, THREE . >> GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO THIS SEPTEMBER 18TH MEETING OF THE BLOOMINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION. THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADVISES AS THE CITY COUNCIL ON
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS LONG RANGE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION ISSUES. SOME ITEMS ARE STUDY ITEMS THAT ARE BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHERE WE WILL NOT TAKE FORMAL ACTION WHILE OTHER
ITEMS BEFORE US ARE PUBLIC HEARINGS WHERE WE ENCOURAGE THE PUBLIC TO TESTIFY. YOU CAN DO THAT HERE AT CITY HALL. YOU CAN ALSO DO THAT REMOTELY BY FOLLOWING THE INSTRUCTIONS ON YOUR SCREEN. SOME ITEMS THE PLANNING
COMMISSION HAS FINAL DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY WHILE IN OTHER ITEMS THIS PLANNING COMMISSION WILL ACT IN AN ADVISORY CAPACITY AND THE CITY COUNCIL WILL HAVE THE FINAL DECISION. 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 FOR A MAXIMUM OF TWO TERMS. WE HAVE ALL SEVEN PLANNING COMMISSIONERS PRESENT HERE SO
WE DO HAVE A QUORUM THIS EVENING. AS WE BEGIN I'LL ASK EVERYONE OF THE CHAMBERS TO PLEASE RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE
FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
WE WILL BEGIN THIS EVENING AS WE TYPICALLY DO WITH ITEM NUMBER ONE. THAT ITEM IS THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON CITY FLEET MAINTENANCE FACILITY. THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON IS THE
APPLICANT AND THE ONLY ASPECT YOU HAVE THE STAFF REPORT FOR US. >> GOOD EVENING CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS. YES. SO THE FIRST ITEM IS MAYBE
GOING TO MOVE FORWARD A FINAL SITE IN BUILDING PLANS TO CONSTRUCT AN APPROXIMATELY 40,000 SQUARE FOOT CITY FLEET MAINTENANCE FACILITY. THERE WE GO.
LOCATED AT 1800 WEST 96TH STREET. PLANNING COMMISSION HAS FINAL DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY ON THIS APPLICATION. THIS SITE OUTLINED IN RED IS
ZONED I2 LIMITED INDUSTRY AND IT'S GUIDED INDUSTRIAL AND PUBLIC WEST 96TH STREET IS TO THE SOUTH AND JAMES AVENUE TO THE EAST. THE CITY ALSO OWNS THE
PROPERTY DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH ACROSS WEST 96TH STREET. SO HERE IS A RENDERING OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING DESIGN. THE BUILDING'S EXTERIOR IS PRIMARILY COMPOSED OF PRECAST
CONCRETE PANELS WITH ADDITIONAL ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS INCLUDING ALUMINUM AND TRANSLUCENT WALL PANEL IN ALL BUILDINGS SETBACKS HAVE
BEEN MET AS WELL AS BUILDING SIZE REQUIREMENTS . THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE SITE PLAN. SO THERE ARE A FEW THINGS TO KNOW ABOUT THE SITE PLAN.
SO THERE'S A CONDITION TO ENSURE THAT PARKING ISLANDS ARE CONSTRUCTED AT THE END OF EACH ROW PARKING SPACES. ADDITIONALLY, ENGINEERING HAS RECOMMENDED REDUCING THE NUMBER OF DRIVEWAY ACCESSES TO
2 OR 3 RATHER THAN FOUR. AND THEN LASTLY FOR THIS SCREEN THE NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS DOES NOT MEET CODE REQUIREMENT WHERE 79 SPACES ARE REQUIRED, 62 ARE
PRESENT. THE APPLICANT WILL NEED TO PROVIDE PROOF OF PARKING FOR THE REMAINING SPACES. THE APPLICANT MUST DEMONSTRATE A REDUCED NEED AND IDENTIFY
AREAS FOR FUTURE PARKING IF IT'S NECESSARY FOR PROOF OF PARKING. THERE MUST BE A SITE PLAN SUBMITTED AND FILED WITH RECORDS FOR THE PROPERTY SHOWING THE PROOF OF PARKING.
AND AGAIN LIKE I MENTIONED EARLIER, THE SITE IS DIRECTLY NORTH OF ANOTHER CITY OWNED BUILDING WHERE ADDITIONAL PARKING SUPPLY IS AVAILABLE.
SO A LAST FEW NOTES ABOUT LANDSCAPING SCREENING AND LIGHTING. THE CIVIL PLANS DO NOT SHOW THE FULL 20 FOOT LANDSCAPING YARD THAT IS REQUIRED ALONG WEST 96TH STREET.
A CONDITION HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT THE CORRECTION BE MADE PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE. OTHERWISE THE LANDSCAPING PLAN HAS THE CORRECT NUMBER
OF TREES AND SHRUBS. THE TRASH AND RECYCLING NEEDS TO BE FULLY SCREENED WITHIN AN ENCLOSED STRUCTURE WHICH IS NOT CURRENTLY PROPOSED BUT IS A CONDITION PRIOR TO PERMIT
ISSUANCE AND THE LIGHTING PLAN WILL NEED TO BE ADJUSTED A LITTLE BIT TO MEET CODE REQUIREMENTS. SO THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE
REQUIRED FOUR FINDINGS AND STAFF WAS ABLE TO MEET THE FOUR FINDINGS ON THE SCREEN AGAIN SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT. THEREFORE STAFF DOES RECOMMEND
APPROVAL AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS AS ARE THE APPLICANTS. THANK YOU MRS. BACK WE'LL START WITH QUESTIONS FOR STAFF
. COMMISSIONER WE THANK YOU. I JUST HAD A QUESTION. IT'S NOT REALLY RELATED TO THE THE PERMIT TONIGHT BUT I'M CURIOUS AT ONE POINT THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT PUTTING SOLAR
ON THIS BUILDING AS ONE OF THE CITY BUILDINGS. THIS WAS SEVERAL YEARS AGO SO I MAY BE OUT OF DATE. I'M JUST CURIOUS WHETHER THAT'S BEEN EXPLORED AS AN OPTION. CHAIR COMMISSIONER, WEIGH I
WOULD INVITE MAYBE DEB TO ANSWER THAT . HELLO. DEB WILLIAMS FROM PUBLIC WORKS CAPITAL PROJECT MANAGER FOR
THE CITY AND WE ACTUALLY BUILD THE ROOF OUT TO HOLD SOLAR AND WE ACTUALLY TALKED ABOUT IT TODAY IN OUR MEETING THAT WE'RE REALLY EXCITED. PART OF THE DESIGN IS SO THAT
ALL THE MECHANICAL UNITS ARE ON ONE END OF THE BUILDING. SO THIS IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE ONE OF THE BIGGEST BUILDINGS WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO PUT SOLAR ON. WE DON'T TYPICALLY DO IT AS PART OF THE ORIGINAL BUILD. YOU KIND OF WANT TO LET YOUR
BUILDING SIT FOR A YEAR BEFORE YOU START PUTTING OTHER THINGS ON TOP OF IT. THANK YOU, MS. WILLIAMS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF
? COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM. THANK YOU, CHAIR. APOLOGIES MY PACKET AS ALWAYS. I JUST NEED TO START DOWNLOADING THEM.
IT'S A MODEST LOFT ROOF RIGHT ON THIS BUILDING PLAN CHAIR. >> COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM I'M GOING TO LET DEB ANSWER THAT AGAIN.
SORRY . YOU CAN INTRODUCE YOURSELF. MIKE SCHILLING PRINCIPAL AND PROJECT MANAGER FOR JLG ARCHITECTS.
SO THE ROOF OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SOLAR. I WAS JUST I HAD IN MY BRAIN THAT THE HIGH SIDE OF THE ROOF WAS ON THE SOUTH SIDE SO THAT THE ROOF WOULD KIND OF BE LIKE THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT YOU WOULD WANT FOR SOLAR.
WE HAVE A FLAT ROOF ON THIS BUILDING. OKAY, PERFECT. NO MORE QUESTIONS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE THEY SIT DOWN? COMMISSIONER LISA THANK YOU, CHAIR. I'LL WAIT. WHY WAIT A YEAR?
IS THERE LIKE WHAT'S THE WISDOM BEHIND. >> PART OF THAT IS FOR WARRANTY. SO WE LIKE TO LET THE ROOF SIT SO THAT IF THERE ARE ANY ISSUES WITH THE CONSTRUCTN THAT THE THAT IT'S JUST
PERTAINS TO THE INSTALLATION AND NOT TO US ADDING SOMETHING ELSE TO THE ROOF. THANK YOU. MM HMM. FINAL QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU. THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON IS THE APPLICANT ON THIS APPLICATION. SO WE WILL MOVE THEN TO A PUBLIC HEARING WHICH I WILL NOW OPEN. I WILL ASK IF THERE'S ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE HERE IN THE
CHAMBERS WHO WISHES TO TESTIFY ON THIS ITEM SEEING NO ONE COMING FORWARD. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY ONLINE? ALL PARTICIPANTS ONLINE OUR STAFF. THANK YOU, MS. BROWN. I WILL LOOK THEN FOR A MOTION
TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING SO MOVED WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I. I OPPOSED. MOTION PASSES SEVEN ZERO WE
MOVE THEN TO DISCUSSION. COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU, CHAIR. SEEMS LIKE A RELATIVELY STRAIGHTFORWARD APPLICATION. SEEMS LIKE STAFF DID A GREAT
JOB AND PREPARING THE REPORT AND I'M IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THIS. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM .
IF THERE ARE NO OTHER COMMENTS I WOULD LOOK FOR A MOTION. COMMISSIONER WAIT IN CASE NUMBER P.L. 2025-113 HAVING BEEN ABLE TO MAKE THE REQUIRED
FINDINGS I MOVED TO APPROVE FINAL SITE AND BUILDING PLANS TO CONSTRUCT AN APPROXIMATELY 40,000 SQUARE FOOT CITY FLEET MAINTENANCE FACILITY LOCATED AT 800 WEST 96TH STREET. SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS AND
CODE REQUIREMENTS ATTACHED TO THE STAFF REPORT THERE ARE A SECOND SECOND MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE MOTION AS PRESENTED. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
I OPPOSED THAT MOTION PASSES SEVEN ZERO. THIS IS A FINAL DECISION BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION UNLESS AN APPEAL IS RECEIVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AT 4:30 P.M. ON
SEPTEMBER 23RD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE WILL MOVE THEN TO ITEM NUMBER TWO WHICH IS ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING WHERE AGAIN THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON IS THE APPLICANT TO DISCUSS THE NORMANDALE LAKE DISTRICT PLAN
AMENDMENT. MR. CASSADAY, YOU HAVE THE STAFF REPORT. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING, PLANNING COMMISSION. I'M GOING TO HAVE JEREMY MEL QUEST AS WELL.
WE'RE KIND OF SHARING PRESENTATION HERE. YEAH. JEREMY MARQUIS, CIVIL ENGINEER WE'RE HERE TODAY TO TALK ABOUT THE NORMANDALE LAKE DISTRICT PLAN AMENDMENT.
SO FIRST WE'LL GO OVER PROJECT BACKGROUND THE INTERSECTIONS SAFETY STUDY AND RECOMMENDED INTERSECTION ALTERNATIVE AT 84TH STREET AND NORMANDY BOULEVARD. THE NORMANDALE LAKE DISTRICT
PLAN AMENDMENT AND THEN STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS GO. SO THE PROJECT BACKGROUND THE DISTRICT PLAN HAD DEDICATED A
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OVER 84TH STREET AND NORMANDY BOULEVARD . THE ESTIMATED COST FOR THAT WAS 5 MILLION. BUT THE BRIDGE NO LONGER MEETS A COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS AS YOU
CAN SEE IN THE PICTURE TO THE LEFT THERE. THERE'S OPTION ONE AND OPTION TWO FOR THE BRIDGE. THE RED THE RED SHOWS THE
APPROACH RAMPS TO THE BRIDGE EXTEND PRETTY FAR TO THE EAST AND WEST. SO THIS WOULD CREATE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS TO THE SURROUNDING AREAS THE WETLANDS
AND THE PARK AREAS. THE BRIDGE IS ALSO PROJECTED TO HAVE A LOW UTILIZATION DUE TO INCREASED THE INCREASED TRAVEL TIME FOR BIKES AND
PADS. BE ABOUT FOUR FOUR TIMES THE CROSSING TIME VERSUS IF YOU CROSS AT THE INTERSECTION.
SO WITH THAT OUR CONSULTANT BOTH OF THEM HAD IDENTIFIED A FEW AGGREGATE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS INSTEAD OF THE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE. THE INITIAL ALTERNATIVES WERE
PRESENTED IN STUDY SESSIONS AT PLANNING COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL BACK IN JUNE AND FEEDBACK FROM THOSE AND FEEDBACK FROM HENRY COUNTY AND CITY STAFF WERE INCORPORATED INTO OUR RECOMMENDED
ALTERNATIVE. SO HERE'S OUR RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE. THIS COMBINES TWO PREVIOUS ALTERNATIVES.
IT REDUCES THE CROSSING DISTANCE FOR BIKES AND PEDS ON THE SOUTH AND EAST LEGS OF THE INTERSECTION BY WIDENING THE MEDIAN REFUGE ISLAND.
AND BOTH OF THOSE APPROACHES IT ALSO MODIFIES THE RIGHT TURN LANES ON EACH OF THE CORNERS SLOWING DOWN VEHICLE
TRAFFIC AND FORCING VEHICLES TO YIELD TO THE ADJACENT ROADWAYS THAT THEY'RE APPROACHING . AND THIS THIS ALTERNATIVE ALSO
NARROWS DOWN THE ENTIRE INTERSECTION. AND IT ADDRESSES CONCERNS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP BY HENNEPIN COUNTY REGARDING INTERSECTION OPERATIONS.
THE ESTIMATED COST FOR THIS IS 3.5 MILLION. ONE THING TO NOTE IS THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE DOING A CORRIDOR WIDE STUDY ON 84TH STREET IN THE NEXT 1 OR 2
YEARS. SO THE IF THERE'S ANY BICYCLE FACILITIES THAT ARE RECOMMENDED WITH WITH THAT ALTERNATIVE WILL INCORPORATE. WE THINK WE CAN CHANGE THIS ALTERNATIVE WITH WITH THAT
CORRIDOR STUDY. SO THIS THIS ISN'T A SET IN STONE. THE CONSTRUCTION WILL STILL BE SEVEN AND TEN YEARS DOWN THE ROAD FOR FOR THIS PROJECT SO
THIS THIS CAN CHANGE IN THE FUTURE. WITH THAT, I'LL PASS IT OVER TO DAKOTA. ALL RIGHT. YEAH. SO THE SECOND COMPONENT OF THIS PROJECT IS THAT IT
ALSO REQUIRES AN AMENDMENT TO OUR NORMANDALE LAKE DISTRICT PLAN. THERE'S NOT A SET PROCESS IN OUR CODE AROUND THIS BUT WE WANTED TO JUST OUT OF A
WARNING ON A CASE OF PRECAUTION TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL THAT KIND OF FOLLOW SIMILAR PROCESSES THAT WE GO THROUGH WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT OR A MORE DETAILED
DISTRICT PLAN UPDATE. AND SO THIS IS A PRETTY MINOR AMENDMENT BUT THE PUBLIC HEARING COMPONENT RELATES TO THIS THE NORMANDALE LAKE DISTRICT PLAN WAS ADOPTED IN MAY OF 2008 AND THEN WAS
HAD A MAJOR UPDATE IN DECEMBER 2017. THE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OVER THE NORMANDY AND 84TH INTERSECTION WAS DESIGNATED AS A CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IN THE NORMAN LEAR NORMANDALE LAKE DISTRICT PLAN. AND SO REGARDLESS IF WE WOULD BUILD IT OR NOT BECAUSE IT'S IN THE PLAN AS A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT THE CITY HAS TO CONTINUE TO PROGRAM
THAT FINANCIALLY. AND SO KIND OF GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND DETERMINING WE WANT TO DO MORE OF AN AT GRADE IMPROVEMENT STAFF THEN DETERMINED THAT WE SHOULD REMOVE THE PED BRIDGE FROM THE
NORMANDALE LAKE DISTRICT PLAN SO THAT WE CAN STOP PROGRAMING FOR IT AND THEN REALLOCATE THOSE FUNDS TO OTHER PROJECTS IN THE DISTRICT AND OTHER CAPITAL PROJECTS.
SO THERE ARE KIND OF A NUMBER OF PRETTY MINOR GRAMMATICAL AMENDMENTS THAT WERE SHARED IN THE STAFF PACKET. I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT KIND OF THE THREE PRIMARY AMENDMENTS THAT RELATE TO
REMOVING THE REFERENCE TO THE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE AND THEN REPLACING IT WITH MORE GENERAL LANGUAGE AROUND IMPROVING THE BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT. SO THOSE THREE KEY PIECES ARE
FOUND ON PAGE 2.162.17 AND THEN PAGE 3.4 OF THE DISTRICT PLAN. SO THIS ONE ON THE SCREEN IS FROM PAGE 2.16. THAT'S AGAIN JUST REMOVING THE
TITLE OF PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE AND REPLACING THAT WITH IMPROVING BICYCLIST AND PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT. AND THEN THERE WAS ONE SENTENCE THERE THAT MADE REFERENCE TO AN ELEVATED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING.
SO WE'RE JUST REMOVING THAT FROM THE SENTENCE. BUT ON PAGE 2.17 IS PROBABLY THE THE BIGGEST OR PRIMARY TEXT AMENDMENT. SO IT'S REPLACING THIS
PARAGRAPH THAT TALKS ABOUT THE EAST WEST PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE AND REPLACES IT WITH A PARAGRAPH ABOUT PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS AND A LOT OF THAT COMES FROM THE SAFETY
STUDY THAT WAS PROVIDED THAT WAS COMPLETED BY BOLTON AND MENKE. JUST KIND OF TALK ABOUT FUTURE AT GREAT IMPROVEMENTS THAT WOULD HELP IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN
AND BICYCLE SAFETY. AND THEN FINALLY ON PAGE 3.4 IS THAT LIST OF PROJECTS. AND SO WE HAVE THE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE LISTED THERE AND SO THIS AMENDMENT IS JUST TO
REMOVE IT FROM THAT PLAN LIST KIND OF AGAIN TAKE IT OUT OF OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROGRAMING.
