►
Description
Additional information at:
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
A
Good
afternoon
welcome
to
the
not
regularly
scheduled,
but,
alternatively
scheduled
committee
meeting
for
the
business
inspections,
housing
and
zoning
committee
for
today,
which
is
November
7th
I've,
been
joined
by
council
members,
Ellison
Osman,
chug
tie
and
Chavez,
which
is
a
quorum
of
the
committee.
I,
will
note
that
Council
councilman
Randall
has
some
sort
of
sort
of
stomach
flu.
A
We
encouraged
him
to
stay
home,
and
so
that
was
probably
pretty
good
and
I
will
need
to
leave
about
halfway
through
the
meeting,
and
so
the
vice
chair,
councilmember
Osmond,
will
chair
from
that
point,
but
I'm
known
for
moving
quickly,
so,
hopefully
we'll
be
able
to
get
through
much
of
the
business
before
that
happens,
I'm
going
to
first
move
the
consent
agenda,
which
is
items
five
through
13..
This
includes
item
number
five,
which
are
the
liquor
license
approvals
and
six,
which
are
the
renewals
item.
Seven
is
a
pretty
big
deal.
A
This
is
the
Business
technical
assistance
program,
cultural
districts,
funding
recommendations,
and
so,
while
we're
not
going
to
discuss
it,
we're
really
happy
with
the
volume
of
applicants
and
the
number
of
projects
we
were
able
to
get
funded
item.
Eight
is
the
Minnesota
Minneapolis
homes
fund,
financing,
contingency
fund
item,
nine
is
accepting
and
approving
funds
for
the
acquisition
of
emergency
shelter
for
persons
experience
homelessness
item
10
is
the
carry
forward
of
the
Year
2022
tax
exempt
housing
revenue
bonds.
No
one
get
any
ideas.
A
We
have
400
million
in
requests
and
we're
carrying
over
to
be
able
to
more
adequately
distribute
them
item.
11
is
a
number
of
items
associated
with
the
rezoning
of
the
upper
Harbor
Terminal
item.
12
is
a
liquor
beer,
liquor
and
beer
licensing
application
change
in
procedure.
This
is
being
referred
to.
Staff
and
item
number
13
is
setting
a
public
hearing
for
November
for
29th
with
regard
to
Electric
assists
for
pedicabs.
Are
there
any
items?
Anyone
would
like
to
pull
off
the
consent
agenda
for
discussion.
B
A
Any
opposed
those
items
are
approved.
We'll
then
have
public
hearings
one
through
three
just
so
everyone
knows
what's
going
on
we'll
then
move
into
discussion,
items
14
and
15
and
then
take
the
quasi-judicial
number
four
and
then
discussion,
item
16.
I
know
no
one
probably
paid
tons
of
attention
to
that.
The
we're
going
to
do
the
public
hearings
that
are
not
commercial
property,
Development
Fund
related.
Then
the
commercial
property
Development
Fund
items,
then
the
quasi-judicial
followed
by
the
rezoning.
It
does
make
sense
to
some
of
us.
Thank
you
for
your
cooperation.
A
D
Our
first
land
sale,
our
laundry
land
sale
that
we
have
for
today
is
1804
18th,
Street
East.
It's
actually
a
side,
yard
sale
and
split
between
two
different
residents.
D
I
left
my
notes,
I'll
make
it
very
very
quick.
This
meets
our
city
policies
for
our
land
distribution,
just
just
disposition.
D
D
Those
are
going
to
Matthew
Stanek
at
1806
31st,
Street,
East
and
David
bisectly
at
1831st
Street
eat
for
their
praise
value
of
three
thousand
dollars
totally,
which
is
fifteen
hundred
dollars
each
on
January,
12
2011,
the
city
acquired
these
from
the
Twin
Cities
Land
Bank,
the
properties
adjacent
to
these
two
parses,
as
I
mentioned.
Both
of
them
are
substanders
by
today's
City
standards.
D
So
when,
by
this
lot
split,
we
actually
get
them
a
little
bit
closer
to
the
size
for
a
city
standard
lot
and
as
I
mentioned
this,
in
accordance
with
the
city's
real
estate
disposition
policy,
which
states
that
a
buildable
lot
that
is
not
served
by
an
ally
and
would
necessitate
construction
of
a
house
plan
inconsistent
with
the
architecture
of
the
Block
in
the
neighborhood
notifications
provided
to
the
Powderhorn
Park
neighborhood
I
know
that
Matthew
stanika's
here
today,
I
haven't
seen
of
David
vasekli
is
here
yet,
but
Matthew
Stanek
is
here
today.
A
A
B
Thank
you
all
for
having
me
I
just
wanted
to
say
a
couple
of
brief
things.
It
looks
like
everyone's
really
busy
today.
You
know
me
and
my
partner
Emily,
who
couldn't
be
here
today,
are
really
excited
about
the
opportunity
to
like
actually
have
a
yard
for
our
house.
This
is
our
first
house.
The
yard
is
Tiny.
We
have
no
alley
it
would.
F
B
To
this
in
the
first
place-
and
we
love
you
know-
there's
no
Boulevard
on
the
street
we'd
love
to
plant
trees,
we'd
love
to
just
continue
to
see
it
be
a
better
place
to
live
for
us
and
our
neighbors
and
my
neighbor
David
and
everyone
else
on
the
Block
that
you
know.
We
love
all
our
neighbors
there
and
I'm
I'm
happy
to
to
be
here
and
ask
that.
A
A
A
I
Good
afternoon,
chair,
Goodman
and
committee
members
before
you
today
is
an
application
for
an
interim
use
permit
to
allow
a
temporary
classroom
building
at
4530
Lyndale
Avenue
South.
This
property
is
occupied
by
a
charter,
school
Stonebridge,
World
School.
The
temporary
classroom
building
in
question
is
already
in
place
on
the
site
in
2019.
An
interim
use
permit
was
approved
to
allow
the
temporary
classroom
building
for
three
years.
That
interim
use
permit
has
since
expired
and
they're,
seeking
the
application
before
you
today
to
allow
the
temporary
classroom
buildings
to
remain
until
June
13th
2024..
I
The
applicant
has
cited
fluctuating
enrollment
and
uncertainty
in
space
needs
in
the
in
the
face
of
the
covid-19
pandemic,
in
choosing
not
to
move
forward
with
an
addition
to
the
school
at
this
time.
Since
the
classroom
building
has
been
in
place
since
2019,
we
have
no
record
of
any
violation
or
complaints
associated
with
the
building
and
we
are
recommending
approval
of
the
new
interim
use
permit
and
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
Thank.
A
J
J
Good
afternoon,
council
members,
thank
you.
My
name
is
Barbara
Novi
I'm,
the
executive
director
of
Stonebridge
World,
school
and
I'm
here
today
to
request
that
extension
that
he
just
discussed
for
interim
permit
to
allow
the
two
portable
classrooms
until
June
of
2024
prior
to
covid.
We
had
received
the
initial
permit
and
our
path
was
quite
clear
on
how
we
wanted
to
expand
the
school,
but
that
really
was
upended
due
to
covid-19
and
the
extreme
impact
that
it
had
on
our
school
as
well
as
all
schools.
J
Over
the
last
two
and
a
half
years,
disruptions
from
covid
were
significant,
had
a
dramatic
impact
on
our
school,
which
included,
creating
and
implementing
a
distance
learning
model
of
instruction,
which
we
had
never
done
prior
integrating
technology
when
over
80
percent
of
our
students
are
free
and
reduced
students
and
had
no
access
to
technology
or
no
real
experience
with
it.
It
included
rapid
changes
to
cleaning
protocols,
equipment,
ventilation
to
the
building
food
protocols,
just
to
name
a
few
things
I
could
go
on.
J
The
list
is
quite
long
covet
impacted
every
area
of
the
school
operation
and,
most
importantly,
it
impacted
our
student.
It's
directly
and
in
some
cases
students
lost
almost
two
years
of
learning,
so
we're
in
the
process
at
this
point
in
time
of
reevaluating
our
expansion
plans,
as
he
mentioned,
fluctuating
enrollment,
there's
lots
of
impacts
for
families,
because
the
covid
moving
losing
homes.
