Based on the context provided and standard records for the Minneapolis City Planning Commission, here is the transcribed text with speaker names assigned. **Note on Commission Leadership:** The meeting is presided over by **Alyssa Olson**, who served as the President of the Minneapolis City Planning Commission at the time of this recording. *** [0:00] **Alyssa Olson (President):** Welcome, everybody, to the regular meeting of the City Planning Commission. Today is Monday, April 10th. My name is Alyssa Olson, I'm the president of the Planning Commission. The city will be recording and posting this meeting to the city's website and YouTube channel as a means of increasing public access and transparency. [0:18] **Alyssa Olson:** This meeting is public and subject to the Minnesota Open Meeting Law. At this time I will ask the clerk to please call the roll. [0:25] **City Clerk:** [Roll call] That's 9 members present. [0:58] **Alyssa Olson:** All right, we have a quorum. So with that we'll proceed to the agenda. A copy of which was posted for public access to the city's legislative information management system which is available at LIMS Minneapolis. There's also copies over by the clerk. [1:15] **Alyssa Olson:** We'll begin with acceptance of the minutes from March 20th. Could I have a motion to accept the minutes? [1:22] **Commissioner Campbell:** So moved. [1:24] **Commissioner:** Second. [1:26] **Alyssa Olson:** All right. We have a motion and second. Is there any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. **Commissioners:** Aye. [1:30] **Alyssa Olson:** All opposed. Any abstentions? All right. That motion passes. The minutes are adopted. Before we organize our agenda Thursday evening, staff had some additional items for us to consider so I'd like to — do you want to say anything, Jim, or I'll go ahead. [1:50] **Alyssa Olson:** There are — is it 3 addendum items that were approved at the Committee of the Whole that normally would be pushed on to — approved without discussion? They did not get pushed through so we are adding them — we're adding them now, and we'll add — we will talk about those when I go through the agenda. [2:13] **Alyssa Olson:** Thank you. All right. Our next order of business which is at LIMS.MN.gov. [2:30] **Alyssa Olson:** I'm going to read all the items on agenda and whether they're slated for consent, discussion or continuance. If you agree with the staff recommendation and any stated conditions you don't need to do anything and the board will pass them without discussion. [2:48] **Alyssa Olson:** If you would like to speak on an item against the staff recommendation when I call out that item, just raise your hand and we'll put that item on our discussion agenda. So with that, we have the following items on the agenda for Thursday evening. [3:07] **Alyssa Olson:** Item No. 4. Is there anyone who would like to speak on staff recommendation on Item No. 4? Okay, we'll put Item No. 4 on our discussion agenda. Item No. 5 is 651 Nicollet Mall. [3:24] **Alyssa Olson:** Staff is recommending this item for consent. Is there anyone here who would like to speak against staff recommendation on Item No. 5? Okay. Seeing none. I'll put item 5 on consent. Item No. 6 is 2426 Englewood Ave. [3:41] **Alyssa Olson:** Staff is recommending this item for consent. Is there anyone who would like to speak against staff recommendation on Item No. 6? Okay. We'll put Item No. 6 on our discussion. Item No. 7 is 560 Humboldt Avenue North, formerly 465 Girard Terrace. [4:00] **Alyssa Olson:** Is there anyone here who would like to speak on Item No. 7? Okay. We'll put Item No. 7 on consent. Item No. 8 public alley adjacent to 2840 Chicago Ave, staff is recommending this for consent. [4:17] **Alyssa Olson:** Anyone to speak against staff recommendation on Item No. 8? Okay. We'll put 8 on our consent. Item 9 is 600 Park Ave. This is continued to the May 8th meeting. Item No. 10 is 137 46th Street West. [4:36] **Alyssa Olson:** Staff is recommending this item for consent. Is there anyone here who would like to speak against staff recommendation on item 10? Okay. We'll put item 10 on our discussion. Item 11 is 3745 Hiawatha Avenue. Staff is recommending this item for consent. [4:53] **Alyssa Olson:** Is there anyone here to speak against staff recommendation on item 11? All right. Seeing none, we'll put item 11 on consent. We also have the three addendum items so those will be items 12, 13 and 14. [5:09] **Alyssa Olson:** None of the items will have a public hearing. No. 12 is 1823 and 1839 Bryant Avenue North. Staff is recommending this item for consent. Item No. 13 is 1301 Westlake TIF plan. [5:27] **Alyssa Olson:** Staff is recommending this item for consent, and Item No. 14 — [5:33] **Commissioner:** [Speaker Not Mic'd] Sorry, say that again. 