AND SO WITH THAT WE HAVE TWO MOTIONS HERE FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THE FIRST ONE RELATES TO THE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY STUDY AND JUST ADOPTING THE FINDINGS FROM THAT.
AND THEN THE SECOND ONE IS THE MOTION RELATED TO ON THE ACTUAL TEXT AMENDMENT IN THE NORMANDALE LAKE DISTRICT PLAN. SO I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU MR. CASSIDY AND
MARQUIS, I WOULD LIKE TO START WITH THE QUESTION IT WAS REFERENCED AND I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY SO RECOMMENDING AN OPTION ANY OPTION WHATEVER FOR THE PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS
HERE ARE DOES THAT AUTHORIZE THE PROJECT FOR CONSTRUCTION IF THE COUNCIL APPROVES THAT OR IS IT WE'RE PUTTING THIS IN THE LONG TERM PLAN AND DOWN THE ROAD THERE'S A OFFICIAL AUTHORIZATION OF IT ONCE
FUNDING IS SECURED ETC.. YES CHAIR TALKED AND YES IT WILL IT'LL BE PUT INTO THE C IP FOR A FUTURE PROJECT
FUNDING WAS GOING TO BE IDENTIFIED FOR IT BUT LIKE I SAID IT'S GOING TO BE 7 TO 10 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD BEFORE CONSTRUCTION ACTUALLY HAPPENS . GREAT. THANK YOU.
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER LINNEY THANK YOU, CHAIR. JUST TO CLARIFICATION ALSO SO RECOGNIZING THAT THE BUDGET OR THE ESTIMATED COST FOR THE
BRIDGE WAS 5 MILLION. ESTIMATED COST FOR THIS 3.5 MILLION THAT 1.5 MILLION UNDERSTANDING THAT THE MONEY ISN'T ACTUALLY THERE YET IS
IT'S STILL GENERALLY RESERVED FOR USE WITHIN THE NORMANDALE LAKE DISTRICT OR WOULD THAT 1.5 MILLION IN QUOTE UNQUOTE SAVINGS COULD BE USED ANYWHERE IN THE CITY?
THANKS, JULIE. YES, SPEAK TO THAT ON THE ABATEMENT DISTRICTS. YES, MR. CHAIR COMMISSIONERS, THE FUNDING FOR THE THESE
PROJECTS IS COMING FROM WHAT WE CALL OUR NORMANDALE LAKE TAX ABATEMENT DISTRICT. AND SO THERE IS A PERCENTAGE OF YOUR TAX OF BLOOMINGTON'S
TAX LEVY THAT GOES TO FUND THIS TAX ABATEMENT AND SO THAT MONEY WOULD JUST BE REMOVED FROM THE TAX LEVY. IF YOU'VE HEARD THAT COUNCIL'S BEEN WORKING REALLY HARD TO
REDUCE THAT LEVY, PART OF THAT IS RELATED TO REDUCING THE EXPENSES IN THE NORMANDALE LAKE DISTRICT. THANK YOU, SIR.
THANK YOU CHAIR IS AN ALTERNATIVE NUMBER FOUR IS THAT POSSIBLE TO BE BROUGHT UP? I KNOW SOMEONE TESTIFIED OVER EMAIL AND THEY'RE IN SUPPORT OF THAT.
I JUST WANT TO LIKE SEE THAT ONE MORE TIME . OKAY. AND THEN CITY STAFF IS RECOMMENDING ALTERNATIVE
NUMBER TWO. CORRECT? CORRECT. YEP. ALTERNATIVE NUMBER TWO WAS THE ONE THAT WAS SELECTED AS THE
RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE. THERE IT IS. OKAY. IS THERE AN ESTIMATED COST FOR ALTERNATIVE NUMBER FOUR AS WELL? I KNOW WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO FOCUS ON THE COST BUT IT JUST IT WOULD IT WOULD BE AROUND
THE SAME 3.5 MILLION. THANK YOU MR. JOHNSON SINCE IT WAS BROUGHT UP THE QUESTION OF WHETHER WE SHOULD FOCUS ON COST OR NOT I BELIEVE THIS APPLICATION IS SLIGHTLY
DIFFERENT THAN OTHER APPLICATIONS WE TYPICALLY SEE WHERE THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS ASKED NOT TO TO TAKE COSTS INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN WE LOOK AT AN APPLICATION. BUT IS THIS A DIFFERENT CASE THAN THAT?
YEAH. CHAIR COCHRAN THANKS FOR THE QUESTION. SO THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS THE ESTABLISHED ADVISORY COMMISSION AND BOARD RELATED TO TRANSPORTATION MATTERS AND ON THESE TYPES OF APPLICATIONS YOU KNOW YOU'RE NOT REVIEWING
A NARROW SET OF FINDINGS OF FACT LIKE WE WERE IN ITEM NUMBER ONE THIS EVENING WHICH ARE ESTABLISHED IN THE ZONING CODE. SO TECHNICALLY YOU CAN TAKE COST IMPLICATIONS UNDER
CONSIDERATION WITH IT ON MATTERS RELATED TO ADVISORY QUESTIONS PERTAINING TO TRANSPORTATION, RECOGNIZING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL IS THE SOLE AUTHORITY RELATED TO FIDUCIARY OR FISCAL DECISION
MAKING FOR THE CITY. YEAH. FISHER CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU CHAIR WAS HEARD A TUNNEL OPTION EXPLORED FOR ANY AMOUNT OF TIME.
MS. LONG THANK YOU FOR COMING. THANK YOU FOR STICKING AROUND . SURE. CHAIR COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM TUNNEL HAD BEEN INCLUDED IN A PREVIOUS PARK PLAN YEARS AND
YEARS AGO BUT IF YOU NOTICE THAT THERE ARE TWO WATER BODIES NEARBY WE IN ENGINEERING HAVE ALWAYS TOLD THEM THAT WE THOUGHT THAT WAS NOT A VERY USEFUL IDEA THAT WE SPEND A LOT OF TIME
WITH IT EITHER BEING FLOODED AND CLOSED LIKE THE EXISTING CROSSING UNDERNEATH THAT'S FURTHER SOUTH OR SO WE THERE HAS BEEN DIFFERENT TIMES WHERE
A TUNNEL HAS BEEN INCLUDED BUT WE DON'T SUPPORT THAT BECAUSE IT'S NOT USABLE 12 MONTHS OUT OF THE YEAR. THANK YOU.
OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF SEEING NONE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT REPORT. IN THIS CASE THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON AGAIN IS THE APPLICANTS. SO THERE WILL BE NO PRESENTATION FROM THE
APPLICANT AGAIN AND WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE PUBLIC HEARING WHICH I WILL OPEN NOW ASKING IF THERE IS ANYONE IN THE CHAMBERS WHO WISHES TO TESTIFY ON THIS ITEM SEEING NO ONE COMING FORWARD IS THERE
ANYBODY ONLINE? ALL PARTICIPANTS ARE MINOR STAFF. VERY WELL. I WILL LOOK THEN FOR A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING SO MOVED MOTION AND A SECOND TO
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE? AYE OPPOSED THEIR MOTION PASSES SEVEN ZERO. AND WE WILL MOVE THEN TO DISCUSSION
. COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU CHAIR. AS MUCH AS I'D LIKE TO SEE A BRIDGE IF IT DOESN'T PAN OUT AND A COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS I
AM GENERALLY IN FAVOR OF YOU KNOW ONE OF THE PROPOSED OPTIONS I BELIEVE THAT YOU KNOW, WE'RE STILL FIGURING THAT OUT. THERE'S OBVIOUSLY A RECOMMENDED OPTION PROBABLY TIME WILL TELL AS WE BUILD
THIS OUT NEXT WAS IT 7 TO 10 YEARS AND SO I'M OVERALL IN FAVOR OF MAKING THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE NORMAN DEAL LAKES DISTRICT PLAN. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM. WHEN WE BROUGHT THIS WHEN THIS WAS BROUGHT BEFORE US AS A STUDY ITEM I MADE THIS COMMENT A BUNCH OF TIMES BUT I ALWAYS JUST GET A LITTLE BIT UNEASY
AS WE'RE LOOKING AT OKAY, IS IT OPTION ONE TO WHATEVER AND I JUST I'VE ALWAYS FELT A LITTLE UNCOMFORTABLE UP HERE AS A LAYPERSON SEEING WHAT TRAFFIC OPTION WE SHOULD GO WITH AND I REALLY RELY ON OUR TRAFFIC CONSULTANTS AND
ENGINEERS TO MAKE THAT DECISION. SO I REALLY DON'T HAVE A LOT OF FEELINGS ON WHETHER THIS MODIFIED ALTERNATIVE IS THE RIGHT THING OR NOT BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE EXPERTISE IN IT SO I'M REALLY GOING TO MOSTLY
DECLINE COMMENT ON THAT. THE ONE COMMENT I WILL MAKE IS IT CERTAINLY GET AWFULLY EXPENSIVE. YOU KNOW WE WERE TALKING ABOUT A BRIDGE THAT WAS $5 MILLION AND NOW WE'RE PUTTING IN SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN
THAT AND IT'S $3.5 MILLION. AND SO IF YOU KNOW, I CAN APPRECIATE THAT WE'RE GETTING RID OF THE BRIDGE BECAUSE I AGREE IT SEEMED LIKE NO ONE WAS GOING TO USE IT ANYWAY BECAUSE IT TAKES LONGER TO GET THERE AND PEOPLE ARE JUST
GOING ACROSS THE STREET WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE TRAFFIC STUDY THAT THE DATA IS NOT SHOWING THAT THERE'S A CRASH PROBLEM HERE AND SO YOU GET IN ONE OF THESE REALLY DIFFICULT
CONVERSATIONS OF WELL, WHAT'S THE PRICE OF SAFETY EVEN IF IT'S JUST ONE ACCIDENT? AND SO YOU KIND OF LEAVE YOURSELF IN THIS IMPOSSIBLE SITUATION OF LIKE IF SOMETHING BAD DID HAPPEN, YOU JUST WHY DIDN'T WE SPEND THE MILLION
DOLLARS? MY GOSH, WHAT A MISTAKE. BUT YOU KNOW, I THINK WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT, THIS RANKS BELOW AVERAGE ON CRASH RATE AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $3.5
MILLION TO TO DO THIS. AND IF IT'S IF IT MAKES IT MORE COMFORTABLE FOR PEOPLE OR ENCOURAGES PEOPLE TO USE THE INTERSECTION MORE AS A PEDESTRIAN, I THINK THAT'S
GREAT BUT THE $3.5 MILLION GO TOWARDS OTHER THINGS THAT MAKE PEDESTRIANS MORE COMFORTABLE IN OTHER LOCATIONS. THIS THIS JUST SEEMS LIKE SUCH A BEHEMOTH INTERSECTION WE'RE TAKING ON HERE AND IF THERE'S
NOT A PROBLEM I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS THE RIGHT PLACE TO SPEND $3.5 MILLION AND AS MR. JOHNSON SAID REALLY THAT THAT'S UP TO OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS ULTIMATELY I THINK
TO DECIDE WHERE THEY WANT TO SPEND OUR RESIDENTS TAX DOLLARS. BUT YOU KNOW, I'M SITTING HERE GOING MAN 3.5 MILLION FOR THIS SEEMS LIKE AN AWFUL LOT. AND ALSO I GET IT LIKE PUBLIC
ENTITIES THAT'S THE SCALE OF THE COST OF THINGS IS WAY OUT OF WHACK FROM WHAT WE AS JUST REGULAR PEOPLE UNDERSTAND LIKE YOU'RE PLAYING IN THE BIG SANDBOX. I GET IT ROADS ARE EXPENSIVE.
CONSTRUCTION IS EXPENSIVE FOR MUNICIPALITIES. I GET IT. BUT AGAIN I JUST IT JUST FEELS LIKE TO ME THE 3.5 MILLION COULD GO TOWARDS OTHER THINGS THAN THAN THIS. SO I GUESS THAT'S WHERE I'M AT
WITH IT. OFFICIAL NAME THANK YOU CHAIR YEAH I AGREE I'M I'M A HEAVY HEAVY HEAVY USER OF THIS AREA INCLUDING CROSSING THE INTERSECTION ON FOOT AND ON
BIKE REGULARLY AND AS MUCH AS I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE A BRIDGE THERE I THINK FOR THE COST I THINK IT FALLS INTO THE PERFECT EXAMPLE OF SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN GREAT HAD IT BEEN BUILT INTO THE
ORIGINAL PLAN. YOU KNOW, 30 YEARS AGO. BUT THE COSTS AT THIS POINT I JUST DON'T THINK ALIGN WITH WHAT HOW THE CITY SHOULD BE SPENDING MONEY.
I THINK THERE'S MUCH GREATER NEED EVEN IN RECREATIONAL SPACES. I THINK THAT SAME MONEY COULD GO A LOT FURTHER IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY. THANKS.
THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER WHITE THANK YOU, CHAIR. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY SO YOU KNOW I, I APPRECIATE VERY MUCH
THE CONCERN ABOUT WHETHER THIS IS THE RIGHT PLACE TO INVEST MONEY. I THINK YOU KNOW, IT'S 3.5 MILLION NOW. WHO KNOWS WHAT IT WILL BE IN 7 TO 10 YEARS WHEN IT'S ACTUALLY TIME TO TO LOOK AT ACTUAL
PLANS. I APPRECIATE THE INTENT OF IT WANTING TO MAKE ANY ANY WHERE WE CAN GET FOLKS OUT OF THEIR CARS AND ON FOOT OR BIKE OR OTHER METHODS OF TRANSPORTATION.
I THINK WE WANT TO DO THAT AND IT'S WORTHY OF AN INVESTMENT. I DO WONDER THOUGH IN TERMS OF JUST THE LOGISTICS OF THE
THE ISSUE BEFORE US THIS EVENING HOW I THINK WE ALL AGREE I'VE HEARD THAT WE ALL AGREE THAT WE ARE FINE WITH TAKING THE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OUT OF THE PLAN.
I THINK IT SEEMS THAT THE QUESTION BEFORE US IS ARE WE COMFORTABLE PUTTING IN LANGUAGE ABOUT HAVING OTHER ALTERNATIVES AND SO I GUESS
I'M NOT SURE IF WE COULD GET SOME CLARIFICATION FROM STAFF IF WE WANT THE BRIDGE OUT BUT AREN'T SURE WE WANT TO REPLACE IT WITH THIS EXACTLY IS THE WORDING OF THE PROPOSED
RECOMMENDATION FROM THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS STILL ACCURATE ? MR. JOHNSON ANY THOUGHTS THERE YET? YOU'RE CORRECT AND COMMISSIONER WHITE I'LL INVITE DAKOTA TO ADD ON TO ANYTHING HE FEELS IS APPROPRIATE AS THE
PRIMARY DRAFTER. BUT FROM MY READING OF THE LANGUAGE I THINK IT'S NEUTRAL ENOUGH TO SET THE TABLE FOR A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT IMPROVEMENTS WHILE I AGREE WITH THE SENTIMENT THAT THE CRASH THANKFULLY LEVELS ARE
LOWER THAN MAYBE YOU'D EXPECT FOR AN INTERSECTION OF THAT SIZE, I THINK THE CITY IS WORKING ON OTHER PROJECTS TOO TO YOUR POINT COMMISSIONER WHITE TRYING TO IMPROVE THE PARTICULARLY THE BICYCLE ENVIRONMENT IN THAT AREA
LOOKING AT A CYCLE TRACK ALONG 84TH STREET AS WELL I BELIEVE IN THE COMING YEARS. SO I THINK THE LANGUAGE THAT THE COURT HAS PUT TOGETHER IS NEUTRAL ENOUGH TO KIND OF JUST
SET THE TABLE IN MY VIEW. MR. CHAIR COMMISSIONER WHITE THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT. MR. JOHNSON WITH THAT IN MIND I YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S I'M
FINE WITH PUTTING THE LANGUAGE IN. I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE KIND OF REGISTERED OUR CONCERNS. I THINK THAT THE FACT THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE DOING A CORRIDOR STUDY OVER THE NEXT
COUPLE OF YEARS, THIS COULD VERY WELL CHANGE TREMENDOUS SLEEP BEFORE IT'S EVER BUILT. SO AS LONG AS THE LANGUAGE THAT'S BEING PROPOSED REALLY IS NOT RESTRICTIVE TO THIS PARTICULAR SOLUTION BUT MORE
THE INTENT OF WANTING TO MAKE IT MORE PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FRIENDLY I'M FINE WITH IT. >> MR. JOHNSON ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU'RE COOKING IF I CAN ADD ONE THING AND THIS IS THE SUM IN THE PERSON IN THE ROOM
IS MORE OF THE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT HERE WOULD BE JULIE LONG AGAIN BUT I WOULD SAY THAT THE CITY ON AN ANNUAL BASIS IN REVIEWING ITS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PN IS CONSTANTLY RESHUFFLING PROJECTS ACCORDING TO PRIORITY OF WHAT THEY THINK THE GREATEST NEED IS FOR THE
USE OF THESE DOLLARS. SO THAT'S AN EXERCISE THAT'S ONGOING AND HAPPENS AS PART OF THE ADOPTION OF EVERY YEAR. C I P MR. JOHNSON OR MR. AND
THE MODIFIED PROPOSAL NUMBER TWO IS THAT A GRAPHIC THAT WOULD APPEAR IN THE NORMANDY BOULEVARD DISTRICT AND SORT OF THE LAWNDALE DISTRICT PLAN OR NO I'LL BE A
CHAIR COOKED IN PLANNING COMMISSION IT WOULD NOT SO WAS KIND OF INTENTIONALLY LEFT TO BE GENERAL TO JUST SAY WE'RE MAKING IMPROVEMENTS TO BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY BUT BY
ADOPTING THIS MOTION OR YOU KNOW SO REGARDLESS IF IT'S MODIFIED NUMBER TWO OR ALTERNATIVE FOUR THOSE IMAGES WOULD NOT BE IN THE DISTRICT PLAN AND WOULDN'T TIE US TO THAT SPECIFIC DESIGN. THANK YOU.