All
of
that,
so
we
need
some
more
time
to
make
the
decision
on
whether
we're
going
to
move
forward
with
this
expansion,
so
we're
requesting
the
extension
to
the
interim
permit
until
2024.
A
A
L
Good
afternoon,
chair
Goodman
and
committee
members.
M
L
All
right
we
got
it.
Thank
you,
sorry
about
that.
My
name
is
Nick
magrino
I'm
from
regulatory
Services
I'm
here
to
present
the
annual
Levy
for
special
assessments
for
inspections,
related
fees
and
fines.
This
is
an
annual
process
that
we
do
where
we
have
fees
and
fines
for
a
few
different
departments,
including
regulatory
Services,
the
health
department
and
Community
planning
and
economic
development.
It's
things
like
fees
for
nuisance
abatement,
vacant
building,
registration,
unpaid,
administrative
citations,
and
we
also
have
tenant
remedy,
act,
repairs
and
tenant
relocation
assistance.
L
Throughout
the
year
we
send
notice
of
intent
to
assess
letters
to
people
who
have
these
unpaid
fees,
the
appeal
process,
their
rights
to
make
prepayments
go
to
an
administrative
hearing.
They
have
the
ability
to
prepay
the
app
by
November
23rd
the
day
before
Thanksgiving,
and,
if
that's
not
done,
it's
then
added
to
their
taxes
label.
In
2023
this
year
we
did
go
back
to
having
all
of
our
hearings
in
person.
We
had
22
hearings
over
the
course
of
the
year.
L
The
total
amount
of
the
levy
it
is
about
2.7
million
dollars.
That
is
up
a
bit
up.
In
the
past
few
years,
enforcement
did
slow
down
across
the
Departments
due
to
the
pandemic,
but
things
are
kind
of
getting
back
to
about
where
they
had
been
in
previous
years
and
so
there's
a
breakdown
of
each
individual
assessment
Levy.
Those
are
mostly
payable
in
one
year
and
people
look
at
that
on
their
tax
statement
in
the
spring.
A
Are
there
any
questions
from
Mr
magrino
singnan
I'm,
going
to
open
the
public
hearing?
I
will
note
that
there
is
a
person
who
is
here
to
speak,
but
we're
not
going
to
address
this
item
independently.
So
we
will
direct
him
to
you,
but
we
will
invite
anyone
who's
here
to
be
able
to
speak
today.
So
thank
you
for
your
report
stand
by.
Thank
you,
we'll
open
the
public
hearing
on
item
number
three
I
understand
there
is
someone
here
to
speak
to
this
issue.
A
P
Name
is
Terrace
bedhani
I
live
at
3430
Wilshire
Place
Northeast
in
Ward
money
I
have
spoken
with
Mr
magrino
about
my
particular
nuisance
abatement
issue,
so
I
am
400
of
the
257
000.
That
is
part
of
the
levy,
so
I
understand
very
small
portion
of
what
your
guys
are
trying
to
do
here.
P
I
missed
the
deadline
to
file
the
appeal.
I
submitted
it,
but
stated
it
was
past
the
deadline
look
as
far
as
the
process
that
I
could
come
here
to
discuss
it
before
the
council
member,
so
I
appreciate
the
time.
I
understand
the
issues
before
the
quarter
at
large
compared
to
this.
But
what
I
would
like
to
just
say
is:
given
the
process
of
nurses
abatement,
the
yard
was
too
long.
Some
contractors
came
in
while
I
was
out
on
vacation
didn't
have
time
to
address
nuises
and
abatement.
P
Front
yard
was
cut
backyard
wasn't,
but
they
were
there
for
about
10
minutes.
I
knew
since
the
baitlin's
418
dollars.
It
comes
out
to
be
about
2500
an
hour,
so
I,
don't
know
how
that
process
works
and
then
seems
excessive
to
me
as
far
as
the
nuisance
abatement
and
then
the
fact
is
that
those
contractors
then
repeatedly
visited
my
neighborhood
after
I
had
already
you
know
done
my
part
to
make
sure
everything
was
under
control.
P
So
it's
to
me
I'm,
just
speaking,
to
kind
of
what
feels,
like
the
unfairness
of
it,
I
understand
that
there
is
a
process,
but
just
wanted
to
bring
it
before
the
council
and
see
if
there's
anything
that
can
be
done
to
address
my
situation.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you
for
your
testimony.
Is
there
anyone
else
here
to
speak
to
this
issue,
anyone
anyone
seeing
none?
We
will
close
the
public
hearing
I'm
going
to
move
approval,
except
for
this
young
man's
issue,
which
I'd
like
you
to
work
out
with
Mr
magrino
in
the
hallway.
Please
we
are
not
going
to
do
it
here.
He
said
he
said
we
don't
have
any
facts
from
staff
in
front
of
us,
but
I'm
sure
Mr
magrino
is
willing
to
work
with
you.
Are
you
willing
to
work
with
him?
A
Okay
sounds
like
he's
going
to
work
with
you
to
address
your
issue,
and
so
my
motion
would
include
whatever
Mr
magrino
works
out.
Maybe
it'll
be
something
less
than
what
is
on
the
assessment
rolls
and
if
you
could
update
the
assessment
role,
should
you
be
able
to
compromise
with
him
great
and
if
you
can't
you
can
fight
it
out
in
the
hallway.
How.
Q
A
Okay,
so
we
are
going
to
approve
the
recommendations
from
staff
directing
Mr
magrino
to
try
to
work
something
out
with
this
nice
young
man
who
made
it
all
the
way
down
here
today
and
update
the
record
accordingly
after
the
fact
or
update
for
the
clerk,
as
it
goes
forward
to
the
council,
is
that
okay,
sorry
all
right
great
on
the
motion
to
approve
all
in
favor
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
any
opposed.
A
A
These
are
substantial
projects
and
Loans
we've
asked
staff
to
do
a
presentation.
We've
asked
the
applicants
to
be
here
today
and
we
will
start
with
Mr
brissen
on
item
number
14,
which
is
a
loan
at
2518
North,
2nd
Street.
Welcome.
Thank.
F
You
very
much
good
afternoon.
My
name
is
Jason
brison
I
am
a
program
coordinator
with
cped
business
development.
Today,
I
am
presenting
requests
for
a
700
000
commercial
property,
Development
Fund
loan
for
2518
North,
2nd
Street
LLC
to
assist
with
the
acquisition
of
2518,
2nd
Street
North
2518
North,
2nd
Street
LLC
is
100
owned
by
Jesse
Ross,
who
is
also
the
owner
of
Misty
Mr
Jesse
Ross,
LLC,
Mr,
Jesse
Ross
LLC
provides
diversity,
equity
and
inclusion,
Consulting,
Executive,
coaching
and
and
speaking
services
for
a
lot
of
well-known
clients.
F
Mr
Ross
also
founded
the
racial
Justice
in
real
estate
group,
founded
in
2020
after
the
the
murder
of
George
Floyd,
he's
also
very
active
in
the
community,
in
the
school
and
and
in
his
through
his
church
as
well.
Mr
Ross
plans
to
relocate
his
business
he's
also
going
to
create
a
community
and
event
space
and
provide
some
affordable
commercial
space
for
local
businesses
in
North
Minneapolis.
In
terms
of
the
structure
of
the
project,
Bell
bank
has
committed
to
providing
a
first
mortgage
at
2.615
million.
F
The
subject
of
this
report
here
today
and
a
proposed
75
thousand
dollar
two
percent
loan
and
the
owner
is
contributing
250
000
in
equity,
there's
still
a
500
000
funding
gap
for
the
project
and
due
to
the
timing,
the
city
is
proceeding
with
this
report
here
today
to
address
that
500
000
Gap,
the
applicant
is
working
with
media
on
a
potential
Bridge,
Loan
and
also
the
city
is
facilitated,
an
introduction
to
the
groundbreak
Coalition
regarding
seeking
additional
9
on
debt
funding
for
the
project.
