►
From YouTube: May 9, 2022 Planning Commission
Description
Additional information at:
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
A
Planning,
commission
today
is
monday
may
9th.
My
name
is
alyssa
olson
and
I
am
the
president
of
the
planning
commission.
The
city
will
be
recording
and
posting
this
meeting
to
the
city's
website
and
youtube
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
role
to
verify
quorum.
C
A
A
All
right,
we
have
a
quorum
next,
we'll
proceed
to
the
agenda,
a
copy
of
which
is
posted
for
public
access
to
the
city's
legislative
information
management
system,
which
is
limbs.minneapolismn.gov
or
you
can
grab
one
from
the
back
table.
There
we'll
begin
with
acceptance
of
the
minutes
from
april
25th.
Could
I
have
a
motion
to
accept
those
minutes.
D
A
That
motion
passes
and
the
minutes
are
adopted.
Our
next
order
of
business
is
to
organize
the
public
hearing,
I'm
going
to
read
through
the
agenda
items
and
state
whether
they're
slated
for
consent,
discussion
or
continuance
consent
items
will
be
adopted
by
the
board
without
discussion
with
all
will
be
adopting
the
staff
recommendations
and
any
stated
conditions.
A
Discussion
items
we
will
discuss
and
then
certain
items
may
be
continued
to
a
future
meeting.
So
if
you
agree
with
the
staff
recommendation,
you
do
not
need
to
do
anything,
but
if
there's
an
item
that
you
would
like
to
discuss,
you
can
raise
your
hand
or
let
us
know
that
you
would
like
to
discuss
that
item
and
we
can
put
it
on
on
the
discussion
agenda.
A
A
All
right
seeing
none
I'll,
put
item
four
on
consent.
Item
number
five
is
prince
rogers
nelson
way.
Commemorative
street
renaming
first
avenue
north
between
7th
street
north
and
8th
eighth
street
north
and
staff
is
recommending
this
item
for
consent.
Is
there
anyone
who
would
like
to
speak
against
staff
recommendation.
A
A
All
right,
seeing
none
I'll,
put
item
number
six
on
consent,
item
number,
seven,
5121
and
5129
france
avenue.
South
staff
is
recommending
this
item
for
con.
Okay,
we'll
put
this
item
on
discussion.
Item
number:
seven,
we'll
discuss
item
number
eight
2603
through
2621
bloomington
avenue
staff
is
or
we
are
continuing
this
item,
one
cycle
to
the
may
23rd
meetings.
We
will
continue
item
number,
eight
number,
nine,
715
and
719
lowry
avenue.
North
east
staff
is
recommending
this
item
for
consent.
Is
there
anyone
here
to
speak
against
staff
recommendation
on
item
number?
Nine.
A
A
Item
number
12,
315
and
319
13th
avenue
north
1312
university
avenue
northeast
okay,
we'll
put
item
number
12
on
discussion
and
item
number
13,
1530
east
franklin,
avenue
staff
is
recommending
this
item
for
consent.
Is
there
anyone
who
would
like
to
speak
against
staff
recommendation
for
item
13.
A
B
Chair,
if
I
may
interrupt
just
one
moment,
I
apologize
I'm
getting
over
a
cold,
so
I
had
a
coughing
attack
over
here,
but
I
just
want
to
confirm
the
numbers
that
I
had,
because
I
think
I
had
some
overlap.
So
I
have
for
consent,
4
5,
6,
9
and
13.,
and
then
I
have
eight
excuse
me
eight
for
continue,
and
then
I
had
7
10,
11
and
12
for
discussion.
A
Right
so
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
any
discussion,
seeing
none
all
in
favor,
say:
aye
aye
all
opposed
any
abstentions.
A
We're
going
to
open
the
public
hearing
on
our
consent
agenda.
So
if
there
was
an
item
that
was
on
the
consent
agenda
that
you
would
like
to
speak
on
now
would
be
the
time
so
those
items
would
be
4,
5,
6,
9
or
13.
If
you
would
like
to
come
up
to
the
podium
state,
your
name
and
address
for
the
record
and
go
ahead.
E
E
A
H
A
A
All
right,
we
had
one
item
that
was
continued
and
that
was
item
number
eight,
which
was
2603
through
2621
bloomington
avenue
north.
This
is
going
to
be
continued
once
or
one
cycle
to
the
may
23rd
meeting.
But
if
you
came
here
today
to
speak
on
this
item,
we
will
take
your
testimony
now.
A
A
A
We
will
now
move
on
to
our
discussion
items.
The
first
one
is
item
number.
Seven
and
staff
is
shanna.
Sether.
J
Good
afternoon
president
olson
city
planning,
commissioners,
my
name
is
shanna
sether.
I
am
a
city
planner
for
the
city
of
minneapolis,
in
the
community
economic
community
planning
and
economic
development
department
and
the
assigned
planner
for
the
france
avenue
apartments.
It's
very
nice
to
see
you
all
in
person.
J
Here's
the
primary
zoning
map,
so
you
can
see
the
property
is
zoned
r18.
So
rna
is
a
multiple
family
district.
However,
it
restricts
the
maximum
number
of
dwelling
units
to
three.
Therefore,
the
applicant
is
seeking
a
rezoning
or
petition
to
rezone
the
properties
from
r1a
to
the
r4,
multiple
family
district.
J
The
bfc3
corridor,
3
built
form
overlay,
is
already
in
place
on
the
property,
so
that
allows
for
maximum
building
heights
to
be
regulated
through
that
district
floor
area
ratio,
setbacks,
impervious
surface
lock
coverage.
So
none
of
those
things
are
proposed
to
change
with
the
petition
to
rezone.
The
petitioner
zone
is
simply
to
allow
for
more
than
three
dwelling
units.
J
In
addition
to
the
petition
to
rezone,
the
applicant
is
also
seeking
a
variance
to
increase
the
maximum
or
I'm
sorry
to
reduce
the
minimum
front
yard
setback
along
france
avenue
south
site
plan
review
is
required
for
the
new
construction
of
the
multiple
family
dwelling
and
then
finally,
the
applicant
is
seeking
application
to
increase
the
maximum
height
from
three
stories
to
four
stories
in
the
corridor.
Three
built
form
overlay
district.
J
The
subject
property
is
located
along
france,
avenue
south,
which
is
shares
of
border
with
the
city
of
minneapolis,
and
the
city
of
edina
edina
to
the
west
properties
immediately
in
the
area
are
predominantly
low
density
residential
uses.
However,
there's
an
early
childhood
learning
center
learning
center
at
the
north
end
of
the
property
that
property
zone
or1
and
then
there
was
also
a
property
nearby
at
51st
and
ewing
that
was
recently
rezoned
from
r1a
to
r4,
and
that
was
done
in
2018..
J
Public
comments
have
been
received
for
the
proposed
project,
so
we
received
one
email
ahead
of
the
application
that
was
included
with
your
original
staff
report
packet
and
then
one
additional
public
comment
was
provided
in
the
public
record.
For
today,
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
the
requested
land
use
applications
based
on
the
following
findings.
J
First
staff
finds
that
the
proposed
rezoning
of
the
properties
from
r1a
to
the
r4
multiple
family
district
are
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan,
so
staff
has
identified
the
four
goals
here
on
the
slide
and
also
included
in
your
staff
report
on
pages
three
through.
I
believe
it's
seven
three
through
six.
J
The
property
has
a
future
land
use
designation
of
urban
neighborhood,
which
is
consistent
of
you
know
for
residential
uses.
It's
predominantly
a
residential
use,
designation
property
is
also
a
block
and
a
half
south
of
the
50
50th
street
west
goods
and
services
corridor.
So,
although
not
directly
located
on
a
goods
and
services
corridor,
that
type
of
land
use
feature
and
proximity
to
the
development
would
encourage
for
higher
density
residential
uses
and
then
the
built
form
guidance
as
well
as
the
zoning
classification
is
corridor.
Three.
J
The
guidance
here
is
to
allow
for
building
heights
usually
of
one
to
three
stories,
but
staff
and
the
city
planning
commission
can
consider
a
taller
building
up
to
four
stories
in
this
district
by
finding
that
the
project
is
consistent
with
a
comprehensive
plan
and
we'll
get
into
how
they
intended
to
do
that
here.
In
just
a
moment.
J
The
applicant
is
also
seeking
a
variance
to
reduce
the
front
yard
setback
along
france
avenue
south
this
drawing
was
included
in
your
packet
and
it
shows
kind
of
the
layout
of
the
properties
along
france
avenue.
So
when
establishing
a
front
yard
setback,
there's
two
different
requirements
and
it's
the
greater
of
the
two.
The
first
is
the
district
setback,
the
district
setback
in
the
corridor.
3
district
is
15
feet,
but
that
will
increase
and
it's
based
on
what
we
call
a
string
test.
So
we
connect
the
corners
of
the
two
adjacent
residential
structures.
J
So
when
doing
that,
you
can
see
the
property
to
the
north,
which,
on
this
plan
is
planned
to
your
left
of
the
proposed
development,
is
set
back
quite
a
bit
further,
so
that
increases
the
setback
to
approximately
44
feet,
4
inches.
So
the
structure
I
just
proposed
steps
back
and
kind
of
closest
at
the
south.
The
closest
projection
is
14
feet.
10
inches
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
the
requested
variants.
Finding
that
practical
difficulties
exist,
including
the
location
of
the
adjacent
dwelling,
the
lack
of
a
public
alley.
J
J
So
the
applicant's
working
with
an
irregular
shaped
parcel
staff
finds
that
those
constraints
have
led
to
the
practical
difficulty
for
which
the
variance
is
soft
and
not
created
by
the
applicant
staff,
finds
that
the
proposed
variance
is
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan
and
the
spirit
intent
of
the
zoning
ordinance.
So
the
experience
of
the
ordinance
is
to
minimize
conflicts
among
land
uses,
to
provide
open
areas
and
provide
more
light
and
air
for
adjacent
land
uses.
J
So
the
intent
behind
the
reduction
in
the
front
yard
setback
is
to
create
a
greater
separation
to
those
properties
to
the
east,
along
ewing,
avenue
south
that
are
single
and
two
family
structures.
The
applicant
has
provided
some
drawings
about
the
visibility
and
the
setback
on
the
upper
floor
that,
for
and
and
shadowing
studies
that
further
show
that
the
proposed
setback
is
a
reasonable
request.
J
J
Site
plan
review,
the
applicant
is
only
seeking
alternative
compliance
for
canopy
trees.
There
are
a
number
of
trees
proposed
they're
all
deciduous.
They
don't
quite
meet
that
height
and
width
for
a
canopy
staff
is
recommending
alternative
compliance
just
because
of
the
quantity
of
the
landscape
materials,
but
other
than
that
they
are
meeting
all
of
the
other
requirements
inside
plan
review.
J
The
administrative
height
increase
is
required
in
the
built
form
overlay
corridor.
3.
To
add
that
additional
story,
the
applicant
is
proposing
to
comply
with
that
requirement
by
purchasing
rec
credits
or
renewable
energy
credits.
So
that's
our
environmental
sustainability,
cultural
resiliency
standard,
so
40
of
or
not
less
than
40
percent
of
the
electricity
usage
shall
be
derived
by
purchase
of
these
credits.
We've
had
one
project
do
this
so
far,
so
we
know
it's
a
program
that
can
be
done
successfully
elsewhere.
J
I
Commissioner
mcguire,
thank
you
just
one
question
and
I
might
have
missed
it
in
the
staff
report,
but
I
don't
think
I
did
does
this
include
any
affordable
housing.
J
J
As
of
last
count,
we
have
permitted
308
dwelling
units
within
that
range
since
we
adopted
iz
or
inclusionary
zoning,
and
so
once
we
hit
500
we're
going
to
notify
the
world
that
we're
starting
a
clock
for
six
months
and
then
at
that
point
the
minimum
requirement
to
trigger
the
inclusionary
zoning
goes
from
the
current
requirement
of
50
units
down
to
20..
So
it's
a
long
way
to
get
to
no,
they
are
not
providing
inclusionary
zoning
units
and
they
are
not
required
to
provide
them
either.
Okay,
thank
you,
commissioner.
K
Marwah
hi,
yes,
I
have
a
quick
question
in
the
feedback
we
received
the
public
comment
in
the
email.
There
was
a
note
about
that.
It
blocks
the
proposed
property
neighbors.
Does
this
setback
now
kind
of
clear
that
up
basically.
J
I
think
that
the
applicant
might
be
able
to
best
address
that
comment.
The
applicant
has
met
with
property
owners
to
the
east
and
I
think
that
they
could
probably
do
a
better
job
of
characterizing
that,
and
I
believe
we
may
have
some
of
those
neighbors
here
present
as
well
today.
Okay,
thank.
D
L
Actually,
I
live
at
5605,
vernon
avenue
or
tracy
avenue
in
edina
minnesota,
not
far
from
the
subject
site
here
just
to
the
west.
So
thank
you,
president
olson
and
members
of
the
commission.
It's
a
pleasure
to
be
here.
It's
a
pleasure
to
be
back
in
person.
It's
been
a
while,
so
it
feels
a
little
feels
a
little
different,
but
here
we
are
so
again.
My
name
is
alex
giese.
L
I
am
the
lead
project
developer
on
this
project,
I'm
here
with
evan
jacobson,
who's
principal
architect
at
tushie,
montgomery,
architects
and
he's
been
by
my
side
throughout
the
entire
process.
Here,
as
we've
gone
through
several
iterations
and
have
arrived
at
the
project
that
you
see
before
you
tonight,
I
just
want
to
start
with
a
couple
of
quick
thank
yous,
and
I
won't
take
long
up
here.
First
shanna,
thank
you
for
your
presentation
and
also
just
for
all
the
great
collaboration
throughout
the
course
of
many
projects.
L
But
this
one
most
recently
shanna
is
always
incredibly
responsive
and
helpful
in
guiding
our
design
development
and
her
assistance
on
this
project
in
particular,
was
crucial
as
we
were.
Navigating
new
land
use
and
built
form
guidance
and
trying
to
marry
that
with
a
newly
forming
code
code
of
ordinances.
L
So
that
was
a
challenge
I
think
for
everyone,
and
we
really
did
rely
on
on
her
help
and
just
navigating
all
that
and
as
a
result,
our
our
proposed
development
today
is
quite
different
from
what
we'd
envisioned
going
in
to
the
formal
process
with
shanna,
and
I
think
it's
in
a
better
place
now
than
probably
what
we
envision
thanks
to
her
critical
feedback
and
and
that
of
her
fellow
city
planners.
So
just
appreciate
that
very
much
second
ruth
olson
who's.
L
Not
I
doubt
that
she's
here,
but
she
was
the
neighborhood
coordinator
for
the
fulton
neighborhood
committee
when
we
started
the
process
and
she
was
incredibly
helpful
in
helping
us
begin
the
process
of
neighborhood
engagement,
which
was
crucial
to
this
project.
In
particular.
I
know
it
is
on
every
project
and
we'll
get
kind
of
a
little
bit
more
into
that.
So
she
was
very
helpful
in
that
and
then
about
you
know
midway
through
that
process.
She
switched
to
becoming
a
policy
aide
for
for
council
member
palmisano.
L
So
then
we
actually
got
to
reengage
with
her
as
we
engaged
with
ward
13.,
and
it
was
just
a
great
process,
guided
and
and
helped
by
by
ruth.
So
so
that
was
very
helpful
and
and
to
that
end
you
know,
as
I
referred
to
this
project
has
been
very
much
about
engagement,
whether
it
was
through
the
formal
channels
of
the
various
neighborhood
committees
in
ward,
13
or
direct
communication
and
meeting
with
surrounding
neighbors
place,
significant
value
on
the
input
and
feedback
of
all
the
various
stakeholders
in
this
project
and
our
project
has
evolved
accordingly.
L
Our
most
recent
formal
engagement
was
with
the
committee
of
the
whole,
so
I'm
seeing
some
of
you
again
and
you
know
you,
the
committee
of
the
whole
provided
very
important
feedback,
which
was
incorporated
into
the
project
and
hopefully
you've
seen
that
reflected
in
the
latest
version
of
this
plan
so,
like
I
said,
the
building
looks
and
functions
very
differently
today
than
it
did
six
months
ago
and
I
think
that's
a
good
thing
and
it's
a
testament
to
taking
the
engagement
process
very
seriously
and
truly
listening
to
what
folks
have
to
say-
and
I
understand
that
this
doesn't
mean
that
everyone's
going
to
be
happy
with
the
project
at
the
end
of
the
day,
and
you
know
that
we're
here
to
discuss
that
tonight.
L
And
just
you
know
what
the
city
of
minneapolis
really
wanted
for
this
corridor,
and
so
I
hope
you
agree
so
with
that
said
I'll
answer
questions.
Commissioner
marwa.
I
I'm
happy
to
respond
to
your
question.
