. GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO THIS AUGUST 14TH MEETING OF THE BLOOMINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION. THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADVISES THE CITY COUNCIL ON DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, LONG RANGE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION ISSUES. ON SOME ITEMS THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL STUDY THE ITEM WITH NO FORMAL ACTION BEING TAKEN. OTHER ITEMS BEFORE US WILL BE PUBLIC HEARINGS WHERE WE WILL TAKE FORMAL ACTION ON THOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS. WE DO WELCOME TESTIMONY FROM THE PUBLIC IF YOU IF YOU ARE SO INCLINED YOU CAN DO THAT HERE AT CITY HALL IN THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS. YOU CAN ALSO DO SO ONLINE BY FOLLOWING THE INSTRUCTIONS ON YOUR SCREEN SOME ITEMS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL HAVE THE FINAL DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY. WELL IN OTHER ITEMS THE CITY COUNCIL WILL MAKE THE FINAL DECISION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL BE ACTING IN AN ADVISORY CAPACITY. WE HAVE SIX VOLUNTEER RESIDENTS HERE THIS EVENING TO ACT AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION SO WE DO HAVE A QUORUM. AS WE BEGIN THIS EVENING I'LL ASK EVERYONE IN THE CHAMBERS TO PLEASE RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. OKAY, WE HAVE FIVE ITEMS ON OUR AGENDA THIS EVENING. ITEM NUMBER ONE IS A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT PLAN UPDATE SOME COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS. MR. THOMAS RAMER OLSON YOU HAVE THE STAFF REPORT . GOOD EVENING. THIS IS VERY MUCH BETTER. OKAY, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. YES. SO THE FIRST TIME IN FRONT OF YOU RIGHT NOW IS THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE THE SOUTH DISTRICT PLAN. THIS AMENDMENT WILL. IT'S IT'S STRUCTURED TO FUNCTION AS AN ADDENDUM TO THE ORIGINAL PLAN WHICH WAS ADOPTED BACK IN 2012 AND THERE'S SOME NUANCES TO IT BEING AN ADDENDUM AS OPPOSED TO A FULL REWRITE. BUT THE BACKGROUND IS IS THAT THIS PART OF THE YEAR 2024, 2025 A PC WORK PLAN OR PLANNING COMMISSION WORK PLAN ? THE OVERALL GOAL THE OVERARCHING GOAL OF THIS UPDATE IS TO COMPARE SOUTH OF DEVELOPMENTS AS IT'S AS IT IS RIGHT NOW TO THIS DAY AND COMPARE THAT TO THE VISION THAT WAS EXPRESSED BACK IN 2012. BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE CHANGING THAT VISION. WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT PROPOSING TO CHANGE THAT VISION OR THE ASSOCIATED GOALS FOR THE THE THE DOCUMENTS VISION. INSTEAD WE'LL BE JUST RECOMMENDING NEW POLICIES AND ACTIONS THAT MAKE THE SOUTH OF DISTRICT PLAN RELEVANT TO EXISTING CONDITIONS AND IN LINE WITH CURRENT CITY POLICIES. IT KICKED OFF BACK IN JULY OF 2024 SO IT'S BEEN QUITE A WHILE. IT'S STARTED OUT AS ANY STUDY ITEM DOES. THERE WAS A LOT OF BACKGROUND RESEARCH. THERE WAS A TEAM ASSEMBLED OF FOLKS FROM DIFFERENT DIVISIONS AND DEPARTMENTS WITHIN THE CITY. WE REVIEWED THE ORIGINAL 2012 DOCUMENT WITHIN OUR RESPECTIVE DOMAINS AND WE CAME WITH OUR FINDINGS AND OUR RESEARCH TO VARIOUS COMMISSIONS BACK IN OCTOBER WE HAD A MONTH LONG IT SEEMED LIKE A MONTH LONG MEETING OF STUDY SESSIONS. WE MET WITH NOT ONLY THE PLANNING COMMISSION BUT CREATIVE PLACEMAKING PORT AUTHORITY SUSTAINABILITY AND THEN WE KEPT IT OFF WITH THE CITY COUNCIL AT THE END OF THE MONTH BUT WE DID END UP COMING BACK TO THE PARKS ARTS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE IN DECEMBER TO ALSO GIVE THE SAME PRESENTATION AND TO HEAR THEIR FEEDBACK ON WHAT OUR RESEARCH HAD REVEALED AND THEN IN FEBRUARY MARCH THIS YEAR WE CAME BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO AFTER GETTING SOME DIRECTION ON HOW THE UPDATE SHOULD TAKE TAKE FORM WE PRESENTED AN OUTLINE OF WHAT WE WERE PROPOSING LOOKING AT THE CONTENT OF THE BACKGROUND RESEARCH WE HAD DONE AS WELL AS SOME OF THE INITIATIVES AND POLICIES WE WERE RECOMMENDING TO GET YOUR GET YOUR SIGN OFF ON IT AND WE DID THE SAME THING WITH CITY COUNCIL IN MARCH AND NOW WE'RE BACK TO SHOW YOU THE DRAFT THAT IS COMPOSED OF A LOT OF POLICIES AND ACTIONS. SOME OF THEM ARE OUTLINED HERE ON THIS SLIDE AND YOU KNOW, THIS IS JUST TO REITERATE THAT THIS DOES FUNCTION AS AN ADDENDUM IN WHICH CASE THE CONTENT IN THIS UPDATE WILL SUPERSEDE OR IT WILL ACTUALLY AUGMENT SOME OF THE ACTIONS AND POLICIES EXPRESSED IN THAT 2012 PLAN. SOME THE POLICIES AND ACTIONS TOUCH ON AREAS LIKE CREATIVE PLACEMAKING ESSENTIALLY THE THE UPDATE WILL GO THROUGH THE HISTORY OF CREATIVE PLACEMAKING AS IT AS ITS AS ITS FUNCTION WITHIN THE CITY. IT HAS A FAIRLY SHORT HISTORY BUT IT'S BEEN VERY EFFECTIVE AND AND VERY IMPACTFUL AND SO IT GOES THROUGH THAT HISTORY ABOUT HOW IT CAME ABOUT SOME OF THE ACTIONS AND INITIATIVES IT SPEARHEADED AND THEN WHAT IT HAS PLANS FOR ON THE HORIZON. WE TOUCH UPON SUSTAINABILITY IN A VARIETY OF WAYS. WE LOOK AT SUSTAINABLE BUILDING POLICY WITHIN THE WITHIN THE UPDATE WE LOOK AT THE MEASUREMENT OF HOW WE MEASURE SUSTAINABILITY AND HOW IT WAS ORIGINALLY EXPRESSED IN 2012 AND CALLING FOR OR IT'S A RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU KNOW THE CITY PURSUE A NEW WAY TO MEASURE AND TRACK SUSTAINABILITY AS THE DISTRICT AS IT MATURES. WE ALSO LOOK AT ANOTHER GLANCE AT DISTRICT ENERGY WHICH WAS TOUCHED UPON IN 2012. IN FACT THERE WAS A STUDY COMMISSIONED LOOKING AT SUSTAINABLE OR SORRY DISTRICT ENERGY AND ITS IMPLEMENTATION IN THE SOUTH LOOP IT WAS DEEMED INFEASIBLE AT THAT TIME IT A LOT OF THE COSTS THAT WOULD BE IMPOSED BUT WITH THE 12 YEAR GAP WE'VE OR I'M SORRY IT'S 13 YEARS NOW WITH THE 13 YEAR GAP NOW THAT SINCE THAT WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN THERE'S A LOT OF TIME HAS PASSED AND THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN SOME ADVANCEMENTS IN DISTRICT ENERGY THAT WOULD MAKE IT EASIER TO IMPLEMENT CHEAPER TO IMPLEMENT PERHAPS DIFFERENT TYPES OF TECHNOLOGIES THAT COULD BE THAT ARE BROUGHT TO MARKET THAT THAT COULD BE IMPLEMENTED. WE JUST WANT TO GET A SENSE OF THAT. AND SO ANOTHER RECOMMENDATION IN THE IN THE PLAN IS TO COMMISSION A NEW STUDY LOOKING AT DISTRICT ENERGY AND ITS IMPLEMENTATION IN THE SOUTH LOOP REMOTE AREA. OUR PARKING PLANNING STAFF ARE ALREADY IN THE MIDST OF STUDYING STUDYING THAT ISSUE WITHIN WITHIN THE SOUTH OF DISTRICT IT'S PRIMARILY FOCUSED ON THE SOUTH OF DISTRICT SO IT DEFERS TO THE OUTCOMES OF THAT STUDY ESSENTIALLY BUT IT DOES REITERATE THE POINT THAT THERE ARE CONFLICTS BETWEEN REMOTE AIR PARKING IN THE VISION FOR THE SOUTH, ITS DEVELOPMENT VISION WE LOOK AT OFFICE USES, WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE OFFICE MARKET HAS TAKEN A HIT IN THIS POST-PANDEMIC ENVIRONMENT AND OFFER A FEW WAYS TO TO ADDRESS THAT. LOOKING AT DISTRICT SPECIFIC GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS SOME OF THE RATIOS OF OFFICE TO TO RESIDENTIAL AND IN IN SOME OF THE IN SOME OF THE BUILDINGS THAT WE DEVELOPED WITHIN SPECIFICALLY THE H H X OUR DISTRICT THAT THAT DISTRICT LIES OUTSIDE THE RUNWAY DISTRICT OR THE AIRPORT RUNWAY ZONE WHERE RESIDENTIAL IS NOT ALLOWED. SO IF WE'RE ZONING FOR OFFICE OUTSIDE THAT THAT AREA WHERE RESIDENTIAL IS ALLOWED PERHAPS ALLOWING SOME MORE FLEXIBILITY TO ENCOURAGE MORE RESIDENTIAL OR NOT ENCOURAGEMENT BUT GIVE DEVELOPERS THE FLEXIBILITY OF PURSUING RESIDENTIAL IF OFFICES IN FEASIBLE AND THEN IT HARKENS BACK OR IT IT IT REFERS BACK TO PREVIOUS STUDIES THAT PLANNING HAS ALREADY CONDUCTED REGARDING OFFICE REUSE AND REDO ADAPTATION. SO THAT'S THAT'S ANOTHER AREA TOUCHES UPON WE LOOK AT LINDA LANE AND THAT CHANGING CHARACTER WITH SOME OF THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S OCCURRED ALONG IT AND HOW ITS THAT'S IMAGES SHIFTED FROM WHAT IT WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED OR ENVISIONED IN 2012 SO A RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO COMMISSION NEW STUDY TO RE-ENVISION OR REIMAGINE LINDA LANE SO THAT IT'S MORE IN LINE WITH MARKET REALITIES THAN WHAT THE MARKET WAS BACK IN 2012. SO IN BUILDING DESIGN STANDARDS, LOOKING AT HOW UH SOME OF THE STANDARDS THAT GOVERN TALLER BUILDINGS WITHIN THE DISTRICT SO WE HAVE A RECOMMENDATION WITH REGARD TO THAT PUBLIC SPACE DESIGN TRYING TO AVOID SOME OF THE OUTCOMES THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE 24TH IN LINDAU AND MAKING SURE THAT THOSE AREN'T REPLICATED IN OTHER AREAS WHERE THERE ARE GOOD OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC SPACE DESIGN PARKS AND OPEN SPACE. WE HAVE A NEW PARK AND OPEN SPACE FRAMEWORK MAP THAT REFLECTS THE PARKING SYSTEM MASTER PLAN THAT WAS ADOPTED IN 2021. SO BRINGING IT UP TO DATE AS WELL AS SHOWING WHERE THE PLANNED INVESTMENTS ARE REGARDING PARKS AND TRAILS IN THE DISTRICT TRANSIT AND WALKABILITY. AGAIN, JUST BRINGING THE DOCUMENT UP TO DATE BACK IN 2012 THERE THERE WAS NO RED LINE. THERE WAS NO ORANGE LINE OR I'M SORRY ORANGE LINE DOESN'T GO THROUGH SOUTH OF DISTRICT THERE'S NO D LINE SO BRINGING THAT UP TO MAKING THAT RELEVANT SO THAT WE'RE ACCOUNTING FOR ALL THE TRANSIT INVESTMENTS THAT HAVE OCCURRED IN THE IN THE SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT AND SOME OF THE PLANNED PEDESTRIAN INVESTMENTS THAT THAT THE CITY IS IS GOING TO MAKE ALTHOUGH THOSE THOSE INVESTMENTS THE TIMING OF THOSE INVESTMENTS ARE STILL SUBJECT TO CHANGE. BUT NONETHELESS WE WERE LOOKING AT A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND AND THOSE THAT ARE SOUTH LOOP SPECIFIC WHERE WE DETAIL THEM IN THE IN THE ADDENDUM AND THEN FINALLY STORMWATER STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REAFFIRMING OR NOT REAFFIRMING BUT JUST MAKING IT FIRM THAT ALL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE SOUTH OF DISTRICT HAS TO FOLLOW STORMWATER STANDARDS THAT WERE ADOPTED IN 2018 AND THEN THERE'S OTHER AUTHORITIES WITHIN THE AREA FOR INSTANCE THE RICHFIELD BLOOMINGTON WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION SOME OF THEIR STANDARDS IF THEY'RE NOT TOUCHED UPON BY OUR STANDARDS THEN WE HAVE TO DEFER TO THEM AS FAR AS STORMWATER STORMWATER MANAGEMENT WITHIN THE DISTRICT. SO AND THEN WE ALSO DO A REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN THAT WAS OUTLINED IN 2012. WHAT'S THE PROGRESS? WHAT ITEMS HAVE BEEN REMOVED FROM CONSIDERATION? WHAT ARE ON HOLD OR HAVEN'T BEEN IMPLEMENTED YET OR STARTED AND THEN WHICH ONES ARE ONGOING AND COMPLETED AS FAR AS ENGAGEMENT GOES? LAST YEAR WE PRESENTED AT MUSIC IN THE PARK JUST INTRODUCING THE THE UPDATE TO ATTENDEES. WE GOT A LOT OF WE GOT A LOT OF POSITIVE FEEDBACK OF PEOPLE'S EXPERIENCE WITHIN THE SOUTH OF DISTRICT. IT JUST HAPPENED THAT EVERYONE WE TALKED TO WHO DIDN'T LIVE IN THE SOUTH OR SOUTH OF DISTRICT SO THAT WAS UNFORTUNATE BUT NONETHELESS THEY HAD A LOT OF POSITIVE THINGS TO SAY AND BUT THEY DID THEY DIDN'T NOTICE DESPITE THEIR BRIEF TIME WITHIN THE SOUTH THEIR DISTRICT THEY DIDN'T NOTICE THE LACK OF A GROCERY STORE. SO THAT WAS INTERESTING. WE ALSO SET UP A A LET'S TALK BLOOMINGTON PROJECT PAGE WHERE IT WAS IT FUNCTIONED AS A REPOSITORY OF ALL THE OUTPUT OF THIS PLANNING PROCESS AND THEN AS A MEANS TO INTERACT WITH STAFF TO OFFER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS THAT WE COULD THEN ANSWER IN IN IN IN AN APPROPRIATE TIME. WE'VE BEEN TALKING WITH KEY EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS. A LOT OF PEOPLE OPERATING OR FUNCTIONING WITHIN THE SOUTH OF DISTRICT GETTING THEIR VIEWS AND THEIR OPINIONS. IN FACT JUST RECENTLY I, I GOT A CORRESPONDENCE I RECEIVED A CORRESPONDENCE FROM FROM SHOE DEVELOPERS IN THE SOUTH OF DISTRICT WHERE THEY HAVE A FOOTPRINT WITHIN THE SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT. I'LL HAVE TO FOR THAT TO YOU LATER. IT WAS VERY LAST MINUTE SO APOLOGIES FOR THAT. AND THEN WE'VE HAD SOME IN-PERSON MEETINGS AS WELL AND WE HAVE RECEIVED SOME PUBLIC COMMENTS. THOSE WERE EARLY IN THE PROCESS AND THOSE ARE IN EXHIBIT A FOR YOUR REFERENCE AND BECAUSE THIS IS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, WE ARE BOUND TO SOLICIT REVIEW AND COMMENTS FROM ADJACENT JURISDICTIONS. THERE'S ABOUT 25 THAT WERE NOTIFIED OF THE OF THIS OF THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND THE SOUTH OF DISTRICT UPDATE OR SOUTH RIVER SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT PLAN UPDATE THEY THEY'RE GIVEN A 60 DAY PERIOD WHICH IS REQUIRED BY THE MET COUNCIL WHICH REVIEWS THESE APPLICATIONS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS TEN HAVE SO FAR RESPONDED AND OF THOSE TEN ONLY ONE HAD A COMMENT AND THAT'S ALREADY BEEN IMPLEMENTED IN THE THE DRAFT OF THE PLAN BEFORE YOU TONIGHT SO THEY HAVE THERE'S UNTIL AUGUST 26TH IS WHEN THE THAT 60 DAY PERIOD EXPIRES ALTHOUGH WE WILL STILL TAKE COMMENTS AND AND ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS AS THEY COME IN CERTAINLY THE NEXT STEPS ARE TO HOLD A SIMILAR PUBLIC HEARING FOR ANTICIPATED MEETING OR WE'RE ANTICIPATING A MEETING ON ON SEPTEMBER 8TH IN FRONT OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO ALSO HOLD A SIMILAR PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN ONCE THE DRAFT IS ADOPTED WE WILL SUBMIT IT TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL FOR THEIR REVIEW AND APPROVAL AND THEN UM AND THEN WE'LL WE'LL HAVE AN UPDATED SOUTH OF DISTRICT PLAN. SO THERE'S A RECOMMENDATION BEFORE YOU TONIGHT LANGUAGE IS HERE FOR YOU AND OTHER THAN THAT I CAN TAKE ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU MR. RIMMER ALSO QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER LINDSAY OH, OKAY. SORRY ABOUT THAT. THOSE ARE FINGER MR. WHITE THANK YOU, CHAIR. I'M JUST TRYING TO FIND THE RIGHT SECTION AND I'M LOOKING AT EXHIBIT B AND IF IF I'M UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY EXHIBIT B IS ARE THE DETAILED RECOMMENDATION CHANGES? IS THAT CORRECT? IS THAT I'M SORRY THE DRAFT LDP UPDATE YEAH. CHAIR CLIFTON COMMISSIONER WHITE YEAH THAT EXHIBIT B IS THE DRAFT OF THE OF THE ADDENDUM IF YOU WILL. THANK YOU. SO OF THE OF THE UPDATE TO THE SOUTH DISTRICT PLAN. >> OKAY THANK YOU AND THAT WASN'T ACTUALLY MY QUESTION I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS LOOKING AT THE RIGHT THING . SO I WAS CURIOUS IN PARTICULAR ABOUT THE I'M SORRY I SHOULD HAVE BOOKMARKED IT THE SUSTAINABLE ALITY PIECE IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S ON PAGE SIX SUSTAINABLE BUILDING STANDARDS . COULD YOU JUST TALK A LITTLE BIT I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED AND I WASN'T AROUND WHEN SOME OF THESE CONVERSATIONS HAPPENED SO I'M PLAYING A LITTLE BIT OF CATCH UP WHILE I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THAT WE CAN'T MANDATE, YOU KNOW, THE CONCERNS ABOUT MANDATING STANDARDS THAT ARE ARE STRONGER THAN SUSTAINABILITY STANDARDS THAT ARE STRONGER THAN STATE BUILDING CODES. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE IS WRITTEN AS YOU KNOW, GOALS TO ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT AND TO ENCOURAGE AND THE WAY I READ THIS IS YOU'RE SUGGESTING REMOVING THAT AND REPLACING IT WITH WHAT SEEMS TO ME TO BE WEAKER LANGUAGE. SO COULD YOU JUST TALK A LITTLE BIT I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT'S IN THIS SECTION. YES, CHAIR COMMISSIONER THE THE LANGUAGE IN THAT'S BEING PROPOSED FOR AMENDING THE INITIATIVE THAT WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN IN 2012 IS JUST IT'S OUT OF ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION. WE DIDN'T WANT THIS GOAL TO SEEM LIKE IT'S SETTING THE CITY UP FOR IMPOSING ANY AGAIN AND NOT IN VIOLATION OF STATE LAW OR STATE STATUTE. WE DIDN'T WANT TO IMPOSE ANY HARSHER REQUIREMENTS OR HARSHER. THAT'S THE THAT'S A MUCH THAT'S THAT'S INCORRECT TERM ANY MORE ANY STANDARDS THAT WERE EXCEEDING WHAT WAS REQUIRED AND SO IT WAS IT WAS MERELY CLARIFYING AT THAT POINT BECAUSE THERE WAS I BELIEVE THERE WAS LITIGATION IN THE INTERVENING YEARS THAT CLARIFIED WHAT CITIES COULD DO WITH REGARD TO SUSTAINABLE BUILDING POLICIES AND HOW IT COULD BE APPLIED SO THIS MERELY IS IT IS FOLLOWING WITHIN THE FOOTSTEPS OF THAT LITIGATION AND JUST MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE ONLY HOLDING THESE STANDARDS TO BUILDINGS THAT THE CITY ASSISTED IN IN DEVELOPING THROUGH THROUGH ONE PROGRAM OR ANOTHER. IF I MAY, MR. CHAIR, FOLLOW UP. THANK YOU PLEASE. SO I'M JUST I GUESS I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT IN DOING THAT WE'RE NOT BACKING AWAY FROM ENCOURAGING PRIVATE BUSINESSES WHO ARE DOING DEVELOPMENT FROM CREATING MORE SUSTAINABLE BUILDINGS AND AND THAT WE'RE NOT BY PUTTING THIS IN THE PLAN AND THIS AMENDMENT THAT WE'RE NOT BACKING AWAY FROM THE COMMITMENT THAT WE'VE MADE AS A CITY TO SUSTAINABILITY AND SUSTAINABLE BUILDING DEVELOPMENT SO I GUESS I'M JUST CURIOUS WOULD THIS BE THE ONLY SUSTAINABLE BUILDING AND APOLOGIZE IF THIS WAS IN THE MATERIALS AND I MISSED IT BUT WOULD THIS NEW LANGUAGE BE THE ONLY LANGUAGE ABOUT SUSTAINABLE BUILDINGS OR IS THIS JUST THIS AND SOME MORE VOLUNTARY? IS THERE ANY LANGUAGE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE IN THERE ABOUT VOLUNTARY MEASURES THAT WE WOULD BE ENCOURAGING? CHAIR ACTING COMMISSIONER WHITE I'M UNABLE TO COMPLETELY ADDRESS THAT BECAUSE THAT THAT'S THE TYPE OF WORK THAT COMES OUT OF THE SUSTAINABILITY DIVISION WITHIN PUBLIC WORKS THERE. THEY'RE PROBABLY BEST TO ADDRESS THAT. YOU KNOW HOW THEY ENCOURAGE DEVELOPERS TO PURSUE MORE SUSTAINABLE BUILDING PRACTICES AND MANAGEMENT OF THEIR FACILITIES IF IF WHAT SORT OF MEANS WE ENCOURAGE I'M NOT AWARE OF THIS WAS JUST SOMETHING THAT WAS FLAGGED WHEN WE DID THE INITIAL REVIEW OF THE 2012 DOCUMENT AND AGAIN MAKING AN OUT OF ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION JUST PROPOSING THIS LANGUAGE TO AS AN AMENDMENT TO WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY POSED BACK AND PROPOSED BACK IN 2012 IF THERE'S OTHER PROGRAMS OR WAYS TO ENCOURAGE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, THAT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING WE YOU KNOW, THE PLANNING DIVISION COULD TO LOOK INTO AND SEE IF IT'S NOT NOT SO MUCH A A REDUNDANCY OF WHAT THE SUSTAINABILITY DIVISION IS ALREADY DOING WITH THEIR WORKERS OFFICE OF SUSTAINABILITY I'M SORRY I APOLOGIZE OTHER THAN IF I'M UNABLE TO RECALL HOW THEY PREFER TO BE ADDRESSED BUT CERTAINLY I COULD CHECK IN WITH THEM AND SEE HOW THEY'RE ENCOURAGING THAT AND IF IT'S WORTH INTEGRATING INTO THIS ADDENDUM JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT WE ARE WE ARE STILL ENCOURAGING SUSTAINABLE BUILDING PRACTICES. IT'S JUST WE CAN'T WE OBVIOUSLY CAN'T MANDATED BLANKET AND IN A BLANKET FASHION WE CAN ONLY DO IT UNDER CIRCUMSTANCES AND CIRCUMSTANCES. NOW I APPRECIATE THAT AND I DO UNDERSTAND I'LL SAVE THE REST OF MY COMMENTS FOR WHEN WE GET TO THE COMMENT SECTION. >> MR. JOHNSON DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING THAT YEAH THANK YOU CHAIR COOKED IN AND COMMISSIONER WHITE IF I CAN ADD A LITTLE CONTEXT TO I THINK IT'S VERY MUCH STILL IN THE GOAL OF THE SUSTAINABILITY DIVISION TO PURSUE A SUSTAINABLE BUILDING POLICY. NOT ONLY THAT WOULD BE APPLICABLE TO SOUTH LOOP BUT WOULD BE APPLICABLE CITYWIDE AND AGAIN THOSE PROJECTS THAT ARE OF STUDY WOULD BE MORE OF THE PROJECTS THAT HAVE A CITY FINANCIAL SUPPORT OR COMPONENT TO THEM AS WELL AS CITY PUBLIC FACILITIES CERTAINLY AS WELL. SO THAT HASN'T DROPPED OFF THEIR RADAR SCREEN. I THINK THE GUIDANCE WE GOT FROM SUSTAINABILITY STAFF IS JUST KIND OF SUPPORT THAT FUTURE EFFORT AND THAT'S THAT VERY MUCH IS STILL ON THEIR RADAR. IT'S JUST WE KIND OF HIT THIS ROAD BUMP OR THIS HICCUP WITH RESPECT TO THE SOME OF THAT LITIGATION OR THOSE LEGAL CLARIFICATIONS THAT WERE MADE RELATED TO STATE BUILDING CODE. SO IT'S NOT OFF THE RADAR SCREEN. IN FACT, I THINK THEY WERE CONSIDERING IT FOR THEIR 20 2526 WORK PLAN. THEY DIDN'T INCLUDE THAT IN THE FINAL ADAPTED VERSION BECAUSE OF STAFF CAPACITY CONCERNS BUT IT'S STILL ON THEIR RADAR SCREEN AND IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S FALLING AWAY. THANK YOU, MR. JOHNSON. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR YOU. MR. SAMUELSON IF YOU COULD GO TO THE FINAL PAGE OF EXHIBIT B AND I'M SORRY I WAS UNABLE TO GET YOU THESE QUESTIONS BEFOREHAND SO YOU MAY BE UNSURE BUT I'D LIKE TO GO TO THE SECTION LABELED PEDESTRIAN AND TRAIL THE SECOND ONE HERE AND I'D LIKE TO GO TO THE SECOND TO FINAL ITEM WHICH IS THE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OVER 34TH AVENUE AT EAST 78TH STREET WHICH HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE PLAN. WHAT WAS THAT CHAIR I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC NO ONE FROM PUBLIC WORKS IS SITTING IN THIS MEETING. WHAT'S THAT? OH OH, I'M SORRY. MAYBE THEN I APOLOGIZE. I GUESS JULIE LONG IS ON THE CALL CITY ENGINEER JULIE LONG IF SHE CAN ADDRESS THAT. THIS WAS KIND OF IN THE SAME MANNER THAT WE WE REVIEWED THE 2012 DOCUMENT. WE ALSO WENT THROUGH THE THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN WITHIN THAT DOCUMENT KIND OF IN A STEPWISE FASHION AND LET PEOPLE GIVE US THIS PROVIDES PLANNING STAFF THE STATUS OF EACH PROJECT AND SO NOT MUCH MORE CLARIFICATION WAS PROVIDED TO PLANNING STAFF ABOUT THAT BUT I BELIEVE JULIE IF SHE'S ABLE TO PROVIDE MORE CLARIFICATION. MS. LONG I MISSIONERS AND CHAIR THAT WAS A PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE AT 34TH AVENUE OVER 34TH AVENUE AT WEST EAST SONIC STREET JUST LIKE IT SAYS. BUT WHEN WE LOOK AT THAT WE'RE NOT SEEING A WHOLE LOT OF PEDESTRIAN NEED TO DO THAT DIRECTION. WE FEEL THAT THERE'S A MUCH GREATER NEED TO CROSS UNDERNEATH THE 494 BRIDGE TO GET OVER TOWARDS HOLIDAY MAXX IN THE CEMETERY AND AN EIGHTH GRADE SITUATION. SO WE REMOVED THAT FROM THE PLAN. THANK YOU MS. LONG CAN YOU SORRY YOU'RE PUTTING GREATER CONSIDERED CONSIDERATION TOWARDS TOWARDS ANOTHER PLAN WE ELSEWHERE IN THE PLAN WE LISTED A BUNCH OF OTHER PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE. STAFF HAD A BRAINSTORMING SESSION AND WE FELT THAT THERE WERE HIGHER PRIORITIES FOR PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE CONNECTIVITY WITHIN THE DISTRICT THAN CROSSING OVER 34TH AVENUE. PART OF THAT IS REASON BECAUSE IN I'M GOING TO GET THE YEAR WRONG LET'S SAY 2018 WE DID A STUDY PRIOR TO US TO DOING SOME OF THE SANITARY SEWER WORK FOR SOME WORK ON 24TH AVENUE OR SORRY NOT 20 AMERICAN BOULEVARD AT 34TH AVENUE AND AT IN THE ORIGINAL TRAFFIC STUDY THAT WAS CONDUCTED IN 2012, IT SHOWED A MUCH GREATER NEED AND GROWTH IN THAT AREA. AND BASED ON THE 2018 STUDY THAT WE DID PRIOR TO THE SANITARY SEWER PROJECT WE HAVEN'T REALIZED THAT GROWTH AND DIDN'T SEE THE NEED FOR THAT EITHER. THE ROUNDABOUTS THAT WERE PROPOSED AT THAT TIME IN THE 2012 REPORT OR THIS PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE AND THE FUTURE. SO IT'S NOT THAT IT'S OFF THE WALL THIS ONE IS BUT IN MOST CASES THEY'RE NOT OFF THE TABLE. BUT WE NEED THE DEVELOPMENT AND THE PEDESTRIANS TO COME FIRST BEFORE WE THINK WE SHOULD BE INVESTING OUR LIMITED INFRASTRUCTURE DOLLARS INTO THOSE TYPES OF PROJECTS. THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION. I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION FOR YOU MS. LONG AND I THINK YOU MAYBE HIT ON IT BUT DOES THE PLAN INCLUDE ANYTHING ABOUT A CONTINUATION OF THE SIDEWALK SIDEWALK ALONG 34TH AVENUE AS YOU GO UNDER FOR 94? YES, IT DOES. EXCELLENT. THANK YOU. >> AND JUST A SIDE NOTE, CHAIR WITH YOUR PERMISSION, WE ARE PARTNERING WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY AND MINDAT TO BUILD A NEW THE MISSING SIDEWALK ON 20 ON THE EAST SIDE OF 24TH AVENUE FROM AMERICAN BOULEVARD UP TOWARDS THE 494 BRIDGE IN 2026. GREAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MISS LONG MR. RIMMER ALSO I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION FOR YOU. CAN YOU GO UP TO THE EXERT EXCERPT FROM THE PARK SYSTEM MASTER PLAN THAT ONE IS THERE ANY FOLLOW UP ON WHY THE TRAILS NO LONGER CONNECT THE WILDLIFE REFUGE? OH CHAIR AND CHAIR IN YEAH I REMEMBER YOU ASKING THAT AT THE PREVIOUS STUDY SESSION. I THINK THAT CONNECTION WOULD GO THROUGH LAND THAT WAS I THINK OWNED AND MANAGED BY THE AIR FORCE. I REMEMBER HAVING THIS CONVERSATION WITH JULIE LONG AS WELL ABOUT THIS JUST TO SEE IF THAT WAS THE VIABILITY OF THAT TRAIL HAD BEEN EXPLORED AND I THINK THAT WAS WHAT WE RAN INTO WAS THE OWNERSHIP OF THAT PARCEL WOULD MAKE IT VERY COMPLICATED TO EXTEND THE THE THAT TRAIL SYSTEM NORTH TO CONNECT NORTH AND SO THAT'S WHAT I RECALL FROM THAT CONVERSATION. JULIE IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING MORE TO ADD TO THAT OR IF I'M MISREMEMBERING THAT DISCUSSION. >> MS. LONG MR. CHAIR, PLANNING COMMISSION MR. RAMBLER ALSO IS REMEMBERING THAT CORRECTLY THE U.S. AIR FORCE HAS RECENTLY BUILT A NEW SHOOTING RANGE IN THAT AREA AND THEY ARE NOT INTERESTED IN HAVING CIVILIANS GO BY THEIR NEW FACILITY AND SO THAT IS BEEN ELIMINATED. THAT CONNECTION I THINK WE MAY BE TALKING ABOUT TWO DIFFERENT AREAS HERE SO THE THERE'S TWO TRAIL CONNECTIONS I THINK WE'RE CURRENTLY MISSING. THERE'S ONE ON THE VERY, VERY NORTHEAST TIP OF THE CITY HERE WHICH I THINK YOU BOTH ARE REFERENCING. WHAT I'M MORE INTERESTED IN IS CONNECTING THE BASS PONDS TO YES WHATEVER. SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT THAT'S NOT WHERE WE'VE BUILT OUR SHOOTING RANGES? >> NO. OKAY. THERE'S NO COMMISSIONER CHAIR WE HAD A PROJECT TO START LOOKING AT THAT IN 2023 AND WE DID THE WETLAND DELINEATION ALONG THE PROPOSED ROUTE AND UNFORTUNATELY THOSE WETLANDS LIMITED THE PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY CONTROL AND SO IN ORDER TO MAKE THAT CONNECTION WE WOULD HAVE TO GO ON TO PRIVATE PROPERTY AND SO THAT ALTERNATIVE WAS ELIMINATED. >> SINCERE APOLOGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDING IT'S QUESTION WHAT ALL RIGHT. OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. MR. CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU, CHAIR. