►
From YouTube: June 15, 2020 City Planning Commission
Description
Minneapolis City Planning Commission Meeting
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov/
B
A
E
D
E
A
A
So
I
speak
for
myself
and
not
for
any
of
the
other
commissioners
in
saying
that
the
events
starting
with
the
murder
of
George,
Floyd
and
the
subsequent
events
in
the
city
of
Minneapolis
have
been
has
been
heartbreaking
and
add
and
have
been
tough
and,
of
course
started
with
it
with
just
a
completely
unacceptable
circumstance.
So
you
know
first
blush
were
a
kind
of
a
technocratic
body
of
the
Planning
Commission
that
doesn't
have
a
lot
to
deal
with
the
events
of
the
last
several
weeks.
A
But
you
know
we
represent
the
full
city,
as
we
sit
here
as
there's.
Every
other
board
and
Commission
in
our
work
helps
shape
that
city
from
day-to-day
decisions
to
the
policy
work
that
we
do
so
you
know
just
a
moment
of
reflection
that
the
built
environment
was.
It
was
kind
of
an
actor
and
a
symbol
and
a
lot
of
the
work
of
the
last
week's
and
the
events
of
the
last
weeks
and
that
the
building
shaped
by
this
commission
have
been.
A
A
And
we,
of
course,
also
spent
a
lot
of
time
in
the
2040
plan.
With
what
extraordinary
help
from
leadership
from
staff
to
address
some
of
the
more
for
some
of
the
older
land
use
discrimination
elements,
including
the
racial
covenants
and
redlining
which
got
baked
into
our
zoning
code?
So
you
know,
there's
a
lot
of
systems
of
oppression
and
and
the
land
use
and
zoning
is
one
of
them,
and
so
it's
not
just
the
police
that
give
that
kind
of
enabled,
ultimately,
the
murder
of
George
Floyd
and
for
many
and
I.
Think
appropriately.
A
Is
this
broader
set
of
discriminatory
systems
that
brought
everyone
to
the
streets
so
in
our
land?
Use
system
determines
where
we
live
and
who
gets
to
live
where,
but
our
streets
are
welcoming
where
harmful
pollutants
are
spewed,
how
much
climate
pollution
we
put
out
to
the
air
and,
as
I
said,
these
twenty,
the
20
40
planes
to
address
some
of
these
decisions
that
our
day-to-day
decisions
on
this
commission
really
have
a
lot
to
do
with
how
people
are
able
to
grasp
opportunity
and
whether
or
not
we're
discriminating
as
a
city
or
not
I.
A
Don't
have
particular
words
of
wisdom
at
the
end
of
this,
but
except
to
say
that
you
know
as
we
we
discover
discrimination
within
the
land-use
patterns
and
within
our
zoning
codes.
We
we
will
work
as
hard
as
we
can
to
to
rectify
those
and
staff
has
done
an
extremely
good
job,
and
the
council's
are
an
extremely
good
job
with
doing
that,
and
it
will
stay
committed
to
open
dialogue
and
that
will
stay
resolute
in
this
process.
A
F
Yeah
I
just
wanted
to
say,
as
a
resident
of
North
Minneapolis
I
hope
that
we
can
empower
and
represent
all
of
our
community
voices,
particularly
underserved
ones
in
our
community,
as
we
reshape
and
rebuild
the
process
going
forward
to
make
sure
that
we
are
staying
true
to
what
the
community
needs
and
wants
and
listening
most
important
listening.
Thank
you.
G
Thank
you,
I
just
wanted
to
thank
you
for
saying
what
you
said.
Sam
I
just
wanted
to
add
a
couple
things,
and
that
is
that
I
do
hope
that
we
take
away
something
meaningful
from
all
of
this
and
actually
try
to
implement
equitable
practices
into
how
we
conduct
our
business,
but
also
moving
forward.
If
we
come
across
any
opportunities
when
we're
doing
policy
reconsideration-
or
you
mentioned
all
the
restrictive
covenants
and
things
like
that
so
and
those
are
results
of
planning
and
I
think
we
are
well
situated
to
look
at
those
and
address
those.
A
E
G
A
A
Next
up,
we
have
item
number
6,
which
is
18,
20
yard,
Avenue,
South
and
Ward
7.
We
will
discuss
item
number
6.
Next.
We
have
item
number
seven,
which
is
at
25
21
Bloomington
Avenue
in
Ward,
9
I
am
going
to
assume
unless
staff
indicate
otherwise
in
the
chat
that
item
number
seven
may
be
placed
on
consent.
A
A
Item
number
Levin
is
3601
44th,
Street,
East
and
Ward
12.
We
will
place
item
number
11
on
consent.
Number
12
is
ht2
3501
35:25,
nfn
Avenue
in
war
10
will
discuss
part
of
a
number
12
item.
Number
13
is
35.
Groveland
Terrace
in
Ward
7
will
place
item
number
13
on
consent
and
I
see
a
note
in
the
chat
that
item
number
11
being
pulled
from
consent
will
be
placed
on
our
discussion
list.
I
A
A
A
A
I
A
A
A
Item
number
21
is
kanna-chan:
ib3
1600,
East
Franklin
Avenue
on
Ward
6,
replaced
item
number
21
on
consent;
item
number
22,
the
Sabathia
Community
Center
310
East
38th
Street
in
Ward
8.
We
will
continue
item
number
22
to
the
July
6th
meeting
and
item
number.
23
is
Simpson
housing,
community,
shelter
in
apartments
27:34
or
2740.
First
Avenue
South
in
Ward
10
will
place
item
number
23
on
Sunset
and
so.
A
A
I
A
I
A
G
I
A
A
A
A
A
A
D
G
J
D
G
L
E
M
D
A
G
L
D
E
N
H
A
C
Good
evening,
commissioners,
Peter
Crandall
Senior
Planner
with
seabed
land
use
the
first
project
that
we're
considering
tonight
is
located
at
18
20
yard.
Avenue
South
the
applicant
is
seeking
a
rezoning
of
the
property
from
the
are
two
residence
district
to
the
are
three
multiple
family
residence
district.
The
site
is
currently
occupied
by
a
two
and
a
half
story:
residential
building
containing
three
dwelling
units,
two
of
which
I
believe
are
currently
legally
occupied.
C
Under
the
r2
zoning,
the
site
itself
is
13,500
square
feet
in
area
and
the
applicant
is
seeking
a
rezoning
in
order
to
add
a
fourth
unit
and
to
legally
occupy
four
units
within
the
existing
structure.
So
they're
not
currently
proposing
any
modifications
to
the
building
itself,
but
internal
modifications
that
would
allow
for
the
establishment
of
for
legal
dwelling
units
in
the
parcel
can
go
to
the
next
slide.
C
As
far
as
the
land-use
guidance
for
the
site
goes,
the
land-use
category
is
urban
neighborhood,
which
is
broadly
applied
to
the
anterior
of
residential
neighborhoods
across
the
city
and
allows
for
a
wide
variety
of
land
uses
and
intensities,
and
then
the
built
form
district
is
the
interior
to
district,
which
is
largely
applied
to
neighborhood
interiors
that
are
so
much
closer
to
the
downtown
downtown
core
than
the
outer
neighborhoods
of
the
city
built
form
guidance
for
the
interior
to
district
is
for
smaller
scale.
Residential
buildings.
C
C
G
C
The
larger
Lots
provision
in
the
policy
guidance
that
allows
for
us
to
recommend
approval
of
an
our
three
zoning
category
for
this
parcel
18:20
Gerrard
is,
as
I
stated
earlier,
13,500
square
feet
in
area
in
general,
typical
residential
Lots
in
Minneapolis,
are
usually
between
four
and
six
thousand
I
did
calculate
the
average
parcel
size
for
this
block
and
the
surrounding
eight
blocks.
