►
From YouTube: June 17, 2021 Planning Commission Committee of the Whole
Description
Additional information at
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
B
B
This
meeting
includes
the
remote
participation
of
board
members
and
staff
as
authorized
under
minnesota
statutes,
section
13d
021,
due
to
the
declared
local
public
health
emergency.
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.
B
This
meeting
is
public
and
subject
to
the
minnesota
open
meeting
law.
At
this
time
I
will
call
the
meeting
to
order,
and
I
will
ask
the
clerk
to
please
call
the
rule
to
verify
the
presence
of
a
quorum.
C
A
D
A
C
A
A
E
A
B
C
A
F
C
B
All
right
that
motion
passes
and
we've
adopted
the
agenda
next
up
is
acceptance
of
the
minutes
of
the
regular
meeting
of
may
27th
2021..
Can
I
have
a
motion
to
accept
those
minutes,
commissioner,
ford.
B
B
All
right
that
motion
passes
up
next
is
the
consent
agenda.
There's
two
items
tonight.
The
first
item
is
item
number.
Four:
a
land
sale
for
3601,
44th
street
east
east
and
staff
is
madele
duenas.
G
Hello,
commissioners,
my
name
is
medell
duinas
and
I'm
a
planner
in
long
range
planning.
So
the
first
item
that
I
have
today
is
item
number
four,
which
again
is
the
landsat
of
3601
44th
street
east.
For
the
snelling
yards
development.
The
parcel
is
guided
as
urban
neighborhood
and
corridor
six.
G
The
property
has
been
replated
to
accommodate
two
four-story
residential
buildings,
which
are
allowed
under
the
future.
Land
use
and
built
form
guidance
of
minneapolis
2040.
staff
recommends
that
the
planning
commission
find
that
this
landscape
is
consistent
with
the
future
land
use
and
built
form
categories
of
the
comprehensive
plan.
Are
there
any
questions.
B
C
F
B
All
right
that
motion
passes.
The
next
item
is
item
number
five
snelling
yards
senior,
housing,
tiff
district
plan
and
staff
is
again
medell
duinas.
G
Yes,
so
this
tif
district
for
this
nellie
and
yard
senior
housing
project
has
been
prepared
to
help
finance
the
construction
of
the
first
100
unit.
Four-Story,
affordable
apartment
building.
G
So
the
tif
district
plan
establishes
a
new
housing
tif
district
to
finance
various
public
redevelopment
costs
and
includes
a
budget
for
the
use
of
tax
increment
revenue
generated
by
the
new
tif
district.
The
property
satisfies
both
income
tests,
as
established
by
the
internal
revenue
code,
since
95
percent
of
the
apartment
units
will
be
affordable
at
50,
ami
and
5
will
be
affordable
at
80
ami.
G
G
Third,
to
support
strong
and
diverse
neighborhoods,
where
people
choose
to
live
and
for
to
promote
sustainable
development
staff
finds
that
the
snelling
yards
senior
housing
tif
district
plan
is
consistent
with
minneapolis
2040
and
recommends
that
the
city
planning
commission
recommend
approval
to
the
city
council.
Are
there
any
questions.
H
C
B
A
My
I'm
using
the
wrong
roll
calls,
as
you
can
tell
schrader
and
sweesy.
B
All
right
that
motion
passes
passes.
Thank
you
medel.
Thank
you
all
right
up.
Next
is
our
two
discussion
items
the
first
one
is
item
number
six,
france,
50
mixed
use
at
4901
to
4921
france
avenue,
south
and
staff
is
shanna
sether.
I
D
I
I
The
applicant
is
proposing
a
mixed-use
building
with
45
dwelling
units
and
about
16
500
square
feet
of
retail
space.
In
this
location
it
would
have
well
I'll
start.
The
zoning
here
is
currently
r2b
and
the
corridor
iv
built
form
overlay
district.
The
property
is
also
in
the
shoreland
overlay
district,
due
to
a
wetland
in
the
city
of
edina
about
500
feet
away,
which
impacts
the
required
applications
here.
I
I
The
applicant
is
proposing
two
levels
of
below
grade
parking,
ground
floor,
commercial,
totaling,
16,
518
square
feet,
along
with
some
residential
amenity
space
and
then
units
on
the
upper
floors,
totaling
45
dwelling
units,
it's
a
mix
of
one
and
two
bedrooms,
and
one
plus
den
and
then
three
bedroom
units
on
the
fifth
floor.
I
So
here
is
a
view
of
the
building
as
you're
looking
at
it
from
france
avenue.
The
applicant
is
proposing
to
establish
this
development
as
a
planned
unit.
Development.
The
maximum
size
in
the
corridor
for
built
form
overlay
district
is
28
000
square
feet.
The
existing
lot
exceeds
28
000
square
feet,
so
the
only
way
to
propose
a
project
on
a
lot
greater
than
that
28
000
square
foot
maximum
is
to
do
it
through
a
plan
unit
development.
I
The
maximum
size
is
eighty,
nine
thousand
six
hundred
square
feet,
and
the
proposed
gfa
of
this
building
is
one
thousand
for
one
hundred
and
two
thousand
seven
hundred
and
ninety
nine
square
feet
and
they're
also
requesting
an
exception
to
the
front
yard
setback
along
france
avenue
south
the
existing
zoning
of
the
site
is
r2b
and
the
applicant
is
requesting
to
rezone
the
site
to
or2
as
part
of
the
project
if
this
were
rezoned
to
a
commercial
site
that
would
be
supported
by
the
existing
adopted
policy
for
this
location,
but
consent
signatures
are
required
to
go
to
a
commercial
district
here.
I
So
with
that
the
applicant
is
proposing
or2
zoning,
which
does
have
setback
requirements
that
wouldn't
be
required
in
a
commercial
district.
So
that
is
being
requested
for
flexibility
on
that
through
the
planned
unit
development.
I
The
applicant
is
also
requesting
a
variance
to
the
maximum
size
of
a
neighborhood
serving
retail
sales
and
service
use
in
the
or2
district.
The
maximum
allowed
is
four
thousand
square
feet
and
the
ground
floor.
Commercial
space
is
shown
at
16
508
square
feet,
there's
also
a
variance
requested
to
the
maximum
lot
coverage
from
70
to
76,
and
then
the
site
plan
review
application
in
terms
of
amenities
for
the
planned
unit
development.
I
You
can
note
in
the
staff
reports
how
we've
evaluated
consistency
with
a
comprehensive
plan
here
and
also
evaluated
the
amenities
that
the
applicant
is
proposing
for
the
planned
unit
development.
I
won't
go
into
great
deal
detail
on
them,
but
part
of
the
consideration
here
today
is
whether
or
not
the
amenities
that
are
being
proposed
are
really
the
appropriate
amenities
to
offset
the
exceptions
requested
by
the
applicant,
so
the
maximum
building
size,
the
front
yard
setback
and
the
establishment
just
overall.
I
So
this
property
is
community
mixed
use
in
terms
of
the
future
land
use
map.
As
I
noted
commercial
zoning
would
be
supported
here.
There
is
commercial
zoning
directly
adjacent
to
the
site,
but
the
rezoning
signatures
can
be
fairly
robust
and
it
can
be,
you
know,
a
difficult
process,
so
the
applicant
is
proposing
or2
here.
I
I
The
applicant
is
proposing
a
five-story
building,
so
they
are
requesting
to
increase
the
maximum
height
by
providing
some
additional
amenities
through
that
in
terms
of
the
feedback
being
requested
here,
staff
is
specifically
looking
for
feedback
on
the
proposed
building
heights,
so
the
applicant
has
requested
that
height
increase
by
providing
a
mixed-use
building
with
a
large
retail
tenant
space.
On
the
first
floor,
the
shoreland
overlay
district
here
also
again
requires
that
conditional
use
permit.
I
That
is
due
to
a
wetland
in
edina
the
maximum
floor
area
in
a
plant
unit,
development
is
limited
to
89
600
square
feet,
and
the
building
size
here
exceeds
that
they're,
proposing
a
102,
799
square
foot,
building
so
exceeding
the
maximum
size
of
a
building
in
corridor.
Four
to
increase
the
maximum
gross
floor
area
of
individual
buildings
within
the
pd.
I
The
planning
commission
has
to
find
that
the
development's
layout,
amenities
and
building
scale
are
consistent
with
the
intent
of
the
built
form
policies
of
the
comprehensive
plan,
so
we're
looking
specifically
for
feedback
about
ways.
The
applicant
could
break
up
the
length
of
the
building
on
both
the
east
and
west
sides
to
make
this
something
that's
more
consistent
with
the
intent
of
the
corridor.
