►
From YouTube: April 20, 2023 Zoning Board of Adjustment
Description
Additional information at:
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
Submit written comments about agenda items to: councilcomment@minneapolismn.gov or https://www.minneapolismn.gov/government/meetings/public-comment/online-comment
A
Oh
well,
I
have
you
briefly.
I
did
hear
from
his
Wang
that
she's
running
a
few
minutes
late,
but
she
should
be
here
soon.
B
A
B
Okay,
let
the
record
show
that
we
do
have
Quorum
and
with
that
we'll
proceed
to
our
agenda,
a
copy
of
which
was
posted
for
public
access
to
the
city's
legislative
information
management
system
available
at
lims.
That's
l-I-m-s,
dot,
Minneapolis
mn.gov!
Is
there
a
motion
to
approve
this
agenda
so.
C
B
It's
moved
and
seconded.
Is
there
any
discussion
hearing
none
all
in
favor
of
the
motion
indicate
by
saying
aye
aye
any
against
indicate
by
saying,
nay,
any
abstentions,
and
with
that
the
agenda
is
approved
and
believe
all
the
board
members
have
seen
a
copy
of
the
minutes
from
the
March
16
2023
Zoning
Board
of
adjustment
meeting.
Is
there
a
motion
to
approve.
B
Let's
see
I
think
Mr
Hutchins
got
that
so
is
there
a
second
all
right,
it's
moved
and
seconded.
Is
there
any
discussion
on
the
motion
seeing
none
all
in
favor
of
the
motion
indicate
by
saying
aye,
all
again,
Syndicate
by
saying,
nay,
any
abstentions?
If
you
weren't
here
last
time,
please
abstain,
abstain
and
that
motion
passes
the
minutes
from
the
zoning
Board
of
adjustment.
March
16
2023
meeting
are
approved,
Mr
lso
there,
any
petitions
or
Communications.
D
Hello,
chair,
Perry
members
of
the
board,
the
I
have
one
communication
this
evening.
It
is
the
result
of
an
appeal
of
the
decision
of
the
board
of
adjustment
at
223
40th
Street
East,
the
applicant,
then
appellant
appealed
the
fence
height
in
the
required
front
yard.
That
appeal
was
denied
by
the
business
inspection,
housing
and
zoning
committee
and
that's
the
outcome
so.
B
So
our
there
were
a
couple
of
things
that
we
denied.
D
Right,
correct,
chair,
Perry
members
of
the
board,
only
the
fence
height
was
appealed.
The
the
appellant
decided
applicant,
slash
repellent,
decided
to
make
some
modifications
to
the
retaining
wall
and
some
of
the
other
things
and
still
was
granted
the
variance
for
the
impervious
surface.
So
that
still
applies
on
only
appealed.
Defense
height
variants
was
proposing
to
pull
it
back
a
little
bit,
but
still
not
in
compliance
with
zoning
regulation.
B
Okay
thanks
any
questions.
Mr
Ellis
I
see
none.
Thank
you
very
much,
a
reminder
to
applicants
and
others.
If
you're
going
to
speak
at
the
public
hearing,
please
sign
in
on
the
sheet
outside
the
door
and
speak
clearly
into
the
microphone
if
you've
not
signed
in
you
can
do
so
on
your
way
out
also
to
applicant
sellers.
Please
contact
staff
after
the
hearing
with
any
questions
regarding
your
projects
and
if
you
could
turn
your
cell
phones
off
or
turn
them
on
silent.
That
would
be
appreciated.
B
Let's
review
the
agenda,
I'll
read
the
agenda
number
and
and
the
address
of
the
project
and
state
whether
it's
slated
for
consent,
continuance
with
God
return
or
discussion,
and
we
have
one
item
on
the
agenda
and
it's
a
discussion
item
so
I'll
just
talk
about
what
those
are.
These
are
items
for
which
the
board
will
take
public
testimony
deliberate
on
and
make
a
decision
after
the
public.
Testimony
has
been
heard
for
each
particular
discussion
item
I
will
close
the
public
hearing
for
that
agenda
item
once
they
close
the
public
hearing
for
an
item.
B
No
additional
public
testimony
will
be
taken,
but
staff
may
be
asked
to
address
board
questions
after
the
public
hearing.
For
an
item
is
closed.
