. >> GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO THE MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF BLOOMINGTON. IT IS MAY EIGHTH. THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS
MADE UP OF SEVEN MEMBERS. ALL SEVEN ARE PRESENT THIS EVENING. EACH MEMBER VOLUNTEERS THEIR TIME IS A BLOOMINGTON RESIDENT . MEMBERS ARE APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS ADVISORY TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR MOST ITEMS THE COMMISSION MAKES RECOMMENDS MOTIONS AND THE CITY COUNCIL HAS THE FINAL DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY. THERE ARE CERTAIN APPLICATIONS
THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN APPROVE OR DENY ON ITS OWN SUBJECT TO APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL. WE HAVE ONE ITEM GOING ON TO
THE CITY COUNCIL THIS EVENING . FOR EACH ITEM THERE WILL BE A STAFF REPORT THEN A CHANCE FOR THE APPLICANT TO PRESENT THAN A CHANCE FOR ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC TO PROVIDE TESTIMONY.
THEN THE COMMISSION WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND DISCUSS THE ITEM BEFORE ANY ACTION IS TAKEN. OUR FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS TONIGHT IS THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
PLEASE STAND IF YOU'RE ABLE. WHICH RELEASES TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION
UNDER GOD WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL . ALL RIGHT. ITEM ONE THIS EVENING IS DOES HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING.
IT IS A CITY CODE AMENDMENT FOR THE SMALL BUSINESS CODE CODES AND PROCESS PHASE ONE ORDINANCE AND PLANNING SUPERVISOR KARSTEN DAY YOU
HAVE THE STAFF REPORT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, CHAIR AND PLANNING COMMISSION AND GOOD EVENING. I'M JUST GOING TO GO OVER A FEW THINGS RELATED TO OUR SMALL BUSINESS CODE AND
PROCESSES PHASE ONE ORDINANCE. SO I JUST WANT TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF A PROJECT BACKGROUND SOME OF THE OUTREACH ENGAGEMENT THAT GOT US TO THIS POINT KIND OF WALK THROUGH THE ORDINANCE ITSELF AND SOME OF THOSE POLICY
CHANGES AND THEN OF COURSE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. SO THIS ITEM RELATED TO SMALL BUSINESSES WAS ADDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL TO THE 2020 2024
PLANNING COMMISSION WORK PLAN KIND OF BASED OUT OF SUPPORT IN BOTH THE CITY'S 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE BEATTY STRATEGIC PLAN. THERE WERE SIX TOPICS THAT WERE PRESENTED IN STUDY
SESSIONS TO BOTH YOU AND THE CITY COUNCIL KIND OF BACK IN DECEMBER AND JANUARY OF THIS YR. WE HAVE FOUR OF THOSE TOPICS MOVING FORWARD HERE IN PHASE ONE AND THEN TWO OF THOSE
ITEMS ONE THE GREASE INTERCEPTION DISCUSSION. THERE ARE NO PROPOSED ORDINANCES AT THIS TIME AND INSTEAD WILL BE KIND OF WORKING WITH BUILDING AND
INSPECTIONS AND WITH WITH FOLKS KIND OF AFFECTED BY THAT KIND OF GIVE THEM KIND OF EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS ON HOW TO RIGHT SIZE THAT SYSTEM FOR THEM AND THEN THE TRASH ENCLOSURE STANDARDS.
WE WANT TO BRING BACK IN A SEPARATE DISCUSSION AT A LATER TIME THIS YEAR AND MAINLY THAT BEING THAT SEEMED TO BE KIND OF THE ONE TOPIC AT BOTH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL THAT HAD KIND OF MORE
MIXED REVIEWS OR NOT CLEAR CONSENSUS AND I THINK SOME OF THAT WAS PROBABLY JUST A FUNCTION OF THE NUMBER OF TOPICS THAT WE WERE COVERING HERE BUT CERTAINLY WANT TO CONTINUE MOVING THAT FORWARD JUST ALSO DIDN'T WANT
TO STOP THE MOMENTUM ON THESE FOUR ITEMS. I HAD A LITTLE BIT MORE CONSENSUS SO THE OVERALL GOAL WITH THE ORDINANCE AGAIN IS TO IDENTIFY AND LOWER BARRIERS
FOR BUSINESS FORMATION AND OPERATIONS HERE IN THE CITY . AND SO LET'S SEE OR THIS ONE OF THE SLIDES WENT MISSING.
THAT'S OKAY. SO I GUESS PART OF THE THE TOPICS OF THIS ORDINANCE ADDRESSES TONIGHT ARE FOUR SO MODIFICATIONS TO OUR ODOR MITIGATION STANDARDS TO REDUCE COST AND PROCESS FOR FOOD
ESTABLISHMENTS MODIFICATIONS TO PARKING FLEXIBILITY MEASURES WHICH INCLUDES A NEW FLEXIBILITY MEASURE RELATED TO THE RE-USE OF COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS. SOME CLARIFICATIONS AROUND OUR
ROOF MOUNTED MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SCREENING AND THEN FINALLY MODIFICATIONS TO OUR EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS INCLUDING THE ALLOWANCE OF COATINGS CERTAIN MATERIALS
HOW WE GOT TO THIS POINT AGAIN THERE WAS OUTREACH ENGAGEMENT DONE BY BOTH OUR PORT AUTHORITY STAFF AND IN PLANNING HAVING THOSE DIRECT CONNECTIONS LIKE OUT WITH BUSINESS OWNERS AND KIND
OF ANECDOTALLY HEARING WHAT THEY WERE SAYING. WE HAD A LET'S TALK BLOOMINGTON PAGE WITH A SURVEY FOR BUSINESS OWNERS. WE DID SOME ENGAGEMENT WITH ARCHITECTS AS WELL AS BEING PRESENT AT SOME OF OUR LARGER
CHAMBER EVENTS IN THE CITY AND PRESENTING THIS IDEA AND IN SEEKING FEEDBACK SO NUMBER OF WAYS THAT WE GOT TO THOSE SIX TOPICS AND THEN THE FOUR THAT WE'RE TALKING TO TONIGHT
AND SO I MADE IF IT'S HELPFUL I CAN JUST PAUSE AFTER EACH ONE IF THERE'S ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS AFTER EACH TOPIC BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S A LOT THERE AND SO I'LL JUST START FIRST WITH THE ORDER
MITIGATION THIS ORDINANCE PROPOSES TO REDUCE THE SEPARATION DISTANCE REQUIRED FOR ODOR MITIGATION FROM 250FT
TO 150FT AS WELL AS CLARIFYING THAT MEASUREMENT DISTANCE FROM THE EXHAUST LOCATION TO THE NEAREST RESIDENTIAL DWELLING. IT ALSO DESIGNATES THE CITY BUILDING OFFICIAL TO APPROVE
ODOR MITIGATION SYSTEMS AND REMOVES THE CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT FROM FROM THE ENGINEER OR FROM A CERTIFIED ENGINEER. AND PART OF THAT WAS THAT IT
CAN BE QUITE DIFFICULT FOR BUSINESS BUSINESS OWNERS TO GET THAT CERTIFICATION FROM ENGINEERS BECAUSE YOU CAN'T FULLY MITIGATE ODOR OR FULLY REMOVE ODOR AND SO THERE WAS
SOMETIMES HESITATION FROM ENGINEERS TO SIGN OFF ON THAT AND KIND OF POSES A DIFFICULT SITUATION FOR SOME BUSINESS OWNERS. SO STAFF FELT LIKE WE HAVE THE INTERNAL KIND OF CAPACITY AND
KNOWLEDGE TO BE ABLE TO HELP MAKE THAT DETERMINATION IN THIS AS BUSINESSES THERE AND THEN FINALLY IT REMOVES THE ODOR MITIGATION REQUIREMENT FOR TYPE TWO HOODS.
AND SO THOSE ARE THE KINDS OF HOODS THAT DEAL MORE WITH STEAM BUT IT STILL MAINTAINS THE REQUIREMENT FOR TYPE ONE. AND SO THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT ARE MORE LIKE GRILLS AND INCREASE IN THOSE MORE HEAVY
DUTY KIND OF SMELLS AND ODORS THAT YOU MIGHT SEE IN RESTAURANTS. I WOULD SAY FROM THE FROM BOTH STUDY SESSIONS THERE'S PRETTY GENERAL SUPPORT FOR THESE ITEMS. SO THERE THERE WASN'T MUCH
CHANGE FROM THE STUDY SESSION . SO IF THERE'S ANY I'M JUST CLARIFYING QUESTIONS ON ODOR MITIGATION. ANY QUESTIONS? WHITE THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
I'M JUST CURIOUS IN TERMS OF THE APPROVAL AUTHORITY JUST TO CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. SO IN THE PAST A BUSINESS WOULD HAVE HAD TO PROBABLY PAY AN ENGINEER FOR THAT
CERTIFICATION. NOW THAT CERTIFICATION OR THAT APPROVAL WOULD COME FROM A CITY STAFF PERSON, IS THAT JUST PART OF THE THE CURRENT CERTIFICATION OR CURRENT
APPROVAL PROCESS? IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL FEE FOR THAT OR DO WE HAVE THAT DO WE KNOW FOR A FACT THAT WE HAVE STAFF CAPACITY TO HANDLE THAT ADDITIONAL SORT THAT ADDITIONAL WORK?
