[Music] [Music]
Heat. Heat. Good evening everyone and welcome. I will call this Bloomington City Council meeting to order. It is Monday, April 28th, 2025. Thank you to everyone who's joined us here in the council chambers. Thanks to everybody watching online. We will begin our meeting as we always do. If you are able, please stand, remove
any head coverings, and join me in 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. Once again, welcome and thanks for joining us tonight. Uh it looks like the rough weather has missed us, council, but uh we'll we'll stay on our toes and we'll keep our eye on the skies just in case things something might happen. And if need be, we'll make sure everybody gets uh to a safe place if it if
necessary. But uh it looks like I think we're in the clear for for now. So first order of business tonight, council, is to adopt tonight's agenda. And our agenda is as follows. Under introductory items, we've got four items under
introductory items. Item 2.1 is the introduction of new employees. We then have two proclamations as item 2.2 and 2.3. First proclamation is for Asian-American Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander Month. Second proclamation is our National Drinking Water Week. And item 2.4 is the work
plan of the Advisory Board of Health for 2025. Item three, our consent business. We've got 11 items on the consent business. Council member Lman, you're going to be taking on the consent agenda for us tonight. Thank you so very much for that. Items four uh are hearings, resolutions, and ordinances. Item 4.1 is
a public hearing on our side code lookback ordinance and item 4.2 is a public hearing regarding our co-l livingiving standards ordinance. We will then move on to item five, our organizational business. We've got three items there. Item 5.1 is to accept
donations from and approve the updated with the Bloomington Remembers Veterans and Nine Mile Creek corridor renewal project schematic design update. That's a lot of words, but we're going to talk about NineM Creek is what that basically is and the work that we're doing down there. Item 5.2 is our city council
policy and issue updates. And item 5.3 will be heading into close session tonight, council, to talk about property acquisition related to the fire station. And after we get all of that done, we will adjourn ideally by 9:00 this evening. Council, anything to add or any corrections of tonight's agenda as
stated? If not, I would move approval of tonight's agenda as stated. Uh, so moved. Oh, did you move it? Sorry. Second. Yes, sir. Sorry. So, we have a motion. I went in hot. My apologies. Motion and a second for council member Dallasandro. Thank you so
very much. No further council discussion regarding tonight's agenda. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Opposed? Motion carries 70. And we have an agenda and we will get started. Uh, item 2.1 on the agenda is the introduction of new employees. We've got a couple of different groups coming forward this
evening with introductions. We flipped a coin and Leah Hughes, you get to go first. Is good evening and welcome. Good evening, mayor, uh, city managers and council members. So, tonight I am thrilled to officially introduce you to Dakota
Kenyon. She is the new community health and wellness center manager. Um, Dakota was previously um, the manager of Williston Fitness Center um, for the city of Minnotonka. Her first day with Bloomington was actually on March 31st and it's been clear since that day that she's joined us that is she is an
exceptional fit for this role. Her mindset, work ethic, background, and warm engaging personality align beautifully with the values and vision we had in mind for this position. So, she has hit the ground running. She's been involved in a lot of the um design development meetings we had so far since council's approval on the 14th. Um and
with that, I'd like to welcome Dakota to the podium to introduce herself to you. Dakota, good evening. Welcome. Thank you and thanks, Leah. It's a pleasure to meet all of you officially. Uh, a little bit about me professionally. I got my start in campus recreation. So, I
attended the University of Minnesota and got a bachelor's degree in kinesiology. Uh, from there, I got a graduate assistantship to go down to the University of Tennessee. I know there there's another alum in the room here. So, go balls. and I I there got a
masterers of science in uh kinesiology, sport and exercise science and psychology, motor behavior. So happy to be here. That graduate assistantship was in facilities. So that's where my passion really began. From there I was
the fitness coordinator with the city of Egan for about six years. and from the city of Egan. I went to the city of Minnitonka to manage their recreation facility, Williston Fitness Center, which is where I was prior to this. A little bit about me personally, uh I'm
spending my time teaching myself hobbies, refinishing furniture, that type of thing. If I wasn't doing that and rescuing furniture, I'd probably have 10 rescue dogs. So, I think that's a good thing. Any questions for me? I am eager to be here and involved in this
project and so thankful for the opportunity. Well, we're we're glad to have you here. Thanks for being here this evening and um thanks for the progression from Minnitonka Egan to Bloomington. I think that's just natural. So, well done. We're very very glad to have you here. Thank you.
Next up, we have a number of introductions in public health. I'm going to call on Dr. Nick Kelly. I think I'm gonna call on Dr. Nick Kelly. There he is. Yes. Good evening and welcome Dr. Kelly. Good evening council uh Mayor. We have
several staff we are introducing tonight and as public health staff we are often very forwardleaning. So most of our staff saw the weather and were like I'm gonna jump in virtually tonight. So we are going to pull uh them
up and see who we are starting with. All right. So, uh, Caitlyn Bros, uh, is on the screen with us. She is one of our WIC dietitians, been with us a couple of months. uh she completed her education at the University of Minnesota, spent 10
years doing clinical uh nutrition work at the U loves it so much that she wanted to come work with our families um and is here working with us in Wick virtual today. I'm so excited to be a part of the city of Bloomington. I
have been uh so impressed with the focus on equity inclusion and I just feel so grateful to be a part of the team and very eager to start my work here. Thank you. Thank you for joining us. We're very glad to have you on board. Welcome. Who's up next?
All right. Uh so next on the screen uh we have Megan Drake Perea, our new assistant public health administrator. Uh really thrilled to have her joining our team. She brings a wealth of experience uh at local level, at the
state level, and most recently at the national level. Um she comes to us with just a wide breadth of experience and as an avid biker and paddle boarder uh she's very excited to be exploring the wonderful park and rec system we have.
So Megan, good evening Megan. Welcome. Good evening. Thanks for having me. Really excited to be here and thank you Nick for the introduction. Glad to have you on board. Thank you for being here with us virtually tonight.
Thank you. It's a fun little version of who's gonna pop up. All right, so uh next we have Gabby Fitzgerald. Uh Gabby is a certified health education specialist with a background in public health education.
Uh spent quite a bit of time at my health doing teen and young adult work. Uh nonprofit adolescent health clinic. Uh she comes to us with a extensive background and experience doing this work in the community. And what really drew her to come work with us is the
legacy and history of incredibly strong tobacco work that this council has put forward. um which made this an incredibly attractive place for her to come. So Gabby, yes, good evening, mayor, council members, and city managers. Yes, I
deeply admire the work Bloomington has done to um push forward really progressive and really inspiring tobacco control measures and policies. So looking forward to to being a part of that legacy and making our communities a healthy and safe place for people to
live and work and play. very important. Well, thank you for joining us tonight, Gabby. And uh yes, and I would agree. And there were uh council members long before any of us were sitting up here who took that on as a top priority, the the tobacco control within the city and
uh made a mark with Bloomington. And so we're pr proud to carry on that tradition here. All [Music] right. So, we have Nadira Muhammad joining us. She is one of our new staff working on substance prevention work. Uh
so she's got a clinical pharmacy background and a lot of experience working at the state and the clinical pharmacy side and then quite a bit experience diving into working and serving her uh her community navigating opioid issues and that pushed her into a
public health career uh moving from clinical pharmacy. And so we are benefiting from an incredible clinical pharmacist that moved into a public health role as she joins our our substance prevention team. um she came to Bloomington because we're
recognized as an innovative uh leader and approached this space with a a lens of equity and service that uh aligned with how she wants to work. Thank you for that um Nick. That was a very kind introduction. Um good evening
mayor and council members. I'm really excited to be here tonight. Um thank you for taking the time to meet with us all. Um, we are really all excit I think we are all excited to kind of serve alongside you all in this wonderful city. So again, thank you for your support and meeting with us tonight.
Well, thank you for joining us and and thank you for the important work that you're doing. All right. Uh so this is uh Samia Ahmed. Uh she's one of our community health workers and with some of our new state funding, her role is really focusing on navigating housing and helping us work
on improving that. So working with our partners across the three cities. Uh so she loves diving in and supporting residents, navigating the complexities of housing, um and loves the the reality of working here. And in her free time, she stays busy as a mom of eight and a
longtime Minnesota resident. Samuel, we might be muted. Sorry, I forgot to unmute. Um, thank you, Nick, for the introduction and good evening, mayor and city members. Uh, city council members, I appreciate um your time and I'm excited
to continue on this work and housing is a very important part of that community and I'm I'm excited to be here. Thank you. Well, thanks for joining us tonight. Welcome. [Music] I'm going to need you to dance a little bit. I think Jada. Jada.
Okay, we can do Jada. Jada, are you uh good to go? Um, I am here, but I can't seem to get my camera on. If you have any suggestions or if I'm just having technical difficulties, we will chalk it up till Monday. Te diff
difficulty. Um, so like to introduce you all to Jada McDonald. Uh Jada uh came to us out of the University of Iowa uh with a a strong background in uh maternal health, women's health, and in some
social justice. Uh she came up here uh really looking to move and start her career in a place that is investing in public health. So Minnesota was a target for her looking for employment. And we were fortunate that she chose uh to work with us. Um she's part of our substance
prevention team really focusing on well-being and improving our community. Jada. Yes. Thank thank you so much and good evening all. Um I'm really excited to be a part of this community and I've already learned so much from just the
community here and my colleagues and co-workers. So I really appreciate it and I'm excited to get into the recreation in Minnesota, get into the lakes and I joined the Bloomington Pickle Ball League. So maybe I'll see some of you there. But again, thank you so much for introducing me to this
community. Well, welcome to our community. We're glad to have you. Thank you. I think is this Miriam? So we'll introduce you all to Miriam Silio. Uh Miam is one of our community health workers uh working with us. She
comes to us with a background really working with older adults in in navigating healthcare journeys. She is uh incredibly passionate about working with our our young families as they navigate uh life with kids and moving
forward um and supporting their their well-being. So, she's excited to join our team and be part of that work. So, Miriam, thank you so much for the introduction, Nick. Um good evening to you all. In my role as a community health worker, I've loved spending the last seven months
helping community members navigate resources and access the support they deserve. It's been an incredibly meaningful experience and I'm excited to continue serving Bloomington. Well, welcome. We're glad very glad to have you on board. Thanks for being with us tonight.
Appreciate you all accommodating our flexibility with the schedule and just an incredible kudos to Caitlyn for making all the magic happen. Absolutely. And um I I do want to say and I I say this to all of our new employees when when we bring them on board. And we introduce them for a reason. We want we want them to be introduced in front of
the council, but also so that members of the public can see these folks. And it's important because uh in so many cases, our public employees, our our our public health folks, our public works folks, our park and w folks, they're the face of the city of Bloomington. It's not
it's not the mayor and our city council members. It's it's the folks that interact and work with people every single day. And this is it's especially the case with our public health employees. They do outstanding work. uh they they do uh important work and the
the reality is that um as I said they are the face of Bloomington and that with that comes with a lot of responsibility because it's uh you are representing an entire community and uh so uh to all the folks that we met this evening we're very glad to have you on board and uh no pressure at all but
you're you're the face of the community now and we're looking forward to having you represent us in so many different ways. So welcome to all of you and thank you for being with us tonight. [Applause] Next up, council, we have a couple of
proclamations, and I'm going to head down to the podium. So, our first proclamation is for Asian-American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Heritage Month, which is the entire month of May, the 1st through the 31st. What we typically like to do, folks who who are here uh either to speak, which I think we have our
speakers here, or just in support, come on up, join me while I read the proclamation. Even if you're not speaking, come on up and join us here. on camera. We'd love to see that. Come on. Come on. Camera's right up there, so smile and wave. Everybody can see you. There you go. There you
go. This is a proclamation for Asian-American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Heritage Month, May 1st through the 31st, 2025. Whereas the city of Bloomington through its human rights commission joins our nation in recognizing the month of May as Asian-American, Native Hawaiian, and
Pacific Islander Heritage Month. And whereas during the month of May, we honor and acknowledge the rich and diverse cultures of Americans of Asian, Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander descent. And whereas the 2020 dennial census reports that 6.7% of the Bloomington,
Minnesota population identifies as Asian or Pacific Islander American. And the council of Asian-Pacific motans in 2023 annual report indicates a total population of approximately 348,168 Asian-Pacific motans. And whereas we honor the
perseverance of those who courageously reached for their hopes and dreams in a new land. And we celebrate the important impact immigrants have have had toward making Bloomington a more diverse and inclusive community. And whereas the Asian-American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander community
constitutes a vital dimension of Bloomington's diverse ethnic and social fabric whose languages, cultures, and religious beliefs have enriched communities in all parts of the state. And whereas the city of Bloomington is home to a diverse group of Asian-American, Native Hawaiians, and
Pacific Islanders, including but not limited to Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Cambodian, Chinese, Taiwanese, Laian, Tibetan, Filipino, M, Indian, and Hawaiian.
And whereas we embrace the variety of their experiences. From the recent immigrant who brings fresh global perspectives to the Chinese American adoptee who is born into a complex duality to the child of mixed races who struggles with their identity, their stories have all impacted their
communities. And whereas considering the increasing anti-American hate crimes and xenophobia against the Asian-American and Pacific Islander community, Bloomington denounces these crimes and will continue to address the needs and concerns of our valued residents. And whereas Bloomington will continue to
create spaces for our community members to come together to share experiences and to tell stories so that we create the best opportunities to ignite curiosity and connections. Now therefore, be it resolved that I, Tim Busy, mayor of the city of Bloomington, Minnesota, Min Bloomington, Minnesota,
do hereby proclaim the month of May 2025 as Asian-American Native Hawaiian Pacific Islander Heritage Month in the city of Bloomington, dated this 20th day of April, 2025. And when we talk about uh continuing to create space in our community, uh April 30th, 2 to 6 p.m. at
Normandale Community College, we have a uh a gathering to celebrate Asian-American Month. Uh it's presented by Normanddale Community College, the city of Bloomington, and the Friends of the Japanese Garden Club, and the Asian Culture Club at Normandale. So, uh I have three folks listed here. I have
Jeffrey Vang, Chesca Dit, and Vinwyn. Who's first? Please step on up. It is the microphone is yours. Should I lower this? It's real nice for us a little bit.
Good evening, mayor, council members, city staff, and community members. My name is Vinwin, and I'm a proud Vietnamese American in my first year at Normanddale Community College. I want to thank you for welcoming me and my fellow classmates and friends here tonight.
It's a little strange to say out loud, but I'm very proud of my parents, La and Toy. They came to the United States in the 1990 with just under $300 in their pockets and a head full of hope. They left everything behind to build a better life. Arriving in a country whose
language and customs they barely knew. And it, as if that wasn't hard enough, they were met with racism, sometimes subtle and sometimes blatant from people who didn't understand them or care to try. They worked minimum wage jobs, lived in what felt like
impenetrable poverty, and kept going. My dad once told me an experience in America could be summed up as the balance of work, work, and work. It took years before they found stability. But through it all, they never stopped
believing in the dream. That in this country, you can carve your own path, that you can struggle into success. For my parents, success didn't mean luxury. It meant coming home to a warm dinner with family. It meant being able to remember their home country
through food, through faith, and through friends. My mom worked in nail salons since the day she arrived. One of her first jobs was right here in Bloomington. Through her work, she found connection. She met other V she met other Vietnamese immigrants who became
lifelong friends. There's a deep community within the nail industry and a home away from home. And for my family, it made all the difference. Even though America was so different from what they once knew, they found comfort in the small things. Authentic pastries shared in a Sunday morning.
