►
From YouTube: February 6, 2023 Planning Commission
Description
Additional information at:
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
Submit written comments about agenda items to: councilcomment@minneapolismn.gov
A
A
Good
afternoon
everybody
and
welcome
to
the
regular
meeting
of
the
City
Planning
Commission
today
is
Monday
February
7th.
My
name
is
Alyssa
Olson
and
I'm.
The
president
of
the
Planning
Commission,
the
city,
will
be
recording
and
posting
this
meeting
to
the
city's
website
and
YouTube
channel
as
a
means
of
increasing
Public,
Access
and
transparency.
This
meeting
is
public
and
subject
to
the
Minnesota
Minnesota
open
meeting
law.
At
this
time,
I'll
ask
the
clerk
to
please
call
the
roll.
B
A
All
right,
we
have
a
quorum.
So
next
we'll
proceed
to
the
agenda,
a
copy
of
which
was
posted
for
public
access
to
the
city's
legislative
information
management
system,
which
is
available
at
limbs.minneapolis
mn.gov.
There
are
also
copies
on
the
counter.
Next
to
the
clerk
we'll
begin
with
acceptance
of
the
minutes
from
January
23rd
could
I
have
a
motion
to
accept
those
minutes
all
right.
We
have
a
most
emotion
and
a
second.
Is
there
any
discussion,
seeing
none
all
in
favor,
say
aye
aye
all
opposed
any
abstentions.
A
All
right
that
motion
passes
our
next
order
of
business
is
to
organize
the
public
hearing
agenda
I'm,
going
to
read
through
the
items
on
the
agenda
and
state
whether
each
item
is
slated
for
consent,
continuance
with
return
or
discussion.
I'll
also
briefly
explain
what
those
mean
so
consent
items
will
be
passed
without
discussion
by
the
board
and
we'll
be
adopting
the
staff
recommendation,
as
well
as
any
conditions
stated
on
those
items.
A
A
So
the
following
items
are
on
our
agenda
for
this
evening.
Number
four
is
10
11
and
10
25
Portland
Avenue.
This
item
is
being
returned
and
so
we'll
do
the
return
action
on
our
consent
agenda
item
number
five
is
28
37,
Oakland,
Avenue
and
2844
Park
Avenue
staff
is
recommending
this
item
for
consent.
Is
there
anyone
here
who
would
like
to
speak
against
staff
recommendation
on
item
number
five.
A
A
Seeing
none
we'll
put
item
number
six
on
consent,
I,
don't
know
item
number,
seven
is
3805
Washington
Avenue
North
and
we
will
discuss
item
number
seven
foreign
item
number
eight
is
5401
Chicago
Avenue
and
811
54th
Street
East
staff
is
recommending
this
item
for
consent.
Is
there
anyone
here
who
would
like
to
speak
against
staff?
Recommendation
on
item
number?
Eight:
okay,
we'll
put
item
number
eight
on
our
discussion
agenda
item
number:
nine
is
18
23
18,
27,
1831,
1835
and
1839
Bryant
Avenue
North.
A
We
will
discuss
item
number
nine,
so
we
have
items
four
five
and
six
on
consent
and
items
number
seven.
Eight
nine
on
discussion
could
I
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
agenda
as
amended
so
moved.
A
All
right,
we'll
move
on
to
our
consent
agenda,
which
is
items
four
five
and
six
I
will
open
the
public
hearing
on
the
consent
agenda.
So
if
there's
anyone
here
who
would
like
to
speak
on
items,
four
five
and
six,
you
can
come
to
the
podium
now
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record
all
right,
seeing
no
one
I'm
gonna
close
the
public
hearing
for
the
consent
agenda.
A
A
All
right,
we
will
move
on
to
our
three
discussion
items
for
the
evening.
The
first
item
is
item
number
seven
3805
Washington,
Avenue,
North
and
staff
is
Lindsay
Silas.
D
Good
evening,
Tara,
Olson
and
committee
I
am
here
to
discuss
3805
Washington,
Avenue
North
I
know
that
there
were
some
questions
from
commissioner,
so
I'll
just
keep
the
presentation
short
and
give
an
overview
of
the
project.
This
site
is
located
between
94
Interstate
94
in
the
Mississippi
River.
It's
a
little
over
one
and
a
half
acres
in
size
and
contains
an
existing
building
that
was
previously
used
as
offices.
D
The
applicant
is
proposing
to
establish
day
one
Recovery
Center,
which
include
multiple
types
of
care
for
clients
undergoing
treatment
for
substance
abuse
disorders
in
the
in
the
zoning
District,
the
I2
zoning
District.
This
is
considered
a
hospital
use
which
requires
a
conditional
use,
permit
here's
the
site
in
question
and
a
site
plan
showing
the
addition
of
some
landscaping
around
the
surface
parking
area.
D
D
Oh
sorry,
that's
not
supposed
to
be
there,
and
so
as
far
as
conditions,
just
the
standard
conditions
for
one
and
two
staff
is
recommending
that
the
parking
lot
be
screens
with
screening,
that's
at
least
three
feet
in
height
and
60
opaque,
and
that
the
applicant
provide
a
pedestrian
connection
between
the
primary
building
entrance
and
Dowling
Avenue
North,
and
that
the
number
of
beds
on
exceed
42,
as
proposed
by
the
applicant
and
with
those
conditions
staff,
is
recommending
approval
and
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
Thank
you.
A
Lindsay
commissioner
Meyer.
E
D
So
part
of
this
project,
coming
through
is,
was
that
we
are
discussing
some
new
licensing
changes
at
the
state
that
are
basically
resulting
in
this
proposed
use
being
considered
to
be
a
hospital
on
and
and
what
that
use
is
going
to
look
like
when
the
land
use
rezoning
study
is
adopted.
D
It's
likely
that
we're
going
to
create
a
new
category
that
would
incorporate
these
types
of
substance,
abuse,
treatment,
facilities
that
would
more
align
with
the
licensure
that
is
going
to
be
required,
and
then
the
reason
for
limiting
the
number
of
beds
to
the
number
of
beds
proposed
is
just
to
make
it
clear
that
that
is
what
is
going
to
be
provided
in
this
facility
as
proposed,
and
that
any
change
to
the
number
of
beds
would
have
to
come
back
through
for
another
conditional
use
permit,
which
is
something
that
would
be
required.
D
Anyways
for
something
that
requires
a
conditionally
experiment.
Adding
beds
would
require
a
conditional
use
permit
anyway,
so
having
that
condition
is
just
to
make
it
clear
to
the
commissioner,
the
applicant
and
anyone
who
may
be
paying
attention
to
this
project
that
this
initial
use
permit
is
just
for
a
total
of
42
beds.
E
Yeah
so
I
was
I
was
definitely
interested
in
the
hospital
classification.
Also
for
the
item
that
we
returned
today,
and
it
seems
like
that's
something
we
should
try
to
clarify
looking
forward,
but
for
this
condition,
would
we
be
making
it
any
easier
for
them?
Like
suppose,
they've
found,
you
know
it
turns
out,
they
can
accommodate
43
people
and
instead
of
42.,
if
we
just
didn't
add
the
condition,
would
they
not
have
to
come
back.
E
Okay,
well
I
I,
guess:
I
find
the
condition
unnecessary
and
not
really
like
doing
anything
in
the
public
interest.
As
far
as
I
can
tell
like
I
mean
it
seems
like
the
type
of
thing
that
should
be
regulated
but
should
be
regulated
by
you
know:
Human
Services
or
the
health
department.
E
So
okay,
I,
don't
know
I
I
would
propose
to
just
not
include
it.
If,
if
that's
okay.
A
So
Lindsay,
the
the
ratio
of
beds
to
parking
spaces
is
regulated
by
the
zoning
code.
Correct,
okay,
is
that
supported
by
like
best
practices,
or
how
do
we
come
to
that
number?
That.
D
So
that
would
actually
be
more
applicable
if
they
were
reducing
the
number
of
beds,
then
they
would
potentially
be
at
exceeding
the
maximum
number
of
parking.
But
that's
not
like
you
know,
that's
not
a
condition
that
we
proposed
here.
A
I
guess
I
would
I'm
not
seeing
any
of
the
Commissioners
I
would
say
that
you
know
it's
not
preventing
them
from
expanding,
but
they
would
have
to
come
back
and
I.
Don't
know,
commissioner
I'm.
E
D
No
there's
there
would
be
no
variance
required,
I,
don't
even
know
if
we,
you
know,
wrote,
Into
the
findings.
The
fact
that
we
were
conditioning
that
so
like
if
the
applicant
had
proposed
50
beds
as
part
of
this
project,
that
that's
how
we
would
evaluate
the
project
and
then
that's
how
you
know.
That's
probably
the
condition
that
we
would
have
attached.
I.
Think
in
this
case,
the
reason
that
we
thought
42
beds
was
one.
This
is
you
know,
there's
some
new
licensure
happening
happening
at
the
state.
This
is
a
pretty
large
building.
D
It's
a
really
large
site.
We
just
wanted
to
kind
of
have
some
predictability
around
the
number
of
beds
that
were
going
to
be
included
in
this
project
because,
unlike
with
a
community
residential
facility,
there
isn't
like
a
maximum
number
of
beds
for
that
type
of
use.
Okay,
but
no
I.
You
would
not
need
to
make
any
new
findings,
it's
just
a
condition
of
the
conditionally
experiment
application
and
can
be
removed.
If
the
commission
desires,
okay,.
F
Are
there
any
I
mean
I
understand,
because
it's
a
conditional
use,
we
usually
sort
of
Define?
What
that
is?
Are
there
other
typologies
or
things
that
require
stating
size
components
in
the
canal
church,
for
example,
or
anything
like
that?
That
requires
specificity
like
this
or
is
this
unique
to
a
hospital.
D
So
when
we
have
a
lot
of
different
buckets
of
Congress
congregate,
living
type
uses,
some
of
those
do
have
maximum
number
of
beds
so,
like
we
have
different
categories
for
Community
residential
facilities
based
on
the
number
of
beds
and
those
are
different
uses
in
the
different
zoning
districts,
so
whether
they
require
whether
they're,
permitted
or
conditional
is
dependent
on
the
number
of
beds
that
are
provided.
So
that
would
probably
be
the
closest
example.
D
You
know,
I
think
in
this
case
you
know
we
were
similar
to
the
project
that
was
returned
on
on
this
agenda.
We
have
just
been
having
a
lot
of
conversations
around
these
types
of
uses
and
what
they're
going
to
be
in
the
future,
and
so
just
given
that
wanted
to
give
some
additional
predictability
to
this
project
as
far
as
the
size
that
could
be
expected.
Okay,.
E
So
it
seems
to
me
like
it's
not
a
an
especially
consequential
condition,
either
way,
but
I
feel,
like
you
know,
I'm
going
to
make
the
motion
to
and
without
it,
because
I'd
like
to
communicate.
You
know
that
if
they
are
able
to
fit
in
a
few
more
beds
to
help
a
few
more
people,
that's
something
that
we
would
encourage
and
not
view
as
like
a
public
nuisance.
E
So
I
will
move
item
a
or
so
sorry
item.
Seven
with
can
just
use
permanent
under
a
with
conditions.
One
two
three
and
four,
but
not
five.