YEAH. CHAIR ALBRECHT COMMISSIONER WHITE YES, THAT THAT'S CORRECT. THAT PREVIOUSLY IT WOULD HAVE REQUIRED A BUSINESS OWNER TO
KIND OF PAY TO HAVE THOSE PLANS KIND OF STAMPED OR APPROVED BY AN ENGINEER. I MEAN WITH THIS CHANGE I MEAN IT WOULD JUST BE PART OF THEIR TYPICAL BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS THAT GETS REVIEWED BY
STAFF AND IN MAKING SURE THAT IT MEETS ALL BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS AND THE BUILDING OFFICIAL KIND OF SIGNING THAT OFF WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE BUILDING PERMIT.
COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU CHAIR. PLANNING SUPERVISOR KARSTEN DE YOU GOT A BULLET POINT UP HERE FOR CLARIFYING MEASUREMENT FROM THE EXACT LOCATION TO THE
NEAREST DWELLING. SO WHAT IS WHAT IS THE CURRENT CODE? HOW DOES IT READ CURRENTLY OR IS IT VAGUE? YEAH. CHAIR ALBRECHT COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM SO THE CURRENT
MEASUREMENT IS JUST FROM THE I BELIEVE THE NEAREST WALL OF THE BUILDING TO THE NEAREST WALL OF THE RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL DWELLING AND SO
DEPENDING ON YOU KNOW I THINK IN CASES OF LIKE MULTITENANT BUILDINGS KIND OF DEPENDING ON YOU COULD HAVE REALLY THE ORDER MITIGATION ON ONE END OF THE BUILDING BUT IT COULD HAPPEN THAT OTHER END IS WHAT'S CLOSEST TO THE
RESIDENTIAL HOME AND SO WE'D BE TAKING THE MEASUREMENT FROM THERE. SO THE IDEA HERE WAS JUST TO HAVE A BETTER RATIONALE I THINK FOR REQUIRING THAT AND HAVING A MORE ACCURATE MEASURE
OF KIND OF WHERE THAT THE ODOR SOURCE IS COMING FROM TO MEASURE TO THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING. THANK YOU. ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE ON. ALL RIGHT.
SEEING NONE. ALL RIGHT. THE NEXT ITEM WAS PARKING FLEXIBILITY. SO AGAIN, THE CITY CURRENTLY HAS SIX KIND OF FLEXIBILITY
MEASURES THAT BUSINESSES CAN USE TO REDUCE THEIR REQUIRED MINIMUM PARKING IN OUR CODE. HOWEVER, THOSE KIND OF SIX
HAVE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF WHO APPROVES IT AND THOSE DIDN'T QUITE ALIGN WITH SOME OF THE EFFORTS THAT WE'VE DONE IN OTHER ORDINANCES AROUND STREAMLINING DEVELOPMENT. AND SO THERE WERE SOME
SITUATIONS WHERE IT COULD BE THAT STAFF WAS APPROVING OR COULD NOW APPROVE A SITE PLAN BUT THEN THE PARKING FLEXIBILITY IF NEEDED MAYBE STILL FELL ON THE PLANNING
COMMISSIONERS CITY COUNCIL OR VICE VERSA. AND SO JUST KIND OF CAN CREATE SOME CONFUSION OR AWKWARDNESS AROUND HAVING THESE DIFFERENT AUTHORITIES TO HAVE TO APPROVE THAT. AND SO THIS ORDINANCE WOULD
DESIGNATE THE CITY ENTITY THAT HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY TO APPROVE THE SITE PLAN WOULD ALSO APPROVE THE PARKING FLEXIBILITY. AND SO THERE ARE SOME CASES WHERE THAT WOULD BE A STAFF APPROVAL. SOME CASES WHERE TO BE
PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL. AND THEN IN OUR PLAN DEVELOPMENT ON THE CASE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD APPROVE ,THOSE ARE THAT PARKING FLEXIBILITY. AND THEN IN ADDITION THIS
ORDINANCE WOULD ESTABLISH A SEVENTH FLEXIBILITY MEASURE RELATED TO THE RE-USE OF EXISTING COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS. SO A BUILDING OR TENANT SPACE
THAT'S 10,000FT OR LESS COULD APPLY OR TO GET A 25% REDUCTION IN THEIR MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS. IN THIS ORDINANCE WE ALSO KIND OF CLARIFY THAT THAT STAFF DO
HAVE TO MAKE THE DETERMINATION THAT THE SITE IS IN FACT CONSTRAINED AND DOESN'T PHYSICALLY HAVE THE ROOM TO ADD ADDITIONAL PARKING TO MEET THE MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENT. AND THEN AGAIN TO ENSURE THAT
THERE'S NO TRAFFIC SAFETY CONCERNS OR ACCESS CONCERNS ON THE SITE. AND SO THIS IS JUST AN EXAMPLE HERE TO KIND OF ILLUSTRATE WE HAVE A 4250 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING.
AND LET'S SAY WE THIS IS GOING TO BE A FULL OFFICE USE BASED ON OUR CURRENT PARKING MINIMUMS. WE REQUIRE ONE STALL PER 285FT THAT WOULD REQUIRE 15
PARKING STALLS. THIS SITE ONLY HAS 13 AND CURRENTLY PHYSICALLY DOESN'T HAVE THE ROOM TO ADD ADDITIONAL PARKING CALLED COMPLYING PARKING. AND SO COULD BE A SITUATION
AND WHERE WE RUN INTO SOME OF THESE OLDER BUILDINGS WHERE SOMEONE WANTS TO REUSE IT MAYBE THIS WASN'T AN OFFICE USE BEFORE AND NOW SOMEONE'S PROPOSING IT TO BE WE CAN RUN INTO CHALLENGES AROUND THIS THIS PARKING MINIMUM
REQUIREMENT. AND SO WITH THIS PROPOSED FLEXIBILITY, WHAT WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN 15 STALLS WOULD ALLOW THEM TO WOULD ONLY REQUIRE 11 STALLS AND SO THEY
HAVE 13 TO BE COMPLYING AND TO BE ABLE TO REUSE THAT BUILDING IN AN APPROPRIATE MANNER. SO I THINK AND THEN I GUESS ONE NOTE WE MADE TWO JUST TO
ALSO HELP CLARIFY WITH ANY OF OUR PARKING FLEXIBILITY MEASURES IT'S THE CURRENT PROCESS AND WE'RE NOT PROPOSING TO CHANGE THAT AND IN THIS WOULD REMAIN THAT YOU
KNOW STAFF CAN REQUIRE A PARKING STUDY IF IT'S ALSO WE FEEL LIKE IT WARRANTS OR IS NEEDED TO HELP IN MAKING THAT DETERMINATION AROUND PARKING FLEXIBILITY. SO PAUSE THERE IF THERE'S ANY
CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. ANY QUESTIONS? WE'LL SEE NONE. OKAY, GREAT. THE THIRD TOPIC ON ROOFTOP SCREENING THE MAIN PIECE I
GUESS THERE'S TWO MAIN PIECES. THE FIRST IS JUST CLARIFYING THAT THE NEED FOR SCREENING APPLIES WHEN IT'S VISIBLE FROM THE GROUND LEVEL. I THINK WE ACKNOWLEDGED AS
STAFF THAT SCREENING CAN BE QUITE COSTLY. AND SO WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S RESERVED FOR SITUATIONS THAT PRESENT THE MOST SIGNIFICANT IMPACT TO THE PUBLIC AND KIND OF ALIGN WITH
I THINK THE INTENT OF THE CODE. AND SO IT'S JUST AGAIN CLARIFYING THAT SCREENS REQUIRED IF IT'S VISIBLE FROM AN ADJACENT PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET OR SIDEWALK AT THE
GROUND LEVEL THAT SCREENING WOULD BE REQUIRED. AND THEN THE SECOND PIECE OF THAT IS TO EXEMPT EXHAUST PIPES FROM ROOFTOP EQUIPMENT SCREENING. AGAIN, I THINK STAFF WE
ACKNOWLEDGE THAT OFTEN THE EXHAUST PIPES CAN BE QUITE TALL AND DIFFICULT TO SCREEN. THERE ARE A WIDE MIX OF INDUSTRIAL USES AND FACILITIES IN BLOOMINGTON THAT HAVE PRESENTED, YOU KNOW,
SITUATIONS WHERE SCREENING REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN CHALLENGING OR CAN BE UNCLEAR TO STAFF. AND I THINK FROM STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO AGAIN SAVE IT FOR
SITUATIONS WHERE IT CAN THIS CAN SCREENING. EXHAUST PIPES CAN BE QUITE DIFFICULT KIND OF FROM A CONSTRUCTION STANDPOINT AND ACTUALLY PROBABLY LIMITS THE VISUAL BENEFIT OR DOESN'T MEET
A COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS LIKE IF IT'S SUPER SUPER TALL AND YOU HAD TO SCREEN IT THE SCREENING IS ALSO THAT TALL AND AT THAT POINT IS IT REALLY SCREENING SOMETHING OR IS IT STILL JUST LIKE A REALLY TALL STRUCTURE THAT YOU SEE?