Vietnamese coffee slipped slowly over laughter and conversation with family and friends. So yes, I'm proud of my parents, not just for what they overcame, but for life they built and for the joy that they carved out of that. That's why this proclamation
matters. It's a reminder that Bloomington stands for all its people, immigrants or nativeorn, Asian or otherwise. It's a declaration that this city sees us, values us, and celebrates the contributions of our Asian-American
communities. On behalf of my family, and many others, thank you to Normdale College and foundation, the city of Bloomington, and its community for giving us a voice and a platform. Because of your care and commitment, we're not just surviving. We're standing here proud, seen, and
heard. Thank you. [Applause] I left my paper at the chair. Okay. Oops. Someone once said that the flower that
blooms in adversity is the most rare and beautiful of all. Hello everyone, mayor council people. Um my name is Chesca Dit and yes, I do live in Chaza. I'm a proud Filipino Normanddale student and tonight I'd like to take the time to acknowledge
and recognize the economic and cultural contributions of the Asian-American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander or AAHPI communities right here in Minnesota. This community has bloomed beautifully and grown powerfully over
the past century. Many AA and HPI immigrants and their descendants have built thriving businesses that are vital to our local community. So, think St. Paul's Monk Village, Eat Street in Minneapolis, and Asia Mall in Eden
Prairie. They're more than just places that where we eat and shop. their cultural hubs that create jobs and invite us all to experience the rich flavors and traditions of Asia and the Pacific Islands. We also see the impact in our
farmers markets where among farmers are a cornerstone bringing fresh produce and traditional herbs that have become an everyday essential in for many motans. Their dedication and connection to the land have reshaped the way we eat and
live in the fields of STEM and medicine. AA and HPI professionals are leading innovation. The Filipino community have a long and proud history in nursing. And many AAHPI researchers at institutions like the Mayo Clinic and
engineers in Minnesota's medical device industry are shaping the future of health and technology. When it comes to civic engagement, organizations like the Coalition of Asian-American Leaders are leading the way, advocating for just and equitable policies. were inspired by
trailblazers like Senating Senator Fong Her Representative Samantha Sensor Mura and Senator Mai Ma leaders ensuring our voices are heard in the halls of power and right here in the city of Bloomington. We're proud to have local leaders like Council Member Mua and
interim city manager Elizabeth Tolsman. um excuse me, sorry, the continuing the legacy of representation and impact. But perhaps the most powerful contribution, my aunt, my
parents, all Asian-American, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander families and parents. They work long hours, make countless sacrifices, and pour love into our children's into their children's futures quietly, powerfully, and with unwavering hope. Asian-Americans have
helped shaped Minnesota in countless ways. From small businesses that flavor our neighborhoods to the healthcare workers who stood at the front lines during the pandemic. The code I began with is actually from a movie that some of you may know well or maybe not. It's
from Disney's Mulan. It's taken from the emperor. And as we continue to celebrate for this month for Asian-Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders, let's not only look back at the struggles that we've overcome, but look forward to the future that we're building together. Let's continue to bloom and
bring honor to us all. Thank you. [Applause] Hello everyone. Um, I just want to say I hope you've all been having a good day. It's cloudy, very cloudy for some
reason. It's Minnesota. Um, my name is Jeffrey Vain and I am a proud Mong American and this year's president of the Asian Cultural Club at Normanddale Community College. This proclamation is a very meaningful step forward. It honors the
rich contributions of Asian-American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander communities. But inclusion doesn't just stop here. It's a daily commitment from all of us. True representation means AA and HPI voices aren't just acknowledged
but are heard in leadership, in classrooms, and in community spaces. Our stories matter and they deserve to shape the conversations that shape our city.
So today, I ask our city leaders, businesses, and neighbors to keep showing up, to keep listening, and to keep celebrating our communities, not just in the month of May, but every single day.
I'd also like to take this moment to extend a personal invitation to the mayor, council members, city staff, and community members to join us for the AA and HPI Heritage Celebration at Normanddale Community College on Wednesday, April 30th from 2:00 p.m. to
6 p.m. I'd also like to take this moment to thank all my board members um who stand here behind me, all the people uh from the Normandale Foundation and all the people from the city of Bloomington who has um taken the time out of their days and out of their weeks and months
to take some time to help us prepare for this event. Um we've all worked very hard since the month of January. So um we hope that you all show out for that for the event. We're very excited to welcome keynote speaker and martial
artist demonstrator named Peter K. Wong who will share his talk about the courage to fail, how embracing our pain builds confidence. The event will also feature cultural booths, a traditional Japanese tea ceremony and tasting,
Japanese garden tours and koi feeding and a cultural fashion show and many more. We hope to see you all there. And once again, thank you. It's been an honor to be here in front of you all today. Oh, thank you all so very much for your
words. Outstanding job. And um I just so appreciate uh your your words of uh unity and and moving forward. And anybody who can quote Mulan is is great by my in my So let's get a picture. Uh Elizabeth and S, you want to join us for a
picture? Yes. Sit down here. Why don't we all step this way so we can give everybody look at you in here just a little bit to somebody hides my I don't know your name in the red. Could
you either go one way or the other just so we can see your face? Yes. There we go. That will work. Perfect. Thank you. [Applause] I can push this up for you again. Going back up again.
Okay, perfect. Right there. Next up, we have a proclamation for drinking water week. And I'm going to call up Tony Schmigg and Eric Hershey, utility operator and senior operator. No pressure, guys, but these were these were pretty sharp. And uh you guys are
up next, so good luck. Thanks for being here tonight. Yeah, thank you. Yep. Absolutely. It's proclamation for drinking water week May 10th through 4th through the 10th, 2025. Whereas water is our most valuable natural resource and whereas only tap
water delivers public health protection, fire protection, support for our e economy and the quality of life we enjoy. And whereas any measure of a successful society, low mortality rates, economic growth and diversity, productivity and public safety are in
some way related to access to safe water. And whereas we are all stewards of the water infrastructure upon which future generations depend. And whereas each citizen of our community is called upon to help protect our source waters from pollution, to practice water
conservation, and to get involved in local water issues by getting to know their water. Now therefore, I, Mayor Timbas do, hereby proclaim May 4th through the 10th, 2025 as drinking water week in the city of Bloomington. And I urge all citizens to continue their efforts to protect our most valuable
natural resource dated this 28th day of April, 2025. And gentlemen, thank you so very much for joining me and thank you so very much for your work in once again making Bloomington bestin- glass uh the the best tasting drinking water in the
state of Minnesota. And uh I I always want to ask the question, what makes Bloomington water different and so special? What what's the magic that you guys put into it that make it so good? Well, water. Well, well, it's not from the river. It's not from
the river. Okay, fair enough. Anybody want to say anything? Um, just on behalf of uh utilities division. Just want to thank mayor, council, and um Bloomington community for continuing to support the division for all these years.
Um, it's a great place to work and look forward to a long career. Great. Great. Thank you. And and I can say uh of so many people that I talk to, they bring up water in Bloomington and usually they live in different communities and they bring up how good the water is here in
Bloomington. It's a testament to you guys. So, well done. Thank you so very much. Let's present this. Make it official. We'll do the grip and grin. Thank you very much. Congratulations. Thank you. Mr. Mayor, when are we going to see the
drippy again? What's the guy's name? Drippy. Right. It's the second year in a row he hasn't graced us with his presence. I'm sad. We will we will put out the call. I think it's Willie Waters. Willie Water. That's what I That's why I asked. I didn't know the I didn't know the answer. Put out the call for Willie
Water for next year. That's expectation. I'm sure our final item under 2 uh 2.0 0 are our u introductory items is uh the annual work plan for our advisory board of health and I want to call forward once again Dr. Nick Kelly our public health
administrator and uh Annabelle Kornbloom the chair of the public uh the the advisory board of health for the presentation good evening welcome back welcome back Dr. Kelly, good and uh mayor and council members. Annabelle, good to see you again. She she helped out at the diamond
service award. Yes, thank you for doing that. Appreciate that. Thank you. Uh have the advisory board of health annual work plan. Couple of housekeeping details to quickly go through. Uh this is a list of our
current members. Um and Annabelle on there as the chair. And then uh I I serve as the staff advisor. Uh Nevo is our board secretary. Um and then council member Carter is our shack representative. And Annabelle will give
you more of the details. Um in 2024 we made a recommendation to focus on youth health when it comes to cannabis policies due to concerns such as impaired brain development. We also sent a letter of support about
the community brain health services program. And then in 2025, we have an interest in doing more. Um, in January we had the ship partners update, reviewed and approved the 2526 calendar, reviewed and approved the
2024 annual report and the work plan. And then in February we had environmental health updates, um, approved the 2024 report and plan. March was housing update, mental health and peer
support. Um, we had a division update in April and then in May we are going to do the joint advisory board of health meeting with Adina and Richfield with a focus on mental health.
And then in uh June, we've got the division and community partner update, the community resource team, community support, and then reviewing the public health annual report. In September, insurance
accessibility, CWC, CHWC update, emergency preparedness. October is mental health and substance use prevention and homelessness and housing support. And then in November we have mental health
and substance use prevention, community partner update. And in December, joint housing update and division update. Thank you for the presentation. Quick and to the point. I appreciate that. Well done. And uh thank you for the work that uh you have
done. Council questions, comments. Council member Carter. Uh thank you, mayor. leave it to the public health person to have questions. So, um, first of all, thank you so much for your leadership on the advisory board and to all of the other commissioners that serve and to Dr. Kelly, your um your
leadership as well. And so, I have just uh two questions. So, um I I am curious looking at the work plan, um it's not super obvious to me what are the outcomes that we can expect to see as a council or as a community um as it relates to the work plan. I appreciate
that you said we want to do more and so I guess I'm just curious what that kind of looks like um over the course of time. We're hoping to be able to make more recommendations and um engage more.
So, Mayor, Council Member Carter, the board is is really looking to make some improvements on mental health and well-being to really achieve the BTT goal. Uh so part of what we're doing is trying to understand what we can do to
influence that and make some of those changes given our role in statutory authority on a city end. Yeah, that's super helpful. Um, and that actually led nicely to my second question because I would be curious if the advisory board of health um has had conversations or it
sounds like you now will be having conversations related to um, you know, potential recommendations to the city council for policies that we should be looking at to improve the health of our community. um you know we see public health uh
being attacked at certain levels of government at this point and underresourced and so um there are a lot of challenges in our community and I would just really encourage the advisory board of health um even though you might not be able to make certain decisions but I mean I don't know about other
council members but I as a council member would love to see recommendations u we have a lot on our plates all the time and so we're not always thinking kind of you know about certain specific areas as and so if there are you and I know vaccine rates are going down right are there certain things we can be doing
as a community to to help improve those or mental health is another great example um so I guess I would just say if there are things like that that are going to be coming forward I'm super excited about it and again want to thank you for your work on this thank you
council member Delisandro thank you Mr. mayor. Um uh to to add to that, I I I definitely support the focus on mental health. Thank you very much for considering that. It looks like there are several opportunities over the course of the year where you'll be meeting um both uh jointly and and with
partners on that. Um, and I I believe if I'm reading this uh correctly um that that includes um some conversations um internally with like our um uh in both environmental health and then also with our um our police department on their
brain health programming and things of that nature. Um so great, thank you for that. Um, one of the areas of opportunity I think um that I don't see here and maybe you considered it and then decided not to work on it is as we think about um what we're trying to do
the considerations we have around uh potentially um providing resources for folks to update and improve um the uh air quality of their houses and things like that through the insulation program and the other sustainability ideas we've
just talked about last week. Um, I'd love to be sure that uh the advisory board of health has a point of view on that that they can bring to the table. Um, I don't know if you were considering that and opted out because there's a lot to do and you prioritized or if you could share with me what you think your involvement, if any, might be in in
those discussions and I do understand that some of that's related to the fact that we haven't necessarily approved some of those funding decisions yet. Thanks. So, Mr. Mayor, Council Member Dellesandro, uh the advisory board of health did, uh have indoor air quality
on a prior work plan and had some conversations uh around that internally with staff of how we can navigate that space. Um the uh not having a direct funding source uh to navigate some of those spaces with the resources needed
to really make progress on that uh was part of the reason we did not have that as a priority moving forward. Would you have room um in in your program if they asked you to take a and review some of what they've been working on? Would that be something that you could fit in given
the fact that you have a pretty busy week, a pretty pretty busy year? Um if they came to you, for example, as opposed to you having to do any leg work, Mr. Mayor, Council Member Lando, the we can certainly work that in. And that's been a conversation we've had on a
regular basis with uh Emma Struss. Yeah. Great. Okay. Thanks. Appreciate it. Council member Lman. Thank you, mayor. Um, more comment. Uh, uh, having the opportunity to do Metro, uh, Metropolitan Alliance for Healthy
Families for many years, uh, and work with you in that capacity and just looking at all of what you have here, I'm always amazed at how much stuff that our our public health department kind of works through. And I just, you know, happened to see here for your September, you have uh, emergency preparedness. And, uh, you know, it's kind of timely,
mayor. You know, I thought about what happened over in uh Spain today and Portugal and France and Belgium who they lost their power and I don't I don't know if you guys are going to be working at all with those types of things. I know that we um had done some of that pre-work with the pandemic. Um and so
I'm always just uh concerned about that and just um you know there's lots of things for us to work on and just I'm not sure if that's even something that's in your purview u you know to try to prepare the city for that. Um, but I, you know, it's more of a comment. You don't no need to to answer today, but there's something that I just pops in my
mind. But thank you again for all the work you guys do. Mr. Dean, yes, mayor, council member. Actually, um, talking with our fire chief. We will be bringing some emergency preparedness work uh, led out of the fire department um, in partnership with public health and other
departments. and you also will have the opportunity to be a part of a tabletop at some point before the end of this year for preparedness purposes. Member Mo, thank you, Mayor. Um, also more of a comment um given the um the
recent uh murder of the United Healthcare CEO and I see that we have the conversation coming up in September for insurance accessibility. Uh I'm in one particularly interested in how we can best support employers in Bloomington to make sure that we can
continue to support uh affordable insurance given the constant changing of the insurance policies, cost of insurance. um that I think to me is a a big piece that I'm really interested in uh as we're looking at continuing the to improve our community health is how can
we ensure accessible affordable access to insurance to help people in those situations. So I'm particularly interested in that um in the lens of Bloomington and how we can support our employers uh here in town. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Council
Member Nelson. Yeah. Thank you, Mayor. Um, obviously, uh, the funding environment is dynamic for you guys right now. And one of the things that I've always been impressed with about the department, um, or the public health department is that you rely very
strongly on grant funding and not, um, uh, public, uh, property tax funding for your programs. And so, could you just talk to a second about the risks you're seeing in that environment? um and some contingency planning and what what what
things you might be challenged with so that at least they're on our radar uh as decision makers cuz I know that uh I I have to believe that's a big concern right now. Uh Mr. Mayor, Council Member Nelson, uh
we uh work very closely with uh finance and the city manager's office as we look at our budgets and process. Uh about 70% of our budget is contracts and grants. Uh we are fortunate to have a very good makes. Uh about 25% of that is federally
funded. Uh we have very strong support from our state of Minnesota um and some of the uh reimbursements and other processes we have. So we are continuing to balance that and look at that. Um if we see uh continued major changes, we
will keep adapting to that. um working with the city manager's office um and and seeking input on how to navigate that council. Any additional questions, comments? I'd like to uh echo uh whoever complimented or thanked you earlier. I think everybody did, but thank you for
the work that you do. It's it's important. It's timely in so many different ways and has been timely. It feels like for a long time now. Uh for as long as I've been mayor, I think it's been timely. So, I appreciate the work that that you put into it. I appreciate the work that you've done putting together the staff that you have, Dr.
Kelly, because uh the folks that we met today, the folks that I've been there for a long while, I I know an outstanding group, and uh I know how well you all work with uh our counterparts at the state level. I know how well you serve the cities of uh Richfield and Edina. And I appreciate
the advisory board of health and the and the guidance and the leadership that you provide to the uh to the department and to Dr. Kelly and to to all of us just in general for the the with the goal of of maintaining a healthy community which is an important part of what we're trying
to accomplish here. So, thank you so very much. Uh as I as I have said council before or after all of the presentations that we've received, uh this is part of uh our city charter. Our boards and commissions are required to come in front of us annually and report on their
previous year's work and present a work plan for this year. And so appreciate what we've heard today. And with that council, I would look for a motion to adopt the 2025 advisory board of health work plan as attached to the city council packet. So motion. Motion by
council member Carter, second by council member to adopt the 2025 advisory board of health work plan. Any further council discussion on this hearing? None. And all those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Motion carries. 70. Thank you both very
much. Thank you. Next item on our agenda, council, is item three, our consent business. Council member Lman has our consent agenda tonight. Council member Lman. Thank you, Mayor. Are there any holds um on items 31 through
3.11? Okay. 3.8 being held. Anything else? 3.8. Okay. So then I'm going to go ahead and move 3.1 through 3.7 and then 3.9 through 311. Second. Motion by council member Lman, second by council member Mua to accept tonight's
consent business as stated. No further council discussion on this. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Motion carries 70. So that one hold at item 3.8. 8 and that uh council member revis I just have
a comment not holding it for anything. I I just want to reiterate that I disagree with the decision that the council made on regards to hiring uh the search company for the city manager. Um I think um it is the wrong decision. It was made
already, but I just wanted to um voice my opposition to it. That's it. Thank you. Thank you, council member. Council member Lman. Well, mayor, uh I think we'll go ahead and if you if
you would move the the I'll go ahead and move this. Yeah, I'll go ahead and uh see if I got the uh the appropriate number. Thank you very much. I appreciate that. Oh, Mayor, I'll move to authorize the appropriate officials uh to enter a contract with Mosaic Public Partners LLC.
