►
From YouTube: July 21, 2020 Business, Inspections & Zoning Committee
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
Good
afternoon
and
welcome
to
the
regular
meeting
the
business
inspections
and
zoning
committee
for
July,
21st,
I'm,
Lisa,
Goodman
and
I
am
chairing
the
committee
today
as
we
as
we
begin
I'll
note
for
the
record.
This
meeting
has
remote
participation
from
members
of
the
City
Council
and
city
staff
is
authorized
by
Minnesota
State
statute,
13
D
point
0
to
1
due
to
the
declared
public
health
local
emergency.
At
this
time,
I'll
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
roll,
so
we
can
verify
a
quorum
for
this
meeting.
House.
D
C
C
E
C
B
The
record
reflect
that
we
have
a
quorum.
The
agenda
for
today's
meeting
is
in
front
of
us,
will
first
take
up
the
consent
agenda,
which
is
items
3
through
13
item.
3
is
setting
a
public
hearing
for
the
next
meeting
on
August
4th
to
consider
a
business
subsidy
agreement
with
Northgate
development
item.
4
is
a
local
district
designation
for
the
Lyndhurst
residential
historic
district
items.
B
Five
through
nine
are
all
rezoning
applications
submitted
for
properties
located
at
29:11,
Grand
Street,
northeast
26:41,
Fremont,
Avenue,
South,
11:27,
fourth
Street
southeast
for
1112
Avenue,
South,
East,
1820,
Girard,
Avenue,
South
and
31:36
Minnehaha
Avenue,
as
listed
on
the
agenda
item.
10
is
an
alley
vacation
submitted
for
461
Girard,
Terrace
and
items
11
through
13
are
referrals
to
staff
for
ordinances
related
to
the
regulation
of
off
street
parking
and
travel
demand
management
and
the
regulation
of
rooming
houses
and
congregate
living
facilities.
F
C
H
B
Are
these
are
approved,
we'll
move
on
to
our
quasi
judicial
public
hearings?
Starting
with
item
number?
One
item
number
one
is
an
appeal
submitted
by
Michael
rattle
and
Robert
Van
Alstyne
regarding
the
decision
of
the
Heritage
Preservation
Commission
to
approve
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
for
this
and
historic
variance
for
Joyce
Memorial
Methodist
Church,
a
historic
landmark
located
at
12:19
West
31st,
a
recognized
robbed
from
our
community
planning
and
economic
development
department
to
give
that
presentation.
I
Thank
You
councilmember
good
afternoon
councilmembers.
My
name
is
Rob
sketchy,
I'm,
a
city
planner
in
the
historic
preservation
section
of
c-pod
today,
I'm
presenting
an
appeal
application
submitted
by
Michael
Riedel
and
robert
van
nelson
of
the
June
23rd
2020
Heritage
Preservation
Commission's,
approval
of
a
certificate
of
appropriateness,
application
for
rehabilitation
and
historic
variance
to
allow
for
a
34
unit.
Multiple
family
dwelling
on
an
art
to
be
parcel
located
at
the
Joyce
Memorial
Methodist
Church
12:19
West
31st
Street
in
the
South
Uptown
neighborhood
next
slide.
Please.
I
The
Joyce
Memorial
Methodist
Church
was
designated
as
a
city
of
Minneapolis
landmark
in
May
2020.
The
property
is
significant
for
architecture
as
the
best
example
of
a
California
Mission
Revival
style
Church
in
the
city
and
the
work
of
master
architects,
downs
and
EADS.
The
property
was
constructed
in
1907
and
retains
good
integrity,
the
building
features,
clay,
hip,
roof
segments,
mission-style,
parapets,
stair
and
bell
towers,
deep
arch,
entryways
and
window
openings
and
quatrefoil
windows.
All
of
these
are
characteristic
character,
defining
elements
of
the
California
Mission
Revival
style.
Next
slide.
Please.
I
The
applicant
has
proposed
to
rehabilitate
the
church
and
reuse
the
building
as
a
34
unit
apartment,
the
applicant
submitted
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
and
historic
variance
application
to
allow
the
rehabilitation
of
the
building,
including
the
restoration
of
characteristic
historic
features,
including,
but
not
limited
to
the
clay,
tile
roof
and
all
existing
historic
windows.
Also,
the
property's
stained
glass
windows,
the
applicant
proposed
minimal
alterations
to
the
primary
north
and
west
street,
facing
elevations
and
proposed
the
majority
of
new
window
openings
to
accommodate
the
dwelling
units
on
the
south
and
east
non
primary
elevations.
I
The
HPCC
expressed
support
of
the
project's
variance
expressing
that
historic
church
buildings
are
generally
difficult
to
reuse.
The
Commission
voted
that
the
variance
is
appropriate
on
the
exterior
alterations
made
to
accommodate
the
proposed
reuse
are
appropriate
next
slide.
Please,
staff
has
also
included
in
the
application
floor
plans.
I
Excuse
me,
the
staff
has
included
from
the
application
floor
plans
in
this
presentation
to
referenced
for
the
proposed
34
unit
layout.
If
you
would
go
to
the
next
slide,
please
on
June
23rd
2020,
the
minneapolis
hpc
heard
at
the
certificate
of
appropriateness
and
historic
variance,
applications
for
the
rehabilitation
and
reuse
of
the
subject
property
in
concurrence
with
staff
recommendations.
I
The
commission
voted
to
approve
the
certificate
of
appropriateness
application
to
allow
for
the
exterior
rehabilitation
of
joists
Memorial
Methodist
Church,
subject
to
design
considerations
related
to
new
window
openings,
as
well
as
the
interpretation
of
historic
openings
and
the
HPC
approved
the
historic
variance
to
allow
for
a
34
unit.
Multiple
family
dwelling
apartment
on
an
are
to
be
zoned
parcel
I'm
available
for
any
questions.
If
you
have
any
of
the
the
remaining
floor,
plans
are
included
in
this
presentation
for
reference.
Thank
you.
Thank.
B
B
Anyone,
okay
seeing
none,
we
will
go
ahead
and
proceed
to
the
opening
the
public
hearing.
With
this
type
of
hearing,
we
give
the
applicant
an
opportunity
to
make
appellant
to
make
it
their
case.
First
is
Michael
or
Donnell,
or
robert
van
nelson,
on
the
line
ice
here
from
staff.
They
are
on
the
line,
and
so
I
will
afford
you
each
the
opportunity
to
address
the
committee
in
whatever
order
you
like.
J
Yes,
so
I
am
Robert
Ben
Nelson
I
am
at
12:15
West
31st
Street,
the
property
directly
to
the
east
of
the
Joyce
Church
and
I'll,
be
speaking
on
behalf
of
in
terms
of
just
simplicity
and
maybe
efficiency
of
time
to
the
main
concerns
and
Michael
Gradle
and
I
have
in
regards
to
the
variance
it
was
granted.
I
had
shared
with
committee.
J
So
so,
in
anticipation
that
I'd
just
like
to
set
a
little
bit
of
context,
I've
been
living
at
this
residence
for
over
20
years,
I'm
advocate
and
proponent
for
urban
development
and
the
goals
of
the
2040
plan
at
the
background
in
in
architecture
and
have
worked
in
community
development,
both
in
the
city
of
Minneapolis,
st.