SO IT'S JUST KIND OF MAKING IT MORE CLEAR THAT WE WOULD IN SOME REQUIRE SCREENING ON THE EXHAUST PIPES PAUSE IF THERE'S ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS THERE QUESTIONS THERE?
NONE. OKAY. AND THEN THE LAST TOPIC AREA WAS RELATED TO EXTERIOR MATERIALS. I THINK THIS THIS IS THE ONE WHERE I JUST NOTED THAT I
THINK AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT MORE DISCUSSION OR MAYBE SOME DISAGREEMENT. SO JUST WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT AND I THINK WE HAD GENERAL SUPPORT AT THE COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION ON THESE ITEMS SO WE STAFF DECIDED TO KIND OF MOVE FORWARD AS IT WAS PRESENTED IN THE STUDY SESSION . THE FIRST TOPIC AREA IS
RELATED TO PAINTING AND CODING. AND SO THIS PROPOSED ORDINANCE WOULD ALLOW THE PAINTING OR CODING OF CERTAIN PRIMARY MATERIALS MAINLY BEING BRICK THAT CURRENTLY ISN'T ALLOWED
TO BE PAINTED OR CODED COULD BE WITH THIS CODE AMENDMENT. I THINK SOME OF THE REASONS THAT STAFF DECIDED TO MOVE
FORWARD IS THAT WE CURRENTLY ALLOW CODING OF SECONDARY MATERIALS IN THE CITY. AND THEN BEFORE THESE EXTERIOR MATERIALS STANDARDS WERE ESTABLISHED IF ANY BUSINESS
HAD A CODED SURFACE THEY ARE GRANDFATHERED IN AND ALLOWED TO CONTINUE TO RE COAT THEIR SURFACE. AND SO THERE ARE EXAMPLES ALREADY IN THE CITY OF PAINTED
BRICK AND PAINTED MASONRY IN THE CITY. SO WHILE THIS DOES OPEN IT UP TO OTHER SURFACES THAT COULD BE PAINTED, IT'S THINGS THAT ALREADY EXIST IN A LOT OF WAYS
IN BLOOMINGTON AS WELL. ONE COMPROMISE OR ONE THING THAT WE ADDED FROM THE STUDY SESSION WAS TO ESTABLISH THE CITY HAS ADOPTED THE INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY
MAINTENANCE CODE. AND SO WE JUST WANTED TO PULL SOME STANDARDS FROM THAT CODE AND PUT THEM DIRECTLY IN OUR EXTERIOR MATERIALS SECTION AS JUST ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY FOR OUR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH STAFF THAT WOULD BE DOING THE
ENFORCEMENT OF OUR ZONING CODE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT AS A REFERENCE TO ENSURE THAT BUILDING FACADES ARE BEING PROPERLY MAINTAINED AND THERE'S NO CONCERN AROUND
DEGRADATION OF THE FACADE WITH CODING. THESE ARE JUST SOME EXAMPLES OF CURRENTLY PAINTED BUILDINGS
IN BLOOMINGTON THAT ARE LEGALLY PAINTED. I WOULD SAY IN MOST CASES IT'S PROBABLY OLDER INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS THAT HAVE ALWAYS BEEN ALLOWED WERE KIND OF GRANDFATHERED IN TO BE CODED AND CONTINUE TO BE
RECODED AS WELL AS A LOT OF HOTELS I THINK ARE PROBABLY THE TWO BIG EXAMPLES. SO THESE WERE JUST SHOWING SOME PLACES IN THE CITY THAT HAVE CURRENT CURRENTLY PAINTED
BRICK AND STUCCO. ONE OF THE OTHER CHANGES RELATES TO OUR PRIMARY AND SECONDARY MATERIAL RATIO. SO OUR CURRENT CODE HAS A
RATIO OF 85% PRIMARY MATERIALS IN 15% SECONDARY MATERIALS. THIS ORDINANCE WOULD PROPOSE TO BRING BLOOMINGTON IN MORE ALIGNMENT WITH CITIES IN THE METRO TO HAVE A RATIO OF 65%
PRIMARY MATERIALS AND THEN SECONDARY 35% SECONDARY MATERIALS. THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE ALSO INCLUDES A TABLE THAT I THINK
JUST MORE CLEARLY LAYS OUT WHAT WE DEFINE OR ACCEPT AS PRIMARY AND SECONDARY MATERIALS. AND SO THOSE AREN'T REALLY CHANGING. IT'S JUST TO LISTED OUT THERE
MORE CLEARLY ON HOW STAFF HAVE ALWAYS INTERPRETED BECAUSE THERE'S KIND OF THE CAVEAT THAT THERE'S ANY EQUIVALENT MATERIAL AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING MANAGER.
SO SOME OF THESE THINGS WERE THINGS STAFF HAVE ALWAYS INTERPRETED AS EQUIVALENT MATERIAL JUST WANTING TO MAKE IT MORE EXPLICIT IN THE LIST FOR APPLICANTS AND ARCHITECTS TO KIND OF KNOW KNOW WHAT WE ALLOW. SO HERE AGAIN JUST ON THE
SCREEN SHOWS SOME OF THOSE DIFFERENT MATERIALS OF WHAT'S PRIMARY AND WHAT'S SECONDARY. WE ALSO THIS ORDINANCE WOULD SLIGHTLY ADJUST SOME OF OUR
DEFINITIONS FOR ARCHITECTURAL CONCRETE ART ARCHITECTURAL CONCRETE MASONRY UNITS AS WELL AS METAL PANELS SYSTEMS. AND AGAIN THAT'S JUST TO TRY TO ACCOUNT FOR KIND OF CURRENT
CONSTRUCTION TRENDS AND METHODS. CONCRETE PANELS AND CAST IN CONCRETE HAVE COME A LONG WAY AND CAN DO A NUMBER OF TEXTURES AND PATTERNS. YOU KNOW, YOU CAN MAKE IT LOOK
LIKE BRICK WHERE IT'S ACTUALLY CONCRETE AND SO JUST WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE ALWAYS ALLOWED THOSE KINDS OF DIFFERENT PATTERNS AND MATERIALS BUT AGAIN JUST MAKING IT MORE CLEAR AROUND
SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE WOULD ALLOW SO YOU CAN KIND OF SEE A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT TEXTURES AND PATTERNS THAT CONCRETE CAN BE SIMILAR FOR CONCRETE MASONRY UNITS. THIS WOULD BE A SECONDARY
MATERIAL BUT AGAIN JUST MAKING SURE OUR DEFINITION KIND OF ACCOUNTS FOR THE VARIETY OF WAYS THAT THE BLOCK FACES CAN CAN BE MANIPULATED TO CREATE THE TEXTURE.
AND I WOULD NOTE THAT THESE HAVE ALWAYS NEEDED TO BE INTEGRALLY COLORED AND THAT'S NOT CHANGING. AND SO IN THESE CASES YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO PAINT CONCRETE PANELS OR BLOCKS THAT
THE COLOR IS TYPICALLY A DYE THAT'S MIXED IN WITH THE CONCRETE AND IT'S INTEGRALLY COLORED AND CAN GIVE YOU AGAIN A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT COLORS AND TEXTURES. AND THEN FOR METAL PANEL SYSTEMS AGAIN JUST KIND
OF FURTHER CLARIFYING THAT THERE'S A NUMBER OF METAL PANELS OUT THERE AND JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE OUR DEFINITION ACCOUNTS FOR THAT. SO IT'S CLARIFYING THAT WE ALLOW INSULATED PANELS,
COMPOSITE PANELS AND SINGLE SKIN METAL PANELS. I THINK THOSE ARE THE MAIN THINGS IN EXTERIOR MATERIALS. ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS THERE?
