►
Description
Additional information at
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
A
C
C
C
The
city
will
be
recording
and
posting
this
meeting
to
the
city's
website
and
youtube
channel
as
a
means
of
increasing
public
access
and
transparency.
This
meeting
is
public
and
subject
to
minnesota
open
meeting
law.
I
will
call
this
meeting
to
order.
Will
the
clerk
please
call
the
rule
to
verify
the
quorum.
B
A
A
B
D
D
C
B
F
C
All
right,
okay,
so
that
motion
passes
and
the
agenda
is
adopted
next
on
the
agenda
is
the
acceptance
of
the
minutes
of
a
regular
meeting
from
august
5th
2021..
Can
I
have
a
motion
to
accept
those
minutes,
commissioner?.
B
A
A
B
A
C
A
C
C
Rookie
move
all
right
that
motion
passes.
So
the
first
item
on
our
discussion
agenda
today
is
number
four
upper
harbor
terminal
and
staff
is
hillary
devorek.
H
H
H
This
is
the
development
overview.
This
is
the
image
that
has
been
that
is
in
the
coordinated
the
direct,
the
coordinated
plan
that
is,
has
been
completed
for
this
project
and
will
be
going
to
the
city
council
later
this
year,
and
so
the
upper
harbor
terminal
site
is
located
on
the
western
bank
of
the
mississippi
river
in
north
minneapolis.
H
The
site
up
until
most
recently
has
been
used
as
an
intermodal
barge
shipping
terminal
and
was
used
for
storage
and
transfer
of
commodities
to
and
from
the
site.
The
barge
terminal
remained
in
operation
until
the
end
of
14.
When
bargins
ceased
to
the
plan,
closure
of
the
upper
st
anthony
falls
lock
in
the
spring
of
2015,
due
to
the
asian
carp
uses
prior
to
the
site
of
being
a
barge
shipping
terminal
included,
lumber
yards
and
mills
and
later
commercial
gardens
fast
forward
many
years.
H
What
you
see
on
this-
and
I
apologize
if
it's
small
or
hard
to
read
the
yellow
buildings,
those
that
is
the
housing
components
of
those
buildings,
the
the
pink
or
the
red-
is
the
commercial
or
non-residential
portions
of
those
buildings.
And
then,
as
you
head,
it's
not
gonna,
I
don't
know
if
you
can
see
my
mouse.
Can
you
see
my
mouse?
H
H
There
are
services
leading
to
the
site,
however,
those
services
need
to
be
extended
to
accommodate
all
of
the
new
development
that
is
proposed
over
the
entire
53
acres.
Currently,
there
are
overhead
transmission
lines
that
come
across
the
river
from
the
power
plant,
the
xl
power
plant
across
on
the
east
side
of
the
river
to
this
site,
and
then
they
head
south
down
and
into
downtown
those
the
existing
power
line.
H
Transects
those
southerly
portions,
those
southerly
parcels,
excuse
me
of
the
site
and
those
overhead
power
lines
will
be
moved
in
cooperation
with
xcel
energy
to
the
railroad
corridor,
which
is
on
the
west
side
of
the
site
for
those
southern
parcels.
H
So
just
going
to
take
you
through
the
background
of
the
project,
so
this
current
project
and
there
have
been
many
starts
and
stops
for
the
upper
harbor
terminal
site
since
the
city
learned
that
the
federal
government
was
going
to
be
closing
the
upper
locks.
But
for
this
current
project
we
started
visioning
and
community
engagement
in
2015.
H
in
2019,
the
city
council
established
the
collaborative
planning
committee.
They
were
charged
with
producing
a
coordinated
plan
for
the
site
and
they
have
done
that.
I
we
provided
links
to
that
development
plan
or
the
coordinated
plan
and
the
website
for
the
whole
project.
So
I'm
hoping
or
I'm
encouraging
you
as
we
move
forward
in
the
next
several
months
or
a
year
to
to
read
through
some
of
these
materials.
I
could
have
flooded
you
with
information,
but
I
thought
providing
links
to
some
of
these
pages
was
a
better
use
of
your
time.
H
H
H
H
Then
there
was
scenario
one
which,
which
is
the
draft
coordinated
development
plan
and
then
scenario
two
is
the
maximum
build
allowed
under
the
minneapolis
2040
plan,
an
auar
requires
a
mitigation
plan
and
that
mitigation
plan
identifies
the
environmental
impacts
and
then
mitigation
strategies
to
address
those
impacts
and
then
also
in
that
medication
plan.
It
also
talks
about
or
assigns
responsibility
to
those
again.
We
provided
a
link
to
the
aur
page
for
this
project.
H
I
encourage
you
to
read
that
there
are
approximately
55
pages
of
land
use,
justin
bland
used
discussion
in
that
again,
I
could
have
given
all
of
that
to
you,
but
I
wanted
to
condense
it.
So
I
wasn't
flooding
you
with
information.
Eventually,
you
will
need
to
read
all
of
it
because
it
is
applicable
to
your
work.
H
However,
I
did
not
provide
everything
in
this
in
this
memo,
as
I
was
just
wanting
to
introduce
you
to
the
project
to
you
and
then
key
you
up
for
what
will
be
happening
later,
this
fall,
but
I
would
encourage
you
to
go
back
and
read
the
auar
at
least
the
land
use
section,
because
there
is
a
lot
of
information
in
there.
That's
that's
very
applicable
to
what
you
all
do
for
the
city.
H
H
H
H
This
is
how
we
talk
about
this
project
when
we
discuss
this
as
a
project
team
and
with
our
development
partners.
H
So
you
will
see
many
written
materials
from
me
that
that
top
reference,
these
parcel
numbers
so
commit
them
to
memory.