Paul
and
privilege,
RA,
so
I
can
say
in
general,
I
appreciate
the
the
developers
intent
and
the
committee's
intents
to
look
for
creative
solutions
to
reuse,
both
interesting
buildings
in
the
neighborhood
and
work
on
creating
a
vibrant
neighborhood.
J
But
that
said,
there
are
some
specific
concerns
that
that
we
saw
specifically
in
relation
to
policy
37
in
terms
of
how
we
think
about
making
these
data-driven
decisions
as
a
community
and
as
a
city
I
have
a
number
of
slides
and
information
to
be
incorporated.
But
in
the
interest
of
time
I'd
like
to
just
focus
on
and
what
our
objective
is
is
to
really
find
a
better
way
of
utilizing
this
project
based
on
some
concerns.
If
you
can
advance
to
slide
six,
please
then
just
jump
ahead.
J
So
if
you
convince
to
the
slide
7,
please,
the
only
data
that
was
provided
was
a
reference
to
an
article
2
references
to
a
single
article
in
the
Atlantic
that
identified
6,000
to
10,000
churches
dying
each
year
in
America
I'm,
not
certainly
dramatic,
and
would
be
concerning.
It
would
support
the
difficulties
of
renovating
that
property.
J
The
article
had
a
note
at
the
bottom
saying
that
a
previous
version
had
erroneously
stated
that
substantial
number
and
in
fact
there
were
only
3700
churches
that
were
closed.
So
again
that
sounds
concerning,
but
when
looking
further
through
that
particular
reference
or
citation,
if
you
could
go
to
slide
10
please,
but
that
article
then
is
explicitly
talking
about
the
organization
of
ministry
in
churches
and
in
fact
presents
a
counterfactual
argument
and
that
over
4000
new
church
organizations
were
created
in
the
year
that
they
cited
the
3700
being
closed.
J
So
if,
if
staff
could
advance
this
slide,
11
the
the
objective
isn't
really
to
kind
of
drill
into
and
try
to
play
a
gotcha
element
around
this.
This
analysis.
But
it's
it's
really
I'm
trying
to
look
at
how
how
we're
making
a
case
or
what?
What
is
the
result
of
saying
that
we
need
to
develop
a
34
unit
on
that
property.
J
There
also
hasn't
been
any
consideration
or
explanation
as
to
what
the
target
market
and
we're
really
looking
for
some
type
of
transparency
as
to
what
is
the
affordability
of
the
unit?
Is
it
targeted?
Are
the
rents
comparable
to
other
available
options
in
the
neighborhood
and
then
other
other
specific
items
from
these
choices?
If
we
accept
it
needs
to
be
34
units,
it
puts
the
garbage
bins.
First,
30
full
of
housing
units
within
17
feet
or
less
than
15
feet
to
the
front
sidewalk,
which
is
a
main
pedestrian
lay
in
the
Uptown
area.
J
It
will
be
visually
obstructed
to
a
degree
based
on
the
plans,
but
but
I
don't
think
it's
reasonable
to
expect
that
the
cells
can
be
contained
by
the
structure
in
additionally.
Any
type
of
structure
that
obscures
it
sufficiently
enough
will
create
the
safety
element
as
it's
a
dark
space
already,
and
it
would
be
an
opaque
object,
often
all
alleyway,
that
is
already
fairly
frequented
by
restroom
users
after
part,
on
the
other.
J
Concerns
of
those
choices
then
sacrifice
a
lot
of
amenities
or
public
space
that
would
be
offered
and
are
offered
by
other
developments
in
the
area
that
had
the
same
micro
unit
concept.
So
this
isn't
a
summary
of
everything
that
every
building
has,
but
several
of
them
have,
or
most
of
them
have
at
least
half
of
them
things
like
common
spaces,
common
living
rooms,
kitchens
that
can
be
rented
all
of
these
things
that
make
the
trade-off
of
a
micro
unit
attractive
to
to
the
segment's
that
look
they're.
J
You
just
wanted
to
talk
about,
then.
Its
congruence
with
this
malaria
plan
for
Tom
density
has
proposed
would
put
it
at
over
120
units
per
acre,
which
is
higher
than
the
highest
density,
targeted
area
in
area
plan,
and
that
area
has
been
kind
of
clearly
defined
as
a
particular
stretch
of
housing
closer
to
Lake,
Street,
Lagoon,
Street
corridor.
J
You
know,
I
understand
that
lines
has
to
be
drawn
somewhere
and
there's
there's
some
practicality
I'm,
looking
at
it
as
unique
structure.
So
maybe
it's
not
necessarily
a
you
know,
a
single-family
house
or
the
the
current
rating.
That
makes
a
ton
of
sense
it.
It
should
be
higher
density
in
some
regard,
but
we
should
think
about
that
density
and
the
choices
that
are
required
to
support
that.
J
Additionally,
at
the
the
sort
Preservation
Committee,
there
was
a
significant
opposition
to
the
development
as
drawn.
You
could
advance
the
slide
15
over
75
percent
of
the
households,
as
identified,
had
expressed
concern
about
the
project
and
had
signed
on
to
the
initial
middle.
At
the
hpc,
I
can't
say:
qualitative.
There
is
a
lot
of
support
from
the
neighbors
for
development
and,
if
anything,
there's
more
interested
in
getting
more
information
as
to
is
it
targeting
affordability.
J
Will
it
help
address
the
diversity
of
the
housing
stock
in
the
city
and
what
are
those
trade-offs,
so
I
think
there's
receptivity
and
support
from
the
neighborhood
for
something
I
was
a
norm,
but
the
question
is
really:
what
are
the
trade-offs
that
are
being
made
currently
and
if
there's
an
opportunity
for
the
city
councilor
the
zoning
committee,
to
improve
it?
If
you
could
give
them
the
slide
16,
you
know
that
that's
really.
J
B
You
mr.
Van
Dusen,
thank
you
for
your
presentation
and
the
and
the
interest
of
disclosure
we
pretty
much
didn't
see
it.
So
we've
been
flapping
around
from
slide
to
slide,
with
no
connection
to
your
comments
at
all,
so
I'm,
a
little
bit
confused
I
want
to
see
if
you're,
the
only
person
who's.
Speaking
with
regard
to
the
appeal
and
then
I'll
ask
my
questions
or
just
offer
anyone
else
who
is
speaking
on
behalf
of
the
appeal.
If
they'd
like
to
speak
first.
J
B
B
I
B
I
K
Goodman,
this
is
interior
to
in
Minneapolis
2040.
That's
the
reason
they've
chosen
to
go
the
route
of
the
historic
fences,
because
staff
would
not
be
able
to
support
a
rezoning
to
allow
this
density
as
of
right.
The
historic
variance
allows
for
adaptive,
reuse
of
existing
structures
by
retaining
the
historic
integrity
of
those
structures
and
as
a
different
set
of
findings,
and
we
would
use
for
a
land
use
application
under
the
zoning
code.
So
a
historic
variance
allows
for
more
flexibility
in
the
spirit
of
adaptive,
reuse
of
historic
structures.
B
B
K
What
was
proposed
by
the
applicant,
so
yes,
there's,
certainly
other
configure
I'm,
not
an
architect.