If
you
wouldn't
mind
restating
it,
I
think
I
have
a
good
sense
of
it,
but.
K
L
Does
it
helps?
I
mean
there
are
a
number
of
I'd
say:
challenges
with
the
site
which
shannon
touched
on,
one
of
which
is
the
lack
of
an
alleyway.
The
other
is
the
adjacent
property
being
set
back
in
inordinate
number
of
feet
and
having
to
deal
with
the
string
setback,
so
our
intent
here
was
to
and
then
third
being
that
the
irregular
lot
size.
L
So
the
intent
was
to
push
the
the
building
forward
closer
to
france
and
closer
in
line
with
the
spirit
of
what
we
think
that
the
intent
for
the
corridor
was
or
is,
and
then
away
from
the
neighbors
to
give
a
buffer
a
much
needed
buffer
to
those
neighbors
on
ewing
so
and
those.
L
That
we
spent
the
most
time
engaging
with,
and
you
know
just
trying
to
help
them
understand
that
you
know,
although
they
might
not
love
this
the
idea
of
a
project
here,
we
were
trying
to
put
the
best
project
forward
for
them.
So.
K
Thank
you
that
answers
my
question
and
I
do
actually
really
like
how
you've
done
that
setback.
I
feel,
like
the
massing,
feels
a
lot
less
dense
that
way
too,
with
as
it's
kind
of
flowing
in
from
the
single
family
neighborhood
into
it.
So
I
actually
think
that
was
a
very
smart
move
that
you
all
did
architecturally.
Oh.
G
Yeah,
thank
you
is
the
result
of
all
that
adjustment
to
the
to
the
lot
and
so
forth
that
there's
no
problem
with
this
easement
that's
been
released.
Now
we
don't
have
an
issue
with
the
easement.
Well
does.
Does
christina
peterson
have
an
issue
with
an
easement
in
her
letter
to
us.
She
says
that
there's
a
easement
that
is
being
violated
by
you.
J
Pardon
me,
hello,
so
easements,
generally
speaking,
can
either
be
through
two
private
property
persons,
which
is
the
case
here,
or
the
city
of
minneapolis,
could
have
an
easement
such
as
a
public
alley.
So
private
easements
are
between
two
property
owners.
When
applying
zoning
regulations,
we
work
within
the
boundaries
of
the
zoning
lot
or
the
parcel.
So
the
purview
today
is
based
on
the
site
plan
and
then
the
provided
information
today
and
any
identification
of
easements
now
or
in
the
future
would
have
to
be
adhered
to.
G
Well,
I
I
understand
that
it's
not
formal.
This
issue
is
not
formally
before
us.
I
am,
however,
curious
to
know
if,
if
it
is
in
fact
true
or
is
it
in
dispute
or
what
thank
you
by
the
way.
A
Any
other
questions
for
the
applicant
all
right.
Thank
you.
We
will
now
open
the
public
hearing
to
any
residents
who
would
like
to
come
up
and
speak
if
you
can
come
up
to
the
podium
and
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record
and
go
ahead
with
your
comments.
N
Hello,
I'm
doug
terrix
at
5124,
ewing,
behind
the
property.
These
fine
gentlemen,
I
just
want
to
start
out
by
saying
we
did
meet
with
them
twice
at
and
both
times
we
objected
to
the
build
size
massing
of
the
building.
N
N
So
there's
two
pieces
to
it.
The
first
one
is
is
about
the
the
finding
about
the
rezoning,
and
in
that
case
the
disagreement
is
whether
or
not
it's
consistent
with
the
policies,
the
comprehensive
plan
they
did
list
some
in
the
in
the
listening
of
that
it
provides
jobs
or
whatever
and
a
few
other
things.
N
But
to
say
it's
consistent
with
the
spirit
of
the
comprehensive
plan
is
pretty
far
from
the
opinion
of
of
a
lot
of
people
who
saw
it
so
currently
it's
on
the
property
of
of
two
houses
that
are
what
you
call
naturally
occurring:
affordable
housing.
That's
some
of
the
language
from
the
comprehensive
plan
itself.
N
It's
one
of
the
policies
of
the
plan
and
those
people
are
being
forced
out
so
that
we
can
take
it's
taking
away,
affordable
housing
and
building
in
no
affordable
housing.
Ripping
the
news
from
yesterday's
highlight
from
yesterday's
start
tribune,
we
saw
jennifer
ho
talking
about
the
crisis.
We
have
with
affordable
housing
and
saying
it's
a
crisis,
and
we
need
to
have
systems
to
handle
that
minneapolis
has
those
systems.
It
is
to
build
out
affordable
housing
when
we
have
opportunities
like
this.
N
So
there
are
five
things
I
mean.
If
you
talked
about
the
spirit
of
the
comprehensive
plan,
you
could
say
it
has
to
do
with
environmental
issues
of
which
they
have,
I
think,
built
right
up
to
70,
mid
70s
of
impervious
land,
so
they're
not
really
trying
to
get
a
lot
of
water
in
the
ground,
but
you
can
say
that
they're
trying
to
hit
other
issues
in
there,
but
the
five
that
I
saw
that
seemed
to
be
the
theme
of
the
comprehensive
plan,
number
33,
affordable,
housing,
production
and
preservation.
N
It
says
preserve
housing
that
serves
the
lowest
income
and
retain
naturally
occurring
affordable
housing
doesn't
do
that
38.
It
says
we
want
affordable
housing
near
transit
and
job
centers.
It
is
near
transit
and
job
centers,
but
it's
not
providing
affordable
housing
and
there's
some
sub
points.
There
saying
you
want
to
make
make
affordable
housing
along
transit
corridors,
there's
37
mixed
income,
housing,
39,
produce,
more
affordable
housing,
43
prioritize,
affordable
housing
and
prevent
displacement.
N
The
theme
when
I
read
it
isn't
that
is
the
overwhelming
theme
of
the
the
plan
in
yesterday's
news
and
I
think,
building
in
more
of
the
same
properties,
we're
probably
at
a
point
of
being
at
a
glut.
We
have
no
mains
huge
places
built
not
filled
out
the
one
they
mentioned
at
51st
and
ewing.
The
three-story
place
that
no
one
had
a
problem
with
it's
beautiful.
It
fits
into
the
commercial
node.
The
same
people
who
signed
this
unanimously
opposed
this.
N
None
of
them
were
opposed
to
the
one
one
block
away
three
stories
built
tucked
into
a
commercial
node,
so
we
think
that
the
it
is
not
consistent
with
the
spirit
and
intent
of
the
comprehensive
plan,
which
is
a
major
finding
of
this.
The
other
one
is
one
of
the
major
findings
that
existing
use
of
property
is
within
the
general
area
of
the
property
in
question.
It's
it's
similar.
It
fits
you
can
see
it.
You
can
look
at
these
drawings
and
you
take
the
site
plan
and
you
see
it
doesn't
fit.
N
It
doesn't
take
a
lot
to
see
that
it's
a
four
and
a
half
story
building.
I
think
it
technically
is
somehow
a
four
story
building,
but
there's
nine
steps
up
to
most
of
the
units
and
it's
about
five
feet
up
for
the
parking
so
we'll
get
to
that
because
they're
claiming
a
parking
benefit,
I
think
parking
has
to
be
completely
below
ground
to
get
credit
for
that.
So
I
think
they
lose
0.3
on
far
and
it's
not
submittable
the
way
it
is.
N
But
let's
get
back
to
the
whether
it's
it
fits
into
the
neighborhood
fun
fact
within
350
feet
of
the
neighborhood
more
than
half
are
one-story
buildings.
The
rest
are
two,
so
it's
a
bunch
of
one-story
and
two-story
buildings,
houses,
old
houses
from
the
70s
and
when
they
rebuilt
ewing
and
if
you
drop
in
a
four
and
a
half
story
building
in
amongst
all
that
now,
when
there's
only
one
thing
at
one
corner,
this
is
not
the
commercial
node.
N
This
is
this
quiet
block
that
maybe
someday
in
2040
could
have
some
affordable
housing
on
it
or
some
other
housing,
maybe
a
three-story
housing,
even
but
a
four
and
a
half
story.
Building
today,
2022
on
a
place
that
has
no
other
development,
it
does
not
fit
into
the
existing
property
and
zoning
classification
within
the
general
area.
So
we
just
feel
on
two
of
the
major
findings
that
it
does
not
seem
to
fit
at
all
comprehensive
plan,
nor
fitting
in
also
there's
been
no
change
in
the
character
of
this
block.
N
It's
the
same
house
as
single
family
houses.
We
don't
think
it
really
hits
into
the
fifth
finding.
We
also
do
think
if
we
do
give
a
four
and
a
half
story
building
to
a
developer,
it
seems
to
be
for
the
profit
or
to
the
to
the
benefit
of
a
single
property
owner.
So
we
think
four
out
of
the
five
are
clear,
no's
on
rezoning
at
this
time.
This
way
for
this
property,
we
are
in
support
of
the
three-story
one
around
the
corner.
No
one
opposed
it.
N
We
like
the
one
nola
mains
tucked
in
the
commercial
note,
no
one
opposed
it.
It's
building
it
on
this
block
at
this
time
in
this
place.
In
this
way,
we
had
them
over
twice.
We
told
them
don't
build
a
four
story,
build
a
little
bit
smaller.
They
went
to
seven
feet
on
both
the
north
and
south
sides
they
went
to.
N
We
think
they
should
have
been
15
feet
because
the
back
properties
walk
out,
that's
really
their
front
door,
they
need
15
feet,
they
have
12
feet
on
one
side,
they've
got
a
variance
in
the
front.
They
went
to
minimums
inside
impervious
land,
almost
a
minimum.
Every
huge
thing
you
could
possibly
do
they
went
for
and
they
didn't
get
our
input.
N
So
if
they
say
they
like
their
engagement
process
with
the
neighbors,
a
hundred
percent
of
the
neighbors
will
tell
you
that
was
a
fun
process,
but
so
we
think
that
there
is
a
place
on
this
property
and
our
other
investors.
I
know
of
other
investors
who
would
be
happy
to
come
in
and
make
something
that's
right
size.
So
that's
our
our
first
bit.
The
second
thing
is
on
so
we
definitely
100
opposed
if.
N
It
up
yeah,
well,
there's
a
lot
here
because
I
think
the
premium,
the
renewable
just
to
come
in
in
spirit
and
say
we're
buying
renewable
energy
credits
to
get
us
off
the
off
the
charts
say
we
want
the
premiums.
The
findings
are
that
you
have
to
be
in
the
spirit
of
the
of
the
spirit,
the
comprehensive
plan.
I
don't
think
that
was
a
spirit
somebody
buys
their
way
in
and
then
they
say,
parking
parking
is
has
to
be
100
below
ground.
N
This
is
five
feet
above
ground,
so
I
don't
think
they
get
the
0.3
on
that
they're
at
the
maximum
record-breaking
maximums
for
the
neighborhood.
According
to
the
comprehensive
plan,
this
would
become
the
record
build
for
for
the
far,
but
so
so
we
think
that's
a
required
finding
that
you
see
that
it
it
it
is
allowing
in
order
to
get
the
premiums.
N
Not
only
do
they
have
to
check
the
box
say
we
got
the
energy
credits,
but
it
also
has
to
be
your
opinion
that
it's
in
the
spirit
of
the
20,
the
comprehensive
plan,
and
that
it
also
further
achieves
the
goals
the.
What
does
it
say
that
the
increase
in
height
is?
Let's
see?
What
did
it
say
here?
The
exceed
three
stories
and
about
the
evaluated
request
to
exceed
three
stories
will
be
evaluated
on
basis
of
whether
or
not
the
taller
building
is
a
reasonable
means
for
further
achieving
the
goals.
N
So
three
stories
could
have
achieved
it
only
thing.
The
four-story
does
is
maximize
the
profits,
but
it
doesn't
help
the
neighbors
and
it
really
looks
wrong
in
this
property.
So
we
live
behind
it.
They
have
the
shadow
studies
you'll
see
from
five
o'clock
on
we're
in
shadow.
That's
another
thing,
of
course
nobody
wants
that.
You
didn't
have
to
build
it.
You
could
have
set
back
the
third
floor
and
we'd
get
about
another
hour
per
day
throughout
may
through
august.
N
So
that's
that's
a
real
thing,
so
someone
reaching
and
then
overreaching
and
then
overreaching
again
seems
to
be
not
the
good
neighbor
that
we
look
for.
I
think
it
does
not
pass
the
smell
test.
There's
other
things
with
the
setbacks.
I
did
mention
that
I've
got
a
lot
more,
but
the
neighbors
in
general,
100
or
post
this
on
both
the
grounds
of
the
of
the
rezoning
and
of
this
particular
site
plan.
So
if
you
have
any
questions.
G
So
I
find
your
argument
pretty
compelling
about
the
compliance
with
the
2040
plan
and
the
cons,
I'm
concerned
about
the
tearing
down
of
affordable
housing
to
it
to
put
in
market
rate
housing.
But
am
I
not
correct
that,
if
you're
willing
to
accept
this,
the
three-story
building
and
and
smaller
footprint
of
moving
just
making
the
adjustments
you
talked
about,
but
that
wouldn't
achieve
any
additional
affordable?
No,
preferably.
N
There
would
be
an
affordable
complex.
It
was
three
stories
that
was
built
to
scale
one
big
platform,
preferably
it
would
be
a
smaller
building
at
this
time
in
history,
a
smaller
building
that
would
fit
that
would
have
affordable
housing
would
be
the
ideal
and
it
whenever
the
the
neighborhood
starts
to
they've
done
two
other
buildings.
N
This
is
a
side
but
they've
built
two
other
buildings
that
were
fill
in
where
they
took
out
houses
and
built
in,
and
they
were
already
next
door
to
them
were
bigger
buildings,
so
apartment
buildings
on
either
side
occurrence
and
a
turtle
bread.
This
is
totally
the
opposite
if
you
were
building
affordable
housing
now
I
wouldn't
even
think
that
would
be
great
at
four
stories,
but
there
would
be
a
better
argument
to
say
if
we
said
we
needed
to
go
to
four-story
to
make
it
affordable
to
get
affordable
housing
in
there.
N
G
Were
saying,
were
you
not
that
you
would
accept
three
stories
of
market
rate
housing.
G
N
I
I
have
a
just
a
point
of
order:
question
the
public
hearing
is
not
really
supposed
to
be
a
negotiation
with
the
neighbors
correct.
So
maybe
we
should
hear
the
public
comment
and
then
comment.
Yes,
not
really.
Yeah.
A
A
Can
ask
questions
of
the
residents?
I
believe.
A
D
A
I
O
I
I
I
do
think
it's
with
the
spirit
and
intent
of
the
comprehensive
plan
and
find
that
multiple
multi-family
units
would
be
more
affordable
for
residents
versus
two
single-family
homes,
especially
in
this
neighborhood.
I
think
we
need
to
provide
opportunities
for
everyone
to
live
in
this
neighborhood
because
it
hasn't
really
been
traditionally
very.
A
A
I
think
it
is
in
the
spirit
of
the
comprehensive
plan,
just
because
something
doesn't
meet.
Every
goal
of
the
comprehensive
plan
doesn't
mean
it's
not
in
the
spirit
of
the
comprehensive
plan,
and
I
think
staff
have
laid
out
their
findings
well
for
this
project,
so
I
will
also
be
supporting
the
project.
P
I
think
that
the
comprehensive
plan
can
be
a
matter
of
interpretation
which
is
clearly
what
we're
seeing
here
and-
and
I
agree,
one
of
my
big
concerns
is-
is
about
the
community,
so
we're
hearing
two
very
different
stories
on
the
engagement
level
with
the
community
and
the
community
doesn't
feel
like
they
were
engaged
with,
and
while
that
isn't
something
for
me
to
support
or
not
support,
I
just
want
to
make
a
note
of
that,
because
I
think
it's
really
important.
P
H
I'd
agree
with
that,
and
I
I
would
also
add
that
you
know
our
job
here
is
to
determine
whether
or
not
the
the
items
before
us
fit
within
the
comprehensive
plan.
But
I
also
do
think
there
are
important
components
within
it
that
prioritize
neighborhood
engagement
and
I'm
new
to
the
to
the
commission,
and
this
is
the
second
time
we've
seen
there-
be
a
large
discrepancy
between
what
we're
hearing
from
the
developer
and
what
we're
hearing
from
the
neighborhood.
H
I
tend
to
agree
that
this,
I
believe,
does
meet
with
the
existing
goals
and
policies
of
the
comprehensive
plan.
I
would
say
that
it
would
be
advantageous
to
the
developer
between
now
and
further
legislative
hearings
before
the
city
to
improve
upon
the
relationship
that
you've
had
with
the
neighbors
and
do
what
you
can
to
live
up
to
expectations
within
the
comprehensive
plan
that
do
prioritize.
