##VIDEO ID:GqqYDrP_h44## >> WELCOME, ERYONE, TO THE  REGULAR MEETING OF THE  MINNEAPOLIS PLANNING COMMISSION  FOR JANUARY 27TH, 2025.      I'M CHRIS MEYER CHAIR OF  THE COMMISSION.  WE ARE JOINED  BY NEW STAFF TODAY.  MICHAEL  WALLED GAMER WHO IS GOING TO BE  FILLING IN FOR RACHEL TODAY FOR  THE CLERK, AND I NOW ASK THE  CLERK TAKE THE ROLL.   (ROLL CALL  >> THERE ARE 6 COMMISSIONERS  PRESENT.   >> LET THE RECORD SHOW WE HAVE A QUORUM.      FIRST WE'LL TAKE UP THE  MINUTES FRO JANUARY 13TH, 2025. IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE  THOSE MINUTES?   >> SO MOVED.   >> SECOND.   >> ALL RIGHT.  IS THERE ANY  DISCUSSION ON THE MINUTES?   SEEING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR SAY  AYE.  OPPOSED, ABSTENTIONS.  THE MINUTES ARE ADOPTED.      NEXT WE WILL ORGANIZE THE  AGENDA, STAFF IS RECOMMENDIN  THAT THIS ITEM 4 BE ON CONSENT.  THAT ITEM 5 BE YOU DISCUSSED AND THAT ITEM 6 WILL BE DISCUSSED.   >> OKAY.  >> SO IF YOU CAME HERE FOR ITEM  4 AND WANTE TO SPEAK AGAINST  THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, CAN  YOU RAISE YOUR HAND.  ALL RIGHT. I'M NOT SEEING ANYONE HERE TO  SPEAK AGAINST THE STAFF  RECOMMENDATION.  SO ITEM 4 WILL  BE ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA.  A  THEN ITEMS 5 AND 6 WILL BE  DISCUSSED.      IS THERE A MOTION TO  APPROVE THAT AGENDA.   >> SO MOVED.   >> SECOND.   >> ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.  E.   >> OPPOSED, THAT AGENDA IS  ADOPTED.      SO WE'LL DO TH CONSENT  ITEM FIRST.  I'LL OPEN THE  HEARING FOR THE CONSE AGENDA.  IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK TO ITEM NO. 4  ALL RIGHT.       I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC ♪ HEARING FOR ITEM NO4.      COMMISSIONERS IS THERE ANY  DISCUSSION ON THE CONSENT  AGENDA?   ALL RIGHT.       IS THERE A MOTION TO  APPROVE THE CONSENT ITEM.   >> SO MOVED.   >> IS THERE A SECOND.   >> SECOND.   >> ALL RIGHT.  ALL IN FAVOR SAY  AYE.   >> AYE.  OF OPPOSED,BSTENTIONS THE CONSENT ITEM IS ADOPTED.      WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO  IT NO. 5.  2922, 20932  WASHINGTON AVENUE NORTH.  STAFF  IS AURIN AARON HA GNAWER.   >> GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS SO FOR WASHINGTON AVENUE --  (PAUSE.)  >> THE PROPOSAL IS TO COMBINE  THE TWO PROPERTIES AT 29 AS I  AND 2932, ESTABLISH A 2000ING  AUTHORITY WHERE THEY WOULD THE  ABILITY TO STORE 50 VEHICLES  OUTSIDE AND MORE INSIDE.   THE THREE APPLICATIONS THE  CONDITIONS PERMIT THE 2000ING  USE IS A VARIANCE FOR A FENCE  HEIGHT WHEN IT'S CLOSE TO THE  PUBLIC SIDEWALK AND INCITE  PLANNING REVIEW.      THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IN FRONT OF YOU IS APPROVAL OF THE  CONDITIONAL E PERMIT AND SITE  PLAN REVIEW WITH CONDITIONS AND  THEN DENIAL OF THE FENCE  VARIANCE.      I WAS GOING TO FOCUS MY  PRESENTATION ON THE FENCE  DISCSION AND A CURB-CUT ON  WASHINGTON AVENUE.  I'M HAPPY TO REPORT THAT THAT THE FENCE  VARIANCE MAY NOT BE AN ISSUE  WI THE RECOMMENDATION WITH THE APPLICANT.  THEY MIGHT BE  SUORTIVE OF COMPLYING WITH THE FENCE REQUIREMENTS AND THEN THE  CURB-CUT.     SO EXISTING CONDI  THAT FENCE JUST TO QUICKLY GO  OVER THAT, I'LL BEORE BRIEF  THAN WHAT I WAS PLANNING ON.   CURRENT CONDITIONS, 8 FOOT CHAIN LINK FENCE ON 30TH AND  WASHINGTON AVENUE.  THE PROPOSAL IS AN OPAQUE 8-FOOT TALL FENCE  THAT WOULD BE ABOUT ONE FOOT  FROM THE 30TH AVENUE PROPERTY  LINE AND THEN THE APPLICANT IS  LOOKING TO SET THE -- I THINK  THIS SITE PLA THAT I HAVE IN  FRONT OF YOU -- THE FENCE -- THE NEW FENCE WOULD BE SET BACK 7  FEET FROM THE FRONT OF  WASHINGTON AVENUE.      THE APPLICANT IS NOW  SUPPORTIVE OF COMPLYING WITH --  WITH THE -- PUTTING THE --  STEPPING THE FENCE BACK 7 FEET  AND THEN HAVIN THE LANDSCAPE  BUFFER IN FRONT OF THE FENCE  ALONG 30TH AND WASHINGTON  AVENUE.  SO WE -- THIS IS JUST  NEWS TONIGHT THAT THE APPLICANT SHARED WITH US AND WE REALLY  APPRECIATE THAT.        NOW I JUST WANT TO FOCUS ON THE CURB-CUT CONDITION OF  APPROVAL.  THERE'S CURRENTLY 5  ACCESS POINTS TO THE SITE WHEN  LOOKING AT BOTH PROPERTIES 2922  AND 2932.  THE APPLICANT WAS  WILLING TO CLOSE OFF THE  CURB-CUT ON 30TH AVENUE BUT  REALLY IS LOOKING TO MAINTAIN  THAT ACCESS POINT, THAT NORTHERN ONE, ON WASHINGTON AVENUE.  SO  AT WOULD BE THIS ONE RIGHT  HERE.      STAFF RECOMMENDING THE  CLOSER OF BOTH THE 30TH AVENUE  CURB-CUT AND THE WASHINGTON  AVENUE CURB-CUT.  THERE WOULD BE STILL THREE ACCESS POINTS AT  THIS POINT AND JUST IN  COMPLIANCE WITH 550.660,  VEHICULAR ACCESS AND CIRCULATION SHOULD BE DESIGNED MINIMIZE CURB CUTS SHOULD BE CONSOLIDATED IF  POSSIBLE BE.  IF THIS IS A NEW  DEVELOPMENT SITE, WHICH IS IS  NOT, THAT THREE ACCESS POINTS  WOULD BE WAY MORE THAN WE WOULD  LIKELY SEE.  WE WOULD --  THEREFORE, WE DID RECOMMEND AND  ARE RECOMMENDING CLOSURE O TWO  CURB CUTS FOR THE PROJECT SITE.  I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS  BOTH ON ANY OTHER CONDITIONS AND THE THINGS I PRESENTED TODAY.      WE KNOW THATHIS PERHAPS  COULD LIMIT SOME FULL USE OF THE SITE FOR A PROPOSED USEUT THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY THAT WE HAVE  TO HELP IMPROVE THE SITE  CONDITIONS WITTHESE  APPLICATIONS THAT ARE IN FRONT  OF US AND JUST THAT COMBINATION  REALIZATION OF EXISTING  CONDITIONS AND THE APPLICANT'S  PROPOSAL, WE THINK THIS COULD BE A MUCH IMPROVED SITE OVER  EXISTI CONDITIONS SO I'M HAPPY TO TAKE QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE  THEM FOR ME.   >> I DO.  SO YOU'RE RECOMMENDING HOW MANY CURB-CUTS AND THE  APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR HOW  MANY?   >> CURRENTLY 5 CURB-CUTS.  