. .. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ PLEASE STAND BY. ≫ ONE MINUTE TO START, TECH TEAM. ≫ OK, ONE MOMENT. ≫ WELCOME, EVERYONE, TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. I AM THE CHAIR OF THE COMMISSION. AT THIS TIME, I WILL ASK THE CLERKTO CALL THE ROLL. ≫ COMMISSIONER BAXLEY. ≫ HERE. ≫ COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY. ≫ PRESENT. ≫ COMMISSIONER CONLEY. ≫ PRESENT. ≫ COMMISSIONER GARCIA. ≫ COMMISSIONER SHEPPARD? ≫ PRESENT. ≫ VICE PRESIDENT WAGNER. ≫ HERE. ≫ THERE ARE SEVEN MEMBERS PRESENT. ≫ WE A QUORUM. FIRST, I WILL TURN TO THE MINUTES OF JUNE 8, 2026. IS A MOTION TO ADOPT THOSE MINUTES? ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THE MINUTES ARE ADOPTED. NEXT, WE ARE GOING TO ORGANIZE OUR AGENDA. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING WE DISCUSS ITEM NUMBER FOUR, 3000 MINNEHAHA AVENUE, AND THAT THE REST OF THE ITEMS BEYOND CONSENT. I WILL READ THROUGH THE OTHER ITEMS. IF YOU WERE HERE TO SPEAK AGAINST ONE OF THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, LET US KNOW WHEN WE CALL THAT ITEM. IF YOU WANTED TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OR MAKE COMMENTS, YOU WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO DO THAT IN A LITTLE BIT. FIRST, WE ARE GOING TO DISCUSS ITEM NUMBER FOUR. ITEM NUMBER FIVE, 1225 BROADWAY ST. IS ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK AGAINST THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR ITEM NUMBER FIVE? WE WILL KEEP THAT ON CONSENT. ITEM NUMBER SIX. 3409 BOARDMAN ST. WAS ANYONE HERE TO BEGIN AGAINST THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR ITEM NUMBER SIX? WE WILL KEEP THAT IN CONSENT. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, 2125 JAMES AVENUE NORTH, WAS ANYONE HERE TO SPEAKAGAINST STAFF RECOMMENDATION? OK. WE BELIEVE THAT ON CONSENT.TO REVIEW, WE ARE GOING TO DISCUSS ITEM FOUR. IN ITEMS 5, 6, 7 WILL BE ON CONSENT. ALL RIGHT, I'M GOING TO OPEN THE HEARING FOR OUR CONSENT AGENDA. IF ANYONE WANTS TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS ON 5, 6, 7, YOU CAN DO SO NOW. NOT SEEING ANY, I WILL CLOSE THE HEARING. COMMISSIONERS, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS ON OUR CONSENT ITEMS? ALL RIGHT. WITH SOMEONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEMS 5, 6, 7 WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS? ≫ SO MOVED. ≫ ANY FINAL DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR, SAFEY A YE. THAT IS ADOPTED. IF YOU ARE HERE FOR 5, 6, 7, YOUR ITEM IS PASSED. GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR ITEMS. NOW FOR THE MAIN EVENT, 3000 MINNEHAHA AVENUE. ANY STAFF IN DEFENSE? ≫ GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR MEYER AND COMMISSIONERS. BEFORE YOU TODAY ARE SEVERAL APPLICATIONS TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO-STORY APPROXIMATELY 16,600 FOOT ADDITION, THE RELOCATION OF A PUBLIC ALLEY AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS AT 3000 MINNEHAHA AVENUE AND 3033 SNELLING AVENUE.THIS IS THE FORMER THIRD PRECINCT SITE LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF LAKE AND MINNEHAHA. THESE APPLICATIONS WERE PREVIOUSLY CONTINUED FROM THE MAY 18 AND JUNE 8 MEETINGS BECAUSE WE PREVIOUSLY HAD A VERY ROBUST CONVERSATION ON THIS TOPIC AT THE MAY 18 HEARING, I AM NOT GOING TO RUN THROUGH THE WHOLE PROJECT AND APPLICATIONS BUT INSTEAD AM GOING TO FOCUS ON WHAT CHANGED BETWEEN MAY 18 AND WHAT IS IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY. THIS HERE IS THE UPDATED ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN. THE LARGEST CHANGE THAT HAS BEEN MADE SINCE MAY 18 IS TO RECONFIGURE THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SITE TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL MANEUVERING AREA ANDTO WIDEN THE PROPOSED DEAD-END ALLEY SEGMENT TO ALLOW FOR LARGER COMMERCIAL VEHICLES SERVING THE ADJACENT PROPERTY AT 3010 MINNEHAHA TO TRAVEL BETWEEN MINNEHAHA AVENUE AND SNELLING AVENUE. THE DEAD-END PORTION OF THE ALLEY IS PROPOSED TO BE WIDENED FROM 15 TO BETWEEN 27 AND 31 FEET IN WIDTH. THROUGH THE DEDICATION OF ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY AS PART OF THE PLAN. THIS ADDITIONAL MOVING --MANEUVERING AREA WOULD ALLOW FOR BUSES AND TRUCKS TO MAKE THE TURN BETWEEN THE PRIVATE DRIVEWAY ON THE 3010 MINNEHAHA PARCEL AND THE DEAD-END ALLEY AND THEN TO MAKETHE TURN TO THE EAST-WEST ALLEY SEGMENT AND TRAVEL OUT TO SNELLING AVENUE, AS WELL AS DOING THE SAME THING IN REVERSE. THIS CHANGE REDUCES THE LOT AREA OF THE NORTHERN PARCEL BY ABOUT 700 SQUARE FEET WITH THAT ADDITIONAL AREA GOINGTO THE ENLARGED ALLEY. THE APPLICANT HAS ALSO MOVED THE PARKING GARAGE FOR THE COMMUNITY BOATING TRAILER FURTHER TO THE NORTH, RECESSING IT FURTHER INTO THE LOGISTICS PART OF THE BUILDING. THIS SHORTENS THE NORTH-SOUTH DIMENSION OF THE PROPOSED ADDITION BY ABOUT 11. 5 FEET AND REDUCES THE BUILDINGFOOTPRINT BY A LITTLE OVER 260 SQUARE FEET. THE APPLICANT HAS ALSO PROPOSEDA NEW DESIGNATED WALKWAY ON THE PROJECT SITE WHICH WOULD CONNECT FROM THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK ON SNELLING AVENUE, THROUGH THE PROPERTY, TO THE NORTH-SOUTH ALLEY, TO THE REAR ENTRANCE OF THE BUILDING, AS WELL AS TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE OF 3010 MINNEHAHA. THESE CHANGES HAVE ALSO COME WITH SMALLER CHANGES TO THE SITE IMPROVEMENTS, THE BACKUP GENERATOR HAS BEEN ELIMINATED FROM THE PROJECT SCOPE. THE LANDSCAPED AREA AND SHRUB COUNT HAVE BEEN INCREASED SLIGHTLY. THERE HAVE BEEN SOME CHANGES TO THE MEDIAN ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE. THE AMOUNT OF TURN TO COMPLAINTS NEEDED FOR ACTIVEFUNCTIONS AND BLANK WALLS HAS BEEN REDUCED. THERE HAVE ALSO BEEN CHANGES TO THE ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE FOR LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING. THIS IS THE CIVIL SITE PLAN. WE CAN COME BACK TO THIS IF NEEDED FOR THE UPDATED CHANGE THAT SHOWS THE WIDENED DEAD-END SECTION OF THE ALLEY. THESE ARE THE TURNING DIAGRAMS.THESE IN PARTICULAR ARE FOR AN R.V. OF JUST OVER 50 FEET IN LENGTH. I AM SHOWING WHAT THAT TURN WOULD LOOK LIKE HEADING FROM SNELLING TO MINNEHAHA. THE NEXT ONE IS THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION. AND THEN, WE HAVE SOME COMPARISONS BETWEEN THE TWO DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF THE PROJECT YOU HAVE SEEN. IN THIS IMAGE, YOU ARE LOOKING AT THE ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN. THE TOP IS WHAT WAS IN FRONT OFYOU ON MAY 18. THE BOTTOM IS WHAT IS CURRENTLYPROPOSED. I RECOGNIZE THERE ARE SOME DIFFERENCES IN THE SYMBOLOGY AND COLORING. THE SAME HERE WITH THE LANDSCAPE LAY OUT PLAN SHOWING THE WIDENED ALLEY, THE CHANGE TO THE LANDSCAPING, WALKWAY THAT HAS BEEN ADDED. AND THIS IS THE SAME COMPARISON. I KNOW THERE IS A LITTLE DIFFERENCE IN THE RENDERING STYLES. IT IS A VERY SIMILAR VIEW SHOWING THE TWO DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF THE PROJECT. QUITE A FEW DIFFERENT PUBLIC COMMENTS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. I THINK THERE WERE SEVEN COMMENTS INCLUDED WITH THE PUBLISHED STAFF REPORT YOU SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED EIGHT OR NINE JUST NOW. AND HAPPY TO GO INTO FINDINGS AND COMPLIANCE RESPONSES IF NEEDED. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE COMMISSION APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND HERE. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REZONINGS AND THE VACATIONS AND RETURN THE C. P. ≫ THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FROM STAFF BEFOREWE OPEN THE HEARING? I AM NOT SEEING ANY. THANK YOU.WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. WE HAVE THE APPLICANT WITH US -- DO WE HAVE THE APPLICANT WITH US? YEAH. ≫ THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN MEYER, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. FOLLOWING THE TIME WE WERE HERELAST MAY 18, WHEN WE HEARD SOME CONCERNSABOUT MANEUVERABILITY AT THAT POINT SEEMED TO BE THE PRIMARY CONCERN. WE DID SCHEDULE A FOLLOW-UP MEETING WITH HOOK ANDLADDER. WE HAD A MEETING ON MAY 29, ABOUT 11 DAYS FOLLOWING THE LAST COMMISSION MEETING. WE MET WITHTHEM AND WENT OVER A NUMBER OF CONCERNS. AT THAT POINT, THE CONCERNS BECAME MORE EXPLICIT TO US THATTHEY ALSO CONCERNED VIEW CORRIDOR AS WELL AS PARKING USE, IN ADDITION TO THE WIDENED MANEUVERABILITY.SO WE BEGAN WORKING ON THE CHANGES THAT ANDREW FRENZ JUST WALK YOU THROUGH. WE ALSO, FOLLOWING THE MAY 29 MEETING, HAD ANOTHER MEETING TO SHARE THE DIAGRAM PRESENTED THIS EVENING FOR THAT WAS ON JUNE 10. WE HAVE HAD TWO MEETINGS WITH THEM SINCE THE LAST MEETING AND SPENT QUITE A BIT OF TIME WORKING ON THE CHANGES YOU SAW IN ADDITION TO COORDINATINGTHOSE WITH THE CONSULTANTS. YOU HAVE THE VIEW CORRIDOR IMAGES HERE AS WELL. YOU CAN SEE KEYNOTED WHAT THE CHANGES WERE THAT YOU WERE JUST WALK THROUGH -- WALKED THROUGH. I DON'T THINK ANDREW WALKED THROUGH ALL OF THOSE. NUMBER ONE, ONE OF THE CONCERNSACCOMMODATING THE VIEW CORRIDOR AS WELL AS THE MANEUVERABILITY,WE MOVED THE GENERATOR FROM WHERE IT WAS CURRENTLY LOCATED UP TO THE ROOF LOCATION. THERE IS SOME ADDED COST INVOLVED LIKELY FOR STRUCTURE, ADDITIONAL WIRING. WE MOVED THETRANSFORMER AS WELL TO A DIFFERENT LOCATION. THERE WILL BE SOME ADDED COST TO RELOCATE THAT. BUT WE MOVED IT SO IT WOULD NOT BE IN THE WAY OF THE CIRCULATION WIDENING THE HALLWAY OR DRIVEWAY TO 33 FEET. NUMBER THREE IS THAT WIDENING. IT WAS PREVIOUSLY A 19-FOOT ALLEYWAY.WE WIDENED THAT TO 33 FEET, SO IT PROVIDES SOME ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY PARKING PERHAPS FOR AN R.V. AS WELL AS MANEUVERABILITY FOR R.V. 'S, SO IT CAN ACCOMMODATE SOME OF THOSE USES THEY HAVE AS WELL. FRENZ DISCUSSED THAT WILL WIDENTHAT VIEW CORRIDOR TO THE PRIVATE DRIVE. I THINK WE HAVE AN IMAGE THAT SHOWS. THIS IS THE VIEW PREVIOUSLY. THE GARAGE, IF YOU WERE STANDING STRAIGHT ON, THE ROD DID -- THE GARAGE DID BLOCK THEVIEW CORRIDOR OF THEIR ENTRY. THE NEXT FEW IS OF THE CHANGE WE MADE THAT SHOWS HOW YOU GET THAT FULL VIEW OF EVERYTHING OTHER THAN WHAT WOULD BE SEEN IF THE DEMOCRACY CENTER WAS NOTTHERE AT ALL. SO, YOU GET A PRETTY WIDE VIEW. WE ARE SHOWING AN IMAGE OF SIGNAGE ON THE BACK OF THEIR BUILDING THAT IS BRIGHTER AND LARGER THAN THEY CURRENTLY HAVE WHICH MIGHT BE AN IDEA TO HIGHLIGHT KIND OF WHERE THEIR PRIVATE DRIVE ENTRY IS WHICH ISIN A SOMEWHAT DIFFICULT PLACE TO FIND IN THE FIRST PLACE. JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THOSE ITEMS FOR YOU AND OPEN IT UP TOANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. ≫ THANK YOU. FOR THE RECORD, CAN YOU TELL US YOUR NAME? ≫ I AM SORRY, JENNIFER ANDERSON-TUTTLE OF LSC ARCHITECTS. CHAIRMAN MEYER:QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONER SHEPPARD. COMMISSIONER SHEPPARD: AT OUR LAST MEETING AND IN YOURMEETING SUBSEQUENT WITH HOOK AND LADDER, YOU DISCUSSED THE SIZE OF VEHICLE THEY WERE CONCERNED WITH. WHAT WAS IT ANDDID YOU RUN OUT OF TURNING LANE? ≫ THANK YOU. I THINK THEY REFERENCED A 45-FOOT R.V. WHICHIS WHAT WE AT FIRST TRACKED. WHEN WE HAD PRIVATE MEETINGS WITH THEM, THEY SHARED THEY HAD A BIG EVENT THE NIGHT BEFORE WEMET WITH THEM AND AT THAT EVENT, THEY HAD A 50-FOOT R.V. ,SO WE RERAN ALL OF THE MANEUVERING MODELING AND HAD ACIVIL ENGINEER DO THAT AND A 50-FOOT R.V. IS WHAT WE HAVE NOW MODELED ANDTHAT IS WHAT THEY SHARED THAT EVENING. COMMISSIONER SHEPPARD EXCELLENT. THAT IS WHAT WE JUST LOOK AT? ≫ CORRECT. I ALSO WANTED TO, BECAUSE I THINK THE WAY IT HAS BEEN MAYBE INTERPRETED IS A LITTLE CONFUSING. I THINK THE EXISTING PARKING LOT IS 80 STALLS. THE PROPOSED NEW PARKING LOT IS59 STALLS. IT IS 46 SOUTH OF THE ALLEY AND 13 NORTH OF THE ALLEY. AND THEN, THERE ARE 14 BICYCLE STALLS IN ADDITION. SO, THAT IS A TOTAL OF 73 IF YOU CONSIDER BOTH VEHICULAR AND BICYCLE ACCESS.MINNEAPOLIS COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY -- CHAIRMAN MEYER: COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY AND THEN COMMISSIONER CONLEY. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY FOR OUR CLERKS, IS IT POSSIBLE TO GET THIS PRESENTATION ADDED TO THE PUBLIC RECORD? ≫ WE WILL TRY TO GET A COPY OF IT. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: THANK YOU SO MUCH. A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. YOU MENTIONED 59 PARKING STALLS. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THERE ISA COMMITMENT TO GIVE USE TO THE PUBLIC BUSINESSES. COULD YOU SPEAK TO THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE? ≫ I AM LIMITED AS TO HOW I CAN SPEAK ABOUT THAT. WE DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY CONNECTION TO PARKING NEGOTIATIONS OF THAT LOT AS THE ARCHITECTS WERE REALLY JUST DEVELOPING THE SITE PLAN AND USE OF THAT, WITH THE CITY WILLBE DETERMINED FOLLOWING OUR INVOLVEMENT. I CAN ONLY SPEAK TO THE FACT THAT MY UNDERSTANDING IS, FROM MEETINGS I HAVE BEEN IN, THAT THE CITY IS PLANNING TO NEGOTIATE SHARED USE OF SOME KIND AT A POINT ONCE THE PROJECT IS APPROVED AND MOVED FORWARD. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: THAT IS WHAT I HAVE HEARD THROUGH THE GRAPEVINE AS WELL. IS THERE ANYONE FROM FROMFINANCE AND PROPERTY SERVICES, THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION HERE WITH US TODAY? ≫ NOT HERE TODAY BUT I HAVE HADCOMMUNICATIONS WITH BARBARA O'BRIEN WHO HAS SAID THERE WILLBE CONSIDERATIONS FOR A PARKING USE AGREEMENT FOR AFTER HOURS AND HOURS THE DEMOCRACY CENTER IS NOT MEETING THAT PARKING THAT WILL TAKE PLACE. LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, DURING AN ELECTION DAY, THAT WOULD BE A DIFFICULT TIME FOR SHARED USE PARKING. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY:: THANK YOU. ≫ I THINK THOSE CONVERSATIONS WILL COME. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: THANK YOU. THAT IS USEFUL INFORMATION. DISAPPOINTED THEY DO NOT HAVE AREPRESENTATIVE HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS THEY CAN ANSWER. ≫ I WAS MADE AWARE THAT WAS A CHANGE. I THINK PAUL MAY HAVE HAD A DEATH IN THE FAMILY THAT JUST HAPPENED. THERE WERE ACTUALLY TWO MEDICAL EMERGENCIES, A MEDICAL EMERGENCY AND A DEATH IN THE FAMILY. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY:I AM SORRY TO HEAR THAT. MY CONDOLENCES. I'M TRYING TO SEE IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. I THINK THINGS WILL JUST COME UP AS WE LISTEN TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.IT WAS REALLY HELPFUL. ≫ THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN MEYER: COMMISSIONER CONLEY. COMMISSIONER CONLEY: THANK YOU,CHAIR. I HAD A QUESTION ON THE SLIDE RIGHT BEFORE THE ONE YOU JUST SHOWED. GO BACK ONE. IF SOMEONE IS COMING IN FROM MINNEHAHA, IT LOOKS LIKE THE PUBLIC ALLEY HAS BEEN EXPANDED TO 37 FEET. BUT THAT TURNING RADIUS FROM THE PRIVATE DRIVE TO THE PUBLIC ALLEY, CAN YOU TELL ME IF THAT HAS BEEN WIDENED FROM WHAT WE SAW ON THE 18TH VERSUS TODAY? THE CURVE WHERE YOU HAVE TO TURN, YOUR COMING IN FROM AN YEAH -- MINNEHAHA, RIGHT THERE.THAT CURVE RIGHT THERE. HAS THAT BEEN EXTENDED? ≫ THAT CURVE HAS BEEN WIDENED TO 33 FEET. IT IS WIDENED BY MORE THAN 13 FEET FROM WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY. COMMISSIONER CONLEY: THANK YOU. ≫ YEAH, THAT IS BEFORE. YOU CANSEE THE DIFFERENCE. CHAIRMAN MEYER: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER WAGNER? COMMISSIONER WAGNER: THANK YOU,CHAIR MEYER. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. CAN YOU SPEAK TO WHETHER YOU MODELED LARGE SEMITRUCKS OR SIMILAR AND WHAT THAT MODELING LOOKED LIKE? ≫ OK, SO WE HAVE A BUS AND A SEMI MODELED. THANK YOU. MINNEAPOLIS ANY -- CHAIRMAN MEYER: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU. PROCEEDING WITH OUR PUBLIC HEARING, I HAVE SIX NAMES THAT SIGNED UP. IF YOU ARE NOT ON HERE, PLEASE GO OVER HERE AND ADD YOUR NAME. I AM LOOKING AT THE YELLOW SHEET ON THIS. IT IS NOT ALWAYS CLEAR BUT I WILL DO MY BEST READING OFF YOUR NAMES. EACH PERSON WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES TOSPEAK. FIRST, I HAVE CHRIS MEZERA. WELCOME, INTRODUCE YOURSELF. YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. ≫ THANK YOU. MY NAME IS CHRIS MOZINA. I'M ONE OF THE FOUNDERS OF THE HOOK IN LETTER AND HAVE SERVED AS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR THE PAST DECADE. I WANT TO SAY THAT I APPRECIATE THE COMMISSION TAKING THE TIME TO HEAR US OUT ON THIS SUBJECT. IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO US AND OUR ENTIRE COMMUNITY. I ALSO WANT TO THANK JENNIFER AND ALIC IA FOR THE TIME TO MEET WITH US. THERE WERE ADJUSTMENTS MADE. THE LIST OF SEVEN OR EIGHT POINTS WE MADE AN SUBMITTED AS PART OF THE FORMAL RECORD INMAY SPOKE TO TWO PRIMARY ISSUES. ACCESS AND PARKING. THE ACCESS ISSUE WAS NARROWLY FOCUSED IN MY THE DETERMINING -- THE TURNING ISSUE RADIUS THAT THANKFULLY WAS ADDRESSED. THE OLD STANDARD OF 30-FOOT BOXTRUCKS IS NO LONGER THE REALITY WE LIVE WITH. 50-FOOT TREE LIMBS LESS TRACKERS ARE WHAT LIVER BEVERAGES TO COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES TODAY. I WANTED TO POINT OUT THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS ORGANIZATION IN MY LIMITED AMOUNT OF TIME TO BRING TWO POINT TWO ISSUES WE BRING UP THAT WE THINK SATISFACTORILY RESOLVE THIS IS SIMPLY RELOCATING THE R.V. GARAGE THAT IS CURRENTLY CAUSING THE REDIRECTION OF THE ALLEY AND THE ELIMINATION OF THE 80 PARKING SPOTS, OF ABOUT 40% OF THOSE SPOTS. WE DO HAVE ADEQUATE BIKE PARKING TODAY AS WELL.WE JUST HOPE, ANCHORED A JUNETEENTH CELEBRATION THIS PAST WEEKEND, EMBARKING ON PRIDE WEEK THIS WEEK. WE SERVE A LARGE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE IN SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS.THINK I MENTIONED THIS LAST TIME, WE ARE THE LAST REMAINING PERFORMING ARTS VENUEFROM HIGHWAY 35 TO THE RIVER. I THINK WE DESERVE TO STICK AROUND MORE THAN A NEW PARKING SPOT FOR AN R.V. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN MEYER: THANK YOU. NEXT I HAVE CHRISTINE SMITH. WELCOME, INTRODUCE YOURSELF. YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. ≫ I AM CHRISTINE SMITH, THE OWNER OF RECORD OF 3010 MINNEHAHA. I HAVE OWNED IT FOR 37 YEARS -- 27 YEARS. I HAVE SUFFERED THROUGH 27 YEARS OF THE CITY DISREGARDING ME AS A PROPERTY OWNER AND AS APERSON. THIS IS MORE OF THE SAME. I AM NOT HAPPY. THE ARCHITECTS DID A FABULOUS JOB OF LISTENING TO US. BUT THE SAME ISSUES REMAIN. THEY ARE UP THE ACCESS TO THE FRONT OF MY BUILDING. YOU ARE CUTTING OFF PEOPLE'S ABILITY TOCOME IN. YOU ARE CUTTING OFF OUR DELIVERY. AND QUITE FRANKLY, IF I WAS NOT-- IF IT WAS NOT THE CITY NEXT DOOR TO ME, IF IT WAS JUST ANOTHER PROPERTY OWNER AND THISISSUE WAS COMING UP, THERE IS NO WAY THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS WOULD PERMIT ANOTHER PROPERTY OWNER TO IMPINGE THAT MUCH ON AN ALREADY ESTABLISHED BUSINESS. BECAUSE IT IS THE CITY, HERE WEALL ARE. AND I AM NOT HAPPY. THAT IS ALL I HAVE TO SAY. CHAIRMAN MEYER: THANK YOU. NEXT, WE HAVE BRIAN BELL. ≫ MY NAME IS BRIAN BELL AND I REPRESENT FGNL, LLC. I WANT TO TALK QUICKLY ABOUT THE LEGAL ISSUES. AS I NOTED IN MY COMMENTS, TAKING ISSUES WITH RESPECT TO THIS DEVELOPMENT. THE MINNESOTA SUPREME COURT HASSTATED REPEATEDLY THAT ENSURING REASONABLE ACCESS TO A BUILDINGOR ELIMINATING REASONABLE ACCESS TO A BUILDINGBASED ON A PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT RESULTS IN A COMPENSABLE TAKING. HAVING ACCESS TO THEIR MAIN DOOR OBVIOUSLY REQUIRES THE PERFORMERS TO HAVE ACCESS, MOBILITY VANS TO HAVE ACCESS. IT IS NOT JUST SINGLE VEHICLES THAT NEED TO HAVE ACCESS. AND SO, IT IS OUR POSITION THATAPPROVING THIS PLAN AS DRAFTED WOULD CUT OFF THAT ACCESS AND CONSTITUTE A COMPENSABLE TAKING. BASED ON THE LAND-USE APPROVALS ITSELF, AS YOU ARE AWARE, THE CONFERENCE OF PLAN IN NUMEROUS LOCATIONS DISCUSSES -- COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN NUMEROUS LOCATIONS DISCUSSES ENCOURAGING THE ARTS, PROMOTING THE ARTS, NOT FRUSTRATING THE ARTS. THIS PROPOSAL WILL PUT A DEATH KNELL ON A VALUED CULTURAL INSTITUTION IN SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS. AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE PANGEA THEATER IS ALSO CONTEMPLATING A DEVELOPMENT IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH OF THE HOOK. WE WELCOME THAT. BUT THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD ALSOPOTENTIALLY IMPEDE THOSE PLANS. AGAIN, THAT IS IN VIOLATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHICH AS A KNOCK ON TO THAT WOULD PREVENT RESOLVING THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, ETC.THE DEVELOPMENT ALSO FOR THE REASONS WE STATED WOULD FRUSTRATE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS, BECAUSE TRAFFIC ISSUES DUE TO CARS CIRCLING FOR PARKING, WHICH ARE ALL REQUIREMENTS FOR PRESERVATION OF PARKING REQUIREMENTS.THE FINAL THING I WILL SAY IS IT IS GREAT TO HAVE COMMITMENTSSECONDHAND OR THIRDHAND. BUT UNTIL WE HAVE A SIGNED AGREEMENT ON PARKING, THAT IS NOT SOMETHING WE CAN TAKE TO THE BANK. IT IS GREAT TO RELY ON MODELING. BUT WHEN THIS IS BUILT, IT IS SIMPLY TOO LATE TO GO BACK AND CHANGE IT. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN MEYER: THANK YOU. NEXT, WE HAVE PATRICK SCULLY WHO WILL BE FOLLOWED BY JESSE. ≫ GOOD AFTERNOON. I AM PATRICK SCULLY. I WON THE LOTTERY WITHOUT BUYING A TICKET. CHRISTINE SMITH BOUGHT THE FIREHOUSE FOR PATRICK'S CABARET, GAVE ME A 20-YEAR LEASE AT $1 A MONTH. WE ARRIVED IN 1999 BETWEEN SLEEPY NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT PATRICK'S CABARET'S PRESENCE HELPED DRIVE THE FLOWERING OF THE LAKE STREET CORRIDOR AND LONGFELLOW. CONTINUING THIS, 10 YEARS AGO, HOOK AND REPLACED THE CABARET. UNFORTUNATELY, DEREK CHAUVIN WORKED NEXT DOOR, AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS STILL REELING.FOR OVER SIX YEARS, THE HOOK AND HAS SUFFERED NEXT DOOR TO THIS BLIGHT WHICH REPELS PEOPLE. HOW MANY YEARS WERE THERE WITH RAZOR WIRE SURROUNDING IT? IN THE SPIRIT OF REPARATION, THIS PLAN SHOULD TRY TO FIX THAT AND NOT FURTHER PENALIZE THE HOOK. LISTEN TO EACH AND EVERY CONCERN THAT THEY DETAIL. THEY KNOW. THEY WORK THEIR. THEY ARE TRYING TO SURVIVE THERE. INVOLVE THE HOOK AND THE BUILDING OWNER AS YOU PLAN, WORKING WITH THEM, NOT AGAINST THEM. THE CLOSER A BUSINESS IS, THE BETTER YOU HAVE TO LISTEN. WORK WITH THEM AND ALL OF THE NEIGHBORS. LOCAL FORCES OF GENEROSITY, PERSISTENCE, VISION, AND INCLUSION. ONE QUICK QUESTION TO SUM UP. WHY 6000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL? THE COLISEUM BUILDING RIGHT DOWN THE STREET HAS OVER 30,000 SQUARE FEET VACANT TODAY. THANKYOU. CHAIRMAN MEYER: THANK YOU. NEXT, WE HAVE JESSE B. I CANNOT QUITE READ YOUR FULL LAST NAME, FOLLOWED BY LISA BLOOM. ≫ MY NAME IS JESSE BROAD. I OWN OR PARTNER WITH NOBLE PRESENTS. WE PRESENT A LOT OF SHOWS AT THE HOOK AND LADDER AND BEEN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR YEARS. MY MAIN CONCERN IS PARKING. TO DEVELOP AND CONTINUE TO DEVELOP AN ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT IN THE DOWNTOWN LONGFELLOW NEIGHBORHOOD, TO REVIVE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND PUT IN RESTAURANTS AND OTHER STAGES AND WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE, WE ARE GOING TO NEED PARKING. SO, WE DEFINITELY NEED TO HAVE -- AND WHAT HAPPENED IS WE BECAME USED TO USING THAT PARKING LOT. AND OUR CUSTOMERS ARE USING THAT PARKING LOT. SO,TO REDUCE IT, REMOVE IT, OR MAKE IT HARD TO ACCESS, THERE IS A CONCERN FOR THE VITALITY OF OUR BUSINESS.I DID NOT SEE AN ECONOMIC STUDY DONE, WHAT WOULD IT BE TO HAVE THIS BUILDING COME. THE WAY IT IS SET UP, IT IS AN IMPACT STUDY FOR ECONOMICS. BUT I HAVE NOT SEEN ONE. SO, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. THE MAIN THING TOO IS SAFETY OFTHE NEIGHBORHOOD AND HAVING PEOPLE BE THERE AND USE IT. ANDSO, PARKING AGAIN COMES INTO PLAY. IT IS A VERY CRITICAL THING FOR ALL OF OUR BUSINESSES. WE ARE SUPER HAPPY THE CITY IS FINALLY REDEVELOPING THE PROPERTY BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN A REAL PROBLEM FOR US. IT HAS IMPACTED US FINANCIALLY. AND SO, TO HAVE IT REDESIGNED AND REDEVELOPED IS AMAZING. WE JUST ASK YOU TO LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE HERE AND SOME OF THESE LITTLE DETAILS BECAUSE THE DETAILS MATTER IN A PROJECT LIKE THIS AND WHEN YOU ARE AFFECTING A NEIGHBORHOOD LIKE THIS. AND SO, WHAT CAN WE DO TOKEEP ACCESS, TO KEEP IT EASY FOR TRUCKS AND R.V. 