If
you
will,
if
you
want
to
all
of
us,
have
and
when,
when
people,
renumber
them
or
name
them,
something
different,
I
can
tell
you
we
all
get
off,
so
those
the
northern
half
of
the
site
is
where
the
i3
is,
and
then
the
southern
half
and
those
parcels
between
I-94
and
the
railroad
tracks
are
i2.
H
H
So
I'm
going
to
get
into
all
of
the
overlays
that
are
on
this
site
and
there
are
many.
So
this
is
the
built
form
overlay
zoning
map
personals.
H
Well,
all
of
the
parcels,
except
for
the
park
parcel
park,
parcels
ii,
all
of
the
other
parcels
are
quarter
or
six
built
form,
and
then
the
park
parcel
is
parks
and
open
space
for
parks.
Excuse
me,
all
of
the
development
in
terms
of
height,
I
should
say,
will
match
the
built
form
guidance.
H
However,
on
parcel
7a,
the
development
the
developers
have
proposed
a
15-story
building
and
the
collaborative
planning
committee
that
was
established
for
this
did
vote
in
support
of
increasing
the
height
of
that
property
in
on
7a,
and
so
we
will
be
seeking
a
comprehensive
plan
amendment
to
address
that
it
is
currently
in
the
quarter
six.
I
think
we
would
be
going
to
transit
10
and
then
they
would
do
premiums
up
to
that.
15
stories.
H
This
is
the
overlay
zoning
map
for
this
site.
The
site
is
located
all
of
the
parcels
except
for
parcel
78
and
7b
are
located
in
the
shoreland
overlay.
H
The
shoreline
overlays,
you
know
limits
height
to
the
two
and
a
half
stories
or
35
feet
through
this
process.
Again
through
the
collaborative
planning
committee,
there
was
a
vote
to
increase
the
height
of
those
buildings
on
parcels,
one
a
one
b,
three,
four
five
and
six
up
to
six
stories.
I
should
I
should
take
that
back.
Four
and
five
aren't
gonna
be
up
to
six
stories,
but
one
a
one
b
and
six
6a6b
would
be
so
they
would
be
seeking
a
conditionally,
determined
or
variance
to
increase
the
height
of
those
buildings.
H
The
next
and
last
overlay
is
the
merka
overlay,
the
mississippi
river
quarter,
critical
area,
which
this
commission
recently
voted.
A
new
ordinance
for
parcels,
one
through
six,
are
located
in
the
merka
overlay.
H
I'm
going
to
just
go
back
to
just
the
zoning
map
for
right
now,
so
then
the
other
two
applications
are
so
that
that
takes
you
through
all
of
the
zoning
and
the
overlay
work.
No
overlays
will
be
changed,
just
the
underlying
base,
zoning.
H
What
we
are
proposing
for
zoning
classifications
is
the
park
would
go
to
c1
parcels,
one
e,
I'm
sorry,
I'm
gonna
stop
right.
There,
I'm
gonna
come
back
to
that.
I'm
sorry!
I'm
going
to
complete
the
future
land
use
section!
I'm
sorry,
because
that
will
all
make
more
sense.
Then
I
apologize
so
personals
one
one,
six
and
seven
are
in
the
quarter
are
mixed
you.
So
this
is
future
land
use.
H
Classifications
from
the
2040
plan,
parcel
two:
are
the
park
parcels
and
the
parks
and
open
space,
and
then
you
can
see
three
four
and
five
are
in
the
production.
Mixed
use.
H
So
to
meld
the
zoning
with
the
future
land
use
guidance.
Those
parcels
that
are
in
the
quarter
of
mixed
use
would
be
rezoned
to
the
c3a
we
are
proposing
to
rezone
the
park,
parcel
2c1
and
then
for
3,
4
and
5.
We
are
proposing
an
eye
one
or
light
industrial
zoning
classification,
and
I
also
want
to
say
keep
in
mind
that
as
part
of
the
city-wide
rezoning
study
that
will
be
coming
forward
in
2022
or
2023.
H
As
I
had
indicated,
we
will
be
replating
this
property.
Currently,
there
are
nine
tax
parcels
on
this
site.
As
you
can
see
from
the
numbering
and
the
in
the
parcel
numeration,
we
will
be
creating
10
tax
parcels.
H
I
didn't
go
through
the
entire
memo
because
it
was
more
for
your
background
and
information,
but
we
do
have
some
questions
and
I
I'm
anticipating
that
we
will
be
before
you
several
times
with
this
project
and
obviously
each
parcel
will
require
land
use
approvals
and
we
will
bring
each
parcel
to
you
for
a
review
until
they're
designed,
though
we
don't
have
more
information
to
share
with
you
at
this
time
about
individual
development
sites,
but
in
order
to
transfer
land,
not
ownership
but
transfer
the
development
rights
to
united
properties
or
first
avenue
or
the
park
board,
we
need
to
rezone
it.
H
H
If
you
have
questions
about
the
future
zoning
or
the
comprehensive
plan
amendment
that
is
required
for
7a
or
if
you
just
have
questions
in
general
about
the
project,
it
has
been
going
on
for
a
long
time.
It's
been
in
the
media.
It's
been
talked
about.
The
city
council
has
had
briefings
on
it.
The
heritage
preservation
commission
just
had
a
briefing
on
the
site.
Last
last
week
the
site
is
eligible
for
local
designation,
and
so
we
will
be
needing
to
bring
demolition
permits
to
the
hpc
later
this
year
as
well.
H
C
Thank
you,
hillary
commissioners,
any
comments
or
questions
or
discussion.
I
appreciate
you
laying
out
the
process
and
how,
when
the
applications
are
going
to
come
and
in
what
order,
that's
helpful.
I
Okay,
I'll
go
first,
I'm
super
excited
about
this
project.
I
First
of
all,
I
guess
that's
my
biggest
comment
and
I'm
really
not
envious
of
staff
working
on
it
because
it
sounds
like
there's
a
million
layers
associated
with
it.
So
thank
you
guys
for
working
so
hard
on
it.