Second motion by council member Lman, second by council member Mua on item 3.8 under consent business. That's the authorization to contract services with Mosaic Public Partners for our exe executive search firm for our city manager position. No further council discussion on this. All those in favor,
please signify by saying I. I opposed. Motion carries 61 with council member Revas in opposition on item 3.8. Thank you, Council Member Lman. Moving on to item four, our hearings, resolutions, and ordinances. We have two to this evening, two public hearings.
Our first public hearing is item 4.1. This is regarding our sign code lookback ordinance. Nick Johnson, our planning manager, is here. Yep. Raise the table up. It's getting a workout today. Uh oh. Might have worn the batteries out. Uh oh. Did you break it,
Nick? Okay. It's as high as it's gonna Oh. Oh, I'd be careful. There it is. Okay. Very good. We're good. Uh good evening, mayor. Uh members, thank you for your patience. Uh we'll start with the slideshow, but uh as we do a
introduction here, um uh just to remind everyone, I believe you're all on the board uh in February of last year when we adapted the new sign code. So, thank you for your uh patience and working through all the granular detail of that. There certainly was a lot of long study sessions and uh public hearing for that
one. Uh so if you recall as part of that process, what we uh presented to you and made a commitment to the public as part of that process was to do a uh one-year evaluation uh following the adoption of that new policy. And so this project that was added to the planning or to the
excuse me 2025 planning commission work plan represents the uh fulfilling that commitment of doing the look back uh at the last year under our new sign code. Uh so we'll provide you just a little bit of background on um uh about that process and then I'll I'll go into uh an
overview of the ordinance itself, the recommended changes that the planning commission is putting forth before you. Uh we're going to do it in somewhat of a format that's similar to miscellaneous issues ordinance. If you recall, we have many many different uh little tweaks and changes. Some are more cleanup oriented, some are more policy oriented. Uh so
that's how we'll present that to you and spend more of our time on the uh items that we view as uh more policy changes and then just a refresher reminder about outreach and engagement about uh signs in general and about the process we went through previously and then we'll present the planning commission
recommendation. So just to provide a little bit of background I mentioned uh so this new sign code has been in the wild now for uh a little bit over a year. Uh in 2024 we issued 66 uh sign permits with the new ordinance. Uh we didn't have any sign variances uh in
2024. We haven't had any this year. Um we've reviewed and approved uh 33 uh sign permits so far this year. Uh so all of the data and kind of the anecdotal feedback uh that we're getting from the sign uh installers and the businesses so
far is positive. Um uh if it were not, it would be reflected uh in some of the recommendations around uh this ordinance uh as well as the potential for sign variances or request for PD flexibility around signage uh in the past year. And certainly things are going to uh shake
out more over time than just a single year, but this is uh the data that we can present to you. Um and I did check in with all of the planning staff who are more uh intimately involved in uh the sign permit review and approval process uh to collect this qualitative data. Um, so that's the feedback we're
getting so far. Uh, to give you, uh, just a refresher about the process that we've gone through with respect to these changes. So, in this ordinance, we're going to be presenting 15 recommended changes to you, uh, recommended by the planning commission. Uh, the way that we generated this list had to do with uh,
effectively creating a brainstorm list as staff was in the ordinance working through actual uh, live situations with businesses with various properties throughout Bloomington. uh when you're kneede in the code as opposed to theoretical situations with real situations, you tend to notice some of
these uh opportunities for improvement or enhancement or things that are missing in the policy. So in effect, for the last year's worth of time, staff has had a tracking list of potential improvement opportunities that we've had for this code. Um and that's what initi that's what informed uh the initial list
of 20 or so. We didn't we cut a few of them. Not all of them were recommended by staff. Uh we presented 16 potential changes to the planning commission in January of this year in a study session format. Um the planning commission supported 15 of the 16 uh changes
recommended by staff. So that was completed in January. We moved ahead with the public hearing uh aspect of the process that took place on March the 27th. I can provide more feedback and then we're here before you this evening uh under a public hearing uh to present
the the ordinance changes. Um, so yeah, the the cleanup items. So there's five items that we designate as cleanup items. Nope. Very similar to miscellaneous issues ordinances. There's things that we find in city code uh that are no longer accurate um are just not
correct uh or represent a lack of clarity in the code. And that's how I would describe these cleanup items is really just improving interpretation and uh aligning with the correct uh person or authority or uh area um to improve
the the implementation of the ordinance. So there's five of these. One of them has to do with frontage definition. The ordinance uses both building and lot frontage as metrics to inform the amount of sign area that you get in different ways. Um and so currently there's only one frontage definition. It's really oriented towards lot frontage. So, we
want to add a uh definition of building frontage. Related to this, there are currently no uh graphics describing how the city will measure uh building frontage. As you can imagine, there's many uniquely shaped buildings uh throughout buildings. So, or throughout Bloomington, excuse me. Uh so, you need
graphics to kind of visually describe how that process will lay out. And that's uh that's what item two includes. Item three has to do with uh the fact that freestanding signs typically are uh um the allowance for the number of them are done on a per public street frontage
basis. And so when you have a sign that's located and oriented towards an intersection uh of two public streets, it can it can get staff and the property owner into a little bit of an exercise of which lot frontage does this uh actually apply to. Uh so this one is
just clarifying kind of a long-standing internal uh uh approach to dealing with signs that are more oriented towards the corner. Item four references the public works director um would be changing uh that to the city engineer position. Uh and then item five has to do with uh
video signs on uh threats to to traffic safety. Um, in terms of who makes that def that determination, right now it it leaves it kind of silent and this would just clarify that the city engineer is the one who clarifies what is safe from a traffic safety perspective. So, these are the cleanup items. Um, I can pause
if there's questions for all these and I should have mentioned that I actually have an individual slide for all 15 of these items. So, what I would propose is to go through them uh in more quicker fashion and then if you have specific questions about those individual ones, I can pull up the specific uh language.
Council, any questions on these cleanup items? Nope, I don't think so. I think we're moving on. All right. Thank you, mayor and members. Um, so getting to the policy changes, getting more to the meat of what's in the ordinance. So, uh, currently roof integral signs, uh, those are sign types that are actually built
uh, typically into a a mansered roof or that type of roof on a commercial building. You can see a picture of it there in the McDonald's. Um, our code would consider this a roof integral sign. Right now, the code is silent. It's neither a prohibited sign type or a permitted sign type. This was just an oversight in the first uh ordinance
process. Uh we would propose to uh add roof integral signs as a permitted site and sign type in all five uh uh sign districts. Uh so that's item six. Item seven, roof signs. This represents a more significant change from uh previous
city policy. Uh the previous sign code and the new sign code currently prohibit roof signs. Uh we have had inquiries for roof signs on a few occasions. One of them resulted in a master sign plan application by AC Hotel uh to put that cube on top of um that property uh which
was allowed through the master sign plan process um which is limited to South Loop. Um but uh in reviewing this further, we really think this is a bit of a missed opportunity in terms of trying to create uh more iconic or uh visually interesting commercial and uh
other type other property types. Um so the ordinance would recommend uh adding uh roof signs um in the class three, four and five sign districts which is effectively commercial, industrial and mixeduse properties. Um signs on residential fences. Uh this was
typically this is another area where the code is relatively silent on whether fences are allowed to or I'm sorry signs are allowed to be mounted on fences. Uh the planning commission felt there should be allowances to do so on uh commercial or industrial properties but not residential properties. So, the
ordinance reflects that guidance. I can get into more of the specifics and the concerns on signs on fences if need be. Um, item nine has to do with the size of freestanding and uh directional and incidental signs. So, uh you see
directional signs often littered throughout kind of large campus type properties. Some of them um uh do involve large truck traffic. We're having a slightly larger sign type is more uh amendable or positive. Uh and so currently the the current current sign code limits this to 8 square feet. The
ordinance would propose to increase it to 12 square feet which matches allowances for directional signs on buildings. So not a significant increase. Uh item 10 is uh connected to item 9 in so much as that uh currently there's no extra allowance for
directional signs in the uh for the CX2 zoning district which of course is the Mall of America and other sites planned to be more uh destination entertainment uh and retail. Uh so given the traffic volumes um that are uh associated with those sites, thinks it makes just more
sense to increase the allowance for those sign types at the Mall of America and other sites that have the largest traffic volumes in the city. Um just with all the things going on around there, things can get lost. So uh the ordinance would propose to increase that to 20 square feet. So again, mayor, I'll
pause just in case there's any questions about these five items. I see a couple of hands. Council member Mua then council member Alesandro. Council member Mut. Thank you, Mayor. Um, my question is around item number eight, signs and residential fences. Is this specifically
just for business type use cases? My concern is uh around like first amendment rights. If someone wanted to put a sign up to say whatever they wanted to say, um, would that be still allowed? Mayor, uh, Council Member Mua. So, it's still allowed on a property. It has to
do with non-commercial speech signs. There's allowed three per property. Uh, just not mounted on a fence. And so one of the challenges, and I can get to the specific language if if it's helpful, but one of the challenges with signs on fences is typically they're not properly attached or adhered to the fence in a way that's more permanent in nature.
Fences also tend to be located in public easements. So sometimes you'll have fences located within an easement area. Uh the third thing is that sometimes they if mounted on a fence can block clear view triangles. Now obviously that would be a problematic fence uh to begin with as well. Um, but I think fourthly,
uh, the other issue just with stuff I'm, uh, not, uh, as comfortable in, but, it has to do with just visual aesthetics and health, safety, welfare type considerations of aesthetics. Um, so we do have allowances for, uh, non-commercial speech signs. They certainly can just move it into the yard. Um, oh, height. That's what I was
going to say. I'm sorry. So, there is a limitation on the height of non-commercial speech signs or residential properties of four feet. So, sometimes when mounted on a fence, it can be taller than what the code allows. It's not a significant um uh health, safety, welfare issue. I'd put it more in the aesthetics component of it. Um
but it does is one of those issues where you have conflicts with other sections of the code routinely uh when you have signs on fences, if that makes sense. So I think what environmental health staff would request is that there's just more clear language um that signs on fences
are not uh permitted because they're in violation of all these other things, the easement, the height, uh the location, uh etc. etc. Thank you. Yep. I just want to make sure when we're implementing these, we're not infringing on first amendment rights and that's still being allowed. It's just uh in a different way
that they have to do it. Thank you, Council Member Dallas. Uh thank you, Mr. Mayor. Hey, Mr. Johnson. Um, following up on eight, I was waiting because I thought maybe you might answer my question with uh, Council Member Mua's question, but mine
mine is a little bit more um, scenario driven. So, um, if I wanted to paint a mural on the outside of my fence, would that be considered a sign? And if it is a sign
because it's painted on, I'm in violation of this. Correct, Mayor. Council member Delsandro, it depends. Um it depends on whether or not we would design uh consider the sign to be speech. Um there's some murals of
just artwork that uh wouldn't necessarily meet the definition of uh speech. Uh I don't think um in the as how it's defined in the sign code uh for the record. Um and so I think that's a little bit of a uh I mean I definitely would need to get with legal staff on
that one just to make sure that we're all in alignment of that. But we do have a mural permit process. Um, uh, the intersection of murals and signage typic tend to deal with commercial speech, uh, which probably wouldn't be the case at a residential property. Um, so I think
that's something that I likely need to study a little bit more, but I think it will depend and hinge on whether or not we would consider it a non-commercial speech sign. Okay. Um Um, okay. Understood. Um, there are two cases that I know of explicitly. one
on 86th Street, one on 90th Street that are both technically going to be in violation of this ordinance when we put it out there. Um, one is a a a a pair of signs that has been up there for years that basically lambast the city of Bloomington for having too many rental property properties in its neighborhood.
Right. That's on offense. Not in the easement, I don't think, but doesn't matter. The other one is um was a um a unity message in response to hate speech that was um uh graffitied onto a fence and the
community came together and overrode it with something positive. In either case, I'm of the opinion that that is absolutely their free right uh free that their free speech right um I don't necessarily like the message on the first one. Happen to like the message on the second one.
Doesn't matter to me. One happens to be stapled or affixed to the fence which is a chain link. The other one happens to be painted onto a wood fence. I worry that this particular thing as we hit as we try to prohibit in residential neighborhoods will f will be challenged in a million different ways over it just
becomes a headache for us. I would I I'm just I guess I'm asking the question do we really want to go down this path for on on the basis of aesthetic reasons like that I you know who's whose aesthetics like I just you know I I can
promise you as sharply as you're dressed I know people who don't have your aesthetic for example you know would they be not able to come to the front desk you know depending on how we define our aesthetic right I worry about those things so I'm curious how you how Do you plan to navigate this given that I think
we will have push back? Yeah, Mayor Council Delander, thanks for bringing this up. I assure you that um by uh aesthetic, we're not talking about the nature of the speech and I want to assure the city attorney that we do not uh take uh any kind of opinion about the content uh of of any type of sign. So,
that's number one. The second thing, um, I bring that up because that's a very commonly discussed, uh, idea or consideration around signs on fences. It rubs some people the wrong way. Maybe just put it, uh, that way. Not the content, but just the ability to do so. That's on the bottom of my list of, uh,
things that I'm trying to solve. Um, with this particular one, um, with respect to all of the other, uh, code conflicts that signs on fences present, what I would advocate to the the properties or anyone who had wanted to deliver a non-commercial, uh, message within their yard is that they have
every ability to do so within their property in the yard. Um, uh, it's just not on offense. So, I don't I don't I agree with you. I don't want the the city to be in a situation where we're limiting speech in any way, if that makes sense.
Council member Lman and council member Nelson. Council member Lman. So just uh just two real quick questions. Um so then for those commercial build uh commercial um for this number eight they're doing business um is there would would that qualify
them or because they're in a residential area they would be not allowed to do that to put something on their fence. Yeah. Mayor, Council Member Lman, the reason that the of the um the original item was actually presented as all sites in Bloomington uh to try and limit
commercial sign or I'm sorry, signs on uh fences. The scenario that was brought up at the planning commission discussion was that you sometimes have industrial properties that require screening of outdoor storage areas and so it actually makes it difficult in some instances to see the building uh where a building
sign may or may not be more visible or a freestanding sign for example. And so in that circumstance or that scenario that we discussed, um the planning commission felt it was okay and appropriate to have a commercial speech sign uh mounted on a fence that otherwise is screening um
outdoor storage areas. So that that was kind of the scenario should be restricted if you were a business operating in a residential area from being able to do that, right? Businesses are limited uh to the types of signage when they're operating in a residential area already by home business sign standards. are only allowed a foot one
and a half square feet of sign areas or home business. Okay, thanks for that. My second question that I have is so I just want to make sure I understand this. It's more a question of understanding. So if I'm a resident and I I want to put you know a lawn sign out there or or
some other kind of speech out there, the position of the staff if we we pass this would be that you'd have to put it on your lawn. But if your your if your offense was blocking that, how would people see that speech? So, is that
inhibiting speech by doing that? Mayor, Council Member Lman, um uh the sign, I'm sorry, the fence ordinance there there are scenarios where it does allow uh fully opaque fences to be located along streets, but the fence ordinance does uh
typically prohibit uh fully opaque or screening wall fences along residential streets. So if it was a chainlink fence, you could clearly see the message uh through the fence in that particular case. If it wasn't, yes, I think that would be a circumstance where any
potential could be blocked. So how would we deal with that? Is it the is the remedy for that to take down the fence so you could have the speech to be seen? Is that that would be what we'd recommend to that? I think you're raising a fair point. Um I think it's a potential downside of the uh the
amendment to the code. Okay. So I am understanding it correctly then. I I think so. I mean I wouldn't I wouldn't advise someone to remove a fence just to get Well, I'm just trying to make sure I understand that that's I mean because I can't think any other way, but I think that's enough. Thank you. Y Nelson.
