. >> GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO THE MARCH 27TH 2025 MEETING OF THE BLOOMINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION FOR AN OVERVIEW FOR
FOLKS WHO ARE IN THE AUDIENCE THIS EVENING IN CHAMBERS AND ON TV, THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS MADE UP OF SEVEN MEMBERS. WE HAVE SEVEN THIS EVENING. EACH MEMBER VOLUNTEERS THEIR
TIME AND 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 RECOMMENDATIONS 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 THE APPEAL TO THE
CITY COUNCIL. ALL OF OUR ITEMS THIS EVENING ARE HEADED TO COUNCIL FOR EACH ITEM THERE WILL BE A STAFF REPORT THAT A CHANCE FOR THE APPLICANT TO PRESENT THEN A
CHANCE FOR ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC TO PROVIDE TESTIMONY AND THEN THE COMMISSION WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND DISCUSS THE ITEM BEFORE ANY ACTION IS TAKEN. OUR FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS THIS EVENING IS THE PLEDGE
OF ALLEGIANCE. PLEASE STAND IF YOU ARE ABLE TO DISPLAY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA EITHER A PUBLIC OR WHICH STANDS ONE
NATION UNDER GOD INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. ALL RIGHT. OUR FIRST ITEM THIS EVENING
DOES HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING. IT IS A CITY CODE AMENDMENT FOR THE SIGN CODE IT IS A ONE YEAR LOOKBACK ORDINANCE AND PLANNING MANAGER JOHNSON, YOU
HAVE THE STAFF REPORT. THANK YOU, CHAIR ALBRECHT NICE TO SEE YOU. MEMBERS I'LL JUST JUMP RIGHT INTO THIS ONE. WE DID REVIEW THE SET OF PREVIOUS STUDY SESSION SO I'LL TRY AND KEEP MY COMMENTS
RELATIVELY BRIEF AND NOT GO TO INTO TOO DEEP OF EXPLANATIONS ON SOME OF THESE UNLESS REQUESTED. SO JUST A QUICK AGENDA SLIDE. JUST A REMINDER ON WHY WE'RE DOING THIS PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW
OF THE ORDINANCE BEFORE YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT OUR OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT APPROACH AND PROVIDE YOU THE NEXT STEPS. SO AS A POINT OF BACKGROUND
AGAIN THE SIGN CODE WAS COMPLETELY OVERHAULED AND ADOPTED IN FEBRUARY OF 2024 WAS A SIGNIFICANT PROJECT AND AS PART OF THAT PROCESS THE
STAFF CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMISSION WE ALL KIND OF MADE A CONTINUED COMMITMENT TO REVIEW IT ONE YEAR AFTER ADOPTION GIVEN THE SIGNIFICANT NATURE OF THE POLICY CHANGES CONTAINED THEREIN.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT THIS PROJECT IS REFLECTING IS AND WAS ADDED TO THE WORK PLAN AS JUST THAT ONE YEAR LOOK BACK HOW DID IT PERFORM? WHAT ADJUSTMENTS SHOULD WE MAKE OVER THE COURSE OF 20
2466 SIGN PERMITS WERE ISSUED THROUGH THE COURSE OF USING THE NEW POLICY STAFF IDENTIFIED VARIOUS ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT. A COUPLE OF THEM CAME FROM THE
PUBLIC AS WELL. MOSTLY I'M WORKING WITH SIGN INSTALLATION COMPANIES. ALL THAT BEING SAID I WOULD THIS CERTAINLY WON'T BE THE LAST OR END OF ANY ADJUSTMENTS
TO THE SIGN CODE. THERE'S ALWAYS THINGS THAT WE'LL FIND IN FUTURE YEARS SO ABSENT A DEDICATED PROJECT FOR THAT I THINK YOU WOULD SEE SOME OF THESE ANY POTENTIAL FUTURE AMENDMENTS TO THE SIGN CODE INTO MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES
ORDINANCE AT THE END OF THE YEAR WOULD MOST LIKELY BE THE BEST VENUE OTHER THAN A PRIVATELY INITIATED AMENDMENT. SO AGAIN THIS WAS REVIEWED AT THE JANUARY 30TH KAREEM CHARADE AND I WENT THROUGH
EACH INDIVIDUAL ITEM ONE BY ONE WITH KIND OF EXPLAINING THE WHY AND WHAT IT WAS THE CHANGE WAS INTENDED TO DO. SO I WON'T DO THAT IN THIS CASE. INSTEAD THE ANALYSIS I INTEND TO PROVIDE YOU HERE IS MORE SIMILAR TO HOW WE'VE
APPROACHED MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES IN THE PAST. WE'VE KIND OF GROUPED THESE AMENDMENTS IN TWO BUCKETS ONE ARE THINGS THAT IN OUR JUDGMENT ARE JUST CLEANUP ITEMS. THESE ARE THINGS IN THE ORDINANCE THAT JUST NEED TO BE
CLARIFIED OR CLEANED UP. IT'S NOT SIGNIFICANTLY CHANGING POLICY IN ANY WAY. THE OTHER IS THE ACTUAL SIGN POLICY UPDATES AND I'LL SPEND MORE TIME ON THOSE ON THAT BUCKET THAN THIS FIRST BUCKET.