Just
for
some
context.
Average
parcel
size
in
the
r2
is
sometimes
a
little
bit
larger
for
this
particular
area.
That
rich
personal
size
is
about
8,000
square
feet.
Next
slide.
C
F
O
We
purchased
this
building
approximately
four
or
five
months
ago
and,
as
you
saw
it's
a
beautiful
building,
architectural
II
built
by
the
Munsingwear
family
as
I
understand
for
his
daughter,
indicated
it's
ten
thousand
six
hundred
square
feet
of
finished
space
on
a
13,000
square
foot
Lots.
Currently
there
are
only
two
full-time
residents.
Although
there
are
thirteen
bedrooms
and
seven
bathrooms,
some
of
the
other
residents
are
gone,
two-thirds
of
the
time
or
a
third
of
the
time.
O
So
we
have
a
very
quiet
building
in
a
very
beautiful
neighborhood
of
professionals
that
I've
met
wonderful
people
that
live
across
and
so
forth.
That
I've
discussed
the
zoning
change
with
and
they've
seen
the
improvements
that
that
we've
made
in
the
property.
It
was
quite
dilapidated
when
we
purchased
it
and
we've
improved
it
significantly,
primarily
through
interior
cosmetics
and
new
cabinets
and
the
like.
O
O
A
M
Hi,
my
name
is
Jeff
Emerson
and
thanks
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
to
the
commissioners,
I
live
at
1901,
Humboldt,
Avenue,
south
diagonally,
across
Lincoln
Avenue
from
the
applicants,
property
and
I
believe
I
speak
for
the
neighbors
in
opposing
the
rezoning
of
this
property
to
r3.
This
rezoning
is
inconsistent
with
the
2040
comprehensive
plan,
which
speaks
specifically
to
the
low-density
area
in
which
the
property
sits.
I
believe
you've
received
several
letters
from
the
neighbors
opposing
the
rezoning
largely
for
this
reason,
I'd
like
to
draw
your
attention
to
the
June
12th
memo
from
Eleanor
Rosen.
M
Hopefully
you
have
the
history
I
submitted
of
1820
Girard
Avenue
south,
which
was
written
by
a
local
historian
and
yes,
the
property
was
built
as
a
duplex
in
1919,
and
one
of
the
early
residents
was
Cora
Goodrich,
the
daughter-in-law
of
early
Minneapolis
pioneer
dr.
Calvin
Goodrich
and
dr.
Goodrich
owned
the
land
parcel
known
as
Lowry
Hill,
and
he
was
the
father-in-law
of
Thomas
Lowry
himself.
M
Two
doors
down
to
the
south
is
1904
Girard,
it's
the
original
farmhouse
from
when
Lowry
Hill
was
developed
and
it's
still
surrounded
by
a
beautiful
canopy
of
oak
trees
that
are
100
years
old,
and
this
section
is
very
popular
with
pedestrians.
I
believe,
because
of
the
historic
nature
of
the
properties,
I
have
three
specific
comments
about
the
land
use
application.
M
First,
could
you
please
turn
to
the
zoning
map,
which
is
attachment
number
two
of
the
city's
analysis.
The
map
is
centered
on
1820
Girard,
Avenue
south,
and
it
shows
about
sixty
properties
that
surround
the
applicants.
Property.
All
of
the
properties
that
are
shown
are
r1
or
r2,
and
all
of
them
are
single-family,
duplex
or
triplex,
but
the
city
and
its
analysis.
On
page
three
point
number
three
concludes
quote
rezoning:
the
property
to
the
r3
district.
M
M
Previous
tenants
of
this
property
mainly
park
on
Lincoln,
which
is
a
narrow
street
and
is
difficult
to
navigate
with
snow
buildup
in
the
winter
and
parking,
has
been
a
concern
for
the
residents
in
the
art
to
zoning
situation,
and
it
would
become
increasingly
problematic
in
an
r3
situation.
With
four
units,
or
more
so
with
more
than
four
units,
which
would
be
permitted
with
this
proposed
r3
zoning.
M
You
have
received
a
number
of
submissions
from
some
of
the
neighbors.
Please
read
the
letter
of
Susan
Lynn
feste
she's
lived
across
the
street
for
almost
40
years,
and
she
summarizes
the
concerns
of
the
neighbors
that
rezoning
of
this
older
property
to
potentially
permit
up
to
nine
units
would
forever
change
the
historic
character
of
this
neighborhood.
M
Dr.
Appleman
is
a
landlord
with
other
properties
in
Minneapolis
and
he
does
not
intend
to
live
at
this
property.
The
goal
of
1820
Girard
Avenue
LLC,
which
is
the
named
owner
of
this
property
I.
Imagine
as
true
with
any
investment
entity
is
profit
and
not
the
interest
of
the
city
or
the
neighborhood
I
do
appreciate
dr.
M
Appleman,
reiterating
their
intention
to
only
place
a
fourth
unit
and
we're
grateful
for
that,
but
it's
impossible
to
know
the
owners
future
plans
if
they
will
change
or
if
a
new
owner
will
have
different
plans
as
permitted
under
our
three.
So
in
summary,
the
neighbors
urged
the
Planning
Commission
in
the
City
Council
and
any
other
department
with
input
into
this
application
to
deny
rezoning
of
this
property.
If
you
can
come
up
with
a
solution
that
would
permit
four
units
but
not
change
the
r2
zoning
of
the
property.
M
A
A
A
F
Yes,
I
will
actually
be
voting
against
this
motion.
I,
actually
in
all
the
correspondents
had
already
highlighted
the
letter
sent
from
Miss
Rosenstein
that
excited
I,
thought
very
convincing
arguments
and
related
to
why
we
couldn't
approve
the
rezoning.
I
I
understand
what
a
very
density
friendly
Commission,
but
it
does
seem
as
though
looking
at
the
map,
this
would
be
kind
of
an
outlier
to
approve
the
r3
zoning
and
and
although
I
think
one
unit
isn't
problematic
and
the
neighbors
concur
with
that
sentiment.
F
It's
not
possible
to
get
the
one
unit
without
allowing
for
the
future
possibility
for
what
nine
units
and
as
a
former
Commissioner
to
Tucker,
used
to
say,
rezoning
is
forever
so
I,
just
I,
guess
I
as
much
as
I.
Personally,
don't
have
a
problem
with
the
fourth
unit.
I.
Do
think
that
all
of
the
reasons
outlined
in
that
correspondence
very
firmly
show
that
there
isn't
illegal
standing
for
proving
the
rezoning
to
r3,
so
I
will
be
both
voting
in
opposition
to
the
motion.
Thank
you.
A
Very
you
know:
I'll
just
say
that
you
know
one
of
the
goals
of
the
comprehensive
plan
was
to
increase,
be
able
to
increase
density
while
maintaining
that
kind
of
physical
characteristics
of
our
neighborhoods
and
and-
and
this
item
to
me,
I
think
does
do
that.
I
know
that
there
are
apartment
buildings
right
around
here.
I
actually
grew
up
at
1901
Knox
and
know
that
there
are
a
number
of
apartments
on
Humboldt
and
certainly
along
the
frontal.
A
Cortical
the
area
to
have
multi-unit
condos
multi-unit
apartment
buildings,
certainly
if
you
look
within
a
two-block
radius
or
so-
and
this
looks
like
a
beautiful
building
and
a
large
lot
and
I
think
that
allowing
such
a
re
reused
to
occur,
as
is
consistent
with
with
the
Comprehensive
Plan
I,
see
no
other
comments
clerk.
Please
call
the
ball.