MR. CASSIDY LISA THANK YOU CHAIR. I YES, I KIND OF AGREE WITH
CHAIR CAPTAIN AND COMMISSIONER LINNEY ON THE KIND OF TURF WAR GOSPEL FIRST LIKE THANK YOU TO LAKE CITY STAFF JULIE LONG OLD TEAM YOU GUYS ARE AMAZING BUT LIKE WITH THIS IF IT'S 3.5
MILLION NOW AND IT'S IN SEVEN YEARS OR THE BUILD WOULD BE IN 7 TO 10 YEARS CONSTRUCTION IT MAY BE A LOT HIGHER BECAUSE INFLATION AND YOU KNOW JUST
COSTS GOING UP POTENTIALLY AND SO THE NUMBER ONE THING I WOULD SAY IS IF THERE ISN'T LIKE A HUGE CONCERN IN TERMS
OF DANGER, YEAH, I JUST WOULDN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE LIKE AT LEAST ME PERSONALLY IF IT WAS MY DECISION SOLELY INVESTING THAT MUCH YOU KNOW
INTO IT AND I DO FREQUENT THIS INTERSECTION A LOT AND ESPECIALLY DOING LIKE TRAFFIC HOURS SO I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE INTERSECTION AND YEAH THAT'S AND I HAD A QUESTION IF
WHENEVER I CAN PLEASE YEAH SO I THINK NICK YOU SAID THE DOLLARS WHERE THE DOLLARS ARE GOING IS REVIEWED BY STAFF
EVERY FOR THIS SPECIFIC AREA EVERY ANNUALLY SO SAID MR. JOHNSON YEAH CHAIR COOKED IN COMMISSIONER YOU SAY ULTIMATELY THE CITY COUNCIL HOLDS A PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPTS THE ANNUAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AS A TEN YEAR
PLAN. THEY DO THAT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS SO THE CITY COUNCIL IS MAKING THAT DECISION THROUGH THE ADOPTION OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN. OKAY. SO THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOESN'T REALLY HAVE A SAY OR
ANYTHING IN THAT. THE CHAIR CORRECT. AND COMMISSIONER, YOU SAY THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES HAVE A ROLE TO EVALUATE THE THE CIP, THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN TO ENSURE THAT IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. SO THAT WILL BE A REVIEW THAT WILL COME BEFORE YOU. IT'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS AT THE CITY COUNCIL BUT THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES HAVE A ROLE IN VERIFYING THAT THE PLAN IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMP PLAN. GREAT. OKAY.
THANK YOU. MR. SUMMERS THANK YOU, CHAIR. WHEN I LOOK AT THE PEDESTRIAN
SAFETY STUDY THERE IS A PART OF IT THAT IS THE PEDESTRIAN PIECE AND A PART THAT IS VEHICLES WAITING IN TRAFFIC. SO WHEN I LOOK AT THE NO BUILD
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS, IT SEEMS AS THOUGH THE ALTERNATIVES DECREASE TRAFFIC IN WAYS THAT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE DRIVING THROUGH THAT AREA BUT
ALSO PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLISTS BECAUSE MY OPINION IS THAT WHEN PEOPLE ARE WAITING IN TRAFFIC THEY ARE POTENTIALLY MORE HURRIED TO GET THROUGH AN INTERSECTION OR
MAKE DIFFERENT DECISIONS THAN IF THEY ARE DRIVING WITH LESS IMPEDIMENTS. I AM CURIOUS OVER TIME TO SEE
HOW THE PROPOSED RFP AND OTHER PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ITEMS WORK ON THAT CORNER AFTER SEEING THAT THIS INTERSECTION HASN'T
BEEN THAT MUCH OF A SAFETY RISK IN THE PAST. IT FEELS TO ME LIKE THAT FEELS LIKE MORE OF A MEASURED OPTION. AND I DO ECHO SOME OF THE SENTIMENTS OF NOT BEING AN
EXPERT IN THIS WORK AND BEING SO APPRECIATIVE OF OF THE INFORMATION SAT BEFORE ME. BUT THAT'S WHAT I'M SEEING WITH WHAT IS IN FRONT OF ME.
THANK YOU. BEFORE MR.. I THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. I HAVE I THINK PUTS IN EXCUSE ME WHAT'S GOING TO TURN INTO A LITTLE BIT OF A SERIES
OF QUESTIONS. SO WITH THE APPRECIATION THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT A 7 TO 10 YEAR WINDOW ON ANYTHING AND THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE AN
INTERVENING CORRIDOR STUDY FOR BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS. IN PRACTICAL TERMS WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE TONIGHT IS JUST A
PLACEHOLDER TO TAKE THE BRIDGE OUT CORRECT? WELL, WE HAVE TWO MOTIONS OF RIGHT THAT ARE RECOMMENDED BEFORE US. I THINK THE SECOND ONE IS DEFINITIVELY TAKING THE BRIDGE OUT. IT'S THE WAY I READ IT AND I
WELCOME THE STAFF TO CORRECT ME ON THIS IS THAT THE FIRST MOTION THAT'S RECOMMENDED BEFORE US IS SIGNALING THAT WE'RE INTERESTED IN LOOKING AT DOING SOMETHING HERE IN. THE REASON I ASK IS IF WE'RE
TAKING THE BRIDGE OUT AND THAT'S REMOVING THAT $5 MILLION BALLPARK OBLIGATION FROM THE AREA ARE WE PUTTING
IN A $3.5 MILLION OBLIGATION IN ITS PLACE OR ARE WE JUST PUTTING THE CONCEPT OF IMPROVEMENTS IN ITS PLACE? MR. CASSIDY. YEAH. CHAIR CAPTAIN COMMISSIONER MUNSTER FOR THIS PROPOSED
AMENDMENT IT WOULD BE THE LATTER. SO WE'RE JUST PROPOSING TO TAKE OUT THE THE PED BRIDGE SPECIFICALLY WHICH WOULD THEN TAKE OUT THAT $5 MILLION COST OR WHATEVER IT IS TO REDUCE
THE TAX LEVY. AND THEN THERE'S NO LIKE REPLACEMENT OF A PROJECT IN THERE YET IT'S MORE BECAUSE THERE IS THIS OUTSTANDING CORRIDOR STUDY AND DEPENDING
ON WHAT WE WANT TO DO IT WAS JUST REPLACED WITH MORE GENERAL LANGUAGE TO TO MAKE PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT BUT ALSO AT THIS
INTERSECTION. SO I'M SORRY PLEASE JUST TO BE SURE THAT I'M CLEAR THE 5 MILLION COMES OUT AND DOES NOT GET REPLACED WITH ANOTHER NUMBER TODAY.
CHAIR CAPTAIN COMMISSIONER MUNSTER I WOULD JUST SAY FROM THE THE DISTRICT PLAN PERSPECTIVE NO BUT I WOULD SAY MAYBE JULIE SOMETHING TO ADD WITH THE TAX ABATEMENT DISTRICT THAT'S RELATED
THERE'S MONEY THERE, CORRECT? YEAH. MR. CHAIR COMMISSIONER MUNSTER IN ORDER TO DO THE FINANCIAL MODEL THAT FINANCES THE DOING
OF THE TAX ABATEMENT MONEY THEY WOULD REMOVE THE 5 MILLION BUT THEY WOULD LEAVE THAT 3.5 AS A PLACEHOLDER. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE SPECIFICALLY FOR THESE
IMPROVEMENTS THAT YOU'VE SHOWN BUT IT IS 3.5 MILLIONOR A FUTURE BIKE AND PAD IMPROVEMENT. SO IF YOU ARE NOT INCLINED TO HAVE THAT GO FORWARD YOU SHOULD PROVIDE DIRECTION THAT
YOU DON'T. WE SHOULD REMOVE ALL 5 MILLION AND GO DOWN TO ZERO. GOT IT. I JUST WANTED TO BE SURE I UNDERSTOOD WHERE WHAT WAS MOVING. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU . WELL, COMMISSIONER, IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S THE QUESTION BEFORE US IS DO WE WANT TO LEAVE THAT PLACEHOLDER OF 3.5
MILLION IN FOR THIS TAX ABATEMENT PLANNING OR NOT? COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM, THANK YOU, CHAIR. I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT
OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS A SAFE INTERSECTION. IT'S FINE. IT'S NOT THE MOST HEAVILY UTILIZED PIECE. I BIKE BY BIKE THROUGH THIS INTERSECTION A LOT. I THINK SOME IMPROVEMENT MIGHT BE GREAT.
I WOULD DEFER TO THE EXPERTS ON IF TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES OR REDUCING LANES WOULD BE HELPFUL BUT I FIND MYSELF SOMETIMES COMING FROM GOING TO
NORMAN DELIC BANDSHELL. I FIND MYSELF GOING DOWN POPLAR BRIDGE BIKING WITH A KID BIKE TRAILER UP A SUPER HUGE HILL AND THEN COMING UP IN ARMIDALE TO GET TO THE BANJO TO AVOID THE INTERSECTION.
AND SO I WOULD SAY I THINK WE SHOULD. I LIKE THE LANGUAGE THAT'S IN HERE ON PAGE 55 OF THE PACKET. I THINK THAT KEEPING DOLLARS
IN THERE FOR PEDESTRIAN SAFETY THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT THAT CAN KIND OF BE USED IN AND DEPLOYED IN VARIOUS WAYS IS A IS A MEASURED APPROACH TO TAKING YOU KNOW TAKING AWAY
THE BRIDGE. THANK YOU SEANIE. YEAH, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM. I THINK THE OTHER THING IS IS IT'S SO HARD TO KNOW RIGHT NOW WHAT THE TRAFFIC IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE THERE WITH YOU KNOW,
THE 494 I MEAN UNTIL THE 494 WORK IS DONE. SO MANY PEOPLE TAKING AMERICAN BOULEVARD WITH THE TRAFFIC CORRIDOR STUDY AND THE WORK ON 35. I THINK IT WOULD BE FOOLISH TO
TAKE ALL OF THE MONEY AWAY NOW IF ONLY DUE TO THE UNCERTAINTY A FEW YEARS FROM NOW WHEN WE MAY REALIZE IT'S EVEN MORE IMPORTANT OR URGENT TO GET SOMETHING IN THERE. AT THIS POINT I DON'T KNOW IF
ANYTHING NEEDS TO BE DONE NOW BUT I THINK KEEPING THE PLACEHOLDER WOULD BE PRUDENT. COMMISSIONER ISA THANK YOU CHAIR. YEAH I ALSO AGREE.
I JUST THINK THAT IF THERE IS A WAY WE COULD VOTE ON KEEPING DOLLARS FOR THE NORMAN DEL DISTRICT AREA OR PLAN SPECIFICALLY THAT'D BE GOOD. BUT IF WE'RE VOTING
SPECIFICALLY ON THE INTERSECTION OF WEST 84TH STREET AND ARMADALE I I'M LEANING NOT IN SUPPORT IF IT'S SPECIFICALLY THAT BUT I AM IN SUPPORT OF THAT MAKES SENSE
. I THINK SO. MS. LONG. KEEPING THIS LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT TARGETS THAT $3.5 MILLION SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS INTERSECTION OR IS IT FOR THE
DISTRICT AS A WHOLE AS I READ IT SAYS FOR PEDESTRIAN SAFETY SHORT AND LONG TERM IN THE INTERSECTION OF WEST 84TH AND NORMAN DALLAS IT WOULD BE IN THAT AREA.
SO IF YOU WANTED TO CHANGE THE AREA THAT WOULD BE AN OPTION. OKAY. THANK YOU , MR. WHITE.
THANK YOU, CHAIR. I AT THIS POINT I'M HONESTLY INCLINE TO LEAVE IT WHERE IT IS ONLY BECAUSE UNTIL WE HAVE THE CORRIDOR STUDY DONE AND
UNTIL WE HAVE MORE INFORMATION I WOULDN'T WANT TO PULL IT OUT AND LEAVE IT IN THERE IN THE ETHER SO TO SPEAK. SO I GUESS I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH KEEPING IT
TIED TO WEST 84TH AND NORMAN DOUBLE OF ARD FOR NOW BUT I WOULD LIKE TO REVISIT IT AFTER THE CORRIDOR STUDY. >> I THINK I THINK COMMISSIONER AN AGREE WITH YOU COMMISSIONER WHITE IF I'M
INTERPRETING THIS CORRECTLY WHAT WE'RE REALLY DOING IS MAKING SURE WE HAVE THE DOLLARS AVAILABLE FOR A FUTURE PROJECT SO WE'RE COLLECTING THAT TAX NOW TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN WE DO WANT TO PULL THE TRIGGER THAT MONEY HAS BEEN
THERE AND HAD BEEN COLLECTED SO WE CAN AFFORD THE PROJECT AND SO ULTIMATELY WE MAY NOT DECIDE TO DO THIS PROJECT AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE WORST THING THIS CAN HAVE OF THIS CAN ALWAYS CHANGE AFTER WE DO THE CORRIDOR STUDY.
I SUSPECT WHEN THAT CORRIDOR STUDY DOES OCCUR THIS WILL GET REVISITED AND SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S MY FAVORITE THING IN THE WORLD BUT I DON'T THINK THERE'S A GREAT DEAL OF RISK IN KEEPING IT THERE AND SO I'M
COMFORTABLE WITH THE WAY IT'S CURRENTLY BEING SHOWN. FISHERIES ARE JUST TO PLAY. THANK YOU. CHAIR JUST PLAY DEVIL'S ADVOCATE. WHAT IF DOWN THE LINE WE
IDENTIFIED WITHIN THE NEXT 7 TO 10 YEARS IF WE'RE STILL HERE WHICH WE WON'T BE BUT HYPOTHETICALLY RIGHT IDENTIFIED THAT ANOTHER AREA WHERE THOSE DOLLARS COULD BE USED BETTER POTENTIALLY RIGHT
AND OBVIOUSLY DEL LAKE DISTRICT THERE WOULD WE BE HARD SET BECAUSE WE VOTED ON THIS YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK SO. I THINK WE COULD GO THROUGH THE EXACT PROCESS THAT'S HERE
THIS EVENING. YOU JUST DO AN AMENDMENT TO THAT THAT DISTRICT PLAN I, I THINK I'M IN AGREEMENT THEN WITH THE COMMISSION IN CHECK OF THIS SO THEY COULD ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION.
IF NOT I WOULD LOOK FOR A MOTION TO MR. CUNNINGHAM IN CASE NUMBER 2025-108I MOVED TO RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE AND ADOPT THE FINDINGS OF THE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY STUDY AND WHICH INCLUDES SHORT TERM AND LONG TERM PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS TO THE INTERSECTION OF WEST 84TH STREET AND NORMAN BOULEVARD. SECOND WE HAVE A MOTION AND A
SECOND FOR THE FIRST MOTION REGARDING THE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY STUDY. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I. I OPPOSED THAT MOTION PASSES
SEVEN ZERO COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU, CHAIR IN CASE NUMBER 2025-108I MOVE TO RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE NORMANDALE LAKE DISTRICT
PLAN UPDATE AMENDMENT REMOVING THE REFERENCE TO THE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OVER THE WEST 84TH STREET AND NORMANDALE BOULEVARD INTERSECTION. WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND REGARDING THE PEDESTRIAN
BRIDGE AT THIS INTERSECTION. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I. I OPPOSED THAT MOTION ALSO PASSES SEVEN ZERO THIS WILL GO BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL AS A
PUBLIC HEARING ON OCTOBER 13TH. THANK YOU. STAFF THANK YOU. WE WILL MOVE THEN TO ITEM NUMBER THREE AGAIN, THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON IS THE
APPLICANT AND WE ARE HERE TO DISCUSS THE 494 PROJECT TO UPDATE AND MUNICIPAL CONSENT REQUEST INFORMATION. MISS MARONE IS HERE FOR THE STAFF REPORT. GOOD EVENING.
COMMISSION. I'M AMY MARONE, ASSISTANT TRAFFIC ENGINEER WITH BLOOMINGTON ENGINEERING AND WE HAVE ANDREW LA TIRE WITH MINOT.
