►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Good
evening,
everyone,
so
it
is
very
bright
out
there
for
it
being
5
p.m.
My
name
is
erin
and
I
am
the
chair
of
the
community
environmental
advisory
commission
before
we
begin
I'd
like
to
note
that
this
meeting
includes
the
remote
participation
of
members
as
authorized
under
minnesota
statutes,
section
13d
.021,
due
to
the
declared
local
health
pandemic.
I
will
now
call
this
meeting
to
order
and
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
role,
so
we
may
verify
the
presence
of
a
quorum.
So
I'm
going
to
hand
it
back
on
over
to
kim.
B
A
C
D
A
B
B
D
B
E
B
E
A
A
Great
thanks
kim
before
we
start
diving
in
we
do
need
to
go
through
the
adoption
of
today's
agenda
and
also
the
acceptance
of
the
minutes
from
last
month.
I
do
think
that
it
might
be
worthwhile
to
move
up.
The
st
anthony
falls
conversation
to
the
discussion
section,
so
I
think
that
that
would
be
my
one
point
of
change.
D
B
I'm
sorry
I'll,
I'm
gonna
turn
off
my
video
on
that
because
I
actually
missed
my
videos
or
my
audio
is
cutting
in
and
out.
Could
you
just
repeat
you
wanted
to
amend
the
saint
anthony
falls
discussion
to
be
moved
up
from
announcements,
move.
B
B
And
then,
who
motioned
and
seconded
that.
B
Yes,
okay,
no
worries
all
right,
so
this
is
to
approve
both
the
agenda
and
the
minutes
is
that
correct
with
the
amended
agenda
to
move
the
saint
anthony.
A
A
F
B
C
F
B
B
D
B
D
B
D
D
A
A
A
As
a
city,
we
have
a
responsibility
to
care
for
the
land
on
which
we
live
and
work
and
all
of
its
natural
surroundings.
This
stewardship
is
an
integral
part
of
our
involvement
in
this
commission
and
we
honor
it.
As
we
begin
our
meeting,
we
now
open
this
space
to
discuss
ways
in
which
we
can
support
indigenous
people
in
our.
A
Community,
I
know
for
one
for
myself
that
I
don't
know
a
ton
about
the
saint
anthony
falls
topic,
but
I
am
curious
to
understand
how
that
intersects
with
spirit
island
and
the
sacred
area
for
the
indigenous
people
of
the
snake
of
this
general.
A
A
G
Yes,
I
think
it's
a
very
interesting
situation.
In
1985,
the
u.s
corps
of
engineers
wrote
an
over
100
page
report,
talking
about
the
hydroelectric
capability
possibilities
of
the
upper
and
falls
and
then
of
the
in
trying
to
increase
the
lower
falls.
Lower
falls.
Didn't
look
so
really
such
a
good
opportunity,
but
the
upper
falls
could
jet
the
upper
falls.
G
There
could
generate
22
megawatts,
which
kim
was
saying
you
know,
could
replace
some
of
the
coal
plants
or
nuclear
plants
or
so
forth,
and
and
and
and
they
had
a
like
a
1.65
benefit
to
cost
ratio.
So
it
was
not
not
an
impossible
task,
and
this
has
actually
been
that
in
iowa
recently
there's
a
red
rock
reservoir
on
the
des
moines
river,
which
is
smaller
than
the
mississippi.
G
Here
I
believe,
that's
that
was
just
in
the
last
it
took
a
couple
of
years
to
you
know
to
build
it,
but
it
was
just
dedicated
recently
and
actually
producing
electricity
and
the
des
moines
a
river
runs
into
the
mississippi
at
kia
cook
iowa.
G
So
I
won't
take
any
more
time,
but
I
would
like
us
to
eventually
write
a
letter
to
whomever
or
think
about
supporting,
like
electrifying
the
upper
dam.
There.
H
I'll
jump
in,
I
think,
yeah.
I
think
this
is
this:
the
the
dam
and
the
federal
government
kind
of
trying
to
offload
it
is
a
really
big
and
interesting
discussion.
H
I
I'd
have
to
learn
more
about
the
potential
to
use
the
energy
for
electricity,
but
what
from
what
I've
heard
recently
is
that
there's
been
a
shift
less
to
use
damn
control
or
like
damn
made
energy,
because
there's
carbon
free
energy
is
like
much
much
lower
cost
and
and
and
there's
been
a
big
push
to
decommission
dams
across
the
country
and
have
the
river
free-flowing
and
it's
actually
more
supportive
of
the
ecosystem
there.
H
So
I'm
interested
in
the
conversation
and
but
as
far
as
I
know,
I
would
be-
I
might
fall
more
on
the
side
of
of
not
investing
in
a
dam
and
more
interested
in
a
free-flowing
alternative.
G
The
in
the
case
of
a
new
dam
that
somebody
wanted
to
build
and
would
then
impound
water
behind
it,
make
a
big
lake
that
would
flood
native
sites
or
whatever
I
can
agree
with
you,
or
there
are
many
places
where
I
would
definitely
agree
with
you,
but
in
this
case
there's
an
already
existing
dam
which
isn't
essentially
well
it's
it's
impounding,
some
water,
which
is
providing
drinking
water
for
us
and
bath
water
and
processed
water
and
all
kinds
of
good.
I
mean
we'd
have
to
do
something.
G
If
we
didn't
have
that
and
and
it's
not
it,
it
isn't
a
large,
it
isn't
covering
a
large
area.
It's
just
it's
the
river,
making
it
a
little
bit
higher
on
the
way
up,
which
is
useful
for
boating,
and
things
like
that
too.
G
So
it's
already
existing.
It
would
just
be
a
matter
of
of
using
the
falling
of
the
water
to
generate
electricity.
So
I
think
you
have
to
separate
the
cases
I
can
understand
people
who
don't
want
to
who
don't
want
new
dams
or,
and
one
of
the
they
think
the
hazard
of
this.
If
it
really
was
bought
by
somebody
who
I
don't
know
whatever
they
do
with
it,
but
if
they
demolish
that
dam
would
would
in
peril
imperil
our
drinking
water,
the
water
supply
here.
So
I
don't
think
we
want
to
do
that.
A
A
A
But
for
from
the
city
of
minneapolis,
the
drinking
water,
the
source
water
for
that
is
up
near
fridley,
so
it's
actually
just
outside
of
the
city
of
minneapolis.
I
A
I
think
one
other
point
to
make
is
that
the
public
comment
deadline
is,
I
guess
tomorrow
so
like
as
a
body,
we
wouldn't
necessarily
be
well.
We
pretty
much
could
not
put
in
a
particular
comment
letter
at
this
point
in
time,
but
I
know
that
there
are
ways
that
each
of
us
could
put
in
comments
online
kim.
Did
you
have
something
to
add.
B
Yeah,
I
would,
I
was
just
gonna
say
that
that's
related
to
the
you
know,
sale
of
the
property
and
different
things
of
that
nature,
like
ideas
and
stuff.
So
I
I,
while
there
is
a
deadline
there.
I
certainly
think
that
in
the
future
we
could
send
to
the
army
corps
of
engineers,
or
we
would
send
to
the
city
and
ask
it
to
be
submitted
to
the
army
corps
of
engineers.
B
The
a
letter
saying,
let's
take
a
look
at
this
or
or,
however,
we
want
to
address
it,
but
I'm
just
saying
I
don't
think
it's
a
hard
and
fast
because
at
this
point
this
is
a
long
process
and
they
don't
have
a
lot
of
takers
for
it.
And
so
I
don't.
I
don't
think
we.
I
think
we
have
a
little
more
time
if
we
did
want
to
dig
deeper.
A
Yeah
and
I
think
that
it
could
be
worthwhile
to
depending
not
only
having
the
city
of
minneapolis's
water
operator
but
potentially
singles
as
well
yeah.
We.
A
Since
their
intake
is
also
above,
the
falls
tess.
C
Yeah,
I
wanted
to
ask
there's
like
a
lot
of
pieces
to
this
process,
so,
what's
sort
of
on
the
table
now,
and
my
understanding
is
that
the
army
corps
would
like
to
get
rid
of
the
entire
site,
both
the
land
and
the
lock
and
dam
itself.
C
There's
been
a
lot
of
pushback
on
the
army
corps,
getting
rid
of
the
dam
and
lock
and
no
one
wants
to
take
it,
including
the
city.
But
a
lot
of
groups
are
advocating
a
sort
of
split
plan
where
the
army
corps
keeps
the
lock
and
damn,
but
the
land
around.
It
is
either
given
or
sold
to
the
city.
C
In
my
understanding
and
that's
sort
of
like
what
you
were
speaking
to
aaron
about
like
nakti
and
other
groups
have
talked
about
plans
for
it
connects
with
the
waterworks
public
lands
plan
around
that
area,
and
I
just
wanted
to
ask
kim
if
you
know
whether
the
city
has
any
position
on
that
sort
of
split
plan
where
the
land
around
the
loch
and
dam
would
go
to
the
city,
or
at
least
the
army
corps
would
not
control
it
anymore,
but
still
control.