SO AS A REMINDER WE RENUMBERED THESE A LITTLE BIT. I HOPE THAT WASN'T TOO CONFUSING BUT ITEMS ONE THROUGH FIVE ARE IN STAFF'S JUDGMENT CLEANUP ITEMS THERE WAS ADDING A DEFINITION FOR
BUILDING FRONTAGE AND TWEAKING THE EXISTING FRONTAGE DEFINITION TO CLARIFY THAT FOR LOT FRONTAGE. THE SECOND ITEM IS ADDING SOME GRAPHICS THAT HELP THE PUBLIC AND INSTALLERS UNDERSTAND HOW
WE MEASURE BUILDING FRONTAGE IN VARIOUS SCENARIOS. SO I WANTED TO PROVIDE THAT FOR CLARITY. THE THIRD ITEM IS HAS TO DO WITH FREESTANDING SIGNS WHEN
THEY'RE LOCATED AND DIRECTED TOWARDS THE CORNER OF A SITE AT AN INTERSECTION KIND OF CLARIFYING LONGSTANDING STAFF INTERPRETATION OF HOW TO DEAL WITH THOSE SITUATIONS IN TERMS OF WHICH STREET
THEY'RE COUNTING TOWARDS FROM A NUMBER STANDPOINT REFERENCE TO THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR THIS IS NO LONGER AN OFFICIAL POSITION AT THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON POST ORGANIZATIONAL RESTRUCTURE. SO JUST CHANGING THAT TO THE
CITY ENGINEER WHO REALLY IS THE MORE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY IN THAT CASE ANYWAY. AND THEN THE FIFTH ITEM IS JUST AGAIN CLARIFYING THAT ANY REFERENCE TO TRAFFIC SAFETY
REQUIREMENTS THERE WAS NO AUTHORITY LISTED OF WHO WOULD MAKE THAT DETERMINATION IN THE CODE AND WE'RE JUST ADDING THE CITY ENGINEER. SO GETTING INTO THE POLICY SORRY FORGIVE ME IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT ANY OF THE
CLEANUP ITEMS? OKAY. GETTING INTO THE SIGN POLICY CHANGES AGAIN MOST OF YOU TOOK PARTICIPATED IN THAT JANUARY 30TH SESSION SO AGAIN JUST
STOP ME IF THERE'S QUESTIONS ON AN INDIVIDUAL ONE, I'LL TRY AND PROVIDE ANY UPDATES ABOUT ANY TWEAKS THAT WERE MADE SINCE THAT TIME. SO A ROOF INTEGRAL SIGNS. THERE'S AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT
ROOF INTEGRAL SIGN THERE IS AT THE MCDONALD'S ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE SLIDE. THAT'S A SIGN THAT'S EFFECTIVELY MOUNTED AND ENCAPSULATED IN THE FULL EXTENT OF THE ROOF.
THE CURRENT SIGN CODE DOES NOT LIST THAT AS EITHER A PERMITTED OR PROHIBITED SIGN TYPE. SO WE WANTED TO HAVE THAT ADDED TO ALL THE SIGN DISTRICT'S ROOF SIGNS WE DISCUSSED ADDING THAT THERE IS
GENERAL SUPPORT AROUND THAT SO WE ARE ADDED THE ORDINANCE DOES ADD IT IN SIGN DISTRICTS THREE THROUGH FIVE SO THAT'S YOUR MORE YOUR COMMERCIAL YOUR
INDUSTRIAL YOUR MIXED USE SIGN DISTRICTS. ONE NOTE ABOUT THAT THERE IS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF ROOF SIGNS AS PART OF THE STUDY SESSION AND SO THE ORIGINAL CONCEPT
LISTED AS EIGHT FEET NO MORE THAN EIGHT FEET ABOVE THE ROOF THERE WAS SOME CONSIDERATION ON THE STAFF SIDE PER THE DISCUSSION ABOUT HAVING SOME KIND OF PROPORTIONALITY ELEMENT TO THAT WE ULTIMATELY
DECIDED NOT TO INCLUDE THAT PROVISION BECAUSE WE DIDN'T WANT TO ADD ADDITIONAL COMPLEXITY TO THE TO THE POLICY BUT CERTAINLY OPEN TO YOUR FEEDBACK ON THAT WHERE WE LANDED FROM A MAXIMUM HEIGHT
STANDPOINT WAS TEN FEET BECAUSE I THINK THERE IS SOME MERIT IN THE DISCUSSION ABOUT IF A BUILDING IS VERY TALL AND EIGHT FOOT SIGN ABOVE THE ROOF ACTUALLY IS QUITE SMALL PROPORTIONALLY SPEAKING SO WE
INCREASE THAT TO TEN. WE THINK THAT'S A LIMIT THAT SHOULD WORK WELL IN MOST SITUATIONS. OF COURSE THERE IS THE VARIANCE OR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FLEXIBILITY TO ALL IF SOMEONE WANTED TO SEEK
THOSE ROUTES. SO THAT'S KIND OF THE COMPONENT ON ROOF SIGNS SIGNS ON FENCES THERE WAS GENERAL SUPPORT AROUND THAT. HOWEVER THERE WAS SOME CLARIFICATION THAT MAYBE IN A
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL SETTING IT COULD BE APPROPRIATE. SO WE TOOK THAT FEEDBACK AND WE CLARIFIED THAT WHAT WE'RE PROHIBITING IS SIGNS PAINTED ON OR ATTACHED TO RESIDENTIAL
FENCES ON RESIDENTIAL SITES ARE WE THINK THAT THAT'S WHERE MORE OF THE POTENTIAL NUISANCE OR CHALLENGES EXIST IS PROBABLY MORE ON RESIDENTIAL FENCES.
