Welcome everyone to the regular meeting of the Minneapolis Planning Commission. Uh my name is Chris Meyer. At this time, I will ask the clerk to please call the role. >> Commissioner Chowry is absent. Commissioner Ch uh Connley is absent. Uh Garcia
>> present. >> Gordon >> present. Jones here. Shepy is absent. Shepard >> here. >> Wagner >> here. >> Uh, Vice President Baxley >> here. >> And President Meyer
>> here. >> There are seven members present. >> That is a quorum. Uh, first we'll move to the minutes of January 20th, 2026. Is there a motion to adopt those minutes? >> So moved. >> All right. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Any discussion?
>> All right. All in favor say I. I. I opposed abstensions that is adopted. Uh next we will organize our agenda. Staff is recommending that item four be discussed and item five beyond consent. Was anyone here to speak against the staff recommendation for item number
number five which is 420 uh 4238 and 4240 Fremont Avenue North. All right. Not seeing any. So we will have that on consent. Is there a motion to adopt that agenda? moved. Second.
>> All right. All in favor say I. I. >> I. >> Opposed. That is adopted. >> All right. So, we'll open the public hearing for our one consent item, item number five. Did anyone want to speak to that? All right. And we'll close the public
hearing. Commissioners, were there any comments or discussion about item number five? All right. Is there a motion to adopt staff recommendation for item number five? >> Some moved. Second. [snorts] >> All right. All in favor say I. I.
>> Opposed. >> That is adopted. >> All right. So, we'll move to our one discussion item. Uh 763rd or 33 Third Street North. Staff is Andrew Lisa. Thank you, chair, commissioners. Again, this application before you is for a
site plan review located at 7603rd Street North. This is a threestory spa proposed at just over 34,000 square ft. The site is located on Third Street North and 8th Avenue North.
It's currently vacant. There is a dog park and a surface parking lot. Uh currently no alley serves this site and there are no natural or significant natural features on site. Uh a variety of uses make up this area predominantly residential although there
are commercial uses across third and also along Washington. A mixeduse building abuts that shared lot line along the southeast. The blue line LRT extension plans also call for 8th Avenue to go underneath the
vioideuct connecting to Fifth Street North as well. Again, this proposal before you is a threetory 3400 or 34,000 foot spa and wellness use. There are pools, tubs,
saunas, steam rooms on the first floor. Second floor is made up of locker room facilities as well as massage services. A smaller third floor uh connects to a rooftop deck with a pool area. There's an accessory food and beverage use
enclosed. Also restrooms and a lounge area. This use is permitted in this zoning district. The applicants have applied for the site plan review. They've also submitted a minor TDMP. Going over the floor plans, we see the
lobby in the upper right. That's off of third there. So again we see the the pools, tubs, spas so on and so forth uh that make up that first floor. Second floor again locker room uh facilities,
some massage areas there. Most of the third floor is that uh outdoor area, the uh rooftop deck there with the pool. Uh small area is enclosed along that abuing uh property to the southeast and that's where the bar
lounge area is. uh some restrooms. So staff reviewed this development proposal, finds it does comply with most of the zoning code standards with three aspects needing alternative compliance. Those three are blank walls, window requirements, and general landscaping
and screening. Staff is supportive of two of these requests, both the blank wall and the general landscaping and screening. uh code requires that any facade longer than 25 ft be broken up with a uh uh a
facade recess, window, door, etc. The blank wall is along that uh souththeastern uh lot line where that adjacent mixeduse uh building exists. that existing
structure ranges from 04 to8 ft from that lot line. Building code really limit what you could do in terms of breaks there. Uh staff finds that complying with that it's not really practical as it would largely be invisible. Uh next we have the landscaping and
screening. A total of 47.2 square feet is required to be landscaped. Uh with that one tree and one shrub. Uh staff finds that uh the red outline here uh is the footprint of the building. Most of
that available area uh is made up in that recess associated with the front uh lobby entrance. Some facade breaks along and finds that uh meeting that landscaping uh requirement is not
feasible for this. That blue line uh at the bottom is where the blank wall is adjacent to that existing structure. The alternative compliance not supported by staff is regarding the first floor windows both on third and 8th. The
zoning code requires 30% glazing. The third street has 26.4% 4% glazing whereas the 8th Avenue side again required to have 30 has 0% windows. Uh
staff recommends denying this and adds a condition of approval requiring that that 30% windows are met. Here's a rendering of the proposal. So again we see the lobby on the right there. Uh one window. The rest of that
third street facade uh largely windowless. All of that 8th Street facade is windowless. Just going over again how we're looking at this. We take a band between 2 feet and 10 ft. Take a look at the width of
the building. And that is where our window requirements come from. There are more windows associated with that lobby area that are not included in uh in those calculations being that they're over that 10 ft above grade.