QUESTIONS? GREAT SEEING NONE. OKAY, I'M ALMOST DONE. I PROMISE. THE LAST SLIDE HERE IS JUST AGAIN WITH ANY KIND OF CODE AMENDMENT THERE'S TYPICALLY SOME MINOR CLEANUP ITEMS.
SO IN THIS ORDINANCE WE'D BE UPDATING THE LANGUAGE OF ODOR SUPPRESSION TO ODOR MITIGATION. AGAIN, KIND OF TO AN EARLIER POINT THAT TO HELP KIND OF SET EXPECTATIONS FOR BOTH STAFF
AND PUBLIC THAT ODORS CAN'T LIKE BE 100% ELIMINATED BUT THERE ARE WAYS THAT WE CAN MITIGATE THAT. SO JUST MAKING SURE THAT LANGUAGE IS IN THE CODE,
ENSURING CONSISTENCY ACROSS OUR CODE FOR EXAMPLE, THERE'S A PROPOSED AMENDMENT RELATED TO THE OPPORTUNITY HOUSING ORDINANCE BUT AGAIN IT'S JUST TO ALIGN OUR SECONDARY
MATERIALS IN THAT SECTION AS WELL AS OUR EXTERIOR MATERIALS SECTION AND THEN REMOVING ANY KIND OF SUBSECTIONS OR DEFINITIONS THAT ARE NO LONGER RELEVANT. AND SO THERE'S AN EXAMPLE THERE IN OUR EXTERIOR
MATERIALS THAT REFERENCES CODING TOO LIKE GRAFFITI RESISTANT CODING THAT'S LIKE GRAFFITI RESISTANT OR SOMETHING AND THAT JUST
DOESN'T REALLY APPLY ANYMORE. AND SO JUST WANTING TO CLEAN THAT UP AND SHORTEN OUR OUR CODE. SO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION HERE IS ON THE SCREEN TO MOVE
TO RECOMMEND THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE BUT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE. SO THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF
? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE THE CITY IS THE APPLICANT IN THIS ITEM ON THIS ITEM. SO I WILL GO AHEAD AND OPEN
THE PUBLIC HEARING IF ANYONE WHO WISHES TO TESTIFY IN THE CHAMBERS CAN DO SO. DO WE HAVE ANYONE ONLINE WHO WISHES TO TESTIFY?
NO ONE ONLINE LOOKING FOR A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING SO MOVED. SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I I THOSE OPPOSED.
MOTION CARRIES ON TO DISCUSSION . COMMISSIONER HICKTON I GUESS I'LL GET STARTED HERE. MADAM CHAIR. FIRST OF ALL, I'M PRETTY
EXCITED BECAUSE THIS ITEM APPEARS TO HAVE RECEIVED OUR BEST OF BLOOMINGTON SEAL SO IT'S GREAT TO BE HERE. I KIND OF FEELS LIKE WE'RE PART OF OPRAH'S BOOK CLUB OR
SOMETHING WITH SO THAT'S VERY EXCITING. BUT TO THE MATTER WE TALKED ABOUT THIS AT THE STUDY SESSION AND I STILL FEEL THIS WAY AS I REALLY STRUGGLE WITH
THE EXTERIOR MATERIALS FIRST WITH THE COATINGS. I MEAN WE'VE SEEN THIS COME BEFORE US SO MANY TIMES AND WE'VE ALWAYS SAID NO AND I STILL MAINTAIN THAT THAT'S THE
RIGHT POSITION TO BE ON. I I'M NOT AND JUST I THINK IT'S CAN BE REALLY HARD TO ENFORCE AND IT'S JUST ADDS BURDEN TO OUR PEOPLE WHO DO HAVE TO ENFORCE IT AND AND JUST ANOTHER LAYER OF THINGS
THEY HAVE TO DO AND I'D RATHER JUST KEEP IT THE WAY IT IS I, I DON'T SEE THAT AS BEING A BIG ISSUE SO I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THE EXTRA RECORDINGS MORE MORE SO THOUGH THE SECONDARY MATERIALS IS THE THING I
REALLY DON'T LIKE INCREASING THE BREADTH AND QUANTITY OF SECONDARY MATERIALS WITH THE IFRS AND SOME OF THESE THINGS AND I'M JUST NOT IN FAVOR OF IT PRINCIPALLY
WELL PRINCIPALLY BECAUSE THE PEOPLE THAT ARE LIKE WE'VE SEEN THAT COME BEFORE US A BUNCH OF TIMES TOO AND THE PEOPLE THAT ALWAYS ASK FOR A VARIANCE ON THE PERCENTAGE OF SECONDARY MATERIALS IS
ALWAYS IT'S BIG BUSINESS, IT'S THE APARTMENT DEVELOPERS, IT'S THE OWNER OF THIS STRIP CENTER NOT THE TENANTS OF THE STRIP CENTER. AND SO THIS ITEM IS SUPPOSED TO BE FOCUSED ON SMALL BUSINESS STANDARDS AND IF
YOU'RE A SMALL BUSINESS YOU'RE STARTING AT A TACO RESTAURANT OR YOU KNOW, A QUILT SHOP OR WHATEVER YOU PROBABLY ARE NOT OWNING THE BUILDING. YOU'RE A TENANT IN A STRIP CENTER OR SOMETHING AND SO I
DON'T SEE THIS AS IMPACTING SMALL BUSINESS ALL I THINK WE'RE REALLY GETTING HERE IS HELPING BIG BUSINESS AND WE GET LOWER QUALITY BUILDINGS
AND SO IT'S YOU KNOW SOMETIMES ON THESE ITEMS WHERE IT'S KIND OF A MIXED BAG OF THINGS LIKE HEY, YOU DON'T LIKE SOME STUFF BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO STOP YOU FROM SUPPORTING THE ITEM AS A WHOLE IN THIS CASE IT DOES. I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS
APPLICATION UNLESS WE WERE TO STRIKE OUT THE ITEMS REGARDING THE EXTERIOR MATERIALS. I CAN'T GET THERE COMMERCIAL
CURRY THANK YOU CHAIR I THINK THAT IS COMMISSIONER COOK JOHN'S COMMENTARY IS INTERESTING AND DEFINITELY I DEFINITELY SEE THE POINT
OF YOU KNOW, THESE BUILDINGS BASICALLY NOT BEING FOR THE MOST PART OWNED BY SMALL BUSINESSES. THE ONLY THING I WONDER HOW MUCH OF THIS ACTUALLY FLOWS THROUGH BUT LIKE IF IF IT DOES
END UP REDUCING AND I DON'T KNOW BY WHAT PERCENT YOU COULD REDUCE THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION WITH USING THESE MATERIALS BUT IF IT REDUCES THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION AND THAT THEN
FLOWS THROUGH TO THE END USER OR ALLOWS FOR MORE PROJECTS TO GO THROUGH I CAN SEE THAT AS A BENEFIT TO SMALL BUSINESSES
BUT I GUESS THAT'S THAT'S THE ONLY CONSIDERATION I WANT TO POINT OUT REGARDING YOUR POINT
COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU CHAIR THE EXHAUST LOCATIONS AND THE SCREENING I'M ALL FOR IT SEEMS LIKE A NO BRAINER AND WOULD REALLY BENEFIT SMALL BUSINESSES.
I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER COOKED IN ON THE THE COATINGS AND THE CHEFS HAVING A HAVING A CONSTRUCTION BACKGROUND.
COMMISSIONER CURRY IS RIGHT THAT IT IS A COST SAVINGS TO TO PAINT A NATURALLY COLORED BRICK OR CMU CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT.
