's
something
that
you
know,
developers
can
get
this.
O
If
they
have
that
condition,
they
can
come
back
and
say,
look
at
we
just
weren't
able
to
get
a
lease,
and
I
think
it's
I've
also
had
the
experience
where
a
lot
of
people
think
this
would
be
a
great
business,
but
without
the
right
person
without
the
right
vision
that
that
may
not
work
and-
and
I
think
that
that's
something
best
left
to
those
that
have
the
the
money
capital
experience
to
jump
in
with-
and
I
think
dictating
you
know
where
a
business
might
be
is-
is
a
little
bit
beyond
what
we're
here
to
do.
O
Also
on
the
I
want
to
touch
on
the
affordable
housing
part
of
it
like.
While
I
agree,
there's
a
lot
more
need
at
the
the
bottom
end
of
the
area:
media
income.
We
need
affordable
housing
on
every
spectrum
in
every
part
of
the
city.
So
I
think
that
this
I
really
commend
the
developers
for
kind
of
bringing
that
to
this.
Q
Yeah,
I
just
wanted
to
bring
the
discussion
back
a
little
bit
to
the
comprehensive
plan.
So
when
we
are
trying
to
require
a
condition
as
kimberly
mentioned,
we
want
to
make
sure
that
there
is
a
direct
correlation
or
a
nexus
to
one
of
the
applications
that
are
requested
and
as
outlined
in
the
staff
report.
West
broadway
is
the
area.
That's
a
I'm
sorry,
that's
the
side
of
the
site,
that's
adjacent
to
a
goods
and
services
corridor.
So
that's
where
the
comp
plan
says
that
we
should
be
focusing
any
commercial
activity.
Q
That's
on
the
site,
however,
since
the
site
is
in
neighborhood
mixed
use,
we
we
can't
require
it
through
the
comp
plan.
So
you
know
obviously
commercial
is
allowed,
but
it's
not
something
that
the
comp
plan
would
even
you
know,
strongly
encourage
or
require.
Thank
you.
B
Thank
you,
commissioners.
Further,
commissioner.
C
B
All
right
we'll
take
that
as
a
motion
to
approve
all
five,
a
b
c
d
and
e,
with
all
staff,
suggested
staff
conditions
on
all
of
those
various
motions.
Commissioner
olsen.
J
Z
Yeah,
so
I
yeah,
I
I'm
gonna
vote
it
against
the
motions
I
think
commissioner
meyer,
for
making
them.
However,
I
was
more
swayed
in
the
opposite
direction
by
the
the
testimony
I,
when
commissioner
schroeder
said
that
it's
difficult
to
secure
some
tenants
in
commercial
space
and
we
should
listen
to
what
the
experts
the
developers
are
telling
us
I'm
sorry.
Once
again,
I
hear
that
north
minneapolis
is
being
held
to
a
different
standard
than
we
hold
anywhere
else
in
the
city.
Z
Z
Z
Where
are
they
going
to
go
to
eat?
They
can't
hop
a
bus,
because
there's
no
bus
stop
there,
but
we
always
have
to
walk
over
to
northeast
to
get
a
dang
meal.
I'm
I'm
more
frustrated
that
we
consistently
lower
our
expectation
level
for
what
successful
development
should
be
whenever
it
comes
to
five
five,
four
one
one
and
five
five,
four
one
two.
Z
I
wish
we
would
apply
things
consistently
across
the
city
instead
of
constantly
settling
for
less
because
the
problem
is
we
settle
for
less
so
often
that
it
sets
a
tone
for
the
entire,
the
entire
quadrant
of
the
city.
You
know
think
about
everyone
here
on
this
call
when's.
The
last
time
you
had
a
meal
in
north
minneapolis.
Z
Ask
yourself
that
now,
whether
we
can
make
them
have
a
restaurant
or
not,
and
whether
or
not
they
think
it's
appropriate
to
have
commercial
on
west
broadway.
That's
not
the
point.
The
point
was:
there's
not
a
space,
that's
even
allowable
to
have
a
decent
sit-down
restaurant
get
filled.
If
a
developer
or
an
adult
a
restaurant
came
to
them
tomorrow
and
said:
I
want
to
open
a
restaurant
there.
There
probably
won't
be
enough
space
and,
quite
frankly,
with
the
amenity.
They
have
the
view
they
have.
Why
they're
not
putting
something
on
that
rooftop
is
beyond
me.
Z
Z
I
don't
understand
why
we
sacrifice
our
standards
just
because
what
this
is
all
north,
it's
better
than
what's
there
now,
I'm
I'm
just
more
appalled
than
anything,
so
I
will
be
voting.
No,
I
I'm
all
for
affordable
housing
and
I'm
all
excited
that
for
once,
people
living
who
need
affordable
housing
can
live
along
a
riverfront,
that's
fantastic,
but
I
wish
we
weren't
so
quick
to,
like
presume
that.
Oh
thank
goodness
that
this
one
nice
things
happening.
Z
B
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Livke
here
are
there
further
comments
on
the
motion
promotion
before
us
to
approve
consistent
with
staff,
recommendations
and
conditions
items,
a
b
c
d
and
e.
B
Seeing
no
further
discussion
clerk,
please
call
the
ball.
T
D
C
O
B
That
motion
carries
the
applications
on
this
item
are
approved
and
we
will
move
on
now
to
item
number
nine,
which
is
I
apologize,
hiawatha
holiday
station
stores
rebuild
4601
hiawatha
avenue
in
412.
staff
is
jenna.
AB
AB
AB
in
2002
holiday
companies
took
over
operation
of
the
convenience
store
in
may
of
2020.
This
year
the
building
was
burned
down
during
the
civil
unrest
the
applicant
is
proposing
to
reconstruct
the
building
and
has
requested
three
land
use.
Applications
first
is
an
expansion
or
alteration
of
a
non-conforming
use.
AB
Second,
is
a
conditional
use
permit
to
allow
for
a
dynamic
sign
and
third
is
site
plan
review
to
allow
for
an
automobile
services
use,
so
the
property
when
it
was
constructed
back
in
1987,
was
zoned
community
business
district,
which
allowed
as
a
an
automobile
convenience
facility
or
gas
station
and
car
wash
in
1987,
with
just
site
plan
review
approval
in
1991
on
this,
the
property
was
rezoned
to
see
to
the
neighborhood
corridor
commercial
district
in
2005,
in
preparation
for
the
transit
stations
for
the
the
what
we
now
know
as
the
metro
blue
line,
the
city
of
minneapolis
applied
the
pedestrian-oriented
overlay
district
to
several
properties
near
proposed
transit
stations.
