City Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

One minute to start, tech team.

Sounds good. Thank you.

Welcome everyone to the regular meeting for the Minneapolis Planning Commission for August 10th, 2026. My name is Chris Meyer and I'm the chair of the commission. At this time, I will ask the clerk to call the roll.

Commissioner Baxley is absent. Chowdhury? Present. Conley? Present. Garcia? Present. Gordon is absent. Jones?

Here.

Shepty is absent. Shepherd is absent. Vice President Wagner is absent. And President Meyer?

Here.

There are five members present.

That is a quorum. First, we'll move to the minutes for July 13th, 2026. Is there a motion for those minutes? Is there a second? Second. All right. Any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Abstentions? The minutes are adopted. Next, we're going to organize the agenda. Staff have recommended that everything be on consent. I'm going to read through each item. If you came to speak against the staff recommendation, raise your hand when I call on it, and we can take that off the consent agenda. If you wanted to make a neutral or positive comment about something, you can do that in just a little bit. But for now, we're just looking for people who want to speak against the staff recommendation. So first for number four, 2953 Pierce Street Northeast, was anyone here to speak against item number four? Okay, we'll keep that on consent. Item number 5, 312 Lindale Avenue North. In Ward 5, was anyone here to speak against 312 Lindale Avenue North?

Okay.

Keep item number 5 on consent. Item number 6, 1860 East 28th Street and 2717 Longfellow Avenue. Was anyone here to speak against this recommendation for item number 6? All right. So that will be on consent. And item number 7, 1803 Bryant Avenue North. Was anyone here to speak against the staff recommendation for 1803 Bryant Avenue North?

All right.

And number eight, 2011 Pillsbury Avenue. Was anyone here to speak against that? Okay. So we will discuss item number eight. And then I would like to discuss number nine just because I want to give the public a chance to understand what ordinances are moving through So to review, we're going to have items number four, five, six, and seven on consent. And then we will discuss items eight and nine. I just want to double check from the audience. Did anyone come here to speak against something where I didn't call it? Okay. Is there a motion to adopt that agenda?

Second.

All right. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? That is adopted. All right, so we'll first move to adopt our consent items. So those are items four, five, six, and seven. If you came and wanted to speak and support or make a neutral comment, you can do that now. I'll open the public hearing. Were you coming to speak? Oh, no, okay. All right, not seeing anyone, so I will close the public hearing. Commissioners, do we have any comments or discussion about our consent items? Would someone like to move approval of the staff accommodations? Any discussion? All right. All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed? Abstentions? Those are adopted. So if you were here for items number four, five, six, or seven, your project is adopted. Good luck with it. All right. So now we'll move to our first discussion item, 2011 Pillsbury Avenue. And staff is Andrew Liska.

Good afternoon, Chair, Commissioners. The item before you is for an emergency shelter located at 2011 Pillsbury Avenue. Again, that request is the congregate living use emergency shelter with 65 beds. And this requires a conditional use permit to allow that in the UN3 urban neighborhood district. This parcel is just south of Franklin on Pillsbury Avenue. Well, parcel off of Franklin there. Nicollet is to the east there as well. Both Franklin and Nicollet are goods and services corridors. The structure was originally constructed in 1906 as a rooming house with 24 rooms. Extensive permit history shows similar iterations of that use have existed throughout time. The license history tells a similar story of that. although there's less historical information just based on city record keeping. The applicant is proposing an emergency shelter with 65 beds. They're working with Hennepin County. The intention of this is to serve families, up to 27 families, not exceeding 65 people, specifically parents and children. The zoning code defines an emergency shelter as a facility providing sleeping accommodations, restroom facilities, day-to-day basis for persons without permanent housing for periods greater than 24 hours up to six months. There are no changes proposed to the exterior of the building, and all aspects of the application align with the zoning code. Just a conditional use permit is required to establish this use. There are several findings required when issuing a conditional use permit. First, steps of strategy. The applicant has staff present on site at all times, and there's security both interior and on the exterior of the structure. The applicants are proposing to work with Hennepin County in their referral system. So people would work with the county. People would not just show up hoping for a bed. They'll be referred to the site before showing up. This structure was originally constructed as a single room occupancy use. Again, that permit history shows similar iterations of similar uses throughout time. Staff finds that this proposal would kind of align with how this building has operated over time. Again, this is right near two goods and services corridors. We got Franklin Avenue, Nicollet Avenue, served by a lot of bus routes, good connectivity to the rest of the city. This also aligns with several of the comprehensive plan policy goals. We have goal one, goal three, and goal five, along with a few of the policies, specifically policy 35, innovative housing types, policy 40, homelessness, We see point C there on policy 40, prioritize the enhancement of local shelter safety methods and systems. Again, staff has reviewed this application. We find it really, in working with Hennepin County, they've developed a good system. I know 1803 Bryant got approved on consent already. They've been working there. Hennepin County has encouraged them to apply for other grants. And that's what is kind of the impetus for this application in continuing to serve more of Minneapolis. And again, policy 85, access to health, social and emergency services. Again, if the land use app is approved, the proposal would comply with all provisions of the UN3 district. And with that, staff recommends approval of that CUP here with 65 beds. I'll be here for any questions.

