►
From YouTube: September 6, 2022 Planning Commission
Description
Additional information at:
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
A
Good
afternoon,
everyone
and
welcome
to
the
City
Planning
Commission
today
is
Tuesday
September
6
2022.
My
name
is
Alyssa
Olson
and
I'm.
The
president
of
the
Planning
Commission,
the
city,
will
be
recording
and
posting
this
meeting
to
the
city's
website
and
YouTube
channel
as
a
means
of
increasing
Public,
Access
and
transparency.
This
meeting
is
public
and
subject
to
the
Minnesota
open
meeting
law.
At
this
time,
I'll
ask
the
clerk
to
please
call
the
roll.
A
Right,
we
have
a
quorum
next
we're
going
to
proceed
to
the
agenda,
a
copy
of
which
was
posted
for
a
public
access
to
the
city's
legislative
information
management
system,
which
is
available
at
limbs.minneapolis
mn.gov.
C
A
A
Otherwise,
if
you
want
to
copy
there
on
the
dice
there
so
I'm
going
to
read
through
each
item
on
the
agenda
and
state
whether
it's
slated
for
consent
or
discussion
consent
items
will
be
passed
with
staff
recommendation
in
any
listed
conditions
by
the
board.
Without
discussion
discussion
items,
we
will
have
a
public
hearing
and
discuss
them
before
we
take
a
vote.
A
So
if
you
agree
with
staff
recommendation
on
an
item,
you
do
not
need
to
raise
your
hand
to
indicate
that
you
want
to
speak
on
an
item.
It
will
be
passed
as
listed.
If
you
would
like
to
speak
against
staff
recommendation
on
an
item
we'll
have
you
raise
your
hand
and,
and
anyone
who
wants
to
speak
on
an
item
tonight
raise
your
hand
please.
So
we
can
get
an
idea
of
how
many
people
we
have
for
each
well
when
I
get
to
those
so
I.
A
Thank
you
good
audience
participation,
so
I'm
gonna
go
through
the
items
and,
if
you're,
if
you're
interested
in
speaking
against
staff
recommendation
on
those
items,
raise
your
hand.
So
the
first
item
is
item
number
four,
which
is
three
zero:
zero
one
Broadway
Street
Northeast
staff
is
recommending
this
item
for
consent.
Is
there
anyone
who
would
like
to
speak
against
staff
recommendation
for
item
number?
Four.
Four.
Excuse
me
all
right.
Seeing
none
we'll
put
item
number
four
on
consent.
A
A
A
A
Item
number
eight
is
210
Lake
Street
East.
We
will
discuss
item
number
eight.
A
How
many
people
are
here
to
to
speak
to
item
number?
Eight?
Okay,
thanks
item
number:
nine
is
eleven
eleven
Third
Avenue
South
and
we
will
be
discussing
item
number
nine.
Commissioner
Alper
would
like
to
discuss
this
item.
A
Item
number
10
is
2800
2802
2840
and
2850
North
wyzetta
Boulevard.
This
item
is
recommended
for
consent.
Is
anybody
here
to
speak
against
staff
recommendation
on
item
number
10.
A
A
Item
number
12
is
1924
26
26th,
Street
East.
This
item
is
recommended
for
consent.
Is
there
anyone
who
would
like
to
speak
against
staff
recommendation
on
item
number?
12.?
Okay,
we'll
put
item
number
12
on
consent?
Item
number
13
is
3238
Gerard
Avenue
South.
This
item
is
recommended
for
consent.
Is
there
anyone
who
would
like
to
speak
against
staff
recommendation
on
item
13.?
A
A
A
A
A
Right
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
any
discussion,
seeing
none
all
in
favor,
say:
aye
aye,
all
opposed
any
abstentions,
all
right,
so
we've
adopted
the
agenda
next
on
our
agenda.
Is
the
consent
agenda,
so
I'm
going
to
open
a
public
hearing
on
the
consent
agenda
before
we
vote
to
approve
the
consent
agenda?
A
Is
there
anyone
here
who
would
like
to
speak
on
the
consent
agenda?
If
so,
you
can
come
to
the
podium
now
and
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record.
A
D
A
A
F
And
Commissioners
Peter
Crandall
senior
city
planner
with
cped
land
use.
The
first
project
that
we
will
be
looking
at
tonight
is
located
at
2318
Johnson,
Street
Northeast.
This
is
in
the
Windham
Park
neighborhood
Northeast
Minneapolis.
F
F
This
is
the
zoning
map
of
the
site
and
then
an
aerial
view
showing
that
currently
vacant
sites
again
directly
across
the
street,
across
Johnson
Street
from
Windham
Park,
and
then
the
land
use
and
built
form
map
showing
the
corridor
4
designation
of
the
property
and
then
some
of
the
context
showing
that
the
entirety
of
Johnson
Street
Northeast
is
guided
for
corridor
four
along
with
Lowry,
which
is
one
block
to
the
North.
And
then
you
can
see
Central
Avenue.
G
F
Other
goods
and
services
Corridor
a
few
blocks
to
the
west
of
the
site.
These
are
some
pictures
of
the
site
again
currently
vacant
and
then
some
photos
of
the
property
from
the
shared
alley
at
the
rear.
F
And
then
plans
for
the
new
three-story
residential
building
with
four
dwelling
units.
The
project
would
have
principal
entryways
at
both
the
front
and
the
rear
of
the
structure.
F
F
So,
in
summary,
the
applications
required
for
the
project
include
a
rezoning
from
the
r1a
multiple
family
District
to
the
R4,
multiple
family
District.
This
would
bring
the
zoning
in
line
with
the
land
use
and
built
form
guidance
on
the
2040
plan
and
allow
for
the
construction
of
a
multiple
family
structure
of
four
units
on
the
site.
F
So,
with
respect
to
the
two
variance
requests,
one
of
the
variances
is
to
reduce
the
minimum
established
front
yard.
The
required
front
yard
under
the
current
built
form
overlay
would
be
15
feet,
there's
an
established
yard
that
is
established
by
the
two
existing
homes
to
the
north
and
south
of
the
site,
and
then
a
line
drawn
from
the
nearest
point
of
those
two
structures
which
are
shown
here
on
the
slide.
As
you
can
see,
a
pretty
small
portion
of
the
proposed
structure
encroaches
into
that
established
front
yard.
F
So
that
would
be
the
request
that
the
applicant
is
making
to
reduce
that
requirement
and
then
the
second
variance
concerns
the
parking
area
at
the
rear
of
the
structure.
Under
the
ordinance
surface,
parking
lots
with
more
than
three
spaces
are
required
to
provide
adequate
maneuvering
space
such
that
none
of
the
vehicles
would
be
required
to
maneuver
in
the
alleyway.
The
applicant
is
proposing
four
spaces,
and
so
they
are
requesting
a
variance
to
modify
those
standards
to
allow
four
cars
to
maneuver
in
the
alleyway.
Under
these
proposed
conditions,.
F
Staff
is
recommending
approval
of
the
rezoning
and
the
site
plan
review
application,
but
is
recommending
denial
of
the
two
variance
requests,
primarily
because
staff
could
not
determine
a
practical
difficulty
under
the
existing
site
conditions
for
those
two
requests
and
that
kind
of
summarizes
our
position.
I
can
take
any
questions
and
I
know
the
applicants
here
as
well
to
speak
to
the
project.
A
Thank
you,
Peter
Commissioners.
Are
there
any
questions
for
staff?
A
I
have
a
question
so
the
maneuvering
space
I
mean
it
appears
that
there
is
quite
a
bit
of
space
behind
the
Cars.
So
what's
the
required
is
that
what
the
red
box
is
then,
on
this
slide,
that's
what
would
be
required
for
maneuvering
space
or.
F
Yeah,
so
typically,
what
would
be
required
for
this
size?
Parking
lot
would
be
a
22
foot,
Drive
aisle
that
the
vehicles
could
maneuver
and
turn
around
in
without
encroaching
into
the
alleyway
to
back
up.
Essentially,
so,
if
it
were
three
spaces,
this
configuration
would
be
fine
under
the
ordinance,
but
because
it's
for
it
has
that
additional
sort
of
space
requirement
got.
A
A
All
right,
thank
you,
Peter.
If
there's
no
other
questions
for
staff
we
can
move
on
to
the
public
hearing.
Is
the
applicant
here
to
speak
on
this
item.
H
Good
afternoon
Commissioners
my
name
is
William
Wells
I
am
the
architect
I'm.
Also
here
with
Eric
olustad
he's
the
developer
with
value
homes.
I
just
wanted
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
premise
of
the
project,
and
then
the
variances
we've
been
working
on
this
project
for
a
couple
months
with
staff
and
neighbors
and
I.
If
you
could
zoom
in
a
little
bit
more
on
that
slide,
I'd
appreciate
it.
It
talks
sort
of
just
contextually
where
the
project
is
across
the
street
from
the
park
in
Northeast
Minneapolis.
We
are
on
Johnson
Street.
H
Currently,
the
site
is
a
vacant
lot
and
you
can
see
that
Johnson
Street
is
a
major
connector
in
Northeast
Minneapolis
down
to
the
Quarry
and
35W,
so
that
street
is
is
actually
has
been
up
zoned
as
part
of
the
2040
comp
plan
and
is
a
very
busy
street
right
now.
There
is
some
development
south
of
us
there's
some
multi-family
housing
just
south
of
us,
but
that
development
is
starting
to
move
north.
The
premise
of
the
project
and
the
plans
that
you
have
in
front
of
you
is
essentially
housing
for
families.
H
We
are
looking
to
build
units.
If
you
look
specifically
at
the
floor
plans,
you
have
sort
of
a
master
bedroom
and
then
there's
two
or
three
smaller
bedrooms
it
we
are
specifically
going
to
be
marketing
and
designing
the
building
for
a
couple
with
kids
is
who's
going
to
live
here
across
the
street
from
the
park
and
that's
good
for
Minneapolis,
and
that's
good
for
the
Minneapolis
public
school
system
in
the
neighborhood
in
general.
In
terms
of
the
parking
to
make
this
development
work,
we
have
to
have
one
space
per
unit.
H
H
That's
a
site
plan-
if
you
could
zoom
in
on
that
please
so
this
just
changed
on
Johnson
Street
used
to
build
a
park
on
Johnson
Street,
but
the
City
of
Minneapolis
rebuilt
that
street,
probably
anticipation
of
the
increased
traffic
on
Johnson
Street.
But
now
you
can't
park
on
Johnson
Street
anymore.
H
H
We
do
have
a
front
yard
setback
variants
and
a
maneuvering
variants.
These
variances
are
related,
so
I
am
requesting
to
move
the
building
forward
effectively
one
foot:
it's
one
foot
forward,
just
to
align
it
with
the
building
to
the
south
of
us,
so
the
front
facades
you
can
see
on
the
site
plan.
The
buildings
will
align
as
you
sort
of
go
down
the
street,
so
we're
asking
to
just
align
the
fronts
of
the
buildings
and
I
need
that
extra
extra
foot
to
help
with
the
maneuvering
in
the
alley
with
the
cars.
H
So
the
cars
are
not
hitting
the
garages
or
or
crossing
the
property
line,
so
that
that
is
one
reason
that
we
are
asking
to
move
the
building
forward
just
a
little
bit.
There
is
it's
hard
to
understand
on
the
site
plan,
but
there
is
very
significant
topography
out
there.
There's
a
double
slope:
the
built
the
site
from
the
sidewalk
in
front
of
the
site
to
the
back
of
the
site,
slopes
down
about
seven
feet,
it's
very
serious
slope
and
then
from
the
north
to
the
South.
There's
about
a
four
and
a
half
foot
slope.
H
So
the
maneuvering
in
the
alley
is
extremely
difficult
and
then
you've
got
three
garages
right
on
the
property
line.
It
is
extremely
hard
to
turn
a
maneuver,
especially
in
the
winter
when
it
snows
and
then
I
lose
another
two
feet
from
snow.
It
gets
so
tight
back
there,
we're
just
afraid
we're
going
to
cross
the
property
line
as
the
cars
back
up
or
we're
going
to
hit
one
of
the
garages
so
I
need
that
extra
foot
just
to
help
with
the
maneuvering
back
there
just
to
make
it
safe
to
make
it
safer
back
there.
H
For
everybody
and
make
sure
that
we're
trying
to
be
good
neighbors
as
far
as
the
parking
I'd
like
to
talk
just
a
little
bit
more
about
the
parking,
the
staffer
report
recommends
three
parking
spots,
but
the
staff
report
also
says
we're
allowed
to
have
eight
parking
spots.
We
can
have
eight
parking
spots
legally
on
this
site.
H
H
If
I
moved
down
to
three
spots,
I
still
have
the
same
maneuvering
problem
so
just
going
directly
with
the
staff
recommendations
on
the
site
plan,
approval
on
number
five
site
plan,
review,
condition
of
approval,
number
five
they're
saying
change
down
to
three
parking
spots:
they're
trying
to
use
that
to
remove
the
variants
for
the
alley,
but
that
doesn't
solve
the
problem.
I've
still
got
three
cars
that
have
a
maneuvering
problem,
so
that
doesn't
work
and
then
I'd
have
one
spot.
H
I'd
have
one
dwelling
unit
that
didn't
have
parking
so
that
that
that's
not
solving
problems
number
five,
so
we
asked
the
number
five
be
removed
and
we
don't
think
that
zoning
staff
has
the
authority
to
declare
that
we
only
have
three
parking
spots
because
we're
legally
allowed
eight
parking
spots
and
there's
just
the
issue
of
where
the
fourth
unit
would
park.
H
H
H
We
would
do
three
Flats
three
stories:
three
Flats,
so
just
going
to
three
units
doesn't
change
the
building
design
at
all
for
us.
I
just
wanted
to
point
that
out
to
staff
and
the
neighbors
here
tonight.
I'd
also
like
to
point
out
that
we're
legally
allowed
an
far
of
two
on
the
site,
and
we
are
only
at
an
far
of
one.
H
H
We're
legal
allowed
a
two
an
far
of
two
which
is
significant,
but
we're
only
doing
an
far
of
one
on
the
site,
so
I
just
wanted
to
point
that
out
to
neighbors
and
the
Planning
Commission
that
the
building
is
significantly
smaller
than
it
could
be
on
the
site,
and
we
have
intentionally
done
that
if
Trish
try
to
make
the
building
look
like
kind
of
a
big
house
to
be
sensitive
to
the
scale
of
of
the
street
and
the
neighbors
I
am
available
for
questions.
If
there
are
any
questions.
A
D
I
guess
I
don't
have
a
question.
I
just
have
a
comment
for
the
applicant,
so
just
because
you're
allowed
to
do
up
to
something
doesn't
mean
that
that
works
with
the
setbacks
and
the
requirements
for
turning
radius.
So
our
staff
City
staff,
definitely
has
the
ability
to
interpret
the
code
and
tell
you
you
can't
do
that
within
the
setbacks.
D
So
I
think
staff's
interpretation
in
the
report
is
fine.
They
just
are
interpreting
the
code.
It
sounds
like
there's
a
threshold
of
three
parking
stalls
when
you
go
over
that
that
trigger
some
additional
rules.
So
with
the
floor
area
ratio
same
thing,
you
know
you
just
still
have
to
make
it
work
within
the
site.
You're,
given
every
site's
different
I
have
no
issue
with
the
overall
use,
but
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
staff's
interpretation
of
our
rules
is
certainly
correct.
A
I
J
H
Correct
we
are
marketing
to
couples
with
kids.
We
do
anticipate
that
there
will
be
couples
with
kids
living
across
from
the
park.
The
Wyndham
Park
is
beautiful,
beautiful
Park.
