>> WELCOME EVERYONE TO THE REGULAR MEETING FOR THE MINNEAPOLIS PLANNING COMMISSION FOR DECEMBER 8, 2025. I'M CHRIS MEYER, CHAIR OF THE COMMISSION. CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY IS ABSENT. CONLEY. >> PRESENT. >> FORNEY. >> HERE. >> GORDON. >> HERE.
>> JONES IS ABSENT. SKJEFTE IS ABSENT. SHEPPARD. >> PRESENT. >> WAGNER IS ABSENT. VICE PRESIDENT BAXLEY. >> HERE. >> AND PRESIDENT MEYER. >> HERE. >> THERE ARE SIX COMMISSIONERS PRESENT. >> WE HAVE A QUORUM. SO FIRST WE'LL MOVE TO THE
MINUTES FROM NOVEMBER 17, 2025. IS THERE A MOTION TO ADOPT THOSE MINUTES? IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] OPPOSED? ABSTENTIONS? THOSE MINUTES ARE ADOPTED. NEXT WE'RE GOING TO ORGANIZE THE
AGENDA. SO I'M GOING TO READ THROUGH EACH OF THE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA AND SEE IF ANYONE WANTSO DISCUSS THEM. STAFF ARE RECOMMENDING ALL ITEMS TO BE ON CONSENT AGENDA. SO IF YOU CAME TO SPEAK AGAINST
A STAFF RECOMMENDATION, WHEN I CALL OUT YOUR ITEM, LET US KNOW THAT YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO IT. SO FIRST WE HAVE ITEM NUMBER 4, 1001 3RD AVENUE SOUTH. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK AGAINST? WE HAVE SOMEONE BACK THERE WHO
WANTS TO SPEAK AGAINST THAT ONE? OKAY, SO WE WILL DISCUSS ITEM NUMBER FOUR. NEXT WE HAVE ITEM NUMBE 5, 3148 41ST AVENUE SOUTH. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK AGAINST STAFF RECOMMENDATION? OKAY SAW SOMEONE BACK HE.
SO WE'LL DISCUSS ITEM NUMBER VE. NUMBER 6, 5462 NICOLLET AVENUE AND 5463 BLAISDELL AVENUE. WILL ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK AGAINST THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON THAT ONE? WE'LL HAVE THAT ONE ON CONSENT.
NUMBER 7, 4029 28TH AVENUE SOUTH. SOMEBODY OVER HERE? SO WE WILL DISCUSS ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. ITEM NUMBER 8, 2028 JAMES AVENUE NORTH. ANYONE TO SPEAK AGAINST THE STAFF RECOMMENDION ON THAT ONE?
WE'LL HAVE EIGHT ON CONSENT. AND THEN FINALLY NUMBER 9, 2034 JAMES AVENUE NORTH. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK AGAINST THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON ITEM NUMBER NINE? SO WE'LL HAVE THAT ON CONSENT.
SO TO REVIEW, ITEMS 4, 5, AND 7 WILL BE DISCUSSION. AND THEN ITEMS 6, 8, AND 9 WILL BE CONSENT. IS THERE A MOTION TO ADOPT THAT AGENDA? >> SO MOVED.
>> IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] OPPOSED? ABSTENTIONS? THAT IS OUR AGENDA. SO I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR OUR CONSENT AGENDA. SO IF YOU ARE HERE FOR ITEMS NUMBER 6, 8, OR 9 AND YOU WANTED
TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT IT, YOU CAN DO SO NOW. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK ABOUT THAT? NOT SEEING ANYONE, SO I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ISHERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA? IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA? >> SO MOVED. >> SECOND. >> ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?
ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] OPPOSED? ABSTENTIONS? ITEMS 6, 8, AND 9 ARE ADOPTED. IF YOU CAME HERE FOR THOSE, GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR PROJECTS. ALL RIGHT, SO WE WILL NOW MOVE
TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR, OUR FIRST DISCUSSION ITEM 1001 3rd AVENUE SOUTH.
AND OUR STAFF IS ANDREW LISKA. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, STAFF, COMMISSIONERS. THIS IS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
LOCATED AT 1001 3rd STREET SOUTH. THE EXISTING STRTURE TOTALS JUST OVER 500,005 SQUARE FEET. -- 505,000 SQUARE FEET. AND IT'S A MIX OF OFFICES AND
COMMUNICATION EXCHANGE TODAY. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING TO CONVERT THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE INTO A COMMUNICATION EXCHANGE. ALTHOUGH THE FLOOR PLANS SHOW A LOT OF OFFICE, TWO REMAIN ON THE FIRST AND SECOND FLOORS.
HERE'S THE SIT BOUND BY 10th STREET SOUTH, THEN 11TH, THEN 4th, THEN 3rd. THIS STRUCTURE OCCUPIES THAT ENTIRE BLOCK. THIS BUILDING WAS BUILT IN THE LATE 1980s AND RECEIVED A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IN
1990. THE CO CALLS THE STRUCTURE AN OFFICE AND COMPUTER COMPLEX WHICH IS AKIN TO AGAIN A COMMUNICATIONS EXCHANGE AS THE ZONING CODE. OVER TIME THE FLOOR PLANS FOR
THAT USE CHANGED. THERE WERE TIMES WHEN A MAJORITY OF THOSE STRUCTURES WERE USED AS A COMMUNICATION EXCHANGE. STAFF HAS FOUND BUILDING PERMIT RECORDS THAT SHOW SOME OF THOSE LOWER FLOORS, FLOORS 1, 2, AND 3 BEING USED AS AN OFFICE TODAY.
THE APPLICANT REQUESTED A ZONING LETTER. STAFF DETERMINED THAT YES, FLOORS 1, 2, AND 3 ARE OFFICES. 4, 5, AND 6 ARE THAT COMMUNICATION EXCHANGE. AND THAT'S WHAT GETS US TO THIS CUP APPLICATION TO AUTHORIZE THAT USE THROUGHOUT THIS ENTIRE
STRUCTURE. ALL OF THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO THE STRUCTURE ARE ALL INTERIOR, THERE'S NO EXTERIOR CHANGES WHATSOEVER. WHEN LOOKING AT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, SEVERAL FINDINGS MUST BE MET. STAFF EVALUATED THOSE FINDINGS
IN THE REPORT AND IS ABLE TO MAKE ALL OF THOSE NECESSARY FINDINGS. IF ANY COMMISSIONER OR MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC HAS A CONCERN WITH ANY OF THESE SPECIFICALLY, WE CAN KIND OF HIGHLIGHT THAT. BUT AGAIN STAFF FINDS THAT ALL
OF THE REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR A CUP ARE MET. AND WITH THATECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1001 3rd AVENUE SOUTH.
AND I THINK THAT WE HAVE THE CO HERE AS I MENTIONED CALLING THIS AN OFFICE COMPUTER COMPLEX AGAIN FROM 1980. AND WE HAVE SOME FLOOR PLANS. THOSE ARE KIND OF SMALL AND SOME PHOTOS. I'LL BE HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. THE APPLICANT IS ALSO PRESENT.
>> GREAT. COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE WE OPEN THE HEARING? NOT SEEING ANY. THANK YOU. I WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICT.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS. I'M JAKE STEIN, WE REPRESENT THE APPLICANT. AS STAFF INDICATED, THIS BUILDING WAS ORIGINALLY BUILT AS THE AMERICAEXPRESS DATA CENTER WAS ITS OFFICIAL TITLE IN 1990.
THIS IS THE RESULT OF THE 2023 ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT WHICH CHANGED A DATA CENTER FROM A PERMITTED USE DOWNTOWN TO A CONDITIONAL USE. IT WAS ONLY RECENTLY WHEN WE
REQUESTED A ZONING LETTER TO CONFIRM THE BUILDING WAS STILL A DATA CENTER THAT WE GOT INTO THE DISCUSSION OF PARSING OUT FLOOR BY FLOOR. THE TRUTH IS IT'S ALWAYS BEEN A MIX OF OFFICES AND COMMUNITY -- COMPUTER AND SUPPORT.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO CONTINUE TO EVERY TIME WE MAKE A FLOOR PLAN CHANGE, WE DON'T HAVE TO ASK FOR A C.U.P. AMENDMENT. SO IN DISCUSSING THIS WITH STAFF, WE DETERMINED THIS WAS THE BEST APPROACH. IN MANY WAYS THIS IS A PAPERWORK CLEAN UP.