All
the
lock
and
dam.
A
B
Yeah,
I
know
that
the
city
is
supportive
of
the
water
works
project
and
been
actually
working
closely
with
the
park
board
on
that
so
and
the
park
board
foundation,
so
I'm
sure
they're
open
to
that.
The
big
issue
that
I've
heard
from
property
services
and
jeff
johnson
who's,
the
executive
director
of
the
convention
center.
This
might
be.
Like
a
you
know,
a
convention,
tourism
thing
is
sort
of
where
it
was
landed.
B
You
know
because
they're
of
the
the
we're
just
not
it's
not
an
asset
or
that
the
city
is
interested
in
getting
at
because
it
has
long-term
cost
implications.
It's
not
something
the
city
is
does
is
like
a
core
business.
You
know
so
it
it
sees
it
a
lot,
the
actual
dam
and
the
lock
itself
as
a
large
liability,
and
I
think
that's
why
they
have
an
interest
but
property
being
developed.
B
F
B
Yeah,
that's
approximately
correct
and
that's
true
that
there
that
hydro
is
on
kind
of
the
lower
part
of
the
dam,
so
to
speak.
There's
like
the
sort
of
larp
the
upper
dam
is
sort
of
past.
You
know
a
little
bit
farther
up
from
the
big
falls,
but
that
one
runs
off
of
a
channel
that
goes
from
the
sort
of
lower
dam.
But
yes,
and
that's
about
nine
megawatts.
B
F
And
you
know,
as
we
look
ahead
to
the
carbon
reduction
plans
for
the
city,
you
know
I
would.
I
would
say
that
having
hydro
existing
hydro
and
maximizing
the
output
from
that
facility
could
be
an
important
part
of
that
decarbonization
plan,
not
only
because
it's
providing
clean
power,
but
also
because
it
would
be
reliable
power
even
when
the
sun's
not
shining
and
the
winds
not
blowing.
So
it
could
help
provide
a
you
know,
kind
of
a
buffer
during
those
periods
and
potentially
you
could
manage
the
water
height
behind
the
dam
as
energy
storage.
F
So
I
I
think
it's
like
any
dam.
It's
it's
got
pros
and
cons,
but
I
think
we
need
to
weigh
it
in
those
terms
as
well.
D
I
Yeah,
so
I
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
to
understand
or
make
sure
that
well.
First
of
all,
I
have
some
understanding
of
this,
but
I
don't
know
everything
about
this.
I
think
probably
all
of
us
are
kind
of
trying
to
gather
our
knowledge
together
does
does
sale,
ultimately
mean
that
the
owner
has
the
full
privilege
to
make
changes
to
it,
or
is
it
just
the
beginning,
and
ultimately,
the
army
corps
of
engineers
and
a
stakeholder
process
would
govern
any
changes.
I
Definition
of
navigable
waters
includes
waters
that
aren't
navigable,
even
if
a
block
and
dam
has
been
closed
and
so
changes
to
the
dam
would
be
a
separate
process
from
the
sale,
and
so
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
if
there's
somebody
at
the
city
that
could
help
kind
of
explain
that
whether
this
is
one
combined
process
or
if
it's
really
two
separate
processes,
one
for
ownership
and
one
for
actual
changes
to
how
the
falls
functions-
and
I
have
a
tiny
bit
of
experience
from
this
from
a
hydro
project
that
a
former
employer
I
worked
with,
did
another
historic
place.
A
A
I
mean
again,
I
can
only
see
certain
people's
heads
nodding
or
thumbs
up
in
the
air,
and
I
just
want
to
get
a
general
sense
and
then
also
ask
too,
if
that
is
something
we
want
to
do.
Who
would
we
want
to
hear
from?
A
I
know
that
we
started
semi
making
a
list,
but
I'm
just
I
want
to
kind
of
build
it
out
so
that
we
have
an
idea
of
who
all
we
would
want
to
hear
from
and
what
that
might
mean
for
other
ciac
meetings,
future
seat.
B
Well,
I
guess
I
I
would
for
sure
want
to
hear
from
the
army
corps
of
engineers
because
they
even
like,
as
nick,
was
referring
to,
even
if
they
aren't
owning
the
lock
and
dam
they'll.
They
have
other
responsibilities
for
the
river
and
such
so
and
the
so.
I
think
there
would
be
first
and
foremost-
and
there
probably
is
also
some
folks
within
the
city
planning
department,
for
example,
who
have
worked
on
the
various
mississippi
river
developments.
B
A
C
The
friends
of
the
falls
coalition
has
been
doing
presentations
over
the
last
few
weeks,
just
I've
seen
on
their
website.
Friends
of
the
falls
presents
on
recent
project
milestones,
including
its
developing
partnership,
with
nakti
passage
of
wrda,
2020
and
discussion
of
the
upper
of
the
army
corps
upper
lock.
This
disposition
study
and
public
comment
period,
which
is
ending
tomorrow,
but
they
seem
like
a
useful
resource.
A
H
I'd
be
interested
in
hearing
from
nakti.
Also,
I
don't
know
if
anyone
said
that.
A
Yet
great
okay,
so
I
have
a
list
put
together
here
and
we
can
talk
further
about
when
we
would
want
to
hear
more
at
different
ciac
meetings,
future
ciac
meetings
and
as
individuals
feel
free
to
take
a
look
at
some
of
the
different
information.
That's
out
there
in
the
agenda,
there's
a
link
to
the
friends
of
the
mississippi
river
and
their
explanation
for
their
views
on
what's
happening
with
the
site
and
feel
free
to
again
put
in
your
own
personal
comments.
A
B
B
So
there
was
a
full
eaw
that
the
community
had
requested
to
get
done,
which
was
just
recently
completed,
and
I
sent
off
some
comments
that
were
put
together
and
submitted
by
the
southside
green
zone,
which
is
incorporates
the
site
where
the
proposed
hiawatha
public
works
facility
goes
in,
and
I
submitted
those
along
to
you
last
week
with
the
board
packet.
So
there's
opportunity
to
make
comments.
A
large
document.
B
B
So
I
know
others
like
sandy
fazeli
has
spoken
to
this
quite
a
bit
if
she'd
like
to
make
comments,
but
there's
an
opportunity
to
basically
bring
forward
this
any
concerns
that
have
been
that
maybe
aren't
being
addressed
or
need
to
be
looked
at
by
the
city
when
it
comes
to
environment
pollution
impact
within
the
southside
green
zone
and
phillips.
C
C
Saying
if
you
want
to
go
ahead,
if
you
had
something
to
say
you
can
jump
in.
J
Thanks
tess,
I
was
just
going
to
say:
I've
had
blinders
on
and
wasn't
aware
of
the
eaw,
so
I
will
definitely
take
a
look
at
it.
Thank
you
kim
for
sharing
that.
A
Sorry
I
will
say
that
I'm
fairly
disappointed
that
the
that
the
city
of
that
public
works
didn't
send
this
to
ceac,
because
we'd
been
asking
to
be
notified
when
the
transportation
demand,
management
and
and
the
eaw
were
completed.
A
C
I
would
be
interested
just
like
not
having
much
of
a
background
on
what
cx
involvement
has
been
so
far,
maybe
at
a
different
time,
and
in
relation
I
would,
I
think,
would
be
helpful
to
have
more
clarity
about
sort
of
what
the
next
steps
are.
Once
the
ea
w
comment
period
closes,
I
think
there
has
to
be
some
sort
of
approval
process
and
then
there's
also
the
issue
of
the
roof
depot
building
potentially
being
torn
down,
and
I
don't
know
if
that
relates
to
the
aw
yeah.
C
It
would
be
helpful.
I
think,
to
have
a
little
more
clarity
about
that,
and
I'd
also
like
to
suggest
potentially
since
time
is
so
short,
it
looks
like
the
south
side.
Green
zone
has
put
together
a
pretty
comprehensive
letter,
and
I
wonder
if
we
could
just
talk
about
signing
on
to
that.
A
J
It's
maybe
just
to
respond
to
a
couple
of
tess's
points,
so
not
having
read
the
eaw
yet
or
the
transportation
management
plan.
I
think
so.
Ciac
in
late
2020
essentially
had
the
opportunity
to
connect
with
a
few
city,
council
members
and
roof
depot
was
one
of
the
the
main
talking
points
and
we
did
hear
from
council
president
bender
and
councilmember
jenkins.
J
Is
that
right
that
you
know
they
were
both
sort
of
attuned
to
this,
especially
council
member
jenkins,
and
I
think
we
also
were
able
to
sort
of
get
a
soft
commitment
that
if
the
the
results
of
the
eaw
and
transportation
management
plan
you
know
did
not
seem
to
benefit
the
community
or
adverse
impacts,
oh
yeah,
as
well
as
ken
gordon,
so
yeah.
J
Essentially,
if,
if
there,
if
there
were
very
evident
adverse
impacts,
that
they
would
consider
potentially
revisiting
this
as
a
body
but
by
and
large
the
the
talking
point
that
we
heard
was
like
this
is
not
our
problem,
because
it's
in
a
different
word.