H
A
P
Afternoon,
chair
and
commissioners,
so
for
this
item,
3501
to
35,
25,
Hennepin
Avenue,
the
project
site
is
six
parcels
at
that
southeast
corner
of
35th
and
Hennepin.
The
unique
property
contains
and
would
entertain
a
charming
1923
Twin
Cities
Granite
Works
building.
It's
a
reverse
corner
lot
with
a
front
yard
property
line
along
Hennepin
and
35th
Street
West,
and
it
also
has
a
dead-end
alley
that
creates
unique
property
lines.
At
the
back
of
the
lodge.
There
are
a
mix
of
buildings
and
zoning
in
the
area
to
the
east.
P
P
P
You
know
comparing
this
to
what's
there
now
at
this
time,
but
see
pet
is
supportive
of
the
applications,
except
the
variance
to
reduce
the
front
yard
setback
of
the
transformer
along
Hennepin
Avenue
and
the
applicant
is
supportive
of
the
staff
recommendation.
The
conditions
of
approval
I
do
want
to
note.
There's
the
addendum
memo
that
calls
out
that
staff
made
an
error
in
the
height
analysis.
This
is
application
II.
It
should
be
as
the
applicant
proposed
and
has
been
shown
in.
P
The
community
has
been
shown
in
the
plans
since
December
2019
and
that
being
to
increase
the
height
from
four
storeys
56
feet
to
56
to
5
storeys
59
feet.
Instead
of
what's
noted
in
the
report
56
feet,
staff
is
looking.
Staff
is
recommending
approval
of
this
application
and
with
an
additional
condition
of
approval,
that
being
that
the
design
not
change
to
what
you
see
currently
so
positives
and
support
of
the
project.
P
If
you
could
go
to
the
next
slide,
please
you'll
be
looking
to
remove
the
surface
parking
lot,
which
is
a
fair
amount
of
the
right
currently
to
Kirk
cuts
along
Hennepin
Avenue,
a
goods
and
services
corridor
and
a
high-frequency
transit
network.
It
would
also
support
the
pedestrian
improvement
of
the
pedestrian
environment
in
the
area
with
the
nice,
courtyards
and
multiple
entrances
that
access
Hennepin
Avenue,
it
would
improve
the
stormwater
runoff
situation
current
currently,
with
a
large
surface
parking
lots
at
the
back
likely.
A
lot
of
water
goes
to
the
neighboring
properties
to
the
east.
P
With
this
proposal,
you
would
have
more
on-site
capturing
of
stormwater
or
slowing
down
the
stormwater
and
getting
more
stormwater
to
Hennepin
Avenue.
Instead
of
to
the
residential
residential
properties.
To
the
east
also
note
with
inclusionary
zoning,
it
would
provide
six
affordable
units.
It
it
does.
What
the
comp
plan
is
looking
for
in
having
a
mixed-use
building
along
a
goods
and
services
corridor.
P
With
that
lower
the
smaller
building
along
then
a
smaller
building
portion
along
35th,
so,
and
also
not
just
a
lot
more
glass
on
the
upper
floor
to
help
increase
the
transparency.
The
next
slide,
please,
and
in
spending
more
and
more
time.
Looking
at
this
diagram,
it
just
shows
the
applicants
thoughtfulness
in
placing
different
parts
of
the
building
in
different
areas
to
reduce
the
impact
and
also
to
blend
in
with
the
area
next
slide.
P
So
a
fair
amount
of
comments
have
come
in
both
in
the
staff
report
and
then
in
the
addendum
packet,
the
concerns
of
height
traffic
and
parking,
but
also
two
letters
of
support
in
the
addendum
packet.
I'm
I
also
know
what
I've
been
working
with
others
in
in
real
time,
those
that
money
have
tried
to
sign
in
and
did
not
know
that
they
were
to
have
to
call
in
after
3:30
and
just
trying
to
see
if
we
can
work
on
getting
them
to
be
able
to
speak.
A
J
Good
evening,
commissioners,
this
is
Bob
Logan
from
ESG,
architects
and
I.
Think
Aaron's,
summary
of
the
project
is
very
thorough
and
complete.
I,
don't
have
much
to
add.
I
will
note
that
for
the
commissioners
here,
the
design
that
we're
presenting
tonight
remains
quite
consistent
with
the
design
that
we
presented
to
committee
the
whole
on
December
12th
I
recognize
there
are
some
new
commissioners
now
on
the
Commission
that
weren't
present
for
that
committee,
the
Whole
meeting,
but
the
primary
actually
very
few
changes
since
we
presented.
J
One
of
the
changes
to
note
is
that,
based
on
feedback
from
the
public
works
department
and
our
general
contractor,
we
we
did
increase
the
set
back
of
the
below-grade
parking
from
the
alley
in
order
to
facilitate
keeping
that
alley
open
during
construction
and
and
we
did
since
we
met
with
community
the
whole.
We
have
met
with
the
neighborhood
a
couple
times.
It's
been
a
very
robust
discussion.
Most
of
the
discussion
is
primarily.
F
J
But
the
primary
discussion
points
have
been
the
design
teams
and
the
development
teams
decision
and
to
to
how
the
building
is
masked
and
primarily
that
the
five-story
portion
of
the
building
is
located
on
the
east,
where
it
is
closer
to
the
single-family
residential
properties
and
I
will
say
that
we've
been,
we
recognize.
You
know
the
the
adjustment
that
this
will
be.
J
Should
this
be
developed
from
what's
existing
and
we've
been,
we've
taken
great
care
to
create
the
exhibits
that
really
quite
clearly
show
the
height
and
massing
so
that
both
the
public
and
the
commissioners
can
can
understand
the
proposal
and
and
primarily
I'll
just
describe
our
motivation
for
the
design
that
we've
done.
I
think
Aaron
noted
properly.
That
part
of
the
reason
for
the
massing
is.
E
J
Desire
to
enrich
the
pedestrian
Suites
streetscape
along
Hennepin
Avenue,
which
is
really
the
primary
corridor
and
the
primary
public
place
from
which
most
of
the
public
will
interact
with
the
building
and,
as
Erin
noted,
there's
a
desire
to
create
these
courtyards
with
individual
entrances
in
order
to
engage
and
interact
with
that
public
realm.
The
other
discussion
point
and
Aaron
actually
talked
about
this
quite
well,
so
I
won't
spend
much
time
on
this,
but
it's
also
about
stormwater
management,
which
is
related
to
the
application
to
increase
the
allowable
impervious
area.
J
It's
true
that
we
are
requesting
an
application
to
slightly
increase
the
allowable
impervious,
but
I
will
note
that
the
proposed
design
represents
a
significant
improvement
from
the
existing
condition.
So
not
it
Aaron
did
mention
the
large
surface
parking
lots
which
obviously
surface
drain
to
the
street
before
going
to
the
storm
system,
picking
up
sediment
and
contaminants
along
the
way,
but
also
of
the
existing
buildings.
The
majority
of
them
do
not
drain
internally
and
most
of
them
also
drain
via
scuppers
and
rainwater
leaders
to
the
surface
parking.
J
So
the
vast
majority
of
that
site,
whether
it's
building
roofs
or
for
surface
parking
drains
via
the
surface,
primarily
out
through
the
alley,
and
so
our
building
in
addition
to
creating
slightly
more
pervious
area,
will
control
the
stormwater
much
more
directly.
And
then
it
will
also
note
that
the
green
roof
areas
that
were
showing
within
those
courtyards
do
not
technically
count
toward
as
pervious.
So
we
have
to
count
those
as
impervious
so
would
those
be
count
if
those
were
counted
as
pervious?
J
The
numbers
would
be
a
lot
better
and
then
the
last
thing
that
I
want
to
talk
about
is
something
that
isn't
directly
addressed
in
the
staff
report,
but
has
been
a
subject
of
discussion
with
a
couple
of
the
neighbors
who
use
the
alley.