I
I'll
make
a
motion
to
adopt
the
a
b
and
c
for
item
seven,
as
presented
in
the
staff
report.
Is
there
a
second
second.
C
G
B
A
Q
Good
evening,
commissioners,
peter
crandall
senior
city
planner
with
cped
land
use
the
project
before
you
for
this
item
is
located
at
1500
james
avenue
north.
This
is
the
north
community
school.
It's
a
public
school
part
of
the
minneapolis
public
school
system.
It's
on
an
existing
parcel
that
is
approximately
420
000
square
feet.
So
that's
nine
and
a
half
acres
in
the
near
north
neighborhood
of
minneapolis.
Q
The
applicant
as
a
part
of
this
project
will
be
removing
and
relocating
that
sanitary
sewer
to
the
western
portion
of
the
site
in
order
to
facilitate
the
addition
at
the
center
of
the
block-
and
this
is
the
site
plan
showing
the
proposed
edition
and
site
improvements.
So
you'll
see
that
the
bulk
of
that
new
building
mass
is
located
in
between
the
two
existing
school
buildings.
Q
So
the
applications
required
for
this
project
would
be
a
conditional
use
permit
to
construct
that
addition
to
the
existing
k-12
school
there's
a
variance
to
reduce
the
minimum
front
yard
requirement
along
irving
avenue
north
and
that's
for,
in
addition
to
the
electrical
room.
It's
a
small
addition
on
the
east
side
of
the
existing
structure.
Q
So,
with
regard
to
the
impervious
surface,
variance
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
that
variance
with
two
conditions
that
the
applicant
shall
work
with
public
service,
with
public
works
staff
to
find
additional
opportunities
for
on-site
stormwater
retention
and
treatment,
and
that
the
surface
material
in
the
entry
plaza
and
the
learning
plaza.
Those
are
the
two
kind
of
main
entryway
plazas
on
the
north
and
south
of
the
site,
should
utilize
pervious
papers
or
other
pervious
material
to
reduce
that
requested
impervious
surface
variants.
Q
Q
Q
We're
proposing
a
condition
that
the
applicant
should
meet
the
minimum
visual
interest
requirements
with
additional
windows
and
that
proposed
gymnasium
addition.
So
that
would
require
at
least
one
window
every
20
feet
to
break
up
potential.
Blank
walls
on
the
elevation-
this
is
the
location
of
that
and
then
the
elevations
in
question.
Q
K
Yeah
hi
peter.
I
have
a
quick
question
so
on
the
visual
interest
component.
Having
making
them
have
windows
on
a
gymnasium
seems
a
little
bit
like
not
the.
If
that's
not
the
use
doesn't
need
windows,
you
know
and
we're
telling
them
that
that's.
The
only
way
to
do
visual
interest
is
through
windows.
Is
there
ideas
that
the
cities
propose
that,
instead
of
windows,
what
are
other
visual
interest
aspects
that
they
could
do,
because
there's
many
that
they
could
do
that
do
not
have
to
be
windows
on
a
gym.
Q
Absolutely
yeah
there
are
other
options
for
that
windows
is,
I
think,
the
most
commonly
employed
one
and
we
do
have
a
general
window
requirement
that
would
require
significantly
more
windows
up
to
30
percent
for
non-residential
uses
that
face
a
public
right-of-way
or
an
on-site
public
pathway.
So
that
is
significantly
more
than
this
condition
would
require.
Probably
but
again,
there
could
be
other
potential
solutions
that
the
applicant
might
have
ideas
about,
or
if
the
commission
has
thoughts
about,
there's
lots
of
ways
to
meet
that
for
sure.
R
Thanks
peter
is
the
storm
shelter,
a
requirement
of
the
city,
or
is
that
something
that
the
client
is
proposing?
I
mean
I
think
it's
a
good
idea,
but
is
that
a
city
requirement.
Q
A
Right,
I'm
not
seeing
any
more
questions
so
we'll
open
the
public
hearing.
Wait.
Were
you
not
done
all
right,
we're
done.
Okay,.
M
Thank
you,
president
olson,
and
the
commission
members.
My
name
is
kurt
hartog,
I'm
the
executive
director
for
capital
planning,
construction
and
maintenance
of
minneapolis
public
schools,
1250
west
broadway
here
in
minneapolis.
Thank
you
so
much
for
your
your
time
and
attention
is
there?
M
Okay,
thank
you
just
a
quick
overview,
minneapolis
public
schools.
If
you're
not
familiar
with
the
school
district,
we
have
72
buildings
over
8
million
square
feet
of
educational
space
in
the
city
of
minneapolis,
about
400
acres
of
land
and
with
that
land
we
use
a
for
a
lot
of
different
things.
Right.
We've
got
a
lot
of
solar
projects
that
we're
going
on
right
now
we
have
23
solar
installations.
M
We,
the
board
of
education,
directed
the
my
department
to
start
that
re-envisioning
process
includes
a
new,
safe
and
welcoming
entrance.
We've
got
a
new
dining
experience,
going
in
that's
kind
of
that
middle
part,
we're
putting
in
new
teen
parent
services
for
our
teen
parents,
they're
getting
a
new
area
as
well.
We're
going
to
construct
a
state
of
the
art,
careertech
ed
center
for
the
entire
district,
so
there'll
be
students
coming
all
over
the
district
into
north
high
school.
M
For
this,
of
course,
the
new
auxiliary
gym,
which
was
mentioned,
which
will
serve
as
a
storm
shelter
for
us
new
studios
for
kbem.
We
have
a
lot
more
daylighting.
We
put
a
lot
of
daylighting
in
this
building
new
auditorium
upgrades
and
we
upgraded
the
ventilation
system
throughout
to
improve
indoor
air
quality
and
also
the
plumbing
system
to
address
some
lead
and
water
concerns
at
this
school.
M
We're
estimating
the
construction
right
around
50
to
60
million
kraus
anderson
is
the
construction
manager
for
this
project.
It's
going
to
be
a
community
asset
for
everybody
in
minneapolis
to
use
a
lot
of
good
features
coming
in
with
this
building
and
this
structure,
you
can
kind
of
see
a
little
rendering
of
what
we're
envisioning
at
north
high
school,
a
lot
of
windows,
some
open
space,
kind
of
a
really
nice
campus
for
a
high
school
and
a
career
technical
education
center.
M
So
we
agree
with
most
of
the
recommendations
made
by
the
planning
and
and
the
review
of
zoning.
M
There
is
one
typo
here
up
in
front
of
the
recommended
motions
for
item
a
b,
c
and
e
we
approve
of
and
we're
requesting
the
commission
to
approve
item
d1
d2
talks
about
permeable
pavement,
especially
in
the
entrance
and
in
the
in
the
kind
of
our
lunch
area.
Our
experience
with
permeable
pavement
or
permeable
pavers
has
not
been
positive,
they're
very
hard
to
maintain
they
limit
our
ability
to
manage
snow
and
ice
in
our
schools
and
in
our
entryways,
and
they
require
a
significant
amount
of
maintenance.
M
M
M
We're
asking
the
planning
commission
to
approve
an
alternative
compliance
to
allow
for
the
existing
trees
to
be
counted
in
the
minimum
requirement
of
48
trees.
We
have
21
new
trees
proposed.
We
have
27
existing
trees,
mostly
along
the
boulevard
that
would
give
us
48
new
trees
as
you're
aware
we're
also
getting
pretty
well
devastated,
with
emerald
ash
borer
and
we're
working
to
replace
those
trees
as
they're
removed
by
the
city
and
the
park
board.
M
M
We're
also
requesting
the
planning
commission
to
approve
a
variance
on
the
number
of
shrubs
they're
475
shrubs
proposed
we're
asking
for
a
variance
of
204
shrubs.
M
Our
staffing
isn't
really
set
up
to
take
care
of
all
that
landscaping
unless
it's
green
and
they
can
run
a
mower
over
it
and
so
we're
asking
to
to
have
that
reduced
for
us.
I
don't
think
it's
going
to
impact
visual
aesthetics
or
the
experience
at
north
high
school,
but
the
management
of
all
those
shrubs
and
keeping
all
those
shrubs
alive
for
a
very
long
period
of
time
is
very
difficult
for
us
and
very
expensive
for
us,
and
so
we're
asking
for
a
reduction
in
that
amount
to
204..
M
The
other
part
was
the
visual
screening
along
the
streets.
There,
mps
does
have
berms
along
knox
avenue
and
along
16th
avenue
for
screening.
They
range
from
two
feet:
six
inches
to
four
feet
and
in
those
areas
we're
proposing
a
variance
there
to
allow
that
to
occur
and
the
other
areas
not
requiring
that
visual
screening.
M
M
Item
f7:
we
cannot
meet
the
code
requirements
for
parking
spaces
and
the
tree
distance
in
our
spaces
adjacent
to
the
school.
For
many
reasons.
Obviously
they
park
right
up
to
the
school.
We
don't
have
a
lot
of
trees
there,
so
we're
requesting
a
variance
for
parking
areas
that
are
adjacent
to
the
school
building.
The
parking
areas
that
aren't
adjacent
to
the
school
building
will
have
the
trees
and
we'll
have
the
shade.
M
It's
just
that
the
row
that
is
up
against
the
part
of
the
school
building
we
just
can't
meet
that
requirement,
and
the
other
item
is
item
f12.
We
talked
a
little
bit
about
the
storm
shelter
and
our
architect.
Lse
is
proposing
more
of
an
intricate
design
rather
than
windows.
As
you
know,
windows
in
a
storm
shelter
are
very
expensive,
very
hard
to
maintain
they're.
M
Basically,
bulletproof
glass
is
what
comes
comes
out
to
it
and
there
are
precast
panels
and
we
can
get
the
precaster
to
put
some
intricate
designs,
especially
facing
north
or
facing
one
of
the
roads,
to
help
us
make
it
visually
appealing.
So
it
doesn't
look
like
a
precast
panel
sitting
there
versus
a
window
which
for
us
would
be
maintenance,
challenged
to
maintain
and
to
replace
throughout
the
life
of
the
storm,
shelter.
A
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Mcguire
has
a
question.
I
For
you,
I
do
thank
you.
This
is
my
neighborhood,
so
I'm
happy
to
see
some
improvements
coming
here
and
some
investment
in
north
high
are
any
of
your
other
schools
deficient
in
landscaping
and
shrubbery.
I
feel
like
most
public
schools
are
very
green
and
lush
and
pretty.
I
M
Like
to
say
yes,
they
are
green
and
lush
and
pretty
we
do
have
I
mean
yeah.
There
are
bushes
and
there
are
landscaping.
Obviously,
from
a
safety
and
securities
perspective,
we
don't
like
to
have
a
bunch
of
landscaping
and
bushes
next
to
the
school,
because
those
are
hiding
places,
and
so
we
don't.
M
We
don't
appreciate
that
from
that
perspective,
is
that
they'll
harbor
animals
and
they
kids
can
hide
there
and
that's
what
we're
trying
to
avoid
most
of
our
other
schools
have
some
landscaping,
obviously
a
lot
less
now
because
of
the
emerald
ash
borer
a
lot
of
our
you
know.
M
We
had
over
300
trees
that
were
ash
trees
in
the
district
that
are
being
removed
and
working
with
hennepin
county
to
replace
all
those
so
most
in
most
parts,
yes,
but
keeping
a
green
area
lawn
area
alive
is
a
lot
different
than
trying
to
keep
shrubs
and
everything
else
alive.
We're
pretty
good
with
keeping
lawn
areas
there,
but
the
the
the
shrubs
and
the
and
sometimes
the
trees
tend
to
be
problematic
for
us
to
to
maintain
especially.
S
R
Thank
you
yeah.
I
think
I'm
I'm
pretty
comfortable
with
you
sort
of
working
out
those
details
with
with
staff,
but
I
I
really
along
the
spirit
of
I
mean
we're,
adding
a
lot
of
parking
here
and
I
think
storm
water
addressing
that
issue
through
some
alternative
compliance
getting
creative
with
that,
I
think,
would
be
terrific
recognizing
your
sort
of
maintenance
constraints.
R
However,
if
a
private
client
said
hey,
I
just
don't
have
the
maintenance
equipment
to
take
care
of
these
things,
we
probably
would
push
back
pretty
hard,
so
I
know
you
guys
will
be
able
to
work
out
something
there.
I
am
curious
about
this
storm
shelter.
Did
you
was
this?
Is
this?
Are
there
not
other
spots
in
the
building
that
the
storm
I
mean
the
existing
auditorium?
Could
that
be
a
storm
shelter?
I'm
just
curious
on
why
it's
the
end
of
the
building?
M
You
know
it's
got
to
be
able
to
operate
when
everything
else
is
not
operating,
so
it
kind
of
made
sense
to
kind
of
make
it
its
own,
because
then
you
can
separate
that
out.
So
if
you
know
we
lose
power
in
the
school,
the
storm
shelter
doesn't
lose
power,
and
so
that's
kind
of
the
the
thought
behind.
You
know
why
we,
you
know,
went
that
direction
so
to
speak
and,
and
the
other
part
was
obviously
the
requirement
for
survivability
lack
of
a
better
term
in
the
storm
shelter.
M
O
H
Just
seeking
clarification
from
something
you
said
in
your
presentation
and
then
what
you
just
said
in
response
to
a
question.
You
had
said
in
your
presentation
that
the
variance
that
you're
seeking
to
reduce
the
number
of
required
shrubs
as
a
result
of
staffing
and
cost,
but
then
I
just
mentioned
that
it's
more
of
a
concern
of
safety
for
students
and
staff.
M
It
it
really,
you
know,
thank
you,
it
is
really
both
I
mean.
Obviously
we
don't
want
a
bunch
of
shrubs
around,
because
you
know
that
creates
hiding
spots.
You
know
that
so
there's
a
safety
and
security
element
to
it,
there's,
but
but
the
larger
element
is
just
maintaining
those
and
making
sure
they
thrive
and
and
do
what
they
that
they're
supposed
to
be
doing
from
a
landscape
perspective.
M
You
know,
you
know,
to
be
frank,
you
know,
minneapolis
public
schools
just
doesn't
have
the
staff.
To
do
that.
I
mean
we.
We
just
don't
that
that
that's
a
budgetary
item
that
comes
out
of
her
general
fund-
and
you
know
when,
when,
when
you're
asking
a
school
district
to
make
decisions
around
funding
and
it's
in
its
its
textbooks
or
it's
maintain
the
shrubs
you
got
to
make
you
know,
there's
a
there's,
a
balance
there.
M
K
Yes,
hi,
thank
you
and
I
also
agree.
I
think
this.
A
lot
of
this
is
your
expertise
and
working
with
the
staff
on
to
find
you
know,
remedies
that
that
work
for
both
parties
make
sense
to
me.
My
my
comment,
though,
is
about
the
kind
of
the
beautification
of
that
space,
even
without
windows.
I
think
I'm
okay
without
it
being
windows,
but
I
think
you
could
do
public
art
on
that.
That's
right
next
to
a
park
think
about
how
inspiring
more
it
would
be.
K
That
was
done
by
the
students
and
you
actually
worked
with
the
arts
program
there
and-
and
you
know,
made
sure
that
everything
was
kind
of
graffiti
coded
and
well
set
up
and
then
from
a
maintenance
perspective
to
make
sure
that
that
whole
wall
and
that
whole
scale
again
that
would
be
on
the
main
road-
was
all
prepared
in
a
maintenance,
and
you
all
did
that.
I
think
I
would
be
okay
with
that.
K
Being
part
of
that
visual
interest
component,
be
okay
with
you
guys,
even
oh
there,
okay,
there
is
some
of
that,
but
have
it
be
more
dynamic?
I
think
this
is
a
school.
Have
it
feel
like
it's
integrated
into
that
program
and
painted
by
the
kids
and
be
part
of
that
school
and
be
part
of
the
neighborhood,
not
just
precast
fiber
panels
in
different
colors.
You
know,
but
I
think
that's
I.
K
R
Thank
you.
Could
you
just
walk
through
the
I
mean
we're
not
adding
a
ton
of
program
to
this
site,
but
we're
increasing
the
parking
by
a
lot
sort
of
disproportionate
to
the
amount
of
program.
We're
adding,
can
just
talk
through
the
need
for
parking.
The
new
drop
off
the
a
little
bit
on
the
design
of.
Why
that's
important
to
you
guys
sure.
M
Thank
you,
the
west.
Basically,
the
west
half
of
the
building
is
now
going
to
be
the
career
tech
education
center,
which
means
there'll,
be
students
coming
in
in
the
morning
and
then
the
afternoon.
So
there's
going
to
be
a
lot
of
movement,
a
lot
more
students
in
there
we
anticipate
somewhere.
The
total
capacity
is
11
1200
at
north
high
school.
That's
going
to
you
know
come
about
also
on
the
west
side
is
teen
parent
services,
where
our
teen
parents
drop
their
kids
off.
