>> GOOD MORNING. WELCOME TO THE BUSINESS, HOUSING, AND ZONING COMMITTEE. I WILL CALL THIS REGULAR MEETING TOWARD FOR NOVEMBER 13, 2025. -- TO ORDER FOR NOVEMBER 13, 2025.
MY NAME IS JAMAL OSMAN, I'M THE CHAIR. I WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE THESE MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE TO ENABLE GREATER PARTICIPATION. THEY INCLUDE REALTIME CAPTIONING TO INCREASE THE ACCESSIBILITY OF OUR PROCEEDINGS TO THE COMMUNITY. THEREFORE ALL SPEAKERS NEED TO BE MINDFUL OF THE RATE OF THEIR SPEECH SO THAT OUR CAPTIONERS
CAN FULLY TRANSCRIBE ALL COMMENTS FOR THE BROADCAST. WE ASK ALL SPEAKERS TO MODERATE THE SPEED AND CLARITY OF THEIR COMMENTS. WE'LL BE USING SPEAKER MANAGEMENT, SO PLEASE SIGN UP. AT THIS TIME, I WILL ASK THE CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL SO WE CAN VERIFY A QUORUM. >> COUNCILMEMBER VETAW.
>> PRESENT. >> CASHMAN. >> PRESENT. >> JENKINS IS ABSENT. CHAVEZ. >> PRESENT. >> VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY. >> PRESENT. >> AND CHAIR OSMAN. >> PRESENT. >> THERE ARE FIVE MEMBERS PRESENT. >> LET THE RECORD REFLECT WE HAVE A QUORUM. OUR AGENDA IS IN FRONT OF US.
WE WILL BE BEGINNING WITH THE CONSENT AGENDA. CONSENT AGENDA IS ITEM 8 THROUGH 25. ITEM EIGHT IS APPROVING THREE LIQUOR LICENSE. ITEM NINE IS APPROVING SEVEN LIQUOR LICENSE RENEWALS.
ITEM TEN IS APPROVING THREE GAMBLING LICENSE RENEWALS. ITEM 11 IS ACCEPTING A GRANT FROM THE STATE FOR DISLOCATED WORKERS. ITEM 12 IS A PROVEN
CERTIFICATION FOR THREE TIF DISTRICTS. ITEM 13 IS APPROVING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AT 201 WEST BROADWAY. ITEM 14 IS AUTHORIZING
MODIFICATIONS TO THE PRESERVATION FUND FOR THE CREAMETTE BUILDING. ITEM 15 IS A CONTRACT FOR KMA WITH THE PROPERTY AT 1200 WEST BROADWAY. ITEM 16 IS APPROVING A NEW STREET NAME OF KIRK WASHINGTON
JR. SUBMITTED BY COUNCILMEMBER ELLISON. ITEM 17 IS ALSO APPROVING A NEW STREET NAME OF CHEE XIONG ALSO SUBMITTED BY COUNCILMEMBER ELLISON. ITEM 18 IS APPROPRIATION FOR
DEMOLISHES TWO CITY-OWNED PROPERTIES. ITEM 19 IS APPROVING LAND SALES FOR EMERGENCY STABILIZATION PILOT PROGRAM TO HOMES FOR HOMIES. ITEM 20 IS SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR DECEMBER 2ND TO
CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO THE LAND SALE SIDE YARD PROPERTIES RESOLUTION. ITEM 21 IS SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR DECEMBER 2ND TO CONSIDER MODIFICATIONS TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR
59 TIF DISTRICTS. ITEM 22 IS SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR DECEMBER 2ND TO CONSIDER THREE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS. ITEM 23, SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR DECEMBER 2ND TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE RELATED TO
THE DEMOLITION AND WRECKING OF STRUCTURES. ITEM 24 IS SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR DECEMBER 2ND TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE FOR THE TENANT PROTECTIONS AND OPPORTUNITY TO PURCHASE. AND LASTLY ITEM 25 IS SETTING A
HEARING FOR DECEMBER 2ND FOR A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE PROPERTY AT 222 9th STREET SOUTH. WITH THAT, DO ANY OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCILMEMBER VETAW.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. I'D JUST LIKE TO PULL ITEM 24 FOR DISCUSSION, PLEASE. >> ITEM 24 FOR DISCUSSION. ARE THERE ANYONE ELSE? I'D LIKE TO RECOGNIZE WE HAVE
BEEN JOINED BY COUNCILMEMBER JENKINS. WITH THAT, I MOVE APPROVAL FOR ALL ITEMS EXCEPT ITEM 24. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] TO OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTION
CARRIES. NOW COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. JUST A COUPLE QUESTIONS. ITEM 24 IS SETTING THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE TOPA ORDINANCE.
A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS I'VE BEEN ASKED IS ABOUT WHY THIS WASN'T REINTRODUCED. I THINK WE STARTED HAVING QUESTIONS ON THIS SUBJECT BACK IN FEBRUARY OR SO OF 2024. AND THIS IS THE FIRST THAT MOST PEOPLE ARE HEARING ABOUT IT SINCE THEN.
IT WENT BACK FOR SOME STAFF WORK. SO JUST WONDERING WHY IT WASN'T REINTRODUCED AND WHY WE'RE JUST SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR IT INSTEAD OF GOING THROUGH THE REINTRODUCTION PROCESS.
>> CHAIR OSMAN, COUNCILMEMBER VETAW, MY NAME IS ERIC HANSON, I'M THE DIRECTOR OF CPED. WE WILL GET YOU THE DATE, BUT THIS WAS INTRODUCED SEPARATELY A WHILE AGO FOR TENANT OPPORTUNITY TO PURCHASE. THERE'S ALSO A COMMUNITY OPPORTUNITY TO PURCHASE THAT
CAME FORWARD AS THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRESERVATION ORDINANCE THAT WAS INTRODUCED AND WENT THROUGH THE CITY COUNCIL LAST YEAR. BUT THIS ONE WAS PROPERLY INTRODUCED. >> IS THIS THE ONE FROM FEBRUARY OF 2024? >> I THINK IT'S THAT TIME. >> OKAY. AND SO HAS THERE BEEN ANY
ENGAGEMENT AROUND THIS SINCE IT WAS INTRODUCED IN FEBRUARY OF 2024? >> COUNCILMEMBER OSMAN, COUNCILMEMBER VETAW, THERE HAS BEEN ENGAGEMENT AROUND OPPORTUNITIES TO PURCHASE
ORDINANCE, AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRESERVATION ORDINANCE THAT WENT THROUGH. AND THE AUTHORS HAVE BEEN WORKING ON ENGAGEMENT. THOSE AUTHORS ARE NOT ON THIS COMMITTEE. IT'S VICE PRESIDENT CHUGHTAI AND COUNCILMEMBER ELLISON. WE DO NOT HAVE THAT PREPPED FOR CONVERSATION WITH THE COUNCIL
TODAY, BUT WE CAN GET YOU THAT INFORMATION ABOUT ENGAGEMENT. >> SO THERE HASN'T BEEN -- FIRST ANY INFORMATION YOU CAN GIVE ME ABOUT ENGAGEMENT WOULD BE GREAT. BUT I THINK I'M MORE INTERESTED IN INFORMATION AROUND STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT. YOU KNOW, WHEN THIS WAS
ORIGINALLY BROUGHT UP, THERE WERE LOTS OF LANDLORDS AND OTHER FOLKS WHO HAD BEEN TALKING TO US ABOUT HOPEFULLY HAVING A VOICE AT THE TABLE OVER THAT PERIOD OF TIME THAT IT WOULD TAKE FOR US TO PASS SOMETHING. AND I'M JUST CONCERNED THAT THAT
HASN'T HAPPENED IN THIS YEAR, OVER A YEAR, BECAUSE IT WAS FEBRUARY OF 2024. SO JUST WONDERING AND THAT WOULD BE A STAFF DIRECTIVE, PLEASE, CLERKS TO JUST GIVE US THE INFORMATION ON WHAT ENGAGEMENT HAS HAPPENED FROM STAFF TO --
I'M NOT NECESSARILY ASKING FOR COUNCIL MEMBER ENGAGEMENT. I'D LIKE TO KNOW HOW STAFF HAS BEEN ENGAGING FOLKS. >> CHAIR OSMAN, IF I MAY, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE AUTHORS, THE AUTHORS HAVE BEEN KIND OF GUIDING THIS PROCESS.
SO WE'LL BE WORKING WITH THEM TO RESPOND TO THE INQUIRY TO YOU, COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. >> OKAY. THAT'S IT, CHAIR. >> COUNCILMEMBER CHAVEZ. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. I JUST WANT TO GET ON QUEUE TO
SPEAK ON ITEM 24, THE TOPA ORDINANCE. I KNOW WE'RE JUST SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING, BUT I AM EXCITED THIS IS FINALLY COMING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL. THE TENANT OPPORTUNITY TO PURCHASE ACT IS A CHANCE TO GIVE RENTERS THE OPPORTUNITY TO
PURCHASE A BUILDING. THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO MY CONSTITUENTS IN WARD 9. IT'S SOMETHING I HEAR ON A PRACTICALLY DAILY BASIS ON WHY IT IS NEEDED TO ESTABLISH A PARTICULAR ORDINANCE IN OUR COMMITTEE. I THINK ABOUT MS. LINDA, IF WE
HAVE THIS POLICY IN PLACE WOULD HAVE BEEN PERHAPS IN A DIFFERENT SITUATION INSTEAD OF NEIGHBORS HAVING TO COME TOGETHER AND FUNDRAISE AND MAKE SURE SHE COULD STAY IN HER HOME AND NOT BE DISPLACED. AND HEARD MULTIPLE INSTANCES ON HOW MEASURES LIKE TOPA CAN HELP
KEEP PEOPLE IN THEIR HOMES AND INCREASE HOME OWNERSHIP. PARTICULARLY THOSE IN OUR BLACK, BROWN, NATIVE, AND PEOPLE OF COLOR COMMUNITIES WHERE DISPROPORTIONATELY PEOPLE DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO HOME OWNERSHIP. I AM SUPER EXCITED THAT MY COLLEAGUES ARE BRINGING FORWARD
TO THE TOPA ORDINANCE AND I LOOK FORWARD TO APPROVING THAT WHEN THE TIME COMES. >> THANK YOU. SEEING NO ONE ELSE, I WILL MOVE APPROVAL FOR SETTING ITEM 24 FOR SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR DECEMBER 2ND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES]
. AND THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTION CARRIES. OUR FIRST ITEM OF PUBLIC PUBLIC HEARING IS AN ORDINANCE RELATED TO THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION REGULATIONS. THIS WAS CONTINUED FROM OUR LAST MEETING, OCTOBER 28TH.
AND THIS IS BEFORE US. I'LL ASK STAFF TO GIVE US A PRESENTATION ON THIS. >> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR OSMAN AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY NAME IS ANDREA BURKE. I AM THE SUPERVISOR OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION TEAM AND CPED. I'M HERE TODAY TO GIVE A QUICK
UPDATE ON THIS AGENDA ITEM WHICH WAS CONTINUED FROM THE OCTOBER 28, 2025, MEETING. CPED HAS COMPLETED AN UPDATE TO THE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE. THE LAST TIME THIS CODE WAS UPDATED WAS IN 2001.
SINCE THEN, WE'VE REWRITTEN THE ORDINANCE TO MAKE IT CLEARER, MORE CONSISTENT AND BETTER SUITED TO TODAY'S NEEDS FOR REVIEWING, EVALUATING, AND PROTECTING HISTORIC AND POTENTIALLY HISTORIC PLACES IN MINNEAPOLIS.
AT THE OCTOBER 28TH MEETING, STAFF GAVE A PRESENTATION THAT EXPLAINED THE PROPOSED CHANGES AND TODAY STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE BHZ COMMITTEE SUPPORT AND APPROVE THE UPDATED CHAPTER
599 TEXT AS WRITTEN. THAT CONCLUDES MY UPDATE AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WITH THAT, WE ARE GOING TO PROCEED TAKING THE PUBLIC COMMENTS. I BELIEVE THE ITEM PUBLIC COMMENT WAS OPEN. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE
TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND RECOGNIZE VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER OSMAN. APPRECIATE STAFF'S TIME IN THIS
PAST COMMITTEE MEETING AND THE CURRENT ONE TODAY. I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THIS ORDINANCE FORWARD FOR APPROVAL. >> ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES]
AND THOSE -- I'M SORRY. WERE YOU -- >> I'M IN FAVOR OF THE ORDINANCE, I JUST WANTED TO SPEAK TO A COUPLE OF THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT I THINK ARE HAPPENING THROUGH THIS ORDINANCE JUST FOR PUBLIC TRANSPARENCY. WHAT I THINK HAS BEEN DONE HERE
THAT'S REALLY POSITIVE AND THANK THE STAFF FOR THEIR WORK IS JUST MAKING THE PROCESS CLEARER FOR IDENTIFYING POTENTIAL LANDMARKS IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS AND REVIEWING DEMOLITION REQUESTS, REVIEWING DESIGN CHANGES WILL MAKE IT EASIER FOR APPLICANTS. THIS IS PERTINENT TO ANOTHER
DISCUSSION ITEM ON THE AGENDA TODAY. IT WOULD ALSO STREAMLINE REVIEW OF DESIGN CHANGES IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS AND MAKES THAT FASTER. MAKING HISTORIC TAX CREDIT PROJECTS ELIGIBLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW INSTEAD OF A PUBLIC HEARING. THAT ALSO STREAMLINES THAT
PROCESS AND IMPROVING COST RECOVERY WITH A 20% INCREASE IN APPLICATION FEES. THAT'S ALSO GOOD FOR THE CITY TO BE ABLE TO STAFF THIS WORK. SO I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS AND GIVE MY SUPPORT FOR THIS ORDINANCE. >> OKAY.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. I'M GOING TO REPEAT THAT MOTION FROM VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
NEXT WE HAVE A LIQUOR AND SIDEWALK CAFE LICENSE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY BABII CAJUN. I WELCOME -- FROM CPED.
>> I'M DISTRICT SUPERVISOR CRAIG ELIASON. TODAY I'M PRESENTING AN APPLICATION FROM BABII DOLL LLC, DOING BUSINESS AS BABII CAJUN AT
1221 LAKE STREET. THEY'RE REQUESTING A LIMITED SUNDAY SALES WITH SIDEWALK CAFES. THEY PLAN TO OFFER CASUAL DINING WITH OCCASIONAL LIVE DJ AND ENTERTAINMENT. THEY WILL OFFER SEATING FOR 81 PATRONS INSIDE AND 38 SEATS ON A SIDEWALK CAFE LOCATED ALONGSIDE
WEST LAKE STREET AND FREEMONT AVENUE SOUTH. THERE WILL BE NO BUSINESS LICENSE OPERATING CONDITIONS FOR THIS LICENSE. THE HOURS OF OPERATION INDOORS ARE FROM NOON TO MIDNIGHT DAILY. AND OUTDOORS ON THE SIDEWALK
CAFE NOON TO 10:00 P.M. DAILY. ON OCTOBER 23, 2025, 171 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES WERE SENT TO RESIDENTS, PROPERTY OWNERS, AND POSTED ON ALL RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS WITH FOUR OR MORE UNITS WITHIN 600 FEET OF THE
PREMISES. NOTICES WERE ALSO SENT TO THE SOUTH UPTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, THE UPTOWN BUSINESS ASSOCIATION, AND VICE PRESIDENT CHUGHTAI. WE HAVE RECEIVED ONE RESPONSE IN SUPPORT FROM THE COMMUNITY REGARDING THIS APPLICATION. THAT RESPONDENT ALSO WANTED TO
EXPRESS HIS DESIRE THAT BABII CAJUN ADVERTISE TO ITS CUSTOMERS THE AVAILABILITY OF OFF-STREET PARKING AND TO REMIND CUSTOMERS TO BE MINDFUL OF THE NEIGHBORS WHEN LEAVING AT NIGHT. A REVIEW OF ANY COMPLAINTS, 311 CALLS, POLICE CALLS, FOUND NO
SIGNIFICANT ISSUES CONCERNING THE BUSINESS AND ISSUANCE OF THESE LICENSES. THE LICENSES AND CONSUMER SERVICES DIVISION RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF AN ON SALE LIQUOR, LIMITED ENTERTAINMENT WITH SUNDAY SALES AND SIDEWALK CAFE LICENSES. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION AND AT THIS TIME I WILL STAND
FOR ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT PRESENTATION. I'M GOING TO PROCEED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I SEE HERE THE OWNERS, I WOULD LIKE TO
RECOGNIZE DANIEL CHRISTIANS. WELCOME AND BOTH OF YOU COME. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN, COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS DANIEL CHRISTIANS. I'M COUNCIL FOR BABII CAJUN. SHE WILL EXPRESS IT HERSELF.
I JUST WANT TO SAY I'M EXCITED FOR ANOTHER RESTAURANT TO OPEN UP IN THE AREA. I'M HERE ESSENTIALLY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT MAY COME UP OR ASSIST. BUT WITH THAT, I WILL BE QUIET AND GIVE HER THE FLOOR HERE. THANK YOU. >> HI EVERYBODY.
MY NAME IS SUE, I'M THE OWNER OF BABII CAJUN. I'M EXCITED TO SERVE SEAFOOD BOIL TO EVERYBODY IN THE COMMUNITY. IF ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS OR WANTS SOME SEAFOOD BOIL, JUST LET ME KNOW. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD
LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. I WILL MOVE THIS ITEM FOR APPROVAL. I'M REALLY EXCITED TO SEE THE FORMER BUFFALO WILD WINGS SPACE, RIG RIGHT? IN UPTOWN HAVE A NEW RESTAURANT.
IT'S BEEN SO GREAT SEEING JUST IN THE LAST FEW WEEKS SEVERAL NEW RESTAURANTS COMING THROUGH OUT FOR APPROVAL IN UPTOWN, DREAM STATE CAFE, AND CHIBA HUT LAST WEEK. AND NOW YOU. IT'S REALLY GREAT AND WONDERFUL TO SEE YOUR ACTIVATION OF THE WEST LAKE STREET CORRIDOR.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR DOING BUSINESS IN THE AREA AND I'LL MOVE THIS ITEM FOR APPROVAL. >> THANK YOU. WITH THAT MOTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] ALL OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU. >> YEAH. NEXT PUBLIC HEARING WE HAVE IS AN EXTENDED HOURS OPERATION
LICENSE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY U TOBACCO AT 808 WASHINGTON AVENUE SOUTHEAST. I'LL WELCOME BUSINESS LICENSE MANAGER AMY LINGO TO GIVE A BRIEF PRESENTATION. WELCOME. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. I'M MANAGER AMY LINGO WITH
LICENSING AND CONSUMER SERVICES. I'M PRESENTING AN APPLICATION FROM ZAIN INCORPORATED FOR U TOBACCO AT 808 WASHINGTON AVENUE. THEY INTEND TO EXTEND THEIR
HOURS TO A TOBACCO WITH CONFECTIONARY SECTION. THIS LOCATION RECENTLY OPENED OCTOBER 7, 2025. >> CONTINUE. >> THE BUSINESS HAS AGREED THAT FOR THE FIRST SIX MONTHS THEY WILL CLOSE AT 2:00 A.M. AND IF THERE ARE NO ISSUES, THEN THEY WILL CONTINUE TO THE 3:00 A.M.
AS PROPOSED. THE HOURS OF OPERATION ARE THE CURRENT HOURS FOR THAT AREA ARE 7:30 A.M. TO 10:00 P.M. SUNDAY THROUGH THURSDAY. 7:30 A.M. TO 11:00 P.M. FRIDAY AND SATURDAY. THEIR PROPOSED HOURS ARE 7:30 A.M. TO 2:00 A.M. 7 DAYS A
WEEK FOR THE FIRST SIX MONTHS. AND AFTERWARDS 7:30 A.M. TO 3:00 A.M. DAILY. ON OCTOBER 20, 2025, 44 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES WERE SENT TO RESIDENTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 600 FEET OF THE PREMISES. NOTICES WERE ALSO SENT TO THE PROSPECT PARK NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATION AND COUNCILMEMBER WONSLEY. WE HAVE RECEIVED TWO COMMENTS FROM THE COMMUNITY, BOTH OF WHICH ARE IN OPPOSITION. THEIR CONCERNS ARE THE PROPOSED HOURS BEING TOO LATE, NEGATIVE IMPACT ON NIGHT LIFE AND THE PROMOTING OF THE USE OF TOBACCO. A REVIEW OF ANY COMPLAINTS, 311 CALLS, POLICE CALLS, AND ANY
OPERATING CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED. THE SECOND POLICE PRECINCT MET WITH THE OWNER AND HAVE SIGNED OFF ON THEIR SECURITY AND SAFETY PLAN THE POLICE ALSO COMMENTED THAT THE OWNERS HAVE WORKED CLOSELY WITH THEM AT THEIR SISTER LOCATION AND HAVE BEEN VERY RESPONSIVE TO ANY OF THEIR NEEDS
WHETHER FOR PROBLEMS WITH LATE NIGHT CROWDS OR PROVIDING VIDEO EVIDENCE TO HELP IDENTIFYING ISSUES THAT ARE IN PROXIMITY BUT NOT NECESSARILY RELATED TO THEIR ORIGINAL BUSINESS. NO SIGNIFICANT ISSUES CONCERNING THIS BUSINESS AND ISSUE OF LICENSES HAVE BEEN FOUND. THE LICENSES AND CONSUMER
SERVICES DIVISION RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE EXTENDED HOURS OF OPERATION LICENSE WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THEM BEING OPEN UNTIL 2:00 A.M. FOR THE FIRST SIX MONTHS AND THEN 3:00 A.M. AFTERWARDS IF THERE ARE NO ISSUES. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. AT THIS TIME I WILL STAND FOR ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. I AM GOING TO PROCEED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I SEE HERE THAT U TOBACCO, MUSTAFA,
WELCOME. >> GOOD MORNING. I'M MUSTAFA. I'M ONE OF THE OWNERS OF U TOBACCO. WE'RE A FAMILY-OWNED BUSINESS. UNFORTUNATELY MY DAD WASN'T FEELING TOO WELL TO COME WITH ME, SO IT'S JUST ME TODAY. WE'RE HERE APPLYING FOR EXTENDED
HOURS OF OPERATION UNTIL 3:00 A.M. WE'VE DONE IT WITH ANOTHER BUSINESS FOR ABOUT 25 YEARS. WE'VE BEEN GOOD AT IT. ANY QUESTIONS? >> NO, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THE
PUBLIC HEARING. OH -- IF I CAN HAVE MANAGER AMY LINGO, I DO HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. I THINK THE CONCERN FROM THE RESIDENTS ARE VALID BECAUSE OF THIS AREA.
SOMETIMES WE HAVE CRIMES THAT TAKE PLACE AROUND HERE. I KNOW THE BUSINESS HAS BEEN AROUND FOR A WHILE AND HASN'T BEEN ANY PROBLEM. BUT WHAT IS THE CURRENT HOURS THEY HAVE RIGHT NOW, IS IT UNTIL -- >> SO THE CURRENT HOURS FOR THIS
LOCATION IS 7:30 A.M. TO 10:00 P.M. SUNDAY THROUGH THURSDAY. 7:30 A.M. TO 11:00 P.M. FRIDAY AND SATURDAY. IT IS OF NOTE THAT IN PROXIMITY TO THIS LOCATION THERE ARE OTHER EXTENDED HOURS UNTIL 3:00 A.M., THE CVS AND THE RAISING CANES
ARE PRACTICALLY NEXT DOOR, AND THERE ARE APPROXIMATELY EIGHT BARS WITH 2:00 A.M. LICENSES WITHIN SEVERAL BLOCKS AS WELL. BUT THE CURRENT LOCATIONS FOR THE ZONING OF THE AREA ARE 10:00 P.M. CLOSURE SUNDAY THROUGH THURSDAY, 11:00 P.M. FRIDAY AND SATURDAY. >> OKAY.
WONDERFUL. AND THIS FIRST SIX MONTHS IS UNTIL 2:00 AND THEN 3:00? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> OKAY. APOLOGIZE, COUNCILMEMBER JENKINS.
OKAY. GREAT, THANK YOU. I WILL APPROVE THIS ITEM, BUT I WOULD ALSO DEFINITELY TALK TO THE OWNER AND SAY SAFETY IS VERY IMPORTANT. AND WE'LL HOPEFULLY ASSESS THOSE
SIX MONTHS AND SEE HOW THINGS GO AND COME BACK AND DECIDE WHERE WE GO FROM THERE. BUT WITH THAT MOTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
ALL RIGHT. NEXT ITEM IS WE HAVE ANOTHER EXTENDED HOURS OPERATION LICENSE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY SIP OF SILK AT 333 HURON BOULEVARD.