THERE ARE NO CHANGES TO THE BUILDING CURRENTLY PROPOSED. CERTAINLY NOTHING TO THE EXTERIOR, AND ANY CHANGES OVER TIME WILL JUST BE ENTIRELY TO THE INTERIOR. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. APPRIATE WORKING WITH STAFF ON THIS AND APPRECIATE STAFF'S SUPPORT. >> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS?
SO IAVE ONE. JUST TO CLARIFY, YOU ARE THE ONE WHO INITIATED THIS? >> THAT'S CORRECT. WE MADE THE APPLICATION AFTER DISCUSSING WITH STAFF ABOUT WHAT THE BEST WAY TO CLEAN THIS UP IS. REALLY THE DISCUSSION IS IF THE SECOND FLOOR, WE WANTED TO ADD
SOME COMPUTERS OR SUPPORT EQUIPMENT, WHAT DO WE DO? WHAT'S THE TRIGGER? AND UNDER THE CURRENT ORDINANCE, IF WE DON'T APP FOR THE C.U.P. TO INCLUDE THE WHOLE BUILDING, WE WOULD HAVE TO COME THROUGH AND DO A C. U.P. AMENDMENT EVER
TIME WE EXPANDED. A LOT OF THE BUILDING WAS ORIGINALLY BUILT WITH THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THIS. I THINK IN THE LAST YEAR, THIS WAS THE SINGLE BIGGEST BUILDING PERMIT AS WE'VE MADE SOME IMPROVEMENTS TO THIS BUILDING IN THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS. THERE'S A LOT OF INVESTMENT IN
THE BUILDING ALREADY AND WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE IT THE WAY IT HAS BEEN WITH ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITYO MAKE MODIFICATIONS AS NEEDED. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> ALL RIGHT. ANY ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS WHO WOULD LIKE TO COME UP? YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES.
COME UP AND INTRODUCE YOURSELF. >> I RESIDE AT THE APARTMENT BUILDING AT 365 NICOLLET MALL
HERE IN WARD 3. I'M HERE IN OPPOSITION OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A COMMUNICATION CENTER OR DATA EXCHANGE. I A THE COMMISSION TO SEND THE PROPOSAL BACK TO CITY STAFF FOR FURTHER STUDY OF THE PROPOSAL.
THIS PROJECT APPEARS TO BE FOR A SMALLER DATA CENTER NOT SUBJECT TO RECENT RESTRICTIONS ON LARGE DATA CENTERS. I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE CURRENT STUDY AND SUPPORTIVE LETTER ADEQUATELY ADDRESS THE IMPACT ON UTILITY USAGE POSED BY THIS PROPOSAL INCLUDING FOR
INTERNET OR DATA. THERE IS NO ANTICIPATION OF COSTS SPREAD TO CONSUMERS FOR HIGHER USAGE OF WATER, ELECTRICITY, OR INTERNET BANDWIDTH. I ALSO DO NOT BELIEVE IT IS FAIR TO COMPARE DATA USAGE FM
HISTORICAL USE TO 1990 GIVEN THE MAGNITUDE AND DENSITY OF DATA EQUIPMENT. I BELIEVE IT IS THEREFORE IN QUESTION WHETHER THE PROPOSAL WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE GENERAL WELFARE BASED ON UTILITY USAGE. MOST IMPORTANTLY, I DO NOT BELIEVE THE PERMIT SHOULD BE
ALLOWED UNDER CONDITIONAL USE CRITERION FIVE. I DO NOT SEE HOW AN OUT OF STATE ENTITY WHICH CLAIMS MINNEAPOLIS IN ITS LLC NAME, BUT NO STAFF OR REAL PRESENCE HERE CAN BE CONSISTENT WITH DELOPMENT POLICY 23 OF THE MINNEAPOLIS 2040 PLAN. THERE ARE NO PROMISES OF
EMPLOYMENT HERE AND I WOULD BE CONCERNED HOW THIS COULD BE CONSISTENT WITH ANY OF DEVELOPMENT POLICY 23, HOW THIS PROJECT SERVES THE PUBLIC OR BUILDS EQUITY WHEN IT SEEMS TO BE JUST ADDING CAPACITY TO AND ENRICHING AN OUT OF STATE ENTITY WITH NO REAL TIES TO MINNESOTA
AND NO DEFINED BENEFITS TO MINNEAPOLIS OR ITS RESIDENTS. I APPRECIATE THE COMMISSION'S TIME. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? NOT SEEING ANY, SO I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS, ANY COMMENTS,
DISCUSSION, EMOTIONS? COMMISSIONER CONLEY. YE YES. >> THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. SO MY QUESTION IS TO STAFF. I WONDERED ABOUT HOW WE MIGHT HAVE UATED POLICY, PROCEDURES, THE WAY THAT WE LOOK AT
COMMUNICATION EXCHANGES OR DATA CENTERS GIVEN THAT THESE ARE POPPING UP, IT'S A RELATIVELY NEW ISSUE AND THERE IS A COST TO UTILITIES. THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER CONLEY, SO THERE IS A ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT BEING STUDIED RIGHT NOW BY OUR
CODE DEVELOPMENT TEAM THAT'S TAKING A DEEPER LOOK INTO DATA CENTERS, PARTICULARLY LARGER ONES THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE ESTABLISHED IN THE CITY LOOKING AT A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT THE SPEAKER JUST BROUGHT UP IN TERMS OF ENERGY USAGE, WATER, UTILITY, THAT SORT OF THING.
THERE'S AO BEEN LEGISLATION INTRODUCED AT THE STATE LEVEL. THIS ONE IS WELL BELOW ANY SORT OF NEED FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. BUT BECAUSE THIS ONE IS EXISTING AND HAS BEEN EXISTING IN THE CITY SINCE THIS BUILDING WAS
CONSTRUCTED, THIS ISN'T ONE THAT IS NECESSARILY GOING TO BE SCRUTINIZED AS PART OF THAT ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT RK. IT'S NOT ONE WHERE WE THOUGHT WE NEEDED TO SLOW DOWN AND TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT THIS. THIS IS REALLY MORE OF A PROCEDURAL ISSUE.
AS NOTED THE BUILDING PERMIT HISTORY ON THIS ONE IS VERY CLEAR FOR THE UPPER FLOORS OF THE BUILDING HAVING RIGHTS TO A DATA CENTER. IT WAS LESS CLEAR ON THE LOWER FLOORS AND WITH THAT, WE WEREN'T ABLE TO ISSUE A ZONING LETTER TO THE APPLICANT WHEN REQUESTED THAT SAID THE LOWER FLOORS HAD
RIGHTS TO THIS USE AND IT'S A COMMUNICATION EXCHANGE IN THE CODE. SO THIS IS REALLY CLEANING THAT UP BECAUSE IT WAS NOT PERFECTLY CLEAR ABOUT THE USE OF FLOORS 1, 2, 3. SO YOU WILL LIKELY B SEEING SOMETHING FROM OUR CODE DEVELOPMENT TEAM IN THE NEXT
YEAR ABOUT DATA CENTERS OVERALL THAT WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT A LOT OF THE POTENTIAL OFF SITE IMPACTS OF THOSE USES. >> MR. PRESIDENT, THANK YOU. THAT'S REALLY GREAT CLARIFICATION, I'M HAPPY TO HEAR THAT'S SOMETHING BEING EXPLORED RIGHT NOW.
I THINK THE APPLICANT WOULD NEED TO COME BACK TO US THOUGH IF THE USE CHANGES, RIGHT? SO IF THERE'S AN EXPANSION OR IF THE ENTIRE BUILDING IS USED AS A DATA CENTER, THEN THAT'S A DIFFERENT AGENDA ITEM BEFORE US. >> THAT'S WHAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU
RIGHT NOW. SO THE USE IS IN THE BUILDING RIGHT NOW -- >> FOR THE ENTIRE BUILDING NOT JUST THE CERTAIN FLOORS? >> YES. SO THAT'S THE PART THAT WE'RE CLEANING UP AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION. BECAUSE OUR BUILDING PERMIT HISTORY WHILE WE HAVE A
CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FROM WHEN THE BUILDING WAS FIRST OPENED THAT REFERENCES A COMPUTER COMPLEX FOR THE ENTIRE BUILDING, OUR PERMIT HISTORY WAS NOT PERFECTLY CLEAR ABOUT WHICH FLOORS THE BUILDING CONTAINED A COMMUNICATION EXCHANGE ON.
