►
From YouTube: May 6, 2021 Zoning Board of Adjustment
Description
B
Good
afternoon,
everyone
welcome
to
this
live
broadcast
of
our
virtual
meeting
today
may
6
2021..
This
meeting
includes
the
remote
participation
of
members
as
authorized
under
minnesota
statutes,
section
13d
.021,
due
to
the
declared
local
health
pandemic
for
the
record,
my
name
is
matt
perry
and
I
am
chair
of
the
zoning
board
of
adjustment.
B
D
C
B
E
F
C
B
D
B
G
F
F
D
H
B
I
B
I
see
none
I'd
like
to
I'm
next
on
our
it's
not
on
the
agenda,
but
I'd
like
to
take
a
moment
under
this
petitions
and
communications
to
introduce
miss
jasmine
fries.
She
is
our
new
board
member,
we're
very
pleased
to
have
her
aboard.
I
think
I
speak
for
all
of
us
on
the
board
to
have
the
position
filled
and
by
someone
who,
I
think
will
bring
a
lot
of
energy
and
insight
into
our
proceedings,
and
so
I'd
like
to
give
miss
fries
a
moment
just
to
say
a
few
words.
J
B
Okay,
let's
move
on,
let's
review
the
agenda,
I
will
read
the
agenda
number
and
the
address
of
the
project
and
state
whether
it's
slated
for
consent,
continuance,
withdrawal
return
or
discussion
and
I'll
talk
about
what
consent
items
are
and
discussion
items
are
consent
items
are
those
that
will
be
passed
without
discussion
by
the
board.
We
will
be
adhering
to
the
staff
recommendation
found
on
your
agenda
under
the
item's
recommended
motion.
Section
importantly,
any
applicable
conditions
will
be
listed
in
the
same
section.
B
If
you
agree
with
this
recommendation,
including
any
applicable
conditions,
you
need
to
do
nothing
and
the
board
will
pass
it
as
recommended.
Please
check
in
with
the
staff
member
assigned
to
that
item.
If
you
have
questions
following
this
decision,
if
you
disagree
with
the
recommendation,
please
indicate
you'd
like
to
speak
against
the
item.
When
I
ask
and
we'll
put
it
on
the
discussion
agenda,
so
what
are
discussion
items
these
are
items
for
which
the
board
will
take
public
testimony
deliberate
on
and
make
a
decision
after
the
public.
B
Testimony
has
been
heard
for
each
particular
discussion
item.
I
will
close
the
public
hearing
for
that
agenda
item.
Once
I
close
the
public
hearing
for
an
item,
no
additional
public
testimony
will
be
taken,
but
staff
will
be
asked
to
address.
Board
may
be
asked
to
address
board
questions
after
the
public
hearing.
For
an
item
is
closed.
Board
members
will
then
discuss
and
act
on
motions
and
the
chair
does
not
vote
except
in
the
case
of
a
tie.
So
here's
the
recommended
dispositions
of
the
items
the
land
use
request
items
are
on
our
agenda
today.
B
B
I'm
seeing
none
agenda
item
number
seven
is
1513
35th
street
e
staff
is
recommending.
This
item
be
continued
until
our
may
20th
21
2021
zoning
board
of
adjustment
meeting,
which
is
one
cycle,
and
we
can
discuss
this
more
when
we
review
requested
continuances
an
agenda
item
number
eight,
our
last
one
is
1712
marshall
street
northeast
staff
is
recommending.
This
item
be
continued
as
well
and
again
until
our
may
20
20th
2021
zoning
board
of
adjustment
meeting,
which
again
is
one
cycle.
We
could
discuss
this
more
when
we
review
requested
continuances.
B
C
K
C
C
B
L
C
B
So
that
motion
passes
and
for
those
of
you
who
are
here
for
item
number
six,
your
land
use
request
is
approved.
Good
luck
with
your
project,
let's
go
on
to
our
two
items
for
continuance,
we'll
start
off
with
1513.
This
is
agenda.
Item
number
seven
1513
35th
street
east
staff
is
requesting
the
site
and
be
continued
until
the
may
20th
2021
zoning
board
of
adjustment
meeting
with
mr
cohass.
Please
provide
background
on
the
request
for
the
continuance
of
this
item.
M
Thank
you,
chairperry
members
of
the
board.
This
item
is
a
request
to
reduce
the
minimum
lot
area
for
the
property
at
15,
13
35th
street
east.
This
is
a
single
family
dwelling,
that's
in
a
commercial
district
and
the
lot
area
reduction
would
be
due
to
a
proposed
lot
line:
adjustment
between
the
subject,
property
and
one
of
the
neighboring
properties.
M
The
applicants
in
this
case
had
submitted
a
complete
variance
application.
We
began
preparation
for
this
item
to
be
heard
at
tonight's
board
of
adjustment
hearing,
but
then
the
applicant
requested
that
this
be
continued
to
the
next
available
hearing,
so
they
could
have
some
additional
time
to
revise
their
application
materials.
B
B
D
B
D
D
B
And
that
motion
passes
so
the
land
use
application
for
1513
35th
street
east
will
be
continued
to
the
may
20th
2021
zoning
board
of
adjustment
meeting.
Now
on
to
our
second
request
for
continuance.
This
is
agenda.
Item
number
eight
1712
marshall
street
northeast
staff
is
requesting.
This
item
be
continued
until
the
may
20th
2021
zoning
board
of
adjustment
meeting.
Mr
liska,
can
you
give
us
some
background.
N
Thank
you
chair,
as
I
kind
of
touched
on
last
time,
with
the
continuance.
The
updated,
mississippi
river
critical
area
standards
require
that
this
application
receive
the
mississippi
watersheds
blessings
before
it
moves
on
to
the
board.