HE WEARS A FEW HATS BUT IN THIS REGARDS HE IS REPRESENTING THE COORDINATOR FOR THE 494 CORRIDOR PROJECT. HE LED US THROUGH THE ENTIRE
494 VISION STARTING BACK IN 2010 AND THE CITY WAS A PART OF THAT FULL PROCESS OF DEVELOPING THE VISION AND WHAT HE'S GOING TO DO TONIGHT IS SHARE INFORMATION ABOUT
PROJECT TWO THAT IS IN THE WORKS AND BEING PLANNED THAT WILL HELP REALIZE THAT THE REST OF THAT FULL VISION. SO LET ME SHARE
. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. AS I ME I INTRODUCED ME ANDREA LATOYA I'VE BEEN AT MINDAT
METRO DISTRICT SINCE 2013. I HAVE BEEN WORKING AS A PROJECT MANAGER FOR PRETTY MUCH DURING ALL THE TIME AT THE ADMIN THAT SO FOR
TONIGHT'S PRESENTATION YES WE ARE STARTING TO WALK THROUGH WITH OUR PARTNERS LOCAL PARTNERS REQUESTING FOR
MUNICIPAL CONSENT. SO FOR MY PRESENTATION TODAY I'LL GIVE IT I'M SURE DISCUSSION ON WHAT STATE STATUTES REQUIRE MEN TO
REQUEST FOR MUNICIPAL CONSENT GIVE A BRIEF ON WHAT THE CORRIDOR VISION IS AND HOW MEN THAT HAS BROKEN IT OUT IN IN
DELIVERING THAT CORRIDOR VISION LOCAL PARTICIPATION FOR PHASE TWO SPECIFICALLY FOR PHASE TWO WE ALREADY WENT THROUGH PHASE ONE THAT IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION SO I POINT OUT A FEW ITEMS
THAT WE ARE SEEKING. THE CITY'S COST SHARE ON BRIEF ON THE PROPOSED TRAFFIC
STAGING AND MANAGEMENT OF TRAFFIC DURING CONSTRUCTION OF THE SECOND PHASE OF THE CORRIDOR VISION AND THE LAST COUPLE OF SLIDES WILL BE TALKING THROUGH WHERE WE ARE
AT WITH THE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AND COULD YOU SO FOR WHY I'M STANDING IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY IS THAT YES WE ARE REQUIRED BY STATE
LAW TO REQUEST FOR ME TO CONSENT ANY TIME A THAT PROJECT IS GOING THROUGH A MUNICIPALITY AND IT IS EITHER CHANGING ACCESS TO AND FROM THE HIGHWAY IF IT IS
INCREASING OR DECREASING CAPACITY ON THE HIGHWAY AND ALL IF WE ARE IF THE PROJECT IS REQUIRED, IF THE PROJECT IS GOING TO BE ACQUIRING PERMANENT RIGHT OF WAY. SO ALL THESE THREE ARE
TRIGGERED FOR THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF WORK THAT WE NEED ARE ON 82ND STREET AND THAT WORK DOES REBUILD THE INTERCHANGE AND IT CHANGES SOME OF THE
ACCESS TO AND FROM 35 W AS YOU MIGHT BE AWARE THE 494 CORRIDOR VISION DID CALL FOR EXPANSION OF THE HIGHWAY BY ADDING EASY PASS LANE SO
ANOTHER TRIGGER FOR MUNICIPAL CONSENT AND YES TO GET ALL THAT ADDED PAVEMENT THE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT THAT IS REQUIRED WE WOULD NEED TO ACQUIRE A PERMANENT RIGHT
OF WAY. SO CORRIDOR VISION IN SUMMARY REALLY WAS THREE PIECES AS I'VE MENTIONED E-ZPASS RUNNING
FROM HIGHWAY 169 ALL THE WAY THROUGH HIGHWAY 77 ON THE EAST SIDE RECONSTRUCTING AND RECONFIGURING THE I-35W AND 494 INTERCHANGE AND THEN EAST
OF 35 W WE WERE ALSO ALTERING ACCESS WE ELIMINATING DIRECT ACCESS FROM NICOLLET AND 12TH AVENUE AND ADDING ALL THAT HIGHWAY ACCESS TO A PORTLAND
AVENUE SO MOST A BIG CHUNK OF ALL THIS ALL THOSE THREE CATEGORIES IS ALREADY CONSTRUCTED AS PART OF PROJECT ONE OR PHASE ONE WHICH IS
CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION. SO VERY QUICK HIGHLIGHT ON WHAT PROJECT ONE ENTAILED MOSTLY ON THE WEST SIDE OF 35
W WITH PAVEMENT RECONSTRUCTION CONFIGURE RE RECONFIGURING A PORTION OF THE 30 5W4 94 INTERCHANGE SO THE EAST HALF WITH A NEW DIRECTION AROUND
FROM NORTHBOUND 35 W TO WESTBOUND 494 WE AS I MENTIONED RECONSTRUCTING MAIN LINE PAVEMENT ON THE EAST SIDE OF 35 W RE CONSTRUCTING THE
12TH PORTLAND ON NICOLLET AVENUE BRIDGES WE ALSO INCLUDED A NEW PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE JUST EAST OF PORTLAND AVENUE AND PROPOSAL OF THAT BRIDGE CAME FROM SUCH
INTERACTIONS WITH COMMUNITIES AND CITY STUFF THERE'S BEEN QUITE A BIT OF MULTI MODAL IMPROVEMENT THAT I'VE BEEN IN THAT I INCORPORATED IN THE
CORRIDOR VISION AND ALSO QUITE A BIT THAT IS GOING TO BE BUILT AS PART OF PROJECT ONE BUT ALSO AS PART OF PROJECT TWO. SO A CONSTRUCTION STATUS WISE
FOR PROJECT ONE IF YOU'RE OUT IF JUST IF I'M SURE THAT YOU HAVE BEEN TRAVERSING THIS CORRIDOR QUITE A BIT OF WORK IS DONE WEST OF 35 W MOST OF THAT PAVEMENT SHOULD BE
CONCLUDED TOWARDS THE END OF THIS YEAR SO HOPEFULLY OF COURSE IN THE CONSTRUCTION FIELD TRYING TO KEEP THE SNOW AWAY OF THAT WE CAN KEEP WORKING RIGHT SO 90 OR 95%
OF THAT PAVEMENT WORK WILL BE DONE BEFORE THE END OF THIS YEAR FOR NEXT YEAR MOST OF THE WORK IS GOING TO BE CONCENTRATE ON THE EAST SIDE OF 35 W THE PORTLAND AVENUE
BRIDGE WILL BE COMPLETED THIS YEAR WHERE AS I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY ALL THE HIGHWAY ACCESS FOR EAST OF 35 W WILL BE ON LYNDALE AVENUE AND
PORTLAND AVENUE. SO ONCE PORTLAND COMES IN THEN WE WILL TEAR DOWN NICOLLET AND 12 THEN START REBUILDING THOSE. SO ALL THAT WORK IS NOW THE
NICOLLET AND 12TH AVENUE BRIDGES ARE PLANNED FOR 2026 OVERALL COMPLETION FOR PHASE ONE IS SEPTEMBER END
OF SEPTEMBER 2026 AND HAPPY TO REPORT THAT PROJECT IS GOING TO KEEP TO BE ON TRUCK TO TO MEET THAT DEADLINE SO COMING
INTO PHASE TWO AS I MENTIONED YOU WOULD SEE THAT PHASE TWO IS IT IS A CONCLUSION OF THE CORRIDOR VISION ON THE EAST ON
THE WEST SIDE OF 35 W WEST OF HIGHWAY 100 THE EASY PASS LANES WILL BE MOSTLY ON THERE SO WE ARE GOING TO BE TAKING OUT THE GRASS MEDIAN WEST OF EAST BUSH LAKE ROAD AND
PAVING PAVING, PAVING THAT OVER TO TO TO INTRODUCE THE NEW EASY PASS LANES IN THAT AREA WEST EAST OF 35 W ITS
EXPANSION ON THE OUTSIDE BUT BECAUSE THE PAVEMENT IS ALSO A LITTLE OLD WE ARE ALSO GOING TO BE TEARING ALL THAT OUT AND REPAVING THAT PAVEMENT ALL THE
WAY FROM 35 W TO EAST OF 24TH AVENUE ON 35 W WE ARE ALSO RECONSTRUCTING MEAN LANE PAVEMENT FROM 82ND STREET TO 76TH STREET AND ALSO COMING
IN AND COMPLETING THE EASTBOUND FOR 94 TO SOUTHBOUND MOVEMENTS INCLUDING THE RE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE 82ND
STREET BRIDGE. I'VE MENTIONED THIS ALSO THE LAST BULLET POINT ON THAT PAGE WE ARE ALSO INCLUDING A MULTIMODAL IMPROVEMENTS IN THE
SECOND PHASE QUITE A BIT ON 82ND FROM KNOX AVENUE WEST OF 35 W ALL THE WAY IS TO FREMONT I THINK IT'S EAST OF FREMONT AS WELL.
THERE IS IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THE FRONTAGE ROAD EAST OF 12TH AVENUE FOR MULTIMODAL IMPROVEMENTS UH CITY
OF BLOOMINGTON LOOK OF COURSE PARTICIPATION AND IT'S BY ITS IT'S LISTED AS A CLOSE PARTICIPATION BECAUSE THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF COST SHARE THAT MEAN THAT IS GOING TO BE
TAKING ON SO ABOUT FOR THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON THESE ITEMS THAT YOU'RE SEEING ITEMS THAT ARE FALLING OUTSIDE MINDAT RIGHT OF WAY SO ANYTHING WITHIN THAT RIGHT
OF WAY WILL BE PAID FOR BY MENARD BUT OUTSIDE WE CAN'T SO WE HAD LIMITED IN DOING THAT SO THAT'S WHY WE WOULD REQUEST FOR THE CITIES TO COVER THOSE
COSTS BUT I WOULD ALSO MENTION JUST TO CLARIFY THAT ANY WORK THAT THAT IS CAUSED BY MEN THAT ON THE LOCAL SYSTEM WILL BE COVERED AND PAID FOR BY
MINDAT FIRST AVENUE WE ARE REPLACING THE SIGNALS ON FRANCE AVENUE. SO BY YOUR REGULAR COURSE PARTICIPATION POLICY POLICIES THERE IS OF COURSE HERE THAT GOES TO THEITY. SO WHOEVER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR
THE MOVEMENT WE CALL THEM LEGS ON THE INTERSECTION THEY COVER THOSE COSTS STREET LIGHTS THROUGH COORDINATION WITH CITY STAFF THEY HAVE
REQUESTED FOR STREET LIGHTS ALONG 82ND AND ABOUT FIVE LIGHTS OR THAT'S THE NUMBER THAT WE ARE ESTIMATING FOR THAT TO BE. AND THEN ENGINEERING AND
CONTINGENCIES ARE AT 60,000 BUT ALL THESE ONCE THE PROJECT IS LED WILL BE REFINED AND THE ACTUAL COURSE SHALL WILL BE BASED ON WHAT THE THE THE PREFERRED CONTRACT OR THE
PREFERRED BIDDER BIDS FOR FOR THE WORK. OKAY PROPOSED A MULTI FOR PHASE TWO SIMILAR TO PHASE ONE
WE ARE ANTICIPATING A FOUR YEAR CONSTRUCTION WINDOW FOR PHASE TWO AGAIN SIMILAR TO PHASE ONE WE ARE PROPOSING TO RETAIN THREE LANES IN EACH
DIRECTION ON BOTH FOR 84 AND 35 W YES THOSE LANES MIGHT BE NARROW BUT HOPING THAT TRAFFIC IS STILL ABLE TO TRAVERSE THE CONSTRUCTION AREA EASIER THAN LIMITING LANES.
I'LL PUT A CAVEAT ON THAT BULLET POINT THAT THERE ARE A FEW SECTIONS WHERE WE MIGHT WE MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO TO MEET THIS REQUIREMENT.
WE HAVE IDENTIFIED ONE JUST EAST OF HIGHWAY 77 AND THE 24TH AVENUE BRIDGES WE MIGHT HAVE A CONSTRAINT AREA WHERE WE HAVE TO NARROW IT DOWN TO TWO LANES IN EACH DIRECTION BUT THE DURATION FOR THAT
CONSTRAINT WE ARE ASSUMING IT TO BE ONE CONSTRUCTION SEASON AND PART OF THE REASON IS THAT BECAUSE OF WE AS PART OF THE CORRIDOR VISION AND
ACCOMMODATING EASY PASS LANES WE HAVE TO REPLACE THE HIGHWAY 77 BRIDGES SO TO STAGE THE REPLACEMENT OF THE HIGHWAY 77 BRIDGES OVER 484 WE WILL BE
LIMITING SOME SPACE ON MAINLINE FOR 94. THAT'S WHY WE ARE CONSTRAINING SPACE THERE. SIMILARLY ALONG 35 W JUST NORTH OF 82ND THERE'S A
SECTION THAT FOR ABOUT 90 DAYS WE WOULD HAVE TO CONSTRAIN IN THE NUMBER OF LANES THAT ARE GOING THROUGH THAT SECTION . SO 2027 SO THE PROJECT IS
PROPOSED TO BE LEFT ON THE NEXT SLIDE WE KIND OF DIVE ON IN DETAIL ABOUT PROJECT DELIVERIES. COULD YOU PROJECT IS IS PLANNED TO BE LATER IN THE FALL OF 2026 2027 THE FIRST
YEAR WILL BE FOCUSED ON UTILITY RELOCATION. THERE IS QUITE A BIT OF CITY UTILITIES THAT NEED TO BE RELOCATED TO MOVE OUT OF THE
WAY OF THE MAIN LANE WORK THEN 2028 THROUGH 2030 THAT'S WHERE THE MAJOR MAIN LINE CONSTRUCTION WILL BE HAPPENING AND IT WILL BE HAPPENING CONCURRENTLY BOTH ON THE 494
AND ON 35 W SO PROJECT DELIVERIES COULD YOU STARTED THIS SECOND PHASE IN EARNEST IN SEPTEMBER OF 2024 AS AMY MENTIONED AT THE BEGINNING
OF MY PRESENTATION REALLY THE CORRIDOR VISION WE STARTED THE ENTIRE PROCESS IN 2018 AND FROM 2018 WE LED THE FIRST PHASE IN 2022. WE WERE LUCKY THAT LAST YEAR
WE GOT FUNDING FROM ADDITIONAL FUNDING FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT ALLOWED US TO COMPLETE THE REST OF THE CORRIDOR VISION WE HAVE WORKED THROUGH A COUPLE OF ITEMS OR TASKS FOR THE PROJECT WHERE WE
ARE AT. WE ARE CLOSER TO 70% OF PENN VALLEY DESIGN. WE'RE GETTING THE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT NEARLY THERE. SO IT'S STILL TRUE THAT
TOWARDS IF IT'S NOT DECEMBER THEN IT BE EARLY 2026 OR JANUARY TIMEFRAME WHERE I WOULD HAVE THE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT COMPLETED. ONCE THAT IS DONE THEN IT ALLOWS US TO START THE
PROCUREMENT PROCESS OF GETTING THE CONTRACTOR ON BOARD SO THAT'S WHY IT SAID 70% JANUARY AND PROPOSED DATING IN OCTOBER . SO ALL THAT TIME THERE IS STILL QUITE A BIT OF WORK THAT
HAS TO GO INTO GETTING A DESIGN BUILD CONTRACTOR ON BOARD AND THEN THE LAST BULLET POINT MENTIONED THERE'S A COUPLE OF TIMES THAT WE ARE PLANNING TO LEAD THE PROJECT
IN THE FALL OF 2026 ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION STARTING IN 27 ALL THE WAY THROUGH 2030 THAT IS MY PRESENTATION AND I'LL BE
GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU MR. RETAIL QUESTIONS . I HAVE A QUESTION. YES. IS THERE A PHASE THREE COMING? YEAH. YEAH, NO THERE ISN'T. OKAY.
LIKE I MENTIONED WE ARE LUCKY. SURPRISINGLY WE HAD WHEN WE STARTED OUT THE ORIGINAL ESTIMATED BUDGET WAS ABOUT $2 BILLION.
FIRST PHASE RIGHT NOW IS RUNNING ABOUT 400 MILLION. SO YES, WE WERE ORIGINALLY PLANNING TO BREAK IT OUT INTO A COUPLE OF PHASES BUT AS I MENTIONED LAST YEAR WE GOT LUCKY THAT WE GOT THE FUNDING
TO COMPLETE THE REST OF THE CORRIDOR VISION. GREAT. THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS SO YEAH, THANK YOU KARIBU AND I'M GOING TO
SAY IS THERE GOING TO BE INCREASED STANDARD? WELL I IS IT WOULD BE AN INCREASE TO 80 63A SECOND SORRY SORRY. YOU KNOW TRAFFIC WISE WITH THIS BECAUSE I THINK ONE OF THE TRIGGERS WAS IF THERE'S AN INCREASE OR DECREASE.
YEAH. MR. CHAIR COMMISSIONER, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. YES I THERE IS QUITE A BIT OF INFORMATION THAT WE KEPT OUT TO KEEP MY PRESENTATION UNDER TEN SLIDES.
SO YEAH THERE'S THERE IS QUITE A BIT BECAUSE WHAT I MENTIONED RECONFIGURING THE 30 5W4 94 INTERCHANGE SO THERE ARE FEW MOVEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN
ELIMINATED OFF THE HIGHWAY AND THERE IS THIS THING THAT WE WHAT TIMING A BOX WHERE THE TRAFFIC ON ON THE LOCAL STREETS IS USING PENN AVENUE
82ND LINDELOF ONLY ON THE EAST SIDE OF 35 W AND 76TH SO TRYING TO KEEP THEM ON THE LOCAL SYSTEM BUSSES COMING ON TO THE HIGHWAY. SO IN DOING THAT YES WE ARE ANTICIPATING TO HAVE INCREASED
TRAFFIC WHAT 82ND THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. THANK YOU CHAIR THANK YOU FOR THIS PRESENTATION.
ONE QUESTION THE SIGNAL REPLACEMENTS ON FRANCE AVENUE IS THAT GOING TO BE A RECONFIGURATION OF THE TRAFFIC ON FRANCE AVENUE OR JUST SIGNAL REPLACEMENT BECAUSE THE SIGNALS ARE OLD AND NEED
REPLACING OR IS IT A COMPLETE RECONFIGURATION OF THE INTERSECTION? THANK YOU CHAIR COMMISSIONER LANE YES, IT'S BOTH. YES. THE SIGNALS ARE OLD AND WE ARE
RECONFIGURING THE ACCESS TO MAINLY IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN FEEL CROSSING BOTH THE SOUTH SIDE OF 494 AND THE NORTH SIDE OF THE 94.
YEP. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ? MR. TAYLOR THANK YOU AND WE HOPE TO SEE YOU BACK HERE IN 2030 FOR THE RIBBON CUTTING THEY GO RIGHT?
YEAH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MR. ROOM YES, THANK YOU. WE'LL MOVE THEN. OH, LET ME JUST NOTE THAT I WILL GO BEFORE CITY COUNCIL'S A PUBLIC HEARING ON OCTOBER 13TH NOW THEN WE'LL
MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR WHICH IS A STUDY ITEM THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON'S THE APPLICANT TO DISCUSS THE MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES ORDINANCE 2025 THIS HAS BACK WITH THE STAFF REPORT.
