[0:29] » Good afternoon, everyone.

[0:31] welcome to the regular meeting

[0:32] of the business, housing and

[0:34] zoning committee for july 7,

[0:36] 2026.

[0:37] my name is jamal osman, and

[0:38] I'm the chair of this

[0:39] committee.

[0:44] I will call to order this

[0:44] meeting.

[0:47] before we begin, I want to

[0:48] remind all folks, this meeting

[0:49] is broadcast live to enable

[0:51] greater public participation.

[0:54] they include realtime

[0:56] captioning to increase the

[0:58] accessibility of our

[0:59] proceedings to the community.

[1:02] therefore, all speakers need

[1:03] to be mindful of their speech

[1:04] so that our captioners can

[1:05] fully transcribe all comments

[1:06] for the broadcast.

[1:07] we ask all speakers to

[1:08] moderate their speed and

[1:09] clarity of their comments.

[1:10] we'll be using the speaker

[1:12] management, so please sign u

[1:14] at this time I'll ask the

[1:17] clerk to call the roll so we

[1:17] can verify a quorum.

[1:18] thank you.

[1:21] » Council member rainville.

[1:22] » Present.

[1:23] » Warren.

[1:23] » Present.

[1:24] » Shaffer.

[1:25] » Present.

[1:26] » Chavez.

[1:26] » Present.

[1:27] » Chug high is present --

[1:30] chughtai is absent.

[1:31] vice chair chowdhury.

[1:32] » Present.

[1:33] » And chair osman.

[1:34] » Present.

[1:34] » There are 6 members

[1:35] present.

[1:36] » Let the record reflect we

[1:37] have a quorum.

[1:38] our agenda is in front of us.

[1:40] we will begin with the consent

[1:41] agenda.

[1:41] if you want to speak during

[1:43] any of this public hearing

[1:46] today, please sign up with the

[1:47] clerk.

[1:48] all right.

[1:55] item 6, approve six liquor

[1:58] licenses.

[2:00] item 7 approves 24 liquor

[2:02] license renewals.

[2:03] item 8 approves 22 -- I'm

[2:07] sorry -- item 8 approves two

[2:09] gambling licenses.

[2:11] item 9 approves amended

[2:12] business licenses, operating

[2:13] condition.

[2:16] for breakfast bar of

[2:17] minnesota.

[2:18] item 10 accepts the low

[2:21] responsive bid for snow

[2:22] removal at minneapolis

[2:24] convention center.

[2:25] item 11 authorizes a loan

[2:29] restructure for jigji dwsm a

[2:32] business center.

[2:33] item 12 authorizes financial

[2:35] agreement for rehab

[2:37] properties, part of

[2:39] minneapolis housing finance.

[2:41] item 13 authorizes revision to

[2:43] the alternative financing

[2:44] program.

[2:46] item 14 is a resolution

[2:50] approving land disposition and

[2:51] financial assistance from

[2:52] hennepin county housing and

[2:55] redevelopment authority.

[2:56] item 15 authorizes a contract

[3:01] with metropolitan consortium

[3:03] of community developers for

[3:04] loan services.

[3:06] item 16 approves two street

[3:09] vacations located north of

[3:10] franklin west.

[3:11] item 17 refers to the staff an

[3:15] ordinance related to the

[3:17] autonomous vehicle regulation.

[3:18] and, lastly, item 18 sets a

[3:21] public hearing for july

[3:25] 22nd to consider the

[3:27] mayor's nomination of enrique

[3:31] valazquez to the director of

[3:33] regulatory services

[3:34] department.

[3:36] » Thank you, chair.

[3:37] I'd like to pull item 9 for a

[3:39] separate discussion and vote.

[3:41] » Item 9 we'll pull for

[3:42] separate vote.

[3:44] council member shaffer.

[3:45] » I just wanted to make a

[3:46] comment on 16 bore we move

[3:48] to the vote.

[3:48] and just to say thank you for

[3:50] this work on behalf of cped

[3:53] and others about this vacation

[3:54] on these two small triangular

[3:57] parcels.

[3:57] with the eventual transfer,

[4:00] hopefully, to mprb.

[4:00] and this is something that we

[4:02] were very interestedn for a

[4:03] long time, and I'm just very

[4:04] thankful to see that coming

[4:05] forward.

[4:05] this is an area of the city

[4:08] that does not have a lot of

[4:09] green space.

[4:09] it's one of the target areas

[4:12] for mprb.

[4:13] and I'm thankful to see this

[4:14] vacation coming forward.

[4:17] » Thank you.

[4:20] with that, I'll move items

[4:22] except item 9.

[4:27] and I refer item 17 to staff

[4:31] and set item 18 for public

[4:32] hearing.

[4:33] on that motion, all those in

[4:35] favor say aye.

[4:37] and those opposed say nay.

[4:38] the ayes have it and the

[4:40] motion carries.

[4:42] all right.

[4:44] for public hearing, for

[4:46] everyone in attendance and

[4:47] especially those who might --

[4:50] » Chair osman?

[4:51] » Yes.

[4:53] » Council member rainville

[4:54] pulled out an item for

[4:56] discussion, I believe.

[4:56] » I appreciate the reminder.

[4:58] council member rainville,

[4:59] please go ahead with item 9.

[5:01] » Thank you.

[5:02] so I see ms. Lingo here.

[5:03] I'm wondering if you could

[5:05] describe the operating

[5:06] conditions for the breakfast

[5:07] bar.

[5:16] » Through the chair, council

[5:19] member rainville, thank you.

[5:19] so the conditions that we have

[5:20] before us for the breakfast

[5:22] bar are related to the

[5:24] activity for the business, as

[5:25] well as for the outdoor

[5:27] structure.

[5:28] so we have negotiated a

[5:29] take-down of that outdoor

[5:32] structure to occur no later

[5:33] than september 15th of

[5:34] this year, and then in that

[5:36] part of those negotiations we

[5:38] have clearly laid out an

[5:41] agreed-upon behavior and

[5:43] expectations for sound and use

[5:44] of that tent.

[5:47] » And that's what you mean by

[5:51] "activity"?

[5:52] so you say the conditions are

[5:53] regarding activity.

[5:54] so the activity inside the

[5:55] tent or thectivity once the

[5:57] tent is gone?

[5:59] » The activity inside of the

[6:00] tent, how the patio space is

[6:02] to be used for this time

[6:03] frame.

[6:03] » From now till september?

[6:05] » Correct.

[6:06] » Great.

[6:06] thank you.

[6:07] good job.

[6:07] I appreciate the work.

[6:08] we all know that there's been

[6:10] some issues there.

[6:13] so thank you.

[6:16] » Council member shaffer.

[6:17] » Yeah, I'm just thankful for

[6:19] seeing this coming forward as

[6:20] well.

[6:20] this is something that we've

[6:21] heard a lot of complaints

[6:23] about, particularly from the

[6:25] atrium, public housing, there

[6:26] has been a written petition

[6:28] going around with many

[6:31] signatures and due to noise

[6:34] complaints, very late at

[6:35] night.

[6:36] and early in the morning.

[6:37] so thank you.

[6:38] » Thank you.

[6:39] and also, I do want to comment

[6:42] that this is a business owned

[6:46] by african american business,

[6:48] and I really appreciate the

[6:50] staff for finding a way to

[6:51] have the business t continue

[6:55] and especially the outdoor

[6:56] situation.

[6:58] and good luck to them and with

[7:03] that, I will have council

[7:05] member chav easy to speak on

[7:06] this.

[7:08] chavez to speak on this.

[7:09] » I'll let it go.

[7:10] » All right.

[7:10] thank you so much.

[7:11] I will approve for item 9,

[7:13] all those in favor say aye.

[7:14] [ members voting ]

[7:16] and those opposed say nay.

[7:18] [ no response heard ]

[7:18] the ayes have it and the

[7:19] motion carries.

[7:20] all right.

[7:21] public hearing for everyone in

[7:23] attendance and especially

[7:24] those who might participate in

[7:26] our hearing or comment period,

[7:27] let me offer this notice.

[7:30] this hearing is being recorded

[7:33] and broadcast, both

[7:35] recordingings and broadcast

[7:36] are classifd as public data

[7:39] under the minnesota data

[7:40] practices act.

[7:41] by attending or participating

[7:42] in this proceeding, your image

[7:43] and any testimony or

[7:44] information that you might

[7:47] provide will be also subject

[7:49] to disclosure under that law.

[7:51] that includes but is not

[7:53] limited to your attendance,

[7:54] your name, and other personal

[7:55] details you might provide, as

[7:59] well as any testimony or

[8:00] comments you provide which

[8:03] includes any written

[8:03] submission you make which are

[8:06] included in the record of this

[8:08] meeting.

[8:08] our first public hearing is a

[8:12] license application for

[8:13] on-sale liquor with limited

[8:15] entertainment for bill's bait

[8:17] shop located at ward 12.

[8:22] I would ask ahmed mohamed from

[8:26] the business license for a

[8:27] presentation on this.

[8:29] welcome.

[8:30] » I'm license inspector with

[8:32] licenses and consumer

[8:33] services.

[8:33] I'm presenting an application

[8:35] from bill's bait shop, lcc,

[8:37] dba, bill's baithop, located

[8:41] at 3101 42nd street east,

[8:43] minneapolis, minnesota, 55406.

[8:46] in ward 12.

[8:48] the applicant is requesting

[8:50] on-sale liquor, limited

[8:52] entertainment with sunday

[8:53] sales license.

[8:54] if approved, they iend to be

[8:56] a full-service restaurant with

[8:57] a menu focused on fish, along

[9:00] with burgers and hot dogs with

[9:03] outdoor seating.

[9:05] bill's bait shop will be a

[9:06] sit-down restaurant with 48

[9:09] interior seats and 18 private

[9:11] patio seats.

[9:13] the premises includes the

[9:14] ground-level space at 3101

[9:17] 42nd street east.

[9:18] they intend to provide limited

[9:21] entertainment, only ambient

[9:23] music playing in the

[9:25] background inside only.

[9:26] on occasion, they may offer

[9:28] karaoke and trivia, but no

[9:30] exterior eertainment.

[9:34] hours of operation, indoor,

[9:35] sunday for thursday, 11:00

[9:37] a.m. To 11:00 p.m.

[9:38] friday and saturday, 11:00

[9:40] a. To 12:00 a.m

[9:42] outdoor hours for the private

[9:43] patio, sunday through

[9:44] thursday, 11:00 a.m. To 10:00

[9:47] p.m., and friday and saturday,

[9:48] 11:00 a.m. To 11:00 p.m.

[9:50] on june 15th, 2026, 159

[9:54] public hearing notices were

[9:55] sent to residents, property

[9:58] owners, posted on all

[10:00] residential buildings with

[10:01] four or more units within 600

[10:03] feet of the premises.

[10:06] notices were also sent to the

[10:08] standish erickson neighborhood d

[10:11] council member chowdhury.

[10:12] we have received 18 comments

[10:14] from the community.

[10:15] 18 in support of this

[10:16] application.

[10:18] however, their concerns are

[10:19] closing hours for their

[10:20] private patio.

[10:22] these hours are based off the

[10:24] feedback that was received in

[10:25] response from neighbors and

[10:26] are reflected in the requested

[10:29] closing times for the interior

[10:31] and exterior of the business.

[10:33] we brought these concerns to

[10:34] the applicant.

[10:34] the applicant has a history of

[10:37] running successful

[10:38] neighborhood restaurts with

[10:39] little issue.

[10:39] they fully intend to operate

[10:41] as a good neighbor.

[10:42] this is a new business to a

[10:44] ne location.

[10:46] a review of any complaints,

[10:48] 311 calls, police calls, and

[10:51] any operating conditions found

[10:53] no signicant issues

[10:54] concerning the business and

[10:55] the issuanc of this license.

[10:57] the license and consumer

[10:59] services division recommends

[11:01] approval of on-sale liquor,

[11:04] limited entertainment, with

[11:05] sunday sales license.

[11:06] this concludes my

[11:07] presention.

[11:08] at this time, I will stand for

[11:09] comments or questions.

[11:10] thank you.

[11:10] » Thank you so much for that

[11:12] prestation.

[11:14] now I'll proceed to open the

[11:15] public hearing and recognize

[11:18] jamie olson.

[11:19] hi.

[11:19] welcome.

[11:22] » Thank you, act bar.

[11:25] hello, council members.

[11:26] thank you for having me.

[11:27] I am jamie olson, founder and

[11:29] ceo of central restaurant

[11:31] group, bill's bait shop is one

[11:32] of our newest projects and

[11:35] near and dear to me, after

[11:37] my -- it's in honor of my

[11:39] grandpa, bill, who grew up in

[11:41] northern minnesota and loved

[11:42] fishing.

[11:43] so really really excited about

[11:44] this.

[11:45] really excited about the

[11:46] neighborhood.

[11:47] we've heard nothing but

[11:48] positive things and

[11:49] excitement, and we are very

[11:52] much a community-focused

[11:55] restaurant brand company.

[11:57] so, yeah, we respect the

[11:59] community and I'm here to

[12:00] answer any questions.

[12:02] » Thank you so much.

[12:05] are there anyone who would

[12:06] like to speak on this item?

[12:07] seeing none, I'll close the

[12:08] public hearing and recognize

[12:10] vice chair chowdhury.

[12:10] » Thank you, chair osman.

[12:14] akbar, would you just mind

[12:15] saying what the hours are just

[12:16] one more time for us?

[12:21] » So, the indoor hours will

[12:23] be sunday through thursday,

[12:25] 11:00 a.m. To 11:00 p.m.

[12:27] friday and satday, 11:00

[12:28] a.m. To 100 a.m.

[12:30] the outor patio, private

[12:32] patio hours, sunday through

[12:33] thursday, 11:00 a.m. -- excuse

[12:35] me -- 11:00 a.m. To 10:00 p.m.

[12:38] friday and saturday, 11:00

[12:39] a.m. To 11:00 p.m.

[12:41] » Thank you, akbar.

[12:43] » Sure.

[12:43] I just first want to start off

[12:46] by saying thank you so much

[12:47] for coming to city hall, jamie

[12:50] and jerry.

[12:51] really appreciate you both.

[12:53] I'm really excited to move

[12:54] this forward for approval.

[12:58] bill's bait shop is going to

[12:58] be such a wonderful addition

[13:00] to this corner of the 12th

[13:02] ward and the neighborhood.