The
dead-end
alley
for
access,
and,
at
this
point,
I'd
request
staff
to
display
the
exhibit
that
I
uploaded
when
I
signed
up
it's
just
a
one-page
exhibit
and
I
am
watching
online,
but
I
know
that
there's
a
delay.
J
J
It
up
this
while
we
wait
for
that
exhibit.
So
the
the
alley
is
a
dead-end
alley
currently
because
of
the
surface
parking
lots
and
the
multiple
curb
cuts
onto
Hennepin.
It's
used
informally
as
a
through
alley.
Okay,
I
just
don't
quite
see
it
guys,
but
and
so
the
there
is
a
property
that
addresses
Gerrard,
that
that
uses
the
alley
for
access
and
through
designing
the
projects
we.
F
J
Made
aware
that
the
that
that
property
currently
has
only
informal
access
to
the
alley,
and
so
we
worked
with
that
neighboring
property
owner
and
well
they're,
not
enthusiastic
about
the
event
or
about
the
about
the
development
as
a
whole.
We
were
able
to
work
cooperatively
to
sort
of
devise
two
options
that
would
give
them
formal
legal
access
to
this
dead-end
alley
with
once
our
development
is
complete
and
part
of
that
would
would
require
our
this
developer
to
grant
an
easement
across
their
property
to
allow
access.
J
So
we
have
been
working
through
that
we
presented
two
options
to
them.
They've
indicated
that
they
would
prefer
one
of
those
options,
the
option
our
application
was
submitted
to
include
the
option
that
includes
the
greater
area
of
impervious,
so
should
they
choose
and
I
believe
they
are
leaning
that
way
the
option
that
has
less
pavement
it
would
also
help
improve
and
increase
the
previous
coverage
and
I
think
that's
all.
I
will
present
and
also
note
that
the
applicant
is
also
here
tonight
to
answer
questions
that
the
commissioners
might
have.
Thank
you.
A
L
A
L
A
P
P
It
just
noted
that
I
also
note
that
the
applicant
and
for
what
it's
worth
there
was
discussions
in
late
2019
of
having
this
project
go
forward
on
a
on
a
quicker
timeframe,
but
that
the
applicant
wanted
to
pull
back
and
have
more
discussions
with
the
neighborhood
and
comply
with
the
city
requirements
that
would
be
in
place
in
2020
and
Kimberly.
If
there's
other
things
that
you
think
would
be
helpful
to
add
about
the
affordable
housing,
I
would
welcome
that.
A
So
Erin
just
to
clarify
then
so
the
the
inclusionary
zoning,
which
is
a
requirement
that
there
be
affordable
housing,
kicked
in
in
2020,
and
then
you
know
my
understanding
of
it.
Commission
obviously
reviewed
this
is
that
the
the
require
the
percent
required
is
kind
of
a
gradually
increasing
percent
over
a
period
of
time.
So
right
now
the
requirement
is
8
percent,
but
ultimately
the
city
will
have
a
higher
requirement.
G
J
So
those
those
units
would
be
required
to
be
affordable
for
a
term
of
twenty
years
and
I
will
also
note
that
the
strict
requirement
for
this
property
is
not
six
units,
because
the
number
of
units
phases
in
based
on
the
number
of
dwelling
units
for
this
project,
the
required
number
of
affordable
units,
is
actually
four
point.
Seven
to
six.
A
I
The
unified
housing
policy
has
a
lot
of
information
in
it.
It's
very
detailed
and
very
complex
when
it
comes
to
interpreting
the
on-site
production
requirement.
So
it
sounds
like
the
applicant
here
is
pursuing
the
on-site
production.
There
is
a
requirement
in
terms
of
the
finishes
of
the
unit
as
well,
that
the
affordable
units
match
the
quality
of
finishes
and
the
remainder
of
the
units
of
the
building
and
that
the
unit
mixed
for
the
affordable
units
matches
the
unit
mix.
I
So
in
other
words,
if
you
have
a
building
with
one
bedroom,
two
bedroom
and
three
bedroom
units,
you
couldn't
make
all
of
your
affordable
units,
one
bedrooms.
It
would
need
to
basically
have
a
diversified
set
of
affordable
units
that
matches
that
in
the
overall
number
of
units
of
the
building,
and
basically
we
have
a
condition
of
approval
that
requires
the
applicant
to
comply
with
the
unified
housing
policy.
A
A
R
A
S
A
T
T
First
off
with
safety,
the
Minneapolis
2040
plan
policy,
26
vision,
zero,
eliminate
fatalities
and
severe
injuries
that
are
a
result
of
crashes
on
city
streets
by
2027.
So
a
first
bullet
point
is
designed
all
automobile
access
for
the
building's
parking
garage
will
take
place
from
the
alley
on
35th
Street,
causing
safety
concerns
for
pedestrians,
bicyclists
and
motorists
bullet.
Point
item
number
two:
this
block
of
35th
Street
is
a
one-way
with
a
steep
hill
in
our
18
years
entering
our
garage
through
this
access.
T
A
turn
from
35th
Street
heading
east
into
the
alley
is
a
dangerous
turn,
especially
in
the
winter,
because
the
ice
and
snow
many
people
have
slid
into
the
existing
wall
making
that
term
the
proposal
calls
for
a
much
smaller
curb
cut
than
the
existing
one.
Add
that
292
additional
vehicles
making
that
turn
and
we
have
grave
concerns
about
the
safety
of
people
in
vehicles
being
rear-ended,
as
well
as
pedestrians
and
bicyclists
being
hit
bullet
item
number
three
under
safety.
T
T
S
My
name
is
Jennifer
Foss
I
live
at
35,
20
Girard,
Avenue
South,
our
family
has
lived
in
this
home
for
18
years
and
overall,
we're
very
supportive
of
density.
I
also
wanted
to
take
a
moment
to
thank
the
developers
who
are
working
very
kindly
with
us
to
resolve
issues
on
access
to
our
garage,
but
overall
I
wanted
to
just
address
a
few
of
the
issues
we
have
in
particular
that
don't
seem
to
work
with
our
neighborhood.
S
The
city
requires
for
the
approval
approval
of
variances
that
the
proposed
variance,
not
ultra
the
essential
character
of
the
locality
or
be
injurious
to
the
youth
or
enjoyment
of
other
property
in
the
vicinity.
The
requested
setback
variances
and
the
conditional
use
permit
to
exceed
allowed
height
from
four
storeys
to
five
storeys
will
create
a
building
a
mass
in
bulk
at
the
top
of
a
steep
grade
that
will
tower
over
the
neighborhood,
especially
the
single-family
homes
directly
behind
the
building.
S
This
will
significantly
impact
the
enjoyment
of
these
properties,
resulting
in
a
lack
of
solar
access
and
privacy
for
the
residents
on
Girard,
Avenue,
35th,
Street
and
Hennepin
Court,
just
to
the
south
of
the
project
policies.
Five
and
six
of
the
Minneapolis
2040
Comprehensive
Plan
address
encouragement
of
building
mass
and
placement
that
enables
solar
access
and
considers
the
impact
of
shadowing,
and
we
have
concerns
that
the
this
project,
as
designed,
will
have
significant
impact.
S
The
2040
plan
also
calls
for
bulk
along
commercial
corridors
and
then
transitions
into
lord.and
city
areas,
and
this
project
is
actually
designed
the
opposite
way.
Finally,
we
respectfully
requests
that
before
you
make
this
generational
planning
decision,
you
visit
the
effective
properties
in
person
to
fully
appreciate
the
impact
of
a
building
of
this
size
on
a
steep
grade.
Thank
you.