Who's
looked
at
the
floor
plans
of
the
existing
structure
but
I'm
sure
there
are
other
potential
ways
to
layout
units
in
the
building
that
would
result
in
a
different
unit
count.
The
applicant
could
maybe
speak
to
that.
B
K
Yeah,
so
we're
looking
under
the
preservation
ordinance
with
these
applications.
So
I
just
you
know
at
a
certain
point.
We
do
have
to
start
thinking
about
what
potential
off-site
impacts
would
be
when
you're
evaluating
the
number
of
dwelling
units
in
the
structure.
In
the
case
we're
dwelling
units
are
being
established
within
an
existing
building,
though
we're
not
evaluating
things
like
bulk
and
Heights
and
setbacks,
because
the
structure
is
existing.
B
Okay,
well,
it
seems
like
a
giant
density
loophole
and
I
really
would
love
to
preserve
any
historic
building
we
could,
but
there
has
to
be
a
number
between
two
and
thirty
four
that
could
be
better
supported
in
this
location.
It
sounds
like
staff
really
did
not
analyze
the
density.
It
was
just
purely
people
on
the
Heritage
Preservation
Commission
saying,
but
they
need
30
something.
Okay,
there
something's
good
with
us,
is.
K
That
correct
yeah,
the
preservation
ordinance,
is
unique
in
that
financial
considerations
can
be
taken
into
account
with
adaptive,
reuse
of
structures,
as
well
as
evaluating
financial
considerations
for
whether
or
not
a
building
is
beyond
the
point
of
repair
for
a
designation,
so
it
it
is
more
unique
that
way
than
the
zoning
code
is.
Okay.
B
I
just
want
to
see
if
there's
any
other
questions
for
the
appellant,
if
not
I
see
Megan
Elliott
is
on
line
and
I.
Don't
really
think
any
of
the
questions
have
to
do
with
whether
or
not
this
is
a
historic
structure,
but
I
certainly
would
invite
her
to
speak.
If
there
are
no
other
questions,
we
can
feel
free
to
go
ahead
and
you
can
be
followed
by
mr.
B
L
B
L
Absolutely
could
I
have
just
one
minute:
I
just
have
a
couple
of
things
I'd
like
to
mention,
so
this
is
Mike.
Rizzo
I
met
3109,
Fremont
I'm,
the
property
to
the
cell
of
the
proposed
rehabilitation
of
the
church.
One
of
the
things
I'm,
not
sure
that
that
has
been
mentioned
or
that
become
aware
of
there
were
long
discussions
going
back
to
2018
and
2019
with
Ryan,
regarding
what
his
proposed
original
project
would
be,
which
would
have
been
10
to
15
units
and
he
had
support
from
the
neighbors
under
that
plan.
L
L
M
Good
afternoon
council
members
in
chair
goodman,
this
is
meek
and
Elliott.
Are
you
able
to
hear
me?
We
are.
Thank
you,
okay.
So
thank
you
very
much
for
hearing
this
item
today.
I'm
going
to
give
a
very
brief
introduction
to
myself
and
I
will
be
representing
the
team
today,
the
development
team.
Again
this
is
me
and
Elliott
I'm
with
new
history,
we're
a
Minneapolis
based
consulting
team.
M
We
are
exclusively
and
solely
dedicated
to
increasing
the
use
and
reuse
of
our
existing
and
historic
sites
and
structures,
and
certainly
this
Joyce
Memorial
Church
is
exactly
the
type
of
building
we
try
to
find
creative
solutions
for
reuse.
Likewise,
we
work
with
places
and
spaces
like
PD
Plaza.
Today's
department
store
the
Hollywood
Theater
among
others
here
in
Minneapolis,
so
just
a
really
brief,
1
minute
overview
of
how
we
got
to
where
we
are
today
and
hopefully
to
answer
some
of
the
questions
chair
goodman
that
you
were
bringing
up
earlier.
M
To
be
frank,
when
we
started
this
project,
Brian
Scholl
and
his
initial
plan
was
to
demolish
the
building.
It
wasn't,
it
wasn't
an
easy
project
to
make
it
work
and
we've
been
working
with
Brian
for
the
last
couple
of
years.
We
did
work
with
city
staff
to
I
think
the
word
workaround
was
used,
but
that's
exactly.
What
we
tried
to
do
was
a
find,
a
way
that
we
could
reuse
this
building,
keep
it
in
place
of
the
community
resource,
knowing
that
BarNone
community.
M
M
The
building
on
behalf
of
the
Methodist
Church
walked,
through
with
a
couple
of
groups,
tried
to
find
a
different
solution
for
the
project,
and
this
is
probably
dating
back
to
2015
and
then
until
I,
connected
with
Brian
in
2018
that
we
started
looking
at
a
housing
option
for
a
way
of
reusing
the
building.
Like
I
said,
the
initial
plan
was
demo.
We
did
work
with
staff,
we
did
come
up
with.
M
We
looked
at
a
lot
of
different
options,
including
rezoning
and
decided
that
the
only
chance
we
had
at
making
this
work
was
to
go
down
the
path
of
local,
historic,
designation
and
then
using
a
historic
variance
to
again
find
a
creative
way
of
keeping
this
building.
I'll
use
the
word
alive
we
did.
This
is
the
only
time
in
my
in
my
consulting
career
that
I've
had
a
developer,
willingly
nominate
a
building
for
local
designation
I.
Think
most
people
run
from
that
assessment.
M
They
can,
but
again,
this
was
the
way
the
way
we
could
get
this
fine
to
use
for
the
building.
So
we
did
Brian
nominate
the
building.
We
had
support
from
city
staff.
We
had
support
from
the
HPC.
We
have
support
from
status
or
preservation
office
and,
of
course,
City
Council.
My
office
authored
the
nomination
and,
as
Rob
said,
for
its
architecture,
specifically
the
exterior
architecture.
M
With
the
nomination,
we
were
able
to
apply
for
the
certificate
of
appropriateness
where
they
were
youth,
as
well
as
for
the
historic
variance
we
develop
the
design
in
consultation
with
city
staff,
as
well
as
with
the
architects,
pjr
Brian.
Of
course,
my
office
I
think
there
was
a
question
earlier
about
the
number
of
units.
M
The
number
of
units
was
related
to
how
we
could
offset
the
cost
of
reuse,
which
came
from
maximizing
the
number
of
units
that
we
could
fit
within
the
existing
envelope
of
the
building
with,
while
making
minimum
changes
to
the
exterior
of
the
building.
Keeping
in
mind
that
the
Heritage
Preservation
Commission,
as
well
as
the
local
designation,
is
for
the
exterior
only
not
for
the
interior
nots.
Potentially,
the
appellant
did
mention
that
Brian
had
initially
planned
on
10
to
15
units.
That
is
true.
M
We
spent
a
lot
of
time
trying
to
find
a
reuse
for
the
sanctuary
that
would
keep
it
open.
I
I
can't
speak
to
all
the
efforts
that
Brian
went
through,
but
I
do
know
that
there
was
a
period
of
time
where
we
were
trying
to
work
with
a
performing
arts
group.
Several
nonprofit
organizations
even
would
all
call
some.