The
watershed
needs
to
evaluate
if
any
work
is
needed
on
the
slope,
the
applicant
is
still
working
with
the
watershed
and
getting
those
blessings
so
again
continuing
it
to
the
may
20th
meeting
where,
hopefully,
the
application
is.
B
N
The
applicant
seems
like
they're
working
with
the
watershed.
I
know
the
watershed
headquarters
is
just
a
few
blocks
north
of
this
site,
so
I
do
think
this
is
sufficient
in
terms
of
a
delay.
The
120
does
allow
us
to
extend
this
out
until
well.
If
it
went
to
the
board
on
june
the
17th,
we
could
still
meet
the
120
day.
B
B
Is
there
anyone
here
would
like
to
speak
against
continuing
this
item.
I'm
seeing
I'm
not
hearing
anybody
for
either
of
those
is
there
any
board
comment,
I'm
not
seeing
any
board
comment
either.
Is
there
a
motion
to
continue
the
land
use
request
for
1712
marshall
street
northeast
to
our
may
20th
2021
meeting.
B
D
B
O
O
So
this
is
plan
one
two,
four,
three
five
and
it's
an
application
for
a
proposed
variance
located
at
825,
curry
avenue
west
next
slide.
Please,
the
subject
site
is
a
3.5
acre
lot
industrial
lot.
The
subject
site
is
located
in
the
i1
light
industrial
zoning
district
and
is
in
the
corridor.
4
built
form
overlay.
O
O
The
proposed
plan
is
to
replace
the
existing
fencing
around
the
site
with
new
taller
fencing
that
is
more
secure.
The
new
fencing
would
vary
in
height
between
10
and
30
feet,
tall,
depending
on
the
location
of
the
fence
section,
as
shown
on
the
site
plan
on
the
next
slide.
Please
so
on
the
site
plan,
it
shows
that
there
will
be
a
20
what's
proposed
in
terms
of
the
fencing
heights
is
20
foot
tall
fencing
is
proposed
along
the
east
property
line.
O
25
foot
tall
fencing
is
proposed
along
colfax
avenue,
with
one
50-foot
section
that
would
be
30
feet.
Tall
adjacent
to
the
existing
pump
house
and
the
purpose
of
having
the
30
foot
tall,
fencing
adjacent
to
the
pump
house
is
that
it
would
limit
debris
from
being
tossed
from
colfax
and
landing
on
the
roof
of
the
pump
house.
O
The
remainder
of
the
site
would
have
10
foot
tall,
fencing
surrounding
the
perimeter
of
the
property
next
slide.
Please
staff
found
that
practical
difficulties
unique
to
the
property
do
not
exist
in
relation
to
the
proposed
increase
in
fence
heights.
Although
the
use
of
the
property
as
a
substation
presents
unique
security
requirements
in
ensuring
the
ongoing
safe
operations
of
the
facility
and
the
protection
of
the
city
power
grid,
there
is
nothing
about
the
lot
in
and
of
itself.
That
requires
the
fence
heights
to
be
increased
beyond
the
ordinary.
O
Allow.
The
ordinance
allowance
of
eight
feet
as
permitted
for
any
other
industrial
site
staff
found
that
the
circumstances
were
not
created
by
the
present
interests
in
the
property
and
are
not
based
on
economic
considerations.
However,
due
to
the
lack
of
clear
practical
difficulties
based
on
the
property
itself,
this
finding
was
not
found
to
be
met
in
terms
of
findings.
Two
and
three
staff
found
that
the
proposal
was
in
keeping
with
the
spirit
and
intent
of
the
ordinance.
O
Privacy
is
not
a
specific
concern
at
this
site,
and
the
access
to
light
and
air
would
not
be
limited
by
the
increased
fence
heights
as
the
site
is
surrounded
by
other
industrial
uses.
That
would
not
be
impacted
directly
by
the
taller
fencing
the
use
of
the
site
itself
as
a
substation
is
in
keeping
with
the
intent
of
industrial
districts,
so
this
finding
is
met.
O
O
The
increased
height
of
the
proposed
fencing
would
not
have
a
measurable
increased
impact
on
the
character
of
the
area
and,
as
noted
in
finding
two,
the
health,
safety
and
welfare
of
the
general
public
would
be
maintained
or
increased
by
preventing
unauthorized
access
to
the
site.
So
this
finding
was
found
to
be
met
to
be
met.
Excuse
me
next
slide,
please.
O
D
Yeah,
thank
you,
chair
perry
and
thanks
for
the
presentation,
ms
dawkins.
I've
noticed
along
the
midtown
greenway.
There
are
a
couple
of
other
substations
with
structures
surrounding
the
substation.
I
think
they're
decorative
structures
more
so
than
chain-link
fencing,
but
I
was
wondering
if
those
kind
of
structures
required
variances
at
the
time.
O
That
was
actually
a
question
that
came
up
today
and
I
don't
know
the
history.
I
think
a
lot
of
folks
were
asking
specifically
about
the
hot,
the
the
decorative
fencing
around
the
hiawatha
site
and
I
don't
know
the
origin
of
that
particular
project.
I
did
ask
one
of
my
colleagues,
but
I
didn't.
I
wasn't
able
to
find
an
answer
today,
but
brad
ellis
may
have
a
may
have
some
insight
into
that.
I
Chair
perry,
yes
to
to
answer
that
question:
I'm
not
certain
specifically,
my
understanding
on
that
one
is
that
that
was
exempted
as
a
result
of
the
metro
transit
exemption,
since
that
was
primarily
that
was
related
to
the
the
construction
of
the
hiawatha
blue
line.
That's
my
understanding
of
it.
I
could
be
incorrect.
I
don't
want
to
say
that
there
there
has
been
one
other
application.
I
don't
remember
the
mid
there's
one
in
the
middle
of
the
city.
I'd
have
to.
I
could
go
back
and
find
out.