F
A
A
R
A
Thing
it's
a
great
thing:
I
mean
it
really
felt
good
like
people
really
like
you
a
lot.
So
why
don't
you
and
they
believe
in
you
and
I-
think
that's
a
really
really
powerful
and
emotional
thing.
So
thank
you
for
having
people
reach
out
to
us.
If
you'd
like
to
just
talk
a
little
bit
about
what
you're
doing,
that
would
be
great
yeah.
R
No
problem
well,
thank
you
for
having
me
I
am
a
lifelong
resident
of
North,
Minneapolis
I
know
I,
look
young,
but
I'm
a
little
older.
My
my
passion
has
been
fueled
by
one,
the
the
Civil
the
unrest,
but
also
watching
my
mother,
who
worked
at
the
Minneapolis
Urban
League
and
worked
with
mayor
Sharon
sells
Belton
watching
the
the
city
continue
to
see
non-ownership
from
black
and
brown
folks,
and
so
my
hope
is
to
be
able
to
change
that.
I
live
less
than
a
mile
away
from
the
building.
R
I
live
right
off
Larry
and
Sheridan,
and
I
want
to
be
able
to
provide
an
opportunity
not
for
just
myself
but
for
other
folks
from
North
Minneapolis
to
be
able
to
thrive
and
to
build,
build,
grow
and
scale
their
business.
So
I'm,
hoping
that
in
the
process
of
being
able
to
acquire
the
funding,
I
will
also
be
able
to
provide
a
space
that
entrepreneurs
can
come
in,
create
a
business
incubator,
but
also
to
be
able
to
bring
people
from
other
communities
into
North
Minneapolis
as
much
as
possible.
Fantastic.
A
A
S
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
No
questions
just
really
happy
that
this
is
coming
forward.
You
know,
I
think
that
councilmember,
Goodman
and
I
were
talking
not
too
long
ago
about
you
know
when
we
were
first
talking
about
creating
this
fund,
we
didn't
know
exactly
what
it
would
do.
It
was
a
new
idea
and
I
just
think
that
you
know
to
see
Mr
Ross
here
today
and
many
of
the
people
who
have
gotten
this
access
to
the
commercial
property.
S
Development
Fund,
it's
it's
it's
it's
it's
performing
in
exactly
the
way
that
we
want
and
I
want
to.
Thank
you
for
having
ideas
for
having
you
know
the
the
the
the
Innovative
and
creative
Spirit
to
go
ahead
and
do
this.
This
loan
is
is,
is
not
making
you
you're
making
you,
but
hopefully
you
know.
You
know
that
your
city
is
here
to
support
you
and
to
close
that
gap
on
who
who
gets
to
own
in
our
city
and
who
gets
to
own
North
Minneapolis.
It
certainly
should
be
people
who
live
there.
S
It
should
be
people
who
you
know
are
black
are
among
are,
are
you
know,
immigrant
POC
and
Indigenous?
We
we
need
that,
and
it's
exciting
to
see
you
know
cycle
after
cycle
when
these
loans
come
forward.
Folks,
like
yourself,
coming
up
and
and
and
saying
I'm
going
to
own
a
piece
of
of
my
community.
So
thank
you
so
much
for
all
the
work
that
you
do.
Thank
you
to
staff
for
the
work
that
you
all.
Do
it's
a
big
deal
so
and
with
that
I'll
move
approval
of
this
item
approval.
A
F
A
N
N
N
It
will
create
more
than
300
jobs,
and
the
important
part
of
the
jobs
is
how
much
people
get
paid.
The
lowest
paying
job
in
this
facility
will
be
thirty
one
dollars
an
hour
and
to
reflect
on
what
that
means.
That
is,
an
annual
income
above
an
average
median
income
of
a
family
of
four
on
the
north
side.
So
these
are
very
impactful
jobs.
Next,
to
a
neighborhood
that
has
high
unemployment,
it's
manufacturing,
the
City
of
Minneapolis
is
not
does
not
have
a
competitive
advantage
in
the
region
for
manufacturing.
N
It's
a
200,
000
square
foot
manufacturing
facility
that
will
be
located,
so
those
who
are
looking
for
manufacturing
jobs
typically
have
to
go
outside
of
the
city.
This
will
keep
them
in
Minneapolis
in
an
existing
building
Innovation
around
how
this
can
get
housing
units
out,
how
we
can
be
more
efficient,
how
we
give
construction
workers
the
ability
to
work
indoors
year
round
in
other
efficiencies,
and
then
the
early
support.
N
So
today
the
two
million
dollars
would
be
a
mark
in
the
19
million
dollar
project
would
help
the
George,
the
north
Group
LLC,
led
by
Devon
George,
secure
some
additional
Revenue
Bond
financing
and
then
solicit
funding
from
other
philanthropic
sources.
N
A
There
any
questions
for
Mr
Hansen
on
this
report,
seeing
none
thank
you
so
much
for
bringing
this
forward
and
for
being
here.
Mr
George,
let's
just
start
first
by
saying,
if
you're
here
for
this
item
raise
your
hand,
so
we
get
a
sense
of
it.
So
we're
not
going
to
let
everyone
speak
obviously,
but
we're
very
happy
that
you're
here,
but
we're
happy
to
give
you
a
couple
minutes
to
speak
to
what
you're
doing
and
thank
you
for
being
here
today,
sir.
Well.
T
Thank
you
all
for
having
me
thank
you
for
your
continued
support.
As
you
guys
know,
I
have
professionally
retired
NBA
athlete
born
and
raised
in
North
Minneapolis
and
got
into
development
and
really
because
I
want
to
help
my
community
every
time
I
came
home
every
summer
it
seemed
like
the
neighborhood
was
getting
worse
and
my
dad
would,
we
would
do
tours
I
would
go
sign.
Take
autograph,
sign,
autographs.
Take
pictures.
My
dad
always
told
me:
these
are
the
people
that
raise
you.
These
are
people
that
protected
you.
These
are
the
people
that
nurtured
you.
T
T
Now
they're
asking
for
jobs
now
they're
asking
for
housing,
so
I
wanted
to
build
a
business
and
to
really
rebuilding
our
city,
which
I
love,
endear
so
much
I'm,
so
proud
of
being
in
from
Minnesota
and
I'm
all
over
the
world,
but
I'm
proud,
there's
no
place
like
home,
and
now
they
need
jobs
and
need
homes,
and
so
I
can't
turn
my
back
on
people
that
have
looked
out
for
me
to
help
me
and
prop
me
up
to
be
successful,
to
say
now,
I'm
good.
Now
you
need
housing,
oh
well
figure
it
out.
T
T
I
have
a
team
mentality,
I
play
professional
sports
and
won
championships,
so
I
understand
role,
playing
I
understand
that
you
need
to
get
people
that
do
this
and
I
have
the
best
experts
throughout
it,
and
so
we're
all
here
based
on
the
question
that
person
may
come
up
and
address
it
or
speak
because
I
don't
want
to
overstep
and
say
something
that
I
don't
know
or
understand,
and
then
the
other
thing
too
is
we're.
Building
our
we've
had
a
had
a
great
meeting,
I'm,
not
sure,
if
he's
here
today,
but
but
Dan
McConnell.
T
We
had
a
great
meeting
here,
oh
he's
here
we
had
a
great
meeting
with
the
with
all
of
our
trades
today
and
we
have
a
great
plan
of
really
how
we're
working
together.
We
need
each
other
there's
relationships
and
things
that
we
bring
to
the
table
and
there's
things
that
they're
doing
they
bring
to
the
table.
So
we
really
are
going
to
fine-tune
this
and
get
this
together
with
our
trade
unions,
and
so
it's
going
to
be
a
great
project,
but
that's
I'll
leave
it
at
that.
If.
H
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
committee
I
brought
this
documentary
to
show
you.
This
is
dated
December
12
2019..
This
is
when
the
journey
for
creating
modular
housing
started
for
this
old
man.
A
research
project
was
done
by
the
Carlson
School
of
Management,
how
we
could
create
living
wage
jobs
in
a
in
an
urban
marginalized
community,
and
so
since
that
time,
I
have
been
battling
and
lobbying
our
45-member
non-profit
public
sector
and
other
members
of
the
north
job
creation
team.