SO I THINK A GOOD LANDING POINT THERE FREESTANDING DIRECTIONAL AND INCIDENTAL SIGNS JUST INCREASING THOSE FROM 8 TO 12 12FT TO ALIGN WITH THE STANDARD ON BUILDINGS
AND THEN ITEM TEN WAS INCREASING THE SIZE OF DIRECTIONAL AND INCIDENTAL SIGNS IN THE CLASSED FOR SIGN DISTRICT WHICH IS THE SIX TWO ZONING WHICH IS KIND OF OUR REGIONAL TOURISM AND
ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICTS THE MALL OF AMERICA OF COURSE. SO JUST MAKING SLIGHTLY LARGER ALLOWANCES FOR THOSE. SO IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS
ABOUT ANY OF THOSE FIVE COMMISSIONER LISA THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR. I LIVE FOR ITEM EIGHT I WE SAID SIGNS ON RESIDENTIAL FENCES LIKE PLACING A SIGN ON
THERE IS IT PROHIBITED? IT CLARIFIED THIS CODE CLARIFIES THAT NOT ALLOWED RIGHT YEAH CHAIR COMMISSIONER YOU SAY THAT BE CORRECT AND SO CURRENTLY THE
CODE IS SILENT ON IT RIGHT NOW IT TALKS ABOUT OTHER FEATURES THAT YOU CAN'T ADHERE ASSIGNED TO LIKE ON A UTILITY POLE FOR EXAMPLE. WE WANTED TO ADD RESIDENTIAL FENCES AND THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT IT AT THE STUDY SESSION ABOUT WHAT SOME
OF THE POTENTIAL NUISANCE CHARACTERISTICS THAT CAN HAPPEN. OFTENTIMES THOSE SIGNS AREN'T MEETING SET BACK REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE FENCES ARE LOCATED RIGHT AT THE THE PROPERTY LINE. SO IT BASICALLY GETS INTO A SITUATION WHERE THERE IS JUST
CONFLICTS WITH CITY CODE. IN ADDITION TO THAT, SOME OF THE SIGNS THAT STAFF HAS OBSERVED IN THE PAST HAVE BEEN IMPROPER MOUNTED OR NOT WELL ATTACHED TO FENCES OR SOME OF THEM HAVE BLOWN AWAY OR CREATED OTHER KINDS
OF NUISANCE BUT THOSE WERE THE GENERAL ELEMENTS OF THE DISCUSSION. OKAY, JUST FOLLOW QUESTION IF YOU DON'T MIND, MADAM CHAIR. LET'S SAY SOMEONE HAS A SIGN
IN THEIR PROPERTY THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY IN THE YARD AND THEY'RE ON LIKE A MAIN STREET LET'S SAY LIKE 84TH FOR EXAMPLE RIGHT?
AND THE SIGN IS NOT ON A FENCE BUT IT'S ON IT'S LIKE A TWO BY SIX VINYL SIGN ON MAYBE LIKE, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THOSE LIKE HALF FENCES IF YOU GET FROM AN ARTS.
NO, BUT ANYWAYS IT'S THEIR RIGHT. IS THAT NOT AOWED CURRENTLY . WELL THE SORRY CHAIR COMMISSIONER YOU SAY THERE ARE ALLOWANCES FOR SIGNAGE AT RESIDENTIAL SITES NONCOMMERCIAL SPEECH SIGNS FOR
EXAMPLE JEFFERSON HOCKEY ASSOCIATION YOU SEE SIGNS LIKE THAT OR POLITICAL SPEECH OR THOSE THINGS THOSE ARE ALL NONCOMMERCIAL SPEECH SIGNS. SO THERE'S ALLOWANCES FOR THAT. THERE'S ALSO ALLOWANCES FOR HOME BUSINESS SIGNS.