Board
members
will
then
discuss
and
act
on
motions
and
the
chair
only
votes
in
the
case
of
a
tie.
So
our
one
agenda
item
is
agenda.
Item
number
land
use.
Requests.
Agenda
item
is
number
five
2900
to
2910
Hennepin
Avenue,
and
this
is
a
discussion
item.
E
Good
afternoon,
chair
Perry
members
of
the
board
agenda
item
number
five
is
a
remodel
of
the
Uptown
Theater
property
at
2900
to
2012
Hennepin
Avenue.
This
property
is
located
at
the
corner
of
Hennepin
Avenue
and
Lagoon
Avenue
in
the
Uptown
area
of
Minneapolis
property
is
currently
zoned,
c3a,
Community,
Activity,
Center,
po
pedestrian-oriented
overlay
district
and
a
built
form
of
Transit
10..
E
The
property
is
currently
undergoing
a
remodel
to
establish
the
use
as
a
live
performance
theater
that
was
previously
in
use
as
a
movie
theater
and
a
nail
salon.
The
property
received
permits
for
remodel
the
middle
of
last
year
and
during
the
remodel,
several
windows
were
removed
in
excess
of
the
permitted
scope
of
the.
E
E
The
work
in
excess
of
the
permit
scope
was
reported
to
the
City
by
a
member
of
the
public
and
referred
to
zoning
enforcement.
We
issued
orders
to
correct,
and
that
is
the
application
that
is
before
you
today.
The
site
plan
review
standards
require
that
30
of
a
facade
facing
a
public
Street
must
be
windows
in
the
pedestrian-oriented
overlay
District.
This
is
increased
to
40
percent
as
completed
the
work
comprises
30.8
percent
of
the
facade.
The
variance
is
requested
in
order
to
legalize
this
facade
at
less
than
40
percent.
E
E
E
From
its
announcement
at
being
opened
back
in
1918.,.
E
And
we
can
see
here
nearly
100
glazing
on
the
ground
floor,
the
intervening
years,
the
building
has
been
remodeled
several
times
many
times,
but
the
recent
most
recent
tenant
did
still
comply
with
the
40
glazing.
E
The
openings
here
which
separate
the
walls
of
the
building
from
the
performance
space
are
separated
from
that
performance
Space
by
stairs
walls
and
other
rooms,
and
so
the
presence
of
Windows
would
not
affect
the
visibility
of
the
stage
or
the
ability
of
the
space
to
perform
its
role
as
a
performance.
Space
staff
finds
that
the
first
finding
is
not
met.
E
This
variance
is
not
in
keeping
with
the
spirit
and
intent
of
the
ordinance
or
the
comprehensive
plan.
The
specific
items
in
the
comprehensive
plan
are
outlined
in
the
staff
report.
In
the
interest
of
time.
I
will
not
go
over
them
in
detail,
however.
I
can,
if
the
board
wishes
The
increased
requirement
in
the
pedestrian-oriented
overlay
again.
Increasing
the
standard
requirement
of
30
up
to
40
percent
is
intended
to
create
a
more
welcoming
pedestrian
environment
and
to
maximize
eyes
on
the
street
and
other
accepted
principles,
which
is
crime
prevention
through
environmental
design.
E
Staff
finds
that
the
second
finding
has
not
been
met.
The
essential
character
of
this
area
in
the
core
of
Uptown
is
itself
of
large
showrooms
and
store
display
glass.
A
proposal
falling
below
the
40
requirement
in
the
PO
does
not
meet
this.
The
character
of
the
area
The
Proposal,
would
not
be
detrimental
to
health
safety
or
welfare
of
those
using
the
property
or
the
General.
Public
staff
finds
the
third
finding
is
met,
but
only
in
part,
because
not
all
three
findings
have
been
met.
Staff
recommendation
is
to
deny
this
application.
I
will
stand
for
questions.
B
F
E
Think
your
chair,
Perry
board
member
Hutchins,
the
performance
space
itself
can
be
seen
right
here.
G
E
Chairs
and
Stage
the
original,
the
historic
Uptown
Theater
building
was
right.
Here
you
can
kind
of
see
faintly
dashed.
F
E
H
E
Demolition
plan:
okay:
the
next
page
shows
the
proposed
floor
plan,
but
that
sounds
like
maybe
more
what
you're
going
for.