1301 Westlake TIF plan. [5:43] **Alyssa Olson:** And then Item 14 is TIF plan and this item is recommended for consent. So to review we have items 5, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13 and 14 on consent. And we have items 4, 6, and 10 on our discussion agenda. [6:04] **Alyssa Olson:** And we will continue Item No. 9 to the May 8th meeting. Could I have a motion to approve the agenda as amended? [6:13] **Commissioner Campbell:** So moved. [6:15] **Commissioner:** Second. [6:21] **Alyssa Olson:** Any discussion? All in favor say aye. **Commissioners:** Aye. [6:25] **Alyssa Olson:** All opposed? Any abstentions? All right. That motion passes and the agenda has been adopted. So we'll move right into our consent agenda. First we'll vote on the consent items on the agenda that don't have a public hearing so those are items 12, 13 and 14. [6:47] **Alyssa Olson:** Do we need these separately? **City Clerk:** I don't think so, no. **Alyssa Olson:** That's my mistake. We'll do a full consent agenda — **City Clerk:** My apologies. I thought you meant do we need to do the addendum items separately from one another. **Alyssa Olson:** Oh, because — **City Clerk:** Because the addendum items don't have a public hearing just for clarity we recommend doing them separately. [7:05] **Alyssa Olson:** Thank you for the question. Okay. We'll move on and we'll vote on the consent items that do not have a public hearing. So items 12, 13 and 14. Could I have a motion to adopt items 12, 13 and 14 on consent? [7:18] **Commissioner Campbell:** So moved. [7:20] **Commissioner:** Second. [7:24] **Alyssa Olson:** We have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. **Commissioners:** Aye. [7:30] **Alyssa Olson:** All opposed? Any abstentions? All right. Those items have passed so 12, 13 and 14 are done for today. [7:38] **Alyssa Olson:** So next we'll proceed to handle the public hearing for the consent agenda for items 5, 7, 8 and 11. So I'll open the public hearing and if there's anyone here who would like to speak on items 5, 7, 8 or 11 you can come to the podium now state your name and address for the record and proceed with your comments. [7:59] **Alyssa Olson:** All right. Seeing none. [Speaker Away from the Mic] For — are you wanting to speak on items 5, 7, 8 or 11? [Speaker Away from the Mic] Okay, great. All right. [8:15] **Alyssa Olson:** Seeing none, I will close the public hearing for the consent agenda. Could I have a motion to adopt items 5, 7, 8 and 11 on consent? [8:24] **Commissioner Campbell:** So moved. [8:26] **Commissioner:** Second. [8:30] **Alyssa Olson:** All right. We have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. **Commissioners:** Aye. [8:38] **Alyssa Olson:** All opposed? Any abstentions? All right. Items 5, 7, 8 and 11 have also been approved. Next we will move on to our one item that is continued, Item No. 9. [8:53] **Alyssa Olson:** Commissioners, could I have a motion to continue item 9 to the May 8th meeting? [8:59] **Commissioner Campbell:** So moved. [9:01] **Commissioner:** Second. [9:04] **Alyssa Olson:** All right. We have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. **Commissioners:** Aye. [9:08] **Alyssa Olson:** All opposed? Any abstentions? All right. Item 9 will be heard at the May 8th meeting. So now we'll move on to our discussion items and our first item is No. 4, 1714 East Hennepin Avenue and it looks like staff is Hilary Dvorak. [9:44] **Hilary Dvorak (Staff):** Good afternoon, commissioners, and I apologize. I've been in training this afternoon and I'm a little unclear on this presentation but I'll give it a shot. This is an application for 1714 East Hennepin Avenue. [10:01] **Hilary Dvorak:** The subject site is on the southwest corner of 17th Avenue and 18th Southeast. It's guided for a neighborhood mixed use. The site does have split zoning with R4 and RNA and it qualifies for the exception of the zoning code that allows the larger percentage of zoning to cover the entire site so the site was analyzed using the R4 zoning requirements. [10:27] **Hilary Dvorak:** The site is one-third of an acre about 2,000 square feet. The site is shaped like a flag. With property owners extending in the right-of-way with easements over the parcels of the lot of, what looks like, the public sidewalk so only the area covered not by those easements was included for the land-use evaluation. [10:54] **Hilary Dvorak:** So that is the site and you can see it. This is the easement kind of up to here but obviously the property lines go to the middle of the streets but this land was not included in the site because it does have right-of-way transfer