Thank you. Are there any questions before we open the public hearing? Commissioner Jones.

Just to confirm, it's a family-oriented shelter that people stay for up to six months? Do you know if there's an average length of stay that people using a 24- to 6-month shelter have?

The applicant could probably better answer that question. I do know that when they are at the facility, this is very much a transitional housing, so they are working at finding long-term housing solutions. But as to where they fall in that 24 to six months, I can't speak to that, but the applicant may be able to. Thank you.

Anyone else? All right. Thank you. I will now open the public hearing. Do we have the applicant? Welcome. Introduce yourselves. You have 10 minutes.

Hi. Thank you for taking the time to consider our proposal. My name is Kelly Martin, and I am with Steps of Strategy. I am the founder who opened this company 13 years ago with a focus on housing. I have an extensive history. I'm an old drug counselor. I also have worked in child protection. I'm a licensed foster care worker now, taking at-risk youth into shelter. And I got tired of working in the field because I see we're doing... We're continuing to spend dollars in housing and we're watching numbers go up. And so about a year ago, when I won my first contract with Hennepin County a little over a year ago, it just startled me not to consider how we're not preparing people for housing. We think getting them in the door, out of the encampments, which I have helped serve and clear over 200 people and getting them into housing and 70% of them are housed today. This is going to be a much different model. It's going to focus on the family. We are bringing in group-style counseling that will help the families from what they've been through while addressing some of the needs of the children because it's much bigger than we just find a way to get them into their next place to start over. I am not in support of any type of chemical use happening in our facilities. We will have 24-hour staff. I often set up a live-in style staff. Not only that, I also engaged a lived experience community to raise them up to pay it forward to help the next people coming behind them, which is also a part of our model. When we opened at 1803 Bryant, I have supported the church next door in teaching them how to use Narcan. We have brought people back to life on that block because my staff are trained for that. But we're also, we don't believe in criminalizing addiction, but we also believe that the neighbors deserve the right to have a happy life in their homes. And I will definitely be one that will go out and speak up on their behalf. At 1803 Bryant, I have also given my personal phone number that if there are things going on that I need to show up and intervene, we will do that right away. We have worked with the BCR unit. We have worked with the Minneapolis Police Department. This project is to bring a longer term solution to those who are experiencing being unhoused so that they're not becoming unhoused again and again and again and again and again, which I have watched over and over in my 13 years of doing housing. At this time, Steps of Strategy feels like it would benefit us to focus more on the facility style so that we have more time, more community building, more opportunity to engage them. We also have on-site mental health services. This won't be people getting a bunch of referrals to go out into the community to find out what they need to do. Those are services that will be available to them on-site. We also have a tutoring facility. non-profit that we have partnered with that children will get help with their school work and we won't be looking for them to go other places. So I am asking for their approval to support this and I know we have been circling the community quite a bit. I have a few people that stay on site there now as it's a licensed board and lodge and we're going to be transitioning to the shelter license is what I'm requesting. But we are already making an impact from the neighbors who are next door that are drinking in the parking lot of the old bank in that are going over to the health facility on that were continuing to remind them that they have to think about other people that it's not just about them often i believe when we hear homeless shelter we think some of the strategies we saw through COVID and that is not what we're looking to operate. Hennepin County will take all intakes prior to referral. We'll go through assessment of need and if we are not a good fit for them they would not be placed at our location. We're aiming a little bit towards the single parent with maybe smaller children versus teenagers there and i'm not promising that they wouldn't be there but there will be expectation for them as well they are not going to tear down the building or the community those are things that we would bring intervention part of this contract would also lead to us having to be mandated reporters that if there was anything wrong happening to children by the parent that we would be mandated to report that in which i'm already a mandated reporter so we don't do that. Family Solutions is somebody we would be working with that helps with the child behavior. One of the things that we believe has been overlooked in homelessness when it comes to families is the impact on the children outside of getting back and forth to school, but some of the insecurity, the food insecurity that they experience and causes other behaviors with them. So we hope to be able to bridge some of those gaps for the children that we would be serving as well. I think I've covered it. I hope to get your support as we desire. I think the last thing that I would say is that I bring a team. Right now I think we're at about over 120 years of experience between working with families, shelter. We also have an employment program that we hire people once they get to where they need to be, that they're able to support themselves and move forward. The education, clothing, everything that's needed is provided, and those aren't all things that we've gotten a contract for. Those are things that this agency has stood up to do the right thing by the community to meet the needs so that those gaps can be filled and we can stop looking at some of the things that we are missing. in our communities as it relates to people being unhoused. And I do have people here that are testifying today to services, being a part of our team, being a part of our board. So thank you.