Thank you, Mayor. Um I'm going to go with a different area. The the roof integral and the the roof signs. um the changes you're proposing, they're not going to allow people to paint their
roof so airplanes can see it or anything like that cuz I think we talked about that last time. The the changes you're proposing don't allow that still. Is that accurate? Mayor, Council Member Nelson, that's correct. Um the way that the Bloomington Sign Court defines a
roof sign is any sign that extends above the roof line. And so I can provide there's this graphic in the bottom portion of the slide in front of you uh that shows two examples of how uh the the sign code defines uh the roof sign. There's currently no provision in the
Bloomington sign code. I I I think I shared an aerial of Target and Richfield and um that does exist. Uh they're not common um but they do exist in the in the wild. So, but this is not down at a 45. So, it
was seen from there. You couldn't do a hip roof on that McDonald's scenario instead of that and paint that. Sorry, no roofs. Uh, Mayor, Council Member Nelson, it is feasible if if the sign was extending above the roof line, it would
be a roof sign if you allowed this. It's possible that they could do something along those lines. But what I would express to you is that the allowances for building signage are not so great as to do something along the lines. They still are subject to sign area requirements and square footage. It' be a tiny sign. Okay. Effect. Um and then
the freestanding signs. Um does that part apply to private roads or inside of parking lots? So if you had internal way finding on your property, does that freestanding sign, directional and
incidental sign, does that apply to it or is that just only along public roads or public rightways? Uh mayor, council member Nelson. So uh it would apply uh they would be subject to that restriction. However, there is an exemption in the sign code that signs
that are not visible uh to public right away. Um there is some exemptions uh for that. Yep. Okay. And let let me ask the stupidest question about the fence part. Sure. A lot of fence companies put their branding on their fence. Is that a sign?
If you put Johnson Fence Company sign on there so everyone knows who built the the built the fence, does that count as a sign? The little placard that you put on them.
You see them all over the place. Uh, mayor, council member, um, uh, Nelson, thanks for that question. Uh, there isn't a specific provision I would point to that would disallow it. I think it's more along the lines of a logo or trademark, um, of just kind of a
proprietary product. Um, but, uh, yeah, it's a it's a tough one. There's a lot of I mean, I think you're getting into the granular nature of sign codes and some of the challenges that we face in trying to regulate speech. Well, and and uh thank you council me council members for your questions and I
think that whole granular level is the important level and um especially the the whole on residential fences. I couldn't agree more with council member Dalisandro that um we're going to open up a can here on all of this just because
uh we know that there's every campaign season there are signs attached to to fences all over the city either stapled to wood fences or zip tied to uh chainlink fences.
Uh I I could imagine over the right before Halloween to see a big sign that says boo. I mean is that is that a sign? Uh and what I worry about is that our our city staff has enough to do without trying to go around
and deal with all of this and to try and uh be the sign police. And I I just worry that by doing this and this one in particular, the signs on fences, especially residential fences, frankly, in my mind, might be more trouble than it's
worth. Council member Nelson. Yeah, thank you, Mayor. Um, I have never had one of my signs put on a fence. I think you can just put them right next to the fence. You just put them in a stake in the ground right next to the fence.
It's in my opinion not that complicated to comply with the rule. That's just my opinion. But I agree that we don't need our our our people running around trying to enforce that. And I guarantee you there are so many cases of people violating the sign
ordinances particularly for sales, garage sales, real estate, and politics. And what are you gonna do? It's free speech. So, I'm confused. Council member, did did you agree with what I said or
disagree? I I 100% agree. Don't put it on the fence. Just put your speech out next to the fence. It's not that hard. It's really easy. Listen, this is a public hearing. Yes, this is a public hearing. Yes.
Yes. Yeah, we would agree. Thank you for that. Getting us back on track, Council Member Carter. We seem to be deep into this now. Thank you, ma'am. Please continue. Yeah. No, thanks for the discussion. I appreciate the feedback. Um the Any other questions about these items up?
Forgive me. Council member Revas, then Council Member Nelson. Council Member Rivas. All right. Council member Council Member, let's wait until the comment. No, let's wait until the comment period. Okay. This after our public hearing is Yep. Yeah, mayor. I don't have a comment. I
have a question. Are we going to discuss the sevenstory building sign part of it that was public uh uh planning commission did not support but uh staff next slide coming up. So, thank you. All right. I see two
two slides away. Yeah. Mayor, this is the this is the last grouping of items contained within the ordinance. Um so, temps, I'm just going to go through these quickly again. Same thing. I have a I have a a specific slide for each one if you want to go into detail. So, temporary signs for multifamily leasing.
We set the level here and this is for the lease up period. This is a special temporary sign type for when multif family buildings open uh for a two-year period following CO. They get larger amounts of temporary signage to help with the lease up. Um item 12, Bloomington Ice Garden. Bloomington Ice
Garden is not currently listed as one of our high usage uh parks and facilities. Um, what our high usage designation is, if all parks are allowed a 40 square foot freestanding sign, what the high usage designation gets you is an 80 foot sign and additional other freestanding
signs on the property for secondary entrances. Um, so big is not on this list. I could venture to guess that the community health and wellness center would be a good candidate for that type of designation uh in the future. But just a note here for Bloomington Ice Garden um potentially just adding that
to that list. uh building signs for residential uses in class 5. We realized that uh our multifamily uh buildings and residential zoning districts are allowed three signs per building elevation, but the residential portion of a project in a mixeduse zoning district is only
allowed one sign per building elevation. So, this is a discrepancy. We just want to um have the same allowance there. Um the permanent sign construction standards. This is another one. Um uh I hope is not uh um uh well uh typically
right now the code is silent on uh it's not perfectly silent, but it's not perfectly clear on whether you can have a banner, a vinyl banner as your permanent business sign. Um our definitions of temporary signs and banners all show vinyl banners being a temporary sign in nature. that leads
staff to apply temporary sign standards to those sign types or at least to formulate the question, is this allowed as a permanent sign? Um, and so we're seeking clarity by just noting that permanent signs must be uh durable and rigid in construction can be as simple as just putting it on a composite or
plastic backer. Uh, so it's just not a vinyl banner. Um the master sign plan approval piece, the last one is very much in line with the same uh types of actions that uh the the staff worked with the planning commission, city council on with relates related to steam
streamlining development, excuse me. Uh master sign plans are south loop district specific allowances to seek flexibility from the sign code. That's how the AC hotel got a roof sign as I mentioned. That's one example of the use of that. Uh other examples include uh
larger freestanding signage at Bloomington Central Station for the grocery store. Um that's how that tool has been used. Uh in effect given uh the planning commission's uh work with respect to evaluating different forms of PD flexibility um uh and the narrower
scope of signs, staff would recommend that the planning commission uh be granted the authority to uh take action on those subject to appeal. So, similar to all the other types of actions we did, uh we'd recommend still that an appeal opportunity be uh submitted for either the applicant or any member of
the public to appeal this action. So, again, I'll pause for any questions you might have. Uh I'd have a question on item 12. So, is Bloomington Ice Garden is that not invol included in that list that you mentioned of uh high use P park areas or however you defined it there.
Is that not on the list because it doesn't meet the definition or was the list simply put together in Bloomington Ice Garden wasn't put on that list. Mayor the ladder the second one number two. Okay. Yes. Um and actually the the size that they have today exceeds uh 40 ft but they got variances uh uh to get
that sign and so just thinking about you know uh in perpetuity and into the future or any other secondary signs just adding it to that list to make it clear. Got it. Thank you. Council, any questions on this grouping of five changes? Very good. Onward. Okay. The the one
item that planning commission did not uh recommend to go forward, I would note it it did um uh not proceed on a 33 tie vote at as part of the planning commission study session. Uh but currently the tall buildings above seven stories that's mostly applicable to
hotels and office buildings in Bloomington are permitted one uh building side above the second story of the building per building elevation. Um that works well for many of Bloomington's taller buildings. There are some unique buildings uh where uh
the building has the appearance of having multiple elevations or frontages uh but all pointing in the single elevation. And the code is clear that the north elevation of example of that building on the bottom part of the slide is only allowed one building sign for that full elevation. Uh in order to
account for uh uh these kind of unique scenarios, staff presented the opportunity to either increase that to two or three signs per building elevation, not increase the overall square footage. Uh you're still operating from the same bucket uh of square footage and the planning
commission chose not to advance uh that item. So, just noting that for the record and uh kind of presenting you the full menu of what staff put forth. So, Council Member Nelson, do you have did you have a question on this specifically? Not a comment, but a question.
A comment. Wait, why don't we say okay? Any questions on this council? Council member Delisado. Sorry. Yeah. Just to just to get some context if I could, Mr. Johnson. what um in the discussion um outside of outside of
uh personal preferences or whatever it might have been um was there was there any like safety slash um public nuisance slash like too much you know too many lights like what was
there any specific you know environmental reasons that were given that that pushed the the planning commission to to to basically at least some members of the commission to say no. Yeah, Mayor Councelor Dellesandro, I think it just had to do with the
proliferation or uh uh uh increases of commercial speech relative. So I don't think it was a concern about the environment or uh and in environment underlying not you know not the visual environment but um just trying to uh in
recognition of how impactful some of these very high very large uh signs are just trying to uh put set limits on the amount of commercial speech. Council member Mum. Thank you, Mayor. Um, has there been anyone who's reached
out regarding um, having the ability to put more signs on large buildings? I I used to work in the 8500 building at Normanddale Lakes, and there's only one on there, but there's many larger companies that are there. So, I'm assuming the building operator, the building owner, is one who who
determines who can actually put up a sign. So, has there been interest from other companies to be able to have more signage? Mayor, thank you, Council Member Mua. The um the situation on the bottom portion of the slide. I won't uh delve too far into the specific
property, but this was a real world situation where they were exploring adding additional signage and they could not under the current sign code. Um I they've they've been engaged throughout the process. They haven't leaned in to participate as much. So, I don't know if it's gone away at this point. But I agree with your comment that it's a
civil decision. It's a private decision on uh which tenant gets elevated to the um uh you know the prominence of signage on these larger buildings. Yeah. I'm sorry, Mr. Moving on this council. I had I had one more question before you called on Mr. M. Just really
quickly um has how many of the folks who are using the sign orders as it exists today use all of the square footage that's available to them in signage? Um Mayor Councelor Delandro, it depends on the sign type. If you're again if you're limited to say 40 square feet for
a freestanding sign all the time they use it all but on building signs it's not very common um uh especially under the old code which had fairly egregious um allowances for that. Uh but I would say routinely in the range of 60 70 80%
um of the allowance. Okay. Thanks all right council. I think if we've exhausted questions let's move to Oh, I'm sorry. We're going to talk outreach engagement. Sorry, mayor. Just quickly, the the um point I'll make here is that the same list of people who are engaged in our previous process in February. We
have been engaging with them. We have been keeping them up to date on that commitment about circling back after a year. So, we did do that. Um Clear Channel Outdoor has resubmitted a request and I know that they'll they're in attendance here this evening as well. Um they've submitted a request to reduce
the uh the required dwell times for electronic billboards from 20 to 8 seconds uh for long for longer and graphic messages. So they submitted this request in 2024. Planning commission it was presented for their consideration. Planning commission did not opt to include that in the
ordinance. And with that we I have some motions and uh you thank you council. Any final questions or can we open the public hearing? Let's open our public hearing. Let's do that. This is item 4.1. I will now open
the public hearing. 4.1. This is the sign code look back ordinance. Is there anybody in the council chambers who wishes to speak? Good evening and welcome. Uh good evening, mayor, city council. My name is Matthew and I'm with Clear Channel Outdoor. We own and operate the only
four billboard structures in the city. I appreciate the opportunity to speak on this look back tonight. certainly appreciate a year ago you guys allowed us to convert our signs to digital. At that time we requested the dwell time be changed um to 8 seconds. You wanted to take a look at 20 seconds. Again, we're
requesting that change. That is the industry standard that we operate in. It is the industry. It is the standard for the communities that are around you such as Bloomington um and the airport and it is consistent with the electronic changeable signs that you have in your community now. So it would be consistent
like you have at the home furniture sign. We're certainly proven since 2006 we put our first uh digital billboard in Minnotonka. We've demonstrated we can operate these safely at the 8second control signs. The main reasons we want to update again um it allows more
flexibility for our advertisers. It allows more opportunities for local businesses in your community to advertise. And finally, it allows us to further our commitment to uh community service in the cities we operate in. the cities we operate in, we provide them public messaging. Cities use this for
such things as city events, um, city meetings, proclamations, just an effective way to communicate with their citizens. In addition to what we offer up cities, we do offer time for emergency management. We're one of the fastest ways to get out Amber Alert, for instance. Um, we'd certainly love the
ability to invest in your community, update these signs where you've had them a long time, uh, but we won't be able to do that unless we can get the dwell times lowered. So, I certainly appreciate your uh consideration again of this request uh in your community. So, thank you. Thank you for your
comments. Any questions, council of the of the speaker? Council member Delisandro, if I may. Yes, please. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Appreciate you being here. Um so, two things. One, you haven't made the digital updates to the signs that after last year, you have
not yet done that. Correct. Correct. And you are not going to do that unless we give you your eight seconds. Did I understand that clearly? You are correct. Okay, great. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you, Council Member Nelson. Yeah, thank you, Mayor. Um, just quickly, uh, you you mentioned that, um,
many cities are able to put their messages on there. Can you speak more specifically to what Bloomington might be able to do, how much, um, space we would get, or any of those types of things? Certainly. Yeah, we we offer cities up to 20 hours a month on our signs and it just gets put in a
rotation. Uh most cities, I'm sure you're one of them, have great communications department that can design and um design their messaging and we have a system where you send it to us and we put it up.
Certainly. Right. Thank you much. Thank you. Is there anyone else in the council chambers wishing to speak on item 4.1 this evening? Caitlyn, do we have anyone on the phone wishing to speak to item 4.1? Mayor, there's no one online.
Last call for anybody in the council chambers. Item 4.1. Council, nobody on the phone. Nobody in the council chambers coming forward. I'd look for a motion to close the public hearing item 4.1. So moved. Second. Motion by council member Lman. Second by council member Mua to close
the public hearing on item 4.1. No further council discussion on this. All those in favor, please signify by saying I opposed. Motion carries 70. So, council, now uh comment, thoughts, uh direction we'd like to take on this. I know that uh council member uh Reevas
and Council Member Nelson each had comments that they wanted to make. Why don't we start with Council Member Rivas? Yeah, I just had a comment on regards to the the um private homes fences. Um I think it's a good idea to put some limits on the
size or I without having any interference with the first amendment still you can put some limitations on it otherwise we're going to start seeing some crazy stuff out there as it is during election time some people put stuff out there that is
not proper for children to read. I mean they get removed eventually by by passers by but still I think uh without interfering with the first amendment the limitation in size and noble guard and
such things I don't think has would do any harm to the city to have um that said I mean it can be allowed but with certain restrictions to it that's all I got. Thank you. Thank you council member. Council member
Nelson and then council member Lman Lman. Yeah. Thank you, mayor. Um the first thing as I mentioned I want to just comment on was the sevenstory buildings and I'd be in favor of um the staff recommendation to allow more for signage there. I mean, we we have uh a
challenge with office space, and if uh it can help a tenant move into an office building in Bloomington because they can have signage and branding out there in the community, I think that's good. And I I as Council Member Dellesandre asked,
I mean, there doesn't seem to be an environmental um negative impact in terms of light, in terms of visual, in terms of anything like that. So, I would be in favor of adding that one back in. I mean, I know that was a split vote at the planning commission. So, it wasn't that they
disapproved it, it was just that they didn't approve it. So, they split, which is I which is fair. That happens sometimes. And then in terms of the dwell time, I'd be supportive of the eight if that's what other communities are doing. Um, unless someone can give me a really good reason why that won't
work. I think we looked at 20 and what we found is we get nothing. So that's less than what we'd want. So I I would be in favor of that. And uh and then I would also just, you know, I'd love to see how we can utilize our our 20 hours
was it? Yeah. Of that time most effectively if and when those get built. Council member Lman. Thank you, Mayor. Um, so in terms of the seven stories, you know, I mean, there wasn't any any clear decision there. So, we can give that
direction. So, I'm for that if we want to do that, uh, for the seven stories, uh, adding those signs. And then, uh, in terms of that item number eight, uh, that's out there. Um, I I was troubled by the the response that staff had with regard to how would we remedy that uh,
free speech uh, component of it. And I know, yeah, you might want to put it up on on the, you know, my fellow council, just put it right up on the on the sign or right up against the fence, but then if it's falling into the into the public uh sphere, that that becomes an issue, too. So, I don't know if I just don't
feel like that one's fully cooked right now. And I'd rather us go back and have a a deeper look at that. You know, Council Member uh um Victor Revas had mentioned some good points that maybe we should have some look looking at those type of items uh to to get it a little
more done. And then in in terms of the uh you know going from 20 down to down to eight I just I I can't I can't get there. I know I was at 30 minutes or or more on that. You know from the safety I think staff um during that period of time had brought forward uh some of the
safety uh concerns um around that. And uh so I don't know, maybe I need to, you know, take a trip out with the clear clear folks so I can get a little more education and I'm certainly open to that, but uh but today I'm just not I'm not there, but I am willing to be educated on that uh to have a better
understanding of that, but I I can't uh I apologize, Mayor. I should be addressing you. Um but uh that's how I look at this. Council member Dellesandro. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um I'm I uh support all of the items. I am also for uh three up to
three signs on sevenstory buildings. Um I know I know of another scenario uh where at the Mall of America site I went and did a a ribbon cutting with a consulting company in there and they were trying to get their name on the board uh or on the sign or on the side of the building. They couldn't do that.