Why
do
we
have
to
rezone?
Can
you
just
explain
why
we
have
to
rezone
every
individual
parcel
and
why
we
couldn't
just
do
a
pud
for
the
whole
site
and
then
like
not
have
to
rezone
it
in
the
future,
so
in
minneapolis.
H
Pud
is
in
a
zoning
classification.
I
know
in
other
municipalities.
It
is,
but
it's
it's
not
here.
So
that
is
why
we
have
to
rezone
each
parcel.
I
Okay,
that
makes
sense
yeah.
I
don't
really
have
any
other
comments
or
questions.
I'm
just
really
excited
and
I
don't
see
caprini
online,
but
both
of
us
live
in
north.
So
it's
it's
exciting
to
have
some
like
cool
development
happening
in
north
and
get
some
like
cool
attention
on
north
in
the
mississippi.
So
yeah,
I'm
just
excited.
That's
my
whole
comment.
F
To
be
able
to
chime
in
I'm
looking
at
the
map
right
now-
and
I
was
just
curious
about
why
is
there
not
perks
and
open
space
on
the
other
side
of
the
river,
where
the
production
processing
zoned
area
is
looking
like
going,
or
is
that
a
different
part
of
the
process
altogether,
and
not
the
one
we're
focusing
on
today?
That
could
be
the
case.
F
H
There
is
okay,
there
is
so
between
the
parcels
and
the
river
starting
at
parcels.
Three
down
to
five.
There
is
park
space
between
those
parcels,
so
the
road
will,
I'm
gonna
go
back
to
this
image
and
I'm
gonna.
Are
you
guys
with
me
still
I'm
sorry,
I
can't
see
what
I'm
showing
you
guys
for
some
reason.
H
Can
you
see
the
the
development
overview
on
your
screen?
Yeah?
Okay,
so
those
parcels
are
set
back
from
the
river,
and
so,
if
you
can
see
my
cursor,
this
is
darlene
avenue
as
it
comes
into
the
site
and
lands
right
here,
and
one
can
either
go
north
or
go
south
and
then
the
the
the
majority
of
the
park
is
concentrated
here
in
the
middle
around
the
existing
structures
that
exist
on
the
site
and
some
of
those
structures
will
remain
and
be
incorporated
into
the
park
and
some
of
those
structures
will
be
demolished.
H
H
That
is
correct.
That
is
correct,
so
the
parkway
will
come
up
adjacent
to
the
buildings
and
then
there
is
park
space
between
that
parkway
and
then
the
river's
edge,
okay
and
the
park
board
will
be
doing
shoreline
restoration
along
along
the
river,
and
so
what
you
see
today
is
not
what
you
will
see
in
the
future.
You
know:
there's
all
kinds
of
stuff
piled
up
along
the
edge
of
the
river,
but
those
things
will
will
also
be
addressed.
H
And
again
I
intend
to
bring
each
development
parcel
before
you
or
maybe
we'll
have
just
one
meeting
where
we
talk
about
the
park
or
one
meeting
where
we
talk
about
the
community
community
performing
arts
center
or
whichever
aspect
of
the
development
and
that's
some
of
the
feedback.
I'd
like
to
get
from
you
guys
today
is
to
understand
what
you
want
us
to
come
and
talk
to
you
about
or
if
waiting
for
each
development
to
come
in
is
fine
or
if
you
want
anything
else
in
advance.
G
Thank
you,
yeah.
It's
really
exciting.
To
see
this,
I
know
it's
had
fits
and
starts
and
re-engagements
with
the
neighborhood,
and
I
I
know
they
have
weighed
in
and
begun
to
shape
this,
which
is
wonderful,
a
couple
questions.
The
the
park
itself
is
that
will
that
become
a
city
park
that
is
owned
and
maintained
by
the
city,
or
is
that
the
developer?
G
H
Minneapolis
park
and
recreation
board
will
have
ownership
of
that
land
and
they
it
will
become
a
public
park.
G
And
the
structures
and
everything
that
are
existing
in
there
is
there,
obviously
a
key
part
of
the
sort
of
identity
of
that
area.
What
what
is
to
become
of
those.
H
It
has
not
been
completely
finalized
and
what
we
will
be
bringing
back
to
the
heritage
preservation.
Commission.
What
I
can
bring
back
to
all
of
you
is
there
will
be
a
selective
demolition
plan
brought
forward.
We
need
to
demolish
the
warehouse.
There
are
a
few
buildings
at
the
north
end
of
parcel
6,
and
then
there
are
some
structures
on
parcel
2,
which
is
the
park
board
land
that
will
need
to
come
down
to
construct
the
infrastructure,
the
roads,
the
sidewalks.
H
Do
the
utility
work,
the
the
the
majority
of
the
structures,
the
domes,
the
conveyors,
the
green
silos,
all
of
those
things,
some
will
stay
in
some
some
will
come
down
or
some
will
be
requested
to
come
down.
H
But
I
don't
have
a
specific
plan
right
now.
If
you
do
look
in
the
coordinated
plan,
there
is
an
early
version
of
a
demolition
plan
or
a
preservation
plan.
I
should
say
not
a
demolition
plan,
a
preservation
plan
that
you
could
that
you
can
see
in
there.
It's
it's
not,
I
would
say
it's,
it's,
maybe
not
the
most
current
version
because,
as
as
the
park
board
has
gone
through
there,
they
and
they've
had
a
process
with
the
community
with
a
cac
they've
had
it.
H
They
established
a
cac
for
this
and
they've,
been
working
through
that
process
to
to
design
the
park
and
and
come
up
with
uses
and
whatnot
for
the
park,
and
so
through
that
things
have
slightly
changed
and
the
park
board
is
also
just
looking
at.
You
know:
how
long
would
we
keep
a
structure?
Can
we
mothball
things?
We
don't
quite
know
what
we
would
do
this,
but
maybe
we
would
keep
it
for
the
future
but
yeah.
