[0:22] >> GOOD MORNING. WELCOME TO THE BUSINESS, HOUSING, AND ZONING COMMITTEE. I WILL CALL THIS REGULAR MEETING [0:29] TOWARD FOR NOVEMBER 13, 2025. [0:35] -- TO ORDER FOR NOVEMBER 13, 2025. MY NAME IS JAMAL OSMAN, I'M THE [0:40] CHAIR. I WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE THESE MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE TO ENABLE GREATER PARTICIPATION. [0:46] THEY INCLUDE REALTIME CAPTIONING TO INCREASE THE ACCESSIBILITY OF OUR PROCEEDINGS TO THE COMMUNITY. THEREFORE ALL SPEAKERS NEED TO [0:51] BE MINDFUL OF THE RATE OF THEIR SPEECH SO THAT OUR CAPTIONERS CAN FULLY TRANSCRIBE ALL [0:57] COMMENTS FOR THE BROADCAST. WE ASK ALL SPEAKERS TO MODERATE THE SPEED AND CLARITY OF THEIR [1:03] COMMENTS. WE'LL BE USING SPEAKER MANAGEMENT, SO PLEASE SIGN UP. AT THIS TIME, I WILL ASK THE CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL SO WE CAN [1:09] VERIFY A QUORUM. >> COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. >> PRESENT. >> CASHMAN. >> PRESENT. [1:15] >> JENKINS IS ABSENT. CHAVEZ. >> PRESENT. >> VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY. >> PRESENT. >> AND CHAIR OSMAN. [1:22] >> PRESENT. >> THERE ARE FIVE MEMBERS PRESENT. >> LET THE RECORD REFLECT WE HAVE A QUORUM. OUR AGENDA IS IN FRONT OF US. [1:29] WE WILL BE BEGINNING WITH THE CONSENT AGENDA. [1:35] CONSENT AGENDA IS ITEM 8 THROUGH 25. ITEM EIGHT IS APPROVING THREE LIQUOR LICENSE. [1:41] ITEM NINE IS APPROVING SEVEN LIQUOR LICENSE RENEWALS. ITEM TEN IS APPROVING THREE [1:47] GAMBLING LICENSE RENEWALS. [1:53] ITEM 11 IS ACCEPTING A GRANT FROM THE STATE FOR DISLOCATED [1:58] WORKERS. ITEM 12 IS A PROVEN CERTIFICATION FOR THREE TIF [2:05] DISTRICTS. ITEM 13 IS APPROVING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AT [2:11] 201 WEST BROADWAY. ITEM 14 IS AUTHORIZING [2:22] MODIFICATIONS TO THE PRESERVATION FUND FOR THE CREAMETTE BUILDING. [2:29] ITEM 15 IS A CONTRACT FOR KMA WITH THE PROPERTY AT 1200 WEST [2:34] BROADWAY. ITEM 16 IS APPROVING A NEW STREET NAME OF KIRK WASHINGTON JR. SUBMITTED BY COUNCILMEMBER [2:41] ELLISON. ITEM 17 IS ALSO APPROVING A NEW STREET NAME OF CHEE XIONG ALSO [2:49] SUBMITTED BY COUNCILMEMBER ELLISON. ITEM 18 IS APPROPRIATION FOR DEMOLISHES TWO CITY-OWNED [2:57] PROPERTIES. ITEM 19 IS APPROVING LAND SALES FOR EMERGENCY STABILIZATION [3:02] PILOT PROGRAM TO HOMES FOR HOMIES. ITEM 20 IS SETTING A PUBLIC [3:10] HEARING FOR DECEMBER 2ND TO CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO THE LAND SALE SIDE YARD PROPERTIES [3:16] RESOLUTION. ITEM 21 IS SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR DECEMBER 2ND TO CONSIDER MODIFICATIONS TO THE [3:24] TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR 59 TIF DISTRICTS. ITEM 22 IS SETTING A PUBLIC [3:31] HEARING FOR DECEMBER 2ND TO CONSIDER THREE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS. [3:36] ITEM 23, SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR DECEMBER 2ND TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE RELATED TO [3:42] THE DEMOLITION AND WRECKING OF [3:47] STRUCTURES. ITEM 24 IS SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR DECEMBER 2ND TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE FOR THE [3:54] TENANT PROTECTIONS AND OPPORTUNITY TO PURCHASE. AND LASTLY ITEM 25 IS SETTING A [4:01] HEARING FOR DECEMBER 2ND FOR A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE PROPERTY AT 222 9th STREET [4:09] SOUTH. WITH THAT, DO ANY OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? [4:16] COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. I'D JUST LIKE TO PULL ITEM 24 [4:22] FOR DISCUSSION, PLEASE. >> ITEM 24 FOR DISCUSSION. [4:30] ARE THERE ANYONE ELSE? I'D LIKE TO RECOGNIZE WE HAVE BEEN JOINED BY COUNCILMEMBER [4:36] JENKINS. WITH THAT, I MOVE APPROVAL FOR ALL ITEMS EXCEPT ITEM 24. [4:42] ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] TO OPPOSED SAY NAY. [4:48] THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTION CARRIES. NOW COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. [4:54] >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. JUST A COUPLE QUESTIONS. ITEM 24 IS SETTING THE PUBLIC [4:59] HEARING FOR THE TOPA ORDINANCE. [5:07] A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS I'VE BEEN ASKED IS ABOUT WHY THIS WASN'T REINTRODUCED. I THINK WE STARTED HAVING [5:13] QUESTIONS ON THIS SUBJECT BACK IN FEBRUARY OR SO OF 2024. AND THIS IS THE FIRST THAT MOST [5:22] PEOPLE ARE HEARING ABOUT IT SINCE THEN. IT WENT BACK FOR SOME STAFF WORK. SO JUST WONDERING WHY IT WASN'T [5:29] REINTRODUCED AND WHY WE'RE JUST SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR IT INSTEAD OF GOING THROUGH THE [5:35] REINTRODUCTION PROCESS. >> CHAIR OSMAN, COUNCILMEMBER [5:44] VETAW, MY NAME IS ERIC HANSON, I'M THE DIRECTOR OF CPED. WE WILL GET YOU THE DATE, BUT THIS WAS INTRODUCED SEPARATELY A [5:50] WHILE AGO FOR TENANT OPPORTUNITY TO PURCHASE. THERE'S ALSO A COMMUNITY [5:56] OPPORTUNITY TO PURCHASE THAT CAME FORWARD AS THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRESERVATION ORDINANCE THAT WAS INTRODUCED AND WENT THROUGH THE CITY COUNCIL LAST [6:02] YEAR. BUT THIS ONE WAS PROPERLY INTRODUCED. >> IS THIS THE ONE FROM FEBRUARY [6:08] OF 2024? >> I THINK IT'S THAT TIME. >> OKAY. [6:13] AND SO HAS THERE BEEN ANY ENGAGEMENT AROUND THIS SINCE IT WAS INTRODUCED IN FEBRUARY OF [6:21] 2024? >> COUNCILMEMBER OSMAN, COUNCILMEMBER VETAW, THERE HAS BEEN ENGAGEMENT AROUND [6:28] OPPORTUNITIES TO PURCHASE ORDINANCE, AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRESERVATION ORDINANCE THAT WENT [6:34] THROUGH. AND THE AUTHORS HAVE BEEN WORKING ON ENGAGEMENT. THOSE AUTHORS ARE NOT ON THIS [6:40] COMMITTEE. IT'S VICE PRESIDENT CHUGHTAI AND COUNCILMEMBER ELLISON. WE DO NOT HAVE THAT PREPPED FOR [6:46] CONVERSATION WITH THE COUNCIL TODAY, BUT WE CAN GET YOU THAT INFORMATION ABOUT ENGAGEMENT. [6:52] >> SO THERE HASN'T BEEN -- FIRST ANY INFORMATION YOU CAN GIVE ME ABOUT ENGAGEMENT WOULD BE GREAT. [6:57] BUT I THINK I'M MORE INTERESTED IN INFORMATION AROUND STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT. [7:02] YOU KNOW, WHEN THIS WAS ORIGINALLY BROUGHT UP, THERE WERE LOTS OF LANDLORDS AND OTHER [7:08] FOLKS WHO HAD BEEN TALKING TO US ABOUT HOPEFULLY HAVING A VOICE AT THE TABLE OVER THAT PERIOD OF [7:14] TIME THAT IT WOULD TAKE FOR US TO PASS SOMETHING. AND I'M JUST CONCERNED THAT THAT HASN'T HAPPENED IN THIS YEAR, [7:21] OVER A YEAR, BECAUSE IT WAS FEBRUARY OF 2024. SO JUST WONDERING AND THAT WOULD [7:27] BE A STAFF DIRECTIVE, PLEASE, CLERKS TO JUST GIVE US THE INFORMATION ON WHAT ENGAGEMENT [7:34] HAS HAPPENED FROM STAFF TO -- I'M NOT NECESSARILY ASKING FOR [7:40] COUNCIL MEMBER ENGAGEMENT. I'D LIKE TO KNOW HOW STAFF HAS BEEN ENGAGING FOLKS. >> CHAIR OSMAN, IF I MAY, WE [7:46] HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE AUTHORS, THE AUTHORS HAVE BEEN KIND OF GUIDING THIS PROCESS. [7:53] SO WE'LL BE WORKING WITH THEM TO RESPOND TO THE INQUIRY TO YOU, [8:00] COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. >> OKAY. THAT'S IT, CHAIR. >> COUNCILMEMBER CHAVEZ. [8:05] >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. I JUST WANT TO GET ON QUEUE TO SPEAK ON ITEM 24, THE TOPA [8:13] ORDINANCE. I KNOW WE'RE JUST SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING, BUT I AM EXCITED THIS IS FINALLY COMING BEFORE [8:18] THE CITY COUNCIL. THE TENANT OPPORTUNITY TO PURCHASE ACT IS A CHANCE TO GIVE [8:25] RENTERS THE OPPORTUNITY TO PURCHASE A BUILDING. THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO MY [8:30] CONSTITUENTS IN WARD 9. IT'S SOMETHING I HEAR ON A PRACTICALLY DAILY BASIS ON WHY IT IS NEEDED TO ESTABLISH A [8:37] PARTICULAR ORDINANCE IN OUR COMMITTEE. I THINK ABOUT MS. LINDA, IF WE [8:43] HAVE THIS POLICY IN PLACE WOULD HAVE BEEN PERHAPS IN A DIFFERENT SITUATION INSTEAD OF NEIGHBORS [8:48] HAVING TO COME TOGETHER AND FUNDRAISE AND MAKE SURE SHE COULD STAY IN HER HOME AND NOT BE DISPLACED. [8:56] AND HEARD MULTIPLE INSTANCES ON HOW MEASURES LIKE TOPA CAN HELP KEEP PEOPLE IN THEIR HOMES AND [9:02] INCREASE HOME OWNERSHIP. PARTICULARLY THOSE IN OUR BLACK, BROWN, NATIVE, AND PEOPLE OF [9:09] COLOR COMMUNITIES WHERE DISPROPORTIONATELY PEOPLE DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO HOME OWNERSHIP. I AM SUPER EXCITED THAT MY [9:15] COLLEAGUES ARE BRINGING FORWARD TO THE TOPA ORDINANCE AND I LOOK FORWARD TO APPROVING THAT WHEN [9:21] THE TIME COMES. >> THANK YOU. SEEING NO ONE ELSE, I WILL MOVE APPROVAL FOR SETTING ITEM 24 FOR [9:27] SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR DECEMBER 2ND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] [9:33] . AND THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTION [9:38] CARRIES. OUR FIRST ITEM OF PUBLIC PUBLIC HEARING IS AN ORDINANCE RELATED TO THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION [9:46] REGULATIONS. THIS WAS CONTINUED FROM OUR LAST MEETING, OCTOBER 28TH. AND THIS IS BEFORE US. [9:52] I'LL ASK STAFF TO GIVE US A PRESENTATION ON THIS. >> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR OSMAN AND [9:58] COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY NAME IS ANDREA BURKE. I AM THE SUPERVISOR OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION TEAM AND [10:04] CPED. I'M HERE TODAY TO GIVE A QUICK UPDATE ON THIS AGENDA ITEM WHICH [10:09] WAS CONTINUED FROM THE OCTOBER 28, 2025, MEETING. [10:15] CPED HAS COMPLETED AN UPDATE TO THE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE. [10:20] THE LAST TIME THIS CODE WAS UPDATED WAS IN 2001. SINCE THEN, WE'VE REWRITTEN THE ORDINANCE TO MAKE IT CLEARER, [10:27] MORE CONSISTENT AND BETTER SUITED TO TODAY'S NEEDS FOR [10:33] REVIEWING, EVALUATING, AND PROTECTING HISTORIC AND POTENTIALLY HISTORIC PLACES IN [10:38] MINNEAPOLIS. AT THE OCTOBER 28TH MEETING, STAFF GAVE A PRESENTATION THAT EXPLAINED THE PROPOSED CHANGES [10:44] AND TODAY STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE BHZ COMMITTEE SUPPORT [10:50] AND APPROVE THE UPDATED CHAPTER [10:55] 599 TEXT AS WRITTEN. THAT CONCLUDES MY UPDATE AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. [11:02] THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WITH THAT, WE ARE GOING TO PROCEED TAKING THE PUBLIC [11:07] COMMENTS. I BELIEVE THE ITEM PUBLIC COMMENT WAS OPEN. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? [11:19] SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND RECOGNIZE VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY. [11:25] >> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER OSMAN. APPRECIATE STAFF'S TIME IN THIS [11:31] PAST COMMITTEE MEETING AND THE CURRENT ONE TODAY. I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THIS ORDINANCE FORWARD FOR APPROVAL. [11:37] >> ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [11:44] [CHORUS OF AYES] AND THOSE -- I'M SORRY. [11:50] WERE YOU -- >> I'M IN FAVOR OF THE ORDINANCE, I JUST WANTED TO SPEAK TO A COUPLE OF THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT I THINK ARE [11:55] HAPPENING THROUGH THIS ORDINANCE JUST FOR PUBLIC TRANSPARENCY. [12:01] WHAT I THINK HAS BEEN DONE HERE THAT'S REALLY POSITIVE AND THANK THE STAFF FOR THEIR WORK IS JUST [12:06] MAKING THE PROCESS CLEARER FOR IDENTIFYING POTENTIAL LANDMARKS [12:11] IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS AND REVIEWING DEMOLITION REQUESTS, REVIEWING DESIGN CHANGES WILL [12:17] MAKE IT EASIER FOR APPLICANTS. THIS IS PERTINENT TO ANOTHER DISCUSSION ITEM ON THE AGENDA [12:22] TODAY. IT WOULD ALSO STREAMLINE REVIEW OF DESIGN CHANGES IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS AND MAKES THAT FASTER. [12:29] MAKING HISTORIC TAX CREDIT PROJECTS ELIGIBLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW INSTEAD OF [12:34] A PUBLIC HEARING. THAT ALSO STREAMLINES THAT PROCESS AND IMPROVING COST RECOVERY WITH A 20% INCREASE IN [12:40] APPLICATION FEES. THAT'S ALSO GOOD FOR THE CITY TO BE ABLE TO STAFF THIS WORK. SO I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT [12:47] SOME OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS AND GIVE MY SUPPORT FOR THIS ORDINANCE. [12:52] >> OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I'M GOING TO REPEAT THAT MOTION [12:58] FROM VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] [13:04] THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU SO MUCH. [13:10] NEXT WE HAVE A LIQUOR AND SIDEWALK CAFE LICENSE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY BABII [13:20] CAJUN. I WELCOME -- FROM CPED. [13:27] >> I'M DISTRICT SUPERVISOR CRAIG [13:32] ELIASON. TODAY I'M PRESENTING AN APPLICATION FROM BABII DOLL LLC, [13:39] DOING BUSINESS AS BABII CAJUN AT [13:46] 1221 LAKE STREET. THEY'RE REQUESTING A LIMITED SUNDAY SALES WITH SIDEWALK [13:52] CAFES. THEY PLAN TO OFFER CASUAL DINING WITH OCCASIONAL LIVE DJ AND ENTERTAINMENT. [13:58] THEY WILL OFFER SEATING FOR 81 PATRONS INSIDE AND 38 SEATS ON A SIDEWALK CAFE LOCATED ALONGSIDE [14:03] WEST LAKE STREET AND FREEMONT AVENUE SOUTH. THERE WILL BE NO BUSINESS LICENSE OPERATING CONDITIONS FOR [14:09] THIS LICENSE. THE HOURS OF OPERATION INDOORS ARE FROM NOON TO MIDNIGHT DAILY. [14:16] AND OUTDOORS ON THE SIDEWALK CAFE NOON TO 10:00 P.M. DAILY. [14:23] ON OCTOBER 23, 2025, 171 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES WERE SENT TO RESIDENTS, PROPERTY OWNERS, AND [14:28] POSTED ON ALL RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS WITH FOUR OR MORE UNITS WITHIN 600 FEET OF THE [14:36] PREMISES. NOTICES WERE ALSO SENT TO THE SOUTH UPTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, THE UPTOWN BUSINESS [14:41] ASSOCIATION, AND VICE PRESIDENT CHUGHTAI. WE HAVE RECEIVED ONE RESPONSE IN SUPPORT FROM THE COMMUNITY [14:46] REGARDING THIS APPLICATION. THAT RESPONDENT ALSO WANTED TO EXPRESS HIS DESIRE THAT BABII [14:54] CAJUN ADVERTISE TO ITS CUSTOMERS THE AVAILABILITY OF OFF-STREET PARKING AND TO REMIND CUSTOMERS [14:59] TO BE MINDFUL OF THE NEIGHBORS WHEN LEAVING AT NIGHT. A REVIEW OF ANY COMPLAINTS, 311 [15:06] CALLS, POLICE CALLS, FOUND NO SIGNIFICANT ISSUES CONCERNING THE BUSINESS AND ISSUANCE OF THESE LICENSES. [15:13] THE LICENSES AND CONSUMER SERVICES DIVISION RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF AN ON SALE LIQUOR, [15:18] LIMITED ENTERTAINMENT WITH SUNDAY SALES AND SIDEWALK CAFE LICENSES. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION AND AT THIS TIME I WILL STAND [15:24] FOR ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT PRESENTATION. [15:30] I'M GOING TO PROCEED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I SEE HERE [15:35] THE OWNERS, I WOULD LIKE TO RECOGNIZE DANIEL CHRISTIANS. [15:44] WELCOME AND BOTH OF YOU COME. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN, COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS DANIEL CHRISTIANS. [15:51] I'M COUNCIL FOR BABII CAJUN. SHE WILL EXPRESS IT HERSELF. [15:56] I JUST WANT TO SAY I'M EXCITED FOR ANOTHER RESTAURANT TO OPEN UP IN THE AREA. [16:02] I'M HERE ESSENTIALLY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT MAY COME UP OR ASSIST. BUT WITH THAT, I WILL BE QUIET [16:08] AND GIVE HER THE FLOOR HERE. THANK YOU. >> HI EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS SUE, I'M THE OWNER OF [16:16] BABII CAJUN. I'M EXCITED TO SERVE SEAFOOD BOIL TO EVERYBODY IN THE COMMUNITY. IF ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS OR [16:23] WANTS SOME SEAFOOD BOIL, JUST LET ME KNOW. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. [16:28] IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND RECOGNIZE [16:34] COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. I WILL MOVE THIS ITEM FOR APPROVAL. I'M REALLY EXCITED TO SEE THE [16:40] FORMER BUFFALO WILD WINGS SPACE, RI RIGHT? IN UPTOWN HAVE A NEW RESTAURANT. [16:46] IT'S BEEN SO GREAT SEEING JUST IN THE LAST FEW WEEKS SEVERAL NEW RESTAURANTS COMING THROUGH OUT FOR APPROVAL IN UPTOWN, [16:52] DREAM STATE CAFE, AND CHIBA HUT LAST WEEK. AND NOW YOU. IT'S REALLY GREAT AND WONDERFUL [16:58] TO SEE YOUR ACTIVATION OF THE WEST LAKE STREET CORRIDOR. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR DOING BUSINESS IN THE AREA AND I'LL [17:04] MOVE THIS ITEM FOR APPROVAL. >> THANK YOU. WITH THAT MOTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [17:10] [CHORUS OF AYES] ALL OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU. >> YEAH. [17:17] NEXT PUBLIC HEARING WE HAVE IS AN EXTENDED HOURS OPERATION LICENSE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY [17:22] U TOBACCO AT 808 WASHINGTON AVENUE SOUTHEAST. I'LL WELCOME BUSINESS LICENSE MANAGER AMY LINGO TO GIVE A [17:29] BRIEF PRESENTATION. WELCOME. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. I'M MANAGER AMY LINGO WITH [17:36] LICENSING AND CONSUMER SERVICES. I'M PRESENTING AN APPLICATION FROM ZAIN INCORPORATED FOR U [17:46] TOBACCO AT 808 WASHINGTON AVENUE. THEY INTEND TO EXTEND THEIR [17:54] HOURS TO A TOBACCO WITH CONFECTIONARY SECTION. THIS LOCATION RECENTLY OPENED [18:01] OCTOBER 7, 2025. >> CONTINUE. >> THE BUSINESS HAS AGREED THAT FOR THE FIRST SIX MONTHS THEY WILL CLOSE AT 2:00 A.M. AND IF [18:07] THERE ARE NO ISSUES, THEN THEY WILL CONTINUE TO THE 3:00 A.M. AS PROPOSED. [18:13] THE HOURS OF OPERATION ARE THE CURRENT HOURS FOR THAT AREA ARE 7:30 A.M. TO 10:00 P.M. SUNDAY [18:19] THROUGH THURSDAY. 7:30 A.M. TO 11:00 P.M. FRIDAY AND SATURDAY. THEIR PROPOSED HOURS ARE [18:25] 7:30 A.M. TO 2:00 A.M. 7 DAYS A WEEK FOR THE FIRST SIX MONTHS. [18:31] AND AFTERWARDS 7:30 A.M. TO 3:00 A.M. DAILY. ON OCTOBER 20, 2025, 44 PUBLIC [18:36] HEARING NOTICES WERE SENT TO RESIDENTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 600 FEET OF THE PREMISES. [18:41] NOTICES WERE ALSO SENT TO THE PROSPECT PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND COUNCILMEMBER [18:47] WONSLEY. WE HAVE RECEIVED TWO COMMENTS FROM THE COMMUNITY, BOTH OF WHICH ARE IN OPPOSITION. THEIR CONCERNS ARE THE PROPOSED [18:52] HOURS BEING TOO LATE, NEGATIVE IMPACT ON NIGHT LIFE AND THE PROMOTING OF THE USE OF TOBACCO. A REVIEW OF ANY COMPLAINTS, 311 [18:59] CALLS, POLICE CALLS, AND ANY OPERATING CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED. [19:05] THE SECOND POLICE PRECINCT MET WITH THE OWNER AND HAVE SIGNED OFF ON THEIR SECURITY AND SAFETY [19:11] PLAN. THE POLICE ALSO COMMENTED THAT THE OWNERS HAVE WORKED CLOSELY WITH THEM AT THEIR SISTER LOCATION AND HAVE BEEN VERY [19:16] RESPONSIVE TO ANY OF THEIR NEEDS WHETHER FOR PROBLEMS WITH LATE NIGHT CROWDS OR PROVIDING VIDEO [19:21] EVIDENCE TO HELP IDENTIFYING ISSUES THAT ARE IN PROXIMITY BUT NOT NECESSARILY RELATED TO THEIR ORIGINAL BUSINESS. [19:27] NO SIGNIFICANT ISSUES CONCERNING THIS BUSINESS AND ISSUE OF LICENSES HAVE BEEN FOUND. THE LICENSES AND CONSUMER [19:34] SERVICES DIVISION RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE EXTENDED HOURS OF OPERATION LICENSE WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THEM BEING OPEN [19:40] UNTIL 2:00 A.M. FOR THE FIRST SIX MONTHS AND THEN 3:00 A.M. AFTERWARDS IF THERE ARE NO ISSUES. [19:45] THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. AT THIS TIME I WILL STAND FOR ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR [19:52] PRESENTATION. I AM GOING TO PROCEED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I SEE [19:58] HERE THAT U TOBACCO, MUSTAFA, [20:04] WELCOME. >> GOOD MORNING. [20:11] I'M MUSTAFA. I'M ONE OF THE OWNERS OF U TOBACCO. WE'RE A FAMILY-OWNED BUSINESS. UNFORTUNATELY MY DAD WASN'T [20:17] FEELING TOO WELL TO COME WITH ME, SO IT'S JUST ME TODAY. WE'RE HERE APPLYING FOR EXTENDED [20:22] HOURS OF OPERATION UNTIL 3:00 A.M. WE'VE DONE IT WITH ANOTHER BUSINESS FOR ABOUT 25 YEARS. WE'VE BEEN GOOD AT IT. [20:29] ANY QUESTIONS? >> NO, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE [20:35] TO SPEAK? SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. [20:41] OH -- IF I CAN HAVE MANAGER AMY [20:47] LINGO, I DO HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. I THINK THE CONCERN FROM THE RESIDENTS ARE VALID BECAUSE OF [20:54] THIS AREA. SOMETIMES WE HAVE CRIMES THAT TAKE PLACE AROUND HERE. I KNOW THE BUSINESS HAS BEEN [21:00] AROUND FOR A WHILE AND HASN'T BEEN ANY PROBLEM. [21:05] BUT WHAT IS THE CURRENT HOURS THEY HAVE RIGHT NOW, IS IT UNTIL -- >> SO THE CURRENT HOURS FOR THIS [21:11] LOCATION IS 7:30 A.M. TO 10:00 P.M. SUNDAY THROUGH THURSDAY. 7:30 A.M. TO 11:00 P.M. FRIDAY [21:18] AND SATURDAY. IT IS OF NOTE THAT IN PROXIMITY TO THIS LOCATION THERE ARE OTHER [21:24] EXTENDED HOURS UNTIL 3:00 A.M., THE CVS AND THE RAISING CANES ARE PRACTICALLY NEXT DOOR, AND [21:31] THERE ARE APPROXIMATELY EIGHT BARS WITH 2:00 A.M. LICENSES WITHIN SEVERAL BLOCKS AS WELL. BUT THE CURRENT LOCATIONS FOR [21:36] THE ZONING OF THE AREA ARE 10:00 P.M. CLOSURE SUNDAY THROUGH THURSDAY, 11:00 P.M. FRIDAY AND SATURDAY. [21:42] >> OKAY. WONDERFUL. AND THIS FIRST SIX MONTHS IS [21:48] UNTIL 2:00 AND THEN 3:00? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> OKAY. [21:54] APOLOGIZE, COUNCILMEMBER [22:00] JENKINS. OKAY. GREAT, THANK YOU. [22:06] I WILL APPROVE THIS ITEM, BUT I WOULD ALSO DEFINITELY TALK TO THE OWNER AND SAY SAFETY IS VERY [22:15] IMPORTANT. AND WE'LL HOPEFULLY ASSESS THOSE SIX MONTHS AND SEE HOW THINGS GO [22:20] AND COME BACK AND DECIDE WHERE WE GO FROM THERE. BUT WITH THAT MOTION, ALL THOSE [22:25] IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTION [22:31] CARRIES. THANK YOU SO MUCH. ALL RIGHT. [22:37] NEXT ITEM IS WE HAVE ANOTHER EXTENDED HOURS OPERATION LICENSE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY SIP OF [22:43] SILK AT 333 HURON BOULEVARD. [22:51] BEN FROM BUSINESS LICENSE TO GIVE US A PRESENTATION. [22:57] WELCOME. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS. I'M LICENSE INSPECTOR BEN ZINEL. [23:05] I'M PRESENTING AN APPLICATION FROM SIP OF SILK INCORPORATION [23:10] DOING BUSINESS AS SIP OF SILK LOCATED AT 333 HURON BOULEVARD SOUTHEAST IN WARD 2. [23:15] THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING AN EXTENDED HOURS OF OPERATION LICENSE. IF APPROVED THEY INTEND TO [23:21] EXTEND THE HOURS OF THEIR OPERATION TO THEIR CURRENT BUSINESS, WHICH IS A COFFEE HOUSE AND CAFE THAT SERVES FOOD [23:28] AND NONALCOHOLIC DRINKS WITH NO LIVE ENTERTAINMENT. THEY ARE ASKING FOR APPROVAL TO BE OPEN UNTIL 11:00 P.M. SUNDAY [23:35] THROUGH THURSDAY AND UNTIL MIDNIGHT ON FRIDAY AND SATURDAY. SIP OF SILK IS A 72 SEAT [23:43] SIT-DOWN COFFEE HOUSE AND CAFE THAT RECENTLY OPENED. THIS SPACE HAS BEEN VACANT FOR MANY YEARS AND THEY'RE THE FIRST [23:49] TENANT IN THIS BUILDING. SO IT'S GOOD TO SLOWLY FILL THIS BUILDING UP WITH TENANTS. [23:56] CURRENT HOURS ARE JUST UNTIL 10:00 P.M. SUNDAY THROUGH THURSDAY AND UNTIL 11:00 P.M. [24:01] FRIDAY AND SATURDAY. THEY'RE JUST PROPOSING THE ONE ADDITIONAL HOUR SO TO BE OPEN [24:07] UNTIL 11:00 P.M. ON WEEKDAYS AND MIDNIGHT ON WEEKENDS. [24:13] ON OCTOBER 20TH, '36 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES WERE SENT TO RESIDENTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS [24:19] WITHIN 600 FEET OF THE PREMISES. NOTICES WERE ALSO SENT TO THE PROSPECT PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND COUNCILMEMBER [24:25] WONSLEY. WE RECEIVED NO COMMENT FROM THE COMMUNITY. A REVIEW OF THE COMPLAINTS, 311 [24:31] CALLS, POLICE CALLS AND ANY OPERATING CONDITIONS, I FOUND NO SIGNIFICANT ISSUES CONCERNING THE BUSINESS AND ISSUANCE OF THE [24:37] LICENSE. THE MPD SECOND PRECINCT MET WITH THE BUSINESS AND FOUND NO ISSUES AND SIGNED OFF ON THEIR SAFETY [24:43] AND SECURITY PLAN. THE LICENSES AND CONSUMER SERVICE DIVISION RECOMMENDS [24:48] APPROVAL OF AN EXTENDED HOURS OF OPERATION LICENSE. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION AT THIS TIME AND I WILL STAND [24:53] FOR ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT PRESENTATION. I'M GOING TO PROCEED TO OPEN THE [24:59] PUBLIC HEARING AND RECOGNIZE -- [25:05] YES, SIR. COME ON. [25:15] >> CAN YOU HEAR ME? >> YES. >> GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. MY NAME IS AHMED, I'M ONE OF THE [25:22] NEW OWNERS AT SIP OF SILK. JUST WANTED TO APPLY FOR THE EXTENDED LICENSE HOUR TO WELCOME [25:27] ANYONE THAT WANTS TO COME IN. WE'RE JUST A COFFEE HOUSE, WE SERVE PANINI PRESS SANDWICHES, [25:35] WAFFLES, VARIETY OF PASTRIES HOPEFULLY COMING SOON AND OBVIOUSLY A VARIETY OF DRINKS. [25:40] SO JUST HOPING EVERYTHING GOES WELL AND JUST WANT TO SAY MS. CHOWDHURY, IT WAS VERY NICE [25:47] TO SEE YOU LAST WEEK AROUND THE GRAND OPENING. THANK YOU SO MUCH. AND IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR CONCERNS, JUST LET [25:53] ME KNOW. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? [25:59] SEEING NONE, I'LL RECOGNIZE VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY. [26:04] >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR OPENING UP THIS BUSINESS. [26:11] I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A BUSINESS THAT YOU OPENED UP WITH YOUR WIFE -- OH YOUR COUSIN AND [26:19] YOUR FAMILY. BUT I THINK I GOT A CHANCE TO MEET YOUR WIFE? [26:25] >> NO. >> SORRY. I MET SOMEBODY'S WIFE. [26:30] FREEZE FREEZE -- SHE'S LIKE I'M [26:36] SO AND SO'S WIFE, BUT IT WAS NOT YOUR WIFE. WHOEVER THAT WAS, SHE WAS LOVELY. I MET SOMEBODY'S WIFE. [26:41] BUT I AM REALLY EXCITED TO MOVE THIS FORWARD FOR APPROVAL BECAUSE I THINK THIS PART OF [26:49] CAMPUS NEEDS A TYPE OF COFFEE SHOP LIKE THIS, BUT ALSO JUST HAVING AN AREA THAT'S OPEN LONGER FOR STUDENTS TO STUDY, [26:55] AND ALSO ON THE WEEKENDS NOT EVERYBODY GOES OUT AND DRINKS AND SO HAVING A PLACE WHERE YOU [27:01] CAN COME TOGETHER AND GATHER ON THE WEEKENDS AND HAVE COFFEE, HAVE A PANINI I THINK IS A [27:08] REALLY GREAT ADDITION TO CAMPUS LIFE. SO THANK YOU FOR OPENING UP YOUR BUSINESS AND I WISH YOU GOOD [27:16] LUCK. >> ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. [27:21] ON THAT MOTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTION [27:28] CARRIES. NEXT WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR 2025 LEVY FOR SPECIAL [27:36] ASSESSMENTS. I WELCOME NICK TO PRESENT THAT. [27:43] WELCOME. >> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR OSMAN AND [28:14] COMMITTEE MEMBERS. I'M NICK FROM REGULATORY SERVICES HERE TO PRESENT THE [28:21] 2025 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LEVY FOR PROPERTY-RELATED VIOLATIONS. THIS IS AN ANNUAL ITEM THAT WE DO TO APPROVE ALL OF THE UNPAID [28:29] FEES AND FINES THAT WERE ISSUED BY SEVERAL CITY DEPARTMENTS FOR THINGS LIKE ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS, REINSPECTION FEES, [28:35] NUISANCE ABATEMENT WHICH INCLUDES THINGS LIKE MOWING LAWNS, PICKING UP TRASH, [28:43] VEGETATION, BOARDING BUILDINGS. IT ALSO INCLUDES THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRATION, DEMOLITION, AND RENTER [28:50] RELOCATION ASSISTANCE. AS PART OF THIS PROCESS, WE SEND NOTICE OF INTENT TO ASSESS LETTERS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. [28:56] THAT GIVES PEOPLE THE OPPORTUNITY TO APPEAL THEIR ASSESSMENTS TO AN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER. [29:01] WE HAD 22 OF THOSE HEARINGS IN 2025 WITH ONE EXCEPTION THAT [29:06] I'LL TALK ABOUT IN A FEW MINUTES. THAT NOTICE OF INTENT TO ASSESS [29:11] LETTER OUTLINES PEOPLE'S OPTIONS FOR PREPAYMENT, APPEAL TO DISTRICT COURT, OR GOING TO AN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER. [29:16] IT ALSO MENTIONS THE INTEREST RATE THAT'S APPLIED TO SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. [29:27] WE DID HAVE A TOTAL LEVY AS OF OCTOBER 1ST OF ABOUT [29:33] $4.2 MILLION. THIS INCLUDES ALL OF THE DIFFERENT THINGS LISTED UNDER THERE. WE DID HAVE A FEW NEW ITEMS THIS YEAR. [29:38] THE FIRST ITEM I DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO IS THE PUBLIC HEALTH CLEAN UP. THAT'S CONDUCTED UNDER A [29:43] DIFFERENT STATE STATUTE THAN THE REST OF THE ASSESSMENTS THAT ARE PART OF THE LEVY. THERE'S NO INTEREST APPLIED TO THAT ONE, AND THERE'S ALSO NO [29:49] PUBLIC HEARING REQUIREMENT. IT'S A LITTLE BIT LESS PRESCRIPTIVE THAN THE REGULAR STATUTE THAT WE ASSESS THESE [29:55] UNDER. WE DID GIVE THE PROPERTY OWNER AN OPPORTUNITY TO FILE A WRITTEN OBJECTION BY OCTOBER 20TH WHICH WE DIDN'T RECEIVE, BUT IT IS [30:01] PART OF THE LEVY THAT'S BEING CONSIDERED HERE TODAY. WE ALSO HAVE ADMINISTRATIVE [30:06] CITATIONS FROM PUBLIC WORKS, WHICH WE HAVEN'T DONE IN A FEW YEARS. THIS IS FOR THE COMBINED SEWER [30:14] OVERFLOW AND METER DISCONNECT PROGRAM. THAT'S WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO GET [30:20] PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS TO DISCONNECT THEIR STORMWATER DRAINAGE TO THE SANITARY SEWER [30:25] AND THEY'VE STARTED ISSUING CITATIONS THAT ARE ASSESSABLE FOR THAT VIOLATION AGAIN. AND THE THIRD NEW THING IS THAT [30:31] WE HAVE THE PROLONGED VACANCY ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS. THOSE ARE REGULAR CHAPTER 2 [30:38] ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS, BUT THOSE WERE ISSUED PURSUANT TO A [30:43] POLICY AND ORDINANCE CHANGE ABOUT A YEAR AGO WITH WE TAKE PROPERTIES OFF THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRATION AFTER TWO [30:49] YEARS AND INSTEAD MOVE TO ISSUING MONTHLY ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS. THOSE ARE STARTING TO NOW WORK [30:54] THEIR WAY THROUGH THE PROCESS AND WE HAVE A LITTLE UNDER $400,000 THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT PROGRAM. [30:59] AND I BELIEVE WE DO HAVE A PRESENTATION COMING UP FROM INSPECTION SERVICES. IF NOT, THE NEXT BHZ CYCLE [31:09] MEETING THEN THE NEXT ONE. I WOULD ALSO NOTE WITH THE TIME CHANGE THAT WE HAD, TYPICALLY THIS MEETING IS AT 1:30, THERE [31:15] WERE NOTICES THAT WENT OUT THAT HAD 1:30 ON THEM, SO I WILL BE BACK AT 1:30 AND IF ANYBODY DOES [31:21] APPEAR FOR THAT, I'LL BE PREPARED TO SETTLE THOSE CASES OR IF WE'RE NOT ABLE TO SETTLE, [31:26] WE WOULD RESET THEM TO NEXT YEAR TO MAKE SURE THAT WE STILL MEET THAT PUBLIC HEARING REQUIREMENT. [31:32] AND I'D BE HAPPY TO STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT [31:38] PRESENTATION. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING [31:44] AND SEE IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. WELCOME. [31:52] >> THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, CHAIR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. I AM CLAIRE GLEN. [32:01] I'M HAMUDI SABRI'S ATTORNEY. [32:07] THE CITY IS LOOKING TO ASSESS FINES AGAINST MR. SABRI'S [32:13] PROPERTY AGAINST THE CORPORATE ENTITY WHICH IS M&S PROPERTIES. AS THE COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY BE [32:19] AWARE, THIS IS PERTAINING TO THE ENCAMPMENT THAT WAS ON M MR. SABRI'S PRIVATE PROPERTY. [32:25] I DID JUST WANT TO NOTE SEVERAL THINGS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. [32:31] FIRST, MR. SABRI HAS BEEN FINED PERSONALLY FOR THESE EXPENSES AND THOSE ADMINISTRATIVE [32:37] HEARINGS ARE CURRENTLY PENDING. WE HAVE AN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING SET FOR NOVEMBER 21ST IN WHICH I AM REPRESENTING M [32:43] MR. SABRI. THE CITY ALSO IN ADDITION SUED MR. SABRI FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF [32:50] AND DAMAGES IN DISTRICT COURT. I'M REPRESENTING MR. SABRI IN THAT CASE AND MARK COLLENBRIDGE [32:59] IS ALSO REPRESENTING THE CORPORATE ENTITY IN THAT CASE. WE ACTUALLY HAD A HEARING JUST THIS MORNING. WE HAD NO NOTICE OF THIS TAX [33:07] LEVY. AS YOU HEARD, THERE WAS ONE EXCEPTION TO THE HEARING THAT WAS PROVIDED APPARENTLY TO [33:13] EVERYONE ELSE. MR. SABRI, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT HE WAS THAT EXCEPTION. [33:19] SO MR. SABRI WAS NOT PROVIDED ANY OPPORTUNITY TO DISPUTE THIS. WE JUST RECEIVED LAST NIGHT AT [33:26] 4:00 P.M., AND BECAUSE I WAS WITH MY CHILD I DID NOT SEE IT UNTIL VERY LATE LAST NIGHT, A [33:32] LETTER FROM MR. McGREENO THAT WAS INDICATING THAT THIS MEETING [33:38] WOULD BE HAPPENING AT 1:30 TODAY AND INDICATING THAT THAT TIME WAS INCORRECT. THAT LETTER WAS NEVER PROVIDED [33:44] TO US PREVIOUSLY DESPITE THE FACT THAT I HAVE BEEN WORKING AND COMMUNICATING WITH M MR. McGREENO REPEATEDLY OVER THE [33:52] PAST SEVERAL WEEKS ABOUT THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING THAT'S PENDING AGAINST MR. SABRI IN HIS [33:59] PERSONAL CAPACITY. I'M VERY CONCERNED THAT THE CITY IS ESSENTIALLY TRYING TO TRIPLE DIP, NOT JUST DOUBLE DIP, IN [34:07] ASSESSING FINES AGAINST M MR. SABRI AND IN THIS CASE, IT IS HAPPENING WITHOUT ANY MEANINGFUL DUE PROCESS. I UNDERSTAND MY TIME IS UP. [34:13] BECAUSE I DID NOT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SUBMIT ANY WRITTEN OBJECTION, IF I MAY JUST BRIEFLY CONTINUE? [34:20] >> IF YOU COULD WRAP IT UP. QUICKLY. >> YES, JUST VERY QUICKLY JUST [34:25] TO NOTE, IN THE DISTRICT COURT CASE WHICH WE HAD A HEARING IN THIS MORNING, IT IS UNDISPUTED [34:31] THAT MR. SABRI WAS REQUESTING FROM THE CITY TRASH, SANITATION, AND PORT-A-POTTY SERVICES AT THE [34:39] ENCAMPMENT. AND IT IS UNDISPUTED THAT THE CITY REFUSED TO PROVIDE THOSE [34:45] SERVICES. IT'S ALSO UNDISPUTED THAT MR. SABRI PAID OUT OF HIS OWN POCKET TO GET PORT-A-POTTIES AND [34:55] THE CITY HAD THEM REMOVED. SO ESSENTIALLY ASSESSING THESE FINES AGAINST HIS CORPORATE [35:00] ENTITY AT THE SAME TIME THE CITY IS GOING AFTER HIM PERSONALLY ON MULTIPLE DIFFERENT VENUES AT THE [35:05] SAME TIME ON TOP OF THE FACT THAT MR. SABRI ATTEMPTED TO HAVE THESE COSTS MITIGATED THROUGH [35:13] PROACTIVE SERVICES AND NOW THE CITY IS TRYING TO ASSESS THESE ON THE BACK END IS JUST SIMPLY UNFAIR. [35:18] >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU. >> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO [35:23] WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? I SEE MR. SABRI WALKING, DO YOU --? [35:29] ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE. SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN. [35:36] >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. I HAD A QUESTION FOR STAFF. [35:43] THE PROLONGED VACANCY ENFORCEMENT IS A NEW TOOL THAT THE CITY HAS PUT INTO PLACE [35:50] RECENTLY. THIS CITY COUNCIL BASED AN ORDINANCE I BELIEVE LAST YEAR AND NOW THIS YEAR IT'S GONE INTO [35:56] EFFECT. I KNOW THERE'S SEVERAL PROPERTIES BEING ASSESSED THESE MONTHLY INCREASES FOR VACANCY. AND I'M WONDERING WHAT HAPPENS [36:03] WHEN THEY'RE NOT PAID AND THE REASON I ASK IS BECAUSE OF PROPERTY THAT WE'LL BE DISCUSSING LATER IN THE AGENDA [36:09] HAS I THINK TENS OF THOUSANDS OF UNPAID PROLONGED VACANCY ENFORCEMENT FEES. SO WHAT DOES HAPPEN IN THAT [36:16] CASE? >> YEAH, CHAIR OSMAN AND COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN. SO PEOPLE DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO [36:23] PAY THAT TO THE CITY AS AN ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION AS THEY'RE RECEIVING IT. [36:28] AND IF IT'S UNPAID AT THE END OF THE YEAR, IT GOES ON THE TAXES WHICH IS WHAT THIS ITEM IS ABOUT. IT KIND OF DEPENDS, BUT WE PUT [36:34] IT ON THE TAXES AND IF IT'S NOT PAID, EVENTUALLY THE PROPERTY OWNER WILL LOSE THE PROPERTY IN [36:41] TAX FORFEITURE WHICH COULD TAKE 3 TO 5 YEARS. WE DO RECEIVE PAYMENTS FOR THE COUNTY IF WE GET THOSE PAYMENTS. [36:49] BUT IT DOES TAKE A LITTLE WHILE TO RECOOP THAT MONEY. >> THANKS. [36:54] IT'S JUST A LITTLE BIT OF A CONCERN BECAUSE IN SO MANY OF THESE CASES, AT LEAST THE ONES IN MY WARD, THE PROPERTY OWNERS [37:01] ARE UNREACHABLE AND SOMETIMES NOT MAKING THESE PAYMENTS. SO I AM GLAD TO HEAR THAT THERE'S A PROCESS TO MAKE SURE [37:06] THAT IT DOES GET PAID OR THAT THE CITY HAS THE AUTHORITY TO TAKE SOME ACTION LATER ON WHEN [37:11] IT GOES UNPAID. THAT'S THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD. THANKS. >> THANK YOU. [37:17] JUST A QUICK QUESTION. IF YOU CAN ADDRESS THE POINT [37:23] THAT WAS RAISED ABOUT SOMEBODY NOT RECEIVING A NOTICE. IS THERE ANYTHING YOU CAN TELL [37:29] US ON THAT? >> FOR SURE, CHAIR OSMAN. SO WE DID SEND A NOTICE [37:36] OCTOBER 3RD TO M&S PROPERTIES, THE OWNER OF THAT LOT WITH THE INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT THE [37:42] ASSESSMENT WAS FOR, HOW MUCH IT WAS FOR, AND HOW TO SUBMIT A WRITTEN OBJECTION. THAT WASN'T RETURNED BY THE POST [37:49] OFFICE. SO IT'S PRESUMED TO HAVE BEEN DELIVERED. I DID SEND YESTERDAY AN EMAIL [37:54] AND I CALLED MR. SABRI'S ATTORNEY WHICH I NOTICED THAT THE TIME WAS INCORRECT AND IT [38:00] DOES APPEAR THAT THEY ARE HERE. I DO WANT TO CLARIFY, THANKS FOR ASKING ME THE QUESTION. [38:06] SO THERE ARE, AS MS. GLEN WAS SAYING, THREE DIFFERENT ISSUES THAT ARE OBVIOUSLY ALL RELATED, BUT THEY ARE DIFFERENT ISSUES [38:12] WHERE WE HAVE THE PUBLIC HEALTH CLEAN UP AND THAT WAS CONDUCTED UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES CHAPTER [38:18] 145A AND WE SENT THE NOTICE TO MR. SABRI CITING THAT, GIVING HIM AN OPPORTUNITY TO CLEAN UP [38:24] THE PROPERTY. HE DIDN'T DO THAT BY THE DUE DATE, SO THE CITY ULTIMATELY WENT OUT AND DID THE CLEAN UP [38:30] AND THAT'S WHAT THE ASSESSMENT IS FOR. SEPARATE FROM THAT, THERE ARE ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS THAT [38:35] ARE ISSUED BY THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT FOR THE NONCOMPLIANCE. AND THERE IS A HEARING SCHEDULED [38:41] FOR THAT ON NOVEMBER 21ST. WE DO HAVE A PRE-HEARING CONFERENCE SCHEDULED WITH A [38:46] HEARING OFFICER THIS AFTERNOON TO GO OVER SOME OF THOSE LEGAL ISSUES. AND THEN THERE IS ALSO THIRDLY, [38:52] THE LAWSUIT INITIATED BY THE CITY IN DISTRICT COURT. SO THERE'S THREE DIFFERENT [38:58] ISSUES THAT ARE ALSO OBVIOUSLY A LITTLE BIT RELATED, BUT THEY'RE NOT THE SAME. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. [39:03] I THINK THERE'S MORE QUESTIONS. I RECOGNIZE VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY. >> THANK YOU, MR. McGREENO FOR [39:10] ANSWERING SOME QUESTIONS. I'M GOING TO HAVE YOU REPEAT YOURSELF ON WHAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING IS FOR ON [39:15] THE 21st. >> YES. SO CHAIR OSMAN AND COUNCILMEMBER [39:22] CHOWDHURY, THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT ISSUED ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS FOR VIOLATION OF CITY ORDINANCES [39:28] AND STATE STATUTE PRIOR TO THE LOT BEING CLEANED UP. THERE'S OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, [39:34] I THINK 6 OR 7 THAT WERE TIMELY APPEALED AND THOSE WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING NEXT [39:40] WEEK. >> OKAY. SO DIFFERENT PART OF OUR CODE? >> YES, THAT'S CORRECT. [39:45] >> OKAY. AND THEN MY NEXT QUESTION IS FOR THE PUBLIC HEALTH CLEAN UPS THAT [39:50] OCCURRED ON JULY 25TH AND SEPTEMBER 16TH, WAS M&S [39:57] PROPERTIES NOTIFIED THAT THE CLEAN UP WAS GOING TO HAPPEN? AND IF THEY DIDN'T CLEAN UP THEY [40:02] WOULD BE ASSESSED FOR IT BEFORE THE CLEAN UP OCCURRED? >> CHAIR OSMAN AND COUNCILMEMBER [40:10] CHOWDHURY, YEAH, THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT SENT A NOTICE TO MR. SABRI AT HIS ADDRESS CITING [40:16] THE STATE STATUTES FOR THE PUBLIC HEALTH CLEAN UP AND SAYING THAT IF IT WEREN'T COMPLETE BY A CERTAIN DATE THAT [40:21] THE CITY WOULD DO IT AND ULTIMATELY WE DID END UP COMPLETING THAT, OR THE PUBLIC [40:26] WORKS DEPARTMENT ENDED UP COMPLETING THE CLEAN UP. >> THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN THIS LETTER DATED OCTOBER 3, 2025. [40:32] >> THAT IS THE SAME MATTER, THAT'S THE CLEAN UP. >> BUT IT'S SEPARATE LETTERS? [40:38] SO THERE WAS, I PRESUME, A NOTICE OF SOME TYPE BEFORE THE 25TH OF JULY, AND A NOTICE OF [40:45] SOME TYPE BEFORE SEPTEMBER 16TH? >> YES, THAT'S CORRECT. >> THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN THIS [40:51] LETTER THAT IS REMINDING THEM THAT THE CLEAN UP HAD OCCURRED AND THIS IS A NOTICE OF INTENT TO ASSESS? [40:57] >> YES, THAT'S CORRECT. >> OKAY. GREAT. AND THEN THIS IS JUST A QUESTION [41:04] FOR OUR ATTORNEYS BECAUSE THERE WAS A STATEMENT MADE ABOUT TRIPLE DIPPING. [41:09] I JUST WANTED TO HEAR FROM YOU. THE CITY'S ABILITY TO ASSESS [41:18] THIS SPECIFIC PUBLIC HEALTH CLEAN UP AND WHY WE'RE ABLE TO DO THAT? >> THANK YOU. [41:25] THROUGH THE CHAIR, COUNCILMEMBER, I THINK NICK SUMMED IT UP QUITE CORRECTLY, [41:32] THAT THEY ARE THREE SEPARATE LAWS WE'RE OPERATING UNDER. ONE FOR THE INJUNCTION TO STOP [41:38] THE BEHAVIOR ON THE PROPERTY. ONE THAT IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION FOR CIRCUMSTANCES [41:43] OCCURRING AT THE PROPERTY. AND THIS ONE WHICH IS COSTS OF [41:49] CLEANING UP THE CIRCUMSTANCE AT THE PROPERTY. THEY ARE THREE SEPARATE ISSUES. >> THANK YOU. [41:54] AND THEN IS THERE ANY APPEALS PROCESS FOR THIS TYPE OF ASSESSMENT OR ANY TYPE OF [42:01] APPEALS PROCESS OR RECOURSE? >> YEAH, CHAIR OSMAN AND [42:08] COUNCILMEMBER CHOWDHURY. AFTER THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFIES THE LEVY, THE PROPERTY OWNER CAN [42:14] APPEAL THE DECISION TO THE COURT OF APPEALS. THAT'S JUST SPECIFICALLY FOR THE [42:21] ASSESSMENT. >> OKAY. GREAT. SEEING ALL OF THAT INFORMATION [42:26] WHILE IT IS A HEFTY AMOUNT, I DON'T SEE A REASON WHY WE [42:32] SHOULDN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS AND SO I WILL MOVE THIS FORWARD FOR APPROVAL. [42:38] >> THANK YOU. [42:44] SEEING NONE, WITH THAT MOTION ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [42:49] [CHORUS OF AYES] AND THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTION CARRIES. [42:57] ALL RIGHT, OUR NEXT ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM OUR LAST MEETING ON OCTOBER 28TH. [43:04] THIS IS AN APPEAL CONCERNING THE JOHN COOK HOUSE AT 948 18th [43:15] AVENUE. I WELCOME A RECAP FROM LAST MEETING. >> YES, GOOD MORNING. [43:21] I'M ANDREA BURKE AND I SERVE AS THE SUPERVISOR OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION TEAM AND CPED. [43:27] I'M HERE THIS MORNING TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON THE AGENDA ITEM CONCERNING THE APPEAL OF THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION [43:33] COMMISSION'S DECISION TO DENY DEMOLITION OF THE COOK HOUSE LOCATED AT 948 18th AVENUE [43:40] NORTHEAST. THIS PROPERTY IS A DESIGNATED HISTORIC LANDMARK IN MINNEAPOLIS. AS WAS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, THE [43:45] ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 28TH BHZ COMMITTEE [43:51] MEETING. AND DURING THAT MEETING, COUNCIL MEMBERS REQUESTED ADDITIONAL [43:56] INFORMATION REGARDING VACANCY AT THE PROPERTY. I WILL NOW ADDRESS THE THREE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS THAT WERE [44:02] RAISED. NUMBER ONE, HOW MANY FINES HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE PROPERTY OWNER SINCE THE BUILDING WAS PLACED ON THE VACANT BUILDING [44:10] REGISTRY IN 2014? REC SERVICES HAS ASSESSED A TOTAL OF $17,948. [44:18] THESE INCLUDE CHARGES UNDER THE VACANT BUILDING PROGRAM, THE PROLONGED VACANCY ENFORCEMENT [44:23] PROGRAM, HOUSING INSPECTION CITATIONS AND NUISANCE-RELATED FEES. [44:29] THE SECOND QUESTION WAS WHAT IS THE CURRENT FEE STRUCTURE UNDER THE PROLONGED VACANCY ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM. [44:35] THE MONTHLY FEE FOR PROPERTIES UNDER PVE IS CURRENTLY $2,000. AND IN ADDITION LATE FEES OF [44:42] $200 PER CITATION ARE APPLIED WHEN PAYMENTS ARE NOT MADE ON TIME. AND THE THIRD QUESTION IS IS THE [44:49] CITY CURRENTLY ENFORCING THE PROLONGED VACANCY ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM AT THIS PROPERTY? [44:55] YES, ENFORCEMENT UNDER THE PROGRAM HAS BEEN IN EFFECT AT 948 18th AVENUE NORTHEAST SINCE [45:00] DECEMBER 3, 2024. THE DECISION BEFORE YOU TODAY IS WHETHER TO GRANT OR NOT GRANT [45:07] THE APPEAL OF THE HPC'S DENIAL, THE DEMOLITION APPLICATION FOR [45:12] THE COOK HOUSE. THIS CONCLUDES MY UPDATE. I AM AVAILABLE TO UPDATE ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU. [45:18] >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. SO WE ARE CONTINUING TO TAKE THE PUBLIC HEARING. [45:24] JUST A REMINDER, IF YOU HAVE SPOKEN LAST MEETING, PLEASE JUST [45:31] WAIT. RIGHT NOW I WILL RECOGNIZE [45:38] AMANDA T. TO COME AND SPEAK. [45:57] >> THANKS SO MUCH. MY NAME IS AMANDA TEMPLE. I REPRESENT MYSELF AND MY SPOUSE. WE LIVE ON THE 1700 BLOCK OF [46:03] TYLER STREET NORTHEAST IN MINNEAPOLIS. WE'VE LIVED ON THE SAME BLOCK AS THE JOHN COOK HOUSE FOR MORE THAN 24 YEARS. [46:09] WE'VE PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED A LETTER TO THE HPC WHICH SHOULD ALREADY BE PART OF THE RECORD FOR THIS ISSUE AND WE CONTINUE [46:15] TO STAND BY OUR STATEMENTS OF THAT LETTER. WE WOULD LIKE TO ADD A FEW ADDITIONAL POINTS REGARDING THE STATEMENT MADE BY THE APPE [46:21] APPELLANT'S REPRESENTATIVE DURING THE PREVIOUS MEETING IN ORDER TO CORRECT THE RECORD. MR. STEIN STATED THE BUILDING WAS IN ROUGH SHAPE IN 2014 WHEN [46:28] IT WAS PUT ON THE VBR. HOWEVER IT WAS UPDATED WITH A NEW ROOF IN 2018 AND WEATHER TYPE PRIOR TO THE SALE TO THE [46:34] CURRENT OWNER. ADDITIONALLY PHOTOGRAPHS INCLUDED WITH THE STAFF REPORT FROM AROUND THE SAME TIME CLEARLY SHOW THAT THE INTERIOR [46:41] DWELLING WAS INTACT. AS MINNEAPOLIS RESIDENTS WHO SPEND A GREAT DEAL OF OUR LIVES [46:47] IN CLOSE PROXIMITY WITH THE COOK HOUSE, WE WOULD DISAGREE WITH THE ASSERTION THAT THE CLIENT HAS MADE SIGNIFICANT EFFORTS TO [46:52] MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY. ALL RENOVATION WORK ON THE PROPERTY CEASED ONCE THE CURRENT [46:58] OWNER TOOK POSSESSION. THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS NOT SECURED THE BUILDING FROM TRESPASSERS, NOT PERFORMED [47:04] PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE AND HAS NOT KEPT UP WITH EFFORTS TO KEEP THE BUILDING WEATHER TIGHT. [47:09] THE VACANT BUILDING STAFF REPORT REFLECTS SOME OF THE WORK THE CITY HAS COMPLETED BECAUSE THE [47:15] OWNER FAILED TO ACT. THERE'S STILL ACTIVE PENDING ACTIONS REGARDING TRASH ON THE SITE. THE 311 REPORTS ON THE PROPERTY [47:21] HAVE INCREASED AND THE LIMITED SCOPE OF ENFORCEMENT HAS NOT ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED THE ISSUES OF TRESPASS AND OPEN WINDOWS [47:27] ABOVE THE FIRST FLOOR. REGARDLESS OF TODAY'S OUTCOME, THIS PROPERTY DESERVES TO BE CARED FOR AND THE OWNERS HELD [47:33] ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE SAFETY OF THAT PROPERTY AND THE COMMUNITY. I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU. [47:39] NEXT PERSON IS ANNA. [47:52] >> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS ANNA McKELLUM, I'M [47:58] ACTUALLY A ST. PAUL RESIDENT AND CAME ACROSS THIS HOUSE OVER FIVE YEARS AGO WHILE GOING DOWN CENTRAL AVENUE AND PASSING 18th [48:03] TO GO TO A STORE. AND I LOVE OLD HOUSES, BUT SOMETHING ABOUT THIS HOUSE REALLY STRUCK ME. [48:10] I HAD BEEN IN CONTACT WITH KEVIN RIKE WHEN I FOUND OUT IT WAS GOING TO BE CONDEMNED AND HOPED [48:15] THAT IT WOULD BE SAVED AND WAS REALLY HAPPY THAT IT WAS SAVED AND PUT ON THE HISTORIC REGISTRY. [48:21] NOW YOU FAST FORWARD FOUR AND A HALF, 5 YEARS, I DRIVE BY THIS HOUSE EVERY WEEK JUST TO KEEP AN EYE ON IT. [48:26] I HAVE A REAL PASSION FOR THIS HOUSE. IT'S BEAUTIFUL DESPITE ALL OF THE BOARDED WINDOWS AND THE [48:33] CHIPPING PAINT AND THERE'S SOMETHING THAT EXUDES HISTORIC INTEGRITY ON THIS HOUSE. [48:38] OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS, I'VE BEEN GOING BY WEEKLY. I'VE SEEN THAT THE YARD, THE [48:43] HOUSE HAS NOT BEEN KEPT UP IN EVEN BASIC CONDITION. THERE'S FINES FOR THINGS LIKE [48:49] GRASS NOT BEING CUT WHICH IS JUST A BASIC HOME OWNERSHIP THING. WE TALKED ABOUT THE FINE SCHEDULE, AND I DON'T THINK [48:54] THAT'S ENOUGH JUST TO ASSESS FINES. I DON'T THINK THAT IS INCENTIVE ENOUGH FOR THIS OWNER TO TAKE [49:00] CARE OF THE PROPERTY, ESPECIALLY A HISTORIC PROPERTY. I HAD SENT A LENGTHY EMAIL WHICH [49:05] I'M NOT GOING TO REITERATE HERE. BUT I DO A LOT OF HISTORIC WORK, AND I DO MINNESOTA HISTORY DAY FOR STUDENTS AND COMMUNICATE THE [49:12] IMPORTANCE OF PRESERVING OUR HISTORY. AND ONE THING I WROTE IN MY [49:18] EMAIL WAS THAT SINCE THE '50s WE'VE SEEN MASSIVE DEMOLITION OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES ACROSS [49:23] MINNEAPOLIS, ACROSS ST. PAUL. AND THEN IN THE '70s, AND '80s WE CREATED HISTORIC PRESERVATION [49:28] COMMISSIONS LIKE THE ONE YOU HAVE HERE TO MAKE SURE THAT BUILDINGS AREN'T OBLITERATED SO OUR HISTORY LIVES ON. [49:34] THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THINGS LIKE THE ART GODFREY HOUSE HERE TO [49:40] TEACH OUR STUDENTS AND FUTURE GENERATIONS ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF OUR HISTORY AND THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE [49:46] COME BEFORE THEM AND CREATED BEAUTIFUL NEIGHBORHOODS LIKE NORTHEAST MINNEAPOLIS. SO I ASK THE COMMITTEE TO PLEASE [49:53] CONSIDER PRESERVING THIS BEAUTIFUL HOUSE FOR OUR OWN AND FUTURE GENERATIONS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. [49:58] >> THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD [50:04] LIKE TO SPEAK WHO IS ON THE FLOOR? I SEE THE APPLICANT HERE. [50:14] I KNOW YOU SPEAK, BUT SOME OF THE MEMBERS WHO WERE NOT HERE, IF YOU CAN WRAP IT UP IN TWO [50:19] MINUTES. >> ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU, CHAIR, COUNCIL MEMBERS. JACOB STEIN. [50:24] I WANT TO JUST ADDRESS THE MEMO THAT YOU DID RECEIVE FROM STAFF. AND IT DOES INCLUDE SOME I THINK [50:31] GOOD INFORMATION. AND UNFORTUNATELY I THINK THAT MEMO ACTUALLY UNDERSCORES EXACTLY THE POINT THAT MY CLIENT [50:38] HAS BEEN TRYING TO MAKE. IT IDENTIFIES NEARLY $75,000 IN ASSESSMENTS AND REALLY [50:45] UNDERSCORES THAT THIS HAS NOT BEEN WHAT'S BEEN ASSERTED AS A [50:51] DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT, BUT IN FACT A DEMOLITION BY RED TAPE. IT FURTHER DEMONSTRATES THAT THE [50:56] CITY HAS DONE EVERYTHING WITHIN ITS POWER TO MAKE ABATEMENT OF THIS NUISANCE, WHICH THE CITY [51:02] HAS IDENTIFIED AS A NUISANCE IMPOSSIBLE. I WOULD NOTE THIS BUILDING WAS ON THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRY [51:08] FOR FIVE YEARS, AND $20,000 OF THOSE FINES OCCURRED BEFORE MY CLIENT EVEN ACQUIRED THE [51:14] PROPERTY BECAUSE THIS PROPERTY WAS IN FACT ON THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRY BECAUSE IT WAS VACANT AND BOARDED. [51:21] $47,000 OF THOSE FINES OCCURRED AFTER IT WAS NOT JUST CONDEMNED FIRST BY THE CITY, BUT THEN [51:27] DESIGNATED AS A CONDEMNED BUILDING BY THE CITY. AND I THINK MOST DISTURBING OF [51:33] ALL, $20,000, MORE THAN A QUARTER OF THOSE FINES HAVE OCCURRED AFTER THIS APPLICATION BEFORE YOU TODAY WAS MADE. [51:40] SO WE'VE MADE THE APPLICATION AND ARE GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS THAT IS AVAILABLE UNDER THE CITY'S CODE AND THE CITY [51:46] CONTINUES TO ASSESS FINES. NOT ONLY IS THAT UNHELPFUL AND [51:51] PROBLEMATIC FOR FINDING A SOLUTION, WHICH WE'D VERY MUCH LIKE TO DO, BUT IT'S UNJUST, AND [51:57] IT'S UNFAIR. AS A REMINDER, YOU CAN'T SIMPLY JUST PULL A PERMIT FOR A CONDEMNED BUILDING ON THE VACANT [52:04] BUILDING REGISTRY. THERE'S A PROCESS AND A GRIEVANCE THAT YOU HAVE TO ENTER INTO. AND SIMILARLY, YOU CAN'T JUST GO [52:09] AND PULL A PERMIT FOR EXTERIOR REPAIRS. YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH A HEARING FOR A CERTIFICATE OF [52:15] APPROPRIATENESS. SO THERE IS JUST LAYER AND LAYER OF ADDITIONAL PROCESS AND ADDING [52:20] $75,000 TO THE COSTS, I THINK VERY MUCH EMPHASIZES THE CHALLENGE HERE. [52:26] AND I THINK ONE THING I WOULD ALSO NOTE IS MR. McGREENO STATED [52:32] YOU'RE ONLY INCENTIVIZING THIS TO GO TO TAX FORFEITURE. NOBODY WANTS THIS TO HAPPEN. WE'D LOVE TO WORK WITH THE CITY [52:38] COUNCIL AND WITH THE CITY. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. [52:44] IS ANYONE ELSE? NO? YES, PLEASE, COME ON IN. [52:52] >> THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME. I WAS HERE LAST TIME AND I JUST WANT TO -- >> DID YOU SPEAK LAST TIME? [52:58] >> NO, YOUR TIME IS UP. THANK YOU, APPRECIATE IT. [53:04] I DECIDED TO LET HIM SPEAK BECAUSE SOME OF THE MEMBERS WERE NOT HERE. [53:10] ANYWAYS, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND -- I'LL REOPEN THE [53:27] PUBLIC HEARING. GO AHEAD, YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. >> MY NAME IS CATHERINE KEMP. [53:32] I LIVE IN NORTHEAST MINNEAPOLIS NEAR THE COOK HOUSE AND HAVE FOUND IT TO BE A VALUABLE PART [53:38] OF OUR COMMUNITY. AND I AM VERY PLEASED THAT OUR [53:44] COMMUNITY WAS ABLE TO REQUEST THAT IT BECOME DESIGNATED HISTORIC. [53:51] I UNDERSTAND THE NECESSITY OF BUILDING OUR COMMUNITY INCLUDING BUILDING NEW BUILDINGS AND THAT [53:58] THIS DEMOLITION MIGHT HELP THERE BE ENOUGH PHYSICAL SPACE FOR THE [54:04] TRUCKS AND THINGS THAT WOULD NEED TO BE PARKED WHILE PUTTING [54:10] NEW BUILDINGS UP ALONG CENTRAL AVENUE WHICH IS THE NEXT STREET OVER AND ACROSS THE ALLEY FROM [54:15] WHERE THE COOK HOUSE IS. OF COURSE OUR COMMUNITY WANTS TO BUILD AND GROW. [54:21] WE ALSO WANT TO MAINTAIN OUR HISTORY AND RESPECT OUR HISTORY [54:27] AND KNOW THAT THAT HOUSE WAS PART OF BUILDING THE NORTHEAST [54:34] COMMUNITY AND THAT THOSE WERE [54:41] IMMIGRANTS IN THE SCANDINAVIAN AREA THAT LIVED HERE LONG AGO AND WORKED HARD IN LOW WAGE WORK [54:50] AND I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE RESPECT THIS AND BRING [54:58] THINGS OUT. I THINK THE COMMUNITY WOULD BE INTERESTED IN BUILDING UP THIS, SHORING UP THIS BUILDING AND [55:04] SAVING ITS HISTORIC PRESERVATION. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. [55:09] AND I JUST HAD A FEW QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF OR MAYBE THE [55:21] APPLICANT. SO I'M LOOKING AT THE PICTURES THAT WAS PROVIDED. THE BUILDING LOOKS IN VERY BAD [55:28] SHAPE. AND IF I'M RIGHT, I HEARD THIS BUILDING HAS BEEN VACANT FOR [55:35] SINCE 2014, SO 11-12 YEARS. [55:45] AND 2019 AROUND THAT TIME, WAS DESIGNATED AS HISTORICAL SITE [55:51] WHICH NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE EVER SINCE OF THAT. AND THE CITY CONTINUED TO GIVE [55:58] FINES AND NOTHING HAS BEEN IMPROVED EITHER IMPROVING OR [56:06] FIXING THE BUILDING. IS THAT ACCURATE? >> CHAIR OSMAN, THAT IS CORRECT. [56:12] IT WAS PLACED ON THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRATION IN 2014. [56:18] FORMER COUNCILMEMBER RIKE HAD SUBMITTED A NOMINATION, I BELIEVE IT WAS 2019 OR 2020, I [56:25] THINK 2020, AND THEN THE HPC RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE DESIGNATION AND SO DID THE CITY COUNCIL. [56:31] BUT IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT THERE HAS BEEN ANY MUCH WORK [56:36] THAT WAS DONE ON THE PROPERTY SINCE THEN. THANK YOU. >> AND I GUESS THERE WAS A NEW [56:47] OWNER. DID THE OWNER TAKE OVER AFTER IT WAS DESIGNATED OR BEFORE IT WAS DESIGNATED? [56:52] CAN YOU TELL ME ABOUT THAT? >> YEAH, CHAIR OSMAN, THE CURRENT OWNER WAS THE OWNER WHEN [56:59] FORMER COUNCILMEMBER RIKE SUBMITTED THE NOMINATION TO [57:05] RECOMMEND, REQUEST DESIGNATION TO HAVE THE PROPERTY. >> AND WAS THERE ANY [57:11] CONVERSATION NOTICES THAT'S REQUIRED FOR THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO RECEIVE BUILDING BEING [57:19] DESIGNATED AS A HISTORIC SITE? >> CHAIR OSMAN, YES, STAFF REACHED OUT TO THE PROPERTY [57:25] OWNER IN WRITTEN FORM MULTIMILLION TI-- MULTIPLE TIME [57:32] BUT I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT NUMBER TO NOTIFY THEM OF THE DESIGNATION. PHONE CALLS WERE MADE TO INVITE [57:38] THEM INTO THE HEARINGS THAT WERE HAPPENING, BUT STAFF DID NOT RECEIVE A RESPONSE FROM THE [57:43] PROPERTY OWNER AFTER ATTEMPTS TO REACH THEM WERE MADE. >> OKAY. [57:54] I THINK JUST FOR ME A BUILDING BEING THIS VACANT AND LAST WEEK [58:01] WE HEARD THAT THE APPLICANT SAID IT'S NOT FEASIBLE TO FIX IT. [58:13] WE'RE TRYING TO MEET A GOAL HERE. DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE PLAN IS OR MAYBE THEY CAN ANSWER, IF THEY RECEIVE THIS DEMOLITION, WHAT IS [58:20] THE PLAN ON THE BUILDING? IS THERE SOME KIND OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN THEY HAVE? OR HAVE YOU HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT [58:29] THE FUTURE LOOK OF THIS SITE? >> I'M GOING TO ASK A QUESTION OF CLARIFICATION. LET ME REITERATE THE QUESTION, [58:35] WHAT IS THE PLAN IF DEMOLITION IS APPROVED? WHAT IS THE NEXT STEP? >> YES. >> I DO BELIEVE PROBABLY THE ATTORNEY OR IF THE OWNER IS HERE [58:43] WOULD BE BEST BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT. >> THANK YOU. [58:51] >> CHAIR OSMAN, COUNCIL MEMBERS. WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS IF WE DO [58:57] GET THE APPROVAL TO DEMOLISH THE BUILDING, OUR INTENT WOULD BE TO FOLLOW THROUGH ON THAT AND BRING [59:02] FORWARD THE DEMOLITION. THIS WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED OR INTENDED TO BE PART OF A [59:10] REDEVELOPMENT AS ONE OF THE FORMER SPEAKERS INDICATED. SO THE GOAL WOULD BE TO CONSTRUCT PRESUMABLY A NEW HOME [59:18] ON THE PROPERTY. AND I DO WANT TO CLARIFY THE TIMELINE TOO. IT WAS ACTUALLY 2014 IT BECAME [59:25] ON THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRY. 2019 IT WAS ACQUIRED. 2020 IT WAS CONDEMNED. THEN A YEAR LATER IT WAS [59:32] DESIGNATED. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. THAT'S IT FOR MY QUESTIONS. I WILL RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER [59:38] C CASHMAN. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. AND FOR THE APPELLANT'S ATTORNEY, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU TOO. [59:43] MR. STEIN. WHY DID YOUR CLIENT PURCHASE THIS HOME? [59:48] >> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. AT THE TIME IT HAD BE ON THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRY FOR [59:53] FIVE YEARS. HE WAS BRINGING FORWARD A DEVELOPMENT IMMEDIATELY ACROSS THE ALLEY. IT WAS, I THINK IT'S A FORMER [1:00:00] BURGER KING. IT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD FOR A REDEVELOPMENT SITE, OR THE ENTIRE SITE WAS ONE [1:00:06] REDEVELOPMENT. THE INTENT WAS TO DEMOLISH THIS BUILDING. IT WAS DERELICT, IT HAD BE ON [1:00:12] THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRY FOR A LONG TIME. AFTER HE BOUGHT IT, IT WAS CONDEMNED. AT THE TIME HE DIDN'T HAVE AN [1:00:18] OBJECTION TO THAT BECAUSE THAT WAS HIS INTENT WAS TO ABATE THE NUISANCE. IT WASN'T UNTIL AFTER IT WAS [1:00:25] CONDEMNED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PANDEMIC THAT IT WAS DESIGNATED. AND I WOULD NOTE THAT WHILE WE [1:00:35] HAVE HEARD THERE WERE INDICATIONS THAT HE WAS CONTACTED, HE WAS NOT AWARE THIS WAS BEING DESIGNATED. AND THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT [1:00:41] IF HE UNDERSTOOD THE IMPLICATIONS HE WOULD HAVE AGREED TO. PARTICULARLY GIVEN THE [1:00:47] IRREPARABLE CONDITION OF THE BUILDING AT THE TIME. >> HOW MUCH DID HE BUY IT FOR AT THE TIME? >> I BELIEVE IT WAS $240,000. [1:00:53] >> OKAY. AND WHY HASN'T HE PAID THE $19,325 IN FINES? >> IS THAT THE FINES THAT HAVE [1:00:59] BEEN LEVIED SINCE THIS APPEAL STARTED? THE FINES THAT WERE LEVIED SINCE [1:01:04] THIS APPEAL STARTED, WE ASSUMED WOULD BE STAYED. WE WERE NOT AWARE THAT THE CITY WAS GOING TO CONTINUE TO LEVY US [1:01:10] AS WE WERE WALKING THROUGH YOUR PROCESS TO DEMOLISH IT. THE DEMOLITION OR THE ORDERS [1:01:18] SAID THAT WE WERE TO ABATE THE NUISANCE, SO WE APPLIED FOR THE DEMOLITION PERMIT TO THE HPC. [1:01:25] AND ULTIMATELY AT THIS POINT AS I NOTED, IT'S GOING TO COST [1:01:30] $1.5 MILLION TO REPAIR THIS BUILDING, WE'RE BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE. MR. DEBRILL VERY MUCH [1:01:37] UNDERSTANDS THE SITUATION AND THAT WE ARE STUCK BETWEEN EFFECTIVELY TWO FACTIONS IN THE COMMUNITY, ONE THAT WANTS TO SEE [1:01:42] THIS BUILDING DOWN AND ONE THAT WANTS TO SEE IT UP. THERE HAVE BEEN OFFERS TO BUY [1:01:47] THIS FOR PENNIES ON THE DOLLAR. AND I THINK THAT'S THE CHALLENGE IS THIS IS REALLY INCENTIVIZING [1:01:55] A LOSS, A SIGNIFICANT LOSS BY MY CLIENT AND THE CITY'S FURTHER [1:02:00] CITATIONS WILL CONTINUE TO INCENTIVIZE THAT. >> AND WHY HASN'T HE ACCEPTED THE OFFERS TO MAKE THIS SOMEONE [1:02:06] ELSE'S PROBLEM? >> WELL, THERE'S ALWAYS SOMEBODY TO BUY IT FOR A DOLLAR, RIGHT? [1:02:12] I THINK THAT HE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO ACCEPT A LOSS. [1:02:19] THAT IS A SIGNIFICANT PROPERTY VALUE AND HE SHOULD NOT BE COMPELLED BY THE GOVERNMENT TO GIVE UP HIS PROPERTY. [1:02:25] >> IT'S NOT OUR JOB TO MAKE SURE THAT HE GETS A RETURN EITHER. I MEAN THAT WAS NOT A SMART [1:02:31] INVESTMENT TO MAKE. >> WELL, IT WAS VERY DIFFERENT [1:02:36] INVESTMENT BACKED EXPECTATIONS WHEN HE ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY THAT WAS ON THE VACANT BUILDING [1:02:42] REGISTRY, IT WAS ALSO DIFFERENT WHEN THE BUILDING WAS CONDEMNED. IT WAS ONLY WHEN THE CITY ON ITS [1:02:48] OWN VOLITION DESIGNATED IT AS A LANDMARK, A CONDEMNED GEM THAT [1:02:54] IT BECAME PROBLEMATIC FOR HIM. >> I BELIEVE IF THIS WAS SOLD [1:03:00] FOR PENNIES ON THE DOLLAR THAT SOMEBODY WOULD BE WILLING TO MAKE THIS COMMITMENT TO [1:03:05] RESTORATION ON THE BUILDING. WE DON'T KNOW THAT SOMEONE WOULDN'T BE WILLING TO DO THAT. >> WHAT'S SO CONCERNING IS THAT THE CITY IS USING ITS PUNITIVE [1:03:13] POWERS TO TRY TO COMPEL THE LOSS OF THIS PROPERTY BY MY CLIENT. THAT IS VERY CONCERNING AND WE'D [1:03:18] LIKE TO COLLABORATIVELY WORK WITH THE CITY. WE'VE REACHED OUT TO THE COUNCIL [1:03:24] MEMBERS, SPOKE WITH COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAYNE'S OFFICE YESTERDAY. WE'D LOVE TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE CITY. BUT THE TRUTH IS THERE'S NO WAY [1:03:30] THAT YOU COULD USE PRIVATE DOLLARS TO HAVE THIS THING BE ANYTHING OTHER THAN UPSIDE DOWN [1:03:36] AND UNDERWATER. >> WHAT DOES COLLABORATION WITH THE CITY LOOK LIKE FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE? [1:03:41] JUST DEMOLITION? >> I THINK OUR GOAL TO DEMOLISH WOULD BE, THE REASONABLE WE WANT [1:03:47] TO DEMOLISH IT IS TO STOP THE BLEEDING. IF THERE WAS A WAY TO MAKE MY CLIENT WHOLE OR AT LEAST PARTIALLY WHOLE, I THINK WE'D [1:03:54] HAPPILY ENGAGE WITH THE CITY. I UNDERSTAND THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE A LOT OF DOLLARS FOR ACQUISITION, BUT IF THERE WAS A [1:03:59] POSSIBILITY TO GET WHAT HE PUT INTO THIS OR AT LEAST CLOSE TO THIS, I THINKE WOULD ABSOLUTELY ENTERTAIN THAT AND WE [1:04:05] MADE THAT OFFER TO THE COUNCIL MEMBER. AND WE'RE COUNTOUSLY -- [1:04:12] CONTINUOUSLY DISCUSSING WITH MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY. THERE'S ALWAYS SOMEBODY WILLING TO TAKE IT FOR A SUM, BUT MY [1:04:19] CLIENT SHOULDN'T HAVE TO BE COMPELLED TO GIVE UP HIS PROPERTY FOR PENNIES. >> I GUESS I JUST FIND IT SAD [1:04:25] THAT THE PROPERTY IS NOW BEING GIVEN UP JUST THE VALUE HERE IS HOW MUCH CAN THIS OWNER GET [1:04:31] PROFIT OUT OF THIS BUILDING. >> TRUST ME THERE WILL BE NO PROFIT. >> BUT IT HAS VALUE BEYOND [1:04:36] PROFIT. IT HAS HISTORICAL VALUE. >> WELL, I THINK THAT THIS BUILDING WAS CONDEMNED AND [1:04:43] DEEMED A NUISANCE AND A HAZARD TO PUBLIC HEALTH BEFORE IT WAS DEEMED TO BE A LANDMARK. [1:04:49] SO I THINK THAT THE CITY'S OWN SPECTERS WOULD AGREE THAT THIS IS NECESSARY, THE DEMOLITION IS [1:04:56] NECESSARY TO REMEDY AN UNSAFE CONDITION. >> THANKS FOR YOUR ANSWERS. AND I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MS. BURKE AS WELL. [1:05:02] I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THIS $19,325 AND IF THE DEMOLITION IS [1:05:07] APPROVED, WILL THEY STILL HAVE TO PAY IT AND IF SO, WHEN WOULD [1:05:12] PVE END? >> CHAIR OSMAN, AND COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN, FORGIVE ME. [1:05:18] I DON'T BELIEVE I AM ABLE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. I GUESS I AM CURIOUS IF THERE IS A MEMBER OF REG SERVICES THAT [1:05:23] COULD ANSWER THAT QUESTION IN TERMS OF PAYMENT OF THE FINES? THANK YOU. [1:05:30] >> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL, CHAIR OSMAN, COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY NAME IS BRIAN STARRY, FIELD [1:05:36] MANAGER WITH REG SERVICES. I MANAGE ALL OF THE VACANT AND BOARDED BUILDINGS THROUGHOUT THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS INCLUDING THE PROPERTY THAT WE'RE TALKING [1:05:43] ABOUT CURRENTLY. AS FAR AS THE PROLONGED VACANCY ENFORCEMENT, THE CURRENT CHARGES [1:05:56] SO WHEN WE FOUND OUT ABOUT THE APPEAL, THE OWNER'S ATTORNEY DID REQUEST THAT WE PAUSE CITATIONS MOVING FORWARD UNTIL AFTER THE [1:06:02] HEARING AND A DECISION WAS MADE. SO BASED ON OUR CONVERSATIONS [1:06:08] WITH THE CITY'S ATTORNEYS OFFICE THAT WAS THE DIRECTIVE, SO WE ARE CURRENTLY IN A PAUSE STATUS [1:06:18] AS OF NOVEMBER OF THIS MONTH. SO WE DID NOT CHARGE A $2,000 CITATION BASED ON THE OUTCOME FOR THE HEARING AND A DECISION [1:06:25] TO BE MADE. AS FAR AS THE PAYMENT OF WHAT'S [1:06:33] BEEN ASSESSED OR ALREADY IMPOSED, THAT WOULD BE A CONVERSATION I WOULD HAVE WITH MY BOSS TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE [1:06:39] BEST COURSE OF ACTION WOULD BE MOVING FORWARD ON THAT. SO THERE IS NO ONE SIZE FITS [1:06:45] ALL. WE'RE ALWAYS GOING TO DO IMPOSE [1:06:50] THE FINES OR IF WE WOULD WAIVE THEM IT WOULD BE DEPENDENT ON CONVERSATIONS AND WHAT THE [1:06:56] COUNCIL REQUESTS, WHAT THE DESIRE IS FOR THE COMMUNITY AT THIS LOCATION. >> OKAY. I'LL JUST SAY I THINK THAT THEY [1:07:01] SHOULD HAVE TO PAY WHAT THEY'VE BEEN FINED EVEN IF DEMOLITION IS AN OUTCOME HERE WHICH WE HAVE TO [1:07:07] EXPECT IS ONE OF THE OUTCOMES THAT COMES OUT OF PVE, EITHER IT'S REMEDIATION OR SALE OR [1:07:13] DEMOLITION THOSE ARE KIND OF THE THREE THINGS THAT COME OUT OF A BUILDING LIKE THIS AND WE HAVE TO EXPECT THAT THEY'LL STILL [1:07:19] HAVE TO PAY WHAT WAS OWED FOR THE PVE DURING THE LEAD UP TO [1:07:26] THAT. SO THOSE ARE MY $0.02 BUT OF [1:07:32] COURSE YOU'LL MAKE THAT DECISION. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER [1:07:37] VETAW. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. I HAD A QUESTION FOR THE ATTORNEY. MY QUESTION WAS DID YOU SAY THAT [1:07:42] THE PLAN IS TO BUILD A NEW HOME ON THIS PROPERTY IF IT'S TORN [1:07:52] DOWN? >> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. THAT IS CERTAINLY THAT WOULD BE THE LIKELY OUTCOME. AND MR. DEBRILL HAS ACKNOWLEDGED [1:07:59] THAT THAT HE WOULD HAPPILY BUILD A PROPERTY OR EVEN A DUPLEX OR A [1:08:04] TRIPLEX. I THINK WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT YOU CAN BUILD ON THE SITE. ORIGINALLY THIS WAS INTENDED TO [1:08:10] BE PART OF THE PROJECT NEXT DOOR. BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE PLAN RIGHT NOW. BUT AS OF YESTERDAY WE DISCUSSED [1:08:16] WHAT ELSE CAN WE DO? AND I THINK WE'RE OPEN TO ALL OPTIONS. IF THAT WAS A CONDITION, I THINK [1:08:21] WE'D HAPPILY ENTERTAIN WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE AND WE WOULD WORK WITH STAFF TO FIND SOMETHING THAT MEETS THE CITY [1:08:26] CODE. >> I APPRECIATE YOU SAYING THAT, BUT THAT'S NOT LIKE WHY I'M ASKING THE QUESTION. I'M ASKING THE QUESTION BECAUSE [1:08:33] NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE TO PRESERVE AND KEEP THE PROPERTY UP TO PAR. SO I'M JUST WONDERING WHERE [1:08:39] FUNDING IS GOING TO COME FROM AND WITH THE PRICE OF MATERIALS AND ALL OF THE THINGS THAT ARE [1:08:44] HAPPENING RIGHT NOW AROUND BUILDING NEW PROPERTIES, A DUPLEX, A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, WHATEVER, I CAN IMAGINE IT'S [1:08:50] GOING TO BE WELL OVER $1 MILLION TO BUILD SOMETHING NEW. SO WHERE IS THIS COMING FROM? WHERE IS THE FUNDING COMING [1:08:57] FROM? >> SO THE ECONOMICS ARE REALLY QUITE DIFFERENT FOR [1:09:03] REHABILITATION VERSUS REPAIR. WHEN YOU HAVE A DESIGNATED BUILDING THAT'S BRICK IN PARTICULAR, OUR $1.5 MILLION [1:09:11] CONTEMPLATES HAVING TO TAKE IT DOWN BRICK BY BRICK AND REPLACE AS MANY OF THOSE WITH THE SAME BRICKS. IT'S INCREDIBLY LABOR AND [1:09:17] CRAFTSMAN INTENSIVE PROCESS. WHEREAS A NEW BUILDING YOU DON'T HAVE THOSE SAME ISSUES. [1:09:23] YOU DON'T HAVE LEADED PAINT, YOU DON'T HAVE ASBESTOS, YOU DON'T HAVE TO TAKE IT DOWN BRICK BY [1:09:28] BRICK. SO I THINK THAT WE WOULD WORK WITH EITHER MR. DEBRILL WOULD DO [1:09:34] IT HIMSELF OR WE WOULD WORK WITH A BUILDER. THIS IS A VERY NICE PLACE TO LIVE. THIS IS A COMMUNITY. [1:09:39] AND I THINK WE WOULD HAPPILY WORK WITH THOSE BUILDERS TO DO [1:09:45] THAT. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT. I LIVE IN A 103-YEAR-OLD HOUSE. MY HOUSE IS VERY OLD AND I KNOW [1:09:51] WHAT IT'S LIKE TO JUST NEED A PORCH BRICK REPLACED, RIGHT, VERSUS GETTING A BLOCK OF CEMENT [1:09:57] AND THAT'S SOMETHING I COMMITTED TO WHEN I BOUGHT A HOUSE THAT WAS THAT OLD WAS MAKING SURE [1:10:02] THAT I MAINTAINED IT AND I KEPT IT WITH ITS CURB APPEAL AND CHARM NOT JUST FOR MYSELF BUT [1:10:08] FOR THE PEOPLE WHO DRIVE BY AND SEE IT EVERY DAY AND THE PEOPLE WHO VISIT IT. AND THAT'S LIKE A HUGE [1:10:14] COMMITMENT WHEN YOU PURCHASE A HOUSE. AND I DON'T THINK ANY OF US PURCHASE HOMES THAT OLD WITHOUT [1:10:22] UNDERSTANDING THAT THE INVESTMENT IN THINGS THAT CRACK OR BREAK ARE MUCH DIFFERENT THAN [1:10:30] A NEW HOME, RIGHT? OR EVEN BUILDING A NEW HOME. SO I'M HAVING A HARD TIME WITH [1:10:35] THIS ONE, BECAUSE YOUR CLIENT PURCHASED THIS KNOWING THAT IT WAS AN EXTREMELY OLD HOME THAT [1:10:42] NEEDED SOME PRESERVATION AND REPLACEMENT AND THERE'S NO WAY YOU PURCHASE THIS WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING A COMMITMENT TO [1:10:48] THAT AND THAT IT COSTS A LOT MORE. I MEAN IT TOOK ME THREE YEARS TO [1:10:54] FIND SOMEONE JUST TO FIX THE PLASTER BECAUSE PEOPLE JUST DON'T DO THAT WORK ANYMORE. [1:10:59] BUT YOU HAVE TO BE PATIENT AND YOU HAVE TO GET THE RIGHT PEOPLE AND IT COSTS A LITTLE MORE. [1:11:05] BUT THAT'S YOUR COMMITMENT TO PURCHASING THAT. I'M REALLY HAVING A HARD TIME, IT FEELS LIKE YOU'RE TAKING THE [1:11:11] EASY WAY OUT ON THIS. IT'S LIKE THAT'S OLD AND IT'S DELIPIDATED, BUT YOU'RE PART OF [1:11:17] THE REASON FOR THAT AND THEN NOW IT'S LIKE WE'RE JUST GOING TO GET SOMETHING NEW AND START FRESH AND A LOT OF US DON'T GET [1:11:24] TO DO THAT. >> AND I THINK YOU MAKE A REALLY GOOD POINT. THE EXPECTATION WHEN YOU BOUGHT IT IS THAT THE BUILDING WAS IN [1:11:30] PRETTY ROUGH SHAPE. IT WOULD BE ON THE VBR FOR FIVE [1:11:35] YEARS, THERE WAS NOTHING PROHIBITING HIM FROM DEMOLISHING, HE FULLY INTENDED TO DEMOLISH IT WITH THE ADJACENT [1:11:43] DEVELOPMENT. THE CITY AGREED, THEY CONDEMNED IT WITHIN A YEAR OF HIM BUYING IT. AND IT WASN'T UNTIL AFTER IT WAS [1:11:48] CONDEMNED THAT IT WAS DESIGNATED AS A LANDMARK. AND THAT'S WHEN ALL OF A SUDDEN IT BECAME VERY CHALLENGING AND [1:11:54] SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED THE COST BECAUSE REPAIRING THE EXTERIOR OF A DESIGNATED LANDMARK [1:11:59] REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING AND CRAFTSMAN. YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR SNDARDS [1:12:04] FOR REPAIRS. IT'S VERY LABOR INTENSIVE. VERY DIFFERENT EXPECTATIONS THAT BE WHEN HE PURCHASED THE [1:12:10] PROPERTY. >> BUT ALSO CONDEMNED DOESN'T MEAN THE BUILDING NEEDS TO BE TORN DOWN EITHER. [1:12:16] THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT GET CONDEMNED THAT THE CITY IS REQUIRING YOU TO GO IN AND FIX THEM, AND FIX THEM IN A CERTAIN [1:12:22] WAY. ESPECIALLY IF IT'S A HISTORIC LANDMARK. SO I FEEL LIKE YOU'RE USING CONDEMNED LIKE THE CITY WAS [1:12:28] SAYING TEAR IT DOWN AND THEN THE CITY SAID NO, IT CAN STAY. NO, THERE ARE THINGS THAT NEED TO BE FIXED IN OLDER HOMES. [1:12:36] IT GOT DESIGNATED A HISTORIC LANDMARK. THAT DOES SET THE BAR A LITTLE [1:12:41] BIT DIFFERENT. BUT AT THAT POINT IF YOU DON'T WANT TO COMMIT TO IT, YOU SELL IT. YOU GET BACK WHAT YOU PAID FOR [1:12:46] IT AND YOU GET OUT OF IT BECAUSE YOU KNOW THAT -- THAT IS HOW YOU [1:12:51] MAKE DECISIONS AS A HOMEOWNER OR A PURCHASER OR WHATEVER. WHEN YOU REALIZE OKAY THIS IS A [1:12:58] HISTORIC LANDMARK AND THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE REACHED OUT TO ME IN THIS COMMUNITY ABOUT [1:13:04] THIS HOUSE, I'M ALMOST POSITIVE IF HE DECIDED RIGHT AWAY THAT HE DIDN'T WANT THIS THAT THIS [1:13:10] COMMUNITY WOULD HAVE RALLIED TOGETHER EVEN IF THEY HAD TO SET UP A GoFundMe TO GET THIS HOUSE [1:13:16] PRESERVED AND FIXED UP FOR PURPOSES OF COMMUNITY. THESE SORTS OF THINGS. [1:13:22] IT'S NOT ABOUT IF A HOUSE IS GOING TO BE THERE. IT'S ABOUT HOW THEY BRING COMMUNITY TOGETHER. IT'S ABOUT THE NEIGHBOR THAT'S [1:13:29] STANDING NEXT TO YOU AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE BEAUTIFUL CHARM YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE BRICK. [1:13:35] IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT HAVING A HOUSE ON THIS LOT. THIS COMMUNITY REALLY CARES ABOUT THE PRESERVATION OF THE [1:13:42] CULTURE AND THE COMMUNITY AND HOW THIS HOUSE BRINGS THEM TOGETHER. AND I MEAN I'VE HEARD FROM PEOPLE WHO SAY WE BOUGHT A HOUSE [1:13:48] ON THIS BLOCK BECAUSE THAT HOUSE WAS ON THIS BLOCK AND IT'S BEEN SUPER HARD TO JUST WATCH THIS [1:13:55] HOUSE KIND OF FALL APART RIGHT BEFORE OUR EYES AND NOT HAVE SOMEONE THAT IS DIRECTLY [1:14:01] CONNECTED TO SAY HEY COMMUNITY, LET'S RALLY TOGETHER AND FIX IT. BUT JUST TO HAVE AN ABSENT [1:14:07] PERSON WHO IS NOT HELPING OR NOT EVEN WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY TO TRY TO PRESERVE IT. SO I'M NOT SAYING THAT THE [1:14:13] EXPENSE IS NOT HUGE, IT'S A LOT. LIKE BEEN THERE, DONE THAT. IT TAKES A LOT OF MONEY TO [1:14:20] PRESERVE THESE THINGS. BUT AT SOME POINT YOU HAVE TO [1:14:25] DECIDE THIS IS NOT THE COMMITMENT I WANT TO MAKE AND THAT FEELS LIKE THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN IT IN 2019 AND NOT IN 2025 [1:14:34] TO ME. >> I ABSOLUTELY AGREE THAT, YOU'RE RIGHT THE RIGHT MOVE HERE IS TO SELL IT AND GET WHAT YOU [1:14:41] PUT INTO IT. THIS ISN'T A MONEY MAKING VENTURE AT THIS POINT. THE WHOLE REASON THIS APPLICATION IS BEFORE YOU IS [1:14:48] BECAUSE WE WANT TO STOP THE BLEEDING, RIGHT? WE WANT TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO GET OUT OF THIS. [1:14:54] BUT WE'VE GOT THESE NUISANCE ORDERS SAYING THAT YOU NEED TO ABATE THESE NUISANCES AND WE'VE GOT THE HPC THAT TIES OUR HANDS. [1:15:01] SO I THINK WE WOULD HAPPILY WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY, BUT THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY WHO ARE ALSO WILLING TO AGAIN [1:15:07] JUST TAKE IT FOR A SONG. SO WE'D LOVE TO CONTINUE TO WORK [1:15:12] WITH THE COMMUNITY AND EVEN THE CITY IF THERE'S A WAY TO TRY TO AT LEAST STOP THE BLEEDING AND [1:15:17] GET WHAT HE PUT INTO THE PROPERTY. >> THANK YOU FOR THAT. I'LL JUST END WITH YOU CAUSED THE NUISANCE. [1:15:23] YOU KEEP SAYING YOU WANT -- LIKE IT'S A NUISANCE, YOU CAUSED IT. [1:15:28] THE NUISANCE IS FROM YOU ALL. AS THE OWNER, YOU'RE RESPONSIBLE. YOU KNOW, THERE'S VIOLATIONS [1:15:34] AROUND CUTTING THE GRASS. I MEAN THAT DOESN'T FEEL NEIGHBORLY. THAT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE I WANT TO [1:15:40] WORK WITH THIS COMMUNITY WHEN THINGS LIKE THAT ARE HAPPENING. WHEN YOU KNOW THE HOUSE NEEDS TO BE BOARDED UP, MAYBE WITH MESH [1:15:47] BOARDING AND NOT JUST REGULAR BOARDING BECAUSE PEOPLE KEEP GOING IN THE HOUSE. I'M SUPER ACTIVE IN THESE SORTS [1:15:53] OF SITUATIONS IN MY COMMUNITY BECAUSE OF THESE REASONS. AND GUESS WHAT WORKS BETTER, WHEN THE PROPERTY OWNER IS [1:15:59] WILLING TO SIT DOWN AND WORK WITH ME AND THE COMMUNITY ON MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE THE [1:16:04] PROPER BOARDING. AND MAKING SURE THAT THEY'RE NOT CONTINUING TO RACK UP FINES BECAUSE THERE IS GOING TO BE [1:16:09] BLEEDING IF YOU KEEP RACKING UP FINES AND NOT DOING THE RIGHT THING. SOMETIMES THAT COST COMES ON THE [1:16:15] FRONT END WHERE YOU HAVE TO MAKE SOME DECISIONS AND DO THE RIGHT THING. BUT I MEAN A BIG PIECE OF THIS [1:16:21] IS TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR ROLE AND THE PART THAT YOU ALL HAVE PLAYED IN THIS. [1:16:26] AND IT DOESN'T FEEL COLLABORATIVE AND IT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE COMMUNITY. IT FEELS LIKE A BLAME ON THE [1:16:32] CITY AND I'M OKAY WITH THE CITY TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHAT WE'VE DONE, BUT YOU ALL NEED TO [1:16:37] ACTUALLY IF YOU WANT TO WORK WITH THE CITY AND THE COMMUNITY ON THIS, THEN YOU GOT TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PARTS [1:16:44] THAT YOU HAVE PLAYED IN MAKING THIS A REALLY BAD SITUATION FOR [1:16:50] THIS COMMUNITY. [1:16:55] >> WELL, THANK YOU SO MUCH. I PUT MYSELF IN QUEUE. [1:17:01] AND I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE APPEAL BECAUSE THERE ARE NO REASONABLE [1:17:07] ALTERNATIVES THAT ARE FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE ON THE [1:17:12] PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY IS UNSAFE AND [1:17:20] DANGEROUS CONDITION. I DIRECT STAFF TO SUPPORT THE [1:17:26] FINDING ACCORDINGLY. [1:17:31] WITH THAT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [1:17:40] CITY CLERK, CAN YOU CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE. THANK YOU. >> ON THE MOTION TO GRANT THE [1:17:47] APPEAL? >> CORRECT. >> COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. >> NO. >> CASHMAN. [1:17:52] >> NO. >> JENKINS IS COMING BACK RIGHT [1:17:58] NOW. WOULD YOU WANT TO REVOTE AFTER -- [1:18:24] >> CITY CLERK, I WOULD LIKE TO WITHDRAW MY MOTION. AND MOVE IT WITHOUT [1:18:31] RECOMMENDATION. [1:18:38] CALL THE ROLL NOW. >> TO SEND FORWARD WITHOUT [1:18:45] RECOMMENDATION. COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. >> NO. >> CASHMAN. >> AYE. >> JENKINS. [1:18:52] >> NO. >> CHAVEZ. >> AYE. >> VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY. [1:18:58] >> AYE. >> CHAIR OSMAN. >> AYE. >> THERE ARE FOUR AYES AND TWO NAYS. >> THAT MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. [1:19:08] NEXT WE HAVE -- COUNCILMEMBER [1:19:22] CHAVEZ. >> CHAIR OSMAN, CAN YOU CLARIFY TO THE PUBLIC WHAT IT MEANS TO MOVE IT FORWARD WITHOUT [1:19:27] RECOMMENDATION IN CASE PEOPLE ARE CONFUSED. >> WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT THE FULL COUNCIL WILL MAKE THE FINAL [1:19:33] DECISION. NEXT THURSDAY MORNING 9:30 A.M. [1:19:50] I THINK WE ARE ON THE DISCUSSION. OH SORRY. [1:19:57] THE LAST QUASI-JUDICIAL. [1:20:06] SORRY. WE ARE ON OUR LAST QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING. [1:20:12] AND IT'S A VARIANCE APPEAL FOR PROPERTY AT 2821 BROOKWOOD [1:20:20] TERRACE. THIS APPEAL IS SENT FROM THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. [1:20:25] I WELCOME MILES FROM CPED TO GIVE US A PRESENTATION. WELCOME, SIR. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN AND [1:20:31] COMMITTEE MEMBERS. AS MENTIONED WE ARE DISCUSSING TODAY AN APPEAL OF A DECISION MADE BY THE ZONING BOARD OF [1:20:38] ADJUSTMENT REGARDING A VARIANCE AT A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2821 BROOKWOOD TERRACE LOCATED IN [1:20:44] WARD 13. AGAIN THERE WERE TWO VARIANCES THAT WERE HEARD BY THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. [1:20:50] THIS APPEAL IS SPECIFIC TO A DECISION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN 40 FEET OF THE TOP OF A STEEP SLOPE IN [1:20:56] THE SHORELAND OVERLAY DISTRICT. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED JUST DIRECTLY NORTH OF THE MINNEHAHA [1:21:07] PARK BOARD PROPERTY AND THE CREEK ITSELF. IN TERMS OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS AND I DON'T WANT TO GO INTO TOO MUCH DETAIL, THIS [1:21:12] WAS ALL PROVIDED IN THE MATERIALS TO YOU ALL. BUT THE HOME WAS BUILT IN 1927 AND HAD AN ATTACHED GARAGE OFF [1:21:19] THE REAR WHICH YOU CAN SEE IN THE IMAGE HERE. IT HAS AN ENCLOSED SUN ROOM AND [1:21:26] ROOF DECK ABOVE. ONE THING YOU WILL SEE FROM SOME FUTURE SLIDES IS THE LOTS GRADE [1:21:32] DROPS OFF VERY SIGNIFICANTLY AS YOU MOVE FURTHER SOUTH TOWARDS THE CREEK ITSELF. ALTHOUGH THE GARAGE ITSELF IS [1:21:38] LOCATED ON A RELATIVELY FLAT PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. AGAIN THAT ORIGINAL PROPOSAL THAT WENT TO THE ZONING BOARD OF [1:21:44] ADJUST WAS FOR AN ADDITION TO THAT GARAGE TO BRING THAT GARAGE TO 28 FEET BY 23. [1:21:50] AGAIN YOU CAN SEE HERE IN THE BLUE WOULD BE THAT ORIGINAL PROPOSAL OF THE NEW ADDITION, [1:21:55] THE YELLOW IS THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT. AGAIN THERE WERE TWO VARIANCES THERE. [1:22:00] ONE WAS ALSO A REQUIRED SIDE YARD VARIANCE TO BASICALLY CARRY FORWARD THAT EXISTING SIDE WALL [1:22:06] ALONG THE SHARED PROPERTY LINE BETWEEN 2821 AND 2825 BROOKWOOD TERRACE. [1:22:12] THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT DID DENY THAT SIDE YARD VARIANCE [1:22:17] REQUEST WHILE THEY DID APPROVE THE STEEP SLOPE VARIANCE. I WILL NOTE HERE AND IN THE NEXT [1:22:23] SLIDE WE CAN SEE, THE APPLICANT HAS BEGUN REVISING THEIR PLANS IN RESPONSE TO THAT DENIAL OF [1:22:29] THE VARIANCE. THE LEFT IS THE ORIGINAL WHAT WENT TO THE ZONING BOARD OF [1:22:35] ADJUSTMENTS. THE REVISED IS SHIFTING IT TO [1:22:41] MEET THE SETBACK. I BELIEVE THE PROPOSED WOULD BE 26.5 BY 22.5 AS OPPOSED TO THAT [1:22:48] 28 BY 23. THIS ALSO GIVES YOU A BIT MORE [1:22:54] OF AN IDEA OF WHERE THIS IS FALLING ON THE LOT. AS YOU SEE AS YOU MOVE TO THE SOUTH, THERE'S AN EXISTING [1:22:59] RETAINING WALL WHERE THE GRADE DROPS OFF DRAMATICALLY AND CONTINUES TO DROP DOWN TOWARDS THE CREEK ITSELF. [1:23:05] AGAIN WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING HERE TODAY IS THE DECISION BY THAT BOARD TO GRANT THE STEEP SLOPE [1:23:13] VARIANCE. WHAT THE CITY CODE SAYS IS THAT LAND HAVING AN AVERAGE SLOPE OF [1:23:19] 18% OR GREATER WITH A CHANGE OF HEIGHT OF TEN FEET INDICATES A [1:23:28] STEEP SLOPE. ONE THING THAT'S INTERESTING THAT I THINK MAYBE ISN'T APPARENT, IT'S OBVIOUSLY VERY APPARENT THAT SOUTH OF THAT [1:23:33] RETAINING WALL THERE IS A VERY STEEP SLOPE OBVIOUSLY GOING DOWN. YOU CAN SEE LINE B HERE IN RED [1:23:39] IS SHOWING THAT KIND OF DROP, A 37% GRADE CHANGE FROM THE [1:23:46] 50-FOOT RUN FROM THE PARK BOARD PROPERTY TO THE RETAINING WALL. IN THIS CASE, THAT STEEP SLOPE [1:23:51] DEFINITION ALSO INCLUDES LAND ABOVE THE RETAINING WALL ITSELF. THE BLUE ARROWS THERE ARE MEANT [1:23:57] TO ILLUSTRATE WHAT A POTENTIAL [1:24:02] 40-FOOT BUFFER FROM THE TOP CONTOUR OF THE STEEP SLOPE WHICH WOULD BE 869 FEET OF ELEVATION. [1:24:10] THE EXISTING GARAGE ALREADY FALLS WITHIN THIS 40-FOOT AREA [1:24:16] BUFFER, THIS STEEP SLOPE ITSELF. REPLACING WHAT IS THERE TODAY WOULD STILL BE IN THAT IMPACT ZONE AROUND THE STEEP SLOPE. [1:24:22] AGAIN I'M NOT GOING TO HIT ON THE SIDE YARD VARIANCE THAT WAS DENIED AND THERE IS NO APPEAL FROM THE APPELLANTS IN REGARDS [1:24:31] TO THAT SIDE YARD VARIANCE. IN TERMS OF THE VARIANCE APPROVED FOR THE STEEP SLOPE, AGAIN THIS WAS APPROVED AT THE [1:24:37] ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WITH THREE CONDITIONS. ONE THAT THE APPROVAL OF FINAL SITE ELEVATION AND FLOOR PLANS [1:24:43] WILL BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, [1:24:48] THAT ALL SITE IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE COMPLETED BY OCTOBER 16, [1:24:55] 2027. AND FINALLY THE EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE IMPLEMENTED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL [1:25:02] REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE. IN TERMS OF STAFF FINDINGS FOR THE VARIANCE, I WOULD SAY STAFF [1:25:07] FEELS THAT THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MADE THE CORRECT DETERMINATION IN THIS CASE. THIS FEELS LIKE A VERY, NO [1:25:13] VARIANCE IS EVER TYPICAL. THEY'RE ALWAYS QUITE UNIQUE FROM ONE ANOTHER, BUT IN TERMS OF A [1:25:19] SHORELAND VARIANCE, THIS IS ONE WHERE THE PROPOSED ADDITION IS IN A FLATTER PORTION OF THE LOT. IT'S NOT PROPOSING TO MODIFY [1:25:25] THAT EXISTING RETAINING WALL OR THE EXISTING PORTION OF THE LOT THAT'S A STEEPER SLOPE. [1:25:30] AGAIN THE PRESENCE OF THAT TOPOGRAPHY CHANGE REALLY LIMITS ALMOST ANY BY RIGHT ADDITION THAT COULD BE DONE ON THIS [1:25:36] PROPERTY, ESPECIALLY WHEN TAKING INTO ACCOUNT SOME OF OUR OTHER REQUIREMENTS IN TERMS OF AN ADDITION ON THE FRONT OF [1:25:41] BUILDING ITSELF. STAFF WILL NOTE AGAIN, THE EXISTING VEGETATION, ANYTHING SOUTH OF THAT RETAINING WALL, [1:25:47] THERE IS NO PROPOSED CHANGES TO THAT AREA IN TERMS OF EXISTING TREES, VEGETATION, SHRUBS THAT [1:25:54] ARE PROVIDING A LOT OF VISIBILITY BLOCKING ESPECIALLY OVER SPRING AND SUMMER. AND THEN THE OTHER THING THAT WE'LL NOTE HERE IS JUST IN TERMS [1:26:01] OF THE SURROUNDING CONTEXT OF THE CREEK, OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A [1:26:06] UNIQUE AREA WHERE WE HAVE THAT NATURAL CONTEXT FROM THE CREEK, BUT ALSO THE URBAN CONTEXT. THIS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S HAD HOMES IN IT AGAIN GOING BACK [1:26:13] TO THE EARLY 1900s. THERE ARE SOME HISTORIC PROPERTIES. STAFF DOES NOT FEEL THAT THIS ADDITION IS GOING TO IMPACT OR [1:26:21] CHANGE KIND OF THAT LOCAL CONTEXT, PHYSICAL CONTEXT OF THE AREA. [1:26:26] ONE THING I WILL NOTE, AT THE APPE APPELLANT'S REQUEST WE HAVE [1:26:31] LOOKED AT WHAT OTHER VARIANCES HAVE BEEN SOUGHT FOR STEEP SLOPES IN THE PAST IN THIS AREA. WE LOOKED BETWEEN ZENITH AREA TO [1:26:37] THE WEST AND MORGAN AVENUE TO THE EAST. IN THAT AREA WE FOUND 11 [1:26:43] VARIANCES THAT HAD BEEN TAKEN TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. ONE OF THOSE WAS WITHDRAWN, THE [1:26:49] OTHER TEN WERE APPROVED. AND THAT'S BETWEEN 1994 TO EARLIER THIS YEAR. AGAIN, EVERY VARIANCE IS UNIQUE. [1:26:56] THERE'S ALWAYS UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT GO INTO THE REVIEW OF THEM. WHAT I THINK THAT SPEAKS TO IS AGAIN THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF [1:27:02] THE COMP PLAN IN THE ORDINANCE, THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THAT SHORELAND OVERLAY DISTRICT TO SERVE AS A CHECKPOINT REALLY AND [1:27:09] AN EXTRA POINT OF REVIEW FOR THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS. AND I THINK ALSO SPEAKING [1:27:14] TOWARDS THE CONSISTENCY OF THAT VIEW OR THAT ADDITION FROM THE CREEK AS WELL AS IN COMPARISON [1:27:19] TO OTHER PROPERTIES NEARBY. WITH THAT, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING [1:27:24] THAT THE APPEAL IS DENIED AND THE DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IS AFFIRMED. [1:27:31] I'M HAPPY TO STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS. THE ONLY THING I WILL NOTE IS WE HAVE RECEIVED FOUR PUBLIC [1:27:36] COMMENTS AGAINST THIS ITEM. TWO PUBLIC COMMENTS IN SUPPORT OF IT. AND WE DID ALSO JUST YESTERDAY [1:27:42] RECEIVE A COPY OF A PUBLIC COMMENT FROM THE MINNEAPOLIS PARK AND RECREATION BOARD. A COPY OF WHICH WAS INCLUDED IN [1:27:47] THE MATERIALS ONLINE ON LIMS. I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE ANYONE [1:27:53] FROM THE PARK BOARD TO SPEAK ON THE PROJECT AND I DON'T WANT TO COLOR THEIR OWN LETTER WITH MY OWN VIEWS. [1:27:58] THEY DO NOTE THAT THEY'RE RELUCTANT SUPPORT OF VARIANCES WITHIN THE SHORELAND OVERLAY DISTRICT AS IT IS INTENDED TO [1:28:05] PROTECT THE WATERWAYS. IN THIS CASE WE RECOGNIZE THE [1:28:10] SLOPE ITSELF IS NOT PROPOSED TO CHANGE AND AN EXISTING LOW WALL WOULD REMAIN IN PLACE. [1:28:16] HOWEVER THEY REMAIN CONCERNED ABOUT THE NEED FOR A VARIANCE. [1:28:21] THEY DO PROVIDE TWO RECOMMENDED KIND OF ACTION ITEMS WERE THIS TO MOVE FORWARD, ONE BEING THAT [1:28:28] THE APPLICANT WOULD PROVIDE A SURVEY TO THE PARK BOARD AND CLEARLY DELINEATE THAT PROPERTY BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE PARK BOARD [1:28:34] PROPERTY AND THE PRIVATE PROPERTY IN THIS CASE. AND SECOND, THEY WOULD PROVIDE ADDITIONAL DETAILS AT TIME OF [1:28:42] BUILDING PERMIT WOULD BE MANAGED WHICH IS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL THAT WAS ORIGINALLY SET BY THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. [1:28:48] >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. I'LL PROCEED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND GIVE THE APPELLANT [1:28:57] AND APPLICANT SEVEN MINUTES EACH. PLEASE COME UP AND INTRODUCE [1:29:02] YOURSELF AND ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, I'LL GIVE THEM TWO MINUTES. [1:29:13] COME ON. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN AND [1:29:21] BOARD MEMBERS OR COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY NAME IS MARSHA HAAGENSON AND [1:29:29] I LIVE DIRECTLY NEXT TO 2821 BROOKWOOD TERRACE AND I'M HERE [1:29:34] TO APPEAL THE VARIANCE THAT WAS GRANTED IN THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING. [1:29:55] I'M SORRY. >> NO, IT'S FINE. CITY CLERK IS COMING TO HELP YOU. IF YOU CAN PAUSE THE MINUTES. [1:30:02] OR RESTART. [1:30:14] >> THANK YOU. SO THE FIRST SLIDE HERE ACTUALLY SHOWS YOU WHAT THE BACK OF THAT [1:30:20] SAID HOUSE LOOKS LIKE. WITHIN THE PAST WEEK THIS PICTURE WAS TAKEN. [1:30:27] AND THE NEXT SLIDE ACTUALLY SHOWS YOU AGAIN WHAT MILES [1:30:33] BROUGHT UP EARLIER IN TERMS OF WHERE THAT HOUSE IS LOCATED. IT'S LOCATED ALONG THE CREEK. [1:30:40] IT'S WITHIN THIS TURQUOISE TRIANGLE. AND THE LOCATION RISES ABOVE [1:30:48] MINNIEHAHA CREEK ADJACENT TO THE PARK BOARD PROPERTY. AND THERE'S A NEW MINNIEHAHA [1:30:53] CREEK HIKING TRAIL THAT HAS BEEN STARTED THAT IS NOW IN SEGMENT [1:30:58] ONE RUNNING FROM ZENITH TO MORGAN. AND WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THAT TRAIL IS IS TO ALLOW FOR HIKING [1:31:04] ALONG MINNIEHAHA CREEK VERY MUCH SIMILAR TO THE KIND OF THING WE [1:31:09] HAVE FOR THE GRAND ROUNDS FOR BIKING. THIS IS A NEW TRAIL THAT'S BEING [1:31:15] DEVELOPED FROM THE EDGE OF MINNEAPOLIS ALL THE WAY DOWN TO [1:31:20] MINNIEHAHA FALLS. AND SO IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION BECAUSE THAT HIKING TRAIL IS [1:31:27] DIRECTLY BEHIND THIS PROPERTY. HERE'S AN EXAMPLE OF WHERE THE [1:31:34] CREEK RUNS. YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THAT GREEN AREA ON THIS SLIDE. [1:31:39] AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS WE'RE LOOKING AT IF YOU CAN SEE UPTON, IT'S ABOUT THE MIDDLE OF [1:31:44] THE SLIDE. AND THEN ABOUT HALFWAY UP IS BROOKWOOD TERRACE. ALTHOUGH, IT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY [1:31:51] IDENTIFIED HERE. THE PURPOSE OF THIS SLIDE IS TO SHOW YOU THAT THE FIRST SEGMENT [1:31:56] OF THE TRAIL IS GOING TO BE 1.7 [1:32:01] MILES ON MINNEOLIS PUBLIC WORKS PROPERTY. HERE IS KIND OF A BLOW UP OF [1:32:07] THAT AREA. AND THE RED STAR INDICATES THE HOUSE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. [1:32:13] THE YELLOW STARS INDICATE THOSE HOUSES THAT ARE A BLOCK AWAY AND [1:32:19] FOR MANY BLOCKS ALL THE WAY UP TO MORGAN WHERE WE HAVE A STEEP [1:32:25] SLOPE IN THE SHORELAND OVERLAY [1:32:30] THIS IS THE BACK OF THE OPERTY, THE VISUAL IMPACT, I GUESS PARK BOARD USES THE WORD [1:32:36] VIEW SHED. THIS IS THE VIEW SHED FROM THE HIKING TRAIL TO THE BACK OF [1:32:41] THEIR HOME. AND THE OTHER ITEMS HERE, THE OTHER PICTURES ACTUALLY SHOW [1:32:46] FROM THE HIKING TRAIL LOOKING UP TO THE OTHER HOMES ON THIS BLOCK. [1:32:53] THE NEXT SLIDE HERE SHOWS THOSE OTHER STREETS THAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT THAT HAD THE STEEP SLOPE [1:33:01] AREA. THIS IS WHAT THE VIEW IS FROM THAT PART OF THE HIKING TRAIL TO THE BACKS OF THEIR HOMES. [1:33:06] AND YOU CAN SEE THE HOUSES, BUT THEY AREN'T NECESSARILY [1:33:13] PROJECTING OUT. LET ME USE MILES' SLIDE AND TALK [1:33:22] A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE ADDITION THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT. THIS YELLOW BOX IS ESSENTIALLY [1:33:29] ON THE LEFT SIDE IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT THE HOME, THE DIMENSIONS OF [1:33:34] THE HOME NOW. WHICH INCLUDES A SUN ROOM AND A [1:33:43] DECK ON TOP OF A GARAGE. ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE, YOU'LL [1:33:48] SEE THAT THERE IS A NEW PROPOSED AND TODAY WAS THE FIRST TIME I HEARD THAT THEY'VE MADE IT A [1:33:54] TOUCH SMALLER. THE PROPOSED GARAGE IS GOING TO BE 28 BY 23 AND THEN THEY WANT TO ADD ANOTHER STORY ON TOP OF [1:34:03] THAT. AND THEN IN THE BACK OF THAT, TOWARDS THE CREEK, THEY'RE [1:34:10] ACTUALLY PROPOSING AN EIGHT BY TEN DECK. SO IT WOULD BE A TOTAL OF 38 BY [1:34:18] 23 ADDITION, TWO STORIES BEHIND THEIR HOME. [1:34:24] I'M NOT A SCIENTIST, BUT THIS INCREASE WOULD CERTAINLY INCREASE THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE [1:34:33] BY 540 SQUARE FEET. AND WE CAN SEE JUST FROM THIS [1:34:39] DIAGRAM HERE THAT THERE'S ALREADY A LOT OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. [1:34:44] ONE THING I WANTED TO POINT OUT IS THAT THE BACK OF THAT LOT [1:34:52] COMES BACK AND IT COMES BACK TO [1:34:58] A RETAINING WALL. WELL ONE PART OF THAT RETAINING WALL IS REALLY A STRUCTURAL [1:35:04] RETAINING WALL. THE OTHER PART IS REALLY A BACKDROP TO A GARDEN. AND IT'S MAYBE 2 OR 3 OR 4 [1:35:11] BRICKS DEEP. AND I'LL SHOW YOU THAT IN JUST A SECOND. IF WE'RE TO LOOK AT WHY WE WOULD [1:35:17] WANT TO GRANT THIS VARIANCE, WE'D WANT TO LOOK AT THE [1:35:23] RATIONALES FOR BEING ABLE TO SHOW PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY. [1:35:28] AND I'D LIKE TO SHOW YOU THAT WE CANNOT SHOW PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY HERE. [1:35:34] FROM A REASONABLE STANDPOINT, A UNIQUENESS STANDPOINT, AND ESSENTIAL CHARACTER STANDPOINT. [1:35:40] I'D ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THIS ADDITION IS NOT IN HARMONY WITH THE 2040 PLAN. [1:35:47] AND ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS SHOULD BE MADE FOR THE FACT THAT THE PARK BOARD IS BUILDING THIS [1:35:54] NEW TRAIL. IT'S RIGHT ON THE TOP OF A STEEP SLOPE IN THE SHORELAND OVERLAY. [1:35:59] AND IT WILL HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE ENJOYMENT OF THE NATURAL [1:36:04] ENVIRONMENT BY ANYONE WHO WISHES TO PARTICIPATE IN ANY SORT OF OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES IN THAT AREA. [1:36:11] FROM A PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY STANDPOINT, IF WE LOOK AT REASONABLENESS, THE BIG POINT [1:36:18] HERE IS THAT WITHOUT THE VARIANCE, THEY CANNOT MAKE REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY. THAT IS NOT TRUE. [1:36:24] THIS IS A 5-BEDROOM, 4-BATH HOME. THEY CAN MAKE REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY. [1:36:30] THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO -- WHAT THEY ARE SAYING THEY WANT TO DO IS TO DO AN ADDITION WITH A TWO [1:36:40] PLUS THREE CAR GARAGE AND SHIFT THAT PROPERTY OUT TOWARDS THE CREEK AND THE STEEP SLOPE AND INTO THE SHORELAND OVERLAY. [1:36:48] MY QUESTION HERE IS HAVE THERE BEEN OTHER CONSIDERATIONS ABOUT [1:36:54] LOCATIONS OR ORIENTATIONS? CAN YOU BUILD A GARAGE THAT IS A [1:37:02] NONATTACHED GARAGE? I REALLY BELIEVE THAT REASONABLENESS HAS NOT BEEN MET IN THIS CASE. HERE'S THE BACK OF THE HOUSE. [1:37:09] WHAT THEY WANT TO DO IS PULL OFF THE BACK SHED WHICH IS LIKE A [1:37:14] SUN ROOM, FAMILY ROOM, AND A DECK OVER THE GARAGE, AND PUT [1:37:20] ANOTHER STRUCTURE TWO STORIES HIGH FOR 38 FEET BACK. [1:37:25] >> YOU'VE RUN OUT OF TIME, MA'AM. >> OKAY. WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO -- WAS I [1:37:34] ABLE TO GET THE MINUTES BACK FROM -- >> YEAH, WE DID RESET. [1:37:39] >> OH YOU DID RESET? >> YEAH. >> WELL, I HAVE SUBMITTED TO YOU THIS ENTIRE PACKET. [1:37:44] MIGHT I JUST SAY THAT I'D LIKE TO FINISH WITH THE FACT THAT [1:37:51] THIS ADDITION INFRINGES, I BELIEVE, ON NOT ONLY MY [1:37:58] PROPERTY, OTHER PROPERTIES, BUT FOR THE PUBLIC ENJOYMENT OF THE CREEK AND PARKLAND AND I DO NOT [1:38:05] BELIEVE IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM THAT IT MEETS THE 2040 [1:38:10] GOALS. THEY ARE NOT -- >> THANK YOU. >> AND IF YOU LOOK AT THIS PACKET, YOU WILL SEE THE [1:38:16] OPPORTUNITY TO SEE HOW NOT [1:38:22] APPROVING THIS VARIANCE WILL ACTUALLY HELP TO MEET THE 2040 GOALS THAT WE HAVE AS A CITY. [1:38:28] >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO COME SPEAK? [1:38:33] YES, PLEASE COME ON IN. [1:39:08] >> THANK YOU. WE'LL JUST QUICKLY INTRODUCE OURSELVES. SO MY NAME IS JAKE ANDERSON. [1:39:14] I'M ONE OF THE HOMEOWNERS AT 2821 BROOKWOOD TERRACE. [1:39:20] >> MY NAME IS AMY ANDERSON. I AM THE OTHER HOMEOWNER AT 2821 [1:39:25] BROOKWOOD TERRACE. >> HI, JEFF HOXY, HOXY HOMES [1:39:31] CONTRACTOR HIRED TO WORK WITH JAKE AND AMY. >> HELLO, MIKE, ARCOS [1:39:36] ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN, THE ARCHITECT. THANK YOU. >> APOLOGIES, I'M A LITTLE NERVOUS SO I'M GOING TO READ [1:39:41] FROM SOME NOTES HERE. I JUST WANT TO START BY THANKING THE CITY AND STAFF FOR ALL OF THEIR TIME. [1:39:46] MILES HAS BEEN GREAT IN HELPING US THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND WORKING WITH OUR BUILDER TO FIND A DESIGN THAT MEETS OUR FAMILY [1:39:54] NEEDS WHILE ALSO RESPECTING THE MINNIEHAHA CREEK AREA. A PLACE WE TRULY LOVE AND ENJOY YEAR ROUND. [1:39:59] WE FLOAT IT DOWN IT WITH OUR KIDS IN THE SUMMER. WE WALK ALONG IT WITH OUR KIDS IN THE WINTER. [1:40:04] IT'S EXCELLENT. WHEN WE FIRST STEPPED INTO OUR HOME TO LOOK AT IT FOR THE FIRST TIME, WE IMMEDIATELY FELL IN [1:40:10] LOVE WITH ITS 1927 CHARACTER AND THE OLD MINNEAPOLIS FEEL OF THE HOME. WE TOOK EFFORTS TO RESTORE THE [1:40:17] ORIGINAL WOODWORK THAT WAS IN THE HOME AND MAKE IT LOOK LIKE NEW AGAIN THROUGHOUT THE HOME. [1:40:22] WE HAVE LIVED THERE FOR FIVE YEARS AND WE LOVE SO MUCH ABOUT THE HOME. BUT ONE THING WE'VE REALIZED IS [1:40:28] THAT THE ADDITION THAT'S THERE NOW FOR THE GARAGE THAT WAS BUILT DECADES AGO JUST DOESN'T [1:40:34] WORK WELL FOR TODAY'S NEEDS. RIGHT NOW WE CAN'T FIT OUR CARS INTO THE GARAGE WHICH MAKES OUR [1:40:40] EVERYDAY LIFE A CHALLENGE, ESPECIALLY IN THE MINNESOTA WINTERS. WE HAVE THREE KIDS IN MINNEAPOLIS PUBLIC SCHOOLS AT [1:40:46] THREE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS, SO WE'RE CONSTANTLY ON THE, MINI VAN LOADED UP WITH OUR KIDS, OUR [1:40:53] NEIGHBORHOOD KIDS WHO ARE COMMUTING TO WORK AND DOING NEIGHBORHOOD ACTIVITIES. AND WE LOVE USING THE CITY'S [1:40:58] BIKE TRAILS AND ACTIVITIES. FOR US OUR VEHICLES AND BIKES ARE A BIG PART OF EVERYDAY LIFE IN MINNEAPOLIS. [1:41:03] WE'VE WORKED CLOSELY WITH CITY STAFF TO MAKE SURE OUR ADDITION MEETS THE SHORELAND OVERLAY [1:41:09] RULES AND REDUCED THE WIDTH OF THE PROPOSED GARAGE AND DECK TO MEET SOME OF THE FEEDBACK FROM [1:41:14] THE APPELLANT AND TO FURTHER MINIMIZE THE IMPACTFULNESS ON THE SURROUNDING AREA. [1:41:21] WE'VE REALLY TRIED HARD TO FIND THE RIGHT BALANCE BETWEEN WHAT OUR FAMILY NEEDS AND WHAT'S BEST [1:41:26] FOR THE NATURAL AREA AROUND US. THE REVISED PROPOSAL IS A [1:41:32] TYP TYP TYPICAL TWO SIZE CAR GARAGE [1:41:37] TYPICAL TO THE STANDARD 24 BY 24, IT'S JUST A DIFFERENT SHAPE TO MEET THE SIDE YARD VARIANCE. [1:41:43] IT'S LARGE KNENOUGH TO PARK OUR CARS INSIDE AND KEEP OUR GEAR, IT ALSO GIVES US THE ADDED [1:41:49] BENEFIT OF OPENING MORE YARD SPACE FOR OUR KIDS TO PLAY WITHOUT RUNNING INTO OUR CARS AS THEY'RE TRYING TO RUN AROUND. [1:41:55] WE'RE BEING INTENTIONAL ABOUT HOW THIS NEW GARAGE WILL LOOK. THE CURRENT ADDITION DOES NOT MATCH THE LOOK AND FEEL OF THE [1:42:01] HOME IN A MEANINGFUL WAY. WE PLAN TO MATCH MANY OF THE HOMES ORIGINAL 1927 DETAILS [1:42:07] INCLUDING STUCCO COVE EVES AND COMPLEMENTARY MATERIALS. WE WANT THIS ADDITION TO LOOK [1:42:13] LIKE IT'S ALWAYS BEEN PART OF THE HOUSE AND FITS NATURALLY WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. EVEN WITH THE ADDED SPACE, OUR HOME WILL REMAIN IN KEEPING WITH [1:42:19] THE SCALE AND CHARACTER OF THE FULTON NEIGHBORHOOD. AT THE SAME TIME OUR PROPERTY WILL CONTINUE TO BE ONE OF THE [1:42:25] LEAST VISIBLE ALONG THIS STRETCH OF MINNIEHAHA CREEK THANKS TO THE FACT THAT THE WAY OUR LOT [1:42:31] WORKS UP, THERE'S MORE WOODLAND BEHIND OURS AND NONE OF THAT WILL BE TOUCHED DURING THIS [1:42:38] PROJECT. SO WE REALLY APPRECIATE THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL AND THE THOUGHTFUL FEEDBACK THAT HELPED GET US TO THIS POINT. [1:42:44] WE HOPE THE BOARD WILL UPHOLD THE DECISION SO THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH A DESIGN THAT [1:42:49] RESPECTS OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, PRESERVES THE NATURAL SETTING, AND HELPS OUR FAMILY MAKE THE MOST OF OUR HOME AND OUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND FOR [1:42:55] EVERYTHING YOU DO TO MAKE MINNEAPOLIS SUCH A WONDERFUL PLACE TO LIVE. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> AND IF I COULD JUST FOR A [1:43:02] MOMENT TRY TO GIVE PEOPLE A SENSE -- IS IT UP THERE? [1:43:08] >> YEP. >> OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF SOMEONE DOESN'T LIVE ALONG THIS STRETCH, THEY CAN SORT OF [1:43:13] UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU SEE. AS YOU MOVE DOWN THE STREET. SO AS YOU MOVE FROM -- I'LL TRY [1:43:21] TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIGGER. AS YOU MOVE FROM UPTON AVENUE ONWARD. YOU CAN SEE IT'S VERY COMMON TO [1:43:30] SEE MAN MMADE STRUCTURES AND HOS NOT ONLY WITHIN 40 FEET OF THE [1:43:35] BLUFF, BUT ALSO FULLY VISIBLE YEAR ROUND. [1:43:41] AND SO OUR LOT IS ACTUALLY ONE OF THE MOST WOODED ALONG THAT [1:43:47] STRETCH ESPECIALLY IN THE SUMMERTIME. IN THE FALL THE LEAVES FALL OFF, EVERYTHING IS MORE VISIBLE. BUT WE REALLY FEEL, WE'RE [1:43:53] PROPOSING A TWO-STORY ADDITION. OUR NEIGHBORS ON BOTH SIDES HAVE DONE THREE STORY ADDITIONS ABOVE [1:44:00] THEIR GARAGE. SO ALSO VISIBLE FROM THAT SAME TRAIL. SO JUST WANTED TO GIVE PEOPLE A [1:44:06] SENSE THAT IT ISN'T ALL JUST WOODS AND OUR HOUSE. THERE IS PLENTY ALONG THIS STRETCH THAT IS QUITE VISIBLE [1:44:11] ALREADY. >> WONDERFUL. YOU'VE STILL GOT TWO MINUTES. [1:44:16] >> DO YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING? >> I WILL ADD A COUPLE THINGS VERY QUICKLY. JAKE AND AMY HAVE ALWAYS BEEN [1:44:22] VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT THEIR HOME. WHEN THEY CAME TO ME, WE WORKED TOGETHER YEARS AGO ON A PREVIOUS HOME. THEY LOVE THIS HOME, THEY WANT [1:44:28] TO MAKE IT THEIR OWN. AND THE HOME IS BEAUTIFUL, THE BACK GARAGE ADDITION ISN'T. [1:44:34] AND SO WHEN WE STARTED DESIGNING IT WITH MIKE, THE ARCHITECTURE, [1:44:39] IT WILL BE A COMPLETE MATCH TO WHAT THE REST OF THE ORIGINAL HOME IS. IT WORKS GREAT, IT LOOKS GOOD. [1:44:45] IT WILL LOOK BETTER FROM THE CREEK IN MY OPINION, BECAUSE IT WILL ARCHITECTURALLY BE THE SAME. WE CAN PROVIDE SURVEYS, WE'VE [1:44:51] DONE ALL OF THOSE IF THE PARK BOARD WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT. EROSION CONTROL, STORMWATER [1:44:57] MANAGEMENT, COMMON PRACTICE IN EVERY CITY WE WORK IN. TOTALLY COMFORTABLE DOING ALL OF THAT. [1:45:03] FROM THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL WE HAVE SHRUNK THE ADDITION THREE [1:45:09] AND A HALF FEET. ALSO PULLED IT OFF THE PROPERTY LINE TO GIVE MORE ROOM FOR THE [1:45:15] EXISTING TREES. NO TREES NEED TO BE REMOVED. THE RETAINING WALL DOESN'T NEED TO BE TOUCHED. [1:45:20] SO REALLY TRYING TO GET THE BEST FUNCTIONAL SPACE FOR WHAT WILL FIT WITHIN THE PROPERTY. [1:45:25] AND LOOKING AT OTHER AREAS, I MEAN, IF WE WERE TO MOVE IT TO A [1:45:31] DIFFERENT LOCATION IN THE BACKYARD -- [1:45:37] >> IT HAS TO COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE ORDINANCES THAT ARE REQUIRED TO GET A BUILDING PERMIT. [1:45:43] SO IT DOES YES INCREASE BUILDING COVERAGE AND IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE, BUT THEY ALL FALL [1:45:49] UNDER THE ALLOWABLES THAT THE CITY REQUIRES. >> YEP. >> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. [1:45:56] >> THANK YOU. >> I SEE ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE [1:46:02] TO SPEAK? I SEE AARON HERE. WELCOME. [1:46:09] >> GOOD MORNING EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS AARON YOUNG AND I LIVE WITHIN 350 FEET OF THE [1:46:15] PROPERTY. I'M ACTUALLY FIVE HOUSES TO THE WEST. [1:46:20] AND I'M HERE IN SUPPORT OF THE VARIANCE. I WAS ONE OF THE 11 RECIPIENTS [1:46:27] OF A VARIANCE IN MY HOME PROBABLY LIKE TEN YEARS AGO WHICH ALLOWED ME TO GO FROM LIKE [1:46:37] A 1.5 GARAGE TO A TWO-CAR GARAGE. STILL A LITTLE TIGHT, BUT IT IS TWO CAR. [1:46:43] AND JUST THINKING ABOUT THIS AND LISTENING, MY GARAGE DOOR IS 18 [1:46:49] FEET WHICH IS WHAT THEIR WHOLE GARAGE CURRENTLY IS. AND THEY'RE PROPOSING TO GET TO [1:46:55] I THINK 23 FEET. WELL IF YOU HAVE AN 18 FOOT GARAGE DOOR, YOU STILL CAN'T FIT [1:47:01] TWO CARS, SO I THINK IT'S PRETTY REASONABLE. ALONG THAT STRETCH, I WALK THE [1:47:07] CREEK A COUPLE THREE TIMES A DAY, SO I'M LOOKING AROUND AND JAKE IS RIGHT. THERE IS A LOT OF WOOD COVERAGE. [1:47:17] AND I DON'T THINK THIS IS GOING TO MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE, AT LEAST ON MY BEHALF OR MY FAMILY'S BEHALF. [1:47:25] IF YOU LOOKED AT THE OTHER 11 VARIANCES THAT WERE GIVEN, I'M [1:47:30] QUITE CONFIDENT THAT SOME OF THE RESPONDENTS WHO ARE IN OPPOSITION OF THAT AND TO THIS PROJECT WERE RECIPIENTS OF THOSE [1:47:37] VARIANCES, SO THAT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING. THE ANDERSONS ARE A GREAT [1:47:43] FAMILY. AS THEY MENTIONED, THEY HAVE THREE KIDS IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS. WE WANT THAT TO CONTINUE. [1:47:49] AND I THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE A GREAT ADDITION TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. [1:47:54] ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND RECOGNIZE [1:47:59] COUNCILMEMBER CHOWDHURY. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. I JUST HAD A QUICK QUESTION FOR [1:48:05] STAFF. THANKS FOR COMING UP, MILES. [1:48:16] COULD YOU JUST SHARE WHAT WAS THE CHANGE THAT WAS MADE IN THE [1:48:24] BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND ZONING [1:48:30] FROM THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION? >> CHAIR OSMAN, COUNCILMEMBER CHOWDHURY, THE CHANGE IN THIS CASE, AGAIN THE ORIGINAL [1:48:37] VARIANCE THERE WERE TWO REQUESTS. I'LL SEE IF I CAN'T PULL UP THE IMAGE AS WELL. [1:48:50] SO AGAIN THE ORIGINAL REQUEST HAD TWO VARIANCES, ONE WOULD HAVE BEEN THE STEEP SLOPE VARIANCE WE'RE DISCUSSING TODAY. [1:48:56] THE OTHER WAS A SIDE YARD VARIANCE. SO THE EXISTING HOME FALLS I THINK 3 AND 3.1 FEET OFF OF THE [1:49:03] PROPERTY LINE WHEREAS CODE TODAY REQUIRES A 5-FOOT SEPARATION FROM AN INTERIOR SIDE PROPERTY LINE. [1:49:08] SO THE ORIGINAL REQUEST WAS TO CARRY THAT SIDE WALL FORWARD. YOU CAN SEE ON THE LEFT HERE THAT AREA IN BLUE WOULD HAVE [1:49:14] BEEN THE ADDITION IN THAT ORIGINAL PROPOSAL. IN THE REVISED VERSION, AGAIN IN [1:49:19] THEORY THE EXISTING GARAGE LOCATION COULD REMAIN WHERE IT IS. THE APPLICANT IS ELECTING TO [1:49:26] SHIFT THAT ENTIRE GARAGE STRUCTURE TO MEET A 5-FOOT SETBACK ON THE WEST SIDE OF THAT BUILDING. IN TERMS OF AGAIN THE KIND OF [1:49:32] CHANGE AND THE SCALE FOR THE STRUCTURE, AGAIN THE ORIGINAL REQUEST WAS TO HAVE A 28 BY 23 [1:49:37] GARAGE, THIS WOULD PUT IT AT I BELIEVE THE LAST TIME I SPOKE WITH THE TEAM AT A 26.5 BY 22.5. [1:49:45] OBVIOUSLY THAT IS SUBJECT A LITTLE BIT TO STILL CHANGE BETWEEN NOW AND BUILDING [1:49:50] PERMITTING. TYPICALLY WHAT WE DO TELL FOLKS IS IT CANNOT EXPAND BEYOND THE ORIGINAL SCOPE OF THE VARIANCE, [1:49:56] BUT SOMETHING HERE WHERE IT'S BEING REVISED TO ACTUALLY MOVE IN RESPONSE TO THAT VARIANCE [1:50:01] DENIAL IS ALLOWED BASICALLY BEFORE PERMITTING. SO AGAIN THAT SLIGHT CHANGE IN TERMS OF IT LOOKS LIKE AGAIN A [1:50:07] FOOT AND A HALF OFF OF THE I GUESS YOU WOULD CALL IT THE DEPTH IN THIS CASE OF HOW FAR IT [1:50:13] GOES TO THE SOUTH. AND THEN THE DECK ALSO YOU CAN SEE HERE SO IT'S LABELED AS [1:50:18] BALCONY ON BOTH, I BELIEVE TWO FEET OFF OF THAT. SO GOING FROM AN EIGHT FOOTB [1:50:28] BALCONY TO SIX FEET. >> GREAT. AND LAST QUESTION FOR ME IS THAT THIS IS COMPLIANT WITH ALL OF THE SHORELAND CODE REQUIREMENTS [1:50:34] THAT WE HAVE? >> CORRECT. SO THE SHORELAND CODE BESIDES THE STEEP SLOPE REQUIREMENTS HAS SOME ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR [1:50:41] EXAMPLE THINGS LIKE CLEAR CUTTING OF VEGETATION. AS FAR AS STAFF IS AWARE, THERE [1:50:46] IS NO ISSUES WITH THE SHORELAND OVERLAY DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS OR OTHER SECTIONS OF THE CODE. I KNOW IT WAS BROUGHT UP IN [1:50:52] TERMS OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE FOR LOT COVER. THIS ADDITION IS COMPLIANT WITH [1:50:59] AN URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE PROPERTY. IT WOULD HAVE A MAXIMUM OF 60% OF THE LOT BEING ALLOWED AS [1:51:05] IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. THIS IS STILL WELL BELOW THAT PERCENTAGE. >> GREAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ANSWERING THOSE QUESTIONS. [1:51:11] I'LL JUST SAY I'M LOOKING AT STAFF FINDINGS, LOOKING AT THE CONVERSATION WITH THE BOARD OF [1:51:16] ADJUSTMENT, AND THEN ALSO HEARING THE TESTIMONY TODAY, I FEEL LIKE THIS MEETS ALL OF THE [1:51:23] REQUIREMENTS NECESSARY UNDER US AS A CITY. AND I ALSO APPRECIATE THAT THE APPLICANT OF THE VARIANCE MADE A [1:51:32] COMPROMISE AND MADE IT A LITTLE BIT SMALLER. I THINK IT'S ALSO HELPFUL TO UNDERSTAND WHAT HAS OCCURRED [1:51:39] WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL. AND SO WITH THAT, I JUST KIND OF [1:51:46] CONCUR WITH STAFF FINDINGS AND WILL MOVE TO DENY THE APPEAL. [1:51:55] >> SECOND. >> COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. QUESTION FOR STAFF. [1:52:00] CAN YOU JUST REMIND ME WHAT THE [1:52:06] ADDITIONAL 540 SOME SQUARE FEET OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE, IF THAT IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY CODE [1:52:13] BECAUSE I HEARD KIND OF DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS OF THAT IN THE TWO TESTIMONIES. [1:52:19] >> CORRECT. CHAIR OSMAN AND COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN, I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT PERCENTAGE OF IMPERVIOUS OFF THE [1:52:25] TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT THIS IS BELOW THAT 60% MAXIMUM FOR THE LOT ITSELF. [1:52:30] SO THAT WOULD BE OF THE LOT'S TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE AREA, 60% OF THAT IS ALLOWED TO BE [1:52:36] STRUCTURE FOOTPRINT, PAVEMENT, EVEN THINGS LIKE LANDSCAPING BEDS THAT HAVE A PLASTIC UNDERNEATH THAT DOESN'T ALLOW [1:52:43] PERMEATION OF RAIN WATER. AGAIN I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT PERCENTAGE, BUT THIS IS WELL BELOW THAT 60% MARK. [1:52:49] >> UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. I'LL ALSO SUPPORT THE MOTION TO DENY THE APPEAL. [1:52:59] >> SEEING NONE, I'LL ASK THE CITY CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL. TO CALL THE MOTION -- >> IF I MAY SUGGEST, AT YOUR [1:53:07] LEISURE, A SLIGHT SUGGESTION TO THE WORDING OF THAT TO DENY THE APPEAL AND ADOPT THE FINDINGS IN THE STAFF REPORT? [1:53:13] >> ABSOLUTELY. MOTION TO DENY THE APPEAL AND ADOPT THE STAFF FINDINGS IN THE [1:53:18] REPORT. >> CITY CLERK. >> COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. >> AYE. [1:53:24] >> CASHMAN. >> AYE. >> JENKINS. >> AYE. >> CHAVEZ. [1:53:29] >> AYE. >> VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY. >> AYE. >> AND CHAIR OSMAN. >> AYE. >> THERE ARE SIX AYES AND NO [1:53:35] NAYS. >> AND THAT MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. [1:53:43] NOW WE WILL RETURN TO THE PORTION OF DISCUSSION. [1:53:52] FIRST I WELCOME GREG GOLDBERG FROM CPED TO PRESENT THE 2025 [1:53:57] AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND AWARD NOMINATIONS. I WANT TO REMIND MEMBERS THAT WE WILL HAVE TO GET OUT OF HERE BY [1:54:03] WHAT DID I SAY? 1:00? YEAH. [1:55:05] >> GOOD AFTERNOON, MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. CHAIR OSMAN. DO YOU WANT ME TO WAIT ONE MORE [1:55:11] SECOND? I'M SORRY, I DON'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT. I'M CONSCIOUS OF YOUR TIMEFRAME THAT YOU JUST MENTIONED. I'M GOING TO DO A VERY BRIEF [1:55:16] PRESENTATION AND ALLOW YOU TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE. [1:55:24] GOOD AFTERNOON I'M KERRI GOLDBERG, I'M WITH THE CPED PRESIDENTIAL FINANCE TEAM AND I'M HERE TO PRESENT THE [1:55:31] RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND. [1:55:36] THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND IS THE LARGEST PROGRAM THAT ASSISTS IN AFFORDABLE AND MIXED [1:55:43] RENTAL HOUSING PROJECTS WITH TEN UNITS OR MORE AND AT LEAST 20% OF THE UNITS AFFORDABLE TO [1:55:48] HOUSEHOLDS AT OR BELOW 50% OF THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME. THIS YEAR THE CITY RECEIVED 14 [1:55:54] APPLICATIONS REQUESTING JUST OVER $24.6 MILLION AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING NINE PROJECTS FOR [1:56:00] TRUST FUND AWARDS THAT TOTAL [1:56:05] $14.5 MILLION. THE TRUST FUND NOTICE OF FUNDING AVAILABILITY THAT IS ISSUED IN JUNE EACH YEAR CONTAINS THE [1:56:11] CRITERIA ESTABLISHED TO ASSIST STAFF IN EVALUATING AN APPLICATION'S COMPLETENESS AND FINANCIAL VIABILITY. [1:56:17] ALL OF THE APPLICATIONS ARE ANALYZED USING THE UNDERWRITING [1:56:23] STANDARDS AND CRITERIA THAT ARE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL. STAFF ANALYZES THE PROJECT SOURCES AND USES, THE FINANCIAL [1:56:30] GAPS, THE MANAGEMENT AND OPERATING BUDGET AND EXPENSES, THE PROJECT'S RESERVES AND CASH [1:56:36] FLOW. THE PROJECT'S FINANCIAL VIABILITY INFORMS WHETHER THE PROJECT IS READY TO MOVE FORWARD [1:56:42] IN COMPARISON WITH OTHER PROJECTS AND PUTTING THE TRUST FUND DOLLARS TO USE MORE QUICKLY BY GETTING AFFORDABLE UNITS [1:56:48] CONSTRUCTED SOONER. CONSTRUCTION COST INCREASES AND TRUST RATE INCREASES AND LOWER [1:56:55] TAX CREDIT PRICING ALL CONTINUE TO BE PRESENT CHALLENGING TO SECURING FULL PROJECT FUNDING [1:57:00] AND BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION TIMELY. IN ADDITION, THE INCREASED MANAGEMENT AND OPERATING EXPENSES HAVE A SIGNIFICANTLY [1:57:08] IMPACTED THE SUSTAINABLE SOLVENCY OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS. INCREASED INSURANCE COSTS, [1:57:13] INCREASED SECURITY COSTS, HIGH STAFF TURNOVER, AND REVENUE LOSSES DUE TO VACANCIES OR [1:57:19] UNPAID RENTS HAVE STRAINED THE CAPACITY AND CONTINUED OPERATIONS OF NUMEROUS EXISTING PROJECTS AND DEVELOPERS. [1:57:31] THE NOFA ALSO CONTAINS THE CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING AND SCORING APPLICATIONS. [1:57:36] AND ALL APPLICATIONS ARE SCORED AND RANKED ACCORDING TO THE SELECTION CRITERIA WHICH IS ALSO [1:57:41] APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE SCORING IS ONLY ONE COMPONENT OF THE EVALUATION FOR THE AWARD [1:57:47] RECOMMENDATIONS AS I MENTIONED EARLIER AND IDENTIFIED THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE LOOK AT. LOWER RANKING APPLICATIONS MAY [1:57:53] BE RECOMMENDED FOR FUNDING OVER HIGHER RANKING APPLICATIONS BASED ON PROJECT READINESS, [1:57:58] PRIOR AWARDS AND/OR OTHER COMMITTED FUNDING OR CRITERIA AS INDICATED IN THE NOFA. [1:58:08] BEFORE I HIGHLIGHT THE PROJECTS BEING RECOMMENDED FOR AWARDS, I'D LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT THE SUCCESS REFLECTED IN THE NUMBERS [1:58:14] ON THIS SLIDE. THE PROJECTS THIS YEAR WILL CREATE OR PRESERVE 597 UNITS. [1:58:22] 162 OF THOSE UNITS HAVE SECURED RENTAL ASSISTANCE. AND 455 OF THOSE UNITS ARE AT [1:58:30] 50% AMI OR LESS OF WHICH ALMOST HALF ARE AT 30% AMI OR LESS. IN ORDER TO BE COMPETITIVE FOR [1:58:37] FUNDING THROUGH THE TRUST FUND, THE PROJECTS MUST INCLUDE DEEP AFFORDABILITY, SUPPORT SERVICES, [1:58:44] RENTAL ASSISTANCE, HOMELESSNESS AND LARGER UNITS. THESE GOALS ARE ALL WHAT ARE [1:58:49] INCENTIVIZED IN THE SCORING. [1:58:55] THESE NEXT SEVERAL SLIDES WILL HIGHLIGHT THE PROJECTS BEING RECOMMENDED AND THEY ARE MORE FULLY DESCRIBED IN THE RCA. [1:59:01] I'M JUST GOING TO BRIEFLY GO THROUGH THEM. THE FIRST IS LINDQUIST [1:59:08] APARTMENTS. THIS PROVIDES 24 UNITS FOR YOUTH EXITING HOMELESSNESS. [1:59:15] THE WELLSTONE IS ALSO A REHABILITATION PROJECT. THERE ARE 49 UNITS THAT SERVE [1:59:22] FAMILIES. 100% AFFORDABLE. ZARIA APARTMENTS. THIS IS THE SECOND PHASE OF THE [1:59:32] 3030NICOLETTE REDEVELOPMENT SITE WHICH SUFFERED DAMAGE DURING THE CIVIL UNREST IN 2020. THIS PROJECT CONSISTS OF A [1:59:37] SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF AFFORDABLE LARGER FAMILY UNITS. AND THIS PROJECT RECEIVED A PARTIAL AWARD LAST YEAR. THIS PROJECT HAS DONE A VERY [1:59:43] GOOD JOB OF CONTINUING TO SECURE ITS FINANCING. SO WE ARE GIVING THE REMAINING QUALIFYING AWARD TO THIS PROJECT [1:59:51] THIS YEAR. PENNWOOD VILLAGE AND COMMUNITY [1:59:57] MARKET, THIS IS A MIXED USE PROJECT WITH 86 AFFORDABLE [2:00:03] FAMILY-SIZED UNITS. [2:00:10] LYNDALE AVENUE APARTMENTS HAS 40 DEEPLY AFFORDABLE UNITS. LOT A, THIS IS A CITY-OWNED [2:00:15] SITE. THIS IS A NEW CONSTRUCTION 100% AFFORDABLE FAMILY HOUSING PROJECT. THERE ARE A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER [2:00:21] OF 2 AND 3-BEDROOMS. [2:00:30] SORRY, TRYING TO GO QUICKLY. FLOUR EXCHANGE. THIS IS AN ADAPTIVE REUSE OF THE [2:00:36] FLOUR EXCHANGE BUILDING DOWNTOWN. AND THAT WILL CONSIST OF 110 UNITS OF MIXED INCOME HOUSING [2:00:42] WITH A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF UNITS THAT WILL HAVE RENTAL ASSISTANCE. [2:00:49] THE JOURDAIN IS A 41-UNIT MIXED INCOME REHABILITATION PROJECT [2:00:55] FOR FAMILIES. AND IT IS UNDER HOPE COMMUNITY WHICH IS ALSO THE WELLSTONE WHICH WAS ALSO RECOMMENDED THIS [2:01:00] YEAR. I THINK THAT'S MY LAST. [2:01:06] SO IN CONCLUSION, ALL OF THE APPLICANTS DESERVE A ROUND OF THANKS FOR WORKING SO HARD TO SUBMIT APPLICATIONS THAT [2:01:13] INCORPORATE THE MANY CITY PRIORITIES FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I'D ALSO LIKE TO THANK THE [2:01:18] RESIDENTIAL FINANCE TEAM WHO REVIEWS, UNDERWRITES, AND ANALYZES THESE PROJECTS SO WE CAN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO YOU, [2:01:24] PUTTING THE TRUST FUND DOLLARS TO WORK AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. AND I'D ALSO LIKE TO THANK THE CITY'S FUNDING PARTNERS WHO ALSO [2:01:31] ASSIST IN THE REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS AND FINANCING OF THESE PROJECTS. [2:01:36] WITHOUT THEM THE CITY WOULD NOT PRODUCE AND PRESERVE THE AMOUNT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT WE DO SO SUCCESSFULLY. [2:01:41] AND WITH THAT, I'LL TAKE QUESTIONS. >> COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN. [2:01:46] >> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I'M VERY EXCITED TO SEE THIS AWARD FOR THE PROJECT AT THE [2:01:52] FLOUR EXCHANGE. THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND THIS ALL LOOKS REALLY GREAT. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION AND I'LL MOVE THIS ITEM FOR [2:01:59] APPROVAL. >> AWESOME. GREAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH, STAFF, FOR [2:02:04] YOUR WORK ON THIS. I KNOW IT TAKES A LONG PROCESS. IT'S ALWAYS GREAT TO SEE [2:02:09] PROJECTS POPPING UP AND GETTING SUPPORT. CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WELLSTONE THAT'S LOCATED IN WARD [2:02:16] 6. IS IT A REHAB? WHAT IS THE MONEY FOR? >> YES, IT IS A REHAB. [2:02:24] SO THE WELLSTONE AND THE JOURDAIN ARE BOTH OWNED BY HOPE [2:02:31] COMMUNITY. THEY ARE DOING TWO PHASES OF REHABILITATION TO THESE BUILDINGS. AND THIS FIRST PHASE IS DOING SOME OF THE LARGER [2:02:36] INFRASTRUCTURE TO IT. THE HVAC SYSTEMS, SOME OF THE UTILITY RELATED ITEMS FOR IT. [2:02:43] SO THAT WILL BE THE FIRST ROUND. THEY'RE NOT DOING INDIVIDUAL [2:02:48] UNIT REHAB AT THIS TIME. IT'S POSSIBLE THEY WILL COME BACK FOR A SECOND PHASE. BUT THEY ARE PROCEEDING WITH [2:02:55] JUST THE MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE BUILDING AT THIS TIME. [2:03:03] >> GREAT. THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER JENKINS. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN, AND THANK YOU FOR THAT PRESENTATION. [2:03:10] IT IS EXCITING, PARTICULARLY TO SEE THE ZARIA PROJECT. PHASE TWO OF THE 3030 NICOLETTE. [2:03:17] YOU KNOW, THAT SITE WAS [2:03:24] DEMOLISHED, I GUESS IN THE UPRISING, THE FIRES, ET CETERA. NOW THERE'S ALREADY 100 UNITS OF [2:03:31] DEEPLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING THERE THAT HAS LARGE APARTMENTS FOR [2:03:40] THE TENANTS AND RESIDENTS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. SO THIS ADDITION IS VERY WELCOME [2:03:46] AND I BELIEVE IT'S GOING TO INCLUDE SOME OPPORTUNITIES FOR BUSINESSES ON THE FIRST FLOOR [2:03:54] TOO OR THE MAIN LEVEL. SO JUST REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THE PROJECT. AND THE DEVELOPER IS A WOMAN OF [2:04:01] COLOR. SO IT'S A GREAT PROJECT. >> ALL RIGHT. [2:04:06] THANK YOU. SEEING NO ONE ELSE, WITH THE MOTION FOR COUNCILMEMBER [2:04:12] CASHMAN, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES] THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. [2:04:17] THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> ALL RIGHT. [2:04:22] NEXT ITEM IS THE 9% LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDITS. [2:04:42] >> GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR OSMAN, MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. I'M EMILY CARR, SUPERVISOR ON [2:04:48] THE RESIDENTIAL TEAM ON CPED. I'M HERE TODAY TO REPRESENT OUR [2:04:53] ANNUAL 9% LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT RECOMMENDATIONS. EVERY YEAR, CPED ADMINISTERS 9% [2:05:03] LOW INCOME TAX CREDITS. THE HOUSING TAX CREDIT PROGRAM PROVIDES A REDUCTION IN FEDERAL [2:05:09] TAX LIABILITY TO INVESTORS IN QUALIFIED LOW-INCOME RENTAL [2:05:15] HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS THAT COMPLY WITH FEDERALLY IMPOSED RENT AND INCOME RESTRICTIONS FOR A MINIMUM OF 30 YEARS. [2:05:20] I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT 9% [2:05:26] HOUSING TAX CREDITS ARE A TOOL TO PROVIDE 70% OF THE PROJECT'S [2:05:34] EQUITY, IT NEEDS TO BE FINANCED. THE CITY CAN ONLY TYPICALLY FINANCE ONE OF THESE PROJECTS A YEAR WITH OUR ALLOCATION. [2:05:44] THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED A TWO-YEAR QUALIFIED ALLOCATION PLAN OR QAP AND PROCEDURAL [2:05:51] MANUAL FOR THIS YEAR'S NOTICE OF FUNDING AVAILABILITY BACK IN JUNE. THE QAP ESTABLISHES A SCORING [2:05:56] AND SELECTION CRITERIA FOR THE HOUSING TAX CREDIT PROGRAM. [2:06:03] THE PROGRAM TIMELINE IS SIMILAR TO THE PROGRAM EACH YEAR. AND APPLICATIONS FOR THIS YEAR'S [2:06:08] HOUSING TAX CREDITS WERE DUE ON JULY 28TH. [2:06:16] THIS YEAR CPED IS ADMINISTERING AN APPLICATION OF $1,777,841 IN [2:06:25] THE YEAR 2026 IN 9% HOUSING TAX CREDITS. WE RECEIVED FOUR APPLICATIONS [2:06:32] REQUESTING $6.5 MILLION IN TAX CREDITS. THE SUMMARY LIST OF PROJECTS, AMOUNT OF TAX CREDITS REQUESTED, AND UNIT BREAKDOWN IS SHOWN IN [2:06:39] THE REPORTS ATTACHED 2026 APPLICATION SUMMARY. THE APPLICATIONS WERE SCORED [2:06:45] ACCORDING TO THE SCORING CRITERIA ESTABLISHED IN THE ADOPTED QAP. [2:06:50] SCORING FOR EACH OF THE PROJECTS IS SUMMARIZED IN THE ATTACHED HOUSING TAX CREDIT SUMMARY. [2:07:01] THE TOP SCORING PROJECT THIS YEAR WAS 2116 NICOLLET. [2:07:08] WE FUNDED THIS PROJECT LAST YEAR WITH 9% HOUSING TAX CREDITS. THEY NEED ADDITIONAL CREDITS [2:07:13] THIS YEAR BEYOND WHAT WE WERE ABLE TO ALLOCATE LAST YEAR. SO THEY CAME IN AND REQUESTED $1.4 MILLION IN ADDITIONAL [2:07:18] CREDITS TO CLOSE THEIR GAP AND HOPEFULLY GET TO THE CLOSING TABLE EARLY NEXT YEAR. [2:07:25] WITH OUR 1.7 MILLION IN CREDITS, STAFF ARE RECOMMENDING THE [2:07:33] 1.84 MILLION IN THEIR REQUEST BE FUNDED WHICH LEAVES A BALANCE OF [2:07:39] APPROXIMATELY 289,000 TO ALLOCATE. [2:07:45] CLARE5 HOUSING PROJECT WAS THE SECOND HIGHEST SCORING PROJECT SO STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT WE APPLY THAT BALANCE OF OUR [2:07:51] ALLOCATION AND AWARD IT TO THE CLARE 5 HOUSING PROJECT. [2:07:57] BOTH 2116 NICOLLET AND CLARE 5 [2:08:04] WERE AWARDED IN PREVIOUS ROUNDS. CLARE 5 IS A 33-UNIT NEW [2:08:10] CONSTRUCTION PROJECT IN WARD 1 THAT WILL SERVE SENIORS LIVING WITH HIV AND AIDS. SO BOTH OF THESE PROJECTS HAVE [2:08:17] DEEP POLICY ALIGNMENT WITH CITY GOALS, PROVIDE VERY LOW INCOME [2:08:22] HOUSING AND LOW BARRIER HOUSING FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE MOST VULNERABLE IN OUR COMMUNITY. [2:08:30] SO WITH THAT, I AM HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. I ALSO WANT TO THANK ALL OF OUR APPLICANTS THIS YEAR FOR THEIR [2:08:36] CONTINUED COMMITMENT TO PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN OUR COMMUNITY. >> THANKS FOR THE PRESENTATION. [2:08:42] ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MEMBERS? SEEING NONE, I'LL APPROVE THIS ITEM. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. [2:08:50] >> OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT AND THE MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT, NEXT ONE WILL BE -- [2:09:06] YES, LAST DISCUSSION ITEM IS ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE ZONING [2:09:14] CODE ON ON AND OFF PREMISES SIGNAGE. IT IS NOW BEFORE US FOR [2:09:22] DISCUSSION. I WELCOME SARA ROMAN FROM CPED [2:09:28] FOR THE PRESENTATION. >> MY NAME IS SARA ROMAN, I'M A PLANNER IN CPED AND I WILL BE [2:09:35] PRESENTING THE SIGN CODE AMENDMENT FOR YOU TODAY. SO ABOUT A YEAR AGO STAFF WAS ASKED TO EXAMINE HOW SIGNS COULD [2:09:40] BE USED AS A TOOL TO INCREASE VIBRANCY, ARTS AND CULTURE, AND A SENSE OF SAFETY DOWNTOWN. [2:09:47] SO AS PART OF THAT WORK, WE LOOKED AT ON PREMISES SIGNS, SO THOSE ARE LOCAL BUSINESS SIGNS [2:09:52] AND OFF PREMISES SIGNS OTHERWISE KNOWN AS BILLBOARDS. WE ALSO LOOKED AT HOW SIGNS [2:09:58] COULD BE USED TO IMPROVE VISIBILITY FOR DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES INCLUDING SKYWAY [2:10:03] BUSINESSES, AND WE WERE ALSO ASKED TO FOCUS ON THE IDEA OF AN ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT AND HOW THAT COULD BE IMPLEMENTED IN THE [2:10:11] FUTURE. SO THE MAJORITY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS YOU'LL SEE TODAY FOCUS ON DOWNTOWN. [2:10:16] BUT WE ALSO WANT TO CALL OUT THERE ARE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS THAT APPLY CITY WIDE AND SOME [2:10:21] RECOMMENDATIONS THAT APPLY TO SPECIFIC DISTRICTS OR SPECIFIC USES. [2:10:28] SO MOVING INTO THE CHANGES TO OUR PREMISES SIGN REGULATIONS TO DOWNTOWN SPECIFICALLY. [2:10:34] THESE REGULATIONS OR PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ARE GENERALLY EITHER TO INCREASE FLEXIBILITY FOR [2:10:40] SIGNS OR TO MAKE A PROCESS AROUND OBTAINING A SIGN EASIER FOR APPLICANTS. [2:10:49] SO THERE ARE A FEW WAYS WE ARE PROVIDING FLEXIBILITY FOR SIGNS. WE ARE ALLOWING FOR MORE SIGNAGE IN MORE LOCATIONS. [2:10:56] SO ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE ON NONPRIMARY BUILDING WALLS, SO THOSE ARE WALLS THAT DON'T FACE A PUBLIC STREET. [2:11:02] WE ARE PROPOSING TO EXTEND A MINIMUM SIGN ALLOWANCE FOR SKYWAY BUSINESSES AND EXEMPTING [2:11:08] DIRECTORY SIGNS. SO THOSE WOULD BE SIGNS ON THE EXTERIOR OF A BUILDING TELLING [2:11:14] PEOPLE ON THE STREET WHAT'S ON THE INSIDE OF A BUILDING. IN TERMS OF ALLOWING NEW SIGN TYPES, WE ARE LOOKING TO ALLOW [2:11:20] LIGHT PROJECTION SIGNS, THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF AN ARTISTIC APPLICATION ON A HISTORIC [2:11:26] STRUCTURE. BUT THIS WOULD ALLOW ADVERTISEMENT IN THE FORM OF LIGHT PROJECTIONS DOWNTOWN. THIS IS GREAT FOR HISTORIC BUILDINGS WHERE WE DON'T WANT TO [2:11:32] HAVE SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON A STRUCTURE. WE ARE ALSO PROPOSING TO ALLOW [2:11:38] PORTABLE SIGNS ALSO KNOWN AS SANDWICH BOARDS AND BUILDING WRAP SIGNS AS A FIRST STEP ON [2:11:43] SKYWAY BRIDGES. [2:11:50] SKYWAY BRIDGES WERE ALSO SEEN AS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR INCREASING VIBRANCY DOWNTOWN. SO WE'RE CARVING OUT SOME [2:11:58] ALLOWANCES FOR SKYWAY BRIDGES AND WHAT YOU CAN DO ON THEM AND INSIDE OF THEM. WE'RE PROPOSING TO ALLOW [2:12:03] PERMANENT ART, TEMPORARY ART, AND TEMPORARY ON PREMISES SIGNS FOR NO LONGER THAN 90 DAYS AS [2:12:09] WELL AS ALLOWING EVENTS WITHIN SKYWAY BRIDGES. [2:12:17] IN TERMS OF CHANGES FOR ON PREMISES SIGNS THAT WOULD ALLOW CHANGES CITY WIDE, THESE ARE [2:12:23] PRIMARILY PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS SO WE ARE SIMPLIFYING THE PERMIT FEE. IT'S CURRENTLY A TIERED FEE AND [2:12:29] WE WOULD BE MOVING TO A FLAT FEE. WE ARE PROPOSING TO REVISE REGULATIONS FOR TEMPORARY SIGNS TO A 60 DAY MAXIMUM, EXEMPTING [2:12:35] SIREN REPLACEMENTS FROM PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. SO IF YOU'RE AN EXISTING BUSINESS OR A NEW BUSINESS MOVING INTO AN EXISTING SPACE [2:12:40] THAT ALREADY HAS SIGNS, YOU WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO PULL A PERMIT FOR THAT. THAT'S JUST A COST SAVING FOR [2:12:46] SMALL BUSINESSES WE'RE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT. THE OTHER THING THAT WE THINK WILL BE A REALLY INTERESTING AND [2:12:52] WONDERFUL IMPROVEMENT FOR THE CITY IS AN EXEMPTION FOR PAINTED [2:13:00] WALL SIGNS. SO GHOST SIGNS MOVING INTO THE MURALS AND ADVERTISEMENTS SEEN ON LAKE STREET TODAY. [2:13:05] THIS WOULD JUST ALLOW THESE PAINTED WALL SIGNS TO OCCUR ANYWHERE ON A BUILDING AS LONG AS THEY MEET HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS [2:13:11] IN THAT DISTRICT FOR SIGNS. [2:13:19] THE MAJORITY OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES FOR ON PREMISES SIGNS OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN THAT DON'T [2:13:24] APPLY CITY WIDE ARE REALLY FIXES FOR SPECIFIC USES OR SPECIFIC [2:13:30] DISTRICTS. SO WE ARE PROPOSING TO REMOVE A ROOF SIGN PENALTY THAT WAS INITIALLY ENACTED TO ENSURE THAT [2:13:37] ROOF SIGNS WEREN'T HAVING AN OUTSIZED IMPACT ON COMMERCIAL CORR [2:13:42] CORRIDORS. BUT THIS WOULD REMOVE THE PENALTY AND JUST ALLOW ROOF SIGNS TO BE COUNTED IN A STANDARD WAY, THE WAY ANY OTHER [2:13:47] SIGN WOULD BE COUNTED. WE ARE ALSO PROPOSING TO INCREASE THE SIGN AREA [2:13:53] ALLOWANCES FOR CM3 PROPERTIES. SO THAT WOULD ALLOW MORE SIGNAGE OR INCREASED SIGNAGE ALONG OUR [2:13:59] COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS FOR OUR PROPERTIES TO MATCH WHAT CM4 PROPERTIES ARE CURRENTLY GIVEN. [2:14:05] THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS UNINTENTIONALLY ROLLED BACK DURING THE LAND USE REZONING PROPERTY. IT WOULD REINSTATE SIGN [2:14:13] ALLOWANCES FOR NEW BUSINESSES AND NEW BUSINESSES COMING IN COULD ENJOY THAT EXISTING [2:14:18] SIGNAGE THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED. [2:14:24] SO THE NEXT BUCKET OF CHANGES WE'RE PROPOSING ARE AROUND OUR OFF PREMISES SIGNAGE, THESE ARE [2:14:30] OTHERWISE KNOWN AS BILLBOARDS. WE ARE AT A UNIQUE PLACE IN TIME WITH OUR BILLBOARD SYSTEM. SO WE ARE DOING ALL OF THIS [2:14:36] VISIONING WORK AROUND DOWNTOWN AND THINKING ABOUT [2:14:43] REVITALIZATION AND VIBRANCY EFFORTS AND HOW BILLBOARDS CAN PLAY A ROLE IN THAT. BUT WE ARE LOOKING AT A STAGNANT [2:14:51] BILLBOARD CREDIT SYSTEM. OUR BILLBOARD SYSTEM HAS BEEN IN THE PLACE FOR THE PAST DECADE. [2:14:56] IT INCENTIVIZES NEIGHBORHOODS OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN IN ORDER TO OBTAIN A CREDIT. [2:15:01] THOSE CREDITS CAN BE USED TO BUILD BILLBOARDS WITHIN OUR DOWNTOWN OR OUR HIGHWAYS. WITHIN THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS, [2:15:07] WE'VE REALLY SEEN THAT PROGRAM STAGNATE. WE'RE NOT SEEING THE REMOVAL OF BILLBOARDS THAT WE ONCE WERE IN [2:15:12] OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. THAT BRINGS US TO A MOMENT WHERE WE CAN CONSIDER HOW WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH REGULATING [2:15:18] BILLBOARDS THROUGH A NEW PROGRAM. THE FIRST RECOMMENDATION WE'RE [2:15:23] PROPOSING IS TO RETIRE THE SIGN CREDIT SYSTEM, SO NO LONGER REQUIRE CREDITS FOR BUILDING NEW [2:15:29] BILLBOARDS BUT TO PROHIBIT THE INSTALLATION OF NEW BILLBOARDS AND THE CONVERSION OF BILLBOARDS [2:15:36] FROM STATIC TO DIGITAL IN A TIME LIMITED SENSE I WILL DISCUSS FURTHER. WE ARE ALSO PROPOSING TO DETER [2:15:42] SUB [2:15:54] S SUBSIDIZATION OF VACANT STRUCTURES OR UNDERUTILIZED PROPERTY. SO IF YOUR PROPERTY IS VACANT, [2:15:59] YOU WOULD BE REQUIRED TO REMOVE THAT BILLBOARD. TODAY WE HAVE PROPERTIES THAT HAVE PUSHED BACK FROM [2:16:04] REDEVELOPMENT BECAUSE THEY'RE STILL OBTAINING REVENUE FROM [2:16:10] BILLBOARDS, THIS WOULD PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING IN THE FUTURE. WE ARE ALSO PROPOSING AN EXEMPTION OF OFF PREMISES SIGNS [2:16:18] REGULATIONS FOR SPORTS AND CIVIC P EVENTS DOWNTOWN. SOME OF OUR MOST LOVED SIGNS [2:16:23] DOWNTOWN IN RELATION TO OUR SPORTS TEAM IN PARTICULAR CURRENTLY ARE NOT CONFORMING TO [2:16:29] OUR CODE. AND THIS WOULD ALLOW THOSE TYPES OF SIGNS LIKE OUR TIMBERWOLVES BANNER TO OCCUR LEGALLY IN THE [2:16:36] CITY. AND WE ARE PROPOSING OFF PREMISES SIGN REGULATIONS FOR SIGNS LOCATED ON CITY-OWNED [2:16:42] PROPERTIES. THAT GIVES THE CITY THE OPPORTUNITY TO DETERMINE HOW WE [2:16:47] WOULD LIKE TO HANDLE BILLBOARDS ON CITY-OWNED PROPERTIES INTO THE FUTURE IF WE WOULD LIKE TO [2:16:55] PURSUE THAT OPTION. SO TO MOVE BACK TO THE RATIONALE FOR THE PROHIBITION, THE [2:17:00] MAJORITY OF THE DISCUSSION AT CITY PLANNING COMMISSION WAS AROUND THE CODE REGULATION THAT STATES THAT NEW BILLBOARDS WOULD [2:17:06] BE PROHIBITED AND THE CONVERSION OF BILLBOARDS FROM STATIC TO DIGITAL WOULD BE PROHIBITED. [2:17:20] STAFF HAS ALWAYS TALKED ABOUT THIS AS A PAUSE. THIS WOULD BE TIME LIMITED. [2:17:27] WHILE THERE ISN'T AN ORDINANCE TO ENACT A DATE WHERE [2:17:32] REGULATIONS WOULD SUNSET, THIS IS ABSOLUTELY INTENDED TO BE A PAUSE ON ALLOWING NEW BILLBOARDS [2:17:37] WHILE WE CREATE A NEW SYSTEM. AND WE HAVE STAFF AND POLICY MEMBER SUPPORT ON THAT. [2:17:45] SO THERE ARE THREE THINGS WE WOULD LIKE TO DO WHEN CREATING THIS NEW SYSTEM WHILE THIS PAUSE IS OCCURRING. FIRSTLY, THE CITY IS CURRENTLY [2:17:53] COMPLETING A CULTURE SCAPES VISIONING PROCESS. OUR ARTS AND CULTURAL AFFAIRS PROCESS HAS BEEN WORKING WITH [2:17:59] ARTISTS AND PLACE MAKERS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS AROUND THE IDEA OF WHAT OUR DOWNTOWN COULD BE. AND OUT OF THAT WORK IS GOING TO [2:18:05] COME SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS AROUND HOW BILLBOARDS CAN BE USED AS A TOOL FOR VIBRANCY. [2:18:13] THE SECOND IS THAT WE ARE PLANNING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A LEGISLATIVE ASK TO ALLOW REVENUE [2:18:19] SHARING OR SOME OTHER REVENUE GENERATION PROCESS FOR NEW BILLBOARDS. AND SO THIS HAS BEEN A POPULAR [2:18:26] IDEA IN CITIES LIKE DENVER AND ATLANTA AND SAN ANTONIO WHERE NEW BILLBOARDS GENERATE REVENUE [2:18:33] FOR ARTS AND CULTURAL PROGRAMMING, FOR PUBLIC ARTS AND FOR OTHER INITIATIVES. [2:18:38] THE CITY IS NOT CURRENTLY PERMITTED TO UNDERTAKE SUCH AN EFFORT, BUT WE WILL BE ASKING [2:18:44] THE LEGISLATURE AT THIS UPCOMING SESSION TO ALLOW US TO DO SO. SO WHETHER THAT BE A LARGER [2:18:51] PERMIT FEE OR A REVENUE SHARING MODEL OR A TAXING DISTRICT, THE [2:18:57] IDEA OF ALLOWING BILLBOARDS IN A VERY THOUGHTFUL WAY FOR A SPECIFIC PUBLIC PURPOSE IS [2:19:03] APPEALING TO OUR POLICYMAKERS AND ALSO TO STAFF. [2:19:08] THE OTHER POINT OF SUCCESS AROUND THESE PROGRAMS IN OTHER CITIES IS THAT THOSE CITIES GENERALLY DO NOT PERMIT [2:19:14] BILLBOARDS OTHERWISE. SO THIS IS MOMENTUM BUILT UP AND A DEMAND BUILT UP BY NOT [2:19:20] ALLOWING BILLBOARDS THAT ALLOWS THIS BUY IN INTO THESE REVENUE GENERATION PROGRAMS TO OCCUR. [2:19:27] CPED WOULD ALSO LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO OUTREACH WITH DOWNTOWN PROPERTY OWNERS AND [2:19:32] WITH OUR RESIDENTS. SO WE HAVE MET FOR MANY, MANY, MANY HOURS WITH MEDIA COMPANIES [2:19:39] AND WITH BILLBOARD OPERATORS AND PROPERTY OWNERS WHO HAVE BILLBOARDS OVER THE LAST YEAR TO TALK ABOUT THE BILLBOARD PROGRAM [2:19:45] AND WHAT IT COULD BE IN THE FUTURE. AND WHERE WE HAVEN'T HAD THE OPPORTUNITY IS TO SPEAK WITH RESIDENTS ABOUT HOW THEY FEEL [2:19:50] ABOUT BILLBOARDS. IT IS NOT A STRAIGHTFORWARD ISSUE. IT IS VERY NUANCED ABOUT HOW PEOPLE FEEL ABOUT BILLBOARDS SO [2:19:56] THIS WOULD JUST GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE THAT BALANCE IN THIS CONVERSATION. [2:20:02] AND SO AT PLANNING COMMISSION, THERE WAS A RECOMMENDATION TO ALLOW A DATE INTO THE ORDINANCE. [2:20:07] THE MEMORANDUM THAT WAS PREPARED FOR YOU THAT WAS SENT PRIOR TO THE BHZ HEARING OUTLINED THE [2:20:14] REASONS THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE DOESN'T BELIEVE THAT WE CAN ADD A SUNSET DATE INTO THE [2:20:20] ORDINANCE. IF THE COMMITTEE IS INTERESTED IN NOT MOVING FORWARD WITH A [2:20:26] PROHIBITION AROUND BILLBOARDS AND ALLOWING THE SYSTEM TO STAY IN PLACE, THEN WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT AN AMENDMENT BE [2:20:32] MADE TO KEEP THE CREDIT SYSTEM IN PLACE, BECAUSE THE CREDIT SYSTEM IS REALLY WHAT'S PROHIBITING THE PROLIFERATION OF [2:20:39] BILLBOARDS. AND SO AT LEAST WITH THE CURRENT SYSTEM IN PLACE, WE'LL HAVE THE [2:20:45] SAME PROCESS THAT HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS WHERE IF YOU'RE IN A DISTRICT THAT REQUIRES CREDITS, YOU HAVE [2:20:50] TO GET CREDITS. IF YOU'RE IN A DISTRICT THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE CREDITS, YOU DON'T NEED CREDITS, BUT WE SORT OF STAY THE SAME WHILE WE [2:20:57] EXAMINE HOW WE CAN MOVE FORWARD. SO STAFF WOULD JUST ASK TODAY THAT YOU MAKE A RECOMMENDATION [2:21:04] TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE STAFF'S LANGUAGE AS WE PROPOSED IT. BUT I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A LOT OF NUANCE TO [2:21:11] THESE DISCUSSIONS. AND SO I'M HAPPY TO STAND FOR QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR [2:21:17] PRESENTATION. I WILL RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN. [2:21:22] >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. I JUST WANT TO THANK SARA ROMAN, [2:21:28] YOU'VE DONE AN AMAZING JOB ON THIS AND MEG AND JASON ALSO FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAVE [2:21:33] JUST DONE A REALLY GREAT JOB AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS TOGETHER FOR OVER A YEAR SO THANK YOU SO MUCH. [2:21:38] I BELIEVE THAT THESE ORDINANCE CHANGES WILL REALLY HELP WITH THE VIBRANCY OF OUR COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS, NOT ONLY DOWNTOWN BUT [2:21:44] THROUGHOUT THE GREAT STREETS OF OUR CITY, THROUGH THE CULTURAL DISTRICT, THROUGH ALL OF THE [2:21:50] SMALL BUSINESS CORRIDORS. THROUGHOUT ALL WARDS OF THE CITY. SO I THINK THERE'S A HUGE BENEFIT TO DOING THIS. [2:21:55] AND I JUST WANT TO NAME A FEW OF THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE HAVE IN THIS ORDINANCE THAT I'M MOST EXCITED ABOUT MOVING FORWARD FOR [2:22:03] APPROVAL. ONE IS THAT PAINTED WALL SIGNS WILL NO LONGER BE REGULATED CITY WIDE. THIS REMOVES THE NEED FOR OUR [2:22:09] COSTLY PERMIT FOR SMALL BUSINESSES AND CREATES MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR ARTISTS. ACTUALLY ONE OF OUR VIBRANT [2:22:15] STORE FRONTS AWARDEES OWNS A BUSINESS THAT DOES PAINTED WALL [2:22:20] SIGNS CALLED SHARP SIGNS, YOU'VE PROBABLY SEEN THEM AROUND ALL THROUGHOUT THE SOUTH SIDE. AND IT'S A REALLY AFFORDABLE WAY [2:22:25] FOR A SMALL BUSINESS TO ADVERTISE THEIR BUILDING WITHOUT HAVING TO INVEST IN SOME OF THESE REALLY EXPENSIVE PHYSICAL [2:22:32] STRUCTURES OF A SIGN. SO I'M EXCITED THAT WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH DEREGULATING THAT [2:22:37] AND MAKING THAT MORE ACCESSIBLE. I'M ALSO EXCITED ABOUT EXPANDING SIGNAGE ALLOWANCES IN GENERAL. [2:22:43] I THINK THAT BLADE SIGNS AND THE TYPES OF SIGNS THAT HELP PEDESTRIANS NAVIGATE A CORRIDOR [2:22:48] AS THEY'RE WALKING AROUND AND FIND THEIR DESTINATION ARE A REALLY IMPORTANT TOOL FOR US TO [2:22:55] IMPROVE WALKABILITY IN OUR CITY, IMPROVE THE VIBRANCY OF UPTOWN AND OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS THAT [2:23:00] WERE SO DEEPLY COMMITTED TO REVITALIZING. ALSO HAPPY THAT BILLBOARDS WILL [2:23:06] NO LONGER BE ALLOWED TO SUBSIDIZE VACANT BUILDINGS. I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT [2:23:12] VALUE TO BE KEEPING IN MIND IN PHASE TWO AS WELL. BECAUSE I THINK THAT THAT MIGHT HOLD BACK SOME OWNERS FROM M [2:23:19] MAKING INVESTMENTS FROM THEIR BUILDINGS THAT THEY SHOULD BE MAKING THAT WE WANT THEM TO MAKE. [2:23:24] I ALSO AM GLAD THAT REPLACING SIGNS WITH SIMILAR ONES WILL NO LONGER REQUIRE A PERMIT AND A [2:23:30] FEE. I THINK THAT STREAMLINING THAT PROCESS IS GOOD FOR BUSINESSES. [2:23:37] SKYWAYS IS SOMETHING WE WORKED A LOT ON AND CREATING MORE [2:23:42] ALLOWANCES TO ADVERTISE WHAT'S ON THE SKYWAYS IN THE STREET LEVEL SO THAT THE PEDESTRIANS AND VISITORS TO OUR CITY CAN SEE [2:23:47] WHAT'S UP THERE AND NAVIGATE UP THERE. SO THOSE OPPORTUNITIES EVEN FOR THE DIRECTORIES ON THE [2:23:53] GROUND-FLOOR LEVEL TO ADVERTISE SKYWAY LEVEL BUSINESSES WILL BE AN IMPROVEMENT. AND THEN FINALLY NEW SIGN TYPES [2:23:59] LIKE BUILDING WRAPS AND LIGHT PROJECTIONS ARE THINGS THAT I'VE EXPERIENCED IN CITIES THAT I'VE LIVED IN LIKE MONTREAL WHICH IS [2:24:05] A VERY CREATIVE CITY. AND REALLY HELP WITH THE ARTS [2:24:10] AND CULTURAL EXPERIENCE OF THE CITY AND WILL OFFER I THINK A LOT OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR ARTISTS AND CREATIVES TO EXPERIMENT MORE [2:24:16] AND MAKE OUR DOWNTOWN A REALLY EXCITING PLACE TO BE. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL OF [2:24:22] THE WORK ON THIS. I'M GOING TO MOVE THIS FOR APPROVAL TODAY. AND I'M ALSO BRINGING AN [2:24:27] AMENDMENT. SO I WILL EXPLAIN THE AMENDMENT BRIEFLY AND MOVE THAT FOR APPROVAL AS WELL. [2:24:33] THIS AMENDMENT IS RELATED TO SOME FEEDBACK WE GOT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THE PLANNING [2:24:39] COMMISSION ABOUT OFF PREMISES SIGNS. AND SO SOME OF THE CONCERNS WERE ABOUT THE PAUSE ON NEW BIL [2:24:44] BILLBOARDS AND CONVERSION TO DIGITAL BILLBOARDS IN THE AREA NEAR THE TARGET CENTER AND GIVEN [2:24:49] THE UNCERTAINTY OF THE FUTURE OF THE TARGET CENTER, I DON'T WANT TO TAKE AWAY AN OPTION THAT [2:24:54] THOSE BUILDING OWNERS CURRENTLY HAVE TO DRIVE MORE TRAFFIC AND [2:25:01] VIBRANCY OF THEIR BUILDINGS. SO THIS AMENDMENT ALLOWS FOR THE [2:25:09] BUILDING OWNERS IN THE DOWNTOWN WEST ENTERTAINMENT BILLBOARD DISTRICT TO TRANSITION THEIR EXISTING BILLBOARDS TO DIGITAL [2:25:16] ONLY IN THIS SPECIFIC AREA OR BASICALLY PRESERVES THE ABILITY THAT THEY CURRENTLY HAVE TO CONVERT THEIR STATIC BILLBOARDS [2:25:22] TO DIGITAL IN THIS AREA. SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO MOTION TO APPROVE THIS AME [2:25:31] AMENDMENT. I'M GOING TO MOVE TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AS A WHOLE AND ASK THAT MY COLLEAGUES SUPPORT IT. WE HAVE VERY LITTLE TIME LEFT IN [2:25:39] OUR TERM AND I WILL NOT BE COMING BACK NEXT TERM, SO I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT IN HELPING US [2:25:44] GET THIS ACROSS THE FINISH LINE. I ALSO ASK FOR COLLEAGUES TO CONTINUE CARRYING THE BATON ON PHASE TWO NEXT YEAR. [2:25:51] I KNOW OUR IGR CHAIR CHOWDHURY WILL BE WILLING TO GO TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE FOR SOME OF [2:25:57] THE ASKS THAT STAFF HAVE LAID OUT TOO. THANK YOU. >> I PUT MYSELF IN QUEUE. [2:26:04] I ALSO WANT TO SAY THANK YOU AND TWO TOPICS, ONE IS THE BILLBOARD AND THE OTHER ONE IS THE LIGHTS. [2:26:12] TECHNOLOGY IS GROWING. LIGHTS DO BRING CUSTOMERS TO [2:26:18] YOUR PLACE AND I'D LIKE TO SEE [2:26:25] IT LESS REGULATION IN THAT SENSE. AND NOT JUST FOLKS IN DOWNTOWN, BUT WHAT ARE WE DOING ON OUR [2:26:32] CULTURAL CORRIDORS, ON FRANKLIN, LAKE STREET, PLACES LIKE THAT. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT'S [2:26:37] INCLUDED IN THIS ORDINANCE THAT YOU CAN HIGHLIGHT ON THOSE CULTURAL CORRIDORS OR EVEN [2:26:44] OUTSIDE DOWNTOWN. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. SO WE DO HAVE THOSE FEW SETS OF [2:26:50] IMPROVEMENTS AROUND ADDITIONAL SIGN ALLOCATIONS FOR CM3 DISTRICTS. BUT CERTAINLY STAFF WOULD BE [2:26:56] MORE THAN WILLING TO LOOK AT MAKING ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS INTO THE FUTURE AROUND AMENDMENTS FOR OUR AREAS [2:27:03] OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN. I THINK DOWNTOWN IS A GREAT PLACE TO KIND OF TEST SOME OF [2:27:09] THESE REGULATIONS AND SEE HOW THEY FIT WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF A MORE HEAVILY URBAN ENVIRONMENT. [2:27:14] AND THEN WE CAN MOVE TOWARDS OUR OTHER CORRIDORS MOVING WITH THE SUCCESS OF THIS PROJECT. >> YES. [2:27:19] AND ALSO I AGREE, I THINK THE BILLBOARD SYSTEM IS OUTDATED, NEEDS TO BE IMPROVED. [2:27:25] I UNDERSTAND THAT MAYBE IT'S LIKE 1 OR 2 COMPANIES THAT ARE PROBABLY OWN THE MAJORITY OF IT. [2:27:31] AND I'D LIKE TO SEE IT MORE OPEN TO BUSINESSES AND THE SYSTEM [2:27:43] WHICH I DON'T UNDERSTAND MAJORITY OF THE TIME. BUT WE'RE GETTING RID OF IT SO THAT'S A GOOD THING. [2:27:49] LET'S MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE CREATING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR NOT [2:27:56] JUST A COUPLE COMPANIES, BUT MORE LIKE PRIVATE OWNERS, THE COMMUNITY OWNERS, THE BUSINESSES [2:28:02] AND EXPANDING THAT. I LIKE TO SEE IT. SO YEAH LET'S PUT A DATE AND TIME AND GET THAT ORDINANCE [2:28:07] GOING. I WILL RECOGNIZE VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. [2:28:13] THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. I WANTED TO SEE IF YOU COULD [2:28:19] JUST SHARE A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT HOW A REVENUE SHARING [2:28:25] MODEL COULD OPERATE. BECAUSE THE THING THAT I AM VERY SENSITIVE TO IS DOING A [2:28:32] CONVERSION FROM STATIC TO DIGITAL WITHOUT AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE REVENUE SHARING. AND I WANT TO GET A BETTER [2:28:38] UNDERSTANDING OF LIKE IF WE WORK WITH OUR STATE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION TO GET SOMETHING, WHAT DO WE SEEK TO GET TO [2:28:44] BENEFIT THE REST OF DOWNTOWN AND OUR CITY AND THE PLAN FOR VIBRANCY THERE? >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, VICE CHAIR [2:28:52] CHOWDHURY, SO THE WAY THAT WE ARE PROPOSING TO BRING THIS TO [2:28:57] THE LEGISLATURE IS IN AN OPEN-ENDED MANNER. SO THERE ARE SEVERAL WAYS THAT A REVENUE SHARING MODEL CAN OCCUR. [2:29:04] IT COULD BE A TAXING DISTRICT WHERE NEW BILLBOARDS ARE TAXED ON A PORTION OF THEIR REVENUE. [2:29:10] IT COULD BE A REVENUE SHARE AGREEMENT THAT THEY'RE REQUIRED TO ENTER INTO. SO A PORTION OF THE REVENUE THAT'S GENERATED FROM THOSE [2:29:16] BILLBOARDS GOES DIRECTLY TO THE CITY, THE STATE LEGISLATURE WOULD DECIDE IF THAT'S THE GENERAL FUND OR INTO A SPECIFIC [2:29:23] PLACE. SO FOR EXAMPLE, DENVER DIVERTS ALL OF THAT FUNDING INTO SPECIFIC CATEGORIES FOR ARTS [2:29:30] IMPROVEMENTS AND PUBLIC ARTS AND FESTIVALS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. SO THAT'S A BIT OF BARGAINING [2:29:38] WITH THE STATE LEGISLATURE IF THEY WOULD DECIDE TO MOVE THAT FORWARD. AND THERE'S ALSO A FEE OPTION WHERE THE FEE FOR A BILLBOARD [2:29:44] WOULD BE X AMOUNT OF DOLLARS. CURRENTLY FEES ARE LIMITED TO THE COST THAT IT TAKES TO [2:29:49] ADMINISTER CODE. AND SO THAT FEE FOR A BILLBOARD IS JUST THE FEE THAT IT TAKES US TO INSPECT THAT BILLBOARD. [2:29:55] OTHER CITIES, LIKE SAN ANTONIO, THOSE FEES CAN BE UPWARDS OF HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS AND THAT MONEY THEN GOES EITHER [2:30:03] TO THE GENERAL FUND OR IS DIVERTED TO SPECIFIC FUNDING MECHANISMS THROUGH CITY COUNCIL. [2:30:08] AND SO WHERE THE DOLLARS ARE REALLY OCCURRING IS THROUGH [2:30:17] DIGITIZATION. THERE IS A PORTION OF REVENUE THAT IS GENERATED THROUGH STATIC [2:30:22] BILLBOARDS. BUT THERE IS MUCH MORE REVENUE GENERATED THROUGH A DIGITAL BILLBOARD. SO IF WE DON'T DO A PAUSE ON [2:30:27] THE -- A TEMPORARY PAUSE, A PROHIBITION, ON CONVERSIONS FROM [2:30:32] STATIC TO DIGITAL BILLBOARDS, WE ARE IN ESSENCE LEAVING THAT MONEY ON THE TABLE TO HAVE A [2:30:39] FUTURE REVENUE GENERATION SYSTEM THAT COULD GO INTO ARTS EFFORTS OR ELSEWHERE. >> YEAH, THANK YOU. [2:30:45] I FEEL LIKE THAT'S REALLY SHOULD BE ONE OF OUR BIG PRIORITIES LOOKING INTO THE NEXT FEW YEARS AND THAT'S WHY I FEEL PRETTY [2:30:54] CONFIDENT ABOUT US HAVING A PROHIBITION FOR NOW. AND I FEEL PRETTY CONFIDENT ABOUT US PURSUING THAT PHASE [2:31:02] TWO. I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF DEEP ALIGNMENT BETWEEN COUNCIL MEMBERS, THE MAYOR'S OFFICE, OUR CITY STAFF ON THAT. [2:31:13] I DID WANT TO ASK A QUESTION JUST ABOUT THE AMENDMENT THAT'S BEFORE US. [2:31:18] BECAUSE IT'S ESSENTIALLY CREATING AN EXEMPTION FOR A CERTAIN AREA OF THE CITY. COULD YOU KIND OF SPEAK TO WHAT [2:31:27] WE THINK TO LEAVE OR JUST SOME THOUGHTS ON STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE [2:31:33] BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T INCLUDE AN EXEMPTION IN THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE AND JUST WANTED TO GET A STRONGER FEELING FOR YOUR [2:31:38] THOUGHTS ON IT. >> VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY, COULD YOU CLARIFY WHICH EXEMPTION YOU'RE SPEAKING OF? [2:31:44] THE