So I know that it has come up in in real terms. Um, and I'd be supportive of that, especially as as was mentioned, um, because I think it might provide incentive for rental, and that's a leasing, and that's a good thing. Um, I also, um, I'd like to see a compromise
on the 22nd, 8C rule. I know that there are, um, real good reasons in neighborhoods and things like that. I think the, and forgive me, Mr. Johnson, if I don't have this right, um, but I think that the way that it's written, it's about electronic signage and it's not limited by the size of the
electronic signage. And so there are signs in our neighborhoods that if they were changing over every 8 seconds or so would probably be problematic. So I'm wondering if we should have a billboard specific sign ordinance that we can make
those accommodations to. um that that would be something I'd support because um on a highway going 65 m an hour you have a different set of traffic challenges than if you are distracted while driving in on 86th Street at
Fremont for example, right? So um and so I'd like to I'd like to to to know whether or not I'm right on that first off and then that's I guess a question but like u more importantly I' I' I'd be open to considering the 8-second rule. Um, but I think, um, maybe we need to be
a little bit more specific about the kinds of electronic signage we're talking about there. Um, and then lastly, I'm just not going to support any kind of prohibition of residential signage right now because I I don't think it's um thought through enough either. So, thanks.
Additional thoughts, council? Uh, yeah, that that would be a good question to answer. Yeah. Mayor Counselor Delus on the piece about uh electronic signs. Um we do have separate sign uh standards for billboards versus all other standard electronic signs. They're effectively
the same standard. Um and we'd like to keep them aligned just for uh uh alignment and lack of complexity uh standpoint, but um effectively what it is is that we have uh gra we have standards for longer messages with graphics. So there's more speech to
consider, there's more message catching your eye. That's what's set at 20 seconds and we have a separate standard for change electronic changeable copy that's 10 words or less. So very simple messages. That's what you're seeing uh that can fluctuate at the 8-second dwell time. And so if the city were and I I do
want to uh ask the city attorney to kind of weigh in on some of this as well because um the electronic sign piece other than the the materials provided by the member of the public um hasn't been under consideration within the ordinance document throughout the process. So, I want to make sure we're doing things
right just from a a process standpoint um on that piece. Um uh but yes, we have two standards. We have separate standards for billboards and other electronic signs, but they mirror one another. So, it's two different sections of the code. And then the second piece of that is that longer
messages with graphics are at a 20 second dwell time. Shorter uh messages are at an 8-second dwell time. So that was a way that the city attempted with the previous sign code which was carried over to try and incentivize simpler uh less distracting messages in
effect. Okay. I I'd still be supportive of giving billboards 8 seconds. So however we do that whether we put that in the electronic signage or the the the graphic side like if a billboards above a if a sign's above a certain size or
whatever. I understand what you're asking uh us to do is allow you to have very standard sign ordinances and and so no matter what combination size size or graphics or
non-graphics you get the same results. I I think I think we might unless we're going to tear them down and we're going to turn them all into the same kinds of signs. I I mean it feels to me like maybe we should have something there. But anyway, that's something just to
consider. Council member Carter. Uh, thank you, Mayor. So, on the residential sign piece, um, I'm not in favor. I just feel like I agree with what's been said. I think it's kind of a slippery slope. And my concern is, um, staff time, uh, you know, neighbors calling neighbors
and then staff time just getting sucked up, visiting houses repeatedly. I mean, we see it happen in other areas and for other reasons, and I just for what it might um cost us, I don't know if it's worth it. So, I am in favor. I'm in
supportive of the signs on the sevenstory buildings. Excuse me. Um and at this time, I would not be supportive of changing the um billboards from 20 to 8 seconds. If I recall, there was some pretty compelling safety uh data in
terms of driver distraction and crash rates. Unless I'm totally making that up, but I feel like there was something. It was a while ago. Um, and so unless I saw compelling information that could change my mind from a safety perspective, I'd be kind of concerned.
494 is already a disaster. And I don't know how many crashes happen a day at this point with all the construction going on and people apparently not paying attention and I don't want to add to that. So that's where I'm at. Thank you. Thank you, council member. So, council, if um if what I'm hearing
here, if we can just keep moving this along a bit, and I always have trouble with the um with the these multiple as we lump everything together to try and uh number them, but what I'm hearing from folks is that everybody's cool with
items one through five. Uh six and seven are fine. We I I wonder about number eight and nine and 10 and I think the rest of the way then
and number eight I think is the only one that we had questions with on what we have talked about and then the additions of possibilities being the the 22nd to 8second well we can have we can move that separately I think if we wanted to talk about that and then the seven
stories more than one more than one So my my if I can, you know, count noses here, I think I'm seeing everybody is good with one through 15 with with the exception of item number eight. Is that that's the residential that's the sign on residential fences if if that's
what I'm seeing. Uh if I could Mayor, can I ask a clarifying question of the Miss Mandersite? Nick, is that section eight or number eight? Is that something that can be easily shaved off, shaved out of the draft ordinance? Is it possible for you to tell us specifically
what section that is so we can include that in the motion? Yes, I can. Thank you. It would be in the prohibited prohibited sign type um 21.304.11 B prohibited signs subsection 14.
Mayor, that's on page 81 of the packet, right underneath those diagrams of the building outlines. So, Nick, would it make sense that that entire um that entire edit to section
21.304.11 prohibited signs B14 that's struck from the ordinance? Correct. Uh city attorney would be my recommendation would be to change it to reserved. Okay. B or 14? 14. 14 to be reserved.
Okay. And when you say to be reserved, we're pulling that and setting it aside. Is that uh Mayor, the word reserved would be there. Roof signs would be removed and then the word reserved would be there so that we don't mess up all the numbering. We just Understood. Okay. Now I see what you're saying. You're
holding. Okay. Understood. So council what I would look for as we as we have this discussion. So, uh, 1 through 15 with the exception of number eight, which is the prohibited signs. That would be the signs on fences, residential fences, uh, to, um, to carve
that out to to approve everything else. But number eight, I would look for a motion to say, let's go for staff recommendations numbers 1 through 7 and then 9 through 15, and then uh, make item 8, which is uh, 21.304.11
304.11 under B14 reserved. So moved. Second motion and a motion by council member Lman. Second by council member Carter for the motion as stated. Any further discussion on this? Yes, I do have a do have a question. Council
member Revis after so much thinking I guess. Um, I just want a little clarification on what is it exactly the reason why we don't want to allow the 20 the the change to 8 seconds from 20. I council member council member, we're not to that yet. No, we're not we're not
discussing that right now. We're just discussing the 15 recommendations that came forward from the planning commission. We're getting to that next though. Okay. We're getting to that next. Any questions on the 15 that were proposed and then the carving out of eight as I described? No further council discussion on this.
All those in favor of that motion, please signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Motion carries. 70. Now, we've got a couple other things that uh the planning commission either didn't address or declined. Let's start with the sevenstory uh um proposal, and I'm not sure where
that might be in the uh in the code, but to allow more than one large sign, more than one sign on a a building seven stories or greater. So, is that the motion or I I'm looking for uh specifics from Miss Mandershed so I know what we're talking about here. So, mayor, um my
understanding in conversations with staff is that we would be looking for direction to bring back language on these items. Is that accurate, Nick? Whatever the city attorney is comfortable with. Yes, I will I will execute. But effectively what it is is that in uh the building sign section of
the code uh 2130417 E special building sign provision subsection 2, it's buildings seven stories or greater. It sets the limitation at one building sign per elevation. So the proposed code change was to increase that to two or three per
elevation, whatever was uh folks were comfortable with. Um but again, I I want to honor the the correct process according to the city attorney. So, mayor, members, uh, Nick, is are you saying this is on page 84, maximum
number of building elevations with signage, changing that number? It it's not in the it's not in the ordinance. Okay. Correct. So, it was it was I see where we're going with that. I think we have to if you could provide language and bring this back at a at a future date. I think council we're we're asking
that to happen. So moved. I don't I don't I think it's council direction. Okay. Okay. I just want to move this thing. The only clarification I would seek, mayor, is if it's two or three signs per elevation. Both were discussed. Mr. Mayor, I I would Can we put up to three and just leave it that
way so that some people can choose two if they want to and but if they grow, they can be three. Yes, I think that would be safe. Okay. Up to three. And then similarly uh I think for consideration and I think we might be a little bit split in terms of the the the
the delay times on the uh the um the video boards but I think we need more clarification on that in terms of and we've been talking about this but I think some of the questions that council member Dalisandro brought up and the questions that council member Lman brought up I would like to see the um I
know we base this decision on on a a traffic study at some point a safety study Um, I'd like to I'd like to review that once again, how old that study is, if there are newer studies that we can consider, uh, if there's more updated information that we could possibly use
in our in our debate on this. Does that all make sense, Mr. Johnson or Miss Mandershide? Did that make sense in terms of staff direction? I mayor, I think that Nick and I were both resolving other things. What did you just say?
Yes. My here's my takeaway. The things that you are interested in working through more the 8 seconds, the signage, that sort of thing. Staff are looking for direction. They'll schedule a public hearing. They'll draft the ordinance. Then you all will have the the robust discussion on those items. Is that fair,
council? Council member Dellesando. Quickly, just one one related but um not related question for Mr. Johnson. when you all went back and and got the feedback from the people that were involved in the yearling, one of the one of the specific folks we had come to us was uh the the music folks, the Schmidt
music. I've seen that their sign is updated now. Um but they did not get the digital sign that they wanted and I am wondering if they gave you any information about how our signage has hurt them like our ordinance has hurt them maybe or anything like that. like I
I you know getting I wondered if we were biased by asking hey how's it going to all the people that were happy with our sign decisions but we didn't go back and ask the people who were unhappy with the sign decisions. So as part of this as we bring that back if we could just maybe tap into some of those folks. Uh I think that would be interesting to have an
opinion on that from them because I'd still like to support them if we could. Thanks. Yeah, mayor. I didn't get I didn't get any messages of uh um I think that the new code actually resolves some potential variances that they would have had to seek uh to install that sign, but
I could be wrong about that. Okay, you have the direction everybody. You're go back and watch the tape. I'm sure we figure it out. We're good. I feel good. All right, mayor. You still have summary publication. Oh gosh. Thank you. Thank you, Melissa. Thank you. So,
we do have uh we we have uh passed item 4.1 uh as as amended. I'm looking for a motion for summary publication for uh item 4.1. Council member Lman. All right. I'm just trying to figure out where it is. Here it is. Okay. Uh, mayor, I'll move a
resolution authorizing summary publication of the ordinance amending multiple provisions in the sign code, thereby amending chapters 21 and appendex A of the city code. Second. Motion by council member Lman, second by
council member Carter for summary publication on item 4.1. No further council discussion on this. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. Opposed. Motion carries 70 for summary publication. Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Thank you much. We will move on to item
4.2 in our agenda and council looking at the clock on the wall. It's now 8:22. Uh so let's uh make sure that we get through this in an expeditious manner, but make sure that everybody's uh questions are answered uh to the fullest that we can. Item 4.2 is another public
hearing regarding our co-l livingiving standards. Emily Hespach is online and she's going to be leading us through this one. Good evening. Really quick. Okay. Can you all see my screen?
Yes, we can. Excellent. Okay. So, I'm here to kind of finish up the co-living ordinance. Um this has been to several study sessions. Um and then in March, planning commission held a public hearing. No one
testified at that public hearing. Um but the ordinance ordinance did pass 7 to zero. At the beginning of April, the H board also reviewed the ordinance and offered a letter of support um which should be attached to your packet. And
then tonight is the final public hearing um to pass the ordinance. So the why, you all have seen this a few times, so I'm just going to quickly go through this. Um co-living would help to provide a range of affordability um where Bloomington is
lacking in the 30% AMI um area. It would be adding to the spectrum of housing possibilities. And additionally, co-l livingiving usually provides flexible leases um and is good for students, seniors, and mobile professionals. Here's a list of
ordinance changes. I'm going to go through these based on what has changed since the last time you all saw this. So, definition changes. Um last time I believe we hadn't settled on a definition of family. Um so our final
proposal is to change family to be six or fewer adults or any number of adults who are related uh along with any minor children in their care. Um the co-living development definition now calls out that there must be five or more
co-living units um in a development to differentiate between a co-living development and multifamily housing. Uh the co-l livingiving unit definition now specifies that the kitchen will be a shared area and that cooking facilities
will not be included in each unit. And then um we did a little bit of cleanup and deletions of congregate living and boarding houses. Um we were differentiating between group housing that provides care and doesn't provide care which I have a little bit more
detail about on the next slide. So um as you can see we will be considering both co-living and residential care facilities um group housing. So um co-l livingiving would be group
independent living without care services and residential care facilities are group living with some type of care provided. Um, so we wanted to work to streamline kind of the residential care facility definition to prevent confusion and also
to get rid of some uses in the code that are no longer relevant, such as um, boarding houses. So, this was kind of just a little bit of cleanup on our part to make the code easier to use. M. Uh, oh, there we go. Okay. Use
standards. Um, not much has changed with the use standards from the last time you saw them, other than adding the requirement that a kitchen must be on the same floor as a co-l livingiving unit. Staff is suggesting this for better accessibility and to control the number of people that will be using the
kitchen. Um, this thread came up throughout different study sessions to of making sure that there's enough common space for people to use and there's not too many people um kind of jammed in a kitchen or common space. While bathroom requirements are
regulated by building code, kitchens are not. So, staff thought this would be an appropriate way to ensure high quality living. Um, parking did not change from the last time you saw this. So we are
proposing um 0.5 uh vehicle parking spaces per co-l livingiving unit and one space one bicycle parking space per four co-l livingiving units um 90% which would be
for long-term use. Um, and then staff just wanted to point out on the car parking piece that um, compared to other cities in the country, this is still kind of a um, higher requirement than some other cities
had. Use tables. Um, so co-living developments will be allowed with the same permissions in the same districts that multifamily buildings are allowed in. And then the only other thing this visual is showing is that again we deleted congregate living
um rental housing section. Not much new content other than we are updating the definitions to match the zoning code. Now opportunity housing ordinance changes. Um staff is re recommending co-l livingiving be subject to several
OHO incentives if they meet the requirements. Um parking reduction incentive is recommended not to be eligible um just because of the decreased parking requirements already um for co-l
livingiving. And then deletions. I have touched on these. Um we deleted boarding house um as a use and definition and then also congregate living facility definition use and standards. So lastly, um how does this
ordinance remove barriers to housing? Uh it allows more roommate and co-living situations in single and two family housing by increasing the number of non-related people who can live together from four to six. It also increases inclusivity for multigenerational
families. Um this ordinance is creating a use with standards responsive to unique characteristics of the co-living housing type. Um, the ordinance would add OHO incentives for co-l livingiving and like I mentioned earlier, it creates more housing possibilities, especially
within the 30% AMI range. Um, with that, I am available for questions and so is Bernardet, um, the building official, and Lynn, the environmental health manager. They should both be online.