H
So
it's
it's
not
100
known
or
set
in
stone
right
now,
which
structures
wetter
would
not
stay,
but
I
can
say
that
you
know
there
are
structures
on
the
site
that
would
remain.
That
would
allow
one
to
envision
a
barge
coming
up,
docking,
unloading,
coal
through
conveyor
system
and
to
the
site,
and
if
things
come
down
that
also
help
tell
that
story.
There
are
mitigation
items
that
will
need
to
be
done
and
that's
through
the
auar
process.
H
It's
probably
the
last
like
five
pages
of
the
document
where
it
talks
about
you
know
if
you
know
demolishing
these
structures,
what
is
the
mitigation,
and
so
there
will
be
storytelling
on
the
site
through
different
means
and
methods
that
the
park
board
and
public
works
within
the
public
realm
spaces
will
be
highlighting
what
used
to
be
here
and
celebrating
the
history
of
the
site,
or
I
don't
know
if
celebrating
the
history
of
the
site
is
the
accurate
term
but
telling
the
history
of
the
site
through
storyboards
or
whatnot,
and
also
maybe
reflect
you
know
reflecting
through
design
where
dome
once
stood
or
whatnot.
H
But
a
lot
of
those
details
are
yet
to
come,
and
I
will
bring
that
to
you.
B
Yeah,
I
just
had
a
very
quick
question
about
the
park
being
well,
obviously
under
minneapolis
park
board,
but
I
just
wanted
to
ask-
and
this
may
very
well
be
too
soon
to
ask
whether
or
not
there
is
any
potential
plant
for
this
park
to
become
a
regional
park
as
opposed
to
a
city
park
due
to
like
budgeting
and
and
whatnot.
H
I
I'm
not
sure
if
I
have
julie
eldritch
on
the
phone,
if
julie's
on
the
call,
I
want
to
say
that
this
is
part
of
the
regional
park
plan
or
ties
into
the
north
north,
mississippi
regional
park.
That
is
north.
J
H
Here
or
will
eventually
tie
into,
I
should
say
there
are
parcels
located
between
that
park
and
this
property
that
aren't
owned
by
the
park
board.
They
have
been
trying
to
acquire
the
land
along
the
riverfront,
as
everyone
knows,
but
I
don't
I
feel
like
I
should
know
the
answer
to
this
question
and
I'm
just
like
you
stumped
me
all
of
a
sudden.
I
think
john.
H
L
Sure
and
sorry
I
apologize
I'm
in
my
car,
that's
okay!
It
is
part
of
the
regional
park
system,
so
the
primary
funding
for
this
park
does
come
from
met
council.
M
Sorry,
I'm
at
work,
I'm
getting
ready
to
open
gym
night,
quick
question.
Did
I
hear
you
say
that
you
could
actually
bring
us
each
part
or
each
coming
back
up
each
project
separately
so
that
we
could
discuss
it?
Because
I
personally
would
appreciate
that,
because
it's
such
a
big
project
and
there's
so
much
controversy
and
drama.
H
And-
and
we
will
I
mean
we
may
bring
so
the
development
is
going
to
be
built
out
in
phases.
So
one
a
is
not
going
to
come
to
you.
First,
one
b
is
going
to
come
to
you
first
6
a
is
going
to
come
before
6
b
7
is
a
later
phase.
H
Commissioner
company,
thank
you
I'm
glad
we
found
you
again.
Yes,
I
will
be
able
to
bring
each
each
parcel
development
to
you.
We
may
bring
one
or
two
at
a
time,
depending
on
how
quickly
the
development
team
is
ready
to
move
on
each
individual
site.
But,
yes,
we
will
come
in
and
have
have
have
a
conversation
as
we
would
with
any
development
project
in
the
city
on
any
site
to
you
for
review.
All
of
these
will
will
require
kamea
the
whole
review
prior
to
formal
planning.
Commission.
J
H
J
I
Thank
you.
I
guess
I
have
two
questions.
My
initial
thought
when
I
was
looking
at
the
layout
is.
I
was
curious
why
the
senior
housing
was
further
away
from
the
art
center
and
the
health
and
wellness
hub
as
opposed
to
the
mixed
income
housing.
I
So
I
was
just
kind
of
wondering
why
we
chose
that
alignment
as
opposed
to
putting
the
senior
housing
closer
since
you
typically
seniors
would
not
be
as
mobile,
so
it'd
be
nicer
to
have
them
close
to
it
or
if
we
were
trying
to
make
like
a
more
vibrant
center
of
the
area,
and
then
I
guess
the
staff
report
had
some
information
on
like
bikes
and
peds
throughout
the
site,
but
that's
something
I'd
be
curious
about
moving
forward
when
they
come
back,
is
just
the
connectivity
through
the
site
and
making
sure
that,
with
the
first
phases
of
development,
I
personally
would
like
to
see
that
connectivity
like
right
away
so
that
if
it
lags
or
something
like
that,
we
do
have
the
trails
to
get
through
the
site
right
along
the
mississippi.
H
Sure
the
park
board
will
be
the
the
bike
and
there
will
be
city
sidewalk
on
the
development
side
of
the
parkway,
and
then
there
will
be
trails
on
the
riverside
at
this
moment.
They
cannot
connect.
They
cannot
connect
north
and
south
because
there's
private
land
between
the
site
and
where
the
the
trails
start,
and
so
we
won't
get
initial
connectivity,
but
we
will
connect
into
the
bicycle
network
that
is
on
washington
on
second
on
dowling.
H
Join
us
for
a
meeting
to
go
over
the
public
realm
framework
plan
for
the
site,
they're
kind
of
in
the
midst
of
that
of
that
engagement
right
now,
and
so
it
might
be
a
little
premature,
but
maybe
in
a
month
or
so
it
would
be
a
good
idea
to
have
them
come
back
as
far
as
the
senior
housing
on
the
north
end
on
1a
versus
near
the
hub,
I'm
going
to
have
to
reach
out
to
the
development
team
as
to
their
thinking.