E
E
F
Yep,
so
then,
can
you
Circle
the
windows
on
there
too,
just
make
sure
we're
all
on
the
same
page
there
there
and
there,
okay,
just
making
sure
so
from
there.
It
doesn't
look
like
they're
blocking
they're,
the
entertainment
space
is
blocked
by
walls.
There's
a
large
open
space.
Now.
Are
we
just
calling
that
entryway
wall
vestibule,
essentially
what
we're
calling
blocking
it?
Well.
E
F
I
C
You
chair
Perry,
thank
you,
Miss
Brandt,
I'm,
curious
to
what
extent,
if,
at
all,
the
the
zoning
code
and
the
presentation
from
staff
considers
the
aspect
of
safety
from
gun
crime
and
the
impact
that
glass
would
have
as
opposed
to
a
brick
facade.
E
Your
Prairie
members
of
the
board
I'm
not
quite
sure
how
to
answer
that.
Maybe
perhaps
missiles
may
have
a
better
response,
but
this
is
a
standard
requirement
in
every
pedestrian
oriented
and
overly
District
within
the
city
and
I.
Don't
know
that
there
would
be
particular
consideration
for
this.
D
Hi,
chair
Perry
Vice,
chair
safely,
to
answer
your
question.
The
code
considers
safety
in
in
a
sense
one
of
the
reasons
for
the
regulation
of
Windows
and
having
Windows
is
eyes
on
the
street.
The
ability
to
look
out
people
look
in
to
see
if
there's
something
going
on
or
if
something's
going
on
on
the
street,
where
they
can
then
react
to
it
in
some
capacity.
D
One
of
the
things
then,
we've
got
several
regulations
to
this.
We've
got
the
minimum
30
windows.
We
have
it's,
although
it's
higher
here
in
The,
Pedestrian
oriented
overlay
District.
We
also
do
not
allow
people
to
block
windows
with
shelving
or
signs
or
anything
like
that
between
four
and
seven
feet.
So
people
can
view
in
and
out
of
structures,
Etc.
So
that's
kind
of
the
consideration.
We
want
the
ability
of
people
to
see
in
and
out
of
buildings,
so.
F
D
B
Any
other
questions
I
see,
none.
Thank
you.
Let's
open
the
public
hearing
is
there.
The
applicant
is
present.
If
you
want
to
give
your
name
and
address
for
the
record,
and
we
have
read
your
report
that
you
provided
in
the
staff
packet.
So
if
you
just
can
stick
to
the
highlights
of
that,
that
would
be
great.
Thank.
J
You
Mr
chair
members
of
the
board.
My
name
is
Michael
Margulies
I'm,
with
with
Newton
res
LLC
and
I'm
here
on
behalf
of
the
applicant
Armory
Holdings
LLC
Armory
Holdings
owns
the
Uptown
Theater.
It
also
owns
the
Armory
Downtown
Minneapolis
and
has
been
pretty
successful
in
helping
Revitalize
that
portion
of
the
town
a
little
bit
of
context.
J
When
the
Uptown
theater
closed
due
to
the
the
change
in
the
movie
industry,
it
really
had
a
serious
impact
on
the
neighborhood
and
and
armor
has
been
trying
to
figure
out
how
to
make
to
revitalize
this
property
and
therefore
Revitalize
the
Uptown
neighborhood,
which
is
falling
into
some
tough
times,
and
so
what
they've
done
is
taken
the
historic
property
and
a
long
at
least
a
portion
of
the
property
next
door,
which
is
the
2910
building
and
which
is
in
which
these
windows
are
are
located.
J
The
program
the
architectural
program
meets
the
underlying
zoning
requirement
of
meeting
30
glazed
Windows.
It
doesn't
meet
the
overlay
requirement
of
30
percent.
We
disagree
with
the
findings
of
of
the
staff
report.
We
think
that
the
practical,
practical
difficulty
test
is
met.
The
circumstances
here
were
not
caused
by
the
applicant
we're
trying
to
revise,
trying
to
renovate
and
repurpose
a
100
year
old
building,
and
it's
an
extension
of
the
use
that
it's
always
been
used
for.