Uh here's the eighth side. again largely void of all windows. Uh again just in terms of square footages the third street you know 28.2 ft short of that minimum 30% 8th Avenue
side 355.2 square ft short of that required glazing. So with that staff recommends approval of the site plan review. Worth noting [clears throat] is that condition four uh regarding those windows staff adds
that the 30% window shall be uh added to that third and eighth side to meet those uh requirements. I'll be here for questions. The applicant is also present. >> Thank you. Um so the blank wall is not
depicted here, right? It's it's behind this like next to the adjacent building. Okay. >> It would be abing that adjacent structure. Okay. Are there any other questions from commissioners before we move to the public hearing? Not seeing any. Oh, do we have a whole list?
>> Oh, wow. Okay. All right. Um, since we've got a whole list, I'm going to read this disclaimer about it. Um, so I want to offer a reminder to everyone um that these meetings are broadcast live to enable greater public participation. Uh these
broadcasts include real-time captioning as a further method to increase accessibility of our proceedings. Uh so we ask all our speakers to be mindful of the rate of their speech so that captioners can fully capture and transcribe all comments for the broadcast. Uh so we ask speakers to
moderate the speed and clarity of their comments. So we have six people registered here. You'll have two minutes each. Uh so the first person I have is Evelyn Carbry who will be followed by Lauren. Um, Caseage, I have the the carbon copy
here, so it's not the names aren't clearly [snorts] readable to me, but do we have Evelyn here? >> Uh, Chair Meer, could we give the applicant an opportunity to speak? >> Sorry. Um, first, yeah, we we'll do the applicant first. You have uh 10 minutes
for your section and apologies for that. Thank you, Mr. President. My name is Michael Margules. I am the project representative for 8003 Lot, who's the developer of this Bath House project. With me tonight is Travis Tomage, who's the co-founder and the co-CEO of the
Bath House, and he's in from New York, to provide a little bit more operational information to you as you make as you consider this uh as you consider this site plan. planner Lisa has presented um a site plan for approval with the exception of
with the condition of that there will be 30% u of of window glazing on the first floor. We submit that the alternative compliance that's shown in the site plan is more than adequate for the planning commission to approve the site plan as shown.