AB
At
the
time,
the
po
overlay
district
then,
as
as
is
now
prohibits
automobile
services
uses,
and
it's
at
that
point
in
2005
that
the
property
became
non-conforming.
AB
The
property
was
rezoned
to
c3a
in
2009
as
part
of
the
46th
street
stationary
zoning
study
and
automobile
convenience
facilities
are
also
prohibited
in
c3a,
so
the
the
proposed
use,
or
the
existing
use,
I
should
say,
is
prohibited
both
in
the
c3a
district
and
the
po
district.
AB
The
previous
building
was
destroyed
by
fire
during
civil
unrest
in
may
2020.
So
it's
important
to
note
as
a
non-conforming
use,
the
applicant
would
be
allowed
to
rebuild
the
building
in
its
present
location.
I
t:
could
you
forward
to
slide
two
please?
This
is
the
survey
that
is
coming
up,
so
you
can
see
the
location
of
the
previous
building
that
was
there
prior
to
the
civil
unrest
and
and
the
building
where
it
was
before
it
was
destroyed.
AB
So
the
applicant
could
come
in
today
for
a
building
permit
and
rebuild
exactly
what
is
there
so
the
use
is
allowed
as
it
is
non-conforming
and
again
the
applicant
could
rebuild
exactly
what's
there
right
now.
AB
What
they
have
decided
to
instead
is
apply
for
these
three
land
use
applications
to
construct
a
new
3,
900
square
foot,
convenience
store
and
1300
square
foot
accessory
car
wash
in
a
separate
building.
Next
slide.
Please.
AB
AB
Additionally,
you
can
see
the
strike
parking
layout
allows
for
a
little
more
ease
of
parking
and
you
can
readily
identify
where
parking
is
located
in
the
striped
stalls
adjacent
to
the
building
and
the
applicant
is
proposing
significant
amount
of
additional
landscaping
along
both
46th
and
hiawatha,
and
also
an
important
note,
and
what
you
would
have
noticed
today
in
the
cpc
memo
is
we're
getting
a
principal
entrance
at
the
corner
of
46th
and
hiawatha
and
staff
added.
AB
A
condition
of
approval
is
recommending
an
additional
condition
of
approval
that
that
door
be
open
during
business
staff
has
had
that
conversation
with
the
applicant
several
times.
We
just
wanted
to
codify
that
in
in
the
conditions
of
approval.
AB
So
you
see
at
the
south
end
of
the
site,
which
is
right
on
the
plan
in
front
of
you,
that
is
the
proposed
car
wash
the
access
for
that
car
wash
would
occur
on
the
east
side,
which,
on
this
plan,
would
be
up
from
the
the
frontage
road
that
runs
perpendicular
to
46th
street
east.
AB
So
the
proposed
application-
because
it
is
a
non-conforming
use-
requires
expansion
or
alteration
because
we're
seeing
changes
to
the
building
footprint
and
building
size
for
the
convenience
store,
which
again
is
consistent
with
a
po
district
as
we
require
a
minimum
far
in
the
po
districts
and
then
also
we
require
buildings
to
be
located
within
eight
feet
of
the
corner
of
the
property
lines
which
the
proposed
building
does.
AB
There's.
Also
a
proposed
dynamic
sign
that
would
be
attached
to
the
building,
so
they'd
be
removing
the
existing
monument
sign
and
placing
a
new
wall
sign
at
the
intersection.
Again,
that's
a
conditional
use.
The
city
of
minneapolis
has
previously
granted
a
conditional
use
permit
for
this
property
to
allow
for
the
dynamic
portion
of
the
monument
sign
that
that
is,
it's
still
standing
today,
but
that
would
be
removed
as
part
of
the
proposed
project
and
then
finally,
any
automobile
services
use
would
require
site
plan
review.
AB
At
the
time
of
preparing
the
staff
report,
we
had
not
received
any
public
comments
since
then
and
included
in
the
addendum
packet.
Today
we
have
received
a
letter
of
support
from
the
longfellow
community
council.
The
applicant
attended
a
neighborhood
meeting.
I
believe
it
was
a
week
ago
or
the
week
prior
and
they've
provided
a
letter
of
support,
so
that's
included
in
the
public
record,
and
then
today
we
also
received
two
emails
opposing
the
project.
AB
I
believe
there
is
a
caller
on
the
line
who
is
the
author
of
one
of
those
emails,
so
I'm
going
to
briefly
touch
on
some
of
the
required
findings
for
expansion
of
non-conforming
use
and
the
alternative
compliance
for
site
plan
review
and
if
there's
any
additional
clarification
required.
Please
let
me
know.
AB
Stefan
said
a
rezoning
of
this
property
would
be
inappropriate.
Taking
the
site
out
of
the
pedestrian
oriented
overlay,
district
and
out
of
the
c3a
district
would
be
inconsistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan.
A
non-conforming
property
is
allowed
to
continue
as
long
as
it
otherwise
remains.
Lawful
is
not
and
is
not
discontinued
for
a
year
or
more
steph
finds
that
this
proposed
alteration
will
be
compatible
with
adjacent
property.
In
the
neighborhood
we
recognized
that
the
current
site
layout
was
difficult
for
pedestrians.
AB
There
was
a
long
traverse
across
a
very
auto
oriented
parking
area
and
maneuvering
area.
So
this
this
site
is
located
kitty
corner
from
the
46th
street
station
for
the
metro
blue
line,
so
this
will
allow
for
a
logical
pedestrian
connection
directly
into
the
convenience
store
and
that
people
can
buy
grocery
and
and
other
goods
and
services
here
and
then
also.
Similarly,
the
the
parking
is
a
little
bit
more
logical
in
location
and
more
predictable
as
well.
AB
Staff
also
finds
that
the
proposed
layout
would
be
would
not
increase
adverse
off-site
impacts
such
as
traffic
noise,
dust
odor
or
parking
congestion.
The
applicant
is
increasing
the
off-street
parking
with
this
new
layout
from
seven
spaces
to
nine,
with
logical
and
and
sufficient
maneuvering
spaces
access
would
continue
to
occur
from
46
or
I'm
sorry.
Excuse
me,
the
curb
cut
along
hiawatha
avenue,
which
is
only
allowing
for
turns
into
the
site
exiting,
would
occur
on
the
east
side
of
the
site
onto
the
frontage
road.
AB
The
city
of
minneapolis
and
hennepin
county
have
plans
to
close
that
frontage
road
access
along
46th
street.
That's
on
a
separate
track
in
its
own
project.