SO AS LONG AS YOU'RE MEETING THE STANDARDS FOR THOSE SIGN TYPES THAT NONE OF THEM REQUIRE A PERMIT THEY'RE ALLOWED AND WHAT THIS IS REALLY ABOUT IS TAKING THE WHATEVER SIGN IS AUTHORIZED AND ATTACHING IT ON A
RESIDENTIAL FENCE. THAT'S WHAT THIS WOULD SEEK TO PROHIBIT. OKAY. SO LIKE FOR LIKE A HOME BUSINESS LIKE ASSISTED LIVING THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED GENERALLY AS LONG AS IT MET THE SIZE AND PLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. AND MR. JOHNSON, I HAVE ONE QUESTION ABOUT THAT AS WELL FOR FOLKS WHO ALREADY POTENTIALLY HAVE A SIGN ON
THEIR RESIDENTIAL FENCE, I KNOW IN SOME CASES WE WOULD GRANDFATHER THEM IN BECAUSE IT WAS EXISTING PRIOR TO IS THAT THE CASE FOR THIS OR WOULD
THEY BE NO LONGER ABLE TO HAVE THAT SIGN MOVING FORWARD? YEAH, GOOD QUESTION. CHAIR SO SIMILAR TO OTHER STRUCTURES OR NONCONFORMITY THAT WOULD BE MY INTERPRETATION THAT IT WOULD
BE ALLOWED TO REMAIN AS LONG AS IT WASN'T VACATED FOR A PERIOD OF A YEAR OR MORE. IF I'M INCORRECT ABOUT THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY CERTAINLY
CAN CORRECT ME IF NEED BE. SILENCE MEANS SILENCE MEANS I GOT IT RIGHT AND I'M JUST MR. TUSK SORRY I'M HERE. I'M JUST TRYING TO GET MY VIDEO TO WORK.
I HAVE MY CAMERA BLOCKED AND SORRY I'M A LITTLE CASUAL TONIGHT. >> I HAVE COUPLE OF KIDS WITH INFLUENZA SO I KIND OF SCRAMBLING HERE BUT NO, I
DO I DO KIND OF TAKE A DIFFERENT APPROACH THAN NICK DOES ON THAT. THERE'S NO RIGHT TO DO IT RIGHT NOW. SO I DON'T THINK THERE WOULD BE A LEGALLY NONCONFORMING RIGHT TO KEEP IT THERE SINCE
THERE BEING NO CLEARLY ESTABLISHED, YOU KNOW ALLOWANCE FOR IT IN CODE RIGHT NOW. SO WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT TAKING SOMETHING THAT WAS LEGAL AND MAKING IT ILLEGAL. THERE'S NO RIGHT TO DO IT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
SO I DON'T THINK THERE WOULD BE NONCONFORMING RIGHTS IN THOSE SCITUATE AND THAT'S SPECIFIC SITUATION. YEAH, I APPRECIATE THAT KEVIN. I ECHO HIS COMMENTS.
I WOULD NOTE THAT I AM AWARE OF A FEW THAT DO EXIST OUT IN THE COMMUNITY SO IT'S SOMETHING WE CAN DEFINITELY DO SOME MORE RESEARCH ON AND IN ADVANCE OF ANY CONSIDERATION BY THE COUNCIL KIND OF FIRM UP WHAT'S GOING
ON THERE. GREAT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE ON? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THE NEXT GROUP OF SIGN POLICY
CHANGES AGAIN FIVE MORE. THESE ARE THE LAST FIVE SO TEMPORARY SIGNS FOR MULTIFAMILY LEASING JUST INCREASING THE SIZE OF THOSE FROM 64 TO 100FT. AND AGAIN THAT HAS TO DO WITH ONLY THE TWO YEAR LEASE UP
PERIOD. THAT'S A SPECIAL TEMPORARY SIGN TYPE ADDING THE BLOOM TO NICE GARDEN SIGN AS A HIGH USAGE PARK FACILITY SIGN.
SO THERE'S JUST ALLOWANCES FOR LARGER SIGN AT SOME OF OUR HIGH USAGE PARKS AND FACILITIES. BLOOMINGTON NICE GARDEN CERTAINLY QUALIFIES AS ONE OF THOSE AS MORE REGIONAL IN NATURE. ITEM 13 IS BUILDING SIGNS FOR
RESIDENTIAL USES IN OUR MIXED USE SIGN DISTRICT AND RIGHT NOW THEY'RE CURRENTLY CAPPED AT ONE SIGN PER BUILDING ELEVATION AND THE ORDINANCE WOULD INCREASE THAT TO THREE SIGNS PER ELEVATION.