BEN FROM BUSINESS LICENSE TO GIVE US A PRESENTATION. WELCOME. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS. I'M LICENSE INSPECTOR BEN ZINEL. I'M PRESENTING AN APPLICATION FROM SIP OF SILK INCORPORATION
DOING BUSINESS AS SIP OF SILK LOCATED AT 333 HURON BOULEVARD SOUTHEAST IN WARD 2. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING AN EXTENDED HOURS OF OPERATION LICENSE. IF APPROVED THEY INTEND TO EXTEND THE HOURS OF THEIR OPERATION TO THEIR CURRENT BUSINESS, WHICH IS A COFFEE
HOUSE AND CAFE THAT SERVES FOOD AND NONALCOHOLIC DRINKS WITH NO LIVE ENTERTAINMENT. THEY ARE ASKING FOR APPROVAL TO BE OPEN UNTIL 11:00 P.M. SUNDAY THROUGH THURSDAY AND UNTIL MIDNIGHT ON FRIDAY AND SATURDAY. SIP OF SILK IS A 72 SEAT
SIT-DOWN COFFEE HOUSE AND CAFE THAT RECENTLY OPENED. THIS SPACE HAS BEEN VACANT FOR MANY YEARS AND THEY'RE THE FIRST TENANT IN THIS BUILDING. SO IT'S GOOD TO SLOWLY FILL THIS BUILDING UP WITH TENANTS. CURRENT HOURS ARE JUST UNTIL
10:00 P.M. SUNDAY THROUGH THURSDAY AND UNTIL 11:00 P.M. FRIDAY AND SATURDAY. THEY'RE JUST PROPOSING THE ONE ADDITIONAL HOUR SO TO BE OPEN UNTIL 11:00 P.M. ON WEEKDAYS AND MIDNIGHT ON WEEKENDS. ON OCTOBER 20TH, '36 PUBLIC
HEARING NOTICES WERE SENT TO RESIDENTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 600 FEET OF THE PREMISES. NOTICES WERE ALSO SENT TO THE PROSPECT PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND COUNCILMEMBER WONSLEY. WE RECEIVED NO COMMENT FROM THE COMMUNITY. A REVIEW OF THE COMPLAINTS, 311
CALLS, POLICE CALLS AND ANY OPERATING CONDITIONS, I FOUND NO SIGNIFICANT ISSUES CONCERNING THE BUSINESS AND ISSUANCE OF THE LICENSE. THE MPD SECOND PRECINCT MET WITH THE BUSINESS AND FOUND NO ISSUES AND SIGNED OFF ON THEIR SAFETY AND SECURITY PLAN. THE LICENSES AND CONSUMER
SERVICE DIVISION RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF AN EXTENDED HOURS OF OPERATION LICENSE. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION AT THIS TIME AND I WILL STAND FOR ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT PRESENTATION. I'M GOING TO PROCEED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND RECOGNIZE --
YES, SIR. COME ON. >> CAN YOU HEAR ME? >> YES. >> GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. MY NAME IS AHMED, I'M ONE OF THE
NEW OWNERS AT SIP OF SILK. JUST WANTED TO APPLY FOR THE EXTENDED LICENSE HOUR TO WELCOME ANYONE THAT WANTS TO COME IN. WE'RE JUST A COFFEE HOUSE, WE SERVE PANINI PRESS SANDWICHES, WAFFLES, VARIETY OF PASTRIES HOPEFULLY COMING SOON AND
OBVIOUSLY A VARIETY OF DRINKS. SO JUST HOPING EVERYTHING GOES WELL AND JUST WANT TO SAY MS. CHOWDHURY, IT WAS VERY NICE TO SEE YOU LAST WEEK AROUND THE GRAND OPENING. THANK YOU SO MUCH. AND IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR CONCERNS, JUST LET ME KNOW. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR
TESTIMONY. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, I'LL RECOGNIZE VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR OPENING UP THIS BUSINESS.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A BUSINESS THAT YOU OPENED UP WITH YOUR WIFE -- OH YOUR COUSIN AND YOUR FAMILY. BUT I THINK I GOT A CHANCE TO MEET YOUR WIFE? >> NO.
>> SORRY. I MET SOMEBODY'S WIFE. FREEZE FREEZE -- SHE'S LIKE I'M SO AND SO'S WIFE, BUT IT WAS NOT YOUR WIFE. WHOEVER THAT WAS, SHE WAS LOVELY. I MET SOMEBODY'S WIFE. BUT I AM REALLY EXCITED TO MOVE
THIS FORWARD FOR APPROVAL BECAUSE I THINK THIS PART OF CAMPUS NEEDS A TYPE OF COFFEE SHOP LIKE THIS, BUT ALSO JUST HAVING AN AREA THAT'S OPEN LONGER FOR STUDENTS TO STUDY, AND ALSO ON THE WEEKENDS NOT EVERYBODY GOES OUT AND DRINKS
AND SO HAVING A PLACE WHERE YOU CAN COME TOGETHER AND GATHER ON THE WEEKENDS AND HAVE COFFEE, HAVE A PANINI I THINK IS A REALLY GREAT ADDITION TO CAMPUS LIFE. SO THANK YOU FOR OPENING UP YOUR BUSINESS AND I WISH YOU GOOD
LUCK. >> ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ON THAT MOTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTION CARRIES. NEXT WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING
FOR 2025 LEVY FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. I WELCOME NICK TO PRESENT THAT. WELCOME.
>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR OSMAN AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS. I'M NICK FROM REGULATORY SERVICES HERE TO PRESENT THE
2025 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LEVY FOR PROPERTY-RELATED VIOLATIONS. THIS IS AN ANNUAL ITEM THAT WE DO TO APPROVE ALL OF THE UNPAID FEES AND FINES THAT WERE ISSUED BY SEVERAL CITY DEPARTMENTS FOR THINGS LIKE ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS, REINSPECTION FEES, NUISANCE ABATEMENT WHICH
INCLUDES THINGS LIKE MOWING LAWNS, PICKING UP TRASH, VEGETATION, BOARDING BUILDINGS. IT ALSO INCLUDES THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRATION, DEMOLITION, AND RENTER RELOCATION ASSISTANCE. AS PART OF THIS PROCESS, WE SEND NOTICE OF INTENT TO ASSESS
LETTERS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. THAT GIVES PEOPLE THE OPPORTUNITY TO APPEAL THEIR ASSESSMENTS TO AN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER. WE HAD 22 OF THOSE HEARINGS IN 2025 WITH ONE EXCEPTION THAT I'LL TALK ABOUT IN A FEW MINUTES. THAT NOTICE OF INTENT TO ASSESS
LETTER OUTLINES PEOPLE'S OPTIONS FOR PREPAYMENT, APPEAL TO DISTRICT COURT, OR GOING TO AN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER. IT ALSO MENTIONS THE INTEREST RATE THAT'S APPLIED TO SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS.
WE DID HAVE A TOTAL LEVY AS OF OCTOBER 1ST OF ABOUT $4.2 MILLION. THIS INCLUDES ALL OF THE DIFFERENT THINGS LISTED UNDER THERE. WE DID HAVE A FEW NEW ITEMS THIS YEAR. THE FIRST ITEM I DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO IS THE PUBLIC HEALTH CLEAN UP. THAT'S CONDUCTED UNDER A DIFFERENT STATE STATUTE THAN THE
REST OF THE ASSESSMENTS THAT ARE PART OF THE LEVY. THERE'S NO INTEREST APPLIED TO THAT ONE, AND THERE'S ALSO NO PUBLIC HEARING REQUIREMENT. IT'S A LITTLE BIT LESS PRESCRIPTIVE THAN THE REGULAR STATUTE THAT WE ASSESS THESE UNDER. WE DID GIVE THE PROPERTY OWNER AN OPPORTUNITY TO FILE A WRITTEN OBJECTION BY OCTOBER 20TH WHICH
WE DIDN'T RECEIVE, BUT IT IS PART OF THE LEVY THAT'S BEING CONSIDERED HERE TODAY. WE ALSO HAVE ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS FROM PUBLIC WORKS, WHICH WE HAVEN'T DONE IN A FEW YEARS. THIS IS FOR THE COMBINED SEWER
OVERFLOW AND METER DISCONNECT PROGRAM. THAT'S WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO GET PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS TO DISCONNECT THEIR STORMWATER DRAINAGE TO THE SANITARY SEWER AND THEY'VE STARTED ISSUING CITATIONS THAT ARE ASSESSABLE FOR THAT VIOLATION AGAIN. AND THE THIRD NEW THING IS THAT
WE HAVE THE PROLONGED VACANCY ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS. THOSE ARE REGULAR CHAPTER 2 ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS, BUT THOSE WERE ISSUED PURSUANT TO A POLICY AND ORDINANCE CHANGE ABOUT A YEAR AGO WITH WE TAKE PROPERTIES OFF THE VACANT
BUILDING REGISTRATION AFTER TWO YEARS AND INSTEAD MOVE TO ISSUING MONTHLY ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS. THOSE ARE STARTING TO NOW WORK THEIR WAY THROUGH THE PROCESS AND WE HAVE A LITTLE UNDER $400,000 THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT PROGRAM. AND I BELIEVE WE DO HAVE A PRESENTATION COMING UP FROM INSPECTION SERVICES.
IF NOT, THE NEXT BHZ CYCLE MEETING THEN THE NEXT ONE. I WOULD ALSO NOTE WITH THE TIME CHANGE THAT WE HAD, TYPICALLY THIS MEETING IS AT 1:30, THERE WERE NOTICES THAT WENT OUT THAT HAD 1:30 ON THEM, SO I WILL BE BACK AT 1:30 AND IF ANYBODY DOES APPEAR FOR THAT, I'LL BE
PREPARED TO SETTLE THOSE CASES OR IF WE'RE NOT ABLE TO SETTLE, WE WOULD RESET THEM TO NEXT YEAR TO MAKE SURE THAT WE STILL MEET THAT PUBLIC HEARING REQUIREMENT. AND I'D BE HAPPY TO STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT
PRESENTATION. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEE IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. WELCOME. >> THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING, CHAIR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. I AM CLAIRE GLEN. I'M HAMUDI SABRI'S ATTORNEY. THE CITY IS LOOKING TO ASSESS
FINES AGAINST MR. SABRI'S PROPERTY AGAINST THE CORPORATE ENTITY WHICH IS M&S PROPERTIES. AS THE COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY BE AWARE, THIS IS PERTAINING TO THE ENCAMPMENT THAT WAS ON MR MR. SABRI'S PRIVATE PROPERTY. I DID JUST WANT TO NOTE SEVERAL
THINGS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. FIRST, MR. SABRI HAS BEEN FINED PERSONALLY FOR THESE EXPENSES AND THOSE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS ARE CURRENTLY PENDING. WE HAVE AN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING SET FOR NOVEMBER 21ST IN WHICH I AM REPRESENTING MR MR. SABRI.
THE CITY ALSO IN ADDITION SUED MR. SABRI FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DAMAGES IN DISTRICT COURT. I'M REPRESENTING MR. SABRI IN THAT CASE AND MARK COLLENBRIDGE IS ALSO REPRESENTING THE CORPORATE ENTITY IN THAT CASE.
WE ACTUALLY HAD A HEARING JUST THIS MORNING. WE HAD NO NOTICE OF THIS TAX LEVY. AS YOU HEARD, THERE WAS ONE EXCEPTION TO THE HEARING THAT WAS PROVIDED APPARENTLY TO EVERYONE ELSE. MR. SABRI, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING
THAT HE WAS THAT EXCEPTION. SO MR. SABRI WAS NOT PROVIDED ANY OPPORTUNITY TO DISPUTE THIS. WE JUST RECEIVED LAST NIGHT AT 4:00 P.M., AND BECAUSE I WAS WITH MY CHILD I DID NOT SEE IT UNTIL VERY LATE LAST NIGHT, A
LETTER FROM MR. McGREENO THAT WAS INDICATING THAT THIS MEETING WOULD BE HAPPENING AT 1:30 TODAY AND INDICATING THAT THAT TIME WAS INCORRECT. THAT LETTER WAS NEVER PROVIDED TO US PREVIOUSLY DESPITE THE FACT THAT I HAVE BEEN WORKING AND COMMUNICATING WITH MR
MR. McGREENO REPEATEDLY OVER THE PAST SEVERAL WEEKS ABOUT THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING THAT'S PENDING AGAINST MR. SABRI IN HIS PERSONAL CAPACITY. I'M VERY CONCERNED THAT THE CITY IS ESSENTIALLY TRYING TO TRIPLE DIP, NOT JUST DOUBLE DIP, IN
ASSESSING FINES AGAINST MR MR. SABRI AND IN THIS CASE, IT IS HAPPENING WITHOUT ANY MEANINGFUL DUE PROCESS. I UNDERSTAND MY TIME IS UP. BECAUSE I DID NOT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SUBMIT ANY WRITTEN OBJECTION, IF I MAY JUST BRIEFLY CONTINUE? >> IF YOU COULD WRAP IT UP.
QUICKLY. >> YES, JUST VERY QUICKLY JUST TO NOTE, IN THE DISTRICT COURT CASE WHICH WE HAD A HEARING IN THIS MORNING, IT IS UNDISPUTED THAT MR. SABRI WAS REQUESTING FROM THE CITY TRASH, SANITATION, AND PORT-A-POTTY SERVICES AT THE
ENCAMPMENT. AND IT IS UNDISPUTED THAT THE CITY REFUSED TO PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES. IT'S ALSO UNDISPUTED THAT MR. SABRI PAID OUT OF HIS OWN POCKET TO GET PORT-A-POTTIES AND
THE CITY HAD THEM REMOVED. SO ESSENTIALLY ASSESSING THESE FINES AGAINST HIS CORPORATE ENTITY AT THE SAME TIME THE CITY IS GOING AFTER HIM PERSONALLY ON MULTIPLE DIFFERENT VENUES AT THE SAME TIME ON TOP OF THE FACT THAT MR. SABRI ATTEMPTED TO HAVE
THESE COSTS MITIGATED THROUGH PROACTIVE SERVICES AND NOW THE CITY IS TRYING TO ASSESS THESE ON THE BACK END IS JUST SIMPLY UNFAIR. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU. >> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? I SEE MR. SABRI WALKING, DO
YOU --? ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE. SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. I HAD A QUESTION FOR STAFF. THE PROLONGED VACANCY
ENFORCEMENT IS A NEW TOOL THAT THE CITY HAS PUT INTO PLACE RECENTLY. THIS CITY COUNCIL BASED AN ORDINANCE I BELIEVE LAST YEAR AND NOW THIS YEAR IT'S GONE INTO EFFECT. I KNOW THERE'S SEVERAL PROPERTIES BEING ASSESSED THESE MONTHLY INCREASES FOR VACANCY.
AND I'M WONDERING WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THEY'RE NOT PAID AND THE REASON I ASK IS BECAUSE OF PROPERTY THAT WE'LL BE DISCUSSING LATER IN THE AGENDA HAS I THINK TENS OF THOUSANDS OF UNPAID PROLONGED VACANCY ENFORCEMENT FEES. SO WHAT DOES HAPPEN IN THAT CASE?
>> YEAH, CHAIR OSMAN AND COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN. SO PEOPLE DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO PAY THAT TO THE CITY AS AN ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION AS THEY'RE RECEIVING IT. AND IF IT'S UNPAID AT THE END OF THE YEAR, IT GOES ON THE TAXES WHICH IS WHAT THIS ITEM IS ABOUT.
IT KIND OF DEPENDS, BUT WE PUT IT ON THE TAXES AND IF IT'S NOT PAID, EVENTUALLY THE PROPERTY OWNER WILL LOSE THE PROPERTY IN TAX FORFEITURE WHICH COULD TAKE 3 TO 5 YEARS. WE DO RECEIVE PAYMENTS FOR THE COUNTY IF WE GET THOSE PAYMENTS.
BUT IT DOES TAKE A LITTLE WHILE TO RECOOP THAT MONEY. >> THANKS. IT'S JUST A LITTLE BIT OF A CONCERN BECAUSE IN SO MANY OF THESE CASES, AT LEAST THE ONES IN MY WARD, THE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE UNREACHABLE AND SOMETIMES NOT MAKING THESE PAYMENTS. SO I AM GLAD TO HEAR THAT
THERE'S A PROCESS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT DOES GET PAID OR THAT THE CITY HAS THE AUTHORITY TO TAKE SOME ACTION LATER ON WHEN IT GOES UNPAID. THAT'S THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD. THANKS. >> THANK YOU. JUST A QUICK QUESTION. IF YOU CAN ADDRESS THE POINT
THAT WAS RAISED ABOUT SOMEBODY NOT RECEIVING A NOTICE. IS THERE ANYTHING YOU CAN TELL US ON THAT? >> FOR SURE, CHAIR OSMAN. SO WE DID SEND A NOTICE OCTOBER 3RD TO M&S PROPERTIES, THE OWNER OF THAT LOT WITH THE
INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT THE ASSESSMENT WAS FOR, HOW MUCH IT WAS FOR, AND HOW TO SUBMIT A WRITTEN OBJECTION. THAT WASN'T RETURNED BY THE POST OFFICE. SO IT'S PRESUMED TO HAVE BEEN DELIVERED. I DID SEND YESTERDAY AN EMAIL AND I CALLED MR. SABRI'S
ATTORNEY WHICH I NOTICED THAT THE TIME WAS INCORRECT AND IT DOES APPEAR THAT THEY ARE HERE. I DO WANT TO CLARIFY, THANKS FOR ASKING ME THE QUESTION. SO THERE ARE, AS MS. GLEN WAS SAYING, THREE DIFFERENT ISSUES THAT ARE OBVIOUSLY ALL RELATED, BUT THEY ARE DIFFERENT ISSUES WHERE WE HAVE THE PUBLIC HEALTH
CLEAN UP AND THAT WAS CONDUCTED UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES CHAPTER 145A AND WE SENT THE NOTICE TO MR. SABRI CITING THAT, GIVING HIM AN OPPORTUNITY TO CLEAN UP THE PROPERTY. HE DIDN'T DO THAT BY THE DUE DATE, SO THE CITY ULTIMATELY WENT OUT AND DID THE CLEAN UP
AND THAT'S WHAT THE ASSESSMENT IS FOR. SEPARATE FROM THAT, THERE ARE ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS THAT ARE ISSUED BY THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT FOR THE NONCOMPLIANCE. AND THERE IS A HEARING SCHEDULED FOR THAT ON NOVEMBER 21ST. WE DO HAVE A PRE-HEARING CONFERENCE SCHEDULED WITH A HEARING OFFICER THIS AFTERNOON
TO GO OVER SOME OF THOSE LEGAL ISSUES. AND THEN THERE IS ALSO THIRDLY, THE LAWSUIT INITIATED BY THE CITY IN DISTRICT COURT. SO THERE'S THREE DIFFERENT ISSUES THAT ARE ALSO OBVIOUSLY A LITTLE BIT RELATED, BUT THEY'RE NOT THE SAME. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
I THINK THERE'S MORE QUESTIONS. I RECOGNIZE VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY. >> THANK YOU, MR. McGREENO FOR ANSWERING SOME QUESTIONS. I'M GOING TO HAVE YOU REPEAT YOURSELF ON WHAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING IS FOR ON THE 21st. >> YES.
SO CHAIR OSMAN AND COUNCILMEMBER CHOWDHURY, THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT ISSUED ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS FOR VIOLATION OF CITY ORDINANCES AND STATE STATUTE PRIOR TO THE LOT BEING CLEANED UP. THERE'S OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I THINK 6 OR 7 THAT WERE TIMELY
APPEALED AND THOSE WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING NEXT WEEK. >> OKAY. SO DIFFERENT PART OF OUR CODE? >> YES, THAT'S CORRECT. >> OKAY. AND THEN MY NEXT QUESTION IS FOR THE PUBLIC HEALTH CLEAN UPS THAT OCCURRED ON JULY 25TH AND
SEPTEMBER 16TH, WAS M&S PROPERTIES NOTIFIED THAT THE CLEAN UP WAS GOING TO HAPPEN? AND IF THEY DIDN'T CLEAN UP THEY WOULD BE ASSESSED FOR IT BEFORE THE CLEAN UP OCCURRED? >> CHAIR OSMAN AND COUNCILMEMBER CHOWDHURY, YEAH, THE HEALTH
DEPARTMENT SENT A NOTICE TO MR. SABRI AT HIS ADDRESS CITING THE STATE STATUTES FOR THE PUBLIC HEALTH CLEAN UP AND SAYING THAT IF IT WEREN'T COMPLETE BY A CERTAIN DATE THAT THE CITY WOULD DO IT AND ULTIMATELY WE DID END UP COMPLETING THAT, OR THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENDED UP COMPLETING THE CLEAN UP.
>> THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN THIS LETTER DATED OCTOBER 3, 2025. >> THAT IS THE SAME MATTER, THAT'S THE CLEAN UP. >> BUT IT'S SEPARATE LETTERS? SO THERE WAS, I PRESUME, A NOTICE OF SOME TYPE BEFORE THE 25TH OF JULY, AND A NOTICE OF
SOME TYPE BEFORE SEPTEMBER 16TH? >> YES, THAT'S CORRECT. >> THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN THIS LETTER THAT IS REMINDING THEM THAT THE CLEAN UP HAD OCCURRED AND THIS IS A NOTICE OF INTENT TO ASSESS? >> YES, THAT'S CORRECT. >> OKAY. GREAT. AND THEN THIS IS JUST A QUESTION
FOR OUR ATTORNEYS BECAUSE THERE WAS A STATEMENT MADE ABOUT TRIPLE DIPPING. I JUST WANTED TO HEAR FROM YOU. THE CITY'S ABILITY TO ASSESS THIS SPECIFIC PUBLIC HEALTH CLEAN UP AND WHY WE'RE ABLE TO
DO THAT? >> THANK YOU. THROUGH THE CHAIR, COUNCILMEMBER, I THINK NICK SUMMED IT UP QUITE CORRECTLY, THAT THEY ARE THREE SEPARATE LAWS WE'RE OPERATING UNDER. ONE FOR THE INJUNCTION TO STOP
THE BEHAVIOR ON THE PROPERTY. ONE THAT IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION FOR CIRCUMSTANCES OCCURRING AT THE PROPERTY. AND THIS ONE WHICH IS COSTS OF CLEANING UP THE CIRCUMSTANCE AT THE PROPERTY. THEY ARE THREE SEPARATE ISSUES. >> THANK YOU.
AND THEN IS THERE ANY APPEALS PROCESS FOR THIS TYPE OF ASSESSMENT OR ANY TYPE OF APPEALS PROCESS OR RECOURSE? >> YEAH, CHAIR OSMAN AND COUNCILMEMBER CHOWDHURY. AFTER THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFIES
THE LEVY, THE PROPERTY OWNER CAN APPEAL THE DECISION TO THE COURT OF APPEALS. THAT'S JUST SPECIFICALLY FOR THE ASSESSMENT. >> OKAY. GREAT. SEEING ALL OF THAT INFORMATION WHILE IT IS A HEFTY AMOUNT, I
DON'T SEE A REASON WHY WE SHOULDN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS AND SO I WILL MOVE THIS FORWARD FOR APPROVAL. >> THANK YOU. SEEING NONE, WITH THAT MOTION
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] AND THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT, OUR NEXT ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM OUR LAST MEETING ON OCTOBER 28TH.
THIS IS AN APPEAL CONCERNING THE JOHN COOK HOUSE AT 948 18th AVENUE. I WELCOME A RECAP FROM LAST MEETING.
>> YES, GOOD MORNING. I'M ANDREA BURKE AND I SERVE AS THE SUPERVISOR OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION TEAM AND CPED. I'M HERE THIS MORNING TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON THE AGENDA ITEM CONCERNING THE APPEAL OF THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION'S DECISION TO DENY DEMOLITION OF THE COOK HOUSE
LOCATED AT 948 18th AVENUE NORTHEAST. THIS PROPERTY IS A DESIGNATED HISTORIC LANDMARK IN MINNEAPOLIS. AS WAS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, THE ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 28TH BHZ COMMITTEE MEETING. AND DURING THAT MEETING, COUNCIL
MEMBERS REQUESTED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING VACANCY AT THE PROPERTY. I WILL NOW ADDRESS THE THREE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS THAT WERE RAISED. NUMBER ONE, HOW MANY FINES HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE PROPERTY OWNER SINCE THE BUILDING WAS PLACED ON THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRY IN 2014?
REC SERVICES HAS ASSESSED A TOTAL OF $17,948. THESE INCLUDE CHARGES UNDER THE VACANT BUILDING PROGRAM, THE PROLONGED VACANCY ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM, HOUSING INSPECTION CITATIONS AND NUISANCE-RELATED
FEES. THE SECOND QUESTION WAS WHAT IS THE CURRENT FEE STRUCTURE UNDER THE PROLONGED VACANCY ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM. THE MONTHLY FEE FOR PROPERTIES UNDER PVE IS CURRENTLY $2,000. AND IN ADDITION LATE FEES OF $200 PER CITATION ARE APPLIED
WHEN PAYMENTS ARE NOT MADE ON TIME. AND THE THIRD QUESTION IS IS THE CITY CURRENTLY ENFORCING THE PROLONGED VACANCY ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM AT THIS PROPERTY? YES, ENFORCEMENT UNDER THE PROGRAM HAS BEEN IN EFFECT AT 948 18th AVENUE NORTHEAST SINCE
DECEMBER 3, 2024. THE DECISION BEFORE YOU TODAY IS WHETHER TO GRANT OR NOT GRANT THE APPEAL OF THE HPC'S DENIAL, THE DEMOLITION APPLICATION FOR THE COOK HOUSE. THIS CONCLUDES MY UPDATE. I AM AVAILABLE TO UPDATE ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. SO WE ARE CONTINUING TO TAKE THE PUBLIC HEARING. JUST A REMINDER, IF YOU HAVE SPOKEN LAST MEETING, PLEASE JUST WAIT.