We
would
like
to
have
one
parking
space
per
unit
to
make
sure
to
make
the
project
usable
and
viable.
We
we
need
to
have
one
space
per
unit.
H
We
are
allowed
eight
spots
legally
on
the
site.
That's
in
the
staff
report.
We
think
that
one
space
per
unit
is
reasonable
if
the
only
other
parking
spot
would
be
on
the
about
a
block
away,
and
it
would
be
just
extremely
challenging
for
guests
or
in
you
know,
on
one
of
those
units
to
park
a
block
away.
It
seems
like
kind
of
an
unreasonable
request
to
do
that.
K
Good
afternoon
Commissioners,
my
name
is
Eric
olustad
and
I
do
a
lot
of
stuff
at
Northeast,
love,
Northeast
and
Minneapolis
in
general,
and
we
had
a
nice
meeting
with
the
neighborhood
group,
so
everybody
was
invited
to
speak
and
we
went
back
and
forth
and
talked
about
what
would
be
good
and
what
would
work
for
everyone.
There
was
a
lot
of
support
we
did
have.
You
might
have
this
in
front
of
you.
K
Mark
Schneider
at
2302,
Johnson,
Street,
says
I.
Think
it's
a
solid
project,
I
look
forward
to
gaining
more
neighbors
on
My
Block
should
be
approved,
contrary
to
what
some
of
my
neighbors
claim
I,
don't
believe.
This
will
have
any
negative
impacts
on
the
Block.
It's
quite
clear
from
the
visual
renderings
that
this
project
would
neither
overwhelm
nor
impulse
unfair
burdens
on
surrounding
properties.
I
urge
the
Planning
Commission
to
approve
the
staff
recommendations
for
this
project.
I
did
meet
with
Dave,
and
then
we
met
with
John
and
John
and
a
couple
different
meetings.
K
K
The
parking
is
just
the
thing.
Without
four
spots:
I,
don't
I,
don't
it
doesn't
make
any
sense,
because
it's
like
who's
going
to
want
to
lease
a
place
with
at
least
three
of
them
and
then
the
fourth
person's,
like
oh
I,
have
no
parking.
Oh,
it
just
doesn't
work
so
like
William
said,
I
mean
this.
This
is
gonna,
be
you
could
do
a
lot
more
units.
You
could
make
it
bigger
twice
the
size
you
could.
K
You
could
do
a
whole
bunch
of
different
things
that
are
larger
and
and
we're
not
doing
that
we're
just
like
you
said
we're
about
a
ratio
of
one
for
when
you
can
go
far
of
two
so
half
and
we
just
want
quality
living
from
people
who
care
which,
in
this
scenario,
with
Johnson
Street
not
being
able
to
have
any
parking
on
it
with
just
at
least
one
spot
per
unit.
Is
all
we're
asking
for.
So
do
you
guys
have
any
questions
for
me
at
all.
J
You
thank
you
manager,
so
what
I'm
hearing
you
say
is
you?
You
would
have
difficulty
renting
out
the
fourth
unit
if
you
did
not
provide
off-street
parking,
yeah.
K
It
would
be
I
mean
everybody
wants
parking
when
in
all
the
properties
that
we
have.
It's
that's
a
huge
thing.
So
yeah,
it's
just
going
to
be
tough
I,
don't
know
what
you
know,
I,
don't
know
I
mean
because
it's
like
William
said
it's
going
to
be
families
or
young
professionals
that
are,
you
know,
may
have
some
roommates
or
whatnot
or
couples
with
with
kids,
and
you
know
unfortunately,
I
mean
we're
not
to
the
age
of
carless
living
at
this
point.
So
it's
just
hard
to
get
places
without
at
least
one
vehicle.
L
Sorry,
thanks
yeah
I
think
the
four
spots
is
so
I'm
just
curious
on,
because
I'm
sure
you've
looked
at
trying
different
configurations.
I
know
you're
undersized
on
the
building
and
making
the
building
a
little
bit
smaller
to
try
to
help
accommodate
those
spots.
Could
you
talk
a
little
bit
about
why
how
that
would
affect
the
project?
For
example,.
K
Obviously
three
or
four
bedrooms
you
get
higher
rents
than
two
bedroom
and
that's
really
what
we
try
to
do
to
differentiate,
because
you
can
find
a
two
bedroom
anywhere.
Northeast
I
mean
there's
all
these
new
buildings
all
over
the
place.
K
We'd
have
to
drop
a
unit,
and
then,
at
that
point
it's
like
well
go
back
to
the
drawing
board,
really
to
figure
out.
How
do
we
even
make
it
work.
L
K
M
You
it
looks
like
a
great
project.
It
looks
I'm
very
excited
to
see
units
that
have
three
or
four
bedrooms
right
across
from
the
from
the
park.
I
think
that's
wonderful
addition
for
families,
something
I'm
wondering
about
your
parking
situation.
Have
you
talked
to
any
of
the
neighbors
to
see
if
they
might
have
spare
capacity
on
you
know
in
their
driveways
on
in
their
garages,
where
that
extra
unit
could
rent
a
space?
And
you
could
you
know,
work
something
out
with
with
planning
staff
and
be
able
to
proceed
with
that.
Fourth
unit.
K
We
could
definitely
talk
to
neighbor.
I
know
everybody
on
that
alley
on
both
sides.
There's
like
driveways
and
parking
lots
of
parking,
even
just
single
families
or
duplexes.
So
I
know
that
the
one
directly
behind
us
I
forget
his
name.
I,
don't
know
William
if
you
remember,
but
he
was
concerned
because
he
didn't
want
people
like
backing
up
into
the
garage.
So
we're
gonna
build
some
ballards
there
protecting
his
garage
and-
and
he
was
all
for
it-
sent
a
letter
of
support
as
well.
So
we're
definitely
don't
mind.
K
E
So
I
have
a
comment
and
then
a
question
for
Peter.
If
that's
all
right,
my
first
comment
is
I.
I,
don't
think
anybody
up
here
is
under
the
the
impression
that
this
is
a
easy
solution,
because
I
think
a
lot
of
us
really
support
the
project,
but
I
think
the
reality
that
we're
faced
with
is
that
the
City
of
Minneapolis
has
made
a
decision,
especially
in
property
locations
like
the
one
we're
talking
about
today,
which
is
on
two
major
thoroughfares,
not
too
far
from
major
retail.
E
That
you
know
parking
is
not
necessarily
a
priority
for
these
certain
places
and
that's
the
reality
of
where
we're
moving
as
a
city.
That
I
think
needs
to
be
taken
into
consideration
here.
I,
don't
I,
don't
I
agree
that
people
seeking
this
type
of
living
may
want
a
vehicle,
but
I
also
think
that
there
are
many
people
who
are
seeking
this
kind
of
living.
That
may
not
want
a
vehicle,
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
clear
here,
because
you
mentioned
something
about
like
you-
know,
Suburban
living
Carlos
living.
E
E
Peter
I
do
have
a
question
for
you.
If
that's
all
right,
the
applicant
had
made
a
comment
earlier
that
the
two
variance
requests
are
related
and
that
the
additional
foot
at
the
front
of
the
house
would
help
them
meet
requirements
for
the
maneuvering
in
the
back.
Can
can
you
address
that?
Maybe
I
misunderstood
that,
but
that's
what
I
heard
the
applicants
say.
F
Yeah
so
I
think
the
applicant
was
making
the
point
that
pulling
the
house
forward
on
the
site
slightly
creates
some
additional
space
behind
the
parking
spaces
between
the
parking
and
the
alley,
and
that
creates
some
more
opportunities
for
maneuvering
and
visibility.
When
cars
would
be
backing
out
of
the
parking
lot.
It
doesn't
necessarily
solve
the
problem
in
terms
of
the
ordinance
as
far
as
how
it's
strictly
interpreted
with
the
layout,
but
it
does
I
think
probably
help
in
terms
of
giving
them
a
little
extra
breathing
room.
Great.
K
Thanks
yeah
and
I
guess,
my
last
comment
would
just
be
that
the
biggest
concern
for
all
the
neighbors
has
just
been
parking
like
parking.
You
know
this
is
parking,
can't
work
on
jobs
and
we
don't
want
to
overwhelm
the
parking
in
the
parking.
So
it's
like
we're
just
trying
to
get
some
more
parking
because
of
the
neighborhood
and
what
they've
basically
concerned
on
my
thought
as
well,
but
we're
really
aligning
ourselves
with
the
neighbors
that
live
in
the
block
on
the
Block
to
not
over
not
worry
them
above.
Where
are
these
people
going
to
park?
A
Thank
you.
We
are
going
to
move
on
to
anyone
else
who
would
like
to
speak
on
this
item.
There
are
a
number
of
you,
so
we
are
going
to
set
a
two
minute
timer
for
each
person,
which
is
this
lovely
large
timer
over
here,
and
if
you
could
try
your
best
to
not,
you
know
repeat
things
that
have
already
been
said.
A
N
O
Thank
you
I'd
like
to
thank
the
council
members
for
allowing
us
to
represent
our
alternate
views.
Shall
we
say
I
notice,
a
lot
of,
shall
we
say,
discrepancies
from
reality
and
how
this
thing
really
looks
and
really
fits
if
you're
standing
in
the
lot
like
we
were.
Last
week
we
had
a
little
meeting
with
John
Bosler
here,
he's
a
neighbor
across
the
alley
and
his
wife
was
there
I.
Was
there
Mary,
Dean
or
excuse
me,
Lori
Dean
was
there
anyway.
O
It
was
a
unanimous
thought
that
what
really
needs
to
go
there
is
a
single
family
home.
That's
what
was
there
before.
That's!
What's
on
the
North
side,
that's
what's
on
the
south
side!
This
thing
is
a
monstrosity.
It's
overbuilt
without
question
and
a
couple
of
things
that
have
not
been
brought
up
yet
is
the
plant
or
the
front
view
this
is
Dave's
house
Dave
will
be
up
next.
O
This
is
my
house
to
the
right
and
if
you
can
see
the
little
deck
on
the
side
here,
it
protrudes
stick
straight
out
towards
my
house
and
sounds
crazy,
but
it
aligns
perfectly
with
our
bedroom
windows,
so
that
to
us
is
really
unacceptable.
The
other
thing
about
that
side
of
the
house
is
that
there's
air
conditioner
there's
going
to
be
four
air
conditioners
running
well,
this
time
of
year,
they'll
be
running
constantly.
O
Another
thing
is
that
it's
roughly
40
feet
tall
to
the
peak,
and
that
puts
my
house
in
a
shadow,
especially
in
the
wintertime,
complete
shadow
all
winter
alone.
So
we
are
not
condoning
this
thing
at
all.
It
is
a
monstrous
mistake.
P
O
Know
where
the
parking
is
going
to
be
for
extra
cars
and
it's
going
to
be
on
Lincoln
Street
and
the
people
are
going
to
walk
through
the
yards
of
Mr
Bosler
anyone
else
along
the
alley
on
the
other
side,
on
the
Lincoln
side
of
the
alley.
So
that's
what's
going
to
happen.
Thank.
Q
Thanks
thanks
so
much
Madam
president
and
commission
members,
my
name
is
Dave
Alderson
I
do
live
immediately
south
of
the
project
and
I
understand
what
Eric
is
trying
to
do.
It's
brought
on
by
the
2040
plan
in
April
of
2022
the
sales
price
of
that
parcel
jumped
from
ninety
nine
thousand
dollars
to
a
hundred
and
forty
five
thousand
dollars
on
the
parcel
that
the
city
has
estimated
a
current
market
value
of
sixty
four
thousand
dollars.
Q
Q
In
my
understanding,
their
aspirational
values
in
the
2040
plan
that
deal
with
things
like
affordability,
home
ownership
and
so
forth,
and
clearly
this
is
not.
This
is
not
addressing
that
this
is
addressing
simply
the
need
for
more
housing
and
I.
Q
Don't
you
know
it's
a
little
bit
easier
to
find
it's
harder
to
find
affordable
housing
than
it
is
to
find
units
that
would
go
for
three
thousand
dollars
a
month,
which
is
pretty
much
what
these
are
going
to
have
to
command
in
order
to
make
it
work
and
again,
I
understand
the
math
from
Eric's
standpoint,
I
get
that
I,
guess
I,
just
don't
feel
like
it's
very
respectful
of
the
neighborhood
and
I
think
that
there
are
creating
winners
and
losers.
Q
In
this
situation
you
can
already
put
a
Triplex
there,
but
that
Triplex
can
be
a
smaller
footprint.
I,
don't
know
that
that
smaller
footprint
is
going
to
recapture
his
hundred
and
forty
five
thousand
dollars
for
him,
but
that's
a
choice
that
they
made
when
they
bought
that
property.
You
folks
seem
inclined
to
let
it
go
and
that's
what
it
is
I'm
just
here
to
say
that
there's
a
cost
to
the
2
2040
plan
in
terms
of
driving
wedges
into
neighborhoods
communities
we
got
together.
Q
There
were
three
other
homeowners
myself
and
John
I've
had
my
property
for
30
years,
he's
31..
We
had
130
years
of
home
ownership
and
then
here's
a
situation,
that's
driven
a
wedge
in
our
midst,
so
I
just
ask
you
to
consider:
there's
a
human
cost.
You
do
create
winners
and
losers.
Sometimes
when,
even
though
you
know
the
2040
plan
has
got
some
aspirational
goals
that
I
happen
to
agree
with
thanks.
A
R
Name
is
John
Bosler
and
I'm
at
2323
Lincoln
directly
across
the
alley
from
this
I
got
to
make
this
quick,
because
my
background's
architecture
and
Rental
housing
also
and
I've
developed
several
properties
and
redeveloped
houses.
R
I
would
encourage
these
guys
to
be
able
to
figure
out
how
to
definitely
get
at
least
four
spots.
If
they're
going
to
try
to
do
a
fourplex
there,
because
I
know
any
three
bedroom
house
is
gonna
have
more
than
one
car,
which
leads
me
to
my
biggest
concern
congestion
on
the
Alley
currently
that
alley,
because
Johnson
Street
has
no
parking,
there's
there's
nowhere
for
any
of
those
folks
to
have
a
guest
over
or
anything
right
now,
and
you
cannot
get
out
of
the
alley.
R
Consequently,
because
you
have
signals
at
both
ends
and
there's
double
parking
at
the
south
end
now,
I
can't
even
make
that
turn
with
my
car.
So
what
happens?
Is
the
congestion
just
the
population
if
you
increase
it
by
four
households?
You're
gonna
have
so
much
more
traffic
and
it's
on
a
South
facing
slope.
R
If
it's
winter
time
and
you
meet
someone
in
the
alley,
you're
not
going
backwards
because
at
first
place
you're
not
going
to
get
on
Lowry
and
secondly,
if
you
try
to
go
backwards
to
the
South,
you
there's
nowhere
to
back
up
to
it.
No
one
knows
what
to
do.
We
have
way
too
many
cars
in
that
Alley
traffic,
wise,
so
I
would
encourage
I'm
not
talking
about
parked
cars
I'm
talking
about
traffic,
that's
not
to
mention
all
the
other
people
who
use
that
alley,
because
they
don't
want
to
wait
at
a
stoplight.
R
So
I
think
these
are
real
concerns.
I
would
encourage
a
duplex
single
family,
something
smaller
just
try
to
lessen
the
number
of
cars
going
up
and
down
the
alley,
because
that's
a
real
problem
and
we
all
everybody
on
the
Alley
deals
with
it
masking
wise,
just
as
an
architect,
I
I'm
I
think
I'm
not
sure
how
that
really
fits
in
with
the
fabric
of
that
block
in
our
neighborhood
anyway,
thanks.