D
O
We
had
some
staff
had
some
discussion
about
this,
and
the
the
general
consensus
was
that
30
feet
felt
really
tall,
so
you
know
potentially
20
feet,
potentially
what
but
they
exist.
We
also
recognize
that
the
existing
fencing
goes
that
there
is
existing
fencing
on
the
site,
that's
up
to
20
or
25
feet.
So
it's
a
little.
I
mean
we
couldn't
really
find
practical
difficulties,
but
we
weren't
necessarily
adverse
to
having
either
a
replay
up
like
a
more
secure
replacement
of
what
is
already
existing,
although
that
would
still
require
the
variance.
D
O
Possibly
I
wouldn't
I
wouldn't
rule
that
out.
I
mean
I
don't
think
it's
a
unique
character
of
the
characteristic
of
the
lot
per
se,
because
lots
of
lots
have
you
know,
lots
of
industrial
sites
have
are
on
busy
streets
that
you
know
where
people
throw
garbage
out
of
their
cars,
but
that
could
potentially
be
a
path
to
a
practical
difficulty.
A
O
Not
in
the
zoning
ordinance
itself-
and
we
initially
when
this
came
in,
I
reviewed
the
ordinance
to
see
if
there
was
any
kind
of
exception
for
national
security
purposes
or
federal
rulings,
or
anything
like
that,
and
there
really.
There
wasn't
anything
that
I
could
find
or
that
anyone
gave
me
any
advice
on.
So
we
felt
that
the
variance
would
still
be
necessary.
You
know
going
through
the
variance
process
is
the
tool
that
we
have
to
either
allow
this,
and
it
sounds
like
brad
ellis,
has
some
more
information.
I
Yeah
chair,
perry,
board
member
joe
henderson.
I
don't
have
specific
information.
Well,
I
guess
I
do
have
some.
This
is
kind
of
an
interesting
situation
as
well.
Usually
you
do
find
some
sort
of
exemption
related
to
this,
and
I
I
was
quite
honestly
surprised
there
wasn't
some
sort
of
local
preemption.
I
There
is
in-state
code,
a
preemption
from
needing
a
building
permit,
but
then
it
states
that
it
has
to
comply
with
the
local
zoning
controls,
which
you
think
it
would
be
the
other
way
around,
where
that's
how
it
usually
is
had
we
are
preempted,
but
they
still
need
the
building
permit
to
ensure
life
safety.
So
I
I
found
that
a
little
odd
to
be
honest,
but
that's
where
we
are
with
it,
because
you
do
generally
see
these
sorts
of
uses
or
whatnot
exempted.
A
Right
thanks,
mr
ellis
yeah.
I
guess
that
seems
to
me
that
this
is
like
something
that's
integral
and
primary
and
that
we
can't
find
a
way
to
like
allow
them
to
protect
this
power
system.
This
is
crazy.
So
all
right
I
appreciate
it.
I
think
the
ordinance
needs
to
be
looked
at
and
I'm
done
now.
Thank
you.
B
H
H
They
they
developed
a
team
that
that
looks
at
security
of
all
of
our
major
substations
and
all
of
our
all
of
our
our
you
know,
generation
plans
and
and
make
sure
that
we're
doing
the
best.
We
can
to
make
sure
that
the
that
they're
safe
and
it
goes
back
to
a
couple
of
things.
One
is
that
for
this
substation
safety
is
really
a
big
component
of
it
and
also
trying
to
making
sure
that
we
can
keep
the
nuisance
factors
from
entering
into
the
substation.
H
On
top
of
that
that
pump
house
the
somebody
has
to
go
in
there
and
remove
that
trash
off
the
top
of
the
pump
or
the
house
there,
the
building
there
and
and
to
remove
that
as
a
safety
violation
to
get
too
close
to
the
to
the
breakers.
That
are
right
next
to
that,
so
somebody's
in
there
with
a
long
raid.
That
rate
can
act
as
a
arcing
point
to
and
electrocute
somebody
if
something
gets
up
on
the
roof.
They're
too
close.
H
H
That's
that's
the
bottom
line
of
it
because
people
are
having
to
go
up
on
top
of
that
roof
or
trying
to
rake
the
transitions
on
top
of
the
roof,
and
it
was
it
was.
It
was
not.
It
was
not
a
good
thing
to
do
so.
That's
that's
where
that
30
foot
fence
was
put
in,
but
then
nobody
knows
for
sure,
but
that's
why
there's
already
and
there's
still
trash
being
thrown
in
there
and
we
know
if
it
lands
on
the
ground,
they
can
they'll
clean
it
up
and
get
that.
That's,
that's,
not
a
issue.
H
H
So,
but
what
they've
learned
is
that
10
feet
is
a
is
a
good
distance,
and
what
they've
also
learned
is
that
by
by
shrinking
the
size
of
the
the
mesh
and
the
fence,
a
lot
of
senses,
they
have
about,
you
know
inch
and
a
half
or
two
inch
mesh
in
them.
The
chain
link,
fence
and
they've
learned
that
to
trick
that
down
to
a
half
an
inch
or
an
inch,
it's
really
hard
for
somebody
to
crawl
like
a
basket.
They
can
only
use
their
fingers
to
problem.
They
can't
deserve
that.
H
He
won't
work
your
way
into
the
fence,
so
so
for
the
on
the
east
side
there,
what
they,
what
they're,
what
they've
done,
is
they've
they
to
deter
people
from
colonial,
let
it
put
in
the
20
foot
tall
fencer
that
way,
if
somebody's
on
top
of
a
truck
or
a
trailer
there,
they
they're
still
a
good
10
feet,
or
so
a
lot
of
them
didn't
have
to
crawl
over
to
get
to
the
over
the
top
of
the
fence.
So
that's
that's!
H
That's
the
deterrent!
That's
the
reason
for
doing
it.