STAFF AT THE END OF THE DAY IS LOOKING IS LOOKING ONLY FOR THREE ACCESS POINT AND THE APPLICANT WOULD  LIKE TO HAVE FOUR AND THOSE CURB CUTS -- THE APPLICANT IS LOOKING TO HAVE -- THIS ONE MAINTAINED,  THIS ONE -- THE ONE TO THE  BUILDINGND THE ONE TO THE  SOUTH OF THE BUILDING AT 2922.   >> OKAY.  ARE THOSE IMAGES IN  OUR PACKET?   >> THESE IMAGES ARE IN THE  APPLICANT'S SUBMITTAL.  I DID  PULL THEM OUT AND DID SOME  MODIFYG -- >> OKAY, I'M TRYING TO FIND IT  TO GET A CLOSER VIEW.  DO YOU  KNOW THE PAGE NUMBER?   >> YES, AND, COMMISSIONERS, TO  ADD A POINT TO THIS -- I'LL FIND THE -- I'LL FIND THE EXACT PAGE  NUMBER. >> OKAY.  >> BUT THE OTHER POINT I WANTED  TO HIGHLIGHT AND I DIDN'T YET  WAS JUST -- THIS IMAGE I THINK  THOSE A CLOSE-UP BUT THIS IS THE ACCESS POINT THAT WE WERE  REFERRING TO WHERE FOR THE LAST  17 OR 18 ARS, THE CURRENT  TRASH HAULER HAD HAS AN OPAQUE  FENCE THAT HAS -- APPEARS TO BE  INOPERABLE AND S THEY HAVE NOT  BEEN USING THAT ACCESS POINT  FOR  FOR OVER 17 YEARS.  WE  REALIZE THIS IS A DIFFERENT USE  AND THEY WOULD LIKE TO RE-OPEN  THAT BUT WE FEEL THAT AND  HOPE -- WE BELIEVE THAT THIS  SITE CAN OPERATE WITH THE  ELIMINATION OF THIS ACCESS  POINT.   >> OKAY, AND AND ONE OTHER LAST  QUESTION SO IF -- IF WE WANTED  TO DO, IT WOULD BE IN THE IS A  PLAN REVIEW THAT IT WOULD BE  ADDED IN OR WHE IN THE  APPLICATIONSITE  PLAN REVIEW THAT IT WOULD BE  ADDED IN OR WHERE IN THE  APPLICATION WOULD THIS PLY?   >> THIS RECOMMENDATION?   >> NO, IF WE WANTED TO APPROVE  THAT REQUEST?  THE APPLICANT'S  REQUEST.   >> IF YOU WANTED TO APPROVE THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST IT WOULD BE  ELIMINATING -- IT WOULD BE  MODIFYING OR ELIMINATING  CONDITION NO. 3 UNDER SITE PLAN  REVIEW.  THE WESTERN CURB-CUT ON 30TH AND WASHINGTON AVENUE.   >> THANK YOU, THAT ANSWERS MY  QUESTION.  COMMISSIONERS IS  THERE ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE WE  OPEN PUBLIHEARING?   ALL  RIGHT.       SEEING NONE, WE'LL OPEN  THE PUBLIC HEARING.  OH, SORRY,  I DIDN'T SEE -- (LAUGH.) >>  >> COMMISSIONER BAXLEY,  >> AARON THERE'S STILL A  SEPARATION ON THE NORTH SIDE OF  THE PROPERTY.  THEY'RE NOT  PLANNING TO CONNECT THAT OR  CONTINUE CIRCULATION THROUGH  THERE?  HOW IS THAT WORKING.   >> CHAIR AND COMMISSIONER  BAXLEY, THEY ARE LOOKING TO THIS PORTION OF THE BUILDING SO THERE WOULD BE -- THERE WOULD BE A  CONTINUATION BETWEEN THE TWO  PROPERTIES.   >> YOU'RE ACTUALLY HAVE AN  ENTRANCE THERE THAT WAS DENIED  BY THE CITY AND SO  HAVE TO  LEAVE THE BUILDING -- OH, I'M  SORRY.   >> YOU CAN SPEAK AT THE PUBLIC  HEARG SO YOU'RE ON RECORD AND  EVERYONE ELSE CAN HEAR YOU.   >> THERE MIGHT BE SOME NOW  UPDATE INFORMATION OR IF I'M  INCORRECT ON THAT, THERE'S  BEEN -- I ARECIATE THE WORKING RELATIONSHIP.  THERE'S BEEN SOME CHANGES, I THINK, THE APPLICANT  WOULD ADMIT ALONG THE WAY AND SO IF I MISSED SOMETHING, THAT IS  APOLOGIES ON THAT ASPECT.   >> OKAY.  SO WE'LL WAIT AND HEAR SOME MORE ON YOUR TESTIMONY  THEN.  OKAY.  THANKING.      YEAH, YOU MEAN HAVE THE  OPPORTUNITY TO ASK THE APPLICANT AND THEY CAN ANSWER THAT. >> YEAH, I HAVE A QUESTION.  IF  IT WASN'TOMBINING THE TWO LOTS WHAT WOULD YOUR RECOMMENDATION  BE ON ACCESS POINTS?  WOULD YOU  HAVE TWO PER LOT FOR A TOTAL OF  4, LIKE, IF THEY WERE COMING IN  SEPARATE?   >> CHAIR AND COMMISSIONER JONES, WITH THAT QUESTION, I THINK --  IT'S WORKING WITH PUBLIC WORKS.  THEY WENT THROUGH PRELIMINARY  DEVELOPMENT REVIEW.  THIS  CURB-CUT LIMITATION WAS ONE OF  THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THAT  PDR REVIEW AND THAT REPORT IS IN YOUR PACKET.      I DON'T KNOW IF I -- WE  DEFINITELY -- DEFINITELY KNOW  THAT A SITE NEEDS TO MAINTAIN  ACCESS.  ESPECIALLY IF THEY'RE  THERE AND LOOKING AT EXISTING  CONDITIONS.  WE WOULD LOOK AT  CIRCULATION AND SEE IF THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES TO CONSOLIDATE  WHENEVER POSSIBLE.  SO I DON'T  THINK I COULD DEFINITELY SAY AT  THIS POINT THAT EACH SITE WOULD  BE ALLOWED TO HAVE TWO ACCESS  POINTS.  BY BALANCING EXISTING  CONDITIONS AND WANTING TO MEET  ZONING REQUIREMENTS WHENEVER  POSSIBLE.      AND CHAIR MEYER, THE PAGES  IN YOUR REPORT -- THOSE SITE  PLAN PAGES, IF LOOKING -- >> YEP.   >> PAGE 25 AND 26, 27.   >> AH, 27 IS THE ONE I FOUND.  YEAH, WHEN I WAS REVIEWING THE,  I THOUGHT THE CONTROVERSIAL  ISSUE WAS GOING TO BE THE FENCE. SO I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT THIS  WAS GOING TO BE -- SO I'M TAKING A CLOSER LOOK AT THAT.      ARE THERE ANY OTHER  QUESTIONS -- COMMISSIONER  CONLEY?   >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR,UST A  QUICK ONE.      SO IS -- I THINK IT WAS A  SLIDE BEFORE THIS ONE WHERE YOU  SHOWED 2007 VERSUS 2021.      SO THE CURB-CUT THAT --  YEAH.  AT THAT STAFF IS  RECOMMENDING IS BEING REMOVED WHAT'S THERE NOW?  IS IT STILL A CURB-CUT 'CAUSE I CAN'T TELL.   YOU CAN DRIVE IN OR -- >> RIGHT.   >> SO THEN INNSTANCES LIKE  THIS WHO REPLACES THE CURB?   DOES THE CITY DOES?   >> THE EXPENSE WOULD FAL ON THE APPLICANT.      THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, I KNOW THERE ARE MANY THAT HAVE  WORKED ON BUT IT DOES ALLOW THE  APPLICANT 2 YEARS TO COMPLETE  THE WORK, THE SITE WORK THAT IS  BEING REQUESTED.   >> WHICH IS TO BRING THE CURB  BACK AND FLATTEN IT OUT.   >> RIGHT AND TO  BRING -- CORRECT.   >> OKAY, THANK YOU.   >> ALL RIGHT.  ANY OTHER  QUESTIONS?       ALL RIGHT.  I'LL NOW OPEN  THE PUBLIC HEARING AND A NOTE  BEFORE WE DO, FRIENDLY REMINDERS TO TO EVERYONE THAT THESE  MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LE TO  ENABLE BROADER PARTICIPATION  THEY INCLUDE REAL TIME  COMINGSING SO WE ASK ALL  SPEAKERS TO BE MINDFUL OF THE  RATE OF THEIR SPEECHES SO THE  EXAMINATIONER CAN CAPTURE AND  TRANSCRIBE ALL COMMENTS FROM THE BROADCAST.      