There
we're
waiting
for
the
completion
of
the
snelling
improvements
that
and
the
applicant
is
fully
aware
of
that.
AB
As
well
finds
that
the
proposed
layout
of
the
plan
is
an
improvement
to
the
property,
we're
like
I
mentioned,
getting
a
building
that
has
meeting
and
window
requirements
and
then
pedestrian
oriented
overlay
which
increases
window
requirements
to
40
along
the
street
frontages
they're
meeting
their
30
required
windows
facing
the
on-site
parking
lot
and
then
we're
also
achieving
a
better
landscape
plan
that
allows
for
better
screening
of
the
parking
area
there
are
no
residential
uses
proposed,
so
the
fifth
finding
is
not
really
applicable
to
this
particular
project
and
similarly
for
the
sixth
finding
we
are
not
located
in
the
floodway
district
for
the
conditional
use
curve
for
the
dynamic
sign.
AB
We
found
that
all
the
additional
measures
that
are
required
for
dynamic
science
were
have
been
met,
they're
within
their
height
size,
duration
of
message,
the
image
characteristics
and
transition
aren't
flashing
messages.
AB
The
sign
is
not
too
bright
and
staff
has
an
additional
condition
of
approval
for
the
dynamic
sign
if
the
sign
is
not
turned
on.
If
the
business
is
closed
during
the
day
or
I'm
sorry
during
the
evening,
so
the
sign
will
only
operate
when
the
business
is
open
for
operation.
AB
There
are
two
points
of
alternative
compliance
that
the
applicant
is
seeking.
First,
is
to
reduce
the
minimum
landscaping
from
20
percent
of
the
site
not
occupied
by
a
building
to
17
percent
staff,
essentially
found
that
the
trade-offs
for
better
maneuvering
and
better
landscape
and
a
much
better
location
of
the
building
warranted.
The
exception
is
recommending
granting
alternative
compliance
and
then
also
the
applicant
is
required
to
provide
10
canopy
trees.
They
are
proposing
a
total
of
12
deciduous
trees,
eight
of
which
meet
the
canopy
tree
requirement.
AB
Two
of
them
don't
quite
grow
to
that
35
foot,
mature
height
they're
only
at
30,
feet
and
staff
has
taken
a
look
at
the
the
proposed
landscaping
and
it
makes
sense
to
us,
and
so
we
are
again
recommending
alternative
compliance,
so
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
the
expansion
of
non-conforming
use.
The
conditional
use
permit
with
stated
conditions
on
page
13
of
the
staff
report
and
also
the
site
plan
review
with
also
stated
conditions
to
follow,
as
as
letter
c
and
with
that
I'd
be
happy
to
take
any
questions.
C
Thank
you.
So
in
the
document
it
says
you
know
this
is
an
expansion
of
non-conforming
use,
but
then,
in
your
presentation
you
said
it
could
also
be
an
alteration
of
non-conforming
use.
So
I
I
just
want
to
really
have
a
clarity.
Is
there
like?
What
would
what
are
they?
What
are
the
expansions
of
the
non-conforming
use?
If
any,
or
is
it
just
changing
the
layout
and
adding
parking
spots.
AB
Thank
you,
commissioner
meyer,
for
your
question.
It's
it's.
Actually,
the
application
is
called
both
things,
so
the
application
is
officially
called
expansion
or
alteration
of
a
non-conforming
use.
In
this
case,
it's
certainly
an
alteration.
The
location
is
changing
and,
and
the
expansion
is,
the
footprint
of
the
convenience
store
is
increasing,
which
again
is
consistent
with
a
pedestrian
oriented
overlay
where
there's
a
minimum.
Fluorite
ratio
they're
not
meeting
the
minimum
far
but
they're,
certainly
moving
towards
conformity.
AB
So
they're,
not
bypassing
the
landscaping
requirement.
It's
just
they're
insufficient
in
the
percentage
required
when
taking
a
look
at
the
the
future
lack
of
access
on
through
the
frontage
road
we
were
looking
at
maneuvering,
so
myself
in
public
works,
met
with
the
applicant
several
times
to
make
sure
that
they
could
continue
to
maneuver
gas
vehicles,
for
example,
which
are
the
largest
vehicles
that
have
to
enter
the
site
and
be
able
to
exit.
AB
So
when
looking
at
the
amount
of
area
and
the
maneuvering
plan
is
included
in,
I
believe
it's
on
the
fourth
slide
for
today,
and
also
in
your
packets,
in
order
to
kind
of
ensure
that
were
to
continue
to
occur
in
order
for
the
drive
drive
aisles
to
be
met.
So
there's
a
dry
valve
requirement
where
adjacent
to
the
the
pump
islands
there's
also
a
dry
valve
requirement
behind
the
parking
spaces,
and
also
the
fact
that
they
are
moving
towards
conformity
by
kind
of
splitting
out
the
buildings.
AB
So
right
now
the
car
wash
and
the
convenience
store
are
co-located
together
in
a
single
structure.
When
you
move
them
apart,
you
have
to
take
into
account
stacking
spaces,
for
example,
for
the
the
car
wash
and
the
applicant
did
a
wonderful
job
really
avoiding
variances.
These
are
very
difficult
applications,
as
you
can
imagine,
as
there
are
several
zoning
requirements
that
have
to
be
met
and
the
applicant's
not
seeking
any
of
those
variances
based
on
this
proposed
layout.
AB
So
the
combination
of
moving
towards
conformity
with
the
far
improving
the
landscape
areas,
including
the
materials
so
even
though
they
have
sufficient
turf
today,
the
materials
themselves,
the
trees
and
the
shrubs
are
are
insufficient
to
what
we
would
consider
and
require
per
today's
standards
and
again
just
kind
of
allowing
for
more
appropriate
maneuvering
of
the
site
staff
thought
that
granting
the
exception
in
this
case
was
warranted.
B
Sorry
I
was
on
mute
commissioners.
Are
there
any
further
questions.
B
All
right
seeing
none,
I
will
open
the
public
hearing,
ask
the
applicant
to
introduce
themselves
and
add
any
context
they
feel
is
necessary.
R
All
right
and
I'm
carol,
lansing
attorney
at
fairgreat,
drinker,
biddle
and
wreath
90,
south
7th
street
and
with
me
today,
is
john
borreggi,
who
is
with
holiday
station
stores.
R
I
guess
I
did
just
want
to
reiterate
what
shanna
explained
is
that
holiday
in
many
respects
could
have
made
this
easier
on
themselves
by
just
submitting
building
permits
to
rebuild
just
what
was
there
and
what
was
destroyed,
and
certainly
they
want
to
have
a
better
store
for
their
customers
and
their
business.