So
I
think
that
we
might
be
able
to
use
this
as
a
hook
if
we
are
able
to
find
enough
issues
to
really
warrant
council
action.
A
A
So
the
four
main
comments
that
the
south
side
green
zone
council
is
making
is
that
the
eaw
does
not
acknowledge
the
green
zone.
Environmental
justice
designation,
in
which
the
project
is
located,
there's
no
analysis
of
analysis
of
on-site
and
off-road
mobile
pollution
sources
and
the
relative
increase
from
current
to
expanded
operations.
I
But
I
might
suggest
an
approach
that
we
could
take
is
basically
to
say.
Siac
is
the
city-wide
body
believes
that
it
is
most
appropriate
for
the
city
to
listen
to
the
south
side
green
zone?
Please
refer
to
their
comments
and
view
those
as
the
positions
of
people
most
likely
to
be
affected
by
this,
and
without
necessarily
endorsing
each
specific
opinion,
but
rather
just
elevating
that
voice
through
our
own.
J
A
Yeah,
I
know
it's
like
right
after
I
started
talking.
I
was
like
yep.
No
one
can
hear
me,
so
how
would
people
feel
about
approving
a
letter
that
says
something
along
the
lines
of
what
nick
just
verbalized.
J
Oh
sorry,
could
I
yep
are
there
any
other
groups
that
are
issuing
letters
that
we
might
want
to
include
I'm
thinking
the
little
earth
nation,
folks
or
other
community
groups,
and
I'm
not
sure
if
we
need
to
do
more
research
on
that?
But
it
just
seems
like
a
good
opportunity.
If
we're
trying
to
elevate
community
voices
to
include
those
that
we
are
allied
with.
B
B
The
executive
director's
name
is
kyle,
I'm
forgetting
her
last
name
now,
but
they
have
been
involved
in
this
and
supportive
of
the
east
phillips
position
on
this
and
the
project
that's
proposed
there
also,
I
know
that
the
minnesota
center
for
environmental
advocacy
has
been
supportive
and
helped
in
some
way
draft
these
comments
with
the
south
side
green
zone
so
mcea
they
basically
a
team.
They
have
lawyers
and
they
work
in
public.
J
J
That
also
does
extend
the
timeline
a
little
bit.
A
I'm
not
currently
finding
anything
from
ebny
like
super
quickly
if
anybody
has
particular
links
to
any
other
comment,
letters
that
they've
seen
regarding
the
eaw
and
transportation
demand
management
plan.
That
would
be
fantastic.
A
I
think
one
thing
that
would
be
difficult
for
me
is
that
you
know,
especially
if
we
don't
make
a
decision
in
the
meeting
today.
I-
and
so
many
people
are
new
on
c
I
wouldn't
feel
comfortable
with
judging
like,
what's
necessarily
like
in
line
with
cx
thinking
so
yeah
nick.
Can
I.
I
Propose
maybe,
since
I
think
we
have
a
presentation,
that's
coming
up
now,
how
about
a
couple
of
us
try
to
scrounge
up
what
we
can
I'll
draft
I'll
start
drafting
a
brief
letter
and
let's
table
this
for
30
minutes,
okay
and
then,
if
we
find
other
things
that
we
can
discuss,
we
can
include
them
and,
if
not,
I
still
think
there's
some
level
of
legitimacy
in
just
amplifying
the
other
city
advisory
voice
on
this
topic,
even
if
we
aren't
able
to
include
parties
outside
of
the
city's
advice
reports.
A
So
tabling
that,
for
the
time
being,
the
other
point
of
discussion
that
we've
had
is
around
the
stormwater
ordinance.
I
will
say
that
I
don't
think
we
had
any
other
particular
comments
beyond
the
sort
of
resolution
motion
that
we
made
at
the
last
meeting
and
kim.
I
know
that
you
already
sent
that
along.
So
I'm
just
wondering
if
there's
anything
that
we
actually
need
to
do
on
that.
B
No,
there
isn't
anything
you
need
to
do.
I
did
I
just
sent
over
the
letter
as
a
draft,
I'm
just
happy
to
say
it
was-
was
finalized.
Maybe
we
maybe
I
should
back
up.
Yeah
it'd
probably
be
great
just
to
approve
the
letter
officially
and
that
way
we
have
that
as
a
as
a
motion
or
trying
to
remember,
we
didn't
we
approved
to
move
forward
with
trying
to
remember
what
we
did
for
last
time
now.
B
B
The
final
letter
that
I
sent
over
just
to
let
people
know
I
sent
over
the
draft
letter
to
to
liz
stout
who
presented
at
our
last
meeting
because
it
was
going
before
the
public
works
committee,
and
I
just
thought
it
would
be
helpful
to
get
it
to
her
before
the
meeting.
Since
she
can
reference
it
then,
and
so
I
sent
it
over
as
a.
D
Hennepin
county
will
be
adding
green
infrastructure
into
their
complete
streets
policy,
so
it
will
become
a
living
streets
policy
so
that,
as
the
city
is
coordinating
its
green
infrastructure,
it
will
also
be
able
to
tie
in
with
the
county's
grand
infrastructure
rule
and
then
the
friends
of
lake
highway
will
be
sending
in
comments
to
the
npca
to
try
to
have
them
start
regulating
trash
as
a
as
an
issue
which
they
don't
do
currently,
and
we
met
up
with
the
with
the
sewer
director
for
the
city,
and
she
said
that
they're
they
are
looking
at
capital
investments
to
help
clean
up
the
north
pipes
for
lake
highway,
but
the
they
have
to
wait
on
the
hiawatha
master
plan
to
be
proven
by
the
park
board
to
be
able
to
start
moving
ahead.
A
So
I
think
that
we
can
probably
just
move
on
from
this
particular
item
that
was
on
the
agenda,
so
a
presentation
around
travel
demand,
management,
parking
and
eevee.
Oh
sorry,
everybody's
got
something
nick
aaron.
I
I
think
the
the
the
stormwater
ordnance
action
that
we
had
for
the
longer
term,
which
can
be
tabled
until
the
next
meeting
was
there
was
the
near-term
thing.
But
then
there
was
a
discussion
about
some
longer-term
issues
and
I
don't
remember
exactly
what
those
are.
Maybe
it's
worthwhile
for
us
to
find
a
meeting
when
we
have
more
time
to
pull
those
back
out
of
the
minutes
and
decide
what
we
want
to
do
with
it
then,
but
it
was.
I
remember
it
was
things
that
couldn't
be
addressed
in
the
short
timeline
that
we
had
here.
A
I'll
look
at
the
look
back
at
the
notes
and
see
if
there's
anything,
to
pull
out
and
if
I'm
not
finding
anything.
I
will
send
an
email
around
to
the
group.
Well,
regardless,
I
will
send
an
email
around
to
the
group,
either
with
those
things
pulled
out
and
into
an
a
letter
or
just
letting
people
know
that
I
wasn't
able
to
find
it
and
just
asking
people
if
we
can
really
start
getting
more
put
into
that
google
doc
that
we
have
started.
B
So
yes,
joseph
bernard
is
with
us
today
from
the
city
planning
and
economic
development.
Joe,
do
you
want
to
click
on
and
do
you
want?
Do
you
want
to
drive?
Oh
you
got
it
up,
terrific.
Otherwise
I
have
it.
D
B
Too
perfect
sounds
great,
so
then
I'll
turn
it
over
to
you
and
you
can
introduce
yourself
and
then
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
modifications
and
why
we're
going
through
this
process
and
of
course
he
did
send
over
a
number
of
questions
that
we'll
go
over
at
the
end
that
are
included
in
the
agenda.
So
just
trying
to
get
your
sense
of
this
update
to
both
our
transportation
demand,
management
and
ev
parking
ordinances.
K
Thank
you
kim.
I
hello
everyone
thanks
for
having
me
at
your
meeting
this
afternoon,
I'm
joe
bernard,
I'm
a
planning
project
manager
in
cped.
I'm
looking
forward
to
sharing
this
project
with
you
and
getting
some
discussion
going.
There's
it's
a
big
project,
so
I'm
I'm
gonna
gloss
over
some
things
and
might
might
miss
details
on
some
things,
but
I
think
we'll
focus
on
on
what
this
committee
might
be
most
interested
in.
Hopefully.
K
K
But
the
message
here
is
that
we
have
been
on
a
20-year
quest
to
reform
our
parking
regulations
in
the
zoning
ordinance,
and
this
incremental
change
over
time
has
resulted
in
a
state
where
we
already
have
large
swaths
of
the
city
where
there
is
not
a
parking
requirement,
and
our
experience
is
that
people
still
are
providing
parking
in
their
developments,
but
giving
that
flexibility
is
something
that
is
called
for
in
our
plans.
K
So
this
is
kind
of
the
idea
of.
If
you
build
it,
they
will
come
induced
demand.
The
more
parking
you
build,
the
more
driving
you
get
dedication
of
large
portions
of
land
in
the
city
to
inactive
uses
is
also
a
problem
in
our
minds.
It
reduces
the
ability
of
our
residents
to
get
their
daily
transportation
needs
accomplished
within
a
small
geographic
footprint.