'S AND PEOPLE TO COME AND USE THE SPACE WE HAVE BEEN USING FOR SIX YEARS WITH NO WORD FROMTHE CITY? AND NOW, ALL OF A SUDDEN, THIS. WE HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER TO MAKE THIS THING HAPPEN. CHAIRMAN MEYER: THANK YOU. LISABOYD. ≫ HELLO AND THANK YOU TO THE COMMISSION FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. MY NAME IS LISA BOYD,THE STAFF PERSON FOR LONGFELLOW RISING, ANONPROFIT ORGANIZATION FORMED TO FOCUS ON THE REBUILDING OF THE AREA AROUND THE CENTER SECTION WE CALL DOWNTOWN LONGFELLOW. WE FULLY SUPPORT THE HOOK AND LADDER THEATRE'S REQUEST THAT THE CITY AND ARCHITECTS IT HAS HIRED SLOW THIS PROCESS DOWN AND CONSIDER THE HOOK'S DESIGN CHANGE PROPOSAL AS WELL AS TO CONDUCT AN ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY OF THE CURRENT SITE PROPOSAL. WE CONTINUE TO BE DISAPPOINTED IN THE LACK OF CONSIDERATION THE CITY HAS GIVEN TO THE IMPACT OF ITS PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE SITE ONTHIS FORMERLY THRIVING CREATIVE PARTIAL KNOW THAT HAS SEEN SO MUCH TRAUMA IN RECENT YEARS. ALL OF THE BUSINESS IS THE LONGEST BLOCK OF MINNEHAHA AVENUE WERE INVOLVED IN MUTUAL AID SUPPORT OF THEIR NEIGHBORS DURING OPERATION METRO SEARCH IN ADDITION TO THE DAY-TO-DAY RUNNING OF THEIR BUSINESSES. THEY DESERVE OUR RECOGNITION AND SUPPORT. WE SHARE EVERYONE'S FRUSTRATIONWITH HOW LONG IT IS TAKING TO REBUILD DOWNTOWN LONGFELLOW, INCLUDING THE DEMOCRACY CENTER. BUT IT SHOULD NOT HAPPEN AT THEEXPENSE OF A BELOVED ANCHOR INSTITUTION. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN MEYER: THANK YOU. THERE ANYONE WHO DID NOT SIGN UP WHO WANTED TO SPEAK? NOT SEEING ANYONE. COMMISSIONERS, DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE I CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING? I WILL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING THEN .COMMISSIONERS, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION, MOTIONS, QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY, DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK? COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: PERHAPS THIS SHOULD REMAIN FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. I DID HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. IN TERMS OF THE ISSUES NOTED AROUND ACCESS, -- CHAIRMAN MEYER: I WILL REOPEN PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: THE TESTIFIERS SHARED IT WAS NARROWLY FOCUSED ON THE TURNING RADIUS OF THE VEHICLES. WHAT WERE THE CONSIDERATIONS MADE IN TERMS OF CUTTING OFF ACCESS TO THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING AND THEN DELIVERY? ≫I AM ASSUMING WHEN YOU SAY THEFRONT OF THE BUILDING YOU ARE PREFERRING -- REFERRING TO THE PRIVATE ALLEY AND NOT OF THE -- THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING ON THE STREET? COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: CORRECT, FOR US, THAT IS THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, HOW YOU GET INTO THE HOOK AND LADDER. ≫ ONE OF THE CONCERNS I BELIEVETHEY ARE REFERRING TO, WE PROVIDED A NEW SIDEWALK THAT LEADS YOU THROUGH FROM SNELLING THROUGH TOWARDS THE PRIVATE ALLEY. CURRENTLY, THERE IS NOT ONE. WE ADDED THAT. THATIS SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT IN THE SITE BEFORE. THAT IS OF BENEFIT THEY DID NOT HAVE BEFORE PREVIOUSLY. THE OTHER ISA VISUAL VIEW CORRIDOR ACCESS I ASSUME THEY ARE REFERRING TO. THAT IS WHERE WE PUSHED THE BUILDING IN. WAS IT 11 FEET? 11. 5 FEET, YES. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: AND THEN, DELIVERY ACCESS? ≫ YEAH, THE DELIVERY ACCESS HASBEEN IMPROVED. THERE'S NOT ANY DELIVERY THAT WE UNDERSTAND CANNOT ACCESS. WE HAVE SHOWN THE TURNING RADIUS E S FOR VEHICLES UP TO SEMITRUCKS. WE ARE NOT SURE WHAT KIND OF DELIVERY COULD COME LARGER THAN A SEMITRUCK. ANDREW FRENZ COULD PROBABLY SPEAK TO IT AS WELL. ANYONE ALONG A PUBLIC-PRIVATE ALLEY THEY GETS DELIVERIES FROM ANYTHING BEYOND THAT CAN BE ACCOMMODATED IN A PRIVATE ALLEY. I'M SORRY, IN A PUBLIC ALLEY. AND SO, YEAH. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: OK. THANK YOU. MAYBE I COULD ASK THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE HOOK AND LADDER IF THEY COULD MORE CLEARLY LAY OUT WHAT THEY MEANT BY FRONT ACCESS AND DELIVERY ACCESS JUST SO WE UNDERSTAND IN THIS PUBLIC FORUM WHAT YOUR NEED IS. THANK YOU. ≫ ONE OF THE NICEST THINGS ABOUT THE CURRENT SITUATION IS IT IS A STRAIGHT PASS-THROUGH. IT CAN BE VIEWED FROM EITHER SIDE, FROM MINNEHAHA OR OTHERS. WHEN PEOPLE ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE BUILDING ARE PULLING IN, THEY KNOW WHERE TO PULL IN,THEY KNOW HOW TO DO IT. THEY HAVE A CLEAR SIGHT LINE THAT TAKES THEM FROM MINNEHAHA ALL THE WAY TO SNELLING. IT ALSO, FOR PEOPLE COMING IN FROM OUT OF THE MINNEAPOLIS AREA, AND WE HAVE MANY EVENTS WHERE WE ARE BRINGING IN PEOPLE FROM AS FAR AWAY AS MINNETONKA AND MINNEAPOLIS, IT IS PRETTY SCARY TO THEM.BEING ABLE TO SEE A STRAIGHT SIDELINE BETWEEN WHERE THEY PARKED THEIR CAR AND THE FRONT DOOR IS REALLY IMPORTANT. LET ME TELL YOU THAT UNDER THE CURRENT ECONOMIC CONDITIONS, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RED INK AND BLACK INK AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE IS AS FEW AS FIVE PEOPLE. IF THOSE PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE ADEQUATE SIGHTLINES, CANNOT SEE, CANNOT GET THERE, DON'T FEEL SAFE, LIGHTS ARE NOTON, THEY ARE NOT COMING. IT IS REALLY CRITICAL. IF WE WERE IN A DIFFERENT ECONOMIC SITUATION, MAYBE THESE WOULD NOT BE SO CRITICAL. BUT IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO HAVE A STRAIGHT SHOT THROUGH. NO STOPS. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: I DON'TMEAN TO CUT YOU OFF TOO MUCH, BUT COULD YOU SPEAK TO THE DELIVERY? AND THEN, IF YOU WANT TO TAKE A LITTLE GAP FROM THE MIC. ≫ I AM SORRY. I'M USED TO BEING ON STAGE GETTING RIGHT TO THE LIPS. [LAUGHTER] JUST THE OTHER DAY,I WAS THERE, AND I CAME UP FROM MINNEHAHA WITH THE INTENTION I WAS GOING TO GO TO THE FRONT DOOR. AND THERE WAS A BEER DELIVERY. AND IT LITERALLY TOOKUP THE ENTIRE SIDE OF THE BUILDING FROM WHERE WE HAVE THETACO TRUCK, BECAUSE IT IS NOT ALLOWED TO PARK ON MINNEHAHA, SO WE HAVE IT ON OUR PROPERTY, AND THE BACK DOOR. IT WAS EVERYTHING. IT WAS THE WHOLE WEIGHT. COULD IT GET AROUND THAT RATIO? YES, IT COULD. WOULD IT TAKE OUT PART OF THE BUILDING? IF THEY WERE NOT PAYING ATTENTION, YES. IF THEY GO STRAIGHT ON THROUGH,BUILDINGS ARE NOT GOING TO GET BUMPED BY GIANT TRUCKS. SO THATIS WHY. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: THAT IS HELPFUL. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I DON'T WANT TO HOG THIS TIME SO I'M GOING TO TAKE A STEP BACK, AND IF OTHERS HAVE QUESTIONS. CHAIRMAN MEYER: DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR OUR TESTIFIERS OR APPLICANTS? COMMISSIONER CONLEY. COMMISSIONER CONLEY: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I THINK I HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT THERE IS 80 PARKING LOTS BEING REMOVED? ≫ I AM SORRY. DID YOU SAY 88? NO. THERE ARE THREE OR FOUR. 3THE ADA PARKING SPOTS BEING DESIGNED INTO THE SPOT. 80 WAS WHAT I WAS RECALLING THECURRENT PARKING LOT HAS IN TERMS OF STALLS. WE ARE REDUCING THAT DOWN TO THREE WHEN YOU CONSIDER ALSO BIKING PARKER -- BICYCLE PARKING. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: THAT DOES NOT REDUCETHE NUMBER OF ADA PARKING STALLS. ≫ ADA? IT ACTUALLY INCREASES IT ≫ IT IS JUST THE ACCESS ISSUE AND NOT HAVING REASONABLE ACCESS TO THE BUILDING. MR. WAGNER: CAN YOU SHOW ME ON A PLAN ? CAN YOU SHOW ME WHAT IS BEING TAKEN? THANK YOU. ≫ YEAH, IT IS BASICALLY ALL OF THE ISSUES DISCUSSED HERE TODAY. I WOULD SAY REASONABLE ACCESS HAS TO CONSIDER WHAT THE ACCESS IS FOR. SO, MY HOUSE, REASONABLE ACCESS WOULD BE FOR COMMUTER VEHICLES, CONSUMERVEHICLES, WHEREAS REASONABLE ACCESS FOR SOMETHING LIKE THE HOOK AND LADDER IS TO BE ABLE TO HAVE SEMITRUCKS, TO BE ABLE TO HAVE PATRONS WHO CAN ACCESS IT EASILY. AND SO, TO MY MIND, THAT IS WHAT A COURT WOULD LOOK AT WHEN IT CONSIDERED WHETHER ACCESS WAS REASONABLE, NOT JUST WHETHER A PEDESTRIAN CAN WALK UP TO THE BUILDING BUT CAN ALL OF THE ACCESS THAT IS REQUIRED FOR THAT PROPERTY ONLY BE REALIZED. HERE, DELIVERY TRUCKS, PEDESTRIANS COMING FROM SNELLING AVENUE, VAN S, THINGS LIKE THAT, THEIR ACCESS WILL BE FRUSTRATED WHICH FRUSTRATES ACCESS TO THE HOOK AND LADDER. COMMISSIONER WAGNER: I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT HAS DEMONSTRATED ACCESS TO DELIVERY TRUCKS. ≫ NOT TO OUR SATISFACTION. WE CURRENTLY HAVE ACCESS BEING ABLE TO GO STRAIGHT THROUGH. STRAIGHT THROUGH FROM MINNEHAHATO SNELLING AVENUE, STRAIGHT WITHOUT HAVING TO MAKE THIS HARROWING TURN. SO, IT IS OUR POSITION THAT WOULD NOT BE REASONABLE ACCESS. COMMISSIONER WAGNER: BUT FOR PATRONS, THE DROP-OFF IS TO THE WEST OF THE BUILDING? TO THE NORTH OF THE BUILDING? ≫ FOR PATRONS, TO THE NORTH. COMMISSIONER WAGNER: BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS, BASICALLY. SO, IF THERE IS A VAN PARKED THERE TO DROP PATRONS OFF, IS IT WIDE ENOUGH TO STILL GET ANOTHER VEHICLE PASSED IT? NOT A SEMI, IT SHOULD NOT BE THERE DURING THOSE HOURS. ≫ MY UNDERSTANDING IS NO. COMMISSIONER WAGNER: 32 FEET? ≫ THAT IS THE TURN RADIUS. THE PRIVATE ALLEY IS NOT BEING EXPANDED TO MY UNDERSTANDING. IT IS A PRIVATE ALLEY. I DO NOT KNOW THAT THE CITY HASTHE ABILITY TO EXPAND OUR PRIVATE ALLEY. MY UNDERSTANDINGIS WHAT THEY PROPOSE TO DO IS MOVE THEIR BUILDING BACK FROM THE TURN RADIUS TO ALLOW FOR GREATER TURNS BUT I DO NOT THINK THAT IS GOING TO PREVENT BACKUPS IN THE PRIVATE ALLEY ASTHEY ARE TURNING ONTO THE PUBLIC ALLEY. COMMISSIONER WAGNER: THANK YOU.CHAIRMAN MEYER: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?COMMISSIONER GARCIA? COMMISSIONER GARCIA: IF I COULDPOSSIBLY HAVE SOMEBODY REPRESENTING THE HOOK AND LADDER , YES, THANK YOU. MY QUESTION IS BASICALLY, DO YOU SEE ANY ACCEPTABLE OUTCOME ON YOUR SIDE THAT IS NOT THE ALLEY REMAINING STRAIGHT THROUGH? ≫ THAT IS NOT THE QUESTION I WAS EXPECTING. PROBABLY NOT, NO. THE ISSUE OF ACCESS, YOU KNOW, THE DRAWING THAT WAS UP THAT WE WERE JUST LOOKING AT AND THIS TURNING RADIUS, THIS IS ALL WITH THE ASSUMPTION, AND THIS GOES TO THE ADA QUESTION IBELIEVE, IT GOES TO THE ASSUMPTION THERE IS NO ADA PARKING CURRENTLY HAPPENING, NOBODY IN THOSE SPACES. THAT RADIUS IS NOT GOING TO WORK FOR ANY OF THE VEHICLES DESCRIBED WITH THE VEHICLE PARKED THERE, THE WIDTH OF THE VEHICLE WOULD PROHIBIT THAT. WE ARE LOOKING AT THE MAXIMUM CAPACITY WITH OVEN ON PARKED SPACE WHICH IS RARELY THE CASE -- WITH AN UN-PARKING SPACE WHICH IS REALLY THE CASE. WHICH IS WHERE ADA PARKING IS, SO WE WOULD EFFECTIVELY LOSE THAT. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS THE CORRECT QUESTION TO ADDRESS THIS. BUT SINCE OUR LAST MEETING ON THE SUBJECT OF SAFETY, THE LIGHTS HAVE BEEN TURNED OFF IN THIS PARKING LOT. I FIND THAT CURIOUS. I AM HOPING PERHAPS SOMEBODY ON THIS COMMISSION CANLOOK INTO THAT FOR US BECAUSE WE ENTERED THESE CONVERSATIONSIN GOOD FAITH, AND WE ARE LEFT WITH A VERY -- A MUCH MORE DANGEROUS SPACE AT NIGHT. WE DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THAT IS. WYATT HAS GONE ON FOR SIX YEARS. CHAIRMAN MEYER: COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: WHEN DID YOU NOTICE THESE LIGHTS BEING OFF? ≫ WITHIN A WEEK OF OUR LAST APPEARANCE BEFORE THIS COMMISSION. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: IT IS MIKE MCMAHON I WILL FOLLOW-UP AND FIND OUT WHY THE LIGHTS ARE OFF. ≫ THANK YOU. IT HAS HAPPENED IN THE LAST SIXYEARS BUT NOT IN THE LAST THREE OR FOUR. THEY ARE ON DURING THEDAY AND OFF AT NIGHT. CHAIR MEYER QUESTION MARK ANY FURTHER WEAPONS FROM COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: THIS ISREGARDING THE ADA PARKING THE HOOK AND LADDER PROVIDES. COULDYOU SHARE THE NATURE OF THE PARKING, FOR WHAT VEHICLE SIZESAND HOW MUCH PARKING YOU PROVIDE CURRENTLY? ≫ BASICALLY, ALL OF THE PARKING INSIDE IS DEDICATED TO ADA GUESTS. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: HOW OFTEN IS ADA USED? ≫ EVERY SHOW. IT DEPENDS ON THE SHOW WHETHER EVERY SPOT IS UTILIZED. STAFF DOES NOT PARK THEIR. THEY ARE MARKED FOR ADA GUESTS. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: YOU ARESAYING THE BIGGEST ISSUE IS WITH THE DEAD END AND THEN THE TURN. IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE -- ≫ FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE HAD A PERFORMANCE HAPPENING AND THEREWERE GUESTS INSIDE THE BUILDING PARKED IN AN ADA SPOT, AND A TYPICAL PERFORMANCEMAY HAVE THREE ACTS OVER THE COURSE OF THE EVENING, THEY DO NOT ALL LOAD OUT AT THE SAME TIME. IF THERE ARE GUESTS IN THE FACILITY UTILIZING THAT, NAVIGATING THE TURN IS NOT POSSIBLE WITH A LARGER VEHICLE. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: WITH A TOUR BUS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THANK YOU.I HAD A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. SO, MY QUESTION IS REGARDING --ALL RIGHT, TAKE YOUR TIME. MY QUESTION IS REGARDING ENGAGEMENT WITH BUSINESSES AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS IN THE AREA,PARTICULARLY THE BUSINESSES DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO 3000 MINNEHAHA AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS IN DOWNTOWN LONGFELLOW. WHAT HAS BEEN THE NATURE OF THAT IN PROPOSING THIS PLAN? AND A TIMELINE, IF YOU HAVE IT. ≫ SURE, SURE. OUR INITIAL CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP WAS AUGUST 25. FOLLOWING THAT, IT WAS DETERMINED WE WORKED WITH ALEXANDER CATO AND NICK NOY, NICK NO, SORRY ONLY PRONUNCIATION, ON AN APPROACH FOR ENGAGEMENT THAT WOULD WORK WITH THE CITY'SPROCESS. WE DETERMINED -- THERE WAS A COMMUNITY MEETING SEPTEMBER 3 WITH THE LONGFELLOW COMMITTEE THAT HAPPENED AT 6:00 P.M. FOLLOWING THAT, THERE WAS A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 22. WE PRESENTED AT THAT, A PUBLIC MEETING. AND THEN, WE HAD A COMMUNITY OPEN HOUSE AT MOON PALACE ON OCTOBER 3. THAT WAS ALL PRIOR TO A SCHEMATIC DESIGN PACKAGE BEING ISSUED. YEAH, AND THAT BRINGS US TO PLANNING COMMISSION ON MAY 18. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: THANK YOU. THAT IS REALLY HELPFUL. JUST FOR YOUR AWARENESS, I SIT ON THE SAUDI CANCEL, SO I AM THE CITY COUNCILMEMBER APPOINTED TO THIS BODY. I WILL SHARE IN OUR COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING , WE DID NOT HAVE A PRESENTATION ON THE IMPACTS OF WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO LOCAL BUSINESSES AND LIKE ANY INFORMATION ON SPONSORS FROM LOCAL BUSINESSES. IT SOUNDS LIKE THESE PRIOR MEETINGS, WHILE IMPORTANT AND GLAD WE HAD THEM, DID NOT REALLY ENGAGE WITH THE REZONING AND THE ALLEY VACATION AND WHATWE ARE LOOKING AT HERE. DO YOU THINK THAT IS A FAIR ASSESSMENT? ≫ YEAH. I THINK WHEN WE MET WITH YOU INITIALLY EARLY ON, THERE WAS NOT REALLY A DETERMINATION AT THAT POINT THAT AN ALLEY VACATION WOULD BENECESSARY. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: RIGHT. WHAT WE WERE DISCUSSING WAS ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN. I THINK WE GOT A GREAT VIDEO OF WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE AND SOME OF THE COMPONENTSOF THAT. OK, WELL, THANK YOU. THAT IS ALL MY QUESTIONS FOR YOU ON THAT. ≫ THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: AND THEN, I HAVE OTHER COMMENTS THAT CAN WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSES. CHAIRMAN MEYER: I AM ONLY CALLING PEOPLE IF COMMISSIONERS HAVE A QUESTION FOR THEM. COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER CONLEY. COMMISSIONER CONLEY: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. WAS A STRAIGHT PASS THROUGH ONEOF THE CONSIDERATIONS DURING THE DESIGN? ≫ [INDISCERNIBLE] ≫ YEAH, IT DOES NOT WORK WITH THE DELIVERIES THAT BUILDING IS GOING TO REQUIRE AS WELL. WE DID TRY TO SEE IF THERE WAS A WAY TO DO THAT. BUT YEAH. COMMISSIONER CONLEY: OK. SPEAK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT. WHERE ARE THE DELIVERIES COMINGIN AT? ≫ WE ARE GOING TO OPEN THE PLANAGAIN HERE. SO, THERE IS A RECEIVING AREA RIGHT IN THAT AREA. AND SO, FOR THEM ALSO TO BE ABLE TO MANEUVER IN AND OUT OF THE SITE, THEY NEED TO BE