IT'S CHEAPER THAN BUYING INTEGRALLY COLORED BUT I'M WORRIED ABOUT ENFORCEMENT FROM THE CITY ON AND YOU KNOW PLANNING SUPERVISOR KASTEN THEY MADE A GREAT POINT THAT YOU KNOW THESE THESE COATINGS
HAVE COME A LONG WAY BUT THEY'RE STILL SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE MAINTAINED AS OPPOSED TO SOMETHING THAT'S INTEGRALLY COLORED AND WILL BE THAT WAY AS IT WEATHERS AND AS THE FACADE DEGRADES. AND SO I'M I'M WITH
COMMISSIONER COOKED IN ON THIS ONE WHERE I'M A LITTLE WORRIED ABOUT APPROVING THIS ENTIRE
ITEM IS AS LONG AS IT INCLUDES THE THE COATINGS THANK YOU ANY OTHER THOUGHTS I GUESS I'LL
CHIME IN HERE TO I THINK PROBABLY THAT YELLOW YOU KNOW MODERATE SUPPORT WAS PROBABLY ME I, I CAN SEE A BENEFIT TO
ALLOWING COATING I, I THINK I BROUGHT THIS UP LAST TIME BUT THE CENTENNIAL LAKES PROPERTY THAT WAS ALL BRICK GOT PAINTED WHITE AND GRAY AND LOOKS
REALLY GREAT AND KIND OF A FRESH NEW LOOK TO IT WITHOUT PROBABLY HAVING TO HAVE A TON OF CONSTRUCTION TO THEN CHANGE
EXTERIOR MATERIALS SO I CAN SEE THE BENEFIT BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND OTHER COMMISSIONERS PERSPECTIVE REGARDING KEEPING
THAT UP. I, I ALSO AM A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THE EXTERIOR
MATERIALS AND LESS CONCERNED ABOUT THE PAINTING AND MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THE USE OF EXTERIOR MATERIALS. I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION AND
MAYBE YOU CAN HELP PLANNING SUPERVISOR DAY WHEN WE PROVIDE IN OUR INCENTIVE IN THE PROGRAM REGARDING EXTERIOR
MATERIALS WHAT IS WHAT'S THE LOWEST THAT PEOPLE CAN GO IN PRIMARY MATERIALS IN THE WHOLE YOU
CHAIR OR I'LL BREAK LET ME I HAVE SOME OF THAT LANGUAGE IN HERE AND I JUST NEED TO FIND IT AND I'M OH OKAY.
IT WAS THE FIRST ONE SO YEAH THIS IS THE KIND OF PROPOSED CHANGES I GUESS TO THE EACH OH AND SO I GUESS THIS INCENTIVE
THAT WAS CALLED AN ALTERNATIVE EXTERIOR MATERIAL ALLOWANCE THAT WE JUST WANT TO CHANGE THE SECONDARY MATERIAL ON TO JUST AGAIN HAVE CONSISTENT LANGUAGE ACROSS THE CODE BUT THIS GETS AT DEPENDING ON THE
LEVEL OF AFFORDABILITY THAT YOU OFFER YOU CAN SEE THERE IT GOES TO EITHER A 100% 75% OR 50% OF SECONDARY MATERIALS ARE ALLOWED ON A FACADE WITH THE
CAVEAT THAT THOSE ARE FACADES THAT DON'T FACE THE PUBLIC STREET. AND SO IF IT'S YOU KNOW, ON THE CORNER, THOSE TWO FACADES THAT ARE ALONG THE STREET
STILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE CURRENT 8,515% OR OR IF APPROVED THE 6,535% PRIMARY AND SECONDARY MATERIALS. BUT IN THIS CASE THE INCENTIVE
IS THAT FOR SOME OF THOSE FACADES THAT AREN'T JUST REALLY THAT VISIBLE FROM THE FROM THE STREET OR KIND OF FROM THE PUBLIC'S VIEW, THEY COULD THEN INSTEAD
OF THAT 15% GO TO EITHER 50, 75 OR 100% OF SECONDARY MATERIALS. AND A FOLLOW UP QUESTION WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE
SAME KIND OF TRIGGER FOR SMALL BUSINESSES OR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES? BECAUSE I WOULD SAY IF IT'S NOT PUBLIC FACING I THINK I'M
GOOD WITH 65%. I PROBABLY AM NOT WHEN IT'S PUBLIC FACING OH SURE YEAH. AND CHAIR CHAIR ALBRECHT JUST A CLARIFICATION YOU'RE TALKING
ABOUT LIKE I FIND A COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL BUILDING ON A FACADE THAT DOESN'T FIT THE PUBLIC STREET TO ALLOW MORE SECONDARY MATERIALS. YEAH, SO THAT WAS SOMETHING WE
DID CONSIDER AND IT WAS BROUGHT UP IN THE COUNCIL STUDY SESSION AS WELL BUT WE DID CONSIDER IT. I DON'T THINK WE ADDED IT HERE
OR I GUESS WE WERE KIND OF THINKING OF IT PROBABLY MORE ON THE WE DIDN'T WANT THIS INCENTIVE AS A VERY POPULAR INCENTIVES. WE DIDN'T WANT TO DO A BUNCH OF CHANGES TO KIND
OF JEOPARDIZE THAT AND THE IT WAS KIND OF GOING THROUGH ITS OWN ANOTHER ROUND OF A NEXT STUDY AND WILL LIKELY HAVE SOME PROPOSED AMENDMENTS AND SO WE DIDN'T WANT TO REALLY DO
TOO MUCH WORK ON THAT. BUT CERTAINLY I GUESS YEAH, WITH COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS THAT CERTAINLY COULD BE COULD BE AN OPTION TO CONSIDER BUT I GUESS YEAH WE JUST DIDN'T PUT IT AS PART OF THIS PROPOSAL.
OKAY. I WOULD ONLY BE COMFORTABLE IF WE PUT SOME SORT OF TRIGGER IN THAT IT WAS EITHER PUBLIC FACING OR NOT TO CHANGE THE EXTERIOR MATERIALS TYPICALLY
TO BE THAT LOW. OH SURE. AND YEAH I GUESS MAYBE CHAIR ALBRECHT I WOULD JUST ADD TO YOU KNOW I THINK THERE IS A PRECEDENT FOR THAT IN OTHER CITIES AS WELL THAT DO THAT. I THINK A LOT OF CITIES THAT
HAVE THAT LANGUAGE HAVE MORE OF THE FORM BASED CODE AND THAT'S A COMMON THING IS THAT THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY DICTATING THE BULKIER MATERIALS ON THOSE FACADES THAT DON'T FACE THE PUBLIC
STREET. I CAN'T RECALL OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD FOR SOME OTHER CITIES IN THE AREA THAT DON'T HAVE A FORM BASED CODE IF THEY HAVE THAT THAT LANGUAGE BUT THAT CERTAINLY CAN BE A
POSSIBILITY OR CITIES DO HAVE THAT KIND OF FLEXIBILITY. OKAY. COMMISSIONER CURRY THANK YOU, CHAIR YEAH, I AGREE WITH THAT. I THINK THAT'S A GOOD POINT. JUST THE DIFFERENTIATION
BETWEEN STREET FACING AND NON STREET FACING GOING BACK TO MY ORIGINAL THOUGHT I GUESS I MEAN I THINK COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM IS IN CONSTRUCTION
IF YOU WERE TO CHANGE YOU KNOW THE MATERIALS IF YOU KNOW MAKE THESE ADJUSTMENTS LIKE IS THAT LIKE A 2% SAVINGS ON CONSTRUCTION POTENTIALLY OR IS
A 10% OR 25% OR BECAUSE I, I GUESS I'M KIND OF RETHINKING IT AND REALIZING IT MAY NOT BE THAT BIG OF A DIFFERENCE IN TERMS OF PRICE ANYWAY. SO MY JUST KIND OF BE POINTLESS IN TERMS
OF FINANCIAL. COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU CHAIR IT REALLY DEPENDS ON THE PROJECT. CHERYL BURKE REFERENCE CENTENNIAL LAKES THAT REFRESH
PROJECT THE IF THEY WERE GOING TO TEAR THE FACADE OFF THE BUILDINGS AND PUT A NEW ONE UP VERSUS PAINTING IT THAT THAT'S A POTENTIALLY VERY LARGE
SAVINGS FOR A NEW BUILD. IT'S VERY MINOR. YOUR FACADE IS A SMALLER PERCENTAGE OF YOUR OVERALL CONSTRUCTION COST AND SO IT
COULD IF A IF A PROJECT IS BALANCING ON THE TIP OF A KNIFE TRYING TO GO OR NOT GO IT COULD BE A DECIDING FACTOR BUT IT IT'S NOT A MAJOR COST
LIKE A STRUCTURE OR YOU KNOW EARTHWORK ELECTRICAL MECHANICAL SYSTEMS THINGS LIKE THAT. YEAH. SO I'D BE OPEN TO SOME OF THE CHANGES PROPOSED BY CHAIR AND
COMMISSIONER COOKED IN COMMISSIONER YOU SIR I JUST WANT TO LISTEN TO EVERYBODY'S TAKE BEFORE I SPOKE BUT THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR. I WAS I AGREE WITH
COMMISSIONER COOKED IN AND MOST OF THE TAKES EITHER ASK THE COMMISSIONERS HERE I FEEL LIKE THIS TARGETS MORE SO OUR TARGETS LESS THE SMALL BUSINESSES AND THAT WAS
INTENDED IMPACTED IT MAY NOT BE TARGETING THEM AND MAY HAVE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES I KNOW THERE WAS LIKE A UH A SMALL
STORE ON PORTLAND AND AMERICAN BOULEVARD THAT WAS TRYING TO EXPAND AND OPEN A CAFE. IT'S A HOLLOW MARKET SO IT'S LIKE A SUPERMARKET SO THEY'RE TRYING TO ADD A CAFE.