H
We
we
brag
about
bringing
in
1
000
living
wage
jobs
already
to
North
Minneapolis,
and
we
believe
these
333
jobs
will
be
a
game.
Changer
will
be
a
game
changer
and
we'll
have
such
a
huge
economic
impact
on
growing
our
families
and
allowing
them
to
own
the
homes
that
they
would
help
build.
The
training
is
in
place.
We've
made
built
relationships
with
the
trades.
That's
been
stated
earlier.
The
community
is
fully
behind
it.
We
could
have
packed
this
room
today,
but
we
chose
not
to.
We
don't
want
to
do
anything
other
than
say.
H
We've
been
a
partner
with
this
we
want
to
partner
with
the
city.
The
seabed
has
been
more
than
helpful
to
us
in
every
aspect.
I
couldn't
ask
for
a
better
partner
than
we've
gotten
out
of
c-pad.
So
I
want
to
thank
the
committee
for
hearing
from
us
and
all
I.
Ask
you
to
do
is
take
this
journey
with
us.
I
guarantee
you,
you
will
be
proud
about.
God
God
bless
you
all.
Thank.
A
A
N
The
aggregate
salaries
are
going
to
be
close
to
Six
Million
Dollars,
we're
expecting
that
that
will
have
a
multiplier
effect
in
the
community
so
to
what
Mr
English
was
saying
about
being
able
to
afford
housing,
but
also
to
support
the
small
businesses
in
the
area
we
see
the
there
are
two
current
sites
that
can
accept
these,
so
there's
a
market
in
place
with
Mr
George's
other
developments,
one
in
Brooklyn,
Park
and
then,
and
then
the
upper
Harbor
Terminal,
which
you
know
very
much
about.
N
S
Thank
you
again.
It's
really
exciting
to
have
these
two
big
projects
coming
through.
You
know.
I
know
that
this
is.
S
This
is
a
huge
project
and
I
want
to
thank
Devin
George
I
want
to
thank
Bill
English,
and
you
know,
I
know
that
he's
he
might
be
younger
than
he
looked,
but
Bill's
been
doing
this
a
long
time
and
and
and
and
to
have
the
briefings
that
we
had
early
on
Mr,
English
and
and
to
and
to
to
see,
I
know
that
Devin,
your
your
leadership
is
at
the
center
of
this,
but
you
know
I
know
it
doesn't
surprise
you
to
know
that
Bill
english's
credibility
and
his
gravitas
brings
a
lot
to
this
as
well,
and
you
know
folks,
on
the
North
side
will
say:
hey
we've
had
promises
made
before
about
job
creation,
about
this,
about
that
and
I
think
what
feels
different
about
the
the
team
that
you've
assembled
here
is
you've
got
people
who
are
North
Side
residents
not
only
just
grew
up
there,
but
live
there.
S
Now
you've
got
folks
who
have
created
jobs
on
the
North
side
as
a
part
of
this
team,
and
so
to
me
the
The
credibility
is
high,
you've
built
buildings
before,
and
so
we
know
that
you
know
how
to
get
that
done
and
and
I
know
that
we
talk
about
I
know
we
talk
a
lot
about,
you
know
things
like
the
housing,
Continuum
and
and
and
and
that
and
but
this
is
also
a
big
part
of
our
Economic
Development
Continuum
right-
how
we
get
people
in
at
at
a
certain
level
employed
and
growing
their
careers
and
I'm,
pretty
confident
that
that
can
that
can
start
to
happen
here
and
so,
even
though
we've
got
a
you
know,
we've
got
a
two-year
clock
to
go
ahead
and
get
this
thing
done.
S
You
know
that
that
starts
today
and
I'm
really
excited
to
see
this
project
come
come
to
fruition,
I'm
excited
to
see
Northside
residents
employed
here
and
and
I'm
happy
to
move
approval
of
this
item
and
I
and
I
hope.
More
people
in
the
community
can
understand
what
what
this
project
is
and
I'm
excited
for
the
partnership
with
the
trades.
S
We
know
that
Northside
residents
need,
you
know,
all
the
all,
the
all
the
things
that
come
with
the
power
of
collective
bargaining
and
all
that
stuff
to
know
that
you
guys
are
at
the
table
and
the
discussion
and
this
project
means
a
lot
to
so.
Thank
you,
Mr
McConnell,
that's
all
I've
got
to
say
thank
you.
So
much
Madam
chair.
A
I
This
property
is
a
through
lot,
with
Street
Frontage
on
Van,
Buren,
Central
and
Spring
Street
Northeast,
and
has
access
both
to
the
alley
that
runs
through
the
site,
as
well
as
the
connected
north-south
alley
on
the
Block.
The
applicant
is
proposing
to
construct
a
new
six-story
residential
building
containing
64
units
at
the
property.
This
building
would
include
one
level
of
underground
parking
accessed
off
of
the
alley.
Long-Term
bike
parking
is
provided
in
a
bike
room
at
the
first
floor,
with
short-term
bike
parking
provided
adjacent
to
both
Van
Buren
Street,
Northeast
and
Central
Avenue.
I
The
building
Lobby
would
be
located
on
Van
Buren
at
the
southern
end
of
the
building,
with
walk-up
units
moving
North
on
Van
Buren
and
the
project
would
be
subject
to
inclusionary
zoning.
A
total
of
four
public
hearing
land
use
applications
have
been
submitted
for
the
project.
I
This
is
the
wrong
file.
That's
okay!
I
The
first
is
a
rezoning
from
the
r1a
district
to
the
R3
District.
Retaining
the
corridor
6
built
form
overlay,
District
regulations
pertaining
to
built
forms
so
maximum
and
minimum
height
and
floor
area
ratio,
maximum
impervious
surface
coverage
and
and
similar
metrics
are
regulated
by
the
built
form
overlay
District,
which
in
this
case
is
Corridor
six
and
permitted
uses
are
regulated
by
the
primary
zoning
District.
In
this
case,
the
rezoning
is
required
for
the
project
as
the
r1a
district
limits.
I
The
maximum
number
of
units
in
an
individual
structure
to
three,
and
so
this
property
is,
has
the
future
land
use
designation
of
neighborhood
mixed
use
and
is
located
in
the
corridor.
Six
built
Forum
District,
the
existing
r1a
zoning
is
not
congruent
with
the
applicable
future
land
use
and
built
form
guidance
for
the
site.
In
the
comprehensive
plan.
The
R3
District,
as
sought
by
the
applicant,
is
the
lowest
intensity.
Zoning
District
that
allows
four
or
more
units
in
an
individual
structure.
That
rezoning
is
before
you
as
a
separate
agenda
item
today.
I
I
The
project
is
also
seeking
two
setback.
Variances.
This
property
is
a
through
lot,
as
I
mentioned
before,
with
required
front
yards
adjacent
to
both
Van
Buren
Street
and
Central
Avenue,
the
applicable
District
minimum
setback
here
adjacent
to
both
streets
is
15
feet
but
adjacent
to
Van
Buren.
The
property
is
subject
to
an
increased
front
yard
setback
of
28.9
feet
in
depth.
Due
to
the
adjacent
home
to
the
north.
I
If
there
are
any
questions,
but
I
did
want
to
touch
briefly
on
the
first
variance
finding,
which
is
that
practical
difficulties
exist
in
complying
with
the
ordinance
due
to
circumstances
unique
to
the
property
and
that
those
circumstances
were
not
created
by
the
applicant
and
are
not
economic
alone.
This
property
has
several
unique
conditions
which
together,
constitute
a
strong,
practical
difficulty.
This
property
is
a
uniquely
shaped
five-sided
lot,
which
is
generally
triangular
in
shape
and
varies
significantly
in
depth
from
approximately
130
feet,
deep
at
the
North
End
to
approximately
32
feet
deep
at
the
South
End.
I
The
property
is
also
a
through
lot,
which
is
subject
to
two
required
front
yards,
one
of
which
is
increased
to
the
established
front
yard
of
almost
twice
the
regular
District
minimum
setback
and
the,
and,
in
addition
to
that,
the
northern
20
feet
of
the
property
is
subject
to
the
alley.