SO THIS IS ESSENTIALLY CLEANING THAT UP. >> WONDERFUL. AND I THINK I'LL JUST CLOSE WITH JUST A FOLW UP. AND I THINK THAT IT MAY BE WORTH THE CONSIDETION FOR SOME OF THE SMALLER ONES THAT WHEN I THINK DATA CENTERS, WHEN WE THINK DATA CENTERS, WE THINK THE
BIG LARGE FOOTPRINTS THAT HAVE A MASSIVE IMPACT ON WATER, ET CETERA. BUT I THINK IT MIGHT BENEFIT THE CITY TO KNOW WHAT THE USAGE MIGHT BE IN THIS AREA OF DOWNTOWN FOR THIS BUILDING IN THE FUTURE. SO I GET THE CLEAN UP IS NECESSARY. IT'S PROCEDURAL TO BRING THINGS
UP FROM 1990 TO 2025. BUT IT STILL MIGHT BE SOMETHING TO LOOK INTO IN THE FUTURE. SO THANK YOU. >> I HAVE A DIFFERENT QUESTION FOR STAFF. CAN ONE OF YOU REMIND US WHAT POLICY 23 IS THAT THE TESTIFIER SPOKE TO. I DON'T HAVE ALL OF THE POLICIES
MEMORIZED BY NUMBER. BUT IF SOMEONE CAN LOOK THAT UP AND READ IT FOR US. >> NOR DO I, I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK IT UP. >> THE STAFF REPORT DOESN'T REFERENCE POLICY 23 EITHER SO I DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME EITHER. >> OKAY.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION WHILE THEY LOOK THAT UP? >> I'M SEEING POLICY 23 IS ABOUT COORDINATED DEVELOPMENT
STRATEGIES. WHICH IS MORE ABOUT LIKE INTERDEPARTMENTAL AND INTERAGENCY COORDINATION TEAMS. SO IT'SOSSIBLE THAT'S NOT THE ONE. >> OKAY. I GUESS I'LL SHARE MY THOUGHTS
THEN. I FEEL LIKE THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT THE APPLICANT WAS PROA E PROACTIVELY LOOKING TO DO. IT'S AN EXISTING BUILDING, THERE'S NOT ANY EXTERIOR CHANGES. I THANK THE TESTIFIER FOR
DRAWING ATTENTION TO THE ENERGY AND WATER USAGE OF DATA CENTERS. I THINK THAT WOULD BE A LOT MORE APPLICABLE TO A NEW ONE THAT WAS BEING CONSIDERED. BUT FOR CLEANING UP THE EXISTING ZONING FOR THIS, I THINK I'M
INCLED TO APPROVE THIS. ARE THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION FROM COMMISSIONERS? WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? COMMISSIONER SHEPPARD. >> I WOULD AGREE, MR. PRESIDENT. THAT DATA INFRASTRUCTURE
IMPROVEMENTS WHICH DOWNTOWN IS ONLY GOING TO BENEFIT FROM. AND I WOULD MOVE TO APPROVE. >> IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. IS THERE ANYMORE DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT NOT SEEING ANY, CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> COMMISSIONER CONLEY. >> AYE. >> FORNEY. >> AYE. >> GORDON. >> AYE. >> SHEPPARD. >> AYE. >> VICE PRESIDENT BAXLEY. >> AYE. >> AND PRESIDENT MEYER. >> AYE. >> THERE ARE SIX AYES AND 0
NAYS. >> THAT IS ADOPTED. NEXT WE'LL MOVE TO 3148 41st AVEN SOUTH.
STAFF IS ASPEN PFLANZ. >> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR, COMMISSION. ASPEN PFLANZ,ITY PLANNER.
THE APPLICATION BEFORE YOU TODAY IS FOR 3148 41st AVENUE SOUTH, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR A COMMUNITY CENTER IN THE UN2 URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT. THERE IS NO NEW CONSTRUCTION PROPOSED AS PART OF THIS COMMUNITY CENTER, IT IS SIMPLY A CHANGE OF USE FROM AN EXISTING
RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONAL BUILDING THAT'S BEEN ON THE PROPERTY SINCE THE EARLY 1900s TO A NEW COMMUNITY CENTER WHICH IS STILL A CIVIC AND INSTITUTIONAL USE. THE ZONING CODE DEFINES A COMMUNITY CENTER AS AN
ESTABLISHMENT OPERATED BY A NONPROFIT GANIZATION OR GOVERNMENT AGENCY WHICH INCLUDES RECREATIONAL AND CULTURAL FACILITIES, MEETINGS ROOMS, SOCIAL SERVICE FACILITIES AND PUBLIC HEALTH FACILITIES OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF AND THAT IS NOT A PUBLIC PARK. COMMUNITY CENTER USES MAY
INCLUDE AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAMS IN TUTORING. AGAIN OUR USE TABLE INDICATES THAT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, A COMMUNITY CENTER IS ALLOWED IN UN2. SOME EXISTING PHOTOS OF THE SITE
SHOW THIS GOTHIC REVIVAL CHURCH WITH A SUBSTANTIAL ADDITION IN THE REAR WHICH IS AGAIN USED AS PART OF THE PROPERTY FOR YEARS THAT WAS USED AS A SUNDAY SCHOOL. SO I'LL JUST FLIP THROUGH THESE
PHOTOS. THERE IS AN ALLEYWAY IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY AND THERE IS NO OFF STREET PARKING CURRENTLY, NOR IS ANY OFF STREET PARKING PROPOSED AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION. ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE
PROPERTY, THIS IS A CORNER LOT. ON THE NORTH SIDE THERE IS A SUBSTANTIAL GREEN SPACE THAS JUST AN OPEN GRASSY AREA WITH A FEW MATURE TREES. THIS SITE PLAN SHOWS, I FLIPPED IT SO NORTH IS ON THE RIGHT SIDE
OF THE SCREEN HERE. THE EXISTING SITE PLAN SHOWS AGAIN IT'S A SUBSTANTIALLY SIZED LOT ALMOST 16,000 SQUARE FEET OF LOT AREA. THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT IS JUST OVER 5,000 SQUARE FEET. BUT THE TOTAL GROSS FLOOR AREA
IS AROUND 11,000. TH APPLICANT DOES OWN THE LOT NORTH OF THIS, BUT THAT IS NOT INCLUDED WIT THIS PROPOSAL. SO THAT LOT JUST HAS AGAIN A MATURE TREE AND A SMALL SHED BUILDING. BUT THE COMMUNITY CENTER APPLICATION USE AHEAD OF YOU IS
JUST FOR THE EXISTING SITE THAT I'VE OUTLINED IN RED HERE. THE FLOOR PLANS PROVIDED JUST SHOW THAT THE EXISTING BUILDING FOOTPRINT WILL BE MAINTAINED. SO THERE'S SOME LARGE MEETING
AREAS IN THE LOWER LEVEL OF THE EXISTING BUILDING. AND THE REAR ADDITION HAS SEVERAL CLASSROOMS AND A LARGE MEETING AREA. THE APPLICANT, BECAUSE THIS PROPOSAL WOULD REQUIRE A
BUILDING PERMIT TO CHANGE THE OCCUPANCY OF THE BUILDING, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING AN ADA LIFT WHICH WOULD CREATE A NEW EXTERIOR ENTRANCE ON THE FRONT FACING 41st AVENUE SOUTH. AND THEN THAT WOULD BE ACCESSIBLE FROM THE PUBLIC
SIDEWALK AND THEN WITH A CHANGE OF USE BICYCLE PARKING IS REQUIRED SO THERE WILL BE A BICYCLE RACK INSTALLED ON THE SOUTH END OF THE SITE ALONG 32nd STREET. THERE WAS ALSO A SEPARATE PERMIT
TO UPGRADE THE COMMERCIAL KITCHEN THAT EXISTS IN THE BUILDING. THE SIX FINDINGS REQUIRED FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT STAFF FINDS ARE ALL MET. THERE'S MORE DETAILS ABOUT THAT IN THE STAFF REPORT. BUT I CAN SPEAK TO THESE MORE SUBSTANTIALLY I THERE ARE QUESTIONS. BUT GIVEN THAT THE PREVIOUS USE
OF A CHURCH IS SUBSTTIALLY SIMILAR TO A COMMUNITY CENTER, THERE ARE NO EXTERIOR CHANGES SAVE THE NEW ADA ENTRANCE AND INSTALLATION OF BIKE PARKING. AND THAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A NONPROFIT TO OPERATE THE BUILDING.