A
S
My
name
is
Lily
hosby
and
I'm
at
I
own
two
properties
on
the
Block
and
I
live
at
2415,
Lincoln
Street.
S
Gonna
mirror
a
little
bit
what
you
said
from
a
safety
concern.
I
know,
they're,
saying
it's
marketing
to
Families.
My
family
of
four
could
not
afford
to
live
there.
So
my
concern
is
it's
going
to
be
roommates,
it's
going
to
be
rental
with
the
R4
coding.
My
understanding
is
that
capacity
is
quite
a
bit
larger
and
I
have
young
children
on
an
alley
walking
to
an
elementary
school
that
it's
unsafe,
going
in
and
out
of
so
while
I
do
fully
support
more
than
a
single
family
home,
because
we
need
to
move
that
direction.
S
This
is
a
lot
the
potential
for
14
bedrooms.
If
there's
roommates
is
so
much
more
traffic
and
so
much
more
safety
concerns
for
me
and
my
family,
as
we
I'm,
also
very
pregnant
and
very
emotional,
so
I
apologize.
This
is
not
a
ploy
but
I
just
think.
A
Thank
you.
Is
there
anyone
else
who
would
like
to
speak
on
this
item,
all
right,
I'm,
not
seeing
anyone
so
I'm,
going
to
close
the
public
hearing
for
this
item
Commissioners
any
discussion,
or
would
anyone
like
to
make
a
motion.
J
Yes,
I'd
like
to
ask
the
Builder
or
the
architect
about
the
gentleman
who
mentioned
his
bedroom
when
the
deck
would
be
on
his
bedroom
window.
Is
that
something
that
can
be
resolved.
T
Commissioner,
rainbow
I
will
just
point
out
from
a
staff
perspective
that
is
permitted
in
that
location.
It
meets
all
of
the
required
setbacks.
H
H
U
M
A
D
Thanks
I
would
say:
I
would
agree
with
a
staff
interpretation
I
feel
for
the
neighborhood
in
terms
of
the
parking
I.
Think
for
stalls
for
four
units
seems
logical.
However,
when
we
look
at
a
variance,
we
have
to
look
at
the
Practical
difficulty
of
the
site
under
State
Statute.
It
doesn't
look
like
there
really
is
a
practical
difficulty
with
this
site.
I
think
we're
going
to
be
seeing
a
ton
of
these
as
people
implement
the
2040
plan.
D
It's
a
fourplex
on
a
single
family
lot,
which
is
kind
of
the
spirit
and
intent
of
the
2040
plan,
so
I
just
don't
think
it
warrants
a
variance.
I
looked
at
the
Contours
there's
like
a
two
foot
grade
change
in
the
rear
yard.
I.
Don't
think
that
that's
that's
really
not
unique
to
this
site.
The
properties
next
to
it
have
like
a
reasonable
setback.
D
I
just
don't
think,
there's
anything
unique
about
the
property
to
Warrant
the
variances,
so
I
would
just
recommend
going
with
the
staff
recommendation,
however,
I'm
overall
supportive
of
the
project,
so
those
would
be
my
thoughts.
L
Yeah
thanks
I
am
support
of
this
project
as
well
and
I.
You
know
it's.
We
hear
this
in
this
transition
from
where
we
are
to
now.
These
are
difficult
decisions
and
they're
always
stressful,
because
we're
taking
a
current
condition.
That
has
been,
as
you
say,
the
way
it's
been
for
30
years
and
we're
changing
that
and
we
do
have
to
get
to
a
different
place
and
I
think
you
know.
L
I
live
in
a
been
lived
in
my
house
for
30
years
in
South
Minneapolis
across
from
a
school
too
and
I
think
some
of
the
things
that
the
Architects
did
at
that
time
were
sensitive
to
window
placements.
You
know
they're
we're
10
feet
away
from
our
neighbors,
but
we
never
have
a
window
that
looks
directly
in
so
I
think
some
care
could
go
into
really
understanding
that
and
sort
of
tuning
this
as
best
we
can
and
I
think
it
can
work.
L
Well
again,
it's
it's
half
the
size,
it
could
be
I
mean
this
could
be
a
much
bigger
building
and
I.
Think
you
know
it's
going
to
be
fine
I'm,
not
in
support
of
the
variance
on
the
parking
I.
Just
been
diagnosed
I
think
you
can
get
four
spots
in
the
back
pretty
pretty
easily
I
think
that
should
be
done
so
I'm
not
going
to
support
the
staff's
position
on
that,
both
in
the
front
and
the
back.
So.
M
I
support
staff
recommendations
on
this
project.
I
just
want
to
say
that
I
I
think
the
alternate
rendering
with
the
front
porch
I,
know:
I
I
sit
on
my
front
porch
all
the
time
and
I
I
love
how
that
creates
community
and
vibrancy
and
I.
Think
that's
in
the
spirit
of
the
2040
plan.
I'd
be
supportive
of
that
variance
to
reduce
the
minimum
established
yard
front
yard
setback.
It's
it's
one
foot
it's
about
one.
A
A
Okay,
thank
you,
yeah
I'll,
just
sort
of
pile
on
here
you
know
a
larger
building,
like
commissioner
Baxley
said,
could
be
built
here
with
zero
parking
and
legally.
We
wouldn't
have
the
standing
to
deny
it
unless
the
2040
plan
was
amended.
A
So
another
thing
is
financial
considerations,
aren't
a
reason
to
allow
a
variance
and
we
don't
require
any
parking.
So
so
you
know
you're
giving
your
site
and
you
need
to
figure
out
how
to
fit.
However,
many
parking
spaces,
you
think
you
need
on
that
site
with
the
building
within
the
footprint,
so
I
also
will
be
supporting
staff
recommendation
on
this
item.
I
wonder
if
anyone
wants
to
make
that
motion
I.
L
T
I,
just
I
think
Commissioners
Baxley.
Commissioner
baxley's
comments
were
somewhat
leading
to
perhaps
granting
the
most
amount
of
flexibility
to
the
applicant
in
order
to
allow
them
to
come
up
with
some
solutions
to
provide
four
parking
spaces
on
site.
You'll
note
condition:
number
five
under
the
site
plan
review
says
that
the
applicant
should
modify
the
parking
to
no
more
than
three
parking
spaces.
That's
a
little
duplicative
because
we're
denying
the
variance
under
c.
T
So
if
the
intent
is
indeed
to
allow
the
applicant
as
much
flexibility
as
possible
to
figure
out
a
way
to
fit
four
spaces,
the
variants
would
still
be
denied
and
it
would
achieve
that
outcome
by
deleting
condition.
Number
five
under
site
plan
review.
D
Thanks
for
that
clarification,
I
guess
I'd
say
if
they
can
make
four
parking
spaces
fit
while
complying
with
the
requirements
of
the
zoning
code.
I'm
fine
with
that.
So
if
we
want
a
strike
condition,
five
from
that
I
would
be.
That
would
be
a
I
would
amend
my
motion
to
include
that.
If
there's
a
second
to
that,
commissioner.
J
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I
would
like
to
to
pull
Item
B.
The
variance
for
the
the
front
yard
I'm
very
interested
in
doing
that
to
allow
that
front
porch
to
allow
the
developer
to
come
back
with
the
front
porch
and
make
sure
the
gentleman
doesn't
have
a
balcony
looking
into
his
bedroom.
A
Okay,
so
why
don't
we
start
with
approving
items,
a
c
and
d,
striking
condition,
five
on
D
and
then
discuss
Item
B.
Is
that
okay,
all
right,
so
the
motion
is
to
approve
items,
a
c
and
d,
striking
condition:
five
on
D,
all
right
clerk.
Could
you
please
call
the
roll
in
the
motion.
B
G
J
A
All
right
so
Item
B
is
the
variance
to
deny
the
front
yard
setback.
A
So,
commissioner,
rainville
you're,
proposing
approving
the
variants
but
Peter
said
that
he
wasn't
sure
that
would
actually
allow
the
porch.
J
Yes,
so
is
it
appropriate
I
would
ask
our
staff
here
I'd
ask
Kimberly?
Is
it
appropriate
to
allow
Peter
in
his
to
review
that
before
that
can
be
made,
that
decision.
T
So
the
commission
would
need
to
make
a
decision
tonight
as
to
whether
or
not
to
approve
the
variance
as
proposed
in
the
plans
that
were
included
in
the
packets.
We
can't
evaluate
an
alternate
proposal
just
on
the
fly
right
now.
Unfortunately,
so
if
the
commission
wanted
to
Grant
variance
B,
it
would
be
to
allow
the
configuration
that
is
in
your
packets.
Only
and
a
revised
plan
would
need
to
be
brought
forward.
That
includes
that
second
story,
balcony
on
the
front.
A
And
Kimberly
would
we
need
to
make
legal
findings
to
allow
the
variants?
Yes,.
T
A
Anyone
have
any
well
I'm,
not
sure
what
those
findings
would
be
would
be.
My
concern.
E
Can
I
ask
a
point
of
clarification,
so
I
think
correct
me.
If
I'm
wrong,
we
could
deny
the
variance
for
this
particular
front
yard
setback
ask
the
applicant
to
meet
with
City
staff
to
help
come
up
with
a
site
plan
that
would
incorporate
the
front
yard
with
their
review
and
have
that
come
back
to
the
commission
one
more
time
for
that,
whatever
that
front
yard
variance
would
be.
Is
that
correct.
F
I
just
wanted
to
point
out
quickly
that
the
proposal
that
the
applicant
brought
tonight,
the
alternate
proposal
may
be
allowable
under
the
current
ordinance
Even
If.
You
deny
the
front
yard
variance
request
today,
because
balconies
can
encroach
a
certain
amount
into
a
yard,
so
there
there
may
be
a
configuration
that
works
to
change
the
balconies
that
could
be
approved
administratively
after
the
hearing.
But
we
could
work
together
to
determine
something
that
was
workable
within
the
ordinance,
even
while
upholding
staff
recommendation
could.
E
Are
we
so
one
of
our
app
one
of
the
applicants
had
said
that
it
would
require
variance?
Did
you
hear
from
City
staff
that
it
would
that
there
would
be
a
variance
request
needed
in
order
to
have
that
front
yard
porch,
or
was
that
a
determination
that
you
all
made
in
reviewing
the
city
code
AS
written.
H
Commissioners
there's
been
a
lot
of
changes
to
the
city
code
recently.
I
know
there
are
a
lot
of
rules
around
porches
and
Stoops
and
steps
and
what
is
and
what
is
not
allowed
in
the
front
yard.
The
rules
are
very
complicated
and
also
have
to
do
with
precedence
of
what's
around
you.
If
you
have
porches
around
you
that
also
factors
into
the
ordinance
I
know
that,
as
just
shown
there
I
know
that
that
balcony
on
the
front
of
the
building
would
project
a
foot
in
front
of
the
setback
line.
E
I
think
what
you're
hearing
from
the
commission
tonight
is
that
there
is
in
in
our
in
the
nature
of
what
we're
saying
is
that
we
prefer
that
configuration
of
the
site,
and
we
would
the
the
in
the
that
I'm
a
loss
for
words.
A
That's
right:
did
you
have
any
more
questions
for
them
all
right.
T
We
can
discuss
that
I
was
actually
going
to
suggest.
You
know.
One
option
here
is
there's
a
typical
condition
of
approval
that
gets
added,
sometimes
that
the
applicant
shall
work
with
staff
on
Alternatives,
or
you
know,
potential
opportunities
to
relocate
that
balcony
to
the
front
of
the
building.
Then
we
can
evaluate
that
if
it's
determined
it
needs
a
variance,
then
that
would
need
to
come
back
in
front
of
you
if
it's
possible
to
do
it
administratively.
T
A
You
Kimberly
are
there
other
questions,
commissioner
Maguire
or.
D
A
Oh
okay,
all
right
are
you
done,
commissioner.
All
right,
commissioner:
Alper
yeah.
M
I
I
just
want
to
say,
I
think
that
the
the
like
we're
talking
about
one
foot
one
inch
here
within
the
current
application
before
us
I
support
the
applicant
working
with
the
staff
to
figure
it
out
for
the
front
porch,
and
one
thought
here
on
a
finding
is
policy.
M
Eight
Public
Safety
through
environmental
design,
using
design
principles
that
ensure
safe
and
welcoming
environment
when
designing
all
projects
that
impact
the
public
realm,
and
particularly
this
one
talks
about
orienting
buildings,
entrances
circulation
movement
patterns
to
the
street,
to
function
as
eyes
that
watch
over
Street
activity
like
looking
out
on
the
street,
so
I
I
think
that
front
porch,
both
the
top
and
bottom
really
fit
with
that.
So
I
would
be
in
support
of
using
that
as
a
finding
to
support
the
variance
not
denied
the
variance
okay.
A
I
agree
that
it's
just
one
foot,
which
is
why
I'm
inclined
to
deny
the
variants
and
have
them
work
with
staff
to
figure
it
out.
This
is
a
big
building.
If
you
can't
find
a
foot
somewhere,
I
just
don't
want
to.
You
know,
be
getting
one
foot
variances
every
week
that
we
then
disgust
to
death.
I
love
discussing
with
you
guys,
but
commissioner
McGuire.
D
The
other
thing
I'll
say
is
it
doesn't
really
sound
like
the
applicant.
Has
super
worked
with
staff
on
any
on
this,
so
maybe
we
can
deny
the
variance
and
you
can
work
with
staff
they're.
A
great
resource
they've
really
understand
the
complex
code
that
has
changed.
So
maybe
we
deny
the
variance
now
and
you
can
just
work
with
staff.
Listen
to
them.
Work
with
Peter
he's
super
smart
on
the
variants,
and
then
you
can
come
back
to
us
if
it
works.
J
Could
I
make
that
a
little
tougher,
with
your
permission,
that
they
they
work
with
staff,
so
that
this
gentleman's
bedroom
window
does
not
have
a
patio
looking
into?
It?
Is
that
okay.
D
I
I,
don't
think,
there's
an
essential
Nexus
between
the
variants
for
the
front
yard
and
the
deck
which
I
think
is
legally
required
for
a
bit.
We
can't
those
two
aren't
related
right,
so
we
can
just
recommend
that
they
do
the
variance
or
we
can
deny
the
variants.
We
can
recommend
that
they
work
on
the
balcony,
but
I
don't
think
we
can
dictate
that
because
that's
just
a
recommendation.
J
D
A
So
the
motion
on
the
table
is
to
deny
variance,
Item
B
and
ask
the
applicant
to
work
with
staff
on
potentially
adding
the
balcony
in
the
front,
and
we
have
a
motion
and
was
there
a
second.
A
Right
we
have
a
motion
in
a
second.
Is
there
any
discussion
all
right,
I'll
ask
the
clerk
to
please
call
the
roll
on
the
motion.
P
P
B
A
V
Good
afternoon,
president
Olson
and
commissioners
before
you
today
are
three
applications
associated
with
an
addition
and
remodel
to
the
existing
McDonald's
restaurant
located
at
210
East
Lake
Street.
This
property
is
located
on
the
north
side
of
Lake
Street
between
2nd
and
3rd
Avenue
South
and
is
developed
with
a
single
story
fast
food,
restaurant
building
and
drive-through
facility,
which
were
constructed
in
1973.
Both
the
fast
food
restaurant
use
of
the
building
and
the
drive-through
facility
at
the
property
are
legal
non-conforming
uses.
V
The
applicant
is
proposing
a
variety
of
interior
and
exterior
modifications
to
the
existing
building,
including
the
construction
of
three
small
additions.