C
A
C
You
so
much
is
there
a
motion
on
the
floor
about
adopting,
what's
there
before
us
now
or
that.
C
I
I
think
that
the
logic
that
commissioner
Meyer
makes
it
makes
a
total
sense,
I
mean
if,
if
I
mean
there
are
other
constraints,
the
building
size
and
so
forth,
and
if
it
turns
out
that
they
can
fit
in
two
more
beds
and
meet
the
what
other
requirements,
then
why
waste
the
city's
time
and
our
time
approving
those
two
more
bids.
F
Of
building
in
the
city,
so
is
that
in
related
I'm,
assuming
if
they
come
back,
it's
a
we're.
Gonna
have
to
have
a
parking
discussion
anyway,
right.
F
A
D
Commissioner,
Meyer
is
correct
in
that
the
the
issue
at
hand-
that's
discussed
in
the
staff
report
is
the
maximum
parking,
so
they
there
is
no
minimum
parking
required.
The
maximum
parking
for
a
hospital
is
one
space
per
two
beds.
So
if
fewer
beds
were
built,
then
technically
there
would
be
fewer
parking
spaces
allowed
as
part
of
that
application
and
those
would
have
to
be
removed
from
the
parking
area
to
be
in
compliance.
A
Okay,
all
right
any
other
questions.
J
C
I
A
Excellent
that
motion
passes
so
we'll
move
on
to
our
next
item,
which
is
item
number
eight
and
staff
is
Hilary
dvork.
C
I'm,
looking
at
the
well
I'm
sorry
you're
looking
at
the
wrong
one.
L
L
Nope,
okay,
well
we're
gonna
just
not
going
to
quite
do
what
I
was
going
to
do,
but
I'm
going
to
do
it
anyway.
So
this
is
5401
Chicago
Avenue
and
811
East
54th
Street
the
developers
proposing
to
construct
a
mixed-use
building
on
the
site
with
47
dwelling
units
and
approximately
3
800
square
feet
of
ground
level:
commercial
space.
It's
located
at
the
southeast
corner
of
Chicago
Avenue
and
54th
Street.
The
site
is
Zone
C1,
it's
in
the
airport
overlay,
which
has
no
impacts
on
the
site
because
it's
shorter
than
what
the
airport
allows.
L
So
there's
no
mention
of
it
in
the
report
and
it's
in
the
corridor.
4
built
form,
District,
I'm,
sorry,
but
I
know
that
this
is.
L
Sorry,
you
guys
I
wanted
to
show
you
the
vacation
aspect
of
the
site,
and
it
is
not
in
this
one.
There
is
a
vacation
application
as
part
of
the
project.
There
is
a
north-south
alley
that
will
not
be
impacted.
That
is
where
the
site
will
have
access
from
there's
an
East-West
alley
that
dog
legs
out
to
Chicago,
just
at
the
southern
edge
of
the
development
site
as
a
result
of
the
right-of-way
vacation,
there's
also
a
preliminary
and
final
plot
in
your
packets.
Today.
L
That
has
to
be
done
when
we
are
vacating,
formal,
right-of-way
or
public
right-of-way,
the
north
half
of
that
vacated
alley
will
accrue
to
the
project
site
in
the
South.
Half
of
the
vacated
alley
will
accrue
to
the
property
owner
to
the
South.
They
have
consented
to
this.
They
are
aware
that
they
are
going
to
be
getting
land
as
a
result
of
this
development
project.
L
So
this
is
the
development
site.
The
commercial
space
is
located
up
at
the
North
End
of
the
building
with
access
directly
after
Chicago,
there
is
a
diff,
an
additional
principal
entrance.
This
is
something
that
had
been
discussed
at
Committee
of
the
whole.
They
did
separate
the
entrances
so
there's
a
second
entrance
to
the
commercial.
Then
your
three
walk-up
units
along
Chicago
Avenue.
There
are
22
parking
spaces
in
the
garage
all
accessed
off
of
the
alley
in
one
level
of
enclosed
parking.
L
So
this
is
that
first
floor
plan
I'm
going
to
jump
to
the
elevations
the
elevations
on
the
top-
that
is
your
Chicago
Avenue
elevation,
the
one
on
the
bottom,
that
is,
your
East
54th
Street,
and
then
these
elevations,
the
top
one,
is
what
faces
the
alley
and
the
bottom.
One
is
what
faces
that
South
property
liner,
where
that
vacated
alley
will
be
again.
L
It's
a
four-story
building
with
the
one
level
of
enclosed
parking,
the
building
meets
all
of
the
site
plan,
review
standards
and
the
ordinance
they
do
not
need
alternative
compliance
for
any
of
our
requirements
in
site
plan
review,
exterior
materials
of
the
building
include
include
brick
and
metal
panel,
fiber,
fiber,
cement,
lapsiding,
burnished
block
and
glass
and
I'm
going
to
pause
here
for
any
questions
because
I,
don't
know
what
my
the
rest
of
my
presentation
said.
So
thank.
A
You
Commissioners
any
questions
for
staff
all
right.
Thank
you!
Hillary.
We
will
open
the
public
hearing,
so
is
the
applicant
here,
and
would
they
like
to
speak
on
this
item.
M
My
name
is
Michael
Koontz
I'm,
the
architect
on
the
project
and
also
representing
the
owner
tonight.
I
have
to
go
over
anything
that
Council
or
City
Planning
wants,
if
not
I'll,
wait
until
other
questions
come
up.
J
I
have
a
quick
question
for
you
in
our
packets
there
was
some
concern
from
the
residents
on
the
materials
that
have
been
used
for
the
building.
Can
you
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
choices
that
you
decided
to
go
with
for
the
facade
of
the
building
yeah.
M
I
wasn't
aware
of
any
comments
from
the
residents.
Yes,
we're
using
brick
face
brick
Masonry!
Let
me
go
to
some
of
the
renderings
I
think
we'll
help.
M
N
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
just
wondering
too
we
got
in
our
emails,
and
please
forgive
me
here.
This
is
my
first
Planning
Commission
meeting,
but
there
was
some
concern
from
constituents
as
well
around
construction
process
and
having
access
to
the
alleyway
during
that.
So
I
was
wondering
if
you
could
speak
to
any
planning
around
the
construction
and
if
that
has
been
decided
yet
yeah.
M
We
had
a
meeting
with
the
neighbors
that
are
adjacent
to
the
property
in
December,
and
that
was
one
area
that
that
was
discussed
and
you
know.
Obviously
the
neighborhood
was
not
real
happy
about
it.
You
know
we
are
fairly
close
to
the
alley
on
the
east
side
and
so
I
do
believe
during
construction.
When
the
you
know
we're
not
going
subgrade.
M
So
there's
not
going
to
be
a
lot
of
Shoring
or
anything
in
this
project,
but
there's
going
to
have
to
be
frost,
footings
that
go
about
four
feet
below
kind
of
where
the
alley
elevation
is
at
that
North
East
part
of
the
site,
and
so
I
do
think
that
that
Ali
will
have
to
be
closed
for
a
small
portion
of
time.
You
know,
maybe
several
weeks
up
to
you
know
a
month
or
something.
N
And
has
there
been
any
consider
sorry,
terrorism,
any
consideration
of
other
ways
that
we
can
still
have
access
to
that
Alleyway
I
see
there
are
some
constituents
that
need
access.
They
have
electric
vehicles,
so
they
you
know
are
utilizing
this
space
not
just
to
park
their
car,
but
actually
to
be
able
to
utilize
their
vehicles.
So
just
curious
to
know
if
there's
been
alternative
ways
to
to
think
about
this.
M
There
has
been
discussions
between
a
few
of
the
property.
You
know
owners
across
the
alley
in
ownership.
I
wasn't
privy
to
all
those
conversations
or
I.
Think
the
smart
thing
to
do
is
to
keep
the
vacated
alley
open
until
all
the
work
is
done,
that's
going
to
require
any
part
of
the
north-south
alley
to
be
closed
and
then,
once
that
work
is
done,
reopen
that
alley,
and
then
they
can
proceed
with
work
to
the
vacated
La.
So
I
don't
perceive
this
really
being
an
issue.
M
O
Conley,
thank
you.
Madam
chair
I
had
a
question.
There
seems
to
be
a
a
recurring
theme
from
residents
around
Green
Space
and
we
are
seeing
a
lot
of
developments
pop
up
where
it
is
concrete
from
corner
to
corner
from
every
every
single
inch
of
the
design
space
is
utilized
for
the
building.
So
what
was
the
thinking
around
that
is
there?
Is
there?
Are
there
any
plans
I'm
looking
at
the
front
right
now?
M
J
M
A
I
think
oh,
the
the
projector.
What
do
you
call
this.
M
We've
added
some
trees
to
the
boulevard,
both
along
Chicago
and
54th
Street.
We
are
trying
to
landscape
as
much
as
we
can
against
the
building.
We
are
pretty
tight
with
the
setback
against
the
building,
and
you
know
this:
the
site,
the
Zoning
for
the
site
is
commercial
as
the
underlying
zoning,
and
so
we
are
allowed
to
be
100,
and
so
it's
you
know
we're
trying
to
be
efficient.
Obviously,
with
the
sites,
I
will
say
that
the
the
vacated
alley
is
going
to
be
mostly
Green
Space
that
will
be
14
feet
of
space.
M
That
goes
from
you
know,
which
was
bituminous
or
or
Hardscape
to
to
it's
going
to
be
Greenery
now.
So
there
is
something
there.
P
Thank
you
I'm
excited
to
see
the
plan
for
these
trees
and
so
I'm
glad
you
brought
this
forward
and
I
just
hoping
you're
working
with
forestry
staff
within
the
Minneapolis
Park
Board.
Obviously,
but
I
I
also
want
to
ask
what
your
plan
is
for
maintaining
these
trees
as
the
property
owner.
Do
you
have
watering
plans
nearby
a
hose
yeah
I?
Think
there's
gonna.
M
Know
in
the
areas
that
are
you
know,
part
of
the
the
property
owner's
scope,
I
think
the
trees
that
you're
seeing
out
here
I
think
that's
going
to
be
part
of
the
city's
realm
correctly
from
wrong
Hillary,
but
yeah
there
will
have
to
be
irrigation,
obviously,
to
sustain
the
plant
life.
P
Yeah
absolutely
and
I,
just
I
just
would
say
it.
I
mean
it's
this
this
park
board
and
the
city
can
only
do
so
much
with
maintaining
new
trees
and
we've
we've
seen
that
it's
really
important
that
homeowners
that
are
nearby
take
care
of
the
boulevard
trees,
and
so
you
know,
especially
since
this
is
serving
40
47
units.
You
know
these
people
like
I
I,
feel
like
it.
It's
easy
to
say:
oh
well,
somebody
else
will
water
the
trees.
P
You
know
so
I
really
hope
you
can
put
that
into
the
plans
with
the
property
manager.
Sure
thank
you.
A
All
right,
I'm
not
seeing
any
more
questions.
Thank
you.
Our
public
hearing
is
open.
So
if
there
are
any
other
residents
here
who
would
like
to
speak
on
this
item,
you
can
come
up
to
the
podium
now
and
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record
and
proceed
with
your
comments.
Q
Hi
we're
we're
a
pair
I
I
appreciate
that
you
brought
it
up.