A
A
G
Hi
sorry
took
me
a
little
bit
to
unmute
myself,
as
was
mentioned
that
this
has
this
project
came
to
committee
of
the
whole
in
December
and
me
being
one
of
the
newer
commissioners.
I
wasn't
part
of
that
discussion.
I
would
have
brought
up
this
question.
Then
I
lived
just
three
blocks
from
here
for
over
five
years,
so
I'm
very
familiar
with
this
property
and
I
totally
understand
this
lighting
and
cars
going
the
wrong
direction.
I've
seen
it
myself
several
times
so
I
guess.
G
My
question
is
that
are
there
and
I
know
that
Hennepin
Avenue
is
not
I,
believe
it's
a
county
road
and
so
therefore
Minneapolis
Public
Works
may
not
have
the
same
amount
of
discretion
in
doing
some
work,
but
I'm
kind
of
like
wondering
if
there
are
ways
to
like
put
a
pedestrian
cross
crossing
signal
there,
that
can
be
activated
and/or,
better
signage
in
that
area.
Somehow
cars
keep
missing
it
and
or
any
anything
that
can
help
with,
because
this
the
35th
street
is
very
steep
in
that
one
one
block
between
Hennepin
and
Gerrard.
P
F
A
P
They
are
well
aware,
given
the
Hennepin,
Avenue
reconstruction
of
this
area,
and
also
you
know,
having
concerns
or
looking
at
the
situation
of
having
that
dead-end
alley,
something
that's
not
ideal,
but
something
that
we
just
are
forced
to
live
with
with
this
project,
given
a
credit
property
lines.
So
there
will
be
that
additional
process
for
vehicle
access
and
maneuvering
and
obviously
the
city's
goals,
are
to
reduce
conflict
points
and
improve
the
safety
of
pedestrians
and
bicyclists
in
the
area.
A
U
Is
John
T
Olsen
I
live
at
35
20
Gerard
Evan
self,
one
directly
to
the
proposed
building.
I
have
been
living
here
for
about
35
years.
I
opposed
your
variances
of
requested
for
this
apartment.
Building.
This
building
is
the
out
of
character
with
the
neighborhood,
the
surrounding
piece
and
the
near
plan.
U
With
us,
mr.
beautiful
parks
and
churches,
then
there's
precinct
Lee
commercial
stretches,
buildings,
shops
and
for
us
peeking
at
the
Calculon
square
plan,
either
the
listing
of
homes,
small
businesses
and
a
historic
fire
station
before
seeing
the
Sylvan
landscape
and
gates
of
snake
with
cemetery
with
the
lakes
to
the
right.
This
proposed
building
would
be
a
jarring
interruption
to
that
pattern.
Instead
of
the
existing
older
structures
of
one
to
three
stories,
this
would
be
a
modern
five-story
building,
just
half
blocks
in
the
cemetery.
U
Our
see
and
state
founders,
including
Charles
Charles
Loring,
father
of
the
Minneapolis
parks,
would
be
rolling
in
their
nearby
graves.
You
likely
have
seen
the
cpt
program
parks
for
people
which
documents
the
innovative,
designing
and
layout
of
the
city
with
Park
landscapes
and
beautiful
boulevards.
These
designs
have
brought
a
quality
of
life
and
international
claim.
Zoning
and
building
requirements
have
supported
that
design
of
beautiful
environments
by
allowing
variances
nullify
these
design
and
set
precedents
for
even
taller
and
more
intrusive
buildings.
U
You
have
me
also
seen
the
TPP
lost
Twin
Cities
series,
which
highlights
the
loss
of
our
historic
and
natural
heritage.
Don't
let
this
project
be
the
continuation
of
that
decline,
the
building
will
increase
in
pervious
space,
increased
runoff
and
reduce
affordable
housing
and
small
businesses.
The
runoff
from
this
area
tends
to
dry
down
the
hill
during
heavy
rains.
The
entrance
is
under
the
building
will
be
tough.
We
will
be
through
an
alley
of
35th
Street,
a
narrow,
steep
road.
It
becomes
icy
in
the
winter
and
as
difficult
to
navigate
the
turn
into
a
deli.
U
A
safety
concern
the
exiting
traffic
will
funnel
into
narrow
residential
streets
from
the
east
where
I
live.
This
building
will
present
himself
as
a
six
story
tall
monolith
on
a
grade
that
is
already
a
story
and
a
half
above
Girard
so
be
the
equivalent
of
seeing
a
seven
or
eight
story
building
it
certainly
won't
block
late
afternoon
and
evening
sunlight
and
affect
quality
of
life.
I
attended
a
neighborhood
presentation
on
the
proposal
on
Jude
January
15th
at
Bryant
Park.
U
V
N
N
H
R
R
Webos
is
down,
at
least
in
terms
of
my
feed
from
from
the
city,
so
I'm
just
going
to
go
ahead
and-
and
you
guys
can
take
a
look
at
s.
Oh
my
visuals,
which
I
hope
will
help
kind
of
give
you
a
sense
of
of
what
the
impact
that
this
project
would
have
on
our
neighborhood.
I
oppose
it,
because
the
variances
and
conditional
use
permits
are
instant
to
me
seem
inconsistent
with
goals.
R
The
leaders
of
the
city
of
Minneapolis
have
a
lo
outlined
in
their
minneapolis
2040
plan,
specifically
goal
number
six
regarding
high
quality,
physical
environments
and
number
nine,
which
outlines
complete
neighborhoods
these
goals
and
the
action
steps
outlined
state
that
the
city
will
promote
design
for
built
environments
that
contribute
to
a
sense
of
place
and
community,
as
well
as
prioritized
pedestrian
oriented,
land-use
building,
design
and
site
design.
Motor
vehicle
use
comes
last
in
their
hierarchy,
and
these
proposed
variances
will
alter
the
essential
character
of
this
neighborhood.
R
The
injure
injurious
to
the
use
and
enjoyment
of
residents
and
be
detrimental
to
the
health,
safety
and
welfare
of
residents
who
live
here
and
nearby.
I
would
also
point
you
to
the
South
Uptown
neighborhood
association
that
came
out
with
a
resolution
from
all
the
neighbors
in
opposition
to
this
project.
That
also
lists
some
very
good
points.
I
also
want
to
point
to
goal
number
nine,
complete
neighborhoods
that
specifically
advocates
reducing
greenhouse
gas
emissions
and
promoting
walking
biking
in
transit.
R
This
project,
as
proposed
features
92
parking
spaces
for
74
apartments
that
will
have
one
entrance
accessible
off
in
narrow
alley
onto
a
one-way
street
heading
eastbound
deeper
into
the
neighborhood.
Undoubtedly,
when
multiple
cars
are
entering
and
exiting
the
single
lane
entrance,
cars
will
have
to
stop
idle
traffic,
will
back
up
onto
Hennepin
traffic
and
congestion,
will
increase
and
create
a
hazard
for
pedestrians
and
bikers,
not
to
mention
the
increase
in
carbon
dioxide.
R
In
addition
to
encouraging
building
placement
and
massing
design
that
considers
the
impact
of
shadowing
and
that's
a
direct
quote
from
the
Minneapolis
2040
plan,
granting
the
conditional
use
permit
will
place
the
bulk
of
this
building
nearly
six
stories
tall
due
to
the
discrete
grade
facing
residential
backyards,
the
building
loom
over
residents
and
reduce
light
and
air,
and
somebody
else
made
a
comment
about
buildings
being
an
outlier
in
their
neighborhoods.
This
is
definitely
in
that
category.
R
Like
I
said
John
and
others
have
said
that
we
had
a
community
meeting.
We
offered
a
lot
of
suggestions.
We
asked
a
lot
of
questions
as
far
as
any
of
us
can
tell
they
work.
Neighbors
were
completely
ignored
in
this
process
and
and
I.