K
Sometimes
the
real
estate
market
is
strong
enough
to
take
care
of
this
problem
on
its
own.
In
other
cases,
we
feel
it's
important
to
protect
development
opportunity
in
advance
through
regulations
like
this.
K
I
think
a
pretty
straightforward
to
understand
that
the
more
cars
that
you
encourage,
the
harder
it
is
to
have
walkable
urban
design,
which
is
a
goal
in
a
minneapolis
2040,
the
more
parking
spaces.
You
have,
the
more
curb
cuts
you
need
to
go
across
sidewalks
bike
lanes
and
through
our
transit
corridors.
K
Not
as
important
are
these
last
two
bullet
points,
but
we
are
trying
to
provide
some
regulatory
relief
here.
We
want
to
make
it
easier
for
businesses
to
locate
in
the
city,
and
we
also
want
to
make
sure
that
our
staff
is
spending
time
working
on
items
that
really
are
going
to
improve
conditions
in
the
city
in
the
long
run
for
things
like
mode
split,
achieving
mode
split
goals
and
greenhouse
gas
emission
reductions.
K
Okay,
so
this
is,
I
would
spend
much
more
time
on
this
if,
if
time
allowed
there's
a
lot
of
detail
here,
but
I'm
gonna
go
through
this
pretty
quickly.
K
Our
minimum
parking
requirements
are
the
first
big
recommendation.
We're
making
is
that
those
will
be
eliminated.
City-Wide.
K
Second
is
that
we
have
a
fair
number
of
changes
to
our
maximum
parking
limits
that
are
already
in
the
zoning
coordinates.
Those
are
mostly
incremental,
but
we're
doing
it
in
such
a
way
that
we
want
to
take
into
consideration
the
fact
that
certain
parts
of
the
city
have
better
transit
service
are
already
more
dense
than
other
parts
of
the
city,
so
our
maximums
will
change,
depending
depending
upon
where
you
are
maximums,
downtown
and
near
transit
stations,
higher
allowances
in
other
parts
of
the
city.
K
Our
bicycle
parking
requirements
will
increase
for
many
uses
across
the
city
with
some
most
of
those
will
be
incremental
as
well,
but
there's
some
significant
changes
to
our
requirements
for
larger
development,
like
the
office
large
office
development
that
you
see
going
on
downtown,
the
current
parking
requirement
is
pretty
minimal
and
and
we'll
be
increasing,
that
requirement
moving
forward.
K
We
want
to
increase
flexibility
for
businesses
that
are
trying
to
locate
in
the
city
to
make
it
easier
for,
say
grocery
stores
to
locate
on
our
commercial
corridors,
which
we
feel
is
a
really
important
use
to
accommodate,
so
that
folks
don't
feel
they
need
to
use
their
cars
to
go,
get
their
groceries.
K
So
I
think
the
an
item
that
this
committee
has
weighed
in
on
in
the
past,
I've
seen
kim,
has
shared
with
me
some
recommendations
that
were
made
by
this
committee.
I
believe
in
in
2019
about
how
the
city
should
approach
electric
vehicle
charging
requirements,
we're
anticipating
in
this
ordinance
requiring
10
percent
of
spaces
parking
spaces
and
new
residential
hotel
and
office
development
to
supply
ev
chargers
and
with
smaller
residential
projects
being
exempt
from
this
requirement.
K
I
think
a
couple
of
issues
that
we
want
to
raise
for
this
committee
is
that
we
are
hearing
a
little
bit
from
our
housing
staff
and
cped.
There's
some
concern
about
the
impacts
that
this
might
have
on
affordable
housing.
The
cost
is
not
exorbitant,
but
not
insignificant,
either.
K
Of
course,
we're
acknowledging
that
we
want
to
make
sure
access
is
equitable
in
the
long
run
that
everybody
has
access
to
some
of
some
of
these
types
of
facilities
and
that
we
are
making
sure
that
cost
is
not
prohibitive
to
install
these
things
in
the
future.
K
The
last
thing
on
this
item
that
I'll
bring
to
your
attention
is
that
this
is
something
that
has
we're
we're
recognizing
that
this
is
something
new
to
administer
at
the
city.
We
haven't
done
this
before
we're,
not
entirely
sure
how
that's
going
to
work,
we're
working
on
the
details,
but
there's
a
chance
that
we're
going
to
consider
that
this
would
have
an
effective
date
somewhere
somewhere
out
in
the
future.
K
So
we
have
a
little
bit
of
time
to
figure
out
how
to
make
sure
we've
we're
administering
administering
it
properly
and
at
this
point,
we're
thinking
that
might
be
january
1st
of
2022.
K
K
The
other
big
thing
that
I
want
to
make
sure
the
committee
is
aware
of
is,
I
think,
our
most
one
of
our
most
cons.
Significant
changes
in
ordinance
is
to
our
travel
demand
management
process,
I'm
going
to
generalize
here,
but
I
want
to
give
a
sense
of
what
the
approach
moving
forward
can
be.
K
We've
historically
used
these
regulations
as
a
means
to
mitigate
negative
effects
of
development
and
in
some
ways
that
will
continue
to
be
the
case,
but
I
think
what
we're
hoping
to
do
is
focus
shift
focus
towards
a
goal
where
we
shape
development
on
the
front
end,
so
that
the
negative
transportation
impacts
the
development
never
materialize.
K
Of
course,
there's
a
continuum
between
those
two
states,
but
the
way
we're
hoping
to
do
that
is.
We
want
to
explicitly
state
our
goals
about
achieving
mode,
split
changes
and
greenhouse
gas
emission
reductions
in
our
ordinance
and
part
of
that
process
is
going
to
mean
de-emphasizing
traffic
studies
as
a
mechanism
for
for
evaluating
strategies
and
compliance
in
our
travel
demand
management
process.
K
Currently
tdm
regulations
only
apply
to
projects
very
large
projects,
100
000
square
feet
or
more
and
to
commercial
projects.
Only
since
we're
eliminating
our
parking
requirements,
I
feel
it's
important
to
still,
as
I
was
saying,
shift
the
focus
towards
achieving
goals
that
are
in
the
comp
plan.
So
so
that's
that's.
Why
there's
there's
we're
gonna
be
capturing
many
more
projects
moving
forward.
K
Okay,
so
again,
don't
need
to
know
all
the
details
of
this
slide,
but
it
gives
you
a
sense
of
the
scales
of
projects
that
we're
talking
about
here.
K
We're
talking
about
projects,
residential
projects
of
50
units
or
more
and
commercial
projects
of
25
000
square
feet
or
more
all
all
development
in
the
city
of
that
size
or
greater
will
be
subject
to
tdm
process.
Moving
forward,
you'll
see
that
there's
some
points
associated
with
with
these
descriptions.
K
That's
how
many
points
you
will
be
required
to
achieve
if
your
project
is
of
that
size
or
use
the
way
that
you
achieve.
Those
points
is
by
including
these
strategies
in
your
development,
so,
for
example,
providing
zero
vehicle
parking.
We
know
has
a
very
strong
correlation
to
reducing
greenhouse
gas
emissions
and
to
achieving
our
mode
split
goals.
We're
giving
something
like
that.
K
So
an
example
here
this
is
a
project
that
would
have
triggered
what
is
considered.
Our
travel
demand
management,
major
requirement,
it's
more
than
250
units.
It
needs
eight
points
from
the
table
and
it
is
not
clear
at
all
how
this
development
would
have
met
our
proposed
tdm
ordinance,
so
that
I
think
the
message
here
is
that
for
a
lot
of
projects,
this
is
going
to
be
an
increase
in
requirement
and
we're
going
to
be
pushing
projects
to
achieve
the
the
goals
that
I've
been
talking
about.
K
K
A
Needed
joseph
there
was
a
question
from
tess
that
I
think
I
answered
correctly,
but
it
would
be
good
just
to
make
sure
the
eva
charging
requirements
apply
only
to
new
projects.
K
Great
question:
yes,
this
would
apply
to
new
projects
only
or
significant
remodels.
I
should
say
significant
additions
to
existing
properties.
J
Hi
thanks
for
the
presentation,
I
am
curious
about
your
point
about
affordable
housing
and
whether
this
could
increase
rent
for
those
who
are
living
in
affordable
housing
and
just
wanted
to
know
more
about
sort
of
what
sort
of
analysis
cped
has
given
to
that
and
whether
there's
a
possibility
for
housing
that
might
be
in
that
scenario
where
they
would
need
to
increase
rent
to.
Instead
get
access
like
priority
access
to
grants
for
ev
charging
or
other.
K
Thanks
for
for
that
comment
and
the
question
I
the
I
think
the
committee
is
probably
aware
that
excel
has
some
programs
that
they're
working
on
that
we've
given
comment
to
excel
in
the
past
to
say
you
should
prioritize,
affordable
projects
when
considering
supporting
ev
charging
infrastructure,
and
so
that's
something
we're
thinking
about,
and
I
would
hope
that
that
eases
some
concerns
around
this
issue.