That
way,
it's
that
the
fencing
and
then
the
remainder
of
the
other
side
has
a
10
foot
tall
fence
and
this
fence
is
called
expanded
metal.
It's
actually
not
a
chain
length
sentence
of
sheet
of
it's
a
sheet
of
metal
and
what
they
do.
Is
they
they
score
it
every
once
in
a
while,
and
then
they
come
along
with
the
machine
and
it
actually
pulls
poles.
Where
scored
they
pull
it,
it
pulls
out
a
little
bit
of
metal.
H
So
it's
got
kind
of
you
know
it's
kind
of
serrated
edge
to
it
and
and
what
they
found
is
that
that
that
metal,
that
metal
fence
has
been
put
around
the
base
of
it,
you
can't
cut
it
with
them.
You
can't
cut
it
with
a
a
bolt
cut
or
anything
like
that.
You
have
to
come
in
with
a
torch
to
get
through
it
and
then,
and
that's
really
the
hardest
and
hardening
of
the
other.
Substation
is
why
why
why
we're
both?
H
Putting
that
on
that
extended
metal
fence
around
the
basement
there
and
and
it's
10
feet
tall,
so
people
can't
crawl
over
and
you
know
again
we're
here
to
to
make
sure
that
that
substation
is
safe.
There's
you
know
five
or
six
substations
in
each
one
city
that
we're
in
minneapolis
and
on
a
hot
summer
day
if
leveling
goes
out
that
that
could
be
a
big
issue.
So
what's
would
be
a
big
issue.
So
that's
why
we're
wrong?
H
D
H
I
think
well,
what
part
of
it
is
is
those
were
approved
in
the
state
and
if
it's
a
state,
it's
a
state,
put
the
state
down
the
one
on
hiawatha,
that's
a
state
approved
permit
and-
and
I
think
I
think
the
same
thing
is
through
the
midtown.
But
anyway
you
know
we
got
a
state
permit
to
do
that
and
then
let's
stay
permit.
You
know
you
know
we
don't
need
to
go
through
zoning
ordinances.
This
this
substation
has
the
same.
H
H
J
L
B
Mr
sullivan,
I
have
a
question
I
just
wanted.
You
you've
heard
if
you've
been
listening
in
that
to
the
staff
presentation
that
in
in
talking
to
staff,
that
we
need
to
find
for
all
three
findings,
staff
is
found
for
two
of
them,
but
has
not
found
for
that
unique
characteristic
of
the
property
that
creates
a
practical
difficulty.
Can
you
help
us
out
with
that?
And
I'm
sure
you
understand,
that
being
in
the
role
that
you
are
in.
H
H
The
substation
is
something
you
can't
move
it.
You
know
we
can't.
We
can't
move
it
to
some
other
spot.
If
we
moved
it,
it
would
require.
It
would
require
moving
the
transmission
lines,
there's
a
bunch
of
buried
underground
conduits
that
lead
out
there
that
feed
the
city
it
would
it
would
it's
not
a
it's,
not
a
it's,
not
a
it's
that
that's
what
makes
it
unique
is
that
it's
it's
it's
it's
a
it's
an
essential
service.
That's
been
there
forever
and
a
day
and
the
the.
H
You
know
the
the
the
needs
to
to
to
you
know,
keep
it
safe
based
on.
You
know,
current
current
environment
that
we're
living
right
now
and
we're
very
serious
about
making
sure
that
this
that
that
we
have
something
that's
going
to
be.
You
know
that's
going
to
be
able
to
operate
without
being
sabotaged,
and
it
was
also
something
that's
safe
for
our
employees
when
we're
inside
the
substation.
B
B
Find
for
as
well
so
I
hope
you
appreciate
the
position
we're
in
we're.
We're
understand
your
desire,
and
so
that's
why
I
think
some
of
the
questions
about
whether
variances
were
required
for
other
locations
and
so
forth
were
brought
up
whether
they
were
approved
and
you've
said
they
were
exempted
by
the
state.
P
Thank
you,
chair
perry.
Thank
you,
mr
sullivan.
My
question
relates
to
the
two
other
substations
that
we've
mentioned
during
this
hearing,
the
one
at
midtown
and
the
one
at
hiawatha
along
the
greenway
stretch,
I'm
curious
about
the
materials
that
you
intend
to
use
in
this
application
and
whether
or
not
they
would
be
visually
similar
to
the
materials
or
rather
the
end
product
of
the
materials
in
the
the
other
two
substations
or
perhaps
I'm
mistaken,
about
what
those
other
substations
are
and
that
there's
just
visual
screening
and
not
a
fence.
P
H
For
the
the
the
the
offense,
the
the
sense
that
we're
proposing
would
be,
I
would
say,
it's
very
similar
to
the
the
lower
the
lower
10
feet.
That's
around
those
substations
down
hiawath
and
like
midtown
greenway,
the
the
stuff
that
the
fire
was
put
in
to
help
visually
obscure
the
substation
from
from
inside
as
an
attempt
to
make
them
feel
more
more
more
artistic.
I
guess
for
lack
of
a
better
word,
both
those
both
of
those
were
in
in
in
high
profile
areas.
H
They
they
they,
you
know
ones
right
along
hiawatha
right
next
to
the
bike
trail,
the
other
one
is
midtown
right
along
the
bike.
Trail
surrounded
by
by
residential
uses
a
lot
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
people
in
those
areas
that
are
that
are
looking
at
it.
This
substation,
it's
tucked
out
of
the
way
it's
back
up
his
back's
up
against
a
railroad
tracks.
We
got
the
impound
lap.
There.
We've
got
the
school
bus
yard
there.
H
We
got
the
public
works,
minimum
sicily
and
they're
they're
they're
they're,
all
industrial
uses
the
property
owner.
You
know,
we've
got
to
the
north
of
us,
there's
a
metalworks
property
owner.
