►
From YouTube: March 15, 2022 Heritage Preservation Commission
Description
Additional information at:
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
B
Good
afternoon
and
welcome
to
this
live
broadcast
of
our
virtual
meeting
of
the
march
15
2022
regular
meeting
of
the
minneapolis
heritage
preservation
commission.
This
meeting
includes
the
remote
participation
of
members
as
authorized
under
minnesota
statutes,
section
13-d
0-2-1,
due
to
the
declared
local
health
pandemic
for
the
record,
my
name
is
barbara
howard
and
I
currently
serve
as
vice
chair
of
the
minneapolis
heritage
preservation.
Commission.
I
will
now
call
this
meeting
to
order
and
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
rules
so
that
we
may
verify
the
presence
of
a
quorum.
D
B
B
Our
first
order
of
business
is
to
adopt
the
agenda
for
this
meeting.
We
will
work
from
the
agendas
that
are
available
online.
I
will
go
through
the
agenda
and
sort
out
which
items
will
be
withdrawn,
which
items
will
be
continued
to
a
future
meeting
which
items
will
be
discussed
and
which
items
will
be
put
on
a
consent
agenda
agenda.
B
Item
number:
four
is
515
washington
avenue
north
word.
Three.
This
application
is
for
a
certificate
of
appropriateness.
Item
number
four
will
be
discussed.
Item
number
five
is
310
second
street
north
ward
3..
This
application
is
for
a
certificate
of
appropriateness.
Item
number
five
will
be
discussed.
B
So
the
proposed
agenda
item
number
four
515
washington
avenue.
North
ward,
3
will
have
staff
presentation,
public
comment
and
commission
discussion
in
action.
Item
number
5,
310,
2nd
street
north
ward,
3
will
have
staff
presentation,
public
comment
and
commission
discussion
and
action.
Commissioners,
may
I
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
proposed
agenda.
E
D
B
B
D
B
Are
approved
before
I
open
the
hearing
to
public
comments.
Let
me
summarize
the
process
for
conducting
public
hearing
in
this
virtual
format.
The
process
for
public
hearing
is
as
follows:
since
we
have
no
items
for
withdrawal,
continuance
or
consent,
we
will
take
each
agenda
item
in
order.
Then
we
will
hunting
staff
will
present
its
report
and
commissioners
may
ask
questions
of
staff.
Then
we
will
hear
from
the
applicant
and
commissioners
may
ask
questions
of
the
applicant.
B
After
that
I
will
open
the
public
hearing
and
we
will
invite
public
comment
we'll
be
taking
speakers
in
the
order
they
pre-registered.
If
any,
we
ask
that
after
your
name
is
called
you
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record
and
then
proceed
to
your
comments.
After
we've
completed
the
list
of
any
pre-registered
speakers,
we
will
see
if
there
are
any
other
speakers
in
the
queue
who
may
have
called
in
in
order
to
activate
your
microphones,
you'll
need
to
press
star
6
on
your
phone
and
wait
to
hear
a
recorded
message.
B
So
again
we
will
take
the
list
of
any
pre-registered
speakers
in
order
and
then
open
the
floor
to
other
speakers
who
may
be
in
queue.
We
ask
each
speaker
to
provide
their
name
and
address
before
making
their
comments.
When
recognized,
please
press
star,
6
on
your
phone
to
activate
your
microphone
and
wait
to
hear
a
recorded
message
so
that
we
can
hear
you.
Please
keep
your
comments
to
the
specific
applications
that
are
before
us
today.
B
After
the
public
comments
are
complete,
I
will
close
the
hearing
and
commissioners
will
deliberate
and
act
on
the
applications
before
us.
So
our
first
item
is
item
number
four
515
washington
avenue,
north
ward
3.
This
application
is
for
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
and
the
staff
report
is
presented
by
john
smoley,
dr
smoly.
G
G
The
site
is
located:
mid-block
along
the
south
side
of
washington
avenue
north
between
5th
avenue,
north
and
6th
avenue.
North
surface
parking
exists
on
the
south
or
rear
and
east
or
interior
sides
of
the
lot.
The
site
is
located
in
the
minneapolis
warehouse,
district's,
20th
century
warehouse,
character
area.
The
period
of
significance
for
the
district
is
1865-1930,
and
this
building
is
a
contributing
resource.
G
G
The
owners
intend
to
operate
these
enterprises
approximately
six
months
per
year
as
weather
permits,
the
proposed
nine
foot
and
six
and
three-eighths
inch
high
rooftop
edition
consists
of
an
enclosed
bar
and
bathroom
facilities
placed
equidistant
from
the
north
and
south
side.
Elevations
of
the
roof.
G
The
area
in
pink
is
the
area
of
the
roof
deck
that
will
be
expanded
toward
the
washington,
avenue
side
or
front
side
of
the
building
on
the
right
side
of
the
slide
in
the
middle,
with
some
darker
sort
of
cross
hatching
or
you
can
see
an
outline
of
where
the
proposed
edition
will
sit
equidistant
from
both
the
interior
side
elevations
and
then
you
can
also
see
the
stair
edition
approved
in
2016
and
2017
just
about
the
middle
of
the
building.
Almost
the
middle
of
the
building.
G
The
existing
roof
deck
floor
assembly
will
be
altered
and
expanded
by
2067
square
feet.
To
accommodate
this
proposed
new
deck.