RIGHT NOW I WILL RECOGNIZE AMANDA T. TO COME AND SPEAK.
>> THANKS SO MUCH. MY NAME IS AMANDA TEMPLE. I REPRESENT MYSELF AND MY SPOUSE. WE LIVE ON THE 1700 BLOCK OF TYLER STREET NORTHEAST IN MINNEAPOLIS. WE'VE LIVED ON THE SAME BLOCK AS THE JOHN COOK HOUSE FOR MORE THAN 24 YEARS. WE'VE PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED A LETTER TO THE HPC WHICH SHOULD ALREADY BE PART OF THE RECORD
FOR THIS ISSUE AND WE CONTINUE TO STAND BY OUR STATEMENTS OF THAT LETTER. WE WOULD LIKE TO ADD A FEW ADDITIONAL POINTS REGARDING THE STATEMENT MADE BY THE APPEL APPELLANT'S REPRESENTATIVE DURING THE PREVIOUS MEETING IN ORDER TO CORRECT THE RECORD. MR. STEIN STATED THE BUILDING WAS IN ROUGH SHAPE IN 2014 WHEN IT WAS PUT ON THE VBR.
HOWEVER IT WAS UPDATED WITH A NEW ROOF IN 2018 AND WEATHER TYPE PRIOR TO THE SALE TO THE CURRENT OWNER. ADDITIONALLY PHOTOGRAPHS INCLUDED WITH THE STAFF REPORT FROM AROUND THE SAME TIME CLEARLY SHOW THAT THE INTERIOR DWELLING WAS INTACT. AS MINNEAPOLIS RESIDENTS WHO SPEND A GREAT DEAL OF OUR LIVES
IN CLOSE PROXIMITY WITH THE COOK HOUSE, WE WOULD DISAGREE WITH THE ASSERTION THAT THE CLIENT HAS MADE SIGNIFICANT EFFORTS TO MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY. ALL RENOVATION WORK ON THE PROPERTY CEASED ONCE THE CURRENT OWNER TOOK POSSESSION. THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS NOT SECURED THE BUILDING FROM TRESPASSERS, NOT PERFORMED
PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE AND HAS NOT KEPT UP WITH EFFORTS TO KEEP THE BUILDING WEATHER TIGHT. THE VACANT BUILDING STAFF REPORT REFLECTS SOME OF THE WORK THE CITY HAS COMPLETED BECAUSE THE OWNER FAILED TO ACT. THERE'S STILL ACTIVE PENDING ACTIONS REGARDING TRASH ON THE SITE.
THE 311 REPORTS ON THE PROPERTY HAVE INCREASED AND THE LIMITED SCOPE OF ENFORCEMENT HAS NOT ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED THE ISSUES OF TRESPASS AND OPEN WINDOWS ABOVE THE FIRST FLOOR. REGARDLESS OF TODAY'S OUTCOME, THIS PROPERTY DESERVES TO BE CARED FOR AND THE OWNERS HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE SAFETY OF THAT PROPERTY AND THE COMMUNITY. I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
>> THANK YOU. NEXT PERSON IS ANNA.
>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS ANNA McKELLUM, I'M ACTUALLY A ST. PAUL RESIDENT AND CAME ACROSS THIS HOUSE OVER FIVE YEARS AGO WHILE GOING DOWN CENTRAL AVENUE AND PASSING 18th TO GO TO A STORE. AND I LOVE OLD HOUSES, BUT SOMETHING ABOUT THIS HOUSE
REALLY STRUCK ME. I HAD BEEN IN CONTACT WITH KEVIN RIKE WHEN I FOUND OUT IT WAS GOING TO BE CONDEMNED AND HOPED THAT IT WOULD BE SAVED AND WAS REALLY HAPPY THAT IT WAS SAVED AND PUT ON THE HISTORIC REGISTRY. NOW YOU FAST FORWARD FOUR AND A HALF, 5 YEARS, I DRIVE BY THIS
HOUSE EVERY WEEK JUST TO KEEP AN EYE ON IT. I HAVE A REAL PASSION FOR THIS HOUSE. IT'S BEAUTIFUL DESPITE ALL OF THE BOARDED WINDOWS AND THE CHIPPING PAINT AND THERE'S SOMETHING THAT EXUDES HISTORIC INTEGRITY ON THIS HOUSE. OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS, I'VE
BEEN GOING BY WEEKLY. I'VE SEEN THAT THE YARD, THE HOUSE HAS NOT BEEN KEPT UP IN EVEN BASIC CONDITION. THERE'S FINES FOR THINGS LIKE GRASS NOT BEING CUT WHICH IS JUST A BASIC HOME OWNERSHIP THING. WE TALKED ABOUT THE FINE SCHEDULE, AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S ENOUGH JUST TO ASSESS
FINES. I DON'T THINK THAT IS INCENTIVE ENOUGH FOR THIS OWNER TO TAKE CARE OF THE PROPERTY, ESPECIALLY A HISTORIC PROPERTY. I HAD SENT A LENGTHY EMAIL WHICH I'M NOT GOING TO REITERATE HERE. BUT I DO A LOT OF HISTORIC WORK, AND I DO MINNESOTA HISTORY DAY FOR STUDENTS AND COMMUNICATE THE
IMPORTANCE OF PRESERVING OUR HISTORY. AND ONE THING I WROTE IN MY EMAIL WAS THAT SINCE THE '50s WE'VE SEEN MASSIVE DEMOLITION OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES ACROSS MINNEAPOLIS, ACROSS ST. PAUL. AND THEN IN THE '70s, AND '80s WE CREATED HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS LIKE THE ONE YOU
HAVE HERE TO MAKE SURE THAT BUILDINGS AREN'T OBLITERATED SO OUR HISTORY LIVES ON. THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THINGS LIKE THE ART GODFREY HOUSE HERE TO TEACH OUR STUDENTS AND FUTURE GENERATIONS ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF OUR HISTORY AND THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE
COME BEFORE THEM AND CREATED BEAUTIFUL NEIGHBORHOODS LIKE NORTHEAST MINNEAPOLIS. SO I ASK THE COMMITTEE TO PLEASE CONSIDER PRESERVING THIS BEAUTIFUL HOUSE FOR OUR OWN AND FUTURE GENERATIONS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU.
ARE THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK WHO IS ON THE FLOOR? I SEE THE APPLICANT HERE. I KNOW YOU SPEAK, BUT SOME OF THE MEMBERS WHO WERE NOT HERE, IF YOU CAN WRAP IT UP IN TWO
MINUTES. >> ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU, CHAIR, COUNCIL MEMBERS. JACOB STEIN. I WANT TO JUST ADDRESS THE MEMO THAT YOU DID RECEIVE FROM STAFF. AND IT DOES INCLUDE SOME I THINK GOOD INFORMATION. AND UNFORTUNATELY I THINK THAT MEMO ACTUALLY UNDERSCORES
EXACTLY THE POINT THAT MY CLIENT HAS BEEN TRYING TO MAKE. IT IDENTIFIES NEARLY $75,000 IN ASSESSMENTS AND REALLY UNDERSCORES THAT THIS HAS NOT BEEN WHAT'S BEEN ASSERTED AS A DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT, BUT IN
FACT A DEMOLITION BY RED TAPE. IT FURTHER DEMONSTRATES THAT THE CITY HAS DONE EVERYTHING WITHIN ITS POWER TO MAKE ABATEMENT OF THIS NUISANCE, WHICH THE CITY HAS IDENTIFIED AS A NUISANCE IMPOSSIBLE. I WOULD NOTE THIS BUILDING WAS ON THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRY FOR FIVE YEARS, AND $20,000 OF
THOSE FINES OCCURRED BEFORE MY CLIENT EVEN ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY BECAUSE THIS PROPERTY WAS IN FACT ON THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRY BECAUSE IT WAS VACANT AND BOARDED. $47,000 OF THOSE FINES OCCURRED AFTER IT WAS NOT JUST CONDEMNED
FIRST BY THE CITY, BUT THEN DESIGNATED AS A CONDEMNED BUILDING BY THE CITY. AND I THINK MOST DISTURBING OF ALL, $20,000, MORE THAN A QUARTER OF THOSE FINES HAVE OCCURRED AFTER THIS APPLICATION BEFORE YOU TODAY WAS MADE. SO WE'VE MADE THE APPLICATION
AND ARE GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS THAT IS AVAILABLE UNDER THE CITY'S CODE AND THE CITY CONTINUES TO ASSESS FINES. NOT ONLY IS THAT UNHELPFUL AND PROBLEMATIC FOR FINDING A SOLUTION, WHICH WE'D VERY MUCH LIKE TO DO, BUT IT'S UNJUST, AND IT'S UNFAIR.
AS A REMINDER, YOU CAN'T SIMPLY JUST PULL A PERMIT FOR A CONDEMNED BUILDING ON THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRY. THERE'S A PROCESS AND A GRIEVANCE THAT YOU HAVE TO ENTER INTO. AND SIMILARLY, YOU CAN'T JUST GO AND PULL A PERMIT FOR EXTERIOR REPAIRS. YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH A HEARING FOR A CERTIFICATE OF
APPROPRIATENESS. SO THERE IS JUST LAYER AND LAYER OF ADDITIONAL PROCESS AND ADDING $75,000 TO THE COSTS, I THINK VERY MUCH EMPHASIZES THE CHALLENGE HERE. AND I THINK ONE THING I WOULD ALSO NOTE IS MR. McGREENO STATED
YOU'RE ONLY INCENTIVIZING THIS TO GO TO TAX FORFEITURE. NOBODY WANTS THIS TO HAPPEN. WE'D LOVE TO WORK WITH THE CITY COUNCIL AND WITH THE CITY. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. IS ANYONE ELSE? NO?
YES, PLEASE, COME ON IN. >> THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME. I WAS HERE LAST TIME AND I JUST WANT TO -- >> DID YOU SPEAK LAST TIME? >> NO, YOUR TIME IS UP. THANK YOU, APPRECIATE IT. I DECIDED TO LET HIM SPEAK
BECAUSE SOME OF THE MEMBERS WERE NOT HERE. ANYWAYS, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND -- I'LL REOPEN THE
PUBLIC HEARING. GO AHEAD, YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. >> MY NAME IS CATHERINE KEMP. I LIVE IN NORTHEAST MINNEAPOLIS NEAR THE COOK HOUSE AND HAVE FOUND IT TO BE A VALUABLE PART OF OUR COMMUNITY. AND I AM VERY PLEASED THAT OUR
COMMUNITY WAS ABLE TO REQUEST THAT IT BECOME DESIGNATED HISTORIC. I UNDERSTAND THE NECESSITY OF BUILDING OUR COMMUNITY INCLUDING BUILDING NEW BUILDINGS AND THAT THIS DEMOLITION MIGHT HELP THERE
BE ENOUGH PHYSICAL SPACE FOR THE TRUCKS AND THINGS THAT WOULD NEED TO BE PARKED WHILE PUTTING NEW BUILDINGS UP ALONG CENTRAL AVENUE WHICH IS THE NEXT STREET OVER AND ACROSS THE ALLEY FROM WHERE THE COOK HOUSE IS.
OF COURSE OUR COMMUNITY WANTS TO BUILD AND GROW. WE ALSO WANT TO MAINTAIN OUR HISTORY AND RESPECT OUR HISTORY AND KNOW THAT THAT HOUSE WAS PART OF BUILDING THE NORTHEAST
COMMUNITY AND THAT THOSE WERE IMMIGRANTS IN THE SCANDINAVIAN AREA THAT LIVED HERE LONG AGO AND WORKED HARD IN LOW WAGE WORK AND I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT
THAT WE RESPECT THIS AND BRING THINGS OUT. I THINK THE COMMUNITY WOULD BE INTERESTED IN BUILDING UP THIS, SHORING UP THIS BUILDING AND SAVING ITS HISTORIC PRESERVATION. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND I JUST HAD A FEW QUESTIONS
FOR THE STAFF OR MAYBE THE APPLICANT. SO I'M LOOKING AT THE PICTURES THAT WAS PROVIDED. THE BUILDING LOOKS IN VERY BAD SHAPE.
AND IF I'M RIGHT, I HEARD THIS BUILDING HAS BEEN VACANT FOR SINCE 2014, SO 11-12 YEARS.
AND 2019 AROUND THAT TIME, WAS DESIGNATED AS HISTORICAL SITE WHICH NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE EVER SINCE OF THAT. AND THE CITY CONTINUED TO GIVE FINES AND NOTHING HAS BEEN
IMPROVED EITHER IMPROVING OR FIXING THE BUILDING. IS THAT ACCURATE? >> CHAIR OSMAN, THAT IS CORRECT. IT WAS PLACED ON THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRATION IN 2014.
FORMER COUNCILMEMBER RIKE HAD SUBMITTED A NOMINATION, I BELIEVE IT WAS 2019 OR 2020, I THINK 2020, AND THEN THE HPC RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE DESIGNATION AND SO DID THE CITY COUNCIL. BUT IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT
THERE HAS BEEN ANY MUCH WORK THAT WAS DONE ON THE PROPERTY SINCE THEN. THANK YOU. >> AND I GUESS THERE WAS A NEW OWNER. DID THE OWNER TAKE OVER AFTER IT
WAS DESIGNATED OR BEFORE IT WAS DESIGNATED? CAN YOU TELL ME ABOUT THAT? >> YEAH, CHAIR OSMAN, THE CURRENT OWNER WAS THE OWNER WHEN FORMER COUNCILMEMBER RIKE SUBMITTED THE NOMINATION TO
RECOMMEND, REQUEST DESIGNATION TO HAVE THE PROPERTY. >> AND WAS THERE ANY CONVERSATION NOTICES THAT'S REQUIRED FOR THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO RECEIVE BUILDING BEING DESIGNATED AS A HISTORIC SITE? >> CHAIR OSMAN, YES, STAFF
REACHED OUT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER IN WRITTEN FORM MULTIMILLION TIM-- MULTIPLE TIM BUT I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT NUMBER TO NOTIFY THEM OF THE DESIGNATION. PHONE CALLS WERE MADE TO INVITE THEM INTO THE HEARINGS THAT WERE
HAPPENING, BUT STAFF DID NOT RECEIVE A RESPONSE FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER AFTER ATTEMPTS TO REACH THEM WERE MADE. >> OKAY. I THINK JUST FOR ME A BUILDING
BEING THIS VACANT AND LAST WEEK WE HEARD THAT THE APPLICANT SAID IT'S NOT FEASIBLE TO FIX IT.
WE'RE TRYING TO MEET A GOAL HERE. DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE PLAN IS OR MAYBE THEY CAN ANSWER, IF THEY RECEIVE THIS DEMOLITION, WHAT IS THE PLAN ON THE BUILDING? IS THERE SOME KIND OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN THEY HAVE? OR HAVE YOU HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT THE FUTURE LOOK OF THIS SITE?
>> I'M GOING TO ASK A QUESTION OF CLARIFICATION. LET ME REITERATE THE QUESTION, WHAT IS THE PLAN IF DEMOLITION IS APPROVED? WHAT IS THE NEXT STEP? >> YES. >> I DO BELIEVE PROBABLY THE ATTORNEY OR IF THE OWNER IS HERE WOULD BE BEST BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT.
>> THANK YOU. >> CHAIR OSMAN, COUNCIL MEMBERS. WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS IF WE DO GET THE APPROVAL TO DEMOLISH THE BUILDING, OUR INTENT WOULD BE TO FOLLOW THROUGH ON THAT AND BRING FORWARD THE DEMOLITION.
THIS WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED OR INTENDED TO BE PART OF A REDEVELOPMENT AS ONE OF THE FORMER SPEAKERS INDICATED. SO THE GOAL WOULD BE TO CONSTRUCT PRESUMABLY A NEW HOME ON THE PROPERTY. AND I DO WANT TO CLARIFY THE
TIMELINE TOO. IT WAS ACTUALLY 2014 IT BECAME ON THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRY. 2019 IT WAS ACQUIRED. 2020 IT WAS CONDEMNED. THEN A YEAR LATER IT WAS DESIGNATED. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. THAT'S IT FOR MY QUESTIONS. I WILL RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER
CA CASHMAN. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. AND FOR THE APPELLANT'S ATTORNEY, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU TOO. MR. STEIN. WHY DID YOUR CLIENT PURCHASE THIS HOME? >> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. AT THE TIME IT HAD BE ON THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRY FOR
FIVE YEARS. HE WAS BRINGING FORWARD A DEVELOPMENT IMMEDIATELY ACROSS THE ALLEY. IT WAS, I THINK IT'S A FORMER BURGER KING. IT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD FOR A REDEVELOPMENT SITE, OR THE ENTIRE SITE WAS ONE REDEVELOPMENT. THE INTENT WAS TO DEMOLISH THIS
BUILDING. IT WAS DERELICT, IT HAD BE ON THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRY FOR A LONG TIME. AFTER HE BOUGHT IT, IT WAS CONDEMNED. AT THE TIME HE DIDN'T HAVE AN OBJECTION TO THAT BECAUSE THAT WAS HIS INTENT WAS TO ABATE THE NUISANCE. IT WASN'T UNTIL AFTER IT WAS CONDEMNED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE
PANDEMIC THAT IT WAS DESIGNATED. AND I WOULD NOTE THAT WHILE WE HAVE HEARD THERE WERE INDICATIONS THAT HE WAS CONTACTED, HE WAS NOT AWARE THIS WAS BEING DESIGNATED. AND THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IF HE UNDERSTOOD THE IMPLICATIONS HE WOULD HAVE
AGREED TO. PARTICULARLY GIVEN THE IRREPARABLE CONDITION OF THE BUILDING AT THE TIME. >> HOW MUCH DID HE BUY IT FOR AT THE TIME? >> I BELIEVE IT WAS $240,000. >> OKAY. AND WHY HASN'T HE PAID THE $19,325 IN FINES? >> IS THAT THE FINES THAT HAVE
BEEN LEVIED SINCE THIS APPEAL STARTED? THE FINES THAT WERE LEVIED SINCE THIS APPEAL STARTED, WE ASSUMED WOULD BE STAYED. WE WERE NOT AWARE THAT THE CITY WAS GOING TO CONTINUE TO LEVY US AS WE WERE WALKING THROUGH YOUR PROCESS TO DEMOLISH IT.
THE DEMOLITION OR THE ORDERS SAID THAT WE WERE TO ABATE THE NUISANCE, SO WE APPLIED FOR THE DEMOLITION PERMIT TO THE HPC. AND ULTIMATELY AT THIS POINT AS I NOTED, IT'S GOING TO COST $1.5 MILLION TO REPAIR THIS
BUILDING, WE'RE BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE. MR. DEBRILL VERY MUCH UNDERSTANDS THE SITUATION AND THAT WE ARE STUCK BETWEEN EFFECTIVELY TWO FACTIONS IN THE COMMUNITY, ONE THAT WANTS TO SEE THIS BUILDING DOWN AND ONE THAT WANTS TO SEE IT UP. THERE HAVE BEEN OFFERS TO BUY
THIS FOR PENNIES ON THE DOLLAR. AND I THINK THAT'S THE CHALLENGE IS THIS IS REALLY INCENTIVIZING A LOSS, A SIGNIFICANT LOSS BY MY CLIENT AND THE CITY'S FURTHER CITATIONS WILL CONTINUE TO INCENTIVIZE THAT. >> AND WHY HASN'T HE ACCEPTED
THE OFFERS TO MAKE THIS SOMEONE ELSE'S PROBLEM? >> WELL, THERE'S ALWAYS SOMEBODY TO BUY IT FOR A DOLLAR, RIGHT? I THINK THAT HE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO ACCEPT A LOSS. THAT IS A SIGNIFICANT PROPERTY VALUE AND HE SHOULD NOT BE
COMPELLED BY THE GOVERNMENT TO GIVE UP HIS PROPERTY. >> IT'S NOT OUR JOB TO MAKE SURE THAT HE GETS A RETURN EITHER. I MEAN THAT WAS NOT A SMART INVESTMENT TO MAKE. >> WELL, IT WAS VERY DIFFERENT INVESTMENT BACKED EXPECTATIONS
WHEN HE ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY THAT WAS ON THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRY, IT WAS ALSO DIFFERENT WHEN THE BUILDING WAS CONDEMNED. IT WAS ONLY WHEN THE CITY ON ITS OWN VOLITION DESIGNATED IT AS A LANDMARK, A CONDEMNED GEM THAT
IT BECAME PROBLEMATIC FOR HIM. >> I BELIEVE IF THIS WAS SOLD FOR PENNIES ON THE DOLLAR THAT SOMEBODY WOULD BE WILLING TO MAKE THIS COMMITMENT TO RESTORATION ON THE BUILDING. WE DON'T KNOW THAT SOMEONE WOULDN'T BE WILLING TO DO THAT. >> WHAT'S SO CONCERNING IS THAT
THE CITY IS USING ITS PUNITIVE POWERS TO TRY TO COMPEL THE LOSS OF THIS PROPERTY BY MY CLIENT. THAT IS VERY CONCERNING AND WE'D LIKE TO COLLABORATIVELY WORK WITH THE CITY. WE'VE REACHED OUT TO THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, SPOKE WITH COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAYNE'S OFFICE
YESTERDAY. WE'D LOVE TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE CITY. BUT THE TRUTH IS THERE'S NO WAY THAT YOU COULD USE PRIVATE DOLLARS TO HAVE THIS THING BE ANYTHING OTHER THAN UPSIDE DOWN AND UNDERWATER. >> WHAT DOES COLLABORATION WITH THE CITY LOOK LIKE FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE? JUST DEMOLITION? >> I THINK OUR GOAL TO DEMOLISH
WOULD BE, THE REASONABLE WE WANT TO DEMOLISH IT IS TO STOP THE BLEEDING. IF THERE WAS A WAY TO MAKE MY CLIENT WHOLE OR AT LEAST PARTIALLY WHOLE, I THINK WE'D HAPPILY ENGAGE WITH THE CITY. I UNDERSTAND THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE A LOT OF DOLLARS FOR ACQUISITION, BUT IF THERE WAS A POSSIBILITY TO GET WHAT HE PUT
INTO THIS OR AT LEAST CLOSE TO THIS, I THINK WE WOULD ABSOLUTELY ENTERTAIN THAT AND WE MADE THAT OFFER TO THE COUNCIL MEMBER. AND WE'RE COUNTOUSLY -- CONTINUOUSLY DISCUSSING WITH MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY. THERE'S ALWAYS SOMEBODY WILLING
TO TAKE IT FOR A SUM, BUT MY CLIENT SHOULDN'T HAVE TO BE COMPELLED TO GIVE UP HIS PROPERTY FOR PENNIES. >> I GUESS I JUST FIND IT SAD THAT THE PROPERTY IS NOW BEING GIVEN UP JUST THE VALUE HERE IS HOW MUCH CAN THIS OWNER GET PROFIT OUT OF THIS BUILDING. >> TRUST ME THERE WILL BE NO
PROFIT. >> BUT IT HAS VALUE BEYOND PROFIT. IT HAS HISTORICAL VALUE. >> WELL, I THINK THAT THIS BUILDING WAS CONDEMNED AND DEEMED A NUISANCE AND A HAZARD TO PUBLIC HEALTH BEFORE IT WAS DEEMED TO BE A LANDMARK.
SO I THINK THAT THE CITY'S OWN SPECTERS WOULD AGREE THAT THIS IS NECESSARY, THE DEMOLITION IS NECESSARY TO REMEDY AN UNSAFE CONDITION. >> THANKS FOR YOUR ANSWERS. AND I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MS. BURKE AS WELL. I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THIS $19,325 AND IF THE DEMOLITION IS
APPROVED, WILL THEY STILL HAVE TO PAY IT AND IF SO, WHEN WOULD PVE END? >> CHAIR OSMAN, AND COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN, FORGIVE ME. I DON'T BELIEVE I AM ABLE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. I GUESS I AM CURIOUS IF THERE IS A MEMBER OF REG SERVICES THAT
COULD ANSWER THAT QUESTION IN TERMS OF PAYMENT OF THE FINES? THANK YOU. >> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL, CHAIR OSMAN, COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY NAME IS BRIAN STARRY, FIELD MANAGER WITH REG SERVICES. I MANAGE ALL OF THE VACANT AND
BOARDED BUILDINGS THROUGHOUT THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS INCLUDING THE PROPERTY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CURRENTLY. AS FAR AS THE PROLONGED VACANCY ENFORCEMENT, THE CURRENT CHARGES
SO WHEN WE FOUND OUT ABOUT THE APPEAL, THE OWNER'S ATTORNEY DID REQUEST THAT WE PAUSE CITATIONS MOVING FORWARD UNTIL AFTER THE HEARING AND A DECISION WAS MADE. SO BASED ON OUR CONVERSATIONS WITH THE CITY'S ATTORNEYS OFFICE THAT WAS THE DIRECTIVE, SO WE
ARE CURRENTLY IN A PAUSE STATUS AS OF NOVEMBER OF THIS MONTH. SO WE DID NOT CHARGE A $2,000 CITATION BASED ON THE OUTCOME FOR THE HEARING AND A DECISION TO BE MADE.