STAFF FOUND THAT THIS MEETS ALL OF THE FINDINGS. AND SO WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR THE COMMUNITY CENTER IN THE UN2 URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION THAT IT IS RECORDED WITH NNEPIN COUNTY.
AND I WILL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. >> THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THANK YOU, ASPEN. I'LL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE THE APPLICANT WITH US? NO APPLICANT?
OH. IF YOU WOULD LIKE, YOU CAN INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT. >> THANK YOU, FORGIVE MY VOICE. I'MORT OF UNDER THE WEATHER.
MY NAME IS ALI, I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE NONPROFIT THAT'S RUNNING THIS FACILITY. I AM READY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS WHAT WE'RE DOING ALREADY IN OUR ST. PAUL OFFICES IS IN LINE IN WHAT WE'LL BE
DOING HERE. SO BASICALLY IT'S SO FAR TUTORING, OUTSIDE TUTORING, WE DO ADR WHICH IS BASICALLY BRINGING FAMILIES AND INDIVIDUALS AND WE HAVE A TEAM.
I DON'T SEE ANY 25, 30 PEOPLE USUALLY COMING IN TOGETHER. SO IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC, NOISE, ALL OF THE MAIN CONCERNS, I DON'T ANTICIPATE ANY SITUATION THAT COULD CAUSE THE NEIGHBORS, ANYTHING OUT OF LINE.
BUT IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? NOT SEEING ANY. THANK YOU. >> APPRECIATE IT. >> ALL RIGHT. OTHER SPEAKERS? EACH PERSON CAN HAVE TWO MINUTES. THERE WERE AEW HANDS RAISED BACK HERE. GO AHEAD AND COME TO THE PODIUM.
INTRODUCE YOURSELF. YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. >> HI, MY NAME IS SYLVIA GONZALEZ, I'M A RESIDENT OF COOPER NEIGHBORHOOD ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CHURCH. I'VE LIVED THERE FOR 30 YEARS. HAVE SEEN WHAT THE CONGREGATION
WAS BEFORE, WHAT IT IS GOING TO BE NOW. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO IT AS LONG AS THERE'S SOME PARKING. AS YOU SAW FROM THE DIAGRAM, THERE IS A PLACE WHERE THEY COULD PUT A PARKING LOT IN. THERE IS GOING TO BE INCREASED TRAFFIC.
I DON'T LIEVE HIM WHEN HE SAYS THERE'S -- 30 PEOPLE SHOWING UP AT THIS COMMUNITY HALL. IF THEY DON'T PROVIDE A PARKING LOT WHICH THEY DO HAVE THE ROOM FOR, THEN THEY SHOULD AT LEAST PROVIDE PARKING PERMITS FOR THE RESIDENTS AROUND THERE.
WE'VE ALREADY RUN INTO PROBLEMS ON 41st AND LAKE WITH THE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC FROM HIGH LOW DINER, THE COFFEE SHOP THAT'S NEAR THERE. IT'S NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO SEE TRAFFIC COMING OUT OF THERE. AND I HATE TO SEE THIS HAPPEN TO
THATORNER OF 32nd STREET AND 41st. THE OTHER ISSUE I HAVE RIGHT NOW IS THAT OVER THE LASTYEAR, I BELIEVE THEY PURCHASED IT IN AUGUST OF 2024. THEY HAVE NOT BEEN MAINTAINING THIS BUILDING. THEY'VE BEEN FINED OVER $15,000 IN FEES THAT HAVE BEEN ASSESSED BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT CLEANING
UP THE RUBBISH, THEY WEREN'T CLEANING THE SIDEWALKS, SO IF THAT'S INDICATIVE OF HOW THEY'RE GOING TO MAINTAIN THIS BUILDING, THEN I OPPOSE THIS CONDITIONAL PERMIT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.NEXT SPEAKER.
WELCOME. >> ALL RIGHT, HI EVERYONE. MY NAME IS NANCY CHOO. I AM A RESIDENT IN THE COOPER NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL. I AND MANY OTHERS WALK BY THIS CHURCH WITH OUR DOG EVERY DAY. THE FIRST CHANGE I NOTICED ABOUT
THIS PROPERTY AFTER THE SALE TO AW HOMES LIMITED IN 2024 IS THAT I COULDN'T WALK NEXT TO THE CHURCH VERY MUCH IN THE WINTER DUE TO THE PERSISTENCE OF UNSHOVELLED SIDEWALKS. AFTER REVIEWING THE APPLICATION FOR THE PROPOSED COMMUNI CENTER WHICH WAS UPLOADED ONLY A
FEW DAYS AGO, I WAS STRUCK BY THE SCA OF WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED AND THE LACK OF DETAIL IN HOW SUCH A PLAN COULD BE IMPLEMENTED. THE APPLICATION INCLUDES INSTALLATION OF A NEW COMMERCIAL KITCHEN AND ELEVATOR. THE APPLICATION MENTIONS A WIDE RANGE OF PROPOSED PROGRAMS INCLUDING ENGLISH CLASSES,
CITIZENSHIP PREPARATION, JOB READINESS, AFTER SCHOOL ACTIVITIES AND HEALTH EDUCATION. FOR ACTIVITIES AND SERVICES AT RECORD IS ESSENTIAL. WITH THAT IN MIND, I'D LE TO HIGHLIGHT TWO ISSUES THAT I BELIEVE DESERVE THE COMMISSION'S ATTENTION.
THE LACK OF COMPLETE VERIFIABLE INFORMATION IN THE SUBMITTED PLAN AND THE LANDLORD'S TRACK RECORD TO DATE. FIRST, REGARDING VOLUNTEER OF SOMALIA, THE NONPROFIT CITED THROUGHOUT THE APPLICATION. I EXPECTED TO FIND AN EIN SO I
COULD REVIEW ITS FORM 990 FILINGS. FOR A PROJECT OF THIS SCALE, IT'S REASONABLE TO EXPECT PARTNERSHIP WITH AN ESTABLISHED NONPROFIT, ONE WITH A DOCUMENTED HISTORY OF CONSISTENT REPORTABLE FUNDING ABOVE THE IRS'S REQUIRED
$50,000 FUNDING. HOWEVER IT DOESN'T APPEAR IN ANY PUBLIC SEARCHABLE REGISTRY WHICH RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT THEIR CAPACITY. SECOND, UNDER THE CURRENT LANDLORD -- UNDER THE PAST
SEVERAL MONTHS, THERE HAVE BEEN A SERIES OF CONCERNING SIGNS POSTED IN THE WINDOWS ALONG THE 32nd STREET EAST SIDE. NOTICES OF UNPAID BILLS, A BLIGHT RED STOP ALL WORK SIGN THAT STAYED UP FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD. WHEN REQUESTING A CDITIONAL PERMIT, BURDEN OF PROOF SHOULD REST WITH THE APPLICANT.
I AM HOPING THAT THE CITY WILL CONSIDER STRENGTHENING ITS PROCESS AND ASK THAT THE APPLICANT REVISE ITS APPLICATION TO CLEARLY DEMONSTRATE CAPACITY TO DELIVER IT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.