exits. [11:12] **Hilary Dvorak:** There's a four story residential building with 27 dwelling units and 23 off-street parking spaces. The only application before you today is for site plan review for the new building. There was an administrative FAR application considered in the application and they do qualify for the premium. [11:30] **Hilary Dvorak:** The premium that they are applying for is the enclosed parking and we do have a condition that the site plan go accordingly. There are a limited number of balconies on the west, north and south sides of the building. [11:46] **Hilary Dvorak:** Let me go back to the site plan. For alternative compliance there are 4 items that need alternative compliance. One is blank walls—it's on the first floor of the building on the parking garage side so here and here those areas of the building are over 2700 square feet and we add windows so we don't have blank wall conditions. [12:15] **Hilary Dvorak:** The planning is the first floor plan — these are the active functions; gray is dedicated to parking and internal circulation. We are recommending alternative compliance due to the unique property lines need to accommodate parking and circulation within the building. [12:33] **Hilary Dvorak:** Staff has conditioned providing the fenestration pattern on the — so we want to ensure that windows along Hennepin Avenue are — excuse me, that's not the right elevation. These windows along Hennepin Avenue are provided. [12:52] **Hilary Dvorak:** They also have alternative compliance needed for the parking garage conditions which are the same as the other functions and then for the canopy trees, they are short on canopy trees and we are conditioning that they meet the canopy tree requirement. [13:07] **Hilary Dvorak:** So we are updating the approval of the application with the stated conditions within your staff packets and within the agenda and I will stand for any questions. [13:24] **Alyssa Olson:** Thank you, Hilary. Commissioners are there any questions for staff before we move on? All right. I'm not seeing any, thank you. I'll open the public hearing and invite the applicant to come forward. When the applicant is done we will open the public hearing to the residents and we are going to use a 2-minute timer this evening so please try to keep your comments to 2 minutes and yeah, thank you, you can go ahead. [13:45] **Mr. Cooley (Architect/Applicant):** Good evening, commissioners. My name is [unclear], the architect with the applicant, and I don't have a whole lot to say but I'll be here to answer questions. I do want to point out a couple things about the site that may be a little bit unique. One: it was an old gas station site. We are going through remediation of the site so there's an application in through DEED to do the environmental remediation on that. [14:05] **Mr. Cooley:** Because of that we will be doing some excavation on the site. That's one. No. 2, which may come up in a little bit: the lot actually has a leg weight to the west on it. It's a very narrow thing. We're not 100% sure regarding the ownership of the fence that sits on that little bit of flag area. We believe it was built at the time the site was lowered for MnDOT as they put the road in and the underpass under the train. [14:42] **Mr. Cooley:** So we worked with the site with the active use on the front and everything else is kind of per — I think, per the standards and we're really not looking for anything on the site plan approval and the variances. With that I'll be happy to open up to any questions that anyone may have and answer questions later. [15:00] **Alyssa Olson:** Thank you. Any questions to the applicant? I'm not seeing any, thank you. [15:23] **Jeff Habar (Public):** Good afternoon. My name is Jeff Habar. I live at 1112 17th Avenue Southeast in Minneapolis, at the west end of the property and I have about — well, I hope I have about 5 points to make so I just want to be clear. [15:42] **Jeff Habar:** The first point I want to make is — I don't have much ground to stand on I realize but I'm opposed to all this mixed use going on in the city. This is an example of it. This is literally going on in my backyard. This is University-area, we have lots of students in the area. We have issues with livability from time to time and to increase density just means more of that. [16:25] **Jeff Habar:** I feel compelled to at least put out a resident's viewpoint that this density is hurting this neighborhood. It really is hurting this neighborhood, and I don't know what the intent is of this property whether it's intended for general use or for students but if we have more students in this type of dense area, our neighborhood is going to further deteriorate in terms of