The 30% glazing requirement stems from a number of concerns. And the rationale for the glazing requirement is to provide a safe and and eyes on the street environment for the building and for the neighborhood. It's to raise the quality of the building exteriors,
making them cohesive and attractive. And it's to make the buildings visually interesting and enhancing the uh pedestrian experience. The key points I'd like to leave with you tonight are that imposing the 30% standard actually makes the building and the
neighborhood less safe, that there's more than sufficient alternative compliance in place to achieve the goals of the 30% glazing standard and that the site plan is adaptable to possible changes in use in the building if the future needs
required. So I want to talk about safety for a minute. contract contrary to the goal the 30% standard imposing it here would make the neighborhood as well as the building less safe Mr. Tomage is going to speak in greater detail to this issue and
particularly how this building operates, but the rationale behind the glazing rule, safety and security is actually put in jeopardy if the standard is imposed. So the first floor that uh planner Lisa showed you has a number of
uh amenities of 7500 square ft. It's got a number of pools. It has three saunas, three pools, a Turkish bath, and other amenities. The people who will be customers and patrons of the bath house
will be wearing very little clothing. They'll be wearing bathing suits. You'll be making them uh and they have an expectation of privacy and a reasonable expectation of privacy. So imposing the 30% window coverage would allow people
from the street to peer in to augle the undressed patrons and making them feel very uncomfortable. So put yourself in the position of of you in this position, your spouse or your partner in this position and imagine how you would feel if you were undressed and on display
because of these windows. We feel that w women in particular would feel insecure and un and unsafe and this feeling would continue when they conclude their visit of the amenities step outside and perhaps face the same people who've been looking at them through the window all
the time that they've been uh in the spa. The other odd event that occurs here is that the inversion of the temperature caused by the steam in the facility and in the bath house will also cause the window of the windows to to steam up, which will essentially create a a free
graffiti wall for people to write on. So in both situations, allowing people to stop on the street to stop and stare at people using the amenity and writing who knows what on the windows essentially creates an attractive attractive
nuisance at the least and a dangerous attractive nuisance uh at the worst. There is more than sufficient alternative compliance in the plan to allow this site plan to go forward as presented. As planner Lisa showed, there
is a uh on the first floor of the 8th Avenue side, there is 0% uh window glazing. But if you look at the totality of the building, we more than exceed the window coverage. On the second floor of the 8th Avenue, which requires only 10%,
we meet uh a 30% level of window coverage. And on the third street side we meet a a 60% uh window coverage. So the if you look at the facades in their totality uh these facads meet the window coverage
and far and far exceed the window coverage. And why is this important? It's important because this goes to the goal of making the exterior of the building attractive and improving the pedestrian experience. We think that the building design and the
window coverage on the first floor is consistent with the goals uh behind the behind the 30% rule. The overall design of the building avoids monotonous facads that threaten the that the avoids monotonous facads. The design is high
quality evoking an oldworld bath house design and fits in with the warehouse uh district. The North 8th Avenue facade contains design elements that are effective in breaking up the first floor facade and making the facade
architecturally interesting. We can actually improve on that if we have to by adding more architectural element in terms of vertical uh landscaping on the exterior of the building. The second floor windows on 8th Avenue exceed the
window coverage by 300% and they create an impactful visual design easily seen by pedestrians. Meanwhile, the North Third Street facade with its large and open entrance is visually appealing and fosters street level activity, transparency, and visual
interest. The third question that has come up is whether or not this building is flexible for the future. What happens if the future uh uh um use of this building changes and the building has been designed in such a way as the panels on
the 8th street facade, 8th Avenue facade can be removed and replaced with windows if the if the change if the use of the building changes materially in the future. So there's sufficient alternative compliance to approve this site plan.
Imposing the 30% standard creates an creates an unsafe environment for the building. The building overall exceeds the glass requirements. And these glass requirements, these the existing additional glass on the building. And the other design elements make this
building interesting. It makes it safe. It makes it a cohesive design and one that enhances the pedestrian experience. I'm going to let uh Travis Tomage uh join me now and explain a little bit about why this building is designed as
it is and why this 30% standard creates an unsafe environment and an inappropriate standard for the businesses going in. Travis, >> thank you for having me. Um my name is Travis Talmage. I'm the co-founder of Bath House. Um appreciate all your time.
