[player id='6503']
Plans for the so-called “Baylor Boutique” multi-unit housing development at Fremont and Douglas, in Lowry Hill, hit a major roadblock on March 27 when the Minneapolis City Council denied the developer’s appeal seeking a variance for a substantially larger structure than is allowed under the current zoning code.
As previously covered in the Hill & Lake Press (March 2025), the proposal to tear down two existing triplexes, combine the lots, and replace them with an eight-unit luxury condominium building had already suffered a significant setback when the Minneapolis Planning Commission in February denied the developer’s application for a variance increasing the allowable floor area ratio (FAR) of the structure by more than 60%.
Following the denial by the Planning Commission, the developer, JADT Development Group, LLC, initiated an appeal to the City Council. The first stop in that appeal process was the council’s six-member Business, Housing & Zoning Committee, which met on March 20. Prior to reaching its decision, the committee took testimony from planning commission staff, the developer, concerned neighbors, and their attorneys.
The committee then voted 3-1 to reject the appeal, with Council Members Jamal Osman, Jeremiah Ellison, and Aurin Chowdhury voting against it. Ward 3 Council Member Michael Rainville voted in support of the appeal, while Ward 8 Council Member Andrea Jenkins abstained without explanation. Local Ward 7 Council Member.
Katie Cashman was forced to recuse herself because her previously announced support for the project barred her from serving as an impartial decisionmaker in this quasi-judicial proceeding.
Prior to voting, Council Member Ellison voiced concerns that a 60% FAR increase was significantly greater than any FAR variance previously allowed by the city, and noted that changes of this magnitude were better addressed through a comprehensive legislative process than a one-off quasi-judicial appeal.
A week later, the matter came before the full City Council. With little discussion, the council voted 11-0 to deny the appeal, with Jenkins again abstaining and Cashman recusing herself. Prior to the vote, Council Member Rainville encouraged the developer to work closely with both neighbors and staff in any future design or revision. This decision by the full council exhausts the developer’s appeal options with the city.
While the developer’s options have now narrowed, they still include a range of choices such as pursuing this appeal through the court system, revising its plans for the property to make it smaller in scale, developing an entirely new concept, or abandoning the project altogether.