Easement
in
total
62
points,
six
percent
of
the
property
is
subject
to
required
yards
or
the
alley
easement.
This
Compares
with
a
typical
rectangular
lot
of
the
same
size
would
only
be
subject
to
setbacks
occupying
35.6
percent
of
the
lot.
I
So
these
conditions
are
unique
to
the
property.
Do
significantly
restrict
the
development
options
for
the
site
were
not
created
by
the
applicant
and
are
not
economic
alone.
The
applicant
is
also
seeking
site
plan
review
on
October
17th
following
a
public
hearing,
the
Planning
Commission
acted
to
approve
both
variances
and
the
site
plan
review
application
subject
to
conditions,
as
recommended
by
staff
staff,
is
recommending
that
the
committee
uphold
the
planning
commission's
action
and
deny
the
appeal
and
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
Thank
you
are.
A
There
any
questions
from
Mr
friends
with
regard
to
his
report.
I
thought
it
was
very
thorough.
Thank
you.
The
the
packet
is
also
quite
thorough.
Any
questions
for
staff.
Okay,
thank
you
very
much
sing.
None.
This
is
a
public
hearing
on
three
items
which
are
approving
two
variances,
as
well
as
the
site
plan
review.
This
is
being
appealed
by
Sarah,
Walbridge,
Jones
and
I
would
guess
that
she
also
has
a
council
here.
A
My
plan
is
to
allow
the
appellant
to
present
for
10
minutes
and
then
there's
a
list
of
10
people
who
are
set
up
to
testify
and
they'll
each
have
the
opportunity
to
speak
for
two
minutes
I'm
going
to
before
we
begin
your
time,
however,
ask
Mr
fussy
if
he
could
give
us
some
Direction
with
regard
to
conversations
happening
in
the
community
surrounding
the
city's
ability
to
uphold
the
plans
within
our
2040
plan
itself.
There's
been
some
concern
that
there's
been
litigation.
A
O
Thank
you,
madam
chair
and
committee
members.
That
is
correct.
My
office
has
reviewed
this
matter
in
terms
of
any
assertion
that
the
now
pending
litigation,
which
challenge
is
the
adoption
of
the
city's
2040
comprehensive
plan,
would
have
what,
if
any
effect,
it
could
have
on
an
appeal
like
this.
O
The
litigators
in
that
case,
and
as
well
as
my
office
have
examined
that
and
it's
it's
Crystal
Clear
that
a
full
state
was
is
it
was
imposed
on
the
judge's
order,
and
that
matter
and
there
it
is
of
no
effect,
and
essentially
the
2040
litigation,
does
not
play
any
role
on
the
council's
determination
of
this
matter
at
this
juncture,
and
your
consideration
should
focus
on
the
applications
in
front
of
you
and,
in
particular
the
variance
applications.
Thank
you
thank.
A
You
Mr
Foster.
Are
there
any
questions
from
members
of
the
committee
on
Mr
fussie's
comments,
seeing
none
I'm
also
going
to
then
turn
the
chair
over
to
councilmember
Osman,
because
I'll
have
to
leave
and
I
don't
want
to
interrupt
the
process,
but
I
will
invite
Ms,
Walbridge,
Jones
or
Her
counsel
to
come
up
for
a
10-minute
period
to
use.
However,
you'd,
like
now.
O
U
Goodman,
council
members
Council,
my
name
is
Brianna
Bergstrom
I'm,
an
attorney
at
Taft
set
Nissan
Hollister
here
today
on
behalf
of
Miss
Sarah
Walbridge
Jones
I
want
to
go
in
depth
a
little
bit
about
the
three
fatal
problems
that
are
outlined
in
the
appeal
statement
that
was
submitted
and
the
first
one
asked
actually
leaves
off
with
what
Mr
fussy
was
talking
about.
Contrary
to
what
he
said,
the
approval
of
this
project,
the
planning
commission's
approval
and
the
anticipated
city
council
approval
is
a
direct
violation
of
Judge
Klein's
June
15
2022
order.
U
U
It
says
plaintiffs
began
this
action
seeking
a
declaration
that
plaintiffs
have
made
a
sufficient
Prima
fascia,
showing
under
the
Minnesota
environmental
Rights
Act,
Mira,
that
the
2040
plan
is
likely
to
cause
the
pollution,
impairment
or
destruction
of
the
air,
water,
land
or
other
natural
resources
located
within
the
state
and
that
City
had
no
affirmative
defenses.
So
first
is
a
declaration
that
that
the
2040
plan
itself
violates
Mira.
U
U
So
in
other
words,
its
challenge
is
to
the
2040
plan
itself
and
they're,
challenging
it
under
Mira,
saying
that
the
city's
2040
plan
is
a
violation
of
Mira,
in
other
words
unlawful
and
you
might
be
asking
well
how
does
this
fit
in
here?
Well,
if
you
turn
to
page
four
towards
the
bottom
judge,
Klein
expressly
stated
one
potential,
but
expected
outcome
of
the
2040
plan
is
increased
Urban
population
density.
It
is
the
increase
in
population
density
that
is
Central
to
plaintiff's,
contentions
of
adverse
or
potential
adverse
environmental
impacts.
U
Go
on
to
page
23,
judge
Klein
wrote
the
court
finds
that
the
city
has
not
satisfied
its
burden
to
rebut
plaintiff's
Prima
fascia's,
showing
of
environmental
harm,
and
he
goes
on
to
explain
a
bit
more
in
detail
about
this
in
evaluating
the
city's
failure
to
satisfy
its
obligation
under
Mira.
A
further
brief
discussion
is
required.
U
The
city
has
not,
as
required
under
Mira,
either
rebutted
or
affirmatively
defended
against
smart
gross
Prima
fascia
showing-
and
this
appears
to
be
due
largely
to
Tactical
decisions
made
by
the
city
during
the
course
of
litigation
and
on
to
page
25
judge
Klein
writes
the
city's
Discovery
responses
further
acknowledged
that
it
never
conducted
any
environmental
review
of
the
2040
plan.
The
record
is
similarly
devoid
of
any
indication
that
the
city
conducted
Discovery
for
the
purpose
of
developing
rebuttable
evidence
or
affirmative
defense.
U
He
concludes
by
saying
this
unfortunate
strategy
has
left
the
city
veraft
of
any
fact-based
rebuttal
or
affirmative
defense,
the
type
of
which
is
called
for
under
mirror
so
judge.
Klein
went
on
on
page
26,
then,
after
finding
the
declaratory
judgment
in
favor
of
plaintiffs,
then
on
to
the
injunction
aspect,
the
relief
requested
by
plaintiff
is
at
the
city
being
joined
from
any
ongoing
implementation
of
the
2040
plan
and
that
the
city
be
required
to
revert
back
to
the
2030
plan
for
its
prospective
enforcement
of
both
residential
development
and
land
use
ordinances.
U
So,
therefore,
it
is
Undisputed
that
the
planning
commission's
approval
of
this
project
and
anticipated
City
council's
approval
is
a
direct
violation
of
this
order.
Disorder
found
that
the
2040
plan
is
a
violation
of
Mira,
so
therefore,
approving
of
anything
that
would
be
pursuant
to
the
2040
plan,
just
like
this
project
is
a
violation
of
Mira.
U
Now
the
planning
commission's
approval
of
this
project
inexplicably
ignores
the
express
risk
to
the
city
in
judge
Klein's
order
and
I
would
direct
you
to
page
four
judge.
Klein
writes
the
city
has
already
been
enjoined
from
enforcing
the
2040
plan
and
is
further
been
ordered
to
revert
back
to
the
2030
plan
by
August
15
2022..
If
this
court
does
not
stay
enforcement
of
the
June
15
2022
order,
the
city
argues
that
it
will
have
to
invest
considerable
time
and
effort
into
re-implementing
the
2030
plan,
including
updating
ordinances,
to
comply
with
changes
in
the
law.