It
sounds
like
you've
read
some
of
our
concerns
and.
Q
My
name
is
Ty
Mendenhall.
It's
my.
R
Wife,
thank.
Q
You
we'd
like
to
read
from
our
email
just
to
make
sure
that
we
don't
miss
anything,
but
you
want
to
take
it
away.
First,
okay,.
R
We
would
like
to
take
the
following
items
concerning
to
your
considerations.
So
first
is
building
color.
We
appreciate
that
this
building
will
not
be
painted
in
a
very
dark
color.
However,
our
hope
is
that
a
more
warm
warm
colors
there's
a
grade
that
is
currently
planned
that
could
be
used
if
the
building
could
at
least
roughly
match
the
Light
Tower
at
off-white
stucco
colors
of
most
the
homes
around
us.
We
will
appreciate
this
very
much
and
the
second
wise
Green
Space.
R
This
building
is
currently
planned
to
use
almost
every
square
feet
of
the
space
within
its
property
lines.
This
will
contribute
greatly
to
its
very
imposing
out
of
place
and
warehouse-like
presence
in
the
neighborhood,
unlike
anything
nearby
and
undoubtedly
her
the
curb
appeal
and
the
property
values
of
all
nearby
homeowners.
Q
I
we
just
had
a
couple
of
other
concerns
in
regard
to
parking.
The
proposed
property
will
have
roughly
twice
as
many
units
as
it
does
parking
spaces
and
we're
aware
of
the
developers
narrative
that
most
of
the
residents
will
not
have
cars.
We
also
don't
believe
that
we
worry
about
increasing
parking
congestion
in
our
neighborhood
streets,
which
are
already
pretty
tight.
Q
Now
and
and
of
course,
that's
during
all
seasons,
and
then
you
know
we'll
vouch,
especially
during
the
times
of
snow
emergencies,
when
everybody's
got
to
move
over
to
to
one
side
already,
and
it
is
I'm
I'm
not
going
to
lie
crazy.
Q
Q
If
you
could
think
about
that,
we're
the
house,
that's
on
the
corner
with
the
EVS
and
our
understanding
is
that
a
whole
month
or
more
of
problems
accessing
our
garage
is
going
to
be
tough
and
I
appreciate
sentiments
about
being
able
to
work
with
us,
but
these
these
cars
are
too
low
to
the
ground,
to
hop
curbs
and
to
get
into
our
garage
and
for
a
whole
month
that,
oh,
my
goodness,
I
mean
we
would
appreciate
some
other
kind
of
system
to
be
able
to
work
that
out.
Q
I
don't
have
the
impression
that
we
have
Agency
on
whether
or
not
this
will
happen,
but
if
we
could
at
least
be
able
to
charge
our
cars
during
the
process,
we'd
appreciate
it
and
then
finally
and
I'll
just
read
this
loss
of
property
use
and
property
value.
Q
Lang
and
I
aren't
going
to
be
able
to
watch
another
sunset
from
our
backyard
ever
again,
and
you
know
we
did
a
ton
of
work
in
our
backyards
with
our
deck
and
our
Landscaping
to
do
that.
A
couple
years
back
and
and
that's
just
hard-
that's
sad
that
sucks-
and
you
know-
and
and
on
top
of
that
we're
aware
that
there's
going
to
be
layers
of
of
units
now
with
Windows
looking
down
right
into
our
backyard.
You
know.
Q
So
there
goes
our
backyard
use
our
backyard
space,
our
everything
about
our
backyard
and
the
sun
sets,
and
there
goes
our
property
or
our
excuse
me,
our
privacy,
you
know,
so
we
don't
have
any
more
backyard
really
forever
now
and
I.
Q
I
know
that
I,
you
know
and
I
know
I'm,
not
speaking
just
for
me,
but
all
told
the
perceived
attractiveness
or
now
unattractiveness
and
thereby
values
of
our
home
is
unquestionably
and
permanently
going
to
be
hurt
in
terms
of
our
property
value
and
just
the
niceness
and
the
wonderfulness
of
our
home.
That's
no
longer
going
to
be
that
way.
Q
Okay
and
any
you
know
and
again,
I
I
know
we
don't
have
a
whole
lot
of
agency
to
change.
This
I
think
the
writing's
on
the
wall,
but
if,
if
you
all
could
do
anything
about
our
concerns
and
our
concerns
of
our
neighbors
here
boy,
we'd
we'd
appreciate
it
just
so.
The
hit
doesn't
feel
as
hard
of
a
hit
as
it's
feeling
right
now,.
H
Hi,
my
name
is
Brynn
and
I
live
just
a
stone's
throw
away
I'm
at
54
or
29
Chicago.
So
thank
you
for
taking
the
time
and
speaking
with
us
today.
I
just
had
a
couple
of
questions.
I
don't
know
if
this
is
the
right
form
to
do
that,
but
as
it
applies
to
the
first
of
all
the
alley
being
closed,
so
I
know
we
heard
that
that
would
be
about
a
month
or
so.
Would
that
be
the
entire
alley
or
part
of
a
section?
Can
you
answer
that.
A
This
isn't
really
a
question
and
answer,
but
if
you
say
that
you're
wondering
we
might
be
able
to
address
it,
okay,
okay,.
H
I
guess
that
would
be
a
note
of
concern,
then
tying
that
more
to
the
threat
of
what
we're
doing
here.
That's
a
note
of
concern
that
they
mentioned
another
one
that
was
mentioned,
but
I
will
reiterate,
is
obviously
the
parking
it's
really
tight
right
now,
especially
with
the
snow
emergencies.
So
you
know
when
folks
are
having
friends
over
and
Friday
Saturday
nights,
it
gets
really
really
busy
out
there.
So
that
would
be
something
that
I
would
just
appreciate.
H
You
folks
consider
is
the
amount
of
parking
spaces
that
have
been
being
offered
right
now
if
that
could
be
increased
and
then
the
other
point
of
concern
also
is:
where
are
these
folks
when
they're
moving
in
and
moving
out,
it's
going
to
be
turnover
fairly
consistently,
where
the
moving
trucks
going
like,
where
are
they
parking
their
car
and
bringing
boxes
in
and
out?
How
is
that
going
to
impact
our
lives?
So
those
are
the
three
points
of
concern
that
I
wanted
to
talk
about
today,
and
thank
you
for
your
time.
Thank.
G
Hi
I
am
Greg
Barnett
I
am
the
immediate
South
neighbor
of
the
new
development,
so
I'll
have
a
quite
an
imposing
new
feature
to
look
out
my
living
room
window,
dining
room
window
kitchen
window,
any
window,
I
look
out
at
and
I'm
going
to
Echo
some
of
the
similar
complaints.
It
looks
completely
concerned,
it
does
seem
like
landscaping
and
perhaps
lighting
is
not
quite
done
yet
there
will
be
more
to
come
later
on
that
I
would
be
really
interested
in
following
up.
G
I,
don't
know
how
many
lights
or
what
type
of
lighting
there
will
be
when
will
be
on
how
much
glare
might
be
coming
in
my
windows
or
not,
and
to
the
point
two,
it's
big,
it's
black.
It's
a
study
in
gray,
tones
and
I.
Don't
see
any
warmth
to
the
building.
It's
not
that
inviting
there's
nothing
else
of
its
size
and
scope
that
it
could
be
a
Counterpoint
with
if
it
was
all
in
steady
in
black
and
white
and
tones
of
gray.
G
Like
it
seems
to
be,
there's
nothing
else
to
balance
out
with
and
a
quick
look
for
four
blocks
up
and
down:
Chicago
Avenue
I'm,
not
seeing
much
of
anything
that
looks
like
there's
a
lot
of
gray,
maybe
10
of
the
houses
I
saw
had
something
of
gray
in
it
to
the
immediate
neighborhood.
There's
a
lot
of
Stucco
a
lot
of
lighter
brick,
a
lot
of
medium
brick,
one
or
two
red
bricks,
one
or
two
light
white
bricks,
but
not
a
lot
of
anything
that
dark
and
noticeable
and
I
think
I
know.
G
G
I
mean
it's
going
to
be
dramatic,
I'm
sure,
but
I'm
not
sure
I
want
to
look
out
of
just
all
this
Darkness
for
the
entire
time
now,
but
we
will
be
getting
half
the
alley,
then
that
will
be
a
greatly
missed
neighborhood
asset
that
Allen
that
little
short,
East,
West
half
alley
does
get
a
lot
of
use
by
the
entire
block,
especially
the
north
half
of
the
block,
but
I
would
like
to
have
something
not
quite
so
dark.
Thank
you.
Thank.
S
Hi,
my
name
is
Paul
whitechek
and
the
size
of
this
building
is
gonna
affect
the
livability
in.
S
S
S
I
really
think
that
loading
zone
needs
to
be
considered
and
included.
S
The
other
thing
I
wanted
to
know
is:
if
that
soil
has
been
tested,
that's
a
site
of
a
former
service
station.
There.
U
My
name
is
Mike
rearing.
I
live
at
5404,
Elliott
Avenue,
oh
you're,
going
to
speak.
This
is
my
son
Leo,
my
wife,
Lindsay
Dickinson
is
also
there
yeah.
We
Echo
similar
sentiments
to
the
rest
of
the
the
neighborhood
here
where
Green
Space
is
of
vital
importance
to
us
people
that
live
in
this
residence.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
they
have
a
a
nice
warm
welcoming
place
to
live.
U
You
know
the
building
color.
We
would
like
it
to
blend
in
with
the
neighborhood
as
best
as
it
can.
Environmental
remediation
came
up.
You
want
to
talk
about
the
Shadows.
U
K
U
So
we're
parallel
or
perpendicular
to
the
alley,
and
we
have
some
concerns
just
about
shadows
in
our
backyard
and
our
building.
We
do
have
some
solar
light
tubes
in
our
house
right
now
and
those
may
not
get
a
lot
of
sun
based
on
the
current
plan.
I
U
Good
job
so
referring
to
the
parking
behind
the
building
and
will
be
more
difficult
for
us
to
access
our
garage.
Our
other
request
is
just
the
the
business
that
does
come
into
the
neighborhood
it.
Hopefully
it's
a
business
that
is
respectful
of
the
neighbors
and
doesn't
create
a
lot
of
excess
noise,
and
it's
something
that
you
know
would
be
a
a
place
that
the
neighbors
would
welcome.
That
sort
of
thing,
but
yeah
I,
think
most
of
our
concerns
have
been
addressed.
Wanted
to.
Thank
you
for
the
time
tonight
appreciate
it.
A
All
right,
seeing
none
I'm,
gonna
close
the
public
hearing
Commissioners
any
discussion.
Commissioner
Ford
I.
C
M
Correct
I
I
think
that
a
few
of
those
spaces
will
be
made
available
for
people
who
work
at
that
space,
but
yeah
for
the
public.
That's
coming
into
that
space.
None
of
those
those
parking
stalls
are
provided.
For
you
know,
customers
if
you
will
just
to
touch
on
the
the
moving
in
moving
out
situation.
M
I
totally
agree.
First
off
is:
we've
got
a
relatively
gracious
garage
door
and
ceiling
height
in
the
in
the
interior,
garage
and
so
I
think
any
vehicle
that
can
come
in
and
move
in.