Four
district
I'll
dive
into
that
more
just
a
little
bit
here,
also
looking
for
feedback
on
that
maximum
size
of
a
retail
sales
and
service
use.
I
The
maximum
lot
coverage
comes
into
play
here,
because
there's
or2
zoning
and
not
commercial
zoning,
so
the
maximum
lot
coverage
is
70
and
the
applicant's
proposing
76
and
then
also
just
requesting
feedback
on
the
amenities,
so
the
amount
of
underground
parking,
outdoor,
open
space,
decorative
pavers
and
the
recycling
storage
area.
I
You
know
just
overall.
I
think
we
want
to
flag
here
that
this
is
really
the
appearance
of
this
building
appears
to
be
more
consistent
with
the
appearance
of
a
building
in
the
corridor,
six
built
form
district
and
not
the
corridor
four
built
form
overlay
district.
That's
why
we're
really
specifically
looking
for
feedback
on
whether
or
not
I
can
keep
going
through
the
slides
here.
I
So
you
can
see
all
the
elevations
whether
or
not
the
massing
of
the
building
here
has
been
broken
up
in
a
way
that
would
justify
the
increase
in
heights
in
the
corridor
for
built
form
district.
You
know
this
comp
plan
is
fairly
new.
The
built
form
overlay
districts
are
still
fairly
new,
but
the
allowed
scale
in
each
built
form
district
is
a
central
part
of
the
minneapolis
2040
built
form
policies,
particularly
in
the
interior
and
corridor
built
farm
districts.
I
So
it's
not
a
case
where
2040
is
just
calling
for
big
buildings
everywhere.
This
is
very
intentionally
designated
as
corridor
four
and
building
scares.
A
building
scale
is
really
a
matter
of
a
few
factors:
it's
height
bulk,
but
it's
also
the
lot
size
and
the
building
length.
So
if
the
project
is
exceeding
the
maximum
lot
size,
so
it
has
to
be
done
through
pudd
and
then
also
asking
for
height
increases
and
variances
of
the
maximum
far
or
in
this
case,
variance
or
flexibility
through
the
pud
for
the
maximum
lot
size.
I
Then
that's
what
leads
staff
to
believe
that
this
is
a
building
that
would
be
more
consistent
with
the
corridor.
Six
built
form
district
and
not
the
corridor.
Four
built
form
district,
and
you
know
just
really
highlighting
that
our
built
form
regulations
now
do
match
the
policies
in
the
comp
plan
so
again,
they're
fairly
new,
but
we're
really
committed
to
not
granting
a
significant
amount
of
variances
to
allow
deviation
from
the
brand
new
regulations
that
very
intentionally
designated
areas
of
the
city
like
this
as
corridor.
I
Four-
and
you
know
that's
something
that
our
elected
officials
and
policy
makers
have
also
committed
to,
and
it's
a
commitment
that
we've
made
to
the
public
to
make
things
more
predictable
in
terms
of
what
development
people
can
expect
to
see
in
various
places
around
the
city.
So
I'm
going
to
close
there.
I
know
that
got
a
little
bit
longer
than
it
typically
would,
but
I
can
stand
for
any
questions
and
then
I
believe
the
applicant
is
here
with
a
presentation
of
their
own
as
well.
D
Yes,
this
is
keith
keith
ford,
I'm
sorry!
I
didn't
type
it
out.
First
kimberly.
Could
you
summarize
or
list
again
rather
what
the
amenities
that
the
developer
thinks
he
is
providing.
I
Muted,
I
lost
that
part
of
my
screen.
I
was
saying,
and
then
I
also
lost
the
part
that
was
gonna.
Allow
me
to
unmute
myself,
so
the
amenities
being
proposed
by
the
applicant
are
the
two
levels
of
underground
parking.
I
The
outdoor
open
space,
which
really
you
know
staff's
analysis,
is
that
the
way
the
outdoor
open
space
has
been
distributed.
Amongst
you
know,
along
the
site,
doesn't
really
engage
pedestrians,
it's
located
between
the
building
and
the
surface
parking
lot
and
we're
interested
in
feedback
on
that
decorative
pavers
is
another
amenity.
That's
worth
three
points,
so
we
allow
points
for
decorative
surfacing
and
then
a
recycling
storage
area
within
the
building.
H
Hi
kimberly
have
a
quick
question
about
the
or2.
It
says
it's
only
45
units
in
this
building,
considering
at
50
they
would
have
to
include
affordable
housing
right
because
iz
kicks
in
at
50..
What
is
the
rest
of
the
building
supposed
to
be
is
used.
For
I
mean
this
is
a
massive
space
to
only
to
kind
of
be
cutting
in
right
below
the
50
limit.
Is
it
going
to
be
office
that
I
mean
in
the
or
zoning
that
they're
intended?
I
guess
what's
less
than
the
building
used
for.
I
So
the
applicant
could
answer
that
more
specifically,
but
the
plans
indicate
that
the
first
floor
would
be
programmed
as
retail
space
and
right
now,
it's
shown
as
one
large
retail
space
or
general
retail
sales
and
service
space.
It's
not
shown
as
being
office,
and
then
the
45
dwelling
units
on
the
upper
floors
are
a
little
bit
larger
than
we
would
typically
see.
You
know
it's
one
bedroom
plus
den
two
bedrooms
and
then
some
three
bedroom
units.
H
I
B
J
J
Commissioners
and
kimberly-
this
is
tom
dillon
speaking,
I'm
part
of
the
ownership
group
and
the
development
group,
I'm
their
owner's
representative
for
the
project,
and
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
be
here
today
and
really
as
as
kimberly
outlined.
We
are
here
for
feedback
from
the
committee
of
the
whole
on
these
preliminary
plans.
J
I
do
want
to
just
highlight
that
we,
as
a
company
currently
own
all
seven
land
parcels
and
all
the
properties
here
along
france
avenue
are
rental
properties.
Currently
we,
our
timing
on
this
project,
if
approved
as
we
go
through
the
process,
would
be
a
start
in
the
spring
of
next
year,
2022
and
completion
somewhere
around
spring
or
summer
of
2023..
J
I
really
don't
have
a
lot
to
add.
I
think
kimberly
did
a
very
nice
job
of
summarizing
it,
and
the
staff
report
was
obviously
very
helpful,
but
I
we
also
have
craig
hartman
with
us,
who
is
our
architect
and
a
principal
at
momentum,
design,
group
and
craig
and
his
team
have
put
a
lot
of
time
into
developing
this
very
preliminary
plan.
So
I
would
like
to
just
turn
it
over
to
craig
and
let
him
walk
you
through.
It.
K
Yeah
thanks
tom,
you
know,
I
think
I
want
to
start
kind
of
macro
and
then
we'll
work
work
our
way
down
to
the
building
and
I'll
try
to
keep
it
brief.
You
know
when
we
first
were
presented
the
site.
You
know
we.
We
saw
this
as
sort
of
a
natural
growth
of
the
50th
and
friends
commercial
node.
You
know
it's
it's
a
great
opportunity
for
us
to
add
residential
density,
to
sort
of
an
existing
commercial
corridor
it
it
strengthens,
sort
of
the
local
economy
and,
frankly,
pedestrian
focused
local
economy.
K
So
we
we
were
excited
to
kind
of
be
presented
with
this
site
and
the
opportunity
to
work
on
this.
You
know
we.
We
really
do
think
that
this
building
will
serve.
You
know
a
demographic,
that's
that's
frankly
existing
to
the
neighborhood.
It's
going
to
give
people
a
new
option
to
stay
in
the
neighborhood.
They
love,
maybe
without
the
the
maintenance
of
a
home
or
or
you
know,
if
they're
seasonal,
something
like
that.
You
know.
I
think
it
gives
people
a
great
opportunity
to
stay
stay
where
they
love.
K
You
know
and
stay
in
the
area
that
they
love.
You
know
the
general
design
intent
of
the
building.
You
know
we
looked
at
it
as
it
was
really
focused
on
a
scheme
where
the
building
would
speak
softly
and
elegantly.
You
know
it's
it's.
You
know
we
want
this
building
to
be
beautiful
today,
but
but
also
many
years
from
now
and
and
and
really
be
timeless.
You
know
to
that
sense.
You
know:
we've
kept
the
materials
very
simple.
We
have
brick
painted
fiber
cement,
paneling
and
metal
trim.
K
K
K
K
And
finally,
you
know
we
did
receive
some
initial
feedback
from
staff,
as
kimberly
mentioned
regarding
the
the
open
space
to
the
south
of
the
building
and
the
idea
that
could
it
should
it
be
relocated
to
more
of
a
midpoint
in
the
building,
and
you
know
present,
I
don't
know
you
know
you'd
almost
call
it
a
rest.