J
Creating
additional
window
space
would
make
it
impossible
for
us
to
use
the
building
the
way
we
want
to
use
it
letting
light
into
the
foyer
area,
which
is
also
performance,
space
would
would
hurt
the
ability
would
limit
the
ability
to
Stage
this
performance
base,
light
the
performance
base
and
have
the
audience
participate
in
the
in
the
in
the
use
of
the
performance
space,
for
the
same
reason
that
you
wouldn't
allow
Windows
into
a
movie
theater.
You
can't
allow
Windows
to
be
used
here
for
the
same
reason
you
wouldn't
have.
J
If
this
was
a
commercial
dark
room,
you
wouldn't
impose
this
requirement
on
them.
The
applicant
didn't
create
these
circumstances,
they're
just
trying
to
use
the
building
and
work
with
the
building
and
the
circumstances
it
gives
us,
and
it's
doing
so
in
keeping
with
the
underlying
blazing
requirement
of
30
percent,
so
I
think
the
Practical
difficulties
test
is
clearly
met.
J
J
The
ordinance
staff
is
suggesting
that
we
look
at
policy
number
six
as
the
justification
for
this.
For
its
rationale.
We
suggest
that
the
application,
the
40
percent
rule
in
this
particular
situation,
actually
works
against
what
the
policy
is
trying
to
achieve.
The
policy
wants
clear
windows,
street
level
and
says
they're
desirable.
J
It
says
it
once
allow
the
policy
wants
to
allow
views,
so
you
can
see
interesting
things
and
to
prevent
a
feeling
of
of
of
enclosure.
J
J
We
think
that
the
policy
issue
of
whether
it
should
be
40
versus
30
percent
pales
in
comparison
to
the
ability
to
convert
this
space
and
and
repurpose
the
theater
and
its
adjacent
space
for
for
for
for
venue,
performances
for
entertainment
performances,
and
we
think
that
we
have
accomplished
that
meeting
the
policies
while
still
keeping
the
30
on
30
requirements.
J
Finally,
I
can't
believe
that
there's
any
much
discussion
that
this
is
detrimental
to
the
health,
safety
and
Welfare
of
the
neighborhood,
allowing
30
coverage
which
is
allowed
in
the
underlying
requirements
under
the
underlying
zoning
will
not
impact
the
health,
safety
or
welfare
of
the
neighborhood.
What
it
will
impact
is
the
revitalization
of
the
neighborhood.
J
It
will
bring
people
back
to
the
street,
which
is
what
this
policy
is
designed
to,
encourage,
which
in
turn
will
make
the
streets
safer,
which
is
what
the
policy
is
trying
to
do,
and
it
will,
in
the
end,
help
energize
this
neighborhood
I.
Think
by
focusing
on
the
40
versus
30
percent.
For
this
small
element.
Here
we
are
losing
sight
of
what
the
ordinance
is
really
designed
to
achieve.
J
F
Chair
Perry,
thanks
for
your
presentation,
thanks
for
coming
down
question
for
you,
why
did
you
choose
to
put
the
staircase
the
wrapper
on
staircase
in
that
location
against
the
exterior
wall
in
the
front?
I'm?
Sorry,
could
you
repeat
that
again,
why?
Why
did
you
choose
to
put
the
wraparound
staircase
in
the
front
of
the
building
against
that
exterior
wall,
thus
negating
the
use
of
the
two
windows
I'm.
J
Not
sure
that
I
have
the
the
full
answer
to
for
that,
the
the
we
are
constrained
in
terms
of
what
the
building
configuration
allows
us
to
do.
We
have
the
historic
structure
that
we
can't
touch.
J
We
have
this
base
that
has
limited
ability
to
reconfigure,
at
the
same
time
we're
trying
to
expand
the
viewing
and
the
Via
of
the
VIP
space,
the
viewing
and
the
lounge
space
and
the
additional
performance
space.
So
there
are
just
so
many
places
to
put
the
things
that
are
otherwise
required
by
code
that
are
essential
exit
and
fire
safety
and
and
Public
Safety
type
aspects.
F
Appreciate
your
answer:
I
got
one
more
for
you
with
the
amount
of
double
doors
within
with
the
need
of
all
that
access
and
egress
because
of
the
type
of
building
it
is
and
trying
to
keep
the
historical
nature
of
the
pro
the
project,
you're
kind
of
limited
to
the
amount
of
Windows
you
can
put
in
because
there's
so
much
door
on
that
face.