livability. So that's my first point around density. [16:56] **Jeff Habar:** Secondly, it relates to the concern about the excavation that might be done because it was an old gas station. I wasn't around at the time but I've lived on the adjacent property since 1988. There is concern about — this is an old peat bog. If you don't build down to the sand you're going to have structural problems. [17:32] **Jeff Habar:** There's a big railroad crossing track that happens there just across the street that vibrates — you can feel it every time a train goes by. So the concern is about ground stability and digging down deeper. I don't have any structural analysis to show that it's a problem but I know it is a problem on my house. [17:51] **Alyssa Olson:** Can you wrap up your comments please? **Jeff Habar:** I'm sorry? **Alyssa Olson:** Could you please wrap up your comments? **Jeff Habar:** Am I only allowed a certain time? **Alyssa Olson:** Yes, 2 minutes. We have the timer. **Jeff Habar:** I wasn't aware of this when you asked me to come speak. **Alyssa Olson:** Okay, could you just wrap up your comments that you have, maybe make the biggest point. [18:24] **Jeff Habar:** I'm concerned about stability, that's my second point. I'm also concerned about this fence on this flag part. I want that fence to stay there. That's what keeps my backyard up. If that goes, I have a big problem with my property. That's 3. The fourth one was referred to in terms of the landscaping issues. There needs to be another shade tree. I want to make sure that happens. And there is no lighting plan. I want to see what that lighting plan looks like so it's not flooding my backyard with lighting. [19:07] **Jeff Habar:** I think that's — also the fence on the west side of the property. It needs to be repaired and it would be great if we could work with the new owners to repair that fence. So I think that's my point: density, stability, landscape issues, lighting and fencing. [19:24] **Alyssa Olson:** Okay. Thank you for your comments. Is there anyone else who would like to speak on this item? [19:35] **Helen Torrence (Public):** Hello, my name is Helen Torrence and I live at 1112 17th Avenue Southeast which would be looking right over this development. And I — I have the same concerns as Jeff, who just talked. [20:02] **Helen Torrence:** One of my big concerns is because of the peat soil. The reason it vibrates and shakes is because the peat soil is kind of like a jelly. It goes down pretty far and so it shakes things when the trains go by. I'm concerned how driving during construction might damage — the homes are over 100 years old. I want to make sure that people understand when there's excavation, this needs to be addressed. And also I second that they need to figure out about the fence and I really want them to answer what will happen with the fence and the landscaping and lighting plan. [21:06] **Alyssa Olson:** Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak on this item? All right. Seeing none, I will close the public hearing for this item. Commissioners? [21:18] **Commissioner Conley:** I have a question for the developer or owner. I just — how do we not know who owns the fence? [21:28] **Mr. Cooley:** Right now the fence is scheduled to remain. There's no plan to take that fence down. The fence sits on the property of this site. I believe it was built by MnDOT. There is — I think there's a legal statute because it's been there for a long time, maybe 50 years. I believe it's called adverse possession. When I look at the civil survey, it is on this particular property. As it sits right now we don't have a plan to take that down. [22:26] **Commissioner Conley:** Thank you for the clarification. Is it in a state of disrepair considering the age? [22:33] **Mr. Cooley:** I think it looks pretty good. I've not seen the neighbor's side of the fence. There are a few areas that probably could use a little bit of repair to it. I don't think it's structurally compromised. [22:58] **Commissioner Conley:** So that would lead me to the following question: if it's on this particular property, the onus would be on you then to take care of any minor repairs or paint that might be needed. **Mr. Cooley:** It's our wall; it's our issue. [23:21] **Commissioner Marwah:** I have a question for the applicant or staff. I'm not sure about the alternative compliance for the blank wall. The windows on the parking garage side, can you explain? [24:02] **Hilary Dvorak:** The condition of the windows that are shown on here remains. So if there's any changes to the garage or bike storage area, those windows would not be eliminated. We want to ensure the ground windows remain in the final plans. [24:58] **Commissioner