The
additions
would
allow
for
a
new
entry
vestibule
later
located
closer
to
the
front
property
line
on
Lake
Street,
New,
Ada,
accessible
customer
restrooms
and
some
additional
back
of
house
space,
including
the
relocation
of
one
drive-through
window.
The
applicant
is
seeking
an
expansion
of
non-conforming
use
application
to
allow
the
proposed
building
additions.
V
The
applicant
is
also
proposing
a
variety
of
site
work,
including
the
replacement
of
the
existing
internally
illuminated
freestanding
sign
that
serves
as
the
menu
board
for
the
drive-through
use.
With
a
new
freestanding,
Dynamic
sign
in
this
zoning
District,
a
conditional
use
permit
is
required
for
a
dynamic
sign,
so
the
applicant
is
seeking
that
conditional
use
permit,
and
this
Dynamic
sign
would
also
not
comply
with
all
of
the
specific
science
standards
for
dynamic
signs,
and
there
are
two
of
those
that
they
are
not
meeting.
V
The
first
is
that
Dynamic
signs
are
required
to
be
located
a
minimum
of
100
feet
from
residents
or
office
residence
districts,
and
then
the
second
is
I'm.
Sorry,
and
here
this
Dynamic
sign
would
be
located
51
feet
from
the
adjacent
residential
property
to
the
north
and
approximately
66
feet
from
the
adjacent
residential
building
to
the
north.
V
Dynamic
signs
are
also
required
to
maintain
a
static
display
for
a
period
of
at
least
60
seconds.
The
majority
of
this
sign
would
comply
with
that
standard,
but
a
portion
of
the
sign
would
be
utilized
to
display
pending
orders
and
that
portion
of
the
sign
would
not
comply
with
that.
60-Second
static
display,
so
the
applicant
is
Seeking
a
variance
to
the
standards
for
dynamic
science
to
allow
the
sign,
as
proposed.
V
One
public
comment
was
received
after
publication,
which
you
should
have
received
today
for
the
expansion
of
non-conforming
use
application
I'm
happy
to
go
into
the
specific
findings.
If
you
have
any
questions,
but
staff
has
found
that
the
application
meets
all
of
the
required
findings
and
is
recommending
approval
of
that
application
for
the
conditional
use
permit.
A
staff
has
found
that
the
proposal
meets
the
cup
findings,
one
three
and
four,
as
well
as
the
additional
findings
for
sign
adjustments,
but
has
found
that
the
proposal
does
not
meet
findings.
V
Two
five
and
six
for
finding
number
two
staff
finds
the
proposed
Dynamic
sign
may
be
injurious
to
the
user
enjoyment
of
the
adjacent
property
to
the
north.
That
adjacent
property
is
occupied
by
a
two-story
duplex.
As
I
mentioned,
the
sign
would
be
located
approximately
51
feet
from
that
property,
approximately
66
feet
from
the
building
itself,
which
does
not
meet
the
standard
in
the
ordinance
of
100
feet
from
residential
property
lines.
The
intent
of
this
provision
is
to
prevent
Dynamic
signs
from
impacting
the
residential
character
of
the
residents
and
office
residence
districts.
V
For
conditional
use
for
the
cup
finding
number
five
we've
found
that
the
dynamic
sign
would
be
incons
or
would
be
consistent
with
the
applicable
land
use
and
policy
guidance.
That
applies
to
the
site
from
the
comp
plan,
but
would
be
inconsistent
with
adopted
policy
and
action.
Steps
contained
in
the
comp
plan
policy.
4
action
step.
G
specifically
address,
addresses
and
directs
the
city
to
utilize
regulatory
tools
to
minimize
the
impact
of
commercial
uses
on
adjacent
Residential
Properties.
V
V
We
found
that
the
variance
is
not
in
keeping
with
the
spirit
and
intent
of
the
ordinance
and
the
comprehensive
plan.
The
proposed
configuration
of
Windows
facing
the
adjacent
residential
use
and
being
located
closer
than
that
100
feet
there.
When
you
have
residential
windows
on
both
the
first
and
second
floor
facing
the
sign
directly
conflicts
with
the
intent
of
that
provision,
this
isn't
a
situation
where
you
have
a
residential
youth
that
does
not
have
residential
windows
or
we
have
a
sign.
That's
facing
the
other
direction.
V
This
in
this
case,
the
sign
is
facing
directly
into
that
adjacent
residential
use
for
the
third
finding.
We
found
that
the
variance
may
have
a
negative
impact
on
the
character
of
the
area
and
the
use
and
enjoyment
of
nearby
property.
As
previously
noted,
this
would
be
located
closer
than
then
is
typically
allowed
to
an
adjacent
residential
use.
V
The
applicant
has
proposed
a
six
foot
privacy
fence
along
much
of
the
north
elevation,
which
would
screen
the
proposed
sign
from
most
of
the
first
floor.
Windows
staff
would
note
that
it
does
not.
The
proposed
fence
would
not
screen
the
sign
from
the
adjacent
residential
windows
on
the
second
floor
and
that
the
proposed
fence
here
is
still
falling
below
the
basic
requirements
in
the
zoning
code
for
landscaping
and
screening
between
a
commercial
parking
area
and
an
adjacent
residential
use.
V
So
normally
you
would
be
required
to
provide
a
six
foot
privacy
fence
like
what
they're
proposing,
as
well
as
a
landscaped
yard
of
seven
feet
in
width.
They
have
non-conformities.
You
know
legal
non-conformities
to
the
site
plan
review
standards,
so
they're
not
required
to
provide
that,
but
I
think
it's.
It
speaks
to
the
potential
impact
on
adjacent
properties,
and
how
unusual
this
condition
in
is.
Staff
would
also
note
that
the
drive-through
facility
on
the
property
currently
operates
until
midnight
on
weekdays
and
until
4
a.m.
V
On
Fridays
Saturdays,
so
staff
finds
that
the
proposed
condition
would
be
you
know,
would
be
having
an
unusual
level
of
impact
on
this
adjacent
residential
property
and
causing
impacts
that
could
potentially
be
injurious
to
the
use
and
enjoyment
of
that
property.
So
staff
is
recommending
denial
of
the
variance
as
the
application
does
not
meet
the
required
findings.
So
with
that,
we
are
recommending
approval
of
the
expansion
of
non-conforming
use
application
subject
to
the
conditions
listed
in
the
staff
report
and
denial
of
the
cup
and
variants
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you,
Andrew.
Any
questions
for
staff,
commissioner
McGuire.
D
Thanks
Andrew
is
the
existing
sign
illuminated.
V
Applicant
has
stated
that
and
they'll
probably
speak
to
that
when
they
come
up
and
I
there's
sort
of
two
things.
I
would
say
in
response
to
that.
One
is
that
we've
requested
that
they
submit
documentation
as
to
the
illumination
of
the
existing
sign.
They
haven't
submitted
that
they
said
that
they
that
it
doesn't
exist,
but
one
other
thing
that
I
would
point
out
is
that
different
types
of
Illumination
can
be
perceived
differently.
V
There
can
be
different
levels
of
glare,
even
if
the
measured
illumination
is
is,
is
lower
right,
so
in
general,
led
illumination
is
perceived
as
brighter
than
than
a
you
know,
an
incandescent
or
fluorescent
illumination
that
there
may
actually
be
less
I.
Think
it's
something
that
our
enforcement,
our
zoning
inspectors,
have
struggled
with.
I
think
we
can
all
picture
the
canopies
on
Holiday
gas
stations
they
recently
I.
Guess
it's
been
a
while
now,
but
they
converted
those
to
LEDs.
V
When
that
happened,
we
received
a
lot
of
complaints
and
it
was
very
obvious
looking
at
them
that
most
people
would
perceive
that
as
a
lot
brighter.
But
the
light
you
know
doesn't
actually
have
much
more
illumination
and
complies
with
the
ordinance,
so
I
think
comparing
different
types
of
Illumination
is
is
difficult
to
do.
Okay,.
D
L
This
is
it's
also
the
orientation
of
this
sign.
If,
if
it
wasn't
facing
the
residential
or
another
spot,
would
you
still
deny
it
or
is
that?
How
does
that
affect
our
reading?.
V
Of
this
yeah,
commissioner
Baxley
I
think
that
is
an
interesting
question.
I
think
I
think
the
responses
to
the
findings
would
be
different.
In
that
case,
whether
or
not
we
would
support
the
variance
I
I,
don't
know
you
know
this
site
does
have
a
lot
of
unique
constraints
right
with
a
with
a
drive
through.
There
are
limitations
to
how
you
can
circulate
through
a
site.
You
have
to
have
the
the
ordering
point
and
the
the
drive-through
windows
on
the
left
side
of
vehicles
and
this
site
has
a
lot
of
non-conformities.
V
You
know
McDonald's
worked
with
staff
myself,
as
well
as
public
works
for
about
two
years
on
different
options
for
this
site
and
the
the
non-conformities
that
they
have
here
are
fairly
advantageous
to
McDonald's,
and
we
they
were
interested
in
in
a
larger
project
to
the
site,
but
we
were
not
able
to
come
up
with
a
different
site
plan
that
met
the
requirements
that
McDonald's
corporate
had,
as
well
as
the
zoning
code
and
the
requirements
that
the
city
public
works
department
had
for
access.
L
V
A
All
right
any
more
questions
for
Steph
before
I,
open
the
public
hearing,
all
right,
I'm,
not
seeing
anything.
You
Andrew
I'll
open
the
public
hearing.
So
if
the
applicant
would
like
to
come
forward
and
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record,
you
can
go
ahead.
U
Foreign,
my
name
is
Justin
I'm,
one
of
the
owners
of
210,
East,
Lake
location,
first
off
I,
just
want
to
say,
I
appreciate
you
guys.
Allow
me
to
introduce
myself
today
many
times
during
this
process.
The
development
team
and
corporate
Partners
really
are
the
point
of
context,
rightfully
so,
but
us
local
owner
operators
relish
at
the
chance
to
put
a
face
with
a
brand
and
face
with
a
specific
location.
So
I
appreciate
that
my
family
and
I
have
been
in
the
business
for
about
20
plus
years
with
McDonald's.
U
We
have
been
of
service
to
the
community
and
serving
the
community.
We
consider
ourselves
Municipal
ecosystem
partners
and
believe
in
the
greater
Minneapolis,
Vision
or
long-term
plans,
as
well
as
the
surrounding
areas.
U
This
particular
location
is
is
special
to
us.
You
know
we
think,
as
I
grew
up
in
Minneapolis
as
well.
This
has
been
like
a
marquee
location.
I,
don't
know
if
you
guys
are
from
the
area
as
well
and
to
see
its
blight
has
been
kind
of
tough.
We
acquired
the
location
in
2019
and
from
that
standpoint,
we've
been
kind
of
with
in
the
fight
with
McDonald's
fights
of
strong
work
in
the
planning
stage,
with
McDonald's
trying
to
really
give
this
restaurant
the
the
face,
lift
and
remodel
that
it
deserves,
and
the
community
deserves.
U
We
are
excited
about
the
remodel
today.
Excuse
me,
I'm
gonna,
go
to
my
notes.
Here
Right,
were
you
excited
about
the
remodel
here
today
and
look
forward
to
providing
the
community
and
the
Lake
Street
Corridor
with
a
building?
That's
in
concert
with
the
new
35
W
ramp
and
the
Lake
Street
Corridor
itself.
We
make
a
priority
to
hire
locally
so
about
50
to
60
of
our
employees
that
are
hired.
The
majority
of
them
are
from
the
community
and
have
been
there
prior
to
us.
U
Taking
over
this
remodel
building
will
provide
media
efficiencies
inside
and
out,
we'll
give
the
community
and
the
guest
experience
some
of
the
the
latest
Technologies
and
the
again
the
experience
that
they
deserve
and
and
that
really
that
they're,
seeing
across
the
city
and
other
locations,
and
probably
wondering
why
their
McDonald's
isn't
being
remodeled,
updated.
U
I,
don't
want
to
talk
too
much
about
the
details,
that's
what
I
have
we
have
the
development
team
for,
but
to
your
point,
the
digital
menu
board
from
my
understanding
is
a
dimmer
luminescent
than
the
current
one,
and
we'll
probably
talk
about
that
today.
Here
the
I'm.
Sorry,
not
the
current
menu
board,
the
one
proposed
it
will
be
a
dimmer
in
il,
then
the
one
that
we
currently
have
and
so
for
for
our
standpoint.
It
seems
to
be
a
better
product
and
for
the
community
and
also
add
more
flexibility.
U
W
Thank
you
Justin
good
evening,
Commissioners
I'm
Carol
Lansing
I'm,
an
attorney
at
fakery,
Drinker,
Downtown,
Minneapolis
and
I'm,
working
with
McDonald's
and
the
balers
on
this
application,
and
first
I'd
like
to
thank
Andrew
for
putting
a
lot
of
time
into
this
project.
There
has
been
a
lot
of
discussion
over
several
years.
I
am
going
to
speak
primarily
to
the
sign
applications,
as
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
the
alteration
and
expansion.
W
However,
along
with
Justin
Curtis
Demars
from
McDonald's
corporate
office
and
Tom
Meyer
with
landform,
the
project
manager
for
the
applications
are
here
to
address
any
other
questions
you
may
have
as
well.
You
know.
Applications
to
improve
non-conforming
drive-throughs
are
particularly
tricky
right
because
they
are
non-conforming
and
there's
a
lot
of
policy
reasons
for
that.
On
the
other
hand,
they
provide
essential
services
to
people
when
the
city
council
was
having
public
hearings
on
this
in
2019
before
adopting
a
Prohibition
on
New
non-conforming
Uses.
There
was
a
lot
of
testimony
saying
these
are
important.
W
We
need
these
Services.
They
help
make
businesses
like
restaurants
and
Banks
and
pharmacies
accessible
to
a
lot
of
people
who
don't
have
that
ability
as
easily
as
people
who
can
drive
and
park
or
walk
there
and
the
city
council
members
I
heard
them
say
you
know
these
businesses
are
still
going
to
be
there
they're
going
to
be
legally
non-conforming
and
you
can
go
to
them.
But
if
you
want
these
businesses
and
and
the
pandemic
showed
all
of
us
that
they
can
be
essential
to
a
lot
of
us
in
different
circumstances.
W
W
So
if
you
find
that
that's
okay,
that
we
meet
the
findings
for
not
being
injurious
to
the
use
of
the
neighboring
property
and
not
being
out
of
character
with
the
area,
then
you
can
approve
all
of
those
applications
and
staff
did
find
that
there
are
practical
difficulties
for
placing
that
sign
anywhere
else.
The
the
location
of
the
building
and
the
drive-throughs
existing
and
there's
no
place.
You
know
further
than
100
feet
that
you
can
put
it.
W
We
also
can't
change
the
orientation
to
face
away
from
the
residences,
because
the
the
driver's
side
is
on
the
left-
and
you
know
they'd
be
talking
across
the
passenger
side
to
do
that,
and
staff
also
recommended
that
these
menu
boards
have
some
unique
considerations
because
of
of
the
service
that
they
provide
in
fast
food.
W
Regarding
the
purpose
and
intent
of
the
this
hundred
foot
standard
staff
states
that
it's
to
prevent
Dynamic
signs
from
unreasonably
impacting
the
residential
character
of
our
use,
of
an
enjoyment
of
adjacent
properties
and
the
rest
of
what
I
want
to
talk
to
you
about
is
why
we
believe
that
the
proposed
sign
will
be
less
impactful
than
the
existing
one
foreign.
So
here
is
the
existing
sign.
It's
got
four
panels.