Thank you. Council questions. Council member Evas, a question. Yeah, I just have a question on regards to the 30% um EMI. It's called MI, right? Um um I have visited u quite
a few of the buildings that have been uh developed in the last couple of years. And after visiting them, the builders um stated that their only units the units that are
the only units that are not occupied at the moment are at the 30% BMI. uh and that they have a lot of uh uh reservations and continuing to build
the 30% rather that they rather do the 80% uh because those are all occupied and the ones at the lower EMI are not. I I so I don't understand what the emphasis is on pushing to continue to
support the 30%. if you can explain that to me, please. Yeah, Mayor, Council Member Revas, thank you for that question. Um, so I think one of the reasons for pushing for this is that, um, the Met Council does have
affordable unit production goals for us, for the city of Bloomington. Um, and for the 30% AMI level, um, I don't think we are close to meeting those goals. Um, I don't think I have the exact updated
numbers in front of me. Um, but I think a big push for that right now is because we're not meeting those goals. Whereas like 80% and 60% AMI, I do believe we're either meeting or very close to meeting.
So if it's possible at a later time, if you can provide me with those numbers, that would be very helpful. I just I'm trying to understand the whole idea of uh continuing to build a a 30% AMI when I I can tell you with certainty that I
visited all the new buildings while I was recovering and what I learned is kind of um um it kind of shocked me to learn that they have all these 30% AMI apartments available and they haven't
been occupied for quite some time and that they were the only ones remaining uh without uh being occupied that at the ones at 80% and 60% were completely gone and in record time from what I understand so if you can provide me the
the information that will be great so I can understand it better uh because if we continue to build uh 30% just because a county or the state have quotas on us and they are not being used I think it's is uh you know count kind of productive
to do that when we they're not being utilized at all or to a certain degree the usage is very low. Thank you, council member. Council member Carter. Uh thank you, mayor. So, I'm kind of confused by that because we
actually haven't had very many 30% built in the units or in the buildings. And so, I guess I'd be curious to see the numbers too and if that's accurate. I mean, I don't, you know, I don't want to say that like, you know, who I don't know the conversations you had with the
builders, but I'm just incredibly confused by that because we've really not built very many 30% or had incentivized 30% because we haven't been able to. Um, there's been some, but not a lot. Um, and then I just want to clarify that in this um co-living
ordinance, we're not requiring these units to be 30%. It's just a way that people at that income can afford to live in Bloomington because they're sharing space with others. So, it's not a requirement. And I just want to make sure that people listening understand
that, too. Thank you for the clarification. Council member, Council Member Lman, a question. Uh, Mayor, thank you. I wanted to thank the staff for the questions that you answered earlier, and I want to let you know that I want to follow up on those, but not tonight because we're limited on time. So, I'll follow up with you. we can get
some of that my questions answered uh for the run. But thank you again for your answers. Any additional questions regarding the changes uh in in definitions or in the recommendations brought forward uh to clean up our uh co-l livingiving standards
ordinance. Hearing none we will open the public hearing. This is a public hearing for item 4.2 a public hearing on the co-l livingiving standards ordinance. Is there anyone in the council chambers who wishes to speak? Item 4.2. No one coming forward in the
chambers. Caitlyn, do we have anyone on the phone or online? Um, mayor, there is someone online. It looks like callin user 952465 is wishing to speak.
Live. Good evening. Welcome. Were you looking to speak to item 4.2 this evening? Yes, if I could. Um, my name is Mike List. Uh, live at 10313 Fifth Avenue South, Bloomington, Minnesota 55420. Um, I was
just, does this ordinance allow for residential areas for nonowner occupied residents? So the question is, does it allow for nonowner occupied residence?
Well, yes. For so someone were to purchase a single family home and then they were to rent out say it's a three-bedroom house or a fourbedroom house that they would rent out those four bedrooms. Miss Hesp, do you have any insight on that? You understand the question? Yes.
Um, so, um, yeah, someone could rent out their house. Um, how this ordinance would affect that is we're changing the definition of family. So now, um, if someone was renting out their house,
they could, um, rent to six unrelated people if if the house was big enough. Sorry. Yes. Well, thank you. that that um provides the clarity that I need. Um given that I
mean I have concerns around that um in that you are now putting you know a basically an apartment or a mini apartment complex in the middle of a residential area and you know there's no clear re
recourse on how to manage that how is that being controlled. Uh when I looked at the at the granted it was two or three weeks ago when I looked at the documentation there's just a single line that says well that it will be licensed but it's not clear what that means. So
it's just not clear to me how there's going to be controls or you know how to contact that and we already are running into issues in other areas where we have single line items like that in in the zoting ordinances. So you have right now
this struggle between the city and the state and who's going to control and who's going to license things. So now we're just going to add another housing type to this to this particular problem. And the other thing is is that you're
going to be opening up, you know, what what could be more of a business type of model. And you know, with the other licensing issues that I'm running into, um, we're running into now lobbies, you know, that
now that there's enough money in the system, now they are able to lobby the state. They took away licensing from the city. They moved all of that now to the state which has then made it more difficult for residents to be able to
work with uh you know trying to get resolutions on things and so now this is just going to be another opportunity where this is going to happen and I've got serious concerns about that. In addition, now you when you take the
owner occupied out of it, you're now going to be single family uh people trying to get in single family homes, which is already scarce, are now going to be competing against small businesses
or toward money interest money interests, which is then going to cause housing prices even go up even more because once they do the dollar cost averaging, they're going to be able pay more for a single family home than than say your typical family trying to get
into a single family home. So, it's going to drive up housing prices, you know, and then you're going to start dealing with the NOS's. You you're starting to deal with nonprofits. You're going to start dealing with the state and county and other organizations
and tax dollars now trying to acquire properties and then rent out those properties. I mean that's just the cycle that I've seen over over time. So um I have concerns in that particular area.
Um in addition to that um you know I mean people have been cheating about renting out houses anyway. I mean, in my particular situation, you know, I've had to deal with I've been in court. I've
had to use PTO twice now to go to court about rental situations taking place next door. Issues are raised. I'm now having to go to court because I'm a witness because I opened
up my door at 11 12:00 at night. Uh it's so the these things are all going on right now in the community and this is just going to make it more prevalent. So Mr. List, you're you're at your you're at your five minutes and I'm going to have to cut you
off, but I I appreciate you calling in this evening and sticking with us and providing your comments tonight. Thank [Music] you. Is there anyone in the council chambers who wishes to speak on item 4.2
this evening? Hello, Mayor, City Council. Is this on? Yes, you did. Hi. Um, Robert Coleman. Um, I'm here in generally in support of this ordinance. Um, the main the last hiccup that I have, sorry, that door was
locked. Um, the uh the main last hiccup that I have is the parking requirements. Um, I think that the 0.5 is too high. Um because there's no I believe because there's no OHO parking flexibility
allowed with co-l livingiving as proposed. Um um if so like I I remember watching the planning commission meeting and when in regards to their comments about the parking minimums they were like yeah let's let the market decide. will let the market decide and then they
supported 0.5 and it doesn't make a lot of sense to me because if the market decides, hey, 0.5 is too much. Sometimes they'll look at it and they're like, oh, we're just not going to do it in Bloomington. And sometimes if they if they want lower, I believe they'll have to get a variance because there's no
flexibility. I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe they would have to go through a variance. And um I think that it's too high. Um, the whole point is that you want to make it affordable. You want to make it uh a lower barrier of entry for people who really just need
housing. Um, I I don't own a car and not having to own a car, being able to walk to work, being able to take the bus, being able to take advantage of Normandale's uh free bus pass has been huge on my finances. like because of not having to own a car, I've been able to
save over a year's worth of my income over the last two years. And it is the biggest contributor to that is not being able to own a not needing to own a car. And because all of these are going to be in places that are um like well likely
they're going to be in places that are well served by transit, you want to be encouraging that. you don't necessarily want to be encouraging, hey, let's have as many cars in these places as possible because the point is to make it uh less expensive. So, I hope that you will support a honestly
the.5 doesn't look like that much uh when you compare it to 1.6 for a studio. I think that's way too high anyway, right? Because that's the requirement. It's not necessarily that they're that those parking spots are going to be used. I mean, I live in an apartment building that was built in the 80s and
the parking lot is empty so much the time and uh even the like the underground parking. I walk in there, you know, on my way through the door and it is like, wow, there's like 10 cars in this half of the parking garage and it it just even in places that have pretty
mediocre bus service like my apartment building, people aren't using all of the parking spots that are required by code, right? like so any uh opportunity that we have to you know meet where people actually are I think is a great thing but I don't think that this ordinance
does that. So thank you Mr. Coleman. Caitlyn, is there anyone else on the phone or online wishing to speak? No, Mayor, there is not. Last call for anybody in the council chambers. Anybody wishing to speak to item 4.2 two this
evening council. No one coming forward, no one on the phone wishing to speak. I'd look for a motion to close the public hearing on item 4.2. So moved. Second. Motion by council member Lman. Second by council member Mua to close the public hearing on item 4.2. No further council discussion on this. All those in favor, please signify by saying
I. I. Opposed. Motion carries 70. Closing the public hearing on item 4.2. Uh just I I would like um Miss Hespach if you could at least address the two questions that we heard. Uh the the first the concerns about the the local or the lack of controls in single family
residents and uh if there would be issues within neighborhoods uh and then the second question about the 0.5 parking requirement and you did mention that in your presentation that that still seems to be a bit higher than what you've seen in other communities. So if you could address those two comments that we've heard during the public
hearing. Yeah, Mayor. Thank you for um those questions. So uh for the first question um about local control um so I will say that we did work with our environmental
health division um on on the family definition um and you know made sure that they were comfortable with changing that number from from four unrelated people to six. Um,
and I would maybe defer to Lynn more um, if she wants to talk any more about um, inspection issues or if she sees this as being a potential problem. Um, but I will just say we did work with our environmental health division um, to
make sure that they felt that this was an appropriate number. And I do think you bring a good point. I mean, Lynn and our environmental health folks, I mean, there are standards, there are requirements for our rental units within the city of Bloomington, and these would not be exempt from those in any way. Correct.
Yeah. Yep. If they're if I mean, if the houses are being rented out, um, yes, they still need rental licenses. Very good. Uh, Council Member Carter, question on this one. Yes. Thank you, Mayor. Just a clarifying question. Um what I was kind of hearing about I in
his in the first um testifier's comments I was hearing a concern about co-l livingiving happening in the residential areas but going back to the use tables um I mean these would not be allowed in R1 R1A RS1 or
R3 correct mayor council member Carter. Yes. So co-living developments are um only allowed in the higher density residential um in general where like multifamily developments would be
allowed. Um where what the testifier was saying would come into play is that um we would be allowing in single and two family homes like roommates there to be a higher number of roommates like where there could only be four roommates
before there could be six now assuming that the building code allows for that. Okay. Okay. Thank you for clarifying that. And for all we know that's already happening, right? like I mean how do we so anyway I'm not going to go down that rabbit hole but uh thank you for
clarifying I guess I just wanted to make the point that like new developments would not be built um in residential areas either for the specific purpose of co-l livingiving if that makes sense. So thank you council member Nelson. Yeah,
thank you, mayor. Um, just add a point of clarification to council member Carter's observation about the zoning table and that this would not be allowed in single family residential. Um, what can happen now is you can own a home and you can have a
roommate. You what cannot happen under this is that you could buy a house and rent out all of the rooms as an investor, as a co-living situation in a single family neighborhood. You could not do that to my
understanding based on this that you could not have a business that rented out all of the rooms. You could own a house and let your friends live there and maybe they pay a little bit of rent. Am I understanding that correctly?
Mayor, Council Member Nelson, um the whole house could be rented out. Um, it would have to be, you know, long-term rentals. Um, but you could own a house and if it was large enough, rent
it to six different people and and without it being owner occupied. Is that correct? Yes. It in single family, you can do that now today. You can do it for four. No, you can do that with four people. Sorry, Mayor. Council
member Nelson. Thank you. Additional questions on that one. Council member Rivas. Yeah, I'm just curious. Um, this is only allowed on single family homes, right? Or is it allowed in apartment buildings as well?
And then the only reason I'm asking this question, if I may add this, I learned recently [Music] um I'm going to kind of reserve the the re how I learned about this, but the there was some people renting an
apartment and they subleas it to other people and then uh this this uh sub lees uh had some trouble. with the property manager and they actually changed the
lock uh on the apartment and uh you know it created a a a problem that I I I was I was discussing it just yesterday with a social worker uh because the person that was living there and got kicked out by the property owner
was a person that needed the housing and what I'm afraid of is that there there are people out there that will be taking advantage of this by subleasasing uh properties that they're renting and
put the people that are actually in need in a situation that that could be detrimental to them. Uh and I'm just basing this opinion on what I learned recently um in this particular situation. It was kind of sad that these people had to
force themselves into the property and then there were a lot of ramifications for the individuals because they had broken into the property that they were actually paying to live in, but they got kicked out by the property manager since the apartment wasn't leased to them. It
wasn't on their name. It was Council Member Rivas, I I I don't believe this the changes here, I don't believe affect subleasasing at all. I think that has to do with individual that has to do with individual properties whether or not they allow sub my the only reason I'm saying all this is because I have a
question to do we allow that somebody to lease an apartment and subleasase it to somebody else and then this could happen to people living there. I I don't believe we have any city ordinances regarding subleasasing. I think it's dependent on the individual private property that is owned whether or not
they allow subleasasing. Is it in the individual? I mean, I I'm just afraid that these people are not being protected. And the mere the one reason that we claim that we're trying to do this uh uh affordable housing is to help people in need. And and to me,
in my humble opinion, this is not being done properly because the the people's job leasing properties are taking the chance of being kicked out by the property owners at any time if they deem to be to do so. Are we protecting them from that? And and council member, if we wanted to look at the issue of
subleasasing, we could do it in the future. That's not part of this ordinance that we're discussing tonight. But I have a question. They I mean practically what I am hearing is that this ordinance allows subleasasing. I correct me if I'm wrong though, but that's what I just understood that if if
I rent a house, I can rent to six different individuals after I rent that house on my name. That is that is that the correct uh uh assumption that I'm making here or am I wrong? Mayor, council member Rivas.
