. GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO THIS MAY 21ST MEETING OF THE BLOOMINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION. THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADVISES THE CITY COUNCIL ON DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, LONG
RANGE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION ISSUES. SOME ITEMS THAT COME BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION ARE STUDY ITEMS WHERE WE WILL NOT TAKE FORMAL ACTION WHILE OTHER ITEMS BEFORE US ARE PUBLIC HEARINGS WHERE WE WILL TAKE
FINAL ACTION WHEN WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING WE DO ENCOURAGE THE PUBLIC TO TESTIFY. YOU CAN DO SO HERE AT CITY HALL BY JOINING US IN THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS. YOU CAN ALSO DO SO ONLINE BY FOLLOWING THE INSTRUCTIONS
THAT ARE ON YOUR SCREEN ON SOME ITEMS THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS FINAL DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY AND OTHER ITEMS. THE CITY COUNCIL WILL MAKE THE FINAL DECISION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTS IN AN
ADVISORY CAPACITY. THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS MADE UP OF SEVEN VOLUNTEER RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON. EACH PLANNING COMMISSIONER HAS BEEN APPOINTED TO SERVE A THREE YEAR TERM WITH A TWO TERM LIMIT.
WE HAVE FIVE COMMISSIONERS HERE THIS EVENING SO WE DO HAVE A QUORUM. OUR FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS THIS EVENING IS THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. ALL RIGHTS.
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 . ITEM NUMBER ONE THIS EVENING IS IN REGARDS TO THE TELEGRAPH HILL OFFICE PARK REZONING ON
TELEGRAPH ROAD. MR. DYLAN PALMER IS HERE WITH A STAFF REPORT. VERY GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. I'M HERE TO PRESENT ITEM
NUMBER ONE ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA. SO THIS IS A OH, THERE IT GOES. ALL RIGHT. THIS IS A REZONING FOR THE TELEGRAPH HILL OFFICE PARK WHICH IS LOCATED IN THE FAR
NORTHWESTERN CORNER OF BLOOMINGTON. THIS IS LOCATED OFF OF BUSH LAKE ROAD AND 494 THIS IS A FOUR BUILDING OFFICE PARK. THERE ARE FOUR BUILDINGS THAT
ARE EACH ON THEIR OWN PARCEL AND THEN A FIFTH PARCEL WHICH IS COMPOSED OF THE PARKING LOTS AND THE COMMON AREAS AS YOU CAN SEE IN THIS MAP, ONE OF THOSE BUILDINGS 75 TELEGRAPH ROAD IS EXCLUDED FROM THIS REZONING AND I'LL
EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE LATER. ALL RIGHT. SO THE PROPOSALS THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO REZONE THE SITE FROM R ONE PD TO B ONE PD PLAN DEVELOPMENT. THE SITE IS CURRENTLY ZONED
FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES. OFFICES INCLUDING MEDICAL OFFICE ARE PERMITTED USE IN THE R ONE DISTRICT. THE SITE WAS INITIALLY PROPOSED TO BE A MULTIFAMILY CONDO COMPLEX.
THIS WAS BUILT AS PART OF THE SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS JUST TO THE SOUTH RHODE ISLAND CIRCLE AND TELEGRAPH ROAD. INITIALLY THERE WERE RESIDENTIAL GARAGES AND RESIDENTIAL UNITS THAT WERE
GOING TO BE BUILT HERE AND IN 1984 THE DEVELOPER DECIDED TO CHANGE THEIR MIND AND INSTEAD CONVERT THESE INTO OFFICE BUILDINGS AND THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AT THAT TIME THE REZONING TO B
ONE WOULD ALLOW FOR MORE PROSPECTIVE TENANTS TO LEASE THIS SPACE AND THEN BRING ANY NON CONFORMING USES AT THE SITE INTO COMPLIANCE. WE DON'T THINK THERE ARE ANY NON CONFORMING USES BUT IT'S
JUST KIND OF A COVER ANY LEGAL BASIS IS THERE THE REASON THAT 78 OF FIVE TELEGRAPH ROAD SO ONE OF THOSE FOUR OFFICE BUILDINGS IS EXCLUDED FROM THIS REZONING IS BECAUSE BOTH
THE CITY AND THE APPLICANT HAVE TRIED TO GET INTO CONTACT WITH THE OWNER OF THAT BUILDING AND UNFORTUNATELY WE HAVE BEEN UNSUCCESSFUL. I BELIEVE THERE WAS RECENTLY A CHANGE IN OWNERSHIP TO THAT BUILDING SO MAYBE SOMETHING TO
DO WITH THAT. THE 78 OR 5 PROPERTY WAS INCLUDED IN THE PUBLIC NOTICE AND IF THE OWNER DOES COME FORWARD BETWEEN NOW AND THE NOTICING FOR THE POTENTIAL
CITY COUNCIL MEETING THE OWNER CAN SIGN ON AND 75 CAN ALSO BE READ ZONE TO BE ONE. BUT AGAIN THAT'S ONLY IF THE OWNER OF THAT PROPERTY SIGNS ON THIS APPLICATION PRIOR TO
THE NOTICES GOING OUT. >> SO THIS IS THE EXISTING ZONING AND THE GUIDELINE ON THE LEFT IS THE ZONING THERE IT'S ZONED R1P PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING AROUND IT IS ALSO
ZONED R ONE PD IT'S GUIDED OFFICE AGAIN THIS WAS RE GUIDED BACK IN 1984 WHEN THE DEVELOPERS CHANGED THIS FROM RESIDENTIAL OVER TO OFFICE AND GUIDED LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO THE SOUTH AND CONSERVATION
TO THE EAST AND THEN THIS IS JUST A GRAPHIC SHOWING THE REZONING. >> SO AGAIN ON THE LEFT THERE IS THE CURRENT STATE WHERE IT'S OWN R ONE PD AND THEN THE RIGHT WHERE THE PROPOSAL TO
REZONE THIS TO BE ONE PD AND THEN THE KIND OF DONUT HOLE IN THE MIDDLE THERE OF 78 FIVE TELEGRAPH REMAINING AS R-1 PD SO THE OFFICE LAND USE
CATEGORY IT ALLOWS FOR PROFESSIONAL AND BUSINESS OFFICES AS WELL AS SOME LIMITED LIMITED ACCESSORY RETAIL AND RESTAURANT USES INTENDED TO SERVE THE BUILDING TENANTS. SO THINK LIKE A SMALL COFFEE SHOP OR SOMETHING INSIDE OF THE OFFICE BUILDING
. THE PROPOSED B ONE ZONING IS MORE COMPATIBLE WITH OFFICE GUIDANCE THAN THE EXISTING R ONE ZONING IT'S CONSISTENT WITH SURROUNDING SITES AND LAND USES. SO B ONE ZONING DISTRICT
OFFICIAL TITLE IS NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE THE ENTIRE POINT OF THE B ONE ZONING DISTRICT IS TO ALLOW FOR OFFICE USES TO BE LOCATED NEAR RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES AND I DO HAVE A
WHOLE LIST OF B ONE USES IF YOU DO WANT TO SEE THOSE THE THEN THIS IS NOT ANTICIPATED TO CREATE AN EXCESSIVE BURDEN ON THE CITY. IT'S ALREADY SERVED BY A COLLECTOR ROAD OFF OF WEST BUSH LAKE THERE'S ADEQUATE
UTILITY CAPACITY AND THEY ARE COMPLIANT WITH THEIR PARKING COUNTS SO STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REZONING AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME, I'M AVAILABLE FOR YOU.
THANK YOU, MR. PLANNER, I DO HAVE A QUESTION. IT WAS REFERENCED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND I REMEMBER YEARS AGO HEARING ABOUT THE THE CONCEPT OF SPOT ZONING BUT AS SOMEONE WHO DIDN'T GO TO
SCHOOL FOR PLANNING I DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT IT. CAN YOU JUST GIVE US AN OVERVIEW ON WHAT IS SPOT ZONING AND WHETHER THAT'S SOMETHING IS THAT IS ENCOURAGED OR DISCOURAGED? CHAIR COOKED IN SPOT ZONING IS THE PRACTICE OF KIND
OF SINGLING OUT A PARCEL LET'S SAY WE HAVE A RESIDENTIAL LARGE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY AND SOMEBODY WANTS TO REZONE THEIR HOUSE TO C FOR LET'S SAY AND IT'S ONLY ONE PARCEL IF
THERE'S NO C FOUR WITHIN MILES AROUND THAT WOULD REALLY BE CONSIDERED SPOT ZONING. SO IT'S A SPECIFIC ONE PARCEL ACTION WHERE THEY'RE CHANGING THE ZONING TO SOMETHING THAT'S
NOT COMPATIBLE WITH ANY OF THE LAND USES AROUND IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF SEEING NONE. THANK YOU MR. PALMER.
I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IS HERE IF THEY WISH TO STEP FORWARD THEY'RE WELCOME TO DO SO AND TELL US ABOUT THEIR PROPOSAL. NOT NECESSARY IF YEAH I MEAN I DON'T IF YOU SUMMARIZE IT REALLY WELL VERY WELL THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING WHICH I WILL OPEN NOW AND ASK IF THERE'S ANYONE IN THE CHAMBERS TO IT WHO WISHES TO TESTIFY ON ITEM NUMBER ONE.
SEE NO ONE STEPPING FORWARD. MS. BROWN IS THERE ANYONE ON THE LINE WHO WISHES TO TESTIFY? ALL PARTICIPANTS ONLINE. OUR STAFF VERY WELL. I WILL IN FOR A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING SO
MOVED TO HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I I I OPPOSED THE MOTION PASSES FIVE ZERO AND WE'LL MOVE ON TO
DISCUSSION. COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM, THANK YOU CHAIR IT SEEMS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD TO ME VERY MR. PALMER THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR A
VERY THOROUGH STAFF REPORT. I HOPE THAT THE OWNER OF 7805 COMES FORWARD BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS WOULD BE
INJURIOUS TO SURROUNDING LAND USE TO HAVE A DIFFERENT ZONED PARCEL IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS PARK. SO I'M IN FAVOR. THANKS. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM. I TOO AM IN FAVOR OF THIS SEEMS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD
FORWARD TO BE ONE SEEMS LIKE A GOOD FIT FOR SOME LOCAL NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESSES THAT AREN'T GOING TO BE DISRUPTIVE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD BUT RATHER COMPLIMENTARY. SO I TOO WILL BE SUPPORTING
THIS IF THERE'S NO OTHER THOUGHTS I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION. COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM IN PLANNING CASE P.L. 2026-26I
MOVE TO RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE REZONING THE PROPERTIES AT 78 1578 25, 7835 AND 7845
TELEGRAPH ROAD FROM R-1 PD SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PLAN DEVELOPMENT TO B ONE PD NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE PLAN DEVELOPMENT IS THERE A SECOND
SECOND I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE MOTION AS STATED. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I.
I OPPOSED THAT MOTION PASSES FIVE ZERO THIS WILL GO BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL AS A PUBLIC HEARING ON JUNE 15TH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO ITEM
NUMBER TWO WHICH I WILL BE RECUSING MYSELF FOR. I WILL ALSO BE RECUSING MYSELF FOR ITEM NUMBER THREE IN MY ABSENCE. ACTING CHAIR WILL BE COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM.
THANK YOU CHAIR . ITEM NUMBER TWO THIS EVENING IS A REGARDING REZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
PARKING FACILITY AT 3737 50 AMERICAN BOULEVARD AND MR. SINTON ARE YOU HAVE THE STAFF REPORT? YES. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS.
TO PREFACE PREFACE THE NEXT TWO ITEMS I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A COUPLE OF NOTES THAT BOTH OF THESE ITEMS HAVE. THERE'S A LOT OF OVERLAP BETWEEN THEM AS YOU PROBABLY
SAW IN THE STAFF REPORT A LOT OF THE SAME ISSUES, A LOT OF THE SAME CONSIDERATIONS APPLY TO BOTH APPLICATIONS. THEREFORE THERE IS A LOT OF OVERLAP. SO I'LL TRY TO BE SUCCINCT NOT
TRYING TO REPEAT TOO MUCH THE MATERIAL BUT FIRST ON THE ITEM TO ON THE AGENDA IS FOR ROSA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY.
WE KNOW THE SITE AS PARKING FLY AND WE HAVE THREE ITEMS ON THAT WE'RE ASKING YOU TO TAKE ACTION ON.
ONE IS CAPITAL PLAN LAND USE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE TWO PARCELS 3730 SOME 50 FROM SOUTH LOOP MIXED USE TO HIGH INTENSITY MIXED USE.
BOTH OF THESE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS ARE UNIQUE TO THE SOUTH DISTRICT. THEY THERE ARE A LOT OF SIMILARITIES BETWEEN THE TWO OF THEM BUT THERE ARE SOME DISTINCTIONS THAT REALLY MAKE
SENSE IN THIS CONTEXT ALONG WITH THAT DESIGNATION CHANGE WE ARE ASKING YOU TO CONSIDER REZONING THESE TWO PARCELS FROM H. S R PD TO C. S TWO PD.
THESE ZONING DISTRICTS ARE VERY MUCH ALIGNED WITH THE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AND THEY GO HAND IN HAND AND THEN THIRD A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN EXISTING PARKING FACILITY
AT 3737 50 AMERICAN BOULEVARD EAST AND SO YOU'VE SEEN A LOT OF THESE SLIDES BEFORE. SO AGAIN FOR THE COMMISSIONERS A LOT OF THE CONTENT AND THINGS THAT WE'LL BE TALKING
ABOUT IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE WE SPENT QUITE A BIT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS BUT PARKING FLY IT'S BEEN AROUND FOR QUITE SOME TIME SINCE 1988 IT'S A REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING FACILITY.