AS FAR AS THE PAYMENT OF WHAT'S BEEN ASSESSED OR ALREADY IMPOSED, THAT WOULD BE A CONVERSATION I WOULD HAVE WITH MY BOSS TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE BEST COURSE OF ACTION WOULD BE MOVING FORWARD ON THAT. SO THERE IS NO ONE SIZE FITS
ALL. WE'RE ALWAYS GOING TO DO IMPOSE THE FINES OR IF WE WOULD WAIVE THEM IT WOULD BE DEPENDENT ON CONVERSATIONS AND WHAT THE COUNCIL REQUESTS, WHAT THE DESIRE IS FOR THE COMMUNITY AT THIS LOCATION. >> OKAY. I'LL JUST SAY I THINK THAT THEY
SHOULD HAVE TO PAY WHAT THEY'VE BEEN FINED EVEN IF DEMOLITION IS AN OUTCOME HERE WHICH WE HAVE TO EXPECT IS ONE OF THE OUTCOMES THAT COMES OUT OF PVE, EITHER IT'S REMEDIATION OR SALE OR DEMOLITION THOSE ARE KIND OF THE THREE THINGS THAT COME OUT OF A BUILDING LIKE THIS AND WE HAVE
TO EXPECT THAT THEY'LL STILL HAVE TO PAY WHAT WAS OWED FOR THE PVE DURING THE LEAD UP TO THAT. SO THOSE ARE MY $0.02 BUT OF COURSE YOU'LL MAKE THAT DECISION.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. I HAD A QUESTION FOR THE ATTORNEY. MY QUESTION WAS DID YOU SAY THAT THE PLAN IS TO BUILD A NEW HOME ON THIS PROPERTY IF IT'S TORN
DOWN? >> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. THAT IS CERTAINLY THAT WOULD BE THE LIKELY OUTCOME. AND MR. DEBRILL HAS ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THAT HE WOULD HAPPILY BUILD A PROPERTY OR EVEN A DUPLEX OR A TRIPLEX. I THINK WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT YOU CAN BUILD ON THE SITE.
ORIGINALLY THIS WAS INTENDED TO BE PART OF THE PROJECT NEXT DOOR. BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE PLAN RIGHT NOW. BUT AS OF YESTERDAY WE DISCUSSED WHAT ELSE CAN WE DO? AND I THINK WE'RE OPEN TO ALL OPTIONS. IF THAT WAS A CONDITION, I THINK WE'D HAPPILY ENTERTAIN WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE AND WE WOULD
WORK WITH STAFF TO FIND SOMETHING THAT MEETS THE CITY CODE. >> I APPRECIATE YOU SAYING THAT, BUT THAT'S NOT LIKE WHY I'M ASKING THE QUESTION. I'M ASKING THE QUESTION BECAUSE NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE TO PRESERVE AND KEEP THE PROPERTY UP TO PAR. SO I'M JUST WONDERING WHERE FUNDING IS GOING TO COME FROM
AND WITH THE PRICE OF MATERIALS AND ALL OF THE THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING RIGHT NOW AROUND BUILDING NEW PROPERTIES, A DUPLEX, A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, WHATEVER, I CAN IMAGINE IT'S GOING TO BE WELL OVER $1 MILLION TO BUILD SOMETHING NEW. SO WHERE IS THIS COMING FROM? WHERE IS THE FUNDING COMING
FROM? >> SO THE ECONOMICS ARE REALLY QUITE DIFFERENT FOR REHABILITATION VERSUS REPAIR. WHEN YOU HAVE A DESIGNATED BUILDING THAT'S BRICK IN PARTICULAR, OUR $1.5 MILLION CONTEMPLATES HAVING TO TAKE IT DOWN BRICK BY BRICK AND REPLACE
AS MANY OF THOSE WITH THE SAME BRICKS. IT'S INCREDIBLY LABOR AND CRAFTSMAN INTENSIVE PROCESS. WHEREAS A NEW BUILDING YOU DON'T HAVE THOSE SAME ISSUES. YOU DON'T HAVE LEADED PAINT, YOU DON'T HAVE ASBESTOS, YOU DON'T HAVE TO TAKE IT DOWN BRICK BY BRICK.
SO I THINK THAT WE WOULD WORK WITH EITHER MR. DEBRILL WOULD DO IT HIMSELF OR WE WOULD WORK WITH A BUILDER. THIS IS A VERY NICE PLACE TO LIVE. THIS IS A COMMUNITY. AND I THINK WE WOULD HAPPILY WORK WITH THOSE BUILDERS TO DO THAT. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT.
I LIVE IN A 103-YEAR-OLD HOUSE. MY HOUSE IS VERY OLD AND I KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE TO JUST NEED A PORCH BRICK REPLACED, RIGHT, VERSUS GETTING A BLOCK OF CEMENT AND THAT'S SOMETHING I COMMITTED TO WHEN I BOUGHT A HOUSE THAT WAS THAT OLD WAS MAKING SURE THAT I MAINTAINED IT AND I KEPT
IT WITH ITS CURB APPEAL AND CHARM NOT JUST FOR MYSELF BUT FOR THE PEOPLE WHO DRIVE BY AND SEE IT EVERY DAY AND THE PEOPLE WHO VISIT IT. AND THAT'S LIKE A HUGE COMMITMENT WHEN YOU PURCHASE A HOUSE. AND I DON'T THINK ANY OF US PURCHASE HOMES THAT OLD WITHOUT
UNDERSTANDING THAT THE INVESTMENT IN THINGS THAT CRACK OR BREAK ARE MUCH DIFFERENT THAN A NEW HOME, RIGHT? OR EVEN BUILDING A NEW HOME. SO I'M HAVING A HARD TIME WITH THIS ONE, BECAUSE YOUR CLIENT PURCHASED THIS KNOWING THAT IT
WAS AN EXTREMELY OLD HOME THAT NEEDED SOME PRESERVATION AND REPLACEMENT AND THERE'S NO WAY YOU PURCHASE THIS WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING A COMMITMENT TO THAT AND THAT IT COSTS A LOT MORE. I MEAN IT TOOK ME THREE YEARS TO FIND SOMEONE JUST TO FIX THE
PLASTER BECAUSE PEOPLE JUST DON'T DO THAT WORK ANYMORE. BUT YOU HAVE TO BE PATIENT AND YOU HAVE TO GET THE RIGHT PEOPLE AND IT COSTS A LITTLE MORE. BUT THAT'S YOUR COMMITMENT TO PURCHASING THAT. I'M REALLY HAVING A HARD TIME, IT FEELS LIKE YOU'RE TAKING THE
EASY WAY OUT ON THIS. IT'S LIKE THAT'S OLD AND IT'S DELIPIDATED, BUT YOU'RE PART OF THE REASON FOR THAT AND THEN NOW IT'S LIKE WE'RE JUST GOING TO GET SOMETHING NEW AND START FRESH AND A LOT OF US DON'T GET TO DO THAT. >> AND I THINK YOU MAKE A REALLY GOOD POINT.
THE EXPECTATION WHEN YOU BOUGHT IT IS THAT THE BUILDING WAS IN PRETTY ROUGH SHAPE. IT WOULD BE ON THE VBR FOR FIVE YEARS, THERE WAS NOTHING PROHIBITING HIM FROM DEMOLISHING, HE FULLY INTENDED TO DEMOLISH IT WITH THE ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT.
THE CITY AGREED, THEY CONDEMNED IT WITHIN A YEAR OF HIM BUYING IT. AND IT WASN'T UNTIL AFTER IT WAS CONDEMNED THAT IT WAS DESIGNATED AS A LANDMARK. AND THAT'S WHEN ALL OF A SUDDEN IT BECAME VERY CHALLENGING AND SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED THE COST BECAUSE REPAIRING THE EXTERIOR OF A DESIGNATED LANDMARK
REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING AND CRAFTSMAN. YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE SECRETARY OF INTERIORTANDARDS FOR REPAIRS. IT'S VERY LABOR INTENSIVE. VERY DIFFERENT EXPECTATIONS THAT BE WHEN HE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY. >> BUT ALSO CONDEMNED DOESN'T MEAN THE BUILDING NEEDS TO BE
TORN DOWN EITHER. THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT GET CONDEMNED THAT THE CITY IS REQUIRING YOU TO GO IN AND FIX THEM, AND FIX THEM IN A CERTAIN WAY. ESPECIALLY IF IT'S A HISTORIC LANDMARK. SO I FEEL LIKE YOU'RE USING CONDEMNED LIKE THE CITY WAS SAYING TEAR IT DOWN AND THEN THE CITY SAID NO, IT CAN STAY.
NO, THERE ARE THINGS THAT NEED TO BE FIXED IN OLDER HOMES. IT GOT DESIGNATED A HISTORIC LANDMARK. THAT DOES SET THE BAR A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. BUT AT THAT POINT IF YOU DON'T WANT TO COMMIT TO IT, YOU SELL IT. YOU GET BACK WHAT YOU PAID FOR IT AND YOU GET OUT OF IT BECAUSE
YOU KNOW THAT -- THAT IS HOW YOU MAKE DECISIONS AS A HOMEOWNER OR A PURCHASER OR WHATEVER. WHEN YOU REALIZE OKAY THIS IS A HISTORIC LANDMARK AND THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE REACHED OUT TO ME IN THIS COMMUNITY ABOUT THIS HOUSE, I'M ALMOST POSITIVE
IF HE DECIDED RIGHT AWAY THAT HE DIDN'T WANT THIS THAT THIS COMMUNITY WOULD HAVE RALLIED TOGETHER EVEN IF THEY HAD TO SET UP A GoFundMe TO GET THIS HOUSE PRESERVED AND FIXED UP FOR PURPOSES OF COMMUNITY. THESE SORTS OF THINGS.
IT'S NOT ABOUT IF A HOUSE IS GOING TO BE THERE. IT'S ABOUT HOW THEY BRING COMMUNITY TOGETHER. IT'S ABOUT THE NEIGHBOR THAT'S STANDING NEXT TO YOU AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE BEAUTIFUL CHARM YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE BRICK. IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT HAVING A HOUSE ON THIS LOT.
THIS COMMUNITY REALLY CARES ABOUT THE PRESERVATION OF THE CULTURE AND THE COMMUNITY AND HOW THIS HOUSE BRINGS THEM TOGETHER. AND I MEAN I'VE HEARD FROM PEOPLE WHO SAY WE BOUGHT A HOUSE ON THIS BLOCK BECAUSE THAT HOUSE WAS ON THIS BLOCK AND IT'S BEEN SUPER HARD TO JUST WATCH THIS
HOUSE KIND OF FALL APART RIGHT BEFORE OUR EYES AND NOT HAVE SOMEONE THAT IS DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO SAY HEY COMMUNITY, LET'S RALLY TOGETHER AND FIX IT. BUT JUST TO HAVE AN ABSENT PERSON WHO IS NOT HELPING OR NOT EVEN WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY TO TRY TO PRESERVE IT.
SO I'M NOT SAYING THAT THE EXPENSE IS NOT HUGE, IT'S A LOT. LIKE BEEN THERE, DONE THAT. IT TAKES A LOT OF MONEY TO PRESERVE THESE THINGS. BUT AT SOME POINT YOU HAVE TO DECIDE THIS IS NOT THE COMMITMENT I WANT TO MAKE AND
THAT FEELS LIKE THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN IT IN 2019 AND NOT IN 2025 TO ME. >> I ABSOLUTELY AGREE THAT, YOU'RE RIGHT THE RIGHT MOVE HERE IS TO SELL IT AND GET WHAT YOU PUT INTO IT. THIS ISN'T A MONEY MAKING
VENTURE AT THIS POINT. THE WHOLE REASON THIS APPLICATION IS BEFORE YOU IS BECAUSE WE WANT TO STOP THE BLEEDING, RIGHT? WE WANT TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO GET OUT OF THIS. BUT WE'VE GOT THESE NUISANCE ORDERS SAYING THAT YOU NEED TO ABATE THESE NUISANCES AND WE'VE
GOT THE HPC THAT TIES OUR HANDS. SO I THINK WE WOULD HAPPILY WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY, BUT THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY WHO ARE ALSO WILLING TO AGAIN JUST TAKE IT FOR A SONG. SO WE'D LOVE TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY AND EVEN THE CITY IF THERE'S A WAY TO TRY TO
AT LEAST STOP THE BLEEDING AND GET WHAT HE PUT INTO THE PROPERTY. >> THANK YOU FOR THAT. I'LL JUST END WITH YOU CAUSED THE NUISANCE. YOU KEEP SAYING YOU WANT -- LIKE IT'S A NUISANCE, YOU CAUSED IT. THE NUISANCE IS FROM YOU ALL. AS THE OWNER, YOU'RE RESPONSIBLE.
YOU KNOW, THERE'S VIOLATIONS AROUND CUTTING THE GRASS. I MEAN THAT DOESN'T FEEL NEIGHBORLY. THAT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE I WANT TO WORK WITH THIS COMMUNITY WHEN THINGS LIKE THAT ARE HAPPENING. WHEN YOU KNOW THE HOUSE NEEDS TO BE BOARDED UP, MAYBE WITH MESH BOARDING AND NOT JUST REGULAR
BOARDING BECAUSE PEOPLE KEEP GOING IN THE HOUSE. I'M SUPER ACTIVE IN THESE SORTS OF SITUATIONS IN MY COMMUNITY BECAUSE OF THESE REASONS. AND GUESS WHAT WORKS BETTER, WHEN THE PROPERTY OWNER IS WILLING TO SIT DOWN AND WORK WITH ME AND THE COMMUNITY ON MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE THE PROPER BOARDING.
AND MAKING SURE THAT THEY'RE NOT CONTINUING TO RACK UP FINES BECAUSE THERE IS GOING TO BE BLEEDING IF YOU KEEP RACKING UP FINES AND NOT DOING THE RIGHT THING. SOMETIMES THAT COST COMES ON THE FRONT END WHERE YOU HAVE TO MAKE SOME DECISIONS AND DO THE RIGHT THING. BUT I MEAN A BIG PIECE OF THIS
IS TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR ROLE AND THE PART THAT YOU ALL HAVE PLAYED IN THIS. AND IT DOESN'T FEEL COLLABORATIVE AND IT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE COMMUNITY. IT FEELS LIKE A BLAME ON THE CITY AND I'M OKAY WITH THE CITY TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHAT WE'VE DONE, BUT YOU ALL NEED TO ACTUALLY IF YOU WANT TO WORK
WITH THE CITY AND THE COMMUNITY ON THIS, THEN YOU GOT TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PARTS THAT YOU HAVE PLAYED IN MAKING THIS A REALLY BAD SITUATION FOR THIS COMMUNITY.
>> WELL, THANK YOU SO MUCH. I PUT MYSELF IN QUEUE. AND I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE APPEAL BECAUSE THERE ARE NO REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES THAT ARE FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE ON THE
PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY IS UNSAFE AND DANGEROUS CONDITION. I DIRECT STAFF TO SUPPORT THE
FINDING ACCORDINGLY. WITH THAT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. CITY CLERK, CAN YOU CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE. THANK YOU.
>> ON THE MOTION TO GRANT THE APPEAL? >> CORRECT. >> COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. >> NO. >> CASHMAN. >> NO. >> JENKINS IS COMING BACK RIGHT NOW. WOULD YOU WANT TO REVOTE
AFTER -- >> CITY CLERK, I WOULD LIKE TO WITHDRAW MY MOTION.
AND MOVE IT WITHOUT RECOMMENDATION. CALL THE ROLL NOW. >> TO SEND FORWARD WITHOUT
RECOMMENDATION. COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. >> NO. >> CASHMAN. >> AYE. >> JENKINS. >> NO. >> CHAVEZ. >> AYE. >> VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY. >> AYE. >> CHAIR OSMAN. >> AYE. >> THERE ARE FOUR AYES AND TWO
NAYS. >> THAT MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. NEXT WE HAVE -- COUNCILMEMBER
CHAVEZ. >> CHAIR OSMAN, CAN YOU CLARIFY TO THE PUBLIC WHAT IT MEANS TO MOVE IT FORWARD WITHOUT RECOMMENDATION IN CASE PEOPLE ARE CONFUSED. >> WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT THE FULL COUNCIL WILL MAKE THE FINAL DECISION.
NEXT THURSDAY MORNING 9:30 A.M. I THINK WE ARE ON THE DISCUSSION. OH SORRY.
THE LAST QUASI-JUDICIAL. SORRY. WE ARE ON OUR LAST QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING. AND IT'S A VARIANCE APPEAL FOR
PROPERTY AT 2821 BROOKWOOD TERRACE. THIS APPEAL IS SENT FROM THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. I WELCOME MILES FROM CPED TO GIVE US A PRESENTATION. WELCOME, SIR. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
AS MENTIONED WE ARE DISCUSSING TODAY AN APPEAL OF A DECISION MADE BY THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGARDING A VARIANCE AT A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2821 BROOKWOOD TERRACE LOCATED IN WARD 13. AGAIN THERE WERE TWO VARIANCES THAT WERE HEARD BY THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
THIS APPEAL IS SPECIFIC TO A DECISION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN 40 FEET OF THE TOP OF A STEEP SLOPE IN THE SHORELAND OVERLAY DISTRICT. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED JUST DIRECTLY NORTH OF THE MINNEHAHA
PARK BOARD PROPERTY AND THE CREEK ITSELF. IN TERMS OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS AND I DON'T WANT TO GO INTO TOO MUCH DETAIL, THIS WAS ALL PROVIDED IN THE MATERIALS TO YOU ALL. BUT THE HOME WAS BUILT IN 1927 AND HAD AN ATTACHED GARAGE OFF THE REAR WHICH YOU CAN SEE IN THE ILMAGE HERE.
IT HAS AN ENCLOSED SUN ROOM AND ROOF DECK ABOVE. ONE THING YOU WILL SEE FROM SOME FUTURE SLIDES IS THE LOTS GRADE DROPS OFF VERY SIGNIFICANTLY AS YOU MOVE FURTHER SOUTH TOWARDS THE CREEK ITSELF. ALTHOUGH THE GARAGE ITSELF IS LOCATED ON A RELATIVELY FLAT
PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. AGAIN THAT ORIGINAL PROPOSAL THAT WENT TO THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUST WAS FOR AN ADDITION TO THAT GARAGE TO BRING THAT GARAGE TO 28 FEET BY 23. AGAIN YOU CAN SEE HERE IN THE BLUE WOULD BE THAT ORIGINAL PROPOSAL OF THE NEW ADDITION, THE YELLOW IS THE EXISTING
FOOTPRINT. AGAIN THERE WERE TWO VARIANCES THERE. ONE WAS ALSO A REQUIRED SIDE YARD VARIANCE TO BASICALLY CARRY FORWARD THAT EXISTING SIDE WALL ALONG THE SHARED PROPERTY LINE BETWEEN 2821 AND 2825 BROOKWOOD TERRACE. THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
DID DENY THAT SIDE YARD VARIANCE REQUEST WHILE THEY DID APPROVE THE STEEP SLOPE VARIANCE. I WILL NOTE HERE AND IN THE NEXT SLIDE WE CAN SEE, THE APPLICANT HAS BEGUN REVISING THEIR PLANS IN RESPONSE TO THAT DENIAL OF THE VARIANCE. THE LEFT IS THE ORIGINAL WHAT
WENT TO THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. THE REVISED IS SHIFTING IT TO MEET THE SETBACK. I BELIEVE THE PROPOSED WOULD BE 26.5 BY 22.5 AS OPPOSED TO THAT
28 BY 23. THIS ALSO GIVES YOU A BIT MORE OF AN IDEA OF WHERE THIS IS FALLING ON THE LOT. AS YOU SEE AS YOU MOVE TO THE SOUTH, THERE'S AN EXISTING RETAINING WALL WHERE THE GRADE DROPS OFF DRAMATICALLY AND CONTINUES TO DROP DOWN TOWARDS THE CREEK ITSELF.
AGAIN WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING HERE TODAY IS THE DECISION BY THAT BOARD TO GRANT THE STEEP SLOPE VARIANCE. WHAT THE CITY CODE SAYS IS THAT LAND HAVING AN AVERAGE SLOPE OF 18% OR GREATER WITH A CHANGE OF
HEIGHT OF TEN FEET INDICATES A STEEP SLOPE. ONE THING THAT'S INTERESTING THAT I THINK MAYBE ISN'T APPARENT, IT'S OBVIOUSLY VERY APPARENT THAT SOUTH OF THAT RETAINING WALL THERE IS A VERY STEEP SLOPE OBVIOUSLY GOING DOWN. YOU CAN SEE LINE B HERE IN RED
IS SHOWING THAT KIND OF DROP, A 37% GRADE CHANGE FROM THE 50-FOOT RUN FROM THE PARK BOARD PROPERTY TO THE RETAINING WALL. IN THIS CASE, THAT STEEP SLOPE DEFINITION ALSO INCLUDES LAND ABOVE THE RETAINING WALL ITSELF. THE BLUE ARROWS THERE ARE MEANT
TO ILLUSTRATE WHAT A POTENTIAL 40-FOOT BUFFER FROM THE TOP CONTOUR OF THE STEEP SLOPE WHICH WOULD BE 869 FEET OF ELEVATION. THE EXISTING GARAGE ALREADY FALLS WITHIN THIS 40-FOOT AREA
BUFFER, THIS STEEP SLOPE ITSELF. REPLACING WHAT IS THERE TODAY WOULD STILL BE IN THAT IMPACT ZONE AROUND THE STEEP SLOPE. AGAIN I'M NOT GOING TO HIT ON THE SIDE YARD VARIANCE THAT WAS DENIED AND THERE IS NO APPEAL FROM THE APPELLANTS IN REGARDS TO THAT SIDE YARD VARIANCE.
IN TERMS OF THE VARIANCE APPROVED FOR THE STEEP SLOPE, AGAIN THIS WAS APPROVED AT THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WITH THREE CONDITIONS. ONE THAT THE APPROVAL OF FINAL SITE ELEVATION AND FLOOR PLANS WILL BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
THAT ALL SITE IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE COMPLETED BY OCTOBER 16, 2027. AND FINALLY THE EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE IMPLEMENTED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE. IN TERMS OF STAFF FINDINGS FOR
THE VARIANCE, I WOULD SAY STAFF FEELS THAT THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MADE THE CORRECT DETERMINATION IN THIS CASE. THIS FEELS LIKE A VERY, NO VARIANCE IS EVER TYPICAL. THEY'RE ALWAYS QUITE UNIQUE FROM ONE ANOTHER, BUT IN TERMS OF A SHORELAND VARIANCE, THIS IS ONE WHERE THE PROPOSED ADDITION IS
IN A FLATTER PORTION OF THE LOT. IT'S NOT PROPOSING TO MODIFY THAT EXISTING RETAINING WALL OR THE EXISTING PORTION OF THE LOT THAT'S A STEEPER SLOPE. AGAIN THE PRESENCE OF THAT TOPOGRAPHY CHANGE REALLY LIMITS ALMOST ANY BY RIGHT ADDITION THAT COULD BE DONE ON THIS PROPERTY, ESPECIALLY WHEN TAKING INTO ACCOUNT SOME OF OUR OTHER
REQUIREMENTS IN TERMS OF AN ADDITION ON THE FRONT OF BUILDING ITSELF. STAFF WILL NOTE AGAIN, THE EXISTING VEGETATION, ANYTHING SOUTH OF THAT RETAINING WALL, THERE IS NO PROPOSED CHANGES TO THAT AREA IN TERMS OF EXISTING TREES, VEGETATION, SHRUBS THAT ARE PROVIDING A LOT OF
VISIBILITY BLOCKING ESPECIALLY OVER SPRING AND SUMMER. AND THEN THE OTHER THING THAT WE'LL NOTE HERE IS JUST IN TERMS OF THE SURROUNDING CONTEXT OF THE CREEK, OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A UNIQUE AREA WHERE WE HAVE THAT NATURAL CONTEXT FROM THE CREEK, BUT ALSO THE URBAN CONTEXT. THIS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S
HAD HOMES IN IT AGAIN GOING BACK TO THE EARLY 1900s. THERE ARE SOME HISTORIC PROPERTIES. STAFF DOES NOT FEEL THAT THIS ADDITION IS GOING TO IMPACT OR CHANGE KIND OF THAT LOCAL CONTEXT, PHYSICAL CONTEXT OF THE AREA. ONE THING I WILL NOTE, AT THE
APPEL APPELLANT'S REQUEST WE HAVE LOOKED AT WHAT OTHER VARIANCES HAVE BEEN SOUGHT FOR STEEP SLOPES IN THE PAST IN THIS AREA. WE LOOKED BETWEEN ZENITH AREA TO THE WEST AND MORGAN AVENUE TO THE EAST. IN THAT AREA WE FOUND 11 VARIANCES THAT HAD BEEN TAKEN TO
THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. ONE OF THOSE WAS WITHDRAWN, THE OTHER TEN WERE APPROVED. AND THAT'S BETWEEN 1994 TO EARLIER THIS YEAR. AGAIN, EVERY VARIANCE IS UNIQUE. THERE'S ALWAYS UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT GO INTO THE REVIEW OF THEM. WHAT I THINK THAT SPEAKS TO IS AGAIN THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF
THE COMP PLAN IN THE ORDINANCE, THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THAT SHORELAND OVERLAY DISTRICT TO SERVE AS A CHECKPOINT REALLY AND AN EXTRA POINT OF REVIEW FOR THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS. AND I THINK ALSO SPEAKING TOWARDS THE CONSISTENCY OF THAT VIEW OR THAT ADDITION FROM THE
CREEK AS WELL AS IN COMPARISON TO OTHER PROPERTIES NEARBY. WITH THAT, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE APPEAL IS DENIED AND THE DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IS AFFIRMED. I'M HAPPY TO STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS. THE ONLY THING I WILL NOTE IS WE
HAVE RECEIVED FOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS AGAINST THIS ITEM. TWO PUBLIC COMMENTS IN SUPPORT OF IT. AND WE DID ALSO JUST YESTERDAY RECEIVE A COPY OF A PUBLIC COMMENT FROM THE MINNEAPOLIS PARK AND RECREATION BOARD. A COPY OF WHICH WAS INCLUDED IN THE MATERIALS ONLINE ON LIMS.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE ANYONE FROM THE PARK BOARD TO SPEAK ON THE PROJECT AND I DON'T WANT TO COLOR THEIR OWN LETTER WITH MY OWN VIEWS. THEY DO NOTE THAT THEY'RE RELUCTANT SUPPORT OF VARIANCES WITHIN THE SHORELAND OVERLAY DISTRICT AS IT IS INTENDED TO PROTECT THE WATERWAYS.