Thank you. Are there any questions for the applicant before we move on?

If I may, Ms. Jones, you did talk about length of stay, and the numbers right now are between 60 to 90 at max 120 days is the average. It's the families that have more barriers that probably see a little bit longer stay closer to that six months. One of the things that we bring to the table is that we have our own access to housing. So I'm not relying on outside landlords to answer all of our problems, but we do want to make sure that funding is in place for their rent. Otherwise, we're just starting all over again, which often happens with people going through the Rapid Rehousing Program. There's not long-term funding for them. So thank you.

Thank you. All right, for every other speaker, you can have two minutes. I believe you guys raised your hands. We can go in whatever order. Welcome, tell us your name, and you have two minutes.

My name's Alvin Earl Roy, Jr. I'm currently a resident at Steps to Strategy. I started out in a shelter last December, just looking for a place to be, a place to rest. I went through the shelter program, Adult Shelter Connect, July last year up until December upon steps of strategy, I was there a month until I found out they have a freestanding room and board program where they allow you to stay freestanding room and board while you attend treatment. And I've been attending that treatment program since January. I am due to graduate September 11th. I'm just glad they gave me a place where I could and just have to work on myself, you know, to better myself. And I'm living proof that it does work. It is a program that works. I mean, I'm grateful to be there. I mean, I don't know what I'd do without Staff to Strategy. It's a really good place to be. I am getting housed through them here within a month. I'm going through the Helix program. I've been referred, so it is a good program.

Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Next speaker.

Can I just say, if you've spoken or want to speak, after you speak, can you please sign up, too? We just need your name for the public record. That's it. Thank you.

My name is Denise King, and I sit on the board for Steps to Strategy. I also work with the organization as far as organizational development and their operations. I have been there weekly working with staff, working with some of the clients, and I can tell you from my own experience there that it is helping people that come through the door. We have minimal issues. We have staff that has been through the program come back and work with Steps of Strategy. They're very passionate about what they do and how they serve those that are coming in. So I can just add that from an overall organizational point, we're very passionate about what we do. The organizational infrastructure is there to support the expansion to the Pillsbury location, and we just look for your support.

Thank you. Next speaker. Thank you. Welcome. Tell us your name and you have two minutes.

Hi, my name is Johanna Easley. I have been one of the clients that I went through the program at Steps of Strategy. I was experiencing homelessness and I was six months pregnant and I went and they gave me a lot of support, my partner and I. I gave birth to my son after, I mean, I started working there after I went through the program and got housed, and then I gave birth to my son, and I actually receive a lot of support from them currently. I don't really know. I have issues with speaking in front of people, but I will say that it has been one of the greatest blessings of my life, honestly. I get to be around people who not only really care about what they do and are passionate about what they do, but they really see you as a human and take that into consideration as to how they're going to support you. So I just wanted to speak on my experience a little bit. Thank you.

Thank you for your testimony. Next speaker. Thank you. Welcome. Introduce yourself, and you have two minutes.