GOOD EVENING AGAIN. SO I'M HERE TO PRESENT THE ANNUAL MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES ORDINANCES TO YOU. SO FOR NEW COMMISSIONERS EVERY YEAR STAFF PUTS TOGETHER A
LIST OF ORDINANCES THAT DON'T WARRANT THEIR OWN PROJECT ON THE WORKPLAN SO IT CAN RANGE FROM SMALL GRAMMAR ISSUES TO LARGER CHANGES BUT NOT SO BIG
THAT THEY NEED THEIR OWN PROJECT SO THIS YEAR WE HAVE THREE BUT WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR TONIGHT IS JUST FEEDBACK ON
SEVEN OF THEM SO THE TIMELINE IS A STUDY SESSION TONIGHT WITH YOU ALL AND THEN GOING TO COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 29TH AND THEN THIS WILL COME BACK AS A
PUBLIC HEARING FOR ALL 33 AND OCTOBER AND HOPEFULLY GO TO COUNCIL ON NOVEMBER. SO THE MAJORITY OF THESE ORDINANCE CHANGES ARE WHAT WE
CALL CLEANUP ITEMS. AND SO I PUT SOME EXAMPLES ON THE SCREEN BUT TYPICALLY IT'S OH THIS SENTENCE WAS MISSING AND AND OR FOR THE SECOND ONE
WE HAD OLD REFERENCES TO THE AIRPORT SOUTH DISTRICT WHICH IS NOW KNOWN AS THE SOUTH LOOP. SO IT'S JUST CHANGES LIKE THOSE AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO REVIEW THOSE TONIGHT. WE'RE JUST GOING TO REVIEW
SOME MORE OF THE POLICY CHANGES. SO I HAVE A TABLE OF CONTENTS IN FRONT OF YOU AND BECAUSE
THESE TOPICS VARY SO WIDELY, I THINK WHAT WOULD WORK BEST IS TO GO OVER EACH CHANGE AND THEN IF YOU HAVE COMMENTS WE'LL JUST TALK ABOUT IT WHEN
I'M DONE PRESENTING ON IT. SO THE FIRST ONE IS A CHANGE TO THE EXTERIOR LIGHTING SECTION OF THE CODE IT NEEDS TO BE UPDATED TO SPECIFY WHEN
LIGHTING PLANS ARE REQUIRED. NOT EVERY PROJECT THAT INVOLVES LIGHTING SUCH AS LIKE A SIGN NECESSITATES A WHOLE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN TO BE
SUBMITTED SO WE WOULD BE CHANGING THAT TO BE ABLE TO BE EXEMPTED BY THE PLANNING MANAGER AND ADDITIONALLY FOR THIS SECTION WE'RE PROPOSING ADDING A STATEMENT ABOUT MAINTENANCE OF LIGHTING TO
ENSURE THAT LIGHTING IS KEPT IN GOOD REPAIR. ALSO IF YOU DON'T HAVE COMMENTS ON THESE I CAN MOVE TO THE NEXT ONE TO FORGIVE ME. THIS HAS BECOME WOULD YOU LIKE
TO DO THAT? DO YOU WANT TO GO ONE BY ONE OR DO YOU WANT TO? YEAH OKAY. POSSIBLE ONE BY ONE SORRY. >> MEANING YOU WANT COMMENTS? OH NO. JUST IF ANYONE HAS COMMENTS I DON'T THINK WE NEED LIKE A YES
OR NO ON SOME OF THESE BUT IF ANYONE SEES RED FLAGS OR HAS A QUESTION LET ME KNOW OTHERWISE I CAN MOVE ON SEEING NONE. OKAY.
THANK YOU. OKAY, SO ORDINANCE Z IS ALLOWING MULTIFAMILY AND COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS SO THE CITY COUNCIL I THINK BACK IN THE SPRING ENDORSED A
RECOMMENDATION AS PART OF A THE OFFICE CONVERSION STUDY TO ALLOW MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES IN CERTAIN ZONING DISTRICTS WHICH ARE LISTED ON
THE SCREEN. AND SO THIS ORDINANCE WOULD JUST KIND OF BE PUT IN WHAT WAS ENDORSED IN THAT STUDY ONTO PAPER
WHICH MR.. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. JUST AS A QUESTION, THIS WOULD BE ALLOWING MULTIFAMILY USES WITH NO COMMERCIAL COMPONENT NOT A MIXED USE CORRECT CHAIR
COMMISH COMMISSIONER MUNSON MUNSTER SORRY. SO IT IS COMBINED WITH MINIMUM LEVELS OF NON NONRESIDENTIAL
FLOOR AREAS AND THESE DISTRICTS SO YEAH IT HAS TO BE COMBINED WITH NONRESIDENTIAL. OKAY. THANK YOU. I MISSPOKE. IS THIS WHAT WE STUDIED EARLIER IN THE YEAR OR LAST YEAR?
CHAIR YES. TOM RAMBLER WILSON DID THAT STUDY OKAY .
ORDINANCE A THESE ARE A COUPLE DIFFERENT OR ARE UPDATES TO APPLICATION PROCESSES AND FEES. SO AS PART OF THE STREAMLINING DEVELOPMENT PROJECT LAST YEAR
WE ESTABLISHED THE PROCESS OF APPEALING A VARIANCE DECISION BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION BUT WE FORGOT TO ADD IT TO THE APPLICATION PROCESSES TABLE AND SO THE
APPEAL PROCESS FOR THAT WOULD INCLUDE A PUBLIC HEARING AT COUNCIL AND THEN ADDITIONALLY WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IN THE BOTTOM TABLE IS THERE IS A PROCESS IN OUR APPLICATION
PROCESSES TABLE FOR APPEALS TO CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS BUT THERE'S NO FEE IN OUR FEE TABLE SO THE FEE WOULD BE $220 WHICH IS
MIRRORING OTHER A P APPEAL FEE COSTS AND SO THIS ONE IS CLEANING UP THOSE TWO OVERSIGHTS JUST TO FISHERIES.
JUST JUST A QUICK QUESTION. SO THERE'S CURRENTLY NO FEE IS THAT WHAT IS CHAIR COMMISSIONER ISSA THERE SHOULD BE A FEE. WE JUST DON'T HAVE IT WRITTEN DOWN IN THERE.
THERE ARE FEES FOR OTHER APPEAL OF DECISIONS. THIS ONE JUST WASN'T IN THE TABLE. YEAH. ALL RIGHT.
OKAY. ORDINANCE BEEBE SURROUNDS GARAGE HEIGHT LIMITS AND SO OUR CURRENT CODE FOR ACCESSORY
STRUCTURES A GARAGE OR ACCESSORY ACCESSORY STRUCTURE CANNOT BE TALLER THAN THE PRINCIPAL DWELLING FOR SOME SHORTER HOUSES OR RAMBLERS
LIKE WE HAVE A LOT HERE THAT LIMITATION CAN BE CHALLENGING SO STAFF IS PROPOSING A MAXIMUM OF 15FT FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND GARAGES THAT
ARE EXCEEDING THE HEIGHT OF THE PRINCIPAL DWELLING . COMMISSIONER WAIT SORRY. MAYBE IT'S BECAUSE IT'S MATH
BUT I JUST WANT TO VERIFY IT'S A TOTAL OF 15FT IN HEIGHT OR 15FT HIGHER THAN THEN THE MAIN STRUCTURE. >> CHAIR COMMISSIONER WE ARE
TOLD OR 15FT IN HEIGHT. OKAY. ORDINANCE C C AGAIN THERE'S
KIND OF TWO ISSUES HERE WITH PLANNING VARIANCES. SO FIRST THE PLANNING COMMISSION SHOULD BE HOLDING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR PLANNING VARIANCES SPECIFICALLY
INVOLVING DEVIATIONS FROM CHAPTER 22 DIVISION D RATHER THAN THE CITY COUNCIL. THIS IS ALREADY WRITTEN IN THAT SECTION OF CODE. IT'S JUST INCORRECT IN THE APPLICATION PROCESSES TABLE.
AND THEN SECONDLY THE CODE DOES NOT ESTABLISH A VARIANCE PROCESS FOR PLANNING STANDARDS WHEN THE DEVIATION RELATES TO OTHER SECTIONS OTHER THAN CHAPTER 22 DIVISION
D. AND IN THIS CASE THE COUNCIL WOULD HOLD THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BE THE DECISION MAKER .
I THINK THE CROOKED ORDINANCE DEAR DEAR IS TO REMOVE ARCHITECTURAL UNITY STANDARD FOR COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS. SO CURRENTLY THE CODE SAYS THAT NONRESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES
THAT ARE ON THE SAME SITE HAVE TO MATCH IN STYLE COLOR SCHEME AND BUILDING MATERIALS STAFF BELIEVES THAT REQUIRING THIS
SHOULD BE REMOVED BECAUSE IT LIMITS DESIGN FLEXIBILITY AND CREATIVITY. AND IT ALSO CREATES AN UNNECESSARY BURDEN ON THE DEVELOPER OR BUSINESS. SO THIS ORDINANCE IS PROPOSING
TO REMOVE THE LANGUAGE THAT WOULD REQUIRE THAT UNITY. TODAY IS A GREAT DAY IN THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON THAT WE ARE FINALLY REMOVING THIS AND I THINK IT'S PROBABLY JUST BECAUSE STAFF HAS BEEN TIRED
OF HEARING ME COMPLAIN ABOUT THIS FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS. THIS IS SO GREAT. WE'VE HAD APPLICATIONS COME BEFORE US WHERE THEY HAVE TO MEET THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE OF AN OLD BUILDING AND THEY
COME TO US WITH LIKE A BEAUTIFUL MINOR THING AND WE SAY NO, SORRY YOU'VE GOT TO GO MEET THE 1980S STANDARDS AND IT'S IT'S AWFUL FOR THE CITY. MS. KESWICK MR. JOHNSON THIS
TYPE OF THING IS REFERENCED I THINK IN MULTIPLE AREAS OF THE CODE WITH LIKE PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS AND THINGS THERE OTHER REFERENCES TO THIS WHERE WE'RE STILL GOING TO GET CAUGHT ON THAT TYPE OF THING
OR IS THIS A UNIVERSAL CLEANUP CHAIR COOKED IN? WE CERTAINLY WILL DO THAT DUE DILIGENCE BEFORE WE BRING THE ORDINANCE BACK TO YOU. I DON'T THINK SO. I THINK IT'S MOSTLY JUST IN THE STRUCTURE DESIGN
SECTION OF CODE AND AS YOU MENTIONED THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT COMPONENT BUT WE'LL CERTAINLY DO DUE DILIGENCE ON THAT AND WE HAVE THE JEFFERSON MARCHING BAND ON STANDBY OR THIS CELEBRATION.
ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON ITEM D? COMMISSIONER WHITE THANK YOU. I DID THANK YOU CHAIR. I DO APPRECIATE YOUR ENTHUSIASM AND I LARGELY AGREE
WITH YOUR COMMENTS. I DO JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THOUGH THAT WE'RE NOT THAT THEY'RE STILL COMPLEMENTING THE WORK OF THE AREA OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND NOT CREATING
A LOT OF WEIRD BUILDINGS STANDING OUT FROM THE REST OF THE BUILDINGS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY CONCERN I WOULD RAISE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE APPROPRIATE LANGUAGE IS BUT I THINK I'M ALL FOR CREATIVITY
MAKE IT LOOK A LITTLE DIFFERENT. NOT DEFINITELY NOT TYING IT TO THE 70S AND 80S BUT I DO SO THINK THERE ARE SOME GOOD REASONS FOR HAVING THINGS NOT
STICK OUT LIKE A SORE THUMB. THERE MIGHT BE SOME ROOM FOR ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION. YOUR COMMISSION LISA YEAH NOT START THE ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION BUT THANK YOU CHAIR BY THE WAY.
YEAH I THINK IT'S JUST I JUST WANT TO SAY LIKE I THINK IT'S REALLY GOOD THAT STAFF IS LIKE IDENTIFY UNNECESSARY BURDENS ON DEVELOPERS AND BUSINESSES
AND THEY ARE CHANGING THINGS AS A AS FOUND YOU KNOW AND SO I'M HOPING IF THERE IS MORE OUT THERE HOPEFULLY THERE'S NOT BUT THAT COULD CONTINUE TO BE LOOKED INTO, YOU KNOW AND
SO YEAH, SO I'D SAY THAT THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN AS IT IS NOW WITH WITH WITHOUT NECESSARY REFERENCE TO COMPLEMENTARY
ARCHITECTURE AND THE REASON I SAY THAT IS BECAUSE OF WHAT WE'VE SEEN IN THE PAST AND LARGELY ON LYNDALE IS WHERE WE'VE I THINK SEEN THIS A COUPLE OF TIMES WHERE WE'VE GOT A LOT OF OLDER STRIP MALLS
THAT ARE STUCK IN THE 60S AND 70S AND WE HAD A BANK AND I THINK SOME OTHER APPLICATIONS THAT CAME FORWARD WITH US AND SOMETHING THAT LOOKED NOTHING LIKE THAT. IT WAS A BEAUTIFUL WHAT WE WOULD CALL A JEWELRY BOX TYPE
THING JUST ALL GLASSED IN AND WHATEVER AND WE SAID NO, NO, NO YOU NEED MORE BRICK ON THAT AND YOU CAN'T HAVE THAT MUCH GLASS AND LIGHT COMING INTO YOUR BUILDING AND SO I
PERSONALLY AM NOT IN FAVOR OF HAVING ANY REFERENCE TO COMPLIMENTARY DESIGN AND I THINK WE LET THE MARKET GO TO TOWN ON THAT.
SO I THINK YOU KNOW I ALSO AGREE AS WELL ABOUT THE COMPLEMENT COMPLEMENTARY DESIGN THING YOU KNOW I THINK THAT COULD TEND TO BE LIKE
SUBJECTIVE LIKE WHAT IS COMPLEMENT? WELL IN THIS CASE IN ALLENDALE IS PRETTY OBJECTIVE BECAUSE EVERYTHING IS BRICK BUT I THINK YOU KNOW INITIALLY LIKE
IF YOU START WITH IF YOU START WITH THE EMPTY PIECE OF LAND AND YOU KNOW I DECIDED TO BUILD GLASS FIRST NOW WHAT WOULD BE COMPLEMENTARY NEXT IS EVERYTHING ELSE IS GLASS. SO IT'S KIND OF LIKE LIKE
WHO'S WHO'S TO START THAT TO BEGIN WITH, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? JUST INTERESTING PERSPECTIVE I GUESS. YEAH. THANKS, MR. CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU, CHAIR. I ALSO WAS THINKING ABOUT A CERTAIN AMERICAN BANK EAST OF 90TH AND LYNDALE AND THIS
CAME UP I'M IN FAVOR OF THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN. I THINK THAT THERE'S ENOUGH LANGUAGE IN THE OTHER PORTIONS OF THE CODE SPEAKING TO, YOU KNOW, KIND OF CLASSIER MATERIALS FOR THE EXTERIOR
OF COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS. SO I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS RIGHT ? OTHER FEEDBACK OKAY.
ORDINANCE E IS TO REMOVE DOUBLE PUBLIC HEARINGS SO DOUBLE PUBLIC HEARINGS WHICH WOULD BE WHEN YOU HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING AT PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL
ARE NOT REQUIRED PER STATE STATUTE AS PART OF OUR EFFORTS TO STREAMLINE DEVELOPMENT TO REDUCE COSTS AND BARRIERS, STAFF IS PROPOSING TO ELIMINATE DOUBLE PUBLIC
HEARINGS FOR SEVERAL APPLICATIONS AND THEREFORE ONLY HAVING A PUBLIC HEARING AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION THERE WOULD STILL BE TIME FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AT COUNCIL BUT
THERE WOULD BE NO NOTICE REQUIREMENT THAT APPLICATIONS THAT ARE PROPOSED TO NOT ONLY HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING A PLANNING COMMISSION ARE LISTED
ON THE SCREEN THERE'S SEVEN OF THEM AND I'LL LET PLANNING MANAGER JOHNSON ADD COMMENTS IF HE HAS ANY. THANK YOU, EMILY. WHAT I WOULD ADD TO THIS ONE IS JUST THAT YOU KNOW OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS
ESPECIALLY FOUR MEMBERS HAVE BEEN ON THE BOARD WITH US DURING THAT TIME WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO MAKE INTENTIONAL EFFORTS TO KIND OF STREAMLINE OUR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED IN THE PAST.
NOT ALL CITIES REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARINGS AT BOTH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL FOR COUNCIL REQUIRED ACTIONS. WE STILL NEED TO DO SOME RESEARCH WITH RESPECT TO SOME
ELEMENTS OF THE CITY CHARTER AND WE'RE WORKING WITH LEGAL ON THAT AND SOME OF THAT MIGHT ALSO DICTATE WHETHER THIS IS FEASIBLE OR NOT. BUT WE JUST WANTED TO TAKE YOUR TEMPERATURE AND TAKE THE CITY COUNCIL'S TEMPERATURE TO SEE IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
THEY WOULD BE AMENABLE TO OR IN FAVOR OF JUST KIND OF BREAKING IT DOWN INTO KIND OF THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF IT. BASICALLY IT'S TWO WEEKS OF SAVINGS IN BETWEEN WHEN AN ITEM GOES FROM PLANNING
COMMISSION TO CITY COUNCIL IF YOU DON'T HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING REQUIREMENT AT CITY COUNCIL. AND SO IF YOU'RE STILL ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT IF THERE ARE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO ARE
ENGAGED IN THE PROCESS AND STILL GIVEN THAT OPPORTUNITY, WE THINK THAT THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO REDUCE A LITTLE BIT OF THE TIME AND COST ASSOCIATED WITH SOME OF THESE APPLICATIONS. BUT REALLY ON THIS ONE WE WANTED TO GATHER FEEDBACK FROM
PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL TO SEE HOW TO MOVE FORWARD AND MR. JOHNSON, JUST SO I'M CLEAR, IS IT BEING REMOVED FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR BEING REMOVED
FROM THE COUNCIL CHAIR? OUR PROPOSAL WOULD BE TO REMOVE THE PUBLIC HEARING THE FORMAL PUBLIC HEARING FROM THE CITY COUNCIL KEEPING IT WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THANK YOU MR. JOHNSON SPEAKING FOR MYSELF I HAVE A LOT OF FAITH IN THIS COMMISSION
THAT WE TAKE THINGS VERY SERIOUSLY AND THAT WE ARE FAIR TO APPLICANTS AND THAT THEY GET A FAIR PUBLIC HEARING RIGHT HERE AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITHOUT THE CITY COUNCIL ON THESE TYPES OF ITEMS. I THINK THE CITY COUNCIL WILL
BE A LOT MORE INTERESTED IN THIS THAN WE ARE WHETHER THEY WANT TO RETAIN THAT PUBLIC HEARING IN FRONT OF THEM OR NOT. BUT SPEAKING FOR ME I'M MORE THAN COMFORTABLE BEING THE FINAL DECISION MAKER ON THESE
TYPES OF ITEMS. MR. CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU, CHAIR. I AGREE WITH WITH THIS IN PRINCIPLE THAT SORRY, SORRY. THANK YOU.