[13:03] I have gotten so many emails,

[13:05] calls, texts, just excited for

[13:08] you to open and just really

[13:12] appreciate the other

[13:14] businesses you've ran in the

[13:15] twin cities area and the

[13:18] neighborhood here has really

[13:19] shared that they would love to

[13:21] have, like, a place where they

[13:22] can walk and have a drink,

[13:24] have some burgers.

[13:26] I think that northwoods smoke

[13:28] fish is going to be very

[13:29] popular.

[13:30] and I just want to also thank

[13:33] amy and akbar for your work.

[13:36] constituents have shared with

[13:37] me how accessible you've been

[13:39] and, really, I think

[13:41] everyone's going to appreciate

[13:42] this compromise on the hours.

[13:43] it's going to go a really long

[13:44] way and I'm just super excited

[13:46] to bring this into this

[13:47] corner.

[13:49] this corner's been vacant for

[13:50] a couple of years now.

[13:52] chicago taste authority used

[13:53] to be here.

[13:55] so having it be filled with a

[13:57] new neighbor is going to be

[13:58] wonderful and I really

[14:00] recommend, you probably

[14:01] already have connecting with

[14:02] the owner of every makeup,

[14:04] they always have a really cool

[14:06] crew of people coming through

[14:07] there that will just probably

[14:09] love bill's bait shop.

[14:11] » Great.

[14:12] wonderful.

[14:12] thank you.

[14:14] with that mion, all those in

[14:15] favor say aye.

[14:16] [ members voting ]

[14:16] and those opposed say nay.

[14:18] [ no response heard ]

[14:19] the ayes have it a the

[14:20] motion carries.

[14:21] our next public hearing is a

[14:23] license application for permit

[14:28] expansion of premises and

[14:30] street café, both are for

[14:33] bryant lake bowl.

[14:35] I'll have manager jamie lingo

[14:36] to talk about and give us

[14:38] presentation on this.

[14:39] » Thank you, chair osman,

[14:42] committee members, I'm amy

[14:43] lingo.

[14:43] I'm presenting an alication

[14:46] from splitsville,

[14:46] incorporated, lcc, doing

[14:48] business as bryant lake bowl,

[14:49] which is located at 810 lake

[14:51] street west, minneapolis,

[14:53] minnesota, 55408, which is in

[14:55] the 10th ward.

[14:56] the applicant is requesting a

[14:58] street café and a permanent

[14:59] expansion of license.

[15:01] if approved, they intend to

[15:02] expand their outdoor area to

[15:03] provide a street calf yea for

[15:05] the outside dining to

[15:07] accompany their current

[15:08] operations of restaurant,

[15:09] bowling, and live theater.

[15:11] the outdoor expansion will add

[15:12] approximately 180 square feet

[15:15] for 16 outdoor seats within a

[15:17] designated and enclosed café

[15:20] area operating during the

[15:21] spring through the fall sea

[15:25] season, street calf yeas

[15:27] operate in spark -- in parking

[15:29] spots.

[15:30] the hours of oration are

[15:31] monday through thursday, 8:00

[15:34] a.m. To 12:00 p.m., the

[15:36] outdoor hours on the proposed

[15:37] street calf yea are monday

[15:38] through sunday, 9:00 a.m. To

[15:40] 11:00 p.m.

[15:41] on june 15th, 2026, 134

[15:44] public hearing notices were

[15:45] sent to residents, property

[15:47] owners and posted on all

[15:49] residential buildings with

[15:50] four or more units within 600

[15:51] feet of the premises.

[15:53] notices were also sent to the

[15:55] lourey hill east neighborhood

[15:56] association, the lake street

[15:57] business association, and

[15:59] council member aisha chug

[16:00] high.

[16:01] we have received two comments

[16:02] from the committee, both of

[16:03] which were in support.

[16:04] we have received no comments

[16:06] in opposition.

[16:08] a review of any complaints,

[16:09] 311 calls, police calls, or

[16:11] anyther operating conditions

[16:13] ha found no significant

[16:16] issues concerning this

[16:16] buness or the issuance of

[16:17] this license.

[16:18] licenses and consumer services

[16:19] recommends approval of a

[16:20] street calf yea and permanent

[16:21] expansion of premises.

[16:22] this concludes my

[16:23] presentation.

[16:23] at this time I'll stand for

[16:24] any questions.

[16:25] » Thank you so much for that

[16:26] presentation.

[16:27] I will proceed to open the

[16:29] public hearing and see if

[16:30] there's anyone who would like

[16:31] to speak on this item.

[16:32] yes, sir, welcome.

[16:33] please state your name and --

[16:36] yes, come over here, yup.

[16:41] » Hello, everyone, my name is

[16:42] ryan o'neill.

[16:43] » Welcome.

[16:44] go ahead.

[16:45] » I'm a resident of the

[16:47] whittier neighborhood.

[16:47] I'm a longtime patron ofbryant e

[16:51] here today to talk about favor

[16:54] of the proposal.

[16:55] it's a place that's been very

[16:57] near and dear to me.

[16:58] when people come in from out

[17:00] of town, I always try and get

[17:01] them to stop by during the --

[17:04] stop by.

[17:05] during the pandemic, I did

[17:06] everything I could to keep the

[17:07] place open.

[17:08] I bought gift t-shirts for my

[17:10] entire family in north

[17:10] caroli.

[17:11] so there's bryant lake bowl

[17:13] advertising out of state.

[17:16] I volunteer a lot there, doing

[17:18] small things, I called the

[17:20] bingo, we're doing bingo

[17:22] tonight at 8:00 p.m.

[17:24] so, it's a place that I've

[17:26] been patronizing for quite

[17:27] some time, over 15 years, and

[17:30] I think this would be a great

[17:33] opportunity for the business

[17:34] in the neighborhood and I just

[17:35] wanted to encrage the

[17:38] council to approve this

[17:38] proposal.

[17:40] » All right.

[17:41] thank you so much for your

[17:42] testimony.

[17:43] is there anyone else?

[17:44] seeing none, I'll close the

[17:45] public hearing and recognize

[17:47] chair chowdhury.

[17:48] » Thank you, chair osman.

[17:49] I'll move this item for

[17:51] approval and then also just

[17:52] highlight to those who are

[17:54] watching, bryant lake bowl was

[17:55] very prominently featured on

[17:57] "love is blind minneapolis,"

[17:59] one of the most iconic breakup

[18:01] scenes of the season occurred

[18:03] at bryant lake bowl.

[18:04] so, excited to expand the

[18:06] premises.

[18:07] hopefully there will be more

[18:11] people getting together than

[18:11] breaking up.

[18:12] but that's not up to us here.

[18:15] » All right.

[18:16] wonderful.

[18:16] with that motion, all those in

[18:17] favor say aye.

[18:18] [ members voting ]

[18:19] and those opposed say nay.

[18:21] [ no response heard ]

[18:21] the ayes have it and the

[18:22] motion carries.

[18:26] our next public hearing is a

[18:28] license applicationor wine

[18:28] and strong beer with no live

[18:31] entertainment at antojitos,

[18:33] located at ward 4.

[18:35] I will have sarah grace from

[18:38] business license to give us

[18:39] details about this.

[18:40] welcome.

[18:41] » Thank you, chair osman and

[18:42] committee members.

[18:43] I'm license inspector sarah

[18:46] gray, that's s-a-r-a,

[18:49] g-r-a-y-s, for special

[18:50] purposes.

[18:50] with licenses and consumer

[18:52] services.

[18:52] I'm presenting an application

[18:55] from antojitos ryan.s, lcc,

[18:56] doing business as antojos

[18:59] ryan.

[19:00] the business is located at

[19:02] 1724 lourey avenue north, in

[19:04] ward 4.

[19:07] the applicant is requesting an

[19:09] on-sale wine with strong beer

[19:10] and no entertainment.

[19:12] if approved, they intend to

[19:13] add wine and strong beer to

[19:15] their full menu, sit-down

[19:18] restaurant, whichocuses on

[19:20] ecuadore and american

[19:21] cuisine.

[19:21] they've been open as a

[19:22] restaurant only for the past

[19:25] year.

[19:25] there will be no entertainment

[19:27] other than tvs or radio.

[19:28] the restaurant is in a

[19:30] standalone building and has

[19:31] capacity for 60 seats inside.

[19:33] ther is no outdo seating.

[19:36] the hours of operation for the

[19:38] restaurant are monday through

[19:39] sunday, 11:00 a.m. Through

[19:41] 9:00 p.m.

[19:43] on june 15th, public

[19:44] hearing notices were sent to

[19:46] residents, property 'owners,

[19:47] and posted on all residential

[19:49] buildings with four or more

[19:50] units within 600 feet of the

[19:52] premises.

[19:53] noticesere also sent to the

[19:57] followwell -- folwell

[20:01] neighborhood and council

[20:02] member.

[20:03] we have received no complaints

[20:05] from the community, 311 calls,

[20:07] police calls, and we found no

[20:10] significant issues concerning

[20:11] the business and issuance of

[20:12] this license and the business

[20:13] has completed a thorough

[20:15] security plan with the 4th

[20:17] precinct police department.

[20:17] the licenses and consumer

[20:19] services division recommends

[20:20] approval of an on-sale wine

[20:22] and strong beer with no

[20:24] entertainment license.

[20:24] this concludes my

[20:27] presentation.

[20:27] at this time I will stand for

[20:28] any questions or cments.

[20:29] thank you.

[20:30] » Thank you so much for that

[20:32] presentation.

[20:32] I will proceed to open the

[20:34] public hearing and see if

[20:35] there's anyone who would like

[20:36] to speak on this item.

[20:39] all right.

[20:40] seeing none,'ll close the

[20:42] public hearing.

[20:45] I recognize council member

[20:45] warren.

[20:47] » Thank you, chair osman.

[20:49] I've heard nothing but great

[20:51] things about this

[20:53] establishmen so I am excited

[20:56] to know that they are

[20:58] expanding their operations

[21:00] there on lowry in our cultural

[21:03] corridor, so this is exciting.

[21:05] and, yeah, that's all I got.

[21:07] » Thank you.

[21:08] with that motion from council

[21:13] member, all those in favor say

[21:14] aye.

[21:14] [ members voting ]

[21:14] and those opposed say nay.

[21:16] the ayes have it and the

[21:17] motion carries.

[21:18] our next item is a public

[21:21] hearing related to the

[21:23] financing for the grain

[21:26] exchange conversion project.

[21:27] I'll have amy carr from cped

[21:29] to speak more about this item.

[21:31] welcome.

[21:33] » Good afternoon, chair and

[21:34] committee members.

[21:35] I'm he emily carr, I'm a

[21:37] supervisor on the residential

[21:38] finance team in cped.

[21:39] and I'm before you today

[21:41] requesting funding approvals

[21:42] for the grain exchae

[21:44] conversion project.

[21:48] staff is recommending approval

[21:49] of up to $39 in tax-exempt

[21:52] housing revenue entitlement

[21:53] 'bonds and up to $1.775

[21:56] million in tax indecreement

[21:59] financing.

[22:00] I'll be joine by matthew

[22:02] hendricks and bradon rothe

[22:04] from development finance for

[22:05] the t.I.f. Portion of this

[22:07] presentation.

[22:09] therain exchange conversion

[22:11] project is the proposed

[22:12] conversion of the grain

[22:13] exchange building from an

[22:15] underutilized office space

[22:16] into a mixed-use, mixed-income

[22:19] development.

[22:20] sherman associates is

[22:21] proposing to redevelop this

[22:23] hioric complex located in

[22:24] the downtown west neighborhood

[22:25] of ward 7.

[22:29] into 232 units of mixed-income

[22:32] housing, including 210 units

[22:33] affordable at 60% ami, and 22

[22:36] units atarket rate.

[22:38] as well as 332,000 square --

[22:42] 32,000 square feet of

[22:43] commercial and office space.

[22:44] the grain exchange consists of

[22:45] two buildings.

[22:45] the north building, 301 fourth

[22:48] avenue, is ten stories.

[22:49] the first floor will be

[22:50] occupied by the current

[22:52] tenant, which is the u.s.

[22:53] postal office.

[22:55] resident amenities and lobby

[22:57] space and rental units.

[22:58] the remainder of this

[23:00] building, floors 2 through 10,

[23:01] will be occupied by rental

[23:02] units.

[23:06] the main building, 400 fourth

[23:08] street is 12 stories and will

[23:10] include commercial space on

[23:10] the first two floors.

[23:12] the third floor and the fifth

[23:15] through 11th floors of

[23:16] this building will be rental

[23:17] units.

[23:18] the fourth floor, currently

[23:19] used as a co-working space

[23:22] will be transferred into a

[23:25] 25,000-square-event event

[23:25] rental space to accommodate

[23:27] large gatherings, such as

[23:28] weddings and conferences.

[23:30] the 12th floor of this

[23:31] building is a rooftop deck.

[23:33] additional amenities include a

[23:35] club room, fitness center,

[23:36] lobby and management offices

[23:38] and an outdoor play area for

[23:40] children.

[23:41] the developer, sherman's

[23:43] associates, is a well known

[23:45] minneapolis-based develop iser

[23:46] and property management firm

[23:47] with a portfolio that includes

[23:49] commercial buildings, hotels,

[23:51] and artments.

[23:52] sherman has developed more

[23:53] than 8,000 rental units in

[23:55] minnesota, colorado, iowa, and

[23:57] florida.

[23:58] recent minneapolis projects

[24:00] include groove lots of, beam

[24:01] and ladder 260.

[24:03] the first set of actions

[24:04] before you today in this

[24:06] report involve the developer's

[24:08] application for tax-exempt

[24:10] housing revenue entitlement

[24:11] bonds, in an amount not to

[24:14] exceed $39 million.

[24:16] as a housing entitlement bond

[24:19] issuer, each year the city

[24:20] receives a bond allocation.

[24:21] in 2026, this allocation was

[24:23] approximately $72 million.

[24:25] housing revenue bonds can be

[24:26] used to finance the

[24:28] acquisition, rehabilitation,

[24:29] and construction of affordable

[24:31] rental housing.

[24:33] housing revenue bonds issued

[24:34] by the city are sold to

[24:36] investors to raise funds and

[24:39] these sales proceeds are used

[24:41] to finance affordableental

[24:42] housing projects.

[24:44] the debt or loan issued from a

[24:46] bond sale is an obligation of

[24:48] the borrower or the project

[24:50] and not of the city.

[24:53] tax-exempt housing revenue

[24:54] bonds are paired with 4%

[24:57] low-income housing tax credits

[24:59] to generate tax credit equity

[25:01] or syndication proceeds.

[25:02] in the grain exchange project,

[25:04] the tax credits will generate

[25:06] more than $36 million in

[25:09] syndication proceeds as a

[25:10] source to the project.