NEXT SPEAKER. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS TOM. I'M A COOPER RESIDENT AND A NEIGHBOR. AS A NEIGHBOR WHO REGULARLY BIKES AND USES PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, I'M CONCERNED
WITH HOW THIS APPLICATION CHARACTERIZES THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S TRANSIT ACCESS AND BIKING INFRASTRUCTURE. ON PAGE ONE OF THE APPLICATION, IT STATES THERE'S A SMALL NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL CIVIC AND INSTITUTIONAL USES MINNIEHAHA ACADEMY LOCATED IN THE AREA. SEVERAL BIKE ROUTES AND LANES
ARE PRESENT. INCLUDING 32nd STREET, 38TH AVENUE, 34TH AVENUE, IT'S SERVED BY TWO BUS TRANSIT ROUTES AND ROUTE 9 ON 36TH AVENUE AND 34TH STREET. THIS DESCRIPTION SUGGESTS 'S
WELL LOCATED FOR BUS AND BIKE USERS. IN REALITY NOT A SINGLE BUS OR BIKE LANE LIES WITHIN THE EIGHT BLOCK MAP SHOWN ON PAGE TWO OF THE APPLICATION. THERE ARE NO BUS STOPS NEAR THIS PROPERTY. THE B LINES ONLY STOP IN THE COOPER NEIGHBORHOOD, IS MORE
THAN 2,000 FEET. THE SECOND STOP REFERENCED IN THE APPLICATION IS OUTSIDE OF THE COOPER NEIGHBORHOOD AND EVEN FARTHER FROM THE PROPERTY AT 3,000 FEET AWAY. THERE ARE ALSO NO ACTIVE BIKE LANES NEARBY. ACCORDING TO THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS ALL AGES AND ABILITY
BIKING NETWORK PLAN, NONE OF THE STREETS LISTED IN THE APPLICATION, 32nd STREET, 38TH AVENUE, AND 34TH AVENUE ARE ACTIVE BIKE ROUTES. 2 OF THESE STREETS ARE IDENTIFIED AS POSSIBLE NEAR TERM LOW STRESS BIKEWAYS BUT THE CITY MARKS THEM AS HIGHLY DIFFICULT
TO COMPLETE BEFORE 2030. THIS PROPERTY IS NOT WELL SERVED BY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION OR BIKE INFRASTRUCTURE. ANY REFERENCES TO THIS PROPERTY OR PROJECT'S ALIGNMENT WITH THE CITY'S 2040 PLAN IN THIS REGARD SHOULDE REEVALUATED AND CORRECTED. I DO NOT BELIEVE ATTENDEES WILL WALK OVER 2,0 FEET FROM A BUS STOP, NOR DO I EXPECT THE
PROPOSED BIKE RACK TO SEE MEANINGFUL USE. THE ADDED ON STREET PARKING DEMAND WILL BURDEN NEARBY RESIDENTS AND FURTHER ENDANGER CYCLISTS FROM MY BACK. THERE'S SOME FIGURES ON THE BACK IF YOU HAVE THE THING. >> YOU CAN GIVE THAT TO OUR
CLERK IF YOU'D LIKE. NEXT SPEAKER. WAS THERE ANYONE ELSE? WELCE, INTRODUCE YOURSELF. YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. >> I'M DAVID GOWAN. I'M T AS WELL SPOKEN AS
EVERYBODY ELSE. BUT I LIVE ON THE DIRECT OPPOSITE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WHERE THIS BUILDING IS. AND LIKE A LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE MENTI MENTIONED, THE PARKING IS A CONCERN. 34TH STREET ALREADY HAS A LOT OF CARS THAT ARE CONSISTENTLY PARKED THERE. AND ALSO WHAT THE HOURS OF
ACTIVITY WOULD BE FOR THIS BUILDING. I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING LISTED BEFORE. SO MAINLY JUST A CONCERN ABOUT PARKING AND HOW THAT WOULD BE HANDD. THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER.
WELCOME, INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. >> HI, MY NAME IS KATIE MALUMBY. I AM A COOPER RESIDENT AS WELL. I LIVE TWO BLOCKS AWAY FROM THE PROPOSED SITE. GIVEN THE BROAD SCOPE OF PROGRAMS, CAN THE APPLICANT
PROVIDE A PHASED PLAN DETAILING THE ACTIVITIES WHICH WILL BE HE HELD?THE HOURS OF OPERATION AND STAFFING WILL BE STRUCTURED AND FUNDED? I WAS NOT ABLE TO SEE ANY BREAK DOWN.
WILL THIS FUNCTION AS AN OPEN COMMUNITY CENTER SERVING ALL OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY? OR IS THE CULTURAL SERVICE CENTER WITH DEFINED TARGETED POPULATION? THOUGH BOTH CAN BE VALUABLE, THE DISTINCTION AND CLARIFICATION MATTERS FOR OUR COMMUNITY. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A PLACE
WHERE ALL RESIDENTS AND NEARBY PELE CAN UTILIZE THIS SPACE. I AM NOT OPPOSED TO THE IDEA OF A COMMUTY CENTER THAT'S CULT CULTURALLY INFORMED, BUT I BELIEVE THAT APPROVAL SHOULD BE
CONTINGENT UPON A REVISED APPLICATION THAT OUTLINES OPERATIONAL PLANS THAT TIES NEEDS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. PROGRAMMING SCHEDULES AND CAPACITY LIMITS, AN INCLUSIVE MISSION STATEMENT, EXPECTED
PARKING DEMAND AND MITIGATION STRATEGIES, COMMUNICATION, ENGAGEMENT, AND FEEDBACK PROCESSES, MAINTENANCE AND COMPLIANCE COMMITMENTS, MEASURABLE TIME-BASED DELIVERABLES. A COMNITY CENTER CAN BE A VALUABLE ASSET AND MY HOPE IS
THAT IF APPROVED, THIS PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED IN A WAY THAT IS TRANSPARENT, INCLUSIVE, ACCOUNTABLE, AND RESPONSIVE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE COMMUNITY THAT IT SERVES. I ENCOURAGE THE COMMISSION TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL DETAILS AND MEASURABLE PLANS BEFORE GRANTING
APPROVAL HERE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAK IF THERE IS ONE? GO AHEAD. WEOME, INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MY NAME IS ERIC. I LIVE ON THE BLOCK. I'M ABOUT TW2 BLOCKS AWAY ON 41 AVENUE. LIKE OTHERS HERE, I ALSO EXPRESS CONCERN OVER PARKING. PARKING HERE IS PRETTY LIMITED ON OUR STREET. AND THE ABILITY FOR US TO FIND PARKING AS IT'S THE WINTER AND
THINGS COME UP CAN BE PRETTY CHALLENGED. IT'S A BIG CONCERN I HAVEN'T HEARD ADDRESSED FULLY FROM THE APPLICANT. THE OTHER THING I HAVE IS THIS IS OUTLINED AS A COMMUNITY CENTER, BUT THE PERSON PROMOTING THIS -- I WANT TO KNOW WILL THIS BE FOR EVERYONE IN THE
COMMUNITY, WHAT KIND OF OUTREACH ARE YOU DOING? CAN I BE INVOLVED. I HAVEN'T HAD ANY COMMUNICATION IN THAT REGARD. I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THAT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE. IF IT'S GOING TO TRULY BE A COMMUNITY CENTER THEN LET'S INVOLVE THE COMMUNITY AND HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS, FROM MY
UNDERSTANDING THAT HAS NOT HAPPENED YET. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? GO AHEAD. WEOME. INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES.
>> MY NAME IS CARL BARTELL, I'M HERE WITH MY HUSBAND TED. WE LIVE IN THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR TO THE MENTIONED PROPERTY. I JUST WANT TO REITERATE THE CONCERNS THAT MOST EVERYONE HAS SHARED ALREADY. THE CONCERNS ABOUT PARKING, CONCERNS ABOUT THE UPKEEP OF THE
PROPERTY. WE'VE SEEN A PATTERN OF NEGLECT ON THIS PROPERTY INCLUDING A BREAK IN THA TOOK SEVERAL DAYS FOR THE OWNER TO REPAIR IN A REASONABLE FASHION. HE HAS NOT BEEN FORTHCOMING WITH US. WE SENT HIM AN EMAIL A YEAR AGO WHEN HE FIRST BOUGHT THE
PROPERTY ASKING, VOICING OUR CONCERNS ABOUT POLLUTION, LITTER, SECURITY. ALL OF THESE THINGS. ASPEN, WE SENT A COPY OF THAT EMAIL TO THEM. THAT'S JUST THE GIST OF IT, IS WE'RE CONCERNED WITH THIS PATTERN OF NEGLECT AND KIND OF
MILD DISRESPECT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WE'RE CONCERNED THAT T RUNNING OF THIS FACILITY IS GOING TO BE IN LINE WITH THAT KIND OF NEGLECT. SO THAT IS OUR CONCERN AND WE ARE HOPING THAT IS ADDRESSED. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? ALL RIGHT, I'M NOT SEEING ANY. BU BEFORE I CLOSE THE HEARING, COMMITTEE, IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR ANY OF THE TESTIFIERS BEFORE I CLOSE THE HEARING? ALL RIGHT, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IS THERE A DISCUSSION OR A TION FROM ANY COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER CONLEY. >> THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. JUST TO CLARIFY, FOR WHAT THE APPLICANT IS APPLYING FOR, THERE'S SIX CONDITIONS THAT NEED TO BE MET. I THINK I COUNTED SIX.