W
The
sign
menus
are
paper,
it's
two-sided
and
the
menu
just
changed
manually
by
flipping
rotating
those
panels,
day
and
night,
or
for
breakfast
and
evening
menus.
Now,
this
sign
is
old.
This
individual
one
is
old
and
needs
to
be
replaced,
but
it's
no
longer
produced.
So
it's
not
just
a
matter
of
getting
the
same
sign
and
putting
that
in.
W
This
is
a
comparison
of
the
old
and
new
and
Andrew
showed
you.
This
I
want
to
point
out.
The
new
sign
is
going
to
be
about
half
the
size
of
the
old
sign.
So
you
know
that's
a
lesser
visual
impact.
It's
also,
you
know
much
cleaner
neater.
Looking
the
menu
options
are
changed
electronically,
as
I'm
sure
you've
seen
and
that
feature
of
being
able
to
display
and
confirm
the
order
is
important
for
particularly
for
people
and
who
have
hearing
difficulties
or
the
deaf
community.
W
So
the
digital
sign
will
also
emit
less
light.
So
the
we
don't
have
a
cut
sheet
for
the
old
sign,
but
that
with
the
data
but
McDonald's
engineers
in
their
design,
team
have
said
that
the
existing
sign
can
emit
up
to
3
000
nits
of
brightness,
or
it
emits
3000
nits
of
brightness,
and
it's
not
adjustable
so
you
turn
it
on
and
it's
on
now
the
new
signs
are
adjustable
and
dim
automatically
at
night.
The
maximum
luminance
for
the
new
sign
would
be
2500
nits.
W
So
that's
already
and
don't
ask
me
to
get
into
knits
more
than
what
I'm
saying
I
admit
that,
but
you
know
its
maximum
is
less
than
the
current
sign
and
it
will
automatically
dim
to
500
at
night.
W
I
want
to
show
you
the
distance
of
the
sign
from
the
property.
This
is
the
existing
site
plan,
and
currently
the
sign
is
here
at
the
corner
of
the
building
and
I
kind
of
tried
highlight
it
in
yellow
the
pink
is
where
the
new
sign
will
be
so
they're.
At
the
same,
you
know
distance
from
a
property
line
perpendicular,
but
it
would
be
moving
to
the
East
and
here's
the
proposed
configuration
and
that's
because
that
helps
with
the
spacing
of
the
cars
in
the
drive-through.
W
With
respect
to
this
fence,
a
McDonald's
has
offered
to
put
in
the
screening
fences.
Andrew
said
it's
non-conforming
in
terms
of
site
plan
requirements.
This
proposal
does,
however,
do
some
increasing
of
a
landscape
area
and
reduction
of
parking
spaces,
not
a
lot,
but
by
a
few,
and
then
this
fence
is
an
effort
to
help
screen
these
lower
Windows,
adding
Landscaping
on
the
inside
of
that
fence,
wouldn't
make
any
difference
in
terms
of
its
screening
function.
So
I,
don't
think
that's
necessarily
relevant
here.
It
doesn't
screen
the
upper
Windows.
W
I'll
say
the
upper
Windows
aren't
screened
currently
from
a
sign,
but
also
the
LED
lighting
is
less
intense.
As
you
look
at.
As
you
know,
you
look
at
it
from
angles,
either
above
or
to
the
side.
It's
it's
designed
to
be
visible
and
impactful
to
the
people
standing
right
in
front
of
it
for
signs
like
this
all
right.
W
W
One
final
issue
I
wanted
to
say
before
summing
up
is
it's
not
in
the
staff
report,
but
the
team
hasn't
engaged
with
the
community
a
neighborhood
organization
they
met
with
them
virtually
about
a
year
ago,
when
the
plans
were
revised,
some
they
updated
them
in
the
process
that
the
organization
wanted,
but
ultimately
Phillips
West
did
not
take
a
position
in
any
way.
W
So,
in
summary,
this
sign
will
be
less
impactful
and
if
you
find
that
to
be
the
case,
you
can
make
all
the
required
findings.
It'll
be
smaller.
It'll,
be
dimmer,
it'll,
be
more
attractive,
more
energy
efficient.
It
will
be
the
same
distance
from
a
residential
property
line.
The
screening
fence
would
be
an
improvement
over
current
conditions.
We
do
believe,
like
I
said
it
will
be
dimmer
and
in
context.
We
think
it
does
not
change
or
negatively
affect
the
character
of
the
area
or
the
use
of
property,
so.
A
U
D
Commissioner,
McGuire
Andrew
will
they
be
doing
the
fence,
regardless
of
the
sign
application?
I
do
think
the
fence
is
a
good
idea.
Is
that
part
of
I.
V
Commissioner
McGuire,
that's
not
something
that
we
are
requiring
because
they're
not
subject
to
site
plan
review.
Should
the
commission
choose
to
approve
the
applications?
That's
certainly
something
you
could
connect
to
the
findings
and
have
as
a
condition
of
approval.
A
L
Thank
you,
Carol
I,
the
my
experience
with
the
new
I
I.
This
will
be
an
improvement
over
the
existing
sign,
but
the
existing
side,
most
likely,
is
probably
fluorescent
bulb
of
a
certain.
L
Think
a
certain
temperature,
the
new
one,
probably
is
going
to
be
led,
which
is
a
different
temperature
of
light
than
that's
there.
In
my
experience
with
those
is
you
know,
it's
pretty
intense,
it's
a
it's
designed
to
be
very
crisp
and
specific,
and
while
this
will
be
smaller,
it
will
have
a
different
impact
and
so
I
think
improving
non-conforming
uses
is
always
a
challenge.
I
think
I
I
would
have
liked
to
see
some
more
information
around
that
side.
I
mean
this.
The
sign
is
the
issue.
The
type
of
Illumination
is
the
issue.
L
X
Yeah
hi
I'm
Curtis
de
Mars,
Regional
construction
manager
for
McDonald's,
and
you
know
that
is
a
good
question,
so
we
reached
out
to
our
electrical
engineer
and
the
existing
menu
boards,
they're
backlit
by
T12
fluorescent
bulbs,
and
so
they
don't
have
a
cut
sheet
on
that
per
se
to
we
would
really
have
to
go
out
there
at
night
with
a
with
a
meter
and
see
how
much
light
those
put
out.
We
do
have
a
lot
of
information
on
the
on
the
LED
screens.
X
You
know
we
even
have
a
graph,
but
the
the
takeaway
is
at
their
brightest.
They
are
at
the
2500
nit.
It
is
a
focused
to
to
you
know
kind
of
like
your
computer
screen.
If
you
turn
it
to
the
side,
you
can't
see
it
as
well,
so
the
other
benefit
is
with
it
being
smaller.
We
can
actually
angle
it
at
like
a
35
degree
angle.
So
it's
not
pointed
straight
at
the
neighbor's
window
versus
the
larger
the
larger
non-digital
menu
board.
That's
going
to
have
to
be
at
a
true.
X
You
know
it's
going
to
be
parallel
with
the
neighbors,
so
that
kind
of
in
general
shining
that
direction
so
yeah
to
your
point,
you
know
what
I've
been
calling
our
sign.
Installers
calling
nobody
has
cut
sheets
I
mean
we
have.
We
have
cut
sheets
on
the
actual
size
of
them.
It's
just
a
metal
box
with
with
the
T12
bulbs
in
there
and
as
you
saw
it
was
you
know,
almost
double
the
size
of
the
the
digital
menu
board.
So
you
know
the
the
technology
is
nothing
new.
X
We
do
have
other
McDonald's
in
Minneapolis
that
have
the
digital
menu
boards
and-
and
so
it's
not
something
new
our
competitors.
We
have
some
competitors
that
have
it
too.
So
it's
not
that
we're
asking
for
something
new,
but
certainly
with
this
site,
I,
agree.
I.
Think
Carol
did
a
great
job
describing
that,
in
our
opinion,
this
is
actually
less
impactful
than
the
existing
non-digital
menu
board.
L
I
might
argue
with
that
only
that
the
new
one's
old
and
it's
kind
of
dim
and
this
one
you're
going
to
notice
a
lot
more
than
that
new
sign,
but
I
think
it's
I
think
the
ability
you
know
it
would
be
great
to
be
able
to
dim
it
at
night,
and
so,
if
that
does
work,
that's
terrific
that
will
be
better
and
I
think
we
want
these
to
improve
in
normal
locations.
Those
signs
are
awesome.
They
are
it's
so
much
better
interaction
there.
It's
just.
We
have
neighbors
so
close
here.
P
L
So
I
appreciate
the
screen
wall.
I
think
that's
going
to
make
a
big
difference.
Unfortunately,
our
friends
that
live
on
the
second
floor
are
already
impacted
tremendously
by
a
lot
more
light
pollution
than
just
that
sign.
So
I
think
if
this
goes
forward,
I
think
that's
screen.
Wall
is
a
must
so
yeah.
X
And
the
other
thing
to
note,
too,
is
that
just
like
with
your
computer,
like
I,
have
the
the
black
background
for
my
Outlook,
just
because
it's
easier
on
my
eyes,
the
the
digital
manual
give
us
that
that
option.
We
can
go
with
a
black
background
at
night
again
to
dim
the
overall.
It
has
the
sensor
on
there.
So
it's
automatically
fluctuating
with
with
the
ambient
light
same
with
the
speakers.
Those
are
automatically
adjusting
to
Ambient
sound,
but.
L
X
Absolutely
so,
and
I
also
want
to
thank
Andrew
and
his
staff,
because
we
have
been
working
with
staff
for
for
years
on
on
the
expanding
non-conforming
use.
So
we
super
worked
with
stuff
I.
Think
was
commissioner
Maguire's
word
on
that.
So
I
want
to
thank
staff
on
you
know
the
expansion
non-conforming
use
it's
a
win
for
the
neighborhood
and
win
for
McDonald's
and
win
for
the
balers
for
sure.
A
Thank
you.
Is
there
anyone
else
in
the
audience
who
would
like
to
speak
on
this
item
before
we
close
the
public
hearing
all
right,
I'm,
not
seeing
any
so
I
will
close
the
public
hearing
Commissioners
any
discussion,
or
would
anyone
like
to
make
a
motion,
commissioner
rainville.
J
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I'd,
like
a
motion
to
approve
item,
a
the
extraction
of
a
non-conforming
use
and
then
pull
Item
B,
the
contusional
use
permit
and
item
C,
the
variance
for
a
separate
vote.
A
D
Yeah
I
I
would
like
to
add
the
fence
as
a
requirement
in
there,
because
if,
if
the
sign
gets
denied
I'd
still
like
the
fence
there,
because
it
sounds
like
the
buffer
wasn't
up
to
our
current
standards
anyway,
would
you
guys
accept
my
friendly
amendment
to
include
the
fence?
No
matter
what
happens.
M
Yeah
I
just
have
a
question
and
I
realize
this
may
not
be
the
right
point
to
bring
this
up
but
I'm.
Just
noting
this,
this
email
correspondence
with
Hennepin
County
about
the
easterly
access,
Lake,
Street
access
and
I'm
wondering
if
that
could
potentially
be
a
condition.
We
could
closing
that
access
point
could
potentially
also
be
a
condition
we
could
add
or
or
where
it's
at
it's
two
separate
questions
where
this
is
at
and
the
condition
potential.
V
Commissioner
Alper
both
Paul
Miller,
who
is
in
the
public
works
department
and
is
reviewing
this
from
Public
Works
traffic
and
right-of-way
and
I,
did
respond
to
the
county
and
and
talked
a
little
bit
about
their
requests.
They
currently
have
non-conforming
rights
to
the
curb
cuts
that
they
have
right.
So
there
are
a
lot
of
things
about
this
site
that
we
would
never
allow
to
be
established
today,
but
they
have
a
legal
right
to
continue
using
them.
V
We
can
attach
conditions
of
approval
that
involve
non-conformity,
so
it
you
know
it.
It
is
possible
that
a
condition
of
approval
about
eliminating
a
curb
cut
could
be
attached
to
a
land
use
application.
However,
it
has
to
have
a
a
grounding
in
the
findings
right,
and
so
you
would
have
to
make
under
under
one
of
the
findings
for
the
expansion
of
ncu
you'd
have
to
connect
that
to
the
closure.
V
A
All
right,
so
we
have
a
motion
to
approve
item
a
with
an
added
condition
that
could
you
say
what
your
condition
is
that.
A
All
right-
and
there
was
a
second
from
commissioner
Baxley
I-
believe
including
correct,
okay,
all
right,
so
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
any
discussion
on
that
motion.
A
All
right.
Seeing
that
I'll
ask
the
clerk
to
please
call
the
roll
commissioner.
Y
Y
J
A
All
right
would
anyone
like
a
commissioner
McGuire.
D
I
would
like
to
make
a
motion
to
approve
the
staff
recommendation
for
B
and
C
I
think
so.
I
Googled
McDonald's
as
the
107th
largest
company
in
the
United
States
I,
just
have
to
think
that
they
could
bring
us
a
cut
sheet
on
the
current
sign
to
get
Andrew's
information.
So
we
could
see
if
it
the
actual
comparison
I
feel
like
they
have
the
resources
to
do
that
and
didn't
so
I
don't
feel
like
we
have
the
the
information
to
approve
those
I
think
they
could
always
come
back
if
they
wanted.
D
With
that
information
and
work
with
staff,
it
sounds
like
Andrew
asked
for
that,
so
I
would
recommend
denial
of
items
B
and
C.
A
All
right
is
there
a
second.
A
Commissioner
Campbell,
were
you
gonna
or
did
you
wanna
say
something?
Okay,.
A
Second,
okay,
commissioner:
Campbell.
E
I
think
we
can
also
make
I
mean
that
that
sword
Cuts
both
ways
right,
like
they're,
the
107th
largest
company,
and
so
they
you
know
in
theory,
might
have
access
to
that
I
think
the
other
the
way
the
sword
cuts.
The
other
way
is
that,
as
the
107th
largest
company,
one
would
think
that
they
would
have
the
resources
to
be
able
to
figure
out
that
information
and
they
haven't
been
able
to
do
that
and
so
I.
Don't
know
that
I
think
you
know
one
of
the
things
that
we
just
have
to
make
an
assumption
here.
E
What's
an
appropriate
level
of
Illumination
in
our
neighborhoods
that
we're
willing
to
accept,
based
on
the
information
we
have
in
front
of
us
here,
I
think
we
also
need
to
balance
the
impact
of
the
decisions
that
you
know
we
make
as
a
board
as
it
relates
to
private
investment,
as
it
does
to
people's
residential
living
standards
and
making
a
determination
with
the
context
in
mind.
I
think
you
know
the
I
can't
remember
her
name,
but
did
a
great
job
of
it.
I
think
providing
some
context
that
it's
not
just
about
the
sign.
E
It's
about
the
the
surrounding
environment,
it's
about
the
lights
in
the
parking
lot.
It's
you
know
about
traffic
and
car
lights
that
are
pulling
through
that
alley
and
I.
You
know
I'm
still
torn
as
to
whether
or
not
I
support
the
variants,
but
I
do
think.
Context
is
important
in
this
case,
as
we
think
about
you
know,
trying
to
make
sure
that
we've
got
you
know.
E
Business
owners
who
are
making
a
difference
in
our
community
by
employing
dozens
of
people
were
trying
to
incorporate
private
investment
into
the
work
that
we
do,
and
you
know
I
think
there
is
I,
know
I'm
speaking
on
both
sides
of
my
mouth
here.
But
you
know,
drive-throughs
are
important
for
a
large
part
of
our
population
right
and
I.
Think
it's
hard
to
look
past
that
so
I
would
say
you
know
we
have
the
information
we're
given.