Marwah:** Okay. And then the side that had the blank wall that was larger than 24 feet — they were conditioned not having blank walls but it seems like a simple solution to add a window to just follow the window patterning down? [25:28] **Hilary Dvorak:** Correct. **Commissioner Marwah:** Okay. I'm fine with that. Thank you. [25:39] **Alyssa Olson:** Hilary, could you just go over — from the neighbors' concern about construction activities. What is the process once that is underway for them to check in and be assured their property is going to be all right? [26:09] **Hilary Dvorak:** If there are concerns by the neighbors during construction, I would encourage them to call the city's 311 line. There are hours of operation that construction activities can happen and noise restrictions. [27:10] **Alyssa Olson:** I appreciate that. I'll let the developer speak to that. [27:27] **Mr. Cooley:** One of the reasons we didn't go down was the conditions of the soil. We're essentially excavating to do soil remediation. We've done geotech on that and that solution is going to be pretty sound. The advantage of not going deep for the foundation is less impact overall. [28:13] **Mr. Cooley:** As we get into that, we will take photographs. There's documentation of the existing site conditions so we know what happened before all the construction started. There will be an onsite job supervisor and a contact point. We have a neighborhood meeting coming up and we'll explain a little bit more. [29:05] **Alyssa Olson:** Do you know what construction methodology you're using — is it going to be piles or a spread footing? [29:18] **Mr. Cooley:** We can do spread footings once we go in and do remediation and bring back sufficient soils. [29:26] **Commissioner Alper:** Thanks, I just have a question that's lingering in my mind. A point of curiosity, really: why keep that little tail or is there any reason — the fence seems like such an issue. [29:44] **Mr. Cooley:** It kind of came with the site. I think it's a condition that we just kind of deal with. I believe it was probably done when MnDOT came in and restructured it. They needed to keep the house up so that's why it's there. It's 8x8 posts that go very deep. It's more of a shoring than a privacy fence. [30:57] **Alyssa Olson:** Is there anyone else? [Public speaks from away from mic] No, the public hearing is closed but if you have questions, I'd encourage you to reach out to the planner for the project. Commissioner Campbell was next. [31:19] **Commissioner Campbell:** I want to thank you for taking the time to come down here and speak to us about this because you live near it. I think for your sake, it's important for maybe us to clarify what our role is — which is really as a check or balance on staff interpreting city codes and zoning regulations to make sure they align with the comprehensive plan. We are often faced with challenges that we cannot consider as part of our duties as planning commissioners, things like parking or shading. [32:51] **Commissioner Campbell:** With that said, I want to make a motion to approve staff recommendation on this project because I do believe it has met the goals of the Minneapolis comprehensive plan. [33:04] **Commissioner Marwah:** Second. [33:10] **Alyssa Olson:** Is there any discussion? Seeing none I'll ask the clerk to please call the roll. [33:18] **City Clerk:** [Roll call] That's 9 ayes and zero nays. [33:44] **Alyssa Olson:** That motion passes so we're done with Item No. 4. Our next item is Item No. 6, 2426 Englewood Avenue and staff is MaLynn Smith. [34:08] **MaLynn Smith (Staff):** Good evening, Chair Olson and commissioners. My name is MaLynn Smith, and I will be presenting 2426 Englewood Avenue. This is located in Ward 5 in the Harrison neighborhood, across from Bassett Creek. Right now it is vacant. [34:43] **MaLynn Smith:** The proposal is for two separate structures, each containing 8 units. There will be 7 enclosed parking spaces on the site as well as 48 bike parking spaces. This requires rezoning from R2B to R3, a conditional use permit, a variance on the steep slope, and site plan review. [35:46] **MaLynn Smith:** Our recommendation is to approve all applications with very minor changes, mostly making sure that they do submit a lighting plan and to comply with their development amenities. I'm here to stand for any questions. [36:26] **Ben Vinzant (Applicant):** My name is Ben Vinzant. I'm the developer and applicant of the project. It's been a very unique site. I'll let Jessica take it from here. [36:57] **Jessica (Design Team/Applicant):** I just wanted to touch on a few things that we did when we came to the Committee of the Whole meeting. We did shift the entrance to the parking to vary