IS THE APPLICANT HERE TO  TESTIFY?  GO AHEAD AND INTRODUCE YOURSELVES.  >> HELLO COMMISSIONERS MY NAME  IS JOSH HOWELL I'M PARTNER  WITH SCOTT SCHEIFFER WITH TYSON  2000ING.   >> I'M SCOTT SCHEIFFER OVER AT  TYSON'S TO YOU 2000ING.   >> I'M GOING TO WORK KIND OF  THROUGH OUR RESPONSES HERE SO  JUST GIVE ME A SECOND TO KIND OF PULLED THE UP -- PULL THIS UP.   DO YOU ALL SEE THE REPORT?  THI  DO YOU ALL SEE THE REPORT?   >> I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH THE  VARIOUS COMPLIANCE ITEMS.  ERE WERE 13 ITEMS OF COMPLIANCE FOR  THE CONDITIONAL USE, SO THE  FIRST TWO -- YOU KNOW, THE  APPLICANT RESPONSE WE ACCEPT THE CONDITIONS.  THE THIRD ONE WHICH IS OUR MAJOR ISSUES WHICH IS THE WESTERN CURB-CUT ON 30TH AVENUE  NORTH, AND THE CURB-CUT ON 2932  WASHINGTON AVENUE NORTH.      WE ARE WILLING TO ELIMINATE ONE OF T CURB-CUTS.  WE LOOK  AT THIS AS TWO DIFFERENT SITES  ALTHOUGH WE'RE COMBINING THEM  FOR USE UNDER THE CONDITIONAL  USE.      IN RESPONSE TO  550.DESIGNATED TO MINIMIZE  PEDESTRIAN HE TRAFFIC IN THIS  PARTICULAR SITE THERE IS NO  SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL USE, AND I HAVE SOME DATA WE'RE GOING TO  SHOW IN A FEW SLIDES THAT SHOWS  IT'S NOT VERY MUCH OF A  PEDESTRIAN AVENU  WASHINGTON  IS VERY MUCH A CAR HIGHWAY.   THERE ARE NO SURROUNDING  RESIDENTIAL USES.  THE CLOSEST  AREA IS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE INTERSTATE.  WHAT WHEN AARON DID HIS REPORT FOR YOU FOLKS, HE  MEASURED THE CLOSEST RESIDENTIAL UNIT AS THE CROW FLIES ACROSS  THE INTERSTATE, I BIEVE 235  FEET.      IF YOU FOLLOW AVENUE NORTH  UP TO LOWRY AND GO ACROSS  ATTESTED ACTUALLY 1400 -- IT'S  ACTUALLY 1400 FEET ABOUT A  QUARTER MILE.      THE SERVICE ACCESS FOR  RVICE VEHICLES -- THE KEY IS  FOR IT TO NOT CONFLICT WITH  DESTRIAN TRAFFIC, AND WHERE A  PRACTICAL TRUCK LDING SHOULD  BE AROUND RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. WE'RE NOT ONE OF THOSE  APPLICANTS.  THIS IS NOT A  PEDESTRIAN CORRIDOR.  THERE'S  VERY LITTLE OR NO PEDESTRIAN  TRAFFIC.  IT IS A VEHICULAR  CORNERED.     I PULLED UP FROM   MINNEAPOLIS WEBSITE THE BICYCLE  AND PEDESTRIAN CNTS ON 26TH  AVENUE NORTH JUST ADJACENT TO  OUR SITE WAS THE CLOSEST ONE.   2007, THERE WERE ZERO  PEDESTRIANS, 20080 PEDESTRIANS,  2009 ZERO PEDESTRIANS, 2010,  ZERO PEDESTRIANS.  2011, 60.   2012, ZERO, 2013, ZERO.  2014,  ZERO.  2015, ZERO, 2016, ZERO  AND 10 IN 2017.      THE ESTIMATE, WHICH I THINK IS GENEROUS IS 10 PEDESTRIANS A  DAY.  MOST OF THE TRAFFIC THA  I'VE OBSERVED THERE ARE THE  FOLKS THAT WORK THERE AT THE  SAM'S AUTO BODY RRENTLY.      HERE'S THE GRAPHIC I HAVE  FROM THE CLOSEST RESIDENTIAL  AREA.  IF YOU LOOKT THE DOTTED LINE, IT'S 1414 FEET TO BE THE  VERY CLOSEST RATHER THAN AS THE  CROW FLIES INTO THE INTERSTATE  AND EVERYTHING IS ENTIRELY  VILLARAIGOSA WE ARE A PR2 ZONED  AREA.  I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE  PEDESTRIAN DESTINATION WOULD BE  IN THAT CASE.        IF -- IF THE CURB-CUT ON  WASHINGTON NORTH IS REMOVEDHE  TOW TRUCK WRECKER VEHICLES WOULD NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT TURNING  RADIUS TO MANEUVER WITHIN THE  PROPERTY BOUNDARIES AND BE  FORCED TO BACK OUT.  WE WOULD  NOT WANT TO BACK OUT INTO THE  PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY.      WITH OUR 7 FOOT LANDSCAPING BUFFER WHICH WE'VE AGREED TO TH CITY BOTH ON 30TH AVENUE AND ON  WASHINGTON, WE FURTHER SHRUNK  THIS SITE AND THE TURNING  RADIUS.  I HAVE A GRAPHIC ON THE OTHER PAGE FOR YOU.      THE REASON WHY THE PREVIOUS OWNER DID NOT USE THIS CURB-CUT  AND FINANCIALLY BECAUSE OF  SECURITY.  IF YOU LOOK ON  PAGE 6, YOU'LL NOTICE THAT THE  GARBAGE TRUCKS ARE TOO TALL TO  ENTER THE SVICE SPACE SO IT  WAS USED AS STORAGE FOR THE  GARBAGE FACILITY NOT AS THE  SERVICE SPACES WE INTEND TO USE  THEM AS TYSON'S TOWING.      THE BAYS ARE NOT  PASS-THROUGH.  THE TWO GARAG  DOORS THAT YOU SEE IN THIS  GRAPHIC ON PAGE 6 -- THOSE ARE  ONE-WAY INSTANCES.  THERE'S NO  GARAGE DOOR ON THE EASTERN SIDE  OF THIS BUILDING.  ALL THE  EXISTING GARAGES ARE, LIKE I  SAID, TOO SHORT FOR T CURRENT  USER.      HERE'S A COUPLE OF TURNING  RADIUS GRAPHICS FOR A TOW TRUCK  WRECKER.  WRECKER IS A 28 FOOT  VEHICLE.  IT'S THE MAINSE AND  IF YOU HAVE A TOW VEHICLE WITH A CAR ON IT -- SCOTT, HOW LONG ARE THOSE TYPICALLY?   >> APPROXATELY, ANYWHERE FROM  7 TO 11 FEET.   >> IN ADDITION TO THE BACK OF  THE VEHICLE.      SO AS YOU LOOK AS CLOSING  OFF THIS WASHINGTON AVENUE  ENTRANCE, YOU WOULD END U WITH  A DEAD-END OF SERVICE SPACE.   THE TRUCK -- WE'D LOSE CAR  STORAGE AT THE FRONT OF THE SITE WHICH IS ALREADY A TIGHT SITE TO BEGIN WITH.  SO SCENARIOS 1 AND  3 SHOWS THE ACTUAL TWO TURNING  RADIUS FOR A WRECKER.      I WENT TO THE HISTORIC SITE THIS IS A SNIP OF 1950 AND NO  RAIN 52 SIDEBURN FIRE INSURANCE  MAP IT CURRENTLY SHOWS 2132 AS A FILLING AND GREASING FACILITY  WHICH IS A SERVICESATIONS WERE  CALLED.  GAS STANK DEPICTED ON  THE MAP AND SERVICE DRIVING BAYS HAD FOR SERVICING CARS.      IT'S A CRITICAL FUNCTION OF THIS BUSINESS TO BE ABLE TO USE  THOSE SERVICE BAYS AND TO PULL  INTO THEM IN A SAFE NNER.      THESE ARE THE VEHICULAR  COUNTS ON WASHINGTON AVENUE  NORTH.  SORRY, I DIDN'T BLOW UP  THIS GRAPHIC.  WE GOT, I THINK,  THE LOW NUMBER 1600 CARS A DAY  FROM MNDOT.      HERE'S AN OVERLAY OF THE  MINNEAPOLIS 2040 PLAN.  THE DOT  RIGHT HERE SHOWS THE SITE.  IT'S A VERY INDUSTRIAL AREA.      THERE'S A 3D OVERVIEW OF  THE SERVICE BAYS MOVING THE  FENCE AS IT IS AS YOU CAN SEE  IT'S TIGHT WITH THE TRUCK AND  YOU SEE THE RIGHT WHERE THE  BUILDING JUT OUT IS A EVEN  TITER RADIUS.  