Is
that
limited
your
decision
making
when
it
comes
to
where
the
windows
sit
yeah.
J
I
think
that's
I,
think
that's
an
accurate
statement
and
I
think
you
have
to
look
at
it
in
the
context
of
of
this
building
in
its
connection
with
the
historic
building
next
door.
True,
there
are
two
separate
buildings,
but
you
also
have
to
look
at
the
purpose
of
these
abilities.
These
per
the
building.
This
purpose
of
these
buildings
is
a
theater
and
just
to
have
glass
to
to
to
meet
this
requirement
sort
of
underwhelmed
by
the
purpose
of
the
theater,
which
is
which
is
to
allow
performance
space.
J
We
also
have
to
deal
with
in
the
context
of
this
neighborhood.
We've
had
temporary
glass
in
there
for
the
last
year,
and
no
sooner
do
we
get
it
up
that
it
comes
out
because
of
vandalism
and
other
public
safety
issues,
we're
trying
to
deal
with
the
public
safety
issue
here,
and
we
think
that
we've
gotten
a
pretty
good
result
here.
There's
plenty
of
glass
there's
plenty
of
opportunity
for
the
neighborhood
to
see
what
goes
on
here
and
that
meets
the
spirit
of
the
of
the
ordinance.
C
J
I'm,
what
I'm
asking
you
to
do
is
to
acknowledge
that
the
underlying
zoning
provides
for
30
coverage.
The
overlay
provides
for
40
coverage
if
we
were
coming
in
and
then
the
whole
building
and
the
whole
project
as
a
whole
meets
the
30
percent,
as
does
this
building
just
the
2910
building.
If
we
were
coming
in
and
asking
you
for
a
variance
with
less
than
30
percent
I
think
that
might
be
cause
for
concern.
J
But
in
this
case,
given
the
other
rationale
as
long
as
we
meet
the
30
percent,
we
have
met
I,
think
the
substance
and
the
goal
of
the
ordinance
and
the
comp
plan.
J
C
And
I
appreciate
the
answer:
I
have
a
follow-up
question.
If
I
may,
to
what
extent
do
you
value
the
the
glass
from
the
street
side?
I
you've
made
a
great
argument
for
what
you
don't
value
about
the
extra
glass
from
the
project
perspective
in
your
program.
But
what
about
the
street
from
from
Hennepin
and
the
adjoining.
J
Is
he
or
she
sees
everything,
that's
going
on
with
the
with
the
entryway
of
the
of
the
Uptown
Theater,
and
this
is
part
of
it.
Their
experience
is
enhanced
from
the
street
Side
by
looking
at
the
theater,
by
looking
at
everything,
that's
displayed
on
the
theater,
the
large
doors
in
the
theater
and
this
area.
J
C
G
You
for
your
presentation,
so
I
just
one
thing:
I'm
you're
talking
a
lot
about
this
dark
room,
sort
of
issue
being
that
the
problem
with
the
windows
and
I
wanted
to
understand
what
it
you
know
from
what
I
understand
from
reading
the
plans,
it
seems
like
you're
leaving
in
the
windows
from
the
historic
building,
because
you
can't
touch
it
and
but
it
does
those
windows
do
look
into
the
performance
area
am
I
not
wrong.
J
I
I
think,
there's
I,
think
look
of
context
is,
is
appropriate,
so
consider
this
room
to
be
the
room
that
is
facing
Hennepin
Avenue
and
that
the
theater
is
there
or
excuse
me:
that's
Hennepin
Avenue.
So
if
we're
going
to
have
a
performance
in
this
room
and
if
you
look
behind
you,
you
have
Windows
I
can't
have
a
performance
here,
because
I
can't
light
it
I
can't
stage
it.
I
can't
have
people
looking
at
the
performance
room
there.
J
If
that's
what
it's
going
to
be
used
for,
because
I
have
light
streaming
in
and
I
have
too
much
ambient
light
that
will
destroy.
This
is
for
the
for
the
venue,
so
it's
counterproductive
to
the
use
of
the
property
and
it
doesn't
achieve
much
in
terms
of
accomplishing
the
the
Street
Experience
of
the
that
the
ordinance
is
trying
to
achieve.
G
So
I
think
one
thing
I'm
sure,
so
the
maybe
it's
helpful
to
bring
up
I,
don't
know
Miss
Brandt.