CHAIR SO I AGREE WITH THIS IN PRINCIPLE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE WOULD STILL BE PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR A PRELIMINARY AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEWS AND THEN PRELIMINARY FINAL PLATS
LIKE ON THE ONLY THINGS THAT WE WOULD BE TAKING TO BE SINGLE ACTION WOULD BE A SINGLE PUBLIC HEARING WOULD BE THE ONES ON THE SCREEN IN FRONT OF US. MS. I ESPER I'LL THANK YOU
CHAIR I'LL SPEAK TO IT AGAIN. SO JUST TO CLARIFY A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, THE CITY COUNCIL STILL HAS THE AUTHORITY TO APPROVE THESE APPLICATIONS. SO WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT A FORMAL PUBLIC HEARING IS REQUIRED AT THE CITY COUNCIL AS PART OF THEIR
ACTION. SO IT'S NOT TO SAY THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS THE AUTHORITY TO APPROVE THESE ITEMS. IT'S JUST THAT THEY WOULD HOLD THE FORMAL PUBLIC HEARING ACTUALLY FOR SOME OF OUR PRELIMINARY AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN ACTIONS
TODAY. THAT'S ALREADY THE CASE. SO THE PLANNING COMMISSION HOLDS THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE CITY COUNCIL IS THE DECISION MAKER ESPECIALLY IF FLEXIBILITY IS BEING SOUGHT. THEY TYPICALLY DO SO WITHOUT A
PUBLIC HEARING AT THE CITY COUNCIL LEVEL. SO JUST TO PROVIDE SOME PROCEDURAL CLARIFICATION IN THE INTEREST OF STREAMLINING DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY, I'M IN FAVOR
OF THIS OFFICIAL NAME. THANK YOU. CHAIR. JUST A QUICK QUESTION. I'M RECONFIRMING WE RECORD ALL OF THESE MEETINGS AND THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD HAVE ACCESS TO
VIEW THE PUBLIC HEARING THAT WE HELD IF THEY WERE INTERESTED. CORRECT. SO THEY COULD HEAR THE COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC JUST WHILE THEY COULD WATCH THE MEETING ALSO. OKAY, GREAT.
THANK YOU. I SEE HEADS NODDING ANSWERING MY QUESTION AND CHAIR COMMISSIONER LANIER WE DO OBVIOUSLY WE DO OF COURSE PASS ALONG OUR MEETING MINUTES AS WELL WHICH ALSO CAPTURES AND
THAT TESTIMONY IN WRITTEN FORM AS WELL. COMMISSIONER WAIT AND IN GENERAL I THINK THIS MAKES SENSE IN TERMS OF THE USE OF TIME AND AND AND CLEAR
PROCESSES. I WOULD SAY THAT STREAMLINING ISN'T ALWAYS THE BEST WAY TO GO AND THAT I THINK SOMETIMES THESE PROCESSES EXIST AND TIME
BETWEEN THINGS EXISTS FOR REASONS AND SO I DO WANT TO BE CAUTIOUS THAT WE ARE NOT REMOVING OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE PUBLIC ENGAGE JUST TO MAKE IT
EASIER FOR DEVELOPERS BECAUSE I THINK THAT THAT IS AN AN UNFAIR AND UNFAIR SITUATION POTENTIALLY FOR THE RESIDENTS OF BLOOMINGTON WHO MAY NOT HAVE STAFF OR ATTORNEYS WHO
ARE TRACKING CITY COUNCIL AGENDAS OR PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDAS AND BUT WHO WOULD BE IMPACTED BY DECISIONS THAT ARE BEING MADE. SO I JUST WANT TO URGE CAUTION
THAT I UNDERSTAND THE DESIRE TO MAKE PROCESSES A STRAIGHTFORWARD AND FAIR AND ECONOMICAL BUT I NEVER WANT TO SEE THAT HAPPEN AT THE COST
OF ALLOWING CITIZENS TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON IN THEIR CITY AND HAVE A VOICE IN IT. SO I DON'T I'M NOT SAYING THAT THIS DOES THAT BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE PROCEEDING WITH CAUTION AND NOT JUST
STREAMLINING TO STREAMLINE AND MAKE IT EASIER FOR DEVELOPMENTS TO PUSH THROUGH. I MUST ADMIT THIS IS A PROCESS THAT I DID NOT KNOW EXISTED WHERE BOTH PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL REVIEW AN
ITEM BUT ONLY WE HOLD THE PUBLIC HEARING IS WHY IF ONLY ONE BODY IS GOING TO HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING WHY WOULDN'T IT BE COUNCIL JUST TO SAVE THEM
TIME CHAIR COOKED IN GOOD QUESTION. I THINK PART OF IT HAS TO DO WITH YOU BEING THE ADVISORY BOARD AND THE CITY'S PLANNING
AGENCY FOR LAND USE MATTERS. I THINK MOST CITIES SET IT UP THAT WAY THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS THE BODY THAT HOLDS THE PUBLIC HEARING. BEYOND THAT, I MEAN THERE ARE
SOME LANGUAGE IN THE CHARTER WHICH I REFERRED TO WHICH RELATES TO ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS THAT REQUIRING A PUBLIC HEARING AT THE COUNCIL LEVEL WE'RE LOOKING INTO THAT. IT DOESN'T PRECISELY SAY THAT IT'S ONE OF THOSE ALL CHARTER
PROVISIONS THAT IS A LITTLE BIT SUBJECT TO INTERPRETATION . BUT YEAH, I THINK FROM MY STUDY OF MOST OTHER CITIES THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES SERVE IN THAT ROLE IN TERMS OF HOLDING THE HEARING.
PART OF IT TOO I THINK IS THAT WHILE THE APPLICATION IS UNDER FORMAL REVIEW BY STAFF, THE KIND OF WIDE LATITUDE OF STAFF DEPARTMENTS THAT DO REVIEW PRIOR TO BRINGING YOU OUR STAFF REPORTS IS THAT IT
PROVIDES US THAT TIME TO SCHEDULE THE PUBLIC HEARINGS. IT TAKES ABOUT A MONTH THE INTERNAL STAFF REVIEW BEFORE IT COMES BEFORE YOU. SO THERE'S THERE'S PROBABLY MULTIPLE REASONS AND I THINK ONE OTHER REASON HAPPENS TO BE
THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDAS TEND TO BE VERY PACKED AND LENGTHY AND SO I THINK SOME CITIES PROCEDURALLY LIKE TO HAVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION HOLD THE PUBLIC HEARING BECAUSE IT TENDS TO BE QUITE
LONG AS AS YOU'VE SEEN IN A COUPLE ITEMS RECENTLY. SO I THINK IT'S ABOUT MANAGING CAPACITY. I THINK IT'S ABOUT PROCESS. I THINK IT'S THE PLANNING AGENCY PIECE OUT OF STATE STATUTE. I THINK THERE'S MULTIPLE
REASONS THAT A CITY MIGHT CHOOSE TO DO THAT PROCEDURALLY . SO THANK YOU CHAIR DASH WANT TO GIVE MY THOUGHTS ON THIS
AND I KIND OF GIVE MY I GUESS OPINION ON THE STREAMLINING. I THINK STREAMLINING IN THIS CASE IS GOOD. I DO DISAGREE WITH YOU A LITTLE BIT, COMMISSIONER, ON STREAMLINING AND IN GENERAL I
THINK THE WAY I LOOK AT STREAMLINING IS GETTING TO THAT END GOAL EFFICIENTLY WITHOUT GETTING TO THE END GOAL AS EFFICIENTLY AS POSSIBLE, YOU KNOW, SO GETTING RID OF ANY RED TAPE I THINK
IN THIS LIKE IF YOU LOOK AT REZONING FOR EXAMPLE, A LOT OF LIKE SMALL BUSINESSES BENEFIT FROM THAT IN A SENSE WHERE LIKE LET'S SAY THEY WANT TO EXPAND OR THIS REASON FOR WHATEVER REASON, RIGHT?
AND I DON'T THINK IT NECESSARILY IS LIKE JUST BIG DEVELOPERS, YOU KNOW, AND I DO THINK THAT THE CITIZENS WHICH
ALL OF US INCLUDING OF COURSE OF BLOOMINGTON HAVE GREAT WAY OF THERE'S A GREAT SYSTEM ALREADY IN PLACE TO HAVE OUR AND ALL THE CITIZENS OF BLOOMINGTON RESIDENTS I SHOULD SAY BLOOMINGTON'S
VOICES HEARD LIKE FOR EXAMPLE TODAY LIKE SOMEONE EMAILED BECAUSE MOST LIKELY THAT INDIVIDUAL COULDN'T MAKE IT SO I DON'T THINK IT NECESSARILY TAKES AWAY THAT'S KIND OF MY STANCE AND I THINK STREAMLINING IS GOOD AND I'M
VERY SUPPORTIVE OF STAFF LESSENING THE BURDEN AS I SAID EARLIER ON SMALL BUSINESSES AND YEAH THANK YOU MR. JOHNSON
I'D LIKE TO ASK ABOUT INTERIM USE PERMITS. IS THE CURRENT NUMBER OF INTERIM USE PERMITS IN BLOOMINGTON GREATER THAN TO A CHAIR?
IF A CHAIR COOKED IN OFF THE TOP OF MY HEADHE ONES THAT ARE ACTIVE I DON'T BELIEVE SO BUT I'M JUST KIND OF GOING ON THE FLY HERE. I'LL ADMIT I WOULD LOOK TO
THIS COMMISSION TO CONSIDER THAT. I THINK YOU ALL KNOW THE INTERIM USE PERMITS I'M TALKING ABOUT AND DO WE WANT
TO DO WE WANT TO REMOVE THAT SECOND PUBLIC HEARING FOR THAT CLARIFICATION? MR. JOHNSON CHAIR COCHRAN SORRY TO INTERRUPT YOU.
INTERIM USE PERMIT APPROVAL AUTHORITY WAS SHIFTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH THE STREAMLINING DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE. SO UNLESS THE INTERIM USE PERMIT ACTION IS APPEALED I CURRENTLY WOULD STOP AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION PER OUR
CURRENT PROCEDURES SO THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS THE AUTHORITY TO SUSPEND INTERIM USE. OH, I'M SORRY, I FORGIVE ME. I THOUGHT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE APPROVAL OR ACTION OF AN INTERIM USE PERMIT.
SO A SUSPENSION A SUSPENSION IS A DIFFERENT ACTION AND THAT IS THAT AUTHORITY DOES CUENTLY RESTS WITH THE CITY COUNCIL BECAUSE SUSPENSION IS REMOVAL OF THOSE RIGHTS OR APPROVAL.
SO YOU'RE CORRECT I GOT CONFUSED AND I REALLY FEEL BAD FOR INTERRUPTING. I DON'T KNOW. I THINK I WOULD STRIKE THAT ONE THAT THAT SEEMS TO BE A
VERY DISCRETE TOPIC IN THIS CITY RIGHT NOW AND I THINK I WOULD WANT TO MAINTAIN THE CURRENT PROCESS WITH THE INTERIM USE PERMITS.
MR. CUNNINGHAM I AGREE. I THINK THAT THAT'S A IT'S GOOD TO HAVE MORE PUBLIC FEEDBACK, MORE OPPORTUNITY AND SPECIFICALLY INTERIM USE
PERMITS . COMMISSIONER MUNSTER, IF I COULD JUST CLARIFY WHAT IS THE SUSPENSION OF THESE THINGS? IS THAT A REMEDIAL MEASURE FOR SOMEHOW NOT ABIDING BY THE
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL? MR. JOHNSON YEAH. CHAIR COACH AND COMMISSIONER MUNSTER THERE MIGHT BE A NUMBER OF REASONS WHY A CITY WOULD CHOOSE TO SUSPEND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. IT COULD BE TIED DIRECTLY TO
CONDITIONS THAT WERE ADOPTED AS PART OF THE PERMIT. IT COULD HAVE TO DO WITH OTHER VIOLATIONS THAT WEREN'T EXPLICITLY ELIMINATED IN THE ACTION. THERE COULD BE A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT COULD
LEAD TO A CITY TAKING THOSE ACTIONS BUT YEAH, EFFECTIVELY IT WOULD REMOVE THE RIGHT USE AND OPERATE THAT SITE AS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.
KEVIN IS ALSO WANTS TO CHIME IN HERE MR. TUSKY ARE THERE COMMISSIONERS COMMISSIONER AND CHAIRS CHAIR AND COMMISSIONER SORRY THAT INCLUDES
REVOCATIONS TOO. IT'S NOT JUST SUSPENSIONS SO WHEN YOU'RE ACTUALLY REVOKING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT OR AN IP, AN INTERIM USE PERMIT YOU'RE TAKING IT AWAY PERMANENTLY.
SO IT INCLUDES REVOCATIONS AS WELL AS JUST A SUSPENSION. JUST TO CLARIFY THAT AND THAT WOULD COME FROM MAYBE BASICALLY VIOLATING THE CONDITIONS OR YOU KNOW, NOT
INSTITUTE DOING THE USE WITHIN THE TIME PERIOD THAT IS ALLOTTED FOR IT AND CITY CODE. THANK YOU MR. TASKING MY POSITION ON THIS UNDERSTANDING
IT BETTER IS ALONG THE LINES OF COMMISSIONER WHITE THAT YOU KNOW I'M ALL ABOUT STREAMLINING BUT I DON'T THINK I'M IN FAVOR OF STREAMLINING AT THE SACRIFICE OF PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
YOU KNOW I WANT TO MAKE US A BUSINESS FRIENDLY CITY AND ALL THE THINGS BUT YOU KNOW, MAYBE ONE OF THESE MASTER SIGN PLAN OR SOMETHING I COULD GET BEHIND BUT SOMETHING LIKE EVEN
LIKE REZONING YOU KNOW IF YOU'RE REZONING A PARCEL NEXT TO A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS SOME OF THE MOST HIGH INTENSITY EMOTIONAL TESTIMONY WE GET IN THIS ROOM AND WE HEAR ALL THE TIME THAT I FEEL
LIKE I JUST BARELY FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS YESTERDAY WHEN MY NEIGHBOR TOLD ME WE GET THAT ALL THE TIME. AND SO THE NICE THING FOR RESIDENTS AT THAT POINT IS
THAT THEY GET THE INITIAL NOTICE FROM US. MAYBE THEY DIDN'T CHECK THE MAIL FOR A FEW DAYS OR WHATEVER. THEY STILL HAVE THAT SECOND OPPORTUNITY AT COUNCIL TO HAVE THEIR VOICE HEARD AND SO YOU
KNOW, REZONING MAKES ME UNCOMFORTABLE. I'VE ALREADY SAID THE INTERIM USE PERMIT MAKES ME UNCOMFORTABLE EVEN ANYTHING IN THE YOU KNOW, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT HAS A LOT
OF BOOTS ON THE GROUND IMPACT ON ON PEOPLE'S DAILY LIVES IN THE CITY BUT YEAH A COUPLE OF THESE PARTICULARLY REZONING AND INTERIM USE PERMIT
SUSPENSION MAKE ME MAKE ME UNEASY COMMISSIONER LIZA THANK YOU CHAIR FOR FOR THAT PERSPECTIVE I WOULD DISAGREE IN A SENSE I FOR EXAMPLE THIS
WITH THE INTERIM USE PERMIT NOT TO GET INTO THE TWO OR WHATEVER FIELD INTERIM USE PERMITS OUT FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND ARE MAJOR ONES ALLEYS.
IT'S IT'S NOT THAT COMMON. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG BUT THEN THE REZONING ASPECT I SEE MORE THE BENEFITS AND AT THE END OF THE DAY I YOU KNOW IT'S
NOT LIKE WE'RE GETTING RID OF PUBLIC HEARINGS AT ALL AND I DO UNDERSTAND THE THAT IT MAY POTENTIALLY BE BETTER FOR RESIDENTS THAT THERE'S TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS.
RIGHT LIKE YOU GAVE AN EXAMPLE OF IF THEY MISSED THE FIRST ONE THEY HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY FROM WHAT I'VE NOTICED WITH PUBLIC HEARINGS MOST OF THE TIME. WELL, THE WAY THE CITY DOES
THINGS IS THEY DO NOTIFY THE RESIDENTS IN THE MEDIA AREA THINGS LIKE 500FT OR I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT NUMBER BUT IN THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORHOOD. CORRECT. AND SO MOST PEOPLE WHO DO HAVE A VESTED INTEREST USUALLY GET
IT IN THE MAIL JUST LIKE MOST OF THEIR OTHER STUFF. SO THEY EITHER YOU KNOW, MOST OF THE TIME FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN STOP BY YOU KNOW MOST OF THE ISSUES ARE OUR NEIGHBORS ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE CONCERNED AND MOST OTHER
RESIDENTS ARE EITHER INDIFFERENT OR MOST FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN IN DIFFERENT. SO THAT'S WHY THEY MAY NOT EVEN COME TO THE EITHER THE FIRST OR SECOND ONE. SO I DON'T THINK IT'S A IT'S
NEGATIVELY IMPACTS CITY RESIDENTS THAT'S MY OPINION. YEAH. COMMISSIONER THANK YOU CHAIR I THINK I PUSH BACK A LITTLE BIT ON THAT.