IT INCLUDES BOTH A SIGNIFICANT PARKING STRUCTURE BUT THEN ALSO OVER 1000 SURFACE PARKING STALLS AND OFFICE BUILDING WAS
OF ENVISIONED TO BE BUILT ON TOP OF THE PARKING STRUCTURE BUT OBVIOUSLY THAT DIDN'T MATERIALIZE AND THERE IS AN EXISTING INTERIM USE PERMIT THAT EXPIRES AUGUST OF NEXT
YEAR. AND WHAT I'LL SUMMARIZE IS SOME OF THE CODE AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED BY THE CITY COUNCIL A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO. AND YOU KNOW, JUST TO PREFACE THAT, YOU KNOW THERE IS NO
MORE INTERVIEWS PERMIT ALLOWANCE WITHIN THE INRIX. OUR DISTRICT THAT WAS REMOVED FROM THE CODE SO YOU KNOW IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION THE
CITY COUNCIL TAKES ACTION TO KIND OF COMPLETE THIS PROCESS OF WILL BE TWO FEWER IEPS EXISTING IN THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON AND THERE'S
FEWER AND FEWER OF THEM. THESE MIGHT BE THE LAST TWO ACTUALLY. SO TO REFRESH FOLKS MEMORY ON CITY CODE AMENDMENTS YOU KNOW WE WE STARTED AN AIRPORT
PARKING STUDY OF A WHILE BACK THAT WAS IN 2024 AND THAT STUDY LED TO CITY CODE AMENDMENTS ULTIMATELY AND THE CITY COUNCIL ULTIMATELY
ADOPTED SOME STAFF RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS BUT THEN THEY ESSENTIALLY DIRECTED STAFF TO CONTINUE WORKING WITH THE EXISTING REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING OPERATORS. PARKING GO AND PARKING PLAY BECAUSE IT WASN'T QUITE THERE
YET AND SO THAT'S HOW WE DID IT. AND SUBSEQUENT TO THAT ACTION THE PROPERTY OWNER ROSE THE DEVELOPMENT OF PARKING FLY. THEY INITIATED A CITY CODE AMENDMENT A PRIVATELY INITIATED CITY CODE AMENDMENT
AND INITIALLY WE WERE SUPPORTIVE OF WHAT THEY WERE PROPOSING BUT WE WERE ABLE TO AGREE TO SOME MODIFICATIONS AND THAT'S WHAT WAS ADOPTED A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO. AND SO TO SUMMARIZE THOSE
AMENDMENTS INCLUDED ELIMINATING REMOTE OR EXISTING REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING FACILITIES AS AN INTERIM USE SO THERE ARE NO MORE INTERIM USES FOR REMOTE AIRPORT
PARKING ANYWHERE. BUT ALONG WITH THAT IT CREATED A CONDITIONAL USE ALLOWANCE FOR REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING FACILITIES IN THE SIX TWO DISTRICT.
WHILE THESE PARCELS REZONE HSR AND TO CREATE A CONDITIONAL USE AND THE SIX TWO THAT ESSENTIALLY MEANS YOU HAVE TO REZONE TO THE C TWO DISTRICT AND THAT'S WHAT THE APPLICANTS ARE DOING TONIGHT.
BUT WITH THAT THERE ARE SOME PERFORMANCE STANDARDS THAT FOR STAFF TO SUPPORT THE CHANGES WE FELT NEEDED TO BE PART OF THE CODE ONE IS TO ESTABLISH A FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
SITE A 2.75 ACRE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SITE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AND THAT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SITE HAS TO BE AT LEAST 120,000FT OF FLOOR AREA
AND THE ONE THING THAT WE HEARD FROM OTHER OPERATORS IS THAT THEY NEED CERTAINTY A PERMANENT ZONING RIGHTS. BUT THEN THIS IS GOING TO
HAPPEN OVER TIME AND SO SURFACE PARKING WHICH IS MOSTLY IN THE CASE OF PARKING FLIES, SURFACE PARKING THAT CAN CONTINUE FUTURE EXPANSION COULD BE DONE IN PARKING
STRUCTURES, YOU KNOW VERTICAL EXPANSION NOT HORIZONTAL EXPANSION AND IT CAN BE INTEGRATED WITH IN FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. AND SO IF THERE IS AN OFFICE BUILDING, FOR EXAMPLE, SOME REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING COULD
BE INCORPORATED WITHIN THAT OFFICE DEVELOPMENT. YOU KNOW SOME OF STRUCTURE PARKING COULD BE FOR A MOTOR FOR PARKING. SOME PARKING WOULD BE TO SERVE THE OFFICE DEVELOPMENT AND SO
THAT'S JUST A LONG WINDED SUMMARY OF WHAT HAS ALREADY HAPPENED. BUT FOR THE CURRENT APPLICATION THEY'RE LOOKING TO RE GUIDE TO HIGH INTENSITY MIXED USE AND SO HERE'S JUST A
GRAPHIC SHOWING WHAT THAT MAP WOULD LOOK LIKE HIGH INTENSITY MIXED USE IS OFTEN ASSOCIATED WITH THE MALL OF AMERICA AND SOME PARCELS SURROUNDING THE MALL OF AMERICA.
IT IS INTENDED TO SUPPORT INTENSE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE THINK IS A REALLY IMPORTANT OF THE SOUTH LOOP MIXED USE DISTRICT
OR NOT DISTRICT BUT DESIGNATION ALSO IS INTENDED SUPPORT COULD SUPPORT HIGH INTENSITY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT TRANSITS, IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT BUT THERE ARE SOME VERY IMPORTANT DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN THOSE
TWO. ONE IS THE SOUTH LOOK MIXED USE DESIGNATION REQUIRES OR DICTATE DICTATES. THERE HAS TO BE RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT WHICH IS
VERY WHICH IS VERY PRESCRIPTIVE ESPECIALLY ON A SITE THAT'S IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE INTERSTATE AND WITH AN AIRPORT OVERLAY ALSO EVEN IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
IT DICTATES A VERY HIGH MINIMUM FLOOR AREA RATIO 1.5 AND THEN A MAXIMUM OF TWO. SO THAT'S VERY PRESCRIPTIVE AND IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY LEAD ITSELF TO A LOT
OF FLEXIBILITY TO RESPOND TO CERTAIN MARKET CONDITIONS. SO WE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THIS RE DESIGNATION. WE WANT TO REMOVE BARRIERS TO
DEVELOPMENT NOT OF ANY KEEP BARRIERS THAT HAVE BEEN BURDENSOME AND BUT ALONG WITH THAT NATURALLY THE ZONING DESIGNATION WOULD BE SHIFTED TO C.
S TWO BECAUSE AGAIN THEY GO HAND IN HAND AND SO THE BASE ZONING IS CURRENTLY HSR AGAIN THAT REQUIRES A RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT.
IT REQUIRES A MINIMUM 1.5 EVERY HOUR WHEREAS A62 DISTRICT ALLOWS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, IT ALLOWS A VERY HIGH HIGH FLOOR AIR RATIO BUT
IT DOESN'T HAVE THE SAME LEVEL OF PRESCRIPTIVE NESS AND IT ALSO ALLOWS MORE OF A LARGER VARIETY OF USES. SO AGAIN, REDUCING BARRIERS TO DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS WHAT WE WANT TO SEE ON THESE REMOTE HERE FOR PARKING FACILITIES.
ANOTHER SLIDE THAT YOU'VE SEEN BEFORE IS WHEN WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE CODE AMENDMENT WE'RE DISCUSSING HOW THIS FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SITE COULD BE IMPLEMENTED AGAIN 2.75
ACRES THERE WOULD BE A SCREENING REQUIREMENT BETWEEN THE REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING AND THE PERMANENT DEVELOPMENT OR THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AND THEN THERE'S A COMPLIANCE
DEADLINE. AND SO THIS IS OVER THIS IS ABOUT TEN AND A HALF YEARS FROM NOW. SO THERE SHOULD THESE APPLICATIONS BE APPROVED? THERE IS A LONG PERIOD OF TIME FOR THE APPLICANT TO ESTABLISH THIS FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SITE AND HOPEFULLY FIND A
DEVELOPMENT TO MOVE FORWARD IN THE NEAR TERM AND AS A ZONING EXERCISE AGAIN THE PLANS THAT I'M SHOWING ARE VERY CONCEPTUAL. THEY'RE NOT PROPOSING THIS
PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS AGAIN A ZONING EXERCISE. THEY'RE SHOWING A FOUR STOREY OFFICE BUILDING ALONG AMERICAN BOULEVARD EAST BECAUSE THAT IS A CODE REQUIREMENT TO BE ORIENTED TOWARDS A STREET WITH
A SURFACE PARKING LOT. SO HYPOTHETICALLY SOMETHING LIKE THIS COULD MATERIALIZE IN THE FUTURE OR IT COULD BE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. WE'RE NOT SURE BUT WE WANTED THE APPLICANT TO AT LEAST
THINK ABOUT HOW THIS THESE CODE REQUIREMENTS COULD BE MET IN THE FUTURE. AGAIN, HERE'S JUST A CLOSE REVIEW WE FELT IT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO ORIENT THE
BUILDING CLOSER TO AMERICAN BOULEVARD EAST AS OPPOSED TO THE INTERSTATE. THAT'S WHERE WE WANT TO FRAME THE STREET FROM OUR URBAN CHARACTER AND YOU KNOW THAT'S MENTIONED THE LIGHT RAIL IS VERY CLOSE SO HAVING MORE
ACTIVITY OF FOR WORKERS AND VISITORS AS RESIDENTS WE WANT THEM TO BE AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE TO THE LIGHT RAIL SO THEY COULD HYPOTHETICALLY USE
THAT TRANSIT MORE OFTEN. NOW THAT'S ALL VERY FUTURE ORIENTED BUT ONE THING THAT WE WOULD SEE IN THE NEAR TERM
SHOULD THESE APPLICATIONS BE APPROVED IS A SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT TO LANDSCAPING ON THE SITE. THE SITES DO HAVE LANDSCAPING. THEY'RE NOT VOID OF ANY
LANDSCAPING BUT I MEAN IT'S HARD TO IT'S HARD NOT TO SEE THE ACRES OF UNENCUMBERED ASPHALT AND NORMALLY WHEN YOU HAVE A VERY LARGE PARKING LOT
YOU HAVE TO INCORPORATE LANDSCAPED PARKING ISLANDS LIKE THAT WITHIN THE PARKING LOT WITH TREES. WELL THAT WAS EXEMPTED AND SO THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE TO DO THAT. SO REALLY IT FORCES ALL THIS
LANDSCAPING TO BE ESTABLISHED ALONG THE PERIMETER AND THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE ON THE PLAN HERE . AND SO HISTORICALLY REMOTE FOR PARKING HAS ALWAYS BEEN TREATED AS A TEMPORARY USE AND SO AS A TEMPORARY USE IT
WASN'T REQUIRED TO MEET ALL OF OUR CURRENT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. WELL, THE COURT CHANGED THAT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. IT IS A PERMANENT USE AND SO
WITH THAT YOU HAVE TO MEET THE CITY CODE AND SO THAT'S WHY LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS ARE IMPORTANT NOW AND INTO THE FUTURE. SO I JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU A
ZOOMED IN VERSION OF ALL OF THE ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPE PLANTINGS THAT WOULD HAPPEN IN THE NEAR TERM WE'RE ALREADY INTO MAY. THIS PROCESS ISN'T DONE YET.
IT WOULD HAVE TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL AND THEN IF APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL AFFIRMED BY THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL. SO WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF PROCESS TO GO YET AND
IN DISCUSSING WITH THE APPLICANT YOU KNOW IDEALLY THEY WOULD HAVE THESE PLANTINGS DONE BY THE END OF THE 2026 GROWING SEASON BUT YOU KNOW NOT SURE IF THEY
COULD GET THEIR HANDS ON ALL THE PLANT MATERIAL BECAUSE THERE'S QUITE A BIT SO AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL WE INCLUDED THAT IT WOULD HAVE TO BE COMPLETED BY MID MIDYEAR NEXT YEAR JUST REALLY SO
THERE'S NO NO REASON NOT TO GET IT DONE WITHIN THE NEXT YEAR AND AGAIN AS A ZONING EXERCISE, HOW COULD
LANDSCAPING BE INCORPORATED INTO THAT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SITE? THE REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING FACILITY IS EXEMPTED FROM LANDSCAPING THE PARKING
ISLANDS FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IS NOT AND SO YOU CAN SEE HERE WHAT A NORMAL WHAT A QUOTE UNQUOTE NORMAL OF A PARKING LOT WOULD LOOK LIKE WITH LANDSCAPED PARKING LOTS AND TREES AND YOU CAN SEE WE
REQUIRE A FAIR AND A FAIR AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING WITHIN THESE SPACES. AND SO REALLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TOWARDS DOWN THE ROAD BY THAT 2036 COMPLIANCE DEADLINE IS THAT THE SITE IS
COMPLETELY COMPLIANT IN TERMS OF LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AND SO WITH THAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE THREE APPLICATIONS TONIGHT AND
THEY DO HAVE THE MOTIONS FOR YOU AND I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IN THE MEANTIME. THANK YOU MR. CENTENARIO ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER WHITE THANK YOU
MR. CHAIR. I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTAND A COUPLE OF THINGS. ONE IS THIS REZONING AND THESE
CHANGES WOULD NOT PRECLUDE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT BEING RESIDENTIAL IT JUST DOESN'T REQUIRE IT IS THAT IS THAT CORRECT IN MY UNDERSTANDING, YEAH, COMMISSIONER THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT.
AND SO AGAIN THE DISTRICT AND I SAID IN THE STAFF REPORT VERY WELL INTENTIONED BUT IF YOU READ THROUGH IT FROM START TO FINISH THERE'S A WHOLE LOT
OF RULES AND I THINK THOSE ARE REASONABLE RULES BUT THEY ARE CUMBERSOME AND THEY DO LIMIT THE CREATIVITY AND THE ABILITY TO RESPOND TO WHAT THE MARKET
COULD FORESEE ON A GIVEN SITE. AND SO IF THE APPLICANT FINDS OF DEVELOP A RESIDENTIAL ENTITY THAT WANTS TO BUILD A RESIDENTIAL BUILDING ON THEIR SITE, THEN THAT'S GREAT.
YOU KNOW WE WE FULLY SUPPORT THAT THIS APPLICANT ACTUALLY HAD AN UNTITLED APARTMENT BUILDING MORE OR LESS ON THE SITE THAT THEY'RE SHOWING AS FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. AND SO WE WERE VERY SUPPORTIVE
OF THAT DEVELOPMENT AND I WOULD I WOULD IMAGINE WE WOULD BE IN THE FUTURE IF THEY WANTED TO DO THAT BUT IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT AND SO WELL WHAT WE ARE PRIORITIZING IS OF LIKE
URBAN FORM LAND USE INTENSITY ALONG AMERICAN BOULEVARD EAST BUT WE WANTED TO BE MORE FLEXIBLE AND THE USES OF THAT DEVELOPMENT. >> THANK YOU. CAN I ASK AN ADDITIONAL QUESTION? OF COURSE.
THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. AND THEN WHAT HAPPENS IF THERE IS NO DEVELOPMENT COME 2036 COMMISSIONERS GREAT QUESTION AND PROVIDED THAT THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SITE IS
ESTABLISHED YOU WOULD HAVE A 2.75 ACRE VACANT SITE WITH A LOT OF PERIMETER LANDSCAPING. NOT NOT IDEAL. THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE WANT
TO SEE BUT REMOVING THE REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING FROM THAT SITE IS CRITICAL TO MAKE THE YOU KNOW, TO MAKE A VIABLE FOR
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF SEEING NONE I BELIEVE I SEE THE APPLICANT IN CHAMBERS IF
THEY'D LIKE TO STEP FORWARD AND TELL US ABOUT THIS APPLICATION. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS MY NAME IS BILL GRIFFITH REPRESENTING ROSA DEVELOPMENT AND YOU'VE
SEEN ME MANY, MANY TIMES ON THIS ISSUE IN PARTICULAR I WONDER WHAT MIKE'S GOING TO DO WITH ALL HIS TIME AFTER THIS IS DONE RIGHT. I'M SURE THERE'S SOME IDEAS. THANK YOU AGAIN TO STAFF AND
TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE FOR HELPING US TO GET TO THIS POINT. HOPEFULLY ONE MEETING AWAY FROM BEING CONCLUDED AT LEAST WITH THIS STAGE. I REALLY WANT TO ADDRESS COUNCILMEMBER WHITE'S QUESTION
BECAUSE I THINK IT'S REALLY, REALLY CRITICAL TO THE DISCUSSION AND HOW WE ENDED UP HERE. THIS IS A BALANCE OF INTERESTS. THIS IS A BALANCE OF EXISTING AND WHAT CAN HAPPEN NEXT.
IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY BUT IT'S ALSO CREATES SOME PERMANENCE AROUND REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING AND THAT'S A GOOD THING BECAUSE THAT QUESTION HAS ALWAYS BEEN HANGING OVER THESE SITES AND ALONG WITH THE
QUESTION ABOUT WHAT THESE SITES CAN BE. AND SO AS MR. CENTENARIO SAID ,ONE OF THE REAL LINCHPIN MOMENTS WHEN WE WERE IN THESE
DISCUSSIONS BACK AND FORTH WITH STAFF IS THIS FLEXIBILITY THAT COMES WITH REGARDING AND REZONING TO SELECT TWO VERY DIFFERENT DISTRICTS. I SAID THAT IN MARCH I DON'T I DON'T NEED TO GO LONG ON THAT POINT BUT IT IS REALLY
CRITICAL TO WHAT COMMISSIONER WHITE ASKED. THE LAST THING ANYBODY WANTS IS A VACANT PARKING SITE AND IT WON'T HAVE CARS ON IT BECAUSE IT'S IT'S INTENDED TO
BE A DEVELOPMENT SITE. AND SO AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT OVER THE MANY MONTHS AT ESSENTIALLY BECOMES AN INCENTIVE TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT YOU KNOW I COULD BE ABLE TO
PARK CARS THERE IT'S NOT GOING TO GENERATE REVENUE AND THEN SO IT BECOMES A DEVELOPMENT SITE AND WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT AND IMAGINE WHAT WHAT CAN HAPPEN NEXT, IT'S ALMOST LIKE
BY ALLOWING IT'S NOT ALMOST LIKE IT IS LIKE AN INCENTIVE TO BUILD BIGGER AND HIGHER BECAUSE YOU CAN NOW PARK CARS WITHIN AN UNDERGROUND RAMP. YOU CAN PARK CARS IN A
STRUCTURED RAMP, YOU CAN BUILD ON THE FRONT, YOU CAN HAVE CARS IN THE BACK ALL SUDDEN A WHOLE RANGE OF THINGS OPEN UP THAT CREATE AND INCENTIVE FOR PROPERTY OWNERS AND DEVELOPERS
TO DO SOMETHING WITH THAT PROPERTY AND ALSO A DEADLINE I THINK THAT WAS THE KEY FOR THE CITY. THE DEADLINE WAS THE KEY FOR THE CITY. THE FLEXIBILITY WAS THE KEY FOR THE PROPERTY OWNERS AT LEAST THAT'S HOW I'LL
REPRESENT IT. THERE ARE OTHERS HERE WHO WILL SPEAK I'M SURE LATER IN THE MEETING BUT REALLY WE'VE REACHED THAT POINT NOW WHERE THE CERTAINTY IS BEING
CREATED BY THESE SET OF ENTITLEMENTS. YOU KNOW THE THE THE MARCH AMENDMENTS MADE THAT OPPORTUNITY REAL AND LEGAL AND NOW THESE ENTITLEMENTS CREATE
THAT THAT PLATFORM OF RIGHTS THAT ALLOW THE OWNERS TO GO INTO THE MARKETPLACE AND SAY WHAT WOULD YOU DO WITH THIS SITE? YOU KNOW DON'T HOLD ME TO IT BUT I SUSPECT IT'LL BE MORE THAN 2.75 ACRES
OF DEVELOPMENT. I SUSPECT IT'LL BE A WHOLE LOT MORE THAN THAT BECAUSE OF THE OPPORTUNITIES CREATED BY THIS BASKET OF APPROVALS. SO THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS A NICE SEGUE TO WHAT I
WANTED TO TALK ABOUT AND I'M HAPPY TO TAKE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS AND ALSO KRISTEN MUIR IS ONLINE SO SHE'S ALSO AVAILABLE. THANK YOU MR. GRIFFITHS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE
APPLICANT? THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. THIS ITEM IS A PUBLIC HEARING SO I WILL GO AHEAD AND OPEN THAT NOW IF THERE'S ANYONE
IN CHAMBERS THAT WISHES TO TESTIFY ON THIS ITEM PLEASE COME FORWARD. >> MS. BROWN IS THERE ANYONE
ON OH, EXCUSE ME . FILL US OUT LATER IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. >> ABSOLUTELY. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. MR. CHAIR.
MY NAME IS AUBREY ALBRECHT. I AS MANY OF YOU KNOW PREVIOUSLY SERVED ON THE BLOOMINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION AND I SAW THIS
APPLICATION MANY TIMES AND I'M HERE TO REALLY ASK A QUESTION AND THAT QUESTION I KNOW CANNOT BE ANSWERED BY ANY OF YOU.
HOWEVER, IT'S MORE OF A QUESTION ABOUT WHERE WE ARE AS A COMMUNITY AND WHERE WE ARE AS A CITY AND WHAT THIS WHAT THIS MEANS FOR THIS SPECIFIC
SITE. I UNDERSTAND THE ECONOMIC REALITIES HERE. I UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAD COVID
THAT THERE WERE CHALLENGES IN FINANCING FOR THIS PROPERTY AND I THINK THAT THE CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMISSION
PROVIDED AN INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF FLEXIBILITY ON REDEVELOPMENT MILESTONES AND I THINK THE GRACE THERE WAS VERY
REASONABLE IN MY OPINION AT THE TIME. >> BUT WE'RE NOW TALKING ABOUT A LONG GAME OF A LONG GAME AND
I THINK THE QUESTION THAT I HAVE THAT I WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE COMMISSIONERS AND THE CITY COUNCIL AND STAFF TO REALLY THINK ABOUT IS NOT
WHETHER OR NOT NOT WHETHER OR NOT THE THE PARKING SHOULD CONTINUE BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THAT'S A BIT OF A BAKED
SCENARIO BUT WHETHER OR NOT BLOOMINGTON HAS A VISION FOR THE SOUTH LOOP THAT IS ACTUALLY REFLECTIVE OF WHAT WE ARE PHYSICALLY DOING AND
APPROVING FOR THE SITE BECAUSE IF THIS IS THE DIRECTION THAT WE ARE GOING TO GO WHICH I DISAGREE WITH THEN WE NEED TO
HONESTLY LOOK AT THE SMALL AREA PLAN FOR THE SOUTH LOOP. WE NEED TO HONESTLY LOOK AT OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND REALLY ASK OURSELVES THE QUESTION AS TO WHAT WE WANT
THE SOUTH LOOP TO ACTUALLY BE BECAUSE IF IT ISN'T WHAT WE PLANNED FOR, IF IT ISN'T IN THE VISION OF WHAT WE HAD HOPED FOR THEN WE NEED TO REFLECT THAT BACK TO THE
COMMUNITY BECAUSE FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS WE HAVE BEEN TELLING COMMUNITY MEMBERS THAT THIS IS WHAT THE SOUTH MIGHT LOOK LIKE AND THAT'S REALLY GREAT BUT IT'S A
DISSERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY BY SAYING THAT WE ARE GOING TO DO ONE THING AND IT'S GOING TO BE TRANSIT ORIENTED, IT'S GOING TO BE HAVE ALL THESE IMPROVEMENTS THE CITY HAS DONE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN THIS
AREA AND WE'VE TOLD DEVELOPERS WE'VE TOLD PROPERTY OWNERS AND MOST MOST OF ALL WE'VE TOLD RESIDENTS THAT THIS ISN'T GOING TO BE A COLLECTION OF SURFACE PARKING LOTS
OF ADJACENT TO LIGHT RAIL AND IT IS AND THESE THIS APPLICATION JUST SAYS WE CAN NOW PERMANENTLY DO THAT.
WE DID A SERIES OF EXTENSIONS CHANGES ETC. THAT THE DEVELOPER WAS ALLOWED TO DO AND EXTENDED THEIR TIMELINE
MULTIPLE TIMES AND SO I THINK COMMISSIONER WHITE'S QUESTION ABOUT WHAT IS IT GOING TO BE WHEN THIS DOESN'T EXIST THERE IS NO EXIST THERE ISN'T THERE
IS EXIST OR NOT EXIST AND THERE'S NO WAY THAT THE CITY IS GOING TO SAY OH YOU'RE JUST GOING TO HAVE AN EMPTY PARKING LOT AND THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ANY REVENUE THERE AND WE'RE
NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY, YOU KNOW, TAX IMPLICATION THERE. THE CITY IS JUST GOING TO SAY CONTINUE OPERATING AS USUAL. SO AT WHAT POINT ARE WE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE VISION
OF THE SOUTH LOOP AND ACTUALLY EXECUTE ON IT BECAUSE IF IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN THEN THAT SMALL AREA PLAN NEEDS TO CHANGE AND THE COMMUNICATION WITH THE COMMUNITY NEEDS TO CHANGE BECAUSE THIS ISN'T THE
VISION FOR SOUTH LOOP. IT WASN'T THE VISION TEN YEARS AGO WASN'T THE VISION 20 YEARS AGO. IT WASN'T THE VISION 30 YEARS AGO AND WE'RE NOW EXTENDING IT IN ANOTHER TEN, TEN AND A HALF
YEARS FOR WHAT END? >> AND I DON'T THINK THIS HAS TO BE AN ALL OR NOTHING CONVERSATION. I DO THINK I JUST THINK THAT
THIS IS A MOMENT IN WHICH BLOOMINGTON NEEDS TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE STILL ACTIVELY BUILDING TOWARDS THE ORIGINAL SOUTH LOOP PLAN OR IF THAT VISION ITSELF HAS CHANGED
AND IF THAT IS WHAT IT IS IT NEEDS TO BE CLEARLY COMMUNICATED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MS. ALBRECHT IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN CHAMBERS THAT WOULD
LIKE TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS ITEM ? MS. BROWN IS THERE ANYONE ONLINE? OH PARTICIPANTS ARE MINUS STAFF THANK YOU. I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING SO
MOVED. SECOND WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING ALL OR ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I I I
THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO LEAD US OFF AND SOME DISCUSSION MR. WHITE SAVE PLEASE GO AHEAD,
MR. CHAIR. YOU KNOW I I'VE QUIT COUNTING HOW MANY TIMES WE'VE TALKED ABOUT AIRPORT PARKING AND IT IS IT IS A COMPLICATED ISSUE.
THERE IS A VISION. THERE'S A NEED TO RESPECT HISTORY. THERE'S THE ECONOMICS AT WORK. THERE'S THE ISSUES OF THE
BROADER, YOU KNOW, ECONOMY AND AND ABILITY TO FIND DEVELOPERS THAT ARE WILLING TO BUILD WHAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE IN THE SOUTH LOOP. AND I'M SYMPATHETIC TO ALL
OF THOSE CHALLENGES BUT I DO STRUGGLE WITH THE FACT THAT TOM STILL THE EMPTY PARKING LOT IN A PLACE WHERE IT SHOULDN'T BE SO I'M NOT NOT
SURE WHAT I'M GOING TO DO. I NEED TO THINK ABOUT IT A LITTLE BIT. I WAS HOPING THAT I WOULD HEAR THINGS TONIGHT THAT WOULD MAKE IT AN EASIER DECISION BUT I. I DO STRUGGLE WITH THAT FUNDAMENTAL PREMISE
OF ALLOWING THAT TO CONTINUE. I APPRECIATE THE HARD WORK THAT THE STAFF HAS PUT INTO THIS THE FLEXIBILITY THAT THE APPLICANT HAS SHOWN AND THE WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH THE CITY.
I UNDERSTAND THEIR NEED FOR MORE CERTAINTY PARTICULARLY AS YOU YOU LOOK AROUND FOR A DEVELOPER OR A BUYER AND THAT'S JUST AGAIN I'M I WILL
JUST BE VERY OPEN I I'M STRUGGLING A BIT WITH WITH IT SO THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WHITE ANYONE ELSE?
COMMISSIONER YES SIR THANK YOU CHAIR I INITIALLY WAS VERY MUCH WHEN I DID SPEAK BEFORE
ON THIS ITEM I UNDERSTOOD FROM THE APPLICANTS ANGLE ESPECIALLY THAT ESPECIALLY BECAUSE THEY WERE ESTABLISHED THERE FOR A LONG TIME AND SO I
BUT AS THE PUBLIC SPEAKER THIS ELECTRIC SPOKE I ALSO 100% AGREE THAT IF IF IT'S NOT IN LINE WITH THE SMALL AREA
PLAN OR THE SOUTH LOOP PLAN THAT WAS ADOPTED WAY BEFORE I WAS HERE PROBABLY THAT IS EITHER SHOULD REFLECT IT
SHOULD REFLECT ON WE SHOULD GO OFF THAT OR THAT SHOULD BE REEXAMINED. SO RESIDENTS DO FEEL LIKE THERE'S CONSISTENCY SO YEAH
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I HAVE A FEW THOUGHTS UNLESS MR. SUMMERS DO EVERYTHING ALL RIGHT. PERFECT. THANK YOU. I I'M GOING TO STEAL A QUOTE
FROM A FORMER CHAIR NOT TO LET PERFECT GET IN THE WAY OF GOOD ENOUGH. I THINK THAT THE ACT OF CITY GOVERNANCE WE'RE ALWAYS TRYING
TO FIND A HAPPY MEDIUM WHERE YOU KNOW A PHRASE I HEAR AT WORK ALL THE TIME IS NO ONE LEAVES THE NEGOTIATING TABLE HAPPY. THE APPLICANT DIDN'T GET EVERYTHING THEY WANTED IN THIS. THE CITY DIDN'T GET EVERYTHING
THEY WANTED IN THIS. I THINK THAT THE SETTING ASIDE OF CERTAIN LOCATIONS ON THE PROPERTY THAT ARE FACING THE INSIDE OF SOUTH LOOP IS MEETING THE INTENT BUT MAYBE
NOT THE LETTER OF THE SOUTH LOOP SMALL AREA PLAN AND I THINK THAT I'M AWARE THAT THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF TIME
THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR A LONG, LONG TIME. BUT ONE THING THAT THIS SITE HAS NEVER HAD THAT IT WOULD HAVE IF THIS MOTION WERE APPROVED IS CONCRETE ZONING TO OPERATE AS A BUSINESS AND THEN
IMPROVE UPON THEIR PROPERTY AND THAT MIGHT NOT SOUND LIKE IT MATTERS BUT IT DOES IN CAPITAL MARKETS IF YOU'RE TRYING TO SOLICIT DEBT FOR A PROJECT, IF YOU DON'T HAVE
FIRM ZONING, A LOT OF INSTITUTIONAL LENDERS WILL NOT GIVE MONEY TO A SITE BECAUSE THE BUILDING COULD BE LEGALLY NONCONFORMING OR NOT ABLE TO BE PERMITTED TO BE
BUILT IF THERE'S A ZONING CHANGE. AND I WOULD LEAN TO MR. JOHNSON TO CORRECT ME IF I SAID SOMETHING WRONG THERE THAT'S AT LEAST MY UNDERSTANDING OF IT. SO I DO I LIKE THE TEN YEARS
NO I DON'T. BUT NO ONE HAS A CRYSTAL BALL TO KNOW WHEN LOAN MARKETS WILL BE RIGHT TO PUT THAT MUCH MONEY INTO AN INVESTMENT HERE. AND I THINK THAT SETTING ASIDE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF ACREAGE
THAT WOULD BE NON-REVENUE PRODUCING IF THE APPLICANT WAS NOT TO DEVELOP ON IT WOULD BE A IS A A HAPPY ENOUGH A MIDDLE GROUND TO HAVE ME BE IN FAVOR
OF THIS BUT I'M VERY INTERESTED TO HEAR EVERYONE'S THOUGHTS. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER SUMMERS THANK YOU. ACTING CHAIR CUNNINGHAM I
AGREE WITH WHAT OUR ACTING CHAIR HAS TO SAY. I THINK WHEN I LOOK AT THE HISTORY OF THE LAST FEW
CONVERSATIONS IT FEELS LIKE THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF HEADWAY ESPECIALLY WHEN APPLICANTS WITH AIRPORT PARKING CONTINUE
TO BRING FORTH PLANS WHERE THAT BUILDING WAS CLOSER TO 494 I REALLY AGREE WITH THE
SENTIMENT THAT CITIZENS OF BLOOMINGTON ARE LOOKING TO THE CITY TO BE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT PLANS ARE AND THOSE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND
DISTRICT PLANS ARE COMPELLING PORTIONS OF WHAT THE CITIZENS OF BLOOMINGTON FEEL IS THEIR VOICE IN THE PLAN. AND I WAS AT THE LAUNCH FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
YESTERDAY AND WHAT I HEARD FROM A LOT OF THE RESIDENTS WAS THAT THEY FEEL LIKE BLOOMINGTON IS A PLACE WHERE THEY CAN PARTICIPATE AND BE HEARD.