AND FROM THE STAFF, IT APPEARS THAT ALL REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN MET FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE TO VOTE ON TODAY. I WILL SAY THAT THERE ARE CITY PATHWAYS FOR REPORTING BLIGHTED PROPERTIES, FOR REPORTING SNOW
NOT BEING SHOVELLED, ET CETERA. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT RESIDENTS KNOW THAT THERE ARE WAYS TO REPORT THINGS LIKE THAT. I ALSO WANT TO MENTION JUST AS A COMMENT, THAT IT'S REALLY, REALLY IMPORTANT WHEN YOU PURCHASE A PROPERTY FOR THE
COMMUNITY, IN THE COMMUNITY, TO HAVE A REALLY GOOD PARTNERSHIP WITH THE COMMUNITY. JUST IN GENERAL, I WOULD SAY THAT TO ANYONE COMING IN PURCHASING AND BUILDING TO BE A PART OF THAT COMMUNITY. COMMUNITY CENTERS IN AND OF THEMSELVES ARE STRUCTURES THAT HELP DEFINE NEIGHBORHOODS, THAT HELP BRING NEIGHBORHOODS
TOGETHER. SO REESTABLISHING THAT RELATIONSHIP WILL BE CRITICAL I THINK TO THIS PROJECT MOVING FORW FORWARD. I HAVE SEEN THAT THIS IS SOMETIMES A FIRST STEP TO OTHER AGENDA ITEMS THAT WE MIGHT SEE .
SO WHEN PROJECTS LIKE THIS COME BACK FOR OTHER PERMITS OR OTHER REQUIREMENTS OR BUILDING ADDITIONS, ET CETERA, KNOWING THAT YOU'VE GOT THE COMMUNITY ON YOUR SIDE FOR THAT, REALLY HELPS US IN MAKING OUR DECISIONS. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. >> THANK YOU.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER SHEPPARD. >> JUST OBSERVATION. I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY CONCERN ABOUT BETHLAND CENANT NOT HAVING AN OFF-STREET PARKING CAPACITY EITHER. AND I GET THAT THAT DOES INDUCE A GOOD AMOUNT OF PARKING ON THE
STREET. I BIKE THROUGH THERE ALL THE TIME, I'M ALSO A COOPER RESIDENT. BUT THAT'S A PROBLEM I'M NOT SEEING AS UNIQUE TO THIS PARTICULAR -- WE HAVE A NUMBER OF FACILITIES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THIS CAPACITY OR MORE, AND THAT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE A CONCERN FOR THEM. I DON'T REALLY SEE IT AS BEING A
CONCERN HERE EITHER. SO I WOULD AGAIN CONCUR THAT THERE ARE SIX CONDITIONS AND THEYAVE MET THEM AND THERE ARE OTHER CITY AVENUES FOR ADDRESSING CONCERNS OF THE OPERATION OF THE PROPERTY ITSELF. SO I WOULD MOVE THIS AS WRITTEN. >> SECOND.
>> OKAY, THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. I'LL GIVE MY COMMENTS. WE'VE HEARD SOME PRETTY CONCERNING THINGS ABOUT THE PROPERTY OWNER HERE TODAY ABOUT LITTER AND LACK OF SNO
SHOVELLING. ONE SPEAKER SAID THAT THEY WERE FINED $15,000 WITH THAT, SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY ARE BEING APPROPRIATELY PENALIZED FOR THAT IF THEY HAVE BEEN FINED FOR THAT. SO I WOULD URGE THE APPLICANT TO
ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES IF THAT'S CORRECT TO SHOVEL THE SIDEWALKS, TO PICK UP THE LITTER, TO BE ENGAGED WITH THE COMMUNITY. AS TO PARKING, I SYMPATHIZE WITH THE CONCERNS THAT PEOPLE HAVE BROUGHT UP, BUT THE CITY
ADOPTED CLIMATE POLICIES ACTIVELY DISCOURAGE MORE PARKING FROM BEING BUILT. SO THERE'S NO MECHANISM WHERE THAT COULD BE INCLUDED TODAY. IF ANYTHING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION TRIES TO GET APPLICANTS TO BUILD LESS
PARKING. BECAUSE THAT BRINGS MORE TRAFFIC INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THE EXISTING SITE IS ALREADY
THERE. WHOEVER USED IT BEFORE IT PRESUMABLY HAD PARKING ISSUES A MENTIONING. THE ONLY EXTERL CHANGES BEING MADE HERE ARE THE ADA RAMP AND THE BIKE RACKS, AND THOSE SEEM
TO BE CLEAR IMPROVEMENTS. AND I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY FOR THE PUBLIC, WHAT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS. THE ASSUMPTION IS IF THE
APPLICANT MEETS CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE LAID OUT, THAT WE AUTOMATICALLY GIVE THE C.U.P. THERE'S NOT A LOT O DISCRETION FOR THE CITY TO REJECT ONE. IT'S NOT LIKE A VARIANCE WHERE THERE'S A LOT MORE DISCRETION IF
THEY CHOOSE. SO I DO FEEL THAT THEY HAVE MET THIS. AN APPROPRIATE USE OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS TO APPLY CONDITIONS. SO IF COMMISSIONERS HE ANY IDEAS ON PARTICULAR CONDITIONS
TO IMPOSE, IT COULD BE SOMETHING AROUND THE HRS OF OPERATION OR SOMETHING. BUT AT THIS POINT I'M INCLINED TO GO WITTHE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE THE MOTION THAT'S ON THETABLE.
BUT I WOULD BE OPEN TO RECOMMENDATIONS IF PEOPLE HAVE THEM. COMMISSIONER FORNEY. >> THANK YOU. I AGREE WITH ALL THAT'S BEEN SAID UP HERE AND EVERYTHING. IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS A REQUIREMENT, BUT IEALLY HOPE THAT THE OWNERS OWNING THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH RESPECT
THE ONE MATURE TREE THAIS THERE. AND AT SOME POINT IN TIME, THERE WILL BE SOME CONDITION REGARDING THE PRESERVATION OF TREES. AND I REALLY JUST HOPE THAT THEY WILL HONOR THE IMPORTANCE OF THAT TREE. THANK YOU.
>> AND THAT WAS A COMMENT, YOU DON'T WANT TO MAKE A CONDITION OUT OF THAT? >> NO. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR MOTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS? WE'VE GOT THE MOTN ON THE TABLE. NOT SEEING ANYONE ELSE.
CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> COMMISSIONER CONLEY. >> AYE. >> FORNEY. >> AYE. >> GORDON. >> AYE. >> SHEPPARD. >> AYE. >> VICE PRESIDENT BAXLEY. >> AYE. >> AND PRESIDENT MEYER. >> AYE. >> THERE ARE SIX AYES.
>> ALL RIGHT. THAT IS APPROVED. GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR PROJECT, PLEASE SHOVEL YOUR SIDEWALKS AND PICK UP THE TRASH AND ENGAGE WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, OUR LAST ITEM IS ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.
4029 28TH AVENUE SOUTH. STAFF IS AARON HANAUER.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS. FOR ROOSEVELT HIGH SCHOOL, THEY ARE PROPOSING AN ADDITION ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE BUILDING NEAR 30TH AVENUE AND 40TH STREET. IT WOULD REQUIRE FOUR
APPLICATIONS, A VARIANCE FOR THE BUILDING PLACEMENT. HERE'S SOME RENDERINGS OF THE BUIL BUILDING FOR 40TH AVENUE BEING HERE, 40TH STREET NORTH BEING HERE. SO AGAIN THIS IMAGE WOULD BE 30TH AND 40TH.