M
O
G
Was
asking
about
and
the
the
windows-
and
I
believe
you
said
that
you'd
like
to
not
have
windows
and
you
instead,
you
have
some
intricate
design.
I
think
it
was
a
word.
You
use
that's
kind
of
vague
and
I'm
curious
as
to
what
what
can
you
tell
us
that
can
reassure
us?
G
It's
going
to
be
something
I
mean
I've
seen
well,
I
mean
I
understand
the
the
budget
problems
of
the
school
board,
but
sometimes
we
just
get
some
pretty
unintric
panels
get
stuck
on
places
and
I'm
wondering
what
what
would
be
the
process
or
what
can
we
expect
to
see
in
this,
in
this
request,
for
a
variance
here
that
you're
talking
about.
M
Do
ian
is
our
architect,
do
you
want
to?
Would
you
like
to
address
that
question.
T
Hi
everyone
thank
you.
I'm
ian
simonson,
lsc,
architects,
100
portland
avenue
south
just
to
elaborate
a
little
bit
more
on
the
precast
panel
design
for
the
storm
shelter.
As
you
can
see
the
image
on
the
board
there.
T
We
are
looking
at
kind
of
an
intricate
pattern:
precast
wall
panels,
they're
10,
foot,
precast
wall
panels,
which
you
know
are
a
primary
structural,
structural
component
of
a
storm,
shelter
and
looking
at
a
couple
different
finishes
and
patterns
on
that
precast
panel.
To
make
it
not
seem
you
know
so
much
like
a
menard's
kind
of
your
typical,
run-of-the-mill
precast
panel,
but
like
an
acid,
etch
and
sandblast
finishes
on
that
on
that
panel
to
create
more
of
a
texture
and
more
interest
on
that
north
facade,
and
then
you
can
also.
T
You
can
also
see
in
the
corner
we're
showing
a
metal,
perforated
metal,
screen
kind
of
wrapping
that
corner
on
the
northeast
side
coming
around
the
gymnasium
there.
I
think
there
also
is
an
opportunity
for
that
perforated
panel.
You
know
to
have
some
kind
of
an
image
kind
of
embroidered
within
it
to
really
create
a
lot
more
interest
and
and
also
kind
of
speak
to
the
culture
of
the
school
as
well.
G
I
I'm
I'm
not
clear
so
we're
talking
about
or
are
we
talking
about
a
concrete
that
might
be
etched
in
some
fashion,
but
it's
nevertheless
gray
concrete
or
white
concrete
or
whatever.
T
G
K
Commissioner
merrill
wants,
I
do,
I
think,
yeah,
obviously
so
I've
I
have
a
lot
of,
but
then
you
also
ended
with
saying
that
you
would
could
etch
like
a
picture
in
there
of
some
sort
of
some.
T
Yeah,
so
you
can
see
in
the
image
I
guess
we'll
see
on
the
right
side
of
the
screen.
That
would
be
the
north
west
corner
of
the.
C
T
These
are
standoff
perforated
panels.
Okay,
that'll
create.
T
K
So
my
my
feedback
to
you,
this
is
a
high
school
right,
so
you
have
probably
an
amazing
amount
of
artists,
an
amazing
amount
of
art
students
at
a
pretty
high
caliber.
There's
a
high
school
students
they'd
be
able
to
do
this
kind
of
stuff
to
work
with
you,
the
amount
of
money
that
you
would
either
spend
to
do
this
sandblasted
concrete
or
not
like
you,
work
with
an
arts
program
work
with
the
students
in
this
building.
Are
you
planning
to
do
that?
Absolutely.
T
K
My
issue
is:
is
that
this
is
in
a
park.
It's
in
a
community.
It's
on
a
main,
drag
work
with
those
students
to
make
this
facade
look
cool,
they're,
the
ones
who
are
going
to
be
the
ones
going
to
this
place
every
day
that
funding
and
that's
money
that
you're
spending
to
do
these
kind
of
intricate
things
should
go
to
them
to
be
helping.
K
Let's
think
about
how
we
could
work
on
the
facade
of
this
together.
That's
like
that's
the
community
engagement
piece
that
I
keep
missing
on
projects.
You
are
in
a
training
facility
of
students
and
architects
and
people
work
with
them
and
I
think
again,
we'll
be
fine
without
I
would
be
fine
with
other
changes
that
you're
making.
If
you,
if
those
are
the
people
who
are
actually
represented
on
this
building,.
I
Missionary
mcguire,
okay,
I'll
I'll.
Second,
what
commissioner
marwa
said?
I
think
you
know
right
now
when
you
drive
past
it,
it's
just
like
a
really
blank
wall
and
there's
a
lot
of
cool
arts
organizations
in
north
I'm.
I
guess
I
would
be
open
to
the
reduction
in
shrubs
and
trees
with
again,
some,
like
other
increased
exterior
amenities,
but
just
want
to
be
really
clear
that
I
I
don't
think
we
should
say
that
north
minneapolis,
high
schoolers
are
hiding
in
shrubs.
I
There's
a
lot
there's
shrubs
at
every
school
and
all
of
your
schools
have
shrubs.
So
I
I
don't
think
we
should
treat
north
minneapolis
students
differently.
If
it's
a
maintenance
thing,
that's
fine!
I
know
getting.
Workers
is
hard
right
now,
but
north
minneapolis
students
are
not
like
hiding
in
shrubs
to
commit
crimes.
So
I'll
just
leave
it
at
that.
R
Well
said,
thank
you.
I
would
just
echo
commissioner
marwa,
and
it
looks
like
you
guys
are
at
least
the
spirit
of
that
for
art
on
the
interior,
so
I'm
confident
that
you'll
be
able
to
kind
of
there's
a
narrative
there
for
that
end
of
the
building.
That
really
is
driven
by
students
that
should
come
through,
and
I
think
not
taking
advantage
of
that
opportunity
would
be
a
shame.
I
think
the
spirit
of
the
addition
the
inside
I
know
the
integration
of
that
you
guys
will
really
do
a
great
job
at
that.
R
T
O
T
I
guess
all
the
way
down
knox
avenue
that
ranges
from
two
and
a
half
feet
to
four
feet
in
height.
So
we
are
looking
at
planting
new
trees
along
that
berm
and
then
also
to
the
north
side,
where
the
new
parking
lot
is
going
to
be
located.
Also
berming
that
as
well
from
that
two
and
a
half
to
four
foot
range
with
tree
plantings
as
well.
T
Well,
I
guess
that's
we're
not
really
doing
much
to
that
side
of
the
site,
so
that
will
kind
of
remain
as
an
existing
condition.
As
far
as
parking
and
and
plantings
is
concerned,.
R
Yeah,
I
guess
I
would
I
maybe
peter
that
may
be
the
case,
but
since
we're
increasing
the
parking
by
so
much
and
not
requiring
walls
that
I
would
really
encourage
you
to
sort
of
treat
the
pr
there's
again
a
wonderful
opportunity
of
of
fitting
into
the
neighborhood
in
a
different
way,
with
a
precedent
that
you
already
have
around
birmingham
treeing.
I
think
it
would
seem
appropriate
that
you'd
look
everywhere.
R
M
Sure
we
we
transformed
franklin
field
over
by
franklin
into
a
basically
an
organic
field,
and
this
is
the
I
think
the
second
year
could
be
the
third
that
we're
we're
doing
that.
So
we
are
transitioning,
all
those
you
know
our
fields
over
there
versus
our
smaller
lawns
or
our
smaller
areas
around
there
and
obviously
we
you
know
at
north.
You
know
we.
M
We
went
from
grass
to
turf
on
the
football
field,
we
added
art
to
that
football
field
too,
so
that
you
know
that
we
had
no
problem
finding
that
we
just
had
to
find
a
space
for
them
in
their
locker
room.
So
I
I'm
confident
that
the
the
wall
will
receive
artwork
as
the
art
classes
move
forward.
M
But
and
of
course
we
have
you
know
we
can't
use
fertilizer,
there's
no
pesticides
that
are
allowed,
you
know,
dandelion
control,
I
think
it's
vinegar,
dawn
and
and
water
is
what
we
use
for
for
the
maintenance
of
weed
maintenance.
So
you
know
we
we,
you
know
we're
doing
what
we
can.
You
know
with
that.
M
Obviously,
there's
always
some
bug
or
disease
that
comes
around
that
we're
just
not
aware
of,
and
and
so
we
do,
our
best
to
try
to
maintain
our
our
landscaping
in
front
of
our
schools
to
give
us
some
curb
appeal
and
we
work
with
our
local
site
staff
to
you
know,
help
them
with
that.
With
that
curb
appeal
piece
yeah
for
the
school.
R
R
R
And
just
to
be
clear,
just
because
I
think
it's
how
you
said
it
that
the
wall
would
accept
art
pieces
from
students
down
the
road
which
I
hope
is
true.
I
think
what
we're
talking
about
is
an
integrated
art
piece
for
the
construction
of
the
wall
itself.
Just
want
to
make
that
clear.
I
think
you
understand
that
yeah.
A
All
right
not
seeing
any
other
comments,
so
thank
you.
Thank.
M
A
U
My
name
is
thomas
pillow.
My
address
is
316
14th
avenue
northeast
in
minneapolis,
and
I
own
a
landscape,
contracting
company
and
I'm
very
aware
of
the
maintenance
of
the
minneapolis
public
schools
in
their
maintenance
program,
and
I
would
state
that
I
agree
with
what
the
gentleman
was
saying
about
the
constrictions
that
they
have
in
their
maintenance
program.
It's
not
like
with
a
private
business
where
you
would
hire
services
like
that
out.
U
It's
in
staff,
it's
actual
guys
that
do
building
maintenance
that
are
maintained
in
these
areas
and
and
the
the
level
of
what
it
would
take
for
this
minneapolis
public
schools
to
fit
within
the
conforms
of
the
planning
and
zoning
requirements
for
landscaping
seems
excessive.
I'd
rather
see
the
money
go
towards
the
students.
A
Thank
you
there.
Anyone
else
who
would
like
to
speak
on
this
item,
all
right,
I'm
not
seeing
any.
So
I
will
close
the
public
hearing.
Commissioners
any
discussion,
commissioner
campbell.
H
I'll
just
say
I
I
think
I
remain
wholly
unconvinced
that
the
right
solution
here
is
a
160
increase
in
parking
and
a
dramatic
reduction
in
what's
being
asked
for
environmental
standards.
H
And
you
know
I
think
budgets
are
about
values
and
I
think,
and
I'm
more
intimately
aware
of
the
minneapolis
public
schools
budget
than
I
ever
have
before
as
a
as
a
public
school
parent.
And
so
I
get
that
that
things
are
tough.
But
I
do
not
think
it's
fair
for
us
to
hold
residents
of
this
city
accountable
to
standards
within
our
comprehensive
plan
and
allow
our
institutions
to
receive
variances
for
the
same
things.
So
I
just
wanted
to
state
that.
A
You
can
take
each
item
on
its
own,
you
can
you
can
strike
conditions
or
modify
them.
H
Okay,
I
would
like
to
make
a
motion
to
I
gotta
find
it
in
here
to
section
f
number
four:
the
applicant
shall
provide
a
minimum
of
48
trees
and
forty
40
457
475
shrubs
on
the
site.
I
believe
the
applicant
was
seeking
a
variance
on
that.
I
would
like
to
require
the
applicant
to
meet
that
standard.
H
A
So
you
would
be
proposing
approving
item
f
and
striking
condition.
Four.
H
V
G
Are
we
moving
voting
on
just.
Q
Q
C
A
I
Commissioner,
mcguire
yeah,
I
would
make
ask
the
motion
in
second
or
potentially
to
make
up
for
a
friendly
amendment
to
work
with
staff
on
item
12
to
include
some
component
of
visual
interest
or
art
during
the
construction,
not
after
so
they
need
this
in
order
to
get
approval,
we're
not
just
trusting
them
to
do
it
after
the
fact
on
item
12.,
okay,
I
don't
know
how
to
word
that
I
would.
K
J
All
right,
thank
you,
so
it
might
be
easiest
if
we
kind
of
look
at
each
condition
in
order
in
order
to
make
sure
that
we
get
the
clear
direction
on
what
the
commission
is
voting
sure.
So,
if
we
want
to
move
f,
maybe
we
could
just
start
with
number
one
and
then
kind
of
work
our
way
down
to
make
sure
that
the
motioner
and
the
seconder
agree
on
the
conditions
as
they're
stated.
Okay,
that
will
ensure
that
peter
has
the
best
direction
when
reviewing
this
application
later.
Thank.
A
A
So
who
made
the
motion?
You
made
the
motion?
Okay,
so
you're
proposing.
Can
you
just
go
through
which
which
items
you
would
keep
or
change
or
strike?
I.
H
Am
only
proposing
so
I
believe
and
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
I
believe
the
applicant
was
seeking
a
variance
on
item
f4.
Is
that
correct.
O
J
A
H
I
would
welcome,
I
mean
I
think
it
sounds
like
commissioner.
Maro
wants
to
separate
them
out.
I
don't
have
an
opinion
on
12.
A
Okay,
so
commissioner,
mcguire's
friendly
amendment
was
to
to
strike
12
or
to
modify.
A
All
right,
so,
commissioner
campbell,
would
you
accept
commissioner
mcguire's
friendly
amendment
to
modify
12,
and
are
you
also
proposing
to
to
strike
seven
yeah.
A
That's
my
proposal.
Okay,
who
said
who's
the
second.
A
You
would
you
still,
second,
that
or.
A
Right
so
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
to
adopt
item
f,
striking
condition,
seven
and
modifying
condition.
Twelve.
G
What
is
the
current
modification,
I'm
going
to
say
I'll.
I
G
I'm
sorry
you're
good
before
he
does
that
I
am
interested
in
getting
to
the
part
where
you
said
integral
to
the
construction,
not
just
a
paste
on
thing.
So.
W
K
In
in
I
think
kind
of
ins
with
instead
of
the
visual
interest
component
for
instead
of
doing
additional
windows,
if
they
work
to
integrate
art
into
that
building
component
into
the
design
from
the
design
phase.
Okay
could
could
the
applicant
put
back
up
the
list
of
requested
variances
or
not
the
variances?
The
modification.
H
Q
Yes,
but
I'm
open
to
the
modifications
that
you're
making
to
12
and
I
might
suggest
that
we've
gotten
a
lot
of
language.
I
think
on
the
record
with
regard
to
that
particular
issue,
and
I
think
I
can
work
with
the
clerk
and
staff
to
come
up
with
wording
and
we
can
double
check
that
with
president
olson
to
make
sure
that
we're
meeting
the
intention
there
and
yes.
R
A
All
right,
so
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
on
the
table.
Staff
would
work
on
our
language
for
item
12.
Oh
sorry,
commissioner,.
A
Did
you
have
your
powerpoint
if
you
could
or
if
peter
could
please
thank
you.
A
H
Q
Q
A
All
right
well,
if
everyone
feels
comfortable
with
understanding
what
the
motion
is
yeah
any
discussion.
Okay,
I
will
ask
the
clerk
to
please
call
the
role
on
the
motion.
A
Q
B
Okay,
so
I'll
I'll
restart
the
vote,
then
thank
you.
No
problem
always
good
to
be
clear
about
what
we're
voting
on.
Yes,
commissioner,
baxley
aye,
commissioner
campbell.
R
O
A
All
right
that
motion
passes,
commissioner
mcguire.
I
A
I
will
say:
oh
commissioner
bex,
oh
okay,
one
of
the
requests
was
striking
condition
two
on
d,
which
requires
the
surface
material
in
the
entry
plaza
to
be
pervious,
pavers
or
other
pervious
material.
I
certainly
am
sensitive
of
the
maintenance
issues
with
at
least
pavers,
for
example,
wondering
if
anyone
has
any
thoughts
on
that.
G
Thank
you.
I
will
move
that
we
strike.
G
Item
two,
I
I
I
agree
what
you
said
and
I
think
that
the
public
schools
are
doing
a
great
job
on
building
rain
gardens
and
tackling
this
not
perfectly
but
they're,
making
better
effort.
The
most.
A
A
H
Just
I
think
it
is
in
my
opinion,
when
we
are
doubling
or
not
doubling
it.
There's
a
hundred
and
sixty
percent
increase
the
number
of
parking
spaces.
H
I
think
it
is
our
responsibility
to
ensure
that
we
are
stewards
of
the
land
that
this
is
on,
and
I
I
don't
think
that
that
allowing
a
variance
to
adjust
the
impervious
surface
requirement
is
is
a
wise
decision.
Considering
the
expansion
of
parking
spaces.
R
I
wonder
if
there
was,
I
wonder
if
peter
was
going
to
say
this.
I
wonder
if
there's
a
way
we
can.