So
for
me,
it's
it's.
It's
I
would
really
implore
the
Commission
to
really
come
see
in
our
neighborhood,
see
where
the
property
lines
are.
Take
a
really
hard
look
at
what
this
building
would
do
to
that
to
that
site
before
you
make
before
you.
R
A
A
R
A
A
E
B
So
I
live
a
few
blocks
away
from
the
project
site
and
I,
just
like
to
speak
in
support
of
what
the
neighbors
have
said.
Also
I'm,
a
member,
a
longtime
member
of
the
neighborhood's
land
use
and
transportation
committee
and
I
hope
mats
Ellis
can
get
is
able
to
connect
max
as
a
woman
and
she's
the
chair
of
the
south
of
town,
neighbor
Association,
and
she
was
going
to
speak
to
present
our
official
neighborhood
position
and,
if
she's
not
able
to
I
guess,
I
would
like
to
just
say
a
few
words
about
the
neighborhood's.
B
Good
I
would
like
to
just
speak
for
myself,
then
my
primary
concern
is
about
the
site
planning
and
the
massing
of
this
project.
Lander
group,
the
developer,
does
a
fantastic
job
of
designing,
really
good
projects
around
our
community.
There
are
a
number
of
examples
of
their
projects
that
I
think
really
contribute
to
our
community,
but
I
think
this
is
not
one
of
them
and
I
believe
it
all
stems
from
their
desire
to
keep
that
one-story
commercial
building
right
at
the
corner
at
3501
and
append.
B
It
clearly
shows
in
the
application
that
they
want
to
keep
that
building
and
redistribute
the
massing
and
there's
a
lovely.
You
know
it's.
An
East
shaped
building
with
lovely
courtyard,
spacing
Hennepin
and
step
backs
with
three
stories
for
storing
five-story
buildings,
so
the
the
building
design
from
Hennepin
is
it's
lovely
and
would
really
contribute
to
the
community,
but
as
a
number
of
people,
I
think
all
of
the
people
have
study
who's
spoken
so
far
from
the
backside.
It's
it's
a
big,
solid,
half
block
long
wall
that
is
actually
six
storeys
tall.
B
If
I
measured
it
correctly
its
sixty-four
feet
tall
at
the
highest
point.
Because
of
the
you
know,
various
changing
grade
along
that
east
elevation,
so
it's
nearly
you
know
it's
if
I
believe,
if
it
were
one,
even
if
the
building
were
even
one
inch
taller,
it
would
be
considered
a
seven
story
building
if
it
were
this
height,
all
the
way
around.
B
Of
course,
because
of
the
grade
changes,
it's
considered
a
five
storey
building
rather
than
a
six-story
building,
but
along
this
elevation
it
is
six
storeys
because
of
the
parking
garage
and
as
people
have
noted,
there
is
a
significant
grade
change
so
that
the
single-family
house
is
behind.
It
are
even
lower
in
elevation
you're
going
to
have
this
huge
wall
looming
above
them
and
I.
Think
it's
just
completely
unnecessary.
B
The
neighborhood
is
not
and
I'm
not
opposed
to
the
density,
but
the
developers
objective,
of
keeping
that
one-story
building
results
in
reduced
abuse
of
of
the
building
massing
and
then
that
height
to
the
back
of
the
site
site
instead
of
along
Hennepin,
where
I
think
it
more
appropriately
belongs,
and
my
field
is
I'm.
A
historic
preservation
consultant.
So
I
am
all
in
favor
of
keeping
historic
buildings.
But
if
this
whole
site
is
going
to
be
direct,
be
redeveloped,
my
opinion
is
that
that
existing
one-story
building
is
a
nice
background.
B
Building,
it's
certainly
a
nice
building,
but
for
the
community
it's
the
trade-off
is
not
a
good
one.
It's
this
building
is
not
so
important
to
keep.
I
would
rather
see
that
building
demolished
and
have
a
building
that
is
lower
in
height,
that
more
appropriately
fits
the
character
of
the
neighborhood
and
particularly
the
the
site.
Given
the
grade
changes
I
believe
at
the
beginning
of
the
this
part
of
the
meeting.
Mr.
B
Henner
mentioned
something
about
sensitive
design
to
the
area
and
I
would
I
would
really
disagree
about
that
and
and,
as
others
have
said,
developers
simply
disregarded
everything
well
most
many
things
that
the
community
offered
in
terms
of
input
and-
and
so
I
would
suggest
that,
although
in
there
are
some
very
nicely
designed
aspects
of
this
project-
and
it
may
be
in
some
ways
better
than
what's
there
now
I
think
it's
not
good
enough.
It's
not.
It
doesn't
meet
really
fundamental
community
and
City
goals
about
compatibility.
B
I
think
it
there's
an
opportunity
for
for
a
better
design
project
that
is
compatible
with
the
neighborhood
that
can
show
how
to
integrate
new
development
in
an
older,
less
dense,
neighborhood
and
the
opportunity
is
just
missed
here
and
I
hope.
The
Planning
Commission
will
reject
this
proposal
and
and
I
would
agree
that
it
that
it
would
be
injurious
to
the
enjoyment
of
property
and
welfare
of
residents
and
contrary
to
the
character
of
the
area
and
I,
guess
I
won't
say
anything
about
the
characterization.
B
J
S
I
suppose
everything
that
my
fellow
neighbors
said
so
I
will
keep
very
short
and,
and
it's
as
a
neighborhood,
a
letter
to
the
Commission
and
I
just
want
to
repeat
he
support
density
in
our
neighborhood.
But
with
that,
the
proposed
project
will
clear
the
following:
the
approval:
a
variance
to
run
side
intersects,
a
conditional,
c-2
6e,
allowing
tapes
on
for
stories
I've,
which
actually
include
two
sticks
as
result
of
the
property,
a
variance
to
our
suit
lot
coverage.
L
L
U
S
V
S
Well
of
it
place
the
tallest
parts
of
the
structure
towards
the
back
of
the
lot,
rather
than
along
Hennepin
corporate,
for
it
to
be
every
phenomenon
has
a
60-foot
right-of-way
compared
to
only
12-foot
in
the
alley.
Just
get
a
pronounceable
interchangeable
that
site,
which
I
invite
all
of
the
Commission.
C
L
K
S
V
A
S
W
A
A
V
Joel
Sedgwick
35:29
Hennepin
Avenue
in
Hennepin
Court
and
president
of
the
Hennepin
Court
owners
association.
So
were
the
six
family
units
just
south
of
the
proposed
a
lot
and
you
know
I
know
it's
getting
late
and
there
have
been
a
lot
of
really
good,
solid
commentary.
Thus
far,
we
sent
a
letter
and
just
wanted
to
reiterate
the
points
that
mr.
V
We
absolutely
would
recommend
the
motion
to
deny
the
variance
to
reduce
the
Southern
Interior
side
yard
setback
from
5
feet
to
0
feet,
so
that
would
bring
the
transformer
and
Mechanics
for
the
proposed
property
to
within
zero
feet
of
the
property
line,
which
would
suggest
it
will
butt
up
against
the
immediate
two
families
at
35,
29
and
35
31
and
again
just
be
closer
to
the
the
shadowing
of
our
courtyard.
We
have
a
pretty
little
treed
area
that
will
probably
not
see
the
Sun
what
the
structure
being
up
there
so
again
to
let
others
speak.
V
We
did
want
to
reiterate
the
direct
impact
that
six
additional
families
feel
to
the
south
and
while
the
design
is
innovative
and
we
believe
in
the
density
and
we
believe
in
the
density
along
Hennepin
Avenue,
we
believe
in
the
fact
that
this
group
is
trying
to
propose
a
design
that
will
better
the
area
as
a
whole
I
in
its
current
design.