[25:11] the total development cost of

[25:14] this project are estimated at

[25:14] just over $122 million.

[25:17] and the developer has also

[25:20] secured approximately $46

[25:21] million in federal and state

[25:23] historic tax credits and

[25:25] environmental passthrough

[25:26] grants.

[25:28] the second part of this

[25:29] request involves the

[25:30] developer's request for up to

[25:34] 1.775 million in increment tax

[25:44] financing.

[25:48] » Thanks, emily.

[25:49] chair osman, committee

[25:50] members, my name is matthew

[25:53] hendricks, I'm a manager in

[25:54] the city's development finance

[25:55] division.

[25:57] tax increment financing, or

[25:58] t.I.f., is a fincing tool

[26:00] available to all cities and

[26:02] counties in minnesota and

[26:03] governed b state statute.

[26:05] the city can only utilize this

[26:07] tool in accoance with the

[26:09] rules established by thetate

[26:10] t.I.f. Act, which means the

[26:13] t.I.f. Disict can only

[26:14] support the specific project

[26:16] defined in the t.I.f. Plan.

[26:17] in other words, under current

[26:19] law, t.I.f. Cannot generate

[26:21] unrestricted general use

[26:22] funds.

[26:24] the project must include

[26:26] specific eligible costs, wch

[26:27] are also defined by statute.

[26:30] and, most importantly, the

[26:32] project must meet a "but for"

[26:35] test, a legal requirement that

[26:37] local government must satisfy

[26:38] before creating a new t.I.f.

[26:39] district to ensure t.I.f. Is

[26:41] only used on projects that are

[26:42] not financially feasible but

[26:46] for public financial

[26:46] assistance.

[26:48] based on staff's review, this

[26:50] project meetshe statutory

[26:52] requirements for the

[26:53] establishment of a housing

[26:54] t.I.f. District.

[26:56] I will now invite our summer

[26:58] urban scholar, bradon rothe to

[27:00] join me and share a little

[27:01] more detail on the rest for

[27:04] the -- on the request for the

[27:05] grain exchange.

[27:07] » Good afternoon, chair and

[27:09] members of the committee.

[27:11] my name sioux bradon rothe,

[27:12] and I'm an urban scholar with

[27:16] the development finance team

[27:16] this summer.

[27:17] as noted, the grain exchange

[27:18] project is requesting $1.775

[27:21] million in tax increment

[27:23] financing.

[27:24] as with all t.I.f. Projects,

[27:25] the increased property value

[27:27] resulting from the completion

[27:28] of this project will not be

[27:30] included in the city's general

[27:31] tax base until the t.I.f.

[27:33] district is decertified, which

[27:35] is anticipated to occur 15

[27:37] years aer development

[27:38] completion.

[27:39] the city will also retain 10%

[27:41] of the tax increment generated

[27:44] each year to pay t.I.f.

[27:46] administrative costs.

[27:47] e t.I.f. Recapture

[27:47] provisions for this project

[27:49] include two components.

[27:49] first, there will be a

[27:52] post-construction review of

[27:52] the deferred developer fee as

[27:54] compared to the current

[27:55] project budget.

[27:56] if the developer is able to

[27:58] increase their up-front fee

[28:00] via construction savings,

[28:02] improved financing terms or

[28:03] any other factors than the

[28:06] amount of t.I.f -- then the

[28:08] amount of t.I.f. Assistance

[28:09] will be reduced

[28:10] proportionately.

[28:11] the second piece of the

[28:13] recapture language could

[28:14] result in a reduction or

[28:15] elimination of t.I.f. Support

[28:16] for the project if the project

[28:19] generates significant proceeds

[28:20] for the developer in the event

[28:21] of a sale or refinancing.

[28:22] this provision is consistent

[28:24] with our t.I.f. Agreements f

[28:25] other projects and I will now

[28:26] turn the preseation back

[28:27] over to emily

[28:33] » Thank you, bradon.

[28:36] this concludes our

[28:37] presentation today.

[28:39] staff recommends proceeding

[28:40] with these requests in today's

[28:42] approvals.

[28:44] if that happens, the project

[28:45] will be positioned to close

[28:46] and begin construction this

[28:48] fall.

[28:49] we can take any questions you

[28:50] have at this time.

[28:51] I also wanted to acknowledge

[28:52] that there's representatives

[28:53] from sherman associates here

[28:55] as well today.

[28:57] so, yes.

[28:58] happy to answer any questions.

[28:59] » Thank you so much, staff,

[29:01] for your presentation of the

[29:02] project and also information

[29:06] about t.I.f.

[29:09] on this we will -- it's a

[29:11] public hearing, so we will

[29:12] open the public hearing and

[29:14] see if there's anyone who

[29:15] would like to speak on this

[29:17] item.I'm seeing no one.

[29:21] I will close the public

[29:23] hearing.

[29:23] and I see a few council

[29:25] members who have a comment or

[29:28] question.

[29:29] I have council member chavez.

[29:31] » Thank you, chair osman.

[29:33] I wouldirst like to mention

[29:34] that building more housing is

[29:35] a good thing and that I would

[29:37] rather build more housing in

[29:39] downtown minneapolis while

[29:39] making it more family friendly

[29:42] than being out data centers in

[29:43] downtown.

[29:44] I think it's important that we

[29:46] should focus on our efforts on

[29:48] building housing for people in

[29:49] our city rather than building

[29:50] it for data centers.

[29:51] so I just wanted to mention

[29:52] that first.

[29:54] I guess for staff, I was

[29:55] wondering if you could please

[29:57] confirm that no data center is

[29:58] going to be a part of this

[29:59] housing project at all.

[30:00] I would jus like to know

[30:01] that.

[30:04] » Did chair osman, council

[30:07] member chavez, no data center

[30:08] will be part of this project.

[30:09] » Thank you.

[30:10] I wanted to make sure.

[30:11] just want to get it on record.

[30:12] and I'm going to have a

[30:13] variety of questions for city

[30:14] staff.

[30:16] can you please confirm the ami

[30:18] breakdown for the public to

[30:20] know?

[30:20] I have the number, but I just

[30:22] want to get it confirmed for

[30:23] the public and people watching

[30:26] at home.

[30:28] » Chair osman, council member

[30:31] chavez, the breakdown is 210

[30:32] units at 60% ami and 22 units

[30:38] at market rate.

[30:39] » And what does cped

[30:41] interpret that 60% ami income

[30:45] range to be?

[30:45] » I don't have the numbers in

[30:46] front of me.

[30:48] » I'll ask other questions if

[30:49] folks would be able to figure

[30:50] that out, at least before the

[30:52] meeting ends, that would be

[30:53] helpful.

[30:55] do you know under this

[30:56] development project how long,

[30:59] is it going to be forever that

[31:00] it'soing to be at 60% ami or

[31:03] is it a specific amount of

[31:04] years that it's going to be

[31:05] required toe at 60% ami?

[31:08] » So under the city tax

[31:10] credit requirements, it will

[31:11] be a minimum of 30 years.

[31:14] » Do you know what's going to

[31:16] happen, is there any

[31:17] conversations with the

[31:18] developer on what's going to

[31:19] happen after those 30 years

[31:21] pass?

[31:22] are they going to keep it at

[31:23] that level?

[31:26] » So typically tax credit

[31:29] runs a minimum of 40 years.

[31:31] I can confirm and follow up

[31:33] after the meeting on the tax

[31:35] edit scoring, there's an

[31:36] tion to get additiol

[31:37] points for extendedaffordabilit.

[31:39] I don't have the details of

[31:40] that scoring in front of me.

[31:42] » Yeah.

[31:42] and I guess I'm asking more

[31:44] of, like, has a developer at

[31:46] least communicated with staff

[31:47] what their pla would be

[31:48] after that?

[31:50] and not necessarily -- yes,

[31:52] they're going to get some tax

[31:53] breaks here, but I guess my

[31:54] question is, has the developer

[31:56] made a decision on what

[31:57] happens after 30 years or even

[31:58] 40 years?

[31:59] » W have the developer

[32:02] available.

[32:02] chris.

[32:04] come on up.

[32:06] » Chair osman, committee

[32:09] members, to answer that

[32:11] question, we're actually right

[32:13] now facing a similar decision

[32:15] with two properties in

[32:16] northeast minneapolis,

[32:17] bottineau commons, bottineau

[32:19] lots of, that we developed 25

[32:20] years ago.

[32:22] and the decision we're making,

[32:24] we're re-upping another 40

[32:25] years of affordability, that

[32:27] will extend out the

[32:28] affordability at least 55

[32:29] years.

[32:29] so similar with grain

[32:30] exchange, as we get 20 years

[32:32] out from now, which I'll

[32:33] probably be back up in front

[32:35] in 20 years making a request

[32:36] to reinvest more heavily back

[32:37] into the apartments.

[32:38] we'll comeack in, and we'll

[32:40] probably re-up an

[32:41] affordability long term.

[32:42] that's been our general

[32:43] practice to maintain

[32:44] affordability long term,

[32:45] high-quality housing,

[32:47] generational housing.

[32:48] we do not want to take

[32:50] affordable housing off the

[32:50] market.

[32:51] we want to keep it high

[32:53] quality, long term.

[32:54] so 20 to 25, 30 years from now

[32:56] I suspect we'll be back in

[32:57] front of the council re-upping

[32:59] long term for another 30 years

[33:02] on affordability with grain

[33:03] exchange.

[33:06] » Suspect you will?

[33:07] » We fully plan to.

[33:08] » Okay, just wanted toake

[33:09] sure.

[33:10] thank you, chair.

[33:11] I guess for staff, a question,

[33:13] just because I think t.I.f.

[33:15] districts or piece meelg

[33:16] t.I.f. Districts, I think it's

[33:17] important for the public to

[33:19] better understand how this

[33:20] works.

[33:21] piecemealing.

[33:22] what's happened, if let's just

[33:23] say, and I hope this doesn't

[33:25] happen, because I want these

[33:25] buildings to be full and I

[33:27] want more people that live in

[33:29] these units.

[33:30] what happens if the project

[33:32] underperforms or if people

[33:33] aren't renting it out and the

[33:34] bonds aren't repaid on

[33:36] schedule, does that impact the

[33:37] city?

[33:37] my understanding is that it

[33:38] doesn't.

[33:38] but I would like to understand

[33:39] what that means for the city.>>.

[33:42] chair osman, council member

[33:44] chavez, thank you for the

[33:44] question.

[33:45] you are correct that the city

[33:47] is not at risk of a debt

[33:51] payment issue if the project

[33:53] underpforms.

[33:54] the city in this case is issue

[33:57] a paygo t.I.f. Note so the

[33:58] risk for any variation from

[34:01] what we're currently

[34:01] projecting lies with the

[34:02] developer.

[34:03] » Okay, thank you.

[34:04] and then the last few

[34:05] questions that I have here is

[34:06] that given that this is really

[34:08] focused in downtown in

[34:10] higher-income areas in our

[34:11] city, I guess a question for

[34:12] cped that I have is, what is

[34:15] cped doing to bring more

[34:17] investments into our cultural

[34:18] corridors with this kind of

[34:19] t.I.f. District or

[34:21] piecemealing t.I.f. Districts

[34:22] into our city?

[34:23] where else is this used in

[34:25] minneapolis?

[34:25] I would love to get a

[34:27] breakdown on that as well.

[34:29] I think my thing is, you see

[34:32] $39 million in tax, whatever

[34:34] you want to call t and you

[34:36] think, my constituents see

[34:37] that, where ee is that being

[34:39] used in our city?

[34:41] are we talking about different

[34:43] zones in minneapolis, like on

[34:45] lake street, 38th street,

[34:47] franklin avenue, west

[34:48] broadway, you name it?

[34:49] so, yeah.

[34:51] » Chair osman, council member

[34:53] chavez, is your question

[34:55] specific to housing revenue

[34:56] bonds or tax increment

[34:58] financing ten?

[34:59] » T.I.f., I guess, either/or,

[35:01] both.

[35:01] I know there's t.I.f., there's

[35:03] like less money on tha but I

[35:07] guess both -- both.

[35:10] there's many votes that are

[35:11] happening right now so I would

[35:12] say both.

[35:12] » The housing revenue bonds

[35:14] are a tool that are paired

[35:15] with a housing tax credit.

[35:16] so we have a lot of projects.

[35:20] we close both new construction

[35:22] an rehab every year acro

[35:23] the city.typically those ared wh

[35:27] our -- paired with our

[35:28] affordable housing trust fund

[35:30] which does prioritize projects

[35:31] within cultural corridors.

[35:33] I also -- I did -- I do have

[35:34] the numbers here for your

[35:36] previous question around ami,

[35:38] and I can answer that now.

[35:42] so for 60% I household,

[35:45] that's up to a family of four,

[35:46] the allowable income would be

[35:48] up to $78,900.

[35:51] for a family of two, it would

[35:55] be $63,100.

[35:57] and I'll let matthew answer

[35:59] around the t.I.f.

[36:01] » Tough the chair, council

[36:03] member chavez, in terms of

[36:06] geography of use of t.I.f.,

[36:07] t.I.f. Is a citywide tool, and

[36:09] we look at use of t.I.f. On a

[36:12] case-by-case basis because

[36:13] each district needs to meet

[36:15] the state statutory

[36:16] requirements.

[36:17] but it's absolutely available

[36:19] citywide.

[36:19] and we could follow up with

[36:20] your office and send a map of

[36:22] current t.I.f. Districts, if

[36:23] you'd like.

[36:23] » Yeah, that would be

[36:25] helpful, of, like, where we

[36:27] usually use t.I.f. Districts,

[36:29] how it's applied, how often do

[36:32] we use it, areas in our city,

[36:33] maybe the past few years.

[36:35] so that would be super

[36:36] helpful.

[36:36] I'll be voting for this today.

[36:38] I just had a lot of questions

[36:40] that I think a lot of my

[36:41] constituents are just asking

[36:42] when they see this item

[36:43] brought before us.

[36:44] as I mentioned earlier, I am a

[36:46] big supporter of building more

[36:47] housing.I think building more hg

[36:49] is really important.

[36:50] I'd rather build more housing

[36:52] downtown than data centers.

[36:53] that's just something that I

[36:54] will kp on naming because

[36:56] am concerned that downtown is

[36:57] going to become a place of

[36:59] just data centers instead of

[37:01] housing and a family-friendly

[37:02] downtown.

[37:03] but I'll support this today

[37:05] and I just hope that in the

[37:07] future if we're going to be

[37:09] using this tool that we

[37:12] prioritize more deeply

[37:13] affordable housing.