H
C
G
Just
you
kind
of
sneak
one
in
there.
Sorry
do
you
in
terms
of
the
partialization?
Is
that
pretty
much
set
hillary
or
is
there
because
it
seems
one
of
the
intriguing
things
about
a
big
development
like
this?
Is
you
know
it's
all
the
magics
in
the
spaces,
in
between
everything
and
with
partialization
comes
setbacks,
and,
and
we
begin
to
sort
of
isolate
for
good
reason
sometimes,
but
you
know,
there's
certainly
an
interesting
potential
for
different
kinds
of
densities
or
or
synergies
between
parcels
absent
those
things.
G
But
so
I
was
just
curious
about
nope.
This
is
pretty
much
here
or
do
you
expect
some
fluidity,
as
this
gets
more
and
more
real,
coming
forward.
H
We
will
be
planning
and
I'm
sorry
I
didn't
have-
I
don't-
have
a.
I
don't-
have
a
preliminary
plot
application
to
show
you
the
parcels,
so
things
are
well.
I
guess
the
parcels
that
are
on
there
is
approximate,
and
so
I
think
for
the
first
phase
of
development.
H
I
would
not
anticipate
having
more
parcels
of
land
five
years
from
now
10
years
from
now,
if,
if
seven's
not
built,
if
you
know
some
of
these
other,
if
some
of
the
parcels
aren't
built
out,
perhaps
things
could
change,
but
at
this
point
in
time
you
know
term
sheets
and
development.
H
K
Good
afternoon,
commissioners,
the
next
item
up
is
greenway
apartments.
You
may
remember
looking
at
this
project
earlier
this
year
for
the
comprehensive
plan
amendment
for
the
properties
at
28,
37,
28,
39,
28,
43,
11
avenue,
south
20
34,
28,
36
and
28
40
12
avenue
south.
K
Previously
those
parcels
had
a
built
form
designation
of
interior
three
and
were
successful
in
amending
the
comprehensive
plan
to
re-guide
to
corridor
six.
In
addition,
one
of
those
other
parcels
too,
it
was
2839
11th
avenue
south-
had
been
slated
for
production,
mixed
use
as
a
future
land
use
category,
and
that
has
also
been
reguided
and
remapped
to
the
urban
neighborhood
future
land
use
designation.
K
The
applicant
is
now
proposing
the
land
use
application
portion
of
the
project
to
move
it
forward.
The
project
itself
hasn't
changed
in
detail
from
what
has
come
before
you
with
the
comprehensive
plan
amendment.
So
here
we're
here
to
talk
today,
specifically
about
land
use,
applications,
rezoning
side
plan
review,
so
the
applicant
is
proposing
a
five-story,
multiple
family
dwelling
and
it
will
have
a
total
of
97
dwelling
units.
K
86
of
those
units
are
intended
for
families
and
individuals
with
a
mix
of
income
ranges
of
30,
50
and
60
percent
of
the
area.
Median
income
and
11
units
will
be
specifically
reserved
for
people
who
would
otherwise
be
experiencing
homelessness.
K
So
a
clarification
from
the
planning
commission
memo
that
was
for
today's
meeting
is
that
it's
not
going
to
be
an
emergency
shelter,
but
instead
subsidized
dwelling
units
so
that
conditional
use
permit
will
not
be
required.
K
K
The
property
lines
to
the
north
and
south
are
both
interior
site
or
interior
side
property
lines.
Here's
some
general
context
of
the
area.
Midtown
greenway
is
nearby
abbott
northwestern
again
midtown
greenway
or
a
few
blocks
here
from
the
transit
hub
on
the
other
side
of
the
midtown,
greenway
and
kind
of
important
intersections
of
chicago
and
lake
as
well.
K
This
just
kind
of
shows
the
greater
area
and
and
kind
of
the
nearby
sites
and
and
the
proposed
site
area
and
context.
K
The
existing
uses
on
the
property
are
a
combination
of
vacant
parcels.
There
was
a
contractor's
yard
and
storage
building
a
single
family
dwelling,
a
two
family
dwelling
and
a
four
unit
residential
structure,
so
those
would
all
be
demolished
as
part
of
the
proposed
project.
K
So
presently
there
are
several
of
the
parcels
that
are
zoned
r2b,
which,
although
being
a
multiple
family
district,
doesn't
permit
multiple
family
dwellings
greater
than
three
units,
so
certainly
the
property's
at
28,
37,
11th
avenue,
south
and
then
2834
in
2840,
12th
avenue
south
will
have
to
be
rezoned.
K
The
remainder
of
the
site
is
zoned
r4,
which
is
also
a
multiple
family.
District.
Multiple
family
districts
are
for
a
multiple
family
dwelling,
is
a
permitted
land
use
and
does
not
have
a
density
requirement.
However,
in
the
plan
unit
development
in
r4
there
is
a
density.
A
lot
area
approved
modeling
unit
requirement
that
can't
be
met.
So
one
of
the
questions
today
will
be
whether
or
not
the
planning
development
is
the
more
appropriate
application
or
if
they
should
come
forward
as
a
multiple
family
dwelling.
K
So
part
of
the
conversation
is
around
what
additional
land
use
applications
would
be
required
based
on
the
plating
of
the
lot.
As
I
mentioned,
there
are
two
front
yards
there's
one
along
11th
avenue,
south
and
another
along
12th
avenue.
South
the
setback
along
11th
avenue
south
would
need
a
variance.
K
It
is
less
than
the
district
setback
and
then
the
setback
of
the
setback
areas
would
also
be
required
along
12th
avenue
south
based
on
the
location
of
the
adjacent
dwelling
to
the
north.
