This transcript is for a meeting of the **Minneapolis City Planning Commission** held on April 24, 2023. The meeting is presided over by Vice Chair **Bill Baxley**. Note: While some speakers are City Council members, they are primarily addressed as "Commissioner" in this context as they sit on the Planning Commission board. **Jason Wittenberg** (Manager of Code Development), **Joe Bernard**, **Janelle Widmeier**, and **Andrew Frenz** represent City Staff (CPED). *** [0:11] **City Clerk**: All right. Nice to see a full house today. This should be fun and interesting today. Thank you all for coming. Mr. Chair? [0:27] **Bill Baxley**: All right. Welcome to the regular meeting of the City Planning Commission for Monday, April 24th, 2023. My name is Bill Baxley and I'm the Vice Chair of this committee. The City will be recording and posting this meeting to the City's website and YouTube channel. [0:48] **Bill Baxley**: This meeting is public and subject to the Minnesota Open Meeting Law. At this time I'll ask the Clerk to call the roll so we can verify a quorum for this meeting. [1:21] **City Clerk**: [Roll call.] We have 7 members present. [1:21] **Bill Baxley**: Let the record reflect a quorum is present. With that we'll proceed to the agenda. A copy of which was posted for public access to the City's legislative system which is available at lims.minneapolismn.gov. [1:42] **Bill Baxley**: We will begin with the acceptance of the meeting minutes of the regular meeting of April 10th, 2023. We have a motion to accept those minutes? Second? [1:59] **Commissioner**: Second. [1:59] **Bill Baxley**: Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say Aye. [1:59] **Commissioners**: Aye. [1:59] **Bill Baxley**: Nay? Any abstentions? That motion passes and the minutes are adopted. So before we get started on sorting the public hearing agenda, I just want to note that I know most of you are here because you're interested in the zoning code text amendment. [2:20] **Bill Baxley**: I want to assure you we will be discussing that item. It will not be approved on consent. However, we have a few other pieces of business we need to attend to first so that item will be dealt with last. [2:36] **Bill Baxley**: If you're here for the text amendment and currently sitting in chambers we ask you to wait in the overflow in the hall. You don't have to but you could. Room 319 so there's room in the chambers for those who have also taken out time in their day to come down and address the other two business items on tonight's agenda. [2:54] **Bill Baxley**: Thank you for your consideration. With that being said our next order of business is the public hearing agenda, which is available at LIMS. There's also a copy on the corner table if you need one. [3:10] **Bill Baxley**: I will read through the agenda numbers and addresses and state whether it's slated for consent, continuance, return, withdrawal or discussion. I'll also briefly explain the difference between consent and discussion items. Consent items are those that will be passed without discussion by the board. [3:28] **Bill Baxley**: We will be adhering to the staff recommendation listed on the agenda. Importantly, any applicable conditions will be listed in this same section. If you agree with this recommendation including any applicable conditions, you do not need to do anything. [3:50] **Bill Baxley**: The Commission will pass it as recommended. If you have any questions following the decision, please check with a staff member assigned to that item. If you disagree with a recommendation, please indicate that you would like to speak against the item when I ask and we'll put it on the discussion agenda. [4:09] **Bill Baxley**: If you are in the overflow room across the hall, Room 319, please let a member of security know that you need to be in chambers so we can acknowledge your desire to move the item to discussion. [4:24] **Bill Baxley**: With that the following items are on the agenda for this evening. No. 4, 501 Royalston Avenue North, staff is recommending this item be returned. Is there anyone here to speak against this item? [4:44] **Bill Baxley**: Item No. 5, 3410 42nd Street East. Staff is recommending this item for consent. Is there anyone here to speak against this item? [5:01] **Bill Baxley**: On Item 6 which appears everybody is here to entertain, which is great: the Zoning Code Text Amendment. As previously stated staff is recommending this item for discussion. If you are here to speak about this item, please hold your comments for now and we'll be opening the public hearing later on in the meeting. [5:23] **Bill Baxley**: Thanks for those who have signed up already, I appreciate that. One more time in case some of you are still making your way from Room 319, Item No. 4, 501 Royalston Avenue North, staff is recommending that we are returning this item—checking again, is there anyone here to speak against this