THEY WENT TO THE CITY TO SUBMIT PERMITS AND THEY HAD AGREEMENT WITH THE NEXT STORE LOT BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO HAVE A CERTAIN NUMBER OF PARKING SPOTS. IT WAS A CHURCH AND THEY HAD A
REALLY HARD TIME. YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE FROM THE ANGLE OF SMALL BUSINESSES I SEE HOW I SEE I SEE WHERE
WE'RE TRYING TO GO TO BUT I FEEL LIKE IT MAY NOT UH, TARGET THEM, YOU KNOW AND IF IF IF DEVELOPERS IF THIS BENEFITS DEVELOPERS MORE AND
IT'S NOT A BIG UH IT MAY NOT FLOW DOWN TO THE TENANTS AND AS COMMISSIONER CURRY HIGHLIGHTED THEN IT MIGHT JUST BE UH IT MIGHT NOT GET WHAT
WAS INTENDED DONE. SO THAT'S MY OVERALL TAKE AND YEAH, SO THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER THOUGHTS DISCUSSION COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU CHAIR COMMISSIONER HE'S A I DON'T KNOW HOW WELL YOU KNOW THE KIND OF INS AND OUTS
OF THAT PROJECT THAT YOU'RE REFERENCING THE WHOLE MARKET WITH THE CAFE BUT IF YOU HAD SPOKEN WITH THE OWNER WOULD THEY BENEFIT FROM I GUESS THE
BIGGEST THING IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS COATINGS, RIGHT? SO IF IF THEY WE GOING TO PUT AN ADDITION ON AND THEN RECODE THE WHOLE BUILDING TO MAKE KIND OF A MORE MONOLITHIC
FACADE TO NOT HAVE THE ADDITIONS DON'T STICK OUT, DO YOU THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO A BUSINESS OWNER OF THAT SCALE OR NOT MAKE A HUGE DIFFERENCE? >> SO I WAS COMING MORE FOR
MORE SO FROM THE ANGLE OF THE PARKING LIMITATIONS. SO THEY HAD THEY WANTED SEATING IN THE CAFE, YOU KNOW SO IT'S I GUESS IT'S NOTHING TO DO WITH THE EXTERIOR SO OH
THIS IS I THINK MORE SO THE PARKING UH I SAW SOMETHING ABOUT PARKING SO I JUST BROUGHT THAT UP BUT YEAH AND AND AND MY MY POINT BASICALLY
WAS THAT THERE'S THINGS THAT WE COULD DO THAT WOULD BETTER MAYBE THAT WOULD DIRECTLY BENEFIT SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS LIKE ALLOWING SOMETHING LIKE THAT YOU KNOW BECAUSE THERE IS PARKING JUST NOT ON THE
SPECIFIC SITE BUT THEY HAD A PARKING AGREEMENT BECAUSE THE CHURCH YOU KNOW IT'S MOSTLY PARKED ON ON SUNDAYS BUT UH YEAH, I GUESS TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION IT WOULD IMPACT THEM
MUCH I DON'T THINK AT LEAST YEAH. THANK YOU. JUST MR. JOHNSON. SURE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.
IF I CAN I DON'T WANT TO DIRECT THE DISCUSSION AND A GOOD POLICY DISCUSSION SO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT MORE CONTEXT. A COUPLE OF THINGS JUST TO THINK ABOUT. ONE IS THE CITY HAS BEEN MAKING INTENTIONAL EFFORTS TO
MAKE OUR CODES LESS COMPLEX BLOOMINGTON BY COMPARISON TO A LOT OF OUR SUBURBAN PEERS HAVE MORE COMPLEX STANDARDS AND CODES AND FOR MANY WAYS THAT'S A VERY EFFECTIVE AND GOOD THING DEPENDS ON THE SITUATION
. SO JUST KEEPING THAT THOUGHT PROCESS IN MIND IN TERMS OF SPECIFICALLY TAILORING STANDARDS TO SMALL BUSINESS. THE SECOND PIECE OF IT IS THAT SMALL BUSINESS CAN BE A DIFFICULT THING TO DEFINE.
YOU CAN DESCRIBE THAT BY THE LEGAL FORMATION OF ENTITY BY THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES WHETHER OR NOT IT'S LOCAL OWNERSHIP. THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT WAYS TO DO THAT AND SOME OF THEM ARE NOT I THINK WOULD
POTENTIALLY VIOLATE SOME LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS AS WELL. I MEAN CERTAINLY KEVIN CAN WEIGH IN ON THAT. I THINK YOU HAVE TO DO IT CAREFULLY IS WHAT I'M GETTING AT. SO THINKING ABOUT THOSE TWO KIND OF BIGGER PICTURE
ELEMENTS AND SOME OF THE PROPOSALS BEFORE YOU THE THIRD BIGGER PICTURE THING I WOULD SAY IS THAT WHEN YOU'RE ADOPTING A CITYWIDE POLICY THEN YES ALL PARTIES ARE GOING TO BENEFIT OR WHETHER IT BE
BIG BUSINESS, SMALL BUSINESS OR HAVING A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHO BENEFITS MORE. I'M NOT SAYING THAT'S OUT OF BOUNDS. I'M JUST SAYING THAT IT'S GOING TO AFFECT EVERYONE AS IT'S PROPOSED SPECIFIC TO THE EXTERIOR MATERIALS AND THE COATINGS.
SO HOW DID WE ASSEMBLE THE LIST OF TOPICS WITHIN THE ORDINANCE? I WANT TO ASSURE YOU THAT SOME OF THESE THINGS CAME UP DIRECTLY FROM TENANTS TRYING TO FILL VACANT TENANT SPACES IN MULTI-TENANT CENTERS WITH
SPECIFIC TO REFRESHING THEIR STOREFRONT AND THAT HAD TO DO IN SOME CASES OF COATINGS IN SOME CASES OF ADDING MORE EXTERIOR MATERIALS IN THE WAY
THAT THEY WANT IT TO REFLECT THEIR BRAND OF THEIR STORE. IN A COUPLE OF CASES THOSE FACADES WERE NON CONFORMING FOR OUR EXTERIOR MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS SO THEY COULDN'T ADD ANY MORE SECONDARY MATERIALS.
SO THAT IS KIND OF WHAT GOT THIS STARTED. SAME THING WITH PAINTING SOME BUSINESSES AND SOME CITIES ALLOW PAINTING, SOME CITIES DON'T. MORE CITIES ALLOW IT AND DON'T ALLOW IT.