Good afternoon. I'm Roland Willis. I'm also an employee of Steps Strategy. I'm also a client of Steps Strategy. So how Steps helped me. So Steps came in my life and one of my most vulnerable experiences Parts of my life is when my dad passed. And me and my dad lived together for the last five years. And when he became sick, I had to pretty much kind of pay my portion of the bills and kind of help pay his, even though he wasn't able to work. And we ended up having to move because the rent got raised up. almost doubled the original when we first moved in, and stepped in and helped relocate us. And I'm one of the ones who I've always worked, always never been in trouble, nor have any addictions, and it's like I'm one of the humans who... It's hard to help because on paper I don't need the help, but in reality I actually need the help. And STEP came and helped fill that void when I was in my most vulnerable stage. And I was working a full-time job, making good money, and I thought I was able to go back to work, and I didn't get the support that I needed at the job I was at, even though I loved the job, and I wasn't ready to work. And I ended up losing that job. My money ran short. And here comes Step helping me again and employing me and helping me grow as a man, as a father, my responsibilities. So that's my two minutes. Okay. But, yeah, steps of strategy have helped me walk one of my most vulnerable stages in my life out, and they're still walking with me. And I'm also able to help others and the youth and the different families we work with. I'm able to kind of help them get out of the situation they're in. So that's my time. Thank you. Next speaker.

Welcome. Introduce yourself, and you have two minutes.

Good afternoon. My name is Jeff Jones. I'm an attorney at Fabianski, Westerhart & Thompson. I represent LBD Real Estate Holdings, which owns a property, and I should acknowledge part owner of 2015 Pleasant Avenue, one block over. I just wanted to first, I had submitted a letter and I wanted to make sure that that letter was received and is submitted. I won't belabor the points of the letter, but I would actually contend that this CUP application doesn't satisfy any of the six requirements. I will note, I support their cause and I support the goals. But it seems like this particular neighborhood is being targeted in the sense that a shelter just went in from Alliance who is the previous owner of this property and shut it down in 2025 because they did not have adequate plans for policing to deal with the drug usage. And at that time they only had 27 beds. And here this CUP application is trying to add 240% to what Alliance openly admitted they could not handle. And then, of course, Alliance opened up a new place at 2115, I believe, Nicollet Avenue, which kind of feels like This is being directed at this neighborhood. The last thing I'll note is, including LBD Real Estate Holdings, but also several neighbors in this, there is significant investment going into this neighborhood. And it sort of seems like if they grant the COP, all of that could be, well, which is the benefit of increasing the tax base, of course, which I know the city desperately needs right now. It seems like by approving a 65 bed and also the Nicollet Avenue, it is just too much, especially for a house that was originally a single family residence. Thank you. Thank you.

Next speaker. Anyone else? Welcome. Introduce yourself, and you have two minutes.

I'm Chris Broberg. I live in the city. I own the property at 2002 Pillsbury and I manage 10 other rental properties on the adjacent block between Pillsbury and Pleasant. You know, these are things that I've spent the best part of my life working on and supporting and making nice places for people to live. And we have families, immigrants, elderly people all living in that area. And I think the concern he expressed about this being 65 beds and, you know, all the support staff that would go along with that, it's just too much commotion for that area. And people should be able to live in peace. And it just doesn't fit the – it's a residential area. It doesn't fit the character of that area. And something very important. And I'm very supportive of the goal. I volunteer at Plymouth Church for the last 15 years every third Sunday for the meal to serve homeless. I'm not unsympathetic to the cause, but I just – the location of this is just completely – I just think it's not a good location for it. I mean, it's too residential. There's too many people there that depend on not being involved in potential chaos. It could come from that much commotion and people in this confined little area and community. And we work hard. My wife walks the block every day picking up garbage. And since the thing shut down, we've had a lot more people You know, it's been a lot less garbage in the area and it's a lot more doable project, but it's an area we really care about and, you know, have a lot of stake there. So I just recommend, I hope you could vote against this and not allow this. Thanks.

Thank you. Next speaker. Welcome. Introduce yourself and you have two minutes.

My name is Rhonda Broberg. It was my husband that began our small family rental property business. And I concur with my husband's son that this just hasn't given much thought to the density of the type of buildings in the area. We need to have less shelter. We need to have less group home. We need to have less service homes. We need to... focus more on having some family property spruce throughout the city as well. And this is not the property for it because there's just too much negative stuff going on. And I have no doubt that steps of... Well, strategy is a good company, good model, that they do good for the city, but the location is just not the right location. It's too many beds for that property. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any other speakers? All right, seeing none, I will close the public hearing. Commissioners, is there any discussion, questions, or motions? Commissioner Chowdhury