It
doesn't
do
that
and
it
really
offends
and
affects
many
families
throughout
this
neighborhood.
So
thank
you
for
hearing
us.
A
W
W
Don't
think
that
any
of
us
could
afford
to
find
a
place
that
that
is
comparable
to
what
we
have
now
in
another
location,
either
in
South,
uptown
or
somewhere
in
Minneapolis
there.
There
really
isn't
anything
comparable
and
I
have
done
an
incredible
amount
of
looking
around
I
and
three
other
of
the
business
owners
in
that
building
sent
a
letter
to
Aaron
Hanauer
and
copied
Lisa
bender.
W
And
it's
a
mix
of
commercial
and
it's
a
nice
quiet
area
of
Uptown
and
to
put
something
like
this
in
the
middle
of
that
area,
as
opposed
to
perhaps
along
the
Hennepin
corridor,
where
it
would
blend
right.
In
with
all
the
other
developments.
It
seems
a
little
jarring,
especially
in
our
current,
in
our
current
day
of
and
I
all
the
issues
that
the
other
people
brought
up
I
can
I
can
confirm.
W
You
know
the
icy
streets,
the
flooding
intersection
down
at
35th
and
Gerrard,
the
the
you
know
how
difficult
and
dangerous
it
is
to
negotiate
in
the
wintertime,
especially
the
impact
to
pedestrians
and
and
bike
traffic.
When
you
are
entering
and
exiting
that
alleyway
is,
it
is
very
dangerous
and
you
have
to
proceed
with
a
great
deal
of
caution
and
and
I
am
I'm
concerned
about
the
increase
of
traffic,
that
that
would
definitely
bring
an
increase
of
accidents
and
I.
W
A
A
E
N
P
The
building
is
staying,
they
are
adding
1,400
square
feet
of
additional
floor
area.
I,
don't
know
the
details
of
what
the
business
owner
and
the
property
owner
have
worked
out
in
terms
of
that
business,
staying
while
construction
or
or
afterwards.
If
the
applicant
representative,
this
Tom
line,
they
might
be
able
to
to
provide
more
details,
but
that
gets
into
a
private
matter
beyond
the
land
use
applications
that
are
being
applied
for
I.
A
J
H
Good
evening,
commissioners,
this
is
23
with
the
lander
group.
Can
you
hear
me?
Yes,
I
think
what
Jane
was
referring
to
is
the
is
the
building
at
35
1315.
The
corner
building
has
currently
three
tenants
in
the
building
and
they
are
to
be
retained.
That
building
is
to
be
retained
and
commercial
tenants
there,
and
so
we
have
the.
H
Beauty
lounge,
we
have
dovetail
renovation
and
then
mosquito
West
Emory
is
our
current
tenants
at
the
3501
and
3503
have
been
building
Ryan
sailor
with
agonist
properties.
Who
is
also
on
the
call?
They
are
the
owners
to
the
interior,
building
that
houses,
the
both
residential
and
commercial
tenants.
H
A
A
E
A
G
A
A
A
E
A
A
Commission's
purview
certainly
heard
about
the
the
distribution
of
the
mass
and
and
understand
that
you
know
I
think
that
one
of
the
things
we
try
to
do
is
be
aware
of
where
that
distribution
of
the
mass
is
and
also
the
situation
on
the
building
relative
to
other
buildings
and
in
looking
at
the
shadow
studies
you
know
it
is
in
general.
Solar
accesses
is
there
on
those
other
buildings,
I
recognize
that
that
buildings
to
the
east
there
will
be
some
shadowing
and
they
are
lower.
You
know
when
I
think
about
this
court
or
any
Penn.
A
Avenue
was
a
major
spine
of
the
city.
There
is
a
bus,
rapid
transit
coming
to
this
corridor
plans
and
coming
to
this
corridor.
It
is
when
we
think
about
complete
neighborhoods
the
ability
to
access,
so
many
things
in
this
area
is
is
extraordinary.
It's
one
of
the
most
walkable
neighborhoods
in
the
city
and
and
so
I
think,
encouraging
and
allowing
for
density
to
access
those
amenities,
the
grocery
stores
and
so
on,
and
the
transit
accesses
is
really
important.
So
this
you
know
is
is
its
kind
of
an
appropriate
reflection.
A
I
think
I've
got
goals
of
2040
plan
and,
of
course,
2040
plan
is
dynamic
and
not
every
project
meets
every
goal.
Our
our
duty
on
the
Commission
is
to
look
in
aggregate
at
how
and
whether
a
given
project
meets
those
goals,
and
so
that
is
kind
of
how
our
process
works.
With
that
see,
no
other
commissioners
wishing
to
speak
clerk,
please
call
them
all.
D
H
D
H
A
C
C
The
applicant
is
proposing
to
demolish
the
existing
duplex
on
the
site
in
order
to
construct
a
new
three-story
residential
building
with
18
dwelling
units.
This
would
require
a
rezoning
from
the
archie
beachy
family
district
to
the
r5
multi-family
districts.
Retaining
the
existing
pedestrian
oriented
overlay
district
on
the
site.
C
The
site
is
located
within
a
half
mile
of
the
lake
in
Hiawatha
LRT,
light
rail
station
and
qualifies
for
the
reduction
in
the
choir
minimum
parking.
The
applicant
is
also
requesting
a
variance
to
the
minimum
interior
side
yard
on
the
north
property
line
from
9
feet
to
7
feet.
We
can
go
to
the
next
slide.
C
This
is
the
survey
showing
that
existing
duplex
on
the
site
located
towards
the
northeast
corner
of
the
property
next
slide
and
a
rendering
of
the
proposed
three-story
apartment,
building,
you'll
notice
from
the
photographs
and
renderings
that
the
area
has
a
mix
of
single-engine
Kinley
homes
as
well
as
smaller
scale,
two
to
two-and-a-half
and
three-story
apartment
buildings.
Next
slide.
C
The
site
does
share
a
residential
ally
with
the
properties
immediately
to
the
rear,
next
slide
and
the
site
plan.
The
applicant
is
not
proposing
to
provide
any
on-site
parking.
They
do
not
have
a
minimum
vehicle
parking
requirement
for
the
site.
They
are
proposing
some
enclosed
bicycle
parking
within
the
structure,
as
well
as
visitor
bicycle
parking
in
the
public
right-of-way
and
along
with
South
property
line,
and
then
there
would
be
two
principal
entrances
to
the
structure
at
the
rear
adjacent
to
the
alley
and
then
along
the
front
property
line.
C
C
C
So
again,
the
applications
before
you
are
the
rezoning
from
our
TV
to
our
five.
The
corridor
for
an
urban
neighborhood
combination
in
terms
of
land
use
staff
is
recommending
approval
to
rezone
the
property
to
our
five.
The
applicant
is
seeking
a
variance
the
north
interior
side
yard
from
nine
feet
to
seven
feet.
Staff
is
recommending
denial
that
application
primarily
due
to
the
fact
that
we
cannot
identify
a
practical
difficulty
for
that
variance.
C
While
we
are
able
to
make
the
findings
for
consistency
with
the
spirit
and
intent
of
a
comprehensive
plan
and
for
reasonableness
and
accommodation
of
future
developments.
But
we
are
recommending
denial
of
the
variance
the
internal
side
yard
on
the
north
property
line
and
then
the
site
plan
review
application,
to
which
we
have
some
minor
and
somewhat
standard
conditions
of
approval,
including
that,
if
the
variance
to
the
interior
or
side
yard
is
ultimately
denied
that
the
applicant
could
then
modify
their
plans
to
meet
that
setback
and
gained
approval
of
the
project.