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY I WAS GOING TO ASK THE QUESTION THAT YOU GUYS ALREADY CLARIFIED SO THANKS FOR FOR HEADING THAT OFF. IT'S A THANK YOU. YOU KNOW, I GUESS THAT WASN'T A QUESTION. I APOLOGIZE. CHAIR MR. RAMBLER ALSO I'D LIKE TO ASK ONE MORE QUESTION MIGHT BE ANOTHER QUESTION FOR JULIE LANG ON THE FINAL PAGE OF EXHIBIT B HERE HAD MENTIONED THE REMOVAL OF A TRAILHEAD AND ICE CREEK. COULD YOU PROVIDE A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION ON THAT ONE? MR. CHAIR, WE HAVE HAD VERY BAD LUCK ON THE DIFFERENT TRAILS THAT WERE PROPOSED IN THIS PLAN AND THE FIRST TWO THAT WE HAVE DONE FURTHER INVESTIGATION AND ENGINEERING WORK ON HAVE BOTH HAD FATAL FLAWS AND SO THAT ONE ALSO WAS ELIMINATED FOR THAT REASON. >> SO I'M HOPING THE REMAINING THREE GO VERY EASILY BUT SO FAR BUILDING TRAILS ALONG THE BLUFF IS A CHALLENGING ENDEAVOR TO BE RESPECTFUL OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE BLUFF. OKAY MR. SUMMERS THANK YOU, CHAIR SO AS I REVIEW THE PLAN, MY BACKGROUND IS IN GROCERY SO THAT GIANT GROCERY SIGN THAT WILL SOON HAVE A LIQUOR STORE UNDERNEATH IT IS A LITTLE BIT ROUGH FOR ME BUT I AM WONDERING IF AS THE FUTURE OF GROCERY HERE LOOKS REALLY DIFFERENT POSSIBLY FROM WHERE WE ARE NOW I WOULD SAY IF BLOOMINGTON WERE TO EVER CONSIDER A MUNICIPALLY OWNED GROCERY STORE IS IT POSSIBLE TO HAVE THAT WITHIN THE ZONING DISTRICTS THAT ARE IN THE SOUTH LOOP PLAN OR WOULD THAT POTENTIALLY NEED TO BE A PUBLIC DESIGNATION? CHAIR COOKED IN COMMISSIONER SUMMERS IF THE USE IS ALLOWED WITHIN THE ZONING UNDERLYING ZONING DISTRICT THEN THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE OR WOULD BE FINE. IT WOULD BE ALLOWED. AS FOR POLICY RELATED TO MUNICIPAL GROCERY STORE AND I GUESS I'M A CANDIDATE I CAN ADDRESS THAT BUT IF IF IT WERE TO COME TO THAT AND THE GUESS DOES IT BLUR THE LINE BETWEEN A PUBLIC AND PRIVATE? I KNOW IT'S A USE IF IT'S A IF IT'S AN ALLOWED USE THEN IT WOULD BE ALLOWED IN THAT ZONING DISTRICT. OKAY. I'M SORRY FOR THINKING OUT LOUD. >> YEAH. AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR RESPONSE. I THINK WE'RE PRETTY FAR FROM MUNICIPALLY OWNED GROCERY STORES IN THE TWIN CITIES AT THIS POINT. BUT IF GROCERY STORES WILL NOT MOVE IN THAT IS SOMETIMES A CONSIDERATION. I'M ALSO THINKING ABOUT THE WAYS THAT WE THINK ABOUT NEIGHBORHOODS AND WANTING AND PEOPLE WANTING TO LIVE THERE AND I'M WONDERING ABOUT CHILD CARE. WHEN I WAS DOING A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THERE'S CHILD CARE OPERATIONS IN THIS DISTRICT. SO IS THAT SOMETHING THAT IS ALLOWABLE IN MIXED USE BUILDINGS? CHAIR ACTING COMMISSIONER SUMMERS I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE THE ENTIRE LIST OF ALLOWED USES ARE WITHIN THE VARIOUS DISTRICTS THAT ARE IN THE THE SOUTH DISTRICT. NICK IF YOU HAVE THAT AVAILABLE AND I AM I AM SEARCHING FOR IT OKAY YEAH I IMAGINE WOULD BE BECAUSE IT'S A BUT I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK OUT OF TURN SO I'M GOING TO WAIT FOR NICK YEAH CHAIR COMMISSIONER SUMMERS WHILE I'M DOING THAT AND I MAYBE I'LL REPORT BACK HERE SHORTLY AFTER I COMPLETE MY SEARCH. BUT WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT THAT IS AN ISSUE THAT'S ON STAFF' RADAR. WE'VE ACTUALLY HAD MULTIPLE STAFF DISCUSSIONS ABOUT BEING MORE PERMISSIVE AROUND WHERE DAYCARE FOR DAYCARE EXCUSE ME FACILITIES ARE ALLOWED BECAUSE WE ARE FULL IN FULL ALIGNMENT OR AGREEMENT THAT A THERE'S A DEARTH OF YOU KNOW, DAYCARE AND CHILD FACILITIES BUT BE THEY SHOULD JUST BE ALLOWED MORE PLACES BECAUSE THEY PROVIDE GREAT COMMUNITY SUPPORT. SO I'LL CONFIRM BACK WITH YOU ONCE I CONFIRM THE ALLOWANCES WITHIN THOSE ZONING DISTRICTS . COMMISSIONER LISA THANK YOU CHAIR I'M JUST CURIOUS DOES IS THERE ANY DATA ON THE SOUTH LOOP AREA DEMOGRAPHIC DATA ON LIKE HOUSEHOLDS SIZES, THINGS LIKE THAT BECAUSE I THINK THAT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO LOOK AT ONE YEAH. CHAIR COOKED IN THINGS LIKE THAT. YEAH. MY APOLOGIES TO YOUR ACTING COMMISSIONER. YES THERE PROBABLY ARE THERE'S PROBABLY CENSUS RELATED DATA ABOUT HOUSEHOLD SIZE AND HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION WITHIN THE SOUTH OF DISTRICT THAT WASN'T THAT DATA WAS IN MIND AND PRESENTED FOR THIS UPDATES BUT IF YOU'D LIKE WE WERE TELLING STAFF CAN OBLIGE AND PROVIDE THAT TO YOU BUT WE DON'T HAVE IT AVAILABLE TONIGHT AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR MY CHAIR AND I THINK IT WOULD JUST BE COOL TO SEE ONE CAN ONE CONSIDER THINGS LIKE CHILDCARE, THINGS LIKE THAT YOU KNOW IF IT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE LESS SENSE TO JUST YEAH YEAH PROACTIVE I GUESS TO KEEP MORE ACTIVE THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WE DO THANK YOU CHAIR THIS HAS BEEN A REALLY INTERESTING READ THROUGH I THINK TO BUILD ON MY COLLEAGUE'S COMMENTS IT WILL ALSO BE REALLY INTERESTING ON ANY DATA ABOUT OCCUPANCY JUST IN GENERAL ON THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS LIKE ARE THEY IN LINE WITH THE OCCUPANCY RATES IN GENERAL FOR APARTMENTS AND CONDOMINIUMS IN BLOOMINGTON? AS WE THINK ABOUT HOW WE ENCOURAGE AND THINK ABOUT HOW THE SPACE IS USED GOING FORWARD? THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. ANY ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEE NONE. MR. JOHNSON YEAH, I CAN REPORT BACK AND I'M GOING TO LOOK UP THE SIX TWO DISTRICT AS WELL. BUT DAYCARE FACILITIES ARE ALLOWED IN THE OUTER DISTRICT AS A LIMITED OR ACCESSORY USE. THAT MEANS THEY CAN OCCUPY 24 5% OF A BUILDING. SO WE CERTAINLY SEEN YOU KNOW, IN OUR CORE CITIES AND ELSEWHERE THAT YOU CAN INTEGRATE CARE WITH IN A MIXED USE SETTING. SO THAT DEFINITELY WOULD WORK. C FOUR IT'S ALSO A PERMITTED JUST A FLAT PERMITTED USE SO SEVERAL OF PORTIONS OF THE DISTRICT OR ZONE C FOUR ARE CURRENTLY IN DAYCARE IS ALLOWED. SO I THINK THERE IS AMPLE OPPORTUNITY FOR THAT USE IN THE DISTRICT. THANK YOU. MR. JOHNSON ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF SEEING NONE. THANK YOU MR. RAMA OLSON IN THIS CASE THE CITY IS THE APPLICANT SO WE WILL THEN MOVE TO THE PUBLIC HEARING WHICH I WILL NOW OPEN AND ASK IF THERE'S ANYONE IN THE CHAMBERS WHO WISHES TO TESTIFY ON THIS ITEM SEEING NO ONE STEPPING FORWARD. IS THERE ANYBODY ON LINE ALL PARTICIPANTS ONLINE OR STAFF THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WILL LOOK THEN FOR A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING SO MOVED FOR A SECOND. SECOND WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I. I OPPOSED A MOTION PASSES SIX ZERO WE WILL THEN MOVE TO DISCUSSION. I THINK I'LL GET STARTED HERE AND WHAT STOOD OUT MOST TO ME AS I WAS REVIEWING THIS IS NOT WHAT WAS INCLUDED BUT WHAT WAS NOT INCLUDED AND THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF A TRICKY ONE BECAUSE WE ARE STRADDLING A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN THE NUMBER OF MEMBERS ON OUR COMMISSION. IT'S PRETTY RARE THAT WE WOULD SWAP OUT THREE OF SEVEN PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS AND TO DO SO RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS BETWEEN THE STUDY ITEM AND THE FINAL APPLICATION IS CERTAINLY TRICKY ON US AND SO SOME OF OUR NEW COMMISSIONERS MAY NOT HAVE THE THE HISTORY OR KNOW ALL THE THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT AT THE STUDY SESSION BUT I THINK A VERY SIGNIFICANT THING WE TALKED ABOUT AT THE STUDY SESSION WAS A HEIGHT MINIMUM FOR THE SOUTH OF DISTRICT AND WHAT WE HAD LANDED ON GIVE OR TAKE WAS A 60 FOOT HEIGHT MINIMUM IS WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU READ EVERY PAGE OF THE AMENDMENT THAT WAS NOT INCLUDED. SO I WENT BACK AND WATCHED LAST NIGHT THE DISCUSSION THAT WAS HAD WITH CITY COUNCIL TO SEE IF THEY HAD RECOMMENDED IT OR IF YOU KNOW WHAT THEIR THOUGHTS WERE ON IT. SO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT OUR STUDY SESSION WE SPENT A GOOD 2020 FIVE MINUTES DISCUSSING WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS AN APPROPRIATE HEIGHT LIMIT OF WHETHER WE SHOULD HAVE ONE OR NOT AND WHAT THAT SHOULD BE AND AGAIN WHAT WE KIND OF LANDED ON WAS A 60 FOOT HEIGHT MINIMUM AND THE THE INITIAL SORT OF QUESTION OF WHETHER WE SHOULD HAVE A HEIGHT LIMIT IN SOUTH LOOP OR NOT WAS REALLY MORE FOCUSED ON OKAY, WE HAVEN'T SEEN HIGH RISE TOWERS OR MID-RISE TOWERS AND SO FORTH AND SHOULD WE BE REQUIRING A SIGNIFICANT HEIGHT MINIMUM TEN STOREYS, 1520 STOREYS I THINK THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL SORT OF NEXUS OF WHAT THAT QUESTION WAS. AND SO ULTIMATELY THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECIDED THAT WELL NO, WE DIDN'T FIND IT APPROPRIATE TO PUT A VERY SIGNIFICANT HEIGHT MINIMUM BECAUSE WE THOUGHT THE MARKET PROBABLY COULDN'T SUPPORT IT AND WE WANTED TO NOT HAVE EMPTY LOTS FOREVER AND BE UNDERSTANDING OF WHERE THE MARKET IS AT. AND SO WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION DID IS WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS FAIR AND FOUND A MIDDLE GROUND AND SO 60FT AND SO 60FT GENERALLY YOU CAN THINK OF A BUILDING AS TEN FEET PER STOREY GIVE OR TAKE. AND SO WHAT THAT REALLY MEANS IS A SIX STOREY BUILDING FROM A MINIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT STANDPOINT AND THE WAY WE ARRIVED AT THAT IS THE BUILDING CODE. THE BUILDING CODE IF YOU'RE UNFAMILIAR, ALLOWS BUILDINGS TO BE BUILT OUT OF WOOD AND I'M GOING TO JUST REALLY PARE THIS DOWN HERE. BUT YOU CAN BASICALLY YOU CAN BUILD A SIX STOREY BUILDING OUT OF WOOD ANYTHING ABOVE THAT YOU HAVE TO BUILD OUT OF STEEL AND CONCRETE WHICH MAKES THE COSTS GO UP SIGNIFICANTLY. SO IF YOU PUT A ONE STOREY PARKING GARAGE IN A FIVE STORY WOOD APARTMENT BUILDING ON THERE, THAT'S A LOT OF WHAT WE'VE SEEN IN RECENT DEVELOPMENT TIMES IN SOUTH THERE'S SIX OF THEM IN SOUTH LOOP AND IT'S PRETTY COST EFFECTIVE IT SEEMS FOR DEVELOPERS. AND SO I THINK WHAT WAS DISAPPOINTING TO ME OR I KNOW IS DISAPPOINT TO ME AND SOME OF MY OTHER FELLOW COMMISSIONERS IS THAT EVEN OUR FLOOR AREA RATIO WAY THAT WE ARE MANDATING OR CONTROLLING DENSITY TODAY LED US TO WHAT IS GOING TO BE OR IS PROPOSED TO BE A FOUR STOREY BUILDING AS THE NEXT PHASE OF BLOOMINGTON CENTRAL STATION AND SO ALTHOUGH IT MET THE CURRENT CRITERIA OF FLOOR AREA RATIO AS STAFF IS RECOMMENDING, I THINK THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOUND THAT DEVELOPMENT TO BE DISAPPOINTING AND NOT THE HIGHEST AND BEST LAND USE OF WHAT SHOULD BE THE CENTER OF THE CENTER OF SOUTH LOOP. AND SO WE HAD BEEN PROPOSING A 60 FOOT HEIGHT MINIMUM TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE AT LEAST GETTING THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OUT OF A WOOD BUILDING AND SO WHEN I WATCHED THE CONVERSATION AT THAT CITY COUNCIL HAD DURING THEIR STUDY SESSION I THINK THAT WAS MISSED. I THINK A LOT OF THEIR CONVERSATION WAS OKAY, SHOULD WE HAVE A TEN STOREY MINIMUM? SHOULD WE HAVE A 1215 STORY MINIMUM WHATEVER IT WAS NOT CENTERED ON WE HAVE FOUND A MIDDLE GROUND HERE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION BELIEVES IS FAIR THAT THAT HOLDS THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY ACCOUNTABLE BUT IS NOT PUTTING AN UNDUE BURDEN IN OUR OPINION ON THAT. AND SO I WAS DISAPPOINTED THAT THAT WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THAT CITY COUNCIL DIDN'T GO FOR IT AND FRANKLY I WOULD LIKE I WOULD PROPOSE THAT WE BRING THAT BACK TO CITY COUNCIL AND AND MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S CLARIFIED FOR THEM AS TO WHAT WE WERE PROPOSING BECAUSE IF YOU THINK ABOUT SOUTH LOOP IT'S NOT JUST BLOOMINGTON CENTRAL STATION WHERE WE'RE GOING FROM 4 TO 6 BUT WE HAD BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE ENTIRE SOUTH LOOP SO YOU'RE TALKING ALL THE WAY TO HIGHWAY 77 WHERE THERE'S ALL OF THOSE PARCELS THAT ARE CURRENTLY ZONED R ONE AND THAT COULD BE SOME VERY LOW DENSITY BUILDINGS AND SO THINGS THAT ARE NOT EVEN CLOSE TO SIX STOREYS AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION FELT THAT FOR THE SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT WE FELT A SIX STOREY OR 60 FOOT MINIMUM WAS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS DISTRICT. NOW MAYBE THIS COMMISSION FEELS DIFFERENTLY NOW THAT WE HAVE THREE MEMBERS THAT ARE NEW AND MAYBE MAYBE OUR NEW COMMISSIONERS DON'T FEEL THE SAME WAY AND THAT'S CERTAINLY YOUR RIGHT TO DO SO AS AN ACTING MEMBER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. BUT OUT OF RESPECT FOR MY FORMER COMMISSIONERS AND WHAT THIS BODY HAD RECOMMENDED TO CITY COUNCIL IT WOULD IT'S MY OPINION THAT THAT SHOULD BE BROUGHT BACK TO CITY COUNCIL TO HAVE A FURTHER EXPLANATION AND A FURTHER DISCUSSION AS TO WHAT OUR INTENT WAS WITH A 60 FOOT MINIMUM AND CLARIFY FOR THEM THAT WE ARE NOT LOOKING FOR MANDATING TOWERS RATHER MAXIMIZING LAND USE THAT CAN BE BUILT OUT OF STICK WOOD BUILT BUILDINGS THAT ARE 60FT. I HAVE OTHER COMMENTS BUT I'LL I'LL STOP THERE FOR NOW. COMMISSIONER ISSA YEAH, I WOULD JUST SECOND THAT AND AGREE WITH WHAT CHAIR COOK AND SAID. COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM I WOULD ALSO AGREE I WAS A BIG FAN OF THE 60 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT I THINK I DIDN'T REREVIEW THE MINUTES. APOLOGIES. ONE THING TO CLARIFY ON THE SIX STOREY BUILDING YOU KNOW IT DOESN'T AS LONG AS IT MEETS THE FLOOR RATIO CALCULATIONS IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE SIX STOREYS IF IT'S 60FT AND I THINK THAT THAT'S ANOTHER GOOD MIDDLE GROUND WHERE YOU COULD DO YOUR CONCRETE MOST OF THE TIME THESE BUILDINGS ARE PRECAST CONCRETE AND THEN WOULD ON TOP OF THAT SOMETIMES THEY'RE CAST IN PLACE OR POST TENSION BUT WE DON'T NEED TO GET INTO THAT HERE. BUT YOU COULD DO A TALLER FIRST FLOOR FOR MIXED USE YOU KNOW RETAIL OR A DAYCARE OR ANYTHING THAT COULD REQUIRE HIGHER CEILING HEIGHTS AND THEN HAVE YOUR STANDARD YOU KNOW, HOUSING FLOORS ABOVE AND IT WOULD YOU KNOW, MEET THE REQUIREMENT MEET THE FLOOR AIR RATIO BUT NOT HAVE IT MIGHT BE MORE COST EFFECTIVE THAN BUILDING MORE STORIES SO I I'M PASSIONATE ABOUT IT I THINK I THINK IT'S A GOOD THING BUT I'M REALLY INTERESTED TO HEAR EVERYONE STARTS THANKS I JUST PROVIDING A LITTLE MORE CONTEXT WHERE WE WENT WITH 60FT INSTEAD OF SIX FLOORS OBVIOUSLY MALL OF AMERICA WOULD BE VERY CHALLENGED TO GO UP TO SIX FLOORS AND SO WE DIDN'T WANT TO MANDATE SOMETHING LIKE THAT BUT MALL AMERICA'S ALREADY 60FT AND SO WE FELT THAT WAS FAIR AS 60FT INSTEAD OF SIX FLOORS ADDITIONALLY AND MAYBE WE DISAGREE ON THIS A LITTLE BIT, COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM BUT I THINK SOMETIMES OUR FLOOR AREA RATIOS ARE FALLING SHORT LIKE IT DID WITH LIBERTY CENTRAL STATION PHASE FIVE WHICH IS GOING TO BE FORCED THE WORRIES INSTEAD OF SIX WHICH FOR ME WAS A DISAPPOINTMENT IN BLOOMINGTON CENTRAL STATION IT WOULD ALSO IMPACT THE R ONE PROPERTIES THAT ARE CLOSE TO HIGHWAY 77 WHICH THAT FLOOR AREA RATIO REQUIREMENT IF THERE EVEN IS ONE WOULD PRODUCE NOWHERE NEAR A SIX STORY BUILDING. BUT IT'S MY OPINION THAT IF THOSE SITES WERE TO REDEVELOP CURRENTLY THEY'RE JUST LIKE 1 OR 2 STOREY APARTMENT BUILDINGS THAT WE WOULD WANT THOSE TO BE SIX STOREYS OR 60FT IN MY OPINION. OTHER COMMENTS MR. CUNNINGHAM JUST CLARIFY I THINK WE'RE ALIGNED ON THIS CHAIR COOKED IN JUST WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY IS THAT HAVING A HEIGHT REQUIREMENT NOT A STORY REQUIREMENT AND THE FLOOR RATIO YOU KNOW, WHATEVER IT MAY BE PROVIDES ENOUGH FLEXIBILITY TO GET DENSITY AND PERCEIVED DENSITY EVEN IF IT'S A FIVE STOREY BUILDING THAT IS 60FT TALL UNDERSTOOD VISUALLY OBVIOUSLY I'M NEW TO THIS WHOLE CONVERSATION AND I THINK PROBABLY AS A KEY DATA POINT I LIVED IN WASHINGTON DC FOR MANY YEARS WHICH HAS OBVIOUSLY EXTREMELY RESTRICTIVE HEIGHT LIMITS ON BUILDING WHICH HAS LED TO SOME INTERESTING DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGES OVER THE YEARS PARTICULARLY WITHIN THE DISTRICT. AND I THINK ONE OF THE CONCERNS I HAVE ABOUT I'M ALL FOR HIGH LEVEL DEVELOPMENT DENSE DEVELOPMENT. MY ONE CONCERN IS IS THE CONCERN BY ENFORCING IT AT SUCH A HIGH LEVEL THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE CREATING A NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THERE'S NO PATH TO STAY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IF YOU WANT TO MOVE INTO SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T HAVE A SHARED ENTRANCE. SO FOR EXAMPLE WHAT YOU'LL FREQUENTLY SEE IN WASHINGTON DC IS VERY DENSE DEVELOPMENT FRONTED BY A ROW OF ROW HOUSES. SO YOU'LL HAVE A VERY LARGE APARTMENT COMPLEX BEHIND IT BUT THE FRONT ROW WILL BE ROW HOUSES THAT CAN THEN SERVE AS THE ASPIRATIONAL SHIFT. WHEN YOU HAVE A BIGGER FAMILY MAKE MORE MONEY YOU CAN BUY ONE OF THE ROW HOUSES WHICH THEN HAS DONE A GREAT JOB OF FOSTERING COMMUNITY IN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS BECAUSE IT KEEPS PEOPLE OVER THE SPAN OF A GENERATIONAL SPAN WHICH I THINK THEN ULTIMATELY GETS TO THE ABILITY TO ATTRACT GROCERY STORES AND A LOT OF OTHER THINGS. AND SO THIS GETS TO MY QUESTION ABOUT THE DENSITY OR THE OCCUPANCY RATE LIKE WHAT IS IT WOULD BE I THINK VERY USEFUL TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE OCCUPANCY RATE IS AND SOME OF THE DEMOGRAPHIC FACTS, PARTICULARLY ECONOMIC DEMOGRAPHICS BECAUSE I THINK AS WE LOOK AT THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOUTH SOUTH LOOP DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT IT'S REALLY GETTING TO WHAT CAN WE DO TO MAKE IT A SUSTAINABLE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE 40 YEARS FROM NOW WE'RE NOT IN THE SITUATION WHERE IT'S APARTMENT BUILDINGS WITH LANDLORDS WHO ARE NOT PAYING ATTENTION AND WE WERE NEVER ABLE TO GET THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT IN. SO I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THE HEIGHT LIMIT BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO KIND OF SHARE WITH ALL OF YOU KIND OF WHERE MY CONCERNS COME IN AS IT RELATES TO A LOT OF THE QUESTIONS I ASK ABOUT HOW WE FIND A WAY TO DEVELOP THAT COMMUNITY WITHIN THE SOUTH LOOP DEVELOPMENT AREA PARTICULARLY I THINK ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS I WAS STRUCK BY GOING ALONG WITH THE CHILDCARE ISSUE IS ALSO HOW FAR THEY HAVE TO GO FOR AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. SO SO MANY OF THE THINGS THAT REALLY TIE A NEIGHBORHOOD TOGETHER ARE MISSING FROM THERE AND SO I THINK MAKING SURE THAT AS TIME GOES ON THAT WE REALLY THINK ABOUT HOW DO WE HELP THAT AREA. I IDENTIFY AND DEVELOP THAT COMMUNITY SO THAT IT'S NOT JUST PEOPLE MOVING IN LIVING THERE FOR TWO YEARS AND THEN MOVING BACK OUT BECAUSE I THINK THAT THAT GETS TO THE LONG TERM SUCCESS OF THE AREA. SO NOT OPPOSED TO THE CONCEPT OF PUTTING A HEIGHT LIMIT OR HEIGHT MINIMUM BUT I JUST THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT. MAY ASKING A QUESTION COMMISSIONER WHAT IS YOUR EXPERIENCE BEEN OR YOUR THOUGHTS TOWARDS WALK OF UNITS AS OPPOSED TO LIKE ROW HOUSES ? WACO UNITS I THINK HAVE BEEN IN WASHINGTON HAVE BEEN VERY, VERY SUCCESSFUL AND FREQUENTLY VERY SUCCESSFUL WITH YOUNG FAMILIES FOR THAT ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO JUST WALK RIGHT OUT NOW I MEAN OBVIOUSLY EVERY CITY'S DIFFERENT. CHICAGO'S THE ONE OTHER CITY I LIVED IN A LONG TIME SO A LOT OF TRIPLEXES AND FOURPLEX IS WHERE SIMILARLY YOUR ABILITY TO KIND OF DIRECTLY GET OUTSIDE BUT THOSE ARE DIFFERENT CITIES AND BLOOMINGTON SO I'M STILL LEARNING KIND OF THE DYNAMIC HERE IN BLOOMINGTON BUT I GUESS IMPORTANT TO KNOW MY BIASES. THANK YOU MR. SUMMERS THANK YOU CHAIR. I WANT TO EXPRESS THAT MY APPRECIATION FOR YOU BREAKING DOWN THE CONVERSATION THAT HAS HAD HAPPENED BEFORE JOINING THE COMMISSION I THINK THAT THERE IS THE SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT PLAN HAS LOFTY GOALS AND IN ORDER TO MEET THEM THE THERE NEED TO BE DECISIONS MADE THAT ARE SOMETIMES NOT FAVORING ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER AND I THINK THAT THE 60 FOOT BUILDING PLAN FROM THE INFORMATION THAT WAS GIVEN TO US AND YOUR BREAKDOWN FEELS LIKE IT'S A REALLY GOOD MIDDLE GROUND FOR BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERING THAT THERE ARE BUILDINGS THAT LOOK LIKE THIS IN THE DISTRICT ALREADY. SO WE KNOW THAT DEVELOPERS ARE INTERESTED IN THIS AND WE ARE PUSHING THEM TO DO A LITTLE BIT MORE. SO I JUST WANTED TO EXPRESS THAT I ALIGN WITH SOME OF THE COMMISSIONERS HERE ON THE 60 FOOT I'M 60 FOOT POLICY. SURE. MARISSA THANK YOU. CHAIR IN I WAS YOU KNOW TOPIC LIKE THIS I LIKE TO LISTEN TO IT MORE THAN I SPEAKERS ESPECIALLY LIKE YOU LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD I THINK RIGHT SO AND OBVIOUSLY THAT WAS INTERESTING COMPARED TO OTHER CITIES COMMISSIONER LAND IS PERSPECTIVE MY QUESTION IS CHECK AND IF YOU DON'T MIND IS FOR YOU ACTUALLY SO ARE YOU JUST TO CLARIFY YOU FOR HEIGHT LIMITATIONS A HEIGHT MINIMUMS? YES I AM IF I AM CURIOUS JUST LIKE AS TO WHY SO SO I WAS ACTUALLY IN FAVOR OF AN EVEN HIGHER HEIGHT MINIMUM THAN 60FT AND I WAS WILLING TO COMPROMISE WITH MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS ON THAT. I WAS IN FAVOR OF AN EVEN TALLER HEIGHT MINIMUM IN BLOOMINGTON CENTRAL STATION AND AT THE PARK AND RIGHT IN PARK AND GO SITES BECAUSE I THINK THEY CAN SUPPORT IT NOW I KNOW A DEVELOPER AND I RECOGNIZE THAT THOSE BUILDINGS ARE EXPENSIVE AND IT'S A LONGER RETURN ON INVESTMENT AND FOR ME TO JUST SIT HERE AND SAY OH I THINK YOU CAN DO THAT IS LIKE A BIG LONG SHOT. SO I VERY MUCH RECOGNIZE THAT. HOWEVER I THINK WE HAVE A WHOLE CITY THAT CAN SUPPORT SIX STORIES, SIX STORY APARTMENT BUILDINGS. WE'RE SEEING THEM ON LYNDALE WE COULD GET THEM ON WE'VE GOT THEM ON PAN. I THINK OUR WHOLE CITY CAN SUPPORT THAT. I THINK BLOOMINGTON JUST IN GENERAL IS HAS A LOT OF PLACES THAT CAN SUPPORT FIVE ON WHAT I DON'T THINK JUST SOUTH LOOP CAN DO THAT AND FOR ME WHEN I THINK ABOUT THE CITY AS A WHOLE IT'S OKAY TO LEAVE A COUPLE KEY SPOTS FOR THOSE REALLY SPECIAL DEVELOPMENTS AND FOR ME BLOOMINGTON CENTRAL STATION WAS ALWAYS SUPPOSED TO BE THAT IF YOU GO WAY BACK. BLOOMINGTON CENTRAL STATION WAS SUPPOSED TO BE THE THIRD DOWNTOWN OF THE TWIN CITIES. IT WAS GOING TO BE MINNEAPOLIS AND ST PAUL AND BLOOMINGTON CENTRAL STATION WAS GOING TO BE THE TRIAD OF THE THREE DOWNTOWNS AND WE HAVE NOT SEEN THAT AND IT'S SAD BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT THE OLDER BUILDINGS THAT WERE BUILT IN LIKE WHATEVER THAT IS LIKE THE 80S AND 90S THERE ARE A LOT OF LIKE 15 STORY BUILDINGS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN NOW THEY'RE ALL JUST SIX AND TO ME IT'S I DON'T KNOW I THINK WE GOT ANTSY AND AND LOOK I MEAN THE PORT AUTHORITY THROWS A LOT OF MONEY AT THESE PROJECTS AND I'M I'M JUST DISAPPOINTED THAT WE THREW MONEY AT PROJECTS THAT IN MY OPINION ARE VERY VANILLA AND THAT IF YOU LOOK AT BLOOMINGTON CENTRAL STATION IT KIND OF LOOKS LIKE LYNDALE AND IT KIND OF LOOKS LIKE EDEN PRAIRIE OR BURNSVILLE OR OTHER THINGS AND I'VE BEEN LIKE FIRM ON THIS COMMISSION THAT LIKE I THINK BLOOMINGTON IS DIFFERENT THAN THOSE OTHER SUBURBS AND THAT WE SHOULD STRIVE TO STAY DIFFERENT. I NEVER WANT BLOOMINGTON TO BE ANOTHER VANILLA SUBURB. I THINK WE ARE THE SUBURB OF MINNEAPOLIS AND ST PAUL AND WE NEED TO MAINTAIN THAT STATUS. FURTHERMORE I THINK SOUTH HAS ASSETS THAT ARE UNIQUE TO ITSELF SO WE HAVE LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT. NO OTHER SUBURBAN COMMUNITY HAS LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT LIKE THAT WE DO YOU HAVE THE MINNESOTA RIVER BLUFF WHICH IS ABSOLUTELY SPECTACULAR OCULAR ASSET THAT I DON'T THINK WE'RE WE'RE USING WE'RE NOT UTILIZING THAT ASSET WELL ENOUGH AND IT'S SO FRUSTRATING FOR ME WHEN I GO DOWN FRANCE AVENUE AND SEE DIANA AND I SEE THEY'VE GOT TWO TOWERS POPPING UP AND IT'S LIKE THAT ONE NEXT TO TARGET IS RIGHT NEXT TO THE TARGET PARKING LOT LIKE HOW DOES HOW IS THERE A TOWER BUILT NEXT TO THE EDINA PARKING LOT THAT HAS NO INTRINSIC ASSET OTHER THAN THAT PROMENADE WHICH I GUESS IS PRETTY NICE BUT LIKE EDINA WILL NEVER HAVE THE RIVER BLUFF THAT WE DO THIS SPECTACULAR NATURAL RESOURCE THEY CAN NEVER HAVE THAT. WHY ARE WE ABLE TO LEVERAGE IT MORE AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO UNLOCK THAT. I WISH I DID AND THAT'S WHY I'M ALWAYS I'M GOING WAY OFF TOPIC NOW BUT I'M ALWAYS HAMMERING ON THESE TRAILHEADS BECAUSE LIKE I SO I LIVE IN SOUTH OF IT'S REALLY HARD TO GET DOWN TO THE MINNESOTA RIVER VALLEY I HAVE TO WALK ALMOST A MILE ALL THE WAY UP TO THE VISITOR CENTER TO GET DOWN INTO THOSE TRAILS AND THAT'S WHY I REALLY WANT THESE TRAIL CONNECTIONS BECAUSE I THINK THAT CAN IMPROVE PROPERTY VALUES, RAISE RENTS IN THE RIGHT WAY AND THEN WE START TO GET TALLER BUILDINGS BECAUSE YOU CAN COMMAND TOLERANCE. AND SO I THINK HOLDING ON TO A FEW OF THESE SELECT PARCELS AGAIN BLOOMINGTON CENTRAL STATION PROBABLY THE TWO AIRPORT PARKING FACILITIES IF THOSE EVER DEVELOPED AND SAYING THIS WE'RE GOING TO RESERVE THESE FOR A SPECTACULAR SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT AND WE'RE GOING TO HOLD DEVELOPERS TO IT AND IF YOU WANT TO PUT FIVE ON PODIUM I'M ALL UP AND DOWN. LINDELL GO FOR IT ANYWHERE ELSE IN SOUTH LOOP BE OUR GUEST. BUT THESE LIKE 1012 PARCELS WE'RE GOING TO RESERVE THESE FOR REALLY SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT THANK YOU FOR THAT THOROUGH EXPLANATION YOUR PERSPECTIVE. OKAY I TOTALLY SEE THAT THOSE THE OTHER WAY AROUND THIS THAT YOU ARE IN SUPPORT OF LOOP OKAY SO THAT MAKES SENSE. YEAH AND I REALLY AGREE WITH YOU AND I WOULD LOVE TO SEE YEAH LIKE THE CITY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE UNIQUE POSITION GEOGRAPHICAL POSITION THAT THAT AREA IS IN AND ALSO UNIQUE TRANSIT POSITION SO AND HAVE LIKE A THIRD DOWNTOWN WITHIN THE TWIN CITIES SO I AGREE WITH THAT THANK YOU ONCE AGAIN SHOULD WAIT YES IF WE'RE DOING A BIT OF A ROLL CALL I AGREE A HEIGHT MINIMUM IS A FANTASTIC IDEA. I, I MISSED THE STUDY SESSION. I BELIEVE I WAS ON VACATION IN FEBRUARY BUT SO I DON'T THINK I'M ON THE RECORD AND I WASN'T PART OF THE CONVERSATION BUT I THINK THE SOUTH LOOP IS A YOU KNOW IT'S IT'S A SPECIAL PART OF BLOOMINGTON AND WE'VE INVESTED A LOT OF TIME AND ATTENTION AND EFFORT INTO MAKING IT A SPECIAL AND AND DIFFERENT PART OF BLOOMINGTON IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO LOOK LIKE 90TH AND PENN OR OLD SCHOCK AND 106 OR YOU KNOW PICK PICK AN INTERSECTION IT'S SUPPOSED TO LOOK A CERTAIN WAY AND IT'S SUPPOSED TO HAVE INCREDIBLY DENSE DEVELOPMENT. AND SO I LIKE YOU I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE HAD I BEEN HERE I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE ADVOCATED FOR A HIGHER HIGHER HEIGHT LIMIT MYSELF. BUT I'M COMFORTABLE WITH 60FT. I TOO I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL SKIPPED OVER IT AS AN OPTION. I THINK YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THAT GOING HIGHER IS A PROBLEM IN TERMS OF WHERE THE MARKET IS AND THE COST TO DEVELOPMENT ,THE COST OF BUILDING MATERIALS AND WHERE THINGS ARE LIKELY TO HAPPEN. I SHARE YOUR DESIRE TO HOLD SOME OF THE SPOTS BACK FOR REQUIRE HIGHER DENSITY REQUIREMENTS BUT I THINK THIS IS A REASONABLE COMPROMISE AND I THINK THAT AS MUCH AS AS I YOU KNOW I TOO LIVED IN WASHINGTON DC FOR A WHILE AND I UNDERSTAND THE APPEAL OF BEING ABLE TO JUST WALK OUT THE FRONT DOOR AND AND BE ON THE STREET AND BE PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND I, I THINK WE DO NEED TO BE THOUGHTFUL ABOUT HOW WE CREATE THAT SENSE OF NEIGHBORHOOD AND THAT SENSE OF CONNECTION AND COMMUNITY IN THE SOUTH LOOP. I DON'T THINK WE'VE PUT ENOUGH EFFORT INTO THAT TO HELPING FOLKS FEEL LIKE THEY'RE THERE FOR THE LONG HAUL AND NOT JUST FOR UNTIL THEIR LEASE IS UP. I THINK THERE'S STILL A LOT OF WORK AND IMPROVEMENT TO BE DONE THERE. I DO THINK THAT THIS IS A PART OF BLOOMINGTON WHERE DENSITY IS KEY AND THESE HEIGHT MINIMUMS ARE A CRITICAL PART OF MAKING SURE THAT WE CONTINUE DOWN THAT PATH. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. WAIT COMMISSIONER LONNIE THIS IS MORE A COMMENT THAN ANYTHING ELSE I WOULD BE VERY CURIOUS TO SIT IN ON A CONVERSATION IN ST PAUL BECAUSE I IMAGINE IT'S VERY SIMILAR TO THE CONVERSATIONS THAT ARE BEING HELD AROUND THE FORD REDEVELOPMENT SITE WHERE THE CONSTANT CHANGE IN THE REDUCTIONS FROM THE DEVELOPER ON DENSITY. SO I THINK THIS IS A REALLY IT'S A TOUGH CONVERSATION TO HAVE AND HOW DO YOU GET AND BUILD AND TAKE FULL ADVANTAGE OF AN AREA WHERE YOU CAN HAVE THAT DENSE HOUSING BUT NOT HAVE IT DEVELOP IN A WAY THAT IT BECOMES LIKE A MUSLIM? SO I THINK THIS HAS BEEN REALLY I ECHO COMMISSIONER SUMMERS COMMENTS. IT WAS REALLY INFORMATIVE TO GET ALL THE BACKGROUND SO I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU ALL TAKING THE TIME TO DO THAT. THANKS MR. JOHNSON JUST HEARING THE TEMPERATURE OF THE ROOM HERE, IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WANTED TO MOVE THIS FORWARD WITH A HEIGHT MINIMUM RECOMMENDATION, HOW WOULD WE DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT? YEAH SURE CAPTAIN. THANKS FOR THE QUESTION. I THINK WHAT IT WOULD INVOLVE IS AN AMENDMENT TO PAGE 13 OF THE DISTRICT PLAN AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT PAGE. ULTIMATELY THAT'S WHAT IS REFLECTIVE OF THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION ON THIS POLICY TOPIC WHERE IT SUGGESTS THAT THE CITY WILL ALLOW DEVELOPERS TO DETERMINE THE ULTIMATE BUILDING CONSTRUCTION TYPE AS LONG AS OTHER GOALS OF THE SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT PLANNING PLAN EXCUSE ME ARE ADVANCED. SO I THINK IT WOULD INVOLVE SOME AMENDMENT TO THE CONTENT OF THAT PAGE THERE. BUT HAVING SOME DISCUSSION WITH LEGAL AND OTHER COLLEAGUES ON THIS MATTER TO CERTAINLY IF YOU WANT TO BE AS PRESCRIPTIVE AS ASSIGNING A SPECIFIC HEIGHT IN THE DISTRICT PLAN YOU CAN DO SO JUST TO NOTE THAT TYPICALLY WHERE THIS TYPE OF INFORMATION WOULD APPLY AND BE IMPLEMENTED WOULD BE IN THE BEST ZONING DISTRICTS THAT ARE APPLICABLE TO THE DISTRICT. SO ULTIMATELY THAT'S WHERE WE WOULD MAKE SOME ADJUSTMENTS TO THE ZONING CODE IF THIS WAS THE POLICY DIRECTION OF THE CITY. BUT YOU WOULD WANT TO HAVE THE FOUNDATION REST IN THE DISTRICT PLAN. CERTAINLY A COUPLE OF CLARIFICATIONS I WOULD SEEK I MEAN I CERTAINLY CAN PROVIDE ADDITIONAL HAVE BOTH TOM AND I HAVING PARTICIPATED IN THE PORT AUTHORITY AND THE CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSIONS THEY DO NOT AGREE WITH THIS DIRECTION . I MEAN I'M JUST GOING TO BE JUST SHARE MY REFLECTION OF WHAT THAT DISCUSSION WAS AND I THINK THAT FOR THE MOST PART THEY PREFERRED AS LONG AS CERTAIN MINIMUM INTENSITY OR DENSITY WAS BEING PROVIDED IN THE FORM OF FLOOR RATIO THEY WERE MORE FAVORABLE TOWARDS ALLOWING THE DEVELOPERS AND ARCHITECTS TO DESIGN THE BUILDINGS AS SUCH. SO JUST TO PROVIDE THAT STANDPOINT, ONE CLARIFICATION I WOULD SEEK AND I KNOW THAT WE WE DID TALK ABOUT IT FOR A LONG TIME SO I DO AGREE WE DID TALK ABOUT IT QUITE A BIT. ONE THING THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR STAFF AS WE REPORT THIS OUT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE PORT AUTHORITY, WE ARE PLANNING TO STOP BY THE PORT AUTHORITY AS WELL GIVEN THEIR HISTORIC ROLE IN THE PORT OR IN THE SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT. ONE THING THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO US AS IT PERTAINS TO THIS RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE IS IF THIS HEIGHT LIMIT WOULD APPLY DISTRICT WIDE ALL USES ALL STRUCTURES, ALL TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT AND THE REASON I SUGGEST THAT YES YOU MENTIONED THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN THE SOUTHWESTERN PORTION OF THE DISTRICT. WE ALSO HAVE A NUMBER OF TECHNOLOGY CAMPUSES IN CERTAIN PORTIONS OF THE DISTRICT, MANY OF WHICH I DON'T BELIEVE WOULD MEET A 60 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT. THAT IS A USE THAT WE ARE ACTIVELY TRYING TO RECRUIT TO THE SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT TECHNOLOGY CHIP SENSORS, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS ESPECIALLY IN THE SOUTHERN PORTION WHERE RESIDENTIAL USES ARE NOT ALLOWED. ANOTHER CLARIFICATION THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL IS KNOWING WHETHER A PORTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT NEEDS TO MEET A 60 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT OR IF THE FULL BUILDING UNIFORMLY NEEDS TO MEET THAT HEIGHT LIMIT EXPECTATION. SO THESE ARE SOME OF THE DETAILS THAT I'M THINKING THROUGH IN MY HEAD WHEN TRYING TO EXECUTE THIS TYPE OF POLICY DIRECTION. SO SOME OF THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL BUT I THINK THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF IT, THE MECHANICS I THINK IT WOULD BE AN AMENDMENT PAGE 13 AT THE BOTTOM I DON'T KNOW IF TOM AGREES WITH THAT LOCATION BUT I THINK THE BOTTOM OF PAGE 13 IS WHERE THIS POLICY DIRECTION RESTS. A FOLLOW UP QUESTION MR. JOHNSON BECAUSE YOU BROUGHT UP A LOT OF FAIR POINTS WITH AN OPTION FOR US TO BE FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ASK FOR THIS VERY SPECIFIC SCOPE ITEM TO BE PULLED OUT OF CONSIDERATION SO IT COULD BE BROUGHT BACK FORTH AS A SEPARATE ITEM FOR CONSIDERATION FOR FURTHER INCLUSION BECAUSE LIKE YEAH LIKE IS 60 IS 60FT EVEN THE RIGHT NUMBER SHOULD ACTUALLY BE 58 LIKE I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF NUANCE THAT IF WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO PUT THIS INTO A POLICY WE NEED TO BE VERY MINDFUL OF IT AND TO YOUR POINT, TECHNOLOGY CAMPUSES, OTHER THINGS THERE'S A LOT OF THOUGHT ABOUT THAT TO ME THAT ALMOST NEEDS TO BE PULLED OUT SO WE CAN GIVE IT SERIOUS CONSIDERATION INSTEAD OF JUST SAYING 60FT BECAUSE I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF POTENTIAL ISSUES BY JUST SAYING SOMETHING LIKE 60FT. SO WOULD AN OPTION AVAILABLE TO THE THE PLANNING COMMISSION BE THAT THIS IS PULLED OUT OF CONSIDERATION, PULLED OUT OF THIS APPLICATION FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION AS A SEPARATE ITEM? YEAH. CHAIR THANKS FOR THE QUESTION . SO CERTAINLY YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE SOUTH OF DISTRICT PLAN NOW SO IF THAT WAS THE POLICY DIRECTION THAT YOU WANTED REFLECTED IN THE DISTRICT, CERTAINLY YOU KNOW IDEALLY IT WOULD BE THROUGH THIS PROCESS . I WOULD SAY THAT WE DO HAVE A PROJECT ANOTHER PROJECT THAT TOM'S WORKING ON ACTUALLY IS THE HEIGHT LIMITS MAP REVIEW OF OUR CITY CODE HEIGHT PROVISIONS THAT RELATE TO DEVELOPMENT. WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN THIS FAR ENOUGH INTO THAT PROJECT AS YOU KNOW KIND OF THE FULL SCOPE OF ALL THE DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS WE ARE GOING TO GO BUT WE ARE GOING TO BRING THAT THROUGH STUDY SESSIONS AT PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL. SO WE WELCOME YOUR VIEW IN TERMS OF ADDITIONAL SCOPING ITEMS THAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT ON THAT PROJECT. SO THAT IS GOING TO BE ONE OPPORTUNITY BUT CERTAINLY WE COULD I MEAN A DISTRICT PLAN SIMILAR TO A CITY ORDINANCE IS A LIVING BREATHING DOCUMENT. YOU CAN AMEND THE DISTRICT PLAN AGAIN WITH THIS THIS ONE VERY SPECIFIC PROVISION. SO CERTAINLY YOU COULD EVALUATE THIS DOCUMENT AS IT'S PRESENTED TO YOU BEFORE YOU COULD SUPPORT IT, YOU COULD SUGGEST AMENDMENTS TO IT. YOU COULD ADOPT IT AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION. YOU DO HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO INITIATE OTHER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS ZONING CHANGES ,THOSE TYPES OF THINGS. SO YOU HAVE MULTIPLE LEVERS THAT YOU CAN PULL TO REVISIT THIS VERY PRECISE SPECIFIC ISSUE IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KIND OF MUDDY THE BROADER DISCUSSION WITH THIS ONE QUESTION SO THAT THAT IS AVAILABLE TO YOU, I DON'T WANT TO PRESENT IT LIKE THAT'S NOT AN OPTION. YOU KNOW, IDEALLY AS GOOD GOVERNMENT FOLKS TRY TO GET EVERYTHING DONE IN ONE PROCESS BUT WE'RE NOT A WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE UPSET IF THERE'S MULTIPLE PROCESSES THAT ARE NEEDED TO ADDRESS THIS QUESTION ONE FINAL QUESTION AS A FURTHER OPTION COULD THE PLANNING COMMISSION CONTINUE THIS ITEM UNTIL AND THEN IT'S BROUGHT BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL AS LIKE A STUDY TOPIC, SEE IF THEY'LL GO FOR IT AND THEN POTENTIALLY HAVE IT COME BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVISED. YEAH SO WE'VE AND I MEAN FORGIVE ME I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO REFLECT THE EXACT PRECISE EVERY ELEMENT OF THE DISCUSSION THAT TOOK PLACE AT CITY COUNCIL BUT I MEAN AND I WELCOME TOM'S VIEWPOINT ON THIS TOO I FELT LIKE THE POLICY QUESTION WAS DIRECTLY ASKED AND ANSWERED BY THAT BODY. SO I HAVE A I'M SOMEWHAT CONCERNED TO BRING THE SAME QUESTION. I DON'T KNOW IF THE 60 FOOT MINIMUM EXPLICITLY WAS AN ONGOING OR A VERY LARGE PART OF THE DISCUSSION BUT MINIMUM HEIGHT LIMITS CERTAINLY WERE AND IT WAS ASKED AND ANSWERED. SO TO THE EXTENT THAT CAN WE DO THAT I MEAN WE CAN EXPLORE WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. I'M CONCERNED IT'S GOING TO RESULT IN SOME RECEPTION OR FRUSTRATION BUT I AM HERE I AM HERE TO SERVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION MOST CERTAINLY. THANK YOU. MY MY LAST THOUGHT ON THAT IS YEAH I WATCHED I THINK I HAVE A DIFFERENT VIEWPOINT THAN MR. JOHNSON WHEN I WATCHED THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING LAST NIGHT I THINK THEY WERE VERY FOCUSED ON IT FROM THE STANDPOINT OF WE'RE TRYING TO MANDATE TOWERS NOT NOT A 60 FOOT MIDDLE GROUND. ANY THOUGHTS ON SOME OF THE OPTIONS THAT WERE PRESENTED BEFORE AS COMMISSIONER YOU SO I SAW YOUR HAND FIRST. NO, YOU CAN GO AHEAD MISPRESENT THANK YOU. CHAIR KICKED SO THE MORE I LISTEN TO NICK YOUR YOUR TAKE IS IT'S INTERESTING BECAUSE WE WOULD A HIGH MINIMUM AFFECT CERTAIN DEVELOPMENTS SUCH AS LIKE CHIP MANUFACTURERS PROBABLY IN THAT AREA I THINK YOU KNOW THERE'S A BUILDING I BELIEVE IT'S IN DOWNTOWN MINNEAPOLIS TO AMERIPRISE BUILDING IT SOLD NOT TOO LONG AGO FOR A LOT LESS I THINK LIKE TENT LIKE WAY LESS THAN THAN THERE WAS BEFORE AND THAT'S OBVIOUSLY IT'S A HIGHER BUILDING AND IT WAS YOU KNOW AS COVID THE COVID PANDEMIC HAPPENED YOU KNOW THERE WAS A LOT OF OFFICE SPACES THAT WEREN'T NEEDED, RIGHT? AND SO I THINK FINDING A GOOD MIDDLE GROUND IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO LIMIT THESE LARGE LIKE CHIP MANUFACTURERS ANY ANY BUSINESS TO COME TO THAT AREA. I UNDERSTAND THERE'S LIKE THE WHAT YOU LIKE I GUESS I UNDERSTAND WHAT CHAIR YOU FEEL LIKE IT WAS INTENDED TO THIS AREA SHOULD HAVE LOOKED LIKE AND AND WHATNOT BUT I DON'T KNOW I'M KIND OF IN THE MIDDLE WITH THAT. I THINK MAYBE LIKE HAVING LIKE A FEW OF THOSE PARCELS DESIGNATED TOWARDS THAT WOULD BE LIKE A GOOD MIDDLE GROUND BUT THAT'S THAT'S KIND OF MY TAKE. BUT AGAIN I DON'T LIVE THERE ANYTHING SO THIS IS JUST FROM OUTSIDE PERSPECTIVE. YEAH. THANK YOU. MR. CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU, CHAIR. MR. JOHNSON I PROMISE I'M NOT TRYING TO PLAY STUMP THE PLANNER. I JUST DON'T HAVE MY IPAD HERE . CAN DO YOU CAN WE LOOK UP WHAT THE CURRENT FLOOR RATIO GUIDANCE IS FOR HSR SEE FOUR AND SIX TWO AND THE REASON I BROUGHT UP C TWO IS BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE THAT'S WHERE THE THUNDERBIRD HOTEL LOT IS CURRENTLY ZONED AT LEAST ON THE ME ZONING MAP AND MY MY QUESTION IS CAN WE SOLVE THIS PROBLEM WITH AIR AS OPPOSED TO A STRICT HEIGHT LIMIT WHICH WOULD GIVE MORE FLEXIBILITY TO DEVELOPERS? AND THEN I WOULD BE VERY INTERESTED TO HEAR CHAIR COOK DON'S THOUGHTS ON SOLVING THIS PROBLEM WITH THAT FIGURE AS OPPOSED TO HEIGHT MINIMUMS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YEAH. WELL I MEAN WHILE HE'S PULLING THAT UP I THINK I MEAN I LIKE THE IDEA OF FLOOR AREA RATIO I IF WE COULD SOLVE THIS BY BOOSTING THE FLOOR AREA RATIO IN OUR ZONES THAT WOULD EFFECTIVELY GIVE US A SIX STOREY BUILDING. YEAH I COULD I COULD GET THERE LIKE I THINK OUR FLOOR AREA MINIMUMS FALL SHORT LIKE AGAIN I KEEP SAYING IT BUT TO HAVE FOUR STOREYS GOING UP PARK ADJACENT IN BLOOMINGTON CENTRAL STATION IS JUST A FAILURE AND SO YEAH I GUESS IF THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER ROUTE WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF THAT HERE. THAT'S LIKE A A ZONING PLAN OF AMENDMENT TO MODIFY ZONES TO PUMP UP THEIR FLOOR AREA RATIOS SO YEAH. CHAIR COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM SO THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION. FIRST I DID WANT TO SAY I, I DO WANT TO GIVE CHAIR COOKED IN HIS DO IN TERMS OF THE FRAMING OF THE COUNCIL CONVERSATION I DON'T WANT TO DISAGREE WITH HIS FRAMING OF IT. I THINK THAT'S ACCURATE AND I DO WANT TO HONOR THAT AS WELL. SO IT'S HSR EXCUSE ME MINIMUM AS FAR AS 1.5 AS TOM SHARED, THE C FOUR ZONING DISTRICT HAS A .40.4 AND OBVIOUSLY THAT'S APPLICABLE TO OTHER SITES NOT JUST IN THE SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT, THE C TWO ZONING DISTRICT OF COURSE THE MALL OF AMERICA THE THUNDERBIRD SITE DOES NOT HAVE A MINIMUM EFFORT AS A MAXIMUM 2.0 THE ELECT ZONING DISTRICT THE PORTION ALONG LYNDALE WHERE THE SICK CAMPUS AND THE DEVELOPMENT ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF LYNDALE HAS A MINIMUM OF 0.7 AND I T INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY SO THAT'S THE KELLY OR O'NEILL FARMS PER SE FARM WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL THAT POLAR THOSE TECHNOLOGY CAMPUS SITES THAT HAS A MINIMUM FLOOR AREA RATIO OF 0.4 AND I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY. I WILL SHARE THAT IN SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS AND IT WAS MOSTLY YOU KNOW YOU KNOW WELL EXPERIENCED DEVELOPER AND SOUTH I'LL PUT IT THAT WAY I DON'T WANT TO PUT THEIR NAME ON THE SPOT BUT I WANT TO SHARE TOO THAT THEY DID SHARE CONCERNS ABOUT HEIGHT LIMITS A MINIMUM HEIGHT EXPECTATION. I DO KNOW THAT ACHIEVING FLOURISH RATIO DOES GIVE THEM MORE FLEXIBILITY TO EXECUTE THAT THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF A FULL SITE PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT THAT THEY'RE EXECUTING AND THAT'S MY THAT'S MY RESPONSE AS WELL. I THINK THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS WHAT PLANNING STAFF HAS BEEN FOCUSED ON IS WE WANT TO SEE GOOD URBAN DESIGN, WE WANT TO SEE THE BUILDINGS CLOSE TO THE STREET WITH GOOD PEDESTRIAN ACCESS FRAMING THE STREET WELL AND MEETING THOSE KIND OF CORE GOOD URBAN DESIGN PRINCIPLES. YOU CAN DO THAT WITH A FOUR STORY BUILDING BELIEVE IT OR NOT. IN SOME CASES IT MIGHT NOT MEET THE EXPECTATIONS OF A PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT BUT IT CAN COMPLY WITH THOSE URBAN DESIGN PRINCIPLES. SO I, I ACTUALLY AGREE WITH THE SENTIMENT OVERALL WELCOME TIMES YOU TWO IF HE WANTS TO ANYTHING ELSE BUT I THINK GOING AT IT FROM A RATIO IS A BETTER WAY AND WOULD BE MORE SUPPORTED FROM THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY JUST BASED ON MY CONVERSATIONS AGAIN NOT SPEAKING FOR THEM THE THAN A MINIMUM HEIGHT EXPECTATION AND THAT ALSO GETS YOU OUT OF KIND OF THOSE TRICKY CONVERSATIONS AROUND WELL WHAT USED TO WE EXPECT TO BE 60FT DOES A TECHNOLOGY BUILDING NEED TO BE 60FT AS A MULTIFAMILY? IT KIND OF TAKES YOU OUT OF SOME OF THAT TO AN EXTENT. ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY KEVIN TUSKY HAS HIS HAND RAISED. >> MR. TUSKY YEAH, I CAN. CHAIR CAN YOU HEAR ME? WE CAN. OKAY. THANKS. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE JUST TO KIND OF ADD ON TO WHAT NICK SAID A LITTLE BIT AGO CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS I THINK IF YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT HEIGHT MINIMUMS THAT'S BETTER LEFT TO THE ZONING CODE. YOU'LL FIND A SECTION IN THERE ALREADY ON HEIGHT THAT GOVERNS HEIGHT MINIMUMS AND DIFFERENT THINGS. ONE THING YOU HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND IS THAT WHEN PEOPLE COME IN FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS YOU'RE GOING TO SEE, YOU KNOW, FACTORS IN THE C, U P OR FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN R CONFORMANCE WITH A DISTRICT PLAN OR CONFORMANCE WITH THE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND IF YOU HAVE VERY PRESCRIPTIVE STANDARDS IN THE DISTRICT PLAN, IT'S GOING TO BE TOUGH FOR SOME OF THE NUANCE SITUATIONS TO BE APPROVED TO MAKE THOSE FINDINGS RIGHT. SO THAT'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT I THINK WOULD BE BETTER LEFT TO THE ZONING CODE IF THERE'S A CERTAIN HEIGHT LIMIT OR DIFFERENT ZONING CODES WITHIN THE SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT OR AN OVERALL MINIMUM CERTAINLY THE LANGUAGE CAN BE GENERAL IN THE SOUTH DISTRICT PLAN UPDATE THAT YOU'RE CONTEMPLATING NOW BUT I DON'T THINK THERE SHOULD BE PRESCRIPTIVE STANDARDS IN THERE JUST BECAUSE THERE'S RUNWAY DISTRICTS, THERE'S DIFFERENT USES, THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS GOING ON IN THAT DISTRICT THAT COULD AFFECT HOW HEIGHT A BUILDING CAN BE BASED ON THOSE THINGS. SO I WOULD JUST BE MY TAKE ON THE WHOLE KIND OF DISCUSSION HERE AND THANKS FOR THE TIME. MR. JOHNSON THANK YOU CHAIR COOKED AND YEAH I WOULD I WOULD ECHO WHAT KEVIN SAID IN TERMS OF YOU CAN'T SEEK A VARIANCE TO SOMETHING IN A DISTRICT PLAN OR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN YOU CAN'T SEEK PRE FLEXIBILITY TO KIND OF ACCOUNT TO THOSE UNIQUE SITUATION. SO I THINK JUST ADDING ON THAT I ECHO THE POINT ABOUT SOME OF THIS SOME OF THESE EXPECTATIONS OR PRESCRIPTIVE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS DO FIT BETTER OR FUNCTION BETTER IN THE ZONING CODE THAN IN A DISTRICT PLAN OR THE COMP PLAN. THANK YOU MR. JOHNSON. I FEEL LIKE WE'RE IN A BIT OF A PICKLE HERE. I THINK I'M HEARING PRETTY CONCLUSIVELY THAT WE ALL WANT SOMETHING AND WE CAN'T HAVE IT . I'M NOT SURE HOW WE I'M NOT SURE HOW WE DO THAT. FISHER WAIT, MR. CHAIR I MEAN I THINK THAT WE'VE GOTTEN SOME CLEAR ADVICE FROM STAFF THAT THERE ARE OTHER LEVERS THAT WE COULD EXPLORE. I THINK THAT PERHAPS WE COULD ASK STAFF TO WORK WITH US TO EXPLORE SOME OF THOSE LEVERS MOVING FORWARD. WE'RE ABOUT TO TALK ABOUT OUR WORK PLAN FOR NEXT YEAR COMING UP PERHAPS THIS COULD BE ADDED AS AN ITEM FOR THAT. YOU KNOW, I THINK I GUESS I, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NOTHING IN THE PLAN IF WE IF WE PUT THIS AMENDMENT FORWARD THAT THERE'S NOTHING IN THE PLAN AS IT'S CURRENTLY WRITTEN THAT WOULD GET IN THE WAY OF US MAKING THESE CHANGES THROUGH FOURTH FLOOR AREA RATIO OR OTHER ZONING AMENDMENTS THAT THE THE CURRENT YOU KNOW THE LANGUAGE IF WE ACCEPT WHAT'S BEEN PROPOSED TONIGHT THAT IT DOESN'T GET IN THE WAY OF MAKING THE CHANGES WE WANT TO SEE MADE THROUGH OTHER LEVERS THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO US. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. WE SO MY OVERALL TAKE THANK YOU CHAIR MY OVERALL TAKE ON THIS IS I GENERALLY ARE ALMOST ALWAYS MY PRINCIPAL I GUESS I SHOULD SAY IS I'M FOR LIKE LETTING THE MARKET TAKE ITS COURSE AND LIKE MINIMAL INTERFERENCE YOU KNOW ASIDE FOR LIKE SAFETY DAYS LIKE THAT FROM GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE I SHOULD SAY CITY INTERFERENCE. AND HOWEVER I DO UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, THE SOUTHALL DISTRICT THERE IS CERTAIN THERE IS CERTAIN VISION RIGHT. AND THAT MANY PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN BLOOMINGTON ORPECIFICALLY IN THAT AREA SOUTH LOOP MOST MAY NOT AGREE WITH THE WAY IT'S HEADING. RIGHT. AND I DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND AND I PERCEIVE WILL LIKE TO SEE IT LOOK A CERTAIN WAY AS WELL IF IT DID BOIL DOWN TO LIKE IF WE HAD TO CHOOSE I SHOULD SAY FROM LIKE ESTHETICS FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM VERSUS YOU KNOW THE FREE MARKET TAKING ITS COURSE. I WOULD I WOULD CHOOSE A FREE MARKET, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY IF IT IF YOU KNOW THIS WOULD NOT HAVING A LIMIT WOULD INCREASE CERTAIN INDUSTRIES OR BUSINESSES AND BRING MORE REVENUE AND THEN YOU KNOW SEEING HOW THAT PLAYS OUT BUT THAT'S MY OVERALL SUMMARY WHEN I LIKE WHEN I COME TO A MIDDLE GROUND IN MY MIND AT LEAST. SO THAT'S ME VOCALIZING THAT. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU, JACK CAN I RESPOND ,MR. JOHNSON THANK YOU. SORRY. I'M SPEAKING MORE THAN I DESIRE TO HEAR. SORRY. JUST TO RESPOND TO THE QUESTION OR THAT ELEMENT PROPOSED BY OR POSED BY COMMISSIONER WHITE RATHER I JUST WANT TO REITERATE THAT FROM STAFF'S VIEWPOINT IN TERMS OF THE DOCUMENT WHAT IS IN BEFORE YOU RIGHT NOW STAFF DOES NOT BELIEVE IT WOULD PRECLUDE THE CITY FROM INCREASING THE EXPECTATIONS AROUND FOR THE ZONING CODE IS IN EFFECT AN INTERPRETATION OF THE HIGH LEVEL GUIDANCE OF YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND DISTRICT PLANS. SO IF THAT'S THE DESIRE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT IN SOME INSTANCES WERE NOT MEETING THE DESIRE TO AIR IN SOME OF THE DEVELOPMENT THAT IS RESULTING IN THE AREA, WE CERTAINLY CAN EXPRESS THAT STRONGLY TO THE CITY COUNCIL. WE CAN LET THEM KNOW THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS CONSIDERING AND CERTAINLY YES YOU HAVE EVERY OPPORTUNITY BUT THROUGH YOUR WORK PLAN ARE OTHER WAYS TO JUST INITIATE A CITY CODE AMENDMENT TO EXECUTE THOSE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS IN SUCH A WAY. CERTAINLY WE WOULD WANT TO DO SOME STUDY AS IT RELATES TO THE SPECIFIC DISTRICTS AS I'VE MENTIONED IT HAS DIFFERENT USES AND DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT GOALS THAN THE HSR DISTRICT FOR EXAMPLE WHERE THE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT IS HAPPENING. SO IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S OF INTEREST TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT WE CAN PUT OUR HEADS TOGETHER ON AND STUDY FURTHER AND WE CAN LET THE CITY COUNCIL KNOW THAT INCREASING DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY OVERALL IS OF INTEREST TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THANK YOU, MR. JOHNSON. MR. RIMMER ALSO CAN I HAVE YOU PULL UP APPENDIX B AGAIN HERE THE PAGE 14 AND THIS THIS CHART GETS PUT IN FRONT OF US A LOT AND I HAVE A FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM WITH THIS WITH THIS CHART BECAUSE WE'RE WE'RE TOLD ALL THE TIME WELL ACTUALLY INDIGO IS JUST AS DANCER'S REFLECTIONS BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT FLOOR AREA RATIO INDIGO IS TECHNICALLY MORE DENSE THAN REFLECTIONS BUT THAT IGNORES THE FACT THAT YOU WOULD HAVE MORE GREEN SPACE THAN IF INDIGO WAS TALLER. SO IF INDIGO WAS TEN STORIES INSTEAD OF SIX WITH THE SAME NUMBER OF UNITS YOU'D HAVE ROOM FOR A POCKET PARK OR OTHER THINGS OUTSIDE AND INSTEAD THERE'S LIKE VERY, VERY LITTLE GREEN SPACE AT INDIGO WHERE REFLECTIONS ACTUALLY HAS QUITE A BIT. AND SO THE IDEA THAT WE CAN BE JUST AS DENSE OUT OF SIX AS WE ARE AT 17 IS A FUNDAMENTAL FLAW. I UNDERSTAND LIKE OKAY IF WE PUT IT ON A CHART AND DISPLAY IT THIS WAY YES BUT I HAVE A FUNDAMENTAL DISAGREEMENT WITH THIS AND THAT TO ME FLOOR AREA RATIO IS NOT ALWAYS THE END ALL BE ALL OF OF HOW TO LOOK AT THIS IF WE COULD GO BACK JUST ONE PAGE HERE AND I'D LIKE TO JUST GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY OR GIVE MYSELF AT LEAST THE OPPORTUNITY TO READ THIS LAST PARAGRAPH AGAIN BECAUSE THIS ULTIMATELY IS WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO APPROVE OR RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF OR NOT. SO IT SAYS ULTIMATELY THE CITY COUNCIL THE CITY WILL ALLOW DEVELOPERS TO DETERMINE THE OPTIMAL BUILDING CONSTRUCTION TYPE AS LONG AS OTHER GOALS OF THE SOUTH DISTRICT PLAN ARE ADVANCED ESPECIALLY GIVEN OTHER CHALLENGE CHALLENGING DEVELOPMENT DYNAMICS OR REQUIREMENTS WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO IT I JUST CAN'T SUPPORT THAT. I CAN'T SUPPORT THAT LANGUAGE ALLOWING THE DEVELOPERS TO DO IT THEMSELVES HAS RESULTED IN WHAT WILL ULTIMATELY IF THEY BREAK GROUND ON IT THIS YEAR OR NEXT A FOUR STOREY BUILDING AT BLOOMINGTON CENTRAL STATION I CAN'T SUPPORT IT SO FOR ME WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK FOR ME TO BE IN FAVOR OF THIS. IT WOULD HAVE TO BE AN ALTERNATE OR SOMETHING. EITHER WE DO THE VERY BLUNT APPROACH OF SAYING OKAY WE'RE JUST GOING TO SAY 60FT WHICH WE'VE HEARD HAS SOME ISSUES OR WE MAKE A MOTION THAT SAYS SOMETHING LIKE WE'RE WE ARE RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL GIVE THIS GIVE THIS GREATER CONSIDERATION TO BE STUDIED AT A LATER DATE OR SOMETHING VERY SPECIFIC. MY CONCERN OF LET'S JUST APPROVE IT NOW AND WE CAN ALWAYS COME BACK TO IT AND SORRY THAT WAS A BIT OF A BLASÉ WAY TO SAY THAT MY THE APPROACH OF LET'S APPROVE IT NOW AND WE ALWAYS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CHANGE IT. I KNOW HOW LONG IT TAKES FOR THESE THINGS TO COME BACK. I'VE BEEN ASKING FOR SIX YEARS JUST TO SEE THIS PLAN AND NICHOLAS SUPPORT ME ON THAT. I ASKED IN 2019 WHAT ARE WE GOING TO UPDATE THE SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT PLAN AND ONLY NOW TONIGHT ARE WE FINALLY TAKING ACTION ON IT CAN TAKE MANY, MANY YEARS FOR THIS STUFF TO COME BACK. THE HOPE THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO COME BACK TO IT NEXT YEAR IS IN MY OPINION UNREALISTIC. WE HAVE A LOT ON OUR WORK PLAN AND WE USUALLY DON'T GET TO EVERYTHING ANYWAY AND WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY LIKE TONIGHT. NOW WE'RE TAKING ACTION ON SOMETHING NOW THIS IS OUR MOST EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY TO EITHER RECOMMEND DENIAL OF OR RECOMMEND THAT THIS IS NOT ADOPTED OR RECOMMEND A VERY SPECIFIC CHANGE OR LIKE THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A VERY CLEAR CHANGE TO THIS BECAUSE I WHERE IT'S AT TODAY I CAN'T SUPPORT IT IS WHERE I'M AT AND IT HAPPENED. MR.. ELSE YEAH. CHAIR CORRECT. AND PERHAPS REFLECTING OTHER PARTS OF THE PROPOSED ADDENDUM WE DO HAVE LANGUAGE WHERE WE ACKNOWLEDGE STUDIES ARE ONGOING AND THAT THE THE CONTENTS OF THE PLAN WILL DEFER TO THE RESULTS OF THOSE STUDIES. SO WE TALK ABOUT THAT WITH REGARD TO OFFICE REUSE AIRPORT REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING SO WE COULD AN ALTERNATIVE THAT I'M PROPOSING WE DON'T NECESSARILY OBVIOUSLY DON'T DO IT IS WE REEXAMINE THE LANGUAGE ON THE PAGE TO MAYBE SAY THAT WE ARE STUDYING THIS FURTHER OR A COMMITMENT THAT THE CITY WILL STUDY THIS AND ANALYZE APPROPRIATE HEIGHT REGULATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE SOUTH. THAT'S I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE CORRECT LANGUAGE BUT THAT IS A POSTURE THAT WE COULD ADOPT IF THAT MAY RESOLVE THIS THIS DISAGREEMENT AND GET YOUR SUPPORT FOR MOVING THE DOCUMENT ALONG. THANK YOU, MR. MORALES SO MAYBE YOU'D BE HELPFUL TO TAKE YOUR CHAIR. MAYBE IT'D BE HELPFUL TO HAVE LIKE A SPECIFIC DATE IF THAT WAS JUST, YOU KNOW. YEAH. THOUGHT ABOUT IT. MR. CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU, CHAIR. I'M IN AGREEMENT THAT IT'S DISAPPOINTING AND I APPRECIATE THE GUIDANCE FROM STAFF AND THE CANDIDNESS OF KIND OF PUT US IN A PICKLE. BUT YES, IT'S IT'S IT'S ALWAYS GOOD TO HAVE A FULL PICTURE AND HAVE SOMEONE KIND OF POKING HOLES IN OUR ARGUMENTS BECAUSE SOMETIMES WE WE PAT EACH OTHER ON THE BACK UP HERE I LIKE PLANNER FRIENDLIER ALSO AND IDEA OF OF ADDING IN YOU KNOW SUBJECT TO THE FINDINGS OF THIS STUDY I LIKE THE OPTION THAT COMMISSIONER IS AHEAD OF TRYING TO HAVE A TIME LIMIT FOR IT REALIZING THAT YES OUR WORK PLAN IS SLAMMED SO I WHAT DID FORMER CHAIR ALBRECHT ALWAYS JUST SAY DON'T LET PERFECT GET IN THE WAY OF GOOD I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO FIND THAT TONIGHT WITH THIS ISSUE AND TAKE ACTION AS IT SITS THERE'S THERE'S THINGS I I'M A LITTLE SAD THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE TRAILHEADS THIS ONE OF THEM ESPECIALLY THE TRAIL LEADING OVER TO FORT SNELLING EVEN I KNEW THAT WAS A MOONSHOT SO YOU KNOW I'M I'M IN FAVOR SO LONG AS WE CAN IMPLEMENT THAT LANGUAGE AS MR. AND MR. OLSON OUTLINED. CHRISTOPHER CUNNINGHAM ARE YOU CONSIDERING OR SUGGESTING OF STRIKING SOME OF THIS LANGUAGE PERHAPS? YOU KNOW ONE OF MY CONCERNS AND I DON'T WANT TO SWAY YOUR DECISION HERE BUT THIS GETS APPROVED THAT'S THAT IS AN