Excited to be here. I have a family in the Twin Cities, very fond of uh of Minneapolis. So, always exciting to come back here and we're excited to hopefully bring our business uh to the city here. So, I want to just give you a brief overview of our business because I think it's important context for what I'm
going to say about the windows. Um our business is very on the nose for what it's named. It is a modern version of a bath house. It's really focused on sauna and contrast therapy. So, we have multiple different kinds of saunas and very large ones at that. multiple different types of pools, steam rooms. Um, and so we're in the temperature
business. It's people getting hot and cold and doing that in a really great environment. Um, we have two locations that are open operating in New York about the same size. Um, and we're building eight across the country. We're going to open four this year. Um, and uh, very excited about about
Minneapolis. So, the first thing I want to talk about is we're very committed to the city. Um, this is going to be in excess of a $25 million investment uh between us and the developer. So, we take sauna and bathouses really seriously. Um, and we're doing that to
really build a wow product that we think the city and the residents will be very proud of. Um, we're also a big employer. Um, we will conservatively hire 60 to 80 people here, potentially more. Um, so we create a lot of jobs. They're all better than prevailing wage. Um, these are jobs
that people can live off and and make a career out of. Um, so I want to walk through the layout of the the building a little bit and specifically the first floor. Our intention is not to go against what the zoning committee wants with the
windows or what the neighborhood wants. We do this with a purpose. Um, our business is really designing best-in-class, best in the world facilities. In order to do that, these amenity areas, which is on the first floor, it's really important that they're done the right way so that customers can have the best experience
possible. When people are in there, as Michael just said, they're in bathing suits. They're going to different sauna, they're going to different pools, and it's really important that they feel comfortable. Um, I don't know if you guys ever sauna or cold plunge, but it's quite a stressful experience. It's supposed to be stressful, and if you're not comfortable, you're not going to get
the most out of the experience, and people feel exposed because they are in bathing suits. So, one of the things we spend a lot of time on is the lighting design, not only for aesthetic. All of our locations that we've opened have won numerous design awards. Um, but it's also because we designed the lighting so
it's very flattering so that people are comfortable and can get the most out of the experience. So, we would never put windows in an amenity area. Similar to if you were going to try and build a great theater, you would never have windows in a theater because it disrupts the product. >> Can I go over
>> a little bit? >> Okay, I'll try and make it quick. Um, so anyway, on that first floor, this our main area where all the pools and the saunas are, and so people looking in on the street would be very uncomfortable for guests. Um, and I think it'd create a really awkward dynamic. Um, as Michael
said, if we had windows, they would steam up. We would never let that light into our amenity areas because it is designed to be a completely controlled environment so that the guests can get the most out of it. Um, so the other thing I I just want to mention is we spent a lot of time designing the space.
We had a lot of offers to come elsewhere within the Twin Cities and greater Minneapolis. We want to be in the North Loop. We believe it's the best place for our business. We think it'll be a great addition to the North Loop. This is about as small a viable footprint as we can work with. I would love to have a
entrance and lobby on the corner. That would be my preference. It didn't work once we started laying it out with where the stair towers would have to be and the elevator and all the stuff. So, this was a sacrifice to get this in this location and make it a really incredible world-class product. Um, it was not
because we don't want to do windows. The windows don't work with our product. We think it would look bad. We have some proposals about doing some greenery um on the brick on the first floor. And as Michael said, we overdid the windows on the second floor. Um, it's not really ideal on the second floor, but we were
able to make it work with the transom windows. So, um, I'm happy to answer any questions and just want to give you guys some context on why we designed it the way we designed it. >> Thank you. You said you [clears throat] have proposals for greenery. Is that what you said? >> We would be open to doing some greenery
on the first floor like some vines. Um, but we can't do windows. It doesn't work with our product. >> Okay. Um, I I want to understand more about why you can't do windows. So, you know, the rules require, you know, um transparent
windows, but if we required windows, but um allowed them to be opaque, would that still work? >> My opinion, >> or is it is the issue with the water like being close to it? >> So, opaque windows, my opinion is that's not going to look as good as really nice
brick or brick with some softening with some vines or something. um the light even coming into the space gets difficult for us because then we can't control the environment the way that it's ideal to be controlled so that customers can have the best experience possible. We're we're in the hospitality business. We're in the business of
making people happy. We want them to be in the best mind space when they're in the space to get the most out of it. >> Okay. So, greenery is one thing you've considered. Have you considered murals or other artwork to >> break up the exter? >> We wouldn't want to do murals. I think
that's just difficult to do something that everybody's going to agree on. I mean, look, for what it's worth, we think this is a really beautiful building. Um, this is one of the buildings that we're proudest of and we have eight of them being built. Um, but no, a mural a mural we would not want to
do, but we would we would be open to doing I can give this to you guys if you want, but we did a rendering with some vines on it. >> Yeah. Can you please show that? >> Yeah. Bring it up. >> No. Um, >> oh, perfect. Thank you. Excuse me, Mr. Chair. Um, the document camera is not working today.