K
That
being
said,
you
know,
affordable
housing.
Finance
is
a
complicated,
tricky
thing
and
we
want
to
be
real
careful
about
it.
So
I
guess,
that's
all
to
say
we're
still
talking
with
our
colleagues
in
housing
about
the
best
approach
here,
but
we
in
as
the
folks
working
on
the
ordinance
we
really
want
to.
I
think
push
for
having
a
standard
that
is
consistent
across
all
types
of
projects
and
folks
living
in
affordable
housing
in
the
future
are
going
to
need
the
access
to
this
infrastructure.
As
well,.
J
Yeah.
Thank
you
just
sorry,
one
quick
follow-up,
there's
no
way
for
cped
to
require
landlords
not
to
raise
rent
as
a
result
of
the
like
ev
charging
expenses
or
that's,
not
a
lever
that
you
can
pull.
Is
that
right.
J
A
Before
moving
on
to
the
other
people
who
have
their
hands
raised
kim,
I
know
that
you
brought
up
a
point
about
this
when
anna
and
I
were
talking
with
you
about
the
agenda.
So
do
you
mind
just
mentioning
the
points
that
you
made
to
us.
B
In
regards
to
the
eb
charging
and
affordable
housing,
yeah
yeah,
so
I
mean,
I
think
joe's
mentioned
a
couple
of
them,
but
one
of
the
main
concerns
is
that
whenever
you
add
additional
requirements,
there's
additional
cost
most
of
the
affordable
housing
we
do
is
in
multi-family.
So
you
know
it's
not
just
one
space
or
something
like
that
or
it
falls
in
so
it
does
have
some
additional
costs
that
are
there
and
and
the
argument
being
that
those
additional
costs
you
know
over
time
or
cumulatively
reduce
the
number
of
units
that
can
be
built.
B
So
it's
a
so
it's
on.
Maybe
you
know.
The
other
trade-off
is
that
the
rents
are
higher.
You
know
I
mean,
but
probably
not
as
much
the
rents
are
higher.
Is
that
because
of
the
financial
stack
that
has
to
go
into
this,
you
know
it's
always
hard
to
get
all
the
money
to
put
together
for
the
projects,
and
so
there's
always
a
concern
about
adding
additional
requirements,
but
on
the
other,
on
the
other
hand,
the
other
trade-off
is
that
this
policy
doesn't
necessarily
require
significant
amounts
of
charges
being
installed.
B
If
you
go
back
10
years
from
now
to
try
to
retrofit
any
kind
of
charging
and
especially
in
any
kind
of
structured
parking
and
so
we're
trying
to
alleviate
that
from
being
the
barrier
of
a
building
that
could
be
around
for
100
years
from
having
electric
vehicle
charging.
So
I
mean
and
again,
if
you
talk
about
equity,
I
mean
people
that
live
in.
Affordable
housing
should
also
have
access
to
the
most
efficient
cars.
B
So
you
know
again
there's
the
issue
that
evs
are
more
expensive,
so
it
might
not
be
there
quickly
but,
as
joe
said,
there's
not
a
at
this
point.
Consistency
is
really
important
and
I
think
it
has
a
is
equitable
to
ensure
that
that,
when
it's
required
for
the
private
sector
that
it
should
be
made
available
as
well
to
those
who
are
in
affordable
housing
or
or
government
supportive
housing
in
some
way.
So
that's
kind
of
the
argument
from
a
couple
different
angles.
A
H
Yeah
thanks
joe
for
the
presentation
and
thanks
kim
for
those
points,
relatedly,
I'm
wondering
how
you
came
up
with
the
10
spaces
required
for
ev,
ready
charging
and,
and
why
or
how
you
came
up
with
like
fewer
than
I
think
it
was
nine
units
being
required
to
do
that
and
then
also
wondering
kind
of,
as
kim
mentioned,
like
buildings
are
built
for
100
years
is,
or
they
last
potentially
100
years,
and
is
10
high
enough
and
is
sorry
there's
a
lot
of
questions.
H
Is
there
like
sort
of
a
schedule
to
reevaluate
and
update
this
policy,
or
is
it
you
know
what?
If,
if
evs
are
adopted,
you
know
much
quicker
than
we're,
anticipating
and,
and
we
don't
want
to
lock
out
that
technology
for
folks
who
live
in
multi-family
housing?
K
So
the
the
question
on
schedule:
there
isn't
one
our
we
took
this
to
our
planning
commission
committee
of
the
whole
last
week
and
they
had
similar
thoughts
of
you
know.
How
do
we
make
sure
that
we're
updating
this
ordinance
in
the
future,
as
as
we
experience
more
evee
vehicles
coming
on
on
the
market?
K
And
I
guess
the
it's-
maybe
not
a
satisfying
answer,
but
we
we
typically
don't
schedule
that
evaluation.
But
this
we
see
our
zoning
ordinance
as
a
living
document
and
there's
amendments
happening
to
it
all
the
time.
So
I
think
we
we
have
the
ability
to
be
responsive
to
those
changes.
K
K
So
the
question
on
that
breaking
point
of
10
units
above
or
below
it's
somewhat
influenced
by
just
experience
in
the
city,
knowing
that
projects
that
are
are
smaller
than
10
units
typically
aren't
going
to
have
structured
parking
and
and
oftentimes.
They
don't
have
parking
at
all
or
very
few
spaces,
so
at
even
a
10
requirement.
In
that
case,
maybe
gets
you
one
space
which
isn't
nothing,
but
we
decided
at
this
point.
The
proposal
is
so
you
see
these
three
columns
here.
K
10
of
the
spaces
in
in
the
larger
developments
and
hotel
and
office
an
additional
20
of
those
flexible
spaces.
So
it's
it's
ready.
It
just
needs
a
charger
and
then
all
of
the
remaining
spaces
needing
that
that
conduit
in
place
for
multi-family,
hotel
and
office,
those
numbers
are,
are
taken
from
kind
of
a
review
of
what
other
cities
across
the
country
are
doing
and
everybody's
doing
something
different.
At
this
point,
san
francisco
requires
10
of
the
spaces
to
have
chargers
and
the
remaining
to
be
ready.
K
Atlanta
requires
20
of
the
spaces
to
be
ev.
Ready.
Boston
is
5
required
with
chargers.
Our
local
example
will
be.
St
louis
park
is
requiring
five
to
ten
percent
of
spaces
to
have
charters,
and
I
I
gotta
say
I'm
a
little
disappointed
that
st
louis
park
has
beaten
us
to
the
to
the
punch
on
this.
K
But
so
it's
an
inexact
science,
I
guess,
is
what
I'm
trying
to
say,
and
we
think
that
this
is
pushing
the
envelope,
maybe
a
bit
nationally
and
and
here
so
we
want
to
future
proof
this
a
little
bit.
But
I
guess
that's
the
the
maybe
too
long
version
of
where
we
came
to
the
these
numbers.
D
A
quick
resource
from
from
shangri-z
you
could
cook
it
and
has
done
a
great
presentation
on
how
to
put
in
splitters
so
that
you
can
have
a
lot
more
capacity
from
the
different.
You
know
conduit,
that's
put
in
there
so
that
it'll
be
always.
You
know
double
and
quadruple
and
amount
of
cars
for
evs.
Thanks.
B
Oh
sorry
kim
and
then
nick
I
just
can't
I
just
thank
you.
I
just
want
to
respond
in
addition
to
joe's
comment
there.
What
makes
this
policy
more
progressive
than
san
francisco
or
st
louis
park
is
that
while
we
don't
require
that
all
the
actual
hard
wiring
be
in
there,
we
require
that
the
conduit
be
made
built
in
so
that
they
can
wire
it
quite
quickly
and
it
cost
effectively
for
all
the
remaining
spaces
and
then
having
the
conduit
in
place.
B
Charger
ready
for
20.
Those
two
things
are
going
above
and
beyond
what
we've
seen
in
other
other
ev
policies,
and
we
think
our
as
as
we
kind
of
talked
about
it
kind
of
future
proof
this
for
a
while,
because
you
think
about
it.
Basically,
this
these
entire
garages
can
be
completely
wired
to
put
a
charger
at
every
space
and
because
of
that
last
in
the
note
section
requirement.
B
Basically,
this
says
that
you
have
to
be
able
to
be
have
enough
power
coming
into
the
building
from
the
get-go
when
it's
built
to
be
able
to
have
20
of
all
the
chargers
operating
at
the
same
time.
So
nowadays
is
kind
of
what
sean
was
referring
to
there's
a
lot
of
the
smart
charging
and
saving,
and
so
you
can
have
like
you
know,
four
chargers
running
off
of
what
was
one
charger.
You
know
two
years
ago,
because
they're
sharing
and
topping
off
the
battery
etc.
B
But
that
way,
basically,
these
buildings
are
going
to
be
ready
to
go
for
full-on
ev
charging
into
the
future.
The
way
this
looks
it's
not
requiring
the
charger,
but
again
that's
also
something
that
the
utility
programs
and
things
like
that.