U
Only
to
then
invest
considerable
time
and
effort
into
undoing
that
revision
and
re-implementing
the
2040
plan.
Should
the
order
be
reversed.
The
court
accepts
this
as
a
plausible
risk
of
serious
harm
and
finds
that
a
state
will
alleviate
the
risk
of
such
harm.
Well,
the
appeal
is
pending
plaintiffs.
Similarly
argue
that
if
the
order
stayed
and
ultimately
upheld
on
appeal,
then
any
permits
that
are
granted
any
work
that
has
been
done
under
the
2040
plan
might
ultimately
need
to
be
undone,
requiring
duplicate
expenditures
by
the
city
and
no
small
costs
to
Developers.
U
Not
only
because
of
the
comments
that
were
made
during
the
oral
argument
that
was
held
on
October
13th,
which
I've
provided
you
a
transcript
and
highlighted
many
of
the
encouraging
comments,
if
you
will
by
the
justices,
but
also
the
star
tribunes
articles
comments
which
I
also
provide
you
a
copy,
a
copy
of
with.
U
And
now,
for
these
reasons
in
this
Express
risk,
that's
why
we
set
forth
three
different
Protections
in
our
appeal
statement
that
the
city
could
could
adopt
to
protect
itself
from
this
risk.
The
first
is
to
delay
any
decision
final
decision
on
this
project
until
January
18th
2023,
which
is
the
end
of
cities,
120-day
statutory
period,
to
make
a
decision
on
this
project.
U
The
second
one
is
to
conditionally
approve
of
it,
which
is
something
that
City
commonly
does
in
situations
like
this,
for
example,
it
could,
if
it
wanted
to
approve
of
it,
condition
that
approval
on
the
appeal
being
found
in
favor
of
the
city
or
it
could
expressly
warn
the
developers
in
writing
of
this
Express
risk
that
if
it
goes
forward
with
this
project,
there
is
a
serious
risk
that
it
may
need
to
be
taken
down
at
judge
Klein's
order.
U
And
now
the
third
fatal
problem
is
has
to
do
with
the
variance
criteria
in
this
case
is
simply
not
met.
Now
the
the
developer
in
the
city
have
to
meet
all
three
variance
criteria
to
move
forward
with
this
project.
First,
starting
with
the
Practical
difficulty
standards.
The
only
reason
there's
any
purported
practical
difficulties
here
is
because
they're
attempting
to
put
a
64
unit
dwelling
complex
into
a
lot
that
is
zoned
to
have
a
three
unit
Max.
That
is
what
has
created
the
Practical
difficulties
in
the
second
sentence,
or
excuse
me
the
last
sentence
under
this.
U
Finding
these
circumstances
were
not
created
by
the
applicant
and
are
not
economic
alone
is
not
only
conclusory,
but
it's
not
supported
by
any
factual
basis
and
in
the
presentation
we
just
heard.
We
also
didn't
hear
any
additional
factual
basis
or
reasoning
for
how
this
is
not
economic
alone,
and
even
looking
past
this
first
Factor.
As
we
know
there
are
some.
There
are
five
areas
around
this
property
that
that
may
purport
to
make
practical
difficulties
even
looking
beyond
that,
you
don't
meet
the
second
or
third
element.
U
The
second
is
that
the
property
owner
authorized
applicant
proposes
to
use
the
property
in
a
reasonable
manner
that
will
be
keeping
with
the
spirit
and
intent
of
the
ordinance
and
the
comprehensive
plan.
First.
This
is
not
reasonable.
Both
of
the
variants
is
the
first
asked
to
go
from
28.9
feet
to
15
feet
less
than
half
almost
and
the
second
variance
15
feet
to
5.3,
almost
two-thirds
of
where
it's
supposed
to
be.
There's
no
case
that
says
that
is
reasonable.
U
Sure
so
it's
not
in
keeping
with
the
intent,
it
says,
create
orderly
development,
protect
residential
character
and
ensure
light
to
access.
This
is
not
orderly
development
when
you're
attempting
to
have
a
64
unit
dwelling
with
only
20
parking
spaces
below
this
is
not
keeping
with
the
residential
character
of
the
neighborhood
I
would
direct
you
to
the
picture
that
we've
included
in
our
packet.
It
is
not
the
same
as
what
the
neighborhood
predicts.
So,
for
those
reasons
we
ask
that
you
deny
the
planning
kitchen
commission's
approval
and
do
not
approve
this
project.
Thank.
Q
You
thank
you
so
much
swollen,
Brett
Jones
and
before
I,
open
to
the
public
hearing
I
will
give
the
project
applicant
an
opportunity
to
present
their
case.
Is
there
a
representative
here
today.
V
Friday
afternoon,
council
members,
I'm
Carol
Lansing
I'm,
an
attorney
at
fagrey,
Drinker,
Biddle
and
wreath
and
I'm
representing
the
applicant
I,
will
not
be
addressing
the
merits
or
status
of
the
court
case,
as
the
City
attorney
has
told
you,
it's
not
relevant
to
this
matter.
V
The
2040
plan,
an
ordinances
that
are
in
place
now,
are
the
policy
and
law
that
must
be
applied
here
on
the
rezoning.
The
staff
report
has
explained
how
it
is
consistent
with
the
2040
plan
for
a
site:
that's
guided,
Corridor,
six
neighborhood
mixed
use
and
on
a
goods
and
services.
Corridor
I
will
point
out
that,
while
the
street
address
may
be
Van,
Buren
Central
is
a
commercial
and
Transit
Corridor
and
there's
lots
of
policies
in
the
2040
plan
that
support
density
on
that
in
that
type
of
location.
V
The
appeal
repeatedly
argues
that
height
and
density
of
the
project
are
unreasonable.
Out
of
character
with
the
black
and
injurious
to
the
use
of
other
property,
these
objections
to
height
density
and
traffic
generation
are
not
relevant
because
they
do
not
relate
to
the
yard
variances.
That
are
an
issue
no
variances
or
other
approvals
are
required
for
the
hydro
density
which
are
allowed.
V
The
appeal
also
argues
that
the
variances
are
unreasonable
for
us
a
lot,
that's
guided
for
three
units
or
an
interior
three
lot.
This
is
not
an
interior
three
lot.
It
is
already
built
form
Corridor.
Six
and
reasonableness
should
be
judged
in
the
context
of
a
corridor.
Six
lot.
V
Show
you
that
in
the
middle
of
the
day
in
Winter,
there
will
be
shadows
on
the
house
to
the
north,
and
that's
this.
It
went
away
morning
and
afternoon.
It's
not
shadowed.
V
I
would
say
that
in
an
urban
neighborhood
environment
to
have
a
house
next
door,
that's
shadowed
in
the
middle
of
winter
is
not
an
unusual
situation.
The
Shadows
have
been
mitigated
in
this
circumstance,
because
the
building
the
new
building
will
be
33
feet,
south
of
the
property
line
and
even
and
even
further
from
the
house
itself,
and
the
Shadows
are
not
relevant
to
the
setback.
V
You
see
the
shadowing
extends
you
know
slightly
in
front
of
the
house
and
as
proposed,
and
if
there
were
no
setback
variants,
it
is
still
just
in
line
in
the
middle
of
the
day
with
the
front
of
the
house.
So
the
shadowing
effects
on
the
house
are
really
no
different
if
it
complied
with
those
variances.
V
V
V
This
exhibit
shows
the
proposed
help
building
and
these
are
the
existing
setbacks
of
the
other
houses
on
the
Block
and
estimates
of
their
front
yard
setback.
The
29,
approximately
29
foot
setback
of
the
house
to
the
north
is
the
greatest
setback
of
any
building
on
this
lot.
Most,
you
know
the
rest
of
the
setbacks.
Several
of
them
are
15
feet
or
less,
and
so
this
proposed
15-foot
setback
will
not
be
out
of
character
with
the
existing
conditions
or
out
of
character
with
how
this
Corridor
six
lot
is
guided.
V
So
in
conclusion,
I
would
like
you
to
deny
the
appeal
request
that
you
deny
the
appeal
and
approve
all
of
the
applications
and
I
also
do
we
do
object
to
any
delay.