>> Oh, no. >> So, um, we can maybe pass it around. >> Yeah, that'll have to do. >> Do you want me to pass around on one side? >> Yeah. >> Oh, great. >> Oh, it is. Okay, great. >> [snorts]
>> Okay. Um, you said that um that there could be removable panels if the use of this building were to change. Is there a way for us to verify that or have that as like a condition or something like
>> the the developer is going to build it so that it's future proof so that it would be designed in a way where you could knock out those panels and put in windows. And would the panels be like where the grass is on on here? Like >> Yeah. On the lower on those bays that you see the uh the vines in.
>> Okay. >> Mr. Mr. Chair, that could be a condition of the approval. >> Yeah. >> All right. Other commissioners, questions for the applicant. >> Commissioner Gordon. >> Yes. What's the proposed uh floor to ceiling height of that first floor
space? >> Six or 16 feet. >> Is it 16 feet? Thanks, Michael. Yeah, 16 feet. >> Okay. Vice President Baxley. >> Yeah. Hey, thank you. Yeah, I think this will be really exciting. I'm trying to figure out the floor plan relative to
the facade, and it appears uh you've got a big window into the steam room next to the front door. Is that >> It's into the office. So, we we actually redesigned that. The office was not originally there, but we wanted to try and get as much glazing as possible. So,
we put our staff office there. Um, so that there was extra glazing. >> Okay. So that's not a steam room. No, that's shown on the plan. Okay. >> Um, and you said you were able to get some clear stories working on the second floor. >> Um, why wouldn't you consider that in
the first floor um in the >> those are locker rooms and back of house spaces on the second floor. So we put transom windows up high because we're okay with natural light in there. Um, but the whole first floor is amenity area. So it's all the sauna in an open area and and
>> so the sill of this window if you got 16 foot ceilings would be above people's height. It would just let light in. It would be private, right? >> Yeah. And so we're trying to avoid we want to control the lighting in that that space. >> Okay. Lots of ways to do that. I'm imagining
>> there are I mean listen, we're we're not good at very many things, but we're very good at building this product. So, you know, we we want to make a material investment, make it a spectacular product, and you know, we just we know our business and we know that this is the right way to do it in the amenity space.
>> Good. I'm I'm sure you've toured lots of spas around the world that basic light is a a huge component of how that works in there and it's controlled and it's very thoughtful and you guys do a great product here. It's just it seems like this could be a win-win all the way around.
>> That's why we have the the rooftop which you know we intend to to have open throughout most of the year. Um, and so that gives kind of the the outdoor element of the experience. >> It's good to hear. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Yeah.
>> Other questions? All right. Not seeing any. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> So, now proceed with the rest of the public hearing. Um, so do we have Evelyn Carbry? Welcome. >> Introduce yourself and you have two minutes.