CITY-OWNED BUILDINGS EXEMPTION? >> NO, THE ALTERATIONS FOR [2:31:53] DIGITIZATION IN THE DOWNTOWN WEST ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT. [2:31:58] >> THE MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN? >> YES, EXACTLY. [2:32:04] >> SO THIS SPEAKS DIRECTLY OF THE QUESTION OF ALLOWING THIS MOMENTUM TO BUILD FOR ALLOWING [2:32:10] THIS REVENUE SHARING MODEL. ORIGINALLY, WE HAD JUST CONSIDERED THIS PAUSE TO BE A PAUSE ON ANY NEW BILLBOARDS AND [2:32:16] ON THE ALTERATION OF BILLBOARDS. WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH CHANGES TO EXISTING SIGNS TO ALLOW THEM [2:32:23] TO CHANGE AREA OR HEIGHT WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF WHAT'S EXISTING, BUT THE DIGITIZATION IS REALLY [2:32:29] THE ALTERATION THAT WAS MOST IMPORTANT TO MAINTAIN THIS IDEA AROUND CREATING A NEW SYSTEM. [2:32:37] AND THEN THE DOWNTOWN WEST ENTERTAINMENT BILLBOARD QUESTION WAS AROUND THE COMMENTS WE RECEIVED AT PLANNING COMMISSION [2:32:43] AND THE CONCERN FROM DOWNTOWN PROPERTY OWNERS THAT HAVE [2:32:48] BILLBOARDS THAT THIS PROHIBITION JUST WOULD NOT END AND WE WOULD NOT REINSTATE THEIR ABILITY TO [2:32:53] HAVE DIGITAL BILLBOARDS INTO THE FUTURE. >> YEAH, THANK YOU. I HEAR THAT CONCERN. [2:32:58] I FEEL LIKE AGAIN, YOU HAVE AA [2:33:06] TRIFECTA IN COUNCIL MEMBERS, MAYOR'S OFFICE AND STAFF [2:33:11] COMMITTING TO PHASE TWO WHICH IS [2:33:16] THAT'S A BIG DEAL IN THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS. [2:33:21] CAN YOU APPROXIMATE HOW MANY STATIC BILLBOARDS ARE IN THE DOWNTOWN WEST ENTERTAINMENT [2:33:27] BILLBOARD DISTRICT? I'M TRYING TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING OF HOW MANY COULD DIGITIZE SHOULD WE APPROVE THIS [2:33:34] AMENDMENT? >> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION ON HAND. [2:33:40] WE COULD CERTAINLY DO A WALK THROUGH AND GET THAT INFORMATION FOR YOU. BUT IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT I HAVE IN FRONT OF ME. [2:33:46] I IMAGINE IT'S A HANDFUL. >> YEAH. I THINK THE THING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO GET A BETTER [2:33:53] UNDERSTANDING OF IS WHAT'S THE LEVEL OF IMPACT THAT WE WOULD SEE. HOW MANY BILLBOARDS WOULD WE SEE [2:33:58] DIGITIZE IN THAT AREA SHOULD WE MAKE THE CHANGE? [2:34:05] WITHOUT THAT INFORMATION, I'M NOT ABLE TO SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT BEFORE US. I DO FEEL LIKE IT'S IMPORTANT [2:34:12] FOR US TO DO THE VISIONING TO ALSO ENGAGE WITH RESIDENTS, BUT [2:34:19] EVEN MORE IMPORTANTLY HAVE THE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE FUTURE OF DOWNTOWN AND THE REST OF THE [2:34:25] CITY BECAUSE DOWNTOWN IS A HUGE PART OF OUR TAX BASE WITH OUR [2:34:30] STATE LEGISLATURE AND WORK WITH THEM TO SEE WHAT THEIR APPETITE IS TO MAKE CHANGES FOR REVENUE [2:34:38] SHARING. >> COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN. AND THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER [2:34:45] CASHMAN, FOR WORKING ON THIS. I KNOW YOU SAID IT'S BEEN OVER A YEAR, BUT IT REALLY DOES FEEL A LITTLE RUSHED FOR ME. [2:34:51] AND IT'S NOT BECAUSE YOU ALL HAVEN'T DONE A FANTASTIC JOB AT TRYING TO FIGURE OUT SOME [2:34:56] SOLUTIONS. I JUST FEEL LIKE THERE'S NO CLEAR VISION. AND I'M NOT -- MOST OF THE [2:35:02] CONVERSATIONS ARE ABOUT DOWNTOWN AND I'M MORE CONCERNED ABOUT LAURIE AVENUE, UPPER HARBOR [2:35:08] TERMINAL. YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE PLACES ON THE NORTH SIDE WHERE THERE'S JUST LIKE A RANDOM BILLBOARD, LIKE WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE [2:35:14] FOR THE COMMUNITY, RIGHT? WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE OVER [2:35:21] THE DAIRY QUEEN ON LYNDALE, ALL THESE RANDOM ONE-OFF BILLBOARDS [2:35:27] AND I DON'T FEEL LIKE WHAT I'VE HAD A CHANCE TO UNDERSTAND REALLY ANSWERS QUESTIONS THAT I [2:35:33] HAVE FOR THE WARD THAT I LIVE IN. THE FREEWAY IS IN MY WARD, RIGHT? WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? [2:35:38] WE'VE RECENTLY SEEN PEOPLE TAKE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN ON DISPLAY, THAT CAR THAT'S BEEN [2:35:44] THERE FOR I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY YEARS OVER 94 IN WARD 4 HAS BEEN TAKEN DOWN. AND THIS MAKES ME FEEL LIKE [2:35:49] MAYBE IT COULD HAVE STAYED, IT'S ART AND WE'RE DOING SOME DIFFERENT THINGS WITH ART IN THE CITY NOW ON DISPLAY. [2:35:57] SO IT'S JUST A LITTLE, IT JUST DOESN'T FEEL CLEAR TO ME. [2:36:02] AND I SUPPORT WHAT COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN IS DOING. I LOVE THAT YOU SAID THERE'S OPPORTUNITY FOR PHASE TWO OR [2:36:08] AMENDMENTS AND THOSE THINGS IN THE FUTURE. AND I WILL BE IN TOUCH TO MAKE SURE THAT WARD 4 CURRENTLY AND [2:36:15] FUTURE PROJECTS CAN BENEFIT FROM THIS. I HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS AROUND [2:36:21] REVENUE ESTIMATES AND LIKE WHAT THAT MEANS FOR WHAT EXISTS IN WARD 4 AND HOW DO WE, IS THERE A [2:36:27] WAY FOR US TO OFFSET SOME OF THAT REVENUE TO HELP WITH THE GROWING PROPERTY TAXES AND YOU [2:36:33] KNOW, THE THINGS THAT PEOPLE ARE ASKING ABOUT SPECIFICALLY IN MY WARD. SO MY OFFICE WILL BE IN TOUCH TO [2:36:41] SET UP A BRIEFING PROBABLY BEFORE THIS NEXT MEETING. I'M GOING TO SUPPORT IT TODAY, [2:36:46] BUT I REALLY DO WANT TO WORK WITH YOU ALL ON WHAT PHASE TWO OF THIS LOOKS LIKE AND HOW WE [2:36:52] CAN MAKE SURE THAT IT'S BENEFICIAL TO COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE BILLBOARDS AND THIS IS NOT [2:36:58] JUST LIKE A CONVERSATION THAT IS FELT LIKE IT'S ABOUT DOWNTOWN. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. [2:37:05] SEEING NO ONE ELSE, I WILL ASK CITY CLERK TO CALL THE -- [2:37:12] >> MR. CHAIR, APOLOGIZE FOR THE INTERRUPTION. JOEL FUSSI FROM THE CITY [2:37:17] ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. PROCEDURELY, IT MIGHT BE BEST TO VOTE ON COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN'S [2:37:23] MOTION THAT SHE'S PUT BEFORE THE COMMITTEE. I ALSO WANTED TO NOTE IN THE [2:37:28] LIMS FILE IN THE STAFF MEMO DOCUMENT, THERE IS ALSO ON THE SECOND PAGE A RECOMMENDED TEXT [2:37:34] AMENDMENT OR A MOTION THAT JUST CHANGES A LITTLE BIT OF WORDING, BUT IT'S ONE THAT THE CITY [2:37:39] ATTORNEY'S OFFICE RECOMMENDS FOR A DIFFERENT SECTION. IT JUST KIND OF LOCKS IN A [2:37:46] COUPLE OF THINGS ON THE WORDING THAT WE THINK WOULD BE ADVISABLE TO ADOPT AS WELL. [2:37:54] SO IT'S CERTAINLY UP TO YOU AS THE CHAIR, BUT I THINK IT MIGHT BE BEST TO VOTE ON COUNCILMEMBER [2:38:00] CASHMAN'S INITIAL MOTION AND THEN WE WOULD ASK THAT SOMEBODY [2:38:05] MOVE THIS SUBSEQUENT MOTION AFTER THAT. >> IS THERE AN OPTION TO DO THIS ON THE COUNCIL MEETING? [2:38:15] I HAVEN'T SEEN THE LANGUAGE. >> I WOULD ASK CHAIR, IF YOU COULD SEND ME THAT PROPOSED AMENDMENT, I'D BE HAPPY TO LOOK [2:38:21] AT IT AND THEN BRING IT AT COUNCIL NEXT WEEK. >> IT WAS THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS [2:38:27] IN THE MEMORANDUM. SO THE CLARIFICATIONS AROUND EVENTS AND NONRELATED EVENTS FOR [2:38:35] OFF PREMISES SIGNS. SO CIVIC, CULTURAL, AND SPORTS ORGANIZATION SIGNAGE, AND ALSO [2:38:41] EVENT SIGNAGE, THERE'S A CLARIFICATION THERE. AND THEN A CLARIFICATION AROUND [2:38:46] THE REQUIREMENT THAT THERE BE A CONTRACT IN PLACE FOR A [2:38:52] BILLBOARD TO BE CONSTRUCTED ON CITY-OWNED PROPERTY. >> OKAY. FINE WITH THAT. [2:38:57] LET'S JUST TAKE -- >> CHAIR OSMAN, MAY I JUST SPEAK. THAT LANGUAGE IS ALREADY IN THE REVISED ORDINANCE. [2:39:02] >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT. [2:39:08] A LOT EASIER NOW. FIRST WE'LL TAKE THE COUNCILMEMBER CASHMAN AMENDMENT. CITY CLERK, CAN YOU PLEASE CALL [2:39:14] THE ROLL. >> YES, ON CASHMAN'S AMENDMENT. COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. >> AYE. >> CASHMAN. >> AYE. >> JENKINS. [2:39:21] >> AYE. >> CHAVEZ. >> AYE. >> VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY. >> NAY. [2:39:26] >> CHAIR OSMAN. >> AYE. >> THERE ARE FIVE AYES AND ONE [2:39:32] NAY. >> THAT MOTION PASSES. NOW PLEASE CALL THE ROLL FOR [2:39:40] AMENDED LANGUAGE. >> COUNCILMEMBER VETAW. >> AYE. >> CASHMAN. [2:39:47] >> AYE. >> JENKINS. >> AYE. >> CHAVEZ. >> AYE. [2:39:52] >> VICE CHAIR CHOWDHURY. >> AYE. >> AND CHAIR OSMAN. >> AYE. >> THERE ARE SIX AYES AND NO [2:39:58] NAYS. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. THAT MOTION PASSES. [2:40:03] ALL RIGHT, WE DO HAVE ONE MORE ITEM LEFT ON THE AGENDA. LASTLY, WE WILL RECEIVE A REPORT [2:40:10] PRESENTATION ON TENANT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE. I WILL WELCOME NICOLE GONZALEZ [2:40:19] TO PRESENT THAT ITEM. WELCOME. [2:41:00] >> GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR OSMAN AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY NAME IS NICOLE GONZALEZ, THE MANAGER OF REGULATORY SERVICES [2:41:07] ALTERNATIVE ENFORCEMENT TEAM. I'M HERE TODAY TO PRESENT ON THE TENANT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE [2:41:13] LEGISLATIVE DIRECTIVE. THIS LEGISLATIVE DIRECTIVE REQUESTED INFORMATION IN THREE PRIMARY AREAS. [2:41:18] AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, IT'S ALWAYS OUR GOALS TO MINIMIZE DISPLACEMENT AND SUPPORT RENTERS [2:41:24] WHO FACE COMPLEX HOUSING SITUATIONS. SO WE APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THIS LEGISLATIVE [2:41:30] DIRECTIVE AND SHARE ABOUT THE WAYS WE CAN PREVENT AND RESPOND TO DISPLACEMENT. [2:41:36] AS IT RELATES TO THIS LEGISLATIVE DIRECTIVE, IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND WHEN A RENTER QUALIFIES FOR ASSISTANCE [2:41:45] AND HOW FUNDS ARE GIVEN AND RECOVERED BY THE CITY. TENANT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE HELPS TENANTS WHO ARE DISPLACED [2:41:52] DUE TO SEVERE MAINTENANCE OR REPAIR ISSUES CAUSED BY A PROPERTY OWNER'S NEGLIGENCE. [2:41:57] WHEN BOTH OF THESE CONDITIONS ARE MET, RENTERS MAY QUALIFY FOR RELOCATION ASSISTANCE EQUAL TO THREE MONTHS OF THE RENT THAT [2:42:04] THEY PAY. WHEN A RENTER QUALIFIES FOR RELOCATION ASSISTANCE, WE ISSUE [2:42:09] AN ORDER TO THE PROPERTY OWNER, THEY HAVE TWO WEEKS TO PAY THE FUNDS. THEY CAN APPEAL IT WITHIN THAT TIME. IF THEY DO NOT PAY THE FUNDS, [2:42:17] THEN THE CITY DOES. IF THE CITY PAYS THE FUNDS, THE RENTAL PROPERTY OWNER MUST PAY BACK THE CITY. AND IF THEY CHOOSE NOT TO, IT [2:42:23] GOES TO A PROPERTY TAX ASSESSMENT. THE CITY IS ONLY ALLOWED TO [2:42:29] RECOVER RELOCATION FUNDS FROM A PROPERTY OWNER BECAUSE THE OWNER HELD LIABILITY IN THE ISSUE. THAT MEANS THAT EVENTS CAUSED BY [2:42:35] FACTORS OUTSIDE THE PROPERTY OWNER'S CONTROL SUCH AS ARSON, CRIMINAL ACTIVITY, NATURAL [2:42:41] DISASTERS AND ISSUES EFFECTING ONLY PART OF THE UNIT DO NOT QUALIFY. [2:42:47] THE PROCESS OF COLLECTING PAYMENTS FROM A PROPERTY ASSESSMENT TYPICALLY TAKES SEVERAL YEARS. [2:42:53] IN MOST CASES, THE QUICKEST TIMELINE FOR COLLECTION IS APPROXIMATELY TWO YEARS. SOME ASSESSMENTS MAY NEVER BE [2:43:00] COLLECTED IF THE PROPERTY OWNER FAILS TO PAY THE PROPERTY TAXES AND THE PROPERTY GOES THROUGH [2:43:05] TAX FORFEITURE. AS WE TALK ABOUT THE RECOVERY [2:43:11] RATE OF FUNDS, IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER HOW LONG IT CAN TAKE TO RECOVER THESE FUNDS. BETWEEN 2021 AND 2024, WE'VE [2:43:22] GIVEN $170,523 TO DISPLACED RENTERS IN NEED. WE'VE BEEN VERY GRATEFUL TO BE ABLE TO OFFER THIS AS A RESOURCE [2:43:28] TO RENTERS WHEN THEY ARE FACING TOUGH CIRCUMSTANCES. AS FOR THE AMOUNT OF FUNDS [2:43:33] RECOVERED BY THE CITY, WHILE THE AMOUNT LOOKS LOW AT THIS POINT IN TIME, IT DOES NOT CAPTURE THE FULL PICTURE. AS I MENTIONED, RECOVERY COSTS [2:43:39] CAN TAKE YEARS AS CASES WORK THEIR WAY THROUGH THE APPEALS OR SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS. AS OF THE END OF OCTOBER, THERE [2:43:46] IS NEARLY $77,000 IN FUNDS THAT COULD STILL BE RECOVERED IN THE [2:43:53] FUTURE. SOME OF THESE CASES ARE IN THE PHASE WHERE THE PROPERTY OWNER [2:43:59] STILL HAS TIME TO PAY BACK THE CITY, AND OTHERS ARE WORKING THEIR WAY THROUGH THE NORMAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROCESS WHICH [2:44:05] WILL GIVE US ANOTHER CHANCE TO COLLECT THE FUNDS THROUGH PROPERTY TAX ASSESSMENTS. [2:44:10] THERE ARE UNIQUE CASES THAT CONTRIBUTE TO THIS NUMBER BEING LOWER, SUCH AS PROPERTIES THAT [2:44:15] WENT INTO TAX FORFEITURE, OR THE CITY WAIVED THE REPAYMENT OF FUNDS DUE TO THE OWNER SHOWING [2:44:20] PROOF THAT THEY WERE NOT NEGLIGENT. ONE FINAL FACTOR THAT SKEWS THIS DATA IS THE BELLOFFS CASE. [2:44:29] THIS IN THIS SITUATION, RESIDENTS WERE DISPLACED BY [2:44:34] FLOODING. AND WE COULDN'T RECOVER ALL OF THE FUNDS AFTER DISCOVERING THE [2:44:40] SPRINKLER SYSTEM HAD BEEN PROPERLY MAINTAINED. THE PROPERTY OWNER PROVIDED PROOF THAT HE WAS NOT AT FAULT, SO WE NEGOTIATED TO ALLOW ONLY A [2:44:48] PARTIAL REIMBURSEMENT OF THE SUPPORT WE GAVE TO RENTERS. NOW THAT WE HAVE A SOLID FOUNDATION OF THE CURRENT [2:44:54] PROGRAM, I'LL ADDRESS NEEDED RESOURCES AND POLICY FRAMEWORK FOR AN EXPANDED TENANT [2:44:59] RELOCATION ASSISTANCE THAT COVERS TEMPORARY DISPLACEMENT. [2:45:05] AS MY TEAM AND I WORK TO ANSWER THIS LEGISLATIVE DIRECTIVE, WE WORKED CLOSELY WITH THE CITY ATTORNEYS. [2:45:10] WE FOUND THAT THE ONLY WAY WE COULD LEGALLY PROVIDE ASSISTANCE FOR TEMPORARY DISPLACEMENT MEANING SITUATIONS WHERE THE [2:45:16] PROPERTY OWNER WAS NOT AT FAULT IS BY THE CITY AWARDING A GRANT TO RENTERS. [2:45:22] TO BE CLEAR, THE CITY WOULD NOT RECOVER THESE FUNDS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS BECAUSE ASKING [2:45:27] THEM TO PAY FOR RELOCATION WHEN THEY WERE NOT AT FAULT WOULD VIOLATE THEIR DUE PROCESS. [2:45:32] ADDITIONAL STAFF SUCH AS INSPECTORS IN SUPPORTING ROLES MAY ALSO BE NEEDED TO FULLY IMPLEMENT THIS. AND WE WOULD NEED TO CONDUCT A [2:45:39] FULL STAFFING STUDY TO DETERMINE HOW MANY STAFF WOULD BE NEEDED. [2:45:44] WE WOULD USE THE CITY FUNDED GRANT FOR TWO PRIMARY INSTANCES. THE FIRST FOR ACTS OF GOD SUCH [2:45:53] AS TORNADO OR FIRE DAMAGE THAT ARE BEYOND CONTROL OF BOTH THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THE RENTER. [2:45:59] SECONDLY, FOR ACTIONS ALSO BEYOND THE PROPERTY OWNER'S CONTROL THAT COULD RESULT IN THE PROPERTY BEING CONDEMNED. [2:46:05] ASSISTANCE FOR THE RENTER WOULD GO UNTIL THE UNIT IS INHABITABLE AGAIN, THE TENANT HAS RELOCATED, [2:46:11] THE MAXIMUM LENGTH OF TIME FOR ASSISTANCE IS REACHED, OR WHEN A RENTER'S INSURANCE KICKS IN. [2:46:20] WE RECOMMEND THREE TIMELINE CATEGORIES FOR DIFFERENT LEVELS OF ASSISTANCE. [2:46:25] FOR IMMEDIATE ASSISTANCE WOULD BE UP TO 24 HOURS, AN EMERGENCY [2:46:31] HOTEL VOUCHER OR A STIPEND. FOR SHORT-TERM IS 24 TO 48 HOURS [2:46:37] OR UP TO 72 DAYS FOR REPAIRS [2:46:43] HAPPENING BUT NOT RESOLVED. AND MIDTERM 30 TO 60 DAYS IS [2:46:48] REQUIRING MORE TIME AND REINSPECTIONS. THERE ARE NOTABLE CHALLENGES [2:46:54] RELATED TO THESE TIMELINES, THESE ARE OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR STAFF, BUT THEY'RE WORTH NOTING AS COUNCIL [2:47:00] CONSIDERS RESEARCH NEEDS FOR SUCH A POLICY. FIRST CUTTING A CHECK NOR RELOCATION ASSISTANCE RIGHT NOW [2:47:06] TAKES TWO WEEKS UNDER CITY PROCESSES. BECAUSE APPROVALS ARE REQUIRED FOR MULTIPLE TEAMS IN REGULATORY [2:47:12] SERVICES AND OTHER DEPARTMENTS, WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE AS QUICK AS [2:47:19] THE POLICY WOULD REQUIRE. SECONDLY, WE WOULD LIKELY NEED RESOURCES SUCH AS LONG-TERM CONTRACTS WITH HOTELS IN THE [2:47:26] CITY THAT COULD QUICKLY TAKE IN PEOPLE WHEN NEEDED AND WE WOULD WANT MULTIPLE OPTIONS THROUGHOUT [2:47:31] MINNEAPOLIS SO PEOPLE COULD STAY AS CLOSE TO THEIR HOMES AS POSSIBLE. THIRDLY, PROVIDING ASSISTANCE TO A LARGER NUMBER OF DISPLACED [2:47:38] RENTERS SUCH AS APARTMENTS THAT COULD HAVE 200 TO 300 RENTERS [2:47:43] WOULD REQUIRE GREATER RESOURCES FROM THE CITY. AND WE CURRENTLY HAVE RENTERS [2:47:50] DECLINE ASSISTANCE, BECAUSE IT MAY PUSH THEM ABOVE THE THRESHOLDS FOR OTHER INCOME SUPPORT THEY RECEIVE. [2:47:56] WE EXPECT TO SEE THE SAME THRESHOLDS FOR ANY SUPPORT WITH [2:48:02] TEMPORARY DISPLACEMENT. TO HELP US GAUGE THE DEMAND FOR TEMPORARY DISPLACEMENT, WE FOUND [2:48:08] ONLY SIX CASES THAT WERE ELIGIBLE FOR TENANT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE OVER THE LAST FOUR YEARS. [2:48:13] THESE WERE CASES WHERE ARSON CAUSED A FIRE, A BULLET STRUCK THE BUILDING'S FIRE SUPPRESSION [2:48:20] SYSTEM CAUSING FLOODING, AND THREE DIFFERENT SITUATIONS IN ORDER TO CORRECT APPLY TO JUST [2:48:26] ONE BEDROOM, NOT THE ENTIRE UNIT. AND THEN LIGHTNING STRUCK A BUILDING AND CAUSED A FIRE. [2:48:32] THIS POLICY IS IMPLEMENTED, WE COULD SEE MORE DEMAND FOR TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE AS MORE OF [2:48:38] THESE CASES ARE BROUGHT TO THE CITY'S ATTENTION. AS OF NOW, IT APPEARS THAT THERE ARE FEW CASES NOT CURRENTLY [2:48:44] COVERED BY TENANT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE. IF SOMEONE NEEDS TO RELOCATE [2:48:49] BECAUSE THEIR UNIT IS UNFIT, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF RESOURCES AVAILABLE NOW. [2:48:56] WE ENCOURAGE TENANTS TO GET RENTER'S INSURANCE IF POSSIBLE, BECAUSE IF THEY HAVE IT THEY MAY [2:49:03] BE ABLE TO GET HELP DURING PERSONAL PROPERTY LOSSES. [2:49:14] WE COLLABORATE WITH ORGANIZATIONS LIKE THE RED CROSS AND EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE IN [2:49:19] UNFORESEEN EVENTS. BOTH OF THESE RESOURCES MAY LIMIT THE NUMBER OF TIMES THE CITY WOULD NEED TO STEP IN AND [2:49:24] PROVIDE ASSISTANCE FOR TEMPORARY DISPLACEMENT. BASED ON OUR EXPERIENCE, WE KNOW [2:49:30] THAT EARLY INTERVENTION CAN PREVENT PROBLEMS THAT MIGHT OTHERWISE LEAD TO DISPLACEMENT. [2:49:37] SEVERE VIOLATIONS SUCH AS LACK OF HEAT, ELECTRICAL HAZARDS, OR FIRE DAMAGE DO NOT ALWAYS [2:49:42] REQUIRE RENTERS TO MOVE. THIS IS BECAUSE OUR TEAM FOCUSES ON ACHIEVING COMPLIANCE BEFORE [2:49:50] ISSUES ESCALATE. SOME OF THE ALTERNATIVE ENFORCEMENT TOOLS WE USE INCLUDE THE EMERGENCY HOUSING REPAIR BOARD. [2:49:55] THIS IS A BOARD THAT ALLOWS REGULATORY SERVICES, GIVES REG [2:50:00] SERVICES THE AUTHORITY TO ORDER URGENT REPAIRS OR TAKE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS WHEN AN OWNER [2:50:06] FAILS TO ADDRESS HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS. TENANT REMEDY ACTIONS AND EMERGENCY TENANT REMEDY ACTIONS, [2:50:12] THE LEGAL TOOLS THAT ALLOW THE CITY IN CERTAIN CASES TO SEEK COURT CASES REQUIRING LANDLORDS [2:50:17] TO SEEK NECESSARY REPAIRS, TO RESTORE ESSENTIAL SERVICES KEEPING RESIDENTS HOUSED SAFELY. [2:50:25] RENTAL LICENSE OPERATING CONDITIONS, THEY'RE CUSTOM LICENSE CONDITIONS THAT CAN BE VOLUNTARILY OR IMPOSED ON [2:50:30] PROBLEM PROPERTIES TO IMPOSE COMPLIANCE SUCH AS LAST MINUTE [2:50:36] INSPECTIONS OR AS A LAST MINUTE EFFORT TO GAIN COMPLIANCE BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH REVOCATION [2:50:41] ACTION. THE GOOD CAUSE PROGRAM ALLOWS US TO IDENTIFY AND INSPECT MORE [2:50:47] FREQUENT PROPERTY MANAGERS THAT HAVE A HISTORY OF MISMANAGEMENT. [2:50:52] AND THEN PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENTS, THIS ALLOWS US TO ADDRESS [2:50:57] SYSTEMIC ISSUES OF MULTIPLE PROPERTIES UNDER ONE COMMON OWNERSHIP. IN CLOSING, THE TENANT [2:51:03] RELOCATION ASSISTANCE LEGISLATIVE DIRECTIVE PROVIDED US AN OPPORTUNITY TO EVALUATE HOW THE CITY CAN BETTER SUPPORT [2:51:09] RENTERS EXPERIENCING TEMPORARY DISPLACEMENT WHILE MAINTAINING FAIRNESS AND LEGAL INTEGRITY FOR [2:51:15] PROPERTY OWNERS. EXPANDING THE EXISTING TENANT RELOCATION PROGRAM TO INCLUDE [2:51:22] TEMPORARY DISPLACEMENT IS NOT CURRENTLY FEASIBLE UNDER ITS CURRENT STRUCTURE AS IT WOULD [2:51:28] REQUIRE CHARGING PROPERTY OWNERS FOR SITUATIONS BEYOND THEIR CONTROL. HOWEVER CREATING A CITY-SPONSORED GRANT OFFERS A [2:51:34] LAWFUL AND EQUITABLE PATH FORWARD. ONE THAT ENSURES TENANTS ARE NOT [2:51:39] LEFT WITHOUT SUPPORT WHEN UNFORESEEN EVENTS MAKE THEIR HOMES TEMPORARILY UNINHABITABLE. [2:51:45] ESTABLISHING SUCH A FUND WOULD REQUIRE CROSS DEPARTMENTAL RESOURCES AND ORGANIZATION AND A [2:51:52] FRAMEWORK TO PROVIDE WHEN AND [2:51:59] HOW. THIS APPROACH REPRESENTS A BALANCED SOLUTION THAT PRIORITIZES TENANT SAFETY, [2:52:05] UPHOLDS DUE PROCESS, AND STRENGTHENS THE CITY'S OVERALL HOUSING STABILITY STRATEGY. THANK YOU, CHAIR OSMAN AND [2:52:10] COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR YOUR TIME TODAY. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT WONDERFUL PRESENTATION. [2:52:16] DEFINITELY WE CAN LEARN A LOT FROM IMPROVING TENANT RELOCATION [2:52:22] PROGRAM. AND MY COMMENTS IS WHEN WE MENTION THAT, PEOPLE THINK IT'S [2:52:29] AN EMERGENCY THING THAT THEY PUT YOU IN A HOTEL. BUT IT'S NOT, IT'S VERY [2:52:36] COMPLICATED. BUT WE NEED TO GET CLOSE TO THAT WHERE WE'RE ABLE TO REACH THE [2:52:42] RES RESIDENTS THAT ARE DEALING WITH THIS CRISIS AND HELP THEM. BUT I KNOW THE STAFF HAVE BEEN [2:52:48] DOING A WONDERFUL JOB WITH CONNECTING WITH RED CROSS AND WORKING WITH THE RESIDENT. [2:52:55] AND I WANT TO PRAISE ENRIQUE FOR HIS WORK ON THAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT. [2:53:00] I SEE NO ONE ELSE IN QUEUE, SO I WILL ASK THE CITY CLERK TO RECEIVE AND FILE. >> THANK YOU. [2:53:05] >> ALL RIGHT. SEEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS BEFORE US, WITH NO OBJECTION, I WILL DECLARE THE MEETING [2:53:11] ADJOURNED. THANK YOU.