If
you
can
bring
up
the
plan,
so
we
can
all
kind
of
look
at
it
together.
But
from
how
I
was
looking
at
the
plans,
it
seems
like
the
windows
are
looking
out
into
the
performance
area
and
I'm
not
sure
how
this
the
vestibule
windows
are
impacting
that
other
the
additional
performance
area.
So
it
seems
like
there
are
windows
that
are
already
existing
in
the
historic
space
that
is
impacting
where
the
seating
is.
J
J
And
the
answer
is
that
the
use
is
diminished
because
you're
asking
us,
the
the
code
is
theoretically
asking
us
to
put
some
transparent
substance
facing
the
street
and
also
to
the
extent
that
it
Blends
Blends
in
or
bleeds
into
the
viewing
space
of
of
the
actual
seat
of
performance
area.
Same
answer,
but.
J
There!
Well
yes,
because
there
are
no
windows
at
this
point.
There
are
no
windows
that
intrude
upon
that
space.
That
would
not
be
true
here,
so
you
take
you've,
got
to
take
the
space
as
you
find
it
in
this
case,
even
more
so
because
it's
a
historic,
historic
building
and
that's
the
Practical
difficulty
test,
it's
you're
you're,
taking
the
building
as
you
find
it,
we
didn't
create
it
that
way.
J
J
Compromising
the
use
of
that
space,
both
visually
and
from
a
and
from
a
a
movement
standpoint
getting
people
to
know.
I
Still
I
have
to
follow
up
on
Anna's
question
here
because
I'm
very,
very
confused.
No.
H
I
I
It
just
seems
very
clear
to
me
that
if
that
interior
wall
was
all
opaque
just
like
when
you
go
to
a
theater
and
they
have
a
separate
vestibule
area
that
there's
an
opaque
wall
that
prevents
light
from
coming
into
the
into
the
performance
space
and
in
the
vestibule,
that's
facing
the
exterior
there's
light,
so
you
can
see
people
hanging
out
in
the
vestibule
or
moving
back
and
forth,
but
once
people
are
in
you
close
that
door
and
you
certainly
could
still
have
I'm
having
a
hard
time
understanding
what
your
difficulty
is
to
have
performances
there,
because
it's
like
any
other
theater,
is
that
that's
an
opaque
wall
on
the
interior
and
it's
a
glass
wall
on
the
exterior.
J
With
respect,
I
think
it
is
a
little
bit
different,
first
of
all,
you're
ending
up
creating
you're,
creating
a
a
transparent
window
or
a
transparent
area
simply
to
create
a
a
light
blocking
device
right
in
back
of
it.
So
my
question
would
be:
what
purpose
does
that
real
purpose?
Does
that
solve
in
terms
of
meeting
the
ordinance
desire
for
The
Pedestrian
experience
looking
in
you're?
J
I
B
I
I
just
want
to
get
clarity
from
you
mentioned
something
about.
You
had
40
percent
glass
there
before.
J
J
J
B
B
B
J
J
Now
the
question
of
the
application
of
it
in
this
particular
situation,
because
it
doesn't
satisfy
any
of
the
policy
goals
of
of
the
ordinance.
B
J
I'm
I'm
saying
I'm
saying
both,
which
is
having
glass.
There
interferes
with
the
use
of
the
property
and
to
the
extent
that
you
accept
that
it
doesn't
interfere
with
the
use
of
the
property.
By
virtue
of
not
admitting
admitting
light,
then
then
there's
no
hardship.
If
you
will
in
in
not
allowing
the
variants
to
proceed,
it
doesn't
accomplish
anything
that
meets
the
spirit
or
the
intent
of
the
ordinance.
F
Thanks
chair,
Perry
I
want
to
be
clear
on
the
bottom
right
hand,
corner
what's
labeled
box
office,
that
is
all
still
glazing,
correct,
I
believe
so.
Yes,
so
then
that's
a
quite
a
bit.
The
entire
corner
is
left
as
glazing,
the
doors
that
lead
into
the
main
called
the
lowered
viewing
area
floor.
Those
ones
leading
in
those
are
a
significant
amount
of
glass
doors.