Stop
you
know
off
the
sidewalk,
you
know
the
place
for
people
to
get
off
of
the
get
out
of
the
circulation
path.
Sit
down.
You
know
water
feature
in
that
area.
K
You
know
create
create
that
node
and
I
think
I
think
we
are
excited
at
the
opportunity
to
to
maybe
look
at
that
to
to
help
break
up
the
maps
and
and
help
the
building
be
more
consistent
with
corridor
four.
You
know
we're
hearing
feedback
and
that's
kind
of
the
point
of
this
is
that
it
might
read
too
long.
It's
too
continuous.
K
I
can
go
to
a
plan
real
quick,
you
know
we,
we
did
try
to
break
up
the
middle
area
and
it
admittedly
it's
fairly
slight.
I
don't
know
if
you
can
see
my
cursor.
K
You
know:
we've
got
kind
of
a
seating
area
in
the
middle
middle
of
the
building
or
about
the
midpoint
of
the
site,
but
this
is
something
that
we
could
play
up
much
further
and
and
sort
of
redirect
some
of
that
open
space
and
really
give
people
a
place.
You
know,
as
you're,
circulating
up
the
sidewalk
a
place
to
get
off,
get
off
and
sit
and
get
off
and
relax
spend
time
things
like
that.
So
I
I
think,
with
that,
I
won't
go
any
further.
K
I
think
I'll
turn
it
over
to
commissioners
and
I'll
welcome
your
feedback
and
questions.
B
Thank
you
we'll
start
with
commissioner
meyer.
E
Thank
you,
so
I'm
receptive
to
the
applicant's
requests
I
feel
like
for
the
2040
plan,
like
what
we've
communicated
is.
You
know
you
you
can
have
up
to
like
the
corridor
for
and
then,
if
there
are
amenities
or
the
things
that
justify
bonuses,
you
can
you
can
possibly
get
up
to
the
next
level,
which
would
be
corridor
six.
So
the
question
is
like
if
there
are
sufficient
amenities
or
benefits
to
justify
that-
and
I
I
think
like
particularly
for
the
setback
request.
E
E
Looking
at
the
aerial
photos
in
the
packet,
it
looks
like
there
are
nearby
buildings
that
look
larger
than
this
one,
and
I
would
agree
that
this
seems
to
be
like
a
natural
connection
of
that
node.
I
I
do
think
that
there
are
a
couple
things
that
could
be.
E
Maybe
added
that
I
would
look
unfavorably,
as
commissioner
was
noting
if,
if
the
threshold
was
was
50-
and
this
is
just
short
of
that-
that
for
residential
units
I
would
look
favorably
on
getting
to
that
threshold
and
including
some
affordable
unions,
and
then
I
I
wanted
to
ask
the
applicant
specifically
to
the
shoreland
overlay.
I
I
feel
it
it
would
be
appropriate,
especially
in
that
case,
to
have
additional
features
above
and
beyond,
where
you
would
be
otherwise
required
for
storm
water
treatment.
K
Yeah
and
to
respond
to
that,
commissioner
meyer,
we
one
of
our
amenities
is
to
provide
the
green
roof,
which
we
feel
like
would
would
you
know,
help
capture
that
rain
water
delay
the
rain
water
you'll
clean
it
to
some
degree
we
are.
We
are
providing
that
one
as
one
of
our
as
one
of
our
pieces.
I
guess.
J
And
if
I
could,
commissioners,
if
I
could
just
add
one
item
around
around
the
45
to
50
unit
range,
we
have
conducted
some
very
preliminary
market
analysis
with
a
third
party
firm
and
they
have
helped
guide
our
preliminary
unit
mix
and
unit
sizing,
and
the
preliminary
information
they've
provided
to
data
about
this
portion
of
the
city
in
this
location
and
with
this
surrounding
community
is
that
the
the
project
should
or
they
recommend
that
it
should
lead
it
or
lend
itself
to
larger
units.
J
I
think
maybe
kimberly
said
that
the
units
are
are
larger
versus
the
typical
minneapolis
type
product
and
of
course
it
depends
on
where
you
are
in
the
city,
but
I
think
you
know
in
the
current
market
units
on
average
in
the
in
the
city
of
minneapolis
are
somewhere
between.
I
don't
know
I'll,
take
a
guess,
725
square
feet
to
just
sub
800
square
feet
on
average
and
craig
you'll
have
to
help
me.
J
K
Overall
average
we're
we're
actually
a
little
bit
larger
than
that,
yet,
okay.
J
Yeah,
so
just
I
just
wanted
to
make
the
simple
point
that
market
intelligence
intelligence
is
just
leading
us
at
this
point
to
to
design
towards
a
larger
unit
versus
what
you
might
typically
see
in
in
other
parts
of
the
city
of
minneapolis.
So
thank
you.
B
All
right,
commissioner:
marwa
go
ahead.
B
H
I
have
I
have
a
lot
of
thoughts
about
this
building.
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
you
know.
I
don't
think
the
amenities
that
you
guys
are
offering
are
nearly
on
par
with
what
you're
asking.
To
be
frank,
I
think
the
design
this
building
looks
like
a
1980s
office
building.
I
mean
I
think
this
is
a
building
opening
in
2023.
It
should
look
a
little
bit
more
modern,
more
interesting,
more
competitive,
more
on
par
with
what
you
know
we
want
to
see
in
this
city.
I
don't
think
this
is
very
inventive.
H
I
don't
think
this
is
very
creative.
I
also
think
you're
cutting
in
five
units
under
a
threshold
for
iz
that's
in
place
for
a
purpose.
I
think,
there's
ways
that
you
can
either
make
some
of
your
units
smaller.
I
understand,
there's
a
market
for
larger
units.
I
live
in
a
larger
condo.
I
get
it.
You
can
also,
though,
add
in.
If
you
want
all
of
these
qualifications,
you
want
a
denser
building.
You
want
this
large
lot.
You
want
a
pud,
then
then
bring
it.
Then
okay,
then
we're
going
to
bring
ize.
H
Then
we're
going
to
do
52
units
and
we're
going
to
do
it.
I
think
in
today's
day
and
age
this
is
a
very
kind
of
pass
a
project,
and
I
it's
kind
of
it's.
We
see
too
many
of
these
and
you
guys
ask
for
all
these
questions.
Recycling
I
mean
every
building
has
recycling
now,
there's
not
like
much
outdoor
space
for
the
people
who
even
live
in
this
building.
Personally,
I
don't,
I
don't
think
this.
I
think
you
guys
can
go
back
to
the
drawing
board.
So
that's
all
for
me.
Thank
you.
H
C
Yeah,
thank
you
cherylson,
my
I.
I
have
a
similar,
similar
thought
about
the
amenities
they
don't
they
seem.
They
don't
seem
like
enough
to
me
having
a
lobby
space
or
a
common
space
and
a
few
outdoor
seating
spaces.
It
doesn't
seem
like
amenity
honestly
now
for
the
green
roof,
though
I
don't
know
I
apologize
if
I
missed
that,
were
you
intending
for
that
to
be
also
a
common
space
to
be
used
by.
K
Residents,
the
green
roof
would
would
simply
encompass
the
the
areas
that
are
adjacent
to
balconies
adjacent
to
outdoor
areas,
so
they
would
many
units
would
look
down
onto
it.
You
know
we
do
have
some
setback
areas.
On
the
second
floor.
That
units
would
look
on
to
that.
Then
it
would
include
area
on
the
top
level
as
well.
C
So
it's
it's
not
necessarily
like
you're,
not
using
it,
as
quote
quote-unquote
amenity
deck,
it's
more
of
a
like
literally
just
water
and
rain
water,
absorption
and.
C
Yeah,
so
I
I
I
mean
I
personally
don't
know
how
we
are
evaluating
the
amount
of
amenities,
and
in
this
case
my
other
thought
is,
which
doesn't
is
not
sitting
too
well
with
me.
Is
that
and
correct
me
if
I'm
understanding
this
wrong,
but
one
basically,
one
variance,
is
being
requested
to
for
something
else
that
is
not
in
line
because
you're
trying
to
make
that
premium
work.
C
So
because
you
want
the
extra
premium
points
for
mixed
use,
then
you're
increasing
the
amount
of
commercial
which
then
needs
a
variance
which
so
it's
just
like
it's
like
kind
of
rolling
a
little
bit,
and
it
seems
like
a
a
condition
that
is
being
it
just
doesn't
make
sense
to
me
to
want
to
offer
a
variance
in
order
to
offer
a
premium.