M
You
know
shared
co-working
space
type
options,
none
of
which
we
could
get
to
the
table
in
time
to
keep
this
building,
and
so
we
move
forward
with
housing,
reuse
and
then
it
was
working
with
djr
the
architect
to
fit
the
unison
in
a
way
that
we
could
retain
as
much
of
the
historic
material
at
the
interior
as
possible.
But
again,
noting
that
it's
the
exterior,
that's
that's
particularly
notable
for
more
preservation
perspective.
M
We
did
recently,
as
as
Rob
noted,
go
to
the
HPC.
The
HPC
did
unanimously
agree
or
approve
of
both
the
historic
variants
and
the
certificate
of
appropriateness.
I
would
say
from
my
perspective
as
a
consultants
working
with
these
buildings.
These
are
extremely
difficult
building
types
to
reuse,
ie,
a
church.
This
is
one
of
the
few
successful
uses
I've
seen
of
a
church.
M
Think
without
it,
and
without
this
variance
I,
don't
think
that
this
building
will
be
reused
and
I
think
there's
still
a
high
likelihood
of
demolition
without
the
support
of
the
variants
and
his
or
certificate
of
appropriateness
is
currently
designed.
I
am
available
to
answer
questions.
I
will
be
and
I'll
be
honest.
That
I
can
speak
more
to
the
preservation
aspect
of
this
and
to
the
density
aspects.
M
B
B
M
So
I
think
and
I
would
actually
maybe
go
back
to
staff
in
terms
of
I'll.
Do
my
best
to
answer
the
question,
which
is
we
look
at
the
historic
variance
as
a
single
tool
to
keep
the
building
in
use
and
the
findings
required
is
or
variants
are
such
that
the
building
is
or
the
changes
are
compatible
with
the
preservation
requirements,
which
I
believe
it
is
and
that
they
are
required
to
offset
unique
circumstances.
G
N
N
N
J
N
Think
Megan
did
a
good
job,
explaining
the
dilemma
that
we
faced
and
as
Miss
Harland
suggested.
You
know
we
were.
We
followed
the
rules
that
the
the
city
has
imposed
to
try
and
sustain
this
building
in
terms
of
the
number
of
units
we
have
to
make
it
work
so
that
the
development
cost
is
somewhat
matched
by
whatever
revenue
we
could
produce.
The
development
costs
for
a
reuse
of
a
building
of
this
type
are
pretty
significant,
and
the
number
of
units
reflects
both.
N
What
we
think
is
an
appropriate
use
of
the
building,
but
also
in
terms
of
the
of
the
financial
balance
in
order
to
will
provide
enough
units
for
megathron
an
economically
feasible
and
keep
them
rents
at
an
approachable,
entry-level
price.
These
are
not
going
to
be
expensive.
You
know,
Savannah's
serve
a
neighborhood
need,
so
it's
it's
a
tough
balancing
act
and
it
was
presented
earlier.
The
financial
aspects
are
allowed
to
be
considered
just
as
part
of
the
part
of
the
rules
that
were
imposed
upon
us.
B
Thank
you.
Then,
sir.
There
are
no
questions.
I'll
see
if
there's
anyone
else
signed
up
on
the
line
to
testify
on
either
one
of
these
issues
or
if
there
are,
and
let's
see,
if
that's
happening
first
and
then
we'll
go
ahead
and
close
the
public
hearing,
seeing
that
there's
no
additional
people
signed
up
to
testify
and
ask
if
there's
any
questions
for
staff,
councilmember,
Schrader.
G
Thank
You
committee
members-
this
is
Joel
fusty
with
the
City
Attorney's
Office
and
I
also
will
defer
to
staff
a
bit
on
this.
But
there
are
two
matters
before
you.
Obviously,
the
first
is
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
and
the
second
is
the
rezoning
on
the
first,
the
certificate
of
appropriateness.
The
elements
are
laid
out,
although
I
do
believe.
The
fifth
element
does
include
within
it
at
least
reference
to
the
comp
plan,
and
so
I
would
defer
to
mr.
lien,
but
I.
G
H
G
Madam
chair
committee,
members,
mister
fussy
speaking
here
again
I
the
staff
report
talks
about
the
two
elements
that
need
to
be
examined
for
the
historic
variance
and
and
those
reference
to
the
compatibility
with
with
the
preservation
in
the
property
and
with
other
properties
in
the
area
and
necessary
to
alleviate
practical
difficulties
due
to
special
conditions
or
circumstances.
I'm,
not
uniquely
familiar
with
this
property
but
I'm
sure
staff
can,
you
know
further,
explain
their
their
reasoning
in
that
matter.
H
Okay,
thank
you.
I,
don't
know
that
I
have
a
follow
up
question
on
that,
but
I
do
have
a
question
for
miss
Elaine
or
other
staff
I'm,
just
back
to
kind
of
your
questions,
madam
chair
about
the
number
of
units.
If
we
get
a
little
kind
of
clarity,
I
mean
it
seems
that
the
issue
was
the
developer,
cannot
do
the
preservation
without
having
this
number
of
units
and
just
wanted
to
have
a
little
bit
better.
Understanding
of
how
that
analysis
was
done
was
done
by
staff.
H
K
I
was
waiting
to
see
if
we're
up
on
him
to
take
that
one.
So
in
situations
like
this
and
like
I,
said
with
the
preservation
application,
we
have
two
applications
before
you,
so
the
certificate
of
appropriateness
is
really
more
about
the
physical
changes
to
the
structure.
If
this
were
all
interior,
we
wouldn't
be
looking
at
a
certificate
of
appropriateness,
but
there
are
some
exterior
modifications
to
make
the
building
accessible
to
bring
it
up
to
code
for
residential
uses.
K
So
that's
why
you're,
seeing
that,
along
with
the
certificate
of
appropriateness,
that
type
of
investment
into
the
building
in
order
to
convert
it
to
residential,
of
course,
does
come
with
an
expense
on
the
part
of
the
developer.
You
know,
I,
don't
know
that
we
looked
at
it
at
a
staff
level
and
said
well
we're
financial
experts
here.
So
we
think
that
you
could
do
15
units
and
get
by
or
20
I
do
know.
K
The
project
did
evolve
over
time
from
when
the
applicant
first
brought
it
to
staff,
just
with
general
zoning
questions
about
whether
or
not
a
number
of
units
beyond
2
or
3
would
be
permitted
in
the
church
and
with
the
interior
2
designation
in
2040,
we
weren't
able
to
get
to
a
rezoning
that
would
allow
for
more
than
three
units
here,
of
course,
that
interior
2
is
in
the
built
form.
Where
we're
looking
at
things
like
bulk
Heights,
you
know
the
built
form
of
the
building
which
is
already
set
in
this
instance.
K
So
the
built
form
here
with
the
preservation
of
the
building
is
what
it
is.
So
the
number
of
units
is
really
than
an
interior
calculation
about
what
can
be
accommodated
within
the
building,
and
you
know,
I,
don't
think
that
we
necessarily
gave
feedback
on.
We
think
this
one
certain
number
of
units
would
be
better
than
another.
We
just
responded
to
the
application
that
was
presented
to
us.
H
H
Did
and
I'll
just
make
a
comment
and
just
kind
of
finish
off.