APPROVED DOCUMENT. SO IF THAT A DEVELOPMENT COMES BEFORE US FOR ANOTHER FOUR STORY DEVELOPMENT AND GOING CENTRAL STATION OR THAT'S WHAT'S ON THE BOOKS I WOULD SAY AND TOM I'M SORRY IF I'M PARAPHRASING WHAT YOU JUST SAID INCORRECTLY THAT INSTEAD OF STRIKING SOME OF THIS LANGUAGE WE WOULD ADD LANGUAGE TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, SUBJECT TO THE FINDINGS OF, YOU KNOW, A STUDY. AND SO I DON'T I DON'T KNOW IF I WOULD WANT TO STRIKE ANY OF IT BECAUSE DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENTS ALWAYS BALANCE ON THE EDGE OF A KNIFE AND SO THE ENTITLEMENTS ARE PART OF IT OVERALL CAPITAL MARKETS ARE PART OF IT RENTS YOU KNOW, MOVEMENT OF PEOPLE WHAT'S GOING ON AROUND THE DEVELOPMENT ALWAYS IMPACTS A LOT AS WELL AND SO YOU KNOW CONSTRUCTION PRICING AS WELL SOMETIMES HAS A BIG IMPACT. AND SO I I THINK I'M HAPPY WE HAVE A SOUTH OF DISTRICT PLAN. I THINK IT'S GOOD THAT WE ARE PUSHING FOR THIS AND I'M PATIENT IF THESE WAIT 5 TO 10 YEARS FOR THE RIGHT MARKET CONDITIONS TO BE REDEVELOPED, I THINK THAT THAT'S BETTER THAN GETTING SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BE THERE FOR 30 TO 40 YEARS. THAT ISN'T WHAT THE CITY OVERALL WANTS WITH THE SPACE BUT WE'RE REQUESTED TO TAKE ACTION TONIGHT AND SO IN THE INTEREST OF TRYING TO MOVE IT FORWARD FROM 2019 TILL NOW I'D BE OPEN TO ADDING IN SOME LANGUAGE NOT NECESSARILY STRIKING ANY WAS THAT SORRY THAT WAS VERY RAMBLING ANSWER TO THAT. I THINK IT'S A VERY DIFFICULT CONVERSATION. MR. JOHNSON WOULD I HAVE A QUESTION WOULD IN ACTION BEFORE US SO I MAKE ONE SUGGESTION NOW YES. SORRY. GO AHEAD. THAT WE CONSIDER PROACTIVELY REZONING SOME PARCELS WHICH KEEPS THE DENSITY IN THE ZONE OR THE USE INSTEAD OF IN THE YOU KNOW SORT OF BURIED SOUTH OF DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DOCUMENT. SO IT IS MORE CLOSELY ALIGNED WITH HOW THE CITY NORMALLY REGULATES DENSITY. BUT IN THIS CASE WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT WE STUDY PROACTIVELY REZONING SOME PARCELS WHICH EFFECTIVELY COULD RESULT IN HIGHER DENSITY ASKING IF THAT'S AN OPTION. YEAH CHAIR I THINK THAT'S ACTUALLY ALREADY REFLECTED IN THE PLAN WITH RESPECT TO THE ISSUE OF OFFICE CURRENTLY WE HAVE A NUMBER OF LOW DENSITY OFFICE PROPERTIES THAT ARE ZONED C FOUR AND ONE OF THE ELEMENTS OF THIS PLAN IS TO PROACTIVELY ENGAGE WITH THOSE LAND OWNERS TO SEE IF WE CAN ENCOURAGE THEM TO REZONE TO MIXED USE ZONING DISTRICTS THAT ALLOW MORE DENSITY AND RESIDENTIAL USES WHERE THEY'RE ALLOWED. SO I MEAN YES, YOU CERTAINLY CAN DO THAT. THE ONE CLARIFICATION I WANTED TO MAKE WITH RESPECT TO THE LANGUAGE THAT'S ON THE SCREEN IS I WANT TO BE CLEAR AND PRECISE ABOUT THE THE TEXT OF THE ACTUAL DOCUMENT IS THAT IT SAYS THAT THE CITY WILL ALLOW DEVELOPERS TO DETER DETERMINE THE OPTIMAL BUILDING CONSTRUCTION TYPE NOT MASS, NOT HEIGHT, NOT INTENSITY. SO YOU KNOW YOU CAN BUILD YOU CAN MEET THE LEVEL THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED TONIGHT WITH STRICT CONSTRUCTION AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT WAS THE DISCUSSION THAT WAS REFLECTED AT CITY COUNCIL AS YOU MENTIONED IS MUST IT BE STEEL CONSTRUCTION OR CAN IS IT ALLOWED TO BE WOOD THAT'S KIND OF THE FUNDAMENTAL POLICY OF ESPECIALLY FOR THE NEWER MEMBERS THAT'S THE FUNDAMENTAL POLICY QUESTION THAT STARTED THIS DISCUSSION IN A WAY. BUT I DO WANT TO BE PRECISE TO THE LANGUAGE THAT IT JUST TALKS ABOUT ALLOWING DEVELOPERS TO DETERMINE THE OPTIMAL CONSTRUCTION TYPE. IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY CAN FORGO OUR MINIMUM EXPECTATIONS AROUND THAT FOR OR OTHER STANDARDS OF OUR CODE. SO I APPRECIATE TOM SUGGESTION . I APPRECIATE WHAT COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM SAID. I MEAN YOU CERTAINLY YOU CAN ALSO SEE THE LAST SENTENCE IN THIS PARAGRAPH. IT TALKS ABOUT NO MATTER THE DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION TYPE THE CITY WILL ENFORCE OTHER SITE STANDARDS IMPORTANT TO TRANSFORMING THE SOUTH LOOP INTO AN URBAN AREA THAT'S VERY MUCH IN LINE WITH EXAMINING R AND WHAT OUR ZONING CODE STANDARDS ARE SO THEORETICALLY YOU COULD ADD BUILDING TO RIGHT BEFORE YOU CAN SEE THE THE SENTENCE I JUST READ THE CITY WILL ENFORCE OTHER SITE STANDARDS YOU COULD INCLUDE OTHER BUILDING AND SITE STANDARDS AND YOU COULD ALSO ADD A SENTENCE TO THE END OF THAT THAT SUGGESTS THAT THE CITY WILL STUDY VARIOUS DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY REQUIREMENTS OF THE UNDERLYING ZONING DISTRICTS TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE GETTING ADEQUATE OR MEETING EXPECTATIONS AROUND DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY INCLUDING AIR MASS HEIGHT. YOU CAN LIST THOSE THINGS AND THAT WOULD DRIVE US THE PLAN WOULD THEN CALL FOR THE CITY TO PURSUE STUDY OF THOSE ELEMENTS. THE I'M NOT I'LL BE HONEST I'M NOT MAKING A TIME CLOCK AND THINGS ALWAYS MAKES ME A LITTLE BIT NERVOUS BECAUSE YOU KNOW THE NATURE OF OUR BUSINESS BUT WE'RE OF COURSE GOING TO EXECUTE WHAT THE PLAN SAYS AND WHAT YOU ALL IN THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE. SO BUT THOSE ARE JUST SOME OF MY QUICK THOUGHTS IN TERMS OF HOW THAT DISCUSSION IS DEVELOPING AND EVOLVING OVER TIME HERE. ANNIE YEAH, JUST TO BUILD ON THAT I'M WONDERING ALTHOUGH NOW BASED ON WHAT PLANNING COMMISSIONER JOHNSON SAID, I THINK THIS IS GOING TO NEGATE WHAT I'M ABOUT TO SAY BUT I'M WONDERING IF WE HAVE TO INCLUDE THAT SENTENCE AT ALL OR THE ULTIMATE WE THE CITY WILL ALLOW DEVELOPERS TO DETERMINE THAT SENTENCE AND INSTEAD COULD JUST START THE PARAGRAPH WITH NO MATTER THE DESIGNER CONSTRUCTION TYPE THE CITY WILL ENFORCE SITE STANDARDS IMPORTED TO TRANSFORMING. IN SOME WAYS I THINK THAT LINE OPENS THIS THE MENTAL SPACE TO DEVELOPERS TO GO WELL GUESS WHAT I GUESS I DON'T NEED TO DO THIS BUT IF YOU TAKE THE PARAGRAPH ABOVE IT DROP THAT ULTIMATELY SAME SENTENCE AND PERHAPS ADD SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT YOUR THAT PLANNING MANAGER JOHNSON SAID IT TACITLY SENDS THE MESSAGE THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR SIX FLOORS MINIMUM IF YOU TAKE THE TWO TOGETHER OBVIOUSLY IT'S NOT ENFORCEABLE BUT IT DOESN'T MAKE IT QUITE AS COMMON BUILD A FOUR STOREY BUILDING AS IT CURRENTLY IS WRITTEN. THANK YOU . IT'S NO FUN BEING THE CHAIR YOU GUYS ARE. I PROMISE. COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM CAN WE TABLE THIS FOR A COUPLE OF MINUTES? I JUST KNOW COMMISSIONER WHITE HAD SOME COMMENTS ON SUSTAINABILITY THAT YOU WANTED TO BRING UP DURING OUR DISCUSSION AND HAD YOU KNOW I FEEL LIKE MAYBE A BREATHING PERIOD AND THEN KIND OF REFOCUSING UNLESS WE WANT TO IF WE IF EVERYONE ELSE WANTS TO JUST KEEP ROLLING ON THIS I'M FINE ROLLING JUST JUST THE THOUGHT WELL I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO TAKE A MINUTE TO DESCRIBE TO THE DISCUSS MY DISAPPOINTMENT WITH THE LACK OF CONNECTION WITH THOSE TRAILS. I THINK THAT IS SO CRITICAL TO THE SUCCESS OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. I MEAN YOU'VE GOT THIS ASSET OF THE BLUFF AND THAT'S THE TYPE OF TENANT YOU WANT TO DRAW THE OUTDOOR PEOPLE, RIGHT? AND WE CAN'T EVEN GET THEM DOWN THERE AND SO THAT'S ANOTHER REASON I MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO LIKE EVEN IF WE WERE ABLE TO SOLVE THIS FIVE ON ONE THAT WAS MY OTHER BIG HANG UP WAS THE SHOWING THOSE TRAILS NO LONGER CONNECTED BECAUSE THE MOMENT WE PUT THAT IN THE DOCUMENT IT IS LIKE DONE FOREVER AND LIKE IT'S IT'S ALWAYS BEEN SHOWN THAT THEY WOULD BE CONNECTED AND I KNOW IT WAS JUST LIKE A NICE WELL BEING DASH LINE THAT WAS LIKE NOT ACTUALLY STUDIED OR WHATEVER AND NOW WE'VE STUDIED IT AND WE FOUND DIFFICULTIES BUT FOR ME I AM LIKE A SOLUTIONS DRIVEN PERSON LIKE WHAT'S IT GOING TO TAKE TO MAKE IT HAPPEN? WE HAVE TO BRIBE BY PRIVATE PROPERTY. HOW MUCH IS A COST LIKE I WOULD HAVE I WOULD HAVE PREFERRED TO SEE THAT ANALYSIS WRITTEN IN HERE LIKE THE CITY TO CONNECT THESE TRAILS THE CITY WOULD NEED TO BUY THESE PARCELS OF LAND AND AT LEAST THEN HERE A PLANNING COMMISSION WE COULD HAVE HEARD WE'VE APPROACHED THE LANDOWNER. WE THINK IT WOULD BE THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY OR WHATEVER AND I KNOW LIKE THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOESN'T DEAL WITH MONEY AND WHATEVER BUT LIKE IT WASN'T ENOUGH FOR ME TO FEEL LIKE THIS ISN'T DEAD FOREVER. LIKE TO ME I FEEL LIKE IF WE APPROVE THIS DOCUMENT THOSE TRAILS ARE NEVER GETTING CONNECTED. I MEAN THAT IS LIKE I HATE TO PUT LIKE THE BURDEN OF THE WORLD ON US BUT MAN THAT IS LIKE AS A CRITICAL THING TO NOT CONNECT THOSE TRAILS AND THEY'RE BOTH BEAUTIFUL AND THEY'RE SEPARATE AND THEY'RE SO CLOSE AND LIKE OKAY I APPRECIATE IT THERE ARE WETLANDS THERE AND I'M ALL ABOUT PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT. I REALLY AM AND ALL THE THINGS AND I JUST WAS HOPING TO SEE MORE MORE OF AN ANALYSIS AS TO WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO MAKE IT HAPPEN INSTEAD OF JUST REMOVING IT. I'M NOT READY TO TOTALLY TAKE THOSE OFF THE TABLE. COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM I AGREE I WAS BUMMED ABOUT THE TRAILHEADS AND WE HOLDING THE RULES AND PROCEDURES BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR ARE WE ALLOWED TO ASK FURTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? YES. IF I MAY CHAIR MS. LONG ARE YOU STILL ON? YES. COULD YOU CLARIFY YOU HAD MENTIONED YOU KNOW, WHAT WAS WHAT WAS YOUR CATASTROPHIC OR SOME SORT OF FAILURE OF THE ENGINEERING WHERE IT WAS KIND OF A NONSTARTER? COULD YOU PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT MORE COLOR ON KIND OF WHAT WAS THE THE STRAW THAT BROKE THE CAMEL'S BACK ON THESE TRAILS? >> I CAN TRY ONE OF MY FAVORITE MAPS THAT MY STAFF WILL TELL YOU I LOVE TO TRY IT OUT IS THE HENNEPIN COUNTY LANDSLIDE MAP. AND SO HENNEPIN COUNTY HAS TAKEN AN INVENTORY ALONG THE BLUFF OF WHERE LANDSLIDES HAVE ALREADY OCCURRED, WHERE SCARPS HAVE OCCURRED. AND SO I USE THAT IN A LOT OF MY DECISION MAKING. AND SO WHEN WE ARE LOOKING AT THESE TRAILHEADS, I WANT THEM TO IT WOULD BE LOVELY IF WE COULD HAVE THE CONNECTIONS DOWN THERE. I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING PLANNING COMMISSION IS SAYING ON THAT. MY ISSUE IS THAT WHEN WE LOOK AND DO THE DEEPER INVESTIGATION AND WE FIND THAT THERE'S ALREADY BEEN A LANDSLIDE I DON'T KNOW IF YOU REMEMBER SOME HOUSES PROBABLY A DECADE MAYBE 20 YEARS AGO IN EDEN PRAIRIE THAT ENDED UP BEING BUILT ON THE TOP OF THE BLUFF AND THEN START THE LAND STARTED TO GO AWAY THAT HAS ALWAYS LINGERED IN MY MEMORY AND SO I DON'T WANT THAT TO HAPPEN HERE IN BLOOMINGTON. SO THAT'S ONE THING THAT WE ALSO WE LOOK AT AS I'VE MENTIONED WE HAVE WETLANDS AND PRIVATE PROPERTY AND YES, WE CAN LOOK AT OTHER ALTERNATIVES. COULD WE INSTALL A BOARDWALK? YES. COULD WE APPROACH PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS FOR PROCURING PARK EASEMENTS ON THEIR PROPERTY? YES. BUT THAT ALL TAKES MONEY AND THE DIRECTION I HAVE BEEN PROVIDED HAS BEEN. YOU STILL HAVE THREE OTHER OPTIONS ON THE TABLE. LET'S GO EXPLORE THOSE AND PUT THESE OTHER TWO ON THE SHELF FOR NOW. SO IF THERE'S DIRECTION AND FUNDING WE CAN CERTAINLY PUT THEM ON BUT CURRENTLY BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW IT IS NOT OUR RECOMMENDATION TO CONTINUE TO SHOW THOSE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. JUST KIND OF IMMEDIATELY RESPONDING TO THAT IF THAT'S THE KIND OF ROBERT'S RULES WHERE THE REST I'D BE IN TOTAL FAVOR OF BOARDWALKS I'D LIKE TO WORK A COUPLE TIMES A MONTH IN EXCELSIOR AND I TAKE THEM OUT CREEK REGIONAL TRAIL THREE DINER ALL THE WAY TO HOPKINS SO IT'S MILES AND MILES OF BOARDWALKS AND I THINK THAT THERE'S A RIGHT WAY TO DO THEM THROUGH WETLANDS WITHOUT IMPACTING THEM GREATLY AND IT'S A IN THE MORNINGS AT FIVE IN THE MORNING IT'S NOT TOO CROWDED BUT IN THE AFTERNOONS IT IS A DENSELY PACKED ENOUGH TO SLOW A BIKE RIDE OR DOWN BOARDWALK AND USED ASSET IN THE CITY OF EDEN. SO I WOULD I WOULD IF I COULD GIVE DIRECTION I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF THEM KNOWING THAT THEY'RE EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE AND WE DON'T HOLD THE PURSE STRINGS. THANKS FOR THAT PERSPECTIVE COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM. I TOO AM IN FAVOR OF IT. AND LOOK, I MEAN I WANT TO BE AS SENSITIVE TO PUBLIC FUNDING AS MUCH AS ANYBODY AND IF YOU KNOW IF IT COMES DOWN TO YOU ALL RIGHT, WE'RE GOING TO BUILD THE TRAILHEADS FIRST AND THE LAST PIECE OF THIS THEN IS THE CONNECTION. MAYBE IT IS 15 YEARS FROM NOW. MY CONCERN IS TAKING IT OUT OF THE PLAN. WE'RE NOT THE PLAN DOESN'T AUTHORIZE ANY FUNDING. IT JUST SAYS THIS IS IMPORTANT TO US AND WE WANT TO KEEP IT AS AN OPTION ON THE TABLE. AND SO TO ME TAKING IT OUT OF THE PLAN TELLS FUTURE PLANNERS WE DON'T NEED TO WORRY ABOUT THAT. WE'RE NOT GOING TO WORK. IT'S IT'S NOT IN THE PLAN. IT'S NOT IT'S NOT THE PLAN. I WANT TO KEEP IT IN THE PLAN WHETHER WE HAVE THE MONEY FOR TODAY OR NOT TO SIGNAL THAT IT IS REMAINS IMPORTANT TO US AND THAT HOPEFULLY GRANTS OTHER THINGS BECOME AVAILABLE DOWN THE ROAD AND THAT IF IT IF IT'S A $5 MILLION BOARDWALK, MAYBE THERE'S A DONOR THAT WANTS TO COME FORWARD WITH THAT OR MAYBE IT'S IMPORTANT TO MALL OF AMERICA OR MAYBE WE GET A BASKETBALL ARENA HERE AND ALL OF A SUDDEN WE HAVE LOTS OF ATTENTION ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND PEOPLE ARE MORE AND WANT TO BIKE TO A TIMBERWOLVES GAME. I DON'T KNOW BUT I'M NOT READY TO NOT HAVE IT IN THE PLAN BECAUSE TO ME THAT THAT KILLS IT IN PERPETUITY AND SO THAT THOSE WERE THE TWO THINGS WAS THAT THE HIGH MINIMUM AND THIS THAT I HAVE A VERY HARD TIME APPROVING THIS OR RECOMMENDING APPROVAL RATHER WITHOUT THAT CONNECTION BEING SHOWN COMMISSION REASON I THANK YOU CHAIR I, I ALSO AGREE THAT IT'S BETTER TO HAVE IT JUST THERE AND IF IT NEEDS TO BE EXPLORED IN THE FUTURE THEN IT COULD. BUT NOT HAVING IT IS ESPECIALLY NOT HAVING IT IS NOT GOOD ESPECIALLY KNOWING THAT OR KNOWING THAT IT WE WE COULD BUILD IT YOU KNOW I KNOW THE BLUFFS SAFETY ISSUE OBVIOUSLY THAT THAT'S LIKE A NON-NEGOTIABLE FROM AT LEAST MY PERSPECTIVE RIGHT NO WE DON'T WANT TO SEE ANYONE DIE SO BUT LIKE WHEN IT COMES TO LIKE THE BOARDWALK HAVING A HAVING THE OPTION TO HAVE IT OR HAVING THE OPTION TO HAVE THIS CITY APPROACH THIS PRIVATE LAND OWNER IS BETTER THAN NOT HAVING IT THERE. ANOTHER THING AND JUST A THIS JUST A COMMON I GUESS IS LIKE LIKE THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT WE DISCUSSED IN THE PAST LIKE IT WAS LIKE I THINK WAS LIKE A TRAFFIC REPORT ON A LONG ROAD IN WEST BLOOMINGTON THAT WAS BROUGHT FORTH AND YOU KNOW IT WAS KIND OF PUT ON US AND I WAS PROBABLY ONE OF THE ONLY ONES THAT DISAGREE WITH CERTAIN ASPECTS OF IT. AND SO IT'S AND I KNOW WE'RE NOT WE DON'T MAKE MONEY DECISIONS BUT WHEN CERTAIN PROJECTS ARE BROUGHT FORTH AND THAT YOU KNOW, IT'S CONSIDERED WE SHOULD ASPECTS OF A CERTAIN PROJECT SHOULD CHANGE BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHERE WE'RE STUDYING THIS AREA ANYWAYS AND AND AND THEN WHEN I SEE THIS WHERE IT'S LIKE CERTAINTIES WASN'T CONSIDERED AND THIS IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME BASICALLY IF THAT MAKES SENSE IT'S KIND OF HARD TO EXPLAIN BUT YEAH, THAT'S MY OVERALL TAKE ON THIS. THE COMMISSIONER IS IS THAT I THINK FOR SURE WE GO AHEAD. THANK YOU CHAIR YEAH, I AGREE. I MEAN I THINK EVEN AS AN ASPIRATIONAL LIGHTLY DOTTED LINE I THINK IT WOULD BE NICE TO SEE IT ADDED BACK IN. I THINK THAT AGAIN AS YOU SAID IT'S NOT A GUARANTEE WILL HAPPEN BUT AT LEAST INDICATING THAT THERE'S INTEREST IN IT AND INDICATING THAT THERE'S THAT IT IS A PRIORITY OR MAYBE IT'S A BIT OF A WISH AT THIS POINT BUT YOU KNOW, MAYBE IT'S A DIFFERENT COLOR DOTTED LINE TO SHOW THAT IT'S ASPIRATIONAL OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT JUST TO SEE THAT IT'S STILL SOMEWHERE OUT THERE IN THE IN THE UNIVERSE. THE OTHER THING I JUST WANT TO CIRCLE BACK TO THE TO THE BUILDING ENERGY CODES. I THINK MY QUESTION WAS ANSWERED. YOU KNOW, I THINK I JUST WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT I AGREE WITH THE LANGUAGE THAT THEY WANT TO PUT IN. I UNDERSTAND WHY THE LANGUAGE NEEDS TO BE IN THERE IN TERMS OF WHAT WE CAN REQUIRE OF PUBLICLY FUNDED BUILDINGS VERSUS PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT. BUT I DO JUST WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT I, I APPRECIATE THAT WE ARE CONTINUING TO SEE SUSTAINABILITY EFFORTS EMPHASIZED IN THE SOUTH LOOP AS THEY ARE ACROSS THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON. I THINK THAT'S A COMMITMENT THAT WE'VE MADE AS A CITY. I THINK IT'S PART OF OUR VISION AS A CITY MOVING FORWARD AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVEN AGAIN IF IT'S ASPIRATIONAL, MAKING SURE THAT THE LANGUAGE STAYS IN THERE, THAT ENCOURAGES DEVELOPERS TO TO AIM HIGH WHEN THEY'RE PLANNING THEIR DEVELOPMENTS, WHEN THEY'RE PLANNING THEIR BUILDINGS EVEN IF IT'S MAYBE NOT REQUIRED OF THEM. I THINK WE CAN EXPECT IT OF THEM AND WE SHOULD EXPECT IT OF THEM. WE SHOULD BE DEMANDING A HIGHER LEVEL OF OF QUALITY AND OF SUSTAINABILITY. WE WE WANT BLOOMINGTON TO BE KNOWN FOR THAT AND WE CAN'T DO THAT IF WE DON'T PUSH. SO I APPRECIATE THE NEED TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE BUT I ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T WEAKEN THE GOAL STATEMENTS ANY FURTHER THAN WE ALREADY HAVE. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. MR. SUMMERS THANK YOU, CHAIR. I WANT TO RESPOND A LITTLE BIT TO COMMERCIAL ESSAY AND ADD ON TO THAT I THINK YOUR SENTIMENTS OF OH SOME OF THESE THINGS FEEL CHALLENGING ALIGNS WITH FOR ME. THERE ARE TIMES WHERE AND I HAVE BEEN ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR LIKE FIVE MEETINGS MAYBE LESS THAN THAT, PROBABLY LESS THAN THAT WHERE I HAVEN'T BEEN PRESENTED INFORMATION LIKE THIS IN MY PROFESSIONAL LIFE THAT DID NOT HAVE DEMOGRAPHICS OR IMPACT NUMBERS ALIGNED. SO WHEN I HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN SURPRISED IS THAT WHEN SURVEY DATA HAS BEEN PRESENTED AND THAT IS NOT JUST FOR THIS THIS IS FOR OTHER THINGS TOO THAT THERE ARE NOT THERE'S NOT INFORMATION ON WHO THE PEOPLE ARE AND WHERE THEY LIVE. AND I THINK THAT THAT LEADS THE COMMISSIONERS TO MAKE ASSUMPTIONS THAT THE SURVEY DATA IS FROM THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THIS DISTRICT WHEN I THINK ABOUT PARKS AND PEOPLE USING A PROPOSED TRAIL IN THE BLUFF AREA WHICH IS BEAUTIFUL AND WE HAVE A REALLY WONDERFUL PROTECTED AREAS IN THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON, WHAT I WONDER IS WHAT IS THE INFORMATION THAT WE DON'T HAVE? HOW MANY PEOPLE WOULD BE IMPACTED BY A TRAIL LIKE THIS ? THOSE NUMBERS I THINK OFTEN LEAD TO DIRECT INVESTMENT FROM THE CITY. WE DON'T DEAL IN THE ACTUAL DOLLARS AND I THINK THAT THE DECISIONS THAT WE'RE MAKING MAKE A REAL IMPACT ON THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON AND IT CAN SOMETIMES FEEL LIKE NOT GETTING THE FULL PICTURE WHEN I'M LIKE I'M NOT QUITE SURE HOW MANY FAMILIES LIVE IN THE SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT. I AM NOT QUITE SURE HOW MANY PEOPLE IDENTIFY AS DIFFERENT RACES AND ETHNICITIES THAT CAN BE PERSONAL INQUIRY AS WELL AND I THINK THAT MAYBE SOME OF THAT INFORMATION COMING TO COMING IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSION ALONG WITH ALL OF THE REALLY GOOD WORK I THINK THAT THE CITY PLANNING IN BLOOMINGTON IS REALLY BEAUTIFUL AND HAS HAD A LONG HISTORY OF REALLY GREAT HARD WORK THAT THAT CAN HELP US AS NEIGHBORS MAKE MORE INFORMED DECISIONS FOR THE PEOPLE THAT WE ARE REPRESENTING. UM, I DON'T KNOW IF COMMISSIONER YOU SAY IF THAT DOESN'T ALIGN WITH WHAT YOU SAID PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CORRECT ME BUT I THINK YOU BRINGING THAT FORWARD HELPED ME FEEL A LITTLE BIT MORE CONFIDENT AS A NEWER COMMISSIONER SAYING I'M NOT SURE I HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION THAT I NEED TO MAKE REALLY INFORMED DECISIONS AND IT SEEMS LIKE ONE OF THE THINGS IS WHO IS LIVING IN THIS AREA PLAYING AND WORKING GROCERIES? >> YEAH I KNOW VERY WELL SAID YOU SAID THAT BETTER THAN I EVER COULD SO YEAH 100%. THANK YOU CHAIR WELL COMMISSION I'VE WRITTEN DOWN SOME OPTIONS FOR US HERE AND I THINK THE OPTIONS I SEE IS WE COULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL. WE COULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH MODIFICATIONS WE COULD RECOMMEND IN THIS CASE IT'S NOT DENIAL BUT WOULD BE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DOES NOT APPROVE THIS PLAN. A FOURTH OPTION WOULD BE THAT WE CONTINUE THIS ITEM FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION. AND MR. JOHNSON, I'D LIKE JUST A BIT OF MORE DISCUSSION ON THAT SO IF I THINK YOU'VE HEARD FAIRLY CLEARLY WHERE THE PLANNING COMMISSION STANDS ON BOTH OUR DESIRE FOR A POTENTIAL HEIGHT MINIMUM ALTHOUGH WE'RE NOT SURE EXACTLY HOW TO IMPLEMENT THAT AND THIS TRAIL CONNECTION WOULD AN OPTION BEFORE US BE TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM AND HAVE STAFF COME BACK BEFORE US WITH SOME RECOMMENDED MOTIONS THAT FIT OUR DESIRES BASED ON THE CONVERSATION YOU'VE HEARD THIS EVENING THE CHAIR COMMISSIONER COOKED IN EFFECTIVELY IF THERE'S SOME ELEMENT THAT CAN'T BE ADDED INTO THE PLAN THAT WILL GENERATE YOUR SUPPORT OR THE BODY SUPPORT IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN'T DO DESIGNING FROM THE DAIS THEN CERTAINLY OF COURSE YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO OR OPTION TO POSTPONE CONSIDERATION OF THIS ITEM. YOU HAVE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING SO IT WOULDN'T BE OPENING UP THE PUBLIC HEARING COMPONENT AGAIN UNLESS DIRECTED TO DO SO AND THAT WOULD DELAY SOME TIMING COMPONENT. BUT JUST FROM SITTING HERE I MEAN I THINK STAFF HAS HEARD YOU LOUDLY THAT THIS CONNECTION FROM, YOU KNOW, EAST OF HOG BACK PONDS NEAR KIND OF THE AIRPORT SAFETY ZONE IS IMPORTANT TO THE COMMISSION IF I CAN JUST MAKE ONE COMMENT ABOUT CITY ENGINEER LONG I'VE WORKED WITH HER FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME NOW AND I'VE BEEN IN A LOT OF MEETINGS WITH HER. IF THERE'S A LINE ON A PLAN JULIUS PROGRAMING IT INTO A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN. THE C I P SHE BUILDS THINGS SO IF YOU'RE WONDERING WHY SHE'S CONCERNED ABOUT PUTTING LINES ON MAPS AND PLANS BECAUSE SHE WORKS THROUGH THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND THAT'S WHO SHE IS AS A PROFESSIONAL THERE'S I WANT TO MAKE THAT COMMENT BUT I'VE CERTAINLY BEEN COMMUNICATING WITH HER. YOU KNOW, IF THE COMMISSION WANTS TO KEEP THAT TRAIL CONNECTION ON THE PLAN, I THINK THAT'S CERTAINLY DOABLE AND STAFF CAN REFLECT THAT. YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY SOME OTHER SYMBOLOGY TO REFLECT THAT IT'S A PHASE THREE OR A FUTURE PHASE CONNECTION IS CERTAINLY OPTION. SO THIS IS JUST MY EXAMPLE OF DESIGNING FROM THE DAIS. SO I THINK THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS TO HAVE ITS OWN TOLERANCE AS TO HOW CONFIDENT IT FEELS TO MAKE THESE RECOMMENDATIONS AND HAVE STAFF PRESENT THIS INFORMATION TO THE COUNCIL OR IF YOU WANT TO SEE IT COME BACK BEFORE TAKING A FORMAL ACTION. WE'LL FOLLOW YOUR GUIDANCE EITHER WAY ON THAT. IT REALLY HAS TO DO WITH THE MAP. AT THE HEART OF THE MATTER IS WHAT IS YOUR CONFIDENCE OR TOLERANCE IN TERMS OF US COMMUNICATING THAT DESIGNING FROM THE DAIS AS OPPOSED TO BRINGING IT BACK? TYPICALLY THE LAST THING I'LL SAY IS THAT TYPICALLY WHEN REQUESTING TO BRING THINGS BACK YOU KNOW THERE'S SOME ELEMENT OF RESEARCH AND YOU KNOW CERTAINLY WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THAT FOR IN THE BUILDING HEIGHTS AND THOSE THINGS ARE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN'T DO ON THE FLY FOR YOU IN ORDER TO MAKE A DECISION. THAT'S TYPICALLY WHEN WE POSTPONE CONSIDERATION WHICH REASON? YEAH, I'LL LET YOU GUYS DECIDE THE ACTUAL VOTING WAY BUT I JUST WANT TO GIVE A SUMMARY OF HOW I FEEL ABOUT THINGS OVERALL. YOU KNOW I'M OR WHAT I WOULD VOTE IF IT WAS SEPARATE I GUESS JUST I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL BUT FOR A HIGH MINIMUM I WOULD AFTER THINKING VERY DEEP ABOUT IT I WOULD PROBABLY NOT BE I'M NOT IN FAVOR RIGHT NOW. I'M NOT SURE WHAT I WAS AT THAT POINT. I THINK IT MIGHT MAY HINDER POTENTIALLY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. SO THAT'S THAT FOR THE CHAIR CONNECTION. I LOVE TO SEE THAT AND I LIKE I WOULD LOVE FOR THE FOR CITY STAFF TO HAVE MORE INFO OR MORE OUTREACH TO LIKE THE LAND OWNER OR SEE HOW POSSIBLE IT IS TO BUILD LIKE THAT AT THAT BRIDGE. YOU KNOW AND JUST OVERALL YEAH EXPLORING THOSE POSSIBILITIES BEFOREHAND YOU KNOW IT WOULD BE NICE AND THEN LASTLY THE DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT AS WELL. YEAH, IT'S ALL. THANK YOU CHAIR. MR. CUNNINGHAM IT KIND OF A POINT OF ORDER QUESTION ON PLANNING MANAGER JOHNSON'S STUFF SO I KNOW WE'VE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING SO IT WOULD NOT WE WOULD NOT HAVE ANY ISSUE ON OUR PUBLIC NOTIFICATIONS BUT THIS WILL ALSO BE GOING IN FRONT OF CITY COUNCIL AS A AS A PUBLIC HEARING CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. SO IF WE CONTINUE THIS TO THE 22 OR THE AUGUST 28TH MEETING AND RIGHT NOW IT'S PENCILED IN TO GO IN FRONT OF CITY COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 8TH THAT WOULD NOT BE ENOUGH TIME TO PUBLIC TO NOTIFY THE PUBLIC HEARING OR WOULD IT BE I GUESS CAN YOU ELABORATE ON THAT A LITTLE BIT? CHAIR COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM THANKS FOR THE QUESTION. WE WOULD SOMETIMES WE PRE ADVERTISE HEARINGS AT CITY COUNCIL PRIOR TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TAKING ACTION. IT'S NOT OUR FIRST CHOICE BECAUSE WE WANT YOUR DECISION MAKING PROCESS TO HAPPEN ORGANICALLY AND EVOLVE NATURALLY BEFORE ASSUMING WHEN THINGS ARE GOING TO ARRIVE AT COUNCIL. SO COULD WE. YES. WOULD WE PROBABLY NOT. WE WOULD DELAY THE PUBLIC HEARING AT CITY COUNCIL UNTIL YOU HAD TAKEN ACTION AND THAT TYPICALLY TAKES ABOUT YOU KNOW, 3 TO 4 WEEKS TO GET IT TO COUNCIL AFTER THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS TAKEN ACTION. SO THE ITEM WOULD LIKELY BE DELAYED LATER ON IN SEPTEMBER . BUT AGAIN, THE CITY'S THE APPLICANT. THERE IS NO AGENCY ACTION TIMELINE HERE. THERE'S NOT A SHOT CLOCK THEY ARE RUNNING UP AGAINST. SO I PROBABLY I HOPE THAT MEETS YOUR QUESTION. THANK YOU. TO ANSWER YOUR OR ADDRESS YOUR COMMENT ON THE DESIGNING FROM THE DAYS FROM THE TRAILHEAD SIDE OF THINGS I HAVE THE UTMOST CONFIDENCE AND STAFF TO CONNECT THE LINES AND PUT IT AS A PHASE THREE. I'M I'M STILL IN FAVOR OF WAS IT PAGE 13 OF THIS MR. AMBLER OLSON OF ADDING IN I COULDN'T SHORTHAND FAST ENOUGH BUT THE ADDING IN THE LANGUAGE TO THAT LAST PARAGRAPH OF THE YOU KNOW OTHER BUILDINGS AND STATE STANDARDS IS WHAT I WROTE DOWN I KNOW THERE WAS SOME MORE THINGS WE WERE GOING TO ADD IF IT'S JUST ADDING, YOU KNOW, 1520 WORDS AGAIN I HAVE CONFIDENCE IN STAFF IF IT'S A FURTHER DISCUSSION OR WE CAN'T REACH A CONSENSUS ON THAT THEN I'D BE MORE IN FAVOR OF CONTINUING THE ITEM. THANK YOU MR. CUNNINGHAM COMMISSIONER ANY JUST TACKLE THAT I WOULD ALSO HAVE FULL CONFIDENCE IN STAFF PUT IN THE DOTTED LINE IN WHATEVER FORMAT . HAVING SAID THAT, COMING INTO THIS MEETING I DID NOT EXPECT THIS TO BE A CONTEST I WAS AND I LOVE THIS. GIVE ME A QUICK COVERS IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THAT'S GREAT. I WOULD I WOULD PERSONALLY