K
Well-
and
I
think
if,
if
I
may,
you
know
we,
the
amount
of
commercial
space
is
not
actually
the
variance.
The
variance
is
required
because
we
are
asking
for
a
space
larger
than
4
000
square
feet.
So
we
could.
We
could,
if
we
divided
it
into
four
four
sections
of
four
thousand
square
feet
or
less.
That
would
comply
with
the
zoning
ordinance
as
the
as
I
understand
it.
Admittedly,
it's
simply
because
we
just
we
just
don't-
have
a
tenant
tenant
lined
up
at
this
point.
K
So
it's
it's
trying
to
it's
trying
to
just
maintain
as
much
flexibility
for
leasing,
leasing
that
space
as
possible.
That's
that's
kind
of
the
gist
of
that
variance.
So
so
we
we
would
be
able
to
be
a
mixed-use
building
and
re
and
achieve
that
premium
if
we
were
to
buy
to
divide
up
the
spaces
into
smaller
commercial
areas,.
C
I
see
I
I
did
not
understand
that
correctly,
so
I
apologize
my
understanding
was
maximum
area
total,
regardless
of
how
many,
how
many
times
it's
being
divided
so.
I
That
is
correct.
The
or2
zoning,
which
is
you
know,
it's
an
office,
residence
district.
So
it's
really
looking
for
neighborhood
serving
retail
sales
and
service
uses.
That
would
be
a
maximum
of
4
000
square
feet
in
area.
So
asking
for
one
space,
that's
16
000
square
feet
would
need
a
variance
if
they
had
the
four
spaces,
though
the
variance
would
not
be
required.
That's
correct
got.
C
It
and
I
guess
if
I
may
ask
one
follow-up
question,
then,
since
you
mentioned
that
you
don't
have
a
tenant
lineup,
which
I
understand
in
this
market
right
now,
so
is
this
space?
Are
you
planning
for
this
space
to
be
designed
in
a
very,
very
flexible
manner,
then
so
that
if
you
have
someone,
then
you
can
in
fact
divide
up
the
space
and
according
to
their
need.
J
D
Thank
you
first
of
all,
a
question
for
kimberly
again,
I'm
so
trying
to
get
my
hand
my
head
around
the
amenities
issue,
so
I
see
from
the
proposal
of
the
developer
that
if
he
lists
off
20
points
being
achieved,
10
for
enclosed
parking,
5
for
a
plaza
three
points
for
a
decade
of
decorative
or
pervious,
paving
one
for
a
water
feature
and
one
for
recycling
are
those
those
points
that
are
in
city
regulations
somewhere.
Right
now
is
that
those
numbers
right.
B
D
One
point
for
recycling:
it's
surely
everyone's
got
those
and
then
secondly,
so
the
the
20
required
is
that
also
in
the
ordinance.
I
D
Right,
so
so
so
this
as
proposed,
this
has
20
points
the
required
number.
So
what
is
our
leeway
then,
on
on
the
issue
of
amenities.
I
That's
a
really
good
question,
so
the
newest
part
of
the
pud
chapter
is
the
portion
that
refers
to
the
maximum
size
of
an
individual
building
in
a
planned
unit,
development
and
there's
some
additional
findings
that
we
need
to
make
for
that.
One
that,
basically,
is
asking
you
know,
is
the
building
you
know
with
this.
Maximum
building
size
being
exceeded
is
the
building
designed
in
a
manner
that
actually
mitigates
that
building
size-
and
you
know,
do
the
amenities
provided
really
accomplish
that.
D
Okay,
so
well,
thank
you.
So,
first
of
all,
I
I'd
associate
myself
with
commissioner
marwar's
comments.
I
think
the
I
is
this
can
be
a
a
very
appropriate
building
and
built
and
use
in
this
neighborhood.
It
is
a
natural
extension
of
50th
and
france
in
a
way,
but
when
I
saw
the-
and
I
don't
want
to
insult
the
architect
here,
but
when
I
saw
the
the
original
the
first
picture
in
the
presentation,
I'm
pretty
sure
I've
seen
that
somewhere
in
golden
valley
in
office
park,
I
mean
it's.
D
That's
that
looks
to
me
like
it's.
It
belongs
in
office
park
somewhere
in
golden
valley
or
plymouth,
and
it
it
it
there's
a
lot
of
mass
there
and
I
it.
D
I
think
I'm
also
wondering
I
suppose,
we're
not
at
a
level
where
you
get
the
the
public
works
commentary,
but
I
was
concerned
about
seeing
the
parking
access
and
egress
is
on
the
on
the
alley
and
we're
talking
about
45
units
worth
of
cars,
as
opposed
to,
I
think,
what's
five
or
six
or
seven
car
houses
that
are
there
right
now,
that's
going
to
put
some
some
stress
on
the
on
the
parking
use
up
on
the
sorry,
the
alley
use
which
comes
to
the
issue
of
neighbors.
D
What
has
have
they
neighbors
seen
this
proposal
yet,
and
this
is
not
a
question-
that's
actually
a
comment
and
then,
if
they
have
or
have
not,
I'm
I'm
also
worried
about
this
issue
of
of
choosing
a
zoning
that
avoids
consent
of
the
neighborhood.
D
This
is
this
is
a
large
structure
it's
different
than
what's
there
right
now.
I
think
that
the
neighborhood
needs
to
have
a
a
considerable
say
in
in
this.
D
What
else
I
think,
I
do
think
that
yeah,
the
frontage
needs
to
be
broken
up.
I
I
do
worry
about
it's
the
the
comment
about
well.
The
market
study
shows
this:
is
the
area
that'd
be
good
for
this
kind
of
housing
and
and
for
large
units.
D
It's
probably
a
market
study
that
shows
it's
not
a
good
idea
to
have
affordable
housing
here
too,
but
I
think
it
needs
to
have
it,
and
so
I'm
concerned
about
the
45
units
rather
than
50.
so
right
now,
I
I
mean
I
I
like
the
idea,
but
I
don't
like
the
proposed
execution.
J
D
B
Thank
you,
commissioner,
ford,
commissioner
sweesey.
Thank
you.
F
Madam
chair
a
couple
of
similar
comments,
I
think,
and
then
some
other
ones.
I
I
do
think
that
this
is
a
big
building
combining
a
number
of
lots.
Obviously,
I
think
that
I'll
get
to
the
architecture
stuff
in
a
minute,
but
I
do
think
the
massing
of
it
is
very,
very
large
and
to
go
back
to
kimberly's
comments
on
this.
F
You
know
the
comp
plan
was
intentionally
developed
to
create
some
predictability
here,
and
this
to
me,
kind
of
at
its
base
feels
like
a
building
that
is
too
big
for
the
space
that
that's
that
we're
talking
about
here.
I'm
not
saying
that
an
apartment,
building
and
retail
isn't
isn't
a
good
idea
as
an
extension
of
50th
and
france.
I
understand
that,
but,
as
you
go,
the
other.
H
F
F
You
know
the
same
areas
that
are,
you
know,
desirable,
neighborhoods
at
the
expense
of
other
ones.
I
totally
agree
that
the
amenities
offered
don't
add
up
to
what
what
the
what
the
request
is
for
the
planned
unit
development.
F
It
seems
to
me
that
those
are
exactly
the
kind
of
amenities
that
people
who
are
paying
good,
rent
and
high
rent
should
expect
in
a
building.
I
think
that's
just
you
know
marketability,
so
I
I
would
agree
that
those
don't
match
up.
I
also
am
not
an
architect
and
don't
want
to
be
offensive.
I
don't
think
there's
anything
wrong
with
the
building
necessarily.
F
I
do
agree
that
it
looks
suburban
and
I
think
you
know
maybe
the
flip
side
of
timeless
is
you
know,
indistinctive
also
something
that
could
have
come
from
any
any
time,
and
I
think
you
know
I
think
a
little
bit.
F
You
might
have
gone
a
little
too
conservative
on
that
for
me
and
obviously
for
others
on
the
group.
That
sounds
like
that's
an
issue
for
a
number
of
things.
One
thing
that
to
kind
of
piggyback
on
what
commissioner
ford
said.
F
One
thing
I
found
a
little
bit,
not
modern
or
contemporary,
in
the
description
of
this
building
and
very
not
very
2040-
was
that
this
is
a
building,
that's
designed
for
people
in
the
who
are
already
in
the
neighborhood
to
move
to
in
the
neighborhood
once
they
want
once
they
want
to
go
to
an
apartment
and
and
what
what
whether
it's
intentional
or
not.
What
that
reads,
as
is
that,
when
the
people
in
this
very
nice
neighborhood
don't
want
to
take
care
of
their
big
houses
anymore,
they
can
sell
that
and
stay
close.