>> Great. Thank you. to uh Minneapolis Planning Commission members. My name is Evelyn Carbury and I'm a resident of the Hersel Lofts located at that property uh the mixeduse property adjacent to the proposed development at 763rd North Third Street North. I'm here today to
express my concern about the proposed development, especially the request for the variance for the required 30% window minimum along the first floor. [snorts] I've lived in the area since 2015. First as a resident at Third North across the street and now as a resident and homeowner at the Hersel loss for the
last nine years. I like many others in our community and concerned about this lack of windows in the building especially that it will reduce neighborhood safety and that it could be a potential liability um in trying to lease the building in the future should the bath house development not be successful. So, I'd like to address a
couple of points that uh Michael brought up in the previous presentation um about the concern that windows would decrease safety and that the steam could lead to graffiti. Um I would just encourage this commission to consider uh another nearby
structure. So, that is the V3 center located along Plymouth Avenue. They have a pool on the first floor um right along Plymouth Avenue which as we know is a highly trafficked street which is entirely windowed um including they have women only swim nights. Um people feel
very safe and comfortable going to this facility. They have shades that they bring down so that women can go there and swim at women's only nights as well as I have been there several times including last week when it was minus 20. And yes, the windows were entirely covered with steam and I can safely say
that there was no umbody that came along and tried to do graffiti with the steam. Um I realize that the bath house has stated a long-term commitment to this location. However, um given plans to open similar businesses such as the watershed spa at 250 North Thirdrd
Avenue later this year, as well as recent closures of nearby businesses such as the North Loop Galley and Rumble Fitness, I'm not convinced of the long-term viability of this business, and I like my neighbors do not want any building, especially a vacant building without first floor windows in our
community. Thank you. >> Next, we have Lauren Carish. >> Carish, nice job. [laughter] We'll be followed by Michael uh Michael Margulus. >> Hi everyone. I'm Lauren Carish. I'm the HOA president at Hershel Lofts, the one
that she just talked about. Um I've been in contact with many of the residents as well as we had a formal uh meeting with many of the residents in the building to talk about the concerns. Our primary concern is the request of the variance of the lack of the windows along the
street facing facades. For safety, I would like to counter what Michael was saying is that a fe as a female walking along the streets at night, having some sort of reflection, having windows allows for safety to be able to see. You
can sometimes see the people behind you. It allows for um it just allows for more feeling of that that more eyes are on the streets. Um, street facing facade windows provide visibility and reflection which allow
pedestrians to be more aware of their surroundings and see who may be approaching them from behind. A long blank wall removes a layer of uh passive safety while lighting and cameras which they had said stated during the North Loop planning uh zoning meeting was that
they would have ample lighting and lots of cameras. Um, you know, we live in the city and and and in the North Loop, we've had cameras that catch crime, but the police always say, "Unless you know who this person is, this videotape
really doesn't do anything." Um, so that doesn't really help. Um, there are also aesthetic and neighborhood character concerns like not having the windows, especially if you're going to turn when you turn a street into a major street. um when the light rail plans to go in on
10th Street. You know, this is a street that people are going to be walking down constantly, driving past constantly. Um and I think the be the view looks so beautiful from up above when you kind of have that aerial view with the pool and everything, but really when you're on that ground level, you're really only seeing a brick wall. And it's nice that
they can have greenery, but we all live in Minnesota and let's be honest, nothing green is growing right now. So, it's going to be just a brick wall. So, really appreciate your time and uh thank you for this consideration. Thank you. Next we have Michael
>> already spoken. >> Oh, okay. So, several of these for are for the bath house. We had Travis. That was one. Um, how about Rachel? Rachel Capino. Carpino. >> Hi. Um, I'm Rachel Carpino. I also live
in Hershel Lofts. Um, I obviously we're talking about the windows. Um, my main concern is this is just um I guess my main concern actually is that I have friends in Brooklyn who have been to the bath house and there has been a lot of
issues with mold [snorts] and other things. There are pictures of it online. There are articles about it. Um, I don't know how I feel about that considering it will be attached to our 100-year-old building and if we get mold
on that, that's going to be a big issue. The other issue to me is North Loop um seems to be lately overrun with a lot of corporate uh places, not local, right? Um, which