I
certainly
recognize
the
maintenance
issue,
but
there's
a
lot
of
other
solutions
besides
pavers
or
the
amount
of
pavers
the
amount
of
concrete
with
drainage
gaps.
There's
lots
of
ways
to
tackle
that.
I
wonder
if
we
could
state
it
in
a
way
where
they
could
work
with
staff
to
provide
sort
of
the
spirit
of
the
and
cummins
club
recognizing
the
maintenance
issues,
but
that
some
permeability
of
the
surface.
Q
Yes-
and
I
was
just
going
to
add
that
I
have
had
some
communication
with
the
applicant
around
this
issue
and
I
think
there
may
be
opportunities
to
implement
a
certain
percentage
of
pervious
pavers
or
some
other
solution
that
they've
identified
that
could
be
covered
under
condition
ones,
so
I
think
striking
condition.
Two
doesn't
necessarily
eliminate
those
possibilities
and
we
can
work
together
to
identify
additional
opportunities
for
that
too.
A
Thank
you
peter
commissioner
mcguire.
Okay,
are
you
good
all
right
all
right?
We
have
a
motion
and
a
second
to
approve
items,
a
through
e,
striking
condition,
two
and
item
d,
any
discussion
all
right,
I'll,
ask
clerk
to
please
call
the
roll.
A
It
the
it
it
says,
the
surface
material
entry,
plaza
and
learning
plaza
shall
consist
of
pervious,
pavers
or
other
pervious
material
and
peter
stated
that
condition
one
got.
V
A
V
Q
This
project
didn't
necessarily
trigger
the
committee
of
the
whole
standards
and
there
wasn't
a
desire
on
the
applicant's
part
at
the
time
of
applying
for
that,
and
I
think
some
of
these
issues
came
out
in
the
process
of
reviewing
the
land
use
application
that
we
maybe
weren't
aware
of
when
the
applicant
initially
came
to
the
city.
Thank.
V
A
All
right!
Our
next
item
is
item
number
10.
Excuse
me,
item
number,
11,
east
minnehaha,
parkway
and
staff
is
again
peter
crandall.
H
Q
Q
The
applicant
is
proposing
to
adaptively
reuse,
the
existing
church
to
add
21
additional
dwelling
units,
21
new
dwelling
units,
and
to
construct
a
new
two-story
residential
building
on
the
site
with
seven
additional
dwelling
units,
the
site
is
currently
zoned
for
the
r1a.
Multiple
family
district,
with
the
built
form
interior
to
I'm
sorry
and
the
applicant
is
also
proposing
to
rezone
the
site
to
the
r4
multiple
family
district
with
the
interior
ii
built
form
overlay
district.
Q
Q
This
is
the
existing
zoning
map
of
the
site
and
an
image
of
the
existing
church
and
then
the
site
plan
as
it
exists
today,
the
applicant
is
not
proposing
any
major
additions
or
modifications
to
the
exterior
of
the
existing
church
building.
So
all
modifications
to
that
building
would
be
internal
to
the
existing
structure,
but
they
are
proposing
to
construct
a
new
additional
building
on
the
site
which
you
can
see
in
this
exonometric
drawing
and
that
new
structure
would
be
located
on
the
western
half
of
that
existing
parcel.
Q
Q
The
applicant's
proposing
a
conditional
use
for
permit
for
a
new
planned
unit,
development
to
adaptively
reuse,
the
existing
church
and
to
construct
that
new
residential
building
on
site.
The
planned
unit
development
is
unnecessary
application
in
this
case,
because
the
parcel
itself
is
non-conforming
to
the
maximum
lot
size
in
the
interior
ii
district.
Q
I
Q
So
I
know
that
the
applicant
is
looking
at
potential
opportunities
for
more
bike
parking
on
the
site
and
they
might
be
able
to
speak
to
that
specific
issue.
But
the
plan
unit
development
application
allows
them
to
seek
that
exception
through
the
pud
by
providing
amenity
points
in
sort
of
an
exchange
for
the
strict
standard.
A
All
right,
I
haven't
seen
any
more
questions,
so
we'll
open
the
public
hearing
and
if
the
applicant
is
here
to
speak
on
this
item,
please
come
forward
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Y
Chart
olson
commissioners.
Thank
you
for
having
us
today.
My
name
is
beth
pfeiffer,
5640,
logan
avenue
south,
along
with
my
colleague,
mary
shogren.
We
are
an
emerging
women-led
development
company.
Each
of
us
has,
over
20
years
experience
working
for
other
developers
supporting
bipac
developers
through
our
consulting
work
and
supporting
nonprofits.
Y
We've
recently
started
doing
some
of
our
own
development
work
and
are
really
excited
at
this
opportunity.
We
have
another
project,
that's
currently
under
construction.
In
this
neighborhood,
it's
called
portico
at
the
falls.
It's
a
24
unit,
condominium,
building,
that's
being
built
at
the
entry
to
minnehaha
falls.
We
were
also
the
co-developers
of
a
project
that
was
mentioned
by
a
neighbor
earlier
tonight,
at
5100,
ewing,
avenue
south
was
a
three-story
apartment.
Building
that,
as
you
heard,
the
neighbors
talk
about
tonight
was
very
welcomed
by
the
fulton
community.
Y
We
were
really
excited
to
do
this
project,
it's
a
passion
project
for
us
and
when
we
first
went
to
look
at
the
site,
the
very
first
thing
that
struck
us
was:
we
can't
tear
this
building
down.
This
is
a
beautiful
asset
to
this
community.
We
have
to
figure
out
a
way
to
be
really
creative
and
reuse
it,
and
we
think
that's
really
consistent
with
the
city's
goals
for
sustainability
and
reuse.
So
we
had
really
two
main
goals.
Y
We
also
know
that
parking
is
always
a
concern
for
neighbors
and
we
did
hear
a
parking
concern.
Historically,
the
church
since
1940
has
included
very
limited
off
street
parking,
just
the
small
parking
lot
that
we
are
maintaining
on
the
site.
We
know
that
the
city
does
not
require
off
street
parking
for
the
project,
but
we
also
understand
that
people
do
still
drive
cars
and
that
they
need
it.
Y
We
do
know
that
this
is
an
excellent
location
for
bike
commuters
and
pedestrians,
and
it
is
well
served
by
transit
with
multiple
express
bus
lines
nearby
and
just
outside
the
0.5
mile
distance.
It's
like
0.58
miles
to
light
rail.
It
has
grocery
liquor,
library,
retail
and
post
office,
all
within
a
two
to
three
block
walk,
and
it
is
again
one
of
the
things
that
we
love
about
this
site.
I
can't
remember
who
asked
earlier
about
the
bike
parking
it.
Y
Y
Y
R
Thank
you,
I
think
it's
a
terrific
proposal
and
I'm
really
glad
getting
really
creative
with
the
use
of
the
existing
structure.
I
I
maybe
I'm
missing,
but
I
know
there's
no
you're
not
proposing
any
elevators
for
both
the
new
and
the
existing.
Could
you
talk
a
little
bit
about
your
position?
I
know
it's
expensive,
but.
Y
Yeah,
actually
one
of
the
really
great
things
about
this
site
and
the
unique
way
that
we're
reusing
the
building
is
that
we
are
making.
I
think,
over
half
of
the
units
have
direct
walk
out
to
the
outside,
so
they're
fully
accessible
through
a
flat
door
coming
in
we're.
Actually,
we
have
one
unit,
that's
required
to
be
fully
accessible,
and
that
was
the
original
rectory
where
the
reverend
lived
and
it's
already
an
accessible
unit,
which
is
great,
but
we
will
also
be
adding
many
units
that
walk
out
directly
to
the
outdoors.
A
Commissioner
rainville
did
you
have?
Oh
sorry,
commissioner?
Marla
did
you
have
one?
Oh
okay,
all
right!
Thank
you.
I'm
not
seeing
any
more
questions
so
we'll
open
the
public
hearing.
Thank
you.
If
there's
anyone
who
would
like
to
speak
on
this
item,
you
can
please
come
forward
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record.
E
Chairman
olson
commissioners,
this
time
I
think,
I'm
on
the
appropriate
item
on
the
agenda
here-
and
this
may
seem
like
a
very
unusual
thing,
but
we
came
in
opposition
to
this
project.
But
after
hearing
the
explanation
and
seeing
how
the
passion
behind
this
project
we've
changed
our
minds,
we
actually
think
this
will
be
a
nice
addition
to
the
neighborhood,
we're
still
concerned
about
parking.
But
I
think
those
issues
probably
can
be
worked
out
and
we're
delighted
that
the
building
itself
will
remain.
E
It
is
truly
a
real
building
that
makes
that
neighborhood
have
the
character
that
it
does.
So.
Thank
you
for
your
time
and
thank
you
so
much
appreciate
it.
Thank.
Z
Thank
you,
council
members.
Thank
you
for
the
presentation
that
was
good.
Is
this
really
how
it
goes?
Is
this
how
you
have
fun?
I
know
I
can't
believe
I
sat
through
this
whole
thing.
Carl
osberg,
311,
east
minnehaha,
parkway,
and
so
I
have
some
questions
to
start
with.
If
that's,
okay
and
the
first
is
this
r4,
I
thought
that
was
for
a
transit
way
and
this
is
a
parkway
which
is
different
than
a
transit
way
right.
Z
This
area
that
we
don't
currently
have
with,
I
think
three
parking
spots
and
I
know
there
is
no
minimum
parking
requirement,
but
it
should
be
a
consideration
that
we
should
look
at
at
how
it
affects
the
neighbors,
especially
during
the
snow
emergency
route,
and
so
I
I'd
like
to,
I
think
29
units
is
too
much
is
what
I
think-
and
I
think
you
know
a
lesser
amount
when
we
we
talked
earlier.
I
think
it
was
20
18
to
21
22.
There
was
some
jockeying
around.
Z
I
just
think
it's
it's
being
maximized,
maybe
a
little
too
much,
and
so
that's
my
comment
on
that
permeability.
I
don't
know
exactly
what
your
percentage
is
on
that.
So
maybe,
if
you
could
answer
my
question
on
the
r4,
a
non-transitway
parkway
I'd
like
to
hear
that
and
then
the
permis
or
permeability
I'd
like
to
hear
an
answer
on
that
too.
Please
to
anyone.
A
It's
not
a
question
and
answer,
but
I'm
guessing.
We
can
get
those
questions
answered
later
on.
Z
Okay,
yes,
so
I'm
against
it,
and
it's
it's
really
this
this
four.
You
know
the
2b
seems
more
appropriate
for
the
neighborhood
that
work
that
we're
at
the
r4
and
again
I
don't
know
all
the
details.
I
did
some
reading
and
they
just
you
can
get
lost
in
that,
so
the
parking
again,
I'm
against
it.
Due
to
that,
it's
just
it's
not
quite
realistic.
Z
I
understand
the
goals
and
where
we
want
to
go
but
three
spots
for
a
hundred
people
or
90
people,
or
so
it
seems
like
it's
too
much
or
too
little
the
the
impact
on
the
parkway.
Again
with
with
that,
I
just
I
would
ask
you
to
table
this,
and
maybe
we
can
work
on
improving
the
design
a
little
bit
with
more
input
as
a
that's
all.
I
have
to
say
thanks.
A
W
This
is
a
it's
a
beautiful
parkway,
lots
of
bikers
lots
of
walkers
lots
of
dog
walkers,
and
my
concern
is:
where
are
you
going
to
put
29
30
cars
assuming
everyone
who's
in
there?
Just
has
one
car
like
it's,
it's
the
parking
and
and
that's
the
biggest
issue
that
I
have
and
if
we
can
figure
out
what
to
do
with
all
that
parking,
I
don't
have
any
other
issues
with
it.
I
think
it's
great
that
they're
keeping
the
the
church
structure.
I
think
that's
that.
That's
that's!
W
A
H
I
was
just
gonna:
are
we
in
the
discussion
period
now
yep?
I
was
gonna,
make
a
motion
to
accept
staff
recommendation
on
the
project.
I
think
this
is
exactly
the
type
of
development
that
we
want
to
see
in
the
city.
I
think
adaptive
reuse
is
great.
I
think
minneapolis
has
a
very
long
track
record
of
misusing
structures
like
this,
and
I
think
I
think
this
project
is
great.
V
Thank
you
ma'am
sure,
I'm
just
curious
what
your
thoughts
are
about.
This
parking
issue.
Y
Y
We
also
know-
and
I
can
have
a
little
diagram
I
can
show,
but
there
is
on-street
parking
on
the
parkway
directly
in
front
of
the
church
and
on
33rd,
and
if
we
only
count
the
available
parking
spaces
on
on
our
property
line,
so
not
extending
in
front
of
the
neighboring
homes.
There
are
two
additional
single-family
homes
on
the
parkway
to
the
west.
Y
There
are
18
on-street
parking
spaces
that
are
immediately
on
the
parkway
in
front
of
our
own
building.
This
is
not
a
heavily
used
area
of
the
parkway
for
people
who
park
and
say
go
to
the
lake
or
park
and
go
somewhere
else
in
general.
We
think
that
the
parking
around
the
building
will
be
sufficient
anecdotally
for
our
portico
at
the
falls
project,
which
is
again
a
24
unit
for
sale
project.
Y
We
were
very
concerned
about
parking
there.
It's
a
very
tight
site
and
we
could
not
fit
more
than
one
level
of
underground
parking
and
we
are
installing
a
car
parking
system
in
that
building
which
stacks
one
car
over
another,
and
we
had
originally
decided
that
we
would
purchase
up
to
13
parking
car
over
car
parking
spaces.
Thinking,
that's
the
demand
that
we
would
need.
We
structured
the
building
and
paid
a
lot
of
extra
money
to
get
the
ground
deep
enough
to
do
that,
and
we
only
ended
up
selling
six
of
them.
Y
So
we
are
seeing
that
people
are
reducing
for
sure,
multiple
cars
in
households
and
again
we
do
think
this
is
going
to
be
an
area
that
attracts
people
who
want
to
live
in
a
location
where
they
don't
need
to
be
dependent
on
single
vehicle
use
and
we'll
use
public
transit
and
bike.
I
I
actually
have
a
question
for
the
applicant
if
that's
okay,
to
follow
up.
Thank
you.
I'm
not
super
familiar
with
your
company.
Do
you
all
like
own
and
maintain
them
long
term?
So
if
there
is
an
issue
and
there
isn't
enough
bike
parking,
would
you
would
you
all
add
some
additional
bike
parking
outside?
Yes,.
Y
We
personally
are
not
the
property
managers,
but
we
do
believe
in
hiring
really
talented
third-party
property
managers,
who
are
professionals
who
do
this,
so
we
will
not
personally
be
managing
the
building,
but
we
will
have
a
great
company
who
does
that
and
we
vet
them
to
make
sure
that
they
have
a
strong
track
word
of
maintaining
property.
So
if
an
issue
were
to
come
up,
that
is
absolutely
something
we
can
look
at.
P
Y
P
K
Yeah,
I'd
also
just
want
to
commend
you
guys
on
the
project.
I
think
this
kind
of
really
fits
with
a
lot
of
the
complaint
goals
we're
seeing.
We
are
not
seeing
a
lot
of
very
fun
inventive
projects
often
so
I
really
thank
you
guys
for
the
work
that
you're
doing
to
really
make
sure
that
there
is
reuse,
that
there
is
some
very
cool
fabric,
keeping
those
historic
buildings
making
something
that's
affordable,
making
something
for
renters.
That's
a
little
bit
different
too
in
the
market
that
we're
seeing
a
lot
of
the
same
in.
A
I
will
just
say:
I
live
in
this
neighborhood.
I
also
am
a
one
car
family
with
more
than
one
person
in
it,
and
this
is
a
great
neighborhood
to
do
that.
There's
you
know
grocery
stores,
hardware
stores,
restaurants,
a
liquor
store,
like
even
a
clothing,
store,
all
right
in
this
area
that
you
could
easily
bike
to
which
me
and
my
family
do
often
so
I'm
supportive
of
the
project.
I
also
love
reusing
the
church,
it's
beautiful
and
it's
sort
of
iconic
on
the
street
there
so
I'll
be
supporting
the
motion.
I
Okay,
sorry,
one
more
thing:
I
I
just
wanted
to
note
that
there
is
affordable
in
this
too,
even
though
they
don't
have
to,
and
I
would
like
to
see
that
remain-
and
I
appreciate
you
all
doing
that
too.
So
I
we
didn't
talk
about
that
at
all,
but
I
just
want
that
on
the
record
that
I
like
that.
B
A
H
J
J
The
existing
properties
at
1312
or
the
existing
properties
are
1312
university
avenue,
northeast
315
and
319
13
avenue
northeast,
which
are
two
duplexes
and
a
triplex
respectively,
and
then
the
property
at
the
corner
is
323,
13th
avenue
northeast,
and
that
is
an
existing
two-story
commercial
building
with
irritate
and
the
peacock
lounge.