F
And
I
I
don't
think
that
that
matches
the
spirit
of
new
development
in
minneapolis
very
generally,
and
I
don't
think
that
really
goes
along
with
the
comp
plan.
Whoever
you
know
it
should
be
attractive
to
anybody
who
wants
to
live
there.
You
know
and
not
really
a
feeder
for
the
next
stage
of
life
for
other
people.
That's
my
opinion.
F
F
I
know
that's
a
different
city
with
different
rules,
but
if
you
live
there
it
feels
like
the
same
neighborhood
and
I'm
sure
people
consider
that
the
same
neighborhood
and
I
I
would
venture
a
guess
that
perhaps
some
of
the
target
audience
that's
intended
to
live
in
this
building
would
would
like
that.
But
I'll
bet
there's
a
lot
of
people
who
wouldn't
either,
and
so
those
are
kind
of
my
comments
on
that.
F
But
I
do
want
to
stress
what
I
said
at
the
beginning,
which
is
that
the
point
of
the
comp
plan
is
to
spread
out.
I
think
one
of
the
points
is
to
spread
out.
You
know
really
nice
pieces
of
property
and
good
developments
to
parts
of
the
city
that
aren't
already
so
dense,
and
I
think
that's
why
you're
running
into
the
problem
with
needing
all
of
these
approvals.
Thank
you.
L
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I'm
just
going
to
be
super
brief.
I
just
wanted
to
say
I
completely
a
hundred
and
ten
thousand
percent
agree
with
every
single
comment
that
the
commissioners
have
made.
If
I
was
to
go
on
any
further.
With
my
comments,
I
probably
would
embarrass
myself,
so
I
won't.
I
hope
that
you're
able
to
go
back
to
the
drawing
board
and
really
consider
the
size
of
the
building
the
materials
that
are
being
used.
It
does
look
like
a
dentist
office.
L
Actually
I
I
think
it
looks
like
a
dentist
office
in
that's,
not
important,
my
oldest
dentist
office,
and
what
what
I
think,
what
kind
of
rubs
me
the
wrong
way,
and
I
realize
that
this
part
part
of
it
is
about
my
feelings
and
that's
not
what
we're
here
to
express.
L
L
Just
kind
of
hang
out
and
just
you
know,
do
whatever
I'm
wondering
who,
who
are
those
people
are
those
people
that
are
just
walking
down
the
street
or
those
people
that
are
only
the
people
that
live
in
the
building
or
you
know,
have
commercial
space
there
have
access
to
that.
I
I
didn't
catch
that
part,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day
my
mind
starts
to
think
about
the
what-ifs
in
situations
like
that.
L
So
so
I
would
appreciate
if,
if,
if
you
went
back
to
the
drawing
board-
and
you
know,
came
back
with
something
a
little
less
large
and
included
affordable
housing,
this
is
the
city
of
minneapolis,
I'm
not
sure.
If
either
one
of
you,
gentlemen,
live
in
minneapolis
or
not
it's
none
of
my
business
and
probably
doesn't
matter
but
to
anyone
except
for
me,
but
yeah.
I
I
appreciate
all
the
comments
that
the
commissioners
have
made,
so
thank
you
for
that.
B
B
All
right,
we
have
one
more
item
tonight.
Our
final
discussion
item
is
item
number
seven
26
in
bloomington,
2603,
bloomington
avenue
and
staff
is
mailing
smith.
H
M
Okay
good
evening,
everyone,
so
this
project
is
2603,
bloomington
avenue,
and
I
guess
I'll
just
start
by
saying
this
is
a
little
bit
different
from
the
project
you
just
saw
because
it's
located
in
the
c4
district,
so
they're
already
in
commercial
zoning,
so
they're
not
going
to
be
dealing
with
some
of
the
setback,
issues
and
coverage
issues
that
you
were
looking
at
on
the
france
project,
so
just
wanted
to
clarify
that
so
they're
in
the
c4
zoning
district
and
also
corridor
four
built
form
overlay
district.
M
This
is
a
six-story
mixed-use
building
with
79
units
and
then
the
ground
floor
includes
12
000
square
feet
of
retail
uses.
It
looks
like
they're
proposing
adult
daycare
as
well
as
child
care
and
some
retail
and
office
space
as
well.
There
would
be
85
enclosed
parking
spaces,
that's
both
underground
and
there
are
a
few
spots
that
are
enclosed
on
the
first
level
as
well
off
of
the
alley.
M
So,
as
I
said,
this
is
at
the
intersection
of
26th
and
bloomington
c4
zoning
some
see
one
on
the
block
and
surrounded
by
residential
zoning
districts.
This
is
the
built
form
overlay
district
map.
So
you
can
see
that
this
is
located
in
the
corridor
for
there's
a
consistent
corridor,
four
along
the
bloomington
avenue
corridor,
and
this
is
how
the
six
story
building
appears
in
a
rendering
on
that
corridor.
M
Here's
the
floor
plan
provided
by
the
applicant,
I
think
yeah,
that's
probably
the
best
one
to
look
at
right
now.
Well,
I'm
gonna
go
actually
here.
So
you
see
that
there's
a
drop-off
off
of
the
alley
and
then
three
or
multiple
commercial
tenants
on
on
the
ground
floor
there.
It
leads
to
underground
parking
as
well
off
of
bloomington.
The
second
floor
has
an
amenity
space,
an
outdoor
play
area
that
we'll
talk
about
in
a
little
bit,
but
that
would
be
used
for
both
residents
and
probably
the
child
care
center.
M
That's
on
the
ground
floor.
So
this
is
a
really
interesting
diagram
provided
by
the
applicant.
So
in
the
quarter
four
built
form
district.
The
maximum
far
that
you
can
have
without
any
premiums
is
2.4.
So
that's
the
image
on
the
left.
The
middle
image
shows
what
you
know.
A
hypothetical
bulk
would
be
allowed
with
an
far
with
achieving
all
of
the
three
premiums
and
that's
what
they're
proposing
to
do
get
to
3.6
by
right
and
then
they're
also
requesting
to
increase
the
bulk
of
the
building
of
the
site
to
4.15
through
variants.
M
One
other
thing
to
note
is
that
they,
just
like
the
previous
building,
you
were
looking
at
they're
proposing
to
increase
the
overall
size
of
a
building.
So
this
is
a
site.
That's
already
also
beyond
the
28
thousand
square
feet,
that's
allowed
in
corridor
four.
M
So
in
order
to
have
a
lot
area
more
than
twenty
eight
thousand
square
feet,
you
have
to
do
a
planned
unit,
development
and
so
they're
they're
requesting
to
increase
the
size
of
the
building
through
the
pud,
and
so
they
we,
you
know
they
are
proposing
some
premiums
and
then
we'll
ask
you
for
some
feedback
on
the
the
requested
premiums
as
well.
M
So
here's
the
four
plans
that
we
already
looked
at
a
little
bit
the
upper
levels.
M
If,
as
you
can
see,
it's
a
c-shaped
building,
six-story
building,
they
would
require
an
administrative
height
increase
application
as
well
to
get
from
four
to
six
stories
in
the
court
or
four
belt
form
district,
and
I
will
just
summarize
kind
of
all
of
the
amenities
that
they
would
like
to
propose
so
for
okay,
so
for
the
premiums
I'm
going
to
start
with
premiums
for
floor
area
ratio
and
for
the
administrative
height
increased,
so
the
first
one
is
affordable
housing.
M
The
second
one
is
mixed-use
commercial
and
residential.
It
appears
to
meet
that
amenity
premium.
I
should
say
sorry
and
then
the
child
care
center,
and
so
those
are
the
premiums
that
they're
applying
for
for
the
far
and
height
increase
and
then
for
the
pud
they
are
proposing
active
liner
uses
as
part
of
a
parking
garage.
M
That's
worth
10
points
they're
proposing
underground
parking,
but,
as
you
can
see
in
the
memo
we
don't.
We
don't
believe
that
it
does
meet
that
amenity
point,
but
they
they're,
probably
okay.
Without
it,
they
have
the
outdoor
children's
play
area
for
five
points
so
total
they
need
to
have
15
amenity
points
and
right
now,
just
like
first
glance.
It
might
be.
M
It
might
meet
the
15
points,
but
I
think
we
do
need
some
more
feedback
from
the
commission
about
the
use
of
the
outdoor
children's
play
area
and
whether
these
amenities
are
related
to
the
overall
increase.
You
know
relevant
to
increasing
the
overall
size
of
the
building
as
an
individual
building
in
the
pud,
and
also
the
overall
bulk
and
height
and
length
of
the
building.