I THINK THAT WHAT BECOMES COMPLEX ABOUT BEING ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS REALLY BEING ASKED AND VOLUNTEERING TO GET REALLY INTO THE NITTY
GRITTY OF WHERE THE STAFF ARE AS NON-EXPERT IN PLANNING. SO WHERE I'M BALANCING THING
THAT THIS FEELS DIFFERENT THAN THE SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT PLAN IT DOES I AGREE WITH THE SENTIMENT FROM COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM THAT THIS DOES FEEL
LIKE A VAST IMPROVEMENT FROM WHERE THIS ALL STARTED AND THAT I DO THINK THAT ONE OF THE APPLICANTS AND I THINK
IT WAS FROM ROSA DEVELOPMENT MENTIONED AND THAT WITHOUT THESE CONDITIONS THAT THEY WERE REALLY STRUGGLING TO HAVE
INVESTORS AND GET LOANS AND DO PLANS FOR ANYTHING ON THEIR PROPERTY.
SO I THINK THAT THIS IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF IMPERFECTION AND I AM IN FAVOR OF IT.
THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER WHITE I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. IT MIGHT BE FOR OUR FABULOUS CITY ATTORNEY STAFF.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF WE REZONE THIS AREA AND ALLOW AIRPORT PARKING IN THESE
SPOTS THAT WE ARE NOT IN ANY WAY CREATING A LOOPHOLE THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL AIRPORT PARKING OR SURFACE LOT PARKING WITH NO ATTENDANT
BUILDINGS IN ANY OTHER AREAS. SO I THINK MR. CENTENARIO SPENT A LOT OF TIME THINKING ABOUT THAT AND WE STRUCTURED
THE CODE AMENDMENTS TO DO A COUPLE OF THINGS WELL ACTUALLY THERE WERE THREE COMPONENTS OF THE AIRPORT PARKING STUDY. ONE IS TO ADDRESS AIRPORT PARKING AT HOTELS WHICH HAS
BEEN HAPPENING FOR DECADES AND BUT QUOTE UNQUOTE ILLEGALLY. IT WAS NEVER IT WAS NEVER PERMITTED BY RIGHT. SO THAT WAS ONE COMPONENT THAT WE WE FELT WE HAD TO ADDRESS
AND SO WE ESTABLISHED SOME BASE VERY BASIC STANDARDS WITH THAT ONE IS TO ALLOW SOME ADDITIONAL REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING WITHIN EXISTING
PARKING STRUCTURES AND THE MALL OF AMERICA DID RECEIVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE AIRPORT PARKING IN THE EAST RAMP AND THAT'S THAT'S BEEN IN OPERATION FOR MONTHS FOR A COUPLE MONTHS NOW.
AND THEN THIRD, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY THE MOST CHALLENGING COMPONENT WAS HOW SHOULD WE ADDRESS THE EXISTING ROAD AIRPORT PARKING FACILITIES, PARK GO PARKING PLAY.
BUT THE WAY WE STRUCTURED THE CODE AMENDMENTS IS THAT WE REALLY HAVE THESE SITES IDENTIFIED FOR ANY LARGE SCALE REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING.
THE MALL OF AMERICA HAD THEIR CUP BECAUSE THEY WERE HAD THE OPTION OF DOING IT. WE COULD SEE ONE MORE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR AN EXISTING RAMP WITHIN THE SOUTH LOOP,
THE RIVERVIEW PARKING RAMP THAT'S SOMETHING WE KNEW ALL ALONG AND THEN WE PARKED GO AND PARKING FLY THAT'S THAT'S IT AND TO OPEN UP ANY MORE
SITES IT WOULD OR IT WOULD TAKE FURTHER COMMITMENTS TO ACCOMPLISH THAT AND I WE WE WON'T SUPPORT THAT WE THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE PARKING STUDY AFFIRMED THAT OUR
APPROACH WAS AN ACCEPTABLE APPROACH AND I DON'T IMAGINE US SUPPORTING FURTHER AMENDMENTS TO OPEN THIS UP FURTHER. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MR..
I JUST WANT TO I JUST WANT TO BE ON THE RECORD THAT I ECHO MIKE STATEMENT 100% AND I APPRECIATE THE CONCERN ABOUT HONORING THE ASPIRATIONS OF THE SOUTH THE DISTRICT PLAN I THINK BLOOMINGTON'S PLANNING
DIVISION AND OUR COUNCIL AND OUR PLANNING COMMISSION DO A PHENOMENAL JOB TRYING TO REACH FOR THE ASPIRATION AND THE VISION THAT OUR LOCAL AREA AND DISTRICT PLANS SEEK.
AND FOR THAT REASON THAT IS WHY YOU KNOW WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THE STUDY PROCESS WE DID NOT SUGGEST OPENING THIS USE UP TO ANY OTHER SITES WHERE IT DIDN'T OTHERWISE EXIST EXCEPT FOR STRUCTURED RAMPS THAT HAD EXCESS
CAPACITY. ONE OF THE TWO FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES THAT THE DISTRICT PLAN IS I GUESS STRAINING ITS ASPIRATION IS ONE SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN THE OFFICE MARKET. IT'S HAD A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
ON WHAT THE SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT CAN BE, THE CHANGES IN THAT REAL ESTATE MARKET AND THE SECOND THING THAT IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE IN TENSION WITH THE ASPIRATION OF THE SOUTH OF DISTRICT PLAN IS THE IMPACTS OF THE AIRPORT.
SOME OF THOSE IMPACTS ARE POSITIVE IF YOU CURE SICK WHICH RECENTLY JUST CUT THE RIBBON ON THEIR HEADQUARTERS PROXIMITY THE AIRPORT WAS A CENTRAL FOR WHY THEY LOCATED THEIR DEVELOPMENT AND THEIR BUSINESS THERE BUT IT ALSO
BRINGS WITH IT A LOT OF NOISE AND A LOT OF OTHER AIRPORT SUPPORTING USES THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A SIGNIFICANTLY HIGH DEMAND FOR IN THAT AREA AND SO THAT'S A TENSION THAT WE'RE FIGHTING WITH EVERY DAY
. IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE'RE STILL SUGGESTING TO RELAX BLOOMINGTON'S ZONING STANDARDS IN WAYS THAT WILL FUNDAMENTALLY ALTER THE ASPIRATION AND VISION OF THE
SOUTH LOOP PLAN. SO I JUST WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THOSE TWO CHALLENGES THAT ARE YOU KNOW, WE'RE STILL WORKING THROUGH EVERY DAY AND JUST REINFORCE MIKE'S STATEMENT
THAT NO A SITE ANOTHER SITE IN THE SOUTH LOOP CANNOT SEEK THE SAME APPROVAL BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT IN EXISTENCE TODAY PERIOD. SO I JUST WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THAT.
THANK YOU, MR. JONES. MR. SENSENBRENNER I'LL ADD IT. YOU KNOW, NICK AND MYSELF, WE WE TALK WITH REAL ESTATE PROFESSIONALS EVERY DAY AND WE
ARE CONFRONTED WITH THEIR IDEA OF WHAT THEY WANT TO DO WITH A PARTICULAR PROPERTY AND ADDITIONAL REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING FACILITIES HAS BEEN A TOPIC AND YOU KNOW, MAYBE THIS
WILL GIVE YOU SOME LEVEL OF COMFORT BUT WE DON'T REALLY GIVE IT MUCH OXYGEN OF WHAT WE DON'T FOR OTHER SITES AND SO WE'RE VERY CLEARLY
COMMUNICATING WITH OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS AND INTERESTED PARTIES THAT WE'RE NOT INTERESTED IN SUPPORTING FURTHER OR REMOTE OR FOR PARKING. WE WENT WE WENT THROUGH THE
OF THE AIRPORT PARKING STUDY. WE EVALUATED THE RANGE OF OPTIONS. WE WENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE CITY COUNCIL. WE TALKED TO PROPERTY OWNERS. WE TALKED TO OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES, OTHER PROPERTY
OWNERS, TOURISM INDUSTRY PROFESSIONALS. SO WE REALLY TRIED TO GET A GOOD SCOPE OF OPINION AND THOUGHTS ON HOW TO BALANCE THIS AND THIS IS WHERE WE'RE
ENDING UP. AND SO YOU KNOW, FOR ME SOMEONE WHO HAS NEVER PARKED THEIR CAR IN A REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING LOT, I MIGHT NEVER I MAY NEVER I TRY TO PROBABLY
OVERSIMPLIFY I WOULD SAY IN MY THOUGHTS ON THIS AND I THINK WHAT'S THERE TODAY VERSUS WHAT COULD BE IMPLEMENTED WITH THESE CHANGES AND I JUST I KEEP COMING BACK TO COMPARED TO WHAT'S THERE TODAY WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT HUNDREDS MORE TREES THAN ARE THERE TODAY AND HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF SQUARE FEET OF DEVELOPMENT THAT'S NOT THERE TODAY. AND SO I KNOW THAT'S A VERY
IT'S VERY SIMPLE SIMPLISTIC BUT IS HOW I BOIL DOWN THE BEFORE AND AFTER. THANK YOU. MR. CENTENARIO ANY OTHER
DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER ISSA I THANK YOU ACTING CHAIR CUNNINGHAM I
AFTER LISTENING TO EVERYONE SPEAK SO FAR I, I WOULD FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE VOTING IF THERE ARE FIRST I WOULD WANT
TO ASK STAFF IF THERE HAS BEEN OUTREACH TO RESIDENTS IN THAT AREA THAT LIVED THERE OR WORK THERE AND IF THEY'RE HESITANT I WOULD FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE VOTING AFTER THAT HAVING A
SOLID VOTE IN FAVOR OR NOT IN FAVOR AFTER THAT. THE WAY I SEE IT IS FOR THE APPLICANT STAFF AT LEAST I THINK THOSE ONE OR MAYBE BOTH THEY'VE BEEN IN BUSINESS FOR
QUITE A WHILE SINCE MAYBE BEFORE IT LIKE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS EVEN ESTABLISHED AT THE SAME TIME RESIDENTS IN THAT AREA WERE SOLD A VISION AND I UNDERSTAND
THAT IT MAY NOT BE EXACTLY AS IT WAS SOLD POTENTIALLY SO I PERSONALLY WOULD BE MORE CURIOUS TO HEAR OF RESIDENTS THAT LIVE AND WORK IN THAT
AREA IF IF THEY HAVE NOT BEEN REACHED OUT TO AND YEAH. AND THEN IF POSSIBLE THAT HASN'T HAPPENED YET. I WOULD PROBABLY LEAN MORE
TOWARDS ABSTAINING JUST TO IF POSSIBLE YEAH. CHAIR COMMISSIONER YOU SAY JUST TO CLARIFY THE CITY DID NOT PERFORM ANY EXTRA OR ADDITIONAL PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
BEYOND OUR TYPICAL PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION PROCESS WHICH WOULD INCLUDE IN INVITING OR ALERTING NOTIFYING THEM OF THE HEARING FOR ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN
500FT OF THE SUBJECT SITES. SO THAT'S OUR TYPICAL PROCESS IS CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW FOR PUBLIC NOTIFICATION. AND JUST TO BE SUPER CLEAR FOR THE RECORD THAT IS SENT OUT
THROUGH THE MAIL, CORRECT THE MAIL AND HEARING NOTICES PUBLISHED IN THE LOCAL NEWSPAPER THE SUN CURRENT WHICH IS THE OFFICIAL PAPER OF RECORD. THANK YOU MR. JOHNSON MYSTERIES DOES THAT
COMMISSIONER HE SAID IS THAT JUST SEE ONE MORE TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION I THINK SO ONE MORE TIME I DOZED OFF AT THE END. SORRY SHE SAID THAT THEY WERE THEY WEREN'T REACHED OUT TO THE MAILING YEAH.
CHAIR COMMISSIONER YOU SAY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500FT OF THE SUBJECT SITES RECEIVE A MAILED NOTICE TO THEIR RESIDENCE OR PLACE OF BUSINESS DEPENDING ON WHAT KIND OF ADDRESS IT IS. THE PROPERTY OWNER OF RECORD
RECEIVES A NOTICE. OKAY. THANK YOU. FOLLOW UP QUESTION AM I ABLE TO ABSTAIN? YES OR LEGAL QUESTION BUT THAT
OH BOY I MEAN IF THE CHAIR COMMISSIONERS I MEAN IF YOU WANT YOU CAN IT'S REALLY NOT LOOKED WELL UPON TO ABSTAIN IF YOU DON'T HAVE A GOOD REASON FOR ABSTAINING AS FAR AS YOU
FEEL LIKE YOU CAN'T BE IMPARTIAL OR THERE'S A CONFLICT OF INTEREST OBVIOUSLY BUT I MEAN YOU CAN ABSTAIN IF YOU SO DESIRE. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.