But
this
is
the
better
option
for
the
community
as
well
than
just
rebuilding.
What
was
there
it?
It
will
make
that
intersection
more
pedestrian
friendly,
more
in
pedestrian
character.
R
Even
though
it's
an
auto
services
convenience
store,
it
will
be
a
store
that
will
be
easier
for
pedestrians
to
access
up
on
the
corner
and
we'll
have
more
services
and
products
for
the
neighborhood,
and
so
the
auto
related
aspect
of
it
is
not
expanding.
There's
not
going
to
be
any
increase
in
the
number
of
pumps
there
was
a
car
wash,
there
will
be
a
car
wash.
So
that
part
is
the
same,
the
store
is
expanding
and
the
site
is
improving
from
you
know,
coming
closer
to
current
day
legs,
we
did
meet.
T
R
R
B
Very
good,
thank
you,
commissioners,
to
other
questions
of
the
application
at
this
time,.
B
Seeing
none,
I
will
open
the
public
hearing
to
the
public
if
there
are
folks
on
the
line
who
wish
to
testify,
please
unmute
yourself,
star
six,
make
sure
to
check
the
mute
on
your
device
and
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record.
G
A
G
South
I
just
wanted
to
comment.
This
issue
came
across
my
radar,
a
little
late.
So
I'm
sorry
in
getting
the
my
comment
to
you,
commissioners,
just
today,
but
I
lead
the
land
use
and
transportation
team
at
the
sierra
club
northstar
chapter
and
our
team
is
dedicated
to
focusing
on
environmental
issues
and
sustainability
in
an
urban
context-
and
I
can
say
from
from
our
chapters
perspective
and
from
my
personal
perspective,
it
doesn't
make
any
sense
to
rebuild
and
expand
a
non-conforming
use
at
this
location.
G
This
is,
as
was
mentioned
in
the
immediate
area
of
the
46th
street
blue
line
station.
This
is
one
of
the
premier
electric
mass
transit.
X
G
G
With
any
of
the
city's
climate,
sustainability
or
long-term
growth
goals
holiday
in
other
markets,
they
have
convenience
stores
that
are
located
in
mixed-use
development
that
incorporate
housing
and
other
issues
that
benefit
the
neighborhood
and
complement
the
station
area.
I
think
that's
something
that
they
should
consider
doing
here,
instead
of
doubling
down
on
our
state's
number
one
polluter,
which
is
surface
transportation,.
A
G
G
Obviously,
what
happened
to
the
the
station
store
and
it
in
previous
times
it
might
be
a
no-brainer
just
to
allow
this
to
be
rebuilt
and
with
those
minor
modifications.
But
these
are
not
usual
times
these
decisions
that
you're
making
today
they
all
add
up-
and
this
is
going
to
have
a
legacy
on
our
climate
on.
I
G
B
B
Well,
all
right
with
that,
I
will
close
the
public
hearing.
Commissioners,
we
have
three
applications
before
us:
non-conforming
use
application
cop
for
dynamic,
sign
and
site
plan
review.
Commissioner
meyer.
C
Thank
you,
you
know
first,
I
I
just
want
to
remark
that
it
is
disappointing
to
see
a
new
gas
station
being
proposed
to
be
rebuilt
here.
Just
today,
the
new
york
times
had
a
headline
that
said
the
age
of
electric
cars
is
dawning
ahead
of
schedule
back
in
2010.
C
People
didn't
think
that
it
would
be
possible
to
reach
the
tipping
point
where
electric
vehicles
would
be
cheaper
than
gasoline-powered
vehicles
by
2025,
but
now
we're
on
on
schedule
to
do
that
and
in
this
article
they're,
claiming
that
we're
likely
to
hit
that
depending
point
by
2024
or
earlier,
if
more
policy
measures
are
adopted.
To
do
that.
So
you
know
it's
disappointing
to
see
us.
You
know
continue
in
in
that
direction.
C
When,
presumably,
you
know
like
a
gas
station
like
this
would
be
built
to
last.
I
don't
know
30
40
50
years
and
our
2040
plan
says
that
we
want
to
reduce
car
usage
for
all
cars
by
38
and
then
the
remainder
will
hopefully
be
going
electric.
C
So
I'm
hoping
that
there
will
not
be
very
much
business
for
this
gas
station
if
it's
complete,
but
that's
you
know
not
really
what's
before
us
today,
we
have
to
review
the
applications
as
they
are,
but
I
I
did
want
to
push
back
on
on
two
of
them.
I
guess
for
the
alternative
compliance,
I'm
I'm
not
persuaded
that
we
should
drop
the
20
requirement.
C
I
think
we
should
stick
with
that
and
I
I
think
you
know,
if
they're
expanding
from
seven
to
nine
parking
spots
that
they
could
use.
They
could
reconfigure
things
and
and
use
some
of
those
two
extra
spark
extra
parking
spots
to
create
space
for
the
landscaping
that
we
would
require.
So
I'm
I'm
going
to
push
on
that
and
then
I
I'm
kind
of
questioning
the
the
third
finding
for
the
the
non-conforming
use
section.
C
So
I
feel
like
by
adding
on
to
the
parking
in
a
pedestrian
overlay
district.
You
know
transit
10.
Next
to
the
transit
station,
you're
you're,
adding
more
traffic
which
will
bring
more
noise
dust
orders.
C
B
Very
good,
thank
you
christopher
commissioner.
AA
Thank
you,
president
rockwell.
My
comments
are
not
directly
responsive
to
the
to
the
question
that
commissioner
meyer
asked
at
the
end,
but
I
think
this
is
a
good
project.
I'm
glad
they
want
to
rebuild.
I
think
it's
important
to
you
know,
support
people
who
want
to
rebuild
this.
This
business
was
destroyed
through
no
fault
of
of
holiday
or
anything
they've
come
back
with
an
even
better
project
that
was
a
problematic
gas
station.
I've
been
to
it
to
get
in
and
out
of,
and
I
think
we
have
to
think
about.
AA
You
know
multi
issues
here
with
some
of
these
projects
that
we
get
and
not
just
one
one
particular
thing,
and
this
will
bring
a
business
back
to
a
corner
that
that
right
now
is
has
nothing
on
it
and
they
want
to
come
back
and
do
it
better.
I
agree
with
staff
that
it's
an
improvement
over
what
was
there
and
I'm
happy
to
support
this
project.
B
Very
good,
thank
you,
commissioner
sweezie,
and
I
see
that
stuff.