WE COULDN'T GET  THE TRUCK IN THERE WITHOUT THE  CURB-CUT ON WASHINGTON AVENUE.      TT'S ALL I HAVE FOR ITEM  3.      ITEM 4, WE ARE -- WE MADE A LITTLE MISTAKE.  WE'RE WILLING  TO MOVE THAT FENCE BACK 7 FEET  ON THE PROPERTY LINE.  IT WAS  JUST A COMMUNICATION BETWEEN T ARCHITECT AND AARON AND I'LL  TAKE BLAME FOR THAT ONE.        NO. 5, THE CONDITION IS 6  DECIDUOUS TREES ALONG 30TH  AVENUE NORTH.  AFTER SOME  REFLECTION, I THINK, THAT PER  550550.530 AND IS 54 WE PROPOSE  COLUMNAR EVERGREENS TO BE  PLANTED ON 30TH AVENUE ON THE  EXISTING KIND OF LOWER HANGING  POWER LINES.  IF YOU LOOK AT THE GRAPHIC ON THE RIGHT YOU CAN SEE HOW THE CANOPY TREE LINE WAS  CLEARED BACK FROM THE POWER  LINES AND THE GRAPHIC ON THE  BOTTOM HERE YOU CAN SEE THE  TREES THAT ARE ACTUALLY GROWN IN THE POWER LINE WE HAD THE  SELLER TRIM THOSE BEFORE -- I  DON'T KNOW IF HE'S COMPLIED WITH THAT BUT IN ORDER TO KIND OF  ADDRESS THE GREEN REQUIREMENTS  FOR THE CITY, WE'RE --E'D LIKE TO DO COLUMNAR EVERGREENS AND IS THERE'S A NUMBER OF REASONS FOR  THAT.  BY PROVIDING -- WE'RE  PROPOSING AND THIS IS A CHANGE  AND NEW TO AARON, DOUBLE THE  NUMBER OF TREES WE WERE EARLIER  TO 20.  AND THE EVERGREENS WILL  OVIDE YEAR-ROUND SCREENING  REMAIN GREEN ALL YEAR AND NOT  INTERFERE WITH THE OVERHEAD  POWER LINES AND UTILITIES.   THEY'RE CLIMATE RESISTANT,  DIGENOUS AND PROVE ADOPTABLE  TO LOCAL CLIMATE AND NOT  INVASIVE TO NATIVE SPECIES.      THE OTHER REASON TO  OVERGREEN THE SPACE IS TO  ADDRESS THE CHRONIC GRAFFITI  THAT HAS PLAGUED THE SIDE.   CHECK THE 311 CALLS IT'S A  NUANCE GRAFFITI SITE AND IF WE  CREATED A DENSE EVERGREEN WALL,  ALONG WASHINGTON AVENUE, WE'LL  BE ABLE TO THROUGH ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN, YOU KNOW, PREVENT CRIME.      ITEM 6, WE WERE ASKED TO DO 1630 SQUARE FEET.  WE'RE DOING  1639 SO JUST ABOVE THE  REQUIREMENT.      NO. 7, IT'S BACK TO  DECIDUOUS TREES.  WE'D LIKE TO  DO EVERGREENS AND WE'D LIKE TO  DO MORE THAN WE'RE BEING ASKED  TO DO.  AGAIN,T'S HISTORICALLY BEEN A NUISANCE PROPERTY WHICH  IS SECTION 226 AND I DO THINK  UTILIZING AND PLANTING  EVERGREENS TO PROMOTE  ENVIRONMENTAL ZINE WE'RE TRYING  TO ABATE OR PREVENT GRAFFITI SO  YOU GUYS DON'T GET CALLS.  *       NO. 9, THE COMBINING OF THE TAX PARCELS.  THERE'S A  COMMUNICATION FROM AARON AS OUR  RESPONSE -- HE SAID IF IT SAYS  IS AN ISSUE AND THE ONLY THING   THE CPED RECOMMENDATION FOR THE  PLICATIONS I CAN INQUIRE OR  REVISE RECOMMENDATION ON THIS  CONDITION.  THIS IS A  BOILERPLATE CONDITION.  WE'RE  REQUESTING A REVERSAL OF TH RECOMMENDATION, LONG-TERM IF THE SITES ARE COMBINED, IT HURTS  VALUE AND, YOU KNOW, WE MAY  DECIDE TO SHRINK THE TOW  FACILITY DEFENDING ON HOW THE  DEMAND GOES.  THIS SITE DOESN'T  CONNECT BECAUSE THE BUILDING ON  THE REAR OF THE EASTSE  PREVENTS THEM FROM ACTUALLY  CIRCULATING.      CONDITIONS 10, 9, 10, 11,  12, 13 WE ALL ACCEPT.      I HAD ONE LAST GRAPHIC I  DON'T THINK WOULD APPLIES BUT I  THOUGHT I WOULD SHARE WITH YOU  ANYWAY BECAUSE WE'RE SETTING  THIS FENCE BACK 7 FEET FROM THE  PROPERTY LINE AS AN INDUSTRIAL  AREA WE CAN HAVE AN 8 FOOT FENCE SO IT'S A NONISSUE BUT THIS IS  CEDAR AVENUE TOWING THE OTHER  IMPOUND LOT WHICH IS NOT  CITY-OWNED THEY HAVE AN 8 FOOT  FENCE.      THAT'S ALL I GOT DO ANY OF  THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY  QUESTIONS FOR SCOTT OR I?   >> GO AHEAD.   >> YOU CAN GO FIRST.   >> OKAY.  COMMISSIONER BAXLEY.   >> JUST A QUICK ONE.  THANK YOU, GUYS.      YOU TALK ABOUT THAT  BUILDING THAT'S PREVENTING YOU  CONNECTING THROUGH IS THAT  YOU'LL BE YOU KNOW ABOUT IT  'CAUSE YOU'VE BEEN THERE BUT YOU MENTIONED POTENTIALLY THE  CITY -- YOU COULDN'T ROVE IT  OR YOU CAN'T, LIKE, JUST TALK  ABOUT THAT.   >> YEAH, WE HAD ASKED FOR A  PASS-THROUGH TO CUT A HOLE IN  THE BUILDING SO YOU COULD DRIVE  THROUGHND WE WERE DENIED THAT  BY CPED BECAUSE IT WAS THEN A  NUMBER OF FEET OF THE ADJACENT  PROPERTY THAT YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE A DRIVE-THROUGH IN THERE SO WE REMOVED THAT FROM THE  ARCHITECTURALS -- AARON AND I  HAVE BEEN WORKING QUITE A BIT  AND WE'RE JUST UNDER A LOT OF  ME PRESSURE FROM HAVING THE  PARCEL UNDER CONTRACT, NEEDING  TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE  SELLER, GET SCOTT IN TIGHTLY HE  LOST HIS SITE IN ST. PAUL.  I  DECIDED TO JUST LET THAT ISSUE  GO AND MOVE FORWARD.   >> OKAY, THANKOU.   >> ALL RIGHT.  I BELIEVE THAT'S  ALL THE QUESTIONS FOR  COMMISSIONERS?  IS ARE THERE ANY OTHER PEOPLE WHO WANTED TO  TESTIFY?   ALL RIGHT.       I'M NOT SEEING ANY.  I  WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.        COMMISSIONER OLSON, YOU HAD A QUESTION FOR STAFF?   >> YES, AARON, I'M JUST  WONDERING ABOUT THE QUESTIONS  ABOUT THE TREES.      SO ARE THE TREES THEY'RE  PROPOSING -- WOULD THOSE MEET  SITE PLAN REVIEW REQUIREMENT OR IS THAT -- >> COMMISSIONER OLSON, THEY  WOULD BE.  LET'S SEE HERE.  WE  CALL FOR DECIDUOUS TREES ON THE  CONDIONS OF APPROVAL AND  THAT'S WHAT THE LANGUAGE IN THE  ZONING CODE STATES.  WE DIDN'T CALL FOR CANOPY TREES WHICH  WOULD BE LIKELY IMPACT OR GET  CLOSE TO THAT POWER LINES AGAIN. THE APPLICANT AS THEY NOTED --  THIS IS A NEW REQUEST AND  DEFINITELY -- SO IT WOULD NOT  COMPLY WITH WHAT THE ZONING CODE IS AING FOR BUT -- BUT WHAT  THE ZONING CODE STATES TO THE  LETTER BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT  THEY ARE NOW PROPOSING AND AS  NEW INFORMATION AS THE APPLICANT NOTED.      BUT, YEAH.   >> I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE ACT ON THESE -- YOU KNOW, IF WE WERE TO JUST APPROVE  STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR SITE  PLAN VIEW, WOULD THEY NOT BE  ABLE TO DO THOSE? >> AS IT READS -- AS IT READS,  WE'RE LOOKING FOR 11 EVENLY  SPACED DECIDUOUS TREES AND IF  YOU -- YOU COULD ACCEPT STAFF'S  RECOMMENDATION OR YOU COULD  DEFINITELY ENTERTAIN THE  APPLICANT'S SUGGEION IDEA OF  PERHAPS, I THINK, REPLACING WHAT A STAFF OUTLINED AND PUTTING IN  A CERTAIN NUMBER OF CONIFEROUS  TREES, OR ERGREEN TREES.   >> OKAY.  SO IF WE LEFT IT AS -- THEY WOULD HAVE TO ADD IN THE  DECIDUOUS TREES AMONGst THE  OTHER TREES THAT THEY WERE  PLANTING?   >> RIGHT, AND I THOUGHT -- I  THINK IN THE INITIAL LANDSCAPE  SUBMITTAL, IT WAS LOOKING AT  MORE OF  COLUMNAR ASPEN TREE.   BUT -- >> COMMISSIONER OLSON, WE'RE  BASICALLY TRYING TO YOU TO  ADDRESS THE GRANITTI ISSUE IN  THE SAME WE'VE HAD THIS UNDER  CONTRACT IT'S BEEN GRAFFITIED  THREE DIFFERENT TIMES AND SO AS  WE LOOK AT CRIME PREVENTION  THROUGH ARCHITECTURAL DESIG AND BEING SENSITIVE TO THE AREA --  AND WANTING IT TO BE GREEN ALL  YEAR-ROUND, I FELT THAT WOULD BE A BETTER CHOICE, A  COLUMNAR-STYLE EVERGREEN IT  WOULD BE QUITE HANDSOME, I  THINK, FROM THE ROAD AND IT  WOULD WRAP THE WHOLE SITE WHICH  IS WHY WE WENT FROM THE MINIMUM  REQUIRED TO DOUBLING THE NUMBER  OF TRE AND THEY WOULD HAVE THE  DENSITY AND GROW INTO EACH  OTHER.   >> OKAY.  THAT'S ENOUGH, OKAY.   THANK YOU.   >> SO IF WE AMENDED THE  REQUIREMENT TO JUS SAY  DECIDUOUS OR EVERGREEN, WOULD T  OBJECTION TO THAT.  WOULD THAT  MEET WHAT YOU WANTED?  IS IT  >> WE WOULD BE SATISFIED.   >> OKAY.   >> AND AARON, DO YOU HAVE ANY  COMMENTS ON THE TAX PARCEL  THING?   >> YEAH, I -- AND HILARY MIGHT  BE ADD ON ANYTHING I SAY BUT, I  THINK, THIS ONE IS -- AS JOSH  ALLUDED TO IS OFTEN -- IT IS  SOMETHING THAT WE OFTEN ATTACH  TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.  I  THINK IT IS MORE IMPACTFUL WHEN  YOU HAVE A NEW CONSTRUCTION  PROJECT THAT'S GOING ACROSS  OPERTY LINES SO I -- I DON'T  SEE ANY BIG ISSUE WITH REMOVING  THAT CONDITION OF APPROVAL.   >> THANK YOU.   >> SO WITH THE FENCE CHANGE  THERE WOULD BE NO VARIANCE THEN  IS THAT MY UNDERSTANDING?   >> COMMISSIONER BAXLEY, THE  FENCE VARIANCE WAS BECAUSE IT  WAS TOO CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY  LINE.  WE MADE A MISTAKE AND SO  WE SET IT BACK.  THE VARIANCE  WAS NOT FOR ITS HEIGHT BUT FOR  ITS LOCATION REGARDING TO THE  PRERTY LINE.   >> SO IT WOULD BE FAIR TO DENY  THAT'S VARIANCE -- >> YEAH, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE THE FENCE IF WE ARE ABLE TO KEEP THE WASHINGT AVENUE ACCESS.   >> AND IF YOU CAN'T -- >> WE HAVE TO SAY GOODBYE TO THE PROJECT.  IT JUST DOESN'T WORK.  >> OKAY.  COMMISSIONER CONLEY?   >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.  THAT  WAS MY QUESTION, ACTUALLY.  WAS, YOU KNOW -- IF THE CURB-CUT HE  DOESN'T WORK OUT, IT'S SOUNDING  LIKEOU CAN'T DO BUSINESS.  SO  IS IT PRIMARILY -- IT JUST YOUR  TRUCKS CAN'T -- YOU SHOWED US  THE TURNING RADIUSES SO IT  SOUNDS LIKE WITHOUT THAT, YOU  CAN'T GET YOUR TRUCKS IN  REGARDLESS OF THE OTHER  CURB-CUTS ON THE PROPERTY?  IS  IT  >> ABSOLUTELY.   >> CAN YOU TALK MORE ABOUT THAT. IS THAT THE ONLY ENTRANCE THAT  THE TCKS CAN USE TO TURN?   TALK A LITTLE ABOUT THAT.   >> COMMISSIONER CONLEY, THE SITE ITSELF, IF YOU LOOK -- I'LL GET  BACK TO THE DIAGRAM HERE.  WHAT  YOU END U CREATING IS A  DEAD-END ON THIS END OF THE SITE AND THESE TRUCK BECAUSE IT'S A  WRECKER -- IT'S A 21 TO 22 FOOT  VEHICLE SO IT'S NOT LIKE A --  YOU KNOW, A SMALL COMPA AND  YOU END UP -- SCOTT'S GUYS WILL  HAVE TO DO A 6 OR 7-POT  TURN -- THIS AREA HAS BEEN  DESIGNATED FOR SNOW-HOLDING IN  E WINTER SO IN THE WINTER  CONDITIONS WILL MAKE IT EVEN  MORE CHALLENGING BECAUSE WE  AGREED TO PUSH THE FENCE IN 7  FEET, THAT TURNING WIDTH IS  FURTHER REDUCED AND YOU CAN'T  ACTUALLY GET INTO THESE GARAGES.      I'LL SHOW YOU THE GARAGES HERE ON THIS -- YOU KNOW,  THEY'RE VERY TIGHT, YOU KNOW,  THE FENCE IS, YOU KNOW, IS 7  FEET IN HERE SO, YOU KNOW, YOU   TRUCK.      AND BECAUSE SCOTT'S GUYS  ARE ALWAYS HANDLING CUSTOMER  VEHICLES HE AND CARS, YOU KNOW,  THE REQUIREMENT TO BE PRECISE  AND NOT DAMAGE VEHICLES IS QUIET HIGH AND SO AS YOU LOOK AT  HAVING THESE ONE-WAYS OR NEEDING TO COME IN; DROP A CAR AND HAVE  A ONE-WAY -- JUST TO BE HONEST,  IT'S A LABOR AND TIME ISSUE.   PROBABLY -- WE JUST HAVE TO SAY  NO TO THE SITE WITHOUT THE  WASHINGTON AVENUE.  IT DOESN'T  PRACTICALLY WORK FOR THE  COMMERCIAL USE THAT WE'RE  PROPOSING.   >> COMMISSIONER OLSON?   >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION UNLESS  ANYONE ELSE HAS ANYTHING ELSE?   >> I'LL DO ONE LAST BIG MOTION HERE. (LAUGH.)  >> OKAY.  SO I'LL MAKE AOTION  TO -- WHOOPS, SORRY.   >> YEAH, GO AHEAD.   >> COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY.   >> THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT.  I  JUST WANTED TO ON NOTE -- DID WE DISCUSS THE TAX BOUNDARY ISSUE? >> CHRIS ASKED A QUESTION TO  AARON ABOUT IT BUT -- >> PERHAPS THIS IS FOR STAFF,  PERHAPS IT'S FOR THE BODY.  I  KNOW THAT THE PRESENTERS OR THE  APPLICANTS SHARE THAT IT WAS A  BOILERPLATE COMBINATION.  I'M  WONDERING IF WE COULD JUST  ACCOMMODATE THEIR ASK IN KEEPING THE DIVISION, I BELIEVE?  AND I STAFF HAD ANY CONCERNS OR IS  AMENABLE TO THAT?   >> -- STAFF SAID THEY DIDN'T  HAVE A PROBLEM WITH DOING THAT  SO MY SUGGESTION WAS GOING TO BE TO STRIKE CONDITION 9, AMEND  CONDITION TO SAY DECIDUOUS OR  CONIFEROUS TREES.   >> OKAY, GREA   >> AND LEAVE THE REST OF THE  STAFF RECOMMENDATION AS IS AND  I'LL JUST SPEAK TO THAT QUICKLY.      