I
I
just
want
to
thank
you
for
doing
such
a
thorough
job
and
I
am
from
the
neighborhood
and
it's
great
to
see
that
you're
spending
the
investment
to
redevelop
the
Sykes
I
think
it's
a
landmark
site
with
new
35.
and
the
train
station
and
the
developments
on
Lake
Street,
so
I
guess
I'll
I'll.
Second,
with
the
commissioner
said
previously
and
and
I
think
there
are
a
lot
of
other
factors
and
I.
I
J
Thank
you,
manager,
I'm,
going
to
vote
to
approve
both
conditional
use
permit
and
the
variance
I
think
they've
made
the
case
that
is
going
to
help
their
business.
The
the
the
signage
is
smaller
and,
as
a
commission,
we
need
to
support
the
private
sector
in
providing
these
services
in
our
neighborhood.
So
I
again,
I
want
to
make
it
very
clear.
I
will
support
both
the
conditional
use
permit
and
the
variance.
E
And
I
would
support
that
I
think
you
know
specifically
with
you
know:
business
districts
and
corridors
section
of
the
the
comprehensive
plan
specifically
mentions
both
inviting
private
investment
and
developing
programs
and
strategies
that
minimize
business
displacement.
I
think
this
Falls
Within
that
as
findings
to
support
that
motion.
A
Anyone
else
have
comments
All
right.
So
do
we
have
a
motion?
What
was
the
motion
yeah?
Okay,
so
the
motion
on
the
table
is
to
adopt
staff
recommendation
which
denies
the
conditional
use
permit
and
the
variance.
So
is
there
any
discussion
on
that
motion
all
right,
seeing
no
discussion
I'll
ask
the
clerk
to
please
call
the
roll.
G
A
Right
so
that
motion
fails.
Would
someone
makes
like
to
make
a
different
motion
and
assuming
it's
the
opposite
motion
of
what
we
just
made
support
it
with
legal,
your
legal
findings
for
each
one,
what
the
reasoning
is
to
approve
the
conditional
use
permit
and
the
variance.
E
I
could
make
a
motion
I'll
move
to
oh
gosh.
Let
me
get
this
wrong.
I'm
gonna,
going
to
move
to
deny
staff
recommendation
and
support
approval
of
the
non-conforming
use
for
the
dynamic
sign,
with
the
condition
that
this
the
fence
be
added
as
part
of
the
design
using
policy,
58
business
districts
and
corridors,
and
specifically
inciting
private
investment
and
minimizing
business
displacement
as
legal
findings
to
support
the
motion.
E
D
A
A
Yes,
commissioner,
fayola
I.
A
All
right
anyone
else
any
discussion
on
that,
commissioner
Alper.
M
T
Will
also
need
additional
legal
findings.
We
have
one
comp
plan
policy,
which
does
a
little
bit
to
support
finding
number
two
under
the
variants
and
one
of
the
findings
under
the
conditional
use
permit.
But
there
are
additional
findings
that
need
to
be
made,
in
particular,
under
the
variance.
We
will
need
a
practical
difficulty
finding
in
order
to
approve
that
application.
M
Curious,
maybe
this
isn't
the
time
and
I
am
happy
to
retract
this
but
curious.
If
the
Lake
Street,
the
McDonald's
on
East
Lake,
has
had
a
similar
issue
that
was
over,
maybe
staff,
no.
T
A
Can
I
make
findings,
commissioner
Maguire?
Actually,
let's
let
Andrew.
V
V
So
if
someone
maybe
wants
to
kind
of
summarize
those
as
findings
and
then
I
think
the
the
conditional
use
permit
findings
are
sort
of
as
Carol
Lansing
mentioned,
sort
of
built
off
of
of
the
variants,
so
I
think
just
meeting
that
one
would
would
give
us
enough
to
work
off
of.
D
Commission
require
okay,
so
for
item
C,
the
variance
for
the
dynamic
display
for
a
minimum
distance,
the
residential
property
and
to
reduce
the
minimum
duration
of
the
static
display.
I
think
the
static
display
it's
a
very
small
portion
of
the
sign.
That's
a
static
display
just
for
the
the
the
orders
that
are
coming
in
I
do
think
that
that's
reasonable.
It
doesn't
seem
like
our
code
is
potentially
keeping
up
with
the
times
in
that
in
that
instance,
because
it
is
small
and
as
the
applicant
mentioned,
it
does
help
with
the
the
ADA.
D
Compliance
in
terms
of
the
distance
to
a
residential
property
line.
I
do
think
it's
less
impactful
than
what's
there
today
and
that
the
the
layout
of
the
current
property
as
lawful
non-conforming
can
be
the
Practical
difficulty.
I,
don't
think
the
variance
I
guess
I'll
have
a
finding
that
the
proposed
variance
would
not
be
detrimental
to
the
health,
safety
or
public
welfare
of
the
general
public
or
those
utilizing.
The
property
or
nearby
properties.
D
I
do
not
believe
the
proposed
variance
would
alter
the
essential
character
of
the
locality
or
be
injurious
to
the
use
of
the
other
properties.
In
the
vicinity
and
they're
adding
that
fence
in
there
as
an
additional
condition
to
help
buffer
that,
as
another
commissioner
mentioned,
to
also
note
that
the
sign
is
likely
as
bright
as
car
lights
that
are
going
through
and
then
for
the
conditional
use.
Permit
findings.
D
I,
believe
we
are
agreeing
with
staff
on
number
one
that
it
would
not
impact
health
safety.
Public
welfare
for
number
two
I
would
say
that
the
sign
would
not
be
injurious
to
the
use
and
enjoyment
of
other
properties
in
the
vicinity.
It's
just
a
replacement
and
an
upgrade
to
a
current
sign
to
come
along
with
industry
standards,
and
that
fence
is
going
to
help
block
the
the
glare
from
the
adjacent
properties
and
they
should
dim
the
sign
at
night.
D
There
will
be
adequate
utilities,
adequate
measures
to
minimize
traffic
congestion,
and
then
we
we
do
think
it
is
consistent
with
the
policies
of
the
comprehensive
plan,
specifically
those
related
to
Business
Development
and
the
rebuilding
of
Lake
Street
is
that
signifi
is
that
did
I
hit
them
all
and
six
I'm
going
through
these
in
the
code
you're
in
the
staff
report,
and
then
the
conditional
use
permit
number
six
should
meet
all
of
their
applicable
regulations
of
the
district.
D
A
Right,
thank
you,
commissioner.
Maguire
she's,
a
planner
you
can
tell
so
we
have
a
motion
and
findings
on
the
table
to
approve
items
B
and
C.
Is
there
any
discussion.
L
G
V
I
I,
don't
have
it
in
front
of
me
here,
but
we
talked
about
the
layout
of
the
existing
site
and
the
restrictions
of
the
placement
of
the
existing
building
location
of
existing
curb
Cuts,
how
the
menu
board
needs
to
be
on
the
left
side
of
the
vehicle
and
how
our
zoning
code
today,
especially
when
it
comes
to
the
duration
of
the
static
display,
is
really
not
written
to
address
improvements
to
drive-throughs,
and
so
it's
difficult
for
them
to
comply
with
our
existing
regulations,
even
for
relatively
minor
changes.
Thank
you.
A
B
Just
so
I'm
clear
is
that
an
abstention
or
that,
oh,
you
want
to
come
back.
Okay.
What
can
we
do
all
right,
commissioner,
Baxley
aye,
commissioner
Campbell.
G
A
Z
M
Commissioner
Alper
great
thank
you
so
much
and
thank
you.
Hillary
really
appreciate
it.
So
I
wanted
to
pull
this
from
the
consent
agenda,
because
I
have
concerns
at
the
at
the
macro
level.
As
we
look
at
how
this
project
fits
into
our
goals
as
part
of
the
comprehensive
plan,
2040
comp
plan
and
I
know.
I
talked
about
this
brought
this
up
when
it
came
before
the
committee
of
the
whole.
M
M
But
you
know
I
mean
it
really
is
it's
a
city
project
and
we
are
here
we're
all
City
residents.
We
care
about
our
city
and
I
want
to
see
this
project
really
reflect
the
values
of
of
what
city
residents
want
to
see
and
what
we
all
are
looking
for
in
the
comprehensive
plan
that
we
we
adopted
as
a
city,
so
I
guess
I,
guess
where
I'm
going
with
this
a
few
different
things.
Really
it's
about
the
variants
and
the
site.
M
Plan
review
and
I
brought
this
up
at
the
committee
of
the
whole,
but
eight
foot
sidewalks
as
part
of
a
public
realm
improvements
which
I'm
going
to
quote
from
the
comprehensive
plan
on
page
122.
One
of
the
action
steps
under
policy.
Seven
public
realm
is
to
require
developers
to
implement
public
realm
improvements
called
for
in
the
Citywide
framework.
I
would
I
would
think
that
the
things
that
they're
doing
through
the
TDM
plan
for
public
realm
improvements
are
the
the
bare
minimum
and
and
by
they
I,
really
mean
it's.
M
Our
our
I
feel
it's
our
project,
we're
it's
going
to
be
a
police
station
for
our
city
and
so
I'm
concerned.
You
know
eight
foot
sidewalks
are
no
good
if
they're
blocked
with
barbed
wire
and
concrete
barriers.
So
I
guess
the
question
I
have
is
what
commitment
do
we
have
that
these
public
realm
improvements
which
were
agreed
upon
in
the
tdmp
and
which
are
called
for
in
the
comprehensive
plan
as
a
bare
minimum?
So
it's
kind
of
duplicative
to
have
it
both
in
the
TDM
plan?
P
AA
Z
They're
still
up
I,
don't
know
why
I
mean
I.
Can
we
can
imagine
or
assume
why
they
went
up
in
the
first
place
if
something
unfortunate,
God
forbid
happened
again
in
our
city,
I,
right
and
imagine,
people
would
maybe
be
taking
precautions
right
and,
like
we've
seen
over
the
last
two
years,
so
I
don't
think
I
can
guarantee,
and
nor
can
anyone
guarantee
to
you
that
we
will
never
be
in
a
situation
where
one
may
not
need
to
block
a
sidewalk,
but
I
can
say
that
these
changes
will
be
done.
The
city
is
not.
Z
N
Z
Clear
to
the
public
that
the
police,
the
city,
will
be
purchasing
that
space,
not
the
building,
not
the
property,
underneath
it
not
the
land.
So
this
is
owned
by
111
Partners
LLC,
not
by
the
City
of
Minneapolis,
great.
M
But
City
funds
will
be
used
on
this
project.
Correct,
okay,
great
thanks
so
I
know.
We've
talked
briefly
about
this
beforehand,
but
the
parking
you
know
it's
it's
like
a
requirement
as
as
cited
in
the
packet,
it
was
36
for
the
police
station
and
we
are
looking
at
a
variance
of
tenfold
and
I
know.
No
additional
parking
is
being
built
with
this
project.
It's
an
existing
facility,
it's
great
to
see
this
reuse
but
they're.
M
That's
that's
a
big
difference
from
our
comp
plan,
our
zoning
code
and
what
is
being
asked
for
by
the
applicant,
which
again
I
understand
it's
a
private
entity.
But
it's
really
us
so
if,
if
that
I
I
guess
I'm
concerned
about
approving
this
and
setting
a
precedent
with
something
that
doesn't
match
our
our
guidance,
I
don't
know
if
anybody
else
says
that,
but
I
guess,
I'm
sort
of
wondering
and
I
got
a
question
from
a
constituent
of
mine.
What
will
this
parking
be
used
for?
Is
it
for
storing
evidence?
M
Great
thanks
for
sharing
that
will
city
employees
working
at
the
police
station,
which
I'm
sure
include
police
officers,
will
they
be
charged
for
parking
their
personal
vehicles
or
is
this
I
do
not
know
that.
M
Okay,
well,
I'm,
pretty
sure
that
most
City
staff
do
not
receive
free
parking,
so
I'm
disappointed
to
see
that
the
packet
doesn't
contain
what
that
charge
will
be
for
for
City
staff
at
this
location.
We
know
that
charging
for
parking
is
a
proven.
M
Tdm
Transportation,
demand
management
strategy
and,
and
that
they're,
you
know
you
need
carrots,
and
you
need
sticks
and
So
like
charging
for
parking
is
one
way
to
create
this
vision
of
a
thriving
City
that
we
all
want
to
see
with
the
comprehensive
plan
and
there's
no
commitment
with
this
project
that
our
own
City
staff
will
will
work
towards
this
goal.
M
I
I
think
the
real
commitment
to
City
Schools
would
be
to
try
a
little
harder
that
we
could
do
better
here
that
we
could
charge
for
parking.
That
could
be
a
strategy.
It's
a
certainly
something
that
could
be
done
in
terms
of
public
realm
improvements.
We
could
see
Jersey
barriers
like
in
I,
think
it's
I
think
it's
Jersey
City
actually
to
separate
bikes
from
Cars
on
11th
Avenue
South.
M
That
would
that
would
be
that
would
go
over
and
above
and
not
seeing
that
right
now
we
have
subpar
bike
Lanes,
where
you
think
you
might
die
on
them
so
I
and
then
you
know
those
those
trees
in
there,
and
here
I
am
representing
the
park
board.
I
just
want
to
say:
there's
there's
some,
it's
great
that
we're
going
to
have
trees
on
here,
30
percent
of
new
trees,
especially
when
they're
built
in
industrial
areas.
They
die
in
the
first
couple
years
and
I,
don't
see
any
commitment
in
here
to
watering
those
trees.
M
You
know
at
a
bare
minimum,
so
I
guess
those
are
my
points.
I
personally
would
be
open
to
denying
the
variants
in
a
and
adding
a
condition,
perhaps
to
the
site
plan
review
with
the
Landscaping
that
they
watered
the
trees.
That's
all.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you,
commissioner
Albert
commissioner
rainville.
J
Thank
you
ma'am
sure.
So,
commissioner
alpers,
your
your
points
were
raised
at
the
city
level.
We
approved
this
so
city
employees
do
receive
pre-part
free
parking,
as
do
Park
Board
employees,
the
you
do
not
charge
your
employees
a
park
in
the
lot
at
the
park
board
correct
so
and
the
the
use
of
those
the
reason
they
have
to
increase
it.
So
much
is
for
the
squad
cars
and
for
the
the
the
the
off
the
officers
to
protect
their
cars
from
vandalism.
Z
Correct,
maybe
I
should
just
back
up
and
have
maybe
just
done
a
presentation,
because
I
did
not
I
thought
it
was
a
question,
not
conversation
I,
so
I
apologize
for
to
the
whole
commission
for
not
starting
the
vote
for
the
variants.
There
are
435
spaces
in
the
parking
garage
200
of
those
will
be
allocated
to
the
police
department.
They
need
to
secure
those
police
cars
and
that
space
for
the
officers
to
do
their
job,
whether
they're
bringing
people
or
evidence
or
whatnot
in
I,
don't
know
the
details
of
that
that
was
not
disclosed.
Z
But
what
is
important
to
note
is
that
they
do
need
to
have
a
certain
number
of
spaces
to
manage
the
police
force
and
those
spaces
do
need
to
be
separated.
There
are
no
more
spaces
being
added
to
the
site
they're
already
there
they
were
built
into
the
middle
of
the
donut-shaped
building.
The
reason
for
the
tdmp
honestly
is
because
we
had
grave
concerns
about
the
number
of
cars
all
utilizing.
The
one
access
point
on
12th.
Z
We
would
have
given
them
500
points
to
put
in
the
second
access
point
if
that
was
where
we
needed
to
go.
That
is
really
what
public
walks
wanted.