I WAS LAST WEEK THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS HELD THE CANDIDATE FORUM FOR CITY COUNCIL AND THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE THAT CAME UP WAS PEOPLE FEELING LIKE THEY DIDN'T THEY DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH COMMUNICATION.
AND I RECOGNIZE THAT THE CITY DOES VERY PUTS A LOT OF EFFORT INTO TRYING TO SHARE AND COMMUNICATE WITH RESIDENTS AND THAT'S GREAT. BUT FOR WHATEVER REASON THERE'S A HUGE SWATH
OF RESIDENTS WHO DON'T FEEL LIKE THEY'RE BEING HEARD AND THEN THEY'RE NOT GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE CANDIDATES RUNNING FOR CITY COUNCIL INCLUDING THE TWO INCUMBENTS TALKED ABOUT THAT
ISSUE AND SO I THINK THAT COMBINED WITH THE FACT THAT THE OTHER THING THAT CAME THROUGH AT THESE HEARINGS WAS JUST HOW MUCH PEOPLE FEEL LIKE BLOOMINGTON IS CHANGING RIGHT NOW WHICH I THINK GIVEN THE
AGE OF THE HOUSING AND WHERE BLOOMINGTON IS DEVELOPMENT WISE IT IS IN A PERIOD OF PRETTY SIGNIFICANT CHANGE AND I THINK THAT THIS MIGHT NOT AS MUCH AS I BELIEVE
STREAMLINING THINGS WOULD BE GREAT. I THINK ENSURING THAT PEOPLE REALLY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROCESS AND TAKE THINGS ON BOARD AND PARTICULARLY IN A CITY WHERE ONE OF THE
COMMUNITIES THAT FEELS THE MOST FRUSTRATED RIGHT NOW ARE SORT OF THE OLDER ORIGINAL HOME OWNERS. AND SO I THINK ON THE REZONING IN PARTICULAR ALTHOUGH THEY CAN THEY MEANING HOMEOWNERS
CAN REALLY PUSH BACK ON REZONING WHEN IT RELATES TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS, I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HEAR THOSE VOICES AND FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO HEAR DIRECTLY FROM THEIR CONSTITUENTS.
AND SO I THINK ON A COUPLE OF THESE IN PARTICULAR I DO HAVE REAL CONCERNS ABOUT TAKING THE DOUBLE PUBLIC HEARING AWAY PARTICULARLY THE REZONING. >> MR. JOHNSON YEAH.
THANK YOU, CHAIR COCHRAN I DO WANT TO MAKE ONE CLARIFICATION. I REALLY APPRECIATED COMMISSIONER WHITE'S COMMENTS AROUND PROVIDING OPPORTUNITIES AND AVENUES FOR PEOPLE TO GET THEIR VOICE HEARD AND I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. COMMISSIONER LANIER IF YOU DO
FIND THIS ORDINANCE IN THE PACKET IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S ON PAGE 158. I DO WANT TO JUST CLARIFY ONE THING THAT THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A FORMAL PUBLIC HEARING WHICH YES, THE LETTERS GET MAILED OUT TO NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS
WITHIN A CERTAIN DISTANCE. WE PUBLISH THE NOTICE IN THE SUN CURRENT LOCAL NEWSPAPER WHICH IS THE OFFICIAL PAPER OF RECORD WITHIN A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME. SO THEY ARE NOTIFIED SO THAT
THAT'S A FORMAL PUBLIC HEARING . WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING TO DO AND AGAIN THIS IS JUST FOR YOUR FEEDBACK IN THE CITY COUNCIL FEEDBACK I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT STRONGLY WHAT WE WHAT WE WOULD PROPOSE TO DO IS TO NOT ELIMINATE THAT
OPPORTUNITY TO FOR RESIDENTS AND THE PUBLIC TO PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE CITY COUNCIL AS PART OF THE ITEM. AND THE WAY THAT WE WOULD DO THAT IS BY ESTABLISHING A NEW
PROCEDURE IN THE TABLE CALLED DEDICATED AND PUBLIC COMMENT. AND SO WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT RIGHT NOW AT A CITY COUNCIL MEETING IF IT'S NOT A FORMAL PUBLIC HEARING OR EVEN ONE OF YOUR ITEMS IT'S AT THE CHAIRS OR THE MAYOR'S
DISCRETION WHETHER OR NOT THEY WILL TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT. BUT WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING WITH THIS CHANGE IS THAT THE CODE WOULD REQUIRE THE CITY COUNCIL IN EFFECT TO HAVE TO TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT ON AN ITEM. IT JUST WOULDN'T BE AN
ADVERTISED HEARING USING THOSE FORMAL PROCEDURES BEFORE A PUBLIC HEARING. SO I DEFINITELY WANT TO HEAR THOSE CONCERNS AROUND AND I'M SURE THERE'S A GOOD RETORT TO
THAT AS WELL AND THAT'S OKAY. AGAIN, THIS IS ABOUT THIS IS ABOUT FEEDBACK AND FEELING FEELING THINGS OUT WITH YOU ALL BE SURE WHAT THANK YOU CHAIR AND THANK YOU MR. JOHNSON PLANNING MANAGER
JOHNSON I THINK THAT'S A REALLY VALID POINT. I WOULD JUST SAY THAT I WOULD HOPE THAT IF THIS DID MOVE FORWARD THAT THE PUBLIC COMMENT OR PUBLIC I FORGET
WHAT THE WORDING IS THAT WE WOULD MAKE SURE THAT THAT HAPPENED BEFORE THE COUNCIL MADE A DECISION. I HAVE SEEN ON OCCASION WHERE ,YOU KNOW, ELECTED BODIES
WILL SAY THEY'RE TAKING PUBLIC HEARING FROM THEIR CONSTITUENTS AND TAKING COMMENT BUT THEY DO IT AFTER THEY'VE ALREADY VOTED AND MADE THE DECISION AT THE END OF THE MEETING OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. AND I WOULD WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE BEING VERY CLEAR
THAT THAT WAS NOT APPROPRIATE IN THIS CASE. I STILL HAVE CONCERNS. I APPRECIATE WHAT THE STAFF IS TRYING TO DO. I APPRECIATE THE EXPENSE INVOLVED WITH PUBLIC NOTICING
AND AND THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT THERE'S JUST SO MUCH GOING ON IN OUR COMMUNITY AND IN OUR STATE THAT I THINK FOLKS IT'S
REAL EASY TO MISS THESE THINGS AND SO THAT'S WHERE I GUESS I THINK I JUST I THINK RIGHT NOW WE'RE NOT SO STRAPPED FOR RESOURCE THAT AN EXTRA MAILING OR AN EXTRA AD IN THE PAPER IS GOING TO BE THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN US MAKING BUDGET OR NOT BUT IT MIGHT MAKE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A RESIDENT FEELING HEARD AND AND B FOLKS BEING ABLE TO HELP HAVE A VOICE IN THE DIRECTION
THAT WE TAKE THIS COMMUNITY. SO I'M I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO SELL ME ON THIS ONE BUT I'M OPEN TO HEARING MORE. COMMISSIONER SUMMERS THANK YOU CHAIR I WANT TO THINK A LITTLE
BIT ABOUT THE PERSON WHO IS COMING IN THIS SPACE FOR MAYBE THE FIRST TIME WITH SOMETHING THAT'S IMPACTING THEIR LIFE OR WORK OR BLOOMINGTON THAT THEY
CARE ABOUT AND I THINK THAT THIS IS POTENTIALLY AN INTIMIDATING SPACE TO COME INTO AND POTENTIALLY A PUBLIC HEARING AT A COMMISSION IS
LESS WAITED FOR SOMEONE WHO'S SPEAKING UP FOR THE FIRST TIME AND GETTING ENGAGED WHICH I THINK MANY OF US WOULD AGREE IS LIKE AN EXCEPTIONAL THING
AND IF WE CREATE SITUATIONS WHERE WE ARE CHANGING WHAT COMMENTS OR PUBLIC HEARINGS LOOK LIKE AT THE DIFFERENT
MEETINGS THAT MIGHT DISCOURAGE PEOPLE OR CONFUSE PEOPLE. AND I THINK IT'S MOST LIKELY TO HAPPEN IN SPACES WHERE PEOPLE ARE LIKE I DON'T REALLY
KNOW WHAT THIS IS OR WHAT'S GOING ON BUT I HEARD THAT THIS IS HAPPENING IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND I WANT SOMEONE TO HEAR ME BECAUSE I'M REALLY CONCERNED OR I WANT TO
ASK QUESTIONS AND THE HOPE IS THAT PEOPLE ARE HEARING THE MESSAGE ALWAYS AND THAT WE'RE SENDING THINGS OUT. BUT THE LANDSCAPE OF MEDIA AND WHAT PEOPLE ARE CONSUMING IS CHANGING CONSISTENTLY.
SO WE'RE DOING OUR BEST TO NOTIFY PEOPLE AND I THINK THAT THE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING IS A
AN OPTION FOR PEOPLE WHO CANNOT CONSTANTLY BE AWARE OF WHAT THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON IS DOING BUT THEY LIVE HERE AND THEY CARE DEEPLY ABOUT THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEIR LAND
AND THEIR BUSINESSES. SO I WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR OF SOMETHING THAT SEEMS LIKE A DIFFERENT PROCESS BUT IT IS KIND OF THE SAME THING AND WE
ARE JUST EXEMPTING OURSELVES FROM NOTIFYING PEOPLE ABOUT IT. I AT THIS POINT WITHOUT MORE INFORMATION WHICH REASON I
THANK YOU CHAIR MY PERSPECTIVE IS MORE SO LIKE THIS FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND AT LEAST FROM WHAT I KNOW I GUESS IS THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FINAL
RECOMMENDATION TO FOR US TO REVIEW RIGHT AND I SINCE STAFF DOES DEAL IS OR IS LIKE THE FIRST LINE WHEN LIKE SEE RESIDENTS HAVE QUESTIONS OR
ARE MAYBE FRUSTRATED OR STAFF ARE THE ONES THAT MAIL OUT THESE NOTIFICATIONS TO NEIGHBORS AND BUSINESSES AND YOU KNOW RELEVANT AREAS OF WHATEVER PROJECT RIGHT I
THINK I TRUST THAT RIGHT I TRUST THAT STAFF DID THEIR DUE DILIGENCE AND THAT'S WHY I'M IN SUPPORT OF KEEPING IT AS IS. SECONDLY COMMERCIAL AND
OBVIOUSLY ARE SOMEONE WITH A LOT OF WISDOM AND SO I LISTENED VERY CLOSELY TO WHAT SHE SAID AND I AND SOMEONE I RESPECT OF COURSE I THINK SO IS IT THAT RESIDENTS DON'T
HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION OR NOT RECEIVING INFORMATION BECAUSE I THINK CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG THE FIRST THING SAID ENOUGH INFORMATION. YOU KNOW, SO I THINK IT'S LIKE A VERY, VERY DIFFERENT IT'S RESIDENTS ARE COMPLAINING THAT
THEY'RE NOT RECEIVING INFORMATION AND AS YOU GUYS ARE ALL AWARE I WAS LIKE ONE OF THE ONLY ONES I THINK THE ONLY ONE THAT VOTED ON SOMETHING THAT CONCERNED RESIDENTS IN A IMMEDIATE AREA NOT THIS LIKE A MONTH WITHIN A MONTH.
SO MY QUESTION TO YOU FROM WHAT YOU'VE SEEN AND NOT TO STRETCH US OUT BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW IS FROM YEAH FROM WHAT YOU'VE SEEN WAS IT THAT THE RESIDENTS FEEL LIKE THEY'RE NOT RECEIVING ENOUGH INFORMATION OR THEY'RE
NOT GETTING NOTIFIED POINT BLANK PERIOD OR THEY'RE MISSING IT AND THEY WISH FOR MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR SHAWNEE? THANK YOU. CHAIR THANK YOU FELLOW COMMISSIONER. YOU SIR.
I THINK THAT IT WAS BOTH. I THINK IT DEPENDS ON WHO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT I THINK BECAUSE COMMUNICATION METHODS HAVE CHANGED THE IMPRESSION I AM GETTING IS THERE IS A
PARTICULARLY WITHIN THE OLDER COMMUNITY WAS IN BLOOMINGTON THE FACT THAT THE SUN CURRENT NOW IS A PAID SUBSCRIPTION VERSUS A FREE NEWSPAPER THE FACT THAT A LOT
OF COMMUNICATING FOR YOU KNOW A LOT OF YOUNGER PEOPLE IS DONE VIA SOCIAL MEDIA FACEBOOK ,INSTAGRAM ETC. WHICH IS NOT NECESSARILY THERE WHERE THEY'RE COMFORTABLE. I THINK THERE'S ONE CATEGORY
OF PEOPLE WHO FEEL LIKE THEY'RE NOT GETTING AS MUCH INFORMATION AND THEN THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE WHO FEEL THAT THEY'RE NOT GETTING SORRY . THERE'S PEOPLE FEELING THAT THEY'RE NOT GETTING THE INFORMATION AND THEN THERE'S
ANOTHER CATEGORY OF PEOPLE WHO FEEL THAT THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION. I THINK ALSO TO BUILD ON WHAT COMMISSIONER SUMMERS SAID, I THINK THE ADVANTAGE OF THE DOUBLE HEARING IS COMING TO
THE PLANNING COMMISSION GIVES SOMEONE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEE WHAT A HEARING IS, TO SEE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE TO SPEAK SO THAT THEN MAYBE TWO WEEKS LATER THEY MAY HAVE THE CONFIDENCE WHEN IT'S IN FRONT OF THE CITY
COUNCIL TO MAKE THAT POINT OR TO REACH OUT TO THEIR CITY COUNCIL MEMBER AND TO PARTICULARLY SEE THAT THE PEOPLE WHO SIT UP HERE WHETHER IT'S THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR THE CITY COUNCIL ARE
INTERESTED, HAVE QUESTIONS, WANT TO HEAR WHAT THEY'RE SAYING. AND SO I THINK THAT AS THE WORLD CONTINUES TO CHANGE, HOW WE GET THE INFORMATION OUT IS GOING TO BE A CHALLENGE AND
WE'RE NEVER GOING TO GET EVERYTHING TO EVERYONE. THAT JUST IS NOT POSSIBLE. BUT I THINK THAT THESE ARE REALLY BIG DECISIONS THAT ARE BEING MADE ESPECIALLY AS BLOOMINGTON CHANGES AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT AS MANY
PEOPLE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN AS POSSIBLE COMMENSURATE WITH THAT. I HAVE A QUESTION AND LAST THING IS FOR I WITH ALL DUE
RESPECT TO OLDER FOLKS, IS THERE A NEWSPAPER STILL SENT OUT ON OR IS THIS INCLUDING THE BLOW TO NEWSPAPER? I THINK I THINK THERE'S LIKE BLOOMINGTON I ALWAYS GET IT
THE SUN CURRENT THAT'S WHAT YOU DO OKAY MR. THOMAS IS THAT INCLUDED ON THE PHYSICAL NEWSPAPER? CAN YOU CLARIFY MR. JOHNSON THE CHAIR CHAIR, COACH AND COMMISSIONER YOU SAY THE SUN CURRENT IS THE CITY'S OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER OF RECORD.
SO UNDER STATE STATUTE EVERY CITY HAS TO ESTABLISH AN OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER OF RECORD AND THAT'S THE RECORD THAT THEY PUBLISH THEIR PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES AND I KNOW
IN THE SUN CURRENT YEAH IT'S A WEEKLY PUBLICATION AND IT'S NOT IT WAS ONE TIME AND NOW NOW YEAH I WOULD I WOULD LIKE
TO SEE THAT TO BE FREE TO ADDRESS THAT POTENTIAL ISSUE YOU KNOW THEY DO LIST THEIR NOTICES ONLINE BUT I HAVE NOTICED THAT SOMETIMES IT LAGS
SO JUST A CONCERN THERE. FISHER CUNNINGHAM IT'S A QUESTION FOR STAFF AND I KNOW WE'RE RUNNING LATE ON ONE SMALL ITEM BUT IT'S IMPORTANT
WHEN OUR AGENDAS ARE PUBLISHED IS THERE ANY ACCESS TO THOSE FOR SAY SOMEONE THAT DOESN'T WANT TO PAY FOR THE SUN CURRENT DOESN'T HAVE THE INTERNET AND DOESN'T LIVE WITHIN A 500 FOOT BUFFER OF A IMPACTED AREA?