The
deck
will
be
surfaced
with
two
foot
by
two
foot:
concrete
pedestal
papers
designed
to
match
existing
papers
with
a
galvanized
steel
handrail
system
to
match
the
existing
handrails
again,
both
of
these
being
approved
in
2016
and
2017
by
the
hpc
and
state
and
federal
tax
credit
reviewers.
G
In
terms
of
public
comment,
staff
has
received
one
letter
in
support
of
the
project
from
the
north
loop
neighborhood
association.
This
is
in
your
staff
report.
Packet
staff
recently
received
one
that
are
opposed
to
the
project
from
a
neighboring
resident,
and
this
has
been
presented
to
you
this
evening.
G
In
terms
of
findings.
The
proposal
meets
all
certificate
of
appropriateness
findings,
with
the
exception
of
two
inconsistencies
with
the
minneapolis
warehouse,
historic
district
design
guidelines,
and
I
will
focus
my
presentation
on
those
two
areas
in
the
warehouse
district
design,
guidelines
for
existing
buildings
under
roofs
and
parapets
design.
Guideline
2.63
states
that
rooftop
decks
and
equipment,
including
hvac,
wind
or
solar-powered
equipment
that
projects
above
the
roof
line
shall
be
set
back
from
the
primary
building.
Elevations
one
structural
bay.
They
shall
not
be
visible
from
the
street.
G
More
visible
locations
will
be
considered
if
evidence
is
provided
of.
Structural
load
needs.
The
proposed
roof
deck
will
possess
a
three
foot
high
galvanized
steel
handrail.
This
railing
will
be
set
back
three
feet:
four
and
five-eighths
inches
from
the
primary
building
elevation
along
washington
avenue
north.
G
Although
the
deck
is
proposed
to
be
placed
closer
to
the
washington
avenue
edge
of
the
building
than
one
structural
bay.
The
parapet
at
this
end
of
the
building
is
three
feet.
Four
inches
in
height,
ensuring
the
handrail
will
not
be
seen
from
the
street,
but
rooftop
decks
typically
occur,
include
other
features
like
tables
and
chairs.
So
for
this
reason
staff
recommends
the
project
be
conditioned
to
ensure
the
proposed
roof.
Deck
is
set
back
one
full
structural
bay
from
the
front
of
the
parapet
on
the
washington
avenue
side
of
the
building
next
slide.
Please.
G
This
addition
will
also
include
include
painted
hollow
metal
doors
and
steel
overhead
coiling
doors.
You
can
see
the
steel
overhead
coiling
doors
on
the
right
side
of
the
slide
and
the
synthetic
stucco
on
the
left
hand
part
of
the
slide
the
stucco
itself,
the
stucco
sample,
is
on
top
and
just
below
it.
In
a
slightly
darker,
shade,
you'll
see
the
existing
stair
structure.
Stucco
you'll
also
see
that
in
the
middle
photo
of
the
slide.
G
G
I
I
would
like
to
point
out
you
know
before
I
conclude
here
that
this
application
did
actually
change
a
bit
since
the
time
it
has
come
in
the
applicant
originally
proposed
a
rooftop
deck
atop,
the
rooftop
edition,
and
this
created
some
concerns
from
you
know,
staff's
perspective
from
a
visibility
standpoint
and
also
it
ran
a
file
of
some
of
the
design
guidelines,
or
it
came
close
to
doing
that.
The
applicant
took
this
feedback
and
went
back
and
revised
their
proposal.
G
That
is
no
longer
part
of
the
proposal,
so
I
just
want
to
thank
the
applicant
for
being
responsive
to
staff's
recommendations.
Having
said
that,
staff
still
does
recommend
the
heritage.
Preservation.
Commission
approve,
adopt
staff
findings
for
the
application
by
awh
architects
for
the
property
located
at
515,
washington
avenue
north
and
the
minneapolis
warehouse
historic
district
and
approve
the
certificate
of
appropriateness
to
allow
the
expansion
of
a
rooftop
deck
and
rooftop
edition.
G
H
Thank
you
very
much
chair
howard,
dr
smalley.
I'm
wondering
the
extent
to
which
we
are
bound
by
the
prior
decision
to
allow
this
rooftop
edition,
because
the
language
that
the
commenter
who
submitted
comments
that
we
received
today
and
your
report
also
references
language
that
says.
Rooftop
additions
are
rarely
appropriate
on
buildings
and
I'm
just
wondering
what
your
perspective
is
on.
The
extent
to
which
you
know
that
horse
is
out
of
the
barn.
G
Madam
chair,
commissioner,
strothers,
that's
a
good
question.
You
know
the
member
of
the
public
who
expressed
concerns
with
noise
and
visibility
on
this
proposed.
Rooftop
deck
is
certainly
you
know,
referencing
warehouse,
district
design,
guidelines,
standards
that
are
taken
into
account
in
this
staff
report
and
were
taken
into
account
in
2016
and
2017..
G
G
G
Now
it's
challenging
to
do
that
in
a
district
that
you
know
historically
was
devoid
of
you
know,
vegetation,
pedestrian
amenities,
parks
and,
and
you
know,
residential
style
facilities,
but
I
think
our
commission,
you
know,
guided
by
these
design
guidelines,
has
done
a
great
job
of
that
in
the
past,
and
I
think
you
can
see
that
with
applications
like
this
and
the
subsequent
applications
on
this
property,
where
property
owners
come
in
and
seek
to
either
get
their
properties
listed
in
the
national
register,
or
take
advantage
of
tax
credits
to
conduct
substantial
rehabilitations
of
these
income
producing
properties.