As
a
commitment
was
that
second
access
point
and
12th,
because
we
had
very
very
big
concerns
about
cars
and
buses,
conflicting
with
the
number
of
buses
that
come
in
and
out
in
AM
and
PM
rush,
so
they
are
going
to
give
us
that.
Second,
the
rest
of
the
things
are
all
good.
They
are
all
good.
Z
We
will
have
a
Transit
screen
in
the
hotel
and
we
will
have
improved
public
realm.
We
are
going
from
sidewalk
to
curb
adding
green
boulevards
getting
wider
sidewalks
and
we
are
as
conditions
of
approval
on
the
site
plan
review,
asking
for
more
improvements
along
12th
and
4th
at
that
corner.
So
we
are
hopefully
going
to
be
fully
improving
the
public
realm
around
this
block.
Once
this
project
is
done,
I
will
stand
for
any
questions.
D
Okay,
thanks
Hillary:
do
you
know
what
this
parking
ramp
was
used
for
before
it
does
seem
like
a
ton
of
parking
stalls?
It's.
Z
A
public
parking
ramp,
that's
what,
since
it
was
converted
from
a
gymnasium
to
a
public
or
an
auditorium
to
a
public
parking
garage,
it's
been
used
for
the
public.
Hennepin
County
used
it
when
they
had
their
offices
in
there,
but
they
also
used
it
as
public
parking.
It's
continuously
been
used
as
public
parking,
so
the
hotel
will
use
some.
The
police
will
use
some
and
the
rest
will
be
used
as
public
parking
just
like
it
is
today.
We
could
all
go
park
there
right
now.
If
we
wanted
got
it
okay,
it's.
D
Open,
thank
you
so
I
guess
just
for
the
record.
City
staff
does
not
get
free
parking.
Maybe
the
police
officers
do
but
City
staff
do
not
get
parking.
H
T
There
are
a
few
select
City
staff
people
who
do
have
parking
worked
into
their
contracts
or
their
salaries
as
part
of
a
benefits
package
that
does
not
extend
to
General
City
staff.
That's
I
think
generally
reserved
for
appointed
positions
and
potentially
I
have
no
idea
what
other
departments
do,
but
within
cpid
it's
appointed
positions.
Only
okay
got
it.
Thank.
D
You
I
guess
I'm
kind
of
torn
on
the
variance
requests
because
it
is
existing.
D
However,
I
do
feel
like
we
should
be
holding
ourselves
and
our
Police
Department
to
the
strongest
of
Standards,
and
that
is
nothing
against
you.
Hillary
I
think
this
is
great
I
just
think.
In
today's
day
and
age
the
police
should
be
the
first
ones
following
the
rules,
so
I
feel
a
little
weird
granting
them
a
variance
for
like
190
parking
stalls.
A
Are
there
other
I'm,
just
imagining
other
police
precincts,
it
does
not
seem
like
there's
near
I
mean
even
a
quarter
of
that
many
parking
stalls.
So
why
is
this
one?
So
why
does
this
one
need
so.
Z
Many
more
I
do
not
know
the
specifics
of
police
precincts
and
the
parking
ratios
to
which
they
are
allocated.
I
I,
don't
know
to
be
honest,
I
don't
know
if
we
have
off
street
parking
other
places
or
whatnot,
but
I
I
know
that
the
one
the
the
former
third
precinct
on
Lake
Street
did
have
a
large
parking
lot
to
the
west
of
it.
That
is
the
one
placed
Precinct
that
I
can
think
of
off
the
top
of
my
head.
T
Commissioners,
as
noted
in
the
staff
report
as
well,
it's
the
existing
layout
of
this
ramp,
that
is
in
part,
leading
to
the
number
of
parking
spaces.
There
are
only
certain
locations
that
lend
themselves
to
demising
walls,
to
section
off
the
number
of
spaces
that
the
police
department
is
going
to
be
leasing
so
because
the
ramp
is
existing,
structural
walls
are
in
place.
There
are
only
certain
areas
where
it
can
be
sectioned
off
as
a
result
of
that.
T
L
I
commissioner
alpert's
concerns
there.
I
I
think
there
are
some
specifics
around
police,
private
vehicles
and
the
function
of
squads
it
can
have
one
entrance
somebody
could
block.
The
entrance
could
have
multiple
instances
for
folks
to
get
out
I
think
the
security
is
a
real
issue
there
and
I
think
the
ability
to
take
a
ramp
that
is
efficient,
inefficient
and
reuse
it
in
a
way
that
protects
the
officers.
I
think
I
think.
P
Z
Z
Z
Every
time
I
go
to
Adobe,
it's
different
can't
see
what
I'm
pointing
at,
but
in
the
bottom
right
corner.
If
you
guys
can
see
it
on
your
screens,
it's
also
in
the
packets.
It
shows
just
the
section
of
the
garage,
so
you
can
understand
where.
P
AB
D
Commissioner,
Maguire
I
just
have
one
more
question.
Sorry,
so
the
police
parking
is
I.
The
way
that
I'm
understanding
this
works
is.
These
are
all
Squad
cards.
You
come
in
with
your
your
personal
vehicle.
You
park
it
where
the
squad
card
goes,
and
then
you
take
the
squad
car
out.
So
really
it's
more.
It's
closer
to
like
a
one
for
one
with
employee
Vehicles,
taking
up
the
squad
parking.
It's
like
a
two
to
one
right:
we
don't
have
parking
for
employees
and
squads.
A
lot
of
them
are
overlapping
and
taking
out
Squad
Vehicles.
D
E
Make
a
motion
to
approve
staff
recommendation
on
item
nine
for
items
a
through
d,
a.
P
A
All
right,
there's
no
b,
okay,
well
AC
and
D
all
right.
We
have
a
motion
and
a
second
is
there
any
discussion,
commissioner
Alper?
Yes,.
A
Oh
okay,
excellent
point:
I
will
now
open
the
public
hearing
on
this
item.
Is
there
anyone?
Would
the
applicant
like
to
come
forward
and
speak
on
this
item?
My
apologies.
Y
Chair
members
of
the
commission,
my
name
is
Michael
Margulies
I'm,
with
Newton
res
LLC
and
I'm
project
representative
for
our
111
Partners
I.
Think,
first
of
all,
Hillary
for
a
lot
of
hard
work
and
and
careful
look
at
this.
We
know
that
this
project
has
been
a
process
of
serious
negotiation
between
the
city
and
the
owners,
and
many
of
the
topics
that
you're
concerned
about
tonight
are
are
really
outside
of
the
developers
hands.
Y
A
certain
number
of
of
parking
spaces,
Hillary
and
I
have
had
some
discussions
about
whether
that
triggers
the
variants,
because
if
this
parking
ramp
are
not
available,
the
city
would
go
across
the
street,
at
least
from
somebody
else,
or
just
as
they're
doing
now
for
the
for
the
current
Precinct,
so
I
think
the
the
parking
issue
is
a
little
bit
of
a
red
herring,
but
I
understand
why,
numerically
it
doesn't
work.
I
want
to
speak
to
council
members,
Albers
question
about
irrigation
and
I.
Y
Think
that's
a
legitimate
concern
and
I'll
call
your
attention
to
the
fine
print
on
the
landscape
plan
number
13,
which
requires
an
irrigation
system
to
become
to
be
installed
and,
finally,
as
to
how
the
city
sets
rules
for
the
they're
going
to
be
leasing
these
number
of
spaces,
how
they
set
rules
for
how
they
use
them,
how
they
allocate
them
among
their
their
users
and
for
the
police
force.
We
will
assume
we'll
leave
that
up
to
the
city
in
their
in
their
policies.
Y
M
Yeah
I
just
I,
think
there
are
almost
150
pages,
so
I'm
just
trying
to
pull
up
number
13.
Y
And
that
is
on
this
on
the
land
use
application
plan.
It's
probably.
A
D
T
D
A
All
right
any
other
questions
for
the
applicant
okay.
Is
there
anyone
else?
Thank
you.
Is
there
anyone
else
here
who
would
like
to
speak
on
this
item
all
right,
seeing
that
I'll
close
the
public
hearing,
we
have
a
motion
on
the
table
to
approve
items,
a
c
and
d
with
staff
recommendation.
Is
there
any
discussion,
commissioner?
Helper
yeah.
M
Thanks
for
showing
me
the
irrigation
plan,
I
I'd
still
like
to
add
a
condition
about
really
taking
care
of
these
trees
like
bagging,
the
new
trees,
filling
them
up,
I
think
it's
like
10,
gallons
worth
of
water
that
you
put
in
a
bag
all
at
once.
Something
like
that.
A
Apologies
I
thought
there
was
a
second,
so
a
motion
from
Campbell
and
a
second
from
rainville.
Is
that
correct?
A
M
M
Yes,
that
the
applicant's
place
I'm
not
sure
exactly
of
the
name
but
like
new
tree
bags
around
the
trees
and
commit
to
watering
them
weekly
like
filling
the
bags
throughout
the
summer.
T
M
L
No
I
guess
what
I'm
saying
is.
It
seems
over
and
above
what
we
would
normally
do
for
any
other
applicant.
That's
planting
trees.
Is
that
correct.
M
You
know
we
saw
that
article.
Hopefully
many
of
you
saw
that
article
in
the
Star
Tribune
recently
citing
trees
that
die
in
St
Paul
and
the
industrial
Zone
at
University,
and
where
is
it
that,
anyway,
that
creative
Enterprise
Zone
there
we
go?
And
so
yes
I,
do
think
I
do
think
it
requires
going
above
and
beyond
just
basic
irrigation
to
help
keep
trees
alive
in
areas
that
have
heavy
amounts
of
concrete
like
downtown
and.
A
Is
the
concern
that
the
trees
will
die?
Is
that
the
concern
okay,
so
the
trees
are
required
to
be
replaced
if
they.
Z
Z
T
Kimberly,
yes,
I
also
just
wanted
to
point
out.
This
is
subject
to
section
530.210
of
the
zoning
code
under
landscaping
and
screening
for
a
site
plan
review
which,
under
three
specifically
says,
maintenance
and
replacement
of
landscape
materials,
shall
be
the
responsibility
of
the
applicant
or
property
owner,
including
the
maintenance
of
any
trees
planted
in
the
right-of-way.
Inadequate
water
supply
shall
be
indicated
in
the
site
plan.
Landscape
Maintenance
should
incorporate
environmentally
sound
management
practices,
including
the
following:
the
use
of
water
and
energy
efficient
systems
such
as
drip,
irrigation
pruning
and
anticipating
and
allowing
plant
communities.
T
A
E
A
C,
with
an
added
condition
on
item
D
that
they
comply
with
the
section
of
the
zoning
code
that
Kimberly
mentioned
regarding
Landscaping.
L
P
J
A
A
28
15
and
2821
West,
44th,
Street
and
staff
is
mailing.
Smith.
A
AB
AB
Good
evening,
chair,
Olson
and
Commissioners,
my
name
is
Maylene
Smith
I'm
senior
planner
with
cpad
and
the
subject
site
is
three
Parcels
at
44th
and
Vincent
in
Southwest
Minneapolis,
the
site
is
currently
zoned.
R2B,
there's
also
a
section
of
the
site
that
is
located
in
the
Shoreland
overlay
District
and
then
the
entire
site
is
in
the
corridor.
3
built
form
overlay,
District,
The
Proposal
is
a
four-story
residential
building
with
38
dwelling
units
and
there's
also
a
below
grade
parking
area.
AB
There's
no
surface
parking,
it's
all
below
grade
and
there's
42
bike
parking
spaces
as
well.
There
are,
there
are
two
public
hearing
items
for
your
review
tonight.
It's
the
rezoning
from
r2b
to
the
R4
District
as
well
as
site
plan
review,
and
the
applicant
is
also
submitting
the
administrative
height
application,
as
well
as
the
premium
for
and
is
including
the
premium
for
environmental
sustainability
to
qualify
for
that
application
and
that's
to
increase
the
height
of
the
building
from
three
stories
in
Corridor
three
to
four
stories.
AB
So
here
are
some
images
of
the
existing
site.
The
top
shows
you
what
the
frontage
looks
like
along
44th
to
the
North
and
then
the
middle
picture
shows
you
the
Vincent
Avenue
facade.
So
you
can
see
the
side
of
one
of
the
single-family
homes,
here's
rendering
of
the
proposed
structure
and
then
here's
the
site
plan
showing
the
L-shaped
building.
AB
As
you
can
see
in
the
lower
right
hand
corner
that's
a
that's
actually
a
patio,
and
so
there
would
be
the
building
would
be
cut
away
from
there
and
the
footprint
of
the
building
is
set
back
about
13
feet
from
the
south
property
line.
AB
AB
The
the
development
includes
walk-up
units
on
both
frontages
as
well.
Here's
the
underground
parking
first,
second
floor
third
floor
and
the
fourth
floor.
The
main
exterior
materials
are
a
gray
big
brick
base.
The
white
material
is
a
fiber
cement,
siding
and
the
accent
materials
are
aluminum
panels.
AB
And
then
this
is
a
context
study
that
the
applicant
has
provided.
You
can
see
the
building
in
the
in
the
center
of
the
proposed
building
in
the
center.
It's
next
to
a
forestry
Condo,
building
directly
to
the
east,
on
the
lake
side
of
the
project,
on
the
opposite
side
of
the
street,
you
see
a
church,
a
school
and
also
a
seven-story
apartment,
building
or
condo
building,
and
then
there's
single
family
homes
to
the
south
of
the
site.
AB
Staff's
recommendation
is
to
approve
both
applications
and
then
the
primary
conditions
of
approval
would
be
to
eliminate
or
revise
the
dog
run.
That's
proposed
along
the
South
and
to
add
four
canopy
trees
somewhere
on
the
site.
The
applicant
has
already
provided
plans
that
show
compliance
with
these
conditions
of
approval,
so
they
are
amenable
to
those
changes,
and
then
we
would
also
recommend
screening
the
Transformer
to
comply
with
the
zoning
code.
A
Thank
you,
mailing
Commissioners,
any
questions
for
staff
before
we
move
forward
all
right.
Thank
you.
I
will
now
open
the
public
hearing
for
this
item
with
the
applicant
for
the
project.
Please
come
forward.
First,
say
your
name
and
address
for
the
record
and
proceed
with
your
comments.
AC
Thank
you.
My
name
is
Charles
Burdick
I'm
at
4948,
Thomas,
Avenue
South
about
15
minutes,
walk
from
this
site,
I'm
with
Street
Front
development.
My
partner
is
Thomas
Herzog
of
Good
Neighbor
homes
and
also
with
us
tonight
is
Natalie
where'sma
from
design
by
mellow.
The
Architecture
Firm
I'll
be
quick
since
there's
a
number
of
neighbors
who
have
been
quite
patient
to
share
their
opinions
as
well.
We're
very
excited
to
propose
more
housing
choices
for
this
walkable
neighborhood.
AC
We
worked
through
several
rounds
of
design
and
really
appreciate
the
feedback
from
maling
to
help
us
avoid
potential
variance
conditions
and
with
her
feedback
we
are
presenting
this
proposal
without
any
variances.
AC
AC
A
Thank
you
Commissioners
any
questions
for
the
applicant
all
right,
so
we'll
move
forward
with
any
residents
who
would
like
to
speak
on
this
item
again
we're
going
to
use
the
timer
today
because
we
have
so
many
of
you.
So
please
keep
your
comments
to
two
minutes
and
please
avoid
mentioning
things
that
have
already
been
brought
up.
A
So
please
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record
and
go
ahead.
My.
N
Name
is
Sandy
Rubenstein
I
live
at
4400,
Upton
and
I
am
a
lifelong
resident
of
Southwest,
Minneapolis
and
I
just
want
to
say
that
there
are
a
lot
of
concerns
to
this
project.