we have now two puttery places. We have a bar for darts. Um, and they seem to be consistently going out of business, right? Like they're really expensive. Um, in Brooklyn to go to this bath house, it costs like $225 for a monthly
membership. You can only go five times. If you want to go more, you got to pay more money. Um, we're already getting HOA fees out the roof. Uh, our condo buildings in North Loop. I don't see it being a viable option for people to really go consistently and so I do think
it will eventually fail. Um, I would also like to mention, this is as an aside, it seems on their website, they do talk about how they use they mine Bitcoin um, and they use the heat from that to
heat the pools and so it's just another layer of oddness that I would like to mention and it is on the bath house website. Um, so I don't feel great about it. It just gives me a weird icky vibe is what I would say. So that's I guess
all I have. Thanks. >> Thank you. And we also had Devon Brown who was also with Bath House. Did Devon, did you want to speak as well? >> Thank you for allowing me to speak tonight. My name is Devon Brown and I live in the Fowl neighborhood. um
as a body worker for 11 years and a former educator at the Aveda Institute. I both work in and personally seek out these environments. I've spent most of my 20s in traditional beyas in Bergen County. Um I've rented out the watershed. I've flown to Atlanta
specifically to visit Korean spas because facilities like that just don't exist yet in Minneapolis. And I've never seen a facility like this with windows um that give public access um to people partaking in the activities within. Um
what excites me most about the bath house though is that it is a community- centered and it's not built on exclusivity and solely on membership. They do have a day pass option. Um healing modalities should be available to people when they need them and not
restrict not restricted by status. income level or scarcity. Um, regarding the privacy, bath house culture is deeply rooted in respect and boundaries. These are spaces designed for restoration and not display. People come to regulate their nervous systems, recover from stress and injury, and
reconnect with themselves and not to be viewed by passerbys. Uh, for that reason, I strongly support the request for the variance in the window ordinance. Transparency to the street is valuable for many types of businesses, but in a bath house setting,
privacy is just not a preference. Um, sorry, I lost my place. Um, privacy is a fun is fundamental to the purpose of this space. uh reduced visual stimulation, what we might think of as gentle sensory deprivation, helps the
body shift into parasympathetic nervous system state where healing and digestion and recovery can occur. Lower light levels and a sense of enclosure allow the nervous system to downshift from vigilance to restoration and that's part of the therapeutic function of the
environment. Thank you. >> Thank you. That was everyone who signed up. Did anyone else want to speak today? Anyone? Last chance. All right, commissioners, were there any questions that people had before we close the public hearing?
>> All right, I will close the public hearing or did you have one >> question for staff? Is that acceptable? >> Yep. >> Yep. We can >> Andrew Andrew. Should the should the tenant not renew the lease and at some point in the future? My understanding is that if this passes today without the
window requirement, there is no real way for planning to require that the windows be installed in the future. Is that correct? >> That's correct. >> Thank you. >> Um Andrew, like um in regard to the proposal to have the removable panels,
even though we couldn't enforce that they actually remove the panels, um do you feel if that was a condition that the staff would be able to verify that they're removable? like we haven't done something like that before. So, I wanted to ask about that. >> I would imagine we could work with CCS
plan review in something like that. >> Okay. >> All right. Commissioners, what are your thoughts? >> I do want to clarify something that was, you know, in the letters that were sent to us and in in the public testimony that there's no variance being requested
here. Um what's being requested is alternative compliance. um you know technical difference, but it does have consequences like um there's no need for any finding of practical difficulty or any of those things. Um the planning commission today can uh just choose to
approve or deny the requested alternative compliance. Commissioner Shepard, >> I do have some thoughts. The purpose of a zoning ordinance is that the good of the community supersedes the good of one individual business on it, particularly since no
businesses are permanent. So I I find that kind of a difficult bridge to cross. There are many ways to introduce glass glazing in a building that are not necessarily transparent to light or vision. And the only reason I've heard that that was not done is because you didn't think
it looked as good as brick. Maybe so. But but we're not an architectural review board. But I but I would find it difficult to accept a a I would find it actually not possible for myself to accept a blank facade
constructing a blank facade on ETH and th those are my views on it. >> Okay. So that would be for the staff recommendation then and to deny the alternative compliance. other commissioners.