I
really
appreciate
staffs
I'm
kind
of
input
into
this
is
a
harder
question,
because
you
know
we
really
try
to
make
2040
be
the
guiding
vision
for
me,
what
I
really
think
is
important
is
preserving
this
historic
building
and,
being
that
it's
an
existing
building,
I
I,
think
I
will
do.
I
will
not
be
supporting
the
appeal.
I.
B
B
That
is
a
historic
home
on
the
MCTC
campus
and
in
order
to
save
it,
there
were
a
lot
of
trade-offs
and
the
building
is
not
that
big,
it's
probably
about
the
size
of
this
church
and
they
had
to
put
20
plus
units
in
it
in
order
to
make
it
work
as
well
and
I
think
we
felt
overall
that
it
made
sense
to
save
this
beautiful
historic
building,
which
Meighan
Elliot
helped
us
on.
Actually
I
think
that
it
it
was
a
good
trade-off.
Of
course
it
was
the
neighborhood
that
had
a
lot
of
density.
B
This
is
also
a
neighborhood
that
has
a
lot
of
density,
and
it
seems
to
me
as
though
the
historic
variance
does
not
really
look
at
or
analyze
the
overall
costs.
We
have
to
in
a
way
believe
the
people
who
are
doing
the
work.
For
me,
saving
the
historic
building
would
be
the
top
number
one
thing
and,
quite
frankly,
the
developer
could
have
put
in
fifteen
four
bedroom
units.
B
B
Although
the
applicants
might
prefer
to
see
a
demolition
and
a
new
bill
that
could
include
garbage
and
could
include
some
of
the
amenities
that
would
be
common
in
the
area,
I
think
overall,
the
preservation
of
the
building
is
the
most
important
thing,
and
sometimes
we
have
to
make
compromises
in
order
to
make
that
happen.
So
I
will
be
supporting
councilmember
Schrader's,
a
motion
with
reservations
and
an
understanding
that
preservation
is
the
guiding
principle
here.
Any
further
comments
or
questions.
Seeing
none
I'd
ask
the
clerk
to
call
that.
C
L
C
C
H
B
F
And
I
can
I
can
also
get
going
here,
so
June
15,
the
City
Planning
Commission,
approved
all
the
applications
that
they
have
review
over
and
recommended
to
the
City
Council,
the
approving
of
the
rezoning
applications.
That's
that's
further
down
on
today's
agenda.
Max
Ellis,
as
you
noted,
councilmember
Goodman,
on
behalf
of
the
South
uptown
native
Association,
appealed
the
following
Planning
Commission
decisions
that
condition
his
permit
for
height
variance
is
to
reduce
yard
requirements,
variance
to
increase
building
law
coverage
and
impervious
surface,
as
well
as
site
plan
review.
F
Reason
for
the
appeal.
In
the
first
paragraph,
the
project
is
out
of
character
with
the
guidance
described
in
Minneapolis
2040,
and
then
they
go
on
for
more
detail
in
the
air
in
their
appeal.
So
just
brief
background
six
parcels.
As
you
noted
chair
Goodman
at
the
southeast
corner
of
35th
and
Hennepin,
it
is
a
unique
property
with
the
containing
that
charming
building
and
is
considered
a
historic
resource.
They.
O
F
F
So
as
as
do
you
highlight
it
in
the
beginning,
councilmember
Goodman
that
mixed-use
development
I'll
go
to
the
next.
If
you
could
go
to
the
next
slide,
please
retaining
that
that
start
building
or
that
potential
historic
resource
at
the
corner,
adding
a
little
commercial
space
1400
feet
and
then
adding
74
residence
units
next
slide.
Please.
F
There
are
positives
and
there's
a
lot
of
positives
in
and
support
for
this
project.
From
a
comp
plan
and
Zoning
coder
standpoint.
We
recognize
that
there
more
applications
than
typical,
but
the
unique
circumstances
exist,
as
it
noted
a
reverse
corner
Lots,
retaining
a
historic
building
at
the
intersection
and
an
abnormal
rear
yard,
lock
configuration
and
also
just
looking
at
the
comp
plan
guidance
corridor
for
its
at
hemp
and
Avenue.
F
This
can
be
seen
with
the
e
shaped
building
design
the
courtyards
along
Hennepin,
not
having
a
long
continuous
building
wall.
As
you
often
see,
multiple
upper
floor
setbacks
more
glass
on
the
fifth
floor
to
improve
increase
the
transparency
of
that
tallest
portion
of
the
building
and
designing
those
upper
floors
to
meet
the
rear.
End
side
yard
setbacks.
The
project
does
need
those
setbacks
for
the
building,
but
those
upper
floors
are
in
compliance
with
the
15-foot
setbacks
and
then
next
slide.
Please
just
they
step
the
building
back.
F
Another
thing
element
on
35th
Street,
just
stepping
the
building
back
down
to
be
in
relation
to
that
residential
building
just
to
the
east.
So,
with
all
that
see,
pet
is
supportive
of
about
the
applications
that
were
applied
for
and
I'll
note
that
a
few
other
public
comments
came
in
in
support
of
the
project
with
your
addendum
packet.
In
addition
to
all
the
other
comments
came
in
with
the
Planning
Commission
review
are.
B
A
This
is
Scott
Engle
on
the
executive
coordinator
for
the
South
Uptown
neighborhood
association
and
I
had
contacted
mr.
Hanna
or
I
would
speak
first
and
then
Maxine
Ellis
said
she's.
The
board
president
just
clarify
so
that.
A
Also,
there
were
a
lot
of
errors
in
the
staff
report
and
technical
issues
with
the
process,
including
the
Planning
Commission
meeting
that
caused
concern
as
well,
so
the
the
first
page,
sir
first
slide
of
the
proposal,
should
show
the
existing
site
that
you
just
saw
from
mr.
Hanauer
I
will
reiterate
that
this
is
six
Lots
long.
This
is
a
half
of
a
block,
long
building,
so
they're
preserving
the
corner
building,
which
is
has
lots
of
character.
A
Obviously
these
are
smaller
low-density
homes,
the
the
Hennepin
elevation,
is
now
going
to
be
a
corridor
for
planning
guidance.
The
planning
guidance
for
Gerard,
the
3500
block
will
be
interior
to
the
third
photo,
shows
35th
streets
and
you'll
see
kind
of
that.
There's
a
hill
going
on
and
then
the
fourth
photo
shows
the
hill
up
the
up
from
Girard
to
Hennepin,
and
this
is
the
important
thing
this
is
what
makes
this
site
unusual
and
which
did
not
get
mentioned
in
enough
detail
by
mr.
Hanna
or
in
the
staff
report,
or
to
you
just
now.
A
The
great
difference
between
Hennepin
Avenue
in
Gerard
is
25
feet,
so
it's
an
unusual
sight
for
Minneapolis.
So
what
is
happening
here
is
the
measurements,
for
the
building
are
all
being
taken
from
the
Hennepin
elevation,
which
is
around
10
feet
taller
than
the
alley
elevation.
So
when
we
talk
about
a
59
foot,
building,
it's
actually
69
feet
at
the
Alliant
elevation,
so
I
want
you
to
keep
that
in
mind.
A
So
the
second
page
of
the
slide
shows
the
proposed
design
and
it's
very
pretty,
and
it
preserves
the
corner
building,
as
you
notice,
there's
the
courtyards
that
were
mentioned.