These
are
industrial
areas
and,
and
we
feel
that
that
what
we're
proposing
is
appropriate
for
our
own
industrial
areas.
B
F
F
I
wanted
to
see
if
people
would
be
comfortable
with
an
accumulation
of
ideas
just
because
the
age
of
the
the
use,
the
age
of
the
youth,
the
age
of
where
it
is
the
safety
to
national
security
and,
coupled
with
the
fact
it's
a
public
safety
concern
coupled
with
another
fact
that
it's
a
safety
concern
for
workers
that
have
to
clean
the
debris,
that's
caused
by
the
throwing
over
from
outside
being
close
to
energized
power
lines.
I
just
want
to
see
if
that
accumulated
together
constitutes
a
practical
difficulty
to
me.
A
Thanks
tripp
perry,
I
agree
with
mr
hutchins,
and
I
feel
like
the
uniqueness
to
me,
is
that
it's
an
essential
service
and
the
property
owner
needs
to
provide
as
much
security
as
it
deems
necessary.
At
this
point,
I
think
it's
it's
crazy,
that
there
isn't
an
exception
and
this
ordinance
of
ours.
That
would
allow
this
to
happen.
A
G
A
Chair
prairie
thanks
jeff
perry.
I
don't
think
we
should
require
them
to
provide
a
more
aesthetically
pleasing
fencing
at
this
location
being
that
it
is
an
industrial
use.
It
backs
up
to
a
railroad.
You
know
I.
I
love
the
two
that
I
see
that
are
along
the
greenways
and
stuff,
but
this
isn't
the
same
condition
and
I
I
feel
it's
improper
to
require
them
to
provide
a
much
more
aesthetic
defense.
At
this
point.
G
P
Thank
you,
tripp
perry,
and
thanks
for
the
the
comments
back
fellow
board
members,
I
should
have
articulated
that.
I
recognize
that
this
is
quite
close
to
the
glenwood
avenue
just
glenwood
avenue
and
the
city
does
have
ambitious
plans
for
redevelopment
of
some
of
these
spaces,
and
so
in
the
future.
This
might
not
be
an
industrial
area,
though
I
recognize
we're
still
two
blocks
south
and,
as
mr
finlayson
quite
aptly
pointed
out
this
and
mr
johannesson,
this
is
a
pretty
heavy
industrial
use.
That
is
not
going
to
be
going
anywhere,
as
mr
sullivan
had
said.
Q
I
I
like
the
the
tactic
presented
by
lewis
hutchinson,
the
combination
of
things
that
makes
it
unique,
and
I
also
agree
that
there
should
be
a
requirement
to
have
an
aesthetically
pleasing
fence,
not
only
because
it
won't
be
industrial
forever,
but
because
I
don't
think
it
it
doesn't
have
to
be
expensive
and
it's
part
of
it's
part
of
our
built
form.
So
it
should
look
nice.
P
Thank
you,
chair
period,
make
a
motion
to
approve
the
requests
for
variants.
Finding
their
practical
difficulties
have
been
established
due
to
the
nature
of
the
nature
of
the
permanent
and
necessary
use
that
exist
on
the
property
and
the
other
comments
that
have
been
mentioned
throughout
this
hearing.
F
P
That
is
an
incredibly
busy
space
with
an
enormous
number
of
people
coming
and
going
throughout
the
year,
particularly
the
winter
months,
and
that
visually
enhancing
the
neighborhood
would
be
a
benefit
to
anyone
that
has
to
go
to
the
impound
lot,
particularly
if
the
fence
is
going
to
be
now
20
to
30
feet.
Tall.
I
Chairperry
members
of
the
board-
I
don't
have
a
specific
item
but,
as
I
understand
it,
the
other
two
installations
did
have
some
additional
funding
related
to
it.
So
I
don't
know
if
we
would
want
to
ask
the
applicant
anything
about
this
at
this
time,
if
that's
even
something
that
they
would
be
able
to
do
the
other
ones
I
don't
know
if
there
there
was.
I
don't.
I
I
believe
that
there
was
maybe
some
sort
of
public
art
process
or
something
along
those
lines
in
the
selection,
so
it
could
be
getting
on
into
something
that's
quite
a
bit
more
complicated
than
the
applicant
was
intending
to
so
before
I
mean,
certainly
you
will
have
the
ability
to
add
that
condition,
but
if
it's
something
that
the
applicant
finds
that
it's
not
wieldy,
they
may
end
up
just
appealing
to
the
city
council
and
we
would
rehash
it
again
there.
So
I
would
just
want
to
have
that
opportunity.
I
B
Q
G
B
G
G
G
L
B
G
M
A
D
F
Thank
you,
chair,
perry,
I'd
like
to
move
that
the
motion,
or
that
the
variance
is
granted
notwithstanding
staff's
findings
or
findings.
One
practical
difficulty
being
stated
before
the
national
security,
the
age
of
the
location,
use
of
the
location,
the
public
safety
interest,
the
workers
interest
and
go
ahead
and
go
forward
with
no
requirements
for
aesthetics.
B
F
R
B
I
Certainly,
chair
perry,
members
of
the
board.
Today
we
have
with
us
jason
wittenberg,
janelle,
woodmeyer
and
joe
bernard.
They
are
the
currently
working
they're,
the
co-development
team,
currently
working
on
our
implementation
and
for
the
2040
plan.
They've
been
hard
at
work,
w
new
regulations
and
today
they're
here
to
kind
of
go
over
the
first
major
adoption
that
they've
had
they've
had
quite
a
few
other
ones
minor,
but
this
is
the
big
one:
the
built
forum,
overlay
districts
and
they're,
going
to
give
the
board
kind
of
an
idea
of
some.