JUST FOR CLARITY THE PERMANENT SIGN CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS THAT'S ITEM NUMBER 14. SO AGAIN THIS IS JUST ADDING SOME CLARITY IN TERMS OF THE CITY'S EXPECTATIONS IN TERMS
OF THE DURABILITY AND LEVEL OF CONSTRUCTION OF A PERMANENT SIGN. THIS DOESN'T APPLY TO TEMPORARY SIGNS BUT SOMETIMES YOU'LL SEE TEMPORARY BANNERS KIND OF DEPLOYED AS INTENDED
TO BE MORE PERMANENT SIGNAGE AND THEN ITEM 15 IS MASTER SIGN PLAN APPROVAL. SO AGAIN ALONG WITH THE OTHER CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE RECENTLY WITH THE STREAMLINING DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE AND TRYING TO MOVE MORE DECISION
MAKING AUTHORITY DOWN TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUBJECT TO APPEAL THIS IS A SIMILAR STEP AS THOSE MASTER SIGN PLAN APPROVALS ARE A WAY TO GET FLEXIBILITY TO THE SIGN
CODE SPECIFICALLY IN THE SOUTH LOOP DISTRICT ONLY AND SO THIS WOULD JUST MOVE THAT DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUBJECT TO APPEAL.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THOSE FIVE? OKAY. JUST ONE LAST REMINDER IS THAT THERE WAS ONE STAFF RECOMMENDED PROVISION THAT DID NOT ADVANCE. IT WAS REFLECTING ON THE
MINUTES I THINK IT WAS A33 IT WAS KIND OF A DEADLOCK DISCUSSION AND THAT'S OKAY. NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT. BUT JUST TO REMIND FOLKS THAT THIS CURRENTLY IS NOT ABSENT THAT DIRECTION, THIS ITEM IS
NOT IN THE SUBJECT ORDINANCE BUT WHAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING WITH THIS ONE WAS THAT CURRENTLY TALL OFFICE BUILDINGS OR BUILDINGS OVER SEVEN STOREYS IN HEIGHT ARE LIMITED TO ONE BUILDING SIGN
ABOVE THE SECOND STORY OF THE BUILDING PER ELEVATION WHAT STAFF RECOMMENDED AT THAT TIME OR EXPLORED WE ASKED THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO CONSIDER WAS INCREASING THAT FROM 1 TO 2 OR EVEN UP TO
THREE SIGNS PER ELEVATION. ULTIMATELY AS I NOTED THERE WAS NOT CONSENSUS TO DO THAT SO JUST KIND OF STAYED IN THAT FOR THE RECORD IN TERMS OF OUR
OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT WE COVERED THIS A LITTLE BIT AT THE STUDY SESSION BUT BASICALLY WE'RE JUST BUILDING OFF THE WORK THAT WE DID IN THE PREVIOUS LARGER SIGN CODE REVAMP. SO WE'VE BEEN EMAILING A LIST
OF ENGAGED PARTIES WHO HAVE IN THE PAST BEEN INTERESTED IN THE SIGN CODE ONE ONE MEMBER HAS ENGAGED WITH US ON THAT. I'LL SPEAK TO THAT HERE IN A MINUTE BUT YEAH WE'VE JUST BEEN DOING EMAILING BACK AND
FORTH WITH SOME INTERESTED PARTIES SIGN COMPANIES THOSE TYPES OF THINGS CLEAR CHANNEL OUTDOOR DID SUBMIT A LETTER FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. YOU HAVE A HANDOUT HERE AT YOUR TABLE IN TERMS OF I WANT
THEM TO SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES BUT IN SUMMARY WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR IS TO CHANGE THE ELECTRONIC BILLBOARD DWELL TIME FROM 20S DOWN TO EIGHT
SECONDS. THE DWELL TIMES WERE REDUCED SIGNIFICANTLY AS PART OF THE UPDATE THAT WAS ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN 2024. THAT WAS THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION AT THAT TIME TO REDUCE THAT DWELL TIMES USED
TO BE 20 MINUTES FOR THESE TYPES OF SIGNS AND THE COUNCIL DIRECTED US TO REDUCE THAT DOWN TO 20S FOR MORE COMPLEX SIGNS OR THOSE WITH GRAPHICS
AND SO THAT'S WHERE IT STANDS TODAY CLEAR CHANNEL AS REQUESTING THAT THEY GET REDUCED REDUCE FURTHER DOWN TO EIGHT SECONDS FOR THOSE THAT DON'T KNOW JUST THE DWELL TIME IS HOW LONG THE IMAGE HAS TO REMAIN STATIC BEFORE IT'S
CHANGING ON TO THE NEXT IMAGE ON ELECTRONIC SIGN STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND ANY FURTHER ADJUSTMENT AT THIS TIME. WE'LL CERTAINLY TAKE DIRECTION FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL ON THAT SHOULD YOU
OR THEY WANT TO EXPLORE THAT BUT JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT IT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION WITH THAT IF THE ORDINANCE IS IF ACTION IS TAKEN ON THE
ORDINANCE THIS EVENING IT WOULD MOVE ON TO THE APRIL 28TH CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND WE HAVE A RECOMMENDED MOTION FOR YOU AND HAPPY TO STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS OR SIT I GUESS.
THANK YOU, MR. JOHNS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE THE CITY IS THE APPLICANT FOR THIS ITEM SO I
WILL GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. THERE IS NO ONE IN THE AUDIENCE THIS EVENING. MR. JOHNSON, IS THERE ANYONE ON LINE?
I'LL DEFER TO MR. BROOKS ON THAT ONE CHAIR ALBRECHT ALL EVERYONE ONLINE IS STAFF ALL RIGHT. >> SEEING NONE I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING SO MOVED. SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I I THOSE OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT.