That's
the
sort
of
field
that
they're
playing
a
lot
more
in
so
there's
some
really
good
programs
and,
of
course,
it's
getting
more
cost
effective
to
buy
private
charging
equipment
as
well
too.
So
this
allows
flexibility
from
that
standpoint
too.
B
E
I
Yeah
one
one
question
and
one
comment:
well,
I
shall
leave
a
comment
first
and
then
ask
the
question:
if
there's
anything
you
want
to
respond
to
that
to
the
comment
feel
free
for
other
committee
members
too,
the
multi-family
gap
is
real
and
it
is
big.
I
I
You
know
a
group
of
zip
codes
in
minneapolis
and
st
paul,
so
a
large
portion
of
those
folks
are
in
multi-family,
and
the
number
of
people
who
said
not
having
access
to
charging
in
my
home
is
a
key
barrier
to
considering
an
ev
for
their
next
vehicle
purchase
was
significantly
higher
than
people
who
reported
living
in
a
single
family
home.
So
it's
not
just
opinion.
It's
it's
real!
There's
information
from
people
who
are
in
that
decision
making
and
at
that
point
of
making
a
decision
that
feel
that
way.
I
Weigh
those
potential
costs
for
affordable
housing
against
the
fact
that
it
limits
those
residence
options
to
have
less
less
expensive
transportation,
and
then
my
question
is
related
to
that.
Would
variances
be
on
the
table.
I
So
if
somebody
came
in
with
an
affordable
project
and
they
can't
make
the
numbers
work
for
some
reason,
is
that
something
that
they
would
that
developers
would
ask
for?
And
how
would
cpad
respond
to
that?
If
somebody
asked
for
a
variance
on
that
eb
on
the
ev
policy.
K
Thank
you
for
the
the
comment
nick
I
I
would
love
to
see
the
it
would
be
useful
to
have
those
survey
or
summary
of
that
survey
for
us,
just
as
background
information
for
staff
working
on
this.
If
that's
possible
your
question
about
variance
is
there
was
well,
I
won't
get
into
the
details,
but
variances
are:
are
we
intend
for
variances
to
be
hard
to
come
by
moving
forward
in
our
zoning
ordinance?
K
So
if
there's
something
that
we
might
explore
with
this
ordinance
in
the
short
term,
I
know
our
housing
staff
has
has
asked
for
well.
Could
we
make
it
so
that
we
just
don't
require
the
chargers
in
affordable
projects?
Somehow
we
don't
know
yet,
but
variances
are
not
not
really
an
option.
A
Just
reflecting
on
how
much
time
we
have
left,
I
think
I'm
going
to
cap
it
at
the
three
people
who
have
their
hands
raised
at
present,
so
mark
then
max
then
leslie
go
for
it.
Mark.
F
All
right
so
thanks
joe
I've
got
a
comment
and
a
question
as
well,
with
respect
to
ev
charging
you're,
probably
aware
that
there
are
now
smart
charging
stations
available
which
allow
the
user
to
be
billed
for
the
energy
used,
and
my
understanding
is.
Those
could
also
charge
a
premium
to
the
user
to
help
recover
the
costs
of
charging
station
installations,
so
thereby
at
least
the
user
would
be
paying
and
it
would
not
necessarily
impact
other
residents
in
an
affordable
housing
situation
that
chose
to
walk
or
use
mass
transit.
F
F
It
seems
to
me
that
there's
some
uncertainty
and
how
those
buildings
will
be
used
that
will
likely
impact
the
amount
of
parking
that's
needed
for
those
future
uses.
And
so
my
question
is,
you
know:
are
you
considering
how
how
that
might
impact
the
need
for
parking
and
ev
charging
in
your
in
your
requirements
and
policy
development.
K
Mark
thanks
for
that,
the
comment
about
the
smart
charger.
I
can't
have
anybody
assume
that
I
know
anything
about
this.
This
is
something
that
I
have
had
to
build
my
knowledge
on.
So
that's
great
information
and
I'll
make
sure
we
bring
that
back
to
the
team
working
on
this
in
terms
of
changing
dynamics
with
the
commercial
real
estate
market
moving
forward,
there's
not
a
whole
lot
immediately
that
we
can
do
to
acknowledge
that
change.
K
K
That
is
going
to
forego
that
part
of
the
project
moving
forward
because
of
anticipated
changes
in
the
commercial
real
estate
market.
So
we're
watching
that
closely
and
and
we'll
adjust
as
as
things
change.
But
at
this
point
it's
our
recommendations
are
largely
informed
by
what
we've
already
seen
in
the
recent
past.
A
L
Hey
joe,
thank
you
for
all
of
this.
This
is
really
great.
My
question
kind
of
relates
to
this
kind
of
point
system
within
the
tdm
policy.
L
How
is
the
city
going
to
factor
in
things
like
you
know,
say
nice
ride
being
available
outside
of
building
but
then
potentially
being
gone
down
the
road
or
we've
all
seen
the
scooters
come.
You
know
as
options
for
transportation,
but
we
know
they
may
not.
There
have
been
issues
with
those,
so
they
may
not
stick
around.
So
is
the
city
not
considering
that
part
of
this
whole
process
and
then
kind
of
to
nick's
point
about
variant
or
variances?
L
If
the
city
is
planning
down
the
road
there's
going
to
be
a
park
space
across
the
street
from
a
development,
how
might
a
developer
tap
into
that
potential?
As
you
know,
meeting
these
requirements.
K
So,
on
the
question
of
nice
riot
as
an
example,
we've
been
working
with
public
works
on
I
mentioned
that
this
strategy
list
has
kind
of
been
changing
and
is
not
exhaustive.
K
One
of
the
things
we're
trying
to
develop
is
something
that
we'd
refer
to
as
like
a
micro
mobility
standard,
something
that
would
look
like
a
mobility
hub.
Maybe
we
we're
really
trying
to
gear
these
standards
towards
stuff
that
happens
on
private
property
as
much
as
we
can,
and
that
is
permanent,
so
that
we
don't
have
to
continually
look
to
see
well.
Is
there
still
a
nice
ride
station
here
we
want
these
improvements
to
stay
with
the
property
in
perpetuity,
so
that's
kind
of
the
goal
we
do
have.
K
K
E
Thank
you
chair
and
thank
you
for
the
presentation.
I
have
a
couple
questions
is
the
city
planning
on
doing
the
installation
for
these
chargers
and
are
you
going
to
add
solar
panels
on
top
of
them
as
you're
doing
some
of
the
meters?
Now
I
see
solar
panels
are
being
placed
on
top
of
some
of
these
charge
stations
where
you
pay
to
park
at
and
is
that
going
to
be?
Is
I
don't
see
anything
about
that
included
in
this
and
who
would
be
doing
the
did?
K
Good
question
so
the
the
chargers,
what
we're
the
requirements
we're
talking
about
here-
are
for
private
property
and
private
development.
So
it's
not.
They
wouldn't
be
chargers
on
the
street
or
in
the
public
right-of-way
anywhere,
and
it
would
be
the
responsibility
of
the
property
owner
the
developer,
to
purchase
and
install
these
chargers
and
the
infrastructure
for
them.
The
city
will
the
city's
only
involvement
is
in
the
permitting
process
for
them.
C
Maybe
a
question,
but
just
looking
at
the
curbside
demand
solutions
if
the
parking
spaces
for
on
street
pick
up
and
drop
off
to
me,
that
sounds
like
it's
aimed
at
rideshare,
like
commercial
rideshare
like
uber
and
lyft.
It
would
be
great
if
it
were
people
carpooling
and
dropping
off,
but
I
think
I'm
wondering
I
guess
what
the
sort
of
thinking
is
behind
that,
if
it's
to
encourage
ride,
share
on
the
one
hand
that
can
reduce
vehicle
ownership,
but
I
think
in
my
understanding
it
also
increases.
C
K
Great
observation:
we
do
not
want
to
encourage
rideshare
as
a
tdm
strategy.
The
intent
with
this
language
was
to
accommodate
potentially
accommodate
some
activity
in
the
public
right-of-way.
That
would
help
alleviate
problems
like
with
deliveries
and
valet
parking.
Here
is
mentioned,
as
it
turns
out
the
more
we
started
working
on
this
with
public
works
and
the
more
we
talked
about
it.
It
became
clear
that
this
just
shouldn't
be
a
strategy,
so
it
actually
we've
removed
it
from
our
recommendations
and
it
won't
be
part
of
part
of
the
ordinance
moving.
K
A
Thank
you
for
the
presentation.
I
know
that
you
have
a
bunch
of
different
questions
that
we
had
listed
in
the
agenda.
What
are
some
of
the
things
that
you're
looking
to
see
act
to
do
in
terms
of
I
don't
know
when
this
is
going
before
council,
all
that
jazz.
K
Sure
so
we're
taking
this
item
to
a
public
hearing
at
the
city
planning
commission
on
april
12th,
and
then
it
will
from
there
go
to
the
city
council
biz
committee
on
may
4th,
I
believe-
and
so
those
are
the
two
of
course
we
take
any
comments
before
then
that's
as
staff.
We
would
incorporate
suggestions
that
we
can
into
the
ordinance
before
bringing
it
to
the
planning
commission.