Delay
in
this
case
would
be
pointless
and
would
be
prejudicial
to
my
client,
so
the
architect
and
the
applicant
are
here.
If
you
have
any
other
questions.
Q
Thank
you
so
much
for
your
comments.
Thank
you.
I'll
now,
open
to
the
other
members
to
speak.
I
would
like
to
speak.
You
will
have
two
minutes.
I
have
a
list
here
and
I
apologize
if
I
mispronounce
your
last
name,
Conrad,
that's
good
I'm,
just
gonna
leave
it
there.
You
have
two
minutes,
sir.
Thank
you.
G
All
right
so
I
know
chair,
Goodman,
isn't
here
anymore,
but
Vice,
chair
Osmond.
Thank
you
for
being
here
and
committee
members.
My
name
is
Conrad
zabakowski
and
I
live
in
ward
3..
Of
course
we
are
in
a
quasi-judicial
hearing
on
613
Van
Buren,
and
we
can
only
look
as
the
City
attorney
staff
member
said.
We
can
only
look
at
the
comprehensive
law,
comprehensive
plan
law
that
was
adopted
by
Council
and
actually,
as
it
so
happens.
As
commissioner
and
Committee
Member
rainville
said
at
the
Planning
Commission
meeting
on
October
17th.
G
They,
the
developers,
are
only
doing
what
the
law
allows
them
to
do
so
under
the
consensus,
Minneapolis
2040
comprehensive
plan
that
includes
higher
density
along
the
busy
Central
Avenue
Northeast
Corridor.
That
I
know
many
of
you
go
to
restaurants.
Go
to
places
on
there
that
the
slot
is
directly
on
it
directly
is
on
Central
Avenue
Northeast.
G
So
I
only
have
two
minutes,
so
I
want
to
make
my
most
important
Point
very
clearly.
Housing
is
a
human
right.
Council
took
bold
action
to
legalize
housing
across
Minneapolis.
Many
of
you
took
that
vote
no
chair.
Oh
sorry,
council
member
Ellison
took
that
vote.
This
neighbor's
appeal
is
a
direct
attack
on
the
idea
that
everybody
is
welcome
in
our
city,
and
that
is
a
direct
attack
against
the
council's
action
on
that
issue.
G
V
Q
C
C
The
applicant's
primary
argument
is
that
the
City
Planning
Commission
should
have
not
evaluated
this
project
under
the
existing
land
use
rules
as
determined
by
the
2040
plan,
but
instead
should
have
reviewed
the
project
under
different
land
use
rules,
and
they
just
assume
that
that
would
have
disallowed.
It
I
want
to
remind
the
committee
that
the
previous
Minneapolis
comprehensive
plan,
the
Minneapolis
plan
for
sustainable
growth,
is
not
the
development
roadblock
that
the
appellant
implies.
I
think
it's
pretty
clear
that
this
project
and
its
rezoning
would
have
been
permitted
under
that
regime
as
well.
C
If
you
look
at
the
future
land
use
map
of
the
plan,
it
explicitly
differentiates
the
613
Van
Buren
property
from
the
rest
of
the
block
and
identifies
it
as
a
parcel
appropriate
for
medium
density.
Mixed
use,
the
street
directly
outside
of
this
property,
is
now
planned
for
a
station
on
the
Metro
F
line,
abrt,
suggesting
that
even
higher
densities
are
warranted
from
when
the
plan
was
first
created
in
a
section
directly
pertaining
to
station
areas.
The
2019
comprehensive
plan
says
to
concentrate
highest
densities
adjacent
to
the
transit
station.
C
In
the
section
on
the
environment,
the
2019
comprehensive
plan
says
to
support
Transit
oriented
development
and
encourage
development
projects
that
maximize
the
development
capacity
of
the
site,
supported
by
these
policies
of
the
2009
comprehensive
plan.
The
City
established
and
repeatedly
reinforced
a
precedent
of
improving
development
of
the
same
scale
as
the
projected
issue
here
and
on
sites
that
had
the
exact
same
featured
land
use
designation.
As
this
one
a
great
example.
C
This
can
be
found
nearby
in
Northeast
in
the
area
along
Broadway
and
Marshall,
which
has
been
built
up
to
six
stories
of
density
and
has
never
been
slated
for
abrt
level
of
service.
I
go
through
all
this,
not
to
usurp
the
role
of
cped
Staff,
but
just
to
point
out
that
the
policies
that
underpin
the
approval
of
613
Van
Buren
are
not
unique
to
the
Minneapolis
2040
plan
and
they
do
not
disappear
if
the
plan
is
assumed
away.
C
E
I
got
it
hi
guys.
How
are
you
you've
had
some
awesome
presentations
today
where
developers
worked
with
the
community
to
like
meet
the
needs
of
the
community
and
what
they
wanted,
so
I'm
the
neighbors
directly
to
the
north?
Okay.
This
is
what
the
neighborhood
wants
to
a
person
is
appropriate,
affordable
housing
for
our
street
four
units,
if
you're
gonna
give
them
that
much
space
is
not
enough,
affordable
housing.
So
when
Conrad
gets
up
here
and
talks
about
how
this
is
like
a
front
to
affordable
housing,
I'm
trying.
E
You
no,
they
were
addressing
us,
so
we
will
address
them
as
well
Alex
that
was
not
from
the
2019
plan
that
was
from
the
neighborhood
small
area
plan.
Okay.
So
if
you're
gonna,
if
people
are
gonna,
bring
up
here
and
tell
incorrect
things,
okay,
there
was
literally
pictures
of
town
homes
for
that
corner
lot:
three-story
town
homes,
so
he
presented
an
incorrect
fact,
as
fact
here
that
was
the
Saint
Anthony's
neighborhood
small
area
plan
drawing
okay
at
the
end
of
the
day.
This
is
what
I
want.
I
want
access
to
my
roof.
E
I
have
the
right
to
put
solar
I
have
told
my
child.
We
are
going
to
put
solar
on
our
roof
and
we
are
going
to
charge
our
car
and
that's
how
he's
going
to
learn
how
to
make
this
world
last
longer.
Okay,
so
to
say,
does
not
have
a
negative
effect
on
me
is
completely
wrong
and
I
believe
that
their
Shadow
study
is
incorrect,
because
I've
done
my
own
and
it
does
not
look
like
it.
It
looks
like
we
will
be
in
significant
Shadows
to
from
September
to
about
March
okay.
E
So,
if
we're
going
to
call
this
quasi-judicial,
let's
get
a
third
party
in
here
to
get
us
some
actual
facts.
Okay,
not
all
these
presentations
I
mean
there's
articles
out
here
where
people
want
missing
middle
housing.
That's
what
our
neighborhood
wants
missing
middle,
affordable
housing,
not
four
units.
M
M
You
have
no
housing
at
all
until
you,
there
is
nothing
really
all
the
way
to
Columbia
Heights
on
that
side
of
the
street,
and
that
would
say
that
we
would
like
to
have
housing.
That
looks
like
something
that
should
belong
in
a
neighborhood,
not
a
monolithic
structure
at
the
corner,
where
nobody
can
turn
out
of
and
into
now
from
Central
Avenue.
M
This
is
an
expressly
grave
problem
to
Public
Safety
and
it
isn't
in
keeping
at
all
with
anything
having
to
do
with
a
house
or
a
home
or
a
duplex
or
a
Triplex
or
a
sixplex
that
has
character
of
the
neighborhood.
This
is
nothing
and
that
setback
that
you
saw.
That's
ridiculous.
You
won't
be
able
to
look
down
the
street
and
see
anything
it
does
away
with
trees.
It
doesn't
weigh
with
anything
it.
The
footprint
takes
up
every
square
inch
of
that
lot
and
there
leaves
no
green
space.
M
There
leaves
nothing
and
it
doesn't
look
at
all
like
anything
else
in
the
neighborhood
and
it's
going
to
be
personally
injurious
to
me
because
I
know
you
can't
take
parking
into
consideration,
which
is
absolutely
asinine,
but
that's
the
way
it
is
I.