IN THIS CASE WE RECOGNIZE THE SLOPE ITSELF IS NOT PROPOSED TO CHANGE AND AN EXISTING LOW WALL WOULD REMAIN IN PLACE. HOWEVER THEY REMAIN CONCERNED ABOUT THE NEED FOR A VARIANCE. THEY DO PROVIDE TWO RECOMMENDED KIND OF ACTION ITEMS WERE THIS
TO MOVE FORWARD, ONE BEING THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD PROVIDE A SURVEY TO THE PARK BOARD AND CLEARLY DELINEATE THAT PROPERTY BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE PARK BOARD PROPERTY AND THE PRIVATE PROPERTY IN THIS CASE. AND SECOND, THEY WOULD PROVIDE ADDITIONAL DETAILS AT TIME OF
BUILDING PERMIT WOULD BE MANAGED WHICH IS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL THAT WAS ORIGINALLY SET BY THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. I'LL PROCEED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND GIVE THE APPELLANT AND APPLICANT SEVEN MINUTES
EACH. PLEASE COME UP AND INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, I'LL GIVE THEM TWO MINUTES. COME ON.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN AND BOARD MEMBERS OR COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY NAME IS MARSHA HAAGENSON AND I LIVE DIRECTLY NEXT TO 2821 BROOKWOOD TERRACE AND I'M HERE
TO APPEAL THE VARIANCE THAT WAS GRANTED IN THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING.
I'M SORRY. >> NO, IT'S FINE. CITY CLERK IS COMING TO HELP YOU. IF YOU CAN PAUSE THE MINUTES. OR RESTART.
>> THANK YOU. SO THE FIRST SLIDE HERE ACTUALLY SHOWS YOU WHAT THE BACK OF THAT SAID HOUSE LOOKS LIKE. WITHIN THE PAST WEEK THIS PICTURE WAS TAKEN. AND THE NEXT SLIDE ACTUALLY
SHOWS YOU AGAIN WHAT MILES BROUGHT UP EARLIER IN TERMS OF WHERE THAT HOUSE IS LOCATED. IT'S LOCATED ALONG THE CREEK. IT'S WITHIN THIS TURQUOISE TRIANGLE. AND THE LOCATION RISES ABOVE
MINNIEHAHA CREEK ADJACENT TO THE PARK BOARD PROPERTY. AND THERE'S A NEW MINNIEHAHA CREEK HIKING TRAIL THAT HAS BEEN STARTED THAT IS NOW IN SEGMENT ONE RUNNING FROM ZENITH TO MORGAN. AND WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THAT TRAIL IS IS TO ALLOW FOR HIKING
ALONG MINNIEHAHA CREEK VERY MUCH SIMILAR TO THE KIND OF THING WE HAVE FOR THE GRAND ROUNDS FOR BIKING. THIS IS A NEW TRAIL THAT'S BEING DEVELOPED FROM THE EDGE OF MINNEAPOLIS ALL THE WAY DOWN TO MINNIEHAHA FALLS.
AND SO IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION BECAUSE THAT HIKING TRAIL IS DIRECTLY BEHIND THIS PROPERTY. HERE'S AN EXAMPLE OF WHERE THE CREEK RUNS. YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THAT GREEN
AREA ON THIS SLIDE. AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS WE'RE LOOKING AT IF YOU CAN SEE UPTON, IT'S ABOUT THE MIDDLE OF THE SLIDE. AND THEN ABOUT HALFWAY UP IS BROOKWOOD TERRACE. ALTHOUGH, IT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED HERE. THE PURPOSE OF THIS SLIDE IS TO
SHOW YOU THAT THE FIRST SEGMENT OF THE TRAIL IS GOING TO BE 1.7 MILES ON MINAPOLIS PUBLIC WORKS PROPERTY. HERE IS KIND OF A BLOW UP OF THAT AREA. AND THE RED STAR INDICATES THE
HOUSE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. THE YELLOW STARS INDICATE THOSE HOUSES THAT ARE A BLOCK AWAY AND FOR MANY BLOCKS ALL THE WAY UP TO MORGAN WHERE WE HAVE A STEEP SLOPE IN THE SHORELAND OVERLAY
DISTRICT. THIS IS THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY, THE VISUAL IMPACT, I GUESS PARK BOARD USES THE WORD VIEW SHED. THIS IS THE VIEW SHED FROM THE HIKING TRAIL TO THE BACK OF THEIR HOME.
AND THE OTHER ITEMS HERE, THE OTHER PICTURES ACTUALLY SHOW FROM THE HIKING TRAIL LOOKING UP TO THE OTHER HOMES ON THIS BLOCK. THE NEXT SLIDE HERE SHOWS THOSE OTHER STREETS THAT I WAS TALKING
ABOUT THAT HAD THE STEEP SLOPE AREA. THIS IS WHAT THE VIEW IS FROM THAT PART OF THE HIKING TRAIL TO THE BACKS OF THEIR HOMES. AND YOU CAN SEE THE HOUSES, BUT THEY AREN'T NECESSARILY
PROJECTING OUT. LET ME USE MILES' SLIDE AND TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE ADDITION THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT. THIS YELLOW BOX IS ESSENTIALLY
ON THE LEFT SIDE IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT THE HOME, THE DIMENSIONS OF THE HOME NOW. WHICH INCLUDES A SUN ROOM AND A DECK ON TOP OF A GARAGE.
ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE, YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE IS A NEW PROPOSED AND TODAY WAS THE FIRST TIME I HEARD THAT THEY'VE MADE IT A TOUCH SMALLER. THE PROPOSED GARAGE IS GOING TO BE 28 BY 23 AND THEN THEY WANT TO ADD ANOTHER STORY ON TOP OF
THAT. AND THEN IN THE BACK OF THAT, TOWARDS THE CREEK, THEY'RE ACTUALLY PROPOSING AN EIGHT BY TEN DECK. SO IT WOULD BE A TOTAL OF 38 BY
23 ADDITION, TWO STORIES BEHIND THEIR HOME. I'M NOT A SCIENTIST, BUT THIS INCREASE WOULD CERTAINLY INCREASE THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE BY 540 SQUARE FEET.
AND WE CAN SEE JUST FROM THIS DIAGRAM HERE THAT THERE'S ALREADY A LOT OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. ONE THING I WANTED TO POINT OUT IS THAT THE BACK OF THAT LOT
COMES BACK AND IT COMES BACK TO A RETAINING WALL. WELL ONE PART OF THAT RETAINING WALL IS REALLY A STRUCTURAL RETAINING WALL. THE OTHER PART IS REALLY A BACKDROP TO A GARDEN. AND IT'S MAYBE 2 OR 3 OR 4
BRICKS DEEP. AND I'LL SHOW YOU THAT IN JUST A SECOND. IF WE'RE TO LOOK AT WHY WE WOULD WANT TO GRANT THIS VARIANCE, WE'D WANT TO LOOK AT THE RATIONALES FOR BEING ABLE TO
SHOW PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY. AND I'D LIKE TO SHOW YOU THAT WE CANNOT SHOW PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY HERE. FROM A REASONABLE STANDPOINT, A UNIQUENESS STANDPOINT, AND ESSENTIAL CHARACTER STANDPOINT. I'D ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT
THIS ADDITION IS NOT IN HARMONY WITH THE 2040 PLAN. AND ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS SHOULD BE MADE FOR THE FACT THAT THE PARK BOARD IS BUILDING THIS NEW TRAIL. IT'S RIGHT ON THE TOP OF A STEEP SLOPE IN THE SHORELAND OVERLAY.
AND IT WILL HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE ENJOYMENT OF THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT BY ANYONE WHO WISHES TO PARTICIPATE IN ANY SORT OF OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES IN THAT AREA. FROM A PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY STANDPOINT, IF WE LOOK AT
REASONABLENESS, THE BIG POINT HERE IS THAT WITHOUT THE VARIANCE, THEY CANNOT MAKE REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY. THAT IS NOT TRUE. THIS IS A 5-BEDROOM, 4-BATH HOME. THEY CAN MAKE REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY. THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO -- WHAT
THEY ARE SAYING THEY WANT TO DO IS TO DO AN ADDITION WITH A TWO PLUS THREE CAR GARAGE AND SHIFT THAT PROPERTY OUT TOWARDS THE CREEK AND THE STEEP SLOPE AND INTO THE SHORELAND OVERLAY.
MY QUESTION HERE IS HAVE THERE BEEN OTHER CONSIDERATIONS ABOUT LOCATIONS OR ORIENTATIONS? CAN YOU BUILD A GARAGE THAT IS A NONATTACHED GARAGE? I REALLY BELIEVE THAT REASONABLENESS HAS NOT BEEN MET
IN THIS CASE. HERE'S THE BACK OF THE HOUSE. WHAT THEY WANT TO DO IS PULL OFF THE BACK SHED WHICH IS LIKE A SUN ROOM, FAMILY ROOM, AND A DECK OVER THE GARAGE, AND PUT
ANOTHER STRUCTURE TWO STORIES HIGH FOR 38 FEET BACK. >> YOU'VE RUN OUT OF TIME, MA'AM. >> OKAY. WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO -- WAS I ABLE TO GET THE MINUTES BACK FROM -- >> YEAH, WE DID RESET.
>> OH YOU DID RESET? >> YEAH. >> WELL, I HAVE SUBMITTED TO YOU THIS ENTIRE PACKET. MIGHT I JUST SAY THAT I'D LIKE TO FINISH WITH THE FACT THAT THIS ADDITION INFRINGES, I
BELIEVE, ON NOT ONLY MY PROPERTY, OTHER PROPERTIES, BUT FOR THE PUBLIC ENJOYMENT OF THE CREEK AND PARKLAND AND I DO NOT BELIEVE IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM THAT IT MEETS THE 2040 GOALS. THEY ARE NOT -- >> THANK YOU.
>> AND IF YOU LOOK AT THIS PACKET, YOU WILL SEE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEE HOW NOT APPROVING THIS VARIANCE WILL ACTUALLY HELP TO MEET THE 2040 GOALS THAT WE HAVE AS A CITY.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO COME SPEAK?
YES, PLEASE COME ON IN.
>> THANK YOU. WE'LL JUST QUICKLY INTRODUCE OURSELVES. SO MY NAME IS JAKE ANDERSON. I'M ONE OF THE HOMEOWNERS AT 2821 BROOKWOOD TERRACE. >> MY NAME IS AMY ANDERSON. I AM THE OTHER HOMEOWNER AT 2821
BROOKWOOD TERRACE. >> HI, JEFF HOXY, HOXY HOMES CONTRACTOR HIRED TO WORK WITH JAKE AND AMY. >> HELLO, MIKE, ARCOS ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN, THE ARCHITECT. THANK YOU. >> APOLOGIES, I'M A LITTLE NERVOUS SO I'M GOING TO READ FROM SOME NOTES HERE.
I JUST WANT TO START BY THANKING THE CITY AND STAFF FOR ALL OF THEIR TIME. MILES HAS BEEN GREAT IN HELPING US THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND WORKING WITH OUR BUILDER TO FIND A DESIGN THAT MEETS OUR FAMILY NEEDS WHILE ALSO RESPECTING THE MINNIEHAHA CREEK AREA. A PLACE WE TRULY LOVE AND ENJOY
YEAR ROUND. WE FLOAT IT DOWN IT WITH OUR KIDS IN THE SUMMER. WE WALK ALONG IT WITH OUR KIDS IN THE WINTER. IT'S EXCELLENT. WHEN WE FIRST STEPPED INTO OUR HOME TO LOOK AT IT FOR THE FIRST TIME, WE IMMEDIATELY FELL IN LOVE WITH ITS 1927 CHARACTER AND THE OLD MINNEAPOLIS FEEL OF THE HOME.
WE TOOK EFFORTS TO RESTORE THE ORIGINAL WOODWORK THAT WAS IN THE HOME AND MAKE IT LOOK LIKE NEW AGAIN THROUGHOUT THE HOME. WE HAVE LIVED THERE FOR FIVE YEARS AND WE LOVE SO MUCH ABOUT THE HOME. BUT ONE THING WE'VE REALIZED IS THAT THE ADDITION THAT'S THERE NOW FOR THE GARAGE THAT WAS
BUILT DECADES AGO JUST DOESN'T WORK WELL FOR TODAY'S NEEDS. RIGHT NOW WE CAN'T FIT OUR CARS INTO THE GARAGE WHICH MAKES OUR EVERYDAY LIFE A CHALLENGE, ESPECIALLY IN THE MINNESOTA WINTERS. WE HAVE THREE KIDS IN MINNEAPOLIS PUBLIC SCHOOLS AT THREE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS, SO
WE'RE CONSTANTLY ON THE, MINI VAN LOADED UP WITH OUR KIDS, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD KIDS WHO ARE COMMUTING TO WORK AND DOING NEIGHBORHOOD ACTIVITIES. AND WE LOVE USING THE CITY'S BIKE TRAILS AND ACTIVITIES. FOR US OUR VEHICLES AND BIKES ARE A BIG PART OF EVERYDAY LIFE IN MINNEAPOLIS.
WE'VE WORKED CLOSELY WITH CITY STAFF TO MAKE SURE OUR ADDITION MEETS THE SHORELAND OVERLAY RULES AND REDUCED THE WIDTH OF THE PROPOSED GARAGE AND DECK TO MEET SOME OF THE FEEDBACK FROM THE APPELLANT AND TO FURTHER MINIMIZE THE IMPACTFULNESS ON THE SURROUNDING AREA.
WE'VE REALLY TRIED HARD TO FIND THE RIGHT BALANCE BETWEEN WHAT OUR FAMILY NEEDS AND WHAT'S BEST FOR THE NATURAL AREA AROUND US. THE REVISED PROPOSAL IS A TYPI TYPI TYPICAL TWO SIZE CAR GARAGE
TYPICAL TO THE STANDARD 24 BY 24, IT'S JUST A DIFFERENT SHAPE TO MEET THE SIDE YARD VARIANCE. IT'S LARGE KNOENOUGH TO PARK OU CARS INSIDE AND KEEP OUR GEAR, IT ALSO GIVES US THE ADDED BENEFIT OF OPENING MORE YARD SPACE FOR OUR KIDS TO PLAY WITHOUT RUNNING INTO OUR CARS AS
THEY'RE TRYING TO RUN AROUND. WE'RE BEING INTENTIONAL ABOUT HOW THIS NEW GARAGE WILL LOOK. THE CURRENT ADDITION DOES NOT MATCH THE LOOK AND FEEL OF THE HOME IN A MEANINGFUL WAY. WE PLAN TO MATCH MANY OF THE HOMES ORIGINAL 1927 DETAILS INCLUDING STUCCO COVE EVES AND
COMPLEMENTARY MATERIALS. WE WANT THIS ADDITION TO LOOK LIKE IT'S ALWAYS BEEN PART OF THE HOUSE AND FITS NATURALLY WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. EVEN WITH THE ADDED SPACE, OUR HOME WILL REMAIN IN KEEPING WITH THE SCALE AND CHARACTER OF THE FULTON NEIGHBORHOOD. AT THE SAME TIME OUR PROPERTY WILL CONTINUE TO BE ONE OF THE LEAST VISIBLE ALONG THIS STRETCH
OF MINNIEHAHA CREEK THANKS TO THE FACT THAT THE WAY OUR LOT WORKS UP, THERE'S MORE WOODLAND BEHIND OURS AND NONE OF THAT WILL BE TOUCHED DURING THIS PROJECT. SO WE REALLY APPRECIATE THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL AND THE THOUGHTFUL FEEDBACK THAT HELPED GET US TO THIS POINT.
WE HOPE THE BOARD WILL UPHOLD THE DECISION SO THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH A DESIGN THAT RESPECTS OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, PRESERVES THE NATURAL SETTING, AND HELPS OUR FAMILY MAKE THE MOST OF OUR HOME AND OUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND FOR EVERYTHING YOU DO TO MAKE MINNEAPOLIS SUCH A WONDERFUL PLACE TO LIVE. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> AND IF I COULD JUST FOR A MOMENT TRY TO GIVE PEOPLE A SENSE -- IS IT UP THERE? >> YEP. >> OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF SOMEONE DOESN'T LIVE ALONG THIS STRETCH, THEY CAN SORT OF UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU SEE. AS YOU MOVE DOWN THE STREET.
SO AS YOU MOVE FROM -- I'LL TRY TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIGGER. AS YOU MOVE FROM UPTON AVENUE ONWARD. YOU CAN SEE IT'S VERY COMMON TO SEE MAN MAMADE STRUCTURES AND HS NOT ONLY WITHIN 40 FEET OF THE
BLUFF, BUT ALSO FULLY VISIBLE YEAR ROUND. AND SO OUR LOT IS ACTUALLY ONE OF THE MOST WOODED ALONG THAT STRETCH ESPECIALLY IN THE SUMMERTIME. IN THE FALL THE LEAVES FALL OFF, EVERYTHING IS MORE VISIBLE.
BUT WE REALLY FEEL, WE'RE PROPOSING A TWO-STORY ADDITION. OUR NEIGHBORS ON BOTH SIDES HAVE DONE THREE STORY ADDITIONS ABOVE THEIR GARAGE. SO ALSO VISIBLE FROM THAT SAME TRAIL. SO JUST WANTED TO GIVE PEOPLE A SENSE THAT IT ISN'T ALL JUST
WOODS AND OUR HOUSE. THERE IS PLENTY ALONG THIS STRETCH THAT IS QUITE VISIBLE ALREADY. >> WONDERFUL. YOU'VE STILL GOT TWO MINUTES. >> DO YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING? >> I WILL ADD A COUPLE THINGS VERY QUICKLY. JAKE AND AMY HAVE ALWAYS BEEN VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT THEIR HOME.
WHEN THEY CAME TO ME, WE WORKED TOGETHER YEARS AGO ON A PREVIOUS HOME. THEY LOVE THIS HOME, THEY WANT TO MAKE IT THEIR OWN. AND THE HOME IS BEAUTIFUL, THE BACK GARAGE ADDITION ISN'T. AND SO WHEN WE STARTED DESIGNING IT WITH MIKE, THE ARCHITECTURE,
IT WILL BE A COMPLETE MATCH TO WHAT THE REST OF THE ORIGINAL HOME IS. IT WORKS GREAT, IT LOOKS GOOD. IT WILL LOOK BETTER FROM THE CREEK IN MY OPINION, BECAUSE IT WILL ARCHITECTURALLY BE THE SAME. WE CAN PROVIDE SURVEYS, WE'VE DONE ALL OF THOSE IF THE PARK BOARD WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT.
EROSION CONTROL, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, COMMON PRACTICE IN EVERY CITY WE WORK IN. TOTALLY COMFORTABLE DOING ALL OF THAT. FROM THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL WE HAVE SHRUNK THE ADDITION THREE AND A HALF FEET.
ALSO PULLED IT OFF THE PROPERTY LINE TO GIVE MORE ROOM FOR THE EXISTING TREES. NO TREES NEED TO BE REMOVED. THE RETAINING WALL DOESN'T NEED TO BE TOUCHED. SO REALLY TRYING TO GET THE BEST FUNCTIONAL SPACE FOR WHAT WILL FIT WITHIN THE PROPERTY. AND LOOKING AT OTHER AREAS, I
MEAN, IF WE WERE TO MOVE IT TO A DIFFERENT LOCATION IN THE BACKYARD -- >> IT HAS TO COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE ORDINANCES THAT ARE REQUIRED TO GET A BUILDING PERMIT. SO IT DOES YES INCREASE BUILDING
COVERAGE AND IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE, BUT THEY ALL FALL UNDER THE ALLOWABLES THAT THE CITY REQUIRES. >> YEP. >> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU.
>> I SEE ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? I SEE AARON HERE. WELCOME. >> GOOD MORNING EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS AARON YOUNG AND I LIVE WITHIN 350 FEET OF THE PROPERTY.
I'M ACTUALLY FIVE HOUSES TO THE WEST. AND I'M HERE IN SUPPORT OF THE VARIANCE. I WAS ONE OF THE 11 RECIPIENTS OF A VARIANCE IN MY HOME PROBABLY LIKE TEN YEARS AGO
WHICH ALLOWED ME TO GO FROM LIKE A 1.5 GARAGE TO A TWO-CAR GARAGE. STILL A LITTLE TIGHT, BUT IT IS TWO CAR. AND JUST THINKING ABOUT THIS AND LISTENING, MY GARAGE DOOR IS 18 FEET WHICH IS WHAT THEIR WHOLE
GARAGE CURRENTLY IS. AND THEY'RE PROPOSING TO GET TO I THINK 23 FEET. WELL IF YOU HAVE AN 18 FOOT GARAGE DOOR, YOU STILL CAN'T FIT TWO CARS, SO I THINK IT'S PRETTY REASONABLE. ALONG THAT STRETCH, I WALK THE
CREEK A COUPLE THREE TIMES A DAY, SO I'M LOOKING AROUND AND JAKE IS RIGHT. THERE IS A LOT OF WOOD COVERAGE. AND I DON'T THINK THIS IS GOING TO MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE, AT LEAST ON MY BEHALF OR MY FAMILY'S BEHALF.
IF YOU LOOKED AT THE OTHER 11 VARIANCES THAT WERE GIVEN, I'M QUITE CONFIDENT THAT SOME OF THE RESPONDENTS WHO ARE IN OPPOSITION OF THAT AND TO THIS PROJECT WERE RECIPIENTS OF THOSE VARIANCES, SO THAT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING.
THE ANDERSONS ARE A GREAT FAMILY. AS THEY MENTIONED, THEY HAVE THREE KIDS IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS. WE WANT THAT TO CONTINUE. AND I THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE A GREAT ADDITION TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND RECOGNIZE
COUNCILMEMBER CHOWDHURY. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. I JUST HAD A QUICK QUESTION FOR STAFF. THANKS FOR COMING UP, MILES.
COULD YOU JUST SHARE WHAT WAS THE CHANGE THAT WAS MADE IN THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND ZONING FROM THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION? >> CHAIR OSMAN, COUNCILMEMBER
CHOWDHURY, THE CHANGE IN THIS CASE, AGAIN THE ORIGINAL VARIANCE THERE WERE TWO REQUESTS. I'LL SEE IF I CAN'T PULL UP THE IMAGE AS WELL.
SO AGAIN THE ORIGINAL REQUEST HAD TWO VARIANCES, ONE WOULD HAVE BEEN THE STEEP SLOPE VARIANCE WE'RE DISCUSSING TODAY. THE OTHER WAS A SIDE YARD VARIANCE. SO THE EXISTING HOME FALLS I THINK 3 AND 3.1 FEET OFF OF THE PROPERTY LINE WHEREAS CODE TODAY REQUIRES A 5-FOOT SEPARATION
FROM AN INTERIOR SIDE PROPERTY LINE. SO THE ORIGINAL REQUEST WAS TO CARRY THAT SIDE WALL FORWARD. YOU CAN SEE ON THE LEFT HERE THAT AREA IN BLUE WOULD HAVE BEEN THE ADDITION IN THAT ORIGINAL PROPOSAL. IN THE REVISED VERSION, AGAIN IN THEORY THE EXISTING GARAGE LOCATION COULD REMAIN WHERE IT
IS. THE APPLICANT IS ELECTING TO SHIFT THAT ENTIRE GARAGE STRUCTURE TO MEET A 5-FOOT SETBACK ON THE WEST SIDE OF THAT BUILDING. IN TERMS OF AGAIN THE KIND OF CHANGE AND THE SCALE FOR THE STRUCTURE, AGAIN THE ORIGINAL REQUEST WAS TO HAVE A 28 BY 23 GARAGE, THIS WOULD PUT IT AT I
BELIEVE THE LAST TIME I SPOKE WITH THE TEAM AT A 26.5 BY 22.5. OBVIOUSLY THAT IS SUBJECT A LITTLE BIT TO STILL CHANGE BETWEEN NOW AND BUILDING PERMITTING. TYPICALLY WHAT WE DO TELL FOLKS IS IT CANNOT EXPAND BEYOND THE ORIGINAL SCOPE OF THE VARIANCE,
BUT SOMETHING HERE WHERE IT'S BEING REVISED TO ACTUALLY MOVE IN RESPONSE TO THAT VARIANCE DENIAL IS ALLOWED BASICALLY BEFORE PERMITTING. SO AGAIN THAT SLIGHT CHANGE IN TERMS OF IT LOOKS LIKE AGAIN A FOOT AND A HALF OFF OF THE I GUESS YOU WOULD CALL IT THE DEPTH IN THIS CASE OF HOW FAR IT
GOES TO THE SOUTH. AND THEN THE DECK ALSO YOU CAN SEE HERE SO IT'S LABELED AS BALCONY ON BOTH, I BELIEVE TWO FEET OFF OF THAT. SO GOING FROM AN EIGHT FOOTBA
BALCONY TO SIX FEET. >> GREAT. AND LAST QUESTION FOR ME IS THAT THIS IS COMPLIANT WITH ALL OF THE SHORELAND CODE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAVE? >> CORRECT. SO THE SHORELAND CODE BESIDES THE STEEP SLOPE REQUIREMENTS HAS SOME ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR EXAMPLE THINGS LIKE CLEAR CUTTING OF VEGETATION.