THE PROJECT REQUIRES FOUR LAND USE APPLICATIONS. A VARIANCE FOR THAT BUILDING PLACEMENT ALONG 40TH STREET FROM REDUCING THE SETBACK FROMEN FEET TO ONE FOOT IN THE CORNER SIDE YARD. AND THAT WOULD BE IN LINE WITH THE EXISTING BUILDING THAT'S
BEEN THERE SINCE THE 1960s. PARKING, TO ALLOW PARKING IN THE FRONT YARD OR BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND THE STREET ALONG 30TH AVENUE. HOWEVER I'LL SHOW YOU THAT'S AN EXISTING CONDITION AS WELL. JUST WITH THE RECONFIGURATION OF
THE PARKING LOT, STAFF WANTED TO HAVE THIS BE A NOTED LAND USE APPLICATION, A VARIANCE GIVEN THAT THE PARKING SPACES WOULD BE CLOSER, NOT CLOSER, BUT THE P K
PARKING LIGHTS AND PARKING SPACES WOULD BE FRONTING 40TH AVENUE MORE THAN THEY DO CURRENTLY. SOME POSITIVES HOWEVER, A 7-FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER AND SCREENING WOULD BE ADDED TO THE 30TH AVENUE FRONTAGE.ALL RIGHT, AND
WALL SIGN THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING ALONG 30TH AVENUE. A SCHOOL IN THE RM1 DISTRICT IS ALLOWED 1, 32-FOOT WALL SIGN. THERE'S A WALL SIGN ALONG THE
GYM THAT'S CURRENTLY THERE. THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE A SECOND WALL SIGN TO NOTE WHERE THE MAIN ENTRANCE IS FOR THE NEW CAREER TECHNICAL EDUCATION PROGRAM THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING. AND FOURTH IS SITE PLAN REVIEW
AND THAT WE GO THROUGH WITH A BUILDING THIS SIZE IT REQUIRED THAT SITE PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION. CPED IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE LAND USE APPLICATIONS THAT THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED. I HAVE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH A COUPLE OF THE NEIGHBORS IN TERMS OF POSSIBLE CONCERNS. I KNOW THAT SOME OF IT MAY BE
WITH THE PUBLIC NOTICING OR JUST MAYBE NOT EVERYONE BEING AWARE AND JUST HEARD ALSO CONCERNS ABOUT THE PARKING SITUATION WITH CURRENT CONDITNS AND POSSIBLY WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT EXPANSION.
BUT IF IT'S OKAY, I CAN LEAVE IT THERE AND ANSWER QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE FOR STAFF AT THIS TIME. >> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THANK YOU, AAR. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE THE APPLICANT WITH US TODAY? WELCOME, INTRODUCE YOURSELF.
IF YOU'D LIKE YOU CAN TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT OR JUST ANSWER QUESTIONS IF YOU'D LIKE. >> SURE. MY NAME IS CHRIS DOBBS, I'M REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT TODAY. I WANTED TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE PROJECT ITSELF. E PURPOSE OF IT IS MINNEAPOLIS
PUBLIC SCHOOLS OPERATES THEIR CAREER TECHNICAL EDUCATION CENTER. IT'S A SEPARATE HIGH SCHOOL FROM ALL OF THEIR OTHER PGRAMS THAT EXISTS IN THREE LOCATIONS. NORTH HIGH SCHOOL WHICH RECENTLY THROUGH ITS RENOVATION, IT'S CAREER TECHNICAL EDUCATION
CENTER. E EDISON HIGH SCHOOL WHICH JUST COMPLETED THEIR CAREER TECHNICAL OPERATION CENTER. NOW HERE AT ROOSEVELT HIGH SCHOOL. THE PURPOSE IS SO THAT STUDENTS
CAN OPT ANY CAREER AND TECHNICAL AT THEIR CURRENT SCHOOL RATHER THAN BE BUSED TO ANOTHER SCHOOL AND BE BUSED BACK TO THEIR REGULAR HIGH SCHOOL TO COMPLETE THEIR DAY. BECAUSE OF THAT, THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE MORE STUDENTS DRIVING TO THIS SCHOOL UNLESS
THEY'RE ALREADY GOING TO ROOSEVELT. AND THE STUDENTS AREN'T GOING TO BE HERE FOR THE WHOLE DAY, THEY'RE JUST GOING FOR ONE CLASS AND THEN LEAVING. THIS IS A REALLY IMPORTANT PROGRAM TO MINNEAPOLIS PUBLIC SCHOOLS, IT'S A PROGRAMHAT THEY REALLY FEEL IS IMPORTANT FOR BUILDING JOB TRAINING SKILLS FOR IT AND THEY'RE INVESTING
THIS MONEY INTO PRODUCING REALLY HIGH QUALITY WELDING CLASSES, AUTO CLASSES, SMALL ENGINES AND MACHINING. THIS IS ALSO WHERE THE CAREER TECHNICAL EDUCATION DISTRICT STAFF WILL BE. AS PART OF IT, WE'RE BUILDING A NEW STORM SHELTER TO COMPLY WITH
NEW CODES. AND THEN, THE REALITY IS IT'S A REAL CHALLENGE, THE BUILDING IS OVER 100 YEARS OLD. IT WAS PUT IN THE MIDDLE OF A NEARLY TWO BLOCK SITE. SO WE TRIED AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE TO MEET THE INTENT OF THE 2040 CODE WHERE WE COULDN'T ACTUALLY MEET IT BY THE LETTER.
FOR INSTANCE INCREASING THAT LANDSCAPING BUFFER, INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING TO REDUCE HEADLIGHTS COMING OFF OF THE SITE. CREATING MATERIALS THAT ARE ALIGNING WITH THE REST OF THE BUILDING. AND ALSO TRYING TO INCREASE THE
AMOUNT OF GLAZING THAT'S GOING ON TO THE CITY AROUND IT SO THAT YOU HAVE THOSE ACTIVE FUNCTIONS SEEN. SO THAT'S REALLY THE INTENT OF THE PROJECT IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT, EACH SPEAKER CAN HAVE O MINUTES. WELCOME. >> GOOD MORNING, MY NAME IS CARLA NEILSON, I RESIDE IN THE
39 3900 BLOCK OF 28TH AVENUE SOUTH AND HAVE FOR 30 YEARS. MY CONCERN IS THE OVERALL LACK OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT WITH WE WHO LIVE, ME AS A RESIDENT AND THE OTHER BUSINESSES AROUND US. I'M NOT A BUSINE. IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT
COUNCILMEMBER CHOWDHURY IS NOT HERE. THIS IS RIGHT SMACK DAB IN THE MIDD OF HER WARD. WHEN I GOT THIS LETTER AND FOUND OUT I WAS ONE OF VERY FEW HOUSEHOLDS BASED ON 350 SQUARE FEET AROUND THE SCHOOL, I WAS LIKE WHAT, THAT IT WASN'T MORE EXTENSIVE.
ROOSEVELT IS A BIG NEIGHBOR TO US, 13.5 ACRES IS THAT SCHOOL. IT'S A PLUS, I'M A NONPARENT. OBVIOUSLY THIS EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY, A PLACE FOR KIDS TO LEARN THESE SKILLS OF WELDING,
MACHINERY, ET CETERA, OBVIOUSLY THAT'S A PLUS. THE FACT THAT WHEN I LOOKED AT THE LSE SCRIPT IT SHOWED THAT THERE WOULD BE MORE TREES, THAT IS A PLUS OVER THERE. BUT THE LOSS OF 60 PARKING SPOTS
AND THAT IS A MIX OF TEACHERS AND STUDENTS THAT ARE PARKING THERE, THAT IS APPALLING. WE'RE A HIGHLY RESIDENTIAL AREA AND MANY OF THE HOMES HAVE 2 AND 3 CARS BY THEMSELVES. I'M ALSO WONDERING WHAT TYPE OF
SAFETY SEENING DEVICES WILL BE PUT IN PLACE ON THE 30TH AVENUE ENTRANCE. SAFETY FOR ALL SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN IS IMPORTANT. THE SAFETY OF LSE IS NOT SHOWING BIKE RACKS ON 30TH AVENUE ENTRANCE FOR THAT.