That's
where
the
elevator
is
so
that
would
only
make
sense,
so
I
think
most
of
the
smaller
or
box
trucks
they're
moving
van
type
Vehicles
will
be
able
to
make
that
anything.
That's
larger
in
size,
I
think
that
ownership
is
going
to
have
to
make
sure
that
everybody
parks
on
Chicago
and
you
know
keeps
keeps
everything
out
of
the
alley.
M
C
Oh
man,
an
impressment,
I,
live
in
an
apartment
building
and
that
last
answer
kind
of
confuses
it
confuses
me.
I
can
certainly
see
why
I
mean
when
you
refer
to
the
elevator.
Is
that
the
an
elevator
from
the
building
Lobby
or
from
the
the
parking
area.
M
C
I
can
I
can
imagine
the
concern
and
I
it's
a
concern
about
trucks
blocking
the
alley.
I
guess
that
that's
a
concern
for
me,
I'm,
not
sure.
What's
done
about
that,
I
I
mean
in
my
building.
People
do
not
unload
into
the
front
lobby
of
the
building,
so
I.
C
M
Not
currently,
you
know,
maybe
a
portion
of
this
vacated
alley
could
be
reserved
for
some
kind
of
a
loading
zone
for
people
that
move
in
again
you're
lower
than
you're
lower
than
where
the
lobby
is
there
elevationally
so
to
have
to
unload
there,
and
then
we
all
your
stuff
up
in
I,
don't
think
that's
going
to
be
very
advantageous.
I
think
people
would
rather
do
it
from
Chicago.
C
L
L
Now
there
is
a
bus,
stop
a
d-line
bus
stop
in
front
of
the
building.
If
we
get
our
Express
routes,
we'll
allow
so
I
have
buses
back
on
54th,
but
they're
not
there
yet.
So
that
is
the
reality
of
the
site.
So
one-
and
there
are
our
bike
Lanes,
also
on
54.,
so
loading
options
would
be
in
the
garage
if
the
vehicle
fits
around
Chicago
Avenue.
L
Yes,
there
is
an
yes,
there
isn't
no
parking
Zone
in
front
of
the
lobby.
The
minimum
requirement
for
a
loading
is
a
hundred
units.
This
is
47.,
so
there
is
no
requirement
and
the
the
3
800
square
feet.
The
minimum
for
commercial
is
20
000..
So
none
of
the
uses
neither
of
the
two
uses
meet
the
minimum
threshold
for
requiring
a
loading
space.
So
I
just
want
to
be
clear
on
that.
Thank.
A
P
Yeah
I
just
want
to
clarify
I'm
I'm,
not
seeing
the
d-line
stop
at
54th.
It's
it.
I
mean
I,
see
it
at
56th,
so
I,
just
it's
the
5
and
the
14.
A
All
right,
let's
see.
E
Thank
you.
Can
you
show
page
33
from
the
staff
report?
It
shows
the
different
amenities
that
are
nearby
and.
L
E
Yeah,
it
was
from
the
application.
Yes,
there
we
go
yeah,
I
and
I
want
to
thank
the
applicant
for
including
that
I
think.
That's
always
helpful
too,
and
include
something
like
that
and
I
think
it's
just
important
to
display
that,
for
the
context
of
why
this
place
has
the
zoning
that
it
does,
because
it's
adjacent
to
a
lot
of
different
amenities,
including
a
grocery
store
and
a
school
and
restaurants
and
churches
and
Chicago
Avenue,
is
a
Goodson
service
corridor.
E
And
you
know
one
of
the
main
goals
of
the
city
in
order
to
meet
our
climate
obligations
is
to
encourage
more
Transit
oriented
development,
and
this
is
actually
you
know,
pretty
modest
zoning
for
a
place
with
Transit
lines
nearby
and
like
in
a
lot
of
other
places
in
the
city.
This
would
allow
for
like
six
stories
where
this
is
only
Corridor
Forum.
So
I
just
wanted
to
speak.
E
To
that
background
and
say
that
you
know
I
appreciate
the
commenters
coming
today
and
speaking
their
concerns,
but
the
idea
that
we
should
try
to
reduce
the
number
of
units
and
increase
the
amount
of
parking
goes
in
the
opposite
direction
of
what
the
city
is
trying
to
do
with
our
climate
goals,
which
is
to
have
more
people
and
fewer
cars
in
the
city,
and-
and
this
is
the
type
of
location
where
we've
been
encouraging.
E
You
know
that
Transit
oriented
development,
so
that's
all
context
of
why
it
has
the
the
zoning
that
it
does
they're
not
asking
for
a
lot
from
the
commission
today
that
they
don't
already
have
by
right
they're,
not
asking
for
any
variances.
There
is
a
site
plan
review.
There
is
the
plat.
There
is
the
the
vacation.
So
if
there
was
a
case
you
know
directly
against
that
alley
or
that
that
plating
or
certain
things
within
the
site
plan
review.
Those
are
things
that
we
could
consider.
E
A
Thank
you,
commissioner,
Meyer
before
I
go
on
remember
if
I
close
the
public
hearing
here.
E
A
Did
I
did
okay
thanks?
Okay,
so
commissioner
Meyer
has
made
a
motion
so
I'll
get
to
you,
okay,
and
we
have
a
second
okay,
commissioner,
Campbell.
J
Just
wanted
to
start
and
first
of
all,
say
to
the
young
man
who
came
here
today.
We
don't
often
get
Young
Voices
and
the
more
we
get
the
better.
So
thanks
so
much
for
coming
out
here
today.
J
The
second
thing
I
wanted
to
say
is
that
we
don't
often-
or
we're
often
put
in
a
position
where
we
are
empathetic
to
the
cause
of
the
people
who
have
come
and
shared
their
opinion.
Having
lived
next
to
these
large
buildings,
but
in
a
lot
of
cases,
we
are
unable
to
incorporate
them
into
decision
making
I
we.
J
This
is
a
refrain
that
this
body
says
regularly,
but
parking
is
the
perfect
example
of
that:
we're
not
allowed
to
review
site
plans
or
anything
in
the
lens
of
parking,
even
though
I
know
that
that's
a
frequent
frustration
for
many
people
who
are
living
next
to
new
large
development
buildings.
I'll
I
encourage
the
the
developer
to
work
to
continue
to
work
closely
with
the
neighbors
in
the
residents.
J
I
think
that
Hillary
did
a
good
job
of
summarizing
sort
of
the
the
the
code
and
how
it
does
not
carve
out
exceptions
for
the
types
of
situations
that
we
talked
about,
but
that's
not
necessarily
enough
in
most
cases
and
so
to
the
extent
that
you
can
work
with
the
residents
in
the
neighborhood
to
limit
the
the
types
of
inconveniences
that
the
the
couple
here
said
about
their
electric
cars
and
that
kind
of
thing
I
think
the
better
off.
J
We
are
ultimately
I'm
going
to
vote
to
approve
this
primarily
due
to
what
commissioner
Meyer
said,
which
is
that
I
think
this
falls
directly
into
the
vision
of
what
we're
trying
to
accomplish.
As
a
city
when
it
comes
to.
J
You
know,
climate
action,
Minneapolis
20
to
40
and
the
like.
Thanks.
N
You
madam
chair
I,
also
want
to
say
thank
you
to
the
residents
that
showed
up
here
tonight
to
speak
about
their
concerns.
I
heard
you
know
many
concerns,
I
heard
a
few
positives
too,
and
for
all
those
that
made
comments
here
tonight
or
sent
in
comments
too
I
also
heard
the
the
developers
say
that
they've
had
some
Community
conversations.
So
you
know
I
will
be
in
approving
this
tonight
and
then
continuing
to
ask
that
everyone
stay
in
connection
with
one
another
and
continue
these
conversations.
N
I
heard
things
around
lighting,
color
green
space
and
the
construction
time.
You
know,
commissioner
Campbell
described
the
electric
vehicle
situation
in
the
back.
So
again,
I
will
be
approving
this,
but
just
want
to
make
sure
that
I
encourage
everyone
to
continue
these
conversations.
J
O
O
So
it's
my
old,
my
old
neighborhood
Jim's
is
great,
so
is
Huey's,
but
I
I
do
think
that
the
residents
bring
up
a
good
point,
I'm,
looking
forward
to
continued
engagement
with
neighbors,
because
I
really
think
that
that's
valuable
to
be
good,
neighbors
and
I
think
that
there's
something
to
be
said
about
the
color.
O
Even
I
I
mean
it's
it's
minor,
but
there's
a
lot
of
new
developments
going
up
because
both
the
county,
the
city,
we're
all
valuing
more
development,
more
housing
for
more
people,
less
Vehicles,
as
commissioner
Myers
said
as
well,
but
a
lot
of
the
construction.
That's
going
up
is
kind
of
this
dark
steel,
gray,
color
that
you
know
I,
don't
know
if
that's
in
an
architectural
Trend
right
now,
but
I'm,
seeing
it
all
over
with
new
development.
So
perhaps
blending
in
a
little
bit
with
the
homes
in
this
area.
Isn't
too
far-fetched
of
an
idea?
O
So
just
something
to
think
about.
As
you
know,
Community
conversations
continue
to
happen,
so
thank
you.
A
All
right,
I
think
those
are
all
old
questions:
okay,
I'm,
not
seeing
any
more
so
the
motion
on
the
table
is
to
adopt
staff
recommendation
and
I
will
ask
the
clerk
to
please
call
the
roll.
C
C
I
A
A
L
L
The
growl
all
right
last
item
on
the
agenda,
which
is
not
unfamiliar
to
some
of
you
on
the
commission.
We
do
have
a
lot
of
new
commissioner
members
and
I
should
say
welcome
to
commissioner
Koski
I
should
have
done
that
at
the
very
beginning
of
our
meeting,
so
I
apologize,
but
you
all
have
a
new
commissioner
sitting
with
you
tonight,
so
I
apologize
and
commissioner
Meyer,
yes,
I'm,
sorry
old,
but
new
again.
So
yes,
so
we
have
two
new
bodies
up
there
on
the
diocese
this
evening.
So
welcome
to
everybody.
L
Now,
I
will
start
on
this
last
item.
So
sorry,
this
is
item
number
nine
1823-1839,
Bryant,
Avenue
North.
This
is
a
residential
development.
Five
stories,
79
units,
53
enclosed
parking
spaces.
Several
applications
before
you
I
will
say
that,
prior
to
this
application,
last
fall.
You
guys
approved,
and
the
Met
Council
approved
a
comp
plan
amendment
to
move
the
built
form
guidance
of
this
site
from
interior
three
to
Corridor
6,
to
allow
a
building
up
to
six
stories
at
a
higher
density.
L
L
L
One
major
point
of
the
comp
plan
amendment
that
was
approved
last
fall
is
that
light
rail
is
coming
to
Broadway
instead
of
Olson
a
major
policy
change
for
the
city,
and
so
we
are
looking
at
having
higher
densities
along
Broadway
and
in
the
immediate
area.
The
next
rezoning
follows
suit
to
the
comp
plan:
Amendment
they
did
the
comp
plan
Amendment.
First
now
they
are
rezoning
the
built
form
guidance
or
that
overlay
from
interior
three
to
quarter
six.
We
are
recommending
approval
of
that,
which
should
not
be
a
surprise.