So
the
established
setback
in
this
case
is
greater,
so
staff
had
identified
those
two
front:
yard
setbacks
and
had
conversations
with
the
developer
early
about
doing
a
plan
unit
development,
so
that
was
originally
what
we
thought
that
they
would
like
to
apply
for,
but
I
think
they're
weighing
their
options.
K
So
today
we
would
like
to
have
specific
feedback
of
is
the
planning
of
development,
the
more
appropriate
application
to
avoid
those
front
yard
setback
variances
or
if
we
think
that
there
is
practical
difficulty
in
order
to
approve
those
variances
along
both
11th
and
12th,
so
from
a
district
setback
and
then
also
from
an
established
setback,
there
will
be
a
variance
also
required
for
balconies
along
the
south
interior
side
property
line.
K
As
I
mentioned,
that's
an
interior
side,
even
though
it
is
accessible
from
the
midtown
greenway
and
that
being
a
public
pathway,
it's
not
a
public
street,
so
there's
an
interior
side,
property
line
here
that
that's
being
met
and
then
an
interior
side,
property
line
on
the
south.
So
in
addition
to
the
the
promenade,
is
also
too
wide
in
a
required
setback.
So
balconies
and
the
walkway
would
require
interior
side
yourself
x
regardless.
K
So
I
had
also
planned
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
proposed
amenities,
but
I
think
it's
probably
really
more
important
to
have
a
conversation
about
whether
or
not
we
think
that
planning
and
development
is
the
appropriate
application
or
if
the
front
yard
setback
variances
seem
seem
reasonable
and
inconsistent.
K
N
Hey
everybody:
this
is
paul
keenan
from
reuter
walton.
I've
recently
taken
this
project
over
from
kyle
in
our
office,
so
you,
I
think,
you've
seen
this
project
before,
but
not
me
so
good,
just
good
to
meet
you
all.
I
will
let
kind
of
our
team
do
a
majority
of
the
talking.
The
one
clarification
I
want
to
make
is
that
there
are
86
total
units
of
which
11
are
for
high
priority
homeless,
so
just
want
to
get
that
out
there.
N
E
See
you
this
is
carol
lansing
fakery,
drinker
working
with
the
development
team
in
shanna
to
figure
out
what
the
application
process
is
to
go
through.
Really,
the
differences
are
just
technical
ways
through
the
code,
we're
not
it
we're
not
gonna
that
the
project
will
be
proposed
in
the
same
way
under
either
approach
with
all
the
same
features.
E
C
All
right,
thank
you,
commissioners,
comments
or
questions
on
this
item.
Commissioner
baxley.
G
Yeah
carol,
maybe
for
staff,
has
this
there's
been
an
awful
lot
of
development
along
the
greenway
up
to
this
point
have
is
this
an
issue
that
is
new
or
have
we
encountered
a
question
like
this
before
I
just
curious.
G
G
K
So
this
is
probably
a
newer
question,
considering
the
recent
amendments
with
built
form
and
the
reduction
in
the
law
area
for
the
planning
and
development.
The
pioneering
development
has
always
been
used
as
a
as
a
tool
to
get
more
amenities
to
offset
some
of
those
strict
zoning
requirements,
such
as
setbacks,
there's
a
handful
of
other
ones
as
well,
but
in
this
particular
case,
just
setbacks.
K
K
However,
reductions
are
requested
along
both
front
yards,
so
it's
really
a
question
of
whether
or
not
we
think
that
there's
practical
difficulty
present
in
order
to
support
the
variances
versus
the
planning
of
development,
where
there
are
amenities
provided
such
as
the
underground
parking,
and
then
we
can
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
promenade
in
the
open
space.
If
we
think
that
that's
the
direction
for
the
pd,
those
amenities
are
already
present.
K
E
Thanks,
I
have
worked
on
a
number
of
those
projects
along
the
greenway
and
in
the
past
we
primarily
did
puds
when
we
had
more
than
one
building
on
a
lot,
because
under
the
zoning
code,
there
is
no
other
way
to
get
more
than
one
building
on
a
lot.
So,
for
example,
the
elan
development
that
has
three
buildings
they're
connected
by
kind
of
a
skyway
but
they're
separate
buildings.
We
had
to
do
a
pud
under
puds.
E
You
can
get
flexibility
to
or
alternatives
for,
front
yards
and
yards
within
a
pud
if
there's
multiple
lots,
but
not
along
sides
that
about
residential
and
so
in
this
instance,
we're
still
going
to
have
to
apply
for
variances
for
the
south
side
yard.
I
have
some
nicer
features
there
and,
frankly,
it's
it's
simpler
from
an
application,
preparation
and
report
standpoint
to
just
do
those
and
not
the
pud.
E
As
I
said,
you
know,
the
the
pud
does
require
amenities,
and
so
that
can
often
be
considered
an
advantage
from
the
city
and
planning
commission
standpoint
to
you
know
get
those
amenities
in
this
case
we're
gonna.
The
underground
garage,
provides
10
points.
That's
going
to
happen!
No
matter
what
and
then
we
would
need
five
points
for
yards
and
you
know
I
think
we
would
be
getting
that,
probably
through
the
promenade
or
or
something
like
that,
so
I
don't
think
it
would
result
in
any
different
features
here.
G
Maybe
I
think
that
that's
kind
of
where
my
thinking
is
that
the
beauty
might
be
better,
but
I'm
interested
in
understanding
from
that
from
you've
got
the
applicants,
though,
when
we
say
practical
hardship.
What
what?
What
does
that
entail
for
those
in
this
particular
project.
E
And
I'll
I'll
talk
about
that,
but
I
see
kimberly
may
just
need
to
revise
or
amend
what
I've
said.
P
No
definitely
not
amending
anything
carol
said
you
know,
I
did
just
wanna
shanna
had
mentioned
the
change
to
the
built
form
regulations
and
how
it
impacted
the
lot
area
for
plan
unit
developments,
making
that
an
option
for
a
site
like
this,
where
it
hadn't
been
previously.