Shannon
you've
got
comments.
AB
Thank
you,
president
rockwell.
I
just
wanted
to
give
numbers
for
context,
so
the
required
landscaping
area
is
forty,
six
thirty.
So
four
thousand
six
hundred
thirty
square
feet.
The
applicant
is
providing
three
thousand
nine
hundred
and
sixty
three
square
feet.
So
they're
667
square
feet
short
of
meeting
that
requirement.
AB
They
also
have
a
minimum
off
street
parking
requirement
of
at
least
six
spaces.
So
if
they
were
to
lose
three
parking
spaces,
for
example,
they
wouldn't
still
they
still
wouldn't
meet
the
minimum
required
landscaped
area.
So
I
just
wanted
to
add
that,
for
the
conversation.
B
Got
it
thank
you,
six
spaces
and
they're
proposing.
I'm
sorry.
Can
you
just
clarify
they're,
proposing
nine
spaces?
Is
that
correct.
B
All
right
very
good,
okey
doke.
Are
there
further
comments,
or
would
someone
like
to
start
us
off
with
emotion.
D
C
B
Very
good
so
just
to
clarify
you're
moving
to
approve
site
plan
review,
but
not
grant
alternative
compliance
for
the
landscaping
requirement.
B
Very
good:
do
we
have
a
second.
O
B
B
V
J
B
All
right
that
motion
carries-
and
that
concludes
our
business
with
item
number
nine
and
we're
now
moving
on
to.
P
D
P
President
rockwell
and
commissioners
before
you
today
are
three
applications
for
a
new
six-unit
residential
building
at
2413,
first
avenue
south
the
applicant
is
seeking
a
variance
to
reduce
the
minimum
lot
area
per
dwelling
unit
in
the
r4
district
from
1250
square
feet
to
989
square
feet,
a
variance
to
allow
vehicular
maneuvering
in
the
right-of-way,
which
in
this
case
is
the
public
alley
to
the
rear
of
the
building
and
site
plan
review.
P
The
subject
property
is
located.
It's
a
5934
square
foot
interior
lot
in
the
whittier
neighborhood.
The
property
is
currently
vacant
and
has
been
for
quite
some
time.
The
property
is
also
located
in
the
washburn,
fair
oaks,
historic
district.
This
project
went
to
the
heritage
preservation,
commission.
They
reviewed
the
project
and
approved
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
to
allow
the
project
on
octo.
I'm
sorry
on
august
11th.
If
we
go
to
the
next
slide,
please,
the
applicant
is
proposing
to
construct
a
new
two
and
a
half
story.
Building
with
six
units.
P
P
The
first
of
those
was
a
letter
from
the
whittier
neighborhood,
which
was
included
with
the
agenda
and
the
other
two
you
would
have
received
today
from
lisa
regarding
the
two
variances
staff
has
found
that
the
proposed
project
meets
the
required
findings
and
is
recommending
approval
if
we
could
go
two
slides
forward
to
slide
four.
P
I
do
want
to
elaborate
on
the
maneuvering
variants.
The
zoning
code
requires
that
parking
areas
serving
residential
uses
with
more
than
four
units,
so
this
building
accommodate
all
vehicular
maneuvering
on-site.
P
In
order
to
increase
the
compatibility
of
the
project
with
nearby
homes
that
are
contributing
resources
to
the
historic
district.
This
is
the
impact
of
reducing
the
developable
depth
of
the
property
and
limiting
the
available
area
for
parking
and
maneuvering
staff
also
finds
the
proposed
maneuvering
variant
would
be
in
keeping
with
the
spirit
and
intent
of
the
ordinance,
as
well
as
the
existing
character
of
the
surrounding
area,
while
serving
six
residential
units.
P
The
alley
which
serves
the
property
also
serves
residential
uses
of
a
wide
variety
of
densities,
many
of
which
include
small
parking
areas
that
do
not
fully
accommodate
vehicular
maneuvering
on
site
and
rely
on
the
alley
for
maneuvering.
The
proposed
variants
would
be
in
keeping
with
this
existing
conditions
in
the
area
and
well
vehicular
back
vehicles.
Backing
out
of
parking
spaces
into
an
alley
is
not
an
ideal
condition.
P
P
Thank
you
regarding
site
plan
review.
There
are
three
sections
of
alternative
compliance
required
by
this
proposal.
First,
alternative
compliance
is
required
to
inc
increase
the
minimum
coverage
of
composite
wood
lap,
siding
on
the
north
and
east
elevations.
It's
also
required
to
reduce
the
minimum
window
coverage
on
the
first
floor.
West
elevation,
you
can
see
that
first
floor,
west
elevation
here
on
the
right
hand
side
of
your
screen.
P
If
we
can
go
to
the
next
slide,
please-
and
here
you
can
see
the
north
and
east
elevations,
where
they
are
requesting
alternative
compliance
for
additional
composite
or
composite
wood.
Lamp.
Signing
steph
is
recommending
approval
of
both
of
these
alternative
compliance
requests.
Due
to
the
project's
location
in
the
washburn,
fair
of
historic
district,
the
project
has
been
designed
to
utilize
materials
and
fenestration
patterns
that
are
visually
compatible
with
nearby
historic
structures
and
has
been
approved
by
the
hpc.
P
A
P
When
it
comes
to
the
width
of
those
landscape,
yards
staff
has
found
that
the
proposed
landscape
yards
are
reasonable,
given
the
small
size
of
the
parking
area
with
just
four
spaces
and
the
limited
available
lot
width
when
it
comes
to
the
screening
height
the
north,
in
this
case
due
to
the
location
of
the
adjacent
building
to
the
north,
which,
as
you
can
see
from
this
plan,
is
only
2.4
feet
from
the
property
line
and
does
include
ground
floor
residential
windows.
P
Adjacent
to
that
property
line,
the
applicant
would
need
to
actually
seek
a
variance
to
increase
fence
height
here
in
order
to
meet
the
minimum
height
for
for
screening.
Given
these
conditions,
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
this
alternative
compliance
as
well
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
the
three
applications
subject
to
the
conditions
listed
in
the
staff
report.
I'm
happy
to
address
any
questions.
Thank
you.
B
Thank
you
very
much.
We
have
well
I'm
not
going
again
a
question
from
commissioner
luke
here.
J
P
Commissioner,
looked
it
here,
I
do
not
know
that
just
off
the
top
of
my
head,
but
I
believe
if
we
can
go
guys,
I
believe
it
is
a
relatively
narrow
exposure
compared
to
what
you
would
typically
see
on
new
construction
today,
the
hpc
review
of
the
project
would
have
looked
more
closely
at
the
materials
and
their
visual
compatibility
with
the
nearby
historic
structures
and
so
sort
of
there.