But
those
are
the
two
official
dates
for
public
testimony
or
public
input.
K
I
think
it
would
be.
We
would
welcome
any
input,
positive,
negative
and
any
anywhere
in
between
from
the
committee
to
make
this
ordinance
better.
A
Thank
you.
So,
with
that
in
mind,
would
folks
be
interested
in
doing
some
sort
of
comment
letter.
I
don't
think
that
we'd
be
able
to
get
something
approved
before
the
april
12th
date
just
because
of
when
our
next
meeting
is
and
the
fact
that
we're
not
allowed
to
approve
things
online.
A
A
I
So
I
would
suggest-
maybe
just
starting
with
the
fact
that
ciac
has
already
written
a
letter
and
the
policy
for
ev
charging
is
largely
aligned
with
it.
So
I
don't
know
that
we
need
to
write
anything
new
unless
there's
something
specifically
joe,
that
you
know
of
where
the
proposal
deviates
from
what
c
generally
was
supportive
of.
A
F
A
So
it
sounds
like
we
might
not
need
to
do
a
letter
unless
we
want
to
comment
on
the
transportation
or
tdm
component.
Is
that
something
that
we'd
want
to
comment
on.
I
And
I'll
just
note
aaron
for
those
who
aren't
I'm
guessing.
Most
of
you
haven't
gone
back
and
read
the
old
data
or
the
old
letters.
The
previous
ciac
letter
also
advocated
for
removing
the
parking
minimums
as
well,
so
that
component,
in
addition
to
the
ev
piece,
has
already
been
covered
by
c
acting.
A
So
I'm
not
hearing
any
sort
of
strong
urge
to
potentially
do
a
letter,
so
I
will
just
set
up
a
document
and
when
I'm
sending
out
something
regarding
the
stormwater
ordinances,
also
include
that
link
there
and
if
you
have
particular
thoughts
that
you
want
seaf
to
consider
put
them
in
there.
And
if
I
see
nothing
in
there,
then
I
think
that
we'll
we
would
just
drop
it
for
now.
I
A
Really
appreciate
that
it,
the
ordinance
that
you've
already
drafted,
takes
into
account
a
lot
of
the
things
that
we
included
in
our
letter
in
2019.
That
is
really
nice
to
see.
B
Just
wanted
to,
can
I
just
say
one
other
real,
quick
thing
on
that.
I
did
want
to
thank
joe
and
and
jason
who
he
works
with.
We
have
been
very
engaged
with
them
really
being
engaged
on
all
the
aspects
as
they've
been
updating
the
zoning
and
so
really
trying
to
get
look
at
things
like
the
ev,
the
bonuses
for
going
more
energy
efficient,
trying
to
align
our
goals
and
that's
something
that
we
haven't
necessarily
done
within
sustainability
in
the
city,
because
we're
small
and
there's
so
many
different
moving
pieces.
B
But
I
just
want
to
say:
we've
had
a
good
working
relationship
with
joe
and
jason
from
from
zoning
and
planning,
and
it's
been
really
great
to
see
that
so
those
guys
are
real
committed
to
our
climate
action
goals
and
are
really
working
hard
to
to
take
your
recommendations
into
consideration.
Having
that
letter
there
to
get
started
was
really
helpful
in
in
leading
our
discussions
when
we
engaged
on
this
topic
with
planning
and
zoning.
So
just
wanted
to
say
that
was
a
good
inter
intergovernmental
working
together
type
of
projects
so.
A
Recognizing
again
that
we
have
under
25
minutes
to
go,
I
do
think
that
it
might
not
be
worthwhile
to
break
up
into
those
small
groups
kim
just
recognizing
that
we
also
wanted
to
talk
about
roof
depot
again.
We
also
have
announcements
and
I'd
love
to
talk
about
what
we
should
talk
about
next
meeting.
A
A
A
A
So
what
I
can
do
is
just
include
this,
this
list
of
questions
into
yet
another
google
talk
and
just
if
people
have
particular
thoughts
that
they
want
to
start
getting
down
onto
paper,
I
would
say:
I'm
I'm
happy
to
have
it
be
a
jumbled
mess
as
long
as
it's
a
jumbled
mess
of
all
of
our
different
thoughts
that
we
have
to
these
questions.
B
Well,
one
of
the
things
I
thought
that
would
be
good
is
for
us
to.
I
know
we
always
have
the
presentations
coming
in.
So
maybe
we
got
to
prioritize
having
our
small
group
breakout,
because
part
of
what
I
wanted
to
have
the
breakout
groups
do
too,
is
that
then
you
start
to
get
to
know
each
other
as
well
too
a
little
more
one-on-one
than
than
you
know,
20
people
on
the
screen
here,
so
that's
kind
of
nice
and
then
we're
working
on.
B
You
know
an
update
on
our
climate
action
plan
and
sort
of
you
know
the
first
half
of
it
is
really
kind
of
assessing
where
we
are
and
developing
sort
of
a
scope
of
what
we
want
to
be
doing,
and
so
that's
why
I'm
really
interested
to
see
to
get
to
start
getting
your
thoughts
on
what's
missing,
how
do
we
incorp
adaptation?
What's
the
big
roll
up
goals?
Should
we
be
focusing
on
carbon
neutrality
or
carbon
sequestration?
B
I
mean
we
don't
we
have
a
bunch
of
stuff
that
we
don't
touch
on
that
wasn't
in
the
realm
in
2013
2014,
so
just
kind
of
starting
to
get
that
together,
because
that's
really
going
to
be
helpful
for
us
as
we
develop
the
scope
of
work
that
we
want
to
cover
as
part
of
the
climate
action
equity
plan
update.
A
To
answer
next
question:
we
do
not
currently
have
any
presentations
scheduled
for
the
april
meeting,
so
I
am
thinking
that
if
people
like
this
idea
of
breaking
up
into
small
groups
and
really
trying
to
prioritize
the
climate
action
plan-
and
these
questions
at
the
april
meeting
that
we
do
make
this
a
majority
of
the
focus,
as
well
as
just
approving
a
storm
water
letter.
If
there,
if
there
is
more
there
and
anything,
we
might
do
around
the
eevee
ordinance
that
we
just
heard.
B
Thank
you,
yeah.
Thank
you
yeah
that
time
it
would
be
fine.
F
Yeah,
it's
contagious
so
kim.
Is
there
anything
that
you
would
be
able
to
talk
to
us
about
maybe
as
a
precursor
to
april?
In
the
remaining
time
that
we
have,
I,
I
know
you
sent
out
your
your
deck
and
I
don't
know
if
we
have
time
for
that.
D
A
B
Yeah-
and
everyone
does
have
that-
that's
just
you
know-
to
give
that
kind
of
an
overview
of
the
big
categories
that
we
have
in
there
and
then
also,
I
know
max
you
had
mentioned
about
metrics
in
there.
One
of
the
slides
does
have
the
metrics
we
use
within
our
clean
energy
partnership.
It's
not
the
entire
climate
action
plan,
but
it
works
on
it's
our
sort
of
energy
and
greenhouse
gas
emissions
and
efficiency
metrics.
A
A
A
D
Here
and
I
had
just
one
more
thought
about
your
breakout
groups
next
time-
this
is
sean
goszewski,
because
many
of
the
other
environmental
commissions
with
hennepin
county
cities
are
working
on
similar
topics
and
many
of
these
topics
are
being
included
in
hanuman
county's
climate
action
plan.
There
would
be
a
possibility
of
eventually
having
some
multi-city
teams
of
either
staff
and
or
commissions,
to
kind
of
dive
in
to
move
ahead
on
different
actions.
D
For
example,
all
the
things
that
were
talked
about
on
zoning
ordinance
updates,
there's
going
to
be
a
new
multi-city
cohort
that
rcc
will
be
working
on
with
west
metro
suburbs
and
having
minneapolis
examples
would
be
great,
but
I
think
that's
one
way
of
scaling
up
many
of
these
climate
actions
throughout
the
you
know
throughout
the
county,
by
as
you
guys
get
teams
going,
there
might
be
additional
multi-city
teams
with
the
west
metro,
hennepin
county
cities,
kind
of
teaming.
D
No
just
just
we'll
be
keeping
in
mind,
whatever
teams
you
guys
get
started
and
seeing
how
that
overlaps
with
the
areas
that
other
environmental
commissions
are
working
on
and
how,
how
maybe
that
might
dovetail
with
some
of
the
initial
multi-city
work
teams
that
the
county
wants
to
support
and
the
county
will
really
only
support
teams
where
cities
are
asking
for
support
kind
of
like
the
energy
benchmarking
campaign.
So
you
may
think
about
like
how
you
could
engage
the
county
to
then
you
know
expand
the
actions.
D
A
I
know
that
tess
had
sent
a
few
links
around
with
a
a
letter
of
support
from
the
east,
but
not
a
letter
of
support.
But
a
comment
letter
for
with
talking
points
from
the
east
phillips,
neighborhood
institute.