DISCUSSION I'LL START US OFF I THINK THESE TWEAKS I THINK WE'RE A GOOD STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION I AGREE WITH STAFF
ON HOLDING BACK ON ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE ON TALLER BUILDINGS THOUGH I WAS ONE OF THE THREE WHO VOTED FOR IT. IT MAKES SENSE TO HOLD IT BACK IF THERE'S SOME QUESTION ABOUT
IT AND I ALSO I'M APPRECIATIVE OF NOT MOVING TO EIGHT SECONDS FOR DWELL TIME FOR BILLBOARDS IF ANYONE RECALLS IF ANYONE WAS WATCHING I WAS NOT
IN FAVOR OF CHOOSING AND MOVING TO ELECTRONIC BILLBOARDS IN THE FIRST PLACE. SO I'M VERY HAPPY THAT WE'RE NOT MOVING TO EIGHT SECONDS FROM 20S AND THE REST OF THEM
SEEM PRETTY SELF-EXPLANATORY AND I AM IN SUPPORT. ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE LOOKING FOR A
MOTION. COMMISSIONER MCGOVERN I MOVED TO RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING MULTIPLE FOUR PROVISIONS IN THE SIGN CODE THEREBY
AMENDING CHAPTER 21 AND APPENDIX A OF THE CITY CODE. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO RECOMMEND ADOPTING THE
CHANGES TO THE SIGN CODE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I I THOSE OPPOSED A MOTION CARRIES AS MR. JOHNSON MENTIONED THAT
ITEM WILL MOVE ON TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON APRIL 28TH AS A PUBLIC HEARING. ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER TWO ALSO HAS A PUBLIC HEARING.
IT IS ANOTHER CITY CODE AMENDMENT FOR CODE CODE LIVING STANDARDS FOR CO-LIVING STANDARDS ORDINANCE AND PLANNER ASPECT. YOU HAVE THE STAFF REPORT.
GOOD EVENING CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS. SO I AM BACK BEFORE YOU TO TALK ABOUT CO-LIVING AND TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING THIS TIME SO JUST TO KIND
OF REFRESH THE PROJECT TIMELINE SO NICK PRESENTED FOR YOU A FEW TIMES LAST YEAR WE LAST TALKED ABOUT THIS AT THE HRA COE HRA AND PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING. WE WENT TO CITY COUNCIL IN JANUARY TO TALK TO THEM AND NOW WE'RE AT A PUBLIC HEARING TONIGHT WE'LL GO TO THE HRA BOARD AT THE BEGINNING OF APRIL AND THEN COUNCIL AT
THE END OF APRIL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING. SO THE WHY OF THIS PROJECT YOU'VE SEEN THE TABLE IN THE TOP RIGHT CORNER AT LEAST ONCE
PROBABLY. AND SO THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON IS DOING A REALLY GOOD JOB OF MAKING OR HELPING SUPPORT AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR LIKE 60
TO 80% AM I? BUT WE ARE LACKING A LITTLE BIT AND 30% AMI AND WE THINK CO-LIVING COULD KIND OF HELP MEET THAT NEED. ADDITIONALLY IN THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER THREE THE HOUSING CHAPTER WE HAVE A FEW DIFFERENT GOALS AND THERE ARE TWO ON THE SCREEN THAT RELATE TO CO-LIVING SO
PROVIDING A SPECTRUM OF HOUSING CHOICES AND THEN ALSO PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO SERVE DEMAND.
I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH THE ORDINANCE CHANGES ONE BY ONE BUT THIS IS JUST KIND OF A GENERAL OUTLINE OF WHERE WE'RE GOING TO GO. SO DEFINITION CHANGES.
I WANTED TO TOUCH ON MOSTLY WHAT'S DIFFERENT THAN THE LAST TIME THAT YOU SAW THIS SO ALL KIND OF TALK ABOUT THAT FAMILY CO-LIVING UNIT AND CO-LIVING
DEVELOPMENT HAVE BEEN SLIGHTLY CHANGED SINCE THE LAST TIME. SO THE FAMILY DEFINITION I BELIEVE THE LAST TIME WE SAW YOU WE HAD INCOMPLETELY DECIDED ON WE DECIDED TO HAVE
THE DEFINITION BE SIX OR FEWER ADULTS OR ANY NUMBER OF ADULTS WHO ARE RELATED TO EACH OTHER ALONG WITH ANY MINOR CHILDREN . THE CO-LIVING DEVELOPMENT DEFINITION NOW CALLS OUT THAT
IN ORDER FOR IT TO BE A DEVELOPMENT IT HAS TO BE FIVE OR MORE CO-LIVING UNITS. THIS IS TO DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN MULTIFAMILY HOUSING AND CO-LIVING DEVELOPMENTS AND
THEN THE CO-LIVING UNIT DEFINITION NOW SPECIFIES THAT THE KITCHEN BETWEEN THESE UNITS WILL BE SHARED AND THAT COOKING FACILITIES WILL NOT BE
INCLUDED IN EACH UNIT LIKE STOVES FOR EXAMPLE. >> NEW WHAT SINCE WE LAST TALKED TO YOU ARE CHANGES TO THE CONGREGATE LIVING FACILITY
WHICH WE ARE DELETING AND BOARDING HOUSES WHICH WE ARE ALSO DELETING. WE EDITED THE RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY DEFINITION IN ORDER TO KIND OF SIMPLIFY SOME
OF THOSE DEFINITIONS THAT WE ARE HAVING ISSUES WITH BEFORE. SO WE NOW HAVE TWO DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF GROUP HOUSING SO THERE'S CO-LIVING WHICH IS
GROUP HOUSING WITHOUT CARE AND RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES WHICH IS GROUP HOUSING THAT PROVIDES SOME FORM OF CARE YOU STANDARDS.