Thank you. President Meyer, right? It's president in this committee, right? Appreciate you. First off, just wanted to give a compliment to the applicant for your presentation. So thorough, didn't have any questions. And yeah, just genuinely impressed by the work that you are doing and have done. And then just genuinely impressed by the folks that we're clients of. Steps of strategy. Thanks for sharing your story. It's not easy to share vulnerable stories about yourself So I just want to say thank you for coming down To the Public Service Center to share that with us as a Planning Commission I don't think we get to hear often from individuals with specific lived experience because it can be very inaccessible to come before a body like this so I just wanted to say Thank you for doing so. It's really valuable and it really filled my cup today to hear that. And I think for me the thing that feels really pressing in this moment is the fact that we have a shelter all family system and it is consistently over capacity and That is just dangerous for community members that are trying to build their family, right? They need a safe place where they can go and get the support that they need so they can be successful and their children can be successful. And this is how we break generational struggles and trauma through actual real services. And this is an area in our city that is zoned for this type of use. I think Steps of Strategy has a very reputable set of experiences that showcase that this would be a good area for them to step into. I also think to the comment about this is a neighborhood for families, I just want to point out that this is a family um, shelter. So this would be an opportunity for families to come in. It's just families who need a little bit more support and then they get to have access to the wonderful things in the neighborhood, restaurants, transit, going to the park, going to the art museum, all very important. Um, so I'm excited to make the motion to move this for approval.

There's a motion. Any further discussion?

Yeah, I also just want a second. what Commissioner Chowdhury just said. And I really appreciated the thought that people actually can stay for long periods of time to kind of get settled. I think that's a really important piece of the model. You know, I think people are concerned about the shelters where people are coming and going and there's really no stability. There's no time to kind of build strength and capacity within the individual or the family. you know, I'm all supportive of the longer stay as people really get their feet grounded and so thank you for the presentation and I too am in support of this proposal.

Thank you Commissioner Jones. Commissioner Garcia?

Thank you. It took me a moment to gather my thoughts but I did want to speak about this since I I would consider myself a neighbor of this project. I live about halfway between the 1803 Bryant and where this proposed location would be. I do see the impacts on our neighborhood and it is something that means a lot to me because I do care about the families that live in our neighborhood already as well as the families that want to live there. And part of the reason I live in that area is because we have great access to transit. We have beautiful shopping districts. We have access to banks and clinics and all of the things that you need within a very easy walk. And that's something that when you're in a transitional time in your life, it's important to have access to the things that it takes to not just survive, but to thrive living in the city. I definitely join Councilwoman Chowdhury and my fellow commissioners in supporting this and being excited to move this forward.

Commissioner Connolly.

Can't be the only one without a comment. Thank you, Mr. President. I will say that with a conditional use permit, staff gave us a great reason why this should be approved. They recommend approval. And the reason that they do that is because they want to make sure that a project aligns with the goals of the city. They want to make sure that it aligns with the policies of the plans that we have established for how we use land. And so the project that Steps of Strategy has applied for and staff has recommended approval for meets all of those qualifications. Not only does it meet the qualifications, but it also meets a need, a desperate need in the city of Minneapolis and in the county of Hennepin. for more housing for families who need it. Not only do we need emergency shelter for families, but we need housing along the continuum. And I'm glad that you addressed that, Ms. Martin. And that is that there's families who are coming off of the street. There's families who lose their housing for a variety of different reasons. And that spectrum of housing includes people who are unhoused to people who are buying their very first home. And so if we can make investments along each of those pieces of that spectrum, then we are making progress as a city. And so I am excited to support this project, excited to see the one on the north side, and excited to see what else that you do. But wanted to clarify that our job is to make sure that the conditional use permits that you apply for meet the city's goals, needs, and programs, and this one clearly does. Thank you.

Thank you. I'm also very excited to support this project, and I completely agree it meets the conditions for the conditional use permit. I want to highlight the description from the staff that the structure was constructed in 1906 as a rooming house with 24 rooms. Extensive permit history demonstrates this structure has been utilized as a single room occupancy, boarding and lodging, and similar uses since it was originally constructed. So there are no variances. There are no exterior changes. This structure was originally intended as a rooming house. I think with that context, it would be a waste if it was only used as a single family home. So I think all the conditions are clearly met with consistency with the 2040 plan and not being injurious. We need to have more housing to get people out of homelessness, and so if we were to find that that condition was not met, that would really go against that. And it was also really great to have so many people who have benefited from this speak. We don't often have that, so I really appreciated that. So with that, I think everyone has spoken. So I'll ask the clerk to please call the roll.