Um if the person buys the house, yes, I mean I I don't think that's necessarily considered subleasasing. No, it does not. Um planning manager planning manager Johnson, I don't know if you have a better answer to that. I I I think you
are correct, Miss Hesbach. I mean, if if a person buys and owns a home, they can rent it out. But there we have no I don't think there's any reference in this ordinance to someone renting a room and then subleasasing a room. I don't think it addresses that in any way, shape, or form
or a house by that or a house or a room in a house. And again, if we if we want to have that conversation sometime in the future about whether or not subleasasing is needs to be controlled or if there's examples of uh That's not my point, though. So, I'm just trying to find out whether this ordinance allows people to
do that. I I mean, if I rent a house, let's say I'm not I don't buy it. I rent it and then I rent the other rooms and I allowed to do that through this. Mayor Mayor, council member Reva. So, I think I think we're uh maybe conflating two separate issues. One is that the the
city code establishes occupancy restrictions uh for all dwellings. But this other layer that we're not discussing or talking about tonight is that there are private decisions made by private parties for the maximum number of people they're willing to rent a home to. For example, based on the number of
bedrooms or an apartment to um if some subleasasing is happening in violation of the initial lease, then that is a private civil action that the government is not really party to would be my understanding. I mean, I I welcome the city attorney's view on that, but um it's really a matter between two private
properties that gets resolved in a private um uh situation. All right. That's that's the clarification I needed. I just wanted to know if if it was allowed to happen that way. Is I mean, and just to clarify one previous point that was discussed by council
member Nelson. I think I was the own worst one of me on this because when we were originally talking about this topic in study sessions, we were kind of uh utilizing the terminology of co-living in lowdensity residential environments. That's already allowed. Um it's allowed as roommates. It's been allowed for a long period of time. Um it's just that I
was trying to use it as a concept to help people drive or understand uh the broader concept of co-l livingiving because it's not a common dwelling type here in the Twin Cities marketplace. Um, so I I think I got myself in a little bit of trouble by referring it to that as akin to, but in effect it's just a
roommate situation. Um, there was Well, yeah, I think I added to the confusion and I apologize. Thank you, Council Member Delisandro. Thank you, Mr. uh, Mayor. I I I understood this. So, just to try to see if I'm back on track here,
I understood that we were what we were reviewing today had two components to it. One was for situations that already exist today like the ability to rent a house to people. Um the number of people that you can rent the house to um who are unaffiliated by
relationship is going from four to six. That's it. That's the change that's related. That's one change that we're being asked to address. It doesn't change the rental rules. It doesn't change the environmental health rules. It doesn't change any of the other things. It just says if you if you have
a house and you want to rent it out, you used to be able to rent it to up to four un unrelated individuals. Now you can rent it to up to six, assuming you have enough space for that because the rules of space still apply. Okay. The the second one, if I understand it, is we're
putting in a new type of building you can build called a co-living development unit building. and that has a series of codes that we're trying to implement. They're not related to each other other than the definition of
family applies in both cases. Do I have that right? I'm just at this point I just want to make sure I understand what we're trying to do here. I I think you've summed that up correctly Alessandro. Fantastic. Um then um based on what I've heard, I'm fine with the
opportunity here. Um I would agree that we could make some additional changes on the parking and other things like that. Um, but I'd like to at least get something on the books and then we can kind of maybe come back and revisit it. Sounds like there might be some other options maybe around subleasasing that we could look at and stuff like that. So
maybe we get this done and then we can come back and pull some of those things forward and and take a look at a future date if that works for everybody. Would you like me to make the motion? Well, I see. Council member Oh, would you like to make the motion, sir? Make the motion. Make the motion. You seemed very excited to make the
motion. No, no, I'm not. No, just I want somebody to make it. Council, is there any is there any further discussion on this or any further questions? Council member MU. Thank you, mayor. Uh I just want to say I've been going back and forth uh with this and I'm going to be in the camp that I think we're probably 20 years too early on this um and I
prefer us to be, you know, 10 years out. So, um I'm not going to be uh supporting this one. Thank you, Council Member. Any additional comments? Council member Lman, I'll try to be quick here. Do we need to extend this or? Yes, we will need to extend. We've got time. Okay. All right. So moving I'll be I'll be
brief here. So I just want to let um Mayor I want to let Mike list know your concerns with group homes are heard and we are concerned about that and we're working with you on that and from my understanding from what we're doing here uh that we've got more control over this
situation. And so just know that uh if we go down this direction, if this council does that, that uh uh that we'll be able to to do that and I will just do a ditto on the rest of your comments that you made for where I stand on this. Thanks, council member. Any additional questions,
comments? Council member Delisandro. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm just going to try to find it [Laughter] now among my many, many things. Okay. Uh, I am making a motion to adopt an ordinance establishing a definition of
co-living unit and co-living development and standards for each removing congregate living facility and boarding house uses from the use table and then modifying the definition of family in the city zoning ordinance thereby amending chapters 94 and 21 of the city code. Second motion by council member
Dalisando, second by council member Lman to adopt an ordinance establishing a definition of co-living unit and co-living development and standards for each. No further council discussion on this. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I opposed. No. Motion
carries six, excuse me, five to two with council members Rivas and council member Mua opposing. Council member Dalisandre. I am moving that we adopt a resolution directing summary publication of the ordinance establishing definition of co-living unit and co-living development
and standards for each removing congregate living facility and boarding house uses from the use table and modifying the definition of family in the city's zoning ordinance thereby amending chapters 91 14 and 21 of the city code second motion by council member Dalisandre second by council member
Carter for summary publication of item 4.2 two. No further council discussion on this. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Motion carries. Oh, yeah. Sorry, never mind. Sorry. Motion carries. 70. Thank you very much uh Miss Hesbach
for the presentation and for wrapping this up for us. It's greatly appreciated. Thanks, Mr. Johnson. Also, and and Miss uh Mr. Mayor, we do we I I do want to talk about group homes. So, if we have time in the in the in the city business to come back around to that to the other council business, I'd love to just bring that back up if
that's possible. Uh, which brings us to another point because we are going to have to extend now until at least 10:00. Understood. Uh, so I'm going to make a motion right now that we extend our uh hours from 9:00 to 10:00 to try and complete the agenda items that we have on our before us tonight. Second motion
and a second uh by council member Dallas to extend until 10 o'clock tonight. No further council discussion. All in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Opposed? Motion carries 70. Moving on to item five, our organizational business. Item 5.1. This
is to accept a donation and approve an updated with Bloomington remembers veterans and an update on the Nine Mile Creek Corridor Renewal Project. Who's going to kick us kick us off? Mayor, I think it might be me. Ah, Miss Mandershide. I think we had a
conversation about this. So, um we have been on um having these conversations over the years and we have moved through a couple different locations and um a couple of weeks maybe months ago um we were having a conversation about um the
site uh over by the parking lot and um couple I felt like it was maybe hours or days later um in a conversation among staff somebody suggested moving it over to Harrison Park. Uh, and we we started
having a lot of internal conversations with um staff about whether that would be possible. Um, it seemed like it was going to be possible. It seemed like it would resolve a lot of the financial challenges of the other sites, very close by, a beautiful setting, um, and
might be able to make the thing go um because that's what we know we all wanted to happen. And so we reached out to the Bloomington remembers veterans folks and um they had a lot of internal conversations and we created a lot of momentum and energy around moving it to
a new site and uh pulling together what I would call sort of the the final uh round in the the third corner of a of a of the circle here uh and getting very close to the finish line. So, what you
have before you tonight is anou. Yeah, I know. Made me mess up that metaphor. I was envisioning a track and we're kind of coming around the third. Uh and uh and so everyone knows what I mean. We're getting close. And uh and so uh tonight we have theou uh
before you all. And in thatou is a a couple of small edits uh to adjust the milestones that are in the document, but then also to amend it to reflect the the the final site over at Harrison Park. Um staff have been working diligently with
BRV and with the arch uh the landscape architects and uh working on ways to integrate it into the NineM Creek project. As you all know, this is one of the uh Bloomington Forward projects. Uh and it's just a great addition to the
project. A lot of the a lot of the work is um was already underway as a part of the Nimal Creek um redevelopment and or modern can't remember the turn of phrase, the update. The restoration, thank you. Uh, and so it's just a lot of
natural synergies that create a lot of efficiencies and and frankly a beautiful setting for the um for the memorial as well as achieving a lot of the accessibility and and related goals. So, I think it's a win-win win-win-win. And um I know we've got some folks from BRV
tonight here as well that would um certainly probably welcome the opportunity if if it's so available um to address you all. And then um I'm pretty sure that they have um something that they'd like to give the city as well. And I'll let them say what that is. Uh and then after we do all that um
then I the staff are wanting to give a NM Creek corridor renewal project update as well. Very good. Thank you for that summary, Miss Mandershide. Appreciate it. Welcome to the podium uh Kate Blessing and Melissa Wor Prasad talk about the Bloomington Remembers Veterans
Memorial. Good evening. Welcome. Super. Thank you very much, mayor, city council. Um, thank you, city attorney, for uh laying out a lot of that timeline and as as you mentioned, anou has a nice description of all of those things. Um, just wanted to reiterate all of those
things really. Um, we are really excited about the new possibility of Harrison Park and then and and are truly um excited to to have that as an opportunity. Um when we were exploring the most recent site when we came and talked with you and looking at the
parking lot area um while it had great visibility, it really lacked um some of that tranquil peaceful space and was going to need a lot of resources to create that through barrier walls and landscaping and so forth. Um so um we were realizing that that just wasn't
going to be possible when the opportunity for Harrison Park came forward. Um that was really a a win-win for all of us. So, we are are really excited about that. We have a timeline of things we've done. We've we've come to you before and and given you the timeline. You've lived the timeline with
us. So, I maybe won't hit all the points with you again. Um, but I think uh you know, a couple of key things. We're really proud of the $350,000 uh deed, Minnesota deed grant that we secured with the help of our representatives here in Bloomington. And um also uh just really excited to be a
part of the NM corridor project. I had made a little list of of the things that I think it offers and I'll just hit those for you really quickly. Um it is got great visibility to Old Chakapi Road. It's a central location in the city. Easy accessibility, open space for our community gathering for future
events. Um there's a lot of daily foot traffic happening as a premier spot to enter into the Nimal Park corridor. And um and it's peaceful and it's tranquil and that's really um some of the things that we were most excited to to see that it be. So, thank you for the opportunity
and thank you to the city um and staff who have been working with us closely to to really explore that. So, uh we also wanted to give a an update on our project revenue. Um so, as I mentioned before, we have secured the Minnesota
Deed Grant. Uh we are giving that first $100,000 from our coffers, our our fundraising efforts uh this evening. And um we marked it as number one because we wanted to be sure to uh acknowledge that there will be additional dollars coming. Um and then of course the wonderful gift
we were given by the city and all of you. So thank you for that. Um and then we have 24,000 right now raised in dog tag sales. And just as a reminder, the dog tag sales are uh the avenue where a veteran can add their name to the memorial through an oversized dog tag shape um which will hang on the
memorial. And you can kind of see those um depicted in that rendering there. Um, and so we have they are $350 each and those tags will be sold uh now and into the future and will raise revenue first and foremost for helping with the building and getting those final
elements in place, but it will also help with maintenance for future. So, as you recall in our previous uh conversation, you had started off a maintenance fund by by putting $50,000 there for future maintenance. This will then help to fund that in the future. So, it's not only
beautiful at day one, it's beautiful at year 52. So, that is that's the goal with those things. And then, um, we wanted to just reassure everyone that our work continues in that fund quest for more fundraising and things. So, we'll be going back to previous
businesses and talking with new individuals and businesses. We still have a list. We're working through those dog sake sales that I mentioned who are still very much at play. um we will not be charging a cost for the um prisoner of war, missing in action, killed in action. Those will be
covered by the American Legion, which is a really wonderful um offer that they've given us early on in the process. We did just hear that we've secured the Minnesota Legacy Grant uh for $15,000 specific for uh veterans projects. So, we're very excited about that. Um shout
out to uh Representative Elkins for uh letting us know that that was out there for us. And then um Fran uh Stockhau on our committee is a member of the Daughters of the American Revolution and has been involved in helping us to write a grant for that and we're waiting to hear on the final decisions there. So
great things up ahead. I'll turn it over to Melissa. All right. So um we've kind of covered already some of the elements and things so I don't want to um keep repeating too much. But if you look at the memorial design from left to right and for those of you that have seen our design before, it's basically been
picked up as it was going to be out here and then laid um at Harrison Park. And we're able to have all the elements, the same flow, um the same symbolism, especially as you walk in and then go. We have a path for the veteran and then a path for the family. Um we'll have the
uh military crests as you can see on the um as you're walking in on the right hand side. The family path is on the other side and then in between are the armatures where the symbolic dog tags will be hanging and then it leads to the flag pole and then it moves down into
our reflection area for with a veterans light. So I just want to call out that one of the elements that the veterans when we were doing the design process and coming up with the themes was reflection and really wanting to have that special place for remembrance. So, I personally am very excited that I've
walked in Harrison Park numerous times and I think just not having to worry about the railroad track, not having to worry about the cars, it'll really truly be that special, you know, really reflective place. Um, so I'm we're very excited about this option and then to
have the foot traffic as Kate mentioned from visitors as the, you know, main entry point into Nine Mile Park. Um, I think it's just going to be great. Amen. And then um we'll talk a little bit just briefly too. Um so we've talked about
the um symbolic dog tags and what we were excited about when Leo Dailyaly was selected as the architect was that they had this idea to have a QR code um and they were originally going to be on the dog tags but we've realized that would be kind of crazy to try to maintain and make sure everybody had the right QR
code. But what that will do is um link to a digital library of veteran stories. So that really meets our goal for education where visitors um we're thinking of student groups, you know, coming and looking at a dog tag and looking at someone's years of service
saying, "Oh, okay. 1943 to 1945 Army, what was World War II like?" And then being able to click on that, click into that digital library and read those stories that you're not going to necessarily find in history books and to just really get that different perspective. And so those can be told
either by the veterans themselves if they're comfortable or if the family members have photos or a short video they want to post um in addition to a written narrative. So um we're very excited about that and I think that's a very unique feature that you won't find at other memorials. Um so we're very
excited about that piece of it and we've been working um so thank you to the city clerk's office. We've been working with them um and Amy Cheney and her team on the Semifi software that we're hoping to be able to use um to be able to keep track and record those stories. So, absolutely. Yeah. So, just maybe to say thank you to
the city staff, Elizabeth Tollesman, Melissa Manderside, Amy Cheney, Anne Catri. Absolutely. Um Renee Clark, just everybody that's been Jamie, I can't think of Jamie's last name in the city clerk's office, but it's just been really great. Jamie Hansen. So anyway, just a great big thank you to everybody that's really helped us get to this
point. Absolutely. Well, and thank you for six, seven years of work on this. It's uh right. It we can bring up that timeline again. Um it it shows that it shows your dedication to this. It really does and
really speaks volumes to um who you are and what you're trying to accomplish as well as the veterans involved here. Kirker here. Um and and all all that have been involved in it. So, thank you for that. It is greatly appreciated. Thank you so very much. Absolutely. Council, any questions?
Council member Mua and then Council Member Lman. Thank you, Mayor. Um and I just want to confirm with staff there are no major uh utilities or anything under this location that we're going to start digging and find that's going to pause this because I do not want for them to come back again and we have to
go through this whole thing again. And so I just want to for the record confirm that we've done our due diligence. Thank you. Third third time's a charm. Council member Lman, I'll be brief here. Uh I just wanted to since this this had conceptually started back with Vern
Wilcox wanted to see this thing happen and all the way down to the work of uh uh Councilman Dellesandro and Carter. want to just thank you guys for your your hard work of getting this all the way to the Well, yeah, I did some work, too, but you guys you did the heavy lifting. Um, and the last thing that I
wanted to mention is that uh um coincidentally today the the Rotary uh gave you guys a thousand bucks. And the reason why I mentioned that is as I vote on this, I want to make sure residents know um because I as the president did that. Uh I had the priv that there's no
uh conflict of interest here. um isn't going to change my vote at all in terms of how this would have been done, but I just want to be sure the folks knew for transparency reasons. Council, any additional questions? Thank you. Well, you you mentioned the $100,000
coming from Bloomington remembers veterans. We want to thank you for that so very much. We want to thank you guys for that. And uh I think uh to commemorate the the thing, let's I think we need a picture. What do you guys think? Okay. Okay. Yeah.
[Laughter] Yeah, we didn't bring we didn't bring a big check. Dorian, you come up. Kirk, come on up here. Come on up. Council, get together in the background here. [Music] Okay, I think yeah, can see everyone.