M
In
addition
to
those
applications
they
need,
they
will
likely
need
some
variances
to
reduce
the
required
front
and
rear
yard
setbacks,
they're,
showing
some
outdoor
terraces
on
the
alley
side.
So
we
would
have
a
question
about
that:
variance
to
increase
the
maximum
floor,
air
area
from
3.6
to
4.15
and
site
plan
review.
M
So,
in
my
feedback
requested
area
of
the
memo,
I
you
know
in
general,
I
don't
want
to.
I
think
that
it's
more
important
to
maybe
talk
about
the
overall
scale
of
the
building.
We
can
talk
about
really
nitpicky
details
about,
like
you
know,
does
this
technically
meet
the
premium
and
amenity
for
different
puds
for
different
pud
amenities
and
premiums,
but
I
think
that
the
overall
conversation
is
really
more
about.
M
Is
this
the
appropriate
building
for
corridor
for
are
the
requested
premiums
and
amenities
appropriate
for
what
they're
asking
to
do,
and
so
I'll
just
I'll
rest
at
that
and
I'll
turn
it
over
to
you
vice
president
or
to
the
applicant,
whatever
you'd
like
to
do.
B
Sure,
quick
question
mailing:
what
do
you
mean
by
active
liner
uses?
Thank
you
so.
M
We
want
to
we
would
we
would
award
that
point
if
they
have
housing
office
or
other
active
uses
around
the
perimeter
of
all
floors
of
a
parking
garage
that
face
a
public
street
sidewalk
or
pathway
in
any
just
district,
where
liner
uses
are
already
required.
On
the
first
floor,
points
shall
only
be
awarded
for
liner
uses
on
all
other
floors
above
the
first,
where
parking
is
located
and
you
can't
have
false
displays
or
windows.
So
in
this
case
they
do
have
a
parking
garage.
M
It's
only
eight
spaces,
so
I
guess
technically
they
would
meet
that.
You
know
if
they
got
rid
of
this,
they
could
also
get
some
the
underground
parking
premium.
So
it's
kind
of
you
know.
I
guess
there
are
so
many
hypothetical
situations
but
yeah
technically
they
would
meet
that
that
premium,
that
they're,
asking
for
okay
or
amenity
amenity.
B
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Meyer,
has
a
question.
E
Yeah,
so
your
third
feedback
request
was
in
regard
to
you,
say
the
walkout
patios,
slash
terracon
level,
two
require
variance.
Does
this
or
any
other
setback,
variance
request
along
the
east
and
south
sides
of
the
building
pose
a
negative
impact
to
adjacent
residential
uses?
E
So
just
wanted
to
to
hear
more
about
that
I
mean
I
I
feel
like
previously:
we've
been
you're,
not
just
receptive
but
pushing
for
for
patios.
So
I
just
wanted
to
hear
more
about
what.
M
Right,
so
they
are
required
to
have
a
setback
of
13
feet
to
the
center
line
of
the
alley,
and
so
this
would,
I
think,
they're
probably
still
determining
how
this
patty
would
look
if
it's
a
terrace
or
if
they're,
individual
patios,
I
don't
know
what
that
would
be,
but
it
it
seems
to
me
like
they
will
need
some
sort
of
setback
request.
But
I
I
don't
know
if
staff
even
could
consider
that
individually
without
knowing
the
answer
to
the
other
questions.
First
about
bulk
and
height
of
the
overall
building.
M
That's
why
I,
you
know,
I
regret
a
little
bit
putting
it
in
the
memo,
but
you
know
I
think
that
maybe
it
could
be
talked
about
tonight.
But
I
think
the
bigger
question
is
just
kind
of
how
everything
else
relates,
because
that
might
also
play
into
whether
this
has
a
big
impact
on
the
neighbors.
But
but
you
know
feel
free
to
comment
on
that
as
an
individual
piece
of
the
application.
If
you'd
like.
E
N
Hi
everybody,
my
name
is
alizmir,
I
don't
I'm
not
sure.
If
my
camera's
open,
I'm
not
sure
that
you
even
want
to
see
me
or
need
to
see
me.
We.
N
Hi,
my
name
is
ellis
mira,
I'm
a
project
manager
in
in
the
bjr
architecture
firm,
and
I
think
that,
instead
of
presenting
the
building
that
you
guys
saw
already
and
mailing
really
did
a
great
job
presenting
it.
I
I
want
to
jump
in
to
really,
in
my
opinion,
the
the
really
unique
and
wonderful
and
beautiful
minneapolis
fairytale
story
that
this
building's
coming
and
maybe
before
that
I'll
just
touch
on.
N
I
was
listening
from
the
beginning
and
a
senior
planner,
and
I
don't
want
to
mess
up
her
name
adele.
I
think
I
believe
was
talking
about
how
you
guys
adopted
some
comprehensive
plan,
and
I
got
very
excited
because
this
building
is
really
really
really
answering.
N
I
don't
know
if
I
can,
even
like
point
all
of
the
comprehensive
plan
policies
that
that
we,
that
this
building
is
really
going
to
support,
but
but
first
things.
First,
this
the
story
of
this
building
is
that
we
have
a
minority
owner
of
this
piece
of
land
that
that
all
of
the
intention
that
she
has
here
is
to
give
back
to
her
own
community
and
to
give
back
to
many
efforts.
N
N
She
is
building
for
her
and
the
need
for
the
community
that
live
that
we
all
know
live
in
this
specific
neighborhood
in
this
specific
pocket.
A
lot
of
somali
families
that
have
a
lot
of
you
know
multiple
kids
and
big
families,
and
this
building
instead
of
being
150
micro
units.
It
is
79
units
of
two
three
and
four
bedrooms
which
is
in
an
extreme
need
for
our
city,
because
it's
not
a
product
that
we're
doing
that.
We
as
architects,
I
mean
we
are
putting
every
you
know.
N
Other
week
we
get
you
know
north
bay
and
yellow
tree
and
and
we're
working
with
all
these
developers
and
doing
one
beds
and
and
micro
units-
and
this
is
a
very
unique
product
that
we
really
raise
by
eyebrows.
Really
that's
what
you
want,
and
yes,
the
purpose
here
is
really
to
maximize
what
can
she
give
back
to
her
own
community
and
which
is,
in
my
opinion,
just
a
beautiful
story.
N
So
the
whole
point
of
us
asking
to
maximize
far
and
even
going
beyond
that
and
maximizing
height,
so
obviously
we're
trying
to
comply
with
the
premiums
and
ask
everything
according
to
the
premium
set
and
we
build
form
was
approved.
N
I
must
say
in
the
middle
of
the
design
process
of
this
building
and
and
the
things
that
we
are
working
with,
the
new
build
forum
is
to
try
and
and
lessen
the
impact
of
that
building.
We
realize
that
that
we're
asking
for
more,
but
we
have
a
very
good
reason
to
and
that's
to
give
it
back
to
this
community.
N
What
we
did
try
to
do
here
in
in
in
meaning
to
lessen
the
the
the
bulky.
I
read
the
comments
and
to
lessen
that
is
to
create
that
c
shape,
which
is
almost
creating
a
really
40
to
45
of
the
length
of
the
building
recess.
N
So
much
back
that
it's
almost
giving
us
as
if
we
have
should
I
share
my
screen.
Is
that
allowed?
Can
I
do
that
or.
B
We
don't
see
your
screen,
we
do
have
our
packets,
so
we
can
see
the
renderings
if
you,
if
you
can't
share
your
screen.
M
N
L
N
What
what
this
building
could
have
been?
If,
if
we
just
you
know,
comply
with
the
premiums,
it
would
be
just
a
big
block
that
fill
all
the
sites
that
I
to
to
be
professional,
and
not
I'm
just
gonna
say
that
I
heard
your
comments
to
the
applicant
before
me.
N
We
try
to
avoid
that
big
blocky
of
look
and
to
create
a
you
know:
a
separation.
We
almost
have
two
separate
buildings
here
by
by
our
our
c-shape
facing
west.
I
want
to
answer.
Maybe
a
couple
questions
that
I
heard
you
guys
are
talking
about
and
mailing
was
pointing
out
the
parking.
I
think
that's
what
our
intention
to
do
is
to
have
that
underground,
the
level
one
parking
not
as
a
parking.
N
It's
not.
We
really
don't
need
the
pud
points.
We
have
plenty
of
other
amenities
that
we
that
we
pointed
out
on
the
package
that
we
want
to
give
regardless
if
we
need
to
or
not,
but
I
think
that
we
will
qualify
for
that
grant
parking
because
our
l1
it's
not
going
to
be
a
parking
spot.