I guess where I'm at, um, so I definitely think in general window requirements are important, um, to have eyes on the street. I definitely think that's a safety improving thing in general. I I do see the argument for an
exception for this type of use, and I think it's a rare enough type of use that I I could go with it. I do hear the concerns that if this closed, then this um windowless facade would would pass on
to the the next owner and that um [snorts] you know I wish we had a way to require that if that happened that they'd be required to add windows. Um but I I think I would probably be
on the side of granting the alternative compliance in this case. Um, other commissioners. >> Well, Commissioner Shepard, if you'd like to make a motion to adopt the staff recommendation, I think we can do that first. >> So moved. I I would move passage of this
with the staff requirement uh as stated in 1 through 7. >> Okay. Is there a second to that? >> Second. >> 1 through nine. Who? I'm sorry. For the record, Vice President Baxley seconds it. >> All right. Any
other commissioners have any thoughts on this? So to clarify for everyone, the staff recommendation is to deny the alternative compliance for the windows. All right, seeing no further comments,
uh, clerk, please call the role. >> Commissioner Garcia, >> I. >> Commissioner Gordon, >> I. Jones. >> I Shepard >> I >> Wagner >> I. >> Vice President Baxley
>> I >> and President Meyer >> no. >> There are six eyes and one nay. >> That is adopted. So good luck with your project and thank you everyone for coming. Our last item uh for today will be to do nominations for executive
offices. Um so let's see what the script is here. So, we have three offices. We've got um the president, vice president, and secretary. And we'll just be taking the nominations for today. Um the actual vote would happen at our next meeting.
Um so, would anyone like to make nominations for the role of president? >> I nominate Chris Meyer. >> I accept. Thank you. >> Would anyone like to make a nomination for the role of vice president? Can I nominate Commissioner Baxley?
[laughter] >> Did you want it? >> Well, I think um >> I don't actually want it. >> You don't? I thought you did. I thought that was something you were interested in and you were >> Maybe next year. >> Tom, does you want to? >> Yeah. Tom, is that something you'd be
interested? I mean, I've done it, so I think >> yeah, I I've thought about it. Um I do attend most of the committee, the whole meeting, so um I would be happy to to step in and help out. Um I do feel fairly comfortable having been on the board now for two years, so um I'd be
open to it. >> Okay. I'm going to nominate Commissioner Ragnar. [snorts] >> Good. >> And how about for Secretary >> Well, who hasn't done there? and I'm going to commissioner Jones for >> I will just add a quick note. I was secretary last year and I did not do a
single thing for the entire year. [laughter] [gasps] >> So, um this the role of the secretary is typically that you sign all of the documents that come through and need to be recorded at Henipin County. Um
I think though because we had Commissioner Baxley's electronic signature on file, we just kept using [laughter] that last year. um which was fine because as uh in the vice president role that was also acceptable. Um so
that would be the main responsibility of secretary and then also in the event that the president or and vice president would not be able to chair a meeting then you would step into that role. Um okay I'll work with you to get your electronic signature and we will retire commissioner backsley.
>> We still have to have the actual vote. All right. Were there any other nominations for any of the offices? All right. Seeing none, we'll close those nominations. All right. Uh, so that concludes our business. Uh, we have no committee of the whole um for this week.
Um, I don't know if we're going to keep doing those. It's been a while since we had one. Um, is this the right date? >> Okay. You've got two different dates on here. You've got the 17th and the 19th on here. So the se 17th, right? >> Our next regular meeting will be on
Tuesday the 17th because Monday that week is President's Day. >> Okay. All right. Are there any other updates from staff or commissioners? >> All right. Seeing none, we are adjourned. Can you still celebrate?