I
R
Yeah
chair
perry,
I
think
it's
probably
going
to
run
most
smoothly
if
we
are
able
to
go
through
all
the
slides
and
then
have
questions
at
the
end.
Okay,
thank
you.
We're
really
happy
to
be
presenting
to
you
here
today,
thanks
for
the
introduction,
brad
we're
going
to
provide
an
overview
of
the
built
form
standards
by
the
end
of
this
presentation.
Hopefully,
you'll
have
a
good
sense
of
what
that
entails.
R
R
There
was
a
very
overwhelming
amount
of
information
that
we
presented
to
them
so
we're
trying
to
strike
a
balance,
partly
by
mostly
focusing
on
the
standards
that
are
more
likely
to
be
invoked
in
applications
considered
by
the
board
of
adjustment,
especially
those
applicable
to
single-family
homes,
duplexes
triplexes
in
our
neighborhood
interiors,
although
we
certainly
recognize
that
that's,
as
evidenced
by
the
previous
application
right
before
this,
that's
certainly
not
everything
that
the
board
of
adjustment
considers.
So
we
are
providing
some
broader
context
as
well.
R
R
S
What
you're
allowed
in
the
built
form
districts
is
what
you're
going
to
get
in
terms
of
development
potential.
This
is
part
of
that
predictability
goal
that
comes
with
an
important
caveat,
especially
for
this
group.
The
site
plan,
review
standards
and
other
standards
related
to
smaller
scale.
Development
haven't
changed
as
significantly
and
so
applications
that
this
body
sees
may
not
change
significantly
significantly
in
the
short
term,
as
it
relates
to
the
typical
variance
requests
that
you
see
along
those
same
lines.
S
There's
now
limits
to
the
amount
of
height
increases
you
can
request.
Janelle
will
go
over
those
in
greater
detail
in
a
moment,
but,
generally
speaking,
the
only
way
to
request
a
height
increase
for
projects
that
this
body
is
likely
to
see
is
through
a
variance
last
thing
I
think,
before
we
move
on
to
some
definition.
Changes
as
our
first
step
is
that
jason
already
mentioned
this,
but
elaborate
a
little
bit
that
uses
allowed
on
a
given
property
have
not
changed
with
this
amendment.
S
So
there
are
developments,
we're
going
to
see
that
that
are
zoned
of
r1a,
for
example,
but
have
a
built
form
district
on
it.
That
allows
for
much
more
development
intensity
than
what
would
have
been
allowed
in
r1a
prior
to
this.
This
change
in
our
zoning
so
because
of
that
that
mismatch,
there's
still
going
to
be
rezonings
that
we
see
until
we
come
forward
with
our
land
use
rezoning
study,
which
will
probably
get
started
sometime
later
this
year.
S
Not
the
most
exciting
of
changes,
but
we
we
have
adopted
some
new
definitions
that
provide
some
clarity
of
intent
with
our
new
regulations
and
changes.
The
way
we
apply
some
of
our
calculations,
so
the
biggest
one
here
is
that
a
change
to
the
gross
floor
area
definition
means
that
structured
parking
is
now
included
in
our
floor
area
ratio
calculation-
and
this
is
something
that's
somewhat
offset
by
our
changes
to
far
regulations
themselves
that
which
are
are
becoming
more
permissive
than
they
were
previously.
S
S
R
R
This
table
shows
the
allowed
far
within
the
the
interior,
one
two
and
three
districts.
Some
of
the
info
on
this
slide
will
be
summarized
on
the
next
slide,
but
we
have
essentially
come
up
with
a
different
far
based
on
whether
the
built
form
is
over
residential
zoning
or
a
commercial
or
industrial
zoning
district.
With
a
bit
more
flexibility
in
the
what's
listed
here
as
the
all
other
districts,
those
districts
that
tend
to
not
have
setback
requirements,
for
example,
and
that
can
accommodate
more
easily
a
bit
more
building
bulk.
R
I'll.
Just
note
that
the
interior
one
is
intended
to
allow
up
to
three
units
on
a
property
interior
two
starts
to
allow
buildings
with
four
or
more
units,
but
only
on
larger
lots
of
7
500
square
feet
or
more
and
then
interior
3
allows
multi-family
buildings
of
four
or
more
units
on
standard
sized
lots.
R
There's
a
bit
more
flexibility
when
you
kind
of
dive
into
the
the
table
for
far
in
four
or
more
unit
buildings
with
those
single-family
homes,
duplexes
and
triplexes,
being
limited
to
the
scale
that
has
historically
been
allowed
for
single-family
homes
and
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
janelle
who's
going
to
cover
the
1-3
unit
building
standards.
In
a
bit
more
detail.
K
Thank
you
jason,
so
the
next
slide
five
slides
actually
are
going
to
be
focusing
on
one
to
three
unit
residential
buildings
and
much
of
the
interior
districts,
as
jason
indicated,
will
continue
to
be
occupied
by
one
to
three
unit
dwellings,
and
these
uses
will
still
continue
to
be
located
in
other
districts.
That
will
be
allowed
to
do
more
density
than
before.
K
Someone
would
be
just
a
little
bit
bigger.
So
that's
specific
to
the
interior
districts.
When
you're
talking
about
other
built
from
overlay
districts,
then
windows,
3
and
drawings
are
just
subject
to
the
maximum
allowed.
Far
for
that
bill
from
district
there's,
no
difference
in
those
districts.
So,
for
example,
in
quarter
three,
the
maximum
far
would
be
1.5
in
a
residential
office
presidential
district,
and
that
would
apply
to
any
and
all
use
of
those
next
slide.
Please.
K
So
now,
we'll
cover
height
and
as
before,
height
regulations
for
one
to
three
unit
dwellings
are
generally
more
restrictive
than
for
other
uses.
So
one
to
two
unit
dwellings
are
going
to
be
subject
to
a
maximum
height
requirement.