It's
three
stories.
It
fits
in
with
the
surrounding
buildings,
the
south
up
to
have
Neighborhood
Association.
We
supported
the
building
at
35th
and
Hennepin
just
a
few
years
back
at
the
hummingbird
building.
That's
a
three-story
building,
it's
beautiful!
It
fits
in
it
doesn't
loom
over
its
neighbors.
It's
one
lot
wide.
A
We
also
supported
the
building
at
36
30
seconds
in
Hennepin,
which
was
developed
just
a
few
years
back
by
the
länder
group
itself,
and
that
one
is
actually
four
stories
and
that
once
again
is
wonderful.
The
neighbors
like
it.
It
fits
in
the
context
of
the
neighborhood.
The
problem
with
the
proposed
building
is
it's
stepping
up,
rather
than
stepping
down
from
the
commercial
corridor
and
the
the
great
change
exasperates
that
the
height.
So
when
we're
talking
about
a
five-story
building,
it's
actually
six
storeys
along
the
alley.
A
A
Yeah
I
mentioned
that
the
the
quarter
four
is
the
new
planning
guidance
for
the
corridor,
the
3500
Hennepin
or
3501
Hennepin.
We
understand
as
a
neighborhood
association.
We
we
support
density,
we're
a
dense,
neighborhood.
It's
this
particular
development
is
just
going
to
loom
over
the
neighbors.
It
will
put
the
name
negative
externalities
of
blocking
lights
and
air.
A
If
you
go
to
the
third
slide,
you
will
see
the
designs
from
the
the
developers
plans.
It's
a
more
than
200
foot,
long
wall
along
the
alley
and
at
points
it
goes
up
to
69
feet
which
in
because
it's
measured
from
the
Hennepin
vantage
it's
from
the
hip
and
elevation.
It's
only
considered
five
storeys,
but
some
people
would
consider
70
feet,
seven
storeys,
so
it's
just
it's
too
massive
along
the
back
end
and
so
I
think
we'd
like
you
to
consider
as
City
Council
members.
A
Is
this
what
you
had
in
mind
when
you
approved
corridor
for
in
the
2040
plan,
previously
up
until
January?
First,
the
gut
planning
guidance
was
for
two
and
a
half
stories
along
this
section
of
happen.
We
understand
and
it's
fine,
that
it's
now
changed
to
four
stories,
as
planning
guidance,
this
particular
site
with
this
great
change.
It's
it
just
seems
inappropriate
and
I
think
what
we
fear
is
we.
We
have
a
tiny
little
neighborhood
with
a
lot
of
people
in
it,
we're
very
dense,
but
we
have
three
corridor
four
streets.
A
We
have
Hennepin
Bryant
and
lyndale
avenues
as
well
as
a
corridor.
Sixth
Street,
Lake,
Street
and
I.
Think.
The
the
reason
that
we
are
moving
forward
with
this
appeal
is
because
we're
concerned
that
this
is
going
to
affect
neighbors
up
and
down
these
streets
into
the
future,
and
your
decision
will
set
a
precedent,
I
think
for
a
corridor
for
planning
in
the
city.
I.
Imagine
all
of
you
as
City
Council
members,
have
this
type
of
planning
guidance
in
your
neighborhoods
and
I.
A
A
Transitions
into
lower
density
planning
districts,
the
interior
is
that
district,
but
instead
this
is
stepping
up
and
higher
in
massing
and
bulk,
and
it
just
seems
inappropriate.
We
are
not
as
a
Neighborhood
Association
opposed
to
the
number
of
units,
the
development
itself,
inbe
neighborhood,
it's
this
particular
design.
A
We've
been
working
with
the
developer
since
November
of
last
year,
and
this
was
the
issue
that
we
brought
up.
It
did
not
get
addressed
at
the
Planning
Commission
commission
committee
of
the
whole
in
December.
There's
no
wait
for,
apparently
for
public
to
provide
input
and
the
developer
got
the
go-ahead
from
the
Planning
Commission
community
of
the
whole,
and
they
just
continued
on
with
this
same
design,
so
I'm
hoping
as
City
Council
members.
You
will
say:
no,
please
tweak
this
make
it
so
it
doesn't
overwhelm
the
neighbors
Thank.
B
B
O
O
We,
as
he
stated,
we
have
been
in
contact
with
the
developer
and
the
most
immediate
item
that
was
discussed
in
and
hadn't
been
addressed.
Is
that
slope
on
the
back
of
the
building?
As
you
can
see,
there's
15
feet
difference
and
we
asked
for
the
math
to
be
pushed
to
Hennepin.
We
asked
for
a
different
layout
for
that
and
that
was
never
addressed
and
we
had
the
neighborhood
would
support
a
building.
That
would
not
be
so.
O
Towards
the
back
end
of
the
alley
and
would
give
some
space
and
air
to
the
neighborhood
that
are
on
the
backside
of
that
Street
and
also
another
thing
is
our
concern
is
for
the
traffic
kind
of
dead-end
alley.
That's
going
to
be
increased
with
74
more
cars
in
that
neighborhood,
so
I
will
just
leave
it
at
that.
We
would
hope
that
you
would
be
able
to
see
that
there's
truly
six
stories
on
the
back
end
that
could
be
pushed
to
the
front.
Thank.
P
I
did
send
in
some
slides
it's
not
necessary,
necessarily
a
critical
that
that
they
that
they
just
want
to
make
sure
that
you
have
them.
They
don't
necessarily
need
to
be
broadcast
I'm
watching
on
my
television,
so
I'm
a
little
bit
behind,
but
I
am
here
because
I
was
at
a
community
meeting
with
60
other
residents
of
this
neighborhood
and
99
percent
of
them
were
not
in
favor
of
this
project
because
of
mainly
because
of
this
height
we're
very
interested.
P
You
know
we
I'm
here
to
advocate
for
new
development
in
the
city
of
Minneapolis
I,
get
that
we
need
more
housing.
I
am
advocating,
though,
for
development
that
mirrors
the
essential
character
of
the
neighborhood,
enhances
the
use
and
enjoyment
of
residents
and
is
beneficial
to
the
health,
safety
and
welfare
of
south
of
town
residents.
Unfortunately,
I
just
don't
think
this
Landers
group
proposed
project
really
rises
to
that
bar
and
you
can
go
on
to
slide
number
three,
so
you
can
forward
on.
You.
Could.
P
P
And
I
can
get
to
some
of
the
real
another
big
aspect
that
I,
don't
think
has
really
been
brought
up
and
that
people
really
understood
at
the
planning
meeting
is
that
the
variances
and
conditional
use
permits
asked
in
this
project
are
inconsistent
with
the
goals
that
are
outlined
in
the
Minneapolis
2040
plan,
particularly
as
they
were
relate
to
that
and
it's
92
proposed
parking
slots
in
that
parking
garage
for
74
living
units
and
I
provided
an
attachment
on
attachment.
A
for
the
list
of
policies
and
action.
P
Steps
drawn
from
the
2040
plan
that
details
the
consistencies
that
I
found
next
slide.
I
believe
that
the
3501
Hennepin
project
features
92
parking
spaces
for
seven
again
for
74
units
and
this
parking
structure
faces
neighbors
and
is
only
accessible
off
of
35
off
of
Hennepin
via
35th
Street,
which
is
an
eastbound
one-way.