L
That
is
what
they
moved
the
comp
plan
guidance
for
then
there
are
four
variances.
There
is
a
variance
to
increase
the
maximum
lot
coverage
from
70
to
79.4
percent
yard.
Variances
went
along
Bryant
for
the
front
yard,
one
on
the
North
interior
side
yard
and
then
one
on
the
rear
yard
staff
is
not
recommending
approval
of
any
of
those
variances.
L
So
again,
it's
79
units,
53
enclosed
parking
spaces
for
the
Florida
ratio
of
premiums
that
they
applied
for
they
get
the
point.
65
percent
points
for
enclosed
parking,
so
they
do
get
to
take
advantage
of
that
higher
far,
which
is
the
3.65.
L
L
They
are
I'm
going
to
be
increasing,
not
sideway
sidewalk
width,
because
that
is
already
at
the
right
width,
but
they
are
going
to
be
doing
enhanced
landscaping
and
there
are
benches
that
they're
going
to
put
on
each
side
of
the
entry
into
the
building
for
those
coming
and
going
and
also
waiting
for
rides
or
whatnot
as
they're
leaving
the
site,
and
then
they
will
also
be
unbundling
unbundling
and
pricing
of
parking.
L
So
the
the
three
points
for
the
public
realm
and
the
one
point
for
the
unbundling
of
pricing
and
parking
gets
them
to
the
Four
Points
Public
Works
in
cped
have
approved
the
tdmp
I'm
not
going
to
go
through
the
rezoning
findings.
I'm
going
to
honestly
just
concentrate
on
the
variances.
We
are
recommending
denial
of
the
site
plan
review,
but
for
the
denial
of
the
variance
applications,
we
would
have
approved
site
plan
review.
L
It
is
a
meeting
all,
but
one
requirement
Insight
plan
review,
which
is
a
blank
wall
on
the
south
elevation
of
the
building,
the
rear,
37
feet
and
I'm.
Sorry
I
went
to
the
wrong
one.
This
portion
of
the
building
is
blank.
There's
an
Excel
transfer
Mercy
in
front
of
it.
Excel
does
not
allow
Windows,
they
could
do
something
to
change
it,
but
there
will
be
landscaping
around
the
Excel
box
and
so
between
the
Excel
box
itself
and
the
Landscaping.
L
You
won't
necessarily
see
the
blank
wall,
but
for
but
because
of
the
variances,
we
had
to
recommend
denial
of
the
site
plan
because
it
would
have
been
a
very
different
building.
So
I'm
going
to
jump
to
the
site
to
the
variances
and
let's
concentrate
on
those
again.
We
could
not
make
any
of
the
first
findings
for
the
four
variances.
The
first
one
is
the
lot
coverage.
L
The
maximum
print
that
would
be
allowed
is
24
000
and
some
change.
The
building
is
27
000
and
some
change,
so
there
is
about
3
000
square
feet
more
of
footprint,
and
we
could
not
find
practical
difficulty
to
support
the
variance.
The
intent
of
Max
luck,
coverage
and
maximum
impervious
surface
are
established
to
come.
Combat
the
urban
heat
island
effect,
promote
adequate
space
for
landscaping
and
reinforce
existing
or
plan
development
patterns
and
to
reduce
adequate
and
to
reduce
storm
water
runoff.
L
So
a
lot
coverage
is
how
much
of
the
building
is
covered
with
a
or
how
much
of
the
site
is
covered
by
a
building
near
total
impervious
is
building
footput,
plus
everything
else
that
doesn't
let
water
through
it.
So
your
sidewalks
driveways
ground
level,
patios
things
like
that,
the
maximum
impervious
is
85.
So
maximum
lot
coverage
is
70.
Maximum
impervious
is
85.
They
are
not
exceeding
the
maximum
impervious
of
85
percent.
L
They
will
have
more
than
the
minimum
amount
of
required
Landscaping
on
the
site.
They
will
have
two
storm
water
infiltration
areas.
They
are
working
with
public
works
on
additional
storm
water
improvements
to
the
site.
All
of
that
to
help
control
runoff.
We
don't
feel
that
increasing,
lock
coverage
will
be
detrimental
to
the
health,
safety
or
welfare
of
the
area,
but
again
because
of
we
could
not
find
practical
difficulty,
we
are
recommending
denial.
L
H
K
L
A
the
residential,
the
low
density
residential
structure
to
the
South
has
a
porch
that
is
30
feet
from
the
front
property
line
that
establishes
the
front
yard
setback
along
the
block,
so
the
required
front
yard
setback
for
this
entire
property
from
south
to
North
is
the
30
feet.
This
section
of
the
building
is
notched
out
to
27.
The
rest
of
the
building
is
up
at
between
zero
and
I.
Think
three
features
so
I'm.
Sorry,
some
of
the
specific
numbers
maybe
have
jumped
out
of
my
head
since
I
reviewed
and
wrote
the
report.
L
Again,
we
couldn't
find
practical
difficulty.
However,
the
building
massing
has
been
pushed
to
the
north,
where
you
have
commercial
buildings
up
on
Broadway.
The
notch
here
would
be
something
similar
that
would
be
required.
Had
this
site
been
Zone
commercial,
where
we
wouldn't
have
left
Havelock
coverage
or
setback
requirements.
However,
it
is
unresidential,
but
they
are
meeting
this
front
yard
Notch.
If
you
will
to
give
some
of
that
open
space
to
that
front
property
line.
I
will
note,
regardless
of
the
setback.
L
The
building
up
here
at
the
corner
of
Bryant
and
Broadway,
is
located
up
to
the
front
property
line
along
Bryant,
and
then
there
is
a
large
multi-family
Housing
Development
going
up
across
the
street.
That
building
is
set
between
0
and
11
feet
from
Brian,
so
you
will
have
matching
similar
setbacks.
If
you
will,
if
you're
moving
south
along
Bryant
walking
down
the
street
towards
or
excuse
me
if
you're
heading
from
north
to
south.
L
So
again
we
couldn't
find
practical
difficulty,
but
we
do
feel
that
it
is
characteristic
of
the
area
to
build
to
the
setbacks
that
they're
proposing
the
last
two
setbacks
in
that
they
have
is
to
reduce
that
North
interior
side
yard
setback
from
11
down
to
eight
and
a
half
feet.
The
portion
of
the
building.
That's
eight
and
a
half
feet
is
16
feet
in
width.
It
is
this
little
Notch
at
the
corner
of
the
building
there.
The
rest
of
the
building
meets
the
required
setback.
L
This
site
is
separated
from
the
commercial
properties
to
the
north
by
a
10
foot
wide
public
alley.
The
portion
of
the
building
again,
that
is
located
less
than
11
feet,
is
only
16
feet
in
length
and
the
building
would
be
located
between
18
and
a
half
and
21
feet
from
those
buildings
on
the
north
side
of
the
alley.
The
last
variance
and
that's
needed
is
along
the
rear
property
line
along
the
alley
here
across
the
alley
you
guys
approved
or
excuse
me,
not
you
guys.
L
The
Planning
Commission
approved
land
use
applications
to
allow
a
surface
parking
lot
on
the
other
side
of
the
alley
from
this
site.
For
the
first
three
lots,
so
some
most
of
this
site
will
be
adjacent
to
a
surface
parking
lot
for
the
927
West
Broadway
building
that
was
being
rehabbed
by
the
same
development
team
many
years
ago.
L
The
rear
the
building
the
building
would
be
between
6
and
23
feet
from
the
rear
property
line.
The
portion
of
the
building
that
is
less
than
the
nine
feet
is
approximately
138
feet
in
length
in
the
building.
That
is
more
than
nine
feet
is
58,
so
you
most
of
the
building.
You
know
a
lot
of
the
building
is
pulled
back
more
than
nine
feet.
It's
a
a
fraction
of
the
building
the
entire
building.
L
Well,
if
you
will
that
is
located
within
that
six
feet
again,
this
side
of
the
alley
is
separated
from
the
properties
to
the
east
by
a
20-foot
wide
public
alley.
So
the
north-south
alley
on
the
block
again
is
20
feet.
The
east
west
alley
is
10,
and
this
site
has
Frontage
on
both
the
East-West
alley
here
and
the
north-south
alley.
L
Here
again,
the
portion
of
the
building
is
located
less
than
the
nine
feet
would
be
located,
26
feet
from
the
properties
located
on
the
east
side
of
the
alley
of
the
five
properties
located
on
the
east
side
of
the
alley.
The
northern
two
properties
have
been
approved
for
the
surface
parking
lot,
with
a
solar
canopy
on
it
to
be
constructed.
The
next
property
to
the
South
is
vacant.
L
So,
overall
the
building
would
be
located
between
26
and
43
feet
from
the
properties
located
on
the
east
side.
For
all
of
that,
again,
it's
lack
of
practical
difficulty
that
we've
found,
but
we
could
make
the
other
two
findings
for
the
four
variances
I
will
stop.
I'm
very
thirsty
and
I
will
stand
for
questions
unless
you
have
anything
else.
A
L
South
it
does
not.
It
is
three
feet
closer
to
Bryant
up
to
that
property
line
than
the
house
okay.
So
this
is
30
feet.
This
is
27.,
but
there
is
a
13
foot
difference
between
from
this
prop
not
difference.
There's
a
13
foot
setback
of
the
building
from
the
south
property
line,
and
then
this
house
is
not
directly
on
it
and
I
would
have
to
okay
get
something
to
see
what
that
number
might
be
for
how
far
the
building
is
south
of
the
property
line.
So.
A
L
One
this
is
similar
to
trolley
line
condos
good
question,
commissioner
Olson,
because
it's
a
commercial
property.
We
don't
include
that
okay.
E
I
E
Okay,
so
it
seems
like
the
city
was
receptive
to
making
a
change
based
on
the
blue
line
going
that
route
instead.
Is
there
a
reason
that
commercial
rezoning
wasn't
considered
as
part
of
that.
L
You
know
we
did
we,
we
did
have
two
scenarios
laid
out
at
the
beginning
of
the
process,
I
think
at
the
time-
and
this
is
going
back
to
I-
guess
it
was
last
summer
summer
of
21
22.
Excuse
me,
we
weren't
sure
of
the
alignment
on
the
beard
or
down
the
brt,
but
on
the
light
rail
it
was
here
if
it
was
Broadway.
We
had
I
think
99
assurance
that
it
was
here
but
to
not
bring
commercial
zoning
further
into
the
block.
L
We
felt
that
it
was
most
appropriate
to
maintain
a
residential
base.
Zoning
than
to
than
to
change
the
the
future
land
use
to
like
a
commercial
mixed
use
or
a
resident
residential
mixed
use,
type
of
District,
and
so
that
is
why
the
the
underlying
properties
are
still
zoned
residential.
N
I
just
have
I'm
going
to
throw
out
the
new
card
here,
because
everyone
can
refer
to
Old
projects
and
whatnot,
but
I
do
not
have
that
Liberty.
So
so,
please
help
me
and
as
I
learned
here
with
all
of
you
so
I
appreciate
this.
N
So
could
you
help
me
understand,
you
know
I
see
that
you've
denied
this
I've
also
heard
you
say
you
know
out
of
practical,
not
having
a
practical
reason.
Is
that
correct,
a
practical
difficulty
yeah
correct?
Okay?