Commissioner Chowdhury? Aye. Conley?

Aye.

Garcia? Aye. Jones? Aye. And President Meyer?

Aye.

There are five ayes.

That is adopted. Good luck with your project. All right, next we have the zoning code text amendment around fence regulations and staff of Sarah Roman.

Good evening, President Meyer, members of the commission. My name is Sarah Roman. I am a senior city planner in our co-development group within CPED planning. And I'm here this evening to present some proposed changes to our offense ordinance. So council members Vita and Palmisano introduced an ordinance in February of 2026 amended in April of 2026 to change three provisions within our fence ordinance to are related to allowing more flexibility for offenses within Front yards and corner side yards and then we have one provision that's related to fences in an interior side yard Related to life safety So a little bit about how we come to our fence regulations, the existing process for people who are building fences in the city. The proposed flexibility was brought to the attention of council members by continued requests from the community. We hear often in our zoning office that additional flexibility is requested for fences. But we do not require fence permits, and we do not require site plan review for fences. And so we recommend that a site plan is approved and reviewed by staff, but it's not a requirement. And so our enforcement is completely complaint-based. And what happens is that a fence contractor or a member of the public, a homeowner, will construct a fence on the property using materials that they've collected online or after speaking with staff. Or they will just construct a fence and sometimes they may find out that their fence does not comply with code. And that an enforcement officer has come out and written orders for them to change their fence to comply with code. And so what they can do is they can either make those changes or they can apply for a variance. In order to apply for a variance, there are required findings that need to be met. The first of which is that there is a uniqueness to the property that is preventing you from complying with code. And so when a variance is being applied for for offense, this is typically where homeowners are finding the most conflict with being able to have an offense variance approved. So historically, at the Board of Adjustment, these typically go to the Board of Adjustment unless they're attached to another land use application. ARGUMENTS AROUND NEEDING A TALLER FENCE OR FENCE IN A DIFFERENT LOCATION FOR REASONS LIKE BEING ADJACENT TO A HIGH TRAFFIC ROAD OR NOT HAVING A REAR YARD FOR PRIVACY, THOSE TYPES OF VARIANCES TEND TO BE APPROVED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. BUT ARGUMENTS AROUND SAFETY AGAINST CRIME HAVE HISTORICALLY NOT BEEN A REASON TO GRANT A VARIANCE. And so outcomes are unpredictable in terms of whether or not a variance is approved for a change in fences. And we do know that applying for a land use application including a variance increases project cost and project time. And so when looking at things through the lens of equity, where we are able to provide more flexibility to remove that barrier of a land use application, staff is looking to make these changes to move that forward. So in terms of our existing regulations, very generally speaking, we allow shorter open and decorative fences in a front yard, and then as you move towards the rear yard, the rear of your property, we allow taller fences and more opaque fences. There are caveats to that. So depending on how close your neighbor's property is or where the home is located, you may not be allowed a six foot tall privacy fence. But generally speaking, very broad sense, we're looking at short open fences in a front yard. And then once you move back, you get that six foot privacy fence in the rear yard. And this is what that looks like in a diagram. This diagram is found in our fence ordinance. So for the first proposed change, we are proposing to allow six-foot-tall fences to be constructed up to the front wall of the home. So currently, what you are allowed to build in a corner side yard, and so to clarify, the corner side yard is when you have a property that's along a corner. You have the front of your house facing a street, and then you have the side of your house also facing a street. This is that side of your home that's adjacent to the street and the sidewalk that we're proposing this change for. And we currently allow you to have a four-foot fence along that portion of your home unless you are enclosing a side door, and then you are allowed to have a six-foot-tall privacy fence. to enclose that door and allow better access to a rear yard. This change would allow you to have a six foot tall fence up to the front wall of your home if the additional two feet of height are constructed of open decorative ornamental fencing. So that could be something like lattice work or chain link. open and decorative fences or open and decorative oh my gosh excuse me open decks and porches as well as vestibules so anything that's a permitted obstruction in a required yard is not considered part of a principal structure and so the fence would only be allowed to be constructed up to that corner point and could not be constructed up to the front of a porch or a vestibule And some examples of what that looks like. So what we currently allow is on the left. So we have a six foot fence in a rear yard and then it steps down to four feet along the side of the home. In the lower left, we have this gray home that has a privacy fence enclosing that front yard. And so if you could imagine that that shrub does not exist, they would be allowed to move that fence to connect to that front corner of the home if this proposal moves forward as proposed with six feet of height, four feet being privacy, six foot being open and decorative, or you could do all open and decorative, but we also would allow the mixture for the first time. The second proposed change is for front yards. So prior to the Landry Street zoning study in 2023, we allowed two different kinds of fences in front yards. We allowed three foot tall opaque fences, which are typically like a masonry or a stone wall. And we also allowed four foot tall open and decorative fences. After 2023, we removed the provision to allow opaque fences. And we now currently only allow four foot open and decorative fences. And so inadvertently what that has led to is enforcement related to homeowners and fence contractors not knowing that the code has changed. And also it no longer allows the type of design decision that's shown in this top image where particularly for multifamily properties that are located in areas with required yards. OR FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, THERE'S A DESIRE TO HAVE USUALLY LIKE A THREE FOOT TALL, SOME SORT OF OPAQUE FENCING TO CREATE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN PRIVATE AND PUBLIC PROPERTY. AND THAT IS NO LONGER ALLOWED UNDER THIS CODE. And so we haven't seen any adverse effects from not allowing the three-foot opaque fencing. The code is working as intended, but it did reduce flexibility. And we haven't seen any necessarily positive outcomes from that change. It's just made things more restrictive. And so we're proposing to just go back to what we previously allowed. And then the final change is the request adjacent to a life safety concern for changes to fences in interior side yards. So this would be the property line that's between two homes. Currently, we allow four-foot fences along that interior side yard unless the adjacent home is over five feet from the property line. And then you can bump up to six feet in height, going back to a six foot privacy fence in the rear yard. In a very small number of cases, there are homes that have been constructed within three feet of a property line. So our current setback requirements are a minimum of five feet from a property line. Our 1963 code had a three foot setback from the property line. But some homes were constructed prior to construction. those codes being put in place, some homes are just constructed due to like some sort of platting error or construction error. And so they are closer than three feet to the property line. And what has happened in certain cases is that a fence is constructed on the property line. And then that home that is less than three feet from the property line is unable to then open a door from the side of their home. And they are blocked from doing so. And so we have had a very small number of life safety issues related to this. And we are proposing to include in the prohibited fence locations a carve out to require that at the location of a door, an existing interior side door, that a fence be not located more than three feet. closer than three feet to that door so that they're able to open that door and safely ingress and egress from that property. So the recommendation before you this evening is that Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve the text recommendation for the fence amendments, and I will stand for questions.