Okay. Y [Applause] Thank you. after 9:00 and we're still looking good. Now, let's do a uh an update from our city staff on the NM Creek quarter
renewal project. Oh, I'm sorry. We we I'm sorry. Uh do you want to do that after or we uh council? I would look for a motion to um where is it now? To accept the donation from the Bloomington Remembers
Veteran Veterans Group as listed and to approve the second amended and restated memorandum of understanding with Bloomington Remembers Veterans. So moved. Motion from Council Member Carter, second from Council Member Dalisandro to uh accept the donation from Bloomington
Remembers Veterans and to send a big thank you to all of our friends in the Bloomington Remembers Veterans organizations. No further council discussion on this. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Motion carries. 70. Now we can go on to our staff presentation. Thank you so
very much for your patience tonight. Renee Clark. Good evening. Welcome. Good evening, Mayor Busussy, members of council. I am here tonight with Jen Desrude from our project manager, and Bob Simons from engineering, our Bloomington project manager, and some
staff in the audience. Brian Greo from water resources, Dave Hansen from um natural resources and park maintenance, and then our director Anne Catri. We will um provide a background on the design process so far, review the
proposed improvements. Bob will come with the outreach and engagement and next steps. No action on this item is requested tonight. We'll take your questions and feedback at the end. We are here to present the schematic
design process. We started with um pre-esign taking a look at technical details hearing from the community priorities and opportunities. We're having our first look at the design details
um after that review with the community that concluded last December where we heard um themes that support environmental restoration opposing bike trails, improved accessibility, um improving infrastructure, wayfinding and educational signage. At that last
check-in, we concluded that uh bikes for trails is not feasible as part of this project. And that is the direction we moved with the proposed improvements. We've categorized those improvements in three buckets on the screen. Natural resources, trails, bridges, and Moyer
Park. We'll cover the improvements in detail um according to the map on the right in the four sections of the park. And I will start with Moyer Park. Um, which is one of the two accessible routes proposed to the lower trails
along the creek. We'll be reducing mode turf, increasing natives. There'll be a walking loop, adjusting the disc golf course, reducing the number of holes to improve safety. An open air shelter will replace the existing shelter and
building. an inclusive playground nature themed combined with nature play um is proposed and that design will start um soon with the first community engagement planned for June looking at playground
options there. All right, thanks Renee. So I'm going to walk through each of the areas at a high level. Um, so Renee already went through the Moyer Park improvements and in all of the areas there's improvements to habitat
restoration, tree thinning, invasive species management, and tree care and preservation along the whole corridor. Um, in this section one, the areas in purple are repaved trails. This is north of 106th Street. And we had heard from the community that paved north of 106th
Street was preferred and unpaved south of 106th Street was the preferred um path surface for that area. Um throughout the corridor we're doing stream bank restoration and um we're doing water quality improvements, bluff stability, um and we're doing some
things with bridges I'll get to later. Um in this area, this is kind of the north part of area two. We're looking at a couple of different options still when it comes to um this area just south of Harrison Park. The the creek
used to have more of a meander. You can see in the picture on the right side. Um and it's straightened out over time. Um we believe it's probably due to ex extensive storm events that have just kind of pushed it through in a straight way. Um, so this area would be a great
opportunity to either have the creek remander or to move the trail to get out of the way of the creek. So we're looking at all of those options right now um and studying them, modeling them, and and getting more information to make the right decision for the creek. Um, so
it's trail realignment opportunities and some creek potential creek realignment opportunities that we're looking at in this area. In area 2B, which is kind of south of there, there's an existing lowhead dam and we're proposing for that to remain. It was installed in the 1990s. It's
functioning just fine. It's in good condition with likely no maintenance in the near term or even in in the we just don't see any need to remove or replace it. Um, and to remove it would be a cost that when it's working and functioning did not make sense to the team. So, we
are proposing to keep that dam in place. for bridge five which is further downstream. There has been um that that is one of the bridges that's below the flood elevation and last summer we saw sediment and debris building up on that bridge. So this is an opportunity to raise up that bridge so that we can
eliminate those or not reduce in the future. In area three, this is south of 106th Street. Um we are looking at keeping the stairs that are from the parking lot down to the um now un
continuing to be an unpaved surface. Um and then bridge 8 is one that is in the picture there. Um the abutments are exposed. The creek has been continuing to move into that area and and it's one that is one that needs to be replaced. So, we're looking at realigning that to
make it um perpendicular to the creek and and protecting the bridge and the creek in the future. And then the last area is closer to the Minnesota River, unpaved trail through here. We're still looking at options for that causeway and
improvements. There's some ideas. We could raise that up a little bit. Uh we could make larger culverts. Um there's we talked about a boardwalk last time. we can't boardwalk the whole thing, but there's some maybe potential for some shorter boardwalks. So, we're still evaluating some options there because we
did hear um from the public that it it floods all the time and we want to have access to that. So, um I don't think 100% of the time access will ever happen, but we're trying to increase the number of days that it's possible. All right. Thank you, Jen. All right. And we had our third phase of engagement
here just recently at the end of March. I held over at the in the rehearsal hall. Once again, similar to our other phases of engagement, it was very well attended. We had just over 200 folks attend tight quarters for the period of time we were in there, but it went really well. It was very well attended and we had great feedback. We had our Let's Talk online uh Let's Talk
Bloomington online page where we accepted feedback. All that's included in your packets. And then we're also in the process of putting together a story map with all of this information, kind of an upto-date of where we're at and putting that on our website as well. some of the top themes that we heard from that last round of engagement. Um,
you can see there one of them being a question that we asked was about the stairs that Jen had mentioned down off of 106 that are currently closed and if folks would like us to replace those and you can see from the the DOT exercise that they were definitely in favor of that. Otherwise, just an overall excitement for the natural pre natural
resource preservation efforts that we're showing that we're proposing and then an overall just enthusiasm for the the different uh types of recreation that we're allowing for all ages and just an enthusiasm for the community engagement piece which is very nice for the staff to hear that they were happy about the engagement that's been occurring with
the project. We also did receive some feedback outside of here in regards to Jen had mentioned those few trail realignment options that that we were looking at. We're looking at the technical data piece of that now and we're going to base it off the technical data and the the benefits to the ecology
in the area and we'll come back at a later date when we're getting closer to 60% with what our thoughts are on that. So, in regards to project budget and funding, when we came for our last update at the early December time frame, we had some target investment ranges at that time. We're getting towards that
30% level now. So, we're starting to hone in a little bit more on the dollar amounts for the three different buckets that we've been talking about. The dollars that you see are all of the costs. They're construction, their the soft cost, the engineering administration costs, as well as a a fairly large contingency as well. So, we
have a few different funding sources. As you all know, we have the local option sales tax of $20 million going towards the project. We also have our payment within our pavement management program. We have park trails funding that we use for any park trail improvements within our parks. One example, Bryant Trepaw Parks, we did last year um and we're
finishing this year with park and trail improvements around those parks. It'd be similar funding to that. Moyer and Central Park are the next on the list for that funding. And then our storm water utility funding for anything specific to that. We other potential sources. Nine Creek wershed district. Uh we had some great news from the district here at their April board meeting. They
approved an amendment to their their water water management plan to include this project. Um and we'll be going back to them this summer um to actually order the project and uh start work on a co-op agreement as we get towards 60% plans and then also looking at other grant opportunities as well.
Um, in regards to operations and maintenance for the project, um, with our ecological management plan, we'll be putting together an operations and maintenance plan, estimating out yearly costs for roughly the next 25 years. Uh, that that'll be brought forward at a later date as well. We have a few
different types of maintenance components. We have the natural resource component which within the project when it comes to the upland restoration, the native pling planning restoration. There'll be a 3 to 5year establishment period included in the project contract that the contractor will be responsible to maintain. And then we'll just have
the ongoing maintenance that we've been doing, our park maintenance crews have been doing when it comes to the trails and bridges and park buildings and things of that nature. And also definitely looking at some volunteer opportunities. We've had some individuals and some groups reach out about partnering for maintenance as we move forward. So, we're definitely interested in that and we'll be looking
into that. Next steps, we get into the permitting process. One of our next steps is the environmental assessment worksheet or the EAW. And this basically lays out the facts of the impacts for the project. We'll be looking at things such as permitting needs, uh, historic
properties, land use, surface waters, uh, wildlife impacts, things of that sort. Um, and that'll be put into an EAW document that'll be noticed to the public, and it goes to many different agencies. for example, the DNR, uh, MPCA, Indian Affairs Council, state archaeologists to get their input on the
impacts for the project. So, that'll be one of our next steps. And then from there will come our permitting process at the federal, state, and local level. So, with that, our next steps, um, we went to the NM Creek District back in early April for this similar update. We also went to the park and
sustainability commissions with this similar update. We're here tonight. We're going to be moving towards our 60% plans as we move in the the May through August time frame as I mentioned working on permits. uh uh the more near-term May June time frame we'll be working on a vendor selection for the Moyer Park
components and then also individual engagement for Moyer Park and then uh um also as I mentioned later this summer we'll be going back to the district to order the project Nal Creek wershed district to order the project and then also start working on a cooperative agreement with them and then we'll move
into the fall at 90% plans uh end of 2025 early 2026 finalizing plans and then moving forward with uh advertising and awarding a project to begin here in the spring of 2026. And thank you. That's all we had for you tonight. So, we'll open it up to
any any questions you might have. Well, thank you. This is exciting. Moving right along. This is good stuff. And still about a year out from breaking ground from digging into it, but I know all the work that has gone into it thus far and all the work that still to come and uh looking forward to it. So, well
done. Council questions, comments. Council member Dlesandro. This is exciting. Mr. Mayor, I agree with you. Couple questions. Um, regarding the creek mandering or the trail alignment, um, does the planning, I assume the planning includes, you can confirm for me. Um, if if if it was storms and
things like that that kind of made the thing the way it is, we are going to have more of those with climate change. What's the process there that you're using to kind of model the increase in that volatility, I guess? Yeah. So, we are using a storm water model to um look at different
storms and different um you know 100-year storm events. And I think doing those iterations, we'll see what the impacts will be, the velocities um when we if we were to move the meander the creek around, it's just taking a longer path and it'll likely slow it down. And
then to your point, what's to keep it from going back is something that we need to evaluate further. Okay, great. Glad to know that that's included. Appreciate it. Um, regarding the open air building, um, I know that I've used that building at Moyer Park today, the inside, especially for like staging when
you have like, you know, potlucks and other things like that that you might have at community events. Um, what what amenities that are currently in that building today are going to come back and also can you just define for us like what the restroom situation will be there at Moer Park?
Mayor Busussy, Council Member Delandro, Council details to be determined. Um, an open air um, shelter for approximately 100 to 150 people with restrooms that are
accessible. Um, more of those details about specific amenities um, we can bring back for discussion or a a proposed um, building structure. We're just not there yet. Okay. And but that that do I have this right? There are three buildings there now and we'd be
going down to one building that is kind of a combo of things. Is that what I'm understanding? There's a park building enclosed building and then there's the shelter, the open air picnic shelter. Aren't there two of those? Do I have that wrong? Is there just the one?
Believe there's just the one. Okay. So, we're going from two buildings to one building and you'll kind of push them together. Yep. And not a building, an open air shelter. Understood. Okay, great. That's helpful. The last question I have is the permit process that you've identified here does not seem to be
taking very long and I am great. I think that is awesome. I also don't believe you. Help me understand because I know that this is just a terrible terrible part of the world that we have to do this stuff. What's the what's the reason for the optimism? It's not optimistic. We we are starting
right now with permitting and we're expecting that it'll take the better part of nine months to get it all done. So we are working with the different agencies starting to introduce the concepts particularly to the NM Creek wershed district having multiple meetings kind of phase walking them through the process. Most of the per
permitting agencies won't want to look or respond to anything till we're at 90%. And so we are having premeings. We're planning to have premeings with them as well. It will take we're anticipating a nine-month permitting process. Okay. So, so the process that I that you had on your timeline that had
the word permits in it was you guys getting to a place where people can be reviewing it, but it wasn't that permits were going to be done by then. Um, permits, we need permits done before we break ground. So, that's that's the goal. I understand now. Thank you. I was very impressed and I was like, what do
you know that we don't know? Perfect. Okay, those are my questions. Thank you. Thank you, council member. Council member Rivas somewhat a followup to her question uh on the creek realignment. Um if you did that, how how much of a of the canopy
would would have to be removed? I just noticed that the the refuge just did something to Ike's uh creek and they had a big swath of trees removed. But I I mean it's something similar to that will
have to be done or or to a lesser scale. I know it's much bigger here than over there, but so how much of the canopy will have to be removed to do the me the meandering natural like it used to be? Yeah, that we're not exactly sure because we haven't decided which route
we'll go. We'll have to evaluate that when we're doing the more detailed calculation. So, we're still digging in. Um we're still collecting data. We're still having our surveyors go out there and and get um the topographic data so that we can make more of an informed decision. So, there will be a cheese,
but I don't show it. Okay, I'm really happy about this. It would be really nice to see this final. Yeah. Well, thank you. Additional questions, council. Very good. When do we expect to hear
from you again? We will expect to be back to council late summer, early fall with that 60% and new cost estimate. Very good. We look forward to it. Keep up the good work. Thank you much. Thank you, council. We're going to move on to item
5.2, our city council policy and issue update. And what I'm going to ask council, I'm I'm going to get through our listening sessions, but I think if everybody could uh maybe hold on to any ideas or any discussion points until our next meeting because we still need to go into close session here yet tonight.
Yep. So, uh, if I if I could indulge you, if you could indulge me in that way, uh, I think we might be able to get out of here a little bit sooner. Uh, as I said, I recapping actually two listening sessions. One that we had last Monday night as part of our work session
and then, uh, this Monday night as well. Last Monday night, we heard from three different folks. We heard from uh, Parker Jeenie, I'm trying to Jenny, I was trying to remember how to pronounce her name. She's Bloomington resident. I spoke about her concerns at Creekide and especially uh accessibility concerns.
John Hmaker Maker spoke at length about budget items and housing and permits and so on. He had a number of concerns that he brought forward and followed up on some of his comments that he made earlier uh a couple of weeks ago or months ago. And Lisa Watson provided a brief update about a proposed new QuickTrip project that would be at uh
94th and the freeway on the uh northwest the northeast side, northeast quadrant there. And uh so she provided an introduction to that project and I'm guessing we'll probably hear more from her uh as as that project moves forward. Tonight uh on the 28th we heard
from six I believe six or seven folks. We heard from uh uh let me see we heard from Elizabeth Camron Camron about uh traffic changes around the new community health and wellness center and her concerns as a neighbor about uh what uh might the impacts be. We heard from Gary
Vig uh had concerns about Creekide changes being made there and advocating for keeping Creek Side as a senior center. We heard also from uh Dave Hogy and he had a uh uh he's had cars towed
from his maintenance facility and had had concerns about that, understandable concerns. and we uh agreed that we were going to try and res resolve that and and make sure that environmental health and our our our legal staff talked to him and we got to a resolution about the cars that were being towed and and the wise in the house and and make sure that
we could um we could uh make our way through that in a in a positive manner. And then we heard from Sue Weberg who also had questions about uh Creekide and what the uses might be and where some of the u different programming might go. And I I appreciate council member
Dalisandro for for answering some of those questions and providing some context for folks who may not really uh have the full picture as to what exactly is happening and and how that's all happening. Uh and then we heard from Rob Winsek who um brought forward concerns about parking by his uh in his
neighborhood, especially as it relates to a an apartment building. We'd heard from Rob in the past and we've got to follow up again in terms of uh with his uh the concerns that he has and what the possible solutions might be and what those impacts of the solutions might be whether it's uh uh preventing parking on
both sides of the street or one or the other sides of the street or however it might work. So, uh the last couple of weeks a lot of new faces once again and it was good to talk to a lot of these folks and that is the uh council listening session uh update for the past two meetings that we have had. That is
all I have. I'll turn very quickly to Miss Haden to see if she has anything. And council, if you if you're okay, if you'll indulge me, if you could kind of hold on to anything because we do have one more item on our agenda this evening, and I would like to get to that and make sure that we get out of here before 10:00. So, that will be good.
Then we will move on to item 5.3. This is a close session for uh a discussion about the property acquisition for the fire station. As we have talked about in the past, uh city councils are allowed to close their sessions for a variety of reasons. not many but a couple of different things including uh evaluation
of personnel and negotiations and this would be one of those things and uh what we will do is as we I appreciate everybody we we're clearing the council chambers now we will adopt a resolution to go into close session we will have the discussion and we're going to stick
to the topic we have to stick to the topic we will come out of the closed session uh we won't be making any decisions or votes in the closed session we will come out of the closed session and if there is any votes to take. We will take votes then and then we will adjourn again in close session after
we're done there. Uh, everybody clear on that? What? That did I say close session? I apologize. We're going to adjourn in open session. I apologize. It's it's getting late again. All right. Everybody clear on that? So, with that, uh, council, we have a resolution. I would look for a motion to adopt the
resolution to go into close session. Motion by council member Dallasro, second by council member Rivas to adopt the resolution moving into close session. No further council discussion on this. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Motion carries 70. We're going to move into close session.
[Music] [Music] [Music]
Heat. Heat. Heat. [Music] Heat. Heat. Heat. [Music] [Music]
[Music] Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [Music]
[Music]
Okay. Heat. Heat. [Music]
[Music] Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [Music]
[Music] Heat. Heat.
[Music]
[Music] Heat. [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] Heat. Heat.
[Music] Heat. Heat. Heat.
[Music] [Music]
comp and we are back in open session. So, council, I would uh I would entertain a motion to direct staff to enter negotiations with a not to exceed price as discussed in close session with the property as discussed in close session. So moved. A motion by council
member Mua, second by council member Dalisandro. Miss Mandershide, is that a correct uh motion for us? Uh mayor and members, I assume that you mean by dollar amount. You also mean the parameters that we discussed in closing. Yes, we did. Yep. Exactly. Everyone clear on that? Very good. We've got a
motion and a second. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Opposed? Motion carries 70. And that council completes our business for this evening. So I would look for a motion to app uh adjurnn this evening. So moved. Second. Motion by council member Lman, second by council member Mu
to adjurnn. All in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Motion carries 70. Thanks for the discussion tonight. Council. Thank you to staff. Thanks very much and thanks to our members of the public who participated this evening. Everybody have a good rest of your week.
[Music]