F
C
F
A
Q
The
primary
objective
of
this
project
is
to
provide
a
quality
solution
to
the
missing
middle
housing,
housing
shortage
by
providing
one
and
two-bedroom
housing
options
close
in
proximity
to
public
transit.
The
long-haul
community
has
expressed
a
desire
for
building
types
with
more
traditional
character
and
diversity
of
apartment
unit
types.
Q
Secondly,
along
these
same
lines,
but
even
a
slight
bit
more
with
the
building
can
accommodate
two
bedroom
units
that
are
much
more
well
suited
for
a
small
family
which
is
currently
an
underserved
20/40
goal.
Oh
I
understand
an
argument
can
be
made
that
the
project
is
proposed
on
a
standard
size
lot,
which
hypothetically
limits
the
necessity
for
variances
the
desired
missing
middle
project
is
not
a
traditional
product
further,
it
is
also
not
a
standard
model
that
is
very
readily
available
within
our
community.
Q
I
would
contend
that
it
is
better
both
the
2040
plan
and
the
residents
of
the
Longfellow
neighborhood
have
expressed
a
shortage
of
this
machine
but
I'll
Jose
product.
My
goal
is
to
provide
this
unique
housing
product
to
the
Longfellow
neighborhood,
which
is
cold
in
proximity
to
public
transit,
to
fulfill
this
challenging
objective
of
the
2040
plan,
sir
various
iterations
I've
worked
hard
to
develop
the
solution
in
a
way
that
follows
the
guidance
of
the
2040
plan.
Q
While
meeting
as
many
of
the
existing
zoning
requirements
as
possible,
in
our
opinion,
the
requested
2
foot
setback
variances
the
minimum
variance
required
to
make
this
unit
mix
viable
in
a
narrow
building
with
room
enough
for
small
families,
it's
not
easy
to
achieve,
as
evidenced
by
the
overall
lack
of
this
product
within
the
community.
In
fact,
even
the
existing
properties
to
the
north
and
south
encroach
by
approximately
1
foot.
The
existing
structure
on
this
parcel
currently
encroaches
by
approximately
4
feet
into
the
two-story
setback
guidance.
Q
If
the
project
were
a
standard,
150
unit
facility
2
feet
may
not
make
a
very
big
difference
in
the
end
product
provided
to
tenants,
but
on
a
small
18
unit
project
striving
to
fulfilled
and
thus
a
middle
objective.
This
2
feet
means
the
difference
between
meeting
the
target
and
not
I
asked
the
Planning
Commission.
Q
Please
understand
this
hardship
and
my
efforts
to
overcome
it
by
helping
me
make
this
product
type
achievable
on
this
slide
near
public
transit
by
granting
the
requested
2
foot
setback,
variance,
please
consider
what
the
city
wants
long
term,
maintaining
the
status
quo
on
standard
Lots
or
achieving
the
2040
vision
for
the
betterment
of
unit
mix
on
standard
size
Lots.
Thank
you
again
for
your
time
and
consideration
I
appreciate
all
you
do
to
make
our
city
better.
A
A
X
X
X
Otherwise,
when
you
look
at
the
plans
and
the
exterior
renderings,
you
can
see
that
we're
able
to
sort
of
add
a
richness
of
texture
with
a
variety
of
materials
and
have
the
building
facade
itself
and
Julie
in
and
out
as
it
goes
along
the
north-south
direction.
I'm.
Sorry,
the
north-south
facade-
and
we
feel
like
that.
That
adds
a
contextual
element
to
the
building
that,
if
we,
if
we
reduce
that
to
feet,
then
we'll
probably
you
know,
lose
some
of
that
ability
to
create
that
interest
on
the
facades
of
the
building.
X
We
did
go
back
and
look
at
some
some
ideas
and
we
basically
found
that
the
reduction.
Sorry,
some
ideas
relating
to
no
variance
I
mean
we
started.
We
started
there
and
evolved
the
project
as
we
went
through
the
design
process,
of
course,
but
what
we
found
is
that
the
reduced
overall
width
of
the
building
really
squeezes
these
interior
bedroom
units
so
that
the
best
model
then
becomes
more
of
like
higher
end
studios
or
you
know,
really
sort
of
tighter
one-bedroom
and
it
makes
it
almost.
X
It
makes
extremely
challenging
to
create
these
at
least
a
few
two-bedroom
units.
In
this
version
of
the
of
the
design
we
did
meet
with
the
neighborhood
council
for
Longfellow
and
took
their
input
very
seriously
in
regards
to
the
materials
and
sort
of
you
know.
We
want,
with
a
little
bit
more
of
traditional,
look
to
the
facade
so
that
we
would
make
sure
it
would
blend
in
with
the
context
and
the
appropriate,
and
then
additionally,
we
listen
to
them
regarding
landscaping
and
having
the
building
shifted
to
the
north.
X
Those
are
the
main
items
I'd
like
to
address.
I
think
that
if
anyone
has
any
questions,
I'm
also
available
to
answer
them,
but
yeah
I
think
that
this
this
two-foot
variance
really
does
help
us
create
a
better
building
for
this
context
and
help
us
achieve
the
goals
of
the
2040
plan,
which
you
know
in
this
specific
location.
It's
certainly
the
density
is,
is
kind
of
appropriate
and
the
corridor
I
think
can
support
this.
So
that's
thank
you
for
allowing
me
to
speak
and
thank
you
for
letting
us
present
our
project.
A
A
A
K
C
Sure
so
if
they
were
to
modify
the
design
of
the
structure
to
meet
that
setback
and
that
change
didn't
trigger
other
land
use,
applications
or
thresholds,
that
would
require
a
public
hearing.
In
terms
of
you
know
what
they're
proposing
to
change,
then
that
could
be
approved
administrative
Lea
without
returning
to
the
Planning
Commission,
so
it
would
require
really
maintaining
the
building
in
its
current.
Q
F
C
If
the
unit
count
was
changed
dramatically
in
either
direction
in
terms
of
number
of
units
that
would
potentially
trigger
return
to
Commission,
but
I
think
the
intention
would
be-
and
the
applicants
can
maybe
speak
to
this
too,
but
would
be
to
try
to
move
the
project
forward
without
those
without
that
necessity.
Thank.
D
D
A
A
K
Thank
You
mr.
chair
I
would
move
that
we
were.
We
approved
the
the
petition
to
rezone
the
property
from
our
to
be
multifamily
to
district
to
the
five
excuse
me
to
the
r5
multi-family
district,
but
also
move
that
we
deny
the
variance
to
reduce
the
minimum
interior
side
yard
setback
along
the
north
interior
side
yard
from
nine
feet
to
seven
feet
and
I
would
also
move
that
we
approve
the
site
plan
review
for
a
three-story,
essential
building
with
18
units,
subject
to
the
conditions.
Listen
to
in
the
item.
G
E
A
I
Just
a
brief
update
on
some
appeals
that
are
scheduled
to
go
to
the
biz
committee
of
the
City
Council
tomorrow,
you
may
recall
it
would
have
been
back
in
May.
The
Planning
Commission
heard
two
projects
right
across
from
each
other
510
Westlake,
Street
and
514
to
520,
Westlake,
Street
and
associated
addresses.
Each
of
those
projects
was
approved
with
a
condition
of
approval
that
the
amount
of
ground-floor
retail
be
increased
for
ground-floor
commercial
space
be
increased
to
50%.
I
To
achieve
the
FA
our
bonus
in
that
category,
the
applicant
is
appealing
the
condition
of
approval
for
each
one
of
those
projects.
We
also
received
an
appeal
from
a
neighboring
property
owner,
appealing
the
approval
of
the
projects,
including
all
associated
applications.
So
in
total
we
have
four
appeals
for
those
two
projects
at
tomorrow's.
This
committee
meeting
and
that's.