item? [5:46] **Bill Baxley**: Item No. 5, 3410 42nd Avenue East staff is recommending this item for consent. Is there anyone here to speak against this item? Very good. And lastly Item No. 6, Zoning Code Text Amendment. [6:04] **Bill Baxley**: As previously stated staff is recommending this item for discussion. If you're here to speak about this item, please hold your comments from now. We'll be opening the public hearing later on in the meeting. All right. Let's review the items on the agenda for consent. [6:20] **Bill Baxley**: That is Item No. 5, 3410 42nd Street East. Could I have a motion to approve the consent agenda? [6:30] **Commissioner**: So moved. [6:30] **Commissioner**: Second. [6:36] **Bill Baxley**: It's been moved and second. Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say Aye. [6:36] **Commissioners**: Aye. [6:36] **Bill Baxley**: All opposed? Any abstentions? I will ask the Clerk to call the roll on the motion—I guess we don't have to do that since we all Ayed it. [6:52] **City Clerk**: Good to check, though. [6:52] **Bill Baxley**: Yeah, very good. All right. We'll proceed to handle the public agenda in this order. First, I will open the public hearing for our consent item and approve those items. [7:12] **Bill Baxley**: After we're done with that, we can proceed to our discussion item. I will now open the public hearing on the consent item. Is anybody here to speak on Item No. 5, 3410 42nd Street East? [7:32] **Bill Baxley**: Okay. Seeing none, I will now close the public hearing on the consent item. Do I have a motion to adopt Item 5, 3410 42nd Street East? [7:53] **Commissioner**: Motion. [7:53] **Commissioner**: Second. [7:53] **Bill Baxley**: Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say Aye. Opposed? Any abstentions? The motion passes. Item No. 4 has been returned and Item No. 5 is passed on consent. [8:19] **Bill Baxley**: We can now move on to discussion items. I'll explain what those are. Discussion items are those for which the board will take public testimony, deliberate on and make a decision. After the public testimony has been heard for that particular discussion item, I will close the public hearing for that agenda item. [8:39] **Bill Baxley**: Once I close the public hearing for the item, no additional public testimony can be taken, however, staff may still be asked to address board questions. After the public hearing for an item is closed, board members will act and discuss on motions. [8:57] **Bill Baxley**: As you can see there are a lot of folks here for this meeting and this item. In order to respect everyone's time we will be limiting public comments to 2 minutes per person. This is not to edit your 2 minutes, it's so we can hear everybody speak. [9:14] **Bill Baxley**: It's very important and we've got a timer and we're going to stick to that as close as we can and I ask for your help so we can hear from everybody tonight. All right? Okie dokes. We're going to start with Item No. 6, the Zoning Text Amendment. Can I hear from staff—Jason, thank you. [9:34] **Jason Wittenberg (CPED)**: Good afternoon, Commissioners. We are extremely pleased to bring to you the Land Use Rezoning Study for your consideration today. We've met with you a number of times about this topic and we're finally to this point and excited to be reaching the public hearing point in the process. [9:52] **Jason Wittenberg**: I'll be joined by 3 of our planners today: Andrew Frenz, Janelle Widmeier and Joe Bernard. As you're aware the Land Use Rezoning Study is a key part of the implementation of Minneapolis 2040. It has the effect of eliminating all the conflicts of Minneapolis 2040 and the land use text and map. [10:16] **Jason Wittenberg**: Not only is that a good practice but it's required by state law as well to eliminate those conflicts. This is a summary of our presentation tonight. We have about 30 slides, I think. We're going to try to keep it to a half hour or less. [10:34] **Jason Wittenberg**: We're going to provide background information that includes a timeline of the process and a description of the project. We'll summarize the proposed ordinance and then we'll cover some key topics including going over key changes that have taken place to the draft CPED recommendations since a draft was released to the public back in January. For the next several slides I'll turn it over to Joe Bernard. Thank you. [11:01] **Joe Bernard (CPED)**: Good night Commissioners. We want to start by recapping how we got here. Prior to 2019, the city spent thousands of hours engaging with stakeholders on the future of Minneapolis as part of the comprehensive plan update process. The adoption of the city's comprehensive plan called Minneapolis 2040 kick-started staff's work. [11:39] **Joe Bernard**: Since then the city has adopted ordinances around inclusionary zoning. We've changed the zoning ordinance to allow 2 and 3-unit buildings in formerly