G
In
my
opinion,
the
warehouse
district
is
our
most
successful
district
in
terms
of
attracting
you
know,
funds
for
the
the
preservation
and
reuse
of
these
buildings
in
ways
that
meet
our
comprehensive
plan
and
meet
the
the
current
needs
of
citizens.
This
is
a
district
where
you
know
we
don't
see
a
lot
of
conflicts
with
the
comprehensive
plan,
and
I
think
that
speaks
volumes
about
the
preservation
commission's
past
determinations
and
the
guidelines
assistance
in
those
areas.
That
was
a
really
long
answer
to
your
question.
Sorry.
I
Yes,
thank
you,
madam
chair
and
commissioner
strothers
john
smoly
gave
a
very
good
answer
to
that.
I
just
wanted
to
provide
one
more
piece
of
additional
clarification
to
your
question.
Commissioner,
there's
no,
you
are
not
bound
by
the
previous
decision
that
was
made,
however,
many
years
ago.
That
decision
has
now
since
expired,
so
you
are
just
deciding
on
the
application
before
you
as
a
whole.
Thank
you.
B
Thank
you,
commissioner,
booty.
Seeing
no
other
questions
for
staff.
I
will
now
open
the
public
hearing
for
this
item.
I
understand
the
applicant
is
here
and
would
like
to
speak
so
alex
hacker.
Please
press
star,
6
on
your
phone
and
wait
to
hear
a
recorded
message
to
activate
your
microphone,
so
we
can
hear
you
and
be
sure
to
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record.
J
Terrific,
this
is
an
interest
way
doing
it
over
the
phone
and
then
watching
on
youtube
about
two
minutes
behind,
but
I'll
try
my
best
thanks
for
considering
this
application,
and
thank
you,
dr
smoly,
for
all
your
support
and
effort
on
on
this
application.
J
This
building
is
near
and
dear
to
our
heart.
It
was
kind
of
one
of
the
first
big
projects
for
awh,
so
we're
glad
to
continue
working
with
the
building
owner
and
this
tenant.
J
The
I
guess,
the
just
broad
picture,
the
the
the
rooftop
is,
you
know
very
desirable
spot,
obviously
there's
a
few
other
ones
in
this
neighborhood.
The
hewing
hotel,
which
we
also
worked
on
and
it's
very
desirable
to
the
neighbors
and
and
all
the
people
that
visit
the
warehouse
district.
J
So
the
the
operator
that
runs
nola
restaurant,
the
basement
bars
dr
smoly,
had
mentioned
is
interested
in
expanding
the
programming,
basically
to
include
the
roof.
Deck
just
thinks
it'd
be
a
wonderful
amenity,
so
to
that
we've
proposed
a
very
small
and
and
what
we
feel
is
a
complying
application
for
the
rooftop
edition
and
to
the
extent
of
the
the
two
points
that
dr
smiling,
that
staff
have
issue
with
the
setback
of
the
roof
deck
and
the
colors
and
texture
the
new
materials.
J
The
the
stucco
that's
shown
in
the
example
that
dr
smelly
included
the
staff
report
and
then
the
the
the
sample
that
we
provided
are
actually
what
we
used
in
the
previous
project.
It's
just
that
the
lower
pictures
like
aged
over
time-
it's
actually
weathered
so,
but
it's
the
same.
There's
no
question
about
that
and
no
issues
at
all,
however,
the
first
exception
or
staff
condition
of
the
rooftop
deck.
J
J
For
a
couple
reasons,
I
mean
number
one:
it's
not
a
very
big
rough
deck.
If
we
don't
do
that
and
then
secondly,
the,
as
was
mentioned,
the
parapet
on
the
washington
avenue
side
is
tall
enough.
That
there's
there's
no
need
for
a
guardrail
or
any
built
item
there.
J
So
we
feel
that
that
meets
the
guideline.
The
guideline
talks
about
you
know,
I
think,
is
really
intended
for
additions
and
it
built
structures-
and
I
guess
it's
a
nuance
on
whether
or
not
the
the
pavers
are
built
structured
but
to
me
a
build
structure
as
an
architectures.
J
You
know
some
vertical
walls
and
whatnot,
and
I
understand
the
guidelines
and
the
sort
of
what
the
intent
of
that
and
the
visibility
is
to
set
things
back,
so
that
they're
not
very
visible
from
the
public
right-of-way,
the
roof
deck,
none
of
which
would
be
visible
from
any
point.
You'd
have
to
be
20
feet
in
the
air
above
the
building
to
see
the
rough
deck
at
that
edge.
J
So
that's
the
main
reasons
that
we're
proposing
that
to
that
edge
and
I'm
sorry
if
he
didn't
it
wasn't
included.
But
we
had
a
couple
visibility
studies
where
we
had
colleagues
standing
at
the
edges
of
where
the
extent
of
the
roof
deck
would
be
to
the
to
that
side
and
he's
a
six
foot
tall
guy
and
he
can
only
see
the
top
of
his
head.
J
So
again,
the
visibility
that's
mentioned
in
the
guidelines
I
think,
is
matt.
So
would
like
to
push
back
on
that
staff
recommendation
and
I
think
that's
about
it.