BUT PAINTING IS A WAY TO REFRESH A BUILDING FACADE RELATED TO THEIR SPECIFIC BRAND. SO THESE THINGS HAVE COME UP WITH TENANTS NOT NEW DEVELOPMENT, NOT NEW BUILDINGS BUT THESE ARE THINGS THAT HAVE
COME UP THAT LED US DOWN THE PATH OF ENGAGING WITH ARCHITECTS ON THE SPECIFIC ISSUE BECAUSE WE KNEW WE WERE GOING TO STUDY IT AND THAT'S WHERE THE MATERIALS RATIO ISSUE CAME FURTHER INTO LIGHT
AND SPEAKING WITH MORE I THINK IT WAS FOUR ARCHITECTS PARTICIPATED IN OUR ENGAGEMENT . DAKOTA CAN CLARIFY THAT FOR ME BUT THAT'S WHERE IT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION THAT
OUR RATIO IS A LITTLE BIT OUT OF STEP WITH A LOT OF THE CITIES THAT THEY SEE. I'M NOT SAYING THAT'S POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER BUT JUST TRYING TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT IN TERMS OF THE SOURCE OF WHY THESE TOPICS
WERE STUDIED AS PART OF THE SMALL BUSINESS PROJECT. SO HOPEFULLY THAT HELPS. HAPPY TO TAKE QUESTIONS ABOUT IT. COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM THANK
YOU CHAIR SORRY I'M TALKING SO MUCH AT THIS PLANNING MANAGER JOHNSON ARE PLANNING SUPERVISOR CARSON CAN YOU GUYS TALK THROUGH THE WHAT ENFORCEMENT RECOURSE THE CITY
HAS FOR FLAKING OR DEGRADING OR BUBBLING COATINGS ON EXISTING MASONRY? YEAH. IF I MAY. DAKOTA CHAIR SO COMMISSIONER
CUNNINGHAM THAT'S SOMETHING ACTUALLY THAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION IS VERY EFFECTIVE AT ENFORCING AND DOING SO AGGRESSIVELY. IT ONE OF THE CHALLENGES THAT
WE HAVE IS WHEN A BUILDING IS COATED ILLEGALLY EITHER BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T CONTACT US TO LEARN WHAT OUR RULES ARE, DIDN'T KNOW THE RULES AND THE PAINTING STARTS HAPPENING. THE CITY HAS MORE DIFFICULT CHOICES AHEAD OF US IN TERMS
OF HOW TO EFFECTUATE CODE ENFORCEMENT. IN THAT CASE THE FLAKING PEELING PAINT THAT'S MUCH MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD AND EASY FROM A PERSPECTIVE OF WHAT THE INTERVENTION IS BECAUSE IN MOST CASES THOSE BUILDINGS
ARE ALREADY CODED. SO A MUCH MORE SIMPLE COAT ENFORCEMENT SITUATION THAN THE ALTERNATIVE. THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER THOUGHTS DISCUSSION I WOULD JUST ADD ONE THING BEFORE I FORGET MR. JOHNSON MENTIONED MAKING THE CODE MORE
SIMPLE AND I THINK THAT THAT'S TOTALLY FAIR AND IF THAT'S THE CASE THEN I WOULD MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE COULD MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS
BUT WITHOUT THE CHANGE IN EXTERIOR MATERIAL RATIO ENTIRELY AND JUST KEEPING IT AS IS INSTEAD OF PUTTING OTHER REQUIREMENTS ON IT AS I HAD
ALREADY MENTIONED. >> COMMISSIONER COMPTON THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. JOHNSON. SO I'M JUST I'M HEARING SOME RESISTANCE TO SOME OF THE EXTERIOR COATINGS AND SECONDARY MATERIALS PIECES OF THIS WHEN IT COMES TO
MAKING A MOTION TO CITY COUNCIL HERE. IS THAT SOMETHING WHERE IT WOULD BE RECOMMENDED THAT THE MOTION IS THAT WE RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DOES NOT ADOPT THIS PLAN OR IS IT THAT THE WE RECOMMEND THAT THEY
ADOPT THE PLAN WITH MODIFICATIONS? YEAH. CHAIR COMMISSIONER COOKED AND SO IT COULD HAPPEN EITHER WAY IF THERE ARE ELEMENTS OF THE POLICY THAT YOU SUPPORT I
CERTAINLY WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO ADOPT THOSE ELEMENTS OF THE ORDINANCE AND YOU CAN DO SO BY FORMAL MOTION TO REMOVE THE EXTERIOR MATERIAL COMPONENTS OF IT.
YOU COULD DO AS COMMISSIONER AS CHAIR ALBRECHT SUGGESTED REVISING THE RATIO TO BACK TO 8515 WHICH IS OUR EXISTING STANDARD. SO THERE'S MULTIPLE THINGS
THAT YOU COULD DO BUT IF THE BODY IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE BULK OF THE WORK THAT'S CONTAINED WITHIN THE ORDINANCE, I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE WITH SUPPORTING THE
AMENDED I'M SORRY ADOPT A MOTION SUPPORTING THE AMENDED ORDINANCE AS OPPOSED TO ADOPTING A DENIAL OR A NON RECOMMENDATION OF THE FULL
ORDINANCE AND WE CAN CERTAINLY REFLECT IT PROPERLY TO THE CITY COUNCIL WHEN WE REPORT BACK TO THEM. I MADAM CHAIR, IF THERE'S NO
FURTHER DISCUSSION I WOULD TAKE A SHOT AT A MOTION HERE. CAN MR. CURRY THANK YOU CHAIR SORRY COMMISSIONER KITCHEN I MAYBE WE JUST DO A QUICK STRAW
POLL OF HOW WE FEEL ABOUT THE THAT ONE CODING AND EXTERIOR COMPONENT BEFORE MAKING A MOTION. YEAH AND MAYBE A CHAIR OBJECT IF I MAY JUST SO CLARIFICATION
FOR ME TO AND SOME GUIDANCE YEAH MAYBE THE STRAW POLL COULD BE CODING YES TO CODING OR NO TO CODING AND THEN THE
PRIMARY SECONDARY IS 8515 OR 6535 IS YOUR PREFERENCE. I THINK THAT WOULD JUST BE HELPFUL FOR ME ON DIRECTION AND COMMISSIONER HICKTON I'M SURE I GET A LITTLE ANXIOUS
ABOUT STRAW POLLS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS. I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE GENERALLY DO FOR STUDY ITEMS BUT MAYBE WE SEEK LEGAL COUNSEL BEFORE WE DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT ON A PUBLIC HEARING.
MR. TUSK YOU DO YOU HAVE ANY GUIDANCE FOR US ON THIS PANEL ? HELLO. SORRY.
I MEAN A SWATH OF SUNLIGHT HERE. BUT CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS, AS LONG AS YOU'RE CLEAR ON WHAT THE MOTION IS LIKE I THINK NICK AND DAKOTA WERE RIGHT ON THERE. >> JUST I WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS WHAT THE MOTION IS AND WHAT IT DOES. SO AS LONG AS IT'S CLEAR I THINK YOU CAN HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE EXCEPT THESE TWO PARTS OR HOWEVER YOU SEE FIT.
I THINK THAT'S FINE. >> AS FAR AS A STRAW POLL, I MEAN I THINK SOMEONE SHOULD JUST MAKE THE MOTION AND AND FOREGO THE STRAW POLL AT LEAST FOR RIGHT NOW. >> I MEAN YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE
A VOTE IN A FEW MINUTES ANYWAY SO WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO TAKE A SHOT AT THE FIRST MOTION? COMMISSIONER TEN THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR.
ONE SECOND PLEASE. I MOVED TO RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE PHASE ONE SMALL BUSINESS CODES AND PROCESSES ORDINANCE THEREBY AMENDING CHAPTERS 910 AND 21
OF THE CITY CODE STRIKING THE CONTENT RELATED TO EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS AND FINISH INCLUDING THE PAINTINGS INCLUDING SECTIONS OF THE STAFF REPORTS AND ALSO THE
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY RATIO AND PERMITTED BUILDING MATERIALS SECTION SECOND. >> ALL RIGHT WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
KEEP IN MIND WE CAN MAKE ANOTHER MOTION SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I. I OPPOSED I I ALL RIGHT.
I DON'T THINK THAT ONE PASSES. OH, YES. DO WE NEED DO YOU NEED NAMES? IF YOU COULD PLEASE JUST REVOTE ON THAT ONE MORE TIME
TO MAKE SURE WE GET THAT CORRECT. OKAY IT WAS COOKED IN I YES. ALL RIGHT ALL THOSE IN FAVOR
SAY I, I, I OPPOSED GOT IT. NAY OPPOSED? NO. RIGHT. SO THAT'S 423. YEAH. SOUNDS LIKE WHAT ELSE? YES. FAILS ANYONE WILLING TO MAKE A
DIFFERENT MOTION COMMISSIONER CURRY. THANKS, CHERYL. TAKE A STAB. I MOVED TO RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE PHASE ONE SMALL BUSINESS CODES AND
PROCESSES ORDINANCE THEREBY AMENDING CHAPTER 910 AND 21 OF THE CITY CODE.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND ALL RIGHT IF MOTION IN THE SECOND FOR THE RECOMMENDATION ON THE SCREEN AS IS ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY
I. I THOSE OPPOSED NO, NO. ALL RIGHT. THAT WOULD BE A 6 TO 1. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO MAKE A
MOTION CHAIR? IF I CAN ADD JUST ONE POINT OF SUGGESTION. NO. AND I APPRECIATE NOTHING. IT'S NONE OF NEGATIVE COMMENTARY ON WHAT JUST TOOK PLACE. I LOVE THE MOTIONS AND
ROBERT'S RULES BUT NOW TO THE POINT AROUND A STRAW POLL AND THE INTENT OF THAT I THINK IF I'M READING THE BOARD CORRECTLY I THINK THAT THE DISCUSSION CENTERED AROUND WHETHER OR NOT TO PASS OUT THE
RESTRICTION OF CODING AS WELL AS THE MATERIALS RATIO MAYBE IT WOULD BE FRUITFUL TO JUST DO A SEPARATE SIDE MOTION ON THAT SPECIFIC ISSUE. I'M NOT TRYING TO COMPLICATE
IT FOR YOU BUT THAT YOU COULD MOVE TO REMOVE THE RESTRICT THE YOU COULD REMOVE YOU COULD MOVE EXCUSE ME TO RETAIN THE 8515 MATERIALS RATIO FOR EXAMPLE IF YOU WERE SUPPORTING
THAT AND THEN THAT WOULD GIVE YOU THE MOTION OF THE ORDINANCE AS AMENDED. I'M SORRY I HOPE I DIDN'T BUTCHER THAT FOR THOSE THAT THAT MADE SENSE. >> YES.