It's
going
to
be
more
like
a
delivery
and
drop-off
area,
and
maybe
you
know
this
is
going
to
be
a
child
in
it,
an
adult
daycare,
so
god
forbid.
N
If
we
don't
need
to
use
ambulance
and
stuff
like
that,
but
it's
basically
circulation
and
and
delivery
and
and
and
so
forth-
it's
not
gonna,
be
we
don't
really
need
the
parking,
affordable
housing.
N
N
I
hope
I'm
covering
it
all,
but
really.
I
think
that
that
the
beautiful
story
that
we're
trying
to
tell
here
is
that
we
realize
we're
asking
more
we're
asking
to
maximize,
but
this
is
going
straight
back
to
the
community
all
comprehensive
plan
policies,
access
to
housing,
access
to
employment.
This
is
the
the
businesses
that
exist
in
this
building
today
are
going
to
go
back
into
that
same
building,
we're
not
displacing
businesses.
We
are
we're
returning
them
all
here,
the
community
that
lives
in
this
area
they
are
going
to
enjoy
that
the
amenity
deck.
N
I
know
that
we
don't
need
to
prove
it
now,
we'll
probably
prove
it
in
the
lua
package.
N
If
you
know
if
we
if
we
need
to,
but
we
will
show
that
our
amenity
deck
intention
is
to
be
a
playground
area
for
the
child
care
and
for
the
building
tenants
as
well,
and
it
will
be
way
above
600
1600
square
foot
per
the
requirement.
It's
going
to
be,
if
not
70,
to
75
off
the
roof
deck
itself.
It's
just
5
000
square
feet,
so
access
to
housing,
access
to
employment,
access
to
commercial
goods
and
service
visual
quality
of
new
new
development
in
that
neighborhood,
I
think,
would
be
really
great.
N
Public
safety
through
environmental
design,
open
spaces
in
new
development.
We're
gonna
have
lighting
we're
gonna
have
some
really
nice
features
artwork
a
decorative
fencing
as
when
it
comes
to
the
pud
points
that
we
don't
ask
for,
but
we
are
going
to
give
is
obviously-
and
I
and
I
heard
the
comments
before-
but
we
will
have
you
know:
climate
resiliency,
building
standards,
renewable
energy,
art
feature
living
wall
system
that
we're
planning
to
do
on
the
south
facing
wall
towards
the
residential
reflective
roof,
which
is
a
lot
of
buildings,
are
doing
now.
N
I
don't
shared
bicycle
and
e
v
called
charges
at
the
at
the
garage
in
the
loading
areas,
decorative
fencing
on
the
on
the
amenity
desk.
I'm
sorry,
it's
been
a
while,
since
we
presented
in
front
of
crowds.
N
I
think
that
you
know
the
whole
point
of
this
presentation
was
to
really
present
the
story
and
tell
you
guys
the
story.
I
don't
know
because,
because
the
package
we
do
try
to
tell
the
story
over
there,
but
whoever
is
listening
to
this.
Don't
necessarily
know
that.
So
it
was
to
me
that's
the
biggest
message
and
I'll
be
happy
to
answer
questions.
B
E
All
right,
so
I'm
gonna
skip
the
third.
You
know
item
item
three
for
feedback
request.
Since
I
you
know
we
need
more
information.
I
guess
on
that,
but
just
you
know
generally
like
in
the
in
the
past,
we've
been
promoting
patios.
I
I
would
generally
be
inclined
to
unless
there's
a
good
reason
not
to
going
into
this.
I
did
already
have
pretty
strong
opinions
about
feedback
question
number
two,
which
is
the
question:
can
the
outdoor
play
space
be
used
for
both
the
child
care
center
and
the
residents?
E
And
I
feel
absolutely,
I
think,
that's
you
know
a
really
great
feature
to
have.
I
like,
I
think
the
important
thing
for
this
type
of
space
is
that
it
be
safe.
So
you
want
to
do
whatever
is
necessary
to
ensure
that,
but
I
think
it's
great
to
you
know
have
multi-general
multi-generational
spaces.
E
E
You
know
looking
at
the
aerial
map.
This
does
seem
much
larger
than
areas
around
it.
So
just
wanted
to
note
that,
but
I
feel
like
the
applicant
has
sold
me
on
this,
because
it's
really
seems
to
be
focusing
on
family
oriented
housing,
which
is
one
of
the
big
things
that
we
wanted
to
see
with
the
premiums
specifically
for
for
daycare.
E
I
I
think
you
know
the
need
for
family
oriented
housing
is,
is
really
important
in
minneapolis,
something
that
is
lacking.
We
have
a
lot
of
units
that
are
oriented,
especially
toward
young
young,
single
adults.
E
E
Bedroom
units,
and
by
providing
affordability
that
makes
me
inclined
to
you,
know,
support
more
housing,
more
more
flexibility
at
this
location.
Thank
you.
Thank.
N
H
Yeah
hi,
a
lot
of
my
comments,
agree
with
what
commissioner
meyer
just
mentioned
as
well.
I'm
also
inclined
to
as
compared
to
the
to
the
last
applicant
that
we
just
saw
you
know
with
the
offering
of
these
larger
units,
but
also
making
them
include
that
there's,
affordable
units
there
and
being
able
to
make
this
project
feasible
for
a
woman
developer
also
is
really
important
for
me.
H
Seeing
that
happen
in
our
market
and
knowing
that
those
same
tenants
will
still
be
there,
the
ones
that
are
being
displaced
by
this
building
current
with
this
new
development
will
still
have
spaces.
I
really
appreciate
all
those
community
oriented
elements
that
you
guys
are
bringing
into
this
project.
I
do
think
that's
really
important.
I
feel
like
this
project.
Much
more
so
upholds
a
lot
of
the
goals
of
the
2040
plan
and
what
we
want
to
see
as
community
developments.
That
happen.
H
My
only
comment,
I
know
it's
not
one
of
the
requests
for
feedback,
but
it's
just
about
the
white
metal
siding.
Personally,
I
don't
love
that
material.
I
think
we've
seen
a
lot
of
that
kind
of
very
plain
metal
siding
across
across
the
city.
I
love
that
it's
a
somali
woman
developer,
maybe
there's
some
cool
color
palette
that
can
kind
of
come
in
that
reflects
that
and
kind
of
more
of
an
ode
to
that
heritage,
even
and
just
some
kind
of
more
interesting
design
element
on
that.
H
I
think
that's
a
great
project
that
would
be
my
comment
would
just
be
about
more
making
a
little
bit
more
visual
interest.
I
like
the
metal
or
not
the
metal.
Sorry,
the
wood
siding,
looking
aspect
of
it.
I
like
that
wood
element,
maybe
either
reverse
those
or
something
that
the
white
is
very
stark,
and
my
other
comment
would
just
be
about
planters
in
green
space
around
the
building.
H
I
know
this
is
just
surrendering
right
now
and
that
might
come
in
later,
but
it
looks
very
as
large
as
this
massing
kind
of
looks
not
seeing
any
tree
planters
or
green
space
planters
around.
It
looks
just
kind
of
makes
it
look
even
bigger
and
not
as
in
the
neighborhood.
If
there's
some
trees,
are
you
guys
the
applicant
can
speak
to
both
of
those
comments?
I
appreciate
it.
N
Yeah
you're,
absolutely
right,
it's
it's
something
that
we
kind
of.
I
I
didn't
initiate
a
conversation
with
a
landscape
architect
yet
and
and
civil.
So
it's
it's
really
pre-designed
you're
right,
I
I
could
have
you
know,
rendered
some
trees
there
and
planters,
but
I
I
I
don't
like
to
cheat
because
I
don't
know
you
know
like
it's:
it's
the
expertise
of
different
people.
You
know
I.
I
could
have
assumed
that
there's
gonna
be
like
you
know,
six
or
seven
or
eight
trees
there
and
there's
a
bus.
Stop
there
you're
right!
N
Absolutely
there
will
be
plantings.
There
will
be
trees
along
that.
I
think
you
know
probably
street
lighting,
whatever
we're
gonna
whatever.
But
I
promise
in
the
next
next
round
of
renderings
you'll
you'll
see
more
green
on
the
street.
N
Yeah
about
the
metal
signing,
I
think
you
know
we
went
through
some
some
variations.
It
started
with
all
being
dark
and
then
we
kind
of
changed
to
bronze
and
at
a
certain
point,
when
we
went
I
I
don't
know
that
it's
going
to
be
white,
but
when
we
got
to
the
lighter
colors
from
some
reason
it
felt
like
the
building
felt
lighter
and
it
helped
us
to
to
convey
the
message
that
you
know
we're
trying
to
really
trying
to
relieve
here
the
bulky
with
what
we
knew
gonna
be
a
comment.