ABLETO BACK IN AND OFF OF -- WORK BACK OUT ONTO THE PRIVATE ALLEYAND THEN OUT TO SNELLING. SO THEY ARE ABLE TO MANEUVER THEIR SEMITRUCKS FROM THAT RECEIVING AREA UNTO SNELLING ASWELL. THIS WAS A SOLUTION THAT LOOKED AS THOUGH IT ALLOWED BOTH PROPERTIES TO HAVE ACCESS AND MANEUVERABILITY FROM THE BACK SERVICE AREA. COMMISSIONER CONLEY: THANK YOU.CHAIRMAN MEYER: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS? LAST CHANCE. I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE HEARING FOR THE FINAL TIME.ALL RIGHT, I WILL CLOSE THE HEARING. COMMISSIONERS, ARE THEIR COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, OR MOTIONS? COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY. COMMISSIONER CHOWDHURY: THANK YOU. CHAIR MEYER. I AM STRUGGLING ON WHERE TO START WITH THIS. SO, I THINK THE PLACE THAT I WILL START IS WHAT MY ROLE IS, OBVIOUSLY PLANNING COMMISSIONER BUT ALSO COUNCILMEMBER, AND MY JOB IS TO REPRESENT 34,000 PEOPLE ON THE BODY OF THE CITY COUNCIL, AND I AM APPOINTED TO THIS BODY. I THINK, FOR ME, IT HAS BEEN A MAJOR POINT OF FRUSTRATION SINCE WE HAVE STARTED TALKING ABOUT 3000 MINNEHAHA OVER THE YEARS ON HAVING FINANCE AND PROPERTY WORK WITH MY OFFICE IN HIGHLIGHTING AREAS IN WHICH WE REQUIRE CONSTITUENT INVOLVEMENT. THIS IS NOTHING AGAINST THE FOLKS AT LSE. I THINK YOU ARE DOING A GREAT JOBAND DOING YOUR PART IN THIS. I THINK PLANNING STAFF IS DOING AGREAT JOB AS WELL. THIS PREDATES THIS WORK. BUT SINCE IWAS ELECTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL IN 2022, I HAVE OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN CHASED AFTER MEETINGS WITH FINANCE AND PROPERTY SERVICES TO HAVE SOME INCLUSION OF THE CONSTITUENTS IREPRESENT THAT WORK IN DOWNTOWN LONGFELLOW, THAT OPERATE BUSINESSES IN DOWNTOWN LONGFELLOW. THAT ARE THERE ALL THE TIME EVEN IF IT IS OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARIES OF MY WARD. IT IS PROBABLY EIGHT OR NINE BLOCKS OUTSIDE MY WARD. THAT IS REALLY FRUSTRATING. IT TOOK YEARS OF ME SAYING IN PUBLIC MEETINGS TO GET SOME SORT OF ACCOUNTABILITYON THE BURNT VESTIBULE AND THE DILAPIDATED NATURE OF THAT BUILDING, TO BARBED WIRE THAT STOOD THERE THAT WAS PLACED BY THE MILITARY AND JUST LEFT THERE. IT IS FRUSTRATING TO ME AFTER REPEATED REQUESTS OF INCLUSION OF MY OFFICE AND ALSO SITTING ON THISBODY AS A PLANNING COMMISSIONER THAT THERE HAD NOT BEEN ANY PRIOR COMMUNICATION TO MY OFFICE ABOUT THE NEEDS OF CONSTITUENTS IN THIS AREA. I THINK AT THIS POINT, AFTER YEARS AND YEARS OF WORK ON THIS, IT WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT OF A NO-BRAINER IN A STEP OF COLLABORATION TO CONNECT WITH THIS OFFICE BECAUSE IT IS NOT ABOUT ME, IT IS ABOUT THE 34,000 PEOPLE I REPRESENT. AND IT IS ALSO REALLY TOUGH FOR ME AS A COUNCILMEMBER IN THE ROLE THAT I PLAY TO HEAR THAT THE BUSINESS RIGHT NEXT TO SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD BE PROUD OF, THE DEMOCRACY AND TO HER, SOMETHING I HAVE SUPPORTED, THAT IS AN IMPORTANT ACTIVATION FOR THE CORRIDOR, DID NOT NOTIFY THEM THAT THIS WAS GOING TO HAVE SUCH A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE TO THEIR BUSINESS PLAN. DOWNTOWN LONGFELLOW IS A PLACE THAT UNFORTUNATELY HAS HAD TO STRUGGLE FOR A VERY LONG TIME AND IS TRYING ITS HARDEST TO COME INTO ITS NEXT ERA. WE HAD A WONDERFUL JUNETEENTH CELEBRATION. HOOK AND LADDER HAS ALWAYS BEEN A MAJOR PART OF THE ACTIVATION. HOOK AND LADDER HAS ALWAYS EMBODIED THE VALUES OF INCLUSIVITY. I KNOW WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE PLANNING MATTERS. BUT THIS CONTEXT I THINK IS IMPORTANT. THIS IS THE CHARGE OF THE WORK THAT I AM SET TO DO. I ALSO THINK IT IS PRETTY HARD TO HEAR THAT THERE IS EXISTING ADA PARKING THAT THE BUSINESS PROVIDES TO ITS PATRONS THAT WILL GO AWAY WITH THE CHANGES THAT ARE MADE HERE. I AM SEEING A HEADSHAKE NO, BUTWE HEARD OVER AND OVER AGAIN HERE THAT THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PARK AT THE SAME TIME. IF WE CAN PROVE THAT, IF I CAN HAVE THAT PROVEN TO ME, I WOULD ACCEPT THAT. BUT THAT HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN TOME THAT THEY WOULD LOSE -- THAT THEY WOULD NOT LOSE THEIR ADA PARKING. IF SOMEONE FROM FINANCE AND PROPERTY SERVICES WANTS TO MAKE THAT CLEAR TO ME, THAT WOULD BEREALLY HELPFUL. I THINK THE WAY WE HAVE HANDLEDTHIS, TO MAKE A DECISION THAT FEELS LIKE IT HAS to make that decision in 22 business days from May 18 until June 22 is a really unfair ask. Especially given the history ofthis location. We have learned this lesson over and over in City Hall, that there is a right way to handle 3000 Minnehaha. But I have made requests and --for the people that work in this area,and that is something that has occurred. That is definitely factoring into my decision today.It feels very difficult, to vote for a plan ahead where I can't ensure the future of the constituents I represent. I'm never going to vote for something I don't feel certain about. ≫ Thank you Commissioner. ≫ Thank you chair Meyer. I will take a moment here, to shape the discussion for this board and offer some information for the public. We have a number of applications before us today. We have site plan review, a pulmonary plan. I went through at the last meeting with city staff, like what is required by application type and what type of vote they are . When I look at it , THE CONDITIONAL USE, I LOOK AT THE SLIGHT -- I DON'T REALLY SEEOR WE ARE FINDING TO LEAD ME TO VOTE NO. I'M NOT GOING TO ACCEPT THIS COMMISSIONER. I'M NOT GOING TO ACCEPT THIS SITE PLAN REVIEW. WE ALSO DISCUSSED THE ALLEY, AND I ASKED STAFF WHAT IS NEEDED TO VACATE THE ALLEY. THEY SAID PUBLIC WORKS REVIEWS WITH OF THE ALLEY -- AND THEY HAVE INCLUDED IN THEIRSTATEMENT , I BELIEVE IT IS IN THE PACKET, THAT -- CHANGE OF THE ALLEY LOCATION. SO JUST LIKE LAST TIME FOR ME, THIS ITEM COMES DOWN TO ONE ITEM ON THE PRELIMINARY AND I DON'T KNOW HOW I FEEL ABOUT IT YET. I WANT TO HEAR FROM THE REST OF THE COMMISSION AND CONTINUE TO THINK ABOUT IT.ON THE PRELIMINARY PLAN, PAGE 24, IT SAYS THE SUBDIVISION WILL NOT BE INJURIOUS TO THE USE OR ENJOYMENT OF OTHER PROPERTY IN THE VICINITY. SO OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF WORK HAS BEEN DONE BETWEEN THIS MEETING AND THE LAST, TO ENSURE THAT TO BE TRUE RIGHT? THE ALLEY HAS BEEN WIDENED. THE DIFFERENT PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT HAVE MET AND WORKED TOGETHER TO FIND A SOLUTION THAT WORKS. COMMISSIONER GARCIA ASKED THE HOOK AND LADDER REPRESENTATIVES WHETHER ANY SINGLE OUTCOME OTHER THAN A STRAIGHT ALLEY WOULD BE OK . THEY SAID NO, ANDTHAT IS THEIR PREROGATIVE TO SAY THAT. A STREET ALLEY -- A STRAIGHT ALLEY WOULD MEAN THE BUILDING WOULD BE SMALLER. THEY NEED A PLACE TO LOAD THEIR SUPPLIES , AND WHATEVER THIS NEW DEMOCRACY ENTER -- DEMOCRACY CENTER NEEDS. IS THIS INJURIOUS TO THE USE OFTHE PROPERTIES IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY AS THE CITY CODE READS? I AM NOT SURE. I DON'T KNOW HOW I'M GOING TO VOTE ON THAT, BUT I THINK THAT WE AS A COMMISSION, AS WE CONSIDER THIS APPLICATION BEFORE US, I THINK THAT IS PROBABLY THE ITEM THAT WE COULD PERHAPS VOTEON. FOR ITEMS D, E, AND G , THEY ARE FINE. I THINK THAT COULD HELP US FRAME THIS CONVERSATION AS WE CONSIDER THIS ITEM. THANK YOU. ≫ FOR Q. -- THANK YOU. YOU HAVE TO HAVE FINDINGS FOR BOTH OF THEM, EITHER WAY. ≫ CHAIR, COULD YOU OR STAFF LAYOUT WHICH PARTS ARE QUASIJUDICIAL AND WHICH PARTS ARE QUASI-LEGISLATIVE? ≫ I CAN ANSWER THAT. ALL OF THEAPPLICATIONS IN FRONT OF YOU HAVE REQUIRED FINDINGS.REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT IS LEGISLATIVE APPLICATION OR JUDICIAL APPLICATION, FINDINGS ARE REQUIRED TO BE MADE. THE FINDINGS IN THE STAFF REPORT ARE DRAFT FINDINGS. IF THE COMMISSION DETRACTS FROMTHE REPORT, THE COMMISSION WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALTERNATE FINDINGS. ITEMS A AND B ARE BOTH REZONING, LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS THAT REQUIRE FINDINGS. THOSE AUTOMATICALLY GO FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL. THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT UNDER C, D, AND E AND THE PRELIMINARY