Thank you. Are there any questions for staff? All right, not seeing any, so I will open the public hearing.

And not seeing anybody in the audience except maybe you?

All right, I will close the public hearing. Commissioners, are there any comments on this? At the start I said I just wanted to have this so that the public gets a preview of what's coming up to the council. So I'm supportive of this and happy to move it forward. I'll make the motion to adopt staff findings. Second. Any last discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Abstentions? That is adopted. And with that we have concluded our business. We do have committee of the whole. Can everyone raise their hand if we can be able to be there on Thursday?

We do have Committee of the Whole. It will be the exact same agenda as last time because we did not have a quorum last time. We couldn't convene the meeting. So if anyone is not going to be there on Thursday, if you could let me know so staff can prepare ahead of time, that would be great.

Great. We want to have as many people as possible so we can talk with each other about our ideas for the 2050 plan. And then the next regular meeting will be August 24th. Commissioner Chowdhury?

Thank you, Chair Meyer. I just wanted to say thanks to the members of the Planning Commission that was at the Committee of the Whole meeting prior to the last one. That was on the data center's regulations. I felt like that was a really good preliminary conversation, and we're going to be expecting the first public hearing on that here before us on October 13th, but something that's going to happen between Today and our next planning commission meeting is on August 17th. That's when city staff is planning on opening up the 60-day public comment period for residents to weigh in. And so I encourage you to pass that information along. There will also be communications, and I'm hearing a video to inform community members about the process of the regulations.

Great. Thank you. Are there any other updates from staff or commissioners?

Just an update on, I believe we haven't had an update on the Democracy Center appeal. That did go through the appeal process through the biz committee and the full city council. The appeal was denied, but some conditions of approval were added related to the parking. So that one has concluded.

Thank you. All right. Not seeing anyone else. We are adjourned.