I THINK WE THANK YOU MR. JOHNSON. I THINK WE COULD DO THAT OR SOMEONE COULD MAKE A MOTION RIGHT NOW JUST WITH THE MOTION ON THE SCREEN AND THEN
AMENDING THAT TO THE 8,515% RATIO AND CHAIR, IF I IF I CAN MAKE ONE CONTEXT POINT ABOUT THE REASON I WAS SUGGESTING THAT IS THAT THERE'S ACTUALLY A LOT OF ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRUCTURAL IMPROVEMENTS TO THE
ORDINANCE EVEN IF YOU DON'T SUPPORT THE THAT REMOVING THE PROHIBITION ON COATINGS AND THE CHANGE TO THE MATERIALS RATIO THERE STILL IS A LOT OF STRUCTURAL AND ORGANIZATION IMPROVEMENTS TO THE POLICY
THAT I WOULD STILL RECOMMEND BE CONSIDERED BUT NOT TO OVERSTEP MY ROLE HERE. COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU CHAIR.
I MOVED TO RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE PHASE ONE SMALL BUSINESS CODES AND PROCESS PROCESSES ORDINANCE THEREBY AMENDING AMENDING CHAPTER NINE CHAPTER TEN AND
CHAPTER 21 OF THE CITY CODE STRIKING THE ITEM RELATED TO
THE 6535 PRIMARY AND SECONDARY MATERIAL STANDARDS. SECOND ALL RIGHT WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ARE WE GO WITH THAT MOTION. IS EVERYONE GOOD? YEAH.
>> ALL RIGHT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I I THOSE OPPOSED? NO. ALL RIGHT. THAT MOTION CARRIES 76161. THANK YOU.
I'M SORRY. YES. ALL RIGHT. GREAT DISCUSSION. THANK YOU, EVERYONE. YEAH, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THAT ITEM MOVES ON TO THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ON JUNE 2ND AS
A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM. ALL RIGHT. ITEM TWO IS A STUDY ITEM. IT IS CONSIDERING APPROVAL OF A DRAFT OF THE DRAFT APRIL
10TH, 2025 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SYNOPSIS AND I DON'T I KNOW WE HAD A FEW FOLKS WHO
WERE NOT IN ATTENDANCE SO I THINK WE'RE ALL HERE. I THINK ALL MEMBERS WERE PRESENT ALL MEMBERS ARE PRESENT. >> ALL RIGHT. I BELIEVE SO. ALL RIGHT. ALL MEMBERS WERE PRESENT.
SO LOOKING FOR A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. SOME MOVED SECOND. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I I
THOSE OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES FINAL ITEM THIS EVENING IS ALSO A STUDY ITEM. IT IS OUR REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION POLICY AND ISSUES UPDATE PLANNING MANAGER
JOHNSON THANK YOU CHAIR ALBRECHT AND MEMBERS THANKS FOR THE DISCUSSION. SO JUST A QUICK SYNOPSIS OF YOUR UPCOMING MEETINGS AND MAY 22ND, JUNE 5TH AND JUNE THE 12TH THAT'S THE NEXT THREE
REGULARLY SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS ON MAY 22ND THERE'S A PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULED FOR A PRIVATELY INITIATED CITY CODE AMENDMENT TO DESIGNATE HEALTH CLUB AS A PERMITTED USE IN THE C. S ONE ZONING DISTRICT. SO THAT'S A PUBLIC HEARING.
THE SECOND ITEM ON THAT AGENDA WOULD BE A STUDY ITEM THE A PROJECT ON THE CITY'S WORK PLAN A STUDY OF REMOTE AIRPORT PARKING FACILITIES AND USES
AND THAT THOSE ARE THE TWO ITEMS SCHEDULED FOR MAY 22ND. THE JUNE 5TH MEETING HAS A PUBLIC HEARING ON PART TWO OF THE SIGN CODE LOOK BACK ORDINANCE PROJECT UPON REVIEW
AND ACTION ON THAT ITEM THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE TO REVISE THE CITY'S STANDARDS FOR ELECTRONIC SIGN DWELL TIME AS WELL AS SIGNS ON TALL BUILDINGS.
SO WE'LL BE BRINGING THAT ORDINANCE TO YOU ON JUNE THE 5TH PER THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION ON JUNE THE 12TH A STUDY ITEM IS SCHEDULED A STUDY OF THE NORMANDALE BOULEVARD AND 84TH STREET
INTERSECTION SPECIFICALLY ELEMENTS WITHIN THE NORMAN DALE LAKE DISTRICT PLAN CALLING FOR A PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OVER NORMANDY BOULEVARD THAT WILL BE STUDIED AND
BROUGHT TO YOU BY THE CITY'S TRAFFIC AND ENGINEERING STAFF AND PLANNING STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THAT WORK AS WELL. SO THOSE ARE THE THREE ITEMS OR I'M SORRY THE AGENDAS
OF THE THREE UPCOMING PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS. I DO HAVE ONE MORE UPDATE. GREAT. MR. JOHNSON SORRY, CHAIR ALL RIGHT. THE ONE OTHER UPDATE I WAS GOING TO MENTION IS JUST THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING COMMISSIONER
APPLICATION PROCESS IS STILL OPEN SO I ENCOURAGE THE PUBLIC TO APPLY TO SEEK A POSITION ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION THE PREVIOUSLY LISTED DEADLINE WAS
MAY 7TH BUT MATERIALS WERE SENT OUT EXPRESSING THAT MAY 18TH WAS ACTUALLY THE DEADLINE SO THE CITY WILL HONOR ANY APPLICATIONS RECEIVED BY BUYER ON MAY 18TH AND THE PROCESS AT
THAT POINT WILL INVOLVE INTERVIEWS BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND A FUTURE APPOINTMENTS AT THEIR FIRST MEETING IN JUNE I BELIEVE. SO JUST A QUICK UPDATE ABOUT THAT PROCESS.
>> GREAT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON COMMISSIONER ISSA? >> SORRY TONY. TOMORROW'S FENCE I DON'T MEAN TO HOLD YOU GUYS BACK BUT A QUICK QUESTION. SO I NOTICED LIKE ON THE EAST
SIDE OF BLOOMINGTON LIKE ON THE SMALLER NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS THERE'S SOME STREETS THAT DON'T HAVE YOU REMIND ME WHEN YOU SAID SIGNS AND STUFF BUT LIKE THAT THEY DON'T HAVE
STOP SIGNS ON BOTH SIDES LIKE ON DO YOU KNOW WHY BECAUSE I'VE ALWAYS I YEAH THAT'S ALMOST NEAR I DON'T CHAIR ALBRECHT I DON'T KNOW IF JULIE
LONG IS AVAILABLE WE COULD CERTAINLY PROMOTE HER SHE WOULD BE BEST EQUIPPED TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. I COULD GIVE YOU A PLANTERS HALF BAKED RESPONSE BUT I
PREFER TO DEFER TO THE CITY ENGINEER ON THAT ONE . THANKS JULIE. >> COMMISSIONERS. COMMISSIONER. CHAIR.
COMMISSIONER. YOU SIR. A LOT OF OUR LOCAL RESIDENTIAL STREETS DON'T HAVE STOP SIGNS. ENGINEERS ARE WEIRD. WE HAVE THESE FANCY WORDS
CALLED WARRANTS WHICH ARE ESSENTIALLY THE RULES OF WHY YOU WOULD WANT TO PUT A STOP SIGN IN AND OFTEN OUR RESIDENTIAL STREETS DON'T MEET THE WARRANTS AND STUDIES HAVE
SHOWN THAT A PROLIFERATION OF STOP SIGNS LIKE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE I LIVE WHEREHEY DONE WHAT IS CALLED A BASKET WEAVE AND THEY PUT STOPS TO STOP SIGNS EVERY
OTHER DIRECTION ENDS UP CREATING ACTUALLY MORE TRAFFIC SAFETY CONCERNS. SO IT'S PREFERABLE THAT DRIVERS SLOW DOWN AND LOOK BOTH WAYS AND KIND OF YIELD
BECAUSE OTHERWISE WHEN WE PUT UP A STOP SIGN YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING IF YOU LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IT'S GOING TO BECOME BACKGROUND NOISE AND YOU'RE GOING TO KIND OF SLOW DOWN IN YIELD.
>> BUT THE EXPECTATION OF THE DRIVER IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION IS THAT YOU ARE GOING TO COME TO A FULL AND COMPLETE STOP AND THAT OFTEN DOESN'T HAPPEN. >> OKAY. I SEE. OH, THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.
OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT. EDUCATION THANK YOU. ANY OTHER ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION ? ALL RIGHT.
SEEING NONE WE WILL CLOSE OUT THE MAY EIGHTH MEETING OF THE BLOOMINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION. THANK YOU AND HAVE A GOOD NIGHT