YOU SAID I WOULD ADD TO THAT THAT YOU KNOW WHAT WHAT HAS BEEN DONE FOR OUTREACH IS STANDARD FOR ANY APPLICATION OF THIS TYPE REGARDING REZONING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IT'S STANDARD
THROUGHOUT. SO THERE IS THERE WAS NO SPECIAL FROM MY UNDERSTANDING IS THERE WAS NO SPECIAL OUTREACH DONE. BUT THE STANDARD OUTREACH WAS
STILL DONE AND I UNDERSTAND. THANK YOU CHAIR. I UNDERSTAND THAT. I JUST FEEL LIKE TOO TO BE FAIR RIGHT. I UNDERSTAND FROM THE BUSINESS ANGLE AND I DO UNDERSTAND THEY
MADE CONCESSIONS ON THEIR END AS WELL WITH ON THEIR HAND SO BUT THEN ALSO THE RESIDENT ASPECT IS SOMETHING THAT I WOULD DEFINITELY WANT TO HEAR MORE OF.
SO THAT'S THAT'S WHY I WOULD PROBABLY STAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS? COMMISSIONER WHITE SO I SHARE
CONCERNS ABOUT THAT HAVE BEEN EXPRESSED ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE NATURE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND AND WHAT WE WANT FOR THAT I'M
SYMPATHETIC. I ALSO AM CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT WILL HAPPEN IN NINE AND A HALF YEARS WHEN THERE'S NO DEVELOPMENT HAPPENING ON THE
SITE BECAUSE I THINK THAT THERE'S ALWAYS GREAT REASONS THAT IT'S NOT HAPPENING AND I WANT TO JUST BE VERY CLEAR
THAT THIS IS THE LAST TEN YEARS AND I'LL HELP PUT UP FENCE MYSELF IF THAT'S NECESSARY IN TEN YEARS IF IT'S GOT TO SIT AS A VACANT LOT
BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S JUST AS AS MUCH AS I APPRECIATE WHAT GOOD PARTNERS THEY HAVE BEEN THE BUSINESS OWNERS HAVE BEEN IN THERE, THE OPERATORS HAVE BEEN AGAIN, I THINK THERE IS A
POINT AT WHICH IT'S JUST TOO MUCH AND I'M THIS CLOSE TO THIS BEING THE POINT BUT I'M PROBABLY GOING TO VOTE YES ONLY BECAUSE I THINK THAT IT IS A REASONABLE COMPROMISE FOR
NOW. BUT I HOPE WE WILL NOT BE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION AGAIN. WHILE I CERTAINLY WON'T BE ON THIS PLANNING COMMISSION IN NINE YEARS I'M SURE BUT I
HOPE THAT WHATEVER IS ON THE COMMISSION AT THAT POINT IS ABLE TO HOLD THE ACCOUNTABILITY ON THIS SO THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WHITE
COMMISSIONER YOU SIR IT'S A JUST SOME MORE SILVER QUESTION 500FT FROM THAT AREA HOW JUST LOOKING AT THE MAPS, HOW MANY
OF THE RESIDENTIAL LOTS ARE WITHIN THAT 500 ARE MOSTLY IN MR. JOHNSON'S THE NOTICE SORRY TO TALK OVER YOUR FIRST CASE. MR. JOHNSON IS THE NOTICING
MAP IN THE PACKET. I THOUGHT I SAW IT. SURE. CHAIR CUNNINGHAM. IT IS IN THE PACKET. I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE IT AS AN EXTRA SLIDE HERE TODAY BUT JUST I MEAN MAYBE I CAN MAKE A BETTER GUESS.
IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THE NORTHEAST MOST RESIDENTIAL SITE OR I'M SORRY TO THE SOUTHWEST OF THIS PROPERTY WOULD BE NOTIFIED AS WELL AS
POTENTIALLY HARDER MIKE BUT YOU HAVE COMMISSIONERS THE WHETHER OR NOT THE PROPERTY OWNER FORWARDED A NOTICE TO
RESIDENTS WE DON'T KNOW YOU KNOW, WE CAN CONFIRM THAT A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LIKE AN APARTMENT BUILDING RECEIVED A NOTICE WHAT THE PROPERTY OWNER DOES WITH THAT NOTICE WE DON'T
HAVE THE ABILITY TO POLICE OR LOOK INTO IT SO SOME SOME PROPERTY OWNERS WILL POST NOTICES AND THINGS AND LIKE A SHARED BOARD AND THE IN THE
BUILDING BUT WE DO NOT SEND NOTICES TO EACH UNIT LIKE A RENTAL UNIT OF AN APARTMENT BUILDING. THANK YOU MR. CENTENARIO DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION?
I DO HAVE THE AND CHAIR CUNNINGHAM SORRY COMMISSIONER YOU SAY I DO HAVE THE NOTIFICATION MAP AVAILABLE IF YOU WANT ME TO SHARE IT QUICKLY PLEASE DO JUST FOR THE
THE MANY FOLKS AT HOME WATCHING. YEAH SO THERE ARE SOME RESIDENTIAL SITES WITHIN THIS BOUNDARY BUT TO MIKE'S POINT THEY MIGHT NOT NECESSARILY BE THE PROPERTY OWNER AND SO IF YOU'RE A RENTER TYPICALLY YOU
MIGHT NOT RECEIVE A NOTICE. SO I WANT TO BE CLEAR AND EXPLICIT ABOUT THAT. THANK YOU. MR. JOHNSON. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION?
IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION IF MR. STANTON OR WE COULD PUT IT
BACK UP ON SCREEN SO MISSION MISSION OR SUMMERS MR. CENTENARIO CAN YOU PUT THE
MOTION BACK UP ON SCREEN APOLOGIES I THINK I'VE GOT IT. I THINK IN CASE NUMBER PL 202600058I MOVED TO RECOMMEND
THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION AT 3737 50 AMERICAN BOULEVARD EAST FROM
SOUTH LOOP MIXED USE TO HIGH INTENSITY MIXED USE SECOND WE HAVE A MOTION IN THIS SECOND ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I I ALL THOSE OPPOSED ABSTAIN STAY THAT MOTION THAT MOTION PASSES
WITH AN ABSTAIN OR WITH A VOTE OF THREE YESES ZERO NOS AND ONE ABSTENTION AND COMMISSIONER SUMMERS IN CASE
NUMBER P.L. 2026-58I MOVE TO RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE REZONING 3737 50 AMERICAN BOULEVARD
EAST FROM H R D TO C NEXT TO P D SECOND WE HAVE A MOTION IN THE SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I I
OPPOSED ABSTAIN ABSTAIN THE MOTION CARRIES WITH THREE THREE YESES ZERO NOS AND ONE ABSTENTION.
COMMISSIONER SUMMERS IN CASE NUMBER PL202658I MOVE TO RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN
EXISTING REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING FACILITY AT 3737 50 AMERICAN BOULEVARD EAST. SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS AND THE CODE REQUIREMENTS ATTACHED
TO THE STAFF REPORT. SECOND THE MOTION ON THE SECOND ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I. I OPPOSED ABSTAIN ABSTAIN.
THE MOTION PASSES WITH THREE YESES ZERO NOS AND ONE ABSTENTION. THAT IS A RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING. THOSE THREE RECOMMEND THREE MOTIONS ARE RECOMMENDATIONS
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO THE CITY COUNCIL OR THIS THE SAME ITEM WILL BE HEARD ON JUNE 15TH 2026 AT 6 P.M. IN THESE CHAMBERS OR SIX 3630
EXCUSE ME I ALWAYS FORGET ABOUT THE LISTENING SESSION. THANK YOU MR. CENTENARIO BUT DON'T GO ANYWHERE. MOVING ON UP HERE.
MOVING ON TO ITEM THREE. ITEM THREE IS A PUBLIC HEARING FOR A REGARDING REZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AT 7901 INTERNATIONAL DRIVE. MR. CENTENARIO I'M ASSUMING
THIS IS GOING TO BE A VERY SIMILAR STAFF REPORT. MR. CHAIR COMMISSIONERS IT IS A VERY SIMILAR STAFF REPORT ALBEIT SHORTER. I WANT TO GIVE EACH
APPLICATION ITS OWN DUE. BUT AGAIN A LOT OF THE DEBATES, A LOT OF THE ISSUES THAT WE'RE WE'VE BEEN GRAPPLING WITH ARE VERY SIMILAR BETWEEN THESE TWO BETWEEN THE TWO APPLICATIONS.
BUT ITEM THREE IN YOUR AGENDA IS FOR PARKING GO AND THE ENTITLEMENTS THEY'RE SEEKING ARE VERY SIMILAR. AGAIN, WE'RE DISCUSSING A
CONFERENCE OF FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION AMENDMENT FOR 7991 INTERNATIONAL DRIVE FROM SOUTH OF MIXED USE TO HIGH INTENSITY MIXED USE. SIMILARLY ONE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN PARKING GO PARKING FLY PARKING GOES DOES NOT HAVE A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY SO YOU WILL YOU DON'T SEE THE PD AT THE END OF THE ZONING DESIGNATION SO THE REZONING WOULD BE FROM AJAX ARE 262.
AND THEN THE THIRD ELEMENT IS A CONDITION ISSUES PERMIT FOR AN EXISTING REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING FACILITY AT THE PARK GO SITE AND SO PARKING GO IT'S
AN EXISTING REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING FACILITY I HAVE ON HERE 1496 STALLS ALTHOUGH THE APPLICANT TELLS ME THAT'S A LITTLE TOO HIGH. SO I THINK WE WE GIFTED A FEW
STALLS APPARENTLY BUT THIS ONE HAS BEEN OPERATIONS SINCE THE EARLY 90S AND YOU KNOW WE COULD TALK ABOUT THE HISTORY FOR A VERY LONG TIME BUT SIMILAR TO PARKING FLY THERE'S
ALSO AN INTERVIEW PERMIT THAT WOULD EXPIRE AUGUST EIGHTH OF NEXT YEAR AND THAT WAS QUITE DELIBERATE TO BRING BOTH OF THESE SITES UNDER THE SAME TIMELINE TO WORK THROUGH THE ROAD OR THE AIRPORT PARKING
STUDY AND THEN SUBSEQUENT SUBSEQUENT CODE AMENDMENTS SO THEY COULD APPLY FAIRLY BETWEEN THESE TWO PROPERTIES AND I WON'T GO INTO AS MUCH
DETAIL BUT A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO THE CITY COUNCIL DID ADOPT CITY CODE AMENDMENTS THAT MADE SOME VERY, VERY IMPORTANT CHANGES ELIMINATED REMOTE
AIRPORT PARKING IS INTERVIEWS AND AGENTS ARE CREATED AS A CONDITIONAL USE AND 62 WHICH THEN NECESSITATED ESSENTIALLY NECESSITATED THE RE-IGNITING AND REZONING THAT YOU'RE CONSIDERING TONIGHT.
BUT WITH THAT THERE WERE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR TO ESTABLISH A FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SITE OF AT LEAST 2.75 ACRES. THE SIX TWO DISTRICT HAS A
MINIMUM FLOOR AREA OF 120,000FT. SO AGAIN WHERE IT DOES THIS DISTRICT DOES REQUIRE A SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON 20,000FT IS IS SUBSTANTIAL
DEVELOPMENT BUT IT IS ALSO MORE PERMISSIVE IN SOME WAYS BUT IT DOES ALLOW FOR SURFACE PARKING TO REMAIN AS IT IS IN IT. THESE FACILITIES CAN EXPAND
WITHIN FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AND WITHIN PARKING STRUCTURES AND SO SIMILAR GRAPHICS TO WHAT YOU SAW BEFORE REGARDING THE
LAND ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF 34TH AVENUE AND AMERICAN BOULEVARD EAST. SO AGAIN WELL THIS IS A VERY PROMINENT SITE, A GATEWAY INTO THE CITY WE REGARD IT TO HIGH INTENSITY MIXED USE.
>> SIMILARLY THE REZONING WOULD BE FROM HSR WHICH REQUIRES A RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT REQUIRES A MINIMUM 1.5 FOR 262 WHICH ALLOWS
RESIDENTIAL ALLOWS HIGH A FOR DEVELOPMENT BUT DOES NOT HAVE THE PRESCRIPTIVE NATURE OF THE HSR DISTRICT AND NOW THE PLANS THAT WERE SUBMITTED ARE A
LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY. THE APPLICANT IN THIS CASE AND GO GOT OUT THE COLORED PENCILS AND THE WATERCOLORS AND DID SOME HAND DRAWINGS FOR US BUT YOU CAN SEE AGAIN THIS IS A
THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL EXERCISE ON HOW A 2.75 ACRE SITE COULD BE IMPLEMENTED ON THIS PROPERTY. AGAIN, WHAT YOU SEE HERE IS A CONCEPTUAL SITE FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. YOU KNOW THERE'S NO BUILDING
DESIGN ON THIS PARTICULAR GRAPHIC BUT IN PAST APPLICATIONS THE APPLICANT HAS PREPARED MULTI-PHASE VISIONS OF WHAT COULD HAPPEN AT THE PARK AND GO PROPERTY.
BUT AGAIN WHAT WE'RE SEEING HERE IS A SITE THAT MEETS THE MINIMUM SIZE THE AREA 2.5 ACRES CAN ACCOMMODATE A AT
LEAST 220,000FT AND IF THEY CHOOSE TO COULD HAVE REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING INCORPORATED WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT FOR COMMISSIONERS THIS MAY BE A GRAPHIC YOU RECOGNIZE FROM
PAST APPLICATIONS OR PAST INTERVIEWS PERMIT APPLICATIONS YOU KNOW, YOU NOTICE THAT THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE LAST GRAPHIC BUT ONE BENEFIT TO THIS PROPERTY IS A LITTLE MORE FLEXIBILITY ON HOW TO
ACCOMMODATE THAT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SITE. THIS IT'S UNIQUE IN THAT IT'S IT'S SURROUNDED ON ALL FOUR SIDES BY RIGHT OF WAY AND A GOOD AMOUNT OF FRONTAGE ALONG
AMERICAN BOULEVARD AND SO ALONG WITH OF YOU KNOW JUST HAVING MORE FRONTAGE ALONG AMERICAN BOULEVARD IT ALSO OFFERS AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE SOME ACCESS CHANGES SO YOU CAN
SEE ON THIS GRAPHIC AGAIN ALL CONCEPTUAL A POTENTIAL NEW ACCESS ALONG 34TH AVENUE AND THERE MAY BE SOME BENEFITS TO THAT TO TRY AND CHANGE THE TRAFFIC PATTERNS FOR SHUTTLES
FOR EXAMPLE SIMILAR TO YOUR LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA. SO WHAT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT BETWEEN THE SITE AND THE PARK AND FLY SITE IS THERE'S MORE
EXISTING LANDSCAPING ON THE PARKING GO PROPERTY AND SO THAT PROPERTY HAS LESS TO ADD IF YOU WILL BUT YOU CAN SEE HERE THE APPLICANT DID PROVIDE
A LANDSCAPE PLAN THAT YOU KNOW THE WAY WE WOULD DESCRIBE IT IS KIND OF LIKE A PHASE ONE LANDSCAPING PLAN. THIS IS THIS IS LANDSCAPING THAT WOULD BE INSTALLED WITHIN THE NEXT YEAR AND THEN FUTURE LANDSCAPING.