PLAN UNDER F ARE ALL QUASIJUDICIAL APPLICATIONS. THE VACATION IS ALEGISLATIVE ITEM. THEY ALL REQUIRE FINDINGS. ≫ ALL RIGHT. REGARDLESS OF WHAT WE DO TODAY,THE LEGISLATIVE PORTIONS GO TO THE COUNCIL. ≫ THAT IS CORRECT. ≫ IF WE WERE TO GO WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION TODAY, THOSE PARTS WOULD GO TO THE COUNCIL. IS THAT CORRECT? UNLESS THERE IS APPEAL. ≫ CORRECT. ≫ JUST TO GO OFF OF THAT, FOR ME, I THINK I PLAY A UNIQUE ROLE HERE, SO I'M ALWAYS GOINGTO SPEAK TO THAT AND CONTEXTUALIZE THAT.I DO THINK I AM HAVING A HARD TIME WITH THE VACATION, IN PARTICULAR. LESS SO THE REZONING. I AM A SUPPORTER OF THIS PROJECT. IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THERE NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSION AND NEGOTIATION. I AM STRUGGLING WITH THE VACATION. THE EXPERT AT A TIMELINE IN WHICH WE HAVE HANDLED THIS. I THINK LIKE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT GOES TO THE COUNCIL, I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN A MOTION TO DENY THE VACATION FOR A GREATER DISCUSSION. THAT IS SOMETHING I WOULD LOVE TO MAKE. ≫ I CAN CLARIFY THE FINDING ON THE VACATION APPLICATION. IT COMES DOWN TO WHETHER THE ALLEYIS NEEDED FOR A PUBLIC PURPOSE. FINDING THAT IT WOULD BE SOMEHOW BE -- BE SOMEHOW INJURIOUS.WE ALSO HAVE STAFFED FROM PUBLIC WORKS RIGHT-OF-WAY . IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS SPECIFICALLY TO HELP PUBLIC WORKS CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THIS ALLEY IS NOT NEEDED FOR A PUBLIC PURPOSE. ≫ THAT IS HELPFUL. I APPRECIATECOMMISSIONER WAGGONER TAKING A STEP TO HELP SHAPE THE CONVERSATION. I AM STRUGGLING WITH FULL APPROVAL ON THIS. THERE NEEDS TO BE A MECHANISM TO HAVE A GREATER DISCUSSION ON WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE. ≫ DOES ANYONE WANT TO HEAR FROMPUBLIC WORKS? CAN WE HAVE THE REPRESENTATIVE FROM PUBLIC WORKS COME UP? THANK YOU.PLEASE INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND TELL US YOUR REASONING. ≫ MY NAME IS JEFF HANDEL AND I AM A PRINCIPAL PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER IN THE TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING AND DESIGN DIVISION OF PUBLIC WORKS. PUBLIC WORKS REVIEWS RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION APPLICATIONS. PUBLIC REVIEWS FOR -- PUBLIC WORKS REVIEWS THINGS LIKE ACCESS AND UTILITIES, AND RECOMMEND VACATION IF PUBLIC WORKS JUDGES THAT TO BE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST. PUBLIC WORKS DOES NOT REQUIREDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS TO PROVIDE PUBLIC PARKING, BORDERLINE ALLEYS WITH DRIVEWAYS OR ALLEYS FOR SEMI'S. I WANT TO EXPLAIN THOSE ARE NOTPART OF A PUBLIC WORKS REVIEW FOR MAKING OUR RECOMMENDATIONS. WE JUST REQUIRE ALLEYS TO BE DESIGNED OUR STANDARDS. ≫ ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NOT SEEING ANY, SO THANK YOU. NO FURTHER DISCUSSION? ≫ I WANTED TO TALK THROUGH A LITTLE BIT. COMMISSIONER WAGONER WAS ON THEPLAT. I THINK YOU WERE GOING SOMEWHERE WITH THAT, THAT I WAS FOLLOWING. BUT F IS WHERE MY STICKING POINT WAS. I'M TRYING TO GET TO WHERE THE PLAT MAKES SENSE AND I DON'T THINK I'M THERE YET. ≫ SURE, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO.ON PAGE 24 OF THE STAFF REPORT UNDER THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, I THINK THIS IS THE STANDARD THAT MUST BE NET. IT SAYS IN ITALICS, THE SUBDIVISION WILL NOT BE INJURIOUS TO THE USE OR ENJOYMENT OF OTHER PROPERTY IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY. UNDER THAT IN NORMAL TEXT, THE CITY RESPONDS AND SAYS -- STAFF RESPONDS AND WHY THEY FEEL -- I WOULD SAY AS A BOARD IF WEWANTED TO, IT WOULD BE INJURIOUS TO THE PROPERTY FOR A LOT OF THE REASONS DISCUSSED TODAY. WOULD WE NEED TO SUPPORT THAT FINDING, OR DO WE NEED TO SAY WHY? ≫ IF WE ARE REFERRING TO FINDING NUMBER TWO, THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, I WOULD RECOMMEND HAVING SPECIFICS AS TO WHY THE PLAT WOULD BE INJURIOUS AND HOW THATIS NOT MITIGATED THROUGH THE SITE PLAN PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT. AND JUST TO BRING MORE CLARITY TO THE ISSUE, WHICH WE THINK EVERYONE IS FOLLOWING BUT THE VACATION IS WHAT ELIMINATES THE CURRENT ALLEY. THE PRELIMINARY PLAN IS WHAT DEDICATES THE NEW ALLEY CONFIGURATION. IT IS TIED TO THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, NOT TO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION. ≫ AND THE PRELIMINARY PLAT IS QUASIJUDICIAL. ≫ AND IT WILL REQUIRE A PLAT ATA LATER DATE BUT THIS IS QUASIJUDICIAL. ≫ THANK YOU CHAIR. THANK COMMISSIONER WAGONER. I AM INTERESTED TO SEE WHAT THEBODY THINKS OF THIS, BUT I THINK FOR F, IF A MOTION IS PROPER FOR DENIAL ON A PRELIMINARY PLOT, AND THE CITY WANTS TO CUT BACK WITH SOMETHING DIFFERENT OR REPEAL IT, I DON'T KNOW. LET ME TAKE A STEP BACK.IF WE DENIED THE PRELIMINARY PLOT, WHAT WOULD BE THE NEXT STEPS? IF THE PRELIMINARY PLOT IS DENIED, THE CURRENT ALLEY GOES AWAY AND THE NEW ALLEY IS NOT DEDICATED. -- AS PROPOSED, BUT YES IF IT WERE DENIED, THEN THE NEW ALLEY WOULD NOT BE DEDICATED AS PROPOSED ON THE PLAN. ≫ I THINK THAT IS WHERE COMPROMISE AND DISCUSSION NEED TO PLAY A ROLE. ≫ I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE ALL OF THE STRUGGLES THAT THE BUSINESS IN THIS AREA HAVE GONE THROUGH. WE REALLY WANT TO DO WHAT WE CAN TO HELP THOSE BUSINESSES. THAT IS WHY I SUPPORTED CONTINUING THIS, AND I HOPE THE CITY IS ABLE TO DO EVERYTHING THEY CAN. I AM APPRECIATIVE OF THIS, WILLING TO HAVE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT USING THEIR PARKING AND NOT WASTING IT. FOR THINGS LIKE ELECTION DAY, THEY ARE GOING TONEED THAT. I GUESS FOR ALL OF THE QUASIJUDICIAL ITEMS , I FEEL LIKE -- I THINK WHERE THERE IS -- ON THE QUASI-LEGISLATIVE ITEMS, FOR THE ZONING, THE COUNCIL, THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THEY HAVE A LOT OF DISCRETION. THAT IS WHERE YOU CAN MAKE A FINDING. SOME OF THE DIFFERENT COMPONENTS -- THAT IS WHERE THAT FITS IN. I THINK MY THOUGHT IS -- LEGISLATIVE PARTS HAVE TO GO TO THE COUNCILANYWAY. -- ALL OF THE QUASIJUDICIAL ONES, AS WELL. BUT MY OPINION IS THAT THE APPLICANT HAS MADE SOME REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS, AND I AM INCLINED TO SUPPORT THE STAFF REPORT NOT HAVING ANY FINDINGS, THAT I THINK GO AGAINST IT FOR THE QUASIJUDICIAL COMPONENTS. MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE, IF THERE WERE MORE DETAILS TO WORK OUT, THE COUNCIL IS GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE THIS UP. I WOULD SUGGEST MOVING IT FORWARD TO THEM. THAT IS MY THOUGHT. OTHER COMMISSIONERS? ≫ THANK YOU CHAIR MEYER. I'M GOING BACK TO THE ALLEY ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE HOOK AND LADDER. WE DISCUSSED PARKING AND GETTING VEHICLES THROUGH. THOSE ARE THE GOAL POSTS THAT ARE NOTGOING TO MOVE IN MY MIND. -- THE BIG STICKING POINT, AS WELL AS PARKING. AS FAR AS USING THE WORD TAKE TO DESCRIBE THINGS. IF THE ALLEY HASN'T CHANGED NORTH OF THE HOOK AND LADDER, I AM NOT CLEAR WHAT IS BEING TAKEN. IF THE PARKING BELONGS TO THE DEMOCRACY CENTER IN THE FIRST PLACE, NOTHING IS BEING TAKEN THERE, EITHER. THE WORD TAKEN CONFUSESME. THIS IS REALLY ABOUT A REDUCTION OF PARKING WHICH IS IRONIC FOR THIS BODY TO BE CONCERNED WITH. THE PRESIDENT WE WOULD BE SETTING, THAT IF THIS WERE A PRIVATE CONCERN, WEWOULD NEVER PERMIT THIS, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT IS TRUE.I'M GOING TO INDULGE THAT AND SAY THE PRESIDENT WE ARE SETTING -- PRECEDENT WE ARE SETTING IS PARKING WOULD BE ENTITLED BY OTHER -- I DON'T KNOW THAT WE SHOULD MAKE IT HERE. ≫ SOMETHING I MEANT TO SAY AS WELL IS THAT THE CONCERNS BROUGHT UP, IF WE FOLLOW THAT LINE OF LOGIC. I THINK THAT WOULD GO VERY CONTRARY TO OUR CLIMATE GOALS AND MANY OF THE OTHER GOALS IN THE 20/40 PLAN. ≫ IT IS NOT JUST ANY PARKING, IT IS ADA PARKING. THIS FEELS VERY INCOMPLETE TO ME. I APPRECIATED THE CONTINUANCE ON THE 18TH. THAT GAVE A LOT OF TIME FOR THEARCHITECTS TO GO MEET WITH THE BUSINESS OWNERS WHICH WAS DESPERATELY NEEDED. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED BEFORE SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR, WHICH IS WHEN -- AUGUST WAS THE FIRST MEETING YOU HAD ABOUT HOW TO ENGAGE. HAD CONVERSATIONS STARTED SOONER . THIS FEELS INCOMPLETE, I AM STRUGGLING WITH F AND G. IT IS NOT COMPLETE TO ME, BECAUSE IT WASN'T REALLY -- I DON'T THINK THE ENGAGEMENT MIGHT HAVE BEEN OFF A LITTLE BIT. I THINK IN DESIGN, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT WAYS TO BE CREATIVE, ESPECIALLY WORKINGWITH ANCHOR BUSINESSES. I'M NOT ARGUING FOR PARKING, BUT I DO FEEL LIKE THE CURRENT CONFIGURATION TAKES AWAY A SIGNIFICANT ASSET TO THE HOOKAND LADDER FOR ACCOMMODATIONS, FOR PEOPLE COMING TO THESE -- TO SEE THEIR SHOWS. PEOPLE PATRONIZING THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE AREA TOO. YOU MIGHT BE GOING TO SEE A SHOW, YOU MIGHT GET SOME BOOKS. I'M NOT IN A POSITION TO VOTE YES ON THIS TODAY. ≫ IF I MAY CLARIFY, WE ARE HEARING A LOT ABOUT ADA PARKING ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING. WHILE I FULLY BELIEVE THAT MAY BE HOW THE PARKING IS USED, IT IS NOT LEGALLY ADA PARKING. THERE IS NO ACCESSIBLE ROUTE FROM THESE PARKING STALLS TO THE FRONT ENTRANCE OF THE BUILDING. IT IS NOT SIGNED ACCORDINGLY. I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR.THIS WOULD NOT TAKE AWAY LEGAL ADA PARKING THAT HOOK AND LADDER IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE. THESE ARE PARALLEL STALLS NEXT TO THE BUILDING THAT WOULD NOT MEET ADA REQUIREMENTS. ≫ JUST TO CLARIFY, I HEARD FROM THE BUSINESS OWNER THAT WHEN YOU HAVE FOUR PARKING SPOTS IN THE BACK OF THE HOOK AND LADDER, THAT THEY USE FOR ADA . WHEN A LARGE VEHICLE IS COMING AND TURNING, THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THAT WITH THE CARS PARKED OUT FRONT. THAT IS WHAT I'M REFERRING TO WHEN I SAY THEY ARE LOSING THAT, WHICH THEY ARE USING FOR ADA. ≫ ANDREW IS PULLING UP THE TURNING RADIUS. ≫ I WANTED TO PULL THIS UP. WE DON'T HAVE A DIAGRAM OF THE PARKING LAYOUT THAT THEY HAVE. THIS IS THE TURNING DIAGRAM ANDQUESTION. WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT ARE THE PUMP -- PARKING STALLS ALONG THE NORTH SIDE AND THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF TERMINOLOGY. THE PARKING STALLS THAT ARE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THIS DRIVEWAY ARE NOT SHOWN HERE. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THIS DIAGRAMS WITH THOSE PARKING STALLS AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THOSE ARE LEGAL OR NOT BECAUSE IT IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE APPLICATION MATERIALS. ≫ THANK YOU YOU. WERE THERE ANYFURTHER QUESTIONS? ≫ IF WE DON'T WANT TO USE THE TERM ADA, THAT IS UNDERSTANDABLE BECAUSE IT IS ALEGAL TERM BUT WE CAN SAY THAT THIS IS PARKING . THAT IS WHAT WE ARE CONTENDING. AND IF IT WOULDN'T GO AWAY , THERE HAS NOT BEEN ENOUGH ACCURATE TIME AND ENGAGEMENT TOSHOW TO THIS BUSINESS OR THIS BODY. I THINK WE CAN AGREE WITHTHAT. THE THING THAT I WILL QUICKLY SAY HERE , THAT SHOWS ME THAT THIS ISN'T COMPLETE FORME AND A POINT OF FRUSTRATION FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, ESPECIALLY REPRESENTING SO MANYPEOPLE WHO WORK HERE AND PATRON HERE AND CARE ABOUT THISAREA. WE AS A CITY SPEND SO MUCH EFFORT AND TIME IN BRINGING BACK THE VITALITY OF DOWNTOWN MINNEAPOLIS, AND THE VIBRANCY OF DOWNTOWN. IT IS A GOOD THING, AN EXCELLENT THING THAT WE SHOULD DO. BUT WE DO TAKE HUGE STEPS AND HUGE BUDGETARY STEPS TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN. WE AS A CITY HAVE NOT MADE THATTYPE OF EFFORT FOR DOWNTOWN LONGFELLOW, AND THIS IS WHAT COMMUNITY MEMBERS ARE ASKING FOR. ALONG WITH A WELL ORGANIZED CORRIDOR, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN PRODUCTIVE IN THIS MATTER AND MADE THE 3000 MINNEHAHA PROJECT A LOT SMOOTHER GOING FORWARD. YOU DON'T HAVE TO LIKE WHAT I AM SAYING, BUT IT IS THE FACT OF THE MATTER. THIS IS YEAR THREE FOR ME ON THIS, SAYING THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER AGAIN. I WISH IT WASN'T. I WOULD LOVE TO MOVE FORWARD WITHTHIS PROJECT. THAT IS WHY IT WILL NOT HAVE MY SUPPORT TODAY. I THINK COMMISSIONERS HAVE LAID OUT THAT FINDINGS FOR DENIAL ISPRETTY COOL DIFFICULT -- IS PRETTY DIFFICULT HERE. I WOULD WANT TO CONTINUE THIS ON FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION. 22 BUSINESS DAYS ON THIS. I HAVE NOT HAD A CONVERSATION WITH FINANCING PROPERTY SERVICES ON THIS MATTER. I THINK THOSE ARE THE TWO OPTIONS THAT WE SEE HERE. YOU EITHER MOVE IT FOR APPROVAL ANDTHEN IT GOES TO CITY COUNCIL, OR THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY IF TIME ALLOWS, FOR ANOTHER CONTINUATION. ≫ I'M GOING TO SUGGEST THAT IF YOU WANT TO HAVE A CHANCE, TO DENY PART OF THIS, I THINK THE REZONING IS THE PLACE TO START. OK. ≫ THANK YOU COMMISSIONER MEYER.I DON'T THINK THERE IS AN ISSUE WITH THE REZONING. SO THAT WOULD BE TOUGH FOR ME TO DO. ≫ DOES ANYONE WANT TO PUT A MOTION ON THE TABLE? COMMISSIONER WAGNER. ≫ I WILL SHARE ONE MORE COMMENTON THE PROJECT, IN LINE WITH A LOT OF THE OTHER COMMENTS. MAYBE THIS WILL GET ME INTO TROUBLE, BUT THE APPLICANT IS THE CITY, SO I CAN CRITICIZE THE APPLICANT A LITTLE BIT. I THINK THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN -- I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT WORD I WANT TO REACH MORE. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE MORE TRANSPARENCY ABOUT EVERYTHING GOING ON, WHY THIS ALLEY NEEDS TO BE MOVED, THE PRESENTATION, ALTERNATIVE DESIGNS, THINGS LIKE THAT. WITH ALL OF THAT SAID, WE ARE HERE AS A PLANNING COMMISSION, REVIEWING AN APPLICATION BEFOREUS. IN MY MIND, THIS APPLICATION MEETS ALL ASPECTS OF CITY CODE BY THE SMALLEST SLIVER, BUT IT DOES. FOR THAT REASON I WILL BE SUPPORTING STAFF FINDINGS. I AM HAPPY TO MAKE THAT MOTION. I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO SUPPORTSTAFF FINDINGS AS A RELATES TO ITEM FOUR. ≫ SECOND. ≫ THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON? I'M GOING TO SAY I APPRECIATE ALL OF THE FRUSTRATIONS, IT IS FRUSTRATING TO ME TOO. I DO THINK THE FINDINGS ARE MET, SO I'M GOING TO VOTE IN SUPPORT, BUT I WILL JUST NOTE THAT THE LEGISLATIVE COMPONENTS HAVE TO GO TO THE COUNCIL. AND IF THIS IS APPEALED,, THE JUDICIAL COMPONENTS WOULD ALSO GO TO THE COUNCIL. HOPEFULLY THERE WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO WORK OUT ANY OTHER DETAILS. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? WE WILL PUT THIS ONE TO ABOUT AND IF IT FAILS WE CAN MAKE AN ALTERNATIVE MOTION. CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. [ROLL CALL VOTE] THERE ARE FOUR AYES AND THREE NAYS. ≫ THAT IS ADOPTED, AND THAT CONCLUDES OUR BUSINESS FOR THE DAY. OUR NEXT FULL PLANNING COMMISSION IS ON JULY 13. WE DO HAVE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, THIS THURSDAY. WE WILL BE STARTING OUR DISCUSSION FOR THE 250 PLAN. I HOPE YOU GUYS CAN ATTEND THAT, IF YOU ARE AVAILABLE. ≫ I WANTED TO CLARIFY FOR THE FOLKS STILL REMAINING. THE NEXT STEP IS GOING TO CITY COUNCIL. I WOULD FOLLOW ALONG WITH THAT.I'M SURE SOME OF YOU KNOW HOW TO GET IN TOUCH WITH YOUR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. FOR THOSE WHO DON'T, TALK TO THOSE SOMEONES. I WILL ALSO HIGHLIGHT TO THIS BODY THAT ON THE CITY COUNCIL, WE ARE MOVING FORWARD ACTIONS ON REGULATING DATA CENTERS. CURRENTLY THERE IS A DATA CENTER MORATORIUM IN PLACE WITH THE EXCEPTION MADE IN DOWNTOWN.THE FIRST STOP -- ARE GOING TO BE REFERRING TOSTAFF IN THE FINAL COUNCIL MEETING ON JUNE 25 IS THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE WHOLE ON JULY 16. THIS IS MY NOTICE TO YOU, TO GET READY TO THINK ABOUT DATA CENTER REGULATION. THAT WILL OPEN A 60 DAY COMMENTPERIOD FOR THE PUBLIC, AND WE WILL HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF TAKING ON TESTIMONY FROM THE PUBLIC, ON THE DATA CENTER REGULATIONS, IN OCTOBER. ≫ THANK YOU FOR THAT UPDATE. ANYONE ELSE? ≫ THE COUNCILMEMBER SAID IF THIS TRACKS ACCORDING TO OURSCHEDULE, AND I HAVE NO REASON TO THINK IT WON'T, THIS WOULD BE GOING TO THE COMMITTEE MEETING ON JULY 21. ≫ NOT SEEING ANYONE ELSE, SO WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU EVERYONE.