N
Can
you
help
me
understand,
then
you
know
if
this
does
continue
to
deny
like
what
would
this
do
for
this
specific
development
like
what
would
all
of
these,
if
they
would
have
to,
you
know,
go
down
to
the
specific
feat
that
we
need
I
mean:
are
we
changing
the
amount
of
parking
that
are
or
amount
of
units
like?
Can
you
use
this.
L
This
is
not
the
best
exercise,
but
if
you
just
lopped
off
the
building
at
this
point,
took
off
all
of
the
amenity
spaces
front
lobby,
elevator
staircase
axis
points
up
that
would
you
know
you'd
have
to
squeeze
a
few
more
feet,
so
you
would,
and
we
wouldn't
want
just
a
parking
garage
on
the
first
floor,
so
you're
going
to
lose
ground
floor
parking
you're
going
to
lose
units
up
above
because,
once
you've
shrink
in
you
have
to
shrink
the
up
upper
floors
of
the
building
as
well.
L
N
A
Hillary
would
so
I'm
just
trying
to
think
of
what
a
practical
difficulty
could
be,
but
the
houses
to
the
South,
those
are
just
single
family,
residential
and
their
setbacks
are
like
30
feet
or
something
like
that.
I
believe
there
are.
I
F
So
you
know
if
you're
in
New,
York
you'd
be
you've
got
to
follow,
sit
back,
so
you
got
to
cut
in
that
airspace,
and
so
you
end
up
with
these
buildings
that
are
shaped
by
sort
of
zoning
and
airspace
and
I
think
in
this
case
the
building
has
been
rationalized.
They
picked
kind
of
a
intermediate
spot
relative
to
the
property
lines
and
built
it
rectilinearily,
as
opposed
to
just
shaving,
so
I
think
there's
is
there
a
practical
difficulty
around?
That
is
it
it
certainly
simpler,
there's
probably
a
chance
you're
going
to
save
materials.
F
One
could
probably
develop
a
narrative
around
that
relationship
in
a
way
that
made
some
sense,
but
I
feel
like
the
what's
been
going
on
in
this
district,
and
we
talked
about
this
when
you
came
before
there's
a
pattern
here.
This
recognizes
that
pattern
and
it's
as
it
transitions
into
single
family,
which
will
transition
also
at
some
point,
the
validity
of
this
scene.
You
know
what
we're
giving
up
like.
They
said
they
just
couldn't
find
practice
of
it.
F
Everything
else
makes
some
sense,
so
I
I
feel
like
this
is
a
an
appropriate
project
to
to
sort
of
recognize
in
that
way,
and
the
Practical
difficulties
are
in
the
sort
of
geometries
of
the
site
and
the
property
lines
relative
to
those.
A
Yeah,
okay,
Conley
and
Campbell.
O
Thank
you,
and
so
building
off
of
that
I
think
you
mentioned
that
even
with
these
denials
sort
of
the
plan
itself
already
fits
in
to
this
area
anyway,
can
you
can
you
like
build
off
of
what
you
said?
It's
kind
of
like
you
mentioned
that
it
it
fits
in
with
the
traditional
feel
of
this
area.
So
talk
to
me
a
little
bit
about
that
because
it
seems
like
it
fits
but
there's
little
pieces
that
you
know
practical
difficulties.
L
So
I'm
trying
to
rectify
that
in
my
head
right
now,
Charleston
commissioner
Conley
for
those
of
you
who
have
not
been
on
the
Planning
Commission
for
some
time
so
Tori,
the
Satori
development
by
jet,
Development
Group,
has
been
discussed
with
the
Planning
Commission
for
I
want
to
say
almost
10
years,
maybe
maybe
eight
years
maybe
2016
might
have
been
the
first
time
we
came
to
planning,
commission
and
Tim
had
a
Grand
Vision
along
Broadway
Avenue
of
three
entire
blocks.
L
Redeveloping
three
blocks:
there
were
skyways,
it
was
tall
development.
This
was
before
2040
and
I.
Think
everyone
was
like.
Oh
my
goodness,
that's
a
lot
of
new
development.
It
looked
all
like
what
you're
seeing
on
the
left
side
of
your
screen.
This
is
Satori
Boutique.
This
is
what's
under
construction
right
now,
at
the
corner
of
Bryant
and
Broadway,
this
got
approved
back
in
2020
before
2040
was
approved.
You
can
see
in
the
zoning
map
that
was
here
and
I
apologize.
I
just
don't
understand
all
of
our
analogy
in
this
room.
L
You
can
see
here
that
back
in
19
I'm
sorry
it
was
approved.
We
rezone
that
entire
site
to
C1.
We
had
the
policy
guidance,
we
had
a
different
comp
plan.
We
had
a
different
zoning
code,
though
so
you
have
to
also
remember
things
have
completely
changed,
but
we're
trying
to
still
move
everything
forward.
So
going
back
to
this
picture
this
project
right
here,
the
sixth
story,
it's
the
119
units,
I
think
it
is
100
and
1219
ground
floor
commercial,
along
Broadway,
walk-up
units
along
Bryant,
which
you
can
kind
of
see
here.
L
This
is
that
corner
of
the
building.
When
we
were
talking
about
the
front
yard
setback
here,
you
can
see
that
the
corner
of
this
building
is
up
to
the
corner
of
Bryant.
Just
like
this,
existing
building
is
here's
the
project
that
you're
talking
about
that.
We
are
talking
about
this
evening
back
here,
so
you
can
see
how
they
play
off
of
one
another.
L
This
was
disgusted
to
me
the
whole
back
in
November
when
we
brought
the
project
before
you
for
that,
and
so
it
is
playing
off
this
relationship
and
then
this
this
infill
building
this
four-story
building-
and
this
is
the
Satori
Lofts
project
that
the
Planning
Commission
approved,
I-
think
back
in
20.
That
was
a
that
was
a
coven
that
was
a
2020
project.
Sorry,
that's
my
point
of
reference:
when
did
you
go
to
Planning
Commission?
Was
it
virtual
or
not?
L
This
was
approved
back
in
2020,
so
this
is
the
second
phase
of
the
Satori
development
along
West
Broadway.
This
is
the
third
phase
that
is
being
proposed,
and
so
collectively
we've
been
talking
about
this
as
kind
of
a
new
area
within
this
area
of
Broadway.
If
you
will
bringing
density
at
affordable
and
market
rate
units
and
this
development
before
each
tonight
is
62
unit
or
not
62.
L
L
We
don't
have
the
right
base,
zoning
that
gets
us
out
of
these
requirements,
but
when
we
were
here
for
Kami
of
the
whole
and
even
coming
back
to
2016
like
the
it's
always
been,
we
want
to
do
all
of
this
together
to
change
to
have
a
real
impact
in
this
area
of
the
city,
and
so
that
is
what's
free
for
you,
I
and
I
kind
of
glossed
right
over
these
images
at
the
beginning
of
the
presentation,
so
I
apologize,
but
this
is
the
back
of
that
building.
L
This
is
a
lot
of
Liberty
for
Green
Space
around
the
parking
lot,
but
this
is
going
to
be
a
surface
parking
lot
in
the
foreground.
This
is
the
back
and
you
can
see
here
that
the
Satori
Boutique
this
one,
you
know,
is
at
the
Terminus
of
that
alley,
and
so
when
you
come
down,
these
are
the
pictures
of
what's
coming
down.
So
this
is
that
Satori
Boutique,
that's
under
construction,
so
we
it
was
three
more
Lots
down.
There
were
many
Lots
facing
Broadway
and
Ally
got
vacated
here,
and
then
all
of
this
got
rezoned.
F
Yeah,
not
just
you
know,
I
do
remember
talking
about
this
at
committee.
The
whole
and
I
think
you
know
the
Project's
potential
is
in
its
sort
of
District
creation.
I
I
would
encourage
the
development
team
to
I
know.
F
You've
got
the
minimum
number
of
plantings
along
brines,
but
that
infrastructure,
the
sort
of
canopy
along
either
side
of
Bryant
needs
to
be
robust
and
I
know
so
make
sure
they're
well
taken
care
of
put
as
many
plants
as
you
can
in
there
and
I
see
the
site
plan
of
the
notched
out
Corner
when
I
see
the
sad
little
rendering
of
that
with
just
a
little
fence
and
nothing
in
there
yet
so.
J
T
F
Is
really
important
and
so
I
think
even
providing
access
outside
to
that
from
the
exercise
room?
You
might
consider
that
as
well.
I
know
it's
just
windows.
It's
can
act
as
a
winter
garden,
but
I
think
that
exterior
experience
would
be
would
be
nice
to
have
so.
But
it's
great.
C
K
L
It's
about
about
one,
not
just
Paving
their
entire
lot
and
putting
you
know
parking
or
loading
spaces
wherever
they
could
fit
them
in,
and
this
applies
to
I
think
R4
through
R6,
so
our
the
higher
density,
multi-family
districts,
it's
just
I
I-
think
we
picked
70
I,
don't
have
an
actual,
a
good
number
of
why
that
number.
But
if
you
think
about
typical
Minneapolis
development
patterns,
you
have
residential
structures
up
front
and
then
you
have
garages
in
the
back
when
you
get
into
the
multi-family.
L
You
know
some
a
lot
do
adhere
to
that
typical.
That
are,
you
know
that
type
of
plating
or
that
type
of
development.
Now
we've
we've
moved
into
enclosed
parking
or
underground
parking
within
buildings,
and
so
I
think
we're
losing
that
backyard.
If
you
will-
and
that's
probably
where
in
this
case
the
the
15
or
the
10
excuse
me
like
comes
from-
is
kind
of
removing
that
space
between
what
could
have
been
a
garage
or
not.
But
so
that's
how
we
came
up
with
the
number.
P
Yeah
thanks,
it's
just
something:
I've
been
pondering
here
as
we've
seen
quite
a
few
of
these
apartment
buildings
apartment
building
projects
come
through
and
how
it
you
know
plays
in
with
green
space
and
water
management
and
even
thinking
about
this
winter
and
where
all
the
snow
goes
are.
We
are
we
thinking
thinking
that
through
and
so
anyway,
where
my
question
came
from.
A
All
right
I'm
not
seeing
any
more
questions
right
now,
so
I'll
open
the
public
hearing
and
if
the
applicant
would
like
to
come
and
speak
on
the
project,
you
can
do
so
now.
T
Good
evening
Commissioners,
my
name
is
Tim
Baylor
I
live
at
2305
River
Point
Circle
in
Minneapolis
in
the
neighborhood,
actually
just
to
touch
on
a
couple
of
the
comments
that
came
up
immediately
to
the
South
that
this
building
is
a
duplex,
not
a
single
family
home.
It's
a
duplex
and
south
of
that
is
an
office.
T
When
we
took
this
project
on,
we
realized
that
we
needed
to
have
some
scale,
so
it
wasn't
just
one
building
we
had
to
have
a
village,
so
that
included
Market
quality
and
market
rate
housing.
By
the
way
in
20
years,
there's
been
no
market
rate.
Housing
been
in
this
area
all
been
affordable
housing.
So
we
wanted
to
put
the
village
concept
together
to
comprise
market
rate,
Market
quantity,
housing,
housing
for
senior
citizens
like
myself,
who
want
to
stay
in
the
neighborhood
or
maybe
even
move
to
the
neighborhood,
but
don't
have
housing
options.