IF YOU RECALL PREVIOUS GRAPHIC THERE WOULD BE DENSE LANDSCAPING ASSOCIATED WITH THAT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SITE AND SO WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE APPLICANT ON
LANDSCAPING. OBVIOUSLY THIS IS MUCH, MUCH MORE LANDSCAPING THAN THAT'S ON SITE TODAY AND OUR EXPECTATION IF THAT IF THESE APPLICATIONS ARE APPROVED IS THAT IDEALLY THEY WOULD
COMPLETE IT THIS YEAR. BUT WE UNDERSTAND THAT WE WANT TO SHOW SOME FLEXIBILITY AND A RECOMMENDED CONDITION THAT IT BE COMPLETED BY MIDYEAR OF 2027.
AND SO OF SHORTER LESS VERBOSE PRESENTATION. BUT I HAVE THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR YOU HERE FOR THE PARKING
GO SITE FOR THE READING LAND USE DESIGNATION, THE ZONING REZONING AND THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. THANK YOU MR. CENTENARIO ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER WIFE THANK YOU
MR. CHAIR. >> SO YOU'D MENTIONED THAT THIS WAS DIFFERENT THAN THE OTHER APPLICATION SO IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO HAVE THE SAME TENURE DEVELOPMENT
TIMELINE. IS THAT AM I READING THAT CORRECTLY AND COULD YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHY IT DOES IT IT ALSO THE SAME SORT OF THE DECEMBER 31ST 2036
TIMELINE THAT'S THAT'S ESTABLISHED IN CITY CODE? OKAY. AND SO THAT'S ALREADY IN CITY CODE AND SO SHOULD THESE ENTITLEMENTS BE APPROVED THEY
WOULD HAVE TO FOLLOW THE SAME TIMELINE. NOW THE BENEFIT OF HAVING A TEN YEAR TIMELINE IS THAT TEN YEARS IS A LONG PERIOD OF TIME .
BUT YOU KNOW, WITH ANY LUCK WE WOULD SEE DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY MUCH SOONER. AND SO AGAIN THERE HAS WE FELT THERE HAS TO BE A DEADLINE BUT THE HOPE IS THAT WITH
PERMANENT ZONING THAT PROVIDES THE INCENTIVE TO TRY AND DEVELOP SOONER. OKAY. OF COURSE COMMISSIONER WHITE THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
I'M LOOKING AT THE THE PLAN SUBMITTED WHICH IS SIMILAR TO THE DRAWING THAT YOU HAVE HERE . SO I'M CURIOUS I SEE THE MINIMUM 2.75 ACRES AND THEN
THERE'S JUST IT'S VERY SMALL TYPE SO BEAR WITH ME THERE'S A WHOLE BUNCH OF OTHER STUFF AROUND IT IS THAT THIS HAS TO REPRESENT SORT OF THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT
AND THEN THE REST COULD STAY THE SAME OR COULD BE DEVELOPED . IS THAT ACCURATE? YEAH SURE. COMMISSIONERS COMMISSIONER WHITE YEAH. SO THE SO THIS GRAPHIC HERE IS REALLY JUST A DEPICTION OF THE
MINIMUM REQUIREMENT AND AGAIN CONCEPTUAL ZONING EXERCISE AND WHAT ACTUALLY IS PROPOSED FOR DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE MUCH MORE DETAILED WITH
YOU KNOW ARCHITECTURAL PLANS ENGINEERING, CIVIL ENGINEERING AND YOU KNOW, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE. AND SO THIS IS THIS IS THE APPLICANT'S PRELIMINARY VISION
OF HOW THAT MINIMUM REQUIREMENT COULD BE MET. BUT WHEN IT WHEN THE TIME COMES IT'S GOING TO THE FUTURE EVOLVED IS GOING TO BE TREATED LIKE ANY OTHER DEVELOPMENT THEY'VE GOT TO HIRE A DESIGN
TEAM AND THEY'RE GOING HAVE TO DESIGN A SUBSTANTIAL SITE. BUT IN TERMS OF SORRY MR. CHAIR, I HOPE AT LEAST IN TERMS OF SORT OF WORST CASE
SCENARIOS THE LITTLE BLOCK AT THE BOTTOM COULD BE DEVELOPED AND THEN THE REST COULD CONTINUE TO BE SURFACE PARKING COMMISSIONERS. THAT'S CORRECT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF SEEING NONE. THANK YOU, MR. CENTENARIO. I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT MR. WILLIAMSON IS HERE OR EXCUSE
ME IF THE APPLICANT COULD COME FORWARD AND TELL US ABOUT THEIR PROJECT AND PLEASE INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND WILLIAMSON. GOOD EVENING PLANNING COMMISSION MIGHT COULD YOU PUT
THAT ONE PICTURE WITH ALL THE DIFFERENT STUFF ON IT? YEAH. OUR NEXT RIGHT THERE ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP AND I'M A LITTLE PUZZLED BY
THIS IS THE GOAL STILL IS TO HAVE A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT ON THE PROPERTY THAT HASN'T CHANGED RIGHT RIGHT MAKE NO THAT IS NOT CHANGED.
SO THAT IS STILL THE LONG TERM PLAN HERE IN THIS PROPERTY AND THERE'S A REASON WHY IN TOKYO YOU DON'T HAVE PASTURE CATTLE WALKING AROUND. RIGHT. THE LAND IS TOO VALUABLE SO IT DEVELOPS OVER TIME.
THAT'S JUST ECONOMICS. IT'S NO DIFFERENT HERE WHEN WE GO TO THAT DRAWING THAT SHOWS THAT LITTLE CORNER BLOCKED OUT THERE'S ABOUT $1.5 MILLION PER YEAR REASONS WHY WE WOULD WANT TO DEVELOP THAT LITTLE PIECE
OF PROPERTY. SO I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE MUCH OF A PROBLEM IN TERMS OF THAT WE DO SOMETHING IN TEN YEARS. WE ARE ALREADY LOOKING AT THAT RIGHT NOW AND WE ARE ALSO TALKING TO OUR LANDSCAPE
SUPPLIERS TRYING TO SECURE PLANT MATERIAL BECAUSE THERE IS QUITE A FEW TREES THAT HAVE TO BE PUT IN AND MIKE WAS A LITTLE SHOCKED WHEN I SAID THAT I USUALLY SHOVEL THEM IN MYSELF BUT THAT'S HOW WE DO IT. WE'RE KIND OF A HANDS ON GROUP SO I JUST WANTED YOU TO KNOW
THAT WE STILL HAVE THIS TYPE OF A CONCEPT AND YOU'LL NOTICE THAT WE REALLY LOOK AT THAT WHOLE PIECE OF AMERICAN BOULEVARD IS BEING DEVELOPED ALSO WE BUILD BECAUSE I'M ALSO THE DEVELOPER FOR PARKING GO
WE LITTLE PROPERTIES ALL OVER THE COUNTRY AND I CAN TELL YOU ONE THING THAT WE DO MORE OR DIFFERENTLY THAN EVERYBODY ELSE WE TEND TO BUILD BIG GRASSY AREAS THAT ACTUALLY CAN
SUSTAIN TREES AND BUSHES THEN PUT LITTLE TINY ISLANDS OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF PARKING LOTS. SO YOU'LL SEE THAT PLAN RIGHT THERE. THOSE ARE ALL GREEN SPACES THAT WOULD OF COURSE BE USED
FOR LANDSCAPING. WE DO THIS ALL OVER THE COUNTRY AND MOST CITIES ARE VERY CONDUCIVE TO THAT. SO THEY LIKE THE IDEA THAT THE TREES WILL ACTUALLY LIVE WHEREAS IN LITTLE TINY ISLANDS YOU KNOW HOW IT IS THE PLOW GOES THROUGH AND TREES GOING.
SO I'M ALSO HERE TO ASK QUESTIONS. WE'RE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS. WE THINK IT'S BEEN A VERY GOOD NEGOTIATED SOLUTION BY BOTH SIDES. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS I'M HERE TO ANSWER THEM.
THE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT I ACTUALLY HAVE ON MR. WILLIAMSON IF NO ONE ELSE DOES THIS MAY COME UP IN THE
PUBLIC HEARING LATER BUT BACK IN AUGUST OF END OF AUGUST OF 24 WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT EXTENDING AN AUP FOR THIS SITE, ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS I DON'T THINK IT WAS ME ASKED YOU KNOW, WHAT
WOULD HAPPEN IF THE IP RECOMMENDATION WAS DENIED AND I BELIEVE YOU SAID YOU WERE STILL GOING TO PARK CARS. ONE THING I'M WORRIED ABOUT WITH THE TERM OF THIS IS IF MARKET CONDITIONS ARE NOT
CONDUCIVE OR THE LAND VALUE IS NOT INDICATIVE OF OF REDEVELOPMENT, WOULD PARKING GO OR YOUR PLAN STILL BE TO
PARK CARS ON THE PARCEL THAT WOULD NEED TO BE SET ASIDE NO ADDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO IT IS THE OWNER'S INTENT TO SET THAT ASIDE. WE'RE GOING TO DO WHAT IT SAYS . OKAY. THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU, MR. WILLIAMSON. HAVE A NICE EVENING. THIS ITEM IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE ANYONE IN CHAMBERS WHO WISHES TO
SPEAK ON THIS ITEM TO PLEASE COME FORWARD AT THIS TIME . COMMISSIONERS CHAIR I'M BACK
AGAIN AUBREE ALBRECHT CITIZEN OF BLOOMINGTON. >> I UNDERSTAND THE NEED TO FIND A COMPROMISE HERE AND I
DO AGREE THAT THE LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS ARE SUBSTANTIAL. >> LANDSCAPING IS NOT THE SAME
THOUGH AS ACHIEVING THE LONG TERM VISION FOR SOUTH LOOP. SO I'M RACKING MY BRAIN ABOUT
WHAT HAS BEEN DONE IN THE PAST AND PRIOR TO THIS TEN YEAR EXTENSION AND THERE WERE DEVELOPMENT MILESTONES THAT WERE REQUIRED.
THERE WAS SORT OF A CHECK IN ON THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT THE INTERIM USE PERMANENT PER PERMIT OVER A PERIOD OF TIME WHERE CERTAIN
MILESTONES HAD TO BE MET. AND I'M CURIOUS TO KNOW WHY THAT'S NOT HAPPENING FOR THESE SITES BECAUSE I HONESTLY THINK
THAT THE CITY MAYBE IS NOT SERIOUS ABOUT TAKING A STEP FORWARD AND REALLY WHAT REDEVELOP MENT WILL LOOK LIKE HERE. AND I THINK IT'S GOING TO TAKE
OBVIOUSLY TAKE SOME LEVEL OF PRESSURE AND IT IS DIFFICULT. I GET IT. I UNDERSTAND IT.
SO IF THIS IS NOT THE LONG TERM VISION FOR THE CITY AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO PUT IN DEVELOPMENT MILESTONES ENDS AND OR FIGURE OUT A WAY TO
REALLY MAKE THIS HAPPEN WHETHER THAT IS FUNDING AND PARTNERSHIP OR WHATEVER IT HAS TO BE. I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME LEVEL OF PUSH AND PULL FROM
THE CITY TO THE DEVELOPER OR THE OWNER TO REALLY MAKE THIS SOMETHING. IS IT AN ARTISTIC STRICT. IS IT PUBLIC SPACE? IS IT SOMETHING.
BECAUSE THIS TEN YEAR TIMELINE WHERE WE ARE GOING TO PUT ON ALL THIS LANDSCAPING AND THEN IT'S GOING TO CONTINUE AS A PARKING LOT UNLESS IT DOESN'T AND THEN WE HAD TEN YEARS AND
THEN WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO JUST NOT PARK CARS THERE? I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. WHAT IS THE WHAT'S WHAT HAPPENS THEN? NOTHING. WE'RE THE SAME PLACE AGAIN AND
I'M NOT SAYING THE AIRPORT PARKING IS BAD. IN FACT I THINK IT IS HELPFUL TO OUR CITY. IT'S AN IT IS AN ASSET BUT IT IS REGIONAL PEOPLE COMING IN,
PARKING THEIR CARS, NOT SPENDING MONEY IN BLOOMINGTON ,NOT CONTRIBUTING TO OUR LOCAL ECONOMY. AND DO WE ARE WE GOOD WITH THAT?
AND IF WE ARE, THAT'S FINE. BUT IF WE AREN'T THEN WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME LEVERS TO PULL IN SOME PLACES. AND I THINK WE SET THAT UP REALLY WELL THE LAST TIME.
COVID AND SUPPLY CHAIN ISSUES REALLY PUT A WRENCH IN IT. I THINK WE WERE THERE. WE WERE SO CLOSE. AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT
REPLICATED AGAIN. >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MS. ALBRECHT. SEEING NO ONE ELSE AND CHAMBER OF PLEASE STEP FORWARD AND
STATE YOUR NAME. YES, MR. CHAIR. BILL GRIFFITH I WASN'T GOING TO SPEAK ON MY FRIEND DANIEL WILLIAMSON'S APPLICATIONS BUT SINCE THEY'RE SO RELATED I'M
GOING TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY AND I'LL BE BRIEF BUT BUT A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY ONE IS THESE USES DID PREDATE THE SOUTH LOOP PLANT. THEY PREDATED LIGHT RAIL. NOW WE CAN ARGUE WHETHER THEY'RE PERMANENT OR
TEMPORARY. THE CITY COUNCIL HAS MADE THAT DECISION. THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED THOSE ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS WHEN THEY CAME TO THEM WHEN THEY CAME TO YOU. SO THAT'S THAT'S THE RECENT
HISTORY. THE NOT SO RECENT HISTORY IS MANY PROPERTY OWNERS IN SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT GOT UP AND SPOKE AGAINST THE CHANGES THAT RESULTED IN THE H R AMENDMENTS
BECAUSE THEY WERE TOO PRESCRIPTIVE AND AND NOW WE HAVE THIS MANY YEARS LATER A RECOGNITION THAT MAYBE THEY WERE AND THEY DIDN'T WORK FOR DEVELOPMENT.
THE PROMISE OF THIS SET OF APPLICATIONS IS YOU'VE GOT SOMETHING THAT CREATES FLEXIBILITY AND A TRUE INCENTIVE. AS MR. WILLIAMSON SAID, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO LEAVE THREE ACRES SITTING THERE WITH NO REVENUE
PRODUCING USES. THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THIS IS GOING FROM A BARE SITE WITH WITH PARK CARS ON IT TO A
DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY. I IN MY ALMOST 40 YEARS OF WORKING WITH DEVELOPERS THEY DON'T LEAVE STUFF ON THE TABLE WHEN THE MARKETOMES AROUND AND THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO DEVELOP THEY
WILL BUILD. THE OTHER THING IS A LITTLE BIT AND YOU UNDERSTAND THIS BECAUSE YOU'RE ALL INDOCTRINATED IN THE PLANNING PRINCIPLES THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS GUIDANCE. IT IS FORWARD LOOKING, IT IS POLICY WHAT WHAT REALLY
PRESCRIBES AND CONTROLS THE LAND USE IS WHAT HAPPENS WITH ZONING AND THAT'S WHAT THE CITY IS GETTING RIGHT IN MY HUMBLE OPINION THIS TIME AROUND WITH SIX TWO BEING A
FLEXIBLE TOOL. YOU'VE SEEN WHAT IT'S DONE AT MALL OF AMERICA AND AND LET'S TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN SOUTH LOOP BOWL YEAR TWO BIGGEST DEVELOPMENTS IN SOUTH LOOP HAVE CHANGED.