P
The
level
of
of
deep
of
detail
that
the
hpc
looks
at
those
materials
is
is
part
of
why
we
are
recommending
approval
of
the
alternative
compliance.
Z
Okay,
so
you're
you're,
saying
that
you're
feeling
very
confident
that
the
the
lab
reveal
that
their
applicant
is
using
it.
Maybe
the
applicant
could
answer
this
when
it
gets
that
portion
of
the
public
hearing
is
pretty
consistent
with
the
area,
as
opposed
to
like
something
that
would
not
be
in
character
such
as
a
six
or
eight
inch
lap,
and
that's
why
we're
justifying
approval
of
this
one.
P
Application
be
sure
to
look
deep
here.
I
I
don't
know
the
the
exact
width
of
the
exposure.
I
can
try
and
look
that
up
here,
but
the
hpc
didn't
find
that
the
the
project
was
compatible
with
the
historic
character
of
the
area.
B
Very
good,
why
don't
we
ask
the
applicant
to
or
sure
are
there.
B
Questions
of
staff
all
right,
I
will
open
the
public
hearing,
ask
the
applicant
to
introduce
themselves
and
also
please
address
commissioner
of
the
gears
question.
If
you
have
that
answer.
X
B
All
right,
it
sounds
like.
Maybe
the
applicant
is
not
on
the
line,
all
right.
B
Well
then,
we
will
open
this
item
to
the
public
hearing.
It
may
be
that
the
one
person
who
was
on
the
line
to
testify
for
this
is
also
no
longer
the
line
is.
A
B
and
while
we're
waiting
for
folks
to
unmute,
I
will
I
see
that
anders
got
a
comment
here.
P
Thank
you,
president
rockwell.
I
was
able
to
look
at
the
plans
here
and
the
I
don't
know
what
the
exact
exposure
of
the
siding
is,
but
the
width
is
7.84
inches.
B
We
have
three
applications
before
us,
two
variances
and
site
plan
review.
Is
there
any
further
discussion
or
would
someone
like
to
start
us
off
with
a
question?
F
I
move
to
approve
item
11
a
b
and
c.
M
We
it
looks
like
we
did.
Just
have
someone
new
join
the
meeting,
I
don't
know
if
we
want
to
call
one
more
time.
B
I
Sure
very
much
it's
paul
smith.
My
address
is
2418
stevens,
avenue,
writer
group
and
appreciate
your
your
patience.
I
had
a
technical
issue
at
this
end
and
I
very
much
appreciate
all
of
your
work
in
solving
these
important
questions.
Listening
the
last
two
hours,
you
guys
are
doing
hard
work
for
the
city.
I
appreciate
it
and
basically,
what
I
want
to
mention
is
that
we
live
almost
directly
across
the
alley
from
the
subject
property
and
we
want
you
understand.
I
I
Object
object
to
the
variances
to
allow
the
project
as
proposed.
We
also
object
to
the
increased
traffic
in
our
alley,
created
by
the
substandard
parking
lot
as
residents
who
will
be
impacted
by
your
decision.
We
hope
this
commission
will
discuss
their
concerns
and
uphold
the
zoning
code,
and
I
echo
earlier
statements
by
continuing
to
encourage
not
depending
upon
motor
vehicles
by
adding
a
parking
lot.
It's
no
longer
a
requirement,
and
I
thank
you
for
your
time.
B
Thank
you
very
much.
Is
there
anybody
else
on
the
line
wishing
to
testify.
B
All
right,
I
will
close
the
public
hearing,
commissioners,
we
do
have
a
motion
and
a
second
on
the
table.
We
have
new
testimony
to
inform
that.
Is
there
any
further
discussion.
B
All
right,
thank
you
for
that
testimony.
I
I
I
certainly
understand
you
know
I
think
we're
moving
in
a
direction
of
not
requiring
any
parking
in
the
city
and
it
which
is
a
current
comprehensive
plan
policy
and
and
that
this
is
a
a
good
area
for
density.
B
I
know
there
is
a
quite
a
lot
of
density
in
this
area,
but
also
has
access
to
you
know
several
several
of
our
high
frequency
bus
lines
and
is
an
eminently
walkable
neighborhood,
and
so
I
think
that
adding
some
of
this
kind
of
infill
density
does
feel
appropriate
in
this
context.
B
So
you
know
other
comments
here.
Please
call
them
all.
B
AD
Thank
you.
Commissioners.
Item
number
12
you
have
seen
before
this
project
was
before
the
commission
in
june
and
at
that
time
applied
for
a
rezoning
from
the
rtb
to
the
r5,
multiple
family
district.
AD
The
applicant
is
returning
to
the
commission
tonight
for
a
modified
proposal,
which
would
essentially
be
the
same
proposed
new
structure
on
the
site,
but
a
three-story
building
instead
of
a
two-story
building.
So
to
remind
you,
the
site
is
located
along
grant
street
northeast.
It's
an
approximately
eight
thousand
square
foot
lot.
AD
The
zoning
map
in
front
of
you
doesn't
reflect
the
current
zoning
because
the
r5
zoning
was
approved
at
the
last
round
of
applications,
so
the
site
is
currently
zoned
r5
and
there
is
an
existing
two-unit
residential
building
on
the
site
which
the
applicant
is
proposing
to
retain
and
then
to
construct
the.
AD
Six-Unit
building
at
the
rear
of
the
site,
the
project
would
require
one
additional
variance
to
reduce
the
minimum,
rear
yard
setback
from
nine
feet
to
seven
feet
and
a
conditional
use
permit
to
increase
the
maximum
building
height
for
a
cluster
development.
In
the
r5
district
from
2.5
stories
35
feet
to
three
stories.
AD
The
r5
district
does
have
a
four
story
height
limit.
However,
cluster
developments
have
a
more
restrictive
height
maximum
of
2.5
stories.
The
future
land
use
for
the
site
is
urban,
neighborhood
and
corridor
three
corridor.
Three
is
a
built
farm
district
and
the
minneapolis
2040
company
has
a
plan
which
allows
for
up
to
three
stories
in
height
for
new
structures.
AD
AD
AD
AE
AE
AE
Yeah,
very
good,
I'm
sorry!
Yes,
I
just
yeah.
Sorry,
I
took
there's
a
delay
on
the
unmute
there,
so
I
so
yes,
formally
I'm
cody
fisher,
I'm
the
applicant.