exclusive single-family areas and did a comprehensive revision of the zoning ordinance to change built form regulations and also eliminated minimum parking requirements. [12:03] **Joe Bernard**: Work on our Land Use Rezoning Study started a couple of years ago and staff has spent much of our time preparing these draft regulations that you're reviewing this evening. That includes reorganizing the zoning city code, new primary tables, a new use table and new maps. [12:29] **Joe Bernard**: This required external and internal engagement and a public review period which concluded in March of this year. After the Planning Commission meeting this evening these regulations will be before the City Council as part of their regular meeting schedule. [12:45] **Joe Bernard**: Among other important policy direction, Minneapolis 2040 includes parcel-specific guidance on the size of building on every property—which we implemented as Built Form—and the uses that can be used on a given property. [13:03] **Joe Bernard**: Built Form includes things like heights, setbacks, floor area ratio; that work was completed in 2021. Land Use covers the activities that are allowed to take place on a given property. As of right now, there are a number of conflicts that exist between our zoning code and what Minneapolis 2040 says should be allowed. [13:33] **Joe Bernard**: This is a problem that state law requires us to remedy and the proposal in front of you this evening is intended to do so. What informs the regulations before you this evening are the vision goals and policies found in Minneapolis 2040. For 3 years the city conducted public outreach to shape the plan over the course of over 150 meetings and 20,000 points of feedback. [14:02] **Joe Bernard**: We looked to the policies in the plan, for example, regarding banning the establishment of heavy polluters as guidance for how recommendations are made in this rezoning study. We're asking ourselves: Are we advancing Minneapolis 2040 goals? Are we eliminating conflicts? Are we making it easier to navigate the code? And what are the racial equity impacts? With that I'm going to hand it back to Jason. [14:45] **Jason Wittenberg**: As Joe mentioned we have done a significant amount of reorganization of the contents. We recognize that it's still a lengthy and pretty complex legal document, but one part that we are excited about is consolidating the use table into a single use table that has color coordination with our zoning maps. It refers to use categories that list examples elsewhere in the code. We think this is going to substantially improve the comprehension of the code. [15:47] **Jason Wittenberg**: All of the primary zoning districts that are proposed are brand-new. The districts that you're familiar with like R1-6 or OR3 go away. The primary zoning districts largely align with the future land use map in Minneapolis 2040. There have been some areas where some discretion had to be used, for example, the downtown area. We used the boundaries of Built Form districts to help guide where the boundaries of future land use districts would be. I'll turn it over to Janelle to cover the Urban Neighborhood districts. [16:50] **Janelle Widmeier (CPED)**: Good evening. Since these areas are guided to be predominantly residential, these districts are intended to be residential districts. There are three Urban Neighborhood districts proposed. UN1, the lowest intensity district, is predominantly small scale uses. UN2 allows predominantly small to moderate scale residential uses, including multi-family dwellings with four or more units; it's mapped on properties with Interior 2 and Interior 3 built form guidance. UN3 is in locations nearer to transit routes and metro stations. [18:38] **Janelle Widmeier**: Moving on to the Residential Mixed Use districts. These are established to provide an environment of mixed-use: residential, institutional, and smaller scale lower impact uses. These districts would implement guidance for Goods and Services Corridors. We have RM1, RM2, and RM3 which allow for larger scale institutional and office uses. With that I'm handing it off to Joe. [20:30] **Joe Bernard**: For Commercial Mixed Use guidance, Minneapolis 2040 outlines four districts. Neighborhood Mixed Use (CM1) is intended for individual or small collections of commercial uses. Corridor Mixed Use (CM2) is the most broadly applied, largely along commercial corridors. Community Mixed Use (CM3) is found in higher density locations with good transit where non-residential uses are required. Finally, Destination Mixed Use (CM4) requires commercial activity on the first floor. [22:47] **Andrew Frenz (CPED)**: In Minneapolis 2040, for Production districts, we have two designations. Production Mixed Use (PR1) which allows for light industrial along with creative and residential uses, and Production and Processing (PR2) which is limited to protect land for the