We've
also
talked
a
lot
at
the
commission
about
the
adoption
of
the
built
form,
regulations
being
kind.
P
P
You
know
a
little
bit
differently
than
we
maybe
had
in
the
past,
so
we're
looking
for
actual.
You
know
really
unique
site
circumstances
where
there
is
a
true
practical
difficulty
in
order
to
recommend
approval
of
those
variants,
applications
which
is
the
question
you
just
asked
carol
and
I
think
she
was
going
to
get
into
a
little
bit.
So
that's
another
reason
why
I
think
we
had
steered
them
in
this
direction
to
reduce
the
number
of
variance
applications
and
pursue
the
plan
unit
development.
E
With
respect
to
the
front
yards,
I
think
it's
not
a
novel
idea
to
recognize
that
when
a
site
has
two
front
yards,
that's
a
unique
circumstance
and
unique
circumstance
doesn't
mean
you
never
see
it
anywhere
else
right.
But
it
is,
you
know
not
typical,
and
in
this
case
both
front
yards
have
increased
setbacks
due
to
the
established
setback
of
the
houses
to
the
north.
E
In
this
case,
it's
pushed
a
little
further
west,
so
it's
more
than
15
on
the
east
but
less
than
15
on
the
west,
and
that's
because
on
the
west
side,
the
adjacent
house
has
a
very
deep
like
over
30
foot
setback.
I
think
so
we're
just
trying
to
kind
of
more
fit
with
the
character.
So
that
is
my
unique
circumstances
and
the
hardship
of
of
placing
a
multiple
family
building
on
a
through
lot
with
two
front
yard
requirements.
E
And
I'll
say,
commissioner
baxley,
that
you
know
and
that's
practical
difficulties.
Another
prong
is
is
of
a
of
that.
That's
unique
circumstances
and
difficulties,
but
then
there's
also
is
it
reasonable?
Is
what
you're
proposing
reasonable
and
that's
what
and
within
the
spirit
and
intent
of
the
ordinance,
and
that's
opposed
to
impact
on
neighbors
I'll
point
out
here
that
there's
a
lot
of
separation
of
this
building
because
of
the
the
ramp
that
goes
to
the
underground
garage
and
the
alley.
C
All
right,
commissioner
meyer,
go
ahead.
D
So
I
I
do
think
that
the
two
front
yards
is
a
unique
circumstance
that
could
justify
the
practical
difficulties.
But
I
don't
have
a
strong
opinion
on
that,
but
I
did
want
to
ask
a
different
question,
which
I
asked
previously
when
this
came
forward
and
for
the
life
of
me.
I
couldn't
remember
what
the
answer
was
the
last
time,
but
I
it
just
seems
really
weird
to
me
that
why
the
bike
parking
is
away
from
the
entrance.
D
Can
you
just
refresh
my
memory
on
why
you're
choosing
to
put
the
bike
parking
away
from
the
greenway
entrance.
O
Yeah
I
knew
that
would
come
up
because
it
did
come
up
last
go-round
we
did
look
at
possibly
relocating
the
bike
storage
to
the
other
side.
One
of
the
reasons
we
didn't
is
because
that
that
bike
parking
is
right
against
the
entrance
to
the
ramp,
making
it
not
a
great
location
for
a
unit,
as
opposed
to
the
alley
which
we're
expecting
to
have
less
traffic,
and
we
have
the
ability
to
have
landscape
buffering.
That's
going
to
prevent
you
know,
headlights
from
shining
into
someone's
bedroom.
O
The
other
thing
is
with
providing
the
promenade.
You
know
it's
not
a
direct
connection
to
the
park
and
the
ramp
down
to
the
greenway,
but
you
know
we're
we're
providing
the
promenade
so
that
you
can
cross
over
to
11th
and
go
down
to
that
ramp
and
and
get
down
to
the
greenway.
So
it's
only
adding
basically
the
length
of
the
site
to
get
there.
D
O
It
is
worth
noting
we
are
providing
entrances
on
on
both
halves
of
the
building.
There
will
be
a
small
lobby
and
office
on
on
both
the
11th
and
12th
avenue
fronts.
So
it's
not
like
someone
is
going
through
the
building
to
get
there
to
the
bike
parking.
G
Since
we're
talking
about
the
the
bike
parking,
will
there
be
a
way
to
get
one's
bike
off
the
greenway
up
there?
I
think
it's
currently
showing
us
all
stairs.
Will
there
be
a
little
sloped
section
to
roll
your
bike
up
there?
What
are
you
guys
thinking
there.
O
O
You
would
be
taking
your
bike
on
and
off
of
the
rail
so
much
that
it
may
not
be
worth
it
just
because
what
we're
trying
to
do
with
the
the
shape
of
the
stair
there
is
match
the
slope
of
the
green
way.
So
we
don't
have
major
retainage
because
that
wouldn't
be,
you
know,
feasible
from
an
engineering
standpoint.
O
So
the
answer
is
that
probably
won't
be
possible,
but
we
do
have
the
park
directly
to
the
west
that
has
the
ramp
down
to
the
greenway
and
then
one
block
to
the
east.
It's
not
directly
connected,
but
one
block
to
the
east
there's
also
a
ramp
that
goes
down
to
the
greenway.
G
I
appreciate
the
study
and
again,
I
think,
to
commissioner
meyer's
question
that
comes
into
play
as
to
do
you
need
to
have
the
bike
as
close
to
the
greenway.
If
I
can't
get
my
bike
off
the
greenway
at
that
point,
maybe
where,
where
it's
located,
is
more
relative
to
how
bikes
are
coming
into
the
project.
So
thank
you
for
studying
that.
E
I
just
wanted
to
say-
and
I
apologize
if,
if
someone
already
said
this,
what
I
learned
today
is
that
the
proposed
stairs
would
be
replacing
an
existing
wooden
rickety
staircase
that
that
goes
down.