[37:15] I think that hearing the

[37:17] salary income range is still

[37:18] going to be hard for, you

[37:19] know, folks that are

[37:21] struggling to make it by to

[37:23] live in downwn.

[37:25] so, just want to make those

[37:25] comments.

[37:27] » All right.

[37:28] thank you, council member

[37:31] chavez.

[37:31] I will recognize next council

[37:33] member rainville.

[37:33] » Thank you, chair.

[37:34] I don't have any comments

[37:36] about data centers.

[37:36] I'm going to stick to the

[37:39] germe here and talk about --

[37:40] » Tnk you.

[37:41] » -- this project.

[37:42] but I wanted to thank our

[37:43] staff.

[37:43] this is really hard work to

[37:45] get all these numbers to match

[37:46] up and keep going back and

[37:48] forth with the developer.

[37:52] this project started two terms

[37:53] ago.

[37:54] I want to thank the developers

[37:55] for your -- you are the best

[37:57] at providing housing for those

[37:59] who least can afford it.

[38:01] you've shown that time and

[38:02] time again in this city.

[38:03] your heart is in the right

[38:04] place.

[38:05] and I really appreciate what

[38:06] you're doing to help those who

[38:07] are less fortunate in our

[38:09] city.

[38:09] so thank you very much.

[38:10] I will be voting for this

[38:11] today.

[38:12] » Thank you, council member

[38:15] rainville.

[38:16] I recognize council member

[38:17] shaffer, and hopefully she'll

[38:18] make the motion, too.

[38:19] » Sure.

[38:19] I'll just say thank you as

[38:20] well.

[38:23] in a time where there's many

[38:24] places to invest your money, I

[38:25] want to say personally thank

[38:26] you for investing in

[38:27] affordable housing in the city

[38:28] of minneapolis.

[38:30] that matters.

[38:30] your track record matters.

[38:32] and you matter to this city.

[38:34] and, so, thankful to cped for

[38:36] your willingness to cobble all

[38:39] these things together and for

[38:40] your perseverence in putting

[38:41] this deal together.

[38:43] because I think a lot of

[38:44] people are going to benefit,

[38:46] and I'm thrilled to see that

[38:49] reality start to happen even

[38:50] this fall.

[38:51] so thank you for the quick

[38:52] timetable.

[38:53] and with that, I will make the

[38:57] tion to move forward the

[38:59] grain exchang conversion

[39:00] project fancing.

[39:02] » Second.

[39:03] » Thank you so much.

[39:05] I will also make a comment

[39:07] here.

[39:09] I really appreciate the

[39:13] developers' thinking.

[39:13] this is something to

[39:15] celebrate.

[39:15] we talk about this conversion

[39:17] plan in our downtown,

[39:19] especially after the covid and

[39:21] things are changing around.

[39:22] so this will be really a good

[39:24] model for the city of

[39:25] minneapolis to follow, to

[39:29] bring people into downtown,

[39:31] they're close to work, a place

[39:33] for folks to afford, and I did

[39:37] talk to the developers to

[39:41] really even get more deeply

[39:44] affordable housing, and they

[39:45] say they will look into it.

[39:47] but also the exciting part

[39:49] about it is there will be

[39:51] commercial space in the area

[39:54] where across e street from

[39:55] here, you know, very short

[39:58] distance for the people that

[39:59] work in this blding to kind

[40:01] of go and really enjoy that

[40:04] place.

[40:06] so, super excited for this

[40:08] project and can't wait for the

[40:12] ribbon cutting when this will

[40:13] open.

[40:14] with that motion, all those in

[40:15] favor say aye.

[40:16] [ members voting ]

[40:17] and those opposed say nay.

[40:19] [ no response heard ]

[40:20] the ayes have it and the

[40:21] motion carries.

[40:21] thank you so much.

[40:23] all right.

[40:27] next item it's a

[40:31] quasi-judicial hearing.

[40:31] before we begin, if the

[40:34] apicant is here to testify,

[40:37] you'll be granted five minutes

[40:39] to address this committee.

[40:42] all other testifiers will be

[40:45] given two minutes to address.

[40:47] with that, this item is a

[40:51] variance appeal submitted by

[40:52] the property at 4710 humboldt

[40:55] avenue north.

[40:58] I will invite myles campo from

[41:01] cped to give us more

[41:01] information about this item.

[41:04] welcome, sir.

[41:04] » Thank you, chair osman,

[41:05] board members -- or committee

[41:07] members, excuse me.

[41:08] so this item, 4710 bum holdt

[41:10] avenue north, as mentioned, is

[41:11] an appeal of a decision by the

[41:14] zoning board of adjustment

[41:15] back in may when that meeting

[41:18] was held.

[41:19] so the variance in this case

[41:21] was regarding a trash

[41:22] enclosure to the rear of an

[41:23] existing eight-unit apartment

[41:25] building at 4710 humboldt

[41:27] avenue north.

[41:27] you can see on the screen here

[41:29] that existing lot, it's a bit

[41:31] of a funky shape, being

[41:33] located on humboldt avenue and

[41:35] shingle creek parkway.

[41:36] the parking and the trash

[41:38] enclosure, as it were, are

[41:39] both located to the rear of

[41:41] the building off of of the

[41:42] alley itself.

[41:43] so you can see here, these are

[41:45] existing conditions on the

[41:46] site from earlier this spring.

[41:49] trying to give a bit of a

[41:50] view of that entire parking

[41:51] area.

[41:52] so, again, currently there are

[41:53] eight spaces available for

[41:54] those eight residents in the

[41:55] building.

[41:56] there are a couple of other

[41:58] kind of impediments in

[42:01] providing screening for that

[42:02] dumpster.

[42:02] so, again, the dumpster is

[42:04] located on the far, kind of

[42:05] north end of the parking area.

[42:08] it is bracketed by some mature

[42:11] trees, as well as utility

[42:12] poles on both sides of that

[42:14] parking area, which

[42:15] potentially would need to be

[42:17] modified in conjunction with

[42:20] xcel energy, if the applicant

[42:21] needed more space to enclose

[42:22] that dumpster itself.

[42:25] again, they can certainly

[42:26] enclose it by moving into in

[42:28] one of those parking spaces

[42:29] and thereby lose that parking

[42:31] area.

[42:32] ideally, they would like to

[42:33] keep a one-to-one ratio for

[42:36] their parking and their

[42:37] residents.

[42:37] you can see that it already is

[42:38] beginning to kind of encroach

[42:40] into that eighth space.

[42:45] one of the things that staff

[42:46] really does want to highlight

[42:47] in terms of context, we'll

[42:48] talk a bit more about the

[42:49] findings that need to be met

[42:50] for a variance, one thing that

[42:51] we always look at is are there

[42:54] unique circumstances to the

[42:54] property that cause the need

[42:55] for a variance or cause the

[42:56] need for kind of a discretion

[43:00] from the code itself.

[43:01] so in this case, again,

[43:03] located at the corner of

[43:04] humboldt and shingle creek

[43:05] parkway.

[43:06] humboldt itself has parking

[43:09] restrictions all along it,

[43:10] north and south.

[43:11] and then there is a bus stop

[43:13] directly in front of this

[43:15] building.

[43:16] so anything there with a red

[43:17] line would be no street

[43:18] parking allowed.

[43:18] there is at least one space on

[43:21] kind of the same block as the

[43:23] apartment building itself, and

[43:25] then on the opposite side of

[43:26] the street there is parking

[43:28] available.

[43:28] one thing that happen the

[43:29] applicant noted in their

[43:30] materials to the board of

[43:31] adjustment is just to the

[43:32] southwest, you can see in this

[43:34] image, there's a number of

[43:36] industrial uses that have a

[43:36] lot of truck traffic that go

[43:39] and take this turn between the

[43:40] two streets.

[43:41] you can see from that aerial

[43:44] imagery from the county that

[43:46] those trucks do take a very

[43:47] wide turn.

[43:48] there have been a couple of

[43:49] accidents on that street

[43:50] related to trucks hitting

[43:51] parked vehicles in the past.

[43:53] so there was concern from the

[43:55] applicant's perspective of

[43:55] moving those residents on to

[43:57] street parking.

[43:59] usually not something we talk

[44:00] a lot about with variances.

[44:01] usually there is an

[44:03] alternative option, but here

[44:05] there definitely is a burden

[44:06] here on the property in terms

[44:08] of parking available.

[44:10] when this went to board of

[44:13] adjustment, the staff, again,

[44:14] felt that it did meet that

[44:16] unique circumstances finding

[44:17] for a variance.

[44:19] however, variances require all

[44:21] three findings of the

[44:22] practical difficulties exam to

[44:24] be met in order to be

[44:26] approved.

[44:26] at the time staff did not feel

[44:28] like that this meant the

[44:29] intent of the code.

[44:31] we require that dumpsters be

[44:33] screened for apartment

[44:36] buildings, to prevent the view

[44:37] from public streets or

[44:38] residential uses, but it

[44:40] serves a practical effect of

[44:42] being a barrier from a

[44:44] nonresident from dumping their

[44:44] trash in that area, which

[44:46] seemed to have been an issue

[44:47] in the past with this site.

[44:48] similarly, again, the kind of

[44:51] essential character, the

[44:52] injury to detriment of

[44:55] surrounding property owners,

[44:56] we noted at board of

[44:56] adjustment that this had five

[44:58] complaints since I believe

[45:00] 2002, specifically related to

[45:01] garbage overflowing in the

[45:02] alley.

[45:02] so clearly there was a burden

[45:03] being felt by adjacent

[45:05] property owners.

[45:06] one thing that we noted at the

[45:08] time, and this was something

[45:09] where staff and the board of

[45:10] adjustment were both under the

[45:12] impression that we could not

[45:13] set any sort of conditions

[45:15] related to hiring a staff

[45:16] person on site, we have

[45:18] confirmed since that meeting

[45:19] with the city attorney's

[45:21] office that one option

[45:21] available to you all would be

[45:24] to condition the variance

[45:27] approval on the hiring or the

[45:28] maintaining of that site

[45:29] through something like a

[45:30] live-in supervisor, a live

[45:32] 199-in building manager.

[45:34] it's not probably staff's

[45:35] first choice in terms of

[45:38] managing compliance long term,

[45:39] right, there's not a lot of

[45:40] ways for us to ensure that

[45:42] requirement is being met 10,

[45:43] 15 years in the future.

[45:44] this variance would run with

[45:46] the land.

[45:47] but it does seem to get at

[45:49] those secondary points, right,

[45:50] in terms of the intent of the

[45:52] ordinance being to manage that

[45:56] potential blight and nuisance

[45:57] from the trash and then the

[45:59] injury or detriment to other

[46:02] property owners.

[46:02] so with all that, I'm happy to

[46:04] stand for questions.

[46:05] we also do have wayne carlson,

[46:07] the property owner here, here,

[46:09] available to speak on this

[46:11] topic.

[46:12] » Okay.

[46:12] thank you so much, staff.

[46:16] I appreciate your

[46:16] presentation.

[46:21] we will proceed to open the

[46:22] public hearing and give the

[46:24] applicant a chance to speak

[46:25] for five mines.

[46:37] » Is this close enoh?

[46:38] » Yes, please go ahead.

[46:40] » I want to thank you for

[46:41] listening to me today.

[46:43] » Please state your name.

[46:44] » Pardon?

[46:45] » State your name.

[46:45] » I'm wayne carlson.

[46:47] and I'm t owner of the

[46:53] horner-carlson family

[46:54] partnership and the building.

[46:55] I want to thank you for

[46:56] listening to me, because to me

[46:57] it's very critical what I'm

[46:58] talking about.

[46:59] and I realize that all you

[47:00] people have a lot of things on

[47:03] your agenda that are a lot

[47:04] bigger than my issue.

[47:05] and ihank you for listening

[47:07] to me today.

[47:11] I'm filing for an exemption to

[47:13] the board ofdjustment for

[47:15] having a refuse container

[47:19] around my garbage container,

[47:20] and I'm doing this, the bottom

[47:23] line is having this surround

[47:26] around my garbage container

[47:29] has some unintended

[47:30] consequences.

[47:31] and the basis for that is that

[47:33] all -- aut two of my eight

[47:38] parking spots -- I can't see

[47:39] well.

[47:40] are going to be taken up with

[47:45] this enclosure.

[47:46] and then I have -- I have

[47:49] really three choices I can

[47:49] make.

[47:50] first of all, I can extend the

[47:51] parking lot and it's going to

[47:52] cost about $138,000 to do

[47:54] that.

[47:57] number two, I can force two

[47:59] tenants to park on the only

[48:00] two parking spots available on

[48:02] shingle creek parkway and

[48:03] making them vulnerable, a

[48:06] dangerous turning corners for

[48:07] thousands of 18-wheelers.

[48:10] or I can add -- third r

[48:12] alternative is the one that

[48:12] I'm proposing that I can add

[48:16] to the management team, a

[48:17] person that would live in the

[48:18] builng -- a tenant that's in

[48:20] the building and daily scan

[48:22] the parking lot to make sure

[48:23] that there's no stray trash.

[48:27] in addition to that, I've

[48:31] also -- at this point also

[48:33] enlarged my container.

[48:35] when I was before the board of

[48:39] adjustment, it seemed like

[48:40] that wasn't a place for me to

[48:41] really be.

[48:42] and one of the ladies there,

[48:44] is it more important to have a

[48:46] surround or to have control of

[48:47] the rubbish?

[48:50] the initial ownership, I

[48:51] bought this building, preive a

[48:55] tax exchange -- preserve a tax

[48:57] exchange 25 years ago with the

[48:58] understanding that the

[48:58] building was going to be taken

[48:59] as part of the greenway

[49:00] project.

[49:01] I understand that aer I

[49:02] bought t the intention was

[49:03] chand when the neighbors

[49:05] insisted that the property be

[49:06] left as a buffer to the

[49:08] intersection and the

[49:09] commercial area.

[49:13] my management, I manage the

[49:14] property as a tier one

[49:16] property for 25 yea.

[49:18] I visit the building at least

[49:19] once a week, cleaning the

[49:22] interiors, cutting the grass,

[49:25] blowing the trash out of the

[49:27] parking lot.

[49:29] I believe this way of managing

[49:31] gives me the ability to be on

[49:32] the premises and see what's

[49:34] going on.

[49:35] over the years, the refuse

[49:37] handling has been changed from

[49:38] individual containers to

[49:39] larger dumpsters to impro

[49:41] the system.

[49:41] the two pictures taken by

[49:46] stuart and I show here, by the

[49:48] city, shows a clean and

[49:49] orderly dumpste area.