FOR ITEM NO. 3, OR  CONDITION NO. 3 -- AND YOU KNOW, I LOOKED THROUGH THE PACKET TO  SEE IF I WAS MISSING SOMETHING  ON THIS BUT, YOU KNOW, HAVING  ADDITIONAL CURB-CUTS IS A BIG  ASK.  IT WOULD HAVE BEEN  HELPL, YOU KNOW, TO REALLY  READ THROUGH ALL OF THAT.  I'M  GOING TO SUPPORT STAFF'S  RECOMMENDATION ON THE CURB-CUTS  BECAUSE WE ARE REALLY TRYING TO  DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO MAKE  NEIGHBORHOODS MORE WALKABLE AND  THERE MAY NOT BE A LOT OF  PEDESTRIANS IN THIS AREA NOW BUT THE CITY AND THE PARK BOARD ARE  VERY ACTIVELY TRYING TO CHANGE  THE CONDITIONS IN THAT AREA, BUYING LOTS OF PROPERTIES ALONG  THE RIVERFRONT, YOU KNOW, THINGS LIKE THE TERMINAL, THE 26TH  AVENUE, BIKE WAY, THE OVERLOOK  THAT WOULD CONNECT THE TWO  DISCONNECTED AREAS RIGHT NOW,  AND SO AND SO THOSE CONDIONS  MIGHT CHANGE SO STAFF'S  RECOMMENDATION IS T CONSOLIDATE THE CURB-CUTS AND I'M GOING TO  SUPPORT THAT AT THIS TIME.   COMMISSIONER OLSON AREOU READY FOR YOUR MOTION?   >> SURE.  I'LL MAKE -- >> I HAVE A QUESTION. >> OH, SORRY.  DID I MS  SOMEONE.   >> I JUST WANTED TO SAY I'M  INCLINED TO SUPPORT THE  APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR ANOTHER  CURB-CUT TO ACCOMMODATE THE  TRAFFIC FLOW THAT EY NEEDED.   I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT.   >> OKAY.  >> AND IT'S AN EXISTING  CURB-CUT.  WE'RE NOT ASKING ONE  TO BE PLACED IN.  WE ACTUALLY  JUST WANT TO USE THE ONE THAT'S  THERE ORIGINALLY TO THE SERVICE  STATION SO IT IS NOT A REQUEST  FOR A NEW CURB-CUT.  IT IS A  REQUEST NOT TO HAVE IT REMOVED  AND WE'RE ALREADY AGREEING TO  REMOVE ONE OF THE 3 CURB-CUTS ON THAT SITE TO REDUCE THAT  INDIVIDUAL PARCEL TO TWO  CURB-CUTS.   >> OKAY, THANK YOU.  I'LL CLOSE  THE PUBLIC HEARING.      SO COMMISSIONER -- WE CAN  PULL THAT ONE FOR A SEPARATE  VOTE IF YOU'D LIKE TO AMEND THE  CONDITION?  SEVEN  >> YES, THAT WOULD BE GOOD.   THANK YOU.   >> OKAY.  >> ALL RIGHT.  ANYONE ELSE?   SEVEOKAY.       I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO  ADOPT STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR  ITEM A THE CONDITIONAL USE  PEANENT AND ITEM B, THE  VARIANCE.  AND THEN I WILL MAKE  A MOTION TO ADOPT ITEMS 1, 2, 4, 6 AND IS 8 UNDER THE SITE PLAN  REVIEW.  AS RECOMMENDED BY  STAFF.        AND I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO CHANGE ITEM 5 UNDER C TO READ:   THE 6 PROPOSED DECIDUOUS OR  CONIFEROUS TREES ALONG 30TH  AVENUE NORTH.        I'LL DO THE SAME TO  ITEM NO. 7 UNDER C.  TO READ THE SITE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE 11  EVENLY SPACED DECIDUOUS OR  CONIFEROUS TREES WITHIN THE  SUBJECT PROPERTY.  AND I WILL  MAKE A MOTION TO REMOVE ITEM 9  FROM -- FROM C SITE PLAN.      AND ON THE NEXT PAGE, TO  ADOPT ITEMS 10, 11, 12 AND 13 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.   >> OKAY, SO JUST TO REVIEW SO  YOU'RE RECOMMENDING ITEMS A AND  B CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDED WHICH INCLUDES THE  DENIAL OF THE FENCE.  AND THEN  1, 2, 3 -- 8?  OR SORRY 1, 2, 3, 4, 8.  SORRY.   >> 6 AND 8.   >> 6 AND 8.   >> AND 10, 11, 12, AND 13 IF YO  >> OKAY.  CONDITIONS 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13 WITH STAFF  RECOMMENDATIONS.   >> YES.   >> AND STRIKING NO. 9.   >> UHUH.   >> IS AND AMENDING 5 AND 7 TO  AND/OR CONIFEROUS AND HOLD 3 FOR A SEPARATE VOTE.   >> YES, CORRECT.   >> OKAY.  DOES STAFF HAVE ALL OF THAT.   >> YES.   >> SECOND.  >> ALL RIGHT.  THER. (LAUGH.)  >> IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION?    ALL RIGHT.       SEEING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR  SAY AYE.  AYE.  OPPOSED,  ABSTENTIONS?  IF THAT MOTION IS  ADOPTED.      DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER MOTION? >> YES, THANK YOU.      I WILL -- I'M ALMOST -- I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO REMOVE ITEM 3, TO STRIKE IT FROM ITEM  C.   >> OKAY.  >> REMOVE IT FULLY 'CAUSE I  THINK THEY'RE ONLY ASKING FOR WE HAVE SOME RIGHT?  >> OH, YES, OKAY.  TO STRIKE  REMOVING THE WESTERN CURB-CUT ON 30TH AVENUE NORTH.  IS THAT --  THAT WAS THE ONE -- OH, THAT'S  THE WRONG ONE.   >> YEAH.   >> AH, WE'RE WILLING TO REMOVE THE -- THE ONE ON 30TH.  IT'S -- (TALKING SIMULTANEOUSLY.) >> THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED, YES, THANK YOU. >> OH, I'M SORRY.   >> HILARY, COULD U HELP ME  OUT -- >> TURN THE MICROPHONE ON. >> OH, SORRY.  OKAY.  SORRY. (LAUGH.)  >> LOTS OF PEOPLE YELLING AT ME  REALLY QUICK. (LAUGH.)  >> SOR.        IF YOU'RE INTENDING TO  ALLOW THEM TO MAINTAIN THE  EXISTING CURB-CUT ON WASHINGTON, THEN YOU WOULD JUST STRIKE FROM  "AND THE WASHINGTON."   >> OKAY.  >> OH, NO I'M SORRY.  NO YOU  ULD STRIKE EVERYTHING BEFORE.  YES.   >> YOU WOULD STRIKE THE WESTERN  CURB-CUT ON WESTERN AVENUE 30TH  NORTH.   >> NO I'M SORRY.  YOU WOULD  STRIKE THE WASHINGTON AVENUE NO  GOIN GOING  HAVE SHALL BE REMOVED.  >> SORRY.   >> NO, YEP, THE WASHINGTON  AVENUE NORTH CURB-CUT ON THE  29TH SHALL BE REMOVED SO YOU  WOULD STRIKE FROM WESTERN -- NO, I'M DOING IT BACKWARDS.  IT'S  THE WAY THAT IT'S WORDED. (LAUGH.)  >> APOLOGS.   >> INTENTIONS TO LEAVE 4 TOTAL;  RIGHT?   >> MY INTENTION WAS TO DISCUSS  AFTER MY MOTION LEAVING THE 4  OPEN SO LET'S TRY THAT. >> SORRY.  I JUST WANTED TO SHOW YOU --  (SPEAKER NOT MIC'D.)  >> YEP.   >> OKAY.  THANK YOU, YES.   >> SO YOU'RE GOING TO READ THE  CONDITION.   >> SO THE CONDITION WOULD AD,  THE WESTERN CURB-CUT ON 30TH  AVENUE NORTH SHALL BE REMOVED TO COMPLY WITH SECTION WHATEVER  VEHICULAR ACCESS -- OKAY.   (LAU.)  >> OKAY.   >> THANK YOU.   >> DOES EVERYONE HAVE THAT.   OKAY.  IS THE A SECOND.   >> SECOND.   >> DISCUSSION?  COMMISSIONER  JONES?   >> I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT THAT CONFIRMS WITH WHAT THE  APPLICANT WANTED.  I GOT THERE  KIND OF CONFUSED THERE MYSELF.   >> YES, IT IS.   >> OKAY.  >> COMMISSIONER CONLEY?  IT  >>YEP.  THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.   I'M WONDERING IFF WE'VE  IDENTIFIED A HARDSHIP?   >> SO THIS IS NOT A VARIANCE.   THIS IS IT SITE PLAN REVIEW SO  THESE ARE JUST CONDITIONS TO  IMPOSE SO WE HAVE THE FULL  AVAILABILITY TO REMOVE THAT  WITHOUT CITING OF THE NORMAL  THINGS OF A NORMAL VARIANCE.   THERE'S NO PRACTICAL  DIFFICULTY -- YEAH, NO THIS IS  JUST SITE PL REVIEW.      COMMISSIONER OLSON, DID YOU HAVE MORE.   >> I'LL LET COMMISSIONER BAXLEY  GO.   >> JUST A QUICK NOTE.  I  APPRECIATE THE CHAIR'S COMMENT  ABOUT THE CITY'S EORT TO  INCREASE PEDESTRIAN-FRIENDLY  ENRONMENTS.  BUT IN THIS CASE  THIS HAS BEEN EXISTING FOR A  LONG TIME AND I THINK FOR THAT  STRETCH AND THAT MODIFICATION  IT'S STILL PEDESTRIAN, THEY CAN  STILL WK THROUGH THERE AND I  THINK GIVEN THE NATURE OF THE  NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE ACCESS TO  THE SITE, THE REMOVAL OF THE  CORNER IS MORE CRITICAL THAN THE SITE SO I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE  MOTION.   >> COMMISSNER OLSON?   >> I DO AGREE WITH WHAT YOU'RE  SAYING AND I DON'T THINK THAT,  YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WE'RE SEEING  LIMITED PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY NOW IS A REASON TO JUST CARRY ON  WITH AS MANY CURB-CUTS AS ANYONE WANTS BECAUSE THERE'S PROBABLY  LESS PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY THERE  BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF  CURB-CUTS SO, YOU KNOW, CHICKEN  OR THE EGG SITUATION.      BUT IN THIS CASE, I AGREE  WITH WHAT COMMISSIONER BAXLEY  SAID.  AND ALSO THERE'S THE  GARAGE DOOR RIGHT NT TO IT.   THERE'S ALREADY A CURB-CUT RIGHT THERE.  I KNOW WE DON'T WANT TO  KE LARGE SPANS WHERE PEOPLE  ARE TRYING TO CROSS, YOU KNOW,  MULTIPLE CURB-CUTS AT THE SAME  TIME BUT I THINK THIS IS A  REASONABLE ASK ESPECIALLY SINCE  THEY'RE NOT SPLITTING THE SITE  AND BECAUSE THE SITE IS SPLIT BY THE BUILDING, SO THAT'S MY  REASONING.   >> ALL RIGHT.  ANY FURTHER  DISCUSSION?   ALL RIGHT.       *  >> * PF CLERK, PLEASEALL THE  ROLL.      THE CLERK CALL THE ROLL (ROLL CALL.)  >> THERE ARE 5 AYES AND 1 NAY.   >> ALL RIGHT.  THAT CONDITION AS MODIFIED IS ADOPTED AND THAT  CONCLUDES EVERYTHING ON THAT  ITEM I BELIEVE?  GOOD LUCK WITH  YOUR PROJECT.   >> THANK YOU.   >> NEXT WE HAVE THE ANNUAL  REPORT FOR 202 FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION, HILARY ARE YOU DOING THIS; RIGHT?   >> I'M GOING TO TURN ON THE  MICROPHONE.  I BELIEVE THE  INTENTION IS TO PRESENT THIS AS  A RECEIVE AND FILE AND IF  THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS OR  COENTS THOSE WILL BE BROUGHT  UP IN TWO WEEKS.  WHEN KIMBERLY  IS BACK AND THERE'S BEEN MORE  TIME FOR DISCUSSION. >> OH, OKAY.  SO CAN YOU PULL UP IMAGES 'CAUSE I DO WT TO  COMMENT -- >> AH, PULL UP IMAGESHAT ARE  IN THE REPORT?   >> YES.  IF NOT I CAN IDESCRIBE  THEM AND JUST MAKE MY COMMENTS  FOR NOW AND THEN WE CAN HAVE -- >> I CAN PUT IT ON A THUMB  DRIVE -- >> YEAH.   >> I CAN START TALKING AND YOU  CAN PULL THEM UP WHILE I  SCRIBE THEM.      LET'S SEE.  SO -- AND THEN  THE PLAN WAS TO HAVE THIS BACK  ON THE AGENDA IN O WEEKS; IS  THAT RIGHT?  I'M SORRY.  OKAY.  >> YES.   >> OKAY.  SO HERE WE HAD A  REALLY STARTINGLY DROP IN APPLICATIONS OVER THE LAST YEAR. WE HAD 520 IN 2020, 343 IN 2021. 257 DOWN TO 194, DOWN TO 131.   SO IT'S A SUBSTANTIAL DROP IN  APPLICATIONS, AND A MAJOR DROP  IN THE NUMBER OF UNITS.  FOR THE NUMBER -- AND THEN VARIANCES  WENT DOWN -- I THINK THAT'S A  GOOD THING, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ONE OF THE EFFECTS OF THE 2040 PLAN  IS THAT WE WANT TO MAKE MORE  THINGS BUY RIGHT YOU EITHER GET  THEM OR YOU DON'T.  I'M NOT  SEEING THE TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS BUT IT WENT FROM, LIKE, 900 DOWN TO 100 OR SOMETHING.      I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS  JUST A DELAYED CONSEQUENCE OF  THE 2040 LAUIT.  I'M NOT SURE  IF THERE ARE GOING TO BE MANY  MORE IN THE PIPELINE, HOPEFULLY, COMING DOWN.  BUT IT IS A REALLY STARTINGLY DROP AND, YOU KNOW,  IT GOT SOME ATTENTION FROM THE  PUBLIC.      AND I, YOU KNOW, WOULD LIKE TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IT IS  THAT'S CAUSING SUCH A DP.   LET'S SEE.  DO YOU HAVE THAT.   THAT'S THE APPLICATION ONE.  CAN YOU GO TO THE UNIT SLIDE?   >> TELL ME IF I GET THERE.   DENIALS, VARIANCE, TRUST, MAJOR  PROJECTS -- IS THIS THE ONE YOU  WERE LOOKING 162 NEW DWELLING  UNITS DOWN FROM -- >> YEAH, THERE YOU GO.  OKAY.       I MEAN, REALLY, REALLY BIG DROP.  YOU KNOW, 3,458 IN 2022.  SO, YOU KNOW, I SENSED THAT  WE'VE BEEN HAVING FEW PROJECTS AND FEWER UNITS PRESENTED TO US, YOU KNOW, IT'S A LOT LESS WORK  FOR US BUT I THINK IT'S REALLY  BAD FOR THE CITY THAT WE'RE N  BUILDING NEARLY AS MUCH HOUSING  AS WE PREVIOUSLY WERE.      A I ALSO THINK IT'S  RELEVANT TO THE REVENUE  DISCUSSIONS THAT AR HAPPENING,  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BET STEVE  BRANTND THE MAMAYOHAVE BEEN  WORKING ON GENERATE DEVELOPING  NEW REVENUE.      I THINK THIS  SOMETHING  THAT SHOULD BE RELEVANT TO THAT  CONVERSATION BECAUSE WHEN NEW  PROJECTS ARE BUIL THAT  GENERATES A LOT OF NEW REVENUE  FOR THE CITY IN DIFFERENT WAYS.  IT SPREADS THE PROPERTY TAX LEVY ACROSS PEOPLE AND IT MEANS THERE ARE MORE PEOPLE IN THE CITY.   GENERATING SALES TAX REVENUE AND BUILDING PROCTS THEMSELVES  GENERATE BUILDING PERMIT FEES  AND OTHER KIND OF THINGS.      I THINK, YOU KNOW, THIS  ISSUE SHOULD BE PART OF THAT BET DISCUSSION AS WELL.      