So
thank
you,
madam
chair
and
fellow
commissioners,.
B
I'm
not
seeing
any
questions
for
you
alex.
Okay,
you
are,
the
alex
is
the
only
registered
speaker,
so
I
will
check
to
see
if
there
are
any
others
online
who
did
not
pre-register,
who
wish
to
speak
either
for
or
against
this
application.
B
B
K
Hopefully
you
can
hear
me:
okay,
I
can
find.
B
K
So,
yes,
technical
difficulties
cleared
up,
but
in
regards
to
the
first
condition,
I
do
believe
that
our
our
guidelines
are
a
little
bit
unclear
about
what
constitutes
kind
of
a
built
element,
but
I
do
agree
with
staff's
findings
that
allowing
the
roof
deck
to
extend
towards
that
parapet
could
encourage.
You
know,
planters
or
things
of
that
nature
that
would
be
visible
from
the
street
and
I
think
our
guidelines,
the
intention
of
our
guidelines,
seems
to
be
to
prevent
anything
to
be
visible
from
the
street.
K
So
I'm
I'm
in
agreement
with
staff's
findings
and
with
this
condition.
B
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Sam
boltz,
commissioner
vander
wright.
L
I
this
is
hard.
I
I
understand
where
the
the
staff's
comments
and
feedback
are
coming
from.
I'm
I've
been
a
freaking
patron
of
the
rooftop
bar
at
nolos.
I
think
it's
a
great
addition
to
the
north
loop
and,
if
you've
ever
been
there
on
a
warm
day
in
the
summer,
you
know
that
it's
an
incredibly
popular
space
to
be
so.
L
You
know-
and
I
could
see
why,
from
a
business
standpoint,
especially
losing
the
square
footage
for
the
the
seating
for
the
new
built
structure,
wanting
the
additional
square
footage
for
the
patio-
and
I
personally
am
not
bothered
by
that,
but
I
can
understand
from
a
guideline
perspective
where
there
could
be
concerns
for
that.
L
So
I
guess
I
don't
have
an
opinion
so
much
as
that's
a
matter
of
where
my
thinking
is
right
now
and
hoping
that
maybe
that
engages
some
of
our
other
commissioners
to
add
to
their
comments
and
thoughts.
I
at
this
exact
moment,
I
don't
feel
bothered
by
the
extension
of
the
patio
wondering
if
there's
a
way
that
we
can
justify
allowing
that
if
there
are
others
that
feel
that
way
too.
So
that's
kind
of
where
I'm
at.
F
B
J
Oh
okay,
the
change
in
occupancy
occupancy
load,
I'm
assuming
you
need
it
would
be.
J
Yeah
just
give
me
two
seconds
here.
J
So
it's
a
eight
foo
occupancy.
I
believe
so
that's
just
about
a
hundred
patrons.
J
I
mean
and
that's
that's
for
code
15,
one
person
per
15
square
feet
right
right.
So
I'm
going
to
answer
your
question,
but.
J
Well,
I
suppose
yeah
it
could
be.
I
mean
that's
not
shoulder
to
shoulder
type
of
occupancy,
but
it
would
you
know,
kind
of
tables
and
chairs
sort
of
situation,
which
is
what
we
would
be
planning
on
it,
and
I
guess
to
that
point
I
forgot
to
mention
that,
and
I
know
it's
a
nuance
to
know
I
mean
I
like
doctor
smelly
mentioned.
I
was
commissioner,
and
we've
done
a
lot
of
attacks
for
other
projects,
but
in
all
my
experience
never
mentions
ffa
or
furniture.
A
B
Thank
you
alex
kelly.
Does
that
answer
your
question?
Yes,
thank
you,
commissioner
masten.
Does
that
provide
you
with
any
comments
you
want
to
make.
H
Commissioner,
howard
commissioner
struthers
here
did
the
applicants
say
there
would
be
a
hundred
additional
people
or
was
that
the
total
number
of
people
with
the
addition.
B
That
would
be
a
hundred
people
difference
between
putting
the
rail
back
by
one
structural
bag.
Okay,
so.
B
I
understand
I
I
tend
to
agree
with
staff
on
this
one
also
because
of
the
the
my
understanding
that
the
the
guidelines
are
set
up
to
to
keep
that
activity
farther
away
from
the
front
of
the
building,
and
I
understand
that
with
tables
and
umbrellas
and
plants
and
all
of
that
and
people,
it
would
be
visible.
B
K
C
Commissioner,
commissioner,
booty.
E
B
N
Hello,
chair
howard
and
commissioners,
so
we
have
that
certificate
appropriateness
to
allow
for
the
new
construction,
310
318.
Second
street
next
slide,
please
the
property
right
here.
It's
17
000
square
feet
at
the
intersection
or
close
to
the
intersection
of
third
avenue
north
and
second
street
north
next
slide.
Please,
the
project
is
in
the
warehouse
and
st
anthony
falls
historic
district
and
within
the
20th
century,
sub-district
of
the
warehouse
district
vet
that
does
allow
greater
building
heights
than
the
19th
century
next
slide.
N
Please
the
proposal
96
units,
it's
a
mixed-use
building
with
a
thousand
square
feet
of
ground
floor,
mixed
use,
retail
and
47
enclosed
parking
spaces
in
the
notice,
probably
the
worst
place
to
to
make
a
typo.