[49:51] all the neighbors that see the

[49:53] dumpster have sigd a letter

[49:55] back when supporting me on

[49:58] leaving the dumpsters

[49:59] initially.

[50:00] my interaction with the

[50:03] council and inspection.

[50:04] the inspection deparent

[50:06] ordered that I provide a

[50:08] surround.

[50:09] I appealed to the council

[50:11] president and she told me she

[50:12] had asked the inspector leave

[50:15] me alonend I was a tier one

[50:16] landlord and she wanted to

[50:18] keep me in the neighborhood.

[50:20] I talked to council member

[50:22] after that and she stressed

[50:23] that in addition to my

[50:25] hands-on management, I hire

[50:27] somebody in the buildin to

[50:29] survise the rubbish

[50:30] container on a daily basis.

[50:31] I've done that, in addition

[50:33] I've added a larger container

[50:35] to take care of that.

[50:36] she recommended I try to

[50:40] appeal to veterans who might

[50:41] have a little more respect for

[50:42] my property.

[50:43] I think this should solve the

[50:45] problem of cleaning up the

[50:47] loose paper and plastic across

[50:49] the building.

[50:51] keeping the parking amenity

[50:53] for the eight tenants requires

[50:54] the parking lot to be extend

[50:55] and paved for twoew spaces.

[50:58] it would require the moving of

[50:59] one or possibly two utility

[51:01] poles to create a new space.

[51:05] it also require removal of

[51:07] large tree to the north, one

[51:08] to the south, and a hedge to

[51:09] the south.

[51:10] it requires the moving of

[51:12] phone, electrical, and come

[51:15] cast -- commissioner cast

[51:18] lines -- comcast at incredible

[51:21] cost.

[51:22] it's a cost of over $137,000.

[51:24] this is beyond m financial

[51:26] capabilities and most likely

[51:27] force me to sell the property.

[51:31] the minneapolis restricted

[51:32] parking.

[51:32] there's no legal parking on

[51:34] either side of the humboldt,

[51:35] which is the front of the

[51:37] building, and on the side of

[51:38] the building there's no

[51:40] parkin because of the bus

[51:42] stop.

[51:43] there's basically one and a

[51:46] half spots that people could

[51:48] park there and tn that would

[51:49] be subject to a snow

[51:53] emergency.

[51:53] there's no parking to the

[51:55] north.

[51:55] basically the's no parking

[51:57] to any area around my building

[51:59] on the north, south, east and

[52:01] west, except these two parking

[52:02] spots.

[52:03] » Sir, you've run out of

[52:03] time.

[52:04] if you can wrap it up, that

[52:05] would be great.

[52:10] » Well, I was going to go

[52:12] in the parking on the treat

[52:13] is unsafe of, because there's

[52:14] about 17,000 turns on that

[52:15] street, and there's been three

[52:17] accidents in the last year

[52:18] there th vehicles running

[52:19] into my buildin

[52:22] front's been blocked off to

[52:23] vehicles and right now there's

[52:26] a bus sp that's knocked

[52:27] over.

[52:27] so what I'm suggesting, and I

[52:29] hope that you'll concur with

[52:33] this is that you allow me to

[52:34] keep it the way it is and let

[52:37] me go ahead with gting

[52:38] someone in the building to

[52:41] help with the cleaning and

[52:42] take care of that aspect.

[52:43] I think this is probably the

[52:44] best interest of the city, the

[52:49] tenants and the neighbors.

[52:52] and I have -- all the things

[52:53] I've discussed here are in

[52:56] addendums, exhibits, so that

[52:57] you know that what I'm saying

[53:00] is as the basis.

[53:01] » Thank you.

[53:02] » Thank you for your time.

[53:03] » If you have any --

[53:04] » I have another question.

[53:05] I just got a bill here for

[53:07] this project for $13,303.65.

[53:12] I hav no idea what that'--

[53:13] » From the city?

[53:14] we'll have staff to talk to

[53:17] you after the meeting.

[53:17] » Okay.

[53:18] » If you have any documents

[53:20] you'd like to submit in

[53:21] writing, you can give it to

[53:22] the clerk.

[53:22] we can have that in the

[53:26] record.

[53:26] all right.

[53:27] are there anyone who would

[53:29] like to speak on this item?

[53:31] seeing none, I will close the

[53:36] public hearing and recognize

[53:37] vice chair crowdry.

[53:40] chowdhury.

[53:41] » Thank you so much, chair

[53:42] osman.

[53:42] thank you, mr. Carlson, for

[53:44] coming down to city hall and

[53:46] writing your appeal.

[53:49] so, colleagues, just taking a

[53:51] look at the staff report on

[53:53] this, I think this situation

[53:56] is, I would say, a little

[53:59] highly unusual.

[54:02] I think, for me, it's very

[54:05] hard to consider the granting

[54:07] of a variance when the code is

[54:09] straightforward.

[54:11] however, the unique

[54:13] circumstances of the

[54:16] situation, I think the

[54:17] applicant really clearly laid

[54:19] out.

[54:20] there's just -- it's just a

[54:22] very tenuous corner for

[54:24] on-street parking, even if you

[54:25] did on-street parking, it

[54:28] would go off in the vinter

[54:30] time and there have been

[54:31] several accidents and then

[54:33] also I think mr. Carlson, in

[54:35] your addendum you did a good

[54:36] job of laying out the

[54:37] financial hardship and that's

[54:38] something that staff concurred

[54:39] with.

[54:40] and I know that council member

[54:44] vita has been talking to you

[54:45] and trying to figure out a

[54:46] solution which commend you for

[54:48] reaching out to your council

[54:50] member and figuring out what

[54:52] works.

[54:52] my one ask, to consider along

[54:54] with hiring a supervisor is

[54:56] making a plan for if the

[54:59] dumpster overflows, right?

[55:00] where would it go even if you

[55:01] had an on-site person to come

[55:03] and pick it up?

[55:05] I think that's really getting

[55:07] to the heart of kind of the

[55:10] issue that residents have

[55:11] complained about.

[55:18] the motion that I'm going to

[55:19] make is based off of what the

[55:21] city attorney's office has

[55:22] said is allowable, which is

[55:23] moving forward with the

[55:23] variance with the condition

[55:25] that mr. Carlson hires an

[55:29] on-site supervisor to to clean

[55:34] on a regular basis.

[55:36] so I guess one question that

[55:39] maybe I could ask the

[55:40] applicant, if that's all right

[55:40] with you, sir, if you want to

[55:46] come up, mr. Carlson.

[55:55] » My question for you, sir,

[55:57] is in addition to the on-site

[55:58] supervisor being there, will

[55:59] you just commit to making a

[56:01] plan for maybe if there's

[56:04] extra space needed for

[56:06] overflowing trash?

[56:07] I know someone will come and

[56:08] clean it up.

[56:09] but just making sure that

[56:10] there's a way for communi

[56:14] members in your building to

[56:15] know that there's a way to

[56:16] address the situation as it

[56:18] occurs.

[56:23] » I guess what I c say is

[56:26] this generally happens when

[56:29] someone has moved out.

[56:30] like in the last one I had

[56:31] moved out, I had an eight-yard

[56:35] container come overnd we put

[56:37] all the garbage in that

[56:38] container and had it moved out

[56:39] that way.

[56:41] so I guess I think I've

[56:43] answered your question by my

[56:44] actions already.

[56:47] have I answered it?

[56:48] » In part.

[56:49] just making sure that -- I

[56:50] think the goal is getting at

[56:55] ensuring that there's no

[56:56] overflow of trash and trash on

[56:58] the ground

[56:58] it sounds like the prfers is

[56:59] going to help -- the

[57:02] supervisor is going to help

[57:03] with that, but making sure

[57:04] there's a way that folks can

[57:05] understand that, that's how

[57:06] they can address thesituation.

[57:09] just making it clear to your

[57:10] tenants that this is available

[57:11] to them.

[57:13] » What is available to them?

[57:14] » The on-site supervisor and

[57:17] additional cleaning, if we

[57:18] grant you the variance.

[57:19] » They know that somebody's

[57:20] doing that?

[57:21] » Yh, and how to get ahold

[57:22] of them.

[57:23] I know you're at the property

[57:25] once a week, you shared in

[57:25] your addendum.

[57:26] » Of course.

[57:28] and I think they already

[57:30] know --

[57:31] » Oh, good.

[57:32] » It's obvious --

[57:33] » I just ask because it's

[57:35] highly unusual for us to grant

[57:36] a variance for something like

[57:37] this.

[57:37] but we have a way to condition

[57:39] it, but the goal is to address

[57:41] the problem at hand and it

[57:43] sounds like there's a good

[57:44] plan for it.

[57:47] » Well, I concur with what

[57:48] you're trying to do.

[57:50] » Okay.

[57:51] well, thank you, sir.

[57:52] that's the motion that I'll be

[57:53] making.

[57:53] » Thank you.

[57:54] » Second.

[57:56] » All rig.

[57:57] seeing no one else, I will --

[58:00] » Apologies.

[58:00] can I just seek clarification

[58:02] here?

[58:03] if the intent is to move

[58:05] forward with an approval of

[58:07] the appeal, I would

[58:09] respectfully recommend in that

[58:10] case that you do move this

[58:12] forward without recommendation

[58:13] at this moment and direct

[58:15] staff to prepare findings of

[58:17] fact in accordance with that

[58:17] motion.

[58:19] » Oy.

[58:20] that sounds good, attorney.

[58:23] so ultimately the goal is to

[58:25] move for the appeal -- grant

[58:27] the appeal with the condition

[58:29] to hire an on-site supervisor

[58:32] and we will ask staff to work

[58:33] with us to create the findings

[58:34] and we'll move forward without

[58:36] recommendation.

[58:37] » Without recommendation.

[58:38] n>> all right.

[58:45] perfect.

[58:45] thank you, council member.

[58:48] so with that motion from vice

[58:50] chair crowdry, all --

[58:53] chowdhury, all those in favor

[58:54] say aye.

[58:55] [ members voting ]

[58:55] and those opposed say nay.

[58:56] [ no response heard ]

[58:57] the ayes have it and the

[58:58] motion carries.

[58:59] all right.

[59:00] thank you.

[59:01] » Thank you.

[59:02] » All right.

[59:04] next item is -- give me a

[59:11] second here.

[59:15] discussion.

[59:15] okay, there we go, thank you.

[59:17] next item is discussion.

[59:21] we have a discussion related

[59:23] to the historic designation of

[59:26] lakeshore arms located at 3026

[59:28] lake street.

[59:31] I welcome rob from cped to

[59:33] give a presentation.

[59:34] thk you.

[59:39] welcome.

[59:40] » Thank you, chair osman,

[59:41] good afternoon, council

[59:43] members.

[59:43] my name is rob skalecki,

[59:47] senior city planner in the

[59:50] historic team.

[59:51] today I'm presenting the

[59:52] designation of the lakeshore

[59:53] arms apartments which are

[59:54] located at 3026 lake street

[59:55] west.

[1:00:00] on august 12th, 2025, the

[1:00:03] heritage preservation

[1:00:04] commission voted to approve

[1:00:05] the nomination for the

[1:00:06] property at 3026 lake street

[1:00:09] west as a landmark.

[1:00:10] they established interim

[1:00:11] protection at that time and

[1:00:12] directed the planning director

[1:00:14] to prepare or cause to be

[1:00:15] prepared a designation study.

[1:00:17] that nomination application

[1:00:19] was submitted by minneapolis

[1:00:23] hpc commissioner amy thomas.

[1:00:24] following that cped staff

[1:00:28] compiled a designation study

[1:00:29] of the property that was

[1:00:30] completed in april of 2026.

[1:00:32] staff sent the study to the

[1:00:34] state historic preservation

[1:00:35] office for review and comment.

[1:00:37] the study concluded that the

[1:00:38] property is eligible for

[1:00:40] landmark designation under

[1:00:41] local criterion 4, for

[1:00:43] architecture.

[1:00:44] at their june 6th, 2026

[1:00:48] meeting, the hbc voted to

[1:00:49] recommend approval for the

[1:00:51] designation.

[1:00:55] the subject property is a

[1:00:57] two-story brick veneer

[1:00:58] apartment building with a

[1:01:00] basement half story.the apartmeh

[1:01:02] 17 units and a bement-level

[1:01:04] garage.

[1:01:06] the building is clad in light

[1:01:08] brown or tan brick and has a

[1:01:09] flat roof that include select

[1:01:13] locations with shaped roof

[1:01:14] sections to add other

[1:01:16] thanment.

[1:01:17] the property was designed by

[1:01:20] vanderbilt and it was built by

[1:01:22] d for owner morris track, a

[1:01:25] local builder and developer.

[1:01:28] the received building approval

[1:01:30] in october, 1930, and

[1:01:31] newspaper records began

[1:01:32] announcing the building

[1:01:33] opening by march 1931.

[1:01:36] the construction of lakeshore

[1:01:37] arms apartments is tied to

[1:01:40] multifamily housing options

[1:01:41] that appeared around uptown in

[1:01:43] the cedar isles dean area in

[1:01:45] the 1920s and 1930s.

[1:01:47] the urban setting in

[1:01:48] connection to the lakes

[1:01:49] attracted minneapol

[1:01:50] residents in the early

[1:01:51] 20th sent the promise of

[1:01:53] urban life mixed with water

[1:01:55] recreation amenities.

[1:01:57] mediterranean design

[1:01:57] influences were especially

[1:01:58] common in the area and spanish

[1:02:01] eclectic style buildings

[1:02:02] became popular.

[1:02:03] the property was designed

[1:02:05] using the spanish style and

[1:02:10] contains a significant degree

[1:02:11] of architectural features.

[1:02:12] those include but are not

[1:02:13] limited to a shaped main

[1:02:15] doorway that includes a heavy

[1:02:17] wood door, light color brick

[1:02:21] cladding, cast cement

[1:02:24] ornamentation, including

[1:02:25] floral materials, concrete

[1:02:27] relief, a cast cement balcony

[1:02:29] with prominent cast cement,

[1:02:33] shaped openings, spiraled

[1:02:35] columns, varied roof shapes,

[1:02:39] clay roof tiles, multilight

[1:02:41] wood, double-hung sash windows

[1:02:44] and french doors at various

[1:02:45] openings and patios and

[1:02:47] balconies throughout the

[1:02:48] building.

[1:02:52] properties built in the

[1:02:54] spanish eclectic architectural

[1:02:56] style use traditional spanish

[1:02:58] design trends incorporating

[1:03:01] balconies and plazas and

[1:03:02] courtyards and patios to

[1:03:03] create an apparent association

[1:03:05] between the building and the

[1:03:06] natural environment.