I'LL ASK THIS QUESTION NOW  AND WE'LL -- WE'LL COME BACK TO  IT IN IT IT COMES BUT I JUST  WANTED -- TO WHATEVER EXTENT WE  CAN HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING  WHAT IS CAUSING THIS PHENOMENON  AND WHAT WE CAN DO TO ADDRESS IT AND HOW BIG SAFE FINANCIAL  IMPACT IT POTENTIALLY MIGHT  HAVE.  WHAT IS THE FINANCIAL  IMCT ON THE CITY.  YOU KNOW,  HOW MUCH MORE REVENUE WOULD WE  BEGAIN WAITING IF WE HAD 3,000 UNITS INSTEAD OF JUST 100 OR  SOMETHING.      SO THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS.   WE'LL COME BACK TO IT IN IT TWO  WEEKS.  COMMISSIONER BAXLEY, DID YOU HAVE ANY -- ANY COMMENTS ON  THE REPORT?   >> NO, NOT AT THIS TIME.  I  MEAN, I'M TRUST, THOUGH -- IT'S  KIND OF AN OPEN-ENDED QUESTION.  IT'S KIND OF A THEORY AS TO -- >> NO, WHAT I'M HOPING IT IS -- >> YEAH.   >> I'M HOPING JUST DELAYED  REACTION TO THE 2040 LAWSUIT A IS IT MIGHT BE TAKING A LONG  TIME FOR PROJECTS TO BE GETTING  IN THE PIPELINE AND IF THAT'S  THE CASE, THEN STAFF CAN TELL  US, LIKE, HOW MANY ARE IN THE  PIPELINE.   >> YES.   >> AND, LIKE, HOW MANY PROJECTS  WE COULD ANTICIPATE FOR 2025,  AND IT HAD BE INTERESTING HOW  LONG OF A TIMELINE IT TAKES FOR  THESE PROJECTS HOW LONG OA LAG BETWEEN THESE DECISIONS AND JUST LIKE HOW MANY PROJECTS WERE  STOPPED BECAUSE OF THE LAWSUIT.  I'D BE INTERESTED TO KNOW.      BUT I DON HAVE ANY OTHER  THEORIES WHICH IS WHY I'M  PUTTING OTHER QUESTIONS OUT  THERE ON THE RECORD.      AND I'D REALLY LOVE TO ASK  THE BUILDERS, LIKE, WHAT IS  STOPPING YOU FROM BUILDING RHT NOW?  IS THERE ANYTHING THAT  MIGHT BE DONE TO GET YOU TO  START BUILDING?  IS IT JUST THE  ECONOMIC CIRCUMSTANCES, JUST NOT ENOUGH DEMAND?  IT OR IS THERE  SOME CHANGE THAT WOULD GET MORE  OF IT?  I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY HOW TO GO ABOUT AROUND SOLICITING  THAT INFORMATION FROM ALL THE  BUILDERS BUT THAT'S INFORMATION  I'D LOVE TO GET AND I'M HAPPY TO HAVE ANY CONVERSATION WITH  ANYONE WHO HAS THOUGHTS ON THEM.      COMMISSIONER CONLEY?    THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. SO  WE'VE BEEN HAVING THIS  DISCUSSION ON THE  HENNEPIN COUNTY BOARD WHICH IS  WHY THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS  GREAT TO HAVE THE MAKEUP THAT IT DOES BECAUSE I ALSO CHAIR OUR  HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT  AUTHORITY AND WE HAVE BEEN  HAVING THESE CONVERSATIONS,  WHETHER WITH IT -- YOU KNOW,  WE'VE HAD CVERSATIONS AROUND  IT COSTING A LOT TO BUILD AND  WHETHER OR NOT THAT COST IS  COMING DOWN.  WE STARTED A  PROGRAM THAT WAS -- THAT'S  CALLED REPAIR AND GROW, WHICH IS INCENTIVIZING DEVELOPERS TO COME ANDEVELOP AND BUILD AND WHAT  DO YOU NEED FROM US?  TO KIND OF MAKE THIS HAEN SO THERE'S A  LOT OF CONVERSATION THAT'S  HAPPENING AROUND LIKE THE PAUSE, KIND OF, THE LULL AND I THINK  IT'S COUNTY-WIDE, TOO.  WHICH C  PONDER WHETHER IT IS COSTING  MORE.   >> YEAH.   >> THERE'S BEEN TALK AROUND SOME OFHE LOW-INCOME TAX CREDITS  GOING AWAY AND THAT'S  DISINCENTIVIZING, YOU KNOW, SOME DEVELOPERS FROM BUILDING  AFFOABLE HOUSING IN SOME WAYS  SO THERE'S A LOT OF THEORIES OUT THERE BUT WE'RE LEARNING A LOT  THROUGH E COUNTY'S HRA AND I'D BE HAPPY ALSO TO SHARE SOME  THEORIES AND DIG AND FIND OUT  WHAT WE'RE HEARING FROM  DEVELOPERS AS TO THE -- >> THAT'S VERY HELPFUL AND IF IT IS A CE IT'S A COUNTY-WIDE  ING, THEN THERE MIGHT NOT BE  VERY MUCH WE COULD DO ABOUT IT.  SO, YEAH, THAT WOULD BE A  REQUEST OF STAFF IS TO TELL US  WHETHER IT IS -- LIKE TO WHAT  EXTENT IT'S A COUNTY WIDE THING  OR METRO-WIDE THING?  IS IT  HENNEPIN COUNTY OR IS IT  SOMETHING HENNEPIN COUNTY IS  DOING WRONG?  OTHER COUNTIES  THAT MIGHT BE GETTING ALL THE  NEW CONSTRUCTION?   ALL RIGHT.     ANY OTHER COMMENTS?  ALL  RIGHT.  I'M NOT SEEING ANY SO WE WILL RECEIVE AND FILE THAT ITEM, AND WITH THAT OUR BUSINESS IS  CONCLUDED.        THE NEXT REGULAR PLANNING  COMMISSION MEETING WILL BE  MONDAY FEBRUARY 10TH.  THE  COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE IS  CANCELLED FOR THIS WEEK.  AND WE HAVE TO LEAVE ON A VERY SAD NE 'CAUSE THIS IS COMMISSIONER  OLSON'S LAST MEETING.  I JUST  WANT TO THANK YOU FOR ALL THE  WORK YOU HAVE DONE FOR THIS  BODY.  YOU'VE BEEN MY MENTOR ON  HERE AND WE WENT ARE REALLY  GOING TO MISS YOU. >> THANK YOU.  I'LL JUST, IF I  CAN -- (LAUGH.) >>  >> PLEASE DO.   >> I'M NOT GOING TO GIVE A  SPEECH.      I'M JUST THANKFUL FOR THE  OPPORTUNITY.  I THINK WE WERE  SAYING, I THINK, IT'S BEEN,  LIKE, 6 YEARS, WAS MY GUESS.  I  FEEL LIKE WHEN I WAS STARTED I  WAS JUST FRESH OUT OF GRAD  SCHO.  I'VE LEARNED A LOT AS A PLANNER AND JUST AS A RESIDEN  OF THE CITY AND I'M THANKFUL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY THA THAT I GOT  TO HAVE THIS EXPERIENCE AND ME  D MY HUSBAND, WHO'S SITTING  RIGHT THERE -- (LAUGH.) >>  >> WE'RE ABOUT TO BECOME PARENTS SO THIS IS A REALLY GOOD TIME  FOR ME TO TRANSITION OFFHE  PLANNING COMMISSION AND IT JUST  NICE TO KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW,  STAFF AND ALL THESE  COISSIONERS ARE GOING TO  CONTINUE JUST DOING AN AWESOME U KNOW, VIBRANT, LIVABLE,  AFFORDABLE, FOR MODAL, FOR  EVERYONE IN THE CITY.  MAYBE  THINK ABOUT STROLLER-FRIENDLY AS I -- AS I LEAVE SO THAT'S ALL  I'LL SAY.  I'M JUST THANKFUL.   SO THANK YOU, GUYS.   >> SO WE CAN GIVE YOU A BREAK  BUT MAYBE YOU CAN COME BACK  AFTER YOU'VE GOT SOME INSIG ON THE STROLLER-FRIENDLY SIDE OF  IT.   >> MAYBE I'LL BE ON THE OTHER  SIDE -- (LAUGH.) >>  >> TT'D BE GREAT TOO.      ARE THERE ANY OTHER UPDATES FROM STAFF OR COMMISSIONERS?   >> HUH-UH.   >> ALL RIGHT.  SEEING NONE, OUR  BUSINESS IS CONCLUDED AND WE ARE