N
So
I
think
that
the
the
brighter
color
helps
you
know.
May
link
was
my
senior
planner
on
on
nico
the
project
on
nicolette
and
18th,
where
we
have
a
lot
of
you
know,
blues
and
just
a
lot
of
game
colors.
You
know.
I
think
that
we
tried
to
do
some
games
here.
I
think
that
the
to
get
a
less
bulky
feeling
the
bright
color
help,
but
but
I
we
promise
to
keep
on
exploring
that.
B
All
right
before
I
go
to
commissioner
sweezie,
I
think
kimberly
has
a
comment.
I
So
I
mostly
just
wanted
to
reiterate
the
comments
that
I'd
made
on
my
presentation
on
the
france
avenue
project
about
you
know
having
projects
in
the
corridor
for
built
farm
district.
That
really
look
like
projects
that
belong
in
the
corridor.
Six
built
forum
district-
and,
I
think,
there's
a
lot
of
similarities
here.
That
I
know
are
likely
not
lost
on
the
commission,
but
I
did
just
want
to
highlight
you
know,
especially
in
this
instance.
B
Thanks
kimberly
we'll
go
to
commissioner
sweezie.
F
Well,
kimberly
kind
of
beat
me
to
it,
but
I
wanted
to
point
out
just
make
a
comment
about
the
principles
of
consistency
which
are
important
in
the
work
that
we
do
here
and
I
see
you
know
almost
no
distinction
other
than
the
area
of
the
city
where
this
is
and
what
are
some
kind
of
defined
uses
for
the
first
and
second
floor
of
their
space.
But
otherwise
I
I
see
it.
As
is
the
same.
F
I
mean
you
look
at
the
picture
of
the
the
ariel
with
it
just
jutting
out
of
the
neighborhood
there.
This
is,
you
know
the
same
kind
of
thing,
although
arguably
this,
this
neighborhood
and
area
is
more
densely
populated
than
the
one
we're
talking
about
at
49th
and
france,
which
to
me,
is
a
stronger
argument
that
this
doesn't
belong
here
again.
F
Thinking
of
what
the
2040
plan
put
out
in
terms
of
predictability
and
things
like
that,
it's
just
too
big
for
the
spot
and
this
by
by
virtue
of
the
plan-
and
you
know
the
the
code
now
and
the
guidelines
calls
for
a
smaller
space.
You
know
I
same
kind
of
thing.
I
did
the
amenities
seem
to
me.
You
know
things
that
are
appropriate
for
a
building
like
this,
as
opposed
to
things
for
which
we
should
be
looking.
F
You
know
other
at
for
points
and
then
also
I
will
say
I
don't
know
how
far
this
is
getting
into
our
business
really,
but
to
comment
on
the
the
thing
about
the
outdoor
play
area
for
residents
shared
by
the
daycare.
That
raises
a
lot
of
issues
for
me.
You
know
there
are
issues
about
the
security
of
play
areas
at
child
care.
F
I
don't
know
if
we're
talking
about
mixing
these
things
during
the
day,
but
anybody
who's
ever
had
a
kid
in
daycare
knows
that
the
little
kids
aren't
supposed
to
be
out
at
the
same
time
as
the
big
kids
and
then,
if
this
were
something
that
were
open
later
to
other
people,
you
know,
there's
a
possibility
that
things
could
get
damaged
and
be
so,
while
you
know
some
of
that
can
work
and
the
multi-generational
thing
with
an
adult
daycare,
and
all
that
you
also
can't
have
random
adults
wandering
into
a
secure
daycare
area
either.
F
So
that
would
have
to
be
fleshed
out
a
lot
more
for
me
in
terms
of
how
that
would
actually
work.
But
I
agree
completely
with
with
kimberly
and-
and
I
really
don't
see
any
difference
between
the
principles
that
a
lot
of
us
were
invoking
so
critically
on
the
last
project
in
this
one,
no
offense,
but
they
just
look
the
same
to
me.
That
way.
B
Thank
you,
commissioner
sweezie
commissioner
smiley.
C
Yeah
both
kimberly
and
commissioner
swayze
kind
of
beat
me
to
this
as
well.
I
will
reiterate
the
comments
while
I
I
appreciate
the
intention,
as
commissioner
meyer
and
marwa
put
it
and
just
kind
of
like
bringing
people
in
the
community
that
giving
them
space.
I
don't
think
this
fits
in
this
area
in,
like
the
the
most
of
the
buildings
around.
It
are
not
even
like
some
of
them
aren't
even
two
stories,
so
I
don't
similar
to
staff's
question.
C
I
don't
see
a
practical
difficulty
here
to
go
with
the
higher
mass
for
this
building.
I
have
to
say
between
this
building
and
the
previous
project
that
we
were
looking
at.
I
do
appreciate
a
little
bit
of
a
breakup
of
the
c
shape
of
the
building
and
that
amenity
deck,
but
I
have
the
exact
similar
concern
as
commissioner
sweezie,
with
sharing
the
playground
area
with
both
security
and
also
kind
of
mixing
up
the
considering
this
building
being
more
of
a
multi-generational,
potentially
lots
of
families
with
kids.
C
I
don't
even
think
that
such
a
pla
area
will
be
sufficient
for
the
residents
themselves,
let
alone
bringing
additional
need
from
the
daycare
so
that
I
guess
that's
my
comment
for
for
the
two
questions
that
were
asked
in
the
feedback.
B
Thank
you,
commissioner,
smiley
commissioner
ford.
D
Thank
you,
yeah.
I
was
struck
by
the
the
the
same
thing
that
kimberly
and
commissioner
sweesey
and
others
have
talked
about
the
about.
It's
really
in
many
respects
similar.
Although
I
mean
it
is
it's
big
and
it's
bigger
than
it's
meant
to
be,
it
should
be,
and
so
we
have
to
find
you
know
I
might
like
to
say
yes
to
it,
but
I
regret
to
find
some
reasons
for
it.
D
I
I
do
want
to
acknowledge
this
that
the
c
shape
helps
on
the
the
mass
of
the
the
building
and
the
this
has
affordable
housing
rather
than
avoiding
it,
affordable
housing
and
it
has
large
family
units,
and,
as
chris
has
mentioned
earlier,
you
know
if
affordable
housing
developers
would
love
to
be
able
to
find
of
affordable
housing
advocates
rather
really
point
to
the
need
for
affordable
family
size
units,
and
this
provides
some
so
there
is.
D
There
are
a
lot
of
reasons
to
we
want
this
to
work,
but
I
think
we're
not
quite
there
yet.
B
All
right,
I'm
not
seeing
any.
Thank
you
for
the
presentation.
B
All
right
that
was
our
final
item
kimberly.
Are
there
any
staff
updates.
I
There
are
no
staff
updates.
We
will
be
bringing
an
update
to
the
next
planning
commission
meeting.
I
think
jason
informed
me
that
there
had
been
a
request
about
bringing
a
map
related
to
the
sro
ordinance
to
the
next
regular
meeting
of
the
commission,
so
we
will
bring
it
to
that
next
meeting
as
requested,
but
nothing
this
evening.
B
All
right,
thank
you,
commissioners.
Any
other
comments.
H
Yeah,
I
have
a
quick
question.
As
you
know,
offices
you're,
going
back
to
work.
Alyssa
looks
like
you're
back.
What
is
the
plan
for
the
commission.
I
So
that's
a
great
question.
The
easiest
answer
that
I
can
give
you
right
now
is
that
we
don't
know
so
there
are
some
changes
being
made
to
the
open
meeting
law
at
the
state
level,
and
then
our
city
clerk
is
working
with
the
city
attorney's
office
to
interpret
them
and
develop
some
policies
and
then
practice
some
options
and
how
things
might
work.
I
So
I
can
tell
you
that
staff
is
going
back
into
the
office
september
7th.
It's
likely
that
we
will
be
having
in-person
meetings
in
around
that
time.
We're
hoping
to
be
able
to
give
you
as
much
advance
notice
as
possible,
though
when
and
if
that
does
happen.
So
the
next
meeting
on
the
issue
with
the
city
clerk
and
the
city
attorney's
office
is
on
the
22nd
and
I'll,
hopefully
have
an
update
for
you
all
after
that.
B
All
right
without
objection,
I'll
declare
this
meeting
adjourned.
Our
next
committee
of
the
whole
meeting
will
be
thursday
july
1st
2021,
and
our
next
planning
commission
meeting
will
be
monday
july
19th.
Thank
you.
Everybody.