the height of the building and we separated the two buildings into two separate structures. Previously we had it as a single unit. [37:46] **Mark Fox (Public):** My name is Mark Fox. I live at 320 Thomas Avenue North. I've been living there for 13 years. My biggest concern is safety on that street. I don't see any cars in this rendering, but if you've been there when the brewery is open, that street isn't wide enough for two-way traffic and parking. It is already unsafe for bikers as is. I don't know how seven parking spots for 16 units is going to work. The street just can't handle R3. [40:10] **Resident (Public):** Thank you so much. While this is a rendering, I do actually have video that was taken on the street this past Thursday at 5:00 when the brewery was in normal business hours. I have public safety concerns in this area. There are no sidewalks, the street is very narrow and we're currently over capacity. I don't know how this would support it. [Video plays] You see that's the property there. There are cars on either side of the street; people walking to their cars and there's no room for two cars to go side-by-side. [43:04] **Allison Madsen (Public):** Hi, my name is Allison Madsen. I own 2424 and 2422 which would be the duplex just to the east. My parents owned it for about 45 years. We refer to it as the "tree house" because we overlook the park. Looking at that rendering I'm afraid we're going to lose a lot of that feel to the neighborhood. [44:18] **Travis Segdall (Public):** Hi, I'm Travis Segdall. I own the property at 2521 Glen Avenue. The alley behind the property — I'm curious what the backyard is going to be like if they're going to come all the way to the alley and do some kind of support there so that doesn't erode. That's my main concern. [45:05] **Alyssa Olson:** I will close the public hearing. Commissioners? [45:10] **Commissioner Ford:** Thank you. I would like to hear about the issue of the parking. Does the developer or the staff have a response to what we just heard? [45:37] **Jessica (Design Team/Applicant):** There's a lot happening here. We've added bike storage lockers and we're really looking for people who want to live in an active place who might not want to have cars. There is no actual parking requirement, but the developer felt it was important to help alleviate some of this. We have done work on the site plan to create pathways and street access. [46:56] **Christian Dean (Architect):** I'm Christian Dean, principal architect. We had a couple mentions about safety and crime. We think more "eyes on the street" will help crime and safety in the area. We understand there's a lot of parking — the brewery is a big player in this. We thought being near the bike trails was a big amenity. We're trying to profile this project for people who ride bikes and ski. To answer the question about the back, we have storm water retention ponds that have been approved. [49:00] **Commissioner Campbell:** I just want to thank you for thoughtfully coming to the Planning Commission with changes to the design that more seamlessly fit in with the neighborhood. This is a really great example of a design team taking feedback and implementing it. [49:53] **Commissioner Alper:** I'm hearing concerns of people driving to the brewery. It's concerning to me to hear all about this car traffic. I'm wondering how can we connect the dots between these planning projects and staff at Public Works so that they know about these projects or so we can do things like eliminate parking on one side of the street? [51:34] **Alyssa Olson:** Public Works is aware of the project. I would defer to Ms. Dvorak if she has anything to add. [53:03] **Hilary Dvorak:** I apologize, Chair. I was emailing about sidewalk gaps so we can better inform you when these questions come up. This is something that's starting to pop up in a few developments; it's on the radar. [53:38] **Commissioner Koski:** I really want to urge us, when we are planning these types of developments, that we are connecting those dots with Public Works. I believe those crosswalks probably don't exist today, so how are we going to make sure that they do? [55:07] **Commissioner Campbell:** I just want to pile on. If we as a city are going to prioritize density and promote the 2040 plan, there definitely needs to be a permanent link between the planning teams and the Public Works teams. [56:18] **Hilary Dvorak:** Every new development of four or more units goes through Public Works review (PDR). All of the various departments have eyes on these plans. Planning Commission comes in the middle so that we have your feedback before final approval. [58:35] **Commissioner Ford:** Unless I'm mistaken, I don't think there's a public