H
F
B
J
B
B
C
Mr
softly
thank
you,
chair,
Perry,
well,
I
appreciate
the
testimony
from
staff
and
the
applicant
I
I
am
in
favor
of
denying
the
variants,
as
recommended
by
staff,
while
I
understand
what
the
applicant
is
trying
to
drive
at
I.
Don't
see
the
Practical
difficulty
as
related
to
the
legal
question
before
us,
and
you
know
we
can.
We
can
certainly
come
to
different
conclusions
about
whether
or
not
the
overlay
is
meeting
its
intended
purpose.
C
F
Thanks
chair,
Barry
I
appreciate
Mr
softly's
comments.
I
guess,
the
only
thing
I
would
say
is
the
nature
of
the
building.
It's
a
historical
building.
There's
not
a
lot
of
uses.
You
can
do
with
an
old
theater.
That's
kind
of
designed
this
way
to
make
it
useful
for
today's
purposes,
you're
going
to
have
to
redesign
some
stuff
by
putting
the
staircase
in
you're
going
to
need
to
just
to
get
the
layout
correct.
F
F
If
you
put
those
glass
windows
in
at
all,
I
think
it
is
detrimental
to
the
use
of
it
as
a
performance
space,
like
you
said,
there's
two
arguably,
two
separate
performance
spaces
which
are
separate
but
not
separate,
because
there's
no
wall
but
could
be
used
separately
is
what
the
applicant
alluded
to.
So
if
you
take
that
second
performance
space,
which
would
be
on
the
left,
the
non-historical
portion
of
the
building
I
would
argue
you
put
a
window
there.
F
It
does
affect
the
use
of
that
room
if
you're
going
to
have
people
coming
and
going
through
those
doors,
you're
going
to
have
light
from
the
street
coming
in
from
what
would
be
then
the
vestibule
into
the
performance
space,
so
I
think
there's
room
on
finding
one
for
practical
difficulty,
I
think
there's
for
finding
two
for
reasonability
I
think
it's
totally
reasonable
to
reuse
a
historical
theater
as
a
theater,
so
I
I
think
there's
room
here
and
I'd
like
to
hear
some
more
comments
from
the
board
members.
I
Struggling
with
this
one,
a
lot
because,
as
I
said,
my
example
of
the
previous
piece
about
a
theater
that
I
go
into,
but
you
are
correct
that
a
theater
that
I,
that
has
a
an
enclosed
vestibule,
also
usually
doesn't
have
an
exterior
wall
on
the
on
the
piece.
So
I
am
sensitive
to
the
fact
that
doing
historic
buildings
and
also
doing
art
related
buildings
are
never
very
financially
successful
and,
as
was
pointed
out,
we
have
an
entire
perimeter
nearly
of
glass.
So
I
do
I.
I
Do
question
the
Practical
difficulty
that
this
presents
and
I
think
to
a
certain
extent.
We
have
to
trust
a
developer
who's
done
pretty
amazing
stuff
at
the
Armory,
and
that
that
this
really
does
make
sense,
while
I
wish
that
there
was
some
allusion
to
where
that
Windows
used
to
be
instead
of
just
a
flat
boarded
out
like
I,
wish
that
there
would
have
been
some
decorative
attempt
to
try
to
remind
the
historic
nature
of
what
those
windows
used
to
be,
as
opposed
to
just
flat
bracket.
I
H
Yeah,
so
I've
spent
a
lot
of
time
in
different
event,
spaces
which
essentially
I
think
would
be
the
use
of
that
half
and
the
light
is
really
being
blocked
by
a
lot
of
things
on
the
way
in
there
that
if
you're
talking
about
screens
and
things
like
that-
which
I
think
is
generally
would
be
the
hardest
thing
to
do
in
that
area.
H
I
I,
don't
see
any
reason
that
you
might
have
to
keep
those
doors
shut,
but-
and
there
will
be
some
light
potentially
from
the
staircase
side,
but
I
do
not
see
that
as
a
way
of
really
preventing
that
being
used
as
what
I
would
consider
an
event
space,
especially
during
the
day
it's
also
east
facing
which
I
think
is
of
note
for
the
concerts
and
things
that
are
likely
happening
in
the
evening.
So
there
would
be
even
more
limited.
C
I'll
just
follow
up
and
I
think
maybe
directly
to
Mr
Hutchins
and
and
argue
that
I
think
the
the
Practical
difficulty
here
is
the
use
that's
been
created,
specifically
the
use
of
the
leasehold
property
to
the
West.