I
I
noted
as
960
units,
so
I
just
want
to
for
the
record
note
that
this
is
96,
not
960
units
and
my
apologies
for
that
all
right,
so
c
penta.
N
I
also
want
to
note
that,
as
you
are
all
aware,
this
project
had
a
design
review
at
the
february
second
hpc
meeting
that
we
went
over
a
number
of
the
things
that
we'll
be
talking
about
today.
So
I
will
focus
my
presentation
on
those
items:
there's
there's
five
conditions
of
approval
that
staff
and
the
applicant
would
like
to
discuss
with
the
commission
next
slide.
Please.
N
N
N
Okay,
so
condition
three
to
comply
with
guideline
3.69.
The
upper
upper
floor
shall
use
the
same
brick
as
the
lower
floors
to
have
one
principle.
Material
and
the
metal
panel
proposed
for
the
upper
floor
is
not
allowed
and,
as
noted
on
the
left
side,
guideline
3.69,
just
noting
needing
one
principle.
N
Material
and
building
facades
that
face
the
public
street
shall
have
one
principal
material
that
may
have
up
to
one
additional
material
for
the
trims
and
trim
and
details
with
that
brick
and
metal
panel
for
this
building
on
all
four
sides
felt
like
it
was
those
two
materials
were
competing
too
much
with
the
current
proposal,
so
staff's
recommending
that
that
upper
floor
be
masonry
next
slide,
please
condition
six
to
comply
with
guideline.
Three
point:
two:
oh
three.
N
Through
three
point:
twenty
two
and
three
point:
forty
four:
that
vertical
recess
on
the
second
street
north
facade
shall
be
flushed
with
the
exterior
wall.
Pain
number
of
guidelines
support
this
recommendation.
We
do
recognize
that
at
that
design
review
a
number
of
commissioners
saw
the
unique
circumstances
of
this
building
and
the
site
to
maybe
support
the
deviation
from
the
guidelines
and
the
applicant
noted
in
february,
and
I'm
sure
they
can
talk
more
to
how
important
allowing
light
into
the
hallways
is.
With
this
designed
element
next
slide,
please
condition
seven
to
comply
with
guidelines.
N
Three
point:
four
four
and
three:
five:
six,
the
storefront
windows
along
the
second
street
north
facade
shall
include
symmetrical
place.
Divisions
to
break
up
and
divide
the
continuous
band
of
glass
into
bays,
such
as
an
example
of
just
carrying
that
brick
down
from
the
upper
floors
to
the
lower
floors
to
continue
that
same
rhythm,
and
we
note
guideline
3.44,
continuous,
horizontal,
vertical
bands
of
windows
should
not
be
allowed
and
3.56
storefronts
shall
be
divided
into
bays
that
follow
the
rhythm
of
the
building
and
finally
condition
eight
to
comply
with
guidelines.
3.62
and
I'll.
N
N
The
larger
recessed
balconies
should
be
reduced
in
size
on
the
northwest
elevation
to
further
the
feeling
of
a
solid
building
wall,
so
at
the
corners
of
the
building.
I
point
to
those
two
arrows:
you
can
see
with
the
placement
of
that
recessed
balcony.
At
that
location,
you
can
see
more
through
the
building
and
maybe
not
create
as
strong
of
a
building.
If
those
were
not
fully
open
that
you
could
see
through
at
an
angle.
N
I
don't
have
it
on
this
slide,
but
we
could
go
to
a
slide
if
it
is
important,
but
on
the
cedar
lake
trail
there
are
larger
balcony
sizes,
one
one
bay
and
we're
looking
to
have
those
recessed
balconies
the
same
size
as
you
can
see
on
this
elevation.
N
So
those
are
the
conditions
that
I
know
the
applicant
would
like
to
speak
to
there.
There
were
a
number
of
letters
submitted
number
some
some
concerns
from
members
of
the
public.
The
applicant
did
receive
a
letter
of
support
from
the
neighborhood
organization,
on
the
condition,
with
conditions
that
they
discuss
the
project
and
have
conversations
with
the
rock
island
loft,
that's
across
the
cedar
lake
trail.
B
N
And
chair
howard
and
commissioners
that
the
last
page
on
that
that
you
just
received
and
thank
you
rachel
is
you'll-
see
the
archive
building
that
that
can
show
the
glass
that
is
installed
today.
B
B
M
Hi,
patrick
crowe,
I
am
the
developer
of
intersect
at
310
second
street
and
madam
chair
commissioners
and
city
staff.
Thank
you
for
allowing
me
to
speak
today
and
to
present
our
project,
we're
very
excited
about
this
and
the
potential
to
bring
this
project
forward.
M
As
aaron
mentioned
a
number
of
these
items
that
we're
going
through
today,
we've
sort
of
internally
and
with
aaron,
had
discussions
about
them
and
how
we
can
meet
these
guidelines.
It,
as
aaron
noted
the
glazing
that
we're
proposing
is
very
similar
to
the
glazing
at
archives.
M
Our
energy
efficiency
is
a
little
bit
higher,
but
I've
been
told
by
pella
that
there
is
no
visual
difference
between
what
you
see
at
archive
and
what
you'd
be
seeing
on
our
property
item
number
three
about
the
brick
we've
already
decided
to
make
that
change.
Based
on
our
the
comments
that
we
received
at
the
design
review,
I
think
that's
that's
fair.
I
think
that's
definitely
something
we
noted
and
we
want
to
make
sure
that
this
is
a
project
that
is
going
to
be
here
for
a
long
time.