On
the
first
floor,
the
property
has
a
mix
of
zoning,
so
two
of
the
lots
are
zoned
r2e,
two
fam
or
I'm
sorry.
Multiple
family
district
and
two
of
the
laws
are
zoned
c1,
which
is
a
neighborhood
commercial
district.
J
J
The
applicant
is
proposing
a
new
planned
unit
development,
which
includes
the
new
construction
of
a
four-story
mixed-use
building
with
56
dwelling
in
I'm
sorry,
53
dwelling
units
and
a
commercial
space
along
13th
avenue
northeast.
That
space
is
about
2160
square
feet
in
area.
The
building
would
also
include
56
off
street
parking
spaces
that
are
within
the
structure
and
access
from
university
avenue
northeast
there's
an
existing
driveway
in
curbcut
along
university.
J
The
existing
two-story
building
would
remain
and
the
applicant
is
seeking
approval
of
five
land-use
applications,
three
of
which
have
to
do
with
ensuring
that
the
zoning
is
consistent
with
the
development
plan.
J
So
the
first
rezoning
is
to
rezone
1312
university
avenue,
northeast
and
315
13th
avenue
northeast
from
r2b
to
or2
and
then
319
13th
avenue
northeast
and
a
portion
of
323
13th
avenue
northeast
to
or2.
So
I
have
a
map
that
kind
of
best
illustrates
kind
of
the
proposed
zoning,
so
two
on
what
we
would
think
of
as
kind
of
the
the
redevelopment
site
they're
adjusting
some
common
lot
lines
between
parcels.
So
this
kind
of
shows
the
air
t
two-story
building
would
retain
its
c1
zoning.
J
Staff
is
recommending
approval
of
the
requested
land
use
applications,
starting
with
the
rezoning,
so
staff
finds
that
the
proposed
rezoning
of
the
site
to
or2
and
then
also
adding
the
split
zoning
overlay
district
is
consistent
with
the
following
goals
and
policies
of
the
comprehensive
plan.
So
the
goals
are
stated
here:
one
two,
nine
and
ten,
and
then
also
policies
related
to
access
to
housing,
commercial
goods
and
services,
a
pedestrian
oriented
building
to
site
design
and
open
spaces.
Within
a
new
development.
J
We
have
some
mixed
classification
for
future
land
use
policy
here,
so
starting
with
1312
university
avenue
northeast.
So
that's
an
existing
duplex.
It's
located
on
the
goods
and
services
corridor,
which
is
university
avenue
the
remaining
parcels,
the
other
three
parcels
along
13th
avenue
northeast,
are
designated
as
corridor
mixed
use
so
that
corridor
mixed
use
designation,
allows
us
to
consider
expansion
of
commercial
zoning
or
or
encourages
uses
beyond,
just
residential
that
we
might
expect,
maybe
just
in
the
in
the
urban
neighborhood
district
and
then,
additionally,
that
feature
of
the
goods
and
services
corridor.
J
That
also
encourages
goods
and
services
itself
and
then
also
an
increase
in
density
and
then
the
quarter.
Four
is
the
built
form
guidance.
J
So,
just
to
reiterate,
the
rezoning
here
from
r2b
in
a
portion
of
the
site
to
c1
to
the
or2
district
is
really
to
resolve
the
conflict
between
the
existing
zoning
classifications
and
the
built
form
which
here
is
corridor
for
the
quarter.
Districts
are
intended
to
accommodate
higher
density
than
just
triplexes
for
what
the
site
is
zoned
for
on
those
two
kind
of
l-shaped
parcels.
J
J
So
with
the
establishment
of
the
pud,
that's
10
points
the
periphery
yards
five
points.
A
total
of
15
points
are
required
for
this
plan
unit
development,
as
proposed
by
the
applicant.
They
are
exceeding
the
minimum
15
points
by
providing
20
points
and
they're
doing
that
by
providing
active
liner
uses
in
the
parking
garage,
they
have
an
art
feature,
they're,
going
to
be
doing
a
reflective
roof,
there's
a
shared
vehicle
within
the
structure,
and
then
they
also
have
a
recycling
storage
area.
J
The
applicant
is
also
seeking
a
lot
coverage
variants.
This
is
where
again
kind
of
the
the
illustration
will
hopefully
help
a
little
bit
to
kind
of
show.
There's
existing
portions
of
the
site
that
are
zoned
commercial
and
existing
site,
parts
of
the
site
that
are
zoned
residential,
so
the
built
form
overlay,
district
controls,
lock
coverage
and
it
has
different
percentages
for
residential
and
office
residential
from
commercial
in
industrial
and
downtown.
J
But
in
this
case
just
commercial
we'll
talk
about
so
the
applicant
is
seeking
a
variance
to
increase
that
maximum
lot
coverage
for
proposed
lot,
one
from
70
to
75
percent.
So
today,
in
your
packets,
you
received
a
staff
memorandum,
updating
that
staff
is
working
with
the
applicant
to
try
to
reduce
the
lot
coverage
requested,
but
they
are
still
requesting
that
variance
to
75
percent.
J
J
So
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
granting
this
variance
based
on
the
following
findings.
So
staff
finds
that
practical
difficulties
exist
in
complying
with
this
requirement
for
the
maximum
lock
coverage
due
to
the
existing
split
zoning
of
the
parcels
and
the
multiple
street
frontages,
the
parcels
included
in
lot.
1
have
that
combination
of
r2b
and
c1
zoning
and
the
applicant
is
proposing
to
rezone
all
of
lot
one
for
consistency
for
that
new
construction.
J
J
There's
approximately
72
100
square
feet
of
that
lot,
one
that's
owned,
c1
and
then
the
the
increase
to
get
to
that
75
percent
is
only
about
1150
square
feet
and
then
also
by
retaining
that
existing
building.
It's
creating
an
l-shaped
parcel
based
on
the
adjacent
residential
structures
to
the
north
along
university
and
also
to
the
west
along
13th
avenue
northeast,
is
creating
two
street
frontages,
where
we
have
additional
policies
that
encourage
building
this
building
up
and
that
is
covering
the
site.
Zoned,
2b
or
2
with
more
structured
footprint.
J
The
majority
of
the
site
is
designated
as
that
corridor,
mixed
use,
which
encourages
commercial
zoning
where
appropriate
in
mixed
use
in
multi-story
buildings
and,
lastly,
staff
finds
that
the
proposed
variants
will
not
alter
the
essential
character
of
the
locality
or
be
injurious
to
the
use
and
enjoyment
of
other
property
in
the
vicinity.
The
applicant
is
exceeding
their
minimum
required
yards,
we're
adjacent
to
low
density,
residential
along
the
north
and
the
west,
and
additionally,
the
site
already
has
that
combination
of
residential
and
commercial
zoning.
J
The
last
application
is
the
preliminary
and
final
plat,
and
that's
just
to
redraw
the
property
boundaries
to
kind
of
delineate
between
lot,
one
for
the
new
construction
and
then
the
remainder
is
lot
two
for
the
existing
two-story
commercial
building.
A
preliminary
and
final
plat
are
a
requirement
as
a
planning
development,
so
those
applications
are
before
you
today.
G
The
one
of
the
earning
of
points
was
the
art
feature
which
I
understand
is
going
to
be
a
mural
on
one
of
the
two
walls.
Is
there
anything
about
said
about
the
size
of
that
mural?
Is
there
I
mean
no,
we
shouldn't
be
designing
it
here,
but
is
there
is
any
kind
of
understanding?
Is
it's
going
to
be
a
large
one
or
what.
J
The
thank
you,
commissioner,
ford
president
olson.
The
condition
within
the
zoning
code
in
order
to
allow
for
points
to
be
awarded
for
an
art
feature
are
specific
to
the
valuation
of
the
art
piece.
So
it
has
to
be.
I
believe
it's
a
quarter
of
a
percent
of
the
project
cost.
So
it's
the
cost.
That's
going
to
determine
the
the
mural
itself
and
not
necessarily
the
size.
G
J
So
the
zoning
code
is
very
specific
in
that
we're
not
allowed
to
regulate
art,
and
that
typically
comes
up
when
we
look
at
signage
and
so
as
far
as
evaluation
of
the
size
and
and
the
type
and
the
message
etc.
That
has
not
yet
been
provided
to
staff,
but
perhaps
that
would
be
a
good
question
to
ask
the
applicant.
V
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
so
I
sat
in
on
a
zoom
presentation
back,
I
believe,
was
in
january
the
developer
game
two
to
the
share
of
the
neighborhood,
and
could
you
explain
this
pocket
park
issue?
It
seemed
to
why
it
seemed
to
me
that
the
developer
was
asking
for
a
different
designation
land
from
or1.
J
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Rainville
president
olson,
I
can't
speak
to
the
details
about
the
evolution
of
the
pocket
park.
What
I
can
say
pretty,
hopefully
very
clearly,
is
that
the
parcel
currently
that
exists,
that
the
the
pocket
park
is
to
exist
on
in
the
future
today
is
zoned
commercial,
as
proposed
in
order
to
allow
for
the
development
is
going
to
be
rezoned
to
or2.
J
It
allows
for
the
mixed-use
building.
The
park
would
be
allowed
in
either
district,
so
if
they
would
have
were
if
they
were
able
to
obtain
the
consent
signatures
required
to
rezone
the
entire
site
to
see
one,
they
could
have
done
that.
Instead,
they
pursued
the
or2
district,
which
still
allows
for
the
proposed
structure
as
designed
and
the
pocket
park.
V
Okay-
and
I
have
several
more
questions,
so
could
you
speak
to
the
obligation
of
the
city?
Traffic
has
has
come
up,
especially
university.
Where
are
we
standing
on
that?
What's
the
staff's
feelings
on
it
is
a
state
highway.
It.
J
Is
the
state
highway?
Yes,
that
is
correct.
Commissioner
rainville,
president
olson,
so
staff
had
early
communication
with
our
public
works
department
about
the
proposed
parking
garage
entrance
being
on
university
in
proximity
to
the
controlled
intersection.
There's
a
light
there
at
13th
and
university
avenue
northeast.
J
They
determined
that
the
that
the
existing
curb
cut
and
the
existing
traffic
and
the
driveway
that
was
the
most
appropriate
location
to
provide
a
parking
garage
access
and
the
site
will
be
continued
to
be
evaluated
through
the
preliminary
development
review
process.
So
if
the
applications
are
approved
will
continue
to
work
with
the
traffic
engineer.
J
In
addition,
the
subject
property
is,
as
proposed
exceeds
50
dwelling
units.
Therefore,
they
were
required
to
provide
a
travel
demand
management
plan.
So
that's
been
included
in
the
public
record
today
and
has
been
evaluated
by
our
traffic
engineer
as
well,
so
as
proposed,
there
would
be
56
parking
spaces
available
to
residents
within
the
proposed
structure
and
that
evaluation
about
traffic
impacts
is
included
in
the
travel
and
management
plan.
V
Okay
and
one
last
question:
if
I
may,
the
the
issue
of
shadowing
has
come
up
quite
a
bit
as
well
in
public
testimony
letters.
Could
you
speak
to
that.
J
Absolutely
commissioner
rainville
president
olson,
the
proposed
structure
is
four
stories
and
it's
less
than
56
feet
in
height.
There
is
a
potential
impact
for
a
change
in
in
that
built
form,
but
that
is
allowed
by
the
zoning
code.
Today's
rezoning
does
not
change
the
fact
that
the
zoning
currently
allows
for
a
four-story
building
56
feet
in
height.
The
proposed
rezoning
is
only
to
allow
for
more
than
three
dwelling
units.
There
is
not
a
tool
for
staff
to
evaluate
shadowing
for
a
building
that
complies
with
the
zoning
ordinance.
Okay,.
V
And
I
do
have
one
more
so
another
issue
that's
been
raised
by
the
residents
is-
and
I
don't
know
if
you
can
answer
this
or
maybe
it's
an
applicant
but
the
digging
or
the
pounding
of
the
ground,
because
the
homes
are
so
old
or
as
old.
The
right
word.
O
V
They're
they've
been
around
a
long
time.
I'm
very
tired.
It's
been
a
long
day,
but
could
somebody
and
if
it
isn't
you
maybe
it's,
the
applicant
could
speak
to
potential
damage
to
those
homes.
J
J
That's
provided
the
applicant
is
exceeding
their
minimum
setback,
so
there
is
a
bit
of
a
separation
between
the
adjacent
dwellings
where
that
structure
is
going
to
be
proposed
in
the
areas
to
be
excuse
me
excavated,
but
as
far
as
any
potential
damage
during
construction
which
can
occur
that
occur,
the
remedy
is
through
the
two
private
property
owners.
That's
not
part
of
the
city
evaluation.
There's
certainly.
J
G
A
I
Commissioner
mcguire
thanks
so
mike,
I
guess
two
questions,
so
it's
my
understanding
that
like
if
this
came
forward
in
a
year
after
the
rezoning
study,
we
would
only
be
looking
at
the
conditional
use,
permit,
site,
plan,
review
and
variance.
Is
that.
J
Correct
it's
difficult
to
project
exactly
what
the
rezoning
study
is
going
to
conclude.
However,
the
proposed
combination
or
the
existing
combination
of
future
land
use
and
built
form
would
indicate
that
higher
density
zoning
would
be
allowed.
We
have
properties
that
are
both
on
a
commercial
corridor
and
designated
as
corridor
mixed
use.
That
would
lend
someone
to
think
that
commercial
zoning
would
likely
occur
here,
but
I
don't
want
to
preview
something
that
I
I
certainly
don't
know,
but
you
could
see
that,
based
on
the
guidance
commercial
zoning
is
appropriate
here.
J
So
if
that
happened
in
the
future,
I'm
not
even
sure
that
the
planning
of
development
conditional
use
permit
would
have
really
been
required.
They
could
have
really
disassociated
the
two
parcels
and
just
did
just
developed
lot,
one
on
its
own
and
the
only
application
that
would
have
been
required.
A
site
plan
review.
I
Okay,
you
knew
where
my
question
was
going
clearly,
okay,
so
then
I
guess
I'll
have
a
follow-up
question
about
the
planned
unit
development.
So
it's
my
understanding
that
with
the
planned
unit
development,
so
our
code
lays
out
specific
things
that
we
can
and
can't
consider.
I
know
a
lot
of
other
places
can
have
architectural
standards
and
I
guess,
like
increased
aesthetics
as
part
of
the
pud,
for
that
flexibility.
I
Is
that
something
that
we
can
talk
about
more
tonight
or
is?
Would
that
not
be
allowed
to
be
discussed
under
our
code,
because
I
just
saw
some
stuff
about
kind
of
not
meeting
the
vibe
of
the
neighborhood
and
obviously
vibe
is
subject.
You
know
aesthetics
are
subjective,
but
I
guess
I'm
wondering
if
that
can
be
part
of
our
discussion
or
if
we
can't
under
the
code.
J
Mcguire
president
wilson,
I
would
say
that
you
can
certainly
tie
conditions
of
approval
to
the
appropriate
land
use
applications
if
we're
mitigating
either
a
finding
that
has
not
been
met
or
a
site
plan
review
standard
that
has
not
been
met.
In
this
particular
case,
the
architectural
design
meets
all
of
the
requirements
for
site
plan
review
and
it's
staff's
opinion
that
the
the
massing
is
appropriate
and
we've
kind
of
evaluated
that
kind
of
the
length
these
staff
reports.
J
I'm
sorry,
I'm
not
thinking
of
all
the
the
findings
related
to
the
pud,
but
certainly
if
we
think
that
there's
a
finding
specific
to
the
planning,
development
or
site
plan
review
that
we
think
would
be
appropriate.
It
could
be
suggested.
I
S
Good
evening
president
olson
members
of
the
commission,
my
name
is
pete
keeley,
collage,
architects
at
708,
15th,
avenue,
northeast,
and
so
first
I
want
to
thank
shanna
for
helping
us
sort
through
all
the
different
lot
lines
and
and
whatnot
I'll
try
to
answer
some
of
the
questions
and
kind
of
keep
this
brief.
S
As
far
as
the
variance
from
the
75
to
70
percent,
we
went
in
with
the
intention
to
actually
meet
that
guideline.
What
we
have
found
in
this
is
that
we
are
trying
to
keep
the
property
line
on
the
rezoning
portion
of
it,
not
at
a
zero
lot
line
condition.
We
can
meet
that
or
come
very,
very
close
to
that
as
a
zero
outline-
and
this
is
maybe
part
of
the
conversation
back
and
forth
with
the
planning
staff
and
the
reason
to
have
a
couple
extra
feet
is
one
to
or
have
a
lot
line.