P
Those
parking
spaces
will
have
one
entrance
accessible
off
of
a
narrow
alley
because
of
the
fact
that
they
want
to
build
up
to
the
property
line,
which
means
that
it
will
be
going
people
and
people
entering
and
exiting
will
be
on
that
one-way
city
street
heading
eastbound
deeper
into
the
neighborhood.
Where
people
walk
you
know,
walk
their
dogs
jog
bicyclist
around.
So
undoubtedly
when
multiple
cars
are
entering
and
exiting
this
single
lane
entrance
cars
are
gonna
have
to
sit
there.
P
They're
gonna
have
to
idle
they're
gonna
back
up
that
short
street
they're,
going
to
back
up
onto
Hennepin
and
traffic
congestion
is
going
to
increase
and
create
another
hazard
for
pedestrians
and
bicyclists
on
Hennepin,
not
to
mention
increasing
carbon
monoxide
and
winter
driving
conditions
on
that
street.
Let
me
tell
you
we'll
make
it
even
worse:
I
Drive
it
that
every
every
year,
I
bet
I'm
a
30-year
resident
of
Girard,
Avenue,
south
and
I
can
tell
you.
It
gets
pretty
narrow
and
pretty
scary
slide.
P
B
P
B
E
My
name
is
Leslie
Plummer
I'm
at
35:12
Girard,
which
is
directly
behind
the
proposed
development,
and
essentially
I
will
agree
with
everyone
who
has
talked
so
far
and
just
kind
of
respect.
Your
time,
I'm
really
just
focused
on
the
height
and
bulk
of
the
mammoth
wall
that
will
be
in
my
backyard,
just
a
70
foot
wall
that
literally
and
figuratively
overshadows
not
only
my
property,
my
neighbor's
property,
but
essentially
the
south
up
tone
community
as
a
whole.
E
B
B
D
Great,
madam
chair
and
committee
members,
this
is
Bob
Lowe
kid
from
ESG
architects,
500
Washington,
Avenue
South.
Can
you
hear
me
we
can
sir
great
I
did
prepare
one
additional
exhibit
and
I
can
begin.
While
we
wait
for
that
to
come
on
the
screen,
it's
it
is
an
exhibit
specifically
to
help
the
council,
members
and
committee
members
understand
the
height.
So
you
know
when
you
can
see
that
we.
D
Great
good,
just
a
tiny
bit
of
background
on
the
design
process.
So
it's
it's
true.
The
design
of
the
building
hasn't
changed
very
much.
Since
we
started
meeting
with
the
neighborhood
group.
We
first
met
with
the
neighborhood
group
and
heard
a
lot
of
nice
things
about
the
Hennepin
Avenue
elevation
about
a
design
overall
and
materials.
But
from
the
very
first
meeting
there
was
a
lot
of
concern
about
our
choice
to
locate
the
mass
of
the
building
where
we
did
and
the
reason
why
we
did.
D
D
I
do
concede
that
it
may
be
more
conventional
massing
strategy,
for
instance,
if
our
if
our
goal
was
to
was
to
get
unanimous
or
enthusiastic
neighborhood
support,
it
probably
would
have
been
more
expedient
to
place
the
majority
of
the
mass
toward
Hennepin
and
and
the
and
the
step
down
toward
the
neighborhood.
But
we
made
this
choice
primarily
because
we're
chosen
were
we
had
a
desire
and
a
vision
to
enhance
the
pedestrian
realm
on
Hennepin
Avenue,
and
so
the
we
first
presented
to
the
neighborhood
group,
and
that
was
the
feedback
we
heard.
D
We
then
immediately
presented
to
the
committee
of
the
whole
and
and
I
would
like
to
just
disagree
with
mr.
Engles
can
ascertain
that
the
that
the
application
or
drawings
didn't
didn't
clearly
show
the
height
against
the
alley.
We
knew
that
the
height
and
bulk
of
our
design
would
be
very
crucial
toward
the
approval
of
this
project.
So
from
the
very
beginning
from
that
Committee
of
the
Whole
meeting,
we
strove
to
create
exhibits
that
very
clearly
showed
the
height
and
bulk
of
the
building
that
we
were
proposing
and,
in
fact,
all
of
the
exhibits
that
mr.
D
Engel
showed
were
included
in
our
in
our
land
use,
applications
and,
and
most
of
them
were
also
included
in
the
committee
of
the
whole
presentation.
So
I
will
just
talk
about
this.
Exhibit
you
can
see
that
from
the
plan
the
site
plan
to
the
left,
which
is
oriented
north
is
up
in
the
same
orientation
as
these
sections.
D
We
chose
to
create
some
additional
sections
just
because
these
exhibits
simultaneously
show
setbacks
and
height,
and
so
you
can
see
there
are
two
section
markers
cut
through
that
plan
on
the
left.
One
is
through
the
southernmost
courtyard
and
that
corresponds
to
the
section
on
the
bottom
and
the
other
is
cut
through
the
courtyard
just
north
of
that,
and
that
is
the
section
on
top.
D
But
I
just
want
to
point
out
that
the
building
the
rear
yard,
the
building
complies
with
the
required
rear
yard
setback
for
the
section
of
the
building
south
of
the
alley,
the
building
and
the
ballot
and
everything
are
within
that
required.
14
foot
setback
for
a
five-story
building
and
you
can
also
see
there's
a
solid
red
line.
That's
kind
of
go
stood
in
that
represents
the
allowable
height
for
a
four-story.
D
Fifty
six
foot
tall
building
our
building
is
one
foot
or
sorry,
one
storey
taller
and
three
foot
higher
and
the
reason
why
it's
only
three
feet
higher
than
what's
allowed.
Even
though
there's
an
extra
story
is
that
the
number
of
the
floor
to
floor
height
is
less
than
what
is
allowed.
So
you
can
also
see
this.
So
this
shows
the
the
grade
differential
between
Hennepin
and
the
alley.
If
you
zoom
in
you
can
see
that
at
that
portion,
the
grade
differential
is
about
8
feet
at
various.
D
The
section
to
the
upper
section
is
cut
through
the
alley
and
you
can
see
that
the
property
line
of
the
development
site,
jogs
east,
where
that
alley
occurs
and
so
for
zoning
purposes,
the
rear
yard
required
rear
yard
setback
is
calculated
from
where
the
development
property
a
bus,
key
ally.
But
you
can
see
that
because
of
the
12
foot
width
of
the
alley,
the
building
itself
is
actually
set
back
with.
O
D
In
the
building
itself
is
set
back,
18
feet
from
the
neighbor's
property,
so
step
back,
actually
a
little
bit
more
than
the
fortune
of
the
building
that
south
ele
that
complies
with
the
setbacks.
And
then
you
can
also
see
the
compare
in
the
section
building
with
the
solid
red
line,
relatively
insignificant
request
that
we're
making
for
height.
And
then
you
can
also
see
that
the
setback
of
the
fifth
floor.
The
top
floor
is
really
quite
significant
and
I
think
you
know
is
really
in
response
to
you
know.
D
B
Q
Q
I
would
my
name
is
Bruce
Cochran
I
live
with
my
family
at
35
22,
our
davines
house,
directly,
east
of
the
proposed
project.