WOULD WELCOME THE POSTPONEMENT TO VOTE ON IT BECAUSE I WOULD LOVE TO GO DOWN FOR EXAMPLE AND TAKE A LOOK AT THE I'VE NEVER FOR EXAMPLE LOOKED AT THE TRAIL SYSTEM AND THINGS LIKE THAT AND SO I THINK HEARING SOME OF THE COMMENTS FROM SOME OF MY COMMISSION, MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS TO SPEND A LITTLE TIME LITTLE MORE TIME DRIVING AND WALKING AROUND THAT AREA DOWN THERE TO GET A BETTER SENSE FOR RECORD RECOGNIZING THIS THAT THIS IS A PRETTY BIG DECISION TO MAKE FOR THE LONG TERM DEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA. >> SO THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WITH IT COMMISSIONERS I WOULD RATHER VOTE TODAY THAT'S FOR MR. CHAIR. YES, MA'AM, I DO. I THINK THE THE TRAIL QUESTION IS EASY ENOUGH FOR STAFF TO CONVEY OUR WISHES TO THE TO THE COUNTY TO THE COUNCIL. I THINK THAT THE ISSUE OF HOW TO ADDRESS OUR DESIRE FOR MORE HEIGHT, MORE DENSITY, ALL OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IS COMPLICATED AND I THINK A LITTLE MORE COMPLICATED THAN YOU KNOW WE HAD EVEN THOUGHT ABOUT IT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE EVENING OR AT LEAST THAT I HAD THOUGHT ABOUT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE EVENING. I'M COMFORTABLE AND OTHERS CAN DISAGREE. I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THE ADDITION OF SOME LANGUAGE TO THE PLAN. I KIND OF LIKE THE IDEA OF STRIKING THAT FIRST SENTENCE AS WHAT YOU SUGGESTED TO SHOW A LITTLE BIT STRONGER INTENT AND ADDING SOME LANGUAGE ABOUT THE DESIRE TO STUDY PERHAPS BY THE END OF 2026 SOME AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE ZONING AND ALL THE OTHER WONDERFUL LANGUAGE THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED TONIGHT TO INDICATE OUR INTENTION TO BE CLEARER IN OUR INTENTIONS OF THE DENSITY IN THE THE THE TYPES OF BUILDINGS WE WANT TO SEE IN THE SOUTH LOOP. I DON'T KNOW IF IF STAFF NEEDS US TO MAKE A FORMAL WORDED AMENDMENT IN ORDER TO FEEL COMFORTABLE CONVEYING THAT TO CITY COUNCIL THEN I THINK WE PROBABLY DO NEED TO CONTINUE IT TO THE NEXT MEETING IF STAFF FEELS LIKE THEY HAVE ADEQUATE DIRECTION TO DRAFT SOMETHING AND CONVEY IT TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON OUR BEHALF WITH WHAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS EVENING I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE VOTING THIS EVENING. THANK YOU. YEAH I THINK I KNOW WHAT THE PROBLEM IS. I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SOLUTION IS LIKE. I THINK WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR IS A NICE DEEP DIVE INTO OUR DESIRE TO SEE 60 ISH FOOT BUILDINGS IN MOST CASES AND THEN HAVE THAT AS SOMETHING WE CAN STUDY. OKAY, WE'VE GOT TO EXCLUDE THESE ZONES OR WE'VE GOT TO EXCLUDE THIS USE OR IT'S GOT TO BE IN LIKE I JUST THINK IT TAKES A DEEP DIVE OF OF A BIG STUDY AND I, I, I THINK IT'S PROBABLY UNFAIR TO HOLD UP THE ENTIRE SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT PLAN UPDATE TO SOLVE THAT. HOWEVER I DO THINK IT IS A VERY CRITICAL COMPONENT OF THE SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT PLAN UPDATE AND SO MAYBE IT IS WE'RE STALLING IT I DON'T KNOW BUT I MEAN I, I THINK IT COULD TAKE US A FAIRLY SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME TO DO THAT MULTIPLE STUDY SESSIONS AND IDEAS BACK AND FORTH AND REALLY ROLLING OUR SLEEVES UP AND TRYING TO TACKLE THAT. AND SO I THINK WHERE I'VE KIND OF LANDED ON ON THIS IS THAT I DON'T LIKE I WANT THE SOUTH DISTRICT PLAN THAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF TO REFERENCE SOMETHING THAT OH THAT SIGNALS THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING INTO THIS AND IT'S A PRIORITY FOR US AND THAT WE ARE NOT ALLOWING DEVELOPERS TO JUST, YOU KNOW, BE UNREGULATED AND I THINK STRIKING THAT FIRST SENTENCE AS PROPOSED BY COMMISSIONER LEE THAT GOES A LONG WAY TOWARDS DOING THAT . MR. JOHNSON WE'RE GOING TO SEE OUR 2026 PLANNING COMMISSION WORK PLAN SOON. CHAIR CORRECTION THAT'S CORRECT. YOU LIKELY WILL GET A STUDY SESSION TYPICALLY WE'LL DO THAT IN LATE NOVEMBER EARLY DECEMBER. THEN WE USUALLY PRESENT IT TO YOU FOR FORMAL ACTION IN LATE DECEMBER THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD CONSIDER IT IN JANUARY OF 2026. UM YEAH. BASED ON YOUR EXPERIENCE, HOW MUCH CONTROL DOES THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAVE OVER OUR OWN WORK PLAN AND HOW MUCH OF IT IS REALLY CITY COUNCIL TELLING US WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO? IN MY EXPERIENCE CHAIR IF YOU RECALL THE SOUTH OF DISTRICT PLAN WAS IN ADDITION TO THE PLAN I'LL JUST USE THIS AS AN EXAMPLE THE SOUTH DISTRICT PLAN UPDATE WAS IN ADDITION TO THE YOUR WORK PLAN FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT DID NOT COME FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND SO I THINK GENERALLY SPEAKING IN MY EXPERIENCE THE CITY COUNCIL HAS BEEN FAIRLY RECEPTIVE TO ADDITIONS OR SUBTRACTIONS OR AMENDMENTS TO THE PLAN AS PRESENTED BY STAFF INITIALLY WHEN PRESENTED TO THEM AND YOU AS YOU KNOW THE CHAIR TYPICALLY HAS SERVED AS A PRESENTER ON THAT COMPONENT WHICH I THINK IS A NICE TOUCH BECAUSE IT GIVES YOU A VOICE TO ADVOCATE FOR THE THINGS THAT YOU THINK ARE IMPORTANT FOR LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION. AND SO I THINK THAT IN GENERAL THE CITY COUNCIL HAS BEEN RECEPTIVE. IS IT REALISTIC TO THINK WE COULD ADD AN ITEM LIKE THIS TO OUR 2026 PLAN? IT CERTAINLY IS REALISTIC AND YOU WOULD HAVE EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO ADD IT IF IT WERE NOT REFLECTED IN THE STAFF RECOMMENDED VERSION OF IT. BUT THERE ARE SEVERAL STAFF IN THE ROOM WHO ARE LISTENING RIGHT NOW TO THIS DESIRE SO CERTAINLY I THINK WE'LL TRY AND MEET MEET YOU WHERE YOU'RE AT AND BY YOU I MEAN THE CONSENSUS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE OF MR. CUNNINGHAM WOULD YOU ENTERTAIN A MOTION CHAIR COOKED AND I'LL ASK IF THERE'S ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION. CHAIR FORGIVE ME. M SORRY TO INTERRUPT AND I AGAIN I HAD AGAIN WE USUALLY TRY AND AVOID DESIGNING FROM THE DAIS I HAVE BEEN TYPING OUT SOME DRAFT LANGUAGE THAT COULD BE RELEVANT TO PAGE 13 TO THE PLAN BUT WHAT I I'M KIND OF PUTTING HERE BEFORE YOU AND MAYBE I'LL SHARE MY SCREEN SO THAT IT'S SO THAT THE PUBLIC RECORD IS CLEAR THE BUT TO THE POINT THAT COMMISSIONER WHITE WAS MAKING AROUND IF STAFF IS CORRECTLY CAPTURING THE ESSENCE OF KIND OF WHAT THE DISCUSSION IS THIS IS NOT A FINAL DRAFT OF THIS BY ANY MEANS BUT I JUST WANTED TO SHOW YOU KIND OF A FLAVOR OF WHAT I'VE BEEN CONTEMPLATING AS YOU'RE DISCUSSING THIS AND WHAT IT WOULD INVOLVE IS STRIKING THAT FIRST SENTENCE AS HAS BEEN YEP. FORGIVE ME. I'LL GET THERE. THANK YOU, TOM . YEP, SOUNDS GOOD. I APPRECIATE THAT. SO THIS IS NOT A FINISHED DRAFT BY ANY MEANS BUT AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, YOU KNOW IT WOULD BE EASY ENOUGH TO STRIKE THAT FIRST SENTENCE AS HAS BEEN DISCUSSED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. I KNOW THAT THAT SOME OF THAT LANGUAGE HAS BEEN AN AREA OF CONCERN OR STUDY SO WE CERTAINLY COULD DO THAT AGAIN. I PREVIOUSLY RECOMMENDED ADDING IN AND BUILDING STANDARDS OF SITE AND BUILDING STANDARDS IMPORTANT TO TRANSFORMING THE SOUTH LOOP INTO AN URBAN AREA. TO ME AGAIN THAT'S STILL THE HEART OF THIS MATTER IS TRANSFORMING IT INTO AN URBAN AREA AND THEN YOU COULD ADD A SENTENCE AT THE BACK END OF THAT PARAGRAPH WITH JUST SAYS THAT THE CITY WILL STUDY THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OF THE ZONING DISTRICTS APPLICABLE TO THAT SHOULD SAY THE SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT FORGIVE ME TO EVALUATE EXPECTATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY INCLUDING FOR HEIGHT MASSING, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. WE COULD LIST ALL OF THE THINGS THAT COULD BE INCLUDED IN THAT BUCKET. SO I DON'T KNOW IF THIS BUILDS MORE CONFIDENCE FOR THE COMMISSION TO MOVE FORWARD AND THAT WERE YOU KNOW, HEARING YOU THAT WE'RE CAPTURING WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR BUT I FIGURED IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO JUST TRY AND DO THIS ON THE FLY BUT. MR. CUNNINGHAM KIND OF A POINT OF ORDER QUESTION AND AMENDING FIGURE SEVEN AS WELL, WHICH IS THE TRAIL MAP CORRECT? JUST I KNOW YOU HAVE IT PLANNING MANAGER SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE GETTING THAT ON THE RECORD. THAT'S ON THE RECORD FOR SURE . SO I GUESS THE QUESTION FOR THE COMMISSION ANECDOTALLY OR OTHERWISE IS ARE WE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT LANGUAGE AS SHOWN HERE? >> TO ME IT READS A LITTLE BIT LIKE DO WE HAVE A ZONING MAP WE COULD PULL UP IN FACT THERE'S ONE IN THE THE DOCUMENT HERE . YEP. FORGIVE MY BAD TYPING. THAT'S ALL RIGHT. YEAH. IS THAT A SEPARATE EXHIBIT TIME OR WHAT? PAGES IT SURE. THANK YOU . THANK YOU, MR. OLSON. SO THIS IS OUR ZONING MAP HERE AND I THINK THE WAY MR. JOHNSON HAS DRAFTED IT IS THAT WE WOULD CONSIDER LOOKING AT THESE ZONES AND MODIFYING THE ZONE ITSELF IN THE CODE AND POTENTIALLY BOOSTING ITS FLOOR AREA RATIO AND MAYBE I'M WRONG ON THAT BUT I'M GOING TO KEEP GOING. WHAT WHAT I'M LOOKING AT HERE IS IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SOUTH LOOP IS OUR ONE AND AGAIN THIS IS WHY I THINK WE NEED A DEEPER STUDY INTO THIS BUT LIKE ARE WE LIKE IT SEEMS LIKE WE NEED TO ALMOST BE RECOMMENDING PROACTIVE REZONING OR SOMETHING. SOME OF THAT ARE ONE I THINK IS SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. OTHER OF THAT ARE ONE IS LIKE THESE VERY LOW DENSITY APARTMENT BUILDINGS AND MAYBE I'M WRONG AND I MAYBE THE LOW DENSITY APARTMENT BUILDINGS ARE M 24 LIKE I JUST WANT TO GET IT WRONG LIKE I'M I'M NOT SURE THIS COMMISSION IS PROPOSING THAT IF SOMEONE TEARS THEIR HOUSE DOWN THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BUILD A 60 FOOT WHICH IS WHY THERE'S SO MUCH NUANCE HERE AND WE NEED TO TAKE THIS BACK OUT AND STUDY IT. SO I'M HOPEFUL THAT THE LANGUAGE THAT MR. JOHNSON PUT BEFORE US LEAVES US ENOUGH FLEXIBILITY TO DO REALLY A COMPLETE DEEP DIVE INTO THIS TO ULTIMATELY ARRIVE AT A RECOMMENDATION THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS COMFORTABLE WITH AND I'M SORRY TO MAKE YOU ALL SWITCH SCREENS AGAIN BUT CAN WE GO BACK TO MR. JOHNSON'S RECOMMENDED LANGUAGE PLEASE? YES, ABSOLUTELY SORRY. I WAS ADDING ONE ONE QUESTION I WAS GOING TO ADD. CHAIR RELATED YOUR LAST COMMENT IS WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANTED TO ADD IN PROACTIVE REZONING STUDY A PROACTIVE REZONING WOULD ALSO BE AN OPTION WHEREAS HERE WE GO . THANK YOU. YEAH. OKAY MR. JOHNSON AS YOU'RE FEVERISHLY TYPING HERE, CAN YOU PUT IN LAYMAN'S TERMS OR PLANNING COMMISSION LAYMAN'S TERMS WHAT THIS LANGUAGE IS AFFORDING US TO DO IN THE FUTURE? YEAH. THANK YOU CHAIR WITH THIS WHAT THE INTENT OF THIS LANGUAGE IS THAT IT'S BASICALLY SETTING A MARKER THAT THE CITY WILL PURSUE A PROACTIVE STUDY TO ENSURE THE DEVELOPMENT AT WITHIN THE DISTRICT MOVING FORWARD MEETS OUR EXPECTATIONS FOR INTENSITY AND I USE THAT WORD INTENTIONALLY BECAUSE YOU KNOW WE USE RESIDENT WE USE DENSITY TYPICALLY FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS WE USE THAT FOR FOR COMMERCIAL PROJECTS WE USE KIND OF A MIX OF THESE DIFFERENT STANDARDS AND TERMS AS IT RELATES TO DIFFERENT LAND USES. BUT I MEAN IF I'M HEARING THE CONVERSATION CORRECTLY IS THAT THE CITY WANTS INTENDS DEVELOPMENT IN SOUTH LOOP AND THAT'S OUR EXPECTATION. AND SO I THINK THE INTENT THIS LANGUAGE IS TO ENSURE SETTING THAT MARKER, SETTING THAT EXPECTATION THAT THE CITY WILL DO THINGS WITHIN ITS OFFICIAL CONTROLS THE ZONING CODE TO ENSURE THAT OUR DEVELOPMENT EXPECTATIONS ARE MET IN OUR REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS. CAN A PARTICULAR ZONE SET A MINIMUM HEIGHT? CHAIR THAT CERTAINLY COULD BE SOMETHING THAT COULD BE PURSUED AND YOU KNOW, IN OTHER CITIES CERTAINLY THEY HAVE EXPECTATIONS AROUND THAT BUT TYPICALLY WHAT THEY TRY TO DO OR IN DEFINED GEOGRAPHIC AREAS I KNOW FOR EXAMPLE IN CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS THAT THEY APPLY ZONING DISTRICTS THAT DO HAVE MINIMUM HEIGHT EXPECTATIONS. HISTORICALLY BLOOMINGTON HAS DONE THAT THROUGH THE THROUGH A HEIGHT MAP. OF COURSE THAT'S A MAXIMUM EXPECTATION. SO IT WOULD BE NEW TO BLOOMINGTON REGULATORY REQUIREMENT ESTABLISHING A MINIMUM HEIGHT EXPECTATION WE HAVE MINIMUM DENSITY REQUIREMENTS. WE HAVE MINIMUM IFR WHICH WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT BUT THAT'S NOT TO PRECLUDE THAT AT A MINIMUM HEIGHT EXPECTATION AND COULD NOT BE REFLECTED IN EITHER THE HEIGHT STANDARDS OF THE CODE YOU COULD CALL IT OUT BY LAND USE FOR EXAMPLE WITHIN THE SOUTH SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT AND THAT COULD BE REFLECTED IN THE HEIGHT ORDINANCE 21 301 TEN OR IT COULD BE REFLECTED IN THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OF THE UNDERLYING ZONING DISTRICT. THE ONLY THE ONLY HESITANCY I SAY THERE IS AN HSR IS UNIQUE TO SOUTH LOOP SIX TWO IS UNIQUE TO SOUTH LOOP C FOUR IS SCATTERED THROUGHOUT THE CITY I T ALSO I BELIEVE IS APPLICABLE TO A COUPLE OTHER SITES OUTSIDE OF THE SOUTH LOOP SO JUST DON'T ASSUME THAT ALL OF THE ZONING DISTRICTS IN THE SOUTH LOOP ARE LIMITED TO THAT GEOGRAPHY ONLY. THANK YOU. ONE OTHER QUESTION FOR MR. JOHNSON. YOU ASKED THE QUESTION BEFORE OF IS THE PLANNING COMMISSION COMFORTABLE PUTTING IT IN STAFF'S HANDS TO PRESENT TO RELAY OUR DISCUSSION APPROPRIATELY TO CITY COUNCIL ? I AS THE CHAIR HAVE THE ABILITY TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. COULD I JOIN STAFF AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WHEN THEY SEE THIS TO ENSURE THAT OUR INTENT HAS BEEN APPROPRIATELY RELAYED AND HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK IF I IF I SO CHOOSE ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WELL AS A BLOOMINGTON CHAIR THANKS FOR THE QUESTION. YOU COME UP WITH GOOD UNIQUE IDEAS AND APPROACHES TO THINGS. I APPRECIATE THAT. CERTAINLY YOU CAN JOIN STAFF AND IN OUR PRESENTATION YOU CERTAINLY HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO SPEAK AS A BLOOMINGTON RESIDENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING AS WELL. THAT WOULD BE BEFORE I WOULD WANT IT TO BE IN AN OFFICIAL CAPACITY. SURE. I MEAN I WELCOME I THINK THAT IS ALLOWED WITHIN THE RULES OF PROCEDURE. WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THOSE AGAIN HERE LATER THIS EVENING. I DON'T KNOW OF ANYTHING THAT WOULD PRECLUDE THAT FROM HAPPENING. I WELCOME ATTORNEY TASK HIS VIEW ON THAT TOO. IT'S IT'S NOT A QUICK QUESTION WE GET EVERY DAY BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S BAD QUESTION YEAH SO COMMISSIONER CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS THAT THE RULES DO ALLOW THAT I WOULD WANT SOME CONCRETE MOTIONS SO WE ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DIRECTION IS GOING TO BE RATHER THAN ONE COMMISSIONER IS OPINION SO WHAT ARE SOME MOTION INDICATING WHAT THE FINAL OUTCOME WOULD BE AND THEN YOU CAN COMMUNICATE THAT COUNCIL WITH SOME OF THE GLASS ON TOP OF IT. BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT'S AN ACTUAL MOTION AND THEN WE HAVE A CONSENSUS. SO THOSE ARE THE THE CONSIDERATIONS THAT I WOULD WANT TO LOOK FOR. THANK YOU. MR. STARSKY THAT'S COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM. THANK YOU, CHAIR. WHAT IS WRITTEN ON SCREEN AND WHAT HAS BEEN STRUCK ON SCREEN AND THEN THE ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS TO IDENT OR FIGURE SEVEN I'M I'M COMFORTABLE WITH STAFF AMENDING THIS REPORT WHEN IT COMES TO CITY COUNCIL. I'M ALSO EXCITED ABOUT YOU PRESENTING TO THE POSSIBILITY OF YOU PRESENTING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR TO THE CITY COUNCIL. I THINK MR. CUNNINGHAM AND I WOULD NOT INTEND TO GET IN STAFF'S WAY. IT WOULD BE MORE OF A ASSURANCE THAT ANY DETAILS WE'VE DISCUSSED HERE THIS EVENING ARE INCLUDED IN THEIR CONSIDERATION BUT OTHERS MAY FEEL DIFFERENTLY. I DON'T HAVE TO GO BEFORE COUNCIL. I'M NOT AWARE OF THE CHAIR EVER DOING THAT BUT AND ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE WE ENTERTAIN A MOTION MR. CUNNINGHAM, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION OR SEE THAT SOMEONE ELSE OR. YEAH, I GOT IT. COMMISSIONER WAIT. GET MY GLASSES IN CASE NUMBER 2025-64. I MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT UPDATING THE 2012 SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT PLAN WITH THE TWO CHANGES THAT WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS EVENING RELATED TO THE INCLUSION OF THE RE INCLUSION OF THE TRAIL AND THE LANGUAGE REGARDING BUILDINGS CHANGES TO PAGE 13 REGARDING BUILDING STANDARDS OUT OF AN ABUNDANCE OF THOROUGHNESS COMMISSIONER WHITE COULD I HAVE YOU READ CAN WE GO BACK TO THE PAGE WE WERE JUST ON THERE THANK YOU. COULD I HAVE YOU READ THE LANGUAGE? WE'RE STRIKING AND READ THE LANGUAGE WE ARE PROPOSING TO ADD? ABSOLUTELY. SO FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO MY OWN MOTION THAT THE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE ON PAGE 13 STRIKES THE SENTENCE. ULTIMATELY THE CITY WILL ALLOW DEVELOPERS TO DETERMINE THE OPTIMAL BUILDING CONSTRUCTION TYPE AS LONG AS OTHER GOALS OF THE LDPE ARE ADVANCED ESPECIALLY GIVEN OTHER CHALLENGING DEVELOPMENT DYNAMICS AND REQUIREMENTS THAT WOULD BE STRICKEN. ADDING TO THE NEXT SENTENCE BETWEEN SITE AND STANDARDS, THE WORDS AND BUILDING AND THEN AT THE END OF THE PARAGRAPH ADDING ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE TO THE EFFECT OF THE CITY WILL STUDY THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OF THE ZONING DISTRICTS APPLICABLE TO THE SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT TO EVALUATE THE EXPECTATION FOR DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY INCLUDING STRUCTURE, HEIGHT, FLOOR AREA RATIO AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS. PROACTIVE REZONING WOULD ALSO BE CONSIDERED TO ENSURE DENSE DEVELOPMENT AND SENTENCE AND I BELIEVE THE TRAILHEAD IN THE TRAIL ADDITION IS ON FIGURE SEVEN ON PAGE 16 AND WOULD ALSO PROBABLY BE NEED NEED TO BE ADDED BACK INTO THE CHART OF PROJECTS. I THINK THAT WAS VERY CLEAR. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND TO MODIFY FIGURE SEVEN TO ADD BACK IN THE TRAIL CONNECTION AS DESCRIBED AND TO MAKE THE MODIFICATIONS TO PAGE 13 STRIKING SOME LANGUAGE AND ADDING SOME OTHER LANGUAGE IS DESCRIBED BY COMMISSIONER WHITE. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I. I OPPOSED THAT MOTION PASSES SIX ZERO THIS WILL GO BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL AS A PUBLIC HEARING ON SEPTEMBER 8TH, 2025 . AND THANK YOU TO EVERYBODY AND STAFF FOR YOUR FLEXIBILITY. >> THANK YOU. MR. SAMUELSON MR. CHAIR, DO YOU WANT A MOTION REGARDING YOUR APPEARANCE WITH THE STAFF AT THE CITY COUNCIL? I DON'T THINK THAT REQUIRES A MOTION. DOES IT? CHAIR I DON'T BELIEVE SO UNLESS KEVIN HAS A DIFFERENT OPINION ABOUT THAT. CHAIR COMMISSIONERS NO, I DON'T THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE A FORMAL MOTION IF EVERYONE'S OKAY WITH IT OR I THINK YOU CAN IN THE RULES ALLOW HIM TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE COMMISSION SO AS LONG AS HE COMMUNICATES WHAT WAS OCCURRING AT THIS MEETING I THINK IT'S DONE VERY WELL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSION WE WILL MOVE THEN TO ITEM NUMBER TWO WHICH IS A STUDY ITEM FOR SMALL BUSINESS CODES AND PROCESSES PHASE TWO MR. CASSIDY YOU HAVE THE STAFF REPORT FOR US . ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, CHAIR. GOOD EVENING. PLANNING COMMISSION. I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT TRASH AND CLOSURES SO JUST A I'LL GIVE A QUICK BACKGROUND ON THE PROJECT COVER OUR EXISTING STANDARDS RELATED TO TRASH AND RECYCLING FACILITIES LAYOUT TWO DIFFERENT POLICY OPTIONS TO CONSIDER ALSO SUMMARIZE A FACILITY TOUR THAT A VARIETY OF STAFF WENT ON LAST YEAR JUST TO KIND OF GIVE A LITTLE BIT MORE PERSPECTIVE TO KIND OF WHAT'S OUT THERE TODAY RELATED TO TRASH ENCLOSURES AND THEN CLOSE WITH SOME GUIDING QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION. SO KIND OF WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT TRASH? THIS WAS ONE OF SIX TOPICS THAT WAS INCLUDED IN OUR SMALL BUSINESS CODE AND PROCESSES PROJECT. THIS WAS ADDED TO THE 20 TO 2024 WORK PLAN BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE OVERALL GOAL OF THE PROJECT IS TO IDENTIFY AND THEN HOPEFULLY REDUCE BARRIERS FOR SMALL BUSINESS FORMATION AND OPERATION. SO THERE'S POLICY SUPPORT IN OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS WELL AS THE CITY'S STRATEGIC PLAN THAT KIND OF LED TO SOME OF THESE TOPICS BEING EXPLORED . WE ALSO WE PRESENTED SO THERE HAVE BEEN PREVIOUS CONVERSATIONS WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THIS TOPIC AS WELL AS A CITY COUNCIL. BUT I THINK JUST GIVEN THE KIND OF BREADTH OF EVERYTHING THAT WE TALKED THROUGH, THERE JUST WASN'T AS MUCH ATTENTION KIND OF GIVEN TO THIS THIS TOPIC AND SOME OF THE DIRECTION WASN'T KIND OF AS CLEAR ON HOW TO PROCEED AND SO THAT'S KIND OF WHY WE BROKE IT UP INTO DIFFERENT PHASES. AND SO THE FOUR OF THE TOPICS WERE ADOPTED EARLIER THIS YEAR AND THEN WE'RE COMING BACK NOW TO TALK ABOUT TRASH AND PHASE TWO. BLOOMINGTON HAS IT A PRETTY PRESCRIPTIVE STANDARDS OF RELATED TO REFUSE AND RECYCLING FACILITIES WHICH WAS PART OF WHY IT WAS INCLUDED IN THE STUDY. ALL OF OUR STANDARDS ARE IN CITY CODE SECTION 21 301 17 AND IN MOST CASES ARE REFUSE AND RECYCLING FACILITIES MUST BE ATTACHED TO THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING AND THEY MUST BE INTERNALLY ACCESSIBLE WITHIN THAT PRINCIPAL BUILDING. THERE ARE SOME FINDINGS IN CODE THAT CAN WAIVER THAT INTERIOR ACCESS REQUIREMENT BUT MOST OF THE TIME IT HAS TO BE INTERNALLY ACCESSIBLE WITHIN THE BUILDING AND THEN IF THE USE IS A FOOD USE LIKE A RESTAURANT OR A GROCERY STORE, THERE'S ALSO SOME ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND FINISHES IN THAT INTERIOR ROOM TO KIND OF ENSURE THAT THERE'S WASHABLE SURFACES AS WELL AS A FLOOR DRAIN AND SOME OTHER THINGS. AND SO THE IMAGE ON THE SLIDE JUST KIND OF SHOWS HERE'S AN EXAMPLE OF A RESTAURANT IN BLOOMINGTON WITH AN ATTACHED TRASH ROOM THAT'S IN INTERNALLY ACCESSIBLE AND THAT YOU KIND OF SEE AROUND TOWN THESE STANDARDS WERE DEVELOPED TO KIND OF ADDRESS GENERAL PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY AND WELFARE ISSUES. AND SO WHILE WHILE THE PROJECT HAS THE GOAL TO TRY TO REDUCE BARRIERS FOR SMALL BUSINESSES ARE JUST SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS TO KEEP IN MIND AND KIND OF CONSIDER AROUND THIS TOPIC AS WE EXPLORE SOME OF THE POLICY OPTIONS. OF COURSE ARE AROUND ILLEGAL DISPOSAL OR DUMPING EMPLOYEE SAFETY WITH A DETACHED ENCLOSURE OR UNSANITARY CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL TO INCREASE ILLICIT DISCHARGE INTO OUR WATER AND SEWER SYSTEMS, VANDALISM AND OTHER ESTHETIC SITE CONDITIONS. AND SO KIND OF FROM SOME OF THE INITIAL DISCUSSIONS WITH PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL STAFF HAVE KIND OF PROPOSED TWO DIFFERENT OPTIONS TO KIND OF TALK THROUGH WHAT IT COULD LOOK LIKE TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY TO THAT CURRENT STANDARD AROUND AN INTERIOR ROOM THAT AN ATTACHED INTERIOR ROOM THAT'S INTERIOR ACCESSIBLE FROM THE INTERIOR. SO THE FIRST OPTION IS KIND OF PROVIDING FLEXIBILITY FOR CERTAIN RE-USE OF NONRESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS. SO I KIND OF THINK ABOUT IT AS OUR CURRENT STANDARDS ON ONE END OF THE SPECTRUM KIND OF MORE ON THAT PRESCRIPTIVE SIDE THIS OPTION IS KIND OF IN THE MIDDLE AS A STEP TOWARDS ALLOWING MORE DETACHED FACILITIES AND THEN OPTION B THAT I'LL DISCUSS NEXT IS KIND OF ON THAT OTHER SIDE OF THE SPECTRUM OF KIND OF BEING MORE FLEXIBLE. SO THIS IS KIND OF THAT MIDDLE GROUND OPTION IF THAT IF THAT'S HELPFUL TO THINK ABOUT A BIT. SO IN OPTION A IT WOULD ALLOW FOR DETACHED TRASH ENCLOSURES FOR THE FOLLOWING SCENARIO. SO THE CHANGE OF OF USE OR A NEW BUSINESS THAT OCCUPIES AN EXISTING BUILDING OR TENANT SPACE IN THE CITY THAT DOES NOT CURRENTLY HAVE AN INTERIOR TRASH ROOM OR IT COULD BE SMALL ADDITIONS OF BUILDINGS AND HOW WE DEFINE THAT IN THIS OPTION WAS IF THE FLOOR AREA OF THE BUILDING INCREASES AT 25% OR LESS THAT THEY COULD BUILD IT DETACHED ENCLOSURE AND THEN IN ADDITION ANY INDUSTRIAL USE REGARDLESS IF IT'S NEW CONSTRUCTION OR RE-USE OF THE BUILDING AND PART OF THE REASON WE INCLUDED THAT WAS OUR CURRENT STANDARDS DO ALREADY ALLOW INDUSTRIAL USERS THAT ARE MORE THAN 300FT FROM A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TO HAVE KIND OF DUMPSTERS OUT KIND OF DETACHED IT'S MORE GENERAL AND THAT WE JUST SAY THAT THEY HAVE TO BE SCREENED. SO IN SOME CASES YOU MIGHT SEE MORE OF LIKE A FENCE KIND OF BUILT AROUND A DUMPSTER THAN A FULL ENCLOSURE LIKE WE'RE GOING TO SHOW HERE. AND SO JUST KIND OF CAPTURING THAT YOU KNOW, I THINK UNDERSTANDING THAT INDUSTRIAL USERS OR YOU KNOW, SOME OF THOSE HEAVIER USERS YOU KNOW, IT'S KIND OF MAYBE MORE NORMAL OR STANDARD TO SEE KIND OF MORE THINGS OUTSIDE AND AN INDUSTRIAL PARTICULARLY IF IT'S FURTHER AWAY FROM A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. BUT IT'S KIND OF BRINGING IT ALL TOGETHER TO KIND OF FOLLOW THE SAME STANDARD. ONE OF THE I GUESS REASONS OR THINGS TO THINK ABOUT WITH THIS OPTION IS THAT RETROFITTING A BUILDING THAT DOESN'T HAVE AN INTERIOR TRASH ROOM CAN BE EXPENSIVE AND DIFFICULT FOR BUSINESSES. THERE'S AN EXAMPLE HERE A RECENT EXAMPLE ON THE SCREEN THIS PROPERTY AT 4210 WEST OR CHOCK A P ROAD AS A SINGLE STORY OFFICE BUILDING IT DOESN'T CURRENTLY HAVE AN INTERIOR TRASH ROOM AND WE HAD A DAY CARE USER INTERESTED IN USING THIS SPACE AND BECAUSE IT'S A CHANGE OF USE FROM AN OFFICE USE IT WAS REQUIRED IN OUR CODE TO MEET OUR CURRENT STANDARDS SO THEY HAVE THE INTERIOR TRASH ROOM SO YOU SEE ON THEIR ORIGINAL APPLICATION AND PROPOSAL THEY WERE PROPOSING TO HAVE A DETACHED STRUCTURE WITH A ROOF NEXT TO THE BUILDING WHICH I THINK STAFF WE UNDERSTOOD IS KIND OF A REASONABLE REQUEST. AND IF YOU LOOK AT A LOT OF CITIES AROUND BLOOMINGTON THAT KIND OF MEETS OR EXCEEDS THEIR MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR TRASH ENCLOSURES, HOWEVER IT'S NOT ALLOWED BY A CURB CODE AND SO WHAT THEY HAD TO CONSTRUCT HERE IS THE ENCLOSED ROOM I BELIEVE THEY WERE ABLE TO GET THE INTERIOR ACCESS WAIVED BUT BECAUSE IT BECOMES AN ENCLOSED SPACE THEN THERE'S ADDITIONAL VENTING AND SOME OTHER CONSIDERATIONS THAT THEY HAVE TO DO. SO THIS JUST KIND OF HIGHLIGHTS AN EXAMPLE OF SOMETIMES SOME OF THE CHALLENGES WE COME ACROSS IN RETROFITTING AN EXISTING BUILDING. ONE OF THE OTHER I GUESS JUST KIND OF A DISADVANTAGE OF OF THIS APPROACH IS THAT SUCH A POLICY COULD RESULT IN SOME INEQUITABLE OUTCOMES WHERE BECAUSE OF THAT 25% OR LESS ADDITION COULD YOU KNOW, ENCOURAGE FOLKS TO HAVE A SMALLER ADDITION THAN MAYBE THEY MIGHT OTHERWISE WOULD HAVE BECAUSE THEY WANT TO AVOID THE CONSTRUCT AN INTERIOR TRASH ROOM. SO YOU KNOW, WE DO WANT TO ALSO JUST BE AWARE OF THAT OR THAT COULD BE A POTENTIAL OUTCOME IF WE WERE TO GO WITH THIS OPTION. AND THEN I JUST WANT TO COVER THE SECOND OPTION BE HERE WOULD BE TO ALLOW A DETACHED TRASH ENCLOSURE BASICALLY FOR ALL NONRESIDENTIAL USES REGARDLESS OF ITS NEW CONSTRUCTION OR THE REUSE OF BUILDINGS AND SO ON. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NONRESIDENTIAL. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COMMERCIAL OFFICE FOOD SERVICE INDUSTRIAL USERS IN EITHER OPTION WE LEFT THE INTERIOR TRASH ROOM REQUIREMENT FOR MULTIFAMILY KIND OF APARTMENT BUILDINGS JUST BECAUSE YOU KNOW IT'S A LITTLE BIT OUT OF THE SCOPE OF THIS PROJECT LOOKING AT MORE KIND OF SMALL BUSINESSES AND IN THAT NON RESIDENTIAL PIECE BUT ALSO IN A LOT OF NEWER APARTMENT BUILDINGS WITH A LOT OF THEM HAVE SOME KIND OF UNDERGROUND GARAGE WHERE IT'S JUST MUCH EASIER KIND OF STANDARD TO BUILD AN INTERIOR TRASH ROOM. IT'S KIND OF THE MARKET DEMAND TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, TRASH CHUTES ON EACH FLOOR THAT ARE KIND OF CONNECTED TO A DUMPSTER, AN INTERIOR TRASH ROOM AND AND WE JUST FRANKLY DON'T GET A LOT OF I GUESS PUSHBACK OR COMPLAINTS OR HAVE ISSUES WITH APARTMENTS BUILDING INTERIOR TRASH ROOMS. IT IS MORE ON THIS KIND OF REUSE OF EXISTING BUILDINGS KIND OF OLDER MULTI-TENANT COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS OR OLDER INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS THAT MAYBE ARE GOING TO HAVE A LESS INTENSE INDUSTRIAL USE. AND I GUESS I WOULD JUST ALSO NOTE IN THIS OPTION, YOU KNOW, WE CAN LEAVE THE INTERIOR TRASH ROOM AS ALSO AS AN ACCEPTABLE OPTION. IT WOULD JUST BE NOT MAKING IT THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT. OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, BUSINESSES WILL PROBABLY CHOOSE THE DETACHED OPTION BUT WE CAN STILL HAVE THOSE STANDARDS IN THERE IF SOMEONE WANTS TO BUILD AN INTERIOR TRASH ROOM. AND SO THESE ARE JUST SOME EXAMPLES IF YOU WERE TO GO THAT ROUTE, LOOK WHAT YOU COULD SEE IN BLOOMINGTON. SO THE TWO IMAGES ON THE LEFT ARE LEGALLY NONCONFORMING TRASH ENCLOSURES ALREADY IN BLOOMINGTON. SO YOU KNOW, AS NICOLE KIND OF SHOW IN THE FACILITY TO WHERE SOME OF THESE DO ALREADY EXIST IN BLOOMINGTON. SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY SOMETHING NEW. BUT AGAIN, JUST TO KIND OF SHOW WHAT ENCLOSURES COULD LOOK LIKE KIND OF ON THE BOTTOM IMAGE THERE. SO THIS IS A FAST FOOD RESTAURANT IN BLOOMINGTON. THERE HAS THE INTERIOR TRASH ROOM AND THEN THAT SAME FAST FOOD RESTAURANT IN A NEIGHBORING CITY THAT ALLOWS DETACHED STRUCTURES. SO I GUESS JUST TO KIND OF GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF LIKE WHAT YOU COULD SEE IF YOU WANTED TO GO THIS ROUTE YOU COULD BE SEEING IF WE WOULD ALLOW IT FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION FOR EXAMPLE KIND OF GOING FROM WHAT WE CURRENTLY SEE BLOOMINGTON LIKE THIS TO BE SOMETHING MORE LIKE THIS IN THE PARKING LOT. SO JUST WANT TO BE TRANSPARENT ABOUT THAT AGAIN KIND OF ALLOWING MORE FLEXIBILITY AND COST EFFECTIVE OPTIONS FOR BUSINESSES CAN BE A BENEFIT. IT HELPS BLOOMINGTON KIND OF ALLIANCE WITH MORE SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES AND HOW THEY REGULATE THEIR TRASH STANDARDS BUT HOWEVER A DISADVANTAGE IS THAT YOU KNOW, THIS OPTION DOES CREATE A SHIFT FROM WHAT HAS BEEN THE STANDARD IN BLOOMINGTON. AND SO WITH ANY CHANGE, YOU KNOW THERE'S JUST GOING TO BE SOME THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO WORK THROUGH AS STAFF AND FOR BUSINESSES SO EARLY ON THERE COULD BE POTENTIAL FOR INCREASE IN ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS, YOU KNOW, TO ENSURE THAT TRASH IS BEING STORED INAPPROPRIATE CONTAINERS AND IT'S NOT JUST SITTING OUTSIDE NEXT TO THE DUMPSTER OUTSIDE OF THE ENCLOSURE AND ALSO MAKING SURE THAT THE DUMPSTERS ARE ACTUALLY IN THE ENCLOSURE AND NOT JUST KIND OF FLOATING AROUND ON THE SCREEN IN THE PARKING LOT. SO AGAIN, JUST SOME THINGS TO CONSIDER THERE REGARDLESS OF EITHER OPTION IF THE DIRECTION IS TO ALLOW DETACHED TRASH ENCLOSURES, WE WOULD STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND ADOPTING I'M A VARIETY OF PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AGAIN KIND OF THINKING ABOUT SOME OF THOSE CONSIDERATIONS AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY AND WELFARE AND SO I JUST WANTED TO OUTLINE KIND OF WHAT WAS IN BOTH PROPOSALS HERE SO WE WOULD RECOMMEND A GENERAL SETBACK OF 30FT FROM A PROPERTY LINE ALONG A STREET AND A FIVE MINUTE FIVE FOOT MINIMUM SETBACK FROM OTHER SIDE OR REAR PROPERTY LINES. WE'D ALSO RECOMMEND AN ADDITIONAL 20 FOOT SETBACK FROM RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AGAIN JUST TO HELP CREATE SOME ADDITIONAL BUFFER. AND THEN WITH THAT I GUESS I WOULD JUST ALSO THINK ABOUT AND THERE'S GOING TO BE A SETBACK ON THAT RESIDENTIAL HOME AS WELL. SO I THINK WHERE WE KIND OF LANDED ON 20FT WAS THINKING ABOUT IN SOME CASES IF YOU HAVE LIKE A MULTI-TENANT COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AND THE BACK END IS KIND OF FACING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AND THAT'S A BACKYARD THAT STRUCTURE THE THE HOUSE HAS A SETBACK OF 30FT FROM THAT REAR YARD. SO IF YOU KIND OF ACCOUNT FOR A 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK FROM THE HOUSE AND THIS 20 FOOT SETBACK ON THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY THAT GIVES YOU A TOTAL OF 50FT DISTANCE TO FOR THAT ENCLOSURE FROM THE HOME AND WE'D ALSO RECOMMEND HAVING A STANDARD TO BE HAVE PROXIMITY TO THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING THAT IT'S SERVING. SO HERE WOULD BE A MAXIMUM OF 75FT FROM THE BUILDING AGAIN JUST KIND OF FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT, ESPECIALLY IN A MULTI-TENANT BUILDING WE DON'T NECESSARILY WANT SOMEONE'S IN THE BUSINESS ON ONE END OF IT THAT THEY HAVE TO WALK ALL THE WAY TO THE OTHER END TO GET TO THE TRASH ENCLOSURE. YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO ENSURE THAT THE ENCLOSURE DOESN'T BLOCK SIDEWALKS OR DRIVE AISLES AND DOESN'T IMPEDE PEDESTRIAN OR VEHICLE CIRCULATION. WE WOULD RECOMMEND LIGHTING STANDARDS KIND OF ALREADY ESTABLISHED IN CODE. SO A MINIMUM OF TWO FOOT CANDLES KIND OF AROUND THE ENCLOSURE AND THEN OUR PARKING LOT STANDARD KIND OF ANY AREA THAT SOMEONE HAS TO TRAVEL AND THAT USUALLY RANGES A MINIMUM OF 1 TO 2 FOOT CANDLES FOR SCREENING. WE ARE PROPOSING THAT IT BE CONSTRUCTED OF MATERIALS THAT MATCH THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING. ANY GAITER DOOR MUST HAVE A MINIMUM 75% CAPACITY. SO YOU KNOW AGAIN IT'S KIND OF A BALANCE YOU WANT TO BE ABLE TO SCREEN IT SO YOU DON'T SEE THE DUMPSTER BUT FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU CAN SEE INTO THE ENCLOSURE AS YOU'RE KIND OF OPENING THAT GATE THAT THERE'S YOU KNOW, NO ONE OR SOMETHING BACK THERE THAT COULD CAUSE YOU HARM. AND THEN WE WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE ENCLOSURES HAVE HAVE A ROOF AND THE MAIN REASON THEY'RE ON IS JUST TO ENSURE THAT THAT RAIN AND SNOW AREN'T GETTING INTO THE DUMPSTER DOOR WHICH THEN CAN LEAD TO ADDITIONAL RUNOFF AND THAT ILLICIT DISCHARGE INTO OUR WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM. AND THEN FINALLY WE WOULD RECOMMEND A HEIGHT OF A MAXIMUM OF 15FT IN HEIGHT AND THAT'S THE STANDARD THAT WE HAVE FOR ACCESSORY BUILDINGS IN COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. SO JUST TO KIND OF MATCH A STANDARD THAT'S ALREADY IN CODE AND THEN I THINK I'LL TURN IT OVER TO PLANNING MANAGER JOHNSON TO JUST KIND OF BRIEFLY SUMMARIZE A STAFF TOUR THAT THEY TOOK LAST FALL JUST TO AGAIN KIND OF HIGHLIGHT KIND OF WHAT'S OUT THERE TODAY IN BLOOMINGTON. YEAH. THANK YOU DAKOTA SO JUST ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WE DO A TOUR AND I'M SPEAKING TO HER BECAUSE I HAD I ACTUALLY PERFORMED THIS TOUR BACK IN THE FALL OF 24. ONE OF THE REASONS WE DO IS WE JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE LANDSCAPE IS IN BLOOMINGTON BUT SEE WHAT'S WORKING WELL FOR TRASH FACILITIES THAT DON'T MEET OUR CURRENT STANDARDS. SO ALL THE PICTURES I'M GOING TO SHOW YOU IN THESE SLIDES ARE ACTUALLY LEGALLY NON CONFORMING EITHER COMPLY WITH THE STANDARDS OR ARE LEGALLY NONCONFORMING MEANING THESE SHOPPING CENTERS OR THESE COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES WERE CONSTRUCTED AT A TIME WHEN THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO MEET THESE MORE RIGOROUS REQUIREMENTS. SO HERE'S JUST KIND OF THE TOP OF THE LINE OR THESE ARE THE ONES THAT MEET TODAY'S STANDARDS. THE ONE ON THE LEFT IS A FOR A RESTAURANT. THE ONE ON THE RIGHT IS AT A MULTI-TENANT BUILDING. THIS ONE ACTUALLY DOES NOT HAVE INTERIOR ACCESS TO ALL THE TENANT SPACES. IT'S VERY COMMON FOR THESE MULTI-TENANT SPACES NOT TO HAVE A CONTINUOUS CORRIDOR. YOU HAVE TO THINK ABOUT EACH TENANT SPACE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A CORRIDOR THAT WOULD GRANT THEM ACCESS INTERIOR ACCESS TO THE SPACE. SO IT'S FAIRLY COMMON TO SEE THAT INTERIOR ACCESS REQUIREMENT WAIVED. SO HERE'S THOSE TWO EXAMPLES. NEXT SLIDE ONE OF THE OTHER REASONS WE WENT ON THE TOUR IS WE WANTED TO SEE IF THERE ARE FACILITIES THAT DON'T MEET OUR CURRENT STANDARDS. WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ONES THAT ARE FUNCTIONING WELL IN OUR VIEW AND ACCORDING TO ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AND THE OTHER STAFF WHO DO OUR ENFORCEMENT AND WHICH ONES ARE NOT FUNCTIONING WELL AND THIS IS WHAT REALLY INFORMS A LOT OF THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS THAT DAKOTA OUTLINED IN TERMS OF IF YOU WANT TO GO TOO DETACHED THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE BELIEVE CAN KIND OF HEAD OFF SOME OF THE THREATS OR NUISANCE CONDITIONS OFF AT THE PASS. SO THIS IS A COUPLE OF BUSINESSES IN BLOOMINGTON. A COUPLE OF THINGS I'LL HIGHLIGHT HERE THESE DO NOT HAVE ROOFS SO CERTAINLY SNOW, RAIN THOSE ARE GETTING INTO THESE TRASH ENCLOSURES. I WOULD DESCRIBE THAT AS A DRAWBACK ON THE POSITIVE SIDE ,THESE ARE SCREENED THEY ARE MATCHING THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING THAT THEY'RE SERVING. I MEAN CERTAINLY YOU CAN HAVE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE MATERIALS OF THE SCREENING ITSELF. THE OTHER THING I WOULD SAY THAT'S POSITIVE IS THAT THESE FACILITIES ARE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE BUSINESSES THAT THEY'RE SERVING. SO THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS. EMPLOYEES ARE NOT HAVING TO CARRY REFUSE OR RECYCLING A FAR DISTANCE. THAT'S GOOD BECAUSE IF THERE IS ANY REFUSE THAT'S LEAKING FROM THE BAG THAT ADDS MORE ILLICIT DISCHARGE TO THE STORMWATER SYSTEM THE FARTHER THEY'RE GOING AS WELL AS THE FARTHER THEY'RE GOING, THAT PRESENTS A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A SAFETY CONCERN DEPENDING ON THE LIGHTING OF THE SITE AND THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. SO JUST WANTED TO POINT THOSE OUT. NEXT ONE YEAH HERE AND HERE'S SOME EXAMPLE OF SOME MULTI-TENANT SITES IN BLOOMINGTON THAT ARE LEGALLY NONCONFORMING. THEY'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE REFUSE CONTAINERS, REFUSE STORAGE OUT IN THE OPEN IN YOU KNOW IN THE FACT OF DUMPSTERS THERE ARE STATE REQUIREMENTS THAT REQUIRE CERTAIN CLOSURE OF THESE CONTAINERS. SO I DON'T WANT TO FORGET LEAVE THAT PART OUT OF IT. BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, THESE ARE NOT SCREENED. THEY'RE OUT IN THE OPEN. YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T PRESENT NECESSARILY THE MOST DESIRABLE SCENARIO WHEN IT COMES TO THE STORAGE OF REFUSE TO RECYCLING. THE OTHER THING I'LL POINT OUT TOO IS THAT YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE STAINING OR THAT PATTERN ON THE ASPHALT ITSELF THAT ACTUALLY IS RESULTING FROM ROOF USE OR OTHER THINGS FLOWING BEHIND THIS BUSINESS TO THE STORM SEWER. SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE NEED FOR A ROOF, IT'S IMPORTANT TO OUR WATER RESOURCE STAFF THAT WE TRY AND LIMIT THE INTERACTION BETWEEN WEATHER AND THESE FACILITIES AS MUCH AS WE CAN BECAUSE ULTIMATELY IT DOES GO TO OUR STORM SEWER SYSTEM WHICH OF COURSE IS UPSTREAM OF ALL OF OUR LAKES AND RIVERS IN MANY CASES. SO JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS TO POINT OUT ON THE TOUR. I THINK WHAT YEAH, THAT'S IT. I THINK JUST KIND OF BIG PICTURE WHAT WE LEARN AND THERE'S OBVIOUSLY MORE PICTURES IN THE DOCUMENT THAT WAS IN YOUR PACKET I KNOW IT WAS PRESENTED BEFORE IN 2024. OUR TAKEAWAYS FROM THE TOUR IS THAT IT CAN BE DONE WELL, IT CAN BE DONE EFFECTIVELY, IT CAN BE DONE IN A SAFE WAY THAT LIMITS NUISANCE AND SOME OF THESE OTHER CONCERNS AND THERE'S OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF EXAMPLES WHERE IT'S NOT DONE WELL AND YOU WANT TO AVOID THAT. BUT YEAH, THESE WERE KIND OF SOME OF OUR LESSONS THAT WE LEARNED AND WITH THAT I HAVE A COUPLE OF GUIDING QUESTIONS THAT WERE IN YOUR STAFF REPORT AS WELL TO KIND OF WALK THROUGH BUT CHAIR I'LL KIND OF TURN OVER TO YOU IN CASE THERE WAS JUST ANY GENERAL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS THAT YOU WANT TO FIELD FIRST. THANK YOU MR. CARSON. DO ANY GENERAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU CHAIR. I MAY HAVE MISSED IT IN READING THROUGH THE CODE SECTION. YEAH. IS THERE ANY IS REFUSE CAN MY QUESTION IS ABOUT GREASE TANKS FROM RESTAURANTS FRYERS KIND OF THE THE MAIN NOT THE MAIN CULPRIT BUT A MAIN CULPRIT AND STATING IS IS THAT TREATED LIKE GENERAL REFUSE WOULD IT BE ALLOWED WITHIN AN ENCLOSURE SUCH AS THIS. NO OKAY YEAH I CAN ANY MANAGER JOHNSON I KNOW YEAH YOU HAD WORKED WITH YEAH DONE THAT MR. CHAIR COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM THERE ARE SCENARIOS THAT ARE NON CONFORMING BUT THERE ARE THEY'RE SIMILAR TO THERE'S EXTERIOR DUMPSTERS THERE ACTUALLY IS EXTERIOR GREASE RECEPTACLES THAT THEY BRING THE GREASE TO OR THE FATS SOLIDS THOSE THINGS THAT THEY PUMP IT INTO THERE. BUT IF A NEW RESTAURANT IS CONSTRUCTED FOR EXAMPLE, THERE'S OTHER USES TOO. BUT IF A NEW RESTAURANT IS CONSTRUCTED AND TODAY THEY DO NEED TO HAVE A GREASE INTERCEPTOR TO ENSURE THAT THAT'S NOT BEING DISCHARGED TO THE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM BEING WASHED DOWN THE DRAIN OR OTHER THINGS LIKE THAT. SO THERE'S THERE'S MORE EFFECTIVE WAYS TO DEAL WITH THAT TODAY WITH TECHNOLOGY. BUT CERTAINLY THERE ARE BUSINESSES THAT JUST HAVE THAT EXTERIOR STORAGE CONTAINERS BUT AGAIN THOSE ARE LOCKABLE, CLOSE ABLE TEND TO CONTAIN THAT WELL AND THEN SOMEONE COMES TO PICK THEM UP. IS THAT IDEAL? NO, ESPECIALLY WHEN NOT SCREEN BUT IT'S SIMILAR TO OUTDOOR DUMPSTER. WE'VE GOT IT. THANK YOU. ONE OTHER QUESTION, GENERAL QUESTION THE ENFORCEMENT AGENCY ON THIS IS AN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH YEAH. CHAIR CAPTAIN COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM THAT IS CORRECT. AND VERMONT ALSO DO ENFORCEMENT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. THE NAME WITH THE LEGALLY NONCONFORMING CASES HAS THERE BEEN AN ISSUE WITH PARTICULARLY NOISE COMPLAINTS OUTSIDE RESTAURANTS WITH RECYCLING DROPS AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT OFTENTIMES HAPPEN AFTER HOURS? >> HAS THAT BEEN AN ISSUE? YEAH. CHAIR COOKED IN COMMISSIONER LENNY I YEAH I FEEL LIKE PROBABLY ANECDOTALLY I JUST SAY I'M SURE EACH DOES GET COMPLAINTS ABOUT THAT OR CONCERNS I GUESS TO THE NUMBER OF THINGS THAT THEY'VE ISSUED RELATED TO THAT SPECIFICALLY I DON'T THINK THERE'S A TON BUT I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING TO KIND OF CONSIDER OR YEAH COMES UP I ESPECIALLY LIKE YOU KNOW BARS AND RESTAURANTS MAYBE WITH LIKE THE GLASS BOTTLES AND STUFF BEING DUMPED. YEAH YEAH I IF I CAN ADD I AGREE TO THAT SENTIMENT IT'S NOT A FREQUENT COMPLAINT A LOT OF THE RESIDENCES THAT ARE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO SOME OF OUR COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS THINK ABOUT LIKE ALDRICH AVENUE BEHIND LYNDALE FOR EXAMPLE. YOU KNOW THAT'S KIND OF A PRETTY KNOWN CONDITION WHEN YOU MOVE IN AND IT'S PROBABLY A LONG TIME CONDITION IF YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT GREAT BEAR CENTER FOR EXAMPLE OR SOME OF THOSE. BUT THIS IS ALSO AN AREA WHERE YOU KNOW, HAVING A LESS OR HAVING LESS MIXING OF USES IS TO THE BENEFIT OF KIND OF KEEPING DOWN SOME OF THOSE NUISANCES. YOU KNOW, WE CERTAINLY WANT TO ADVOCATE FOR MORE MIXED USE ENVIRONMENTS AND TRYING TO GET BUILD IN THOSE COMPONENTS INTO OUR COMMUNITY FABRIC. BUT YOU KNOW HAVING SOME SEPARATION BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL USE IS KIND OF HAD SOME OF THIS STUFF OFF. ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY TASK USE THAT A NEW HAND IT IS YEAH THANKS CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS I REVIEW ALL THE FINE CIVIL FINE ORDERS THAT GO OUT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AND I WOULD SAY THAT THE NOISE HAS NOT BEEN A COMPLAINT OR SOMETHING THAT WE'VE DONE FORMAL ENFORCEMENT WITH THAT MIGHT GET TAKEN CARE OF AND OTHER MEANS ARE JUST KIND OF INFORMAL RESOLUTION. THE THE ISSUE IS THAT MAINLY THAT PLACES THAT DO HAVE THAT AN ENCLOSURE KEEP THE DUMPSTERS OUT AND DON'T PUT THEM BACK IN SO THEY'RE SITTING OUTSIDE AND THEN WE GET YOU KNOW, IF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SEES IT SEVERAL TIMES THEY SEND NOTICES AND IT CAN GET TO THE POINT WHERE THERE'S A FINE. SO MOST COMMON WHAT I SEE IS JUST THAT THEY DON'T PUT THE DUMPSTERS BACK IN THE ENCLOSURE WHEN THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO. THANK YOU, MR. TUSKY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. ALL RIGHT, MR. CASSIDY, LET'S GO WITH THE GUIDING QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT. SO YOU ARE THE FIRST ONE IS JUST REALLY THAT GENERAL QUESTION OF SHOULD WE ALLOW DETACHED TRASH FACILITIES AS EITHER LIMITED TO KIND OF RE-USE OF EXISTING NON-RES DENSER BUILDINGS THAT DON'T HAVE AN INTERIOR TRASH ROOM OR MORE GENERALLY TO ALL NONRESIDENTIAL USES? I GUESS I'LL JUST PREFACE I KNOW THIS QUESTION AND THIS WAS DISCUSSED KIND OF BACK IN DECEMBER WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND I THINK YOU KNOW GENERALLY FOLKS KIND OF LEAN TOWARDS EITHER NO OR MAYBE KIND OF OPTION A THAT WAS PRESENTED AND THEN AT THE CITY COUNCIL WAS JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE MIXED AND NOT QUITE CLEAR. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE JUST KIND OF RE ASKING THE QUESTION AND OF COURSE WE HAVE NEWER COMMISSIONERS AS WELL SO JUST I GUESS I'LL PREFACED AND APOLOGIZE IF YOU'VE BEEN ASKED THIS QUESTION ALREADY. WELL, I THINK I HAVE THE LONGEST HISTORY ON THIS. WE GET ASKED THIS ALL THE TIME AS IT TURNS OUT. MAN ONE OF THE MOST CMON THINGS THAT COMES BEFORE US IS A REQUEST TO NOT HAVE AN INTERIOR TRASH ROOM AND OUTSIDE OF ONE CASE WE'VE BEEN REMARKABLY CONSISTENT IN SAYING NOPE, NOT EVEN UNDER CONSIDERATION. YOU'RE GOING TO FOLLOW CODE ON THAT. IT'S GOING TO BE AN INTERIOR TRASH ROOM. SO THIS WOULD BE A BIG CHANGE FOR US NO DOUBT ABOUT IT . MR. CUNNINGHAM I AGREE IT WOULD BE A BIG CHANGE. I THINK WELL TRY TO THINK OF THE ONE EXCEPTION BUT I MORE PUT IT IN THE RECORD BECAUSE I DON'T REMEMBER IT PERFECTLY AND I DON'T THINK I WAS EVEN HERE FOR IT. YOU MIGHT BE IT WAS NINE MILE BREWING. THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING IT WAS. BUT I THINK THAT THERE IS WAS AN INTERIOR ACCESS. NO, I THINK IT'S OUTSIDE OR OUTSIDE. OKAY. BUT NO NO GREASE IN THAT KITCHENS JUST PIZZA'S NEVER A PART OF IT. LOW FAT PEPPERONI. I UNDERSTAND IT. NO, BUT IT WAS IT WAS THEY HAVE NO FAT THEY HAVE NO DEEP FED FRYERS. THAT WAS THEIR THEIR KIND OF THING. I, I THINK THAT BLOOMINGTON HAS A YOU KNOW WE TALK A LOT ABOUT SUSTAINABILITY. I THINK THE BLOOMINGTON HAS A LOT OF YOU KNOW, AGING INDUSTRY SPACE THAT IS BEING ACTIVELY REUSED AND IF THIS IS LOWERING THE BARRIER OF ENTRY TO FILL THOSE BUILDINGS WITH BUSINESSES AND JOBS IT'S NOT THAT BIG OF A BLIGHT ON OUR COMMUNITY TO MAKE THIS A PERMITTED USE. THAT BEING SAID, IT'S A SLIPPERY SO I'M REALLY INTERESTED TO HEAR EVERYONE ELSE'S TOPIC ON THIS AND I'M ALSO INTERESTED MAYBE OFF THE RECORD TO HEAR ABOUT THE TRASH ENCLOSURE TOUR MADE BY MY PLANNING STAFF. HOW DO WE GET ON ONE IS MY QUESTION. WELL I'VE GIVEN THIS A LOT OF THOUGHT I GUESS I THINK I CAN GET THERE WITH THE RIGHT DESIGN STANDARDS. I HAVE BEEN REMARKABLY CONSISTENT OVER THE FIVE YEARS I'VE BEEN ON THIS COMMISSION THAT NO, WE DON'T DO THIS AND I WAS REALLY DISAPPOINTED WHEN WE LET THAT PREVIOUS APPLICANT HAVE ONE. I, I DID NOT AGREE WITH THE WAY THAT WAS HANDLED. I DON'T KNOW. I THINK IF YOU HAVE THE RIGHT DESIGN STANDARDS IN PLACE AND I WOULD BE YOU KNOW I THINK THIS IS COMING BUT I WOULD BE PRETTY AGGRESSIVE WITH THEM I THINK I CAN GET THERE. AND THEN THERE'S THE SECONDARY QUESTION OF WHETHER WE WOULD APPLY THAT TO EVERYBODY OR JUST CERTAIN USES. I THINK MR. CARSON IS RIGHT THAT IF IT'S JUST THIS SORT OF 25% UPGRADE THING THEN WE MAY HAVE A BUILDING OWNER THAT WAS GOING TO MODIFY 40% OF THE BUILDING WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO 25% NOW BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE TO BUILD THAT TRASH ENCLOSURE ENCLOSURE. AND SO I THINK IF WE'RE GOING TO DO IT I WOULD JUST TO LET I WOULD JUST ALLOW EVERYBODY TO ALLOW ALL NONRESIDENTIAL USES TO HAVE A DETACHED REFUSE FACILITY AND NAME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH CHAIR I'M I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF THIS IS POSSIBLE SO THIS MAY BE A CRAZY IDEA BUT WHAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT STRUCK ME IN LOOKING AT THE PICTURES FROM THE TOUR AND WHATNOT IS OBVIOUSLY SOME OF THE BEST EXAMPLES ARE CHAIN RESTAURANTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT WHO HAVE ENTIRE TEAMS OF DEVELOPERS AND ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS WHO CAN DO ALL OF THIS WORK FOR THEM. AND CONSIDERING HOW THIS CAME BEFORE US THINKING ABOUT HOW TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR SMALL BUSINESSES IS THERE SOME SORT OF WAY TO EITHER INCENTIVIZE I.E. LIKE A PROPERTY TAX BREAK IF YOU HAVE THE INTERIOR MODEL SMALL VERY VERY SMALL BASICALLY TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO DO IT BUT NOT LIMIT PEOPLE . SO IF YOU'RE A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER AND THE COST UP FRONT THAT YOU WOULD NEED TO DO TO PUT AN INSIDE WHETHER IT'S ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN AND DESIGN PERMITTING ALL OF THOSE THINGS THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO TO GET IT UP TO THE CURRENT CODE AND WHEN YOU'RE STARTING YOUR BUSINESS YOU DON'T HAVE THE CASH TO DO THAT. THAT'S QUESTION NUMBER ONE. IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE ANSWERED. IT'S JUST FOR CONSIDERATION ON THE FLIP SIDE COMING UP WITH SORT OF CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS OR SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF LIKE IF YOU'RE HEADQUARTERED OR YOU'RE ON A SOLE OUTPOST WE'LL ACCEPT IT FOR ALL NONRESIDENTIAL USES. BUT IF YOU ARE A CORPORATE ENTITY THAT'S HEADQUARTERED OUTSIDE OF THE SEVEN COUNTY METROPOLITAN AREA THEN YOU ARE SUBJECT TO SORT OF A CORPORATE STANDARD. I MEAN I KNOW NEITHER ONE OF THOSE MAY BE POSSIBLE BUT I THINK RECOGNIZE IN ONE OF THE BIG CHALLENGES FROM MY OWN PERSPECTIVE WITH BLOOMINGTON AND MARKETING BLOOMINGTON IS HOW MANY CHAINS AND BIG COMPANIES WE HAVE THAT OPERATE IN THAT REGARD. AND I KNOW THAT THE CITY A LOT OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT'S BEEN PART OF WHAT THEY'VE CAMPAIGNED ON TO GET ELECTED IS GETTING MORE SMALL BUSINESSES, MORE SMALL RESTAURANTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. AND HERE I'M WONDERING IF THERE'S A WAY THAT WE COULD FIND A WAY TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR SMALL BUSINESSES BUT NOT NECESSARILY CREATE EXACTLY THE SAME BREAKS FOR, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER FAST FOOD CHAIN TO COME IN. YEAH. MR. JOHNSON OR MR. CARSON, ANY GENERAL THOUGHTS ON THAT? I DON'T THINK WE'RE LOOKING FOR A FORMAL RESPONSE. YEAH, JUST ANY MUSINGS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, CHAIR AND AND KEVIN, I KNOW YOU HAVE SOME THOUGHTS ABOUT THIS AS WELL SO FEEL FREE TO CHIME IN AS OPPOSED TO WHAT I'M GOING TO SAY AND NOT JUST ON THIS POLICY BUT MANY OTHER POLICIES THE CITY HAS BEEN STUDYING WAYS TO HOW DO YOU DEFINE A SMALL BUSINESS OR A LOCAL BUSINESS OR THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. SO TYPICALLY THE WAY THAT IT'S DONE LEGALLY IS THAT YOU KNOW ,THEY HAVE TO APPLY EMPLOY A CERTAIN NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES OR LAST FOR EXAMPLE THAT IS A WAY TO DO THAT. WE WOULDN'T RECOMMEND THAT YOU DO THAT. I MEAN I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT. THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES THAT CHANGE OVER TIME IS SIGNIFICANT AND HARD TO TRACK AND HARD TO ENFORCE. IN ADDITION TO THAT YOU WOULD NOT WANT TO CREATE NEGATIVE INCENTIVES OR DISINCENTIVIZE BUSINESSES FROM GROWING EITHER. SO JUST TO KIND OF POLICY CONSIDERATIONS THERE WITH RESPECTS TO THE TAX STUFF, I KNOW THAT YOU KNOW AND HERE'S WHERE KEVIN MIGHT COME IN MORE HELP BUT YOU KNOW, IT'S IMPORTANT TO ALSO RECOGNIZE THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, THE COUNTY, THE WATERSHED DISTRICTS, THE ALL OF THOSE ARE ALSO IN RECEIPT OF, YOU KNOW, PROPERTY TAX REVENUE AS WELL. SO I THINK YOU WHATEVER YOU'D WANT TO DO ON THE CITY SIDE OF THINGS, IT PROBABLY WOULD WORK BETTER FROM THE DIRECTION OF GRANTS OR OTHER FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE THAT COULD HELP INCENTIVIZE THAT IF THAT MAKES SENSE AS OPPOSED TO A TAX REDUCTION. THE LAST THING I WAS GOING TO SAY TO JUST TO THE COMPLEXITY OF WHAT IS A LOCAL BUSINESS OR WHAT IS A SMALL BUSINESS, MANY COMPANIES THAT TECHNICALLY ARE OR DO MEET THE TEST OF A LARGER CORPORATION FRANCHISE ARE SOME OF OUR FRANCHISEES ACTUALLY MEET MANY OF THE DEFINITIONS OF LOCAL OR SMALL BUSINESS BECAUSE THEY'RE LOCALLY OWNED THEY EMPLOY LESSER NUMBERS OF EMPLOYEES SO IT CAN BE A COMPLEX WEB I GUESS IS WHAT I WOULD SAY AND I DON'T KNOW IF KEVIN HAS ANYTHING HE WANTS TO ADD TO THAT BUT IN THE FIRST STUDY SESSION SORRY KEVIN I WOULD JUST SAY THAT WE ACKNOWLEDGE AS STAFF THAT MANY OF THESE THINGS WOULD BE TO THE BENEFIT OF LARGE BUSINESS AND MORE RESOURCE BUSINESS. I THINK THAT GOES WITHOUT SAYING THAT IT'S VERY HARD TO CRAFT PUBLIC POLICY THAT VERY STRICTLY HAS CITY CODE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE MORE LIMITED TO SMALL BUSINESS. THAT'S WHY GOVERNMENTS COME AT IT FROM THE STANDPOINT OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE AS OPPOSED TO REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT. KEVIN I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING BUT YOU HAVE TO HEAR COMMISSIONERS AT LEAST PROPERTY TAXATION IS IS YOU KNOW AS YOU CAN IMAGINE IT'S HIGHLY REGULATED BY THE STATE LIKE WE HAVE VERY LIMITED AUTHORITY TO ABATE TAXES OR DO TEST AND EVEN THOSE THINGS ARE HIGHLY REGULATED BY THE STATE TOO. SO UNLESS THERE IS SOME AUTHORITY IN STATE LAW TO OFFER SOME SORT OF REBATE OR SOMETHING WHICH I'M NOT AWARE OF, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT BE A VIABLE OPTION FOR FOR CONSIDERATION WITH POLICE WITH PROPERTY TAXES PLUS THE THINGS THAT KIND OF NICK WAS JUST SAYING REGARDING YOU KNOW THE OTHER ENTITIES GET RECEIPTS OF PROPERTY TAXES AS WELL SO YOU KNOW IF WE'RE REDUCING THAT A TAX BREAK ON THE CITY THEN THAT MIGHT FLOW TO OTHER ENTITIES TO AND AS FAR AS I JUST THINK IT YOU KNOW THAT NOT LEGALLY BUT I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR PLANNING BUT DECIDING WHO IS SMALL AND WHO'S NOT IS TOUGH CRACKING THAT IS TOUGH AT LEAST WITH THE ZONING. YOU KNOW YOU WANT TO CREATE A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR ALL THE PLAYERS INVOLVED IN THAT DISTRICT AND NOT CREATE KIND OF TIERED WINNERS OR LOSERS OR YOU KNOW, BASED ON WHAT YOUR BUSINESS IS OR HOW MANY PEOPLE IT EMPLOYS. I JUST THINK THAT THAT GETS VERY TOUGH ON TRYING TO DO THAT. SO I DON'T KNOW IF NICK HAS ANY THOUGHTS THERE BUT IT'S JUST ANOTHER LAYER OF THINGS THEY WOULD HAVE TO TRACK IN AND ENFORCE OVER THE YEARS. >> YOU KNOW, NOTHING MORE TO ADD JUST BEYOND THAT OUR PORT AUTHORITY HAS AGAIN THERE'S BEEN A RENEWED EMPHASIS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND SO THERE'S ALWAYS EVALUATING WAYS TO SUPPORT SMALL BUSINESS. AND I CAN TELL YOU THE MAJORITY OF WAYS THAT THEY'RE CONTEMPLATING DOING THAT IS GRANTS OR OTHER FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE THAT MEET CERTAIN CRITERIA. MR.. THERE WAS A COUPLE EXAMPLES OF THINGS THE PORT HAS THEY HAVE A SAC DEFERRAL FEE PROGRAM SO YOU CAN REFER YOUR THROUGH ACCESSIBLE DISCHARGES OVER A PERIOD OF YEARS. WE HAVE THAT IN POLICY. THAT'S NOT A TAX, THAT'S A SEWER FEE AND THEN WE HAVE A FACADE IMPROVEMENT GRANTS TOO THAT THE PORT MANAGES AND THOSE HELP BUSINESS OWNERS YOU KNOW IMPROVE THE FACADE OF THEIR BUILDING. SO ARE THEIR INCENTIVE PROGRAMS THAT COULD BE EXPANDED, YOU KNOW, TO LOOK AT OTHER ASPECTS OF BUILD OUT AND PUT IN TRASH ROOMS SO THAT'S A POSSIBILITY LIKE NICK SAID. THANK YOU. MR. TOWSLEY MR. CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. STAFF SO IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE PAINTING WITH A BROAD BRUSH TO MAKE A METAPHOR AND IT SHOULD APPLY TO ALL BUSINESSES IN BLOOMINGTON. AND EVEN WITH THAT SAID, I'M I'M STILL IN FAVOR OF THIS WITHIN THE RIGHT DESIGN SETBACK AND OTHER PARAMETERS AND ALSO THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT . ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON GUIDING QUESTION NUMBER ONE FOR SURE WAY YEAH I THINK I ALWAYS STRUGGLE WITH FEELING LIKE WELL WE'RE SUDDENLY CHANGING THE RULES UP AND THAT DOESN'T REALLY FEEL FAIR AND AND SO YOU KNOW SOMEBODY WHO CAME IN SIX MONTHS AGO HAD TO BUILD AND BUILD A WHOLE ROOM AND NOW SOMEBODY THAT'S COMING IN SIX MONTHS FROM NOW DOESN'T SO THAT THAT I ALWAYS STRUGGLE WITH THAT SO THAT PROBABLY INFLUENCES HOW I THINK ABOUT THIS GENERALLY SPEAKING I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE DETACHED REFUSE WITH ALL OF THE THE NECESSARY ROOF AND SIZING AND YOU KNOW ALL OF THE THING I THINK YOU'VE DONE A GOOD JOB THINKING THROUGH AND THE PROPOSAL THAT I'VE SEEN THERE THE RESTRICTIONS AND THE DESIGN ELEMENTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT SPACING I THINK AS LONG AS WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, ADEQUATE ENFORCEMENT I DON'T HAVE A YOU KNOW, I DON'T HAVE A GENERAL PROBLEM WITH IT. I JUST ALWAYS STRUGGLE WITH THAT CHANGING THE RULES AND THE THE RELATIVE FAIRNESS OR UNFAIRNESS OF IT ALL. SO PART OF ME WANTS TO DO THE THAT SORT OF COMPROMISE OF WELL IT'S FINE IF YOU'RE TAKING AN EXISTING BUILDING AND TRYING TO FIND A NEW USE FOR IT IF THAT HELPS FACILITATE THAT NEW USE NOT FORCING A YOU KNOW ADDITIONS TO BE BUILT ON TO A BUILDING BUT IF IT'S A NEW BUILD OR A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE I DON'T KNOW IF 25% IS THE RIGHT NUMBER IF IT'S A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE TO THE BUILDING THEN YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW THE OLD YOU KNOW, THE OLD SYSTEM AND CLOSED SYSTEM. I PROBABLY LEAN A LITTLE BIT TOWARDS THAT JUST FEELING LIKE THAT FEELS A LITTLE BIT MORE INTENTIONAL. BUT I, I PROBABLY COULD BE PERSUADED TO JUST LET EVERYBODY DO IT IF IF THAT WAS THE THE BROAD CONSENSUS AND YOU HAVE YOUR THOUGHTS ON GUIDING QUESTION ONE MR. SUMMERS CHAIR THANK YOU. I DON'T HAVE A TON TO ADD OTHER THAN I FEEL LIKE WITH THE RIGHT RESTRICTIONS I WOULD BE OPEN TO ALL NONRESIDENTIAL USES THAT SEEMS MORE CLEAR FOR YOU, COMMISSIONER OR MR. CASSIDY YES. YEAH. THANK YOU CHAIR PLANNING COMMISSION AND I THINK KIND OF INTENTIONALLY WITH THIS QUESTION IT LEADS NICELY THEN TO KIND OF TALK ABOUT WHAT SOME OF THOSE STANDARDS WOULD BE AND LOVE YOUR FEEDBACK ON ON THAT. SO I GUESS IF WE WOULD GO IN THAT DIRECTION TO ALLOW DETACHED REFUSE FACILITY IS A QUESTION IN MIND IS SHOULD THEY BE CONSTRUCTED OF MATERIALS SIMILAR TO THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING OR SHOULD THEY BE REQUIRED TO BE SOME KIND OF FORM OF MASONRY WHICH IS TYPICALLY A KIND CREATE MASONRY UNIT? SO HERE'S AN EXAMPLE OF ONE THAT USE MATERIALS THAT MATCH THE BUILDING ON THE LEFT AND THEN ONE ON THE RIGHT WHERE THE BUILT THE ENCLOSURE WITH CMU IS ADDED IN THE BUILDING ITSELF THAT IT SERVES AS IS BRICK AND STUCCO SO IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE THE SAME COLOR OR MATERIALS. SO JUST SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT AND I GUESS THIS IS LIKE A NICE IMAGE OF A NEW BUILDING OF WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE BUT I GUESS JUST FROM THE FACILITY TO OR YOU KNOW THAT THIS ALSO ON THE LEFT HERE YOU KNOW THAT IS AN ENCLOSURE THAT HAS MATERIALS THAT MATCH THE BUILDING. SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES IT COULD BE MORE OF LIKE WOOD OR DIFFERENT MATERIAL SURROUNDING IT. SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE THAT QUESTION IS COMING FROM IF YOU'D PREFER TO HAVE SOME KIND OF MORE LIKE MASONRY OR JUST MORE GENERALLY KIND OF MATCHING THE BUILDING. MR. CUNNINGHAM UH, I'M VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT TRASH SO SO I KEEP GETTING THIS STARTED. I THINK I WOULD I WOULD LIKE I WOULD PROPOSE MY ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION WOULD BE I LIKE THE SIMILAR MATERIALS TO THE PRIMARY BUILDING. I WOULD BE OPEN TO GIVING STAFF MORE LEEWAY ON THE APPROVAL BY SAYING SIMILAR OR COMPLEMENTARY MATERIALS TO ALLOW STAFF THE LEEWAY TO DETERMINE IF YOU KNOW IF THE BUILDING IS WOOD SIDED. WE DON'T WANT A WOOD TRASH ENCLOSURE AND I'M NOT SURE HOW THE LEGAL PIECE OF THAT WORKS BUT I THINK SIMILAR OR COMPLEMENTARY WOULD BE THE RIGHT WORDING. WELL THIS IS A STUDY ITEM. I THINK THAT'S PRETTY CLEAR AND I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT. I, I WANT MASONRY BUT I ALSO WANTED TO MATCH THE BUILDING AND SO LIKE IF THE BUILDING IS NOT MASONRY YOU'RE KIND OF WHATEVER. SO YEAH, I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT MATCHING OR WHATEVER IF IT'S IF IT'S MASONRY BUT IF IT'S NOT I WOULD PREFER MASONRY. MR. WHITE AGREED. OKAY. WONDERFUL. CLEAR ENOUGH. YEAH, THAT THAT WORKS FOR ME. THANK YOU. AND THEN THE NEXT ONE I KNOW WE KIND OF ALREADY TOUCHED ON THIS AND I FEEL LIKE I GOT A SENSE BUT I'LL ASK IT ANYWAY IS IF IF THEY SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO HAVE ROOF TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SCREENING AND AGAIN THAT PROTECTION FROM RAIN AND SNOW. SO ON THE LEFT IS AN EXAMPLE OF A NEWER ENCLOSURE IN A SURROUNDING CITY THAT DOES NOT HAVE A ROOF AND THEN THE ONE ON THE RIGHT IS AN ENCLOSURE WITH A ROOF AND THAT ONE DOES EXIST IN BLOOMINGTON TODAY AND MR. CUNNINGHAM YES, ROOF YES, THAT'S RIGHT. DEFINITELY. >> OKAY. MR. KASS NOW YOU MIGHT BE USING THE 9 P.M. VERSION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HERE. NO NO NO. THIS IS GREAT. YEAH, I ACTUALLY SEE I'M SUPPORTIVE OF A ROOF. YEAH YEAH. JUST KIND OF ANTICIPATED THAT SO BUT THIS IS GOOD TO JUST CONFIRM AND THEN THE LAST ONE I HAD HERE WERE IF OUR PROPOSAL SETBACK REQUIREMENTS DO YOU THINK THOSE FEEL ADEQUATE? SO AGAIN IN GENERAL 30FT FROM THE STREET, FIVE FEET FROM A PROPERTY LINE NOT ON A STREET AND THEN THAT 20FT FROM ANY ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LINE AS WELL? YEAH I MEAN I FOR ME I'M NOT YOU KNOW MR. STEP BACK HERE BUT WHAT YOU PROPOSED FELT REASONABLE TO ME. OKAY MR. CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU CHAIR. I AGREE VISUALLY, YEAH I MY MAIN CONCERN WAS THE RESIDENTIAL SETBACK THAT I DON'T WANT FOLKS WHO MIGHT BE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORS BEING FORCED TO HAVE TRASH IN THEIR BACKYARD AND SO I THINK THAT THIS SEEMS LIKE A REASONABLE SETBACK TO PROTECT THEM FROM THAT. VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS? MR. SUMMERS SO MY INFERENCE IS THAT THIS IS ENOUGH AND I TRUST THE PLANNING STAFF AND IT WOULD BE GREAT TO SEE IN THE FINAL PRESENTATION OF THIS OR ANY ACTION WE'D BE TAKING IF THERE HAS IF THERE ARE UNITS LIKE THIS IN BLOOMINGTON OR NEARBY COMMUNITIES AND IF THOSE HAVE HAD COMPLAINTS ABOUT THEM BY NEIGHBORS. THANKS. YEAH, THANK YOU. GOOD. ALL RIGHT. YEAH, THOSE ARE ALL THE GUIDING QUESTIONS I HAD. I KNOW LIKE YOU MENTIONED JUST WANTING TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE THE RIGHT STANDARDS THAT YOU CAN KIND OF GET THERE TO ALLOW DETACHED STRUCTURE. SO I KNOW IT'S ALSO 9 P.M. SO NO WORRIES IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK BUT I GUESS THERE'S ANY OTHER STANDARDS ON HERE THAT YOU HAD CONCERNS ABOUT OR THINGS THAT AREN'T ON THIS LIST THAT YOU WANT TO ADD? DEFINITELY WELCOME THAT BUT AS A WRAP UP. COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU. ON THE OPACITY, IF IF IT'S IMPORTANT FOR SECURITY OF WORKERS AND THE SPACE ITSELF, I THINK A MAXIMUM OPACITY WOULD ALSO BE RECOMMENDED. YOU KNOW KIND OF HAVING A RANGE MIGHT BE A GOOD DESIGN GUIDANCE ON THIS CODE ITEM. SURE. THANK YOU. YEAH. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS? VERY WELL. THANK YOU, MR. CASSIDY. ANYTHING ELSE FROM US? THANKS FOR TALKING TRASH AT 9 P.M. OR QUESTION, MR. LIDDY. SORRY, I DO HAVE ONE. THE ONE CONCERN SORRY. I SHOULD HAVE MENTIONED THIS EARLIER. IT'S MORE QUESTION CONCERN SOMETHING THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND FACTORING IN PARTICULARLY ON THIS SET BACK ISSUE. I THINK AGAIN JUST ANOTHER BIAS I HAVE IS I LIVED IN SOUTH AFRICA FOR A LONG TIME WHERE RESIDENTIAL CRIME CONTINUED TO INCREASE IN INCREASE IN INCREASE AND THE ROOFS OFF THE DETACHED ENCLOSURES IF THEY WERE TO CLOSE TO SAY PERIMETER WALLS AND THINGS LIKE THAT THERE WAS IT BECAME A MEANS OF INGRESS FOR CRIMINALS AND THINGS LIKE THAT TO GET INTO BACKYARDS. SO I THINK THE ONLY THING I WOULD SAY IS MAKE SURE TO FACTOR THAT IN IN ANY DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND IS THAT JUST MOVES THAT ENTRY POINT AND CREATES THE ABILITY TO GET INTO SOMEONE'S BACKYARD IF THEY DON'T WANT THEM THERE. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER WHITNEY. ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE, MR. CASSIDY? NO. THANK YOU ALL FOR TALKING TRASH AT 9 P.M.. YOU LET YOU I'M GOING TO LOOK DOWN THE LINE HERE AS WE HAVE THREE ITEMS TO GO ALL BE AT THERE PRETTY QUICK. DO WE WANT TO TAKE A RECESS OR ARE PEOPLE FEELING OKAY? YEAH. OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO KEEP GOING TO ITEM NUMBER THREE WHICH IS OUR ANNUAL REVIEW OF PLANNING COMMISSION RULES AND PROCEDURES PLANNING MANAGER MR. NICK JOHNSON WHAT DO YOU HAVE FOR US? THANK YOU, CHAIR KIRK YOU KNOW MEMBERS I'LL TRY AND PROCEED THROUGH THIS BRISKLY. THE BASICS IS THAT THERE ARE RULES OF PROCEDURE THAT GOVERN EVERY ADVISORY BOARD AND COMMISSION IN THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON AND THESE REQUIREMENTS ARE ROOTED IN THE CITY CODE. SO BEFORE YOU AS SECTION 2.76 OF THE CITY CODE RULES OF PROCEDURE SAYS THE COMMISSION SHALL FORMULATE RULES CONSISTENT WITH APPLICABLE LAWS THAT GOVERN MATTERS RELATING TO THE COMMISSION OR LIMITED INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO MEETING SCHEDULES TIMES LOCATIONS, CONDUCT OFFICERS ETC. AND I DO WANT TO NOTE THAT THE RULES DO NEED TO BE AND ANY AMENDMENTS DO NEED TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THEIR APPROVAL. SO THIS IS A CITY CODE REQUIREMENT. YOUR RULES OF PROCEDURE CURRENTLY REQUIRE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW THEM EVERY AUGUST. SO WE'RE BRINGING IT BEFORE YOU HERE ON AUGUST 14TH TO SATISFY THAT REQUIREMENT AND THE RULES. IT ALSO REQUIRES THAT THE COMMISSION BE REFRESHED ON EXPERT THEY CONTEXTS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. NOW I KNOW SOME OF THE NEWER MEMBERS JUST GET SOME TRAINING AND ORIENTATION ON SOME OF THESE MATTERS BUT ALWAYS A GOOD REFRESHER FOR EVERYBODY TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION AND KEVIN IS ALSO AVAILABLE IN CASE THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS. SO JUST A QUICK AGENDA SETTING AND WHAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT IS FIRST THE EXPERTISE IN CONFLICT PEACE THAN THE RULES THEMSELVES. STAFF DOES HAVE SOME RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS THAT WE HAVE IDENTIFIED. WE WELCOME YOUR DISCUSSION. ANY OPPORTUNITY FOR OTHER AMENDMENTS AND THEN WE DO HAVE A RECOMMENDED MOTION. SO EX PARTE DE CONTACTS EX PARTE DE CONTACTS ARE WHEN AND THIS IS FROM YOUR RULES OR COMMUNICATIONS FROM APPLICANTS ARE INTERESTED PARTIES OR INTERESTED MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WITH YOU OUTSIDE OF THE PUBLIC RECORD THERE IS AN INTEREST IN KEEPING OUR COMMISSION DISCUSSION ON AN APPLICATION WITHIN THE PUBLIC RECORD TO AVOID THE PERCEPTION OF UNDUE INFLUENCE. EXPERT CONTACTS ON MATTERS BEFORE THE COMMISSION SHOULD BE AVOIDED WHEN EX PARTE TO OCCUR THEY SHOULD BE TO DISCLOSE PRIOR TO THE COMMISSION'S DISCUSSION OF A GIVEN ITEM. SO CERTAINLY ESPECIALLY ITEMS OF SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC INTEREST YOU KNOW MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC KNOW YOU SERVE ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THEY MAY TRY TO DISCUSS THE MATTER WITH YOU IN SUCH A WAY THAT PROVIDES FACTUAL OR OTHER INFORMATION THAT COULD INFLUENCE YOUR DECISION MAKING. IF THAT'S THE CASE, IT REALLY SHOULD BE BROUGHT FORTH AND PRESENTED AS PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD SO THAT THE PUBLIC SEES ALL OF THE INFORMATION THAT INFORMED YOUR DECISION MAKING. YEAH, KEVIN I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY ANYTHING TO ADD TO THAT ONE BUT YOU KNOW WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT IN PREVIOUS TRAININGS. I THINK IT'S FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD AND AS WITH THE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ONE IF YOU EVER HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THAT, THAT'S WHY STAFF IS HERE TO HELP SUPPORT YOU IN TERMS OF WHETHER OR NOT IT MEETS THE TEST OR CRITERIA OF AN EX PARTE CONTACT OR CONFLICT OF INTEREST ONE SLIDE LATER. MR. JOHNSON IF IF WE RUN INTO THIS SCENARIO BY ACCIDENT OR OTHERWISE, WHAT IS THE PROCESS? DO WE EMAIL YOU THAT THIS OCCURRED AND IT GETS DISTRIBUTED TO THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS? THANK YOU. HE HAS BROUGHT UP AT THE MEETING. THANK YOU CHAIR CORRECT. AND I WOULD START BY CONTACTING ME AS THE FORMAL IS UNDER THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND WE CERTAINLY CAN TALK ABOUT IT. I CAN GIVE YOU MY VIEW. I THINK OFTENTIMES THESE ARE TYPICALLY MORE CLEAR CUT. IF THEY'RE NOT THEN I WOULD WELCOME AND SEEK OUT THE ADVICE OF CITY'S LEGAL STAFF KEVIN CASKEY AND EVEN IF IT EVEN IF I FELT IT WAS MORE CONFIDENT THAN WHETHER IT MET THE CRITERIA, WE CERTAINLY WOULD ALWAYS MAKE LEGAL STAFF AVAILABLE TO SUPPORT YOU IF YOU WANTED A SECOND OPINION OR WANTED THEIR SUPPORT. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE. SO THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS ON EXPERTISE CONTACTS? MR. CHAIR, IF I COULD JUST JUST ADD A LITTLE BIT TO THAT. THIS IS KIND OF LIKE A HOLDOVER FROM OR SIMILAR TO WHAT HAPPENS IN COURTS LIKE THE JUDGE HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY TO DECIDE A MATTER AND IF ONE OF THE PARTIES CONTACTS THE JUDGE AND TRIES TO GIVE THE JUDGE INFORMATION, THE JUDGE HAS TO DISCLOSE THAT TO THEM AND BOTH PARTIES WHOEVER RUNS ON THE SAME PAGE BASICALLY THIS IS KIND OF WHAT THAT DOES, RIGHT? SO MOST OF THE TIME THE WRITTEN COMMENTS OR THE COMMENTS WILL COME INTO PLANNING STAFF. BUT IF ONE COMMISSIONER GETS CONTACTED AND THEN LIKE I CONCUR WITH NICK, TALK TO NICK FIRST AND LET THEM KNOW BUT AT THE MEETING WE SHOULD PROBABLY INCLUDE THAT IN THE FORMAL RECORD TOO BECAUSE IT IS PART OF THE RECORD AND DECISIONS HAVE TO BE MADE ON THE FORMAL RECORD SO DISCLOSURE IS THE MAIN THING AND ALWAYS TALK TO US YOU KNOW IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS AS YOUR FIRST POINT OF CONTACT SO THANK YOU. IF I CAN PROVIDE ONE EXAMPLE I THINK YOU KNOW OFTENTIMES SOMEONE WILL TELL YOU I SUPPORT THIS PROJECT OR I AM AN OPPOSITION TO THIS PROJECT FOR THESE REASONS THAT WOULD NOT QUALIFY AS AN EXPERT CONTACT IN MOST CASES. BUT IF SOMEONE TOLD YOU INFORMATION THAT WAS FACTUAL IN NATURE OR ANALYTICAL IN NATURE THAT WAS ABOUT A SITE THAT'S SOMETHING YOU WOULD WANT TO BRING FORTH BECAUSE THERE'D BE NEW INFORMATION INFLUENCING YOUR DECISION MAKING IN EFFECT. SO YEAH. QUESTION SO YOUR FIRST POINT IF SOMEONE WERE TO SAY LIKE AS A MEMBER FROM THE PUBLIC OR SAY I SUPPORT THIS OR I DON'T SUPPORT THIS OR EXPECT IT TO NOT ENGAGE OR WHAT ENGAGEMENT BE CONSIDERED EX PARTE IF WE'RE TO ASK LIKE WHY YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? I WOULD JUST SAY HEY COME TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AND SAY THAT LIKE WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT? YEAH YEAH. CHAIR COMMISSIONER YOU SAY I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS NOT PRESUME NOT YOU KNOW REVEALING OR NOT PRESUMING TO MAKE A DECISION ABOUT HOW YOUR WOULD POTENTIALLY VOTE ON A MATTER PRIOR TO HEARING THE FULL INFORMATION IN THE PUBLIC RECORD THAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT THING. SO IF YOU'RE HAVING THOSE TYPES OF CONVERSATIONS I DON'T THINK IT'S EVER NECESSARILY A BAD THING TO INQUIRE ASK QUESTIONS OF SOMEONE WHO'S CONNECTED WITH YOU BUT YOU REALLY NEED TO REMAIN NEUTRAL UNTIL YOU'VE CONSUMED ALL THE INFORMATION IN THE PUBLIC RECORD AND THAT INCLUDES THE ELEMENTS OF THE PUBLIC HEARING UP UNTIL THE DECISION MAKING PIECE. I DON'T KNOW KEVIN, IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO THAT. YEAH. CHAIR COMMISSIONERS NO I THINK THAT'S ACCURATE LIKE DECISIONS HAVE BEEN THROWN OUT FOR BIAS SO WHEN PEOPLE ARE MAKING PUBLIC STATEMENTS OR MEMBERS OF A COMMISSION OR COUNCIL OR MAKING PUBLIC STATEMENTS THAT THEY FAVOR THINGS OR DISFAVOR THINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION THEY'VE BEEN THROWN OUT SO THERE'S BEEN HIGH PROFILE CASES IN MINNEAPOLIS TO THAT EFFECT WHERE YOU KNOW, A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER WAS OUT BASICALLY ADVOCATING A POSITION PRIOR TO THE CONSIDERATION AND IT GOT TOSSED OUT SO YEAH, JUST YOU'RE TO REMAIN NEUTRAL UNTIL YOU'VE HEARD ALL THE FACTS AND THAT INCLUDES THE ENTIRE PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU. WE'LL PROCEED UNDER CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. SO AGAIN WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS IN TRAINING BEFORE BUT CONFLICTS CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ARISE FROM ANY ACTUAL OR POTENTIAL BENEFITS THAT A COMMISSIONER, SPOUSE, FAMILY MEMBER OR PERSON LIVING IN THEIR HOUSEHOLD MIGHT DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY BENEFIT FROM A PLANNING DECISION SIMILAR TO EX PARTE DE A COMMISSIONER MAY CONSULT WITH THE PLANNING MANAGER OR CITY ATTORNEY TO DETERMINE WHETHER AN ACTUAL OR POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST EXISTS. COMMISSIONERS SHALL DISCLOSE IF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST ON A MATTER EXISTS AND SHALL ABSTAIN COMPLETELY FROM DIRECT OR INDIRECT PARTICIPATION IN WHICH THEY HAVE A CONFLICT AND SHALL LEAVE ANY CHAMBER IN WHICH SUCH A MATTER IS UNDER DELIBERATION. SO YEAH, I MEAN I YOU KNOW I THINK THE CLEAR ONES ARE MORE FINANCIAL IN NATURE. IF YOU HAVE A CLEAR FINANCIAL CONNECTION TO THE DECISION BEING MADE THAT'S MORE CLEAR. THERE CERTAINLY IS OTHER ELEMENTS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST THAT ARE MORE ON THE MARGINS OR LAYERS BELOW THAT WHICH HAVE TO DO WITH PUBLIC PERCEPTION OR EVEN A LAYER BELOW THAT. SO I THINK THOSE ONES ARE ALWAYS THE HARDER ONES TO EVALUATE SOMETIMES IT'S THE FINANCIAL ONES ARE MORE CLEAR BUT AS WITH OUR EXPERT DAY I MEAN I WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONTACT ME AND KEVIN JUST IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT A POTENTIAL CONFLICT OR ANY QUESTIONS OR CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, OKAY. SEE NONE. SO STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE RULES OF PROCEDURE. WE ARE RECOMMENDING SIX AMENDMENTS. I ALSO WANT TO RAISE ONE OTHER ITEM FOR DISCUSSION THAT DIDN'T MAKE IT IN THE PACKET. I'LL TRY AND DO THIS BRIEFLY. I THINK FOR THE MOST PART OUR RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS ARE PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD AND I JUST WANT TO NOTE THAT THESE CAME FORWARD AS A RESULT OF WHERE WE VIEW THE RULES ARE EITHER CURRENTLY SILENT OR RELATED TO ISSUES THAT HAVE KIND OF COME UP IN THE PAST PROBABLY TWO YEARS IS WHAT I WOULD SAY TO THAT. SO THE FIRST RECOMMENDED AMENDMENT HAS TO DO WITH THE THE CURRENT RULES ARE SILENT ON WHETHER OR NOT THE PLANNING COMMISSION SHOULD TAKE TESTIMONY OR CAN TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT AT A STUDY ITEM SO YOU CAN ENVISION THE ROUGH USE AND RECYCLING THING THAT WE JUST DID IF YOU HAD AN INTERESTED PARTY WHO WANTED TO PROVIDE THEIR FEEDBACK ABOUT THIS CURRENTLY THE RULES ARE SILENT. TRADITIONALLY THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS NOT TAKEN TESTIMONY. THE INTENT IS REALLY AS YOU THE COMMISSIONERS TO ROLL YOUR SLEEVES UP AND DIG INTO THE ISSUES AND NOT AND KIND OF SAVE THAT FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND THERE IS ALSO IS WAYS FOR FOLKS TO PROVIDE WRITTEN MATERIALS WHICH STAFF HAS ALWAYS COMMITTED TO INCLUDING THOSE IN THE PACKET EVEN WITH STUDY ITEMS. SO THERE IS WAYS TO GET THERE. WE WOULD JUST RECOMMEND ADDING THE SENTENCE THAT UNLESS PERMITTED BY THE CHAIR NO PUBLIC COMMENT OR TESTIMONY IS ALLOWED DURING A STUDY ITEM THAT WAY THE DOOR IS NOT COMPLETELY CLOSED BUT AT LEAST THE RULES ARE NO LONGER SILENT. MR. JOHNSON THIS SEEMS TO BE A LITTLE BIT IN CONFLICT WITH WHAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT WHERE THE PLANNING COMMISSION SHOULD NOT HAVE OPINIONS ON SOMETHING BEFORE WE'VE HEARD THE PUBLIC'S OPINION ON IT. SO STUDIES ITEM INHERENTLY IS ASKING FOR OUR OPINION ON SOMETHING. CAN YOU HELP SORT SORT THAT OUT FOR ME PLEASE? YEAH. CHAIR THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PROVIDING GUIDANCE IN THE PREPARATION OF AN ORDINANCE AND TAKING THE FINAL ACTION ON ON THE ACTUAL ORDINANCE BEFORE YOU SO YOU KNOW I THINK SO LONG AS YOU ARE STILL WAITING TO MAKE A FINAL FORMAL DECISION UNTIL YOU'VE HEARD ALL OF THE TESTIMONY OF THE PROPOSED POLICY CHANGE, I THINK IT'S STILL OKAY AND APPROPRIATE TO PROVIDE STAFF WITH GENERAL DIRECTIONAL GUIDANCE AS TO WHAT PUBLIC POLICY THE PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO SEE ON A PARTICULAR ITEM. THE CHAIR AND AND COMMISSIONERS I MIGHT ADD NORMALLY THE STUDY ITEMS ARE SOMETHING THAT THE CITY INITIATED SO IT'S NOT LIKE YOU HAVE A PRIVATE PARTY THAT'S ADVOCATING FOR THEIR POSITION. IT'S USUALLY THE CITY AND IT USUALLY RELATES TO A CODE AMENDMENT LIKE A LIKE A DISTRICT PLAN LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER COMP PLANS SOMETHING LIKE THAT WHERE IT'S NOT A PRIVATE PARTY THAT'S COMING IN FOR AN APPLICATION AND SOMEONE IS SAYING PRIOR TO THE MEETING THAT THEY APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE IT. IT'S MORE QUASI JUDICIAL. THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THAT AND LEGISLATIVE FUNCTIONING AS REZONINGS CONTEMPLATE AMENDMENTS AND CODE AMENDMENTS ARE A LITTLE DIFFERENT IN THAT SENSE SO THAT MAKES SENSE. >> THANK YOU, MR. TUSK. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE OR THOUGHTS? COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM UH, CONCERN AND ABOUT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT AMENDMENT ONE AS IT RELATES TO IF WE ARE I GUESS PERMITTED BY THE CHAIR AND I INTERPRET THAT AS PERMITTED BY THE CHAIR IN CHAMBERS OR POSSIBLY BEFORE BUT IF WE'RE OPENING THIS UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, DO WE NEED TO PUBLISH THAT IN THE NEWSPAPER? AND THEN WOULD THAT KIND OF CREATE MORE WORK FOR STAFF ? YEAH. CHAIR COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM SO YOU WOULD NOT NEED TO PUBLISH IN THE NEWSPAPER BECAUSE IT'S NOT A FORMAL PUBLIC HEARING I WOULD KNOW WE DO PUBLISH AGENDAS. YOU KNOW TYPICALLY ONE WEEK BEFORE THE FORMAL MEETING SOMETIMES YOU KNOW FRIDAY THE WEEK BEFORE SO IT IS PUBLISHED BUT BECAUSE IT'S NOT THE FORMAL PUBLIC HEARING WE DON'T HAVE TO MEET ANY STATUTORY REQUIREMENT OR OWN NOTICE FORMAL NOTICE. BUT I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU . I MEAN YOU ABSENT A NOTICE IN THE PAPER OR SOME OTHER NOTICE YOU ARE TECHNICALLY PRIVILEGING A PARTY THAT MAY HAVE COME TO THE MEETING FOR SOME OTHER REASON AND I WANTED TO PARTICIPATE. I THINK THAT'S WHY THE CHAIRS DISCRETION HERE IS WHAT'S IMPORTANT IN TERMS OF WHAT WHAT IS NEEDED FOR THE SITUATION COMMITTEE RESOURCE. I THINK SOMETIMES I WORRY ABOUT THE FACT THAT THERE IS WIGGLE ROOM AND HOW WIGGLE ROOM CAN SEEM LIKE FAVORING AGAINST SOMEONE WHO IS SHOWING UP BECAUSE THEY KNOW SOMETHING IS ON THE AGENDA. I WORRY ABOUT MAKING STUDY ITEMS AN OPTION FOR NEIGHBOR PUBLIC AND BUSINESS FEEDBACK WHEN THERE ARE OTHER WAYS FOR THEM TO DO THAT THAT FEEL LIKE THEY'RE GETTING THEIR VOICE DIRECTLY HEARD. AND WE DO HAVE PUBLIC ITEMS AS WELL. SO I THINK THAT I'M IN SOME WAYS THINKING SOME WORST CASE SCENARIOS WHERE SOMEONE SHOWS UP AND THEN THEY MAKE A PRETTY LARGE PR ISSUE OUT OF SOMETHING THAT IS JUST THE BEGINNING OF A PLANNING PROCESS WHEN THEY COULD SEND AN EMAIL TO THE PLANNING TEAM IN BLOOMINGTON AND THE QUESTION FOR ME IS DO WE ANTICIPATE REALLY OPENING STUDY ITEMS UP TO PUBLIC COMMENT BECAUSE IF NOT IS IT FOR ME IT'S ETHICALLY GRAY TO SAY WE MIGHT DO THIS. MR. CUNNINGHAM SORRY I THINK I TOOK US DOWN A BAD PATH AT 915 AT NIGHT. THIS IS THIS IS I'M ASSUMING PLENTY MANAGER JOHNSON THIS IS ONE OF THE CLARIFICATIONS FOR THINGS THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY SILENT ON. IS THAT A CORRECT ASSUMPTION? TRISH CUNNINGHAM THAT'S CORRECT. SO THE UNLESS PERMITTED BY CHAIR IS JUST A HEDGE FOR AN EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCE BUT NO, THE REAL ADDITION TO THE RULE HERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT OR TESTIMONY IS ALLOWED DURING A STUDY ITEM. IS THAT ACCURATE? CHAIR MR. CUNNINGHAM I AGREE WITH THAT ASSESSMENT. OKAY THEN I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS . I TOO AM IN FAVOR OF IT. I THINK IT ACTUALLY IS JUST MORE CLARITY FOR THE PUBLIC WHEN IT'S BETTER TO BRING SOMEONE SOMETHING THAT'S MORE FULLY BAKED SO THEY KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GETTING INTO. SOMETIMES OR STUDY ITEMS ARE PRETTY LOOSE AND AND NOT FULLY FORMED YET AND I DON'T KNOW I, I I'D RATHER GIVE A LITTLE MORE CERTAINTY TO THE PUBLIC HERE'S WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE'S WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED AND SORT OF WE MIGHT SAY SOMETHING THREE TIMES BEFORE WE ACTUALLY TAKE ACTION AND I THINK IT'S JUST MORE CLEAR TO THE PUBLIC TO CONTINUE TO WELL TO TO NOT ALLOW IT. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS? SO CLEAR ENOUGH. MR. JOHNSON I THINK SO. I THINK I'M HEARING CONSENSUS SUPPORT FOR THE LANGUAGE AS DRAFTED AND AGAIN, JUST TO BE CLEAR, IF THE WIGGLE ROOM OR THE DISCRETION PIECE WANTED TO TAKE OUT, YOU WOULD JUST STRIKE THAT FIRST PIECE OF THAT. YEAH AND JUST BUT YEAH I WHAT I'M HEARING I THINK IS CONSENSUS THAT THE LANGUAGE IS DRAFTED BY STAFF IS ACCEPTABLE OKAY AMENDED TO AMENDMENT TWO THIS IS JUST A SIMPLE CLEAN UP WE DON'T LONGER HAVE A HEARING EXAMINER PROCESS IN OUR ZONING CODE. WE PREVIOUSLY HAD ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCES AND OTHER APPROVAL ITEMS THAT WERE HELD BY A HEARING EXAMINER THE STREAMLINING DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE BACK IN THE FALL OF 24 KIND OF REMOVED THAT AS A PROCESS EMPOWERING THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH MORE APPROVAL AUTHORITY EVEN ACTIONS BY THE HEARING EXAMINER PREVIOUSLY HAD TO GO ON TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL AFTER THE FACT. SO JUST SOME CONTEXT FOR THE NEWER MEMBERS. SO THIS IS JUST REALLY A SIMPLE CLEAN UP LESTER'S ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT? I'LL PROCEED. GO AHEAD. AMENDMENT THREE THIS IS JUST ALSO A CLEAN UP JUST STRIKING THE WORD PLANNING THROUGHOUT THE RULES. IT JUST DISCUSSES THE COMMISSION. I DON'T KNOW WHY THERE WAS A SPECIFIC REFERENCE TO PLANNING AND KEVIN I'LL LET YOU SPEAK TO THIS ONE OF HIS QUESTIONS THIS IS MORE YOU'RE MORE YOUR ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE COMMISSIONER TUSKY OR MR. THOMAS YOU KNOW I DIDN'T KEEP GOING YEAH CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS LIKE THAT WAS JUST ME BEING OCD ABOUT KEEPING ALL THE TERMS STRAIGHT IN OTHER PLACES ON THE RULES. IT'S JUST THE COMMISSION AND THIS PLACE I THINK FORMER MANAGER MARK GARDNER DRAFTED THIS AND IT SAID PLANNING COMMISSION SO JUST CLEAN UP GENERALLY THE DRIVE BY OF MR. MARKER ALL RIGHT GOT IS NOW WATCHING AMENDMENT FOR SECTION 3.3 G SO THIS IS GETTING MORE INTO AGAIN THE STUFF THAT IS CURRENTLY SILENT ON AND I CURRENTLY THE RULES DON'T HAVE A TIME LIMIT ON THE AMOUNT OF TESTIMONY HISTORICALLY AND BY ME SAYING THAT WE'RE HISTORICALLY I MEAN IN THE LAST SIX YEARS THE COMMISSION HAS USED A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT AS WAS RECENTLY EXECUTED BY THE CHAIR'S DISCRETION AT RECENT PUBLIC HEARINGS. SO THIS LANGUAGE WOULD JUST KIND OF MEMORIALIZE THAT INTO THE RULES AND AS IT READS IT'S JUST PERSONS PROVIDING TESTIMONY MUST ADDRESS THE COMMISSION AND NO MORE THAN THREE MINUTES THE APPLICABLE TIME LIMIT MUST BE UNIFORMLY ENFORCED BY THE CHAIR PERSONS PROVIDING TESTIMONY CANNOT RETURN A SECOND TIME TO GIVE ADDITIONAL TESTIMONY UNLESS REQUESTED BY THE CHAIR. SO AGAIN THERE'S SOME DISCRETION THERE SO I'M ACTUALLY NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS WHEN WE FILL UP THE ROOM YEAH WE USE THE SHOT CLOCK BUT IT'S PRETTY RARE THAT WE FILL UP THE ROOM LIKE THAT A LOT OF TIMES IT'S 1 OR 2 PEOPLE HERE THAT WANT TO TESTIFY AND I DON'T THREE MINUTES IS PRETTY SHORT AND I DON'T FEEL THE NEED TO CUT PEOPLE OFF IF THEY WANT TO TALK FOR 5 OR 6 MINUTES I WANT THEM TO TALK ALL NIGHT. BUT IN GENERAL THIS IS NOT A PROBLEM FOR US. IN MY FIVE YEARS ON THE COMMISSION AND YOU KNOW USUALLY IT'S JUST 1 OR 2 PEOPLE THAT WANT TO COME UP AND AND SAY SOME THINGS AND I WOULD RATHER CONTINUE TO LEAVE IT AT THE CHAIR'S DISCRETION THAT THE CHAIR CAN SEE HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE IN THE ROOM, SEE HOW FULL THE AGENDA IS SO CONTROVERSIAL. THE TOPIC IS GET THE SENSE FOR YOU KNOW IS THERE A LOT OF ENERGY IN THIS ROOM OR NOT AND INSTITUTE THE SHOT CLOCK IF THEY CHOOSE. THAT'S MY THOUGHTS ON IT COMMISSIONER WHITE YEAH MR. CHAIR I AGREE. I THINK IF WE WANT TO PUT SOMETHING IN I THINK THE MORE APPROPRIATE LANGUAGE WOULD BE THE CHAIR MAY LIMIT TESTIMONY TO THREE MINUTES ETC. ETC. ETC. I THINK THAT THE THE GUIDANCE IN HERE IS IS FINE BUT I THINK IT SHOULD BE A MORE OF THE CHAIR MAY CHOOSE TO IMPLEMENT THIS RATHER THAN WILL IMPLEMENT THIS AND JUST ALSO CLARIFY DOES THE OLD G BECOME H AND THE OLD AGE BECOME I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE CLEAR AND YOU'RE NOT REPLACING WHAT WAS IN G NO I'LL GET TO THAT HERE. OKAY THANKS FOR THE RECORD I BELIEVE I PUT A HARD COPY OF THE RULESN FRONT OF YOU. YEAH OKAY. YEAH. THAT'S THE CURRENT NOT THE AMENDED. I CAN PULL THAT UP IF NEED BE BUT NO WE'RE JUST SLIDING DOWN EFFECTIVELY AND THERE'S AN AMENDED COPY AND OTHER THOUGHTS ON AMENDMENT NUMBER FOUR MR. HE THINKS THE ONE THING I'D SAY IS I ALSO WOULD CHANGED I PERHAPS CHANGE THE WORDING FROM UNLESS REQUESTED BY THE CHAIR OR TO SOMETHING MORE ALONG THE LINES OF UNLESS AUTHORIZED BY THE CHAIR. SO LOOKING FOR EXAMPLE AT HOW WE DID IT LAST WEEK WITH THE HEALTH AND WELLNESS CENTER WHERE AT THE TOP THE CHAIR STATED THAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE THAT EVERYONE WOULD IF THERE WAS NO ONE ELSE IN LINE THEY'D HAVE ANOTHER THREE MINUTES I THINK REQUESTED TO THE PUBLIC COULD READ AS THAT THE CHAIR CAN LIKE PICK AND CHOOSE WHO THEY'RE GOING TO COME AND TALK AND AND PARTICULARLY CONTROVERSIAL CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES THAT MAY BE SEEN AS YOU KNOW FAVORING THE BOARD OF THE COMMISSION AND THE COMMISSIONERS A LITTLE TOO MUCH PERHAPS JUST A THOUGHT. THE OTHER HALF OF THIS IS INTERESTING IS THE RETURN FOR A SECOND TIME. HISTORICALLY WE HAVE ALLOWED THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO AS RECOMMENDED HERE IF YOU ASKED MY THOUGHTS ON IT AGAIN I THINK IT'S A CHAIR'S DISCRETION TYPE OF THING. I JUST THE WAY I PREFER IT IS TO ALLOW MORE PUBLIC TESTIMONY NOW YOU'VE GOT TO BE CAUTIOUS OF IT AND THAT'S LIKE A PRIMARY ROLE OF THE CHAIR IS TO NOT LET THINGS GET AWAY FROM THE MEETING AND YOU LOSE YOUR FOCUS AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS. SO I LIKE ALLOWING THE CHAIR TO HAVE DISCRETION ON WHETHER SOMEONE'S ALLOWED IT. FOLKS ARE ALLOWED TO COME BACK FOR A SECOND TIME OR NOT. I DON'T I DON'T LOVE THE IDEA OF CANNOT I'D RATHER LEAVE IT AT THE CHAIR'S DISCRETION COMMISSIONER HE'S A GREAT I JUST JUST A QUESTION SO LIKE IF THAT WERE THE CASE THEN THAT WOULD WOULD THAT MEAN THAT THE CHAIR WOULD HAVE TO DISCLOSE IT IN THE BEGINNING? IT'S KIND OF NOT IN THE MIDDLE LIKE SO IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE CERTAINLY THINK IT'S BEST PRACTICE TO DO SO YEAH I DO YOU GUYS THINK THAT SHOULD BE ADDED TO HER THEN? I DON'T KNOW. I THINK IT'S A BAD IDEA. JUST YEAH, YOU'RE PROPOSING THAT WE SHOULD HAVE LANGUAGE THAT SAYS THE CHAIR WILL STATE AT THE OPENING OF A PUBLIC HEARING OR YEAH JUST TO AVOID ANYONE BEING LIKE YOU SAID THAT MIDWAY AFTER I YOU KNOW JUST THINKING AHEAD I GUESS YEAH I THINK THAT'S FAIR PRESSURE RIGHT GENERALLY SPEAKING I DON'T DISAGREE WITH COMMISSIONER S'S COMMENT. I WOULD SAY THOUGH THAT I COULD ENVISION TIMES WHERE AS THE EVENING GOES ON THERE MAY HAVE TO BE A CHANGE IN CONDITION SO I'D WANT TO LEAVE SOME AGAIN. I JUST I TRUST THE THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIR SO I THINK THAT IF WE DO WANT TO OFFICIALLY ALLOW FOR A SHOT CLOCK PROCEDURE I'M FINE WITH THAT BUT I THINK IT SHOULD BE AGAIN AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIR. BUT YOU KNOW THE SHOT CLOCK MAY BE IMPLEMENTED AND WE COULD PUT SOME LANGUAGE YOU KNOW, IT SHOULD BE COMMUNICATED CLEARLY, YOU KNOW, TO THE EXPECTATION SHOULD BE COMMUNICATED CLEARLY TO THE TO THOSE IN ATTENDANCE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. I DON'T THINK I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. I THINK I AM IN FAVOR OF UNIFORM IMPLEMENTATION OF SOMETHING IF IF WE'VE IMPLEMENTED A THREE MINUTE SHOT CLOCK AND TO ME AND I JUST THINK I WANT TO GIVE EVERYBODY THE SAME OPPORTUNITY I'D BE WORRIED ABOUT IT AND THAT'S THE WAY I WOULD IMPLEMENT IT ANYWAY IF I WERE ACTING CHAIR IN THAT CASE. BUT I KNOW OTHER FOLKS HAVE THOUGHTS ON THAT. WELL, WE SHOULD BE CLEAR WITH WHAT WHERE WHERE WHAT CAN WE CLARIFY FOR YOU, MR. JOHNSON? OH, HE'S SENSING MY FEELINGS OVER HERE. WE'RE SOLOSE NOW. THAT'S AWESOME. NO, THE WHAT I HEARD IS THE CHAIR MAY LIMIT TESTIMONY TO NO MORE THAN THREE MINUTES. RIGHT. THAT'S KIND OF THE I DON'T EVEN IF IT WERE ME, I WOULDN'T EVEN WRITE THE WORDS THREE MINUTES I WOULD SAY SOMETHING LIKE A SPECIFIED PERIOD OF TIME OR AT THE CHAIR'S DISCRETION. OKAY. AND I INVITE KEVIN TO HELP ME EXECUTE THIS TOO BECAUSE AT SOME POINT IT MIGHT BE A SITUATION WHERE WE MIGHT DEPENDING ON THE COMPLEXITY OF DOING IT WE MIGHT BRING IT BACK TO YOU AS A SUBSEQUENT ITEM. BUT I'LL RESERVE JUDGMENT ON THAT RIGHT NOW I HAVE AN IDEA AND THE OTHER THING I HEARD WAS AUTHORIZED TO GO AHEAD. KEVIN YEAH. THE CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS ONE THING TO THINK ABOUT IS WHAT DO YOU HAVE MULTIPLE PUBLIC HEARINGS ONNE NIGHT FOR THE CHAIR MIGHT ESTABLISH A TIME LIMIT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING THAT WILL APPLY TO EVERY PUBLIC HEARING THAT NIGHT OTHERWISE SAY FOR INSTANCE THE AUGUST 7TH MEETING SOMEONE WANTED TO SPEAK ON THE ST MARK'S COMP PLAN AMENDMENT THAT CAME AT NUMBER ONE AND YOU GAVE THEM THREE MINUTES AND THEN SOMEONE FROM THE COMMUNITY CENTER ITEM WANTED TO TESTIFY AND THEY GOT FIVE. I THINK THAT WOULD BE INEQUITABLE TO RESULT SO I THINK AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING MIGHT MAKE MORE SENSE THAT YOU AND THE CHAIR AND I'M ESTABLISHING A TIME LIMIT FOR TONIGHT AND I'M GOING TO APPLY THAT UNIFORMLY THROUGHOUT EACH PUBLIC HEARING AND TO EACH PERSON THAT WANTS TO TESTIFY. COMMISSIONER IS AN ALTERNATIVE AND MAYBE I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A GREAT IDEA OR MAYBE NOT BUT IS HAVING THE THE CHAIR HAVE DISCRETION TO HAVE A THIRD TIME RIGHT WHERE IF LIKE EVERYBODY GOES TO THE SECOND ROUND AND THEN YOU KNOW YOU GAUGE THE SHOCK THE OVERALL SHOT CLOCK AND SEE IF THERE'S TIME FOR A THIRD ROUND AFTER EVERYONE SPOKE THE SECOND ROUND AND MAYBE THAT WOULD BE A POTENTIAL SOLUTION. YEAH, WE CERTAINLY COULD DO THAT. I WOULD ADVOCATE AGAINST IT BECAUSE THE REASON WE LIKE TO LIMIT THAT IS YOU START TO GET BACK AND FORTH GOING AND THAT IS LIKE A CRITICAL THING THAT I THINK IS UNHEALTHY FOR A PUBLIC DISCORD. SO THAT'S JUST MY OPINION ON IT. YEAH. YEAH I AGREE. SO CHAIR KEVIN, AGAIN I'LL ASK YOU I THINK I UNDERSTAND THE THE CONCEPT OF WHAT'S BEING PUT FORTH. I DON'T HAVE THE LANGUAGE UP ON MY SCREEN AND UNFORTUNATELY I HAVE SOME SNIPPETS HERE OF THESE PROVISIONS AS OPPOSED TO LIVE TEXT. SO MY ABILITY TO EDIT THEM ON THE FLY IS A LITTLE BIT MORE LIMITED IN THIS CASE. AND YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THIS IS A CITY INITIATED THING. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE CONCLUDED TONIGHT. I THINK WE CAPTURED KIND OF WHERE YOU WANT TO GO WITH IT AND WE CAN BRING IT BACK IF PEOPLE ARE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. DEFINITELY SEEING SOME NODDING OF HEADS. KEVIN, YOU AGREE WITH THAT I ASSUME CHAIR COMMISSIONERS YEAH, I DO. I THINK JUST WE'RE NOT UNDER ANY TIME LIMIT. WE'RE FOLLOWING THE RULES BY DOING OUR CONSIDERATION IN AUGUST AND THAT'S ALL I REALLY HAVE TO DO SO WE CAN COME BACK AND GET IT RIGHT FOR THE NEXT TIME. I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY BEST. THANK YOU. AMENDMENT FIVE IS SOMETHING THAT'S COME UP A FEW TIMES WHEN WHEN THE CHAIR IS ENFORCING A TIME LIMIT WE'VE YOU KNOW HEARD AND THE CITY HAS NEVER CHAIRS MAYORS WHOEVER'S RUNNING THE YOU KNOW ANY PUBLIC MEETING IS NOT AUTHORIZE THIS TO OCCUR BUT AGAIN THIS IS AN AREA WHERE THE RULES ARE CURRENTLY SILENT . SOMETIMES YOU'LL HEAR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SUGGEST WILL I GIVE MY TIME TO MY FRIEND OVER HERE AND WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO JUST HAVE A PROVISION IN THE RULES RELATED TO THAT SCENARIO. I'M IN FAVOR SEEING SOME THUMBS UP FAVOR. I THINK WE'RE OKAY. AMENDMENT SIX IS REALLY JUST A CLARIFICATION AND CLEAN UP A CITY CODE ALREADY REQUIRES THIS. IT'S JUST THAT THE CITY COUNCIL THE RULES MUST BE SUBMITTED TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL APPROVAL. SO UNLESS THERE'S NO QUESTIONS SEEING NO THIS ONE WAS NOT IN THE PACKET BUT IT STRUCK AGAIN AND I WAS SOMETHING THAT THE THINKING ABOUT HOW THE CITY COUNCIL HAS BEEN CONDUCTING ITS MEETINGS MORE RECENTLY THEY'VE ACTUALLY ESTABLISHED A 9 P.M. ADJOURNMENT TIME AND THEY WHEN THEY GO PAST THAT WHICH IS NOT UNCOMMON IT JUST REQUIRES A MOTION OF THE BODY A MAJORITY OF MEMBERS AGREEING TO EXTEND THE TIME. THIS IS NOT I'M NOT HERE TO SUGGEST A TIME OF ADJOURNMENT. IT'S JUST MORE SO POINTING OUT TO YOU THAT CURRENTLY YOUR RULES SPECIFY 11 P.M. THE COUNCIL IS CURRENTLY AT 9 P.M.. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT NUMBER IS THAT'S FOR YOUR DISCRETION TO CONSIDER BUT IT'S JUST SOMETHING WE THOUGHT WE WOULD BRING UP AND POINT OUT. COMMISSIONER WAY SO I MEAN HONESTLY I AM FINE WITH 11 BUT I THINK WE PROBABLY COULD PUT 10:00 IN THERE JUST TO KEEP OURSELVES MAYBE UNDER A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A TIME CLOCK JUST GIVEN THE LAST FEW MEETINGS I FEEL LIKE 9:00 WE WASTE MORE TIME VOTING TO EXTEND IT THAN WE GAIN BY SHORTENING IT SO I'M FINE WITH LEAVING. NOTICE I COULD LIVE WITH 10:00 OKAY I FEEL THE SAME ALL RIGHT. BECAUSE YOU'RE COMING IN. I'M GOOD WITH 10 OR 11. THE CONSENSUS IS TEN. I'M FINE WITH TEN MINIMUM. I'M GOING TO SPEAK FOR SAKE OF CLARITY. LET'S GO DOWN THE ROW AND GIVE OUR PREFERRED TIME HERE. I'M FINE WITH 11. YES I'M FINE WITH 11, 1111 I CAN GO WITH 11. 11 IS FINE SO SOUNDS GOOD. MOVING ON. THANK YOU FOR ENTERTAINING US JUST FOR THAT ONE QUESTION THIS IS JUST THE PORTION OF THE SHOW OR IT'S JUST IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT WE HAVEN'T HIGHLIGHTED OR IDENTIFIED THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO ASK US ABOUT OR POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS AGAIN IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW AND CITY CODE OF COURSE. BUT WE'RE HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE. MR. JOHNSON THERE IS ONE MORE ITEM I'D LIKE A BIT OF DISCUSSION ON IS DO WE HAVE ANY ABILITY TO LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF TIME THE APPLICANT IS ALLOWED TO SPEAK? YEAH. THANK YOU. CHAIR AND I HAVE DISCUSSED THIS PREVIOUSLY WITH ATTORNEY TUSKY STAFF DOESN'T RECOMMEND THAT I WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT. I DON'T THINK THE LAW WOULD PROHIBIT THAT. HOWEVER, AS THE APPLICANT IS BRINGING APPLICATIONS BEFORE THE COMMISSION SHOULD IT BE A SCENARIO WHERE THERE'S A DENIAL AND THE APPLICANT WAS GIVEN A SHORTER AMOUNT OF TIME TO PRESENT THEIR CASE? I THINK THAT DOES PRESENT SOME CONCERNS ON THE PART OF OUR LEGAL STAFF AND AND YOU KNOW I ASSUME THAT YOU WOULD BE GIVING THEM MORE TIME THAN JUST A REGULAR MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC. AND SO I'M MAKING THAT ASSUMPTION. BUT YES, JUST IN GENERAL AND KEVIN INVITE YOU TO SPEAK TO IT BUT I THINK THAT RAISES SOME CONCERNS FOR STAFF THAT PEOPLE ARE NOT BEING GIVEN A FAIR OPPORTUNITY TO ADJUDICATE THEIR APPLICATION. YEAH, IT MAY OR MAY SHARE AND COMMISSIONERS I THINK THAT'S RIGHT I BE CONCERNED ABOUT KIND OF DO PROCESS CONSIDERATIONS OF HAVING ENOUGH TIME TO SPEAK NOW THE CITY GENERALLY GETS ALL THE TIME IT WANTS IN THE WORLD AND MORE TO SPEAK AND ANSWER QUESTIONS BUT I JUST HAVE A BAD FEELING ABOUT LIMITING THE APPLICANT AND MY KNOWLEDGE. I THINK IT'S ONLY BEEN EXCESSIVE ON MAYBE ONE OCCASION IN THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS. IT DOESN'T HAPPEN THAT MUCH AND MY RECOLLECTION WHERE SOMEONE JUST GOES ON AND ON BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S AGAINST THE LAW I GUESS BUT I WOULD NOTE THAT COUNCIL THE COUNCIL RULES AND PROCEDURE INCLUDE DON'T INCLUDE A TIME LIMIT. THEY JUST SAY THAT THE APPLICANT GETS TO PRESENT THEIR CASE AND I THINK THAT'S APPROPRIATE. YEAH. THANK YOU BOTH. THE REASON I BROUGHT IT UP IS IT HAS GOTTEN EXCESSIVE A COUPLE OF TIMES APPLICANTS WILL COME IN WITH PRESENTATIONS AND OTHER THINGS AND IT COULD GO FOR LIKE 20 30 MINUTES ALL OF A SUDDEN AND SHE'S SO AND THEN THAT FEELS A LITTLE UNFAIR TO THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WANT TO SPEAK BECAUSE THEN YOU'RE TELLING THE NEXT PERSON THAT COMES UP YOU GET THREE MINUTES WHEN THEY'RE THE ATTORNEY THAT WAS JUST UP HERE GOT 30. AND SO IN THAT CASE IT FEELS A LITTLE UNJUST. BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S NOT PUBLICLY THE APPLICANT AND IT'S REALLY APPLICANT CITY AND ALLOWING THEM BOTH I GUESS UNLIMITED AMOUNT OF TIME IS WHAT'S BEING RECOMMENDED. ANY THOUGHTS ON THIS QUESTION? ANY JUST A QUESTION IS THERE ANY GUIDANCE GIVEN TO APPLICANTS I.E. LIKE YOU'RE ENCOURAGED TO GIVE YOUR PRESENTATION UNLESS ARE YOUR REMARKS FOR FIVE MINUTES OR LESS? YEAH. CHAIR COMMISSION ON THE LANI WE WOULDN'T WE WOULD HISTORICALLY WE HAVEN'T PRESCRIPTIVE A TIME LIMIT BUT I THINK MOST APPLICANTS KNOW THAT THERE'S A POINT AT WHICH THEY START TO LOSE THEIR EFFECTIVENESS IN TERMS OF PERSUASION OR OTHER THINGS. SO AT LEAST SAVVY APPLICANTS UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A BALANCE TO THAT. BUT NO, I MEAN CERTAINLY THEY'VE ASKED US, YOU KNOW, ARE WE ALLOWED TO ADDRESS YES AFTER STAFF AND QUESTIONS AND THEN YOU KNOW, CAN WE USE POWERPOINT OR OTHER EXHIBITS? YOU CERTAINLY CAN DO THAT. THE PUBLIC CAN ACTUALLY DO THAT TOO ON AN OVERHEAD PROJECTOR. SO SHOUT OUT FOR THE PUBLIC THERE DESPITE THE TIME LIMITATIONS. SO YES, I MEAN THE MAJORITY OF THE QUESTIONS WE GET IS WHAT KIND OF TECH DO YOU HAVE CAN WE USE CAN WE HAVE YOU LOAD UP A SLIDE FOR US IT'S USUALLY NOT AROUND THE TIME COMPONENT. THANKS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR NEW ITEMS TO BRING UP? >> MR. WHITE I JUST HAD ONE CLARIFICATION ON ITEM 4.1 SUSPENSION OF RULES TYPICALLY ROBERT'S RULES AND PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE REQUIRE A TWO THIRDS VOTE TO SUSPEND THE RULES. BUT OUR RULES REQUIRE A UNANIMOUS VOTE AND I'M JUST CURIOUS IF THERE'S A PARTICULAR REASON WHY IF THAT STATUTE CUSTOM PREFERENCE CHAIR COMMISSIONER WHITE I DON'T KNOW THE HISTORY BEHIND THAT. I INVITE I DON'T KNOW IF KEVIN HAS ANY GUIDANCE FROM THE STANDPOINT OF STATUTE OR ROBERT'S RULES ETC. I DON'T KNOW THE HISTORY OF THAT ONE. YEAH I DON'T WANT SORRY CHAIR COMMISSIONERS I DON'T I DON'T RECALL THE SO I THINK THAT SECTION HASN'T BEEN TOUCHED AND I'VE BEEN WITH THE CITY I JUST KIND OF BEEN THERE BUT I DON'T KNOW OFFHAND IF ROBERT'S RULES ARE AND THE TWO THIRDS VOTE I'LL HAVE TO CHECK INTO THAT BECAUSE WE'RE SUPPOSED TO FOLLOW ROBERT'S RULES ACCORDING TO THEIR RULES AS FAR AS LIKE PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE AND STUFF. SO IT DOES YEAH, WE CAN WE CAN CHANGE THAT. I THINK FOR A TWO THIRDS VOTE I THINK THAT WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH ROBERT RULES SO WE COULD COME BACK WITH A WITH AN AMENDMENT TO THAT EFFECT. WE WILL ASK YOU TO LOOK INTO THAT PLEASE. THANK YOU. I WAS MORE JUST CURIOUS IF THERE IS A PARTICULAR REASON IT WAS UNANIMOUS RATHER THAN TWO THIRDS NOW TWO THIRDS SEVEN IS CLEAR ENOUGH MAYBE IT'S A MATH ISSUE WITH TWO THIRDS OF SEVEN BUT YEAH SOMETIMES THERE'S A ROUND UP TWO THIRDS OF THE PRESENT VERSUS TWO THIRDS OF THE ENTIRE BODY. YOU KNOW, SO OF THE ROBERT'S RULES BUT THE EXACT VERBIAGE THERE. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE YOU LOOKING INTO IT. ANYBODY ELSE ANYTHING ELSE, MR. JOHNSON? NO, I'M OKAY. OKAY. THAT CONCLUDES ITEM NUMBER THREE WHICH WILL GO BEFORE CITY COUNCIL. FORGIVE ME. I THINK THE INTENT TO CHAIR FOR AND I'M SORRY I GOT LOST A LITTLE BIT THERE FOR A SECOND. I THINK THE INTENT IS TO BRING THIS BACK TO YOU WITH THE CHANGES THAT YOU'VE RECOMMENDED FOR YOUR FINAL AUTHORIZATION. SO WE NEED TO TAKE A MOTION OF CONTINUANCE. I DON'T THINK THAT'S YEAH. KEVIN OKAY. KEVIN SAY I WOULD JUST CONTINUE CONSIDERATION TO THE NEXT WHATEVER THE NEXT MEETING IS IF THAT'S OKAY. JUST SO WE HAVE IT ON THE RECORD PLANNING COMMISSION. THE NEXT MEETING IS AUGUST 28TH MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE. COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM I MOVE TO CONTINUE ITEM THREE OF TONIGHT'S AGENDA TO THE AUGUST 28TH 2025 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. WE HAVE A SECOND SECOND MOTION AND A SECOND FOR CONTINUANCE OF AUGUST 28TH. ANY FINAL DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I. I OPPOSED THE MOTION MOTION PASSES SIX ZERO WE WILL TAKE THIS UP AGAIN AT PLANNING COMMISSION ON AUGUST 28TH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE WILL THEN MOVE NOW TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR WHICH IS THE ELECTION OF PLANNING COMMISSION OFFICERS. MR. JOHNSON YEAH. THANK YOU CHAIR CORRECT. AND SO AS IS THE ANNUAL PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENT AGAIN PER YOUR RULES YOU HAVE TO ELECT A CHAIR AND A VICE CHAIR. SO THE WAY THAT THIS PROCEDURE WORKS IS THAT YOU WILL FIRST ELECT THE CHAIR MEMBERS WHO WISH TO NOMINATE THEMSELVES TO BE CONSIDERED SHOULD DO SO BEFORE THE VOTE PLANNER PALMER WILL HAND OUT BALLOTS FOR THE VOTE AS WELL AS BLUE PENS TO YOU ALL AND SO YOU WILL FOLLOWING THE NOMINATIONS YOU ALL TAKE A VOTE FILL AND WILL COLLECT YOUR BALLOTS TO AFFIRM WHAT THOSE VOTES ARE IN THE MAJORITY WHOEVER IS THE MAJORITY VOTE GETTER WILL SERVE AS CHAIR AND THEN WE WOULD FOLLOW THE SAME PROCEDURE FOR THE VICE CHAIR POSITION. ANY QUESTIONS ON THE PROCESS? WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO NOMINATE THEMSELVES FOR THIS POSITION? I WILL NOMINATE MYSELF. WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO NOMINATE THEMSELVES? NOMINATIONS OKAY I THINK WE'RE READY FOR SECRET BALLOT. WHAT IS THAT ? OH YOU'RE THE EXPERT ON THE RUBBER THROUGH THE PARLIAMENTARIAN SAID I WOULD NOMINATE YOU . THANK YOU . YES. YOU STILL HAVE TO MAKE SURE. PLEASE. THANK YOU . YEAH, THAT'S THE CASE. I HEAR THE BALLOT MACHINES RUNNING IN THE BACKGROUND HERE. I'M SURE WE'LL GET OUR RESULTS SHORTLY. THE TWINS. I THINK MR. JOHNSON HAS A ROLL OF I VOTED STICKERS AS WELL WHEREAS I WILL BRING THOSE NEXT YEAR. THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. CHAIR COOKSON, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, CHAIR COMMISSIONER COOKED AND WAS VOTED TO SERVE AS THE CHAIR THROUGH NEXT AUGUST 20TH, 26. THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND PROCEDURE NOW FOR THE VICE CHAIR YES WE WILL. SO IF YOU WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO NOMINATE THEMSELVES FOR THE POSITION OF VICE CHAIR I NOMINATE MYSELF FOR THE POSITION OF VICE CHAIR WOULD ANYBODY ELSE LIKE TO NOMINATE THEMSELVES? VERY WELL IF YOU DON'T YOU WANT THE PENS BACK AND DO YOU WANT THESE PENS TO THESE PAN? OKAY ISRAEL IF SO SO MR. JOHNSON CHAIR COOKTOWN COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM HAS BEEN ELECTED VICE CHAIR VERY WELL AND MR. JOHNSON HOW LONG DO THOSE TERMS RUN? THANK YOU FOR CLARIFICATION. IT DOES RUN THROUGH JULY OF 2026. SO FOR MEMBERS WHO MAY BE TERMING OUT AT THE END OF JUNE CERTAINLY THERE COULD BE AN ABSENCE TEMPORARY OF A POTENTIAL OFFICER POSITION. IT'S QUITE COMMON IN THAT CASE OTHER OFFICERS WILL SERVE IN THAT ROLE OR MOST SENIOR MEMBERS WITH MORE SENIORITY WOULD ALSO BE SERVING IN THE CASE OF AN EMERGENCY AS PER THE RULES. MR. JOHNSON ON MY SHEET HERE THIS IS LISTED AS A PUBLIC HEARING DO WE NEED TO OPEN AND CLOSE A PUBLIC HEARING OR IS THAT A MISPRINT? SURE CORRECT. AND THAT'S TYPE OF OKAY BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE OUT OF ORDER IF WE ARE TO RE NOTICE ANY OTHER ITEMS ON THE ITEM NUMBER FOUR MR. JOHNSON ARE WE GOOD ON THE ELECTION OF ALL GOOD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. I'LL BE VERY AT THE BALLOTS. THANK YOU. OKAY. OUR LAST ITEM THEN. ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS A PLANNING COMMISSION POLICY AND ISSUES UPDATE MR. JOHNSON AGAIN COMMISSIONERS, THANK YOU FOR YOUR IN-DEPTH DISCUSSION THIS EVENING AND DILIGENCE ON BOTH THE FIRST TWO ITEMS THERE AS WELL AS THE RULES. APPRECIATE THAT THE UPCOMING MEETINGS AUGUST THE 28TH WE HAVE A CONTINUANCE OF THE RULES WILL BRING THAT BACK TO YOU. WE HAVE THREE STUDY ITEMS PLANNED WE HAVE A PUBLIC ARTS INCENTIVES ORDINANCE, COMMERCIAL VEHICLE PARKING AND RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS AND WE HAVE THE MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING PHASE TWO STUDY SESSIONS. SO THESE ARE ALL PROJECTS LISTED ON YOUR WORKPLAN. SO ALL STUDY ITEMS AT THE SEPTEMBER 4TH MEETING CURRENTLY HAS NO ITEMS TRACKING TO IT SO THAT IS THERE'S A POTENTIAL FOR PROBABLE CANCELLATION ON SEPTEMBER FOURTH. I WILL INFORM THE COMMISSION WHEN THAT IS SOLIDIFIED AND THEN SEPTEMBER 18TH THERE IS TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS TRACKING. THE FIRST IS FINAL SITE AND BUILDING PLANS FOR THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON FLEET MAINTENANCE FACILITY PROPOSED AT 1800 WEST 96TH STREET THAT'S NORTH OF THE PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY UP HERE OF JAMES AND THEN A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN AMENDMENT TO THE NORMANDALE LAKE DISTRICT PLAN. EARLIER THERE WAS DISCUSSION AROUND REFERENCES IN THE DISTRICT PLAN TO THE PEDESTRIAN AND BRIDGE PROPOSED BY THE DISTRICT PLAN SO THAT WOULD BE THAT FORMAL AMENDMENT WAS SUPPORTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND THEN FINALLY A STUDY ITEM TO REVIEW THE LIST OF ITEMS PROPOSED AS PART OF THE 2025 MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES ORDINANCE. FOR THOSE THAT DON'T KNOW THE MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES ORDINANCE IS A VERY LARGE BULK ORDINANCE THAT REPRESENTS CLEANUPS AND POTENTIALS FOR POLICY CHANGES THAT ARE DISCUSSED OR IDENTIFIED THROUGHOUT THE YEAR THAT ON THEIR OWN DON'T CONSTITUTE A WORK PLAN ITEM AND WE'VE TYPICALLY BROUGHT THAT FORWARD AND STUDY SO THAT IT SHARPS WHAT THE LIST OF ITEMS ARE ON THAT BEFORE SCHEDULING A PUBLIC HEARING. SO THAT'S THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR YOU THIS EVENING. THANK YOU. MR. JOHNSON IS THERE ANYONE ON THE COMMISSION WHO WOULD LIKE TO BRING UP ANYTHING THAT WE HAVE NOT DISCUSSED THIS EVENING? MR. JONES CHAIR KIRKTON I FORGIVE ME I, I REALIZE THAT WE WENT PAST ITEM. THANK YOU, DYLAN DYLAN'S ALREADY SHOWING HIS MEDAL AND WORTH HERE. WE ALSO NEED TO APPOINT A SECRETARY AND SO COMMISSIONER I'M SORRY SHANTE BROWN'S APPOINTMENT AS A SECRETARY WAS TEMPORARY PER THE RULES YOU NEED TO MAKE A ONE YEAR APPOINTMENT OF SECRETARY STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND SHANTE BROWN AND IT'S AT THE CHAIR'S DISCRETION OF WHO TO NOMINATE. THANK YOU FOR THAT REMINDER JUST LOOKING FOR A NODDING OF HEADS OR THUMBS UP FOR MS. SHANTE BROWN TO BE THE PLANNING COMMISSION SECRETARY VOICE VOTE ACTUALLY SORRY IS IT A VOICE VOTE OR IS IT THE VOTE? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I. I OPPOSED I HEREBY APPOINT A MAJORITY BROWN AS PLANNING COMMISSION SECRETARY. THANK YOU, MS.. BROWN, FOR YOUR HARD WORK. EXCELLENT. ANY OTHER ITEMS FOR THIS EVENING SEEING NONE. THAT CONCLUDES THIS AUGUST 14TH MEETING OF THE BLOOMINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION. GOOD NIGHT