So
it's
not
totally
a
new
connection,
but
it'd
be
a
much
nicer
one.
That's
not
part
of
our
site
plan,
it's
not
on
our
property,
but
and
we
need
to
get
hikra
permission
to
do
it.
E
E
E
E
C
All
right,
we
have
oops
all
right.
We
have
one
item
left.
It
is
item
number
three
and
oh
sorry,
it
is
item
number
six,
inclusionary
zoning
fees,
text,
amendment
and
staff
is
joe
bernard.
Q
Good
afternoon,
commissioners,
today,
the
item
that
I'm
bringing
up
here
for
a
discussion
is
a
text
amendment
that
you'll
be
seeing
at
the
full
planning
commission
meeting
next
month.
Q
So
whenever
a
project
is
proposed
and
built
that
is
subject
to
our
inclusionary
zoning
ordinance,
the
city
needs.
We
need
ongoing
assurance
that
the
projects
will
remain
in
compliance
with
the
ordinance
and
so
the
need
for
these
fees,
something
we
identified
and
understood
when
the
inclusion
inclusionary
zoning
policy
was
adopted
a
couple
years
ago,
we're
just
now
getting
to
a
point
where
the
city
is
preparing
to
hire
a
third-party
administrator
for
to
administer
and
monitor
these
projects.
So
we
need
to
move
forward
with
putting
the
fee
in
in
our
ordinance.
Q
That's
that's
the
gist
of
it
and
it's
all.
I've
got
got
to
share
on
this
item
today,
but
here
to
answer
any
questions
for
discussion.
If,
if
there
is
any.
Q
They're,
based
on
on
the
cost
to
actually
administer
the
the
fees,
so
we
have,
we
have
state.
I
think
I'm
stating
this
correctly.
We
have
state
laws
regarding
how
much
we
can
charge
for
these
fees
and
they
have
to
be
commensurate
with
the
amount
of
staff
time
that
it
takes
to
administer
them.
B
Q
Commissioner
smiley,
I
unfortunately
I
don't,
I
don't
have
a
direct
answer
for
you
on
that.
This
is
something
that
our
staff
is
taking
forward
on
behalf
of
our
housing
staff,
they're
doing
the
bulk
of
the
work
and
administering
this,
but
I
will
definitely
have
an
answer
to
that
question
for
you
at
the
full
planning
commission.
F
To
keep
up
on
a
screen,
while
you
guys
are
talking,
is,
are
these
fees
also
asked
when
it's
not
an
issy?
F
Q
I'm
sure
our
commissioner
we're
we're
certainly
sensitive
to
that.
This
is
a
fee
that
is
only
iz.
Projects
are
subject
to,
as
it's
directly
related
to
monitoring
and
making
sure
that
over
the
years
they
could
stay
in
compliance
that
the
the
units
stay
affordable
over
time,
and
this
is
something
that
went
into
all
the
calculations
about
whether
or
not
it
would
be
feasible
and
advisable
to
do.
I
see
in
the
city
two
years
ago
there
were
assumptions
about
what
those
fees
would
be.
Q
F
Okay,
that
makes
sense
and
and
kind
of
on
raya's
question
or
commissioner
question
as
well.
Is
this
a
fee
that
other
cities
also
charge
not
comfortably
not
about
the
exact
price,
but
is
it
something
that's
common.
Q
Yes,
yeah,
it's
it's
common!
It's
it's
something
that,
as
far
as
I'm
aware,
all
cities
that
have
to
do
ongoing
monitoring
pass
that
cost
on
to
the
developer
in
some
way
or
another.
C
All
right
that
was
our
last
item.
Are
there
any
staff
updates.
P
Yes,
to
go
along
with
the
id
item,
I
did
just
want
to
know.
We've
mentioned
it
here
in
the
past,
but
there
is
a
report
going
forward
to
the
biz
committee
of
the
city
council
next
tuesday.
P
That's
essentially
an
18-month
check-in
on
where
things
are
at
with
the
inclusionary
zoning
piece,
peaceful
from
the
zoning
code
and
the
piece
that
is
in
the
unified
housing
policy.
So
it's
a
fairly
robust
report.
You
can
access
it
by
going
into
the
city's
limbs
site
going
to
the
biz
committee
agenda
and
there
is
a
link
to
the
full
report.
P
There's
also
going
to
be
a
link
embedded
in
that
report
to
a
dashboard
that
dashboard
is
tracking
in
real
time
or
as
close
to
real
time
as
we
can,
where
we're
at
in
terms
of
hitting
the
threshold
for
permitting
projects
between
20
and
49
units.
P
So,
as
you
know,
once
we
hit
the
500
mark
on
those
types
of
projects,
then
there's
a
waiting
period
and
then
the
threshold
will
lower
down
to
20.,
so
it
tracks
that
it
will
show
any
fees
that
have
been
captured
for
projects
paying
the
inlue
fee
instead
of
producing
product
or
providing
units
on
sites
which
projects
are
in
for
permits.
That
will
be
providing
units
on
site.
How
many
units
that
sort
of
thing
so
a
pretty
great
tool
that
our
colleagues
in
separate
housing
have
put
together
and
worth
checking
out.
C
All
right,
thank
you
with
that.
We've
completed
all
the
items
on
our
agenda
for
this
evening.
Does
anyone
have
anything
else
to
bring
before
us
before?
We
adjourn.
C
P
So
we
have
a
weird
situation
where,
because
of
the
labor
day
holiday
and
some
other
calendar
factors,
we
have
a
september
9th
thursday
planning
commission
meeting
coming
up.
Okay,
that's
not
on
your
radars
or
on
your
calendars.
Note
that
I
admit
I
kind
of
lost
track
of
it
until
public
hearing
notices
went
out.
So
we
have
a
regular
meeting
of
the
planning
commission
on
thursday
september
9th.