[1:03:07] and this is evident in the

[1:03:09] lakeshore arms apartments.

[1:03:11] chapter 599 of the minneapolis

[1:03:13] code of ordinances requires

[1:03:15] that the designation be

[1:03:16] submitted to the minnesota

[1:03:17] state historic preservation

[1:03:18] office for review and comment.

[1:03:20] this was done and the

[1:03:21] minnesota state historic

[1:03:26] historic office concurred with

[1:03:27] the findings and recommended

[1:03:29] in a later dated may 19, 2026

[1:03:31] that the property appeared to

[1:03:32] be an excellent candidate for

[1:03:34] local designation under that

[1:03:36] criterion 4 for architecture.

[1:03:38] in order for the hbc and

[1:03:41] council to approve a lanark

[1:03:43] designation, the following two

[1:03:44] findings must be made.

[1:03:45] one that the collection or

[1:03:47] collection of properties meets

[1:03:48] at least one local criterion

[1:03:50] to be designated as a landmark

[1:03:51] or historic district.

[1:03:52] and two that the property or

[1:03:54] collection of properties

[1:03:55] retains sufficient historic

[1:03:57] integrity to be designated a

[1:03:58] a landmark or historic

[1:04:00] strict.

[1:04:00] staff and the hbc occur ensure

[1:04:04] that it meets criterion 4 as a

[1:04:05] property that embodies

[1:04:07] distinctive characteristics of

[1:04:08] the spanish eclectic

[1:04:10] architectural style and meets

[1:04:12] finding one and that lakeshore

[1:04:14] arms apartments retains all

[1:04:15] seven aspects of historic

[1:04:17] integrity, including location,

[1:04:19] setting, design, materials,

[1:04:21] workmanship, feeling and

[1:04:21] association to meet finding 2.

[1:04:24] staff has been in contact with

[1:04:26] the property owner about the

[1:04:28] designation study and

[1:04:30] designation process.

[1:04:30] the owner has stated

[1:04:32] opposition to the designation

[1:04:34] for many reasons.

[1:04:35] and those written comments are

[1:04:37] included for council members

[1:04:39] to consider.

[1:04:41] I believe the owner is here

[1:04:43] today and may want to speak if

[1:04:46] possible.

[1:04:47] staff will also note that the

[1:04:50] owner has, as I mentioned,

[1:04:52] been clear about the

[1:04:53] opposition to the designation

[1:04:55] but staff has received over 15

[1:04:57] public comments that support

[1:04:58] the historic designation of

[1:05:00] the property.

[1:05:01] with that, I'm available as

[1:05:03] staff to answer any questions.

[1:05:05] thank you.

[1:05:07] » Thank you so much, staff.

[1:05:10] I appreciate your

[1:05:11] presentation.

[1:05:12] is is a discussion.

[1:05:13] 'at the same time it's a

[1:05:14] decision we have to make.

[1:05:16] so, it's not a public hearing.

[1:05:17] I'm open to giving an

[1:05:20] opportunity for the owner to

[1:05:21] speak.

[1:05:25] but before that, I will

[1:05:27] recognize council member

[1:05:27] shaffer.

[1:05:28] » Can I speak after the owner

[1:05:29] speaks?

[1:05:30] » If he wants to speak.

[1:05:30] I don't know if the owner is

[1:05:31] here.

[1:05:33] welcome.

[1:05:34] would you like to speak?

[1:05:35] » Yes, I would.

[1:05:36] » Yup.

[1:05:36] we'll give you two minutes to

[1:05:39] speak, that's okay.

[1:05:40] come on.

[1:05:52] » It's not a quasi judicial,

[1:05:55] anything like that, but I

[1:05:57] would say usually we give the

[1:05:58] applicant seven minutes or so,

[1:05:59] but it's not set up that way

[1:06:00] today.

[1:06:01] so I would just give you a

[1:06:03] short time to kind of give us

[1:06:05] a little bit of -- yeah.

[1:06:08] » Okay.

[1:06:09] chairman osman and vice chair

[1:06:15] chowdhury and committee

[1:06:17] members, my name is steve

[1:06:20] horniyg and together with my

[1:06:22] brother, gary, we purchased

[1:06:26] lakeshore arms about a year

[1:06:26] ago now.

[1:06:27] and my family has owned,

[1:06:29] restored and managed apartment

[1:06:31] buildings in minneapolis for

[1:06:33] four generations, over 100

[1:06:34] years.

[1:06:35] we believe in historic

[1:06:38] preservation, that it is an

[1:06:40] important public policy and

[1:06:42] nothing I say today should be

[1:06:44] interpreted otherwise.

[1:06:46] I want to begin and make it

[1:06:50] very clear that I accept the

[1:06:55] hbc's conclusion that

[1:06:56] lakeshore arms possesses

[1:06:58] sufficient architectural

[1:06:59] significance to qualify for

[1:07:01] designation.

[1:07:02] the issue is that over 17

[1:07:06] buildings that were also

[1:07:11] designed by c.j. Bard are also

[1:07:15] beautiful buildings in south

[1:07:16] minneapolis that are equal to

[1:07:18] my building.

[1:07:21] the designation study never

[1:07:24] cited that for one reason or

[1:07:25] another my building was more

[1:07:27] special than any of the other

[1:07:28] buildings.

[1:07:30] you'll see pictures of them in

[1:07:35] the slides that I prepared.

[1:07:37] maybe if we could roll up just

[1:07:42] a couple more on this.

[1:07:43] no?

[1:07:44] can't do that?

[1:07:44] can I do that?

[1:07:54] here is a collection of all of

[1:07:56] the bard buildings in south

[1:07:58] minneapolis.

[1:07:59] they're absolutely gorgeous.

[1:08:01] of there'sothing that my

[1:08:03] building has over any of these

[1:08:04] others and, so, the crucial

[1:08:07] question I why was m

[1:08:09] building chosen?

[1:08:16] [ alarm ]

[1:08:17] » Sorry.

[1:08:17] please continue.

[1:08:18] I want to hear.

[1:08:23] » Your responsibility here is

[1:08:24] much broader than looking at

[1:08:25] the architectural features of

[1:08:27] this.

[1:08:31] you, under the statute, the

[1:08:33] ordinance, chapter 599, you're

[1:08:38] required to look more broadly,

[1:08:39] not only at historic

[1:08:41] preservation, but also the

[1:08:44] economic growth and general

[1:08:45] welfare of the city and the

[1:08:47] implementaon of the

[1:08:50] minneapolis comprehensive

[1:08:50] plan.

[1:08:52] that requires balancing on

[1:08:54] your part several -- balancing

[1:08:56] several important public

[1:08:59] policies, not just

[1:09:01] preservation.

[1:09:02] I respectfully submit that

[1:09:04] when all of these policies are

[1:09:05] considered together,

[1:09:06] designationf this particular

[1:09:09] property is not in the city's

[1:09:10] best interest.

[1:09:11] » Sir, if you could wrap it

[1:09:12] up, pase.

[1:09:16] » So we've had 17 other

[1:09:19] properties.

[1:09:19] mine is n chosen.

[1:09:22] two other quick points.

[1:09:23] under the demolitiontatute,

[1:09:26] if you don't designate this

[1:09:28] today, the demolition statute

[1:09:33] in minneapolis is very

[1:09:34] protective of buildings thatareh

[1:09:36] my building is, that if

[1:09:37] there's ever a demolition

[1:09:39] permit put forth, there would

[1:09:41] be another opportunity to look

[1:09:42] at this.

[1:09:42] » Thank you.

[1:09:43] » And I think to foreclose

[1:09:46] the city, to give up the

[1:09:51] possibility of greater

[1:09:52] development to not only for

[1:09:54] housing, more housing, that

[1:09:57] includes affordable,

[1:09:58] inclusionary housing, without

[1:10:01] seeing apecific proposal

[1:10:03] even being presented is reay

[1:10:04] premature.

[1:10:05] » I appreciate your time.

[1:10:06] I'm sorry.

[1:10:07] we've run out of time.

[1:10:08] » It's okay.

[1:10:13] I see council member shaffer.

[1:10:13] » Tnk you, mr. Hornig,

[1:10:17] for those thoughts.

[1:10:17] and thank you for your long

[1:10:19] history of providing

[1:10:20] affordable housing in

[1:10:20] minneapolis.

[1:10:21] in many of our communities

[1:10:24] across many wards.

[1:10:25] and I know that there are ups

[1:10:29] and downs to the housing

[1:10:30] industry, but I want to say

[1:10:33] thank you for that provision

[1:10:34] and that commitment to

[1:10:35] affordable housing in our

[1:10:35] space.

[1:10:36] today I will be making a

[1:10:38] motion to deny the historic

[1:10:43] designation, primarily, as you

[1:10:45] can remember from the first

[1:10:47] picture that this is really a

[1:10:49] building that is on and

[1:10:53] surrounded by more

[1:10:56] high-density apartment

[1:10:57] buildings.

[1:10:57] and I know that we have heard

[1:10:59] today that he has no plans to

[1:11:01] demolish this building, and we

[1:11:04] have the demolition statute to

[1:11:06] fall back on.

[1:11:07] putting this historic

[1:11:08] designation in place now would

[1:11:11] complely foreclose the

[1:11:13] addition of higher density

[1:11:15] housing at thispot at any

[1:11:17] point in th future.

[1:11:18] ich is really inconsistent

[1:11:20] with many of the 2040 plan

[1:11:22] goals for this area.

[1:11:25] so, I will be supporting this

[1:11:31] denial of the historic

[1:11:34] landmark designation.

[1:11:38] » Thank you, council member

[1:11:39] shaffer.

[1:11:41] I will recognize council

[1:11:42] member chavez.

[1:11:43] » Thank you, chair osman, and

[1:11:45] maybe ask my colleague,

[1:11:47] council member shaffer, if she

[1:11:48] would move the motion to deny

[1:11:50] without recommendation.

[1:11:51] I just would rather have more

[1:11:52] conversations with staff about

[1:11:53] what this means.

[1:11:55] so at least -- I don't want to

[1:11:56] commit to my position today.

[1:11:57] I want to have more

[1:11:59] conversations about how this

[1:12:01] came to be and I do have

[1:12:02] questions.

[1:12:03] so I'd rather --

[1:12:04] » That's absolutely fine with

[1:12:05] me, council member chavez.

[1:12:06] » Thank you.

[1:12:08] » Vice chair chowdhury.

[1:12:10] » Thank you.

[1:12:10] I have a question for staff.

[1:12:19] I just wanted to know, I think

[1:12:21] the property owner brought up

[1:12:24] a good point of the many other

[1:12:26] properties that are designed

[1:12:27] by the same architects.

[1:12:30] how was that -- how were these

[1:12:33] properties selected and is

[1:12:34] there a plan in the future to

[1:12:36] look at the other properties?

[1:12:39] » Yeah, thank you, chair

[1:12:42] osman, council member

[1:12:43] chowdhury.

[1:12:43] so within the designation

[1:12:44] study that staff wrote, a lot

[1:12:46] of the buildings that were

[1:12:48] identified and actually shown

[1:12:49] by the property owner were

[1:12:50] identified through that study.

[1:12:52] so, initially we we looking

[1:12:54] to see if the property met our

[1:12:56] local criterion 6, which would

[1:12:58] be tied to a master industry

[1:13:01] professional like an

[1:13:02] architect.

[1:13:02] so that's part of the reason

[1:13:03] why we looked at these other

[1:13:04] buildings designed by this

[1:13:05] architect.

[1:13:06] we ultimately didn't recommend

[1:13:09] designation under that

[1:13:10] criteria specifically because

[1:13:13] the firm of bard and

[1:13:16] vanderbilt was distinct and

[1:13:18] that is the firm that designed

[1:13:20] this building, whereas, karl

[1:13:22] bard,hen he practiced

[1:13:23] independently earlier, was

[1:13:25] making designs similar to

[1:13:26] those that were shown.

[1:13:29] so, to the other point, when

[1:13:31] staff is looking at properties

[1:13:34] that embody distinctive

[1:13:35] characteristics of an

[1:13:36] architectural style under

[1:13:38] criterion 4 to be considered

[1:13:39] for landmark status, we do

[1:13:42] look at other properties and

[1:13:44] consider if they retain

[1:13:47] historic integri.

[1:13:47] so do they still communicate

[1:13:49] their historic significance.

[1:13:50] and when looking at lakeshore

[1:13:51] arms, we were able to deduce

[1:13:53] that there's a lot that is

[1:13:55] still there to be able to

[1:13:56] communicate that it is an

[1:13:58] example of this architectural

[1:14:01] style.

[1:14:01] that's not to say that if a

[1:14:02] building comes in the future

[1:14:03] that is also this style, you

[1:14:06] know, if that can't be

[1:14:08] considered if this one is

[1:14:10] designated.

[1:14:12] so with that, staff were able

[1:14:14] to look through in the study

[1:14:15] and determine that this

[1:14:18] property did meet that

[1:14:19] criterion 4 to be considered

[1:14:21] for landmark status.

[1:14:22] » Thank you.

[1:14:22] that's helpful.

[1:14:24] and then one final question

[1:14:26] for me just to clarify,

[1:14:28] because I know we're moving

[1:14:29] this forward without

[1:14:31] recommendation, I think I

[1:14:32] definitely need some more time

[1:14:34] to have conversations ahead of

[1:14:36] full council.

[1:14:39] should this go ahead.

[1:14:42] and this islso just for my

[1:14:44] understanding for future local

[1:14:46] historic designations if it

[1:14:48] comes to us, should a

[1:14:51] resolution pass through this

[1:14:51] body, what are the next steps

[1:14:53] that follow?

[1:14:54] I know you said it in your

[1:14:55] presentation, but I'm kindly

[1:14:57] asking you to repeat it.

[1:14:59] » Sure, chair osman, council

[1:15:02] member chowdhury.

[1:15:02] to clarify, are you asking if

[1:15:04] this is approved or denied?

[1:15:07] » After approval, if there is

[1:15:08] approval, what happens next?

[1:15:09] » Sure.

[1:15:10] if this is approved --

[1:15:13] recommended approval today, it

[1:15:13] will go up, of course, to city

[1:15:17] council for your vote on the

[1:15:20] resolution, and then that goes

[1:15:21] up to the mayor's desk and

[1:15:22] once it's signed and

[1:15:23] published, then that would be

[1:15:26] when it would formally become

[1:15:29] a city of minneapolis

[1:15:30] landmark.