Thank
you
for
giving
me
the
opportunity
to
speak.
I
have
three
points
to
make
I'll
try
and
get
it
in
in
two
minutes.
One.
It's
my
understanding
in
Minneapolis,
Planning
Commission
meeting
on
June
15th
was
one
of
the
first
scheduled
distance
meetings
with
the
public
since
the
beginning
of
kovat
lockdown.
Q
If,
in
fact
that
was
the
case,
I
feel
minneapolis
residents
were
given
an
experimental
and
therefore
unfair
forms
present
their
comment.
The
process
was
overly
complex
and
fraught
with
technical
difficulties.
As
a
result,
very
few
people
were
able
to
speak
during
the
public
comment
period
rather
than
try
to
reschedule
the
meeting.
Q
The
meeting
continued
without
acknowledgment
that
there
may
have
been
more
people
speaking
what
the
process
was
more
accessible,
I
work
for
Minneapolis,
Public
Schools,
and
we
have
a
saying
there
show
your
work
I'm,
not
convinced
all
the
members
of
the
Planning
Commission
visited
the
site
of
the
new
building
before
they
made
their
decision.
It's
called
a
Planning
Commission
correct.
Several
residents,
including
myself,
made
offers
to
committee
members
to
come
visit
the
site
to
witness
in
three-dimensional
space
impact
this
building
will
have
on
our
neighborhood
for
generations.
Q
Q
What
was
good,
what
was
what
stood
out
the
most
about
these
meetings
is
how
one-sided
they
feel
to
voting
constituents.
It's
a
sad
rerun,
the
city,
touts
inclusion
and
equity,
while
encouraging
civic
engagement
residents
put
in
the
time
and
effort
to
research
their
concerns
and
form
their
arguments.
They
often
need
to
take
time.
Excuse
me
out
of
their
working
day,
to
engage
with
city
officials
about
their
concerns
at
these
meetings,
I'm
out
of
breath,
because
I
had
to
run
across
the
street
straightens
Julie's
phone
to
get
the
technology
to
work.
Q
Their
comments
are
excuse
me.
Their
comments
are
taken
into
account
and
then
the
commission
votes,
but
what
is
frustrating
is
not
how
they
vote.
We
realize
they
have
reasons
for
the
way
they
vote
and
those
votes
can
sometimes
be
a
hard
to
swallow.
But,
what's
frustrating
is
that
they
vote
in
silence.
They
rarely
give
reasons
to
the
public
for
why
they
both
they
do
the
way
they
do.
Q
If
the
city
claims
that
they
want
us
to
continue
to
be
engaged
and
civic
leaders
should
equal
our
commitment
and
honor
us
by
giving
us
the
arguments
that
you
use
to
vote
the
way
you
do
otherwise
in
a
vacuum,
all
we
can
do
is
create
our
own
reasons
and
hearsay
about
their
voting
decisions.
Rather,
please
leverage
your
platform
and
seize
the
opportunity
to
teach
us
about
your
side
of
the
issues.
Q
B
B
Otherwise
I'm
gonna
make
a
motion
and
it
probably
won't
pass,
but
so
I'm
gonna
move
to
grant
the
appeal
and
I
have
a
fairly
significant
reason
for
doing
so,
and
that
is
that
I
don't
believe
that
a
six-story
building
adjacent
to
single-family
homes
is
consistent
with
what
our
intent
was
in
the
2040
plan.
I
do
think
it's
a
beautiful
project
and
I
have
to
think
about
what
it
would
look
like
in
my
part
of
town
and
in
part
of
the
area
that
I
represent
on
South
Hennepin.
B
It
might
make
sense
to
have
a
building
that
was
four
or
five,
maybe
even
six
storeys,
because
behind
Hennepin
Avenue
is
a
lot
of
multifamily
three
and
four-story
buildings,
so
that
might
make
sense
in
the
part
of
uptown
that
I
represent.
But
clearly
here
the
single-family
homes
abut
a
building
that
is
towering
over
them
and
when
I
did
ask
the
applicant
to
speak
to
whether
and
why
that
was,
they
essentially
said,
yeah.
B
Well,
we
cared
about
Hennepin,
not
about
Gerard,
so
that
kind
of
summed
up
the
developers,
point
of
view
and
I
appreciate
that
the
developer
cares
about
Hennepin
and,
like
I,
said,
I,
think
it's
a
really
beautiful
building
and
I
love
the
way
that
they
designed
the
bump-outs,
but
it
does
basically
really
impact
the
people
who
live
adjacent,
including
the
one
home.
That's
on
35th
and
I
have
a
level
of
empathy
for
that
and
I
feel
like
that.
There
is
a
design
that
could
be
done.
That
was
less
impactful.
B
Some
people
might
say
six
storeys,
four
storeys.
What's
the
difference?
It's
not
a
single-family
house,
but
I
mean
there
are
ways
to
mitigate
the
impact
of
that
large
wall
on
that
level
of
height,
so
I
suspect
I
won't
be
on
the
prevailing,
but
since
no
one
else
wanted
to
speak,
I'm
gonna
go
ahead
and
do
what
one
of
the
people
who
testify
did,
which
was
to
give
my
point
of
view.
B
R
R
It
seems
reasonable
and
I
think
that
the
while
we
probably
could
have
accommodated
a
little
more
of
a
step
down
or
a
little
more
of
a
setback,
I
think
at
the
at
the
end
of
the
day,
that
height
was
still
going
to
be
what
you
know
what
happened
and
was
approvable
and
so
I
think
that
the
sense
of
you
know
light
being
blocked.
I
think
you
know.
Sometimes
the
hard
part
about
this
job
is
just
telling
telling
people
that
you
owned
the
property
you
own
and
not
the
property.
R
Next
to
you,
and
sometimes
things
get
built
that
they
do
have
an
impact
on
views
and
light
at
some
times
a
day
and
I
think
that
that
would
probably
happen,
regardless
of
what
the
design
ended
up
being
I
think
it
probably
could
have
been
stepped
back
a
little
more,
but
I
think
that
the
gains
that
they
show
in
terms
of
and
I
think
that
staff
recommended
in
terms
of
the
the
benefits
on
Hennepin
Avenue
seem
extensive.
I.
Think
there's
actually
some
pretty
significant
benefit
to
this
project.
B
I
will
know
counselor
Fletcher.
This
is
really
not
a
question
of
views.
You
know
view
would
be
like
something
in
our
world
where
you're
looking
out
at
a
skyline
view
or
a
riverfront
view.
This
is
really
a
question
of
a
wall
right
up
to
the
alley,
basically
behind
these
people's
homes,
and
it
didn't
need
to
be
that
way
and
I'm
empathetic
to
that.
So
if
no
one
else
wants
to
speak,
I'll
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
roll
on
my
motion
to
grant
the
appeal.
J
H
B
B
That
motion
passes.
Our
last
item
is
item
number
14,
which
is
a
number
of
rezoning
application
submitted
by
Tony
Carra
for
the
properties
that
we
just
discussed
related
to
people
we
just
addressed
I
would
ask
if
there's
I,
don't
believe
a
staff
report
is
required.
Let
me
see
if
there's
anyone
on
the
committee
who
would
like
a
staff
report.