THESE HAVEN'T CHANGED MUCH SINCE LAST TIME. WE HAVE A LOT OF THE BASIC USE STANDARDS THAT ARE APPLICABLE HOW WE'RE CALCULATING DENSITY
AND THEN WE DID ADD INTO THE ORDINANCE AT THE MINIMUM FLOOR AREA FOR EACH UNIT HAS TO BE 70FT AND ADDITIONALLY MAKING A KITCHEN REQUIREMENT THAT
THERE NEEDS TO BE ACCESS TO A KITCHEN ON THE SAME FLOOR AS THE UNIT. WE THINK THAT HELPS WITH ACCESSIBILITY AND ALSO PERHAPS NOT HAVING TOO MANY UNITS PER
KITCHEN PARKING. THIS IS THE SAME THAT WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME WE ARE PROPOSING TO START WITH POINT FIVE PARKING SPACES PER
CO-LIVING UNIT AND SEEING WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE MARKET WITH THE KNOWLEDGE THAT THIS CAN BE CHANGED IN THE FUTURE IF WE SEE THAT IT'S REALLY NOT
WORKING FOR A BIKE PARKING AND ALSO STAYED THE SAME ONE SPACE PER FOUR CO-LIVING UNITS SO IN THE USE TABLES CO-LIVING
DEVELOPMENTS ARE ALLOWED WITH THE SAME PERMISSIONS AND THE SAME ZONING DISTRICTS THAT MULTIFAMILY BUILDINGS ARE ALLOWED IN AND THEN ANOTHER CHANGE THAT WE MADE TO THESE TABLES ARE DELETING CONGREGATE
LIVING BECAUSE AGAIN WE DELETED THAT DEFINITION AND USE CHANGES TO THE RENTAL
HOUSING CHAPTER CHAPTER 14 BASICALLY JUST INCLUDE ADDING THE SAME DEFINITIONS THAT WE'RE ADDING TO THE ZONING CHAPTER CHAPTER 21 SO WE ADDED CO-LIVING DEVELOPMENT AND
CO-LIVING UNIT AND THEN WE AMENDED THEIR DEFINITION OF GROUP HOUSING AND WE ALSO AMENDED RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY TO MATCH OUR NEW
DEFINITION OF RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY OPPORTUNITY HOUSING ORDINANCE CHANGES SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING
THAT CO-LIVING COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE THESE INCENTIVES AND THERE'S A WHOLE LIST THERE. THERE'S JUST A COUPLE THAT WE
DIDN'T RECOMMEND CO-LIVING AND BEING ABLE TO GET AND THAT IS PARKING REDUCTION AND ALSO STORAGE SPACE .
AS FAR AS DELETIONS GO, I TOUCHED ON THIS BRIEFLY. SO WE DELETED THE BOARDING HOUSE DEFINITION CONGREGATE LIVING FACILITY DEFINITION AND ALL THE USE STANDARDS FOR CONGREGATE LIVING AND THE
CO-LIVING USE STANDARDS WILL BE MOVING INTO THE SECTION WHERE CONGREGATE LIVING WAS SO ONE QUESTION THAT IS IMPORTANT
TO TALK ABOUT AND KIND OF GOES WITH THE WHY HOW IS THIS ORDINANCE REMOVING BARRIERS TO HOUSING SO WE'RE CHANGING THE FAMILY DEFINITION WHICH ALLOWS
FOR MORE ROOMMATE OR CO-LIVING SITUATIONS IN SINGLE AND TWO FAMILY HOUSING IT'S INCREASING THE NUMBER OF NON-RELATED PEOPLE WHO CAN LIVE TOGETHER FROM 4 TO 6 AND IT'S ALSO
INCREASING INCLUSIVITY FOR MULTIGENERATIONAL FAMILIES. SO WE ARE CREATING A USE FOR CO-LIVING WHICH IS MORE RESPONSIVE TO THE COMMUNITY
AND THE NEEDS FOR HOUSING AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADDING OPPORTUNITY HOUSING ORDINANCE INCENTIVES FOR CO-LIVING WHERE THE REQUIREMENTS ARE MET AND ALLOWING FOR AGAIN A DIVERSE
VARIETY OF HOUSING POSSIBILITIES AND TYPES. SO WITH THAT I HAVE THE RECOMMENDATION ON THE SCREEN AND I WILL TAKE QUESTIONS.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER WHITE THANK YOU VERY MUCH. INTERESTING STUFF. I AM JUST CURIOUS AND I HAVE NOT SEEN THE PREVIOUS
PRESENTATIONS. I DID READ THE NOTES SO I SAW THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE ONE THE RECOMMENDATION OF REQUIREMENT OF A KITCHEN FOR EACH FLOOR AND I UNDERSTAND THAT EACH UNIT MAY
OR MAY NOT HAVE A DEDICATED BATHROOM I DIDN'T SEE ANYWHERE WHERE HOW MANY UNITS PER BATHROOM IF IT DIDN'T HAVE A DEDICATED BATHROOM, IS THERE ANY KIND OF REQUIREMENT OR OR
YOU KNOW, MAKING SURE THERE'S ENOUGH BATHROOMS FOR THE NUMBER OF UNITS IN THE FACILITY IF THEY DON'T HAVE INDIVIDUAL BATHROOMS? YEAH. CHAIR COMMISSIONER WHITE THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION. THERE'S NOTHING SPECIFICALLY
IN THIS ORDINANCE BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT'S A MATTER OF THE BUILDING CODE AND THE BASIC REQUIREMENTS AND MINIMUMS THAT THEY HAVE.