M
The
number
six
is
an
item.
That's,
I
know
that's
kind
of
gone
back
and
forth,
and
we've
had
discussions
both
internally,
both
with
city
staff
and
with
commissioners
as
well
about
this.
I
just
want
to
point
out
one
last
time
that
you
know
it's
our
intent
to
keep
that
trail,
access
looking
and
feeling
very
open,
and
this
sort
of
bleeds
into
item
number
seven
as
well,
but
the
ability
to
sort
of
set
that
back
open
that
area
up
and
sort
of
draw
people
into
that.
M
The
extension
of
the
trail-
and
I
think
we
can
do
that
with
lighting-
but
I
think
we
also
need
that
space
and
that
feeling
of
openness
so
that
the
trail
doesn't
access
doesn't
become
feeling,
like
you
know,
a
little
corner
or
something
that's
not
designed
for
the
public
or
something
that's.
You
know
maybe
a
little
bit
more
hidden.
M
We
really
want
it
to
look
and
feel
very
open
and
welcome,
and
inviting
and
we're
going
to
do
that
with
lighting
we're
also
going
to
do
it
with
some
public
art
installments
among
other
things,
but
that
that
setback
is
important
to
help
with
that.
It
also
helps
with
our
daylighting
and
overall
well-being
and
the
building
itself.
M
As
you
know,
we
like
to
have
light
at
both
both
ends
of
our
corridor,
and
this
helps
us
accomplish
that
the
idea
of
breaking
up
the
storefront
windows
along
second
street.
I
think
that's
something
that
we
can
look
at
doing
and
we
made
some
notes
about
adding
a
vertical
mullion
in
that
retail
bay,
where
it
appears
to
have
one
that's
missing
and
I
think
that'll
help
with
that.
The
visual
aspect
of
that
and
the
final
item,
which
is
item,
number
eight
about
bringing
the
or
about
I'm
sorry,
there's
two
more
items
remaining.
M
The
one
is
about
bringing
the
brick
down
closer
at
the
corners
of
the
building
and
and
that's
something
that
we're
definitely
taking
a
look
at.
It's
really
difficult
to
do.
On
the
trail.
Access
portion
again
we're
trying
to
keep
that
area
very
open
and
inviting
feeling,
and
as
it
relates
to
item
number
eight
with
the
balconies
that
we're
proposing
a
very
similar
corner
balcony.
That's
been
used
at
archive
where
we're
keeping
that
opening
and
again
we
want
to
have
as
much
daylighting
in
those
units
that
we
as
we
can.
M
We
want
them
to
feel
open
and
inviting
when
people
are
sitting
on
those
balconies
and
that's
part
of
why
we
left
those
open
initially
and
then
the
recess
on
the
cedar
lake
trail
side,
that's
similar
to
other
properties,
including
rock
island
moths.
Across
the
way
we've
been
trying
to
follow
the
intent
of
some
of
the
other
buildings
that
have
been
built.
M
So
again,
I
thank
you
for
your
time.
We're
really
excited
about
this
project.
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions
that
you
have.
I
do
also
have
tamara
my
historic
consultant
on
the
line
as
well.
I
know
she
may
want
to
chime
in
if
she
feels
like
there's
something
where
I
haven't,
provided
you
guys
with
enough
feedback
about
what
our
position
is,
but
we
we
definitely
are
excited.
We've
enjoyed
this
process
and,
like
I
said,
commissioners
have
been
great
to
work
with.
B
O
Commissioner
howard,
thank
you.
This
is
camera
helderson
with
pigeon
consulting,
I
would
chime
in
now.
I
just
want
to
add
that
one
thing
when
we
presented
to
the
commissioners
during
the
design
review
one
question
that
had
come
up
as
a
way
to
have
that
sort
of
solid
building
wall
corner
at
the
the
trail
where
we
have
the
the
single
column
at
the
bridge.
O
That
makes
making
that
corner
more
substantial
in
that
column
in
particular,
challenging
and-
and
then
I
think,
patrick,
I
mean
he's
the
best
advocate
for
a
project
that
you
could
have.
I
think
he
he
spoke
really
eloquently
on
some
of
the
decisions
that
were
made
about
balconies
and
and
recesses
that
were
really
taken
from
from
other
buildings
in
the
area.
O
It
it
just
helped
us
to
know
you
know
what
what
had
sat
well
with
commissioners
in
the
past,
and-
and
I
do
think
that
you
know
we
got
a
lot
of
great
feedback
from
the
commission
when
we
did
our
design
review
presentation
about.
You
know,
understanding
why
we
have
the
recess
for
daylighting
the
corridors.
P
O
And
one
of
the
moves
that
it's
making
is
to
daylight
the
elevator
hallways
and
corridors
as
much
as
possible,
so
that
we're
less
dependent
on
on
artificial
light
and
that
we've
kind
of
improved
the
quality
and
livability
of
the
building,
and-
and
we
heard
you
all
understand-
that
and
and
get
it
which
we
were
really
thankful
for.
But
we
just
wanted
to
to
remind
the
community
commissioners
that
that
was
a
really
intentional
choice
for
the
sustainability
elements
of
this
building.
Thank
you.
B
Not
seeing
any
or
hearing
anyone,
commissioners
are
there
any
questions
for
the
applicant
one
of
mine
I'll
start
out,
while
you
guys
think
was
to
tell
us
what
is
different.