I PERSONALLY DO NOT THINK THIS PROPOSAL IS READY TO BE AFFIRMED GIVEN THE LACK OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC SERVICE. >> THANK YOU. WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO TESTIFY? WELCOME, INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND
YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. >> HI, MY NAME IS JEN NEWBURG. I LIVE ON 29TH AVENUE IN BETWEEN 39TH AND 40TH STREET. AND I HAVE A STUDENT OR AN ALUMNI WHO WENT TO THE TECHNICAL
SCHOOL TO TAKE AUTOMOTIVE AND IS NOW IN HIS SECOND YEAR AT UNIVERSITY LEARNING TO BUILD FORMULA ONE RACECARS. SO I VALUE THIS EDUCATION, I ALSO HAVE A CURRENT STUDENT AT ROOSEVELT. GIVEN ROOSEVELT'S CURRENT DEMOGRAPCS OF THEIR YOUNGER CLASSES OF STUDENTS, THE ELIMINATION OF THE TEACHER
PARKING LOT, AN ENTIRE PARKING LOT AT ROOSEVELT WILL GREATLY IMPACT PARKING AROUND THE SCHOOL. AND I DIDN'T NECESSARILY SEE THAT MENTIONED OR THE FACT THAT THAT ENTIRE PARKING LOT IS LEAVING THE SCHOOL THAT'S USED
BY ROOSEVELT. >> THANK YOU. WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK? NOT SEEING ANY, BUT I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT IF YOU CAN COME BACK UP. CAN YOU JUST TELL US ABOUT THE BI PARKING AND SPECIFICALLY ON
30TH AVENUE? AND YOU CAN RESPOND TO THE SAFETY SCREENING DEVICES. >> YEAH, I CAN ANSWER A COUPLE OF THESE. THE BIKE RACKS, THERE ARE BIKE RACKS BEING ADDED. I DO SEE THEY'RE NOT IN THE RENDERING, THAT'S JUST AN OMISSION. BUT I BELIEVE IT'S 8 OR 9 BIKE
RACKS BEING ADDED HERE. ALSO AROUND THE BUILDING, THERE ARE WELL OVER 100 BIKE RACKS THAT ARE SERVING THE GENERAL SCHOOL ITSELF. BUT WE'RE ADDING THREE CLASSROOMS TO IT, AND I BELIEVE AND I DON'T HAVE THE APPLICATION IN FRONT OF ME, BUT WE EXCEED
THE NUMBER THAT ARE REQUIRED BY THE ZONING CODE FOR AN ADDITION OF CLASSROOMS. IN TERMS OF THE SAFETY, WE ARE ADDING A NEW SECURE ENTRY TO THE BUILDING. SO WE'LL BE FOLLOWING THE MINNEAPOLIS PUBLIC SCHOOL STANDARDS ON SECURE ENTRY INTO THE SCHOOL ITSELF.
ESSENTIALLY YOU'LL BE BUZZED IN THROUGH EACH SET OF DOORS. >> OKAY. SO THE 30TH AVENUE ONE IS NOT ON THE RENDERING. SO CAN WE ADD A CONDITION THAT WOULD, WOULD YOU BE RECEPTIVE TO A CONDITION THAT WOULD CLARIFY THEM. >> SURE, I'D BE HAPPY TO ADD
THAT. >> KIMBERLY, DO YOU HAVE A SUGGESON ON HOW WE WOULD PHRASE THAT. >> I'M LOOKING TO AARON, IT'S NOT ON THE RENDERING, BUT IS IT ON THE SITE PLAN OR ELSEWHERE ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE APPLICATION MATERIALS?
IF SO, THEN WE WOULDN'T NEED A CONDITION. >> SO THEY'RE LOCATED RIGHT HERE AS YOU COME IN JUST ADJACENT TO THE ENTRANCE. >> AS LONG AS STAFF FEEL IT'S CLEAR THAT THAT IS INCLUDED IN
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, I'M FINE WITH THAT. OKAY, LAST CHANCE FOR ANYONE. DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION YOU WANTED TO ASK THE APPLICANT? >> PLEASE, YES. >> DO YOU WANT TO COME BACK UP, WE HAVE ANOTHER BEFORE WE CLOSE THE HEARING. >> CAN YOU TALK TO US ABOUT ANY
TRAFFIC DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLANS THAT WERE DEVELOPED DURING THE DESIGN? >> THERE WASN'T SPECIFIC TRAFFIC DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN REQUIRED AS PART OF IT. SO WE DO NOT HAVE ONE HERE, AND SINCE THERE'S NO PARKING MINIMUM, WE WEREN'T REQUIRED TO MAKE UP THE PARKING THAT WE LOST
HERE. >> BUT YOU HAD SOME DISCUSSIONS OBVIOUSLY WITH MPS? >> MPS HAS THEIR TRANSPORTATION PLAN AS THEY MOVE THROUGH THIS. AGAIN FOR MOST OF THE STUDENTS WHO ARE ACTUALLY COMING TO THIS CENTER, THEY'RE GOING TO BE COMING ON A BUS FROM THEIR REGULAR HIGH SCHOOL, SO THEY'RE
NOT NECESSARILY GOING TO BE PARKING HERE. SO ANY DEMAND WOULD BE JUST FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE CURRENTLY AT OSEVELT HIGH SCHOOL. >> IN TERMS OF STAFF? SO I THIS STAFF PARKING ONLY THAT YOU HAVE -- >> I BELIEVE CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW THEY OPERATE THIS PARKING LOT HERE IS STAFF ONLY, CORRECT.
>> AND THEY ARE UNCONCERNED WITH THAT? >> THEY'RE NOT CONCERNED WITH LOSING THAT PARKING. >> THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE? I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION OR A MOTION?
SORRY THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. COMMISSIONERS. COMMISSIONER CONLEY. >> THIS IS ONLY A COMMENT, MR. PRESIDENT. I'M EXCITED ABOUT THESE CHANGES TO ROOSEVELT. I THINK THAT THI A REALLY
GREAT PROGRAM AND ROOSEVELT IS JUST A SOLID INSTITUTION IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OVER THERE. I'M ACTUALLY EXCITED TO HEAR THAT THE STAFF WEREN'T CONCERNED ABOUT THE LOSS OF PARKING BECAUSE I HAD SAW THE RENDERINGS SHOW THAT THAT PARKING LOT IS
CUT IN HALF. I THINK THIS WILL BE A BENEFIT NOT ONLY TO THE COMMUNITY ESPECIALLY WITH THE ADDITION OF THE TREES, THE ADDITION OF THE 7-FOOT I THINK IT WAS BUFFER. AND JUS TO THE STUDENT THEMSELVES. SO I'M EXCITED TO SUPPORT THIS TODAY. THANK YOU.
I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE IT. >> THERE'S A MOTION, IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> I'LL SPEAK TO IT AS WELL. FIRST, I'LL JUST NOTE THE CITY COUNCIL IS CURRENTLY REVIEWING THEIR BUDGET. IT'S PROBABLY THE BUSIEST WEEK OF THE YEAR FOR THEM. SO I IMAGINE THAT IS WHERE
COUNCILMEMBER CHOWDHURY IS AT. BUT IT DOES SOUND LIKE THERE COULD BE MORE ENGAGEMENT WITH THE NEIGHBORS AROUND, BUT I THINK THIS IS A GOOD PROJECT THAT'S VERY IN LINE WITH OUR
2040 PLAN AND THE VARIANCES SEEM REASONABLE. I KNOW THE PARKING IS A FREQUENT CONCERN. BUT AS I NOTED FOR THE LAST APPLICATION, THE CITY'S POLICY IS TO, THE CLIMATE POLICY IS TO TRY TO REDUCE PARKING AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, AND WHENEVER POSSIBLE TRY TO GET PEOPLE TO BUS OR
BIKE. AND IT'S GREAT THAT THEY'RE BUSING THE KIDS TO THE SCHOOL. SO THAT IS VERY IN LINE WITH THIS. SO I WILL DEFINITELY VOTE TO APPROVE THIS.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WISH TO COMMENT OR MAKE ANY AMENDMENT? ALL RIGHT, NOT SEEING ANY, CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> COMMISSIONER CONLEY. >> AYE. >> FORNEY. >> AYE. >> GORDON. >> AYE. >> SHEPPARD.
>> AYE. >> VICE PRESIDENT BAXLEY. >> AYE. >> AND PRESIDENT MEYER. >> AYE. >> THERE ARE SIX AYES. >> ALL RIGHT, THAT IS APPROVED. GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR PROJECT. AND THAT IS OUR LAST IM FOR THE DAY. WE DON'T HAVE ANY COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE THIS WEEK.
AND OUR NEXT FULL MEETING WILL BE JANUARY 5, 2026. ARE THERE ANY UPDATES FROM STAFF OR COMMISSIONERS? >> YES, SO UPDATES OUT OF THE BHZ COMMITTEE OF THE CITY COUNCIL, SO I MENTIONED AT OUR LAST MEETING THAT WE DID RECEIVE AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT AT SHERIDAN. THAT APPEAL WAS DENIED BY THE BHZ COMMITTEE OF THE CITY COUNCIL. THERE WAS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL ADDED ASKING FOR SOME ADDITIONAL LANDSPING ON THAT PROPERTY. AND THAT GOES TO THE FULL CITY COUNCIL THIS WEEK. PLANNING COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS
WERE ALSO ON THAT AGENDA. SO HAPPY TO SAY THAT COMMISSIONERS WAGNER, JONES, AND SHEPPARD WERE MOVED FORWARD FOR REAPPOINTMENT. AND THAT WILL ALSO GO TO THE FULL CITY COUNCIL THIS WEEK. >> GREAT. ANYONE ELSE? NOT SEEING ANYONE, SO WE ARE
ADJOURNED. THANK YOU.