So
I
just
wanted
to
thank
thank
you,
chair
rockwell
and
commissioners
for
considering
the
application
and
revisiting
my
specific
project
from
the
previous
approvals
back
in
june.
So
I
think
I
think
peter
did
a
good
job
of
concisely,
summarizing
all
the
specific
points
on
which
the
decisions
at
hand
kind
of
turned,
so
rather
than
kind
of
reiterating
or
reinforcing
any
of
that.
AE
I
wanted
to
provide
a
bit
broader
context
about
my
projects,
specifically
the
intent
and
kind
of
why
we've
approached
it
this
way
and
then
the
alignment
of
that
intent
with
the
city
comprehensive
planning
goals.
So
specifically,
you
know,
given
the
fact
that
this
is
a
8
000
square
foot,
lot
built
forum
corridor
3
on
a
high
frequency
transit
line.
You
know
I
the
the
simplest
thing
and
question
that
I've
been
asked
by
multiple
people
is:
why
not
tear
down
the
duplex
and
build
a
larger
multi?
AE
You
know
20
unit,
multi-family
building
or
something
like
that,
and
for
me
it's
because
I
have
a
couple
of
specific
goals,
so
one
the
existing
duplex
I
care
a
lot
about
kind
of
preserving
noaa,
naturally
occurring
affordable
housing.
You
know,
aside
from
this
being
my
first
development
project.
That
is
something
a
topic
I'm
passionate
about
and
the
two
duplex
two
bed
units
that
exist
currently
rent
for
below
sixty
percent
of
ami,
so
they're
below
fourteen
hundred
dollars
in
rent,
so
they're.
You
know,
I
guess
not
low-income
housing,
but
workforce
middle-class
housing
affordable.
AE
So
I
want
to
preserve
that,
while
still
doing
some,
you
know
sensitive
to
the
urban
fabric
and
continues
with
the
neighborhood
context
incremental
infill
that
would
bring
a
bit
more
housing
stock
into
one
of
the
designated
green
zones
and
opportunity
zones
in
minneapolis
this
along
you
know
a
high
frequency
transit
line,
and
so
so
the
the
affordable
housing
component
was
key
in
that
and
and
I'm
also
specifically
targeting
rents
for
the
six
units
in
this
new
building
to
be
affordable
at
60
of
ami
for
a
one
bed
unit.
AE
So
you
know
around
1
100
a
month,
so
the
whole
project
kind
of
has
that
in
in
mind
as
a
goal,
I
think
the
the
second
thing
for
me.
That's
part
of
my
my
goals
with
this
specific
proposal
is
I
I
care
a
lot
about
climate
change.
You
know,
and
it's
it's
all
over
in
the
comprehensive
plan
as
well
and
preserving
the
existing
duplicates,
in
addition
to
kind
of
keeping
continuity
with
the
neighborhood
in
terms
of
street
frontage.
It
also
you
know
it
it.
AE
We,
we
aren't
kind
of
tossing
aside
all
the
embodied
carbon.
That's
actually
already
in
that
building
and
tearing
it
down
and
starting
over
from
scratch
and
in
the
creation
of
the
the
the
new
proposed
project.
AE
It's
actually
we've
planned
to
eliminate
all
natural
gas,
so
everything
is
going
to
be
electric
in
in
the
building.
The
roof
is
going
to
have
the
maximum
size,
solar
array
that
xl
will
allow
us
and
so
we'll
be
operationally
net
zero.
We're
not
getting
any
certifications
or
anything
like
that,
because
I
can't
afford
it,
but
operation
will
be
it'll,
be
aligned
with
the
city's
goals
around
carbon
reduction
in
a
comprehensive
plan.
AE
But
more
specifically,
I'm
trying
to
use
materials
and
reduce
the
use
of
materials
in
the
new
construction
that
increase
buildings
embody
carbon,
the
the
energy
intensity
of
the
product,
so
reducing
the
amount
of
concrete,
specifically
reducing
the
amount
of
steel
in
the
building
and
trying
to
use
different
types
of
you
know:
tighter
air
sealing
and
higher
levels
of
insulation
to
increase
energy
efficiency
and
minimize
the
carbon
footprint
of
the
building
both
today,
but
then
also
in
the
future,
and
I
guess
after
trying
to
square
the
circle
and
do
all
those
things
with
the
originally
proposed
six-unit
two-story
structure
with
basement
units
and
trying
to
make
it
accessible
adaptable
as
well.
AE
You
know
for
people
that
might
be
accessing
their
unit
with
a
wheelchair,
it,
the
all
those
pieces
couldn't
fit
together
and
it
just
simply
wasn't
viable
as
a
project
and
so
by
taking
you
know,
taking
us
up
to
three
stories
and
doing
a
slab
on
grade.
Were
you
know
they
had
a
benefit
of
reducing
the
amount
of
concrete
and
carbon
as
a
result
from
that,
but
then
also
enhancing
accessibility
and
equity
for
wheelchair-bound
tenants
that
are
going
to
be
able
to
access.
AE
You
know
the
the
their
ground
floor,
accessible,
adaptable
units
at
grade,
which
also,
rather
than
via,
a
lift
which
also
improves
safety
for
those
tenants
as
well-
and
you
know,
I
think
so-
there's
a
whole
multitude
of
things.
I
I
get
this
meeting
is
running
long,
so
I'm
gonna,
I'm
gonna
stop
there,
but
there
is
alignment
with
this
project
and
what's
proposed
in
terms
of
the
built
form,
you
know
not
we're
we're
still
short
of
the
height
maximum.
AE
That's
allowed
for
a
cluster
development
as
measured
by
feet.
It's
the
building
is
within
a
foot
of
the
height
of
the
existing
duplex
on
the
site
and
and
so
really
the
the
these.
This
kind
of
disapproval,
for
that
particular
conditional
use,
permit,
is
kind
of
what
the
project
hinge
hinges
on
in
terms
of
his
viability
to
move
forward
as
I've
described
to
you.
AE
So
I
guess
with
that.
I
also
wanted
to
note
that
he's
not
making
a
statement,
but
my
architect
is
on
the
line
and
is
available
to
answer
specific
design
questions,
maybe
more
related
to
the
narrower
things
that
are
being
considered
here,
rather
than
the
broader
context
that
I
laid
out.
So
thank
you
all
for
your
consideration.
AE
You've
got
a
you've,
got
a
tough
job
and
there's
a
lot
of
goals
and
objectives
to
balance.
So
with
that
I'll
I'll
stop.
B
Seeing
none
we'll
open
the
public
hearing
two
members
of
public
wishing
to
testify.