That's
now
been
joined
through
the
party
wall
and,
and
that
is
a
separate
and
distinct
area
from
the
historical
theater
and
that
that
does
help
form
my
opinion
on
this
question.
G
I
appreciate
the
comments
from
all
my
board.
Members
I.
Think
one
thing
that
I
think
we've
talked
a
lot
about
the
Practical
difficulty
piece
which
I
agree
with
other
comments
have
been
made.
I,
don't
know
that
I
see
that
there
is
a
practical
difficulty
here
in
terms
of
using
the
space
as
an
event
space,
especially
because
there
is
you.
G
There
are
windows
on
the
on
the
historical
building
that
are
able
to
that
are
being
kept
and
your
there
are
still
the
ability
to
use
the
event
space
as
an
event
space
and
a
performance
space
with
those
windows
that
are
there
on
the
historical
building.
G
So
I'm
not
sure
that
I
see
that
there,
but
I
also
want
to
comment
on
The,
Pedestrian
overlay
and
we're
talking
a
lot
about
sort
of
the
like
eyes
on
the
street
and
the
safety
piece.
But
I
also
think
we
need
to
talk
about
The
Pedestrian
experience
in
terms
of
how
pedestrians
on
the
street
are
experiencing
the
facades
and
the
sidewalk
and
I
think
that
removing
the
windows
from
that
area
have
has
both
disrupted.
G
The
streetscape,
in
terms
of
there
are
windows
otherwise
continuously
along
Hennepin
Avenue
and
that
also
I
think
it
removing
the
glass.
Even
if
there
is
some
sort
of
you
know,
opaqueness
to
the
glass
or
having
the
windows,
there
still
creates
a
sense
it.
A
sense
of
you
know
it
improves
The,
Pedestrian
experience
and
removing
it
I
think
does
contribute
to
a
sense
of
enclosure
in
that
one
in
that
place,.
F
Just
to
beat
a
dead
horse,
the
space
is
now
becoming
one
space.
So
the
argument
that
it's
not
the
historical
portion
of
the
building
I
would
agree,
but
it's
being
used
injunction
with
it,
essentially
creating
one
space.
So
then
it
is
the
same
space
and
the
coroner
in
question
that
provides
a
lot
of
the
glazing
required.
F
Has
a
wall
on
the
on
the
plans
a
few
feet
in
blocking
the
light
into
the
performance
space.
So
it's
nullifying
the
light
that
would
be
coming
into
the
performance
space.
We're
essentially
asking
him
to
build
another
one.
On
the
other
side,
doing
the
exact
same
thing:
I
don't
see
the
Practical
need
for
it.
F
It's
not
a
it's
not
achieving
what
the
ordinance
is
trying
to
do,
I
think
by
revitalizing
the
space
using
it
as
a
anchor
in
that
is
actually
adhering
to
the
spirit
intent
of
the
audience
of
creating
eyes
on
the
street
by
having
something
that
gets
used
constantly.
In
my
opinion,
I'll
leave
it
alone.
After
that,.
B
H
B
So
it's
tied
and
I
vote
and
I
vote.
Yay
I
think
there
is
a
staff
made
a
very
compelling
argument
that
there
was
a
practical
difficulty
I'm.
Sorry
there
wasn't
a
practical
difficulty
and
I
also
think
that
the
reasonable
use
as
Ms
Callahan
talked
about
it's
more
than
just
eyes
in
the
street.
It's
about
that
sense
of
being
contained
in
a
tunnel
versus
being
out
and
open
that
the
glass
provides
is
not
being
met,
so
I,
don't
think
either
of
those
are
met.
B
Steph
also
touched
upon
that
it
was
not
in
the
character
of
the
neighborhood
and
I.
Don't
think
it
is
so
I,
don't
think
that
finding
was
met
either
so
I,
don't
think
all
three
of
the
findings
were
met
fully
and
so
I
vote
yay,
and
with
that
the
motion
is
passed
and
the
request
is
denied.
You
can
see
staff
about
what
your
options
are
going
forward.
B
Is
there
any
new
business
or
old
business
none?
Our
next
meeting
is
on
May
4th.
Is
there
a
motion
to
adjourn
so.