It
will
hurt
me
as
the
landlord
owning
the
house
across
the
street
as
a
landlord
for
it,
since
1989
I
won't
have
anywhere
for
my
tenants
to
park.
M
W
Street
Northeast
I've
seen
the
neighborhood
grow
from
primary,
a
blue
collar
older
community
into
more
of
a
diversified
and
younger,
family-oriented
neighborhood.
It's
become
safer
and
more
vibrant
in
the
last
20
years
that
I've
owned
the
property
I'm
here
in
support
of
my
neighbors
and
Sarah's
petition,
I'm
a
strong
opposition
to
the
proposed
613
Van
Buren
Street
project
I
support
the
right
size
development
for
the
continued
growth
of
the
community
that
will
not
negatively
impact
the
neighbors
and
the
essential
character
of
the
neighborhood
as
a
whole.
W
Y
Hello,
my
name
is
Lonnie
Sternberg
and
I
live
at
733,
Van,
Buren,
Street,
Northeast
and
I
am
here
in
support
of
Sarah's
appeal
to
deny
the
site
plan
for
613
Van
Buren
I
just
want
everyone
to
know
that
there
was
a
lot
of
thought
put
into
the
2040
plan,
and
one
of
the
benefits
that
was
being
promoted
was
that
there
was
going
to
be
a
decrease
in
variance
requests
and
also
those
approvals
by
those
elected
City
officials.
Y
Sadly,
we're
seeing
the
community
members
time
and
time
again
that
developers
are
requesting
these
variances
and
they're
being
rubber
stamped
and
that's
truly
what
everybody
is
seeing
approving
all
these
variances
613
is
a
prime
example.
Y
50
of
the
houses
on
Van
Buren
have
a
setback
of
30
feet.
So
there's
a
discrepancy
in
you
know
what
other
people
are
saying.
30
of
the
houses
have
a
setback
of
at
least
20
feet
or
more,
and
what
I'm,
not
understanding
is.
Why
are
these
variances
being
approved
when
it
clearly
doesn't
coincide
with
the
neighborhood?
That
was
something
very
important
in
the
2040
plan.
Y
The
purpose
of
the
city
council
is
to
really
represents
the
people
of
the
neighborhood,
the
people
who
live
on
the
streets,
not
in
different
neighborhoods
South,
Minneapolis,
North
Minneapolis
and,
unfortunately,
the
members
aren't
being
heard
and
we're
the
ones
who
are
being
impacted.
I
am
asking
you
to
you
know:
do
your
duty
and
support
the
appeal
of
Sarah
and
ask
for
a
new
site
plan
that
fits
within
the
ordinances
that
fit
within
the
neighborhood.
Thank
you.
K
I
think
what's
baffling
me
so
much
is
that
I
think
we're
actually
all
on
the
same
page.
We
do
want
affordable
housing.
We
do
agree
that
housing
is
needed.
I
I,
don't
want
to
take
that
away
from
anyone.
I
absolutely
agree
with
that.
You
know
there's
a
hundred
as.
N
K
Know
there's
a
hundred
comprehensive
plan
policies
under
the
2040
plan
and
it
the
2040
plan
pursues
both
substantial
and
incremental
density
increases.
Okay,
we
we
know
that
and
the
strategy
to
implement
those
are
your
built
forms
and
your
zoning
okay,
and
so
we
keep
coming
up
here
trying
to
talk
to
talk
about
the
zoning
piece
or
talk
about
the
built
form
and
slowly.
You
know
we
can
all
show
up
at
1
30
to
but
we're
all
here.
K
Think
that
the
crappy
thing
that's
happened
is
we
don't
have
any
developers
that
that
want
to
work
with
us
right
and
I
understand
I'm,
not
your
constituent,
I
get
that,
but
I
do
live
and
work
in
this
neighborhood
and
I
see
what
would
benefit
both
current
and
future
Neighbors
interior
three
would
create
more
opportunities
for
low
moderate
income
development
and
for
people
who
prefer
larger
Apartments.
You
didn't
want
to
interfere
with
635
and
I
want
to
tell
you
on
behalf
of
the
neighbors
whose
garage
was
blocked
by
that
project.
K
They
had
to
spend
ten
thousand
dollars
just
to
get
a
recorded
easement,
and
here
I
am
spending
money
just
to
get
you
to
hear
me
because
I
had
to
hire
a
lawyer
too.
So
here's
my
ask:
could
you
consider
what,
if
that's
it?
What
if
you
considered
what?
If
what
if
Van
Buren
was
meant
to
be
interior
three
and
what,
if
you
voted
right
now
to
rectify
that,
to
come
back
to
the
table
with
some
a
different
development,
verse,
6
13..
Thank
you
for
your
time.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
Thank.
Q
Well?
Thank
you
so
much
all
for
coming
out
and
freely
making
your
voice
heard
before
I
call
council
member
Allison
to
make
a
motion.
Is
there
any
of
my
colleagues
have
any
question
with
the
staff
or
the
City
attorney
councilmember
Allison.
S
We
have
had
a
lot
of
really
great
presentations
today,
but
I
also
want
to
remind
myself
and
my
colleagues
that
we're
here
just
deciding
whether
we,
whether
we've
gotten
it
wrong
here,
whether
our
staff
got
it
wrong,
whether
the
things
that
we
can't
consider
while
we're
while
we're
making
this
motion
I,
did
want
to
ask
Mr
fussy.
Just
for
a
quick
reminder
of
the
timeline.
S
There
was
the
lawsuit.
There
was
the
stay,
and
now
we're
no
longer
under
a
stay.
Is
that
is
that
correct
of
in
of
enforcing
2040.
O
Well,
Mr
Mr,
chair
and
committee
members,
council,
member
Ellison.
The
stay
is
still
in
effect,
meaning
that
the
district
court
order,
which
essentially
overturned
2040,
is
not
in
place.
What
is
in
place
directly
is
Minneapolis
2040
and
that
its
principles
and
its
standards
are
what
must
govern
your
consideration
of
this.
Thank.
S
You,
and
even
in
the
own
supplement
that
we
got
handed
earlier
today.
It
says
it
quotes.
This
It
quotes
Joseph,
judge
Klein,
and
it
says
you
know
he
made.
He
made
a
statement
when
he
allowed
the
city
to
keep
approving
development
under
2040
pending
appeal
in
order
to
circum
in
order
to
prevent
chaos.
S
So
you
know
the
thing
that
we
have
to
consider
is
whether
or
not
we're
allowing
2040
to
continue
or
not,
and
there's
nothing
that
we've
been
told
today
that
that
is
suggesting
that
we
should
not
allow
2040
to
continue
so
I'm
going
to
move
to
deny
the
appeal
to
uphold
the
planning
commissions,
decision
and
staff
recommendation
and
I'm
sure
a
lot
of
folks
at
the
court
level.
We'll
have
a
lot
more
conversations,
but
that's
the
decision
before
this
Council
today.
So
that's
my
motion.
Q
Thank
you
so
much
councilmember
Allison
I'll
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
roll
for
council
member
I
will
send
this
motion.
B
Q
Okay,
the.
Q
C
Q
Next
item
rezoning
for
deep
housing,
LLC
and
I
will
call
staff
Andrew
friends
to
present
that.
I
All
right,
Vice,
chair,
Osmond
Adam,
is
the
rezoning
associated
with
the
same
project
as
the
appeal
that
we
just
discussed.
It's
a
rezoning
of
the
primary
zoning
district
for
the
two
sites
from
r1a
to
R3,
retaining
the
existing
ill-form
overlay
District
of
corridor
six.
So
it's
really
the
same
considerations
that
we
we
talked
about
earlier
and
the
Planning
Commission
recommended
approval
based
on
staff
findings,
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
Thank
you.
Thank.
Q
You
so
much
is
there
a
question
for
the
staff
right
well
with
that
I
will
move
a
item
for
approval,
all
those
favorites
Ai
and
all
those
opposing
a
and
that
that
motion
carries
I,
see
no
further
business
before
us
with
no
objection,
I
will
declare
this
meal
Nigeria.
Thank
you.
So
much.