T
We
had
an
option
to
rezone
this
to
commercial,
but
we
wanted
to
make
one
of
the
reasons
we
did
not
do.
That
was
we
wanted
to
maintain
the
context
of
the
neighborhood
and
so
the
building,
that's
under
construction.
Now,
six
stories.
We
didn't
really
want
to
have
another
six
story
building
there,
so
the
building
is
five
stories
so
that
it
can
kind
of
blend
better
into
the
community
did
not
anticipate
the
variance
pushback
from
staff
or
the
city.
T
But
that's
one
of
the
reasons.
The
other
reason
is
that
the
city
is
finally
supportive
of
the
project,
and
so
we've
got
Tiff
applications
in
and
the
city
wanted
to
do.
This
phase
in
the
smaller
third
phase,
second
phase
together
we're
going
through
the
city
processes
and
so
timing
is
an
issue.
T
So
that's
one
of
the
reasons
we
chose
this
path
as
opposed
to
completely
rezoning
it,
the
others
that
we're
utilizing
HUD
on
these
two
phases,
as
we
did
the
first
phase
and
that
process
is
the
process
and
so
I'm
trying
to
coordinate
all
these
processes
to
keep
the
project
moving
because
of
the
timing
and
just
the
economies
of
getting
the
paperwork
through
the
city
and
through
HUD,
and
so
that's
that's
kind
of
where
we
are
right.
Now,
25
years
ago,
I
opened
a
business
on
Broadway
and
we've
been
there
for
25
years.
T
My
background
is
as
a
planning,
commissioner,
25
years
ago,
I
was
sitting
where
you
are
and
sidebar
one
of
the
things
that
I
used
to
always
be
amazed
by
is
developers
coming
in
and
have
support
from
staff,
and
they
start
talking,
and
they
talk
themselves
right
out
of
approval,
so
I'm
going
to
try
not
to
do
that
today,
but
I.
Just
wanna
give
you
some
context
as
to
how
we
got
here.
I'm
also
I
worked.
T
A
commercial
I
was
a
real
estate
representative
for
the
McDonald's
corporation
for
10
years,
I'm,
a
ccim,
designation,
designee,
Mai
appraisal,
designee
and
so
25
years
ago.
I
was
wondering
why
nothing
was
happening
in
this
area.
Why
not?
Why?
What
was
going
on
and
so
about,
15
or
16
years
ago,
and
talking
with
Jackie
Cherry
Holmes
and
Mohammed
nawal
from
LLC
Architects
I
said:
hey,
let's,
this
has
to
have
some
scale
nobody's
going
to
do
anything.
We
have
to
do
something,
so
we
did
come
up
with
a
grand
three
blocks.
T
T
You
can't
do
that
start
with
one
block.
So
that's
what
we
did.
So
we
focused
on
this
area
to
kind
of
get
to
where
we
are
today
and
so
I
I
understand
the
recent
changes
to
the
comp
plan.
I
was
a
planning
commissioner.
When
we
did
the
rezoning
30
years
ago,
so
I
understand
the
nuances
that
go
within
that,
but
we
do
need
Anthony.
That
is
a
mandate.
We
do
need
some
quality
housing
in
the
area
and
I
think
that
all
things
being
considered
I'd
like
to.
T
T
T
A
J
So
I
have
a
question
for
you.
As
we
look
at
this.
You
know
we
I
think
I'll
speak
for
myself
here.
I
think
this
would
be
a
great
addition
to
the
neighborhood
I
think
we
are
trying
to
to
see
what
we
can
do
to
to
get
this
through.
I
think
the
reality
is
that
for
us
to
override
staff
recommendation,
we
need
to
have
legally
binding
findings
that
allow
us
to
do
so,
and
so
I
guess.
My
question,
for
you
is,
as
you
look
at
this
property,
do
you
believe
that
practical
difficulties
exist?
T
Jim
well
the
the
two
options
that
I
have
I
can
we
can
go
back
and
let's
see
I
guess
three
options.
We
can
appeal.
If
you
don't
agree
with
me,
we
can
go
back
and
rezone
apply
for
rezoning
it,
which
we
can
do
that
or
we
can
modify
the
plan,
which
means
I,
think
we
can
go
under
the
R5
designation.
T
So
closing
that
Gap
from
a
development
standpoint
has
been
a
challenge
and
there's
been
a
lot
of
headwinds
to
do
that
and
we've
been
successful
thus
far
and
I'd
like
to
kind
of
kind
of
say
along
that
that
tracked,
you
know
we
need
the
density,
so
we
got
79
units
and
we
did
as
much
as
we
could
to
do.
That
can't
afford
to
go
up
another
story
with
the
with
the
rents
that
we
got.
So
that's
the
conundrum.
J
So
Charles
and
one
quick
follow-up,
so
I
think
what
I
want
to
make
clear
here
is
that
the
challenge
that
we're
faced
with
here
is
what,
or
at
least
that
I'm
personally
faced
with,
which
is
that
I
would
like
to
find
a
path
forward
for
how
we
do
this,
but
based
on
the
questions
of
my
fellow
Commissioners
and
the
presentation
from
Hillary
I'm,
not
sure
that
I
see
practical
difficulties.
That
would
allow
us
to
make
findings
unless
people
here
are
able
to
do
that.
A
C
C
What
you've
been
telling
us
about
is
an
economic
problem
of
either
you
have
to
grow
up,
one
One,
More
Story
and
the
additional
cost
of
that
or
you
have
to
cut
back
on
the
the
the
size
of
the
the
footprint
of
the
building
and
lose
units.
Of
course,
new.
Another
problem,
so
I'm
wondering
is,
is,
is
an
economic
issue,
a
a
practical.
This
difficulty.
T
Well,
the
the
other
and
I'm
not
sure
if
it's
a
practically
difficulty
or
not,
but
a
part
of
the
part
of
my
conundrum
is
that
the
city
and
HUD
want
to
do
both
of
these
faces.
At
the
same
time,
we
are,
we
already
have
approvals
for
the
26
Union
on
Broadway,
that's
funding
on
Broadway,
so
we
could
theoretically
do
that,
but
the
city
wants
it
to
come
together,
and
so
part
of
that
is
timing
for
me.
T
So
it's
not
an
economic,
but
it's
timing
and
so
I'm
not
sure
if
that's
a
practical
consideration,
but
that
that
is
something
that
I
have
to
consider.
A
All
right,
commissioner
Campbell,
were
you
done
with
your
question?
Okay,
commissioner.
Conley
thank.
O
O
Can
you
talk
to
me
a
little
bit
more
about
that
building
up
you'd
have
to
add
another
full
another
story
years
ago
you
wanted
the
scale,
but
not
two
six
story,
buildings
right,
but
talk
to
me
a
little
bit
about
how
this
building
in
particular
it's
you
mentioned
that
it's
too
costly,
so
a
financial
burden,
but
also
that
the
rents
are
too
high,
so
I'm,
assuming
that
all
79
units
are
market
rate
with
62
for
seniors
I'm,
just
I
want
to
put
together
the
financial
piece
in
my
head
and
also
trying
to
figure
out
why
the
rents.
T
Are
too
high?
Maybe
a
lot-
maybe
maybe
semantically,
commissioner
Connolly
I
can
describe
it
as
maybe
restricted
and
non-restricted
and
so
affordable
is
a
restricted
wrench.
So
we
have
20
affordable
in
these
units
unrestricted
of
what
we
call
market
rate
now
in
other
parts
of
the
city,
market
rate
is
2.42.50
cents.
A
square
foot
in
this
particular
Market
that
Runners
1.80
square
foot,
1.80
85,
a
square
foot,
and
so
these
Market
rates
in
this
area,
all
right
80
of
the
Ami,
so
they're,
really
affordable.
T
That's
the
conundrum
and
so
going
up
another
floor
gets
that
get
moves
that
Nexus
from
what
we
can
kind
of
try
to
raise
to
get
this
project
done
out
of
the
realm
of
possibility.
A
Okay
yeah,
so
we'd
still
have
to
finish
the
public
hearing.
So
maybe
we
should
anyone
else
here
who
would
like
to
speak
on
this
item
before
we
close
the
public
hearing.
V
Good
evening
my
name
is
Muhammad
lawal
I'm
at
4701,
Humboldt
Avenue
South
in
Minneapolis,
Tim
Baylor,
the
developers
architect
and
have
been
on
this
journey
for
12
years,
with
Tim
Baylor
to
bring
market
rate
Market
quality,
Housing
and
Development
to
North
Minneapolis,
a
part
of
our
city
that
has
been
greatly
underdeveloped
or
over
developed
with
affordable
housing
and
and
I.
Think
the
commissioner
Baxley
and
there's
a
part
of
practical
difficulty
which
I
understand
by
law
that
you
all
need
to
meet
as
Commissioners
in
the
conundrum
of
whether
we
should
have.
V
As
commissioner
Miller
said,
you
know,
perhaps
looked
at
zoning
a
site
commercial
as
opposed
to
the
R5
for
residential
and
the
Practical
difficulty
as
Tim
defines
it
as
I
understand.
It
is
one
of
timing
and
I
look
at
the
project
that
we
have
designed
for
Tim
as
one
of
reasonable
less
and
one
should
look
at
the
three
variances
or
the
four
that
are
being
requested
and
ask
yourself
some
of
the
questions
that
you
are
asking.
What
is
the
difference
between
70
coverage
and
79?
How
did
we
get
to
70?
That's
something
you
know.
So
what?
V
What
is
the
the
difference
and
then
I
I
think
the
major
piece
really
is.
The
setback
that
we're
requesting
on
the
north
side
of
the
site,
which
is
the
alley,
is
11
feet
wide,
is,
should
be
inconsequential
because
it's
for
16
feet
and
three
feet
from
the
setback
for
a
notch.
That
I
believe
everyone
would
agree,
improves
the
image
of
the
building,
as
one
sees
it
from
Broadway
to
major
public
corridor
on
the
west
side
of
the
site,
which
is
a
20-foot
alley.
V
We
are
asking
for
a
variance
the
setback
of
30
feet,
which
is
a
based
on
the
house
that
is
to
the
south
of
ours.
Currently,
if
you
look
at
that
condition,
the
face
of
the
new
building
would
be
17
feet
from
the
curb
we
are
providing.
There's
a
six
foot
sidewalk.
We
are
providing
more
than
required,
Landscaping
along
Bryant
trees
and
the
like
benches.
That
will
improve
the
public
realm
along
Bryant
and
so
I
understand
the
ideological
law
of
practical
difficulty.
V
However,
we
have
a
project
that
is
highly
reasonable
and
at
six
stories
we
still
won't
get
to
79
units
based
on
the
geometry
of
the
site.
The
setback
at
30
feet
the
setback
on
all
things.
We
will
lose
too
many
units
in
a
senior
project
that
there
is
none
of
the
like
in
the
neighborhood.
We
just
won't
get
to
79
units
and
we've
gone
through
it
over
and
over
again,
and
sometimes
in
architecture.
There
are
things
that
you
just
can't
put
together
certain
ways
and
they
just
don't
work.
A
Right
is
there
anyone
else
who
would
like
to
speak
on
this
item?