Two
and
a
half
stories
28
feet
in
all
districts
and
again,
that's
maintaining
that
small
scale
of
existing
neighborhoods
triplexes
are
allowed
to
have
a
little
bit
more
flexibility
in
the
height
as
the
neighborhood
scale
increases.
K
So
an
interior
one
and
two
or
two
is
still
maintained
at
that
two
and
a
half
story:
28
foot
limit,
but
then
starting
in
interior,
three
and
all
the
other
districts,
the
allowed
height
for
a
triplex,
can
be
three
stories
42
feet.
One
notable
exception
is
that
for
existing
structures.
When
a
third
story
edition
is
proposed,
then
there's
some
compatibility
design
standards
that
would
apply
next
slide.
Please.
K
With
far
there
continues
to
be
a
one-time,
500
square
foot,
increase,
that's
authorized
for
existing
structures
and
then
specific
to
two
and
three
unit
dwellings.
There's
two
new
increases
that
are
authorized:
one
is
for
affordable
housing
by
providing
an
affordable
unit.
An
increase
is
allowed,
however,
there's
standards
that
have
to
be
met.
The
project
has
to
participate
in
a
federal
state
or
local
housing
program
or
be
the
mpha
and
then
the
second
one
is
related
to
environmental
sustainability.
J
K
Two
or
three
minute
dwelling
can
be
increased
in
only
the
interior,
two
and
interior
three
districts
and
then
for
height.
There's
one
administrative
option
for
increasing
height.
That
depends
on
the
surrounding
context,
so
it
can
be
increased
when
that
surrounding
context
exceeds
the
maximum
height
next
slide.
Please.
K
K
there's
still
a
six
thousand
square
foot
minimum
requirement
in
r1
and
r2
districts,
and
then
the
other
ones
are
a
minimum
of
five
thousand
square
feet.
One
notable
change,
though,
is
that
a
maximum
lot
size
requirement
of
seven
thousand
five
hundred
square
feet
now
applies
in
the
rfi
district,
our
sixth
district
and
the
or
districts,
and
then
for
a
lot
coverage
and
impervious
surface
requirements.
K
K
They
have
been
updated
a
little
bit
so
on
the
middle
table
on
your
screen,
there's
still
a
setback
requirement.
That
applies
based
on
the
lot
width,
but
these
requirements
are
somewhat
less
restrictive
than
they
were
previously
for
a
wider
lot,
and
now
these
requirements
apply
consistently
across
all
districts
and
then
in
all
other
districts.
The
minimum
interior
side
requirement
is
five
feet
for
rear
yard
requirements
in
the
r1
district.
The
minimum
step
back
requirement
is
six
feet
in
all
other
districts.
K
It's
five
feet,
then,
where
we
do
have
one
or
three
unit
dwellings
in
commercial
downtown.
Our
industrial
districts,
there
are
specific
yard
requirements
for
single
chief
family
buildings
shown
in
the
orange
table
on
your
screen
and
then
triplexes
are
just
subject
to
the
same
requirements
as
any
other
use
in
those
districts
which
we'll
cover
in
more
detail
later
next
slide.
R
R
The
numbers
related
to
conversions
were
were
some
somewhat
similar
to
that,
in
other
words,
if
you're
converting
from
a
single
family
to
duplex
or
duplex
to
triplex,
for
example,
so
again
pretty
incremental
in
the
the
pace
of
construction.
I
don't
have
the
numbers
in
front
of
me
about
how
many
of
those
are
in
districts
that
would
have
not
previously
allowed
those
uses
versus
districts
that
were
where
those
duplexes
and
triplexes
were
already
allowed
prior
to
2020..
K
K
So
we
don't
have
those
specifically
listed
on
the
screen,
but
I'll
just
give
you
an
example
in
interior
one
and
two
generally,
the
maximum
height
requirements,
two
and
a
half
stories
35
feet
and
then
quarter
six,
where
we
allow
larger
scale
development.
The
maximum
height
requirement
is
six
stories.
84
feet
also
related
to
maximum
height.
K
There
are
still
some
general
height
exemptions
for
principal
structures,
so
those
include
things
like
parapets
and
elevator
overruns:
mechanical
rooftop,
mechanical
equipment,
just
things
that
generally
don't
add
a
lot
of
bulk
to
a
building
and
don't
have
noticeable
impacts
to
the
scale
and
those
apply
both
for
one
to
three
unit
dwellings
and
just
any
other
principle
structure,
and
then
kind
of
newer
to
our
regulations
are
minimum
height
requirements
that
apply
in
districts
where
more
development
density
is
supported
and
is
intended
to
prevent
underdevelopment
next
slide.
Please.
K
The
height
increases
for
these
uses
and
locations
are
not
appropriate
unless
all
of
the
findings
for
variants
can
be
met,
then
the
other
method
available
for
eligible
uses
and
locations
is
an
administrative
application.
Previously,
a
conditioning's
permit
was
required,
so
for
the
most
part,
height
can
be
increased
for
these
eligible
uses
or
locations
just
administratively.
K
There
are
some
exceptions,
though,
that
apply
in
the
shoreline
and
the
mississippi
critical,
mississippi
river
critical
area
overlay
district,
where
a
conditions
permit
is
still
needed.
So
this
new
administrative
process
is
tied
to
furthering
the
goals
of
the
comprehensive
plan.
There
are
also
limits
in
place
to
ensure
that
the
height
increases
don't
exceed
the
height
that's
intended,
or
that
the
height
of
the
next
higher
bill
form
district.
R
Thank
you
moving
on
to
lot
dimensions
which
govern
both
the
minimum
and
maximum
size
of
lots
in
area
as
well
as
maximum
minimum
lot
width.
Excuse
me
I'll
note
that
most
commercial
uses
don't
have
minimum
lot
dimension
requirements.