S
That
changes
a
little
bit
is
to
provide
to
maintain
some
of
the
windows
on
the
existing
building
and
to
provide
for
a
few
anomalies
in
the
building,
such
as
a
drain,
pipe
that
comes
out
and
sticks
out
a
foot
or
so,
and
so
the
idea
of
this
was
to
have
a
little
bit
of
flexibility
in
order
to
make
the
best
use
and
the
best
preservation
of
that
existing
building.
That's
why
we're
asking
for
the
flexibility
from
the
70
to
75.?
S
We
did
look
at
reducing
that
but,
like
I
said,
there's
a
few
things
that
are
maybe
getting
in
in
the
way.
A
couple
other
questions
I
I'll
try
to
answer
most
of
them
that
I
remember
the
art.
We
are
planning
to
do
two
art
murals,
actually
one
in
the
pocket
park,
so
the
the
west
side
of
the
existing
building
and
the
north
side
of
the
existing
building
as
well.
So
we're
looking
at
two,
nearly
full-size
murals
in
those
locations
working
with
the
neighborhood
group
as
well
to
kind
of
understand.
S
Maybe
what
the
vibe
is
lack
of
a
better,
a
better
word,
but
so
we're
looking
at
those
as
being
kind
of
painted
murals,
and
I
think
a
lot
of
this
had
to
do
with
kind
of
trying
to
create
the
pocket
park
and
so
trying
to
activate
it
very
strongly
on
the
west
side,
but
also
creating
the
wall
of
the
existing
building,
where
it
went
from
the
kind
of
existing
fancier
brick.
So
to
speak
to
the
common
brick
on
the
side.
S
Its
existing
paint
at
its
existing
kind
of
just
a
flat
surface
now
is
to
paint
that
out
to
kind
of
create
a
very
interesting
pocket
park
in
the
middle,
along
with
some
landscaping,
and
I
think,
first
and
foremost,
what
we
really
want
to
do
in
this
project
is:
keep
the
building
and
kind
of
keep
the
functionality
of
that
existing
building.
S
And
so
we've
kind
of
tried
to
work
this
new
building
around
the
existing
one
and
to
keep
it
viable,
including
kind
of
the
access
point
and
the
drive
access,
so
that
we
can
continue
to
pick
up
trash
in
a
similar
manner.
That
happened
before
so
and
then
really
trying
to
keep.
You
know
on
one
end,
on
the
on
13th
and
on
university
kind
of
three-story
brick
masses
on
those
which
are
are
pretty
close
to
what
the
existing
building
is.
The
existing
building's
around
30
31
feet
we're
at
about
34
on
the
brick
portion.
S
Then
it
steps
back.
So
I
guess
with
that.
I
think
there
were
a
couple
other
questions.
I'm
sorry,
I
don't
remember
them
but
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
I
do
have
michael
pink,
who
is
the
the
developer
on
the
project
here
as
well,
and
I
know
he's
been
through
a
lot
of
the
neighborhood
meetings
and
has
met
with
a
lot
of
the
individual
homeowners
and
business
owners
along
the
street
as
well.
So.
V
Thank
you
manager.
My
question
was
during
the
construction
process:
potential
damage
to
existing
homes,
yeah.
S
So
the
the
existing
site
actually
has
a
lot
of
loose
fill
on
it.
So
at
one
point
it
was
probably
filled
in.
We
have
had
soil
borings
and
done
a
lot
of
testing
out
there,
and
so
we
in
order
to
actually
build
the
building,
we're
actually
going
to
have
to
excavate
a
good
portion
of
that
of
that
site
for
the
loose
fills,
and
so
as
we're
doing
that
as
we're
going
down.
It's
going
to
be
a
combination
of
shoring
and
cut.
S
R
Thanks
pete,
could
you
talk
a
little
bit
about
is
maybe
a
little
bit
more
esoteric
question,
but
you
know
I
really
appreciate
that
sort
of
two,
the
sort
of
public
realm
side
of
this
project,
the
scale
the
articulation
the
I
guess.
It's,
the
the
sort
of
backyard
of
the
two
the
west
and
the
north
facades
seem
to
drop
off
in
terms
of
detail
and
material,
and,
to
be
honest,
I
think,
on
the
west
side,
a
big
shiny,
metal,
west-facing
reflector
into
somebody's
backyard
might
be
a
little
tough.
S
Oh,
we
got
to
where
that
was
well.
We
so
obviously
there's
a
lot
of
work
on
the
the
rest
of
the
the
sides
right
and
there's
a
fair
amount
of
expense
on
the
rest
of
the
sides
to
create
the
pocket
park,
the
in
and
out
the
courtyard
the
recesses
the
step
back.
So
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
were
kind
of
staying
off,
13th
and
off
university,
so
that
was
kind
of
the
starting
point.
S
I
think
on
the
west
and
the
the
north
side
was
maybe
a
little
bit
more
utilitarian,
but
we
did
actually
step
back
the
northeast
corner
of
that
building.
So
to
try
to
align
the
very
northeast
corner
with
the
adjacent
home
to
the
north.
We
also
stepped
back
the
southwest
corner.
So
again
it
kind
of
matched
the
the
front.
The
setback
on
the
of
the
existing
home
as
well.
So
we
kind.
D
O
S
From
the
outside,
for
maybe
the
esoteric
we
kind
of
went
from
the
public
side
into
the
back
side
and
and
then
tried
to
find
some
efficiencies.
So
excuse
me,
then,
on
that
we
did
want
to
kind
of
create
a
base
to
that.
We
do
have
kind
of
the
upper
level
the
pieces
that
kind
of
stick
out
as
well.
S
I
do
think,
as
far
as
the
shiny
metal
box,
I
do
think
those
things
tend
to
fade
quite
a
bit
over
time
and
really
dull
out.
So
I
don't
see
it
being
this
shiny
metal
thing.
I
see
it
more
as
a
light
colored
and
we
wanted
to
stay
kind
of
in
a
lighter
tone,
not
try
to
be
too
ominous
with
someone
there's
a
lot
of
dark
buildings.
Now
I'm
trying
to
keep
it
actually
light
thinking
that.
O
R
S
R
You
I
appreciate
I
I
just
maybe
a
heads
up
having
some
past
experience
with
anticipated,
reflectance
and
actual
just
kind
of
be
aware
of
that.
I
think
I
think
it's
a
great
point.
A
All
right,
I'm
not
seeing
any
more
questions
from
commissioners,
so
thank
you
and
we
will
open
or
continue
the
public
hearing.
So
if
there's
anyone
who
would
like
to
speak
on
this
item,
you
can
come
to
the
podium
and
just
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record
and
go
ahead.
F
F
I've
lived
on
the
corner
of
14th
and
university
for
over
25
years
with
my
wife
and
two
children
and
a
brother
with
autism.
I
have
concerns
about
the
proposed
60-car
parking
garage
with
its
only
entrance
off
university
avenue
and
the
much
increased
danger
it
will
present
to
the
safety
of
our
children.
Elderly
bicyclists
and
people
who
walk
traffic
is
already
terrible
on
university
avenue.
It's
a
state
highway
and
a
truck
thoroughfare
that
goes
to
the
middle
of
our
neighborhood
from
the
railroad
container
yard.
F
A
parking
garage
with
its
only
entrance
off
university
avenue
will
only
make
this
much
worse.
Congestion
will
increase
and
vehicles
will
seek
to
avoid
this
by
whipping
down
our
side
streets.
I
am
concerned
about
our
most
vulnerable
as
they
attempt
to
cross
much
busier
streets
to
and
from
school
church
and
other
venues.
F
F
F
The
developer
has
provided
a
minor
travel
demand
management
plan
that
talks
a
lot
about
how
congestion
will
be
minimized
by
being
biker
and
pedestrian
friendly,
doing
ride,
share
and
more
policy.
Six
of
the
plan
prioritizes
walking
first
followed
by
bicycling
and
transit
use
and,
lastly,
motor
vehicle
use.
I'm
going
to
say
that
part
again.
Lastly,
motor
vehicle
use
building
a
60
car
parking
garage
of
already
busy
university
does
not
accomplish
these
goals.
In
fact,
it
will
do
the
opposite,
and
everyone
will
be
in
greater
danger.
F
F
U
U
As
to
brad's
concern
about
traffic,
one
of
the
major
issues
is
that
this
exit
is
less
than
a
half
a
block
off
of
the
stoplight
of
an
area.
That's
already
backed
up
for
three
or
four
blocks
to
the
north,
and
how
is
traffic
going
to
get
in,
and
out
of?
That
is
what
brad's
comments
were
the
major
concern
of,
and
one
concern
that
I
have
is
with
that
many
units,
and
I
saw
a
plan
showing
their
dumpster
proposal.
U
So
if
a
garbage
truck
drives
down
that
corridor
to
pick
up
the
dumpsters
when
it
backs
out,
it's
not
going
to
be
able
to
see
pedestrian
traffic
and
it's
not
going
to
be
able
to
see
oncoming
traffic
on
university
avenue,
and
I
don't
think
that
that's
being
taken
into
consideration.
So
that's
just
on
the
whole
traffic
thing.
U
This
prod.
This
project
doesn't
fit
within
the
conforms
of
the
character
and
charm
of
this
area,
and
this
area
was
the
linchpin
in
the
development
of
the
northeast
arch
district.
Its
singular
revive,
singularly
started
the
revitalization
of
the
entire
northeast
area,
that's
now
thriving
and
this
type
of
development
of
multi-unit
housing.
U
Four
stories
tall
at
the
central
point
of
this
neighborhood
of
this
iconic
section
of
13th
and
university,
jeopardizes
the
area,
and
I
know
that
the
developer
owns
approximately
8
to
10
more
properties
on
13th
avenue,
and
it
is
my
great
concern
that
when
we
move
forward
on
something
like
this,
it
is
just
the
preliminary
step
to
changing
the
whole
entity
of
the
neighborhood
and
under
the
2040
plan.
That
is
a
strong
concern
in
front
of
you.
U
So
in
in
the
when
I
looked
at
the
2040
plan-
and
I
was
listening
to-
is
it
miss
caesar?
Is
it
sether
when
she
put
up
my
biggest
concern
as
far
as
the
2040
plan
goes?
Is
the
property
located
at
1312
university
avenue
northeast
and
the
2040
plan
calls
for
multiple
overlays
to
be
considered
on
all
developments
and
the
plan
on
1312
university
is
under
the
land.
U
The
property
on
1312
university
under
the
authors
of
the
2040
plan,
was
not
intended
for
the
use
being
proposed
in
front
of
you
today.
One
hundred
percent
is
not
intended,
and
so,
as
a
citizen,
I've
embraced
the
2040
plan.
I'm
pro-development,
I'm
working
with
pete
on
an
arts
project
in
northeast
minneapolis.
I'm
not
against
these
gentlemen.
At
all.
U
I've
had
discussions
with
mr
pink,
but
what
I
am
concerned
about
is
at
this
early
juncture
when
we're
just
as
citizens
being
asked
and
you,
as
the
council
in
the
board,
are
asking
to
embrace
the
2040
plan
that
just
right
out
of
the
gate,
we
are
making
a
colossal
shift
away
from
it.
This
project
is
asking
for
all
sorts
of
different
things
to
make
it
viable,
and
it's
my
contention
to
you
that
it's
not
viable
and
mostly
because
of
the
1312
property.
U
Yep,
of
course,
thank
you
when
we
initially
got
our
letter
from
the
developer
about
the
profound
per
proposed
c1
zoning
it
talked
about,
then
I
have
it
highlighted
here
that
the
proposed
area
is
less
than
what
is
allowed
under
either
zoning
classification.
In
short,
we
are
not
building
to
the
maximum
of
what
is
allowed
under
either
zoning
classification,
and
then
I
get
my
letter
that
they're
asking
to
increase
the
city's
requirement
for
that,
and
I'm
just
wondering
why
we
were
being
told
one
thing
and
another
thing
is
happening.
U
It
also
asked
us
to,
for
our
permission,
to
seek
c1
zoning
and
when
it
became
apparent
that
we
weren't
for
that
they
sidestepped
it,
and
they
came
up
with
this
split
zoning
overlay
and-
and
my
concern
is
that,
with
the
multiple
multiple
properties
they
own
on
13th
avenue
within
a
two
block
radius
of
this
of
of
this
development
that
they're
just
going
to
circumvent
the
neighborhood,
because
it
seems
as
though
they're
doing
it
now.
So.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
X
I
thank
the
planning
commission
for,
I
think,
probably
reading
a
large
document
that
I
sent
to
you,
which
included
a
number
of
arguments
or
challenges
rather
to
the
findings
of
the
staff
report.
X
I
do
want
to
bring
back
the
subject
of
overshadowing
multiple
parts
of
city
guidance
call
into
question
whether
a
development
will
affect
the
enjoyment
of
an
existing
property
and,
as
I
pointed
out
the
to
use
mr
pink's
words
unfortunate
thing
about
this
development
is
that
my
property
would
be
overshadowed
without
direct
sunlight
for
eight
months
of
the
year.
X
I
can
say,
as
a
direct
neighbor
to
this
property,
my
enjoyment
would
very
much
be
affected
and
I
want
that
to
be
clear.
Let's
see
so
we
already
touched
on
it.
Everyone
asked
some
great
questions,
so
we
touched
on
a
number
of
things
that
I
wanted
to
bring
up,
but
regarding
damage
potential
damage
to
the
property,
I
do
want
to
point
out
that
damage
would
be
expensive
and
would
be
privately
litigated,
which
I
think
is
an
important
question
to
ask
or
an
important
accountability
aspect
for
this
project.
X
I
also
want
to
bring
up
that,
though,
maybe
within
the
zoning
they
are
in
their
aligning
with
the
city
policy
for
the
parking.
X
I
think
it's
really
important
to
consider
that
also
in
the
rezoning,
if
you're
thinking
of
a
commercial
property,
I've
looked
at
many
of
the
commercial
use
properties
that
are
in
the
city
of
minneapolis.
Many
of
them
have
alleyways.
X
A
unique
characteristic
of
our
block
is
that
we
do
not
have
alleyways.
So
this
means
that
there
is
a
lack
of
setback
that
an
alleyway
would
provide
that
of
course
affects
overshadowing,
but
it
also
is
a
public
safety
matter.
I
brought
up
in
my
letter
to
this
commission
that
there
is
no
plan
in
terms
of
fire
safety.
X
X
I
think,
just
to
kind
of
reiterate
the
point
that
this
is
this
project
is
supposed
to
be
bringing
something
maybe
new
to
the
neighborhood.
X
Candidly
I
would
share.
I
don't
think
I
could
afford
to
live
in
one
of
those
apartments,
and
so
I
call
that
into
question.
That's
all
I'll
share
for
now,
but
thank
you.
A
I
I
will
ask
that
question
later.
I
promise
we'll
get
it
answered.
Is
there
anyone
else
who'd
like
to
speak
on
this
item,
all
right,
I'm
going
to
close
the
public
hearing.
Shannon.
Would
you
mind
just
telling
us
how
fire
safety
is
determined
when
a
project
comes
through.
D
J
Yes,
president
olson,
so
the
way
development
review
works
is
that
we
kind
of
start
in
the
beginning,
with
some
of
the
other
departments
and
divisions
within
the
city
of
minneapolis.
So
we
do
a
very
cursory
overview
from
a
zoning
perspective
of
identifying
the
land
use,
applications
that
are
required
and
kind
of
the
process.
J
Our
colleagues
in
public
works
look
at
a
variety
of
different
evaluation
criteria
per
their
ordinance
and
standards,
stormwater
management,
traffic,
transportation,
etc.
Fire
inspection
services
is
another
one
of
those
team
members
that
evaluates
a
project
kind
of
on
the
front
end
to
give
preliminary
feedback
construction
code
services
reviews
a
building
permit
for
compliance
with
the
the
international
building
code
as
well,
but
their
initial
feedback
is
usually
more
around
accessibility.
J
So
some
of
the
things
that
fire
inspection
services
require
of
things
like
fire
alarms,
sprinkler
systems,
smoke,
detectors
and
things
like
that,
and
then
the
building
will
would
also
require
a
construction
permit
and
that
construction
permit
evaluates.
You
know
a
sprinkler
whether
or
not
it's
required
exiting
distance.
How
far
to
ensure
the
safety
of
all
the
the
residents
within
the
structure.
I'll
just
again
note
that
this
building
is
not
lying
to
a
lot
line.
The
or2
district
requires
that
there
is
setbacks
where
adjacent
to
the
low-density
residential
districts.
V
Yes,
I
I
have
a
comment
and
I'm
and
I'm
gonna
have
a
motion.
I
stand
with
the
neighbors
on
this.
I
I
hear
you
loud
and
clear:
the
traffic
issues
fire
safety-
it's
just
troubling
to
me
that
that
those
questions
get
answered
down
the
road,
I
feel
they
should
be
answered
in
the
front
and
for
and
at
the
other
hand
I
understand
the
2040
plan.
I
understand
the
developer.
V
A
All
right,
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
discussion,
commissioner
mcguire.