Okay,
I'll
close
the
public
hearing,
commissioner
Ford.
C
This
is
very
frustrating
and,
frankly,
annoying
Mr
Baylor.
You
have
an
experienced
team
with
you.
Who've
been
working
in
this
area
under
your
Architects
working
this
area
and
they
understand
the
law.
They
understand
the
city
policy
and
all
you're
saying
to
us
is
we'd
like
to
have
it
ignored.
It's
not
consequential.
It
is
consequential.
It's
City
policy
and
I
I.
Don't
know
why
your
development
team
and
your
Architects
couldn't
put
together
a
plan
that
we
could
approve.
C
We
want
to
approve
it,
but
what
you've
given
us
is
no
reason
to
to
turn
down
the
the
staff
of
of
the
Planning
Commission
here
today.
You've,
given
us
no
reason
at
all
other
than
you'd
like
to
not
do
it.
This
way.
E
Thank
you
I
believe,
commissioner
Campbell's
book,
for
probably
all
of
us
in
the
city.
More
broadly,
in
that
we
like
this
project,
we
want
to
see
more
of
it
and
I
think
it's
worth
saying
a
little
bit
more
about
why
that
is
and
I
know.
This
has
been
before
the
Planning
Commission
several
times,
but
it'll
be
new
to
some
people
that
you
know
this
is
senior
housing.
It's
going
to
allow
people
to
to
stay
in
the
city,
it's
close
to
Transit,
it's
close
to
the
Cub
grocery
store.
E
You
know
one
of
northside's,
other
grocery
stores
is
closing,
so
Cub
is
one
of
the
last
ones.
So
it's
one
of
the
only
places
that
seniors
will
be
able
to
be
and
and
have
access
to
groceries
in
walkable
distance.
So
I
definitely
think
you.
I
E
While
an
agreement
that
we
want
to
see
projects
like
this
move
forward
and
some
other
contexts
about
the
variances,
like
I
mentioned
for
the
lot
coverage,
you
know
in
other
parts
of
the
city,
you
would
have
been
allowed
to
build
a
lot
more.
You
are
exceeding
the
Landscaping
requirement,
so
you're
providing
more
green
space
than
than
is
necessary
and
for
the
setbacks
as
well.
E
You
know,
if
you
were
in
other
parts
of
the
city
you
wouldn't
be
allowed
to,
like
you
would
be
forced
to
build.
You
know
close
to
the
sidewalk
and
I
think
that's
the
case
for
the
property
I
mean
immediately
north
of
you.
You
know
staff
agrees
that
there
is
no
injury
to
anyone.
You
know
it's
a
a
vacant
property
to
the
South
owned
by
the
city,
and
you
have
taken
steps
with
the
massing.
E
You
know
to
push
it
toward
the
North
and
away
from
the
south.
So
with
all
that
I,
you
know,
I
think
we
should
look
to
some
of
the
previous
actions.
The
the
Planning
Commission
has
taken
nearby.
E
So
you
know
in
December
the
Planning
Commission
approved
quite
substantial
setback,
variances
for
2309
Plymouth,
Avenue
North
and
1254
Russell,
Avenue
North
and
I'm
I'm,
going
to
read
what
the
staff
recommended
findings
were
for
that
so
for
the
first
one
for
for
the
Plymouth
Avenue
one,
it
said
for
the
front
and
Corner
side
staff
finds
the
Practical
difficulties
exist
that
are
unique
to
the
parcel.
The
existing
context
along
Plymouth
Avenue
shows
both
non-residential
and
multi-family
structures
now,
primarily
primarily
facing
Plymouth
Avenue
North
with
reduced
setbacks.
E
The
applicant
has
staggered
the
front
yard
setback
matching
the
setback
to
the
adjacent
residential
structure
to
the
south
at
35
feet
from
the
front
property
line
along
Russell
Avenue
North.
Then
the
building
setback
reduces
to
three
feet
from
the
property
line
starting
25
feet
from
the
shared
property
line
to
the
South.
E
The
applicant
is
proposing
a
one
foot
setback
along
the
corner
side
yard
along
the
Ninth
Avenue
North
staff
finds
that
the
existing
con
staff
finds
that
the
existing
context
along
Plymouth
Avenue
North,
is
a
unique
circumstance
to
the
subject:
property
and
a
condition
not
created
by
the
applicant.
It
seems
to
me
that
this
is
a
a
similar
situation
in
that
we
have.
You
know,
differential
setbacks
for
the
other
properties
on
this
block,
and
it
seems
to
me
that
that
is
a
practical
difficulty
for
the
situation.
E
I
see
Hillary
as
stepped
up.
You
have
any
response
to
the.
A
E
E
So
there
are
differential
setbacks
along
this
block.
The
property
to
the
north
does.
E
A
small
one,
I
can't
remember
exactly
what
it
is,
and
that
is
the
unique
context
of
of
the
street
and
I'm
blinking
on
which
street
this
is
exactly
that.
E
So
so,
if,
if
we've
found
this
practical
difficulty,
then
we
wouldn't
need
to
make
any
further
adjustment
to
the
site
plan
review.
Is
that
correct
that.
L
Is
correct
if
you
can
find
practical
to
the
same
before
because
they
are,
they
are
much
related
yeah.
Is
that,
then
you
could
overturn
staff
recommendation
and
improve
the
site
plan
review
again.
It
met
all
of
the
standards
except
for
that
one.
While
on
the
south
side,
that
was
over
25
feet
and
blank
and
we
recommended
alternative
compliance
be
granted
because
there's
a
transformer
in
front
of
it
and
then
there's
additional
Landscaping
to
help
screen
that
from
the
street.
Okay.
E
I
will
make
it
into
one
so
I
move
approval
of
item
nine,
including
items
a
b
and
C
consistent
with
staff
recommendation,
as
well
as
d
e,
f
and
G,
with
the
finding
of
a
practical
difficulty
that.
E
E
A
All
right
any
discussion.
A
All
right,
I'll,
I'll,
say
I
will
also
be
supporting
this.
This
building
makes
a
lot
of
sense
right
here
and
I.
Think
commissioner,
Meyer's
practical
difficulty
also
makes
sense.
Yeah
I'm
not
seeing
anyone
else,
so
I
guess
I'll
ask
the
clerk
to
please
call
the
roll.
I
I
A
Right
that
motion
passes.
Good
luck,
you
guys-
and
that
was
our
last
discussion
item
for
the
evening.
We
do
have
one
small
item
before
commissioner
Albert
has
to
catch
her
bus,
okay.
So
having
addressed
all
of
our
land
use
items,
we'll
move
on
to
nominations
for
the
Planning
Commission
offices
of
president
vice
president
and
secretary,
would
anyone
like
to
nominate
themselves
or
someone
else
for
the
office
of
president
okay,
commissioner?
Campbell.
J
I
would
like
to
nominate
chair
Olson
for
another
term
as
Planning
Commission
president.
A
Okay,
would
anyone
like
to
nominate
themselves
or
someone
else
for
the
office
of
Vice
President.
P
Commissioner
Alper
yes,
I
would
like
to
nominate
commissioner
Baxley
for
the
office
of
Vice
President.
The.
P
A
Second,
you
would
accept
excellent,
are
there
any
other
nominations,
all
right
and
then,
lastly,
would
anyone
like
to
nominate
themselves
or
someone
else
for
the
office
of
secretary
I.
A
I
will
second
that
I
don't
know
if
the
chair
can.
Second
things:
I
already
did
okay,
okay,
all
right,
so
we
have
three
nominations
and
we
will
vote
on
those
during
our
next
meeting.
Is
that
correct?
Okay?
A
So
we
have,
let's
see
yeah
that
will
be
on
Tuesday
February
21st.
Are
there
any
announcements
from
staff.
L
The
hole
on
Thursday,
the
code
development
team
will
be
bringing
in
forward
the
land
use
resulting
study
for
its
second
discussion.
It
is
up
on
the
web.
Jason
Wittenberg
did
send
an
email
specifically
to
all
of
you
in
addition
to
receiving
the
agendas
from
from
Rachel.
So
please
do
look
into
come
with
questions.
I
I,
it's
very
helpful
and
it's
it's
good
to
get
questions
asked
and
answered,
or
at
least
asked
now,
so
we
can
look
into
or
research
or
do
what
not.
L
So
that
is
Thursday
and
then
yes,
our
next
meeting
is
on
a
Tuesday
because
of
President's
Day
on
Monday,
and
so
please
make
sure
that
you
have
that
on
your
calendar.
It
is
Tuesday
the
21st
at
4
30
here.
A
P
Yes,
I
would
like
to
request
of
Staff,
given
the
number
of
new
people
here
or
renewing
people.
I,
just
I,
think
it's
a
great
time
to
revisit
the
basics.
New
year
new,
a
new
commission
I'd,
really
appreciate
a
follow-up
kind
of
we
had
an
overview
at
the
beginning
of
at
least
commissioner
Campbell
and
my
term
and
I'd
really
appreciate
you
know.
Could
we
get
a
cheat
sheet
on
practical
difficulties?
If
one
exists,
could
we
get
some
of
these
things
like
the
zoning
classifications
and
their
definitions?
J
L
P
P
I
would
just
like
to
add
that
I
think
some
of
this
could
be
passed
out
as
material
or
sent
to
us
that
we
could
have
okay
I
mean
it's
it's
wonderful
to
have
electronic
material,
but
I
wouldn't
mind
having
like
the
top
10
sheets
of
paper
that
are
just
like
here.
That
I
can
peruse.
You
know:
okay,.
I
P
It
doesn't
necessarily
have
to
only
we,
let's
not
wait
till
the
retreat
is
what
I'm
saying
it
can.
It
can
happen
and
the
next
two
weeks,
I
think
I
think
it's
totally
doable
and
I
I
I'm
willing
to
bet
I
place
money
on
it
that
you
have
this
information
within
you
know,
staff
materials
it
would
just
would
be
wonderful
to
have
them
shared
with
us.
How.
L
About
everybody
send
me
your
top
items
and
maybe
I
will
connect
with
the
with
with
cherylson
on
how
to
get
it
back
to
or
present
on
or
whatnot
depending
on
the
list.
I
don't
know
if
I'm
gonna
have
it
all
done
into
it.
I
got
a
couple
hats
on
right
now
these
aren't
excuses.
This
is
legitimate,
like
I'm
doing
great
my
emails
until
like
10
pm
at
night,
so
I
will
do
my
best,
though.
L
So,
if
you
guys
get
me,
the
list,
I
will
also
talk
with
Eric
Nelson,
our
City
attorney
to
find
out
about.
If
there
had
been
a
retreat
talked
about,
we
can
try
to
get
it
scheduled.
I'm,
yep,
I'm
really
sure
that
Kimberly
wants
to
be
there,
but
I
know
that's
not
until
May.
So
let
me
talk
to
everyone.
Let
me
talk
with
Meg
and
our
the
other
managers
and,
let's
see
what
we
can
okay
hold
together
for
everyone
is
kind
of
like
a
mini
retreat
or
something
or
thank.
R
A
All
right,
if
not
and
without
objection,
I'll
declare
this
meeting
adjourned.
Our
next
meeting
is
Tuesday
February,
oh
21st,
and
our
next
Committee
of
the
whole
is
this
Thursday.
The
9th.