production economy. [23:30] **Andrew Frenz**: We have specific policy action steps to limit those processing uses which have the greatest potential for negative impacts on human health. We are not proposing a new zoning district that fulfills the same purpose as the I3 district today because the 2040 plan calls for prohibiting those high-polluting uses. I'll turn it back to Jason. [26:22] **Jason Wittenberg**: Regarding Downtown, we had been operating under a recommendation for 3 districts but have consolidated that down to two: Downtown Center and Downtown Destination. The biggest difference is that Downtown Destination would require retail and food/beverage uses on the ground floor. Back to Joe. [27:59] **Joe Bernard**: Two more categories: Parks and Open Space. The recommendation here is to zone all park property with a primary zoning district that reflects the adjacent future land use guidance. This addresses concerns about regulatory takings. Last is Transportation (TR1), mostly applied along rail corridors to ensure a robust public process if these sites are ever proposed for another use. [29:45] **Joe Bernard**: Overlay districts: we are proposing eliminating four districts that have become obsolete (like the Industrial Overlay). We also made changes to the Shoreline Overlay to comply with state rules. [30:45] **Joe Bernard**: Next we'll summarize issues raised during public review. First: UN1 vs UN2. We received comments asking for UN1 (limit of 3 units) to be applied where we recommended UN2 (4+ units). However, the policy language in Interior 2 clearly states multi-family buildings are permitted, so we did not change the draft map to avoid conflict with the 2040 plan. [32:22] **Joe Bernard**: Regarding small scale commercial in UN districts: 2040 policy states commercial is only intended where it already exists. Expansion is not encouraged. Therefore, we did not add new commercial to UN areas, except for properties "immediately adjacent" to Goods and Services Corridors (RM1), which we refined to be only one parcel deep. I'll invite Janelle back up. [36:11] **Janelle Widmeier**: Increasing food access was a main theme in feedback. We adjusted maximum areas for grocery stores. In RM1 it went up to 10,000 square feet; in RM3 to 15,000; and in PR2/PR1 it is capped at 40,000. We also proposed changes for year-round growing, including green houses for community gardens and amending definitions to accommodate deep winter grow houses. Back to Andrew. [39:18] **Andrew Frenz**: Production use changes: we have now prohibited forge and foundry outside of art studios. We moved metal plating from moderate impact to high impact based on health data. We also reworked the spacing requirement. Instead of a 300-foot buffer, we transitioned to a quarter-mile spacing requirement for high-impact production from any district where residential, schools, or childcare could be established. We also moved commercial laundry to high impact and prohibited it based on emissions data. Back to Jason. [41:52] **Jason Wittenberg**: Regarding Tobacco and Liquor: Tobacco product shops were initially proposed more widely, but we have since restricted them from Corridor Mixed Use to align with City Council's previous work on spacing standards. For Off-sale Liquor, the draft allows it on a wider scale compared to today, including small neighborhood commercial nodes. That concludes our presentation. [44:29] **Bill Baxley**: Thank you, Jason, Janelle, Joe and Andrew. I really appreciate your willingness to discuss this. Does the commission have any questions for staff? [44:49] **Commissioner Marwah**: Hey, Jason, I had a question about the tobacco use. Are we also saying future weed shops or cannabis establishments fall under that? [45:08] **Jason Wittenberg**: That item is on our work plan for future work and it will be dependent upon what comes out of the state legislature. We anticipate it having its own category. [46:37] **Commissioner Marwah**: I had one more quick question about general retail sales and services—are those categories called out as allowed or not allowed? [47:09] **Jason Wittenberg**: The broader use category is allowed in all commercial districts. If a specific use is listed below it, it's usually because it has a specific use standard or is restricted differently in certain districts. [48:19] **Commissioner Meyer**: Thank you for the work. Regarding the removal of Pedestrian Overlay districts—I remember a neighborhood meeting where traffic timing in Dinkytown was justified because it was a Pedestrian district. Do you think removing these would have unintended consequences for how Public Works handles those areas? [48:36] **Jason Wittenberg**: That's a very good question. The standards from that overlay are being incorporated into the base code, so nothing is being lost in development. However, we should proactively reach out to Public Works to see if they were