I,
don't
see
any
benefits
to
the
neighborhood
at
this
point
except
financial
gain
by
the
three
houses
that
actually
approach
the
developer,
all
parties
will
obviously
gain
financially
from
this.
I
am
on
the
HOA
board
for
this
Condo
building,
which
was
converted
in
approximately
2004
from
an
apartment
building
that
was
built
in
1964.
N
I'm
very
concerned
about
the
soil,
about
the
feasibility
of
building
this
building
right
next
to
our
building,
which
already
has
some
cracks
in
it.
I'm
very
concerned
about
the
driveway
proposed
to
be
right
next
to
our
driveway
I'm
worried
about
collapsing
our
garage.
This
is
a
very
old
building
and
I.
Don't
know
if
there's
been
enough.
Studies
done
on
obviously
I'm,
not
a
professional
in
this
area,
but
I'm
concerned
about
that.
So
did
I
do
okay
with
my
time.
Yes,
thank
you
very
much
for
your
consideration.
Thank
you.
C
Thank
you
Commissioners.
My
name
is
Steve
Arnold
I'm,
the
owner
of
a
4425
Vincent
Avenue
South,
four
houses
to
the
South
on
the
same
side
of
the
street
of
this
development.
C
C
I
just
would
like
to
State
my
comment
that
I
strongly
feel
this
development
has
not
addressed
the
parking
element
for
the
neighborhood
I've,
attended
the
two
Zoom
meetings
and
have
learned
that
there
are
many
fewer
parking
spaces
than
apartments
in
the
building.
It's
very
realistic
to
consider
that
30
to
75
additional
cars
for
residents
and
visitors
will
be
pushed
onto
adjoining
streets
and
Beyond.
C
The
current
demands
from
the
homeowners
and
residents
who
live
there
now
this
is,
if
this
is
allowed
to
develop,
owners
will
be
forced,
homeowners
will
be
forced
to
park
blocks
from
their
own
homes,
and
access
to
their
own
dwellings
will
be
significantly
restricted.
C
This
block
South
on
Vincent
now
is
very
congested
with
most
homeowners
splitting
their
parking
needs
with
driveway
and
street
parking,
based
on
the
many
duplexes
located
here,
along
with
single-family
homes
with
multiple
cars.
The
close
proximity
to
Lynn
Hill's
business
district
always
requires
additional
parking
for
customers.
Employees
in
this
area,
it's
difficult
to
find
parking
already
without
adding
this
large
development
of
the
mix.
My
neighbors
and
I
are
very
concerned
about
this
project.
They're
allowed
to
move
forward.
C
AA
Good
evening
Commissioners,
my
name
is
Christopher
Maddox
and
I
live
at
4400
Upton
and
the
excuse
me,
the
condo,
building
on
the
corner.
AA
A
couple
of
the
concerns
I
had
have
already
been
addressed,
so
the
one
or
two
concerns
I
want
to
bring
up
is
that
the
entrance
to
my
parking
ramp
in
4400
Upton
is
opposite.
Another
large
Condo
building
who
have
their
park
and
ramp
dead
opposite.
This
new
building
is
proposed
to
have
the
parking
ramp.
AA
Added
to
that
there
is
a
school
across
the
road
when
parents
come
to
drop
off
and
pick
off
the
pick
up
the
children,
it's
chaotic,
it's
the
area
of
half
a
block
where
you've
got
the
three
buildings
and
the
school
and
I
think
that's
a
safety
concern
again
for
pedestrians
and
for
vehicles,
and
thank
you
very
much.
AD
Good
evening,
chairman
Olson
and
the
commission,
my
name
is
Kevin
jigalski
I
live
at
4416,
Vincent
Avenue
South,
just
up
the
street
from
this
development
I'm
going
to
mimic
a
little
bit.
What
was
said
but
I
want
to
add
to
this,
and
this
is
the
safety
concern
I'm
not
here,
to
complain
about
a
building
being
built.
I
am
concerned
about
the
size
or
the
magnitude
of
this.
This
intersection
4416
is
extremely
congested
during
one
of
the
zoom
calls.
AD
We
even
brought
this
up
to
the
developers
and
they
were
going
to
do
a
study
on
it
or
they're,
going
to
look
at
it
and
I
heard
nothing
from
that.
Tomorrow.
School
starts
at
Carondelet.
We
have
cars
that
park
in
front
of
our
driveway.
We
can't
even
get
into
our
driveway
because
of
the
congestion
every
morning
every
every
evening.
It's
the
same
problem
throughout
the
school
year.
The
other
thing
is
the
buses
there's
a
lot
of
buses
that
Park
on
4416.
AD
AD
We
even
bought
a
car
that
has
a
camera
that
will
stop
the
car
if
there's
kids,
because
there's
so
many
kids
that
go
up
and
down
our
sidewalk
I'm
very
concerned
about
this
property
being
that
it's
from
a
safety
perspective
and
I'm
really
concerned
that
somebody's
going
to
get
hurt
with
this
I
personally
have
been
hit
by
a
car
crossing
the
street.
Fortunately,
it
was
I
was
able
to
push
myself
off.
AD
We
had
a
contractor
at
our
house
last
or
doing
some
work
as
they
were,
leaving
it
was
so
congested
that
they
got
into
a
car
accident
at
44th
and
Vincent.
Adding
more
traffic
more
congestion
to
this
neighborhood
is
the
wrong
thing
to
do,
and
this
is
something
that
I'm
just
waiting
for
the
day
to
hear
an
ambulance
coming,
picking
up
a
kid
that
was
hit
by
a
car.
Thank
you.
AE
Hello,
my
name
is
Michael
kreiman
I
also
live
at
4400.
Upton
I
wanted
to
speak
to
the
shadow
study
that
was
done
and
the
raising
the
maximum
height
allowed.
I
live
on
the
second
floor
of
the
building
and
I
get
very
minimal
daylight
already.
I
have
very
little
direct
light
and
I'm
concerned
that
allowing
a
building
to
be
built
taller
would
eliminate
that
and
would
severely
limit
the
daylight
that
I
receive,
and
that's
a
huge
concern
for
me
and
I.
AE
Imagine
that
it
would
be
for
people
on
the
first
floor
as
well
and
another
thing
I
guess,
I
wanted
to
add
to
the
parking
discussion.
AE
Upton
Avenues
parking
from
I
believe
November
to
April
is
limited
to
only
one
side
of
the
street
during
that
period,
which
increases
the
the
congestion
there
and
so
I'm
concerned
that
that
would
just
you
know,
add
on
to
the
things
that
we've
discussed
already.
So
thank
you.
AF
Hi,
my
name
is
Tamara
embertson
and
I
also
live
at
4416,
Vincent
and
I
know.
My
husband
touched
on
many
of
these
points
already,
but
this
is
additional:
there's
gridlock
on
44th
and
Vincent
today.
So,
if
you're
turning
from
44th
on
to
Vincent,
there
are
typically
two
cars
parked
on
on
that
intersection
on
Vincent
and
when
there's
a
car
waiting
at
the
light
in
the
traffic
lane,
no
one
can
turn
in.
So
what
you
have
is
you've
got
a
green
light,
but
you
can't
turn
in
they've
got
a
red
light.
AF
So
then
you
have
to
wait
until
they
go
and
until
all
the
traffic
from
Vincent
goes.
So
you
continue
to
have
a
gridlock
situation
right
at
that
intersection.
That's
today,
without
any
additional
traffic
without
additional
cars,
the
other
thing
I'll
say
which
I
would
say
my
parking
lot.
My
parking
driveway
has
been
blocked
in
more
than
three
times
this
year,
so
I
can't
get
out.
AF
A
Thank
you.
Is
there
anyone
else
who'd
like
to
speak
on
this
item,
all
right,
I'm,
not
seeing
any
so
I
will
close
the
public
hearing
Commissioners
any
comments
or
discussion.
A
I'll
just
say
that
you
know
this
is
a
rezoning
to
be
in
compliance
with
our
comprehensive
plan
and
it's
a
site
plan
review.
So
this
is
essentially
something
that
can
be
built
as
of
right.
We
don't
require
parking
anymore,
so
they
could
come
and
build
this
building
with
zero
parking.
It
sounds
like
they've
responded
to
the
neighborhood
in
some
ways
by
maybe
adding
a
little
bit
more
after
hearing
that
concern,
so
yeah
I
would
I'm
going
to
support
staff
recommendation
on
this
item.
D
I
saw
in
the
staff
report
and
I'm
sorry
to
step
out
for
a
second,
so
I
apologize.
If
this
was
discussed,
there
was
alternative
compliance
for
two
items:
the
blank
wall,
that
staff
is
recommending
approval,
alternative
compliance
and
the
lack
of
trees
on
site
that
staff
was
open
to
either
allowing
alternative
compliance
or
not
I
feel
like.
We
should
require
the
trees
on
site
personally.
D
For
that
alternative
compliance
for
the
blank
wall
along
the
South,
Side
I,
don't
I,
guess
I,
don't
care
as
much,
but
I
would
just
recommend
that
the
trees
would
be
a
condition
of
approval
there,
because
that
actually
does
traffic
call
me.
It
creates
more
of
a
sense
of
place,
so
I
think
that
could
help
alleviate
some
of
the
neighbors
concerns
as
well.
D
So
if
staff
was
open
to
that,
that
would
be
one
of
my
recommendations.
Sorry
again,
if
that
was
discussed,.
AB
It's
actually,
it
might
be
hard
to
find
it's
part
of
condition.
Number
six
on
your
site.
The
interview
thank.
D
You,
okay,
perfect!
Well,
that's
that
was
my
major
concern.
The
other
thing,
I
guess
is,
are
sorry.
One
of
the
residents
mentioned
the
shadowing
study.
It
looked
like
there
was
a
shadow
study
provided
I,
don't
I
did
not
I,
don't
know
if
it
was
in
here.
I
didn't
have
review
that.
D
Are
they
doing
anything
with
the
height
to
meet
that
alternative
compliance
of
like
this
step
back
or
whatever
that
they
usually
do
or
creating
articulation?
Could
you
just
talk
to
that?
Just
a
little
bit.
AB
So
the
Shadows
study
I,
we,
we
wouldn't
trigger
alternative
compliance
for
the
shadow
study,
so
I
think
in
the
staff
findings.
I'm,
sorry,
I,
don't
have
it
the
shadow
study
here,
but
we
find
that
many
buildings
do
some
shadowing
throughout
the
year.
Just
depends
on
the
time
of
day
and
so
for.
The
shadow
study
that
they
provided
was
in
the
North
and
North
East,
like
the
properties
to
the
north
and
Northeast
at
certain
parts
of
the
day
in
certain
Seasons.
D
L
Yeah
I,
the
you
know,
I'm
going
to
support
this
project,
but
I.
You
know
we
are
adding
to
what
I
think
is
already
a
congested
situation
from
a
car
standpoint.
So
I
think
those
safety
concerns
are
pretty
real
and
I.
Just
I
know
the
City
reviews
these
things
and
and
will
be
but
mailing.
Could
you
talk
maybe
a
little
bit
about?
AB
And
I
can
maybe
just
highlight
that
part.
So
if
you
have
50
dwelling
units
or
more
as
part
of
a
new
project,
then
we
would
start
to
look
at
a
tdmp
and
even
that
doesn't
trigger
a
full
traffic
study.
It's
triggering
the
provision
of
strategies
to
mitigate
some
of
the
the
impacts,
yeah
related
to
having
more
drawings
or
something
of
a
higher
intensity
on
the
site.
So
yeah,
a
full
traffic
study,
wouldn't
even
be
required
at
that
level,
but
we
do
encourage
the
applicant
early
on
to
work
with
public
works.
AB
So
Public
Works
has
reviewed
this
on
a
preliminary
basis.
They've
approved
where
the
curb
cut
location
is
based
on
our
city
policies
and
their.
You
know,
site-specific
policies
as
well,
but
beyond
that
you
know.
Sometimes
we've
seen
four,
maybe
more
commercial
buildings
downtown.
Where
there's
a
lot
of
in
and
out
traffic
for
a
curb
cut,
you
might
see
some
traffic
calming
measures
added
personally,
I
haven't
I,
don't
remember
seeing
that
a
lot
for
just
a
medium
small
apartment
building,
but
temporarily,
maybe
may
have
more
recollection
of
those,
but
not.
T
Too
big
on
the
spot,
but
I
I-
oh
that's,
okay,
I,
I,
don't
know
that
I've
worked
on
a
project
or
seen
one
in
years
recently
as
a
solely
residential
project
of
this
scale,
that's
actually
come
back
with
intersection
impacts
that
have
resulted
in
requiring
a
signal
or
anything
to
that
effect.
I
think
that's
only
come
up
one
time
and
it
was
a
Starbucks
drive-through.
L
AB
Yeah,
those
are
those
types
of
strategies
I
was
thinking
of
and
that
we've
seen
downtown
for
more
like
commercial
parking
garages
and
I
I
haven't
seen
that
for
this,
but
so
it's
not
part
of
a
standard
process
that
zoning
requires
or
that
Public
Works
requires
unless
unless
they
think
it's
a
really
good
idea
and
I,
don't
believe
that
they've
added
that
comment
specifically
to
the
preliminary
development
review,
I.
L
Guess
I
would
encourage
the
development.
You
know.
I
mean
it
is
a
it's
great
you're
providing
some
parking
there,
but
that
is
a
condition
really
to
be
pay
attention
to,
especially
from
a
bystander
and
so
I
think
any
auditory
signals
or
things.
You
can
do
to
alert
folks
and
then
really
understand
how
people
are
going
to
park
on
the
street
relative
up
to
that
entrance.
It's
going
to
get
pretty
dense
and
it's
going
to
affect
your
tenants
coming
out
of
there
as
well.
So.
A
So
one
thing
that
I've
been
thinking
about
for
a
few
weeks
actually
is
at
these
public
hearings
for
projects.
Similar
to
this,
we
often
hear
a
lot
about
both
parking
concerns
and
traffic
concerns.
The
concern
that
there's
not
enough
parking,
but
there
is
also
too
much
traffic
and
we
don't
want
to
add
to
that
and
I'll
say
you
know
those
two
things
don't
necessarily
go
together:
adding
more
cars,
even
if
you
can
park
them
downstairs,
doesn't
mean
we're
going
to
reduce
the
traffic
impacts.
A
So
I
think
you
know
adding
more
opportunities
for
people
to
use,
bicycles
or
other
means
of
transportation.
In
this
in
this
neighborhood,
you
can
walk.
You
know
to
get
things
that
you
need
and
I
think
that's
just
sort
of
a
little
cognitive
dissonance
that
many
of
us
in
the
community
are
still
sort
of
working
through
yeah
I'll
get
off
my
soapbox.
D
Yeah
can
I
yep
I
would
make
a
motion
to
approve
the
site
plan.
Oh
I'm,
sorry
I'm
on
the
wrong
page.
I
would
like
to
make
a
motion
to
approve
items
A
and
B
consistent
with
staff
recommendation.
D
P
G
J
P
A
One
abstention,
all
right
that
motion
passes
and
that
item
is
complete.
That
was
our
last
discussion
item
for
the
evening.
Do
we
have
any
announcements
from
Steph.
T
A
Do
not
thank
you
excellent.
Thank
you
anything
else
from
the
commission
before
we
adjourn
all
right,
if
not
and
without
objection,
I'll
declare
this
meeting
adjourned.
Our
next
Planning
Commission,
regular
meeting
will
be
the
16th,
and
the
next
Committee
of
the
whole
meeting
will
be
this
Thursday.