[1:15:36] standards.

[1:15:36] national park service to make

[1:15:37] sure that any changes to the

[1:15:39] exterior are being sensitive

[1:15:41] to the property's

[1:15:42] significance.

[1:15:44] and if a future property

[1:15:45] owner would want to demolish,

[1:15:47] they'd have the ability to

[1:15:49] submit an application, called

[1:15:50] the demolition of designated

[1:15:52] property, to make that

[1:15:53] decision at a future date if

[1:15:54] it comes to that.

[1:15:55] » And that would go to the

[1:15:57] hpc, right, future demolition?

[1:15:59] » Correct.

[1:15:59] » Okay.

[1:16:01] and is landmark desnation

[1:16:03] any different than historic

[1:16:05] preservation or are they the

[1:16:05] same?

[1:16:06] » So, it would be the same.

[1:16:10] landmark designation at the

[1:16:11] local level is different from

[1:16:12] national register listing.

[1:16:14] so I don't know if that -- I

[1:16:18] think there's some confusion

[1:16:19] between those two.

[1:16:20] but this is local landmark

[1:16:22] designation that we're

[1:16:22] considering today.

[1:16:23] » And if denied, what

[1:16:24] happens?

[1:16:24] » So if the designation is

[1:16:28] denied, and the property owner

[1:16:29] brought up a point, it could

[1:16:30] be brought forward in the

[1:16:34] future.

[1:16:34] if that's the case, there

[1:16:36] would have to be a three-year

[1:16:37] waiting period for someone to

[1:16:40] consider nominating it again

[1:16:41] in the future.

[1:16:42] but there is a possibility to

[1:16:44] reconsider a history of a site

[1:16:47] with a future timeline.

[1:16:48] » Okay.

[1:16:49] great.

[1:16:49] that's all my questions.

[1:16:51] really appreate it.

[1:16:52] » All right.

[1:16:54] council member rainville.

[1:16:55] » Thank you.

[1:16:55] I do have a question for

[1:16:57] staff.

[1:16:58] why was this property chosen

[1:17:00] to study?

[1:17:03] » Chair osman, council member

[1:17:06] rainville, this was submitted

[1:17:06] as a nomination by minneapolis

[1:17:10] heritage preservation

[1:17:11] commissioner, and they do have

[1:17:12] the authority to do that.

[1:17:13] and I think it was just a

[1:17:15] personal interest in the site

[1:17:16] that led to that.

[1:17:20] » Thank you.

[1:17:21] » All right.

[1:17:23] seeingo -- oh, council

[1:17:25] member chavez.

[1:17:26] » One last thing, I guess.

[1:17:28] I'm still trying to learn more

[1:17:30] about this.

[1:17:32] I probably will be reaching

[1:17:33] out.

[1:17:33] my question is, let's just

[1:17:34] say, and I don't know what way

[1:17:36] the council is going to decide

[1:17:37] on this issue, but lest just

[1:17:38] say they decide to -- but

[1:17:40] let's just say they decide to

[1:17:42] approve it, does staff have

[1:17:43] any concerns it would set a

[1:17:45] precedent for the rest of the

[1:17:46] buildings that were

[1:17:49] identified and what that would

[1:17:50] mean for housing in our city?

[1:17:51] I don't know, I'm just

[1:17:52] wondering.

[1:17:53] » Chair osman, council member

[1:17:57] chavez, I think I understand

[1:17:57] your question.

[1:17:58] there's never going to be a

[1:18:01] precedent-setting desion for

[1:18:02] any property the city

[1:18:04] that's being considered for

[1:18:06] landmark status.

[1:18:07] but, you know, at any point in

[1:18:08] the future if one of the

[1:18:11] nominators who's able to

[1:18:11] nominate a property if the

[1:18:14] city wants to bring forward

[1:18:15] one of the other examples for

[1:18:16] consideration, that is a

[1:18:17] possibility.

[1:18:17] » Okay.

[1:18:18] thank you.

[1:18:19] » All right.

[1:18:20] thank you so much.

[1:18:22] with that motion to forward

[1:18:24] this item without

[1:18:26] recommendation, all those in

[1:18:26] favor say aye.

[1:18:27] [ members voting ]

[1:18:30] and tho opposed say nay.

[1:18:32] [ no response heard ]

[1:18:32] the ayes have it and the

[1:18:34] motion carries.

[1:18:34] all right, our last item is

[1:18:38] presentation related to

[1:18:41] impervious surfaces.

[1:18:47] » Thank you chair osman,

[1:18:49] committee members.

[1:18:49] I'll be presenting today but

[1:18:50] we alsoo have further staff

[1:18:52] from our public works

[1:18:54] department, surface waters and

[1:18:55] sewers, available for any

[1:18:57] questions you all may have at

[1:18:57] the end.

[1:18:58] again, this is a receive and

[1:19:00] file for a legislative

[1:19:02] directive that came out of

[1:19:05] council member's wonsley's

[1:19:07] office later.

[1:19:09] looking at synthetic turf

[1:19:10] systems and how those could be y

[1:19:12] managed in code, how they

[1:19:13] could be managed in coat, kind

[1:19:15] of those long-term impacts for

[1:19:18] those systems.

[1:19:18] one of the principal questions

[1:19:20] that we started out with just

[1:19:21] what is artificial turf?

[1:19:24] kind of working definition

[1:19:25] that we had, this actually is

[1:19:26] of not in the code today, it

[1:19:27] was proposed by our

[1:19:30] co-development team

[1:19:31] independent from this

[1:19:32] legislative directive as they

[1:19:33] were looking at kind of our

[1:19:35] single-family housing code,

[1:19:36] looking at updating the

[1:19:38] definitions chapter to address

[1:19:41] artificial or hybrid turf, a

[1:19:42] system which has the

[1:19:44] appearance of natural turf

[1:19:45] grass or reinforces natural

[1:19:47] turf grass, there's not 100%

[1:19:49] natural turf grass.

[1:19:50] basically what I would say,

[1:19:51] again, this was a pretty broad

[1:19:53] definition.

[1:19:53] I think it is a good starting

[1:19:54] point to think about it.

[1:19:56] there are a really broad range

[1:19:57] of these types of systems out

[1:19:58] there.

[1:19:59] they can take many different

[1:20:01] forms.

[1:20:02] one of the things -- one other

[1:20:03] thing that I would note,

[1:20:05] though, in terms of our

[1:20:06] literature review, the

[1:20:08] minnesota storm water manual

[1:20:09] is preparing and has been kind

[1:20:11] of preparing to provide some

[1:20:13] guidance on synthetic turf

[1:20:14] systems.

[1:20:15] it was a requirement from the

[1:20:18] legislature, I believe, last

[1:20:19] year through a study,

[1:20:21] essentially, that might also

[1:20:22] really inform what we end up,

[1:20:24] if we adopt the definition of

[1:20:26] artificial or synthetic turf,

[1:20:28] looking to the state level

[1:20:29] what they're proposing.

[1:20:33] in terms of how artificial

[1:20:34] turf is regulated today, I

[1:20:35] think the main thing that I do

[1:20:36] want to leave with you all

[1:20:38] here is that it is not a

[1:20:39] prohibited thing in the city.

[1:20:41] folks can have artificial

[1:20:42] turf.

[1:20:44] the main two standards in

[1:20:45] zoning that they are subject

[1:20:46] to would be impervious surf

[1:20:48] requirements.

[1:20:49] so we have a maximum on

[1:20:51] impervious surface that you

[1:20:51] can have on a particular lot,

[1:20:53] depending on the zoning

[1:20:54] district.

[1:20:54] and we currently treat

[1:20:56] artificial turf as an I am

[1:20:58] preservous surface, similar to

[1:20:59] other things like permeable

[1:21:03] pavers that purport and

[1:21:04] represent that they are

[1:21:05] permeable, but which either

[1:21:06] have maintenance requirements

[1:21:07] or which may have other draw

[1:21:10] baks.

[1:21:11] drawbacks.

[1:21:13] secondly, it is not considered

[1:21:14] an alternative to required

[1:21:15] landscaping.

[1:21:15] so when we talk about required

[1:21:17] yards for a property, you

[1:21:18] cannot have artificial turf in

[1:21:21] lieu of a natural grass or

[1:21:23] natural landscaping.

[1:21:24] if you cannot meet those two

[1:21:25] standards in terms of

[1:21:27] providing artificial turf,

[1:21:28] typically and historically the

[1:21:30] avenue for you has been to

[1:21:31] seek a land use variance from

[1:21:33] those requirements.

[1:21:34] and then from the public works

[1:21:36] perspective, they noted that

[1:21:37] any project that does disturb

[1:21:39] over half an acre or more of

[1:21:41] soils does need to demonstrate

[1:21:43] compliance with city storm

[1:21:44] water requirements, so that

[1:21:45] includes run-off rate control,

[1:21:47] water quality, and volume

[1:21:49] control.

[1:21:50] typically how that works and,

[1:21:52] again, I would defer really

[1:21:56] any in-depth scientific

[1:21:57] questions to our surface water

[1:21:58] and sewer staff, but design

[1:21:59] documents are provided as part

[1:22:01] of that application that are

[1:22:02] then used to model or simulate

[1:22:05] the performance of that ground

[1:22:08] cover material in a rain event

[1:22:09] or storm event.

[1:22:10] one thing to note here, there

[1:22:11] really is not a application or

[1:22:13] a permit or other regulatory

[1:22:17] document that would trigger

[1:22:18] for a very small-scale

[1:22:21] application.

[1:22:22] so if someone wanted to

[1:22:23] replace their front yard with

[1:22:25] artificial turf, there right

[1:22:26] now is just not a review

[1:22:29] mechanism or anything that

[1:22:30] triggers a city review and

[1:22:31] that would be something that

[1:22:32] would need to be created and

[1:22:33] obviously has kind of knock-on

[1:22:36] effects in terms of

[1:22:37] enforcement.

[1:22:39] part of this legislative

[1:22:41] directive was looking at the

[1:22:42] climate and water quality

[1:22:43] impacts, you know, how can we

[1:22:47] justify artificial turf as an

[1:22:48] allowed material in lieu of

[1:22:49] some of our goals around

[1:22:51] climate sustainability in the

[1:22:53] 2040 plan.

[1:22:54] in terms of those that work in

[1:22:58] favor of artificial turf,

[1:22:59] there's definitely an argument

[1:23:00] for decreased water usage.

[1:23:01] it's part of the reason why

[1:23:03] they have they've seen a much

[1:23:05] larger uptick in the

[1:23:06] southwestern united states in

[1:23:07] dry areas.

[1:23:08] it typically incorporates

[1:23:10] recycled materials.

[1:23:10] so we're going to talk a

[1:23:11] little bit about rubber crumb

[1:23:14] or crumb rubber infill.

[1:23:15] those are typically made out

[1:23:17] of recycled tires, and that is

[1:23:18] one of the few ways that the

[1:23:19] industry has found to reuse

[1:23:20] that type of material.

[1:23:22] and then the other note is

[1:23:24] from a sustainability, you

[1:23:26] know, the climate 'cost to the

[1:23:28] functional or the use cost,

[1:23:30] typically those artificial

[1:23:31] systems, especially here in

[1:23:32] the north where we have kind

[1:23:35] of wacky weather over winter

[1:23:36] and spring, they have a longer

[1:23:38] usable period.

[1:23:39] so artificial turf is ready

[1:23:41] sooner and is playable longer

[1:23:42] into the fall and into early

[1:23:45] winter than a natural turf.

[1:23:47] in terms of kind of points

[1:23:49] against artificial turf, one

[1:23:51] of the main things is that

[1:23:52] this would be a contributor to

[1:23:54] urban heat island effect in

[1:23:55] terms of that plastic does

[1:23:56] retain and hold on to heat a

[1:23:58] lot more than a natural grass

[1:23:59] would.

[1:23:59] obviously if you're replacing

[1:24:01] natural landscaping, you're

[1:24:02] losing some biodiversity and

[1:24:04] natural habitat.

[1:24:04] and then there is just a

[1:24:06] higher carbon footprint in

[1:24:08] installing an artificial turf

[1:24:10] field.

[1:24:10] there can be some savings in

[1:24:11] terms of, again, having

[1:24:13] decreased water usage, but a

[1:24:14] thing to keep in mind is that

[1:24:16] these typically have about a

[1:24:17] ten-year life span.

[1:24:18] so even if they're using

[1:24:19] recycled materials, even if

[1:24:20] they're allowing if a longer

[1:24:22] in-year usability, they're

[1:24:24] still going to be kind of a

[1:24:25] deadline on that field where

[1:24:26] it needs to then be disposed

[1:24:27] of, typically to just a

[1:24:29] landfill.

[1:24:30] again, I mentioned that rubber

[1:24:33] crumb infill material, this

[1:24:34] was one where we did reach out

[1:24:35] to our environmental health

[1:24:37] staff and they really

[1:24:38] highlighted a lot of concerns

[1:24:40] about the potential storm

[1:24:42] water impacts of that rubber

[1:24:43] crumb material washing out

[1:24:45] into water bodies around us,

[1:24:47] specifically there has been

[1:24:49] some studies monitoring levels

[1:24:51] of heavy metals, pfas, pahss

[1:24:55] and in general microplastics,

[1:24:57] they're a major source.

[1:24:58] again, more so from the kind

[1:25:00] of habitat or economic

[1:25:02] health -- or ecological

[1:25:03] health, accuse me, rather than a

[1:25:07] person playing on the field is

[1:25:08] not necessarily going to be

[1:25:08] subject to some of those

[1:25:10] chemicals but it would run off

[1:25:11] into the water.looking at kind o

[1:25:15] the ordinance, specifically

[1:25:16] looking at the zoning code,becas

[1:25:19] been the larger barrier for

[1:25:20] some of the projects that

[1:25:21] we've seen in the past, like,

[1:25:23] five, ten years that have come

[1:25:25] in looking to do artificial

[1:25:26] turf either for like an

[1:25:28] athletic field context or for

[1:25:29] again a more residential or

[1:25:32] quasi residential use.

[1:25:33] one is that rht now,

[1:25:35] obviously, we treat artificial

[1:25:36] turf as an impervious surface.

[1:25:39] one option would be to exclude

[1:25:40] those types of materials from

[1:25:42] maxim preservous surface

[1:25:44] calculations.

[1:25:44] there's a couple concerns from

[1:25:45] staff on this.

[1:25:46] one is partly just allowing

[1:25:47] for mor of these types of

[1:25:49] surfaces is not necessarily in

[1:25:50] line with a lot of our

[1:25:51] long-term susinability

[1:25:52] goals.