utilizing that designation for traffic timing. [51:59] **Bill Baxley**: All right. Thank you again, staff. I'm now going to open the public hearing. I'll call on Evan Roberts. [52:36] **Evan Roberts (Public)**: 49 Arthur Avenue East. This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity. We should allow small scale commercial uses throughout the city, including in UN districts. The current draft bans commercial in residential areas based on rules from 1926. How do we create complete neighborhoods if work is separated from where we live? [55:20] **Zachary Wajda (Public)**: 22 Polk Street Northeast. I support an amendment to allow commercial spaces of 1,500 feet in all neighborhood districts conditionally. This would allow coffee shops and cafes to exist within our neighborhoods. [57:34] **Andrea Reel (Public)**: 3140 Van Nest Avenue. Goods and services like coffee shops and yoga studios serve as de facto community spaces. I want to be able to walk or bike to most things I need to do to reduce my vehicle miles traveled. [59:00] **Brit Anbach (Public)**: 4633 Clinton Avenue. I want to focus on setback issues. In residential mixed use, a 10-story building would require 45 feet of side yards. On a 45-foot lot, that results in a building that is 15 feet wide. We need to standardize setbacks regardless of height. [1:01:21] **Joshua (Public)**: 4944 30th Avenue South. Universal setbacks are important for increasing "missing middle" housing. 15 feet for front and 5 feet for sides is sufficient across the city regardless of building height. [1:03:43] **Ian Buck (Public)**: 2111 First Avenue South. As a new resident, I realized the only places I could live car-free were along Franklin or Lake Street. The rest of the neighborhoods were closed off to me. I encourage you to allow commercial uses in Urban Neighborhood districts. [1:05:36] **Elizabeth Bracket (Public)**: 1221 Russell Avenue North. There is no coffee shop within walkable distance of my house. North Minneapolis is a desert for these amenities. If I wanted to switch a single-family house into a little boutique, I couldn't do it under these rules. [1:07:16] **Chris Lynch (Public)**: 93 Northeast. Some major corridors like Penn Avenue North are zoned Urban Neighborhood. We should allow for a little bit more commercial here and there, especially stand-alone uses like cafes and salons, conditionally. [1:09:42] **Roxanne O’Brien (Public)**: Long-time North Side resident. It’s unfair the public is forced to react in such a short timeframe with only 2 minutes on the clock for a complex issue. Give more time to a process as important as this. Ensure Green Zone committees are informed ahead of time. [1:12:45] **Shalini Gupta (Public)**: Policy Advisor with CMEJ. The legacy of zoning has concentrated highly polluted uses in low-income communities of color. This rewrite must undo the racism entrenched in the code. Support the quarter-mile buffer and reinstate an Environmental Justice (EJ) assessment for high-impact uses. [1:15:37] **Melissa Lawrence (Public)**: Staff Attorney, Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy. Moderate impact uses create a gap. They can cause significant pollution but are allowed across-the-board in production zones without conditions. We ask for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for these uses. [1:17:58] **Evan Mulholland (Public)**: Staff Attorney, MCEA. We want to make sure non-conforming uses—like the GAF shingle factory—cannot expand their pollution or footprint. There should be specific language in the code that bars intensification of adverse impacts from legal non-conforming uses. [1:20:09] **Kyle Shelton (Public)**: 1609 East 59th Street. We are a one-car household. Going to a destination more than a half-mile away takes a long time. Please allow grocery stores up to 20,000 square feet to make them viable. [1:22:13] **Alex Schifferdecker (Public)**: 369 Spruce Place. 2040 says commercial is "not encouraged," but that doesn't mean "prohibited." The geography of work has shifted. Every residential district is now partly an office district. We should allow commercial uses as a conditional use in UN3. [1:24:45] **Adeel (Public)**: I own a commercial property in North Minneapolis. We tried to get approved for an exclusive tobacco shop in 2018. The pandemic happened and now they changed the zoning from C2 to C3. We have to go through the whole process again. [1:26:08] **Ray Peterson (Public)**: 2111 13th Avenue South, Ventura Village. The 2040 plan says there should be concern for retention of family housing, yet this study doesn't address 3 or 4-bedroom units. It also ignores historical preservation. [1:29:21] **Victoria Lauing (Public)**: Chicago Avenue Fire Arts Center. We support art forms produced by heat and flame, including metal casting (foundry). Our environmental footprint is much smaller than industrial foundries. We hope you'll allow artistic