AS FAR AS STAFF IS AWARE, THERE IS NO ISSUES WITH THE SHORELAND OVERLAY DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS OR OTHER SECTIONS OF THE CODE. I KNOW IT WAS BROUGHT UP IN TERMS OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE FOR LOT COVER. THIS ADDITION IS COMPLIANT WITH AN URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE PROPERTY.
IT WOULD HAVE A MAXIMUM OF 60% OF THE LOT BEING ALLOWED AS IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. THIS IS STILL WELL BELOW THAT PERCENTAGE. >> GREAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ANSWERING THOSE QUESTIONS. I'LL JUST SAY I'M LOOKING AT STAFF FINDINGS, LOOKING AT THE CONVERSATION WITH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND THEN ALSO
HEARING THE TESTIMONY TODAY, I FEEL LIKE THIS MEETS ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS NECESSARY UNDER US AS A CITY. AND I ALSO APPRECIATE THAT THE APPLICANT OF THE VARIANCE MADE A COMPROMISE AND MADE IT A LITTLE BIT SMALLER.
I THINK IT'S ALSO HELPFUL TO UNDERSTAND WHAT HAS OCCURRED WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL. AND SO WITH THAT, I JUST KIND OF CONCUR WITH STAFF FINDINGS AND
WILL MOVE TO DENY THE APPEAL. >> SECOND. >> COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. QUESTION FOR STAFF. CAN YOU JUST REMIND ME WHAT THE ADDITIONAL 540 SOME SQUARE FEET OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE, IF THAT
IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY CODE BECAUSE I HEARD KIND OF DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS OF THAT IN THE TWO TESTIMONIES. >> CORRECT. CHAIR OSMAN AND COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN, I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT PERCENTAGE OF IMPERVIOUS OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT THIS IS
BELOW THAT 60% MAXIMUM FOR THE LOT ITSELF. SO THAT WOULD BE OF THE LOT'S TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE AREA, 60% OF THAT IS ALLOWED TO BE STRUCTURE FOOTPRINT, PAVEMENT, EVEN THINGS LIKE LANDSCAPING BEDS THAT HAVE A PLASTIC UNDERNEATH THAT DOESN'T ALLOW
PERMEATION OF RAIN WATER. AGAIN I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT PERCENTAGE, BUT THIS IS WELL BELOW THAT 60% MARK. >> UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. I'LL ALSO SUPPORT THE MOTION TO DENY THE APPEAL.
>> SEEING NONE, I'LL ASK THE CITY CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL. TO CALL THE MOTION -- >> IF I MAY SUGGEST, AT YOUR LEISURE, A SLIGHT SUGGESTION TO THE WORDING OF THAT TO DENY THE APPEAL AND ADOPT THE FINDINGS IN THE STAFF REPORT? >> ABSOLUTELY. MOTION TO DENY THE APPEAL AND
ADOPT THE STAFF FINDINGS IN THE REPORT. >> CITY CLERK. >> COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. >> AYE. >> CASHMAN. >> AYE. >> JENKINS. >> AYE. >> CHAVEZ. >> AYE. >> VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY. >> AYE. >> AND CHAIR OSMAN. >> AYE.
>> THERE ARE SIX AYES AND NO NAYS. >> AND THAT MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. NOW WE WILL RETURN TO THE PORTION OF DISCUSSION.
FIRST I WELCOME GREG GOLDBERG FROM CPED TO PRESENT THE 2025 AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND AWARD NOMINATIONS. I WANT TO REMIND MEMBERS THAT WE WILL HAVE TO GET OUT OF HERE BY WHAT DID I SAY? 1:00?
YEAH.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. CHAIR OSMAN. DO YOU WANT ME TO WAIT ONE MORE SECOND? I'M SORRY, I DON'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT. I'M CONSCIOUS OF YOUR TIMEFRAME THAT YOU JUST MENTIONED. I'M GOING TO DO A VERY BRIEF PRESENTATION AND ALLOW YOU TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE.
GOOD AFTERNOON I'M KERRI GOLDBERG, I'M WITH THE CPED PRESIDENTIAL FINANCE TEAM AND I'M HERE TO PRESENT THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND. THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND IS THE LARGEST PROGRAM THAT
ASSISTS IN AFFORDABLE AND MIXED RENTAL HOUSING PROJECTS WITH TEN UNITS OR MORE AND AT LEAST 20% OF THE UNITS AFFORDABLE TO HOUSEHOLDS AT OR BELOW 50% OF THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME. THIS YEAR THE CITY RECEIVED 14 APPLICATIONS REQUESTING JUST OVER $24.6 MILLION AND STAFF IS
RECOMMENDING NINE PROJECTS FOR TRUST FUND AWARDS THAT TOTAL $14.5 MILLION. THE TRUST FUND NOTICE OF FUNDING AVAILABILITY THAT IS ISSUED IN JUNE EACH YEAR CONTAINS THE CRITERIA ESTABLISHED TO ASSIST STAFF IN EVALUATING AN
APPLICATION'S COMPLETENESS AND FINANCIAL VIABILITY. ALL OF THE APPLICATIONS ARE ANALYZED USING THE UNDERWRITING STANDARDS AND CRITERIA THAT ARE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL. STAFF ANALYZES THE PROJECT SOURCES AND USES, THE FINANCIAL GAPS, THE MANAGEMENT AND
OPERATING BUDGET AND EXPENSES, THE PROJECT'S RESERVES AND CASH FLOW. THE PROJECT'S FINANCIAL VIABILITY INFORMS WHETHER THE PROJECT IS READY TO MOVE FORWARD IN COMPARISON WITH OTHER PROJECTS AND PUTTING THE TRUST FUND DOLLARS TO USE MORE QUICKLY BY GETTING AFFORDABLE UNITS
CONSTRUCTED SOONER. CONSTRUCTION COST INCREASES AND TRUST RATE INCREASES AND LOWER TAX CREDIT PRICING ALL CONTINUE TO BE PRESENT CHALLENGING TO SECURING FULL PROJECT FUNDING AND BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION TIMELY. IN ADDITION, THE INCREASED MANAGEMENT AND OPERATING
EXPENSES HAVE A SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACTED THE SUSTAINABLE SOLVENCY OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS. INCREASED INSURANCE COSTS, INCREASED SECURITY COSTS, HIGH STAFF TURNOVER, AND REVENUE LOSSES DUE TO VACANCIES OR UNPAID RENTS HAVE STRAINED THE CAPACITY AND CONTINUED
OPERATIONS OF NUMEROUS EXISTING PROJECTS AND DEVELOPERS. THE NOFA ALSO CONTAINS THE CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING AND SCORING APPLICATIONS. AND ALL APPLICATIONS ARE SCORED
AND RANKED ACCORDING TO THE SELECTION CRITERIA WHICH IS ALSO APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE SCORING IS ONLY ONE COMPONENT OF THE EVALUATION FOR THE AWARD RECOMMENDATIONS AS I MENTIONED EARLIER AND IDENTIFIED THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE LOOK AT. LOWER RANKING APPLICATIONS MAY
BE RECOMMENDED FOR FUNDING OVER HIGHER RANKING APPLICATIONS BASED ON PROJECT READINESS, PRIOR AWARDS AND/OR OTHER COMMITTED FUNDING OR CRITERIA AS INDICATED IN THE NOFA. BEFORE I HIGHLIGHT THE PROJECTS
BEING RECOMMENDED FOR AWARDS, I'D LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT THE SUCCESS REFLECTED IN THE NUMBERS ON THIS SLIDE. THE PROJECTS THIS YEAR WILL CREATE OR PRESERVE 597 UNITS. 162 OF THOSE UNITS HAVE SECURED RENTAL ASSISTANCE.
AND 455 OF THOSE UNITS ARE AT 50% AMI OR LESS OF WHICH ALMOST HALF ARE AT 30% AMI OR LESS. IN ORDER TO BE COMPETITIVE FOR FUNDING THROUGH THE TRUST FUND, THE PROJECTS MUST INCLUDE DEEP AFFORDABILITY, SUPPORT SERVICES,
RENTAL ASSISTANCE, HOMELESSNESS AND LARGER UNITS. THESE GOALS ARE ALL WHAT ARE INCENTIVIZED IN THE SCORING. THESE NEXT SEVERAL SLIDES WILL HIGHLIGHT THE PROJECTS BEING RECOMMENDED AND THEY ARE MORE
FULLY DESCRIBED IN THE RCA. I'M JUST GOING TO BRIEFLY GO THROUGH THEM. THE FIRST IS LINDQUIST APARTMENTS. THIS PROVIDES 24 UNITS FOR YOUTH EXITING HOMELESSNESS.
THE WELLSTONE IS ALSO A REHABILITATION PROJECT. THERE ARE 49 UNITS THAT SERVE FAMILIES. 100% AFFORDABLE. ZARIA APARTMENTS. THIS IS THE SECOND PHASE OF THE
3030NICOLETTE REDEVELOPMENT SITE WHICH SUFFERED DAMAGE DURING THE CIVIL UNREST IN 2020. THIS PROJECT CONSISTS OF A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF AFFORDABLE LARGER FAMILY UNITS. AND THIS PROJECT RECEIVED A PARTIAL AWARD LAST YEAR. THIS PROJECT HAS DONE A VERY GOOD JOB OF CONTINUING TO SECURE ITS FINANCING. SO WE ARE GIVING THE REMAINING
QUALIFYING AWARD TO THIS PROJECT THIS YEAR. PENNWOOD VILLAGE AND COMMUNITY MARKET, THIS IS A MIXED USE PROJECT WITH 86 AFFORDABLE
FAMILY-SIZED UNITS. LYNDALE AVENUE APARTMENTS HAS 40 DEEPLY AFFORDABLE UNITS. LOT A, THIS IS A CITY-OWNED SITE. THIS IS A NEW CONSTRUCTION 100% AFFORDABLE FAMILY HOUSING PROJECT. THERE ARE A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER
OF 2 AND 3-BEDROOMS. SORRY, TRYING TO GO QUICKLY. FLOUR EXCHANGE. THIS IS AN ADAPTIVE REUSE OF THE FLOUR EXCHANGE BUILDING DOWNTOWN. AND THAT WILL CONSIST OF 110 UNITS OF MIXED INCOME HOUSING
WITH A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF UNITS THAT WILL HAVE RENTAL ASSISTANCE. THE JOURDAIN IS A 41-UNIT MIXED INCOME REHABILITATION PROJECT FOR FAMILIES. AND IT IS UNDER HOPE COMMUNITY
WHICH IS ALSO THE WELLSTONE WHICH WAS ALSO RECOMMENDED THIS YEAR. I THINK THAT'S MY LAST. SO IN CONCLUSION, ALL OF THE APPLICANTS DESERVE A ROUND OF THANKS FOR WORKING SO HARD TO SUBMIT APPLICATIONS THAT
INCORPORATE THE MANY CITY PRIORITIES FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I'D ALSO LIKE TO THANK THE RESIDENTIAL FINANCE TEAM WHO REVIEWS, UNDERWRITES, AND ANALYZES THESE PROJECTS SO WE CAN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO YOU, PUTTING THE TRUST FUND DOLLARS TO WORK AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. AND I'D ALSO LIKE TO THANK THE
CITY'S FUNDING PARTNERS WHO ALSO ASSIST IN THE REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS AND FINANCING OF THESE PROJECTS. WITHOUT THEM THE CITY WOULD NOT PRODUCE AND PRESERVE THE AMOUNT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT WE DO SO SUCCESSFULLY. AND WITH THAT, I'LL TAKE QUESTIONS.
>> COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I'M VERY EXCITED TO SEE THIS AWARD FOR THE PROJECT AT THE FLOUR EXCHANGE. THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND THIS ALL LOOKS REALLY GREAT. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION AND I'LL MOVE THIS ITEM FOR APPROVAL. >> AWESOME.
GREAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH, STAFF, FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS. I KNOW IT TAKES A LONG PROCESS. IT'S ALWAYS GREAT TO SEE PROJECTS POPPING UP AND GETTING SUPPORT. CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WELLSTONE THAT'S LOCATED IN WARD 6. IS IT A REHAB? WHAT IS THE MONEY FOR?
>> YES, IT IS A REHAB. SO THE WELLSTONE AND THE JOURDAIN ARE BOTH OWNED BY HOPE COMMUNITY. THEY ARE DOING TWO PHASES OF REHABILITATION TO THESE BUILDINGS. AND THIS FIRST PHASE IS DOING SOME OF THE LARGER
INFRASTRUCTURE TO IT. THE HVAC SYSTEMS, SOME OF THE UTILITY RELATED ITEMS FOR IT. SO THAT WILL BE THE FIRST ROUND. THEY'RE NOT DOING INDIVIDUAL UNIT REHAB AT THIS TIME. IT'S POSSIBLE THEY WILL COME
BACK FOR A SECOND PHASE. BUT THEY ARE PROCEEDING WITH JUST THE MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE BUILDING AT THIS TIME. >> GREAT. THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER JENKINS. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN, AND
THANK YOU FOR THAT PRESENTATION. IT IS EXCITING, PARTICULARLY TO SEE THE ZARIA PROJECT. PHASE TWO OF THE 3030 NICOLETTE. YOU KNOW, THAT SITE WAS
DEMOLISHED, I GUESS IN THE UPRISING, THE FIRES, ET CETERA. NOW THERE'S ALREADY 100 UNITS OF DEEPLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING THERE THAT HAS LARGE APARTMENTS FOR
THE TENANTS AND RESIDENTS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. SO THIS ADDITION IS VERY WELCOME AND I BELIEVE IT'S GOING TO INCLUDE SOME OPPORTUNITIES FOR BUSINESSES ON THE FIRST FLOOR TOO OR THE MAIN LEVEL.
SO JUST REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THE PROJECT. AND THE DEVELOPER IS A WOMAN OF COLOR. SO IT'S A GREAT PROJECT. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SEEING NO ONE ELSE, WITH THE MOTION FOR COUNCILMEMBER
CASHMAN, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> ALL RIGHT. NEXT ITEM IS THE 9% LOW INCOME
HOUSING TAX CREDITS. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR OSMAN, MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. I'M EMILY CARR, SUPERVISOR ON
THE RESIDENTIAL TEAM ON CPED. I'M HERE TODAY TO REPRESENT OUR ANNUAL 9% LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT RECOMMENDATIONS. EVERY YEAR, CPED ADMINISTERS 9% LOW INCOME TAX CREDITS.
THE HOUSING TAX CREDIT PROGRAM PROVIDES A REDUCTION IN FEDERAL TAX LIABILITY TO INVESTORS IN QUALIFIED LOW-INCOME RENTAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS THAT COMPLY WITH FEDERALLY IMPOSED RENT AND INCOME RESTRICTIONS FOR A MINIMUM OF 30 YEARS.
I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT 9% HOUSING TAX CREDITS ARE A TOOL TO PROVIDE 70% OF THE PROJECT'S EQUITY, IT NEEDS TO BE FINANCED. THE CITY CAN ONLY TYPICALLY
FINANCE ONE OF THESE PROJECTS A YEAR WITH OUR ALLOCATION. THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED A TWO-YEAR QUALIFIED ALLOCATION PLAN OR QAP AND PROCEDURAL MANUAL FOR THIS YEAR'S NOTICE OF FUNDING AVAILABILITY BACK IN JUNE.
THE QAP ESTABLISHES A SCORING AND SELECTION CRITERIA FOR THE HOUSING TAX CREDIT PROGRAM. THE PROGRAM TIMELINE IS SIMILAR TO THE PROGRAM EACH YEAR. AND APPLICATIONS FOR THIS YEAR'S HOUSING TAX CREDITS WERE DUE ON
JULY 28TH. THIS YEAR CPED IS ADMINISTERING AN APPLICATION OF $1,777,841 IN THE YEAR 2026 IN 9% HOUSING TAX
CREDITS. WE RECEIVED FOUR APPLICATIONS REQUESTING $6.5 MILLION IN TAX CREDITS. THE SUMMARY LIST OF PROJECTS, AMOUNT OF TAX CREDITS REQUESTED, AND UNIT BREAKDOWN IS SHOWN IN THE REPORTS ATTACHED 2026 APPLICATION SUMMARY.
THE APPLICATIONS WERE SCORED ACCORDING TO THE SCORING CRITERIA ESTABLISHED IN THE ADOPTED QAP. SCORING FOR EACH OF THE PROJECTS IS SUMMARIZED IN THE ATTACHED HOUSING TAX CREDIT SUMMARY.
THE TOP SCORING PROJECT THIS YEAR WAS 2116 NICOLLET. WE FUNDED THIS PROJECT LAST YEAR WITH 9% HOUSING TAX CREDITS. THEY NEED ADDITIONAL CREDITS THIS YEAR BEYOND WHAT WE WERE ABLE TO ALLOCATE LAST YEAR. SO THEY CAME IN AND REQUESTED
$1.4 MILLION IN ADDITIONAL CREDITS TO CLOSE THEIR GAP AND HOPEFULLY GET TO THE CLOSING TABLE EARLY NEXT YEAR. WITH OUR 1.7 MILLION IN CREDITS, STAFF ARE RECOMMENDING THE
1.84 MILLION IN THEIR REQUEST BE FUNDED WHICH LEAVES A BALANCE OF APPROXIMATELY 289,000 TO ALLOCATE. CLARE5 HOUSING PROJECT WAS THE SECOND HIGHEST SCORING PROJECT SO STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT WE
APPLY THAT BALANCE OF OUR ALLOCATION AND AWARD IT TO THE CLARE 5 HOUSING PROJECT. BOTH 2116 NICOLLET AND CLARE 5 WERE AWARDED IN PREVIOUS ROUNDS.
CLARE 5 IS A 33-UNIT NEW CONSTRUCTION PROJECT IN WARD 1 THAT WILL SERVE SENIORS LIVING WITH HIV AND AIDS. SO BOTH OF THESE PROJECTS HAVE DEEP POLICY ALIGNMENT WITH CITY GOALS, PROVIDE VERY LOW INCOME HOUSING AND LOW BARRIER HOUSING
FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE MOST VULNERABLE IN OUR COMMUNITY. SO WITH THAT, I AM HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. I ALSO WANT TO THANK ALL OF OUR APPLICANTS THIS YEAR FOR THEIR CONTINUED COMMITMENT TO PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN OUR COMMUNITY. >> THANKS FOR THE PRESENTATION.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MEMBERS? SEEING NONE, I'LL APPROVE THIS ITEM. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTION CARRIES.
ALL RIGHT, NEXT ONE WILL BE -- YES, LAST DISCUSSION ITEM IS ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE ZONING
CODE ON ON AND OFF PREMISES SIGNAGE. IT IS NOW BEFORE US FOR DISCUSSION. I WELCOME SARA ROMAN FROM CPED FOR THE PRESENTATION. >> MY NAME IS SARA ROMAN, I'M A
PLANNER IN CPED AND I WILL BE PRESENTING THE SIGN CODE AMENDMENT FOR YOU TODAY. SO ABOUT A YEAR AGO STAFF WAS ASKED TO EXAMINE HOW SIGNS COULD BE USED AS A TOOL TO INCREASE VIBRANCY, ARTS AND CULTURE, AND A SENSE OF SAFETY DOWNTOWN. SO AS PART OF THAT WORK, WE
LOOKED AT ON PREMISES SIGNS, SO THOSE ARE LOCAL BUSINESS SIGNS AND OFF PREMISES SIGNS OTHERWISE KNOWN AS BILLBOARDS. WE ALSO LOOKED AT HOW SIGNS COULD BE USED TO IMPROVE VISIBILITY FOR DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES INCLUDING SKYWAY BUSINESSES, AND WE WERE ALSO ASKED TO FOCUS ON THE IDEA OF AN
ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT AND HOW THAT COULD BE IMPLEMENTED IN THE FUTURE. SO THE MAJORITY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS YOU'LL SEE TODAY FOCUS ON DOWNTOWN. BUT WE ALSO WANT TO CALL OUT THERE ARE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS THAT APPLY CITY WIDE AND SOME RECOMMENDATIONS THAT APPLY TO SPECIFIC DISTRICTS OR SPECIFIC
USES. SO MOVING INTO THE CHANGES TO OUR PREMISES SIGN REGULATIONS TO DOWNTOWN SPECIFICALLY. THESE REGULATIONS OR PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ARE GENERALLY EITHER TO INCREASE FLEXIBILITY FOR SIGNS OR TO MAKE A PROCESS
AROUND OBTAINING A SIGN EASIER FOR APPLICANTS. SO THERE ARE A FEW WAYS WE ARE PROVIDING FLEXIBILITY FOR SIGNS. WE ARE ALLOWING FOR MORE SIGNAGE IN MORE LOCATIONS. SO ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE ON NONPRIMARY BUILDING WALLS, SO
THOSE ARE WALLS THAT DON'T FACE A PUBLIC STREET. WE ARE PROPOSING TO EXTEND A MINIMUM SIGN ALLOWANCE FOR SKYWAY BUSINESSES AND EXEMPTING DIRECTORY SIGNS. SO THOSE WOULD BE SIGNS ON THE EXTERIOR OF A BUILDING TELLING PEOPLE ON THE STREET WHAT'S ON THE INSIDE OF A BUILDING.
IN TERMS OF ALLOWING NEW SIGN TYPES, WE ARE LOOKING TO ALLOW LIGHT PROJECTION SIGNS, THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF AN ARTISTIC APPLICATION ON A HISTORIC STRUCTURE. BUT THIS WOULD ALLOW ADVERTISEMENT IN THE FORM OF LIGHT PROJECTIONS DOWNTOWN. THIS IS GREAT FOR HISTORIC BUILDINGS WHERE WE DON'T WANT TO
HAVE SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON A STRUCTURE. WE ARE ALSO PROPOSING TO ALLOW PORTABLE SIGNS ALSO KNOWN AS SANDWICH BOARDS AND BUILDING WRAP SIGNS AS A FIRST STEP ON SKYWAY BRIDGES.
SKYWAY BRIDGES WERE ALSO SEEN AS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR INCREASING VIBRANCY DOWNTOWN. SO WE'RE CARVING OUT SOME ALLOWANCES FOR SKYWAY BRIDGES AND WHAT YOU CAN DO ON THEM AND INSIDE OF THEM. WE'RE PROPOSING TO ALLOW PERMANENT ART, TEMPORARY ART,
AND TEMPORARY ON PREMISES SIGNS FOR NO LONGER THAN 90 DAYS AS WELL AS ALLOWING EVENTS WITHIN SKYWAY BRIDGES. IN TERMS OF CHANGES FOR ON PREMISES SIGNS THAT WOULD ALLOW
CHANGES CITY WIDE, THESE ARE PRIMARILY PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS SO WE ARE SIMPLIFYING THE PERMIT FEE. IT'S CURRENTLY A TIERED FEE AND WE WOULD BE MOVING TO A FLAT FEE. WE ARE PROPOSING TO REVISE REGULATIONS FOR TEMPORARY SIGNS TO A 60 DAY MAXIMUM, EXEMPTING SIREN REPLACEMENTS FROM PERMIT REQUIREMENTS.