THOSE PLANS HAVE CHANGED 2030 TIMES OVER THE YEARS TO RESPOND TO THE MARKET. AND SO YOU'VE GOT TWO THINGS YOU'VE GOT GUIDING AND ZONING AND YOU'VE GOT A MARKET.
AND I BELIEVE THIS TIME AROUND AND IT'LL REMAIN TO BE SEEN BUT THIS TIME AROUND THEY'RE IN ALIGNMENT AND THAT'S WHAT WE SPENT SO MANY HOURS WITH YOUR STAFF AND YOUR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TALKING
ABOUT AND NEGOTIATING TO GET TO A SET OF PRINCIPLES AND LEGAL CONTROLS THAT CAN WORK. AND SO AGAIN, I APPRECIATE NOT LETTING THE YOU KNOW, THE PERFECT GET IN THE WAY OF THE
GOOD THAT THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE HERE. WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY AND I THINK IT'S A REALLY GOOD OPPORTUNITY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. GRIFFITH. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK
ON THIS ITEM? >> MS. BROWN DO WE HAVE ANYONE ONLINE? PARTICIPANTS ONLINE OUR STAFF. THANK YOU. HEARING THAT I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING. I MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. SECOND WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
I. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. DISCUSSION. THE OTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS?
COMMISSIONER WAIT. I GUESS JUST FOR THE SAKE OF CONSISTENCY I YOU KNOW I HAVE THE SAME CONCERNS THAT I HAD WITH THE THE LAST DISCUSSION THE LAST PROPOSAL BEFORE US.
YOU KNOW, I THINK I THINK TEN YEARS IS A LONG TIME AND I DON'T THINK WE'RE NOW WHERE I THOUGHT WE'D BE TEN YEARS AGO. SO I KNOW THAT THINGS CHANGE.
BUT I AM VOTING YES BECAUSE I'M TRUSTING FUTURE PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS THAT WHERE WE'RE HOLDING TO THAT TEN
YEARS OR LESS. >> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER WAITE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER SUMMERS THANK YOU
CHAIR. I THINK TO BRING FORTH ONE OF THE QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC HEARING ONE THING I HEARD ABOUT WAS DEVELOPMENT MILESTONE.
COULD STAFF TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHY THAT'S NOT REALLY IN THIS VERSION OF THE PLAN? MR. SANTIAGO. SURE COMMISSIONERS. YEAH, I'LL TRY. I'LL TRY TO BE BRIEF. THERE'S OBVIOUSLY THERE'S
ALMOST 40 YEARS OF HISTORY WITH THIS USE ON THESE SITES BUT BEFORE THE PANDEMIC ONE MECHANISM THAT WE TRIED TO
ESTABLISH WAS EXTENDING INTERVIEWS, PERMITS WITH CONDITIONS AND THOSE CONDITIONS RELATED TO CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT MILESTONES.
AND WHAT WE MEAN BY DEVELOPED MILESTONES WAS A SERIES OF DEADLINES THAT WOULD LEAD TO DEVELOPMENT. SO BY X DATE THERE NEEDED TO
BE A CONCEPT PLAN AND BY X DATE THEY NEEDED TO APPLY FOR DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS AND BY X DATE ULTIMATELY THEY WOULD HAVE TO START CONSTRUCTION.
AND SO THAT WAS A THAT WAS THE APPROACH THAT IN BASIC TERMS WAS WE WILL SUPPORT AN IP EXTENSION FOR MULTIPLE PARKING.
BUT WITH THAT EXTENSION THERE WILL BE A PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT. AND SO EACH OF THESE SITES WERE ENVISIONED TO BE MULTI-PHASED TO BE CONVERTED FROM A ROAD FOR PARKING TO QUOTE UNQUOTE PERMIT
DEVELOPMENT OVER A SERIES OF PHASES. AND AGAIN, VERY WELL-INTENTIONED IDEA. AND IN FACT THE PROPERTY OWNER A PARKING FLY WENT THROUGH
THAT PROCESS. THEY GOT APPROVAL FOR A VERY ATTRACTIVE APARTMENT BUILDING AND END UP GETTING REALLY CLOSE TO GETTING BUILDING PERMITS. AND SO IT WAS VERY CLOSE TO MATERIALIZING.
AND THEN THINGS CHANGED AND IT DIDN'T HAPPEN. AND SO IT WAS AN APPROACH THAT THE CITY TRIED AND ULTIMATELY WAS NOT SUCCESSFUL.
THANK YOU, MR. CENTENARIO. DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ,COMMISSIONER OR ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? >> I'LL JUST ADD MY $0.02 THAT
I AM COGNIZANT THAT THESE ITEMS TWO AND THREE ARE VERY SIMILAR AND I JUST WANT TO SAY I COMMEND STAFF FOR WORKING THROUGH THIS.
I BELIEVE IT WAS MR. GRIFFITH ON ITEM TWO THAT MADE A SMALL QUIP ABOUT MR. CENTENARIO HAVING MORE FREE TIME AFTER THIS IS DONE. SO THANK YOU FOR THE HARD WORK ON THIS AND I AM IN FAVOR
OF THIS RECOMMENDATION IF THERE IS NO FURTHER DISCUSSION I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION OR IT WAS FOR THE DISCUSSION. MR. SUMMERS I THINK.
THANKS CHAIR. I AM IN FAVOR OF THIS AND FOR MANY OF THE REASONS THAT I
LISTED IN THE LAST DISCUSSION BUT ALSO TO KEEP THESE TWO IN LINE WITH EACH OTHER MAKES A LOT OF SENSE TO ME.
THE TWO AIRPORT PARKING FACILITIES. THANK YOU. IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION. COMMISSIONER SUMMERS.
THANK YOU, CHAIR. IN CASE NUMBER P.L. 2026-66I MOVED TO RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION AT 7901 INTERNAL NATIONAL DRIVE FROM SOUTH LOOP MIXED USE TO HIGH INTENSITY MIXED USE. SECOND WE HAVE A MOTION AND A
SECOND ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I. I OPPOSED. ABSTAIN ABSTAIN THE MOTION PASSES WITH THREE YESES ZERO
NO'S AND ONE ABSTENTION. COMMISSIONER SUMMERS IN CASE NUMBER P.L. 2026-66I MOVE TO RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL
ADOPT AN ORDINANCE REZONING 70 901 INTERNATIONAL DRIVE FROM H R TO C X TWO. SECOND WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I. I OPPOSED. ABSTAIN ABSTAIN THE MOTION PASSES WITH THREE YESES ZERO NOS AND ONE ABSTENTION.
MR. SUMMERS. IN CASE NUMBER OF PEOPLE 2026-66I MOVE TO RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING FACILITY AT 7901 INTERNATIONAL DRIVE. SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS AND CODE REQUIREMENTS ATTACHED TO THE STAFF REPORT. SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION ON A
SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? OTHERS IN FAVOR SAY I. I OPPOSED ABSTAIN. STAY THERE MOTION PASSES WITH
THREE YESES ZERO NOS AND ONE ABSTENTION. THAT IS A RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT WILL APPEAR BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL ON JUNE 15TH 2026
AT 6:30 P.M. IN THESE CHAMBERS. MOVING ON OR EXCUSE ME I BELIEVE MY TEMPORARY CHAIR SHIP IS OVER AND MR. CHAIR
COOKED AND CAN RETURN TO CHAMBERS. THANKS. OBVIOUSLY
. THANK YOU. WE WILL MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR. IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING. THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON IS THE
APPLICANT FOR CORNER LOT STANDARDS. AS EMILY HESS PUBLIC IS ONLINE WITH THE STAFF REPORT. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS
. I'M SORRY I COULDN'T BE THERE IN PERSON TONIGHT. I'M A LITTLE SICK BUT I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT AMENDMENTS TO
SOME CORNER LOT REGULATIONS. IT'S OKAY. SO THIS ITEM WENT TO STUDY SESSIONS AND MARCH AND APRIL AND IT'S PLAN TO GO TO A
COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING IN JUNE AFTER TONIGHT. >> A LITTLE BACKGROUND JUST REMINDER ABOUT WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.
BLOOMINGTON'S CURRENT ZONING RULES TREAT ALL STREET FACING YARDS ON LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL CORNER LOTS AS FRONT YARDS DISTRICT QUIRES LARGER LOT SIZES, INCREASED SETBACKS AND STRICTER
REGULATIONS COMPARED TO INTERIOR LOTS. THESE STANDARDS MAY HINDER THE CITY'S GOALS OF ENCOURAGING INFILL DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING AFFORDABILITY WHILE ALSO
CREATING INEQUITIES FOR CORNER LOT OWNERS BY LIMITING THEIR ABILITY TO EXPAND THEIR HOMES OR ADD ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. THE ORDINANCE PROPOSAL IS SEEKING TO INCREASE
FLEXIBILITY AND REDUCE THESE HINDRANCES TO CORNER LOT OWNERS. >> THIS SCREEN IS JUST SHOWING A SUMMARY OF THE ITEMS PROPOSED TO CHANGE IN THE
ORDINANCE AND I'LL GO THROUGH EACH ITEM INDIVIDUAL. THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE REDUCES A SETBACK REQUIREMENT FOR PRIMARY AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES INCLUDING ACCESSORY
DWELLING UNITS ON CORNER LOTS FROM 30FT TO 20FT ALONG THE SIDE STREET WALK LINE. THIS CHANGE WOULD MAKE BETTER USE OF CORNER LOT SPACE BY TREATING SIDE STREET YARDS OR
LIKE SIDE YARDS INSTEAD OF TREATING THEM LIKE FRONT YARDS AS FAR AS SITE AREA GOES .
>> THE ORDINANCE IS PROPOSING LOWERING THE MINIMUM SITE AREA REQUIREMENTS FOR CORNER LOTS SO THE ORDINANCE WOULD REDUCE THE MINIMUM SITE AREA FOR
SINGLE FAMILY HOMES FROM 11,050FT TO 90 100FT FOR CORNER LOTS AND FOR TWO FAMILY HOMES FROM 14,625FT TO
11,700FT. THESE CHANGES RESPOND TO FEEDBACK FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL AND ARE INTENDED TO ALIGN LOT SIZES WITH THE PROPOSED SETBACK
REQUIREMENTS AND TYPICAL BUILDING PAD SIZE. >> AS FOR AS SITE WITH THOSE THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE WOULD ALSO REDUCE THE MINIMUM SITE
WITH FOUR CORNER LOTS. A NEW PROPOSAL WOULD BE 70FT FOR SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND 90FT FOR TWO FAMILY LOTS COMPARED TO THE CURRENT 100
FOOT SITE WITH REQUIREMENT. THESE STANDARDS WOULD STILL REMAIN SLIGHTLY LARGER THAN THOSE FOR INTERIOR LOTS AND BOTH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL GENERALLY
SUPPORTED THESE CHANGES. >> AS FAR AS ACCESSORY BUILDING LOCATION GOES CURRENTLY ACCESSORY BUILDINGS CANNOT BE LOCATED BETWEEN A
PRIMARY STRUCTURE AND THE STREET. SO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO ALLOW ACCESSORY BUILDINGS IN THE SIDE STREET YARD WHICH
IS SHOWN ON THE SCREEN. IT'S THE READ AREA AND BETWEEN THAT HOUSE AND THE STREET SIDE YARD THIS WOULD ALLOW CORNER LOT OWNERS TO HAVE MORE SPACE
TO PLACE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ON THEIR LOT. AND LIKE I MENTIONED EARLIER WITH THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE THERE WOULD STILL BE A 20 FOOT SETBACK REQUIREMENT FROM THE STATUTORY OUTLINE.
>> SEVERAL DEFINITIONS WERE CHANGED WITHIN THE ORDINANCE. THIS WAS TO ENSURE CONSISTENCY AND IMPROVE CLARITY AND MOSTLY FOR STAFF.
>> AND THEN THE NEW DEFINITIONS ESTABLISH A SITE PLOT LINE AND A SIDE STREET YARD WHICH I TALKED ABOUT MORE HERE.
SO TO SUPPORT A REDUCED SETBACK ALONG STREETS, THE ORDINANCE IS PROPOSING TO ADD A NEW DEFINITION FOR SIDE
STREET YARD WHICH IS WHAT'S SHOWN IN RED ON THE SCREEN. AND THIS IS TO IMPROVE CLARITY IN THE ZONING CODE. AND THIS ALLOWS GREATER FLEXIBILITY FOR CORNER LOT OWNERS TO USE THE SIDE STREET
YARD DIFFERENTLY THAN A SIDE OR REAR YARD . >> WITH THAT I HAVE THE RECOMMENDATION ON THE SCREEN AND I AM AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU.
A SETBACK. SO WITH QUESTIONS FOR SOUTH SEEING NONE. THANK YOU. WE DO HAVE A QUESTION FROM COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM.
SORRY ABOUT THE DELAY. THOSE FLIPPING BACK TO MY NOTES FROM MARCH MISSPOKE. WE HAD SOME DISCUSSION IN MARCH ABOUT ESSENTIALLY
STANDARDIZING LOT WIDTHS FOR SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX OR DOUBLE TWO FAMILY HOME DWELLINGS. DID OUR RECOMMENDATION FROM THE STUDY SESSION MAKE IT INTO THIS FINAL THIS FINAL
PRESENTATION? >> CHAIR COMMISSIONER YES. THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION. THEY DID SO YEAH. IF YOU RECALL WE WERE DOING KIND OF A LOT OF MATH THAT
STUDY SESSION AND WE ENDED UP TAKING USING THE SAME MATH FOR BOTH SINGLE FAMILY AND TWO FAMILY HOMES FOR THE LOT WITH SO THAT YOU'RE ADDING THE SETBACKS TOGETHER.
A TYPICAL BUILDING BACK ADD SIZE AND THAT IS HOW WE CALCULATED THE LOT WITH AND LEFT IT AS SIMILAR AND EAT
MORE FOR BOTH SINGLE FAMILY AND TWO FAMILY DWELLINGS. >> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTIONS COMMISSIONER. THANK YOU, CHAIR. SO WITH THE NEW SIDE YARD I
THINK IT WAS THE OTHER SIDE STREET YARD DEFINITION BE ON THE SIDE OF WHERE THE I GUESS THE MAILING FRONT ENTRANCE IS MAILING ADDRESS OR LIKE HOW
YEAH IF THAT MAKES SENSE. LIKE HOW WOULD IT BE LIKE OH YEAH THANK YOU. >> YEAH.
CHAIR COMMISSIONER YOU SAID SO I THINK YOU'RE ASKING LIKE WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS BETWEEN THE FRONT YARD AND THE SIDE STREET YARD.
SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ABOUT THE MAILING ADDRESS LIKE WHATEVER STREET IS THE MAILING ADDRESS WOULD BE CONSIDERED THE FRONT YARD IN THIS
INSTANCE IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ASKING. OKAY. THAT MAKES SENSE. YEAH I WAS JUST YEAH, THAT MAKES SENSE. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ? SEE NONE.