I
think
it
sounds
to
me
as
though
you
are
willing
to
take
on
some
of
these
conditions,
and
then
you
have
questions
about
others.
So
I'm
wondering
if
we
could
just
go
through
the
eight
conditions,
just
for
clarity's
sake,
which
ones
you're
calling
into
question
patrick,
so
the
first
condition
has
to
do
with
the
hvac
and
laundry
events.
M
A
M
Unmuting
myself,
that's
okay,
condition
number
one
we
are.
We
are
complying
with.
B
Okay
and
number
two,
it
sounds
to
me:
we
have
the
pictures
of
the
clear
glass,
so
that's
one
that
we
should
discuss
condition
number
three
has
to
do
with
the
brick
on
the
upper
floor,
so
it's
the
same
as
the
lower
floors
and
it
sounded
to
me
like
you
are
okay
with
that
condition
as
well.
M
That's
correct:
we've
already
made
that
change;
okay,
the
design
rendering's
over
in
time
for
the
meeting,
but
that
change
has
been
made
correct.
B
And
condition
number
four:
was
the
metal
panel
exterior
material
correct?
We
will
comply
in
condition
five.
I
just
lost
my
conditions
that
that
had
to
do
with
the
trim.
Colors
correctly
we're
good
with
that.
So
number
six
is
one
that
vertical
recess,
that
one
that's
one,
that
we
should
make
sure
to
discuss
and
number
seven
had
to
do
with
the
storefront
windows
it
sounded
to
me
like
you
are
already
working
on
that
as
well,
so
that
would
be
an
okay
condition
to
keep
in
and
then
condition
eight.
B
B
Seeing
none
thank
you,
patrick
and
tamara.
B
B
B
The
clear
glass,
I
think,
is
more
appropriate
and
it
follows
the
the
standards
number
six,
which
has
to
do
with
the
vertical
recess
that
one
I
think
we
had
talked
about
some
other
options
as
part
of
our
previous
discussion
on
how
to
make
that
seem
more
in
keeping
with
the
standards
and
then
there
was
number
eight.
I
still
am
a
little
concerned
about
that
solid
building
wall.
Commissioner
sandbolt,
you
have
some
thoughts.
K
Yes,
thank
you,
commissioner,
chair
howard.
As
far
as
as
far
as
condition
number
two,
I'm
kind
of
on
the
fence,
I
understand
why
the
condition
is
written,
but
the
images
that
I
saw-
I
did
not
have
any
concerns
with
with
that,
as
I
saw
it
so
that
I'm
I'm
kind
of
on
the
sense
about
the
item
number
six,
I
would
say
the
vertical
recess
has
proposed.
K
We
saw
you
know
in
the
preview,
and
I
I
like
the
idea
of
the
of
sunlight
being
able
to
get
deeper
into
the
building,
and
I
think
that
it's
been
done
in
a
very
thoughtful
manner
and
I
don't
feel
like
it
compromises
the
character
of
the
building
being
able
to
fit
into
the
character
of
the
neighborhood.
So
personally,
I
would
be
okay
with
striking
that
one
and
then
for
item
number
eight.
K
I
think
the
solid
building
wall
on
the
on
the
in
the
northwest
elevation,
because
of
how
that
elevation
does
not
face
a
street
and
faces
more
that
railroad
corridor
and
the
bike
path
I
feel
like
that
is
a
good
basis
for
deviating
for
from
the
regular
standards.
And
so
I
would
be
in
support
of
striking
that
condition
as
well.
B
Thank
you,
commissioner,
sample
just
note
that
that
condition
eight
has
two
parts
to
it,
and
one
is
the
solid
building
wall
on
the
primary
facade
and
corners
and
then
the
other
part
is
the
recessed
balconies
on
the
northwest.
So
it's
kind
of
talking
about
two
different
things.
K
Sure,
and
as
I
as
I
understand,
the
design
is
trying
to
accommodate
the
access
down
into
the
bike
path
and
I
think
that
would
be
a
great
amenity
for
the
neighborhood
and
something
that
that
the
warehouse
district
should
be
able
to
accommodate.
So
I'm
I'm
good
with
striking
those
but
interested
to
see
what
other
commissioners
think.
E
E
Yeah
so,
along
the
lines
of
condition
two,
I
am
also
in
the
same
boat
as
commissioner
sandbolt.
I
don't
necessarily
see
anything.
That's
worrisome
in
the
the
renderings
and
looking
at
just
a
quick
street
view
of
the
the
archive
apartments.
I
didn't
necessarily
find
that
to
be.
I
would
be
more
amenable
to
having
that.
If
that's
something
that
the
applicant
is
feel
strongly
about,
I
know
for
condition.
Six.
E
We
had
discussed
potentially
options
of
like
bringing
across
vertical
bands
or
trying
to
break
up
that
vertical
horizontal
bands.
I
mean
to
break
up
the
vertical
glass,
but
now
that
I'm
looking
at
the
design
again,
I
don't
know
if,
like
that,
would
detract
from
it
at
all
or
maybe
make
it
look
a
little
bit
yeah.
E
I
I
think
that
the
way
that
they
have
designed
it
with
kind
of
the
recess
and
the
material
usage
there
makes
it
seem
a
little
bit
more
solid,
at
least
the
rendering
I'm
looking
at
now,
which
is
one
of
the
ones
they
have
from
the
applicant
pages.