SO IF YOU'RE AN EXISTING BUSINESS OR A NEW BUSINESS MOVING INTO AN EXISTING SPACE THAT ALREADY HAS SIGNS, YOU WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO PULL A PERMIT FOR THAT. THAT'S JUST A COST SAVING FOR SMALL BUSINESSES WE'RE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT. THE OTHER THING THAT WE THINK WILL BE A REALLY INTERESTING AND
WONDERFUL IMPROVEMENT FOR THE CITY IS AN EXEMPTION FOR PAINTED WALL SIGNS. SO GHOST SIGNS MOVING INTO THE MURALS AND ADVERTISEMENTS SEEN ON LAKE STREET TODAY. THIS WOULD JUST ALLOW THESE PAINTED WALL SIGNS TO OCCUR ANYWHERE ON A BUILDING AS LONG
AS THEY MEET HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS IN THAT DISTRICT FOR SIGNS. THE MAJORITY OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES FOR ON PREMISES SIGNS OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN THAT DON'T APPLY CITY WIDE ARE REALLY FIXES
FOR SPECIFIC USES OR SPECIFIC DISTRICTS. SO WE ARE PROPOSING TO REMOVE A ROOF SIGN PENALTY THAT WAS INITIALLY ENACTED TO ENSURE THAT ROOF SIGNS WEREN'T HAVING AN OUTSIZED IMPACT ON COMMERCIAL CORRI CORRIDORS. BUT THIS WOULD REMOVE THE PENALTY AND JUST ALLOW ROOF
SIGNS TO BE COUNTED IN A STANDARD WAY, THE WAY ANY OTHER SIGN WOULD BE COUNTED. WE ARE ALSO PROPOSING TO INCREASE THE SIGN AREA ALLOWANCES FOR CM3 PROPERTIES. SO THAT WOULD ALLOW MORE SIGNAGE OR INCREASED SIGNAGE ALONG OUR
COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS FOR OUR PROPERTIES TO MATCH WHAT CM4 PROPERTIES ARE CURRENTLY GIVEN. THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS UNINTENTIONALLY ROLLED BACK DURING THE LAND USE REZONING PROPERTY. IT WOULD REINSTATE SIGN ALLOWANCES FOR NEW BUSINESSES
AND NEW BUSINESSES COMING IN COULD ENJOY THAT EXISTING SIGNAGE THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED. SO THE NEXT BUCKET OF CHANGES WE'RE PROPOSING ARE AROUND OUR OFF PREMISES SIGNAGE, THESE ARE OTHERWISE KNOWN AS BILLBOARDS.
WE ARE AT A UNIQUE PLACE IN TIME WITH OUR BILLBOARD SYSTEM. SO WE ARE DOING ALL OF THIS VISIONING WORK AROUND DOWNTOWN AND THINKING ABOUT REVITALIZATION AND VIBRANCY EFFORTS AND HOW BILLBOARDS CAN PLAY A ROLE IN THAT.
BUT WE ARE LOOKING AT A STAGNANT BILLBOARD CREDIT SYSTEM. OUR BILLBOARD SYSTEM HAS BEEN IN THE PLACE FOR THE PAST DECADE. IT INCENTIVIZES NEIGHBORHOODS OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN IN ORDER TO OBTAIN A CREDIT. THOSE CREDITS CAN BE USED TO BUILD BILLBOARDS WITHIN OUR DOWNTOWN OR OUR HIGHWAYS.
WITHIN THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS, WE'VE REALLY SEEN THAT PROGRAM STAGNATE. WE'RE NOT SEEING THE REMOVAL OF BILLBOARDS THAT WE ONCE WERE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. THAT BRINGS US TO A MOMENT WHERE WE CAN CONSIDER HOW WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH REGULATING BILLBOARDS THROUGH A NEW PROGRAM.
THE FIRST RECOMMENDATION WE'RE PROPOSING IS TO RETIRE THE SIGN CREDIT SYSTEM, SO NO LONGER REQUIRE CREDITS FOR BUILDING NEW BILLBOARDS BUT TO PROHIBIT THE INSTALLATION OF NEW BILLBOARDS AND THE CONVERSION OF BILLBOARDS FROM STATIC TO DIGITAL IN A TIME
LIMITED SENSE I WILL DISCUSS FURTHER. WE ARE ALSO PROPOSING TO DETER SUB SU
SUBSIDIZATION OF VACANT STRUCTURES OR UNDERUTILIZED PROPERTY. SO IF YOUR PROPERTY IS VACANT, YOU WOULD BE REQUIRED TO REMOVE THAT BILLBOARD. TODAY WE HAVE PROPERTIES THAT HAVE PUSHED BACK FROM REDEVELOPMENT BECAUSE THEY'RE STILL ROBTAINING REVENUE FROM
BILLBOARDS, THIS WOULD PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING IN THE FUTURE. WE ARE ALSO PROPOSING AN EXEMPTION OF OFF PREMISES SIGNS REGULATIONS FOR SPORTS AND CIVIC P EVENTS DOWNTOWN. SOME OF OUR MOST LOVED SIGNS DOWNTOWN IN RELATION TO OUR
SPORTS TEAM IN PARTICULAR CURRENTLY ARE NOT CONFORMING TO OUR CODE. AND THIS WOULD ALLOW THOSE TYPES OF SIGNS LIKE OUR TIMBERWOLVES BANNER TO OCCUR LEGALLY IN THE CITY. AND WE ARE PROPOSING OFF PREMISES SIGN REGULATIONS FOR SIGNS LOCATED ON CITY-OWNED
PROPERTIES. THAT GIVES THE CITY THE OPPORTUNITY TO DETERMINE HOW WE WOULD LIKE TO HANDLE BILLBOARDS ON CITY-OWNED PROPERTIES INTO THE FUTURE IF WE WOULD LIKE TO PURSUE THAT OPTION. SO TO MOVE BACK TO THE RATIONALE
FOR THE PROHIBITION, THE MAJORITY OF THE DISCUSSION AT CITY PLANNING COMMISSION WAS AROUND THE CODE REGULATION THAT STATES THAT NEW BILLBOARDS WOULD BE PROHIBITED AND THE CONVERSION OF BILLBOARDS FROM STATIC TO
DIGITAL WOULD BE PROHIBITED. STAFF HAS ALWAYS TALKED ABOUT THIS AS A PAUSE. THIS WOULD BE TIME LIMITED. WHILE THERE ISN'T AN ORDINANCE
TO ENACT A DATE WHERE REGULATIONS WOULD SUNSET, THIS IS ABSOLUTELY INTENDED TO BE A PAUSE ON ALLOWING NEW BILLBOARDS WHILE WE CREATE A NEW SYSTEM. AND WE HAVE STAFF AND POLICY MEMBER SUPPORT ON THAT. SO THERE ARE THREE THINGS WE
WOULD LIKE TO DO WHEN CREATING THIS NEW SYSTEM WHILE THIS PAUSE IS OCCURRING. FIRSTLY, THE CITY IS CURRENTLY COMPLETING A CULTURE SCAPES VISIONING PROCESS. OUR ARTS AND CULTURAL AFFAIRS PROCESS HAS BEEN WORKING WITH ARTISTS AND PLACE MAKERS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS AROUND THE IDEA OF WHAT OUR DOWNTOWN COULD
BE. AND OUT OF THAT WORK IS GOING TO COME SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS AROUND HOW BILLBOARDS CAN BE USED AS A TOOL FOR VIBRANCY. THE SECOND IS THAT WE ARE PLANNING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A LEGISLATIVE ASK TO ALLOW REVENUE
SHARING OR SOME OTHER REVENUE GENERATION PROCESS FOR NEW BILLBOARDS. AND SO THIS HAS BEEN A POPULAR IDEA IN CITIES LIKE DENVER AND ATLANTA AND SAN ANTONIO WHERE NEW BILLBOARDS GENERATE REVENUE FOR ARTS AND CULTURAL PROGRAMMING, FOR PUBLIC ARTS AND
FOR OTHER INITIATIVES. THE CITY IS NOT CURRENTLY PERMITTED TO UNDERTAKE SUCH AN EFFORT, BUT WE WILL BE ASKING THE LEGISLATURE AT THIS UPCOMING SESSION TO ALLOW US TO DO SO. SO WHETHER THAT BE A LARGER PERMIT FEE OR A REVENUE SHARING
MODEL OR A TAXING DISTRICT, THE IDEA OF ALLOWING BILLBOARDS IN A VERY THOUGHTFUL WAY FOR A SPECIFIC PUBLIC PURPOSE IS APPEALING TO OUR POLICYMAKERS AND ALSO TO STAFF. THE OTHER POINT OF SUCCESS
AROUND THESE PROGRAMS IN OTHER CITIES IS THAT THOSE CITIES GENERALLY DO NOT PERMIT BILLBOARDS OTHERWISE. SO THIS IS MOMENTUM BUILT UP AND A DEMAND BUILT UP BY NOT ALLOWING BILLBOARDS THAT ALLOWS THIS BUY IN INTO THESE REVENUE GENERATION PROGRAMS TO OCCUR.
CPED WOULD ALSO LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO OUTREACH WITH DOWNTOWN PROPERTY OWNERS AND WITH OUR RESIDENTS. SO WE HAVE MET FOR MANY, MANY, MANY HOURS WITH MEDIA COMPANIES AND WITH BILLBOARD OPERATORS AND PROPERTY OWNERS WHO HAVE BILLBOARDS OVER THE LAST YEAR TO
TALK ABOUT THE BILLBOARD PROGRAM AND WHAT IT COULD BE IN THE FUTURE. AND WHERE WE HAVEN'T HAD THE OPPORTUNITY IS TO SPEAK WITH RESIDENTS ABOUT HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT BILLBOARDS. IT IS NOT A STRAIGHTFORWARD ISSUE. IT IS VERY NUANCED ABOUT HOW PEOPLE FEEL ABOUT BILLBOARDS SO THIS WOULD JUST GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE THAT
BALANCE IN THIS CONVERSATION. AND SO AT PLANNING COMMISSION, THERE WAS A RECOMMENDATION TO ALLOW A DATE INTO THE ORDINANCE. THE MEMORANDUM THAT WAS PREPARED FOR YOU THAT WAS SENT PRIOR TO THE BHZ HEARING OUTLINED THE REASONS THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE AND THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE DOESN'T BELIEVE THAT WE CAN ADD A SUNSET DATE INTO THE ORDINANCE. IF THE COMMITTEE IS INTERESTED IN NOT MOVING FORWARD WITH A PROHIBITION AROUND BILLBOARDS AND ALLOWING THE SYSTEM TO STAY IN PLACE, THEN WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT AN AMENDMENT BE
MADE TO KEEP THE CREDIT SYSTEM IN PLACE, BECAUSE THE CREDIT SYSTEM IS REALLY WHAT'S PROHIBITING THE PROLIFERATION OF BILLBOARDS. AND SO AT LEAST WITH THE CURRENT SYSTEM IN PLACE, WE'LL HAVE THE SAME PROCESS THAT HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS
WHERE IF YOU'RE IN A DISTRICT THAT REQUIRES CREDITS, YOU HAVE TO GET CREDITS. IF YOU'RE IN A DISTRICT THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE CREDITS, YOU DON'T NEED CREDITS, BUT WE SORT OF STAY THE SAME WHILE WE EXAMINE HOW WE CAN MOVE FORWARD. SO STAFF WOULD JUST ASK TODAY THAT YOU MAKE A RECOMMENDATION
TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE STAFF'S LANGUAGE AS WE PROPOSED IT. BUT I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A LOT OF NUANCE TO THESE DISCUSSIONS. AND SO I'M HAPPY TO STAND FOR QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.
I WILL RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. I JUST WANT TO THANK SARA ROMAN, YOU'VE DONE AN AMAZING JOB ON THIS AND MEG AND JASON ALSO FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAVE JUST DONE A REALLY GREAT JOB AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS
TOGETHER FOR OVER A YEAR SO THANK YOU SO MUCH. I BELIEVE THAT THESE ORDINANCE CHANGES WILL REALLY HELP WITH THE VIBRANCY OF OUR COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS, NOT ONLY DOWNTOWN BUT THROUGHOUT THE GREAT STREETS OF OUR CITY, THROUGH THE CULTURAL DISTRICT, THROUGH ALL OF THE SMALL BUSINESS CORRIDORS.
THROUGHOUT ALL WARDS OF THE CITY. SO I THINK THERE'S A HUGE BENEFIT TO DOING THIS. AND I JUST WANT TO NAME A FEW OF THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE HAVE IN THIS ORDINANCE THAT I'M MOST EXCITED ABOUT MOVING FORWARD FOR APPROVAL. ONE IS THAT PAINTED WALL SIGNS WILL NO LONGER BE REGULATED CITY WIDE.
THIS REMOVES THE NEED FOR OUR COSTLY PERMIT FOR SMALL BUSINESSES AND CREATES MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR ARTISTS. ACTUALLY ONE OF OUR VIBRANT STORE FRONTS AWARDEES OWNS A BUSINESS THAT DOES PAINTED WALL SIGNS CALLED SHARP SIGNS, YOU'VE PROBABLY SEEN THEM AROUND ALL THROUGHOUT THE SOUTH SIDE.
AND IT'S A REALLY AFFORDABLE WAY FOR A SMALL BUSINESS TO ADVERTISE THEIR BUILDING WITHOUT HAVING TO INVEST IN SOME OF THESE REALLY EXPENSIVE PHYSICAL STRUCTURES OF A SIGN. SO I'M EXCITED THAT WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH DEREGULATING THAT AND MAKING THAT MORE ACCESSIBLE. I'M ALSO EXCITED ABOUT EXPANDING
SIGNAGE ALLOWANCES IN GENERAL. I THINK THAT BLADE SIGNS AND THE TYPES OF SIGNS THAT HELP PEDESTRIANS NAVIGATE A CORRIDOR AS THEY'RE WALKING AROUND AND FIND THEIR DESTINATION ARE A REALLY IMPORTANT TOOL FOR US TO IMPROVE WALKABILITY IN OUR CITY,
IMPROVE THE VIBRANCY OF UPTOWN AND OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WERE SO DEEPLY COMMITTED TO REVITALIZING. ALSO HAPPY THAT BILLBOARDS WILL NO LONGER BE ALLOWED TO SUBSIDIZE VACANT BUILDINGS. I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT
VALUE TO BE KEEPING IN MIND IN PHASE TWO AS WELL. BECAUSE I THINK THAT THAT MIGHT HOLD BACK SOME OWNERS FROM MA MAKING INVESTMENTS FROM THEIR BUILDINGS THAT THEY SHOULD BE MAKING THAT WE WANT THEM TO MAKE. I ALSO AM GLAD THAT REPLACING SIGNS WITH SIMILAR ONES WILL NO
LONGER REQUIRE A PERMIT AND A FEE. I THINK THAT STREAMLINING THAT PROCESS IS GOOD FOR BUSINESSES. SKYWAYS IS SOMETHING WE WORKED A LOT ON AND CREATING MORE ALLOWANCES TO ADVERTISE WHAT'S ON THE SKYWAYS IN THE STREET
LEVEL SO THAT THE PEDESTRIANS AND VISITORS TO OUR CITY CAN SEE WHAT'S UP THERE AND NAVIGATE UP THERE. SO THOSE OPPORTUNITIES EVEN FOR THE DIRECTORIES ON THE GROUND-FLOOR LEVEL TO ADVERTISE SKYWAY LEVEL BUSINESSES WILL BE AN IMPROVEMENT. AND THEN FINALLY NEW SIGN TYPES LIKE BUILDING WRAPS AND LIGHT
PROJECTIONS ARE THINGS THAT I'VE EXPERIENCED IN CITIES THAT I'VE LIVED IN LIKE MONTREAL WHICH IS A VERY CREATIVE CITY. AND REALLY HELP WITH THE ARTS AND CULTURAL EXPERIENCE OF THE CITY AND WILL OFFER I THINK A LOT OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR ARTISTS AND CREATIVES TO EXPERIMENT MORE
AND MAKE OUR DOWNTOWN A REALLY EXCITING PLACE TO BE. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL OF THE WORK ON THIS. I'M GOING TO MOVE THIS FOR APPROVAL TODAY. AND I'M ALSO BRINGING AN AMENDMENT. SO I WILL EXPLAIN THE AMENDMENT BRIEFLY AND MOVE THAT FOR APPROVAL AS WELL.
THIS AMENDMENT IS RELATED TO SOME FEEDBACK WE GOT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ABOUT OFF PREMISES SIGNS. AND SO SOME OF THE CONCERNS WERE ABOUT THE PAUSE ON NEW BILL D BILLBOARDS AND CONVERSION TO DIGITAL BILLBOARDS IN THE AREA NEAR THE TARGET CENTER AND GIVEN
THE UNCERTAINTY OF THE FUTURE OF THE TARGET CENTER, I DON'T WANT TO TAKE AWAY AN OPTION THAT THOSE BUILDING OWNERS CURRENTLY HAVE TO DRIVE MORE TRAFFIC AND VIBRANCY OF THEIR BUILDINGS.
SO THIS AMENDMENT ALLOWS FOR THE BUILDING OWNERS IN THE DOWNTOWN WEST ENTERTAINMENT BILLBOARD DISTRICT TO TRANSITION THEIR EXISTING BILLBOARDS TO DIGITAL ONLY IN THIS SPECIFIC AREA OR BASICALLY PRESERVES THE ABILITY THAT THEY CURRENTLY HAVE TO
CONVERT THEIR STATIC BILLBOARDS TO DIGITAL IN THIS AREA. SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO MOTION TO APPROVE THIS AMEN T AMENDMENT. I'M GOING TO MOVE TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AS A WHOLE AND ASK THAT MY COLLEAGUES SUPPORT IT.
WE HAVE VERY LITTLE TIME LEFT IN OUR TERM AND I WILL NOT BE COMING BACK NEXT TERM, SO I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT IN HELPING US GET THIS ACROSS THE FINISH LINE. I ALSO ASK FOR COLLEAGUES TO CONTINUE CARRYING THE BATON ON PHASE TWO NEXT YEAR. I KNOW OUR IGR CHAIR CHOWDHURY
WILL BE WILLING TO GO TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE FOR SOME OF THE ASKS THAT STAFF HAVE LAID OUT TOO. THANK YOU. >> I PUT MYSELF IN QUEUE. I ALSO WANT TO SAY THANK YOU AND TWO TOPICS, ONE IS THE BILLBOARD
AND THE OTHER ONE IS THE LIGHTS. TECHNOLOGY IS GROWING. LIGHTS DO BRING CUSTOMERS TO YOUR PLACE AND I'D LIKE TO SEE
IT LESS REGULATION IN THAT SENSE. AND NOT JUST FOLKS IN DOWNTOWN, BUT WHAT ARE WE DOING ON OUR CULTURAL CORRIDORS, ON FRANKLIN, LAKE STREET, PLACES LIKE THAT. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT'S INCLUDED IN THIS ORDINANCE THAT YOU CAN HIGHLIGHT ON THOSE
CULTURAL CORRIDORS OR EVEN OUTSIDE DOWNTOWN. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. SO WE DO HAVE THOSE FEW SETS OF IMPROVEMENTS AROUND ADDITIONAL SIGN ALLOCATIONS FOR CM3 DISTRICTS. BUT CERTAINLY STAFF WOULD BE MORE THAN WILLING TO LOOK AT
MAKING ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS INTO THE FUTURE AROUND AMENDMENTS FOR OUR AREAS OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN. I THINK DOWNTOWN IS A GREAT PLACE TO KIND OF TEST SOME OF THESE REGULATIONS AND SEE HOW THEY FIT WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF A MORE HEAVILY URBAN ENVIRONMENT.
AND THEN WE CAN MOVE TOWARDS OUR OTHER CORRIDORS MOVING WITH THE SUCCESS OF THIS PROJECT. >> YES. AND ALSO I AGREE, I THINK THE BILLBOARD SYSTEM IS OUTDATED, NEEDS TO BE IMPROVED. I UNDERSTAND THAT MAYBE IT'S LIKE 1 OR 2 COMPANIES THAT ARE PROBABLY OWN THE MAJORITY OF IT.
AND I'D LIKE TO SEE IT MORE OPEN TO BUSINESSES AND THE SYSTEM WHICH I DON'T UNDERSTAND MAJORITY OF THE TIME. BUT WE'RE GETTING RID OF IT SO
THAT'S A GOOD THING. LET'S MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE CREATING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR NOT JUST A COUPLE COMPANIES, BUT MORE LIKE PRIVATE OWNERS, THE COMMUNITY OWNERS, THE BUSINESSES AND EXPANDING THAT. I LIKE TO SEE IT.
SO YEAH LET'S PUT A DATE AND TIME AND GET THAT ORDINANCE GOING. I WILL RECOGNIZE VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. I WANTED TO SEE IF YOU COULD JUST SHARE A LITTLE BIT MORE
ABOUT HOW A REVENUE SHARING MODEL COULD OPERATE. BECAUSE THE THING THAT I AM VERY SENSITIVE TO IS DOING A CONVERSION FROM STATIC TO DIGITAL WITHOUT AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE REVENUE SHARING. AND I WANT TO GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF LIKE IF WE WORK
WITH OUR STATE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION TO GET SOMETHING, WHAT DO WE SEEK TO GET TO BENEFIT THE REST OF DOWNTOWN AND OUR CITY AND THE PLAN FOR VIBRANCY THERE? >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY, SO THE WAY THAT WE
ARE PROPOSING TO BRING THIS TO THE LEGISLATURE IS IN AN OPEN-ENDED MANNER. SO THERE ARE SEVERAL WAYS THAT A REVENUE SHARING MODEL CAN OCCUR. IT COULD BE A TAXING DISTRICT WHERE NEW BILLBOARDS ARE TAXED ON A PORTION OF THEIR REVENUE. IT COULD BE A REVENUE SHARE
AGREEMENT THAT THEY'RE REQUIRED TO ENTER INTO. SO A PORTION OF THE REVENUE THAT'S GENERATED FROM THOSE BILLBOARDS GOES DIRECTLY TO THE CITY, THE STATE LEGISLATURE WOULD DECIDE IF THAT'S THE GENERAL FUND OR INTO A SPECIFIC PLACE. SO FOR EXAMPLE, DENVER DIVERTS ALL OF THAT FUNDING INTO
SPECIFIC CATEGORIES FOR ARTS IMPROVEMENTS AND PUBLIC ARTS AND FESTIVALS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. SO THAT'S A BIT OF BARGAINING WITH THE STATE LEGISLATURE IF THEY WOULD DECIDE TO MOVE THAT FORWARD. AND THERE'S ALSO A FEE OPTION WHERE THE FEE FOR A BILLBOARD WOULD BE X AMOUNT OF DOLLARS.
CURRENTLY FEES ARE LIMITED TO THE COST THAT IT TAKES TO ADMINISTER CODE. AND SO THAT FEE FOR A BILLBOARD IS JUST THE FEE THAT IT TAKES US TO INSPECT THAT BILLBOARD. OTHER CITIES, LIKE SAN ANTONIO, THOSE FEES CAN BE UPWARDS OF HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS
AND THAT MONEY THEN GOES EITHER TO THE GENERAL FUND OR IS DIVERTED TO SPECIFIC FUNDING MECHANISMS THROUGH CITY COUNCIL. AND SO WHERE THE DOLLARS ARE REALLY OCCURRING IS THROUGH
DIGITIZATION. THERE IS A PORTION OF REVENUE THAT IS GENERATED THROUGH STATIC BILLBOARDS. BUT THERE IS MUCH MORE REVENUE GENERATED THROUGH A DIGITAL BILLBOARD. SO IF WE DON'T DO A PAUSE ON THE -- A TEMPORARY PAUSE, A PROHIBITION, ON CONVERSIONS FROM
STATIC TO DIGITAL BILLBOARDS, WE ARE IN ESSENCE LEAVING THAT MONEY ON THE TABLE TO HAVE A FUTURE REVENUE GENERATION SYSTEM THAT COULD GO INTO ARTS EFFORTS OR ELSEWHERE. >> YEAH, THANK YOU. I FEEL LIKE THAT'S REALLY SHOULD BE ONE OF OUR BIG PRIORITIES LOOKING INTO THE NEXT FEW YEARS
AND THAT'S WHY I FEEL PRETTY CONFIDENT ABOUT US HAVING A PROHIBITION FOR NOW. AND I FEEL PRETTY CONFIDENT ABOUT US PURSUING THAT PHASE TWO. I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF DEEP ALIGNMENT BETWEEN COUNCIL MEMBERS, THE MAYOR'S OFFICE, OUR
CITY STAFF ON THAT. I DID WANT TO ASK A QUESTION JUST ABOUT THE AMENDMENT THAT'S BEFORE US. BECAUSE IT'S ESSENTIALLY CREATING AN EXEMPTION FOR A CERTAIN AREA OF THE CITY. COULD YOU KIND OF SPEAK TO WHAT
WE THINK TO LEAVE OR JUST SOME THOUGHTS ON STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T INCLUDE AN EXEMPTION IN THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE AND JUST WANTED TO GET A STRONGER FEELING FOR YOUR THOUGHTS ON IT. >> VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY, COULD YOU CLARIFY WHICH EXEMPTION YOU'RE SPEAKING OF?
THE CITY-OWNED BUILDINGS EXEMPTION? >> NO, THE ALTERATIONS FOR DIGITIZATION IN THE DOWNTOWN WEST ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT. >> THE MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN?
>> YES, EXACTLY. >> SO THIS SPEAKS DIRECTLY OF THE QUESTION OF ALLOWING THIS MOMENTUM TO BUILD FOR ALLOWING THIS REVENUE SHARING MODEL. ORIGINALLY, WE HAD JUST CONSIDERED THIS PAUSE TO BE A PAUSE ON ANY NEW BILLBOARDS AND ON THE ALTERATION OF BILLBOARDS.
WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH CHANGES TO EXISTING SIGNS TO ALLOW THEM TO CHANGE AREA OR HEIGHT WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF WHAT'S EXISTING, BUT THE DIGITIZATION IS REALLY THE ALTERATION THAT WAS MOST IMPORTANT TO MAINTAIN THIS IDEA
AROUND CREATING A NEW SYSTEM. AND THEN THE DOWNTOWN WEST ENTERTAINMENT BILLBOARD QUESTION WAS AROUND THE COMMENTS WE RECEIVED AT PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE CONCERN FROM DOWNTOWN PROPERTY OWNERS THAT HAVE BILLBOARDS THAT THIS PROHIBITION JUST WOULD NOT END AND WE WOULD
NOT REINSTATE THEIR ABILITY TO HAVE DIGITAL BILLBOARDS INTO THE FUTURE. >> YEAH, THANK YOU. I HEAR THAT CONCERN. I FEEL LIKE AGAIN, YOU HAVE AA TRIFECTA IN COUNCIL MEMBERS,
MAYOR'S OFFICE AND STAFF COMMITTING TO PHASE TWO WHICH IS THAT'S A BIG DEAL IN THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS. CAN YOU APPROXIMATE HOW MANY STATIC BILLBOARDS ARE IN THE
DOWNTOWN WEST ENTERTAINMENT BILLBOARD DISTRICT? I'M TRYING TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING OF HOW MANY COULD DIGITIZE SHOULD WE APPROVE THIS AMENDMENT? >> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION ON HAND. WE COULD CERTAINLY DO A WALK
THROUGH AND GET THAT INFORMATION FOR YOU. BUT IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT I HAVE IN FRONT OF ME. I IMAGINE IT'S A HANDFUL. >> YEAH. I THINK THE THING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF IS WHAT'S THE LEVEL OF IMPACT THAT WE WOULD SEE.
HOW MANY BILLBOARDS WOULD WE SEE DIGITIZE IN THAT AREA SHOULD WE MAKE THE CHANGE? WITHOUT THAT INFORMATION, I'M NOT ABLE TO SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT BEFORE US. I DO FEEL LIKE IT'S IMPORTANT
FOR US TO DO THE VISIONING TO ALSO ENGAGE WITH RESIDENTS, BUT EVEN MORE IMPORTANTLY HAVE THE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE FUTURE OF DOWNTOWN AND THE REST OF THE CITY BECAUSE DOWNTOWN IS A HUGE PART OF OUR TAX BASE WITH OUR
STATE LEGISLATURE AND WORK WITH THEM TO SEE WHAT THEIR APPETITE IS TO MAKE CHANGES FOR REVENUE SHARING. >> COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. AND THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN, FOR WORKING ON THIS.
I KNOW YOU SAID IT'S BEEN OVER A YEAR, BUT IT REALLY DOES FEEL A LITTLE RUSHED FOR ME. AND IT'S NOT BECAUSE YOU ALL HAVEN'T DONE A FANTASTIC JOB AT TRYING TO FIGURE OUT SOME SOLUTIONS. I JUST FEEL LIKE THERE'S NO CLEAR VISION. AND I'M NOT -- MOST OF THE CONVERSATIONS ARE ABOUT DOWNTOWN
AND I'M MORE CONCERNED ABOUT LAURIE AVENUE, UPPER HARBOR TERMINAL. YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE PLACES ON THE NORTH SIDE WHERE THERE'S JUST LIKE A RANDOM BILLBOARD, LIKE WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE FOR THE COMMUNITY, RIGHT? WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE OVER
THE DAIRY QUEEN ON LYNDALE, ALL THESE RANDOM ONE-OFF BILLBOARDS AND I DON'T FEEL LIKE WHAT I'VE HAD A CHANCE TO UNDERSTAND REALLY ANSWERS QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE FOR THE WARD THAT I LIVE IN. THE FREEWAY IS IN MY WARD, RIGHT? WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE?
WE'VE RECENTLY SEEN PEOPLE TAKE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN ON DISPLAY, THAT CAR THAT'S BEEN THERE FOR I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY YEARS OVER 94 IN WARD 4 HAS BEEN TAKEN DOWN. AND THIS MAKES ME FEEL LIKE MAYBE IT COULD HAVE STAYED, IT'S ART AND WE'RE DOING SOME DIFFERENT THINGS WITH ART IN THE
CITY NOW ON DISPLAY. SO IT'S JUST A LITTLE, IT JUST DOESN'T FEEL CLEAR TO ME. AND I SUPPORT WHAT COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN IS DOING. I LOVE THAT YOU SAID THERE'S OPPORTUNITY FOR PHASE TWO OR AMENDMENTS AND THOSE THINGS IN THE FUTURE.
AND I WILL BE IN TOUCH TO MAKE SURE THAT WARD 4 CURRENTLY AND FUTURE PROJECTS CAN BENEFIT FROM THIS. I HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS AROUND REVENUE ESTIMATES AND LIKE WHAT THAT MEANS FOR WHAT EXISTS IN WARD 4 AND HOW DO WE, IS THERE A
WAY FOR US TO OFFSET SOME OF THAT REVENUE TO HELP WITH THE GROWING PROPERTY TAXES AND YOU KNOW, THE THINGS THAT PEOPLE ARE ASKING ABOUT SPECIFICALLY IN MY WARD. SO MY OFFICE WILL BE IN TOUCH TO SET UP A BRIEFING PROBABLY BEFORE THIS NEXT MEETING.
I'M GOING TO SUPPORT IT TODAY, BUT I REALLY DO WANT TO WORK WITH YOU ALL ON WHAT PHASE TWO OF THIS LOOKS LIKE AND HOW WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT IT'S BENEFICIAL TO COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE BILLBOARDS AND THIS IS NOT JUST LIKE A CONVERSATION THAT IS FELT LIKE IT'S ABOUT DOWNTOWN.
THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. SEEING NO ONE ELSE, I WILL ASK CITY CLERK TO CALL THE -- >> MR. CHAIR, APOLOGIZE FOR THE INTERRUPTION. JOEL FUSSI FROM THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. PROCEDURELY, IT MIGHT BE BEST TO VOTE ON COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN'S MOTION THAT SHE'S PUT BEFORE THE COMMITTEE. I ALSO WANTED TO NOTE IN THE LIMS FILE IN THE STAFF MEMO DOCUMENT, THERE IS ALSO ON THE SECOND PAGE A RECOMMENDED TEXT
AMENDMENT OR A MOTION THAT JUST CHANGES A LITTLE BIT OF WORDING, BUT IT'S ONE THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE RECOMMENDS FOR A DIFFERENT SECTION. IT JUST KIND OF LOCKS IN A COUPLE OF THINGS ON THE WORDING THAT WE THINK WOULD BE ADVISABLE
TO ADOPT AS WELL. SO IT'S CERTAINLY UP TO YOU AS THE CHAIR, BUT I THINK IT MIGHT BE BEST TO VOTE ON COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN'S INITIAL MOTION AND THEN WE WOULD ASK THAT SOMEBODY MOVE THIS SUBSEQUENT MOTION AFTER THAT.
>> IS THERE AN OPTION TO DO THIS ON THE COUNCIL MEETING? I HAVEN'T SEEN THE LANGUAGE. >> I WOULD ASK CHAIR, IF YOU COULD SEND ME THAT PROPOSED AMENDMENT, I'D BE HAPPY TO LOOK AT IT AND THEN BRING IT AT COUNCIL NEXT WEEK.
>> IT WAS THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS IN THE MEMORANDUM. SO THE CLARIFICATIONS AROUND EVENTS AND NONRELATED EVENTS FOR OFF PREMISES SIGNS. SO CIVIC, CULTURAL, AND SPORTS ORGANIZATION SIGNAGE, AND ALSO
EVENT SIGNAGE, THERE'S A CLARIFICATION THERE. AND THEN A CLARIFICATION AROUND THE REQUIREMENT THAT THERE BE A CONTRACT IN PLACE FOR A BILLBOARD TO BE CONSTRUCTED ON CITY-OWNED PROPERTY. >> OKAY. FINE WITH THAT. LET'S JUST TAKE --
>> CHAIR OSMAN, MAY I JUST SPEAK. THAT LANGUAGE IS ALREADY IN THE REVISED ORDINANCE. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT. A LOT EASIER NOW. FIRST WE'LL TAKE THE COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN AMENDMENT. CITY CLERK, CAN YOU PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL. >> YES, ON CASHMAN'S AMENDMENT. COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. >> AYE. >> CASHMAN. >> AYE. >> JENKINS. >> AYE. >> CHAVEZ. >> AYE. >> VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY. >> NAY. >> CHAIR OSMAN. >> AYE.
>> THERE ARE FIVE AYES AND ONE NAY. >> THAT MOTION PASSES. NOW PLEASE CALL THE ROLL FOR AMENDED LANGUAGE. >> COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. >> AYE. >> CASHMAN.
>> AYE. >> JENKINS. >> AYE. >> CHAVEZ. >> AYE. >> VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY. >> AYE. >> AND CHAIR OSMAN. >> AYE. >> THERE ARE SIX AYES AND NO NAYS. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. THAT MOTION PASSES.
ALL RIGHT, WE DO HAVE ONE MORE ITEM LEFT ON THE AGENDA. LASTLY, WE WILL RECEIVE A REPORT PRESENTATION ON TENANT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE. I WILL WELCOME NICOLE GONZALEZ
TO PRESENT THAT ITEM.
WELCOME.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR OSMAN AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY NAME IS NICOLE GONZALEZ, THE MANAGER OF REGULATORY SERVICES ALTERNATIVE ENFORCEMENT TEAM. I'M HERE TODAY TO PRESENT ON THE TENANT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE LEGISLATIVE DIRECTIVE. THIS LEGISLATIVE DIRECTIVE
REQUESTED INFORMATION IN THREE PRIMARY AREAS. AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, IT'S ALWAYS OUR GOALS TO MINIMIZE DISPLACEMENT AND SUPPORT RENTERS WHO FACE COMPLEX HOUSING SITUATIONS. SO WE APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THIS LEGISLATIVE DIRECTIVE AND SHARE ABOUT THE
WAYS WE CAN PREVENT AND RESPOND TO DISPLACEMENT. AS IT RELATES TO THIS LEGISLATIVE DIRECTIVE, IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND WHEN A RENTER QUALIFIES FOR ASSISTANCE AND HOW FUNDS ARE GIVEN AND RECOVERED BY THE CITY.
TENANT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE HELPS TENANTS WHO ARE DISPLACED DUE TO SEVERE MAINTENANCE OR REPAIR ISSUES CAUSED BY A PROPERTY OWNER'S NEGLIGENCE. WHEN BOTH OF THESE CONDITIONS ARE MET, RENTERS MAY QUALIFY FOR RELOCATION ASSISTANCE EQUAL TO THREE MONTHS OF THE RENT THAT
THEY PAY. WHEN A RENTER QUALIFIES FOR RELOCATION ASSISTANCE, WE ISSUE AN ORDER TO THE PROPERTY OWNER, THEY HAVE TWO WEEKS TO PAY THE FUNDS. THEY CAN APPEAL IT WITHIN THAT TIME. IF THEY DO NOT PAY THE FUNDS, THEN THE CITY DOES. IF THE CITY PAYS THE FUNDS, THE RENTAL PROPERTY OWNER MUST PAY
BACK THE CITY. AND IF THEY CHOOSE NOT TO, IT GOES TO A PROPERTY TAX ASSESSMENT. THE CITY IS ONLY ALLOWED TO RECOVER RELOCATION FUNDS FROM A PROPERTY OWNER BECAUSE THE OWNER HELD LIABILITY IN THE ISSUE. THAT MEANS THAT EVENTS CAUSED BY FACTORS OUTSIDE THE PROPERTY
OWNER'S CONTROL SUCH AS ARSON, CRIMINAL ACTIVITY, NATURAL DISASTERS AND ISSUES EFFECTING ONLY PART OF THE UNIT DO NOT QUALIFY. THE PROCESS OF COLLECTING PAYMENTS FROM A PROPERTY ASSESSMENT TYPICALLY TAKES SEVERAL YEARS. IN MOST CASES, THE QUICKEST
TIMELINE FOR COLLECTION IS APPROXIMATELY TWO YEARS. SOME ASSESSMENTS MAY NEVER BE COLLECTED IF THE PROPERTY OWNER FAILS TO PAY THE PROPERTY TAXES AND THE PROPERTY GOES THROUGH TAX FORFEITURE. AS WE TALK ABOUT THE RECOVERY
RATE OF FUNDS, IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER HOW LONG IT CAN TAKE TO RECOVER THESE FUNDS. BETWEEN 2021 AND 2024, WE'VE GIVEN $170,523 TO DISPLACED RENTERS IN NEED. WE'VE BEEN VERY GRATEFUL TO BE ABLE TO OFFER THIS AS A RESOURCE
TO RENTERS WHEN THEY ARE FACING TOUGH CIRCUMSTANCES. AS FOR THE AMOUNT OF FUNDS RECOVERED BY THE CITY, WHILE THE AMOUNT LOOKS LOW AT THIS POINT IN TIME, IT DOES NOT CAPTURE THE FULL PICTURE. AS I MENTIONED, RECOVERY COSTS CAN TAKE YEARS AS CASES WORK THEIR WAY THROUGH THE APPEALS OR SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS. AS OF THE END OF OCTOBER, THERE
IS NEARLY $77,000 IN FUNDS THAT COULD STILL BE RECOVERED IN THE FUTURE. SOME OF THESE CASES ARE IN THE PHASE WHERE THE PROPERTY OWNER STILL HAS TIME TO PAY BACK THE CITY, AND OTHERS ARE WORKING
THEIR WAY THROUGH THE NORMAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROCESS WHICH WILL GIVE US ANOTHER CHANCE TO COLLECT THE FUNDS THROUGH PROPERTY TAX ASSESSMENTS. THERE ARE UNIQUE CASES THAT CONTRIBUTE TO THIS NUMBER BEING LOWER, SUCH AS PROPERTIES THAT WENT INTO TAX FORFEITURE, OR THE CITY WAIVED THE REPAYMENT OF
FUNDS DUE TO THE OWNER SHOWING PROOF THAT THEY WERE NOT NEGLIGENT. ONE FINAL FACTOR THAT SKEWS THIS DATA IS THE BELLOFFS CASE. THIS IN THIS SITUATION, RESIDENTS WERE DISPLACED BY FLOODING.
AND WE COULDN'T RECOVER ALL OF THE FUNDS AFTER DISCOVERING THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM HAD BEEN PROPERLY MAINTAINED. THE PROPERTY OWNER PROVIDED PROOF THAT HE WAS NOT AT FAULT, SO WE NEGOTIATED TO ALLOW ONLY A PARTIAL REIMBURSEMENT OF THE SUPPORT WE GAVE TO RENTERS.
NOW THAT WE HAVE A SOLID FOUNDATION OF THE CURRENT PROGRAM, I'LL ADDRESS NEEDED RESOURCES AND POLICY FRAMEWORK FOR AN EXPANDED TENANT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE THAT COVERS TEMPORARY DISPLACEMENT. AS MY TEAM AND I WORK TO ANSWER
THIS LEGISLATIVE DIRECTIVE, WE WORKED CLOSELY WITH THE CITY ATTORNEYS. WE FOUND THAT THE ONLY WAY WE COULD LEGALLY PROVIDE ASSISTANCE FOR TEMPORARY DISPLACEMENT MEANING SITUATIONS WHERE THE PROPERTY OWNER WAS NOT AT FAULT IS BY THE CITY AWARDING A GRANT TO RENTERS. TO BE CLEAR, THE CITY WOULD NOT
RECOVER THESE FUNDS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS BECAUSE ASKING THEM TO PAY FOR RELOCATION WHEN THEY WERE NOT AT FAULT WOULD VIOLATE THEIR DUE PROCESS. ADDITIONAL STAFF SUCH AS INSPECTORS IN SUPPORTING ROLES MAY ALSO BE NEEDED TO FULLY IMPLEMENT THIS. AND WE WOULD NEED TO CONDUCT A FULL STAFFING STUDY TO DETERMINE
HOW MANY STAFF WOULD BE NEEDED. WE WOULD USE THE CITY FUNDED GRANT FOR TWO PRIMARY INSTANCES. THE FIRST FOR ACTS OF GOD SUCH AS TORNADO OR FIRE DAMAGE THAT ARE BEYOND CONTROL OF BOTH THE
PROPERTY OWNER AND THE RENTER. SECONDLY, FOR ACTIONS ALSO BEYOND THE PROPERTY OWNER'S CONTROL THAT COULD RESULT IN THE PROPERTY BEING CONDEMNED. ASSISTANCE FOR THE RENTER WOULD GO UNTIL THE UNIT IS INHABITABLE AGAIN, THE TENANT HAS RELOCATED, THE MAXIMUM LENGTH OF TIME FOR
ASSISTANCE IS REACHED, OR WHEN A RENTER'S INSURANCE KICKS IN. WE RECOMMEND THREE TIMELINE CATEGORIES FOR DIFFERENT LEVELS OF ASSISTANCE. FOR IMMEDIATE ASSISTANCE WOULD BE UP TO 24 HOURS, AN EMERGENCY
HOTEL VOUCHER OR A STIPEND. FOR SHORT-TERM IS 24 TO 48 HOURS OR UP TO 72 DAYS FOR REPAIRS HAPPENING BUT NOT RESOLVED. AND MIDTERM 30 TO 60 DAYS IS
REQUIRING MORE TIME AND REINSPECTIONS. THERE ARE NOTABLE CHALLENGES RELATED TO THESE TIMELINES, THESE ARE OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR STAFF, BUT THEY'RE WORTH NOTING AS COUNCIL CONSIDERS RESEARCH NEEDS FOR SUCH A POLICY. FIRST CUTTING A CHECK NOR
RELOCATION ASSISTANCE RIGHT NOW TAKES TWO WEEKS UNDER CITY PROCESSES. BECAUSE APPROVALS ARE REQUIRED FOR MULTIPLE TEAMS IN REGULATORY SERVICES AND OTHER DEPARTMENTS, WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE AS QUICK AS THE POLICY WOULD REQUIRE. SECONDLY, WE WOULD LIKELY NEED
RESOURCES SUCH AS LONG-TERM CONTRACTS WITH HOTELS IN THE CITY THAT COULD QUICKLY TAKE IN PEOPLE WHEN NEEDED AND WE WOULD WANT MULTIPLE OPTIONS THROUGHOUT MINNEAPOLIS SO PEOPLE COULD STAY AS CLOSE TO THEIR HOMES AS POSSIBLE. THIRDLY, PROVIDING ASSISTANCE TO A LARGER NUMBER OF DISPLACED
RENTERS SUCH AS APARTMENTS THAT COULD HAVE 200 TO 300 RENTERS WOULD REQUIRE GREATER RESOURCES FROM THE CITY. AND WE CURRENTLY HAVE RENTERS DECLINE ASSISTANCE, BECAUSE IT MAY PUSH THEM ABOVE THE THRESHOLDS FOR OTHER INCOME
SUPPORT THEY RECEIVE. WE EXPECT TO SEE THE SAME THRESHOLDS FOR ANY SUPPORT WITH TEMPORARY DISPLACEMENT. TO HELP US GAUGE THE DEMAND FOR TEMPORARY DISPLACEMENT, WE FOUND ONLY SIX CASES THAT WERE ELIGIBLE FOR TENANT RELOCATION
ASSISTANCE OVER THE LAST FOUR YEARS. THESE WERE CASES WHERE ARSON CAUSED A FIRE, A BULLET STRUCK THE BUILDING'S FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM CAUSING FLOODING, AND THREE DIFFERENT SITUATIONS IN ORDER TO CORRECT APPLY TO JUST ONE BEDROOM, NOT THE ENTIRE
UNIT. AND THEN LIGHTNING STRUCK A BUILDING AND CAUSED A FIRE. THIS POLICY IS IMPLEMENTED, WE COULD SEE MORE DEMAND FOR TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE AS MORE OF THESE CASES ARE BROUGHT TO THE CITY'S ATTENTION. AS OF NOW, IT APPEARS THAT THERE ARE FEW CASES NOT CURRENTLY
COVERED BY TENANT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE. IF SOMEONE NEEDS TO RELOCATE BECAUSE THEIR UNIT IS UNFIT, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF RESOURCES AVAILABLE NOW. WE ENCOURAGE TENANTS TO GET RENTER'S INSURANCE IF POSSIBLE,
BECAUSE IF THEY HAVE IT THEY MAY BE ABLE TO GET HELP DURING PERSONAL PROPERTY LOSSES. WE COLLABORATE WITH ORGANIZATIONS LIKE THE RED CROSS
AND EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE IN UNFORESEEN EVENTS. BOTH OF THESE RESOURCES MAY LIMIT THE NUMBER OF TIMES THE CITY WOULD NEED TO STEP IN AND PROVIDE ASSISTANCE FOR TEMPORARY DISPLACEMENT. BASED ON OUR EXPERIENCE, WE KNOW THAT EARLY INTERVENTION CAN PREVENT PROBLEMS THAT MIGHT
OTHERWISE LEAD TO DISPLACEMENT. SEVERE VIOLATIONS SUCH AS LACK OF HEAT, ELECTRICAL HAZARDS, OR FIRE DAMAGE DO NOT ALWAYS REQUIRE RENTERS TO MOVE. THIS IS BECAUSE OUR TEAM FOCUSES ON ACHIEVING COMPLIANCE BEFORE ISSUES ESCALATE.
SOME OF THE ALTERNATIVE ENFORCEMENT TOOLS WE USE INCLUDE THE EMERGENCY HOUSING REPAIR BOARD. THIS IS A BOARD THAT ALLOWS REGULATORY SERVICES, GIVES REG SERVICES THE AUTHORITY TO ORDER URGENT REPAIRS OR TAKE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS WHEN AN OWNER
FAILS TO ADDRESS HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS. TENANT REMEDY ACTIONS AND EMERGENCY TENANT REMEDY ACTIONS, THE LEGAL TOOLS THAT ALLOW THE CITY IN CERTAIN CASES TO SEEK COURT CASES REQUIRING LANDLORDS TO SEEK NECESSARY REPAIRS, TO RESTORE ESSENTIAL SERVICES
KEEPING RESIDENTS HOUSED SAFELY. RENTAL LICENSE OPERATING CONDITIONS, THEY'RE CUSTOM LICENSE CONDITIONS THAT CAN BE VOLUNTARILY OR IMPOSED ON PROBLEM PROPERTIES TO IMPOSE COMPLIANCE SUCH AS LAST MINUTE INSPECTIONS OR AS A LAST MINUTE EFFORT TO GAIN COMPLIANCE BEFORE
PROCEEDING WITH REVOCATION ACTION. THE GOOD CAUSE PROGRAM ALLOWS US TO IDENTIFY AND INSPECT MORE FREQUENT PROPERTY MANAGERS THAT HAVE A HISTORY OF SMANAGEMENT. AND THEN PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENTS, THIS ALLOWS US TO ADDRESS
SYSTEMIC ISSUES OF MULTIPLE PROPERTIES UNDER ONE COMMON OWNERSHIP. IN CLOSING, THE TENANT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE LEGISLATIVE DIRECTIVE PROVIDED US AN OPPORTUNITY TO EVALUATE HOW THE CITY CAN BETTER SUPPORT RENTERS EXPERIENCING TEMPORARY DISPLACEMENT WHILE MAINTAINING
FAIRNESS AND LEGAL INTEGRITY FOR PROPERTY OWNERS. EXPANDING THE EXISTING TENANT RELOCATION PROGRAM TO INCLUDE TEMPORARY DISPLACEMENT IS NOT CURRENTLY FEASIBLE UNDER ITS CURRENT STRUCTURE AS IT WOULD REQUIRE CHARGING PROPERTY OWNERS
FOR SITUATIONS BEYOND THEIR CONTROL. HOWEVER CREATING A CITY-SPONSORED GRANT OFFERS A LAWFUL AND EQUITABLE PATH FORWARD. ONE THAT ENSURES TENANTS ARE NOT LEFT WITHOUT SUPPORT WHEN UNFORESEEN EVENTS MAKE THEIR HOMES TEMPORARILY UNINHABITABLE.
ESTABLISHING SUCH A FUND WOULD REQUIRE CROSS DEPARTMENTAL RESOURCES AND ORGANIZATION AND A FRAMEWORK TO PROVIDE WHEN AND HOW.
THIS APPROACH REPRESENTS A BALANCED SOLUTION THAT PRIORITIZES TENANT SAFETY, UPHOLDS DUE PROCESS, AND STRENGTHENS THE CITY'S OVERALL HOUSING STABILITY STRATEGY. THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR YOUR TIME TODAY. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT WONDERFUL PRESENTATION.
DEFINITELY WE CAN LEARN A LOT FROM IMPROVING TENANT RELOCATION PROGRAM. AND MY COMMENTS IS WHEN WE MENTION THAT, PEOPLE THINK IT'S AN EMERGENCY THING THAT THEY PUT
YOU IN A HOTEL. BUT IT'S NOT, IT'S VERY COMPLICATED. BUT WE NEED TO GET CLOSE TO THAT WHERE WE'RE ABLE TO REACH THE RESI RESIDENTS THAT ARE DEALING WITH THIS CRISIS AND HELP THEM. BUT I KNOW THE STAFF HAVE BEEN
DOING A WONDERFUL JOB WITH CONNECTING WITH RED CROSS AND WORKING WITH THE RESIDENT. AND I WANT TO PRAISE ENRIQUE FOR HIS WORK ON THAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT. I SEE NO ONE ELSE IN QUEUE, SO I WILL ASK THE CITY CLERK TO RECEIVE AND FILE.
>> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. SEEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS BEFORE US, WITH NO OBJECTION, I WILL DECLARE THE MEETING ADJOURNED.
THANK YOU.