THANK YOU, MR. HERZBERG. THERE'S NOBODY IN THE CHAMBERS AS I OPEN THIS PUBLIC HEARING BUT I WILL ASK IF THERE'S ANYBODY ONLINE WHO WISHES TO TESTIFY.
ONE SECOND. OH, I THINK THE MASTER WILL GIVE ME A SECOND.
OH, NO TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES . CHAIR I CAN CONFIRM THAT ALL MEMBERS ONLINE ARE STAFF. THANK YOU MR. JOHNSON. APOLOGIES FOR THE DELAY.
NOT A PROBLEM HELPING OUT. I WILL THEN LOOK FOR A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING SO MOVED. SECOND MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE?
I OPPOSED MOTION PASSES FIVE ZERO. WE'LL MOVE TO DISCUSSION. COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU CHAIR.
I THINK THAT THIS IS A GOOD WAY TO ALLOW FOLKS TO USE THE 80 EDU STANDARDS THAT WE'VE PUT IN PLACE AND ALSO
POTENTIALLY REDEVELOP A FEW LARGER LOTS INTO TWO FAMILY OR TWO FAMILY HOMES. SO I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS I THINK IT OVERALL PUSHES FOR THE CITY GOALS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM. AS I HAVE ATTENDED CONFERENCES FOR MANY YEARS ACROSS THE
NATION FOR PLANNING, THIS IS A RECURRING THEME AND WHAT WE'RE POLICY IS REALLY GOING ACROSS THE UNITED STATES AND MUNICIPALITIES AND I COMMEND THE CITY FOR REALLY BEING ON THE FRONT THE FRONT FOOT OF IT
. YOU KNOW, I'VE HAD SOME SKEPTICAL COMMENTS OVER TIME OF HOW MUCH TIME WE'RE SPENDING ON IT. BUT ASIDE FROM THAT, I DO THINK WE'RE DOING THE RIGHT THING AND I THINK WE'RE AHEAD
OF THE GAME IN WHETHER THIS MAKES AN ACTUAL DIFFERENCE IN THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON. I THINK REALISTICALLY IT'S NOT. WE'RE ALREADY BUILT OUT MAYBE A TIME OR TWO A YEAR THIS COMES INTO PLAY BUT WE HAVE
DONE THE RIGHT THING AND OVER TIME IT'LL CONTINUE TO HAVE ITS IMPACT HAVING DONE THE RIGHT THING IN THE YEAR 2026 I'M IN FAVOR OF IT. THERE'S NO FURTHER COMMENTS. I WOULD LOOK FOR A MOTION.
COMMISSIONER WHITE IN CASE P.L. 2026-64I MOVED TO RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE UPDATING CORNER LOT SETBACKS WIDTH AND AREA REQUIREMENTS AND EDITING
DEFINITIONS RELATED TO CORNER LOTS THEREBY AMENDING CHAPTER 21 OF THE CITY CODE. THERE A SECOND SECOND MOTION AND A SECOND TO RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTS THIS
ORDINANCE ANY FINAL DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I. I OPPOSED THAT MOTION PASSES FIVE ZERO THIS WILL GO BEFORE
THE CITY COUNCIL AS A PUBLIC HEARING ON JUNE 15TH. WE'LL MOVE THEN TO OUR LAST ITEM THIS EVENING ITEM NUMBER FIVE WHICH IS THE PLANNING COMMISSION POLICIES AND ISSUES
UPDATE MR. JOHNSON THANK YOU CHAIR COOKED AND THERE'S TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS SCHEDULED FOR THE JUNE 4TH MEETING. THE FIRST IS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A TYPE TWO HOME BUSINESS A DANCE SCHOOL, AN 8924 AMOUNT CURB ROAD.
THE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING IS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR CANNABIS CULTIVATION AT 200 GRAND AVENUE SOUTH. AND THEN THE THIRD ITEM ON THAT AGENDA IS A STUDY ITEM PRESENTING INFORMATION ABOUT THE URBAN FOREST MASTER PLAN.
SO THIS HAS BEEN A PRIORITY PROJECT FOR OUR NATURAL RESOURCE STAFF AND ONGOING FOR PROBABLY THE LAST I WANT TO SAY TEN MONTHS OR LONGER A LOT OF DATA COLLECTION, A LOT
OF INTERESTING WORK DONE WITH A CONSULTANT AND OTHER CITY STAFF SO THEY'RE GOING TO PRESENT FINDINGS AND ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR YOU ABOUT THAT. IT WAS A PLAN THAT WAS DID HAVE DEDICATED CAPACITY FOR
PLANNING STAFF RESERVE OR ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION WORK PLAN. SO THEY DO WANT TO PROVIDE REPORTING TO YOU ON THAT. LOOKING AHEAD TO THE JUNE 18TH MEETING, THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING IS A PRELIMINARY AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR A
EXPANSION AT THE SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY CAMPUS THAT'S ALONG THE BORDER OF THE B DANA SO AT 7050 NORTH AVENUE SOUTH AND 78 OR 1 COMPUTER AVENUE SOUTH. AND THEN TWO ADDITIONAL STUDY ITEMS ON THE JUNE 18TH MEETING
BOTH OF WHICH ARE WORKPLAN PROJECTS A REVIEW OF THE MULTIFAMILY PERFORMANCE STANDARDS IN THE ZONING CODE AND THEN FINALLY A MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES ORDINANCE STUDY SESSION. SO LOOKING AT THE MINOR POLICY
AMENDMENTS THAT ARE COMING FORWARD THIS YEAR AS PART OF MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES OTHER UPDATES I CAN SHARE THE BLOOMINGTON 2050 LAUNCH EVENT HAPPENED LAST NIGHT INITIALLY AND THANKS MR. SUMMERS FOR
ATTENDING THAT. I APPRECIATE THAT. AND WE HAVE A VIRTUAL EVENT NEXT TUESDAY ON MAY 26TH AND BELIEVE IT STILL HAS SOME CAPACITY FOR ANYONE INTERESTED IN REGISTERING FOR THAT VIRTUAL EVENT.
SO ON MAY 26TH 6 TO 7:30 P.M. AND MICROSOFT TEAMS REGISTER ON LET'S TALK BLOOMINGTON AND THEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS ARE SCHEDULED TO OCCUR AT THE JUNE 1ST CITY
COUNCIL MEETING. SO JUST A HEADS UP ABOUT THAT. AND THEN FINALLY TO THE POINT ABOUT IMPACTS OF ZONING REFORM, I KNOW THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS REQUESTED STAFF REPORT BACK ON APPLICATIONS
THAT HAVE COME THROUGH BY MORE RECENTLY. I JUST WANT TO NOTE THAT THE 16 DETACHED TOWNHOME PROJECT AT THE SOUTH END OF BLOOMINGTON FERRY ROAD WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL
SO AN INCREASE OF 13 UNITS ON THAT SITE AS A RESULT OF THOSE MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING PROVISIONS. SO JUST WANT TO SHARE THOSE UPDATES AND THANKS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY. THANK YOU.
MR. JONATHAN, I HAVE A QUESTION VERY BRIEFLY WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE URBAN FOREST MASTER PLAN AND I BELIEVE WE CALL IT THE PARK SYSTEM MASTER PLAN? YEAH. THANK YOU.
SO THE URBAN FOREST MASTER PLAN MORE BROADLY IS FOCUSED ON CANOPY ANALYSIS OF ALL OF THE CITY. SO STUDYING WHAT AREAS OF THE CITY ARE REALLY LACKING IN URBAN CANOPY AND SO THEY'RE
GOING TO USE THIS INFORMATION TO PRIORITIZE PLANTINGS IN THOSE AREAS THAT CURRENTLY HAVE LESSER CANOPY OR LESS TREE COVER. SO REALLY INTENDED TO TRY TO IMPROVE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS IN THOSE AREAS.
AND THEN SECONDLY WE GET A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT TREES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. SO THEY DID A VERY ROBUST DATA COLLECTION ON ALL TREES IN BLOOMINGTON PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. THEY EVEN HAVE VISUALIZATION MODELS AND HAVE PHOTOGRAPHED
EVERY TREE. SO IT'S A LOT OF HELPFUL DATA AND I THINK SOME OF THE POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS COMING OUT OF THAT IS FOR THE CITY TO BE MORE AGGRESSIVE OR PERMISSIVE OF PLANTINGS IN PUBLIC RIGHT
AWAY IN ORDER TO TRY AND BUILD UP A CANOPY ALONG ROADWAYS. SO DAVE HANSON AND THE CONSULTANT WILL BE HERE ON THE FOURTH TO DIVE MORE INTO THAT. BUT THE POLICY DOCUMENT YOU'RE REFERRING TO IS MORE ABOUT
STRATEGIES ON PUBLIC LANDS, CITY PARK PROPERTIES AND CONSERVATION AND PROPERTIES MINNESOTA RIVER SOME OF THOSE THINGS SO THAT'S KIND OF THE KEY DIFFERENCE I GUESS. OKAY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR COMMISSIONERS TO DISCUSS ANYTHING THAT WAS NOT ON THIS EVENING'S AGENDA AND I WILL OPEN THAT OPPORTUNITY NOW I
WOULD LIKE TO ASK AN ITEM MR. JOHNSON I AS A REGULAR READER OF THE BLOOMINGTON BRIEFING THAT SHOWS UP IN MY MAILBOX ONCE A MONTH I WAS SURPRISED TO READ A THING ABOUT THE
CLOCK TOWER AT 98TH AND LYNDALE AND NOW WE ARE PLANNING TO TEAR IT DOWN. TELL US MORE. YEAH THANKS FOR COOKIN SO I KNOW THIS IS A SENSITIVE ISSUE AND AN IMPORTANT ISSUE TO
ESPECIALLY FOLKS WHO HELPED INVEST IN THAT KIND OF CIVIC LANDMARK AND SO I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF FOLKS WHO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THAT AND RESPECT THEIR REASONS WHY
THIS BOILS DOWN TO EFFECTIVELY OF JUST A BUILDING SAFETY ISSUE THAT DUE TO SOME WATER INTRUSION THAT HAPPENED AND A COUPLE OF THE STRUCTURAL COLUMNS OF THE TOWER AT SOME
POINT IN THE FUTURE IT'S GOING TO BE STRUCTURALLY UNSAFE. AND SO THE CITY IS TAKING PROACTIVE ACTION TO GET AHEAD OF SOME OF THOSE THINGS. IN ADDITION TO THAT, A LOT
OF THE COMPONENTS OF THE CLOCK ITSELF THE CLOCK WAS BUILT IN THE 1990S I BELIEVE AND SO THEY'RE NO LONGER AVAILABLE TO REPLACE A LOT OF THE COMPONENTS AND SO TO DO THE
STRUCTURAL REPAIRS OF THE CLOCK WAS EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE . THEY DID GET SOME PRICING DONE IN 2024 I BELIEVE AND SO AT THAT TIME SOME DECISIONS WERE MADE NOT TO MAKE MAKE THAT
INVESTMENT BUT I KNOW IT'S AN ISSUE THAT PEOPLE HAVE STRONG FEELINGS ON LOTS OF DIFFERENT SIDES SO I PROBABLY CAN'T WIN AND WHATEVER RESPONSE I GIVE YOU ON THIS ONE HERE IT'S JUST SEEKING INFORMATION.
SO JUST TO DIVE A LITTLE DEEPER, WHO MAKES THAT DECISION? IS THAT A CITY STAFF DECISION OR IS THAT A COUNCIL DECISION? YEAH, THAT'S A FAIR QUESTION. I YOU KNOW DIRECTLY WHO IS INVOLVED IS OUR MAINTENANCE
STAFF BUT OBVIOUSLY YOU KNOW, THIS IS A SENSITIVE THIS BEING A SENSITIVE ISSUE. I'M SURE IT INVOLVES CITY LEADERSHIP AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS IN TERMS OF WHAT TO DO FROM A CAPITAL INVESTMENT STANDPOINT.
THEY REVIEW THE CFP EVERY YEAR SO I CAN'T NAME ONE PERSON OR ONE ENTITY IN TERMS OF WHO IS THE RESPONSIBLE DECISION MAKER. I CAN CERTAINLY COLLECT MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT AND GET BACK TO THE PUBLIC BUT I WILL
SAY IS THAT WHATEVER HAPPENS NEXT IS LIKELY TO FOLLOW A LOT OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT. YOU KNOW, SHOULD THE CLOCK TOWER BE REMOVED AS IS PLANNED, WHATEVER HAPPENS THERE NEXT, THE CITY WILL BE VERY PROACTIVE IN ITS TOOLS
OF HOW TO ENGAGE WITH THE PUBLIC ABOUT THAT. WE HAVE DEDICATED PROFESSIONALS IN CREATIVE PLACEMAKING AND OTHER PROFESSIONALS. IN ADDITION, PLANNING STAFF OF COURSE WOULD BE INVOLVED SO
THE CITY WOULD DO A LOT OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT IN TERMS OF WHATEVER WOULD COME NEXT FOR THE SITE ABSENT THE CLOCK TOWER. THANK YOU MR. JOHNSON. LOOK, I'M NOT A STAND FOR THE
THE CLOCK TOWER. YEAH, THAT'S IT'S NOT SOMETHING I FEEL EMOTIONALLY ATTACHED TO BUT IT DOES I WAS SURPRISED TO READ ABOUT IT AND
I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SEEN THIS COME BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND SOME CAPACITY AS A AS A STUDY ITEM. I THINK THIS IS WHY WE HAVE A
PLANNING COMMISSION IS TO LOOK AT OUR CITY AND WHAT'S THE LONG TERM AND I'M NOT AT ALL DOUBTING OUR CITY STAFF AND THEIR EXPERTISE AND I IMAGINE IT WAS REVIEWED BY A LICENSED ENGINEER AND I'M NOT DOUBTING
THEIR EXPERTISE EITHER. HOWEVER, I THINK THIS IS THIS IS A THIS IS SOMETHING THAT COULD HAVE COME BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION COULD HAVE GOTTEN PUBLIC INPUT ON IT.
AND I THINK THIS IS A ROLE WE CAN PLAY BECAUSE WE HAVE PEOPLE ON THIS BODY WITH EXPERTISE THAT'S WHY WE HAVE A PLANNING COMMISSION IS TO ADVISE THE CITY COUNCIL ON MATTERS THAT FALL WITHIN OUR
AREA OF EXPERTISE. WE HAVE PEOPLE IN THIS COMMISSION WHO ARE IN THE DEVELOPMENT INDUSTRY WHO UNDERSTAND FANCING AND AND ALL THAT. I'M A LICENSED STRUCTURAL ENGINEER. I CAN PROVIDE INPUT AS WELL
AND SO I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE SEEN THIS COME BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND I JUST WANT TO BE ON THE RECORD ABOUT THAT. ANY THOUGHTS ON THE CLOCKTOWER
OR ANY OTHER ITEMS SEEING NONE THAT WILL CONCLUDE THIS MAY 21ST MEETING OF THE BLOOMINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION. >> GOODNIGHT