I
Thank
you.
I
think
this
is
a
really
unique
project,
because
it's
like
wedged
around
an
existing
building,
which
is
quite
unique.
I
think
they've
done
a
good
job,
trying
to
increase
the
like
aesthetics
from
both
public
roads
and
I
like
the
pocket
park.
I
I
do
think
when
I'm
looking
through
the
elevations,
it's
a
bit
confusing
to
me
as
someone
who
frequents
this
area,
which,
if
I
was
driving,
which
one
the
pocket
park
would
be
and
which
one
the
entrance
to
the
parking
ramp
would
be
if
you're,
just
driving,
because
when
you
look
they're
just
kind
of
both
gaps
between
two
buildings,
so
I
think
I'm
in
favor
of
the
project,
but
I
would
want
to
see
some
sort
of
distinguishing
between
what
entrance
a
car
should
use
and
what
the
pocket
park
is
from,
because
cars
on
university
do
they
are
going
to
be
turning
in
there
quickly.
I
So
if
you
could
just
work
with
staff
to
make
sure
that
there's
some
way
to
distinguish
that,
if
that's,
you
know
pulling
the
tables
out
in
front
of
the
building,
because
everything's
kind
of
behind
the
front
facade
of
the
building.
So
that
would
be
one
thing:
I'd
want
to
see
updated
and
then
I
I'm
I
am
concerned
about
the
the
finishes
facing
the
existing
residents.
I
I
like
that
the
balconies
are
on
that
corner,
so
it
softens
it
a
little
bit
and
I
like
the
brick,
but
I
I
I
don't
know
I
I
tend
to
think
that
we
sh
you
know.
I
I
like
that
you
made
the
public
facades,
look
really
nice,
but
I
think
we
should
make
the
ones
abutting
existing
residents.
Look
really
nice
as
well.
I
So
maybe
if,
if
staff
and
the
residents
could
work
together
on
that,
that
would
be
really
nice
and
then,
besides
that
yeah,
I
think
just
like
trying
to
meet
more
of
the
historical
context
of
this
neighborhood
with
the
finishes.
So
the
brick
along
13th
in
university
is
nice,
and
then
I
did
just
want
to
know
from
staff
if
mndot
had
like
has
to
approve
it
or
just
like
process
wise
how
that
works.
Just
for
my
own
benefit.
J
Thank
you,
commissioner,
mcguire
and
president
olson.
My
understanding
is
that
public
works
whenever
we
work
with
an
adjacent
agency
and
sometimes
instead
of
county
and
sometimes
at
the
state,
they
have
to
work
in
in
kind
of
conjunction
in
concert
again
kind
of
recognizing
there's
an
existing
trash
that
pick
up
picks
up
an
existing
driveway.
That's
that's
there
today,
so
that
was
part
of
the
evaluation
when
public
works
looked
at
this
originally.
Thank
you.
R
Thank
you.
I
I'm
I'm
tending
to
approve
this
project
as
well,
but
I
am
because
I
think
the
urban
spaces
are
are
actually
very
creative,
they're
oriented
right.
We
have
the
pocket
park
in
the
south
side,
but
I
am
super
concerned
about
those
two
residential
walls.
There's
a
urban
pattern
and
typology
that
exists
on
13th
avenue
that
doesn't
exist
on
university.
R
When
you
combine
those
things
around
a
wall,
we
create
a
pretty
harsh
condition
for
those
neighbors,
so
I
think
the
really
looking
at
those
materials
kind
of
playing
those
down,
backgrounding
them
as
much
as
you
can.
R
R
I
think
it's
a
creative
way
to
maintain
an
existing
structure
and
create
new
vital
spaces
around
that,
and
I
I'll
just
you
know,
I
think
we
can't
the
parking
issue
is
is
is
volatile.
I
mean
the
project
just
before
this.
We
didn't
have
enough
parking
on
site.
This
one's
got
too
much
parking
on
site.
I
don't
I
wonder
if
it's
the
plan
itself
or
how
the
traffic
works,
but
we
seem
to
we're
at
loggerheads
on
every
project,
whether
it's
too
much
or
not
enough
parking.
C
G
I
actually
like
this
project
too,
but
I
am
I'm
quite
concerned
about
the
safety
issue
and
the
traffic
issue
first
of
all
in
general,
and
then
the
the
exiting
and
entrancing
very,
very
close
to
the
the
traffic
signals
at
13th
and
university.
I'm
actually
very
familiar
with
this
area.
I
don't
live
there,
but
I'm
very
familiar
with
it,
and
I
I
think
that
there
are
some
very
serious
traffic
problems
and
that
is
and
safety
problems,
and
that
is
what
concerns
me
and
I
I
don't
see
them
being
addressed
so
far.
G
That's
why
or
at
who.
I
am
right
now.
I
wonder
if
I,
if,
if
commissioner
rainville
might
consider
laying
over
the
issue
for
a
while
until
the
next
meeting,
I
see
that
we
have
until
am
I
correct
until
the
issue
that
the
timing
is
still
appropriate.
As
I
call
I'm
looking
at
the
deadlines
are
in
the
report
here.
G
A
V
I
would
be
agreeable
to
laying
it
over
if
somehow
we
can
get
a
better
handle
on
these
concerns
that
the
residents
have
brought
up
about
the
traffic
and
and
the
safety.
If
that's
a
possibility.
A
J
Thank
you,
commissioner
rainville
and
president
olson.
I
I
would
say
that
staff
has
reviewed
it.
The
condition
exists
on
both
13th
and
university.
We
have
a
controlled
intersection,
so
the
intent
behind
the
design
for
the
applicant
was
to
locate
commercial
along
13th
and
to
not
put
the
parking
garage
on
13th.
But
the
the
the
tool
for
evaluating
the
traffic
analysis
in
depth
is
our
public.
Our
team
in
public
works
in
this
case
in
concert
with
with
mid-dot,
so
staff
has
evaluated
the
traffic
congestion
residential
uses.
J
Don't
have
the
parking
changeover
like
you
would
see
for,
like
maybe
like
a
reception
meeting
hall
or
something
that
has
a
much
higher
intensity
shopping
center
traffic
use
the
proposed
project
meets
it
doesn't
exceed,
I
should
say,
does
not
exceed
our
maximum
parking
requirement.
J
I
I
guess
it
would
be
helpful
for
staff
to
know
what
kind
of
evaluation
in
addition
to
what's
been
provided
in
the
staff
report
would
be
helpful
in
making
a
decision
next
time.
Thank
you.
Thanks.
A
I
guess
I'm
not
seeing
any
questions
up.
I
would
not
support
pushing
this
off.
A
I
support
this
project.
This
reminds
me
of
the
van
buren
project.
This
was
this
is
allowed
based
upon
the
legal
findings
that
staff
have
determined
it's
in
compliance
with
the
comprehensive
plan.
This,
the
planning
commission
would
have
to
make
alternate
legal
findings
to
deny
this
and
I'm
not
seeing
what
those
would
be.
So
I
would
be
opposed
to
the
motion
on
the
table,
but
would
support
a
motion
to
approve
this
project
today,
commissioner
campbell.
V
I'm
not
a
lawyer,
so
I
I
do
not
know
what
the
legal
justification
is.
I'm
listening
to
the
residents,
they
bring
up
a
really
strong
argument
about
traffic.
I'm
familiar
with
this
intersection.
This
stretch
and
it's
dangerous
as
it
is,
I'm
I'm
posing
the
question
of
how
do
we
get
an
answer
to
their
question
about
the
traffic.
I
I
guess
in
general
I
would
support
the
project
too
and
just
say
that
it
sounds
like
mndot
has
to
approve
any
increased
traffic
flow
onto
the
existing
access
point.
Is
that
correct?
So
I
would
trust
our
staff,
our
police,
public
safety
and
then
mndot's
staff
to
evaluate
if
this
access
would
work,
because
I
don't
think
we
have
all
the
traffic
counts
in
front
of
us
and
mndot
would
get
that
information
and
then
city
staff
would
get
that
information.
Is
that
correct.
J
Thank
you,
commissioner,
mcguire
and
the
president.
I
wasn't
sure
if
that
was
definitely.
J
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I
didn't
like
assume
too
much
at
the
the
jurisdiction
about
whether
or
not
a
traffic
study
is
required
is
not
something
I
I
could
answer
today.
What
I
can
say
is
based
on
city
requirements.
This
proposed
project
in
scale
does
not
rise
to
the
level
of
a
traffic
study.
We
are
looking
at
53
dwelling
units
in
56
parking
spaces.
J
That
is
not.
It
doesn't
rise
to
the
level
of
a
discretionary
travel
demand
management
plan.
It
doesn't
rise
to
the
level
of
a
of
a
major
travel
demand
management
plan
would
which
would
be
at
250
dwelling
units
just
for
scale.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
I
So
I
guess
to
follow
up
on
that.
I
appreciate
that
they
have
added
parking
to
the
project
and
you
know
we
really
can't
consider
parking
at
all
because
we
do
not
have
parking
minimums
in
this
city,
but
I
appreciate
that
they
added
that
because
I
don't
think
the
neighbors
want
parking
in
front
of
their
houses
and
I
don't
think
we
want
the
access
off
of
13th.
I
So
it
feels
like
we're
kind
of
stuck
between
a
rock
and
a
hard
place,
because
you're
either
going
to
put
the
access
on
13th
or
you're,
going
to
put
the
access
on
university
so
consolidating
it
on
the
busiest
road
makes
sense
to
me,
and
I
think
for
me
personally,
I
would
not
want
parking
in
front
of
everyone.
You
know
people
are
probably
a
few
people
are
going
to
want
to
have
a
car,
and
you
know
I
would
prefer
them
parking
underground
than
parking
in
front
of
my
house,
especially
with
the
school
nearby.
I
So
to
me,
keeping
that
access
off
of
university
is
the
most
thoughtful
approach
and
then
keeping
the
pocket
park
more
confined
to
the
neighborhood
across
from
like
anchor
fish
and
chips
is
right.
There.
I
think,
that's
like
a
nice
little
vibe.
To
quote
both
of
the
comments
we
haven't
brought
about,
say
vibe,
so
I
think
they
are
trying
to
be
thoughtful.
I
So
in
terms
of
the
things
we
can
consider,
if
it's
you
know
injurious
to
the
use
of
other
people's
property
and
if
it
com
conforms
with
the
2040
plan,
I
would
say
you
know
it
meets
the
2040
plan,
they're
really
trying
to
be
thoughtful.
I
do
think
there
are
a
couple
little
places
for
improvements
that
I
kind
of
noted
on
here,
but
I
would
I
would
support
it.
A
All
right,
yeah
I'll
just
add
you
know
I
wish
I
had
said
this
on
the
van
buren
project.
Like
I
said
this
reminds
me
of
that.
You
know
we
a
lot
of
these
projects
go
on
consent
and
we
don't
even
talk
about
them
and
because
a
neighbor
neighborhood
organizes,
which
is
great
and
important,
you
know
not
all
neighborhoods
have
the
ability
to
do
that
or
the
resources
to
do
that
and
we
approve
those
all
the
time.
A
So
I
don't
know
if
commissioners
aren't
reading
their
packets
and
they
don't
know
what's
going
on
consent
or
you
know,
why
are
we
treating
this
project
different
than
other
projects
that
are
so
similar
so
again
I'll
be
voting?
No
on
the
motion?
A
A
The
motion
is
to
do
to
deny
all
of
the
applications
correct,
shannon
you
want
to
thank
you.
J
Thank
you
vice
president
and
president.
Yes,
in
order
to
deny
the
project,
we
have
to
make
findings
to
the
contrary,
notwithstanding
the
staff
recommendation
so
for
the
rezoning,
you
would
have
to
find
that
the
rezoning
is
inconsistent
with
the
policies
of
the
comprehensive
plan
and
state
policies
where
it
is
in
conflict
for
the
conditional
use
permit.
J
There
are
a
large
number
of
findings
that
are
required
that
we
would
have
to
find
have
findings
to
the
contrary,
same
with
the
variants
same
with
the
site
plan
review
and,
lastly,
with
the
preliminary
and
final
plot.
So
there
are
findings
that
are
associated
with
with
each
of
those
land
use
applications,
and
we
would
need
to
have
findings
in
order
to
find
the
contrary
of
staff
recommendation.
Thank
you.
I
Commissioner,
mcguire
sorry
follow
up
for
staff.
Sorry,
I
was
trying
to
catch
you
before
you
walked
away
for
the
conditional
use.
Permit
findings.
It's
my
understanding.
A
conditional
use
permit
isn't
allowed
used
within
a
district
as
long
as
you
place
certain
conditions
on
it
for
approval,
so
a
conditional
use,
which
is
the
beauty
in
this
case,
which
is
odd,
is
is
essentially
an
allowed
use
in
that
district
unless
they
cannot
meet
certain
conditions.
Is
that
correct?
That
is
accurate?
I
A
All
right,
the
public
hearing
is
closed.
A
So
don't
put
that
mask
back
sorry
if,
if
there
are
no
findings
in
theory
and
we
voted
on
emotion
without
findings,
what.
A
J
Well,
we
can't-
I
mean
you
honestly,
you
have
to
make
findings
in
order
for
you
to
make
that
decision
and
what
happens.
There's
a
follow-up,
if
you
remember
for
635
van
buren,
yes
written
reasons
of
denial
have
to
accompany
the
agenda
at
the
following
meeting,
so
we
have
to
state
those
and
those
have
to
be
adopted
by
the
city
planning
commission
at
your
next
meeting.
I
believe
it's
on
may
23rd,
so
we
need
very
clear
findings
in
order
to
deny
this
project
today.
Okay,
thank
you.
Yep.
A
So
would
commissioner
rainville,
would
you
like,
or
or
commissioner
ford
like
to
try
to
make
some
findings.
V
I'm
at
a
loss-
I
I
I
understand
that
this
meets
all
the
legal
requirements,
but
where
I'm
I'm
at
a
loss
is
I
feel
that
the
neighbors
have
raised
some
really
legit
legitimate
objections
to
this,
and
and-
and
I
understand,
miss
sether-
that
their
questions
can't
be
answered
now.
I
I
I'm
hearing
that
from
you
loud
and
clear,
and
that
that
just
befuddles
me
why
a
legitimate
question
like
a
traffic
access
on
a
straight
state
highway
can't
be
answered
right
now
for
these
people.
A
So
see
we
have
a,
we
have
a
motion
that
may
or
may
not
be
supported
by
the
commission
and
and
if
it
was,
if
we
voted
no
on
the
motion,
then
there
would
be
an
alternate
motion
and
then
we
would
presumably
adopt
that
alternate
motion.
So
can
we
just
vote
on
the
motion
on
the
table
without
findings
to
see
if.
J
I
understand
yeah,
I
understand
the
question
in
my
experience
that
can
occur
at
the
city
council,
where
we
have
staff
who
legal
staff
attorneys
city
attorneys.
In
this
case
the
staff
has
prepared
the
staff
report.
We
have
analyzed
the
project
and
so
to
make
findings.
Contrary
right
I
mean
we
could.
A
Could
we
just
ask
a
commissioner
rainbow
to
state
his
reason
and
use
that
as
a
finding
to
vote
and
then
okay,
all
right.
O
A
Okay,
all
right!
So
if
you
want
to
just
state
your
reasons,
we'll
use
those
as
the
findings
and
then
vote.
V
So
my
reasoning
to
asking
to
to
deny
this
is
there
are
unanswered
questions
about
the
traffic
impact.
A
All
right,
we
have
a
motion
to
deny
all
of
the
applications
for
this
project
and
we
have.
We
have
a
motion
in
a
second.
Those
were
the
findings.
Any
discussion.
O
B
And
commissioner
marwah
has
left
commissioner
mcguire.
I
Commissioner
mcguire
all
right,
I
would
make
a
motion
to
adopt
all
the
items
in
the
staff
report,
with
the
specific
added
condition
that
the
applicant
work
on
the
facades
facing
existing
residents
to
improve
those
to
just
be
a
little
more
in
in
harmony
with
the
existing
neighborhood
and
just
work
with
staff.
On
that
item.
J
I
A
All
right
that
motion
passes.
Thank
you
for
presenting
your
project.
Are
there
any
announcements
from
staff?
Nope?
Okay,
no
announcements
from
staff?
Thank
you,
shanna
for
all
your
hard
work
this
evening,
you've
been
doing
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
hats
here,
a
lot
of
rules,
anything
else
from
commissioners
before
we
adjourn
all.
A
C
A
Thank
you
for
your
mind.
Thank
you
reminding
us
of
that
all
right.
If
not
and
without
objection.
I
will
declare
this
meeting
adjourned.
Our
next
planning
commission
meeting
will
be
monday
may
23rd,
and
our
joint
meeting
with
the
capital
long-range
improvement
committee
commission
will
be
this
thursday
april
28th.