foundry activities in commercial mixed-use districts. [1:32:11] **Sarah Rasmussen (Public)**: Medical student. CMEJ’s demands would protect kids from lifetimes of poor health. In Minneapolis, polluting industries are disproportionately located in communities of color. Practice community-centered care. [1:34:15] **Margaret Kilpatrick (Public)**: 4300 West River Parkway. If you have a 6-story building allowed but setbacks are too big, you basically can't build the building. Conform the setbacks to the original goal of greater housing density. [1:36:01] **Brian Rojas (Public)**: Ward 10 resident. I grew up in South Minneapolis and saw the health concerns of zoning. I urge you to hear the demands for environmental justice. Sometimes it feels like we're not included in these discussions. [1:37:43] **Bill Baxley**: Thank you all. Seeing there's no one else to speak I'd like to close the public hearing. Any discussion or questions by the commission? [1:39:07] **Commissioner Marwah**: I’m bringing forward an amendment to clarify arts uses. I propose to amend Section 545.230 to allow foundry activities as part of an Art Studio in Production districts through a CUP, limited to 5,000 square feet. [Further technical amendments regarding educational arts centers follow]. [1:40:46] **Bill Baxley**: Motion and a second. All in favor? [1:40:46] **Commissioners**: Aye. [The "Arts" amendments pass]. [1:45:50] **Commissioner Alper**: I would like to propose a staff direction. The Planning Commission President shall write a letter to the Mayor requesting a staff direction to CPED and the Health Department to study an Environmental Justice checklist for moderate and high-impact production uses, and to prevent intensification of non-conforming uses by October 31, 2023. [1:50:22] **Commissioner Ford**: I’m happy to support the letter, but I think it’s out of order right now. Let's take it up after the text amendment. [1:52:10] **Eric Nilsson (Deputy City Attorney)**: A staff direction doesn't quite have the force of law here; it's more of a friendly request. You are free to correspond with the Mayor. [1:55:00] **Commissioner Marwah**: Commissioner Baxley and I are looking to amend the Use Regulations to allow "Limited Commercial" in UN2 and UN3 districts on corner lots, subject to a maximum of 1,000 feet. This includes coffee shops, retail, and offices. [1:57:16] **Commissioner Meyer**: I have a more ambitious version. My amendment would allow these uses in UN1, UN2, and UN3, up to 1,500 square feet. I interpret "not encouraged" in the 2040 plan as "conditional," not "prohibited." [2:02:57] **Jason Wittenberg**: Staff's view is that UN1/UN2 new commercial goes beyond what was contemplated in Minneapolis 2040. If the world has changed, we should rethink the Comprehensive Plan first, then the regulations. [2:13:23] **Council Member Koski**: I’m compelled by how the way we work and play has changed. I grew up in Northeast where there were many corner shops. I'm curious about the difference between your two proposals. [2:18:53] **Commissioner Marwah**: I’ll modify my motion to include some of Commissioner Meyer’s suggestions: allow up to 1,500 square feet, include UN1 corner lots for coffee shops and offices, and require one or more residential units on the lot. [2:55:07] **Bill Baxley**: Let’s have the Clerk call the roll on the Marwah-Baxley amendment for limited commercial in UN districts. [2:55:43] **City Clerk**: [Roll call.] 7 Yeas, 0 Nays. [The "Limited Commercial" amendment passes]. [3:07:56] **Commissioner Alper**: I’d like to move an amendment regarding Section 520.13. Legal non-conforming high-impact production uses may not be expanded nor intensified. [3:13:18] **Eric Nilsson**: We already have a public process for expansion. It's not always granted. You can currently weigh all the factors. [3:18:43] **City Clerk**: [Roll call on non-conforming use expansion ban]. 3 Yeas, 4 Nays. [Motion fails]. [3:19:03] **Commissioner Meyer**: I move to increase the max permitted area for grocery stores to 20,000 square feet in RM and C1 districts. [3:22:15] **City Clerk**: [Roll call]. 7 Ayes, 0 Nays. [Motion passes]. [3:32:56] **Commissioner Alper**: I’d like to move the staff letter to the Mayor regarding the Environmental Justice checklist again. [3:43:52] **Commissioner Ford**: I think it's perfectly appropriate to express our opinion to the Mayor. [3:49:52] **City Clerk**: [Roll call on the letter]. 7 Ayes, 0 Nays. [Motion passes]. [3:50:30] **Hillary Dvorak (CPED)**: Just an update: the appeal for 2725 University Avenue was denied, so your actions were upheld. Also, the PC retreat is this Thursday. [3:50:46] **Bill Baxley**: Any update on the 2040 lawsuits? [3:51:10] **Eric Nilsson**: It's going back to district court on the issue of the injunction. Currently, there is no injunction in place, so you're free to implement. [3:51:10] **Bill Baxley**: Thank you. We are adjourned.