CAN THEY COME TO CITY HALL AND JUST ASK THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WHAT'S ON THE AGENDA? CHAIR COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM THEY CAN AND WE DO HAVE A LISTSERV. WE HAVE A DEDICATED LISTSERV AND I KNOW SOME OF THE
COMMUNICATION TOOLS THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE USING TODAY IS NOT ACCESSIBLE TO EVERYONE. SO I DO WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT THAT IS A REAL ISSUE BUT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF WAYS THAT WE GET THE WORDS OUT ABOUT OUR
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ABOUT OUR AGENDA PACKETS, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S REACHING EVERYBODY OR NOT. IT'S IT'S NOT AND TYPICALLY MOST PEOPLE ARE NOT ENGAGED
UNTIL THERE IS A PROJECT THAT IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION ARE PROPOSED TO BE CONSTRUCTED NEAR THEIR HOMES. I ALWAYS ADVOCATE TO THEM THAT THOSE DECISIONS WERE MADE 5 OR 10 YEARS AGO WHEN THE PLAN WAS ADOPTED AND THE ZONING
ORDINANCE WAS UPDATED. BUT SOMETIMES I DON'T MAKE HEADWAY ON THOSE THOSE ARGUMENTS. THAT'S OKAY AND YOU KNOW, AGREE TO DISAGREE. BUT NO, I THINK THE PURPOSE AGAIN FOR A STUDY SESSION ON
THIS PARTICULAR ITEM IS WE JUST WANTED TO TAKE YOUR TEMPERATURE ON IT. AND WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT THE MAJORITY OF YOU ARE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THIS CHANGE AND THAT'S OKAY. THAT'S PERFECTLY RIGHT. AND WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS JUST
ASK THAT QUESTION BECAUSE THIS IS AN ITEM THAT CAME UP IN STREAMLINING BEFORE AND I KNOW IT CAN SEEM LIKE WE'RE TAKING SOMETHING AWAY. MOST CITIES HAVE ONE PUBLIC HEARING, NOT TWO. SO JUST TO CLARIFY THAT BUT I
RESPECT THE FACT THAT BLOOMINGTON HAS THIS LONG STANDING PROCESS AND PROCEDURE AND THAT MANY RESIDENTS DEPEND AND RELY ON IT. SO I DON'T MEAN TO END THE WRAP UP THE CONVERSATION THAT
WAY, BUT I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT WE'VE HEARD YOU WELL, WE'RE NOT DONE YET. SO THIS PROCESS MR. JOHNSON YOU TALKED ABOUT WAS THE PUBLIC COMMENT.
WHAT DID YOU CALL IT? I'M SORRY. YEAH, IT'S A IT'S FORGIVE ME CHAIR IN THE LANGUAGE IT MEANS PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITY SO IT'S DEDICATED IS A PUBLIC
COMMENT OPPORTUNITY SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY IN OUR CODE OR WOULD THIS BE A NEW THING FOR US? IT WOULD BE A NEW THING. SO AGAIN AN ORDINANCE E AND YOUR PACKET IT WOULD BE
ESTABLISHING A NUMBER TEN IN THE LEGEND OR TABLE KEY C MEANS PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITY AND IT WOULD LIST IT WOULD REPLACE PUBLIC HEARING AND ALL OF THOSE APPLICATION TYPES THAT WE
TALKED ABOUT WITH WITH A C MEANING PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITY AND OF COURSE IT WOULD BE MY EVERY EXPECTATION THAT THAT WOULD HAVE TO OCCUR BEFORE THE BODY THE GOVERNING
BODY TOOK ACTION NOT AFTER THAT WOULDN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO ME. AND SO THIS PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITY THAT LEAVES IT TO THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIR OR THE MAYOR IN THAT CASE
OF WHETHER THEY WANT TO HOLD OR OPEN THEIR PUBLIC COMMENT OR NOT. CHAIR IT WOULD NOT SO THE THINKING OR THE IDEA BEHIND THIS IS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD BE REQUIRED TO OFFER A
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR REZONING COMP PLAN AMENDMENT ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ALL OF THOSE APPLICATION TYPES SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO OPEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THAT PUBLIC COMMENT. IT'S MORE ON THE NOTICING SIDE
THAT THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO DO. THAT'S CORRECT. THEY WOULDN'T THE CITY WOULD NOT HAVE TO FOLLOW ITS ESTABLISHED FORMAL PROCEDURES ON A PUBLIC HEARING UNDER STATE LAW WHICH IS THE MAILER TO SURROUNDING PROPERTIES
AGAIN THE SECOND TIME AND PUBLICATION OF THE NOTICE IN THE SUN CURRENT THE SECOND TIME I LIKE THAT A LITTLE BIT BETTER THAT WE'RE NOT TAKING AWAY AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PEOPLE TO SPEAK. HOWEVER I'M STILL IN FAVOR
OF GOING THROUGH THE MAILING PROCESS AND EVERYTHING ELSE AS A TYPICAL PUBLIC HEARING. ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS ONE ?
SO I THINK WE'LL SHARE YOUR FEEDBACK WITH THE CITY COUNCIL AND CERTAINLY PER YOUR GUIDANCE AND THE CITY COUNCIL'S GUIDANCE, IT MAY OR MAY NOT BE REFLECTED IN THIS
YEAR'S ORDINANCE. SO THANK YOU MY FEEDBACK AS WELL. I MAY SAY THANK YOU. OKAY.
WE HAVE OUR FINAL ORDINANCE TO REVIEW ORDINANCE F F SO I HAVE A MAP ON THE SCREEN HERE. THE THICKER BLUE LINES ARE
WHITE REPRESENT THROUGHOUT THE CITY MINOR COLLECTOR ROAD ROADS. AND SO WHAT THIS ORDINANCE IS PROPOSING IS THAT CURRENTLY A CODE REQUIRES AN EIGHT FOOT SIDEWALK ALONG MINOR COLLECTOR ROADS.
THE CITY ENGINEER HAS AGREED THAT THIS COULD BE REDUCED TO SIX FEET 1 TO 1, NOT A BUMP IN A CURB. SO THIS AMENDMENT IS INTENDED TO RIGHT SIZE PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES ALONG LOWER VOLUME
ROADWAYS DECREASE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AND STILL PROVIDE ADEQUATE FACILITIES. COMMENTS
I WAS REALLY HOPING ONE OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS WHO USED TO AND THE SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION MIGHT HAVE THOUGHTS ON THIS I'M UNSURE BECAUSE LIKE I LIKE IT FROM A SUSTAINABILITY PERSPECTIVE BUT AT THE COST
OF LIVABILITY THE COST OF RESIDENT EXPERIENCE I MEAN I THINK HAVING WIDE SIDEWALKS IS IS EXTRA GOOD FOR ACCESSIBILITY, IT'S EXTRA GOOD FOR KIDS WITH THEIR PARENTS, IT'S EXTRA GOOD FOR JUST THE
LIVED EXPERIENCE IN OUR CITY. I'M I'M TORN ESPECIALLY SO I 100% AGREE BUT I WAS NOT COMFORTABLE ENOUGH TO BE THE FIRST TO SAY IT SO THANKS FOR FOR THAT BUT YEAH YEAH I THINK
IT'S I THINK THE WIDER SIDEWALKS ARE GOOD FOR ACCESSIBILITY AND AND YEAH JUST YEAH THANK YOU COMMISSIONER THIS IS A THANK
YOU CHAIR THIS IS JUST A QUESTION. SO WHAT'S THE WIDTH ON THE NON COLLECTOR ROAD SIDEWALKS SIX SIX SO THIS WOULD BE MAKING THEM ALL THE SAME THE SAME
WITH AS THE NON COLLECTOR ROADS. YEAH CHAIR COMMISSIONER LONNIE AND JULIE LONG IS HERE TOO SO SHE'S DEFINITELY SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT AGAIN ON THIS ONE BUT I WILL ATTEMPT TO ADDRESS IT THAT YOU KNOW WE
HAVE TWO CLASSES OF COLLECTOR ROADWAYS IN THE CITY THE MAJOR ONES ARE THE HIGHER VOLUME COLLECTOR ROADWAYS THE MINOR STILL A COLLECTOR ROAD, THE LOWER VOLUMES TEND TO BE
OF CARS AND PEDESTRIANS THAN THE MAJOR COLLECTORS. BUT YES, CURRENTLY THE STANDARD IS EIGHT FEET UNIFORMLY ACROSS ALL COLLECTOR ROADS AND THE ONE NUANCE THAT
EMILY MENTIONED IS THAT SOME OF THEM HAVE CURB LOCK AND SO YOU WOULD NOT WANT TO HAVE A SIDEWALK THAT HAS CURB WALK TO BE SIX FEET IN WIDTH BECAUSE THAT IS NOT AS SAFE BECAUSE IT'S RIGHT NEXT TO THE STREET
IN FACT NO BOULEVARD. SO THAT IF YOU WERE WONDERING KIND OF THAT NUANCE OF NOT ABUTTING THE CURB THAT'S RELATED TO CURB WALK BUT YES THIS WOULD REDUCE THE REQUIRED
WIDTH OF ALL SIDEWALK ON MINOR COLLECTOR ROADS TO SIX FEET. AND YOU KNOW, AS THE CHAIR SAID, THERE'S PLUSES ON THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SIDE OF THINGS JUST PUTTING OUT MORE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE YOU
KNOW POTENTIAL DOWNSTREAM STROKES ARE IF ONES ARE HIGHER VOLUME THEN THERE ARE BENEFITS TO HAVING A WIDER SIDEWALK IN SOME OF THOSE CASES. SO RIGHT NOW THERE'S NO EIGHT FEET AND THERE'S NO
DISCRETION. COMMISSIONER WE YEAH I MEAN I THINK YOU JUST PLANNING MANAGER THANK YOU CHAIR PLANNING MANAGER JOHNSON JUST HIT ON I THINK THE CONCERN IS
IT'S THIS BALANCING ACT BETWEEN THE USEFULNESS OF THE SIDEWALK AND MORE CONCRETE. SO I TEND TO AIR ON THE LESS CONCRETE IS BETTER SIDE
OF THINGS BUT I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE MAY BE SECTIONS OF THIS WHERE THE EIGHT FEET MAKES MORE SENSE BECAUSE OF THE USE PATTERNS OF THAT PARTICULAR AREA. BUT I THINK REQUIRING EIGHT FEET EVERYWHERE DOESN'T
NECESSARILY MAKE SENSE IN TERMS OF THE AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL CONCRETE NECESSARY. I THINK WHERE I'M AT ON THIS
THE PROFESSOR I TRUST THE MOST SHE SAID THAT WE'RE NEVER GOING TO BE ABLE TO NOT USE NATURAL RESOURCES. WE AS HUMANS NEED THOSE SO WE
HAVE TO CHOOSE WHERE WE DEPLOY THEM AND SAVE THEM WHERE WE CAN BUT IT CAN'T BE THAT WE NEVER USE THEM BECAUSE WE NEED STEEL AND WE NEED CONCRETE TO LIVE A LIVABLE LIFE AS HUMAN
BEINGS. AND SO WHEN WE THINK ABOUT WHEN AND HOW MUCH NATURAL RESOURCES WE USE, WE NEED TO USE THEM IN THE PLACES WHERE THEY BENEFIT US AS AS PEOPLE THE MOST.
AND FOR ME THEN THAT TIES INTO ACCESSIBILITY. ACCESSIBILITY IS WHERE I WANT TO USE OUR NATURAL RESOURCES. THAT'S WHERE I'M MOST COMFORTABLE DOING IT. AND SO FOR ME I, I WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR OF THIS AND I
WOULD STICK AT EIGHT FEET TO BE MORE ACCESSIBLE . GROCERIES YEAH I WAS THANK YOU CHAIR I WOULD SECOND THAT AS WELL FOR THE SAME REASONS FOR
IT TO BE MORE ACCESSIBLE THERE'S A LOT OF THERE'S AGING POPULATION IN BLOOMINGTON PEOPLE THAT TAKE MOTORIZED
WHEELCHAIRS, THINGS LIKE THAT A LOT OF THIS IS ALSO ARE THE LONGEST IMPACT AS FAR AS VISUALLY AT LEAST SEEMS TO BE IN EAST BLOOMINGTON WITH
PORTLAND I DON'T KNOW. I THINK THAT'S POINT BUT I DON'T KNOW THE 12TH OKAY 12TH YEAH AND THERE'S YOU KNOW A LOT OF I MARGINALIZED OUR MARGINALIZED COMMUNITY YOU
KNOW MINORITIES THERE SO I, I WOULD HATE TO SEE THAT GET REDUCED DOWN. YEAH THEY WISH LONNIE THANKS CHAIR I THINK TO KIND OF BUILD ON WHAT COMMISSIONER WHITE WAS
SAYING I THINK WHAT I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF IS MORE FLEXIBILITY FOR THE MINOR COLLECTOR ROADS. I THINK THERE'S A REALLY BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SOME OF THESE ROADS AND HOW MUCH THEY'RE USED. I THINK I BELIEVE THE DIAGONAL
ONE THERE IS COLLEGE VIEW ROAD I THAT IS YOU DO NOT SEE A LOT OF PEOPLE ON THE SIDEWALKS IN GENERAL ON THAT ROAD. I LIVE JUST AROUND THE CORNER
FROM THERE AND SO THERE ARE SOME OF THESE ROADS WHERE I THINK YOU COULD EASILY GO DOWN TO THE SIX FEET AND NOT HAVE A HUGE IMPACT. BUT THEN I THINK OTHERS PARTICULARLY SOME OF THESE
STRAIGHT LINE ONES IN EAST BLOOMINGTON THAT ARE MUCH MORE HEAVILY TRANSITED IN GETTING TO PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT I THINK IT WOULD BE WISE TO KEEP IT EIGHT FEET. SO MAYBE IF THERE WAS A WAY TO
BUILD IN MORE FLEXIBILITY ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS IS WHAT I WOULD SUPPORT. I COULD GET THERE IF THERE WAS A THRESHOLD OF DOING I'D LIKE
A STUDY OF A PEDESTRIAN STUDY. YEAH, IT'S INTERESTING AND OTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS ONE
SORRY THAT WASN'T THE MOST CLEAR BUT THANK YOU AGAIN. SO THERE'S NO FORMAL ACTION REQUESTED AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU FOR YOUR FEEDBACK.
WE WILL REVISE THE DRAFTS AFTER GOING TO COUNCIL AND PREPARE FORMAL ORDINANCES FOR CONSIDERATION GIVEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGAIN SOMETIME IN OCTOBER.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU MRS. BECK. AND THIS WILL GO BEFORE CITY COUNCIL AS A STUDY ITEM ON SEPTEMBER 29TH. WE WILL MOVE THEN TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE WHICH IS THE CONSIDERATION OF THE DRAFT
PLANNING COMMISSION'S PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FROM AUGUST 28TH. IS THERE EMOTION, MICHELLE ANY
I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FROM AUGUST 28TH 2025 IS THERE A SECOND SECOND WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO
APPROVE THE MEETING MINUTES FROM AUGUST 28TH. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I I, I OPPOSED THEIR MOTION PASSES SEVEN ZERO WE WILL MOVE THEN TO OUR FINAL ITEM WHICH IS
NUMBER SIX THE PLANNING COMMISSION POLICY AND ISSUES UPDATE MR. JOHNSON THANK YOU CHAIR COOKED IN A QUICK REPORT FOR YOU THIS EVENING SO JUST A HEADS UP THAT TONIGHT'S MEETING CONCLUDES THE FIRST
QUARTER OF THIS CURRENT TERM OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. SO WE'LL BE SENDING OUT A QUARTERLY ATTENDANCE REPORT SO EVERYONE IS UP TO SPEED ON KIND OF WHERE THEY STAND WITH RESPECT TO THEIR ATTENDANCE. ATTENDANCE HAS BEEN VERY
STRONG SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. THE SECOND THING I WANTED TO BRING UP PRIOR TO PREVIEWING THE NEXT MEETINGS IS JUST THAT WE'VE BEEN EVALUATING SOME OF OUR MEETING MINUTES AND COMPARISON TO THE OTHER GOVERNING BODIES AND BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS OF BLOOMINGTON
AND KUDOS TO SECRETARY BROWN. WE'RE DOING A VERY EXTENSIVE AN EXCELLENT JOB IN TERMS OF THE ROBUSTNESS AND ACCURACY OF OUR MINUTES. BUT I DID WANT TO JUST KIND OF PREVIEW FOR YOU A LITTLE
BIT THAT WE MAY BE TIGHTENING SOME THINGS UP A LITTLE BIT JUST TO KIND OF BUILD MORE ALIGNMENT WITH SOME OF OUR ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. WE DEFINITELY DO WANT TO PROVIDE A GOOD SUMMARY AND YOU KNOW, IDENTIFY ALL THE IMPORTANT ELEMENTS OF YOUR
DISCUSSIONS JUST MAYBE A LITTLE BIT LESS LINE BY LINE BACK AND FORTH AS EXTENSIVE AS IT HAS BEEN. SO I JUST WANTED TO PREVIEW THAT FOR YOU SO IT DIDN'T CATCH YOU OFF GUARD FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT RELY ON THE
MINUTES, WE CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO LEAVE OUT THE IMPORTANT POLICY DISCUSSION ELEMENTS THOUGH SO THAT'S OUR GOAL IS TO STRIKE THAT BALANCE. PREVIEWING THE MEETINGS AHEAD ON OCTOBER 9TH WE'RE LOOKING AT A COUPLE OF STUDY ITEMS THE
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION DEADLINE HAS CLOSED FOR THAT. SO IT'S JUST LOOKING AT TWO STUDY ITEMS ON THAT ONE LOOKING AT THE CITY'S STRUCTURE HEIGHT HEIGHTS LIMITS MAP. SO WE HAVE A MAP THAT GOVERNS
HOW TALL STRUCTURES CAN BE ACROSS THE CITY. SO WE'RE GOING TO A STUDY OVER ON THAT. THAT IS A WORK PLAN PROJECT. THE ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC STAFF WILL BE BACK AND THAT MEETING AS WELL FOR THE ANNUAL
PAYMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AND CIPD DATE. SO THEY'LL BOB SIMONS I BELIEVE WILL BE HERE TO PROVIDE YOU THAT UPDATE. AND THEN OCTOBER 23RD THE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION DEADLINE HAS NOT CLOSED YET
FOR THAT MEANING THAT WE WILL HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE COMMERCIAL VEHICLES ORDINANCE WHICH YOU PREVIOUSLY CONDUCTED A DISCUSSION ABOUT RECENTLY AND THEN WE'RE PLANNING THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES ORDINANCE
ON OCTOBER 23RD AS WELL. SO THAT'S WHAT'S BEFORE YOU CURRENTLY. THANK YOU MR. JOHNSON WE'LL TAKE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ANY COMMISSIONERS TO BRING UP AN ITEM THAT WAS NOT ON THIS
EVENING'S AGENDA SEEING NONE. THAT CONCLUDES THIS SEPTEMBER 18TH MEETING OF THE BLOOMINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION. GOOD NIGHT