A
A
So
nick
just
shared
something
in
the
in
our
chat
thread,
so
it
says
ziac
as
the
body
advising
the
city
of
minneapolis
on
citywide,
environmental
issues
has
been
following
developments
related
to
the
hiawatha
facility
expansion,
aka,
the
roof
depot
project
for
many
years,
most
recently,
ciac
engaged
with
city
council
members
by
providing
comments
related
to
the
engagement
practices
for
city
of
minneapolis
projects,
the
opportunity
to
co-locate
community
driven
initiatives
on
or
adjacent
to
the
site
and
commute
cumulative
effect
of
pollution
due
to
changes
in
transportation
patterns.
A
That
would
result
from
the
proposed
program
for
the
final
facility,
ciac
reviewed
and
would
like
to
elevate
comments
from
another
city-sponsored
advisory.
Commission,
the
southside
green
zone
council
as
a
key
voice
of
the
community
affected
by
this
proposed
project.
We
believe
that
this
group
has
familiarized
themselves
with
the
intricate
details
of
the
aaw
and
their
words
regarding
the
shortcomings
of
the
eaw
should
be
empowered.
A
In
addition,
ciac
has
also
reviewed
comments
by
a
number
of
other
groups
focused
on
community
and
environmental
justice,
including
the
east,
phillips,
neighborhood
institute
and
any
other
ones
that
we
might
want
to
include
and
can
say
that
these
organizations
echo
and
or
expand
on
the
south
side
green
zones
green
zone
council's
comments.
A
J
That
sandy,
I
think,
I
think,
that's
really
strong.
I
did
note
mcea's
letter
or
message
had
more
to
do
with
extending
the
public
comment
period.
Saying
that
you
know
30-day
period
is
not
sufficient
for
a
document
of
that
this
size
and
depth,
especially
for
something
that
has
such
local
community
impacts.
J
C
I
think
if
we
want
to
add
other
groups,
besides
the
ssgz
letter
to
that
third
paragraph,
the
wording
doesn't
really
say
anything
about
us
supporting
their
comments,
so
that
might
need
a
little
tweaking
if
we
actually
want
to
say
that
we,
you
know,
support
what
those
groups
have
said.
C
I
It
as
aaron
mark
and
sandy
know,
I
just
tend
to
do
a
lot
of
quick
writing
and
throw
things
out.
So
I'm
definitely
not
not
offended
if
people
don't
like
it
or
if
you
want
to
throw
out
a
whole
paragraph,
but
I
figure
we
need
something
to
start.
The
conversation
with.
A
So
I'm
working
on
pulling
this
into
a
google
doc
just
so
we
could
do
a
tiny
bit
more
of
this
wordsmithing
and
then
would
say
that
within
the
next
couple
minutes
it
would
be
good
to
either
approve
what
we
have
written
or
approve
like
some
additional
edits
that
we
can
just
verbalize,
and
I
can
then
work
on
afterward.
F
I
I
A
A
A
I
guess
I
would
ask
if
people
do
have
just
names
of
the
other
organizations
that
they'd
want
to
see
included
in
that
third
paragraph.
If
you
want
to
just
dump
them
into
the
chat,
so
I
can
make
sure
I
get
them
all
in
there.
J
Hey
tess,
what
is
smiley's
clinic
is
that
just
one
of
the
businesses.
C
I
just
gave
the
chat
to
unmute
it's
a
university
of
minnesota
clinic.
A
Somebody
else
is
on
on
is
unneeded.
That
was
a
weird
feedback
on
my
end,
gonna
toss
it
on
over
to
kim
for
roll.
B
Okay,
great
I
did
have.
I
did
have
one
question
who
made
the
second
on
that
motion.
B
Okay,
terrific,
okay,
great,
so
the
motion
is
made
by
nick
minderman
to
send
a
letter
to
the
city,
count
minneapolis
city
council,
as
shown
on
aaron's
screen
regarding
the
hiawatha
facility
expansion,
environmental
assessment,
worksheet,
all
right
so
we'll
just
go
through
the
list
max
dalton
I
indigo
I
mark
hi
tess.
B
B
F
D
I
A
So
now
that
we
have
three
minutes
left,
I
want
to
just
toss
over
we'll
mention
just
two
quick
announcements.
A
First,
one
is
that
sean
sent
me
a
message
to
say
that
he's
arranged
for
a
call
with
some
of
the
hennepin
county
commissioners
to
talk
about
the
climate
action
plan
for
the
for
the
county
and
that'll
be
at
3
p.m
on
friday.
If
anybody
is
interested
in
that,
please
feel
free
to
like
shoot
me
an
email
or
something,
and
I
can
pass
along
the
zoom
info
or
I
can
just
pass
the
zoom
info
along
to
kim
and
you
can
include
it
in
our
sort
of
mids
or
something.
A
A
B
Sure
I
just
wanted
to
let
people
know
that
we're
the
whole
city
is
in
a
big
website
update,
and
so
we
have
transitioned
the
website,
we're
hoping
it's
going
to
be
more
user
friendly
and
easy
by
having
you
know
more
of
a
buttons
and
interaction
and
not
having
as
much
sort
of
lots
of
pdf
documents
that
you
have
to
dig
farther
and
farther
in,
but
I
will
say
that
we
had
to
cut
a
lot
of
stuff
that's
out,
and
so,
if
you,
you
know,
feel
free
to
browse
around
it,
it's
in
it's
still
working
for
them.
B
It
needs
some
updates.
But
if
you
have
suggestions
or
ideas,
I'd
love
to
hear
them
so
send
me
an
email
or
give
me
a
call,
but
we're
hoping
to
make
it
more
user-friendly,
more
interactive
and
and
more.
I
guess,
timely
about
the
policies
and
programs
and
things
we're
working
on.
B
A
I
think
it
might
just
be
helpful
to
mention
that
tested
catch,
something
in
the
letter
that
it
technically
should
be
going
to
the
city
planner,
not
to
counsel,
so
imagine
it
going
to
hillary
borac
instead,
but
I'll
also
make
sure
to
copy
on
council
and
the
mayor's
office.
So
that
they're,
aware
of
our
continued
stance
on
this
issue,
tess.
C
Yeah,
I
know
we
don't
really
have
time
to
discuss,
but
sandy,
I
think
had
mentioned
in
an
email
thread
about
the
met
council
plan
for
the
buses
and
switching
to
biodiesel
instead
of
electric,
and
I
think
that
is
definitely
something
that
I
would
be
interested
in
us
hearing
more
about.
A
Okay,
definitely
we'll
add
it
to
the
list.
Do
you
know
sandy
when
they're
making
decisions
on
which
buses
they're
going
to
be
buying,
because
I
know
that
that'll
impact
some
of
our
decision
making
timeline.
Since
we
can't,
we
can't
send
something
directly
to
that
council
we'd
have
to
give
it
to
city
council
first.
A
Okay,
great
and
if
you
are
able
to
find
something
on
that
and
if
it's
coming
up
sooner
rather
than
later,
feel
free
to
also
start
a
letter.
And
let
us
all
know
if
it's
something
that
we
need
to
be
addressing
soon
max.
L
Not
an
announcement,
but
just
more
of
a
prompt
for
kim.
I
know
we're
hearing
a
lot
about
vaccine
rollouts
and
it's
happening
quite
quickly.
So
if
you
start
hearing
about
conversations
potentially
attorney
returning
to
an
in-person
format
for
us
or
a
hybrid
model
which
who
knows
what
that
could
possibly
look
like,
might
be
just
good
to
update
us
as
those
conversations
start
to
happen.
B
Great
yeah
we'll
do
we
haven't.
We
do
have
monthly
city
clerk
meetings
around
our
boards
and
commissions,
and
at
this
point
there
has
been
nothing
set
on
a
date
for
returning
either
employees
or
or
boards
and
commissions.
But
we've
heard
early
at
the
beginning
of
this
year
was
july
1st
at
the
earliest,
but
I'm
excited
about
the
vaccine
related
stuff.
So
it's
really
amazing
how
much
you
know
how
many
vaccines
are
rolling
out
so
that
can
really
change
the
opinion.
B
I
think
in
a
fairly
short
period
of
time,
a
matter
of
fact
the
city
does
a
lot
of
vaccine
clinics,
and
so
I'm
back
I'm
volunteering
on
saturday
to
do
that
and
quite
a
few
city
employees
are
involved
in
volunteering
for
that
as
well.
A
Yeah
and
great
points
there
to
nick
about
how
the
pandemic
might
delay
some
of
these
vehicle
purchases
all
right
so
again,
with
this
in
mind,
you'll
see
an
email
from
me
with
links
to
three
different
google
docs
one,
that's
on
the
stormwater
ordinance,
one!
That's
for
any
comments.
A
People
might
want
to
be
making
on
the
eevee
ordinance
that
we
heard
today
and
then
a
different
google
doc,
just
with
space
to
start
putting
down
your
thoughts
and
ideas
around
the
questions
kim
posed
on
the
climate
action
plan,
sandy's
going
to
be
looking
into
metro,
transits
timeline,
whatever's
happening
there,
yeah,
okay,
anything
else
that
I'm
missing.