So
I
feel,
okay
with
striking
that
one
as
well
just
given
that
there
is
some
certain
requirements
with
the
lot
and
how
they
have
need
that
lighting
for
the
corridors.
E
And
then
I
also
will
agree
with
commissioner
sandbolt
about
the
the
item
number
eight
or
the
yeah
for
not
item
number
eight,
but
number
eight
for
the
fact
that
you
know
that
is
an
amenity
and
it
faces
a
a
very
distinct
and
kind
of
unique
corner
for
the
site.
So
I'd
be
willing
to
to
strike
that
one
as
well.
B
Yeah
yeah,
I
understand
and
agree
with
all
that
commissioner
sambolt
and
commissioner
booty
have
said.
This
is
one
of
those
one
of
those
that
I
could
go
either
way
on,
but
I
understand
the
way
the
commission
or
the
way
the
staff
wrote
the
the
conditions
other
commissioners.
K
Sorry,
it
takes
a
second
to
get
like
everything
going
again.
All
of
them
make
a
motion.
The
heritage
preservation
commission
approved
the
certificate
of
appropriateness
to
allow
the
construction
of
a
new
eight-story
mixed-use,
building
with
ground
floor
commercial
and
96
apartments
on
the
upper
floors,
subject
to
the
following
conditions.
D
P
B
Thank
you.
The
motion
passes
and
that
concludes
our
public
hearing
items.
So
next
comes
announcements.
Do
staff
or
commissioners
have
any
announcements,
andrea
burke,
I
suspect
you
have
some
announcements
to
make.
I
Thank
you,
chair
howard.
Yes,
I
do.
I
wanted
to
first
of
all
welcome
our
new
commissioner
on
to
the
commission
kelly
mastin.
This
is
her
first
meeting.
She
is
an
architect
with
miller
dunwoody.
We
are
greatly
excited
to
have
her
on
the
commission
starting
today
and
very
much
appreciate
your
comments
in
today's
meeting.
I
So
I
know
this
is
a
virtual
environment,
but
perhaps
in
the
near
future,
when
we
all
see
each
other
again,
you
can
welcome
her
in
person,
but
for
now
here
is
a
virtual
welcome
to
the
hpc.
Thank
you
and
then
also
I
wanted
to
give
an
update.
I
had
made
an
announcement
a
few
months
back
that
a
previous
decision
by
the
hpc
to
deny
a
demolition
of
a
local
landmark,
the
first
church
of
christ,
scientist,
which
was
appealed
and
upheld
by
the
biz
committee
and
the
city
council.
I
To
also
deny
the
demolition
was
the
city
was
sued
under
the
court
of
appeals
for
that
decision
and
therefore
the
court
of
appeals
reversed
the
decision
of
the
council
so
therefore
asking
the
city
to
allow
the
demolition
that
wrecking
permit
has
come
in
and
that
has
been
approved
so
that
landmark
will
be
going
away.
Very
soon
is
an
unfortunate
loss,
but
that
is
where
the
cards
fell.
On
that
particular
situation
in
case
I
wanted
to
make
that
I
know
there
is
another
announcement,
but
it
is
escaping
me
at
this
point
in
time.
I
Oh,
that
was
the
other
thing.
Excuse
me,
we
are
also
awaiting
the
appointment
of
our
last
commissioner
to
the
hpc.
We
have
made
a
recommendation
to
the
base
candidate,
which
we
were
hoping
to
go
on
biz,
which
is
in
two
days
on
the
17th.
It's
an
unusual
business
committee
time
should
that
commissioner
be
appointed.
We
are
hoping
to
perhaps
get
them
seated
if
everything
works
by
the
end
of
this
month.
I
Following
that
seating,
I
would
like
to
then
start
discussions
and
at
that
maybe
next
meeting
take
verbal
nominations
for
officer
seats,
so
for
chair
for
vice
chair
for
secretary
and
then
on
the
following
meeting.
After
that
we
will
vote.
We
will
not
do
I
know
in
the
past.
In
other
years
we've
taken
votes
by
email,
but
to
comply
with
open
meetings,
laws.
Everything
will
be
verbal,
so
expect
that
and
then
also
after
we
get
that
final.
Commissioner,
seated,
let's
start
talking
about
retreat
dates.
I
I
know
we
had
had
one
sort
of
tentatively
scheduled
as
soon
as
I
got
back
from
parental
leave.
That
did
not
happen.
I
was,
I
will
confess,
very
overwhelmed
coming
back
after
being
gone
for
three
months
and
I
still
feel
as
if
I'm
getting
caught
up,
but
I
think
once
we
get
that
person
here,
let's
start
talking
about
dates
and
get
something
on
the
calendar
when
we
bring
that
up.
So
that
is
all
I
have
for
announcements.
B
Thank
you
annie.
We
have
a
joint
meeting
next
thursday.
Do
we
know
if
there's
going
to
be
any
joint
items
for
that
committee?
The
whole
joint.
B
Seeing
none
with
that,
we
have
completed
all
items
on
the
agenda
for
this
meeting
I'll
ask
members
and
staff
if
there
are
any
other
members
to
come
before
any
other
matters
to
come
before
the
meeting
there
being
no
other
business
for
this
meeting.
If
not
and
without
objection,
I
will
declare
this
meeting
adjourned.
The
next
regular
meeting
of
the
hpc
is
march
29th
2022.