So
just
you
you
can
still
do
an
al's
breakfast
width
of
a
building
in
a
commercial
district.
If,
if,
if
you'd
like
and
people
were
have
been
concerned
about
us,
potentially
prohibiting
things
like
that,
we
have
made
much
more
of
a
use
of
maximum
lot
sizes
than
we
have
historically.
R
The
lowry
avenue
graphic
here
simply
shows
that
that's
an
example
of
a
corridor
that
has
corridor
four
built
form
designation.
It's
mapped
four
parcels
deep
off
of
the
corridor,
both
north
and
south,
and
so
a
quarter.
Four,
for
example,
would
allow
you
to
combine
those
four
lots
into
a
redevelopment
project,
but
you'd
be
starting
to
get
close
to
your
maximum
lot
size
in
that
instance.
Next
slide,
please
and
one
more
example,
demonstrating
intent
of
maximum
lot
sizes.
R
R
K
Thank
you.
So
our
next
topic
is
yard
apartments.
We
already
covered
some
of
this
with
the
one
to
three
yard
requirements
earlier,
so
I'm
going
to
give
an
overview
of
the
art
requirements
that
apply
to
other
uses
which
primarily
affect
the
properties
in
the
office,
residence
and
office
residence
districts,
so
starting
with
the
interior
side
yard
and
rear
yard
requirements
which
are
shown
in
the
table.
K
How
the
minimum
requirement
is
determined
is
now
based
on
the
overall
building
height
and
feet
rather
than
the
overall
building
height
and
stories.
The
reason
for
this
change
is
that
the
height
of
a
story
can
vary
significantly
between
projects,
so
a
residential
building
on
a
commercial
building
often
have
different
floor
heights.
K
The
height
ranges
in
the
table
are
based
on
average
residential
building
floor
height,
the
the
height
used
to
determine
the
required
setback
also
does
not
include
any
permitted
height
exemptions,
so
these
yard
requirements
are
generally
less
restrictive
than
they
were
before
unless
a
building
has
taller
floor
heights,
so
one
example
would
be
an
average
three-story.
Residential
building
now
is
subject
to
a
side
yard
setback
requirement
of
five
feet
before
it
would
have
been
subject
to
a
side
year,
setback
requirement
of
nine
feet.
K
There
are
some
exceptions
to
this
table
which
we
already
covered
for
one
to
three
unit
dwellings,
but
also
long
buildings
that
take
up
the
length
of
most
of
the
lot.
I
would
have
a
little
bit
higher
requirement
in
very
select
locations
where
you
have
a
quarter,
sixth
or
transit
district,
a
budding
in
the
interior
district.
The
requirement
is
also
increased.
K
Something
that
may
come
up
occasionally
with
the
board
is
for
institutional
and
public
uses
in
interior,
one
and
in
interior.
Two
districts
that
have
a
structure
height
greater
than
28
feet
are
going
to
have
a
a
larger
requirement.
For
aside
your
setback
instead
of
five
feet,
it
would
be
seven
feet
next
slide.
Please.
K
So
the
same
approach
was
applied
to
the
that
was
applied
to
the
interior
side
and
the
rear
requirements
was
also
applied
to
the
corner
side,
yard
setback
requirements
so
again,
basing
that
height
on
in
feet
and
on
the
average
floor
height
of
a
residential
use.
That
then
determines
what
the
the
corner
cider
setback
is.
K
These
again
are
generally
a
little
less
restrictive
than
they
were
before
and
before
moving
on
to
the
next
topic,
I
just
wanted
to
mention
a
couple
more
things.
Foreign
requirements
are
pretty
much
the
same
as
what
is
required
for
a
one
to
three
unit
dwelling
so
in
the
residence
and
office
residence
districts,
regardless
of
use.
K
S
Okay,
just
a
few
more
slides
here.
Thank
you,
everyone
for
hanging
in.
I
know
this
is
a
lot
of
information
to
digest.
So
the
what
you're
looking
at
here
is
maximum
lot
coverage
and
impervious
surface
standards
that
we
have
in
the
code.
Those
those
are
in
place
to
accomplish
a
few
things.
It
combats
the
urban
heat
island
effect.
We
want
to
promote
adequate
space
for
landscaping
and
reinforce
existing
development
patterns,
and
I
the
most
important
here
is
reduce
stormwater
runoff,
so
that
stormwater
is
going
into
the
soil
instead
of
our
system.
S
So
the
new
standards
here,
they're
largely
consistent
with
old
regulations
in
the
zoning
ordinance
commercial
property,
continues
to
permit
up
to
100
lot
coverage,
while
allowable
lot
coverage
percentages
generally
otherwise
increase
as
the
built
form
district
allows
more
building
bulk
next
slide.
Please
finally,
we've
developed
some
resources
that
are
available
online
and
we'll
we
can
send
these
links
out
and
they
can
be.
The
resources
can
be
found
at
minneapolis2040.com
in
addition
to
the
code
text
that
is
available
at
munico.
S
S
These
are
basically
cheat
sheets
for
each
built
form
district
that
covers
all
of
the
relevant
regulations
for
that
district,
including
floor
area
ratios,
set
by
setbacks,
lot
coverage,
etc.
They
include
some
visuals
that
indicate
the
location
of
these
districts
throughout
the
city
and
the
intent
as
outlined
in
minneapolis
2040
as
well.
Next.
S
S
R
B
P
Thank
you,
chair
perry,
thanks
everyone
for
the
amazing
presentation.
You
piqued
my
interest
with
the
cluster
development
when
you
mention
cluster
developments
and
I
think
they're
fabulous.
I
have
a
friend,
that's
lived
in
one
for
many
years
and
I'm
curious.
If
you
can
give
me
a
preview
about
what
it
is
that
you're
looking
to
do
to
maybe
encourage
more
of
that
sort
of
development
in
the
city.