[1:25:53] obviouy we mentioned urban

[1:25:55] heat island.

[1:25:56] if you just kind of roll these

[1:25:58] out in a lot of different

[1:25:59] areas, we're going to see an

[1:26:01] uptick in that kind of heat

[1:26:02] retention at the ground level.

[1:26:03] the other side is just,

[1:26:05] though, from an enforcement

[1:26:06] perspective and kind of the

[1:26:09] infrastructure surroundingthese.

[1:26:11] again, we would need to create

[1:26:13] some sort of a permito

[1:26:14] facilitate these types of

[1:26:16] applications, along with that

[1:26:16] there would be inspections and

[1:26:19] then long-term compliance,

[1:26:20] which is really not something

[1:26:22] that our inspectors do today.

[1:26:25] secondarily would be to allow

[1:26:27] artificial turf as a

[1:26:28] replacement for nural

[1:26:29] landscaping.

[1:26:30] again, there is som argument

[1:26:32] for where that could be

[1:26:33] allowed as a permitted

[1:26:35] obstruction or where it could

[1:26:36] be required in those --

[1:26:39] permitted in those required

[1:26:40] yard areas.

[1:26:40] staff has a concern about

[1:26:41] wholesale treating this as a

[1:26:43] landaping material.

[1:26:43] we have had a couple of cases

[1:26:45] in the past, I think since

[1:26:48] 2020, where we now things like

[1:26:51] landscape ro to be used in

[1:26:52] certain areas, but typically

[1:26:53] ere are restrictions there

[1:26:54] inerms of requiring

[1:26:56] plantings to be so spacend

[1:26:57] that, it can't just be

[1:26:59] landscape rock or you c't

[1:27:00] have it in areas thatould

[1:27:01] wash out to youreighbor's

[1:27:02] property.

[1:27:04] so there's certainly,

[1:27:05] essentially, looking at art

[1:27:06] tissue turf would probably

[1:27:08] also require looking at some

[1:27:09] of those other nonnatural,

[1:27:11] nonlandscaping materials.

[1:27:13] looking at artificial turf.

[1:27:16] again I talked about there is

[1:27:17] not a regulatory arm for this.

[1:27:21] one of the major impacts would

[1:27:22] be increased staff needs, in

[1:27:23] terms of again our inspectors

[1:27:25] are not currently currently

[1:27:26] trained to -- we would need to

[1:27:29] create a performance standard

[1:27:30] for any of these systems that

[1:27:31] are going to be deemed as

[1:27:33] preservous versus impreservous

[1:27:35] surface.

[1:27:36] and then how do you maintain

[1:27:39] that compliance long term.

[1:27:40] so one of the issues we have

[1:27:42] right now with permeable

[1:27:43] pavers, we don't count those

[1:27:46] as preservous surface, even

[1:27:47] though if you maintain them

[1:27:49] correctly they can function

[1:27:50] well.

[1:27:50] the bigger issue is

[1:27:51] maintenance, right.

[1:27:52] how do we know that five

[1:27:53] years, ten years down the line

[1:27:55] that property owner is still

[1:27:55] having that function at the

[1:27:56] highest level.

[1:27:59] in terms of how other cities

[1:28:01] are looking at this, and as I

[1:28:03] mentioned, you probably have

[1:28:03] heard a lot more about

[1:28:06] artificial turf from like

[1:28:08] arizona or a california or a

[1:28:10] drier climate area, and that

[1:28:11] is because there is that kind

[1:28:13] of decreased water need.

[1:28:14] when we looked at some of our

[1:28:16] peer cities in terms of size,

[1:28:17] but also in terms of being

[1:28:18] kind of more northern in the

[1:28:20] united states, there wasn't as

[1:28:21] much robust language in those

[1:28:23] cities in terms of zoning or

[1:28:25] policy.

[1:28:25] most tended to treat it

[1:28:27] similarly to how we kind of do

[1:28:28] today in terms of being I am

[1:28:31] preservous surface.

[1:28:33] a very recent example that

[1:28:34] staff would highlight is the

[1:28:35] city of denver, in following

[1:28:37] the state of colorado's recent

[1:28:39] legislative language is

[1:28:41] adopting definitions for

[1:28:42] functional landscape area

[1:28:44] versus nonfunctional landscape

[1:28:45] area.

[1:28:45] that is looking at both

[1:28:48] artificial r turf and natural

[1:28:49] turf from a perspective of

[1:28:51] limiting just kind of grass or

[1:28:53] green space as a ground cover.

[1:28:55] and instead kind of putting

[1:28:56] the focus on, we are going to

[1:28:59] allow artificial turf where

[1:29:00] it's being used for an

[1:29:01] athletic field or a functional

[1:29:03] purpose.

[1:29:03] that could be something that

[1:29:03] the city looks at if, again,

[1:29:05] there is an appetite to take

[1:29:06] up the question of artificial

[1:29:08] turf.

[1:29:09] but, again, I would say, from

[1:29:10] staff's perspective, in

[1:29:12] looking at the zoning code,

[1:29:13] there probably is some ability

[1:29:14] to, ain, add a definition,

[1:29:17] daylight a little bit of the

[1:29:19] existing provisions, but there

[1:29:21] are larger concerns with kind

[1:29:23] of opening pandora's box and

[1:29:25] allows these across the -- and

[1:29:27] allowing these across the

[1:29:28] city.

[1:29:28] again, I'm happy to stand for

[1:29:30] any questions you all may

[1:29:31] have.

[1:29:31] this is our project team, as

[1:29:32] well as I mentioned we did

[1:29:33] work with the health

[1:29:34] department a little bit and

[1:29:35] major shout-out to them for

[1:29:36] providing some guidance on the

[1:29:39] materials.

[1:29:40] and, yeah, we're happy to

[1:29:41] answer any questions.

[1:29:42] » Colleagues, is there any

[1:29:43] questions on this

[1:29:44] presentation?

[1:29:50] council member warren.

[1:29:51] » I don't like plastic grass.

[1:29:58] » Thank you.

[1:30:00] I mean, I was just going to

[1:30:01] quick make a comment myself.

[1:30:03] I think there's definitely

[1:30:04] something worth looking into

[1:30:06] in terms of the types of

[1:30:11] artificial turf even allowed

[1:30:12] as a functional use that we

[1:30:13] should look at as a city in

[1:30:17] 2024, the e.u. Put a ban on

[1:30:20] crumb rubber infill turf due

[1:30:26] to concerns around

[1:30:28] microplastics, pfas, heavy

[1:30:30] metals as laid out by staff,

[1:30:31] and there's other alternatives

[1:30:32] that are available that are

[1:30:36] organic, like cork, sand, or

[1:30:40] parts of the outer husk of a

[1:30:44] coconut.

[1:30:45] in the planning commission

[1:30:46] there has been a few different

[1:30:48] types of artificial turf

[1:30:49] that's come before us.

[1:30:50] but I think this is definitely

[1:30:54] an interesting starting point

[1:30:54] for this conversation that I

[1:30:56] do feel like will come back to

[1:30:58] us eventually because

[1:30:59] artificial turf has had that

[1:31:02] type of way of coming back to

[1:31:05] bhz, or the planning

[1:31:07] commission.

[1:31:07] members, is there any other

[1:31:09] questions on this

[1:31:10] presentation?

[1:31:13] » Yeah, just, I remember

[1:31:15] debating this while university

[1:31:19] of minnesota housing area.

[1:31:21] do we have a city policy or

[1:31:23] ordinance that really clears

[1:31:26] out what's appropriate, what's

[1:31:27] not?

[1:31:32] yeah, just wanted to know do

[1:31:34] we have a city ordinance,

[1:31:35] policy that really says, you

[1:31:40] know, where to apply and who

[1:31:44] can have artificial turf?

[1:31:49] » Chair osman, I think

[1:31:51] generally we do, right.

[1:31:55] so artificial turf is

[1:31:58] permitted as a -- similarly to

[1:32:00] how we would do other types of

[1:32:02] hardscaping.

[1:32:03] so it's allowed within the

[1:32:04] confines of that.

[1:32:04] so as long as it's outside of

[1:32:06] the required yard and it

[1:32:07] doesn't exceed the

[1:32:09] impreservous coverage, but you

[1:32:11] can't cover your entire

[1:32:12] property with t. Impervious.

[1:32:15] so I think from staff's

[1:32:16] perspective, our research

[1:32:17] really supported the current

[1:32:19] policy with maybe the

[1:32:20] exception around where it

[1:32:22] could be applied in more

[1:32:23] practical settings, like

[1:32:25] athletic fields or

[1:32:27] playgrounds, in those kinds of

[1:32:28] environments it might make

[1:32:29] sense to be a little bit more

[1:32:31] permissive.

[1:32:32] but I think staff's

[1:32:33] recommendation at this point

[1:32:35] is that we would hold with our

[1:32:36] current regulations.

[1:32:37] » Okay.

[1:32:38] thank you so much.

[1:32:40] that's it.

[1:32:41] just wanted to make that

[1:32:44] point.

[1:32:45] I think the last item that

[1:32:46] came through was whole

[1:32:48] discussion about this and the

[1:32:51] uniqueness of technology and

[1:32:52] how things are changing now

[1:32:57] and, you know, places that

[1:32:59] they can apply could be a

[1:33:02] conversation.

[1:33:03] so it's kind of nice to be

[1:33:07] clear of what's allowed and

[1:33:08] what's not allowed and also at

[1:33:11] the same time think about it

[1:33:15] if there might be

[1:33:16] opportunities to update our

[1:33:18] policies based on technologies

[1:33:19] that are coming forward each

[1:33:20] day.

[1:33:21] that's it.

[1:33:23] » Yeah.

[1:33:24] council member warn.

[1:33:26] thank you.

[1:33:27] » I'm glad to hear you say

[1:33:29] that you can't cover your

[1:33:31] entire yard with this

[1:33:34] impervious grass, because

[1:33:36] you're not even seeing worms

[1:33:38] come out the ground anymore

[1:33:39] when it rains.

[1:33:40] we've had a lot of rain, and I

[1:33:42] bet you haven't even seen

[1:33:46] worms crawling over the

[1:33:47] sidewalk.

[1:33:47] you used to have to sweep the

[1:33:51] sidewalks to get rid of all

[1:33:52] the worms.

[1:33:52] what happened to all the

[1:33:53] worms?

[1:33:54] and I think these impervious

[1:34:00] turfs is the reason we don't

[1:34:01] have good quality worms

[1:34:02] anymore.

[1:34:02] this is really sad.

[1:34:03] so I'm glad to hear that

[1:34:04] people can't cover their

[1:34:07] entire whatevers with this,

[1:34:08] but we should be very careful

[1:34:10] about the things that we're

[1:34:11] doing to our environment.

[1:34:12] and just grow regular grass.

[1:34:15] and do, like, old crotch

[1:34:19] et ceteray cantankerous people

[1:34:21] used to do when we were kids

[1:34:22] back in the early '80s, tell

[1:34:24] people to stay offour yard.

[1:34:25] the end.

[1:34:26] » Thank you, council member.

[1:34:29] council member shaffer.

[1:34:30] » Yeah, I'll just make a

[1:34:32] couple comments.

[1:34:32] one, I know crumb rubber is

[1:34:35] not used at all in the par

[1:34:36] system anymore.

[1:34:37] there may be some latent

[1:34:39] outliers, but that's not where

[1:34:40] they move forward and many of

[1:34:42] the soccer fields are

[1:34:44] sand-filled, elliot.

[1:34:45] and then I would say, I'm not

[1:34:47] sure we as a city have

[1:34:49] jurisdiction over fields and

[1:34:51] playgrounds that would be on

[1:34:52] parkland.

[1:34:53] so that might be a question

[1:34:55] just for further

[1:34:57] investigation.

[1:34:58] that was my one comment.

[1:34:58] thank you.

[1:35:02] » We can ask that question

[1:35:03] now because now I'm curious if

[1:35:05] we have any jurisction.

[1:35:07] » Kay.

[1:35:08] cped, I don't think we do but

[1:35:09] maybe we do.

[1:35:10] » Through the chair, council

[1:35:12] member shaffer, so the city

[1:35:13] does have zing authority

[1:35:15] over the parks, which would

[1:35:17] include the impervious

[1:35:19] coverage and the materials.

[1:35:20] » Okay, thank you.

[1:35:21] » Okay.

[1:35:22] that's very useful.

[1:35:26] is there anyone else that

[1:35:27] wants to be in queue?

[1:35:30] council member chavez.

[1:35:30] » I'll be quick.

[1:35:31] thank you all so much.

[1:35:33] whatever we need to do to make

[1:35:35] sure that we're not using

[1:35:38] these materials as often as

[1:35:39] some folks do, that's what I

[1:35:41] would like to do because it

[1:35:43] really does have a detrimental

[1:35:45] impact on people's health.

[1:35:47] so I at least -- and the

[1:35:49] worms.

[1:35:51] that council member warren

[1:35:52] mentioned.

[1:35:53] but, yeah, in general, thank

[1:35:54] you so much to staff for the

[1:35:55] presentation today.

[1:35:57] I'd like to know in the

[1:36:00] future, based than on this

[1:36:01] presentation, which has been

[1:36:03] outlined, what we need to do

[1:36:04] to make sure that we're not

[1:36:05] using these artificial things

[1:36:07] that are really impacting

[1:36:08] people's health.

[1:36:09] so, yeah, just wanted to

[1:36:10] mention that.

[1:36:10] » Thanks.

[1:36:11] ah, I'll just close off by

[1:36:13] saying, unless anyone else

[1:36:13] gets in queue, I think if we

[1:36:17] have preservous pavers that

[1:36:20] are considered impervious, I

[1:36:21] think that should be

[1:36:23] considered the same thing

[1:36:24] about artificial tuive grass,

[1:36:26] because it's about

[1:36:27] maintenances and our

[1:36:28] enforcement is very limited

[1:36:29] and doing enforcement on turf

[1:36:31] grass that is not well

[1:36:33] maintained I don't think is a

[1:36:34] valuable use of city

[1:36:35] resources.

[1:36:36] but definitely much to think

[1:36:37] abou

[1:36:38] seeing no one else in queue,

[1:36:40] and no further discussion,

[1:36:41] I'll direct the clerk to file

[1:36:43] that staff report and

[1:36:44] presentation.

[1:36:45] and no further businessefore

[1:36:47] us and with no objection, I

[1:36:48] will declare this meeting

[1:36:49] adjourned.

Business, Housing & Zoning Committee

Agenda

Transcript