process involved in that Public Works review. There's no other opportunity for the kinds of concerns we've had today to be raised. [59:00] **Alyssa Olson:** Rezonings are simply to make the site in compliance with the already-adopted comprehensive plan. We don't require any parking. I would argue that maybe the commercial uses across the street are more of the concern for parking. I'll make a motion to adopt staff recommendation. [1:02:21] **Commissioner Campbell:** Second. [1:03:00] **Alyssa Olson:** I'll ask the clerk to please call the roll. [1:03:04] **City Clerk:** [Roll call] That's 9 ayes and zero nays. [1:03:08] **Alyssa Olson:** All right. That motion passes. We'll move on to our last item for the evening, Item No. 10, 137 46th Street West and staff is Erin Hanover. [1:03:54] **Erin Hanover (Staff):** The project site is located at the southeast corner of Pillsbury Avenue and 46th Street West. The application for this 4-unit development is to rezone from R1A to R3. No variances are being requested. Vehicle access would be off the alley for three off-street parking spaces. [1:05:06] **Erin Hanover:** The R3 zoning is in line with the built form guidance. This R3/UN3 zoning is typically applied to transit corridors, which is the case here. I'm happy to answer questions. [1:06:43] **Commissioner Marwah:** If this was brought to us after the land use study goes through, would it have been approved as of right? [1:07:01] **Erin Hanover:** You wouldn't even see the project because it would be done administratively. [1:07:37] **Applicant Representative (Male):** Good evening. I represent the developer. Two years ago we came to a similar board with a very different project. The new developer really did everything we heard from the community—reduced the scale, number of units, and removed the balconies overseeing the neighbors. I'm here for questions. [1:08:31] **Kurt Anderson (Public):** My name is Kurt Anderson. I'm at 4618 Pillsbury. I'm standing here to express my qualified support. I appreciate that compared to prior proposals it's appropriately scaled. My major point: I'm very familiar with Minneapolis 2040. Are we really building social equity through property ownership here? I would challenge the commission to look for ways to tie this to homeownership and building wealth. [1:11:02] **Karen Costello (Public):** Hi, my name is Karen Costello, 4611 Pillsbury Avenue. I agree with the comments submitted by Kurt Anderson. I would like to promote homeownership and meeting some of the social disparities we have. 46th is an extremely busy street and 4 units is actually maximum for that space. [1:12:10] **Aaron Voight (Public):** My name is Aaron Voight. I live at 4542 Pillsbury South. Compared to the first building that was going to go up, this looks like a house, so I'm very pleased. I do have a concern that there are four very mature maple trees on the boulevard. I hope they're not being removed. There's also nowhere to cross here for kids going to Washburn High School. [1:15:01] **Commissioner Campbell:** I think this is a relatively standard project and I make a motion to approve. [1:15:08] **Commissioner Marwah:** Second. [1:15:19] **Commissioner Conley:** I wanted to ask about those trees. Trees are infrastructure; I was wondering if the developer could speak to those mature trees. [1:15:37] **Applicant Representative:** Yes, the trees are slated to stay. There's a landscape plan that's submitted where you'll see them in place. [1:16:27] **Commissioner Koski:** I just want to say thank you to the community members. I understand the comments about trying to increase our homeownership amounts in Minneapolis. I know we'll take that conversation offline. [1:18:00] **Alyssa Olson:** I will ask the clerk to please call the roll. [1:18:02] **City Clerk:** [Roll call] That's 9 yeas and zero nays. [1:18:04] **Alyssa Olson:** That motion passes. Is there any comments from staff? [1:18:10] **Hilary Dvorak:** 2725 University Avenue was appealed; it will go to BIHZ next Tuesday. We do have the retreat for CPC coming up on the 27th. We have Committee of the Whole this Thursday. On May 8th we have a very long agenda, so please be prepared. [1:18:33] **Commissioner Conley:** Hilary, is that the Chinese restaurant one? [1:18:35] **Hilary Dvorak:** No, that's the one where the main application was the variance of minimum height. [1:20:38] **Commissioner Campbell:** I want to retreat the travel management plans and some of the details around that if you didn't already have it on the list. [1:20:56] **Alyssa Olson:** We've got it on the list. If not and without objection I'll declare this meeting adjourned. Our next meeting will be Monday, April 24th. Thank you, everybody. [1:21:28]