I'm
not
sure
we've
got
two
people
on
the
line.
I
think
one
may
be.
Your
architect
got
jim
lindbergh
and
cindy
geach.
If
either
of
you
are
wishing
to
testify
on
this,
please
unmute
star
six
and
stitch
your
name
and
address
for
the.
B
B
U
B
Very
good,
thank
you
is
cindy
geech.
I
may
be
mispronouncing
your
last
name.
I
apologize
on
the
line.
Please
press
star,
six
to
unmute
make
sure
your
own
device
is
unmuted
as
well.
B
K
Block
of
randall,
okay-
and
let's
see
I'm
actually
the
vice
chair
for
the
marshall
terrace
neighborhood
organization,
and
that's
who
I'm
speaking
on
behalf
of
this
evening-
and
we
are
asking
actually
for
an
extension
of
time
to
review
this
because
we
were
not
notified.
We
did
not
get
a
notification
of
this
meeting
and
we
actually
only
found
out
about
this
over
the
weekend
when
residents
were
receiving
letters.
So
we're
just
asking
a
little
bit
of
time.
B
AC
You
hear
me
yes
yeah.
This
is
matt
steele,
4412,
18th
avenue
south.
I
called
in
just
to
support
this
project.
I'm
excited
to
see
it
because
it's
a
cluster
developments
like
this,
I
think,
are
a
huge
opportunity
for
kind
of
kind
of
a
model
for
gentle
density.
I
see
all
these
projects
that
I
mean
I
generally
you
know,
I'm
generally
in
favor
of
more
housing
in
general,
but
there's
a
lot
of
you
know
bigger
projects
that
that
fill
up
the
majority
of
the
lot
and
it's
great
to
see
something
that
preserves.
AC
I
just
wanted
to
call
and
voice
my
support
of
that,
and
I
hope
that
you
know
it
seems
like
there's
an
opportunity
larger
than
this
as
well,
to
make
sure
that
cluster
development,
you
know,
maybe
in
the
future
some
of
that
policy
could
be
kind
of
aligned
with
what
you
could
see
from
corridor
three
in
terms
of
setbacks
and
everything
as
well,
just
so
that
we
we're
not
discouraging
cluster
developments
like
this
in
favor
of
you
know
much
more
monolithic
buildings
as
well,
so
again
voicing
my
support.
Thank
you
very.
B
All
right
all
right,
close
puppet
hearing,
commissioner
meyer.
C
B
J
B
Peter,
I
might
ask
you,
it
sounds
like
a
notice
was
sent
out
to
at
least
some
of
the
residents
could
just
address
the
notice
process.
AD
Please
sure
noticing
for
neighborhood
groups
happens
21
days
prior
to
a
public
hearing
and
noticing
from
neighboring
property
owners
happens
15
days
prior
to
a
public
hearing,
marshall
terrace
was
identified
as
the
appropriate
neighborhood
group,
both
for
this
round
of
noticing
and
for
the
previous
approvals
that
the
plan
received
in
june.
B
I
will
say
briefly:
you
know,
I
think,
just
see
a
project
coming
forward
fully
electrified.
Is
I'm
not
sure
what
the
word
is?
It's
refreshing,
it's
absolutely
essential.
So
thank
you
for
that.
I
think
that's
a
that
should
not
only
be
the
aspiration
of
folks
in
this
city,
but
it
should
be
what
everybody
is
doing.
So
thanks
for
that,
with
that,
please
call
the
roll.
B
L
B
Carries
that
concludes
our
agenda
items
for
this
public
hearing
kimberly.
Are
there
any
announcements
from
staff.
M
I
will
try
to
keep
it
brief
here,
but
the
one
announcement
I
do
have
is
that
the
co-development
team
has
been
bringing
forward
pieces
of
the
built
formwork
to
the
committee,
the
whole
meetings
for
feedback
and
at
the
last
meeting
I
believe
they
discussed
the
timeline
which
tentatively
had
the
built
form
work
coming
before
the
planning
commission
for
a
public
hearing
on
october
19th.
M
There
are
a
number
of
reasons
why
that
timeline
appears
to
be
a
little
bit
too
aggressive
right
now,
not
the
least
of
which
is
just
the
amount
of
work
it
takes
to
actually
put
the
code
text
into
a
format
that
can
be
reviewed
by
the
city
clerk's
office
before
it
goes
to
print
for
commissioners
to
review.
M
So
what
is
being
tentatively
proposed
is
a
special
meeting
of
the
planning
commission
on
november
9th.
That
is
a
monday
that
would
be
currently
scheduled
as
an
off-week
for
planning.
Commission
there's
also
a
meeting
scheduled
the
week
before.
M
So
this
would
be
an
additional
meeting
on
your
calendars,
but
it
would
also
allow
this
group
to
have
a
meeting
solely
dedicated
to
the
built
formwork.
So
we're
not
reviewing
that
after
several
project
discussions,
so
it
has
not
been
decided
for
sure
at
this
point
yet
but
pencil
that
in
on
your
calendars
and
if
we
have
a
lot
of
conflicts,
please
let
me
know
right
away,
so
we
can
determine
whether
or
not
that's
a
viable
meeting
date
for
the
group.
B
Very
good
commissioner
lucifer.
N
Yeah
kimberly,
I
know
I
saw
an
email
sent
to
the
executive
committee
regarding
that
meeting
and
I
had
sent
her
apply
asking
just
because
I
feel
like
this
fall
is
kind
of
getting.
Z
Packed
asking
what
other
alternate
dates
were
being
considered
if
anything,
perhaps
in
early
december
could
be
considered.
I
know
that
council
probably
wants
to
get
it
approved
before
their
end
of
the
year.
I'm
not
sure
if
they
can
add
another
meeting
or
not,
but
just
kind
of
know.
Are
there
other
dates
on
the
table
as
well,
or
is
it
november
9th
or
nothing.
M
There
are
no
other
dates
on
the
table
right
now,
but
the
november
9th
date
is
also
not
something
that's
been
set
in
stone.
We
understand
it
gets
to
be
a
busy
time
of
year.
This
is
also
the
time
of
year
when
a
lot
of
people
are
trying
to
get
their
projects
before
the
commission,
so
they
can
get
them
through
before
the
end
of
the
year,
but
november
9th
would
be
the
last
possible
date
in
order
to
get
something
approved
by
the
city
council
by
the
end
of
2020..
J
B
Right,
exciting
news:
we
will
all
look
at
our
calendars
and
thank
you
for
that
kimberly.
Anything
further.