SO THAT IS IN PLACE ELSEWHERE . IF I MAY ADD TO THAT. ABSOLUTELY SURE. MR. WHITE SO THE BUILDING CODE DOES NOT ESTABLISH THE NUMBER OF BATHROOMS PER UNIT
OR BEDROOM OR THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. WHAT IT DOES HAVE IS REQUIRED FIXTURE COUNTS FOR THE NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS. SO THAT'S HOW THE BUILDING CODE DOES REGULATE THAT ISSUE.
BUT IN EFFECT IT IS COVERED BY THE BUILDING CODE COMMISSIONER SIR THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR. I GUESS TWO QUESTIONS FOR THE
CO-LIVING SPACE I GUESS. WELL I SAW THAT IT WAS 70FT MINIMUM I BELIEVE THAT'S ALSO WHAT A MINIMUM OF A BEDROOM LEGAL BEDROOM IS. OKAY, OKAY.
THE ANSWER IS THAT QUESTION. OH, WELL MY QUESTION ACTUALLY SPECIFICALLY IS WHY WHY IS IT BECAUSE OF THAT THAT YOU GUYS CAME UP WITH THAT TO MATCH THAT OR IS IT LIKE WHY SPECIFICALLY 70FT? YEAH.
CHAIR COMMISSIONER ISSA THANK YOU. YEAH IT IS TO MATCH THAT WE PUT THAT IN THERE JUST TO
DEVELOP LIKE A BASIC STANDARD BUT IT'S REALLY JUST BASED ON THE BUILDING CODE. OKAY. FOLLOW UP QUESTION IF IN A WAY YEAH GO FOR YOU KNOW I SAW AND I GUESS THIS IS SPECIFIC TO US
BUT ALSO A GENERAL QUESTION I SAW THAT THERE'S INCENTIVES LIKE SITE AREA REDUCTION AND SITE WITH REDUCTION.
YOU KNOW WHY DO WE HAVE EXEMPT INCENTIVES TO BEGIN WITH? DOES THAT MEAN WE HAVE MORE RED TAPE CURRENTLY THAN WE NEED LIKE WHAT IF WE'RE
INCENTIVIZING CERTAIN THINGS TO BE LESS TO BE LESS RED TAPE OR WHATEVER YOU MAY CALL IT? WHY WHY IS IT THERE TO BEGIN WITH? I GUESS IT'S MY QUESTION.
YEAH, SURE. COMMISSIONER ISSA I'M GOING TO LET PLANNING MANAGER JOHNSON TAKE THAT ONE. MR. JOHNSON YEAH. CHAIR COMMISSIONER HE SAYS SO IT'S A BIG IT'S ACTUALLY A BIG LONGER DISCUSSION TOPIC BUT
WHAT IT FUNDAMENTALLY IS INFORMED BY IS THAT AS PART OF THE CITY'S INCLUSIONARY HOUSING POLICY, ONE OF THE WAYS THAT YOU CAN SUBSTANTIATE AND LEGALLY DEFEND REQUIRING CERTAIN LEVELS
OF AFFORDABILITY IN A DEVELOPMENT IS BY TRADING CERTAIN ELEMENTS OF YOUR PERFORMANCE STANDARDS TO KIND OF EQUALIZE THE COSTS IMPLICATIONS OF THOSE THINGS SURFACE PARKING FOR EXAMPLE OR
STRUCTURE PARKING THOSE ARE THINGS THAT COST QUITE A BIT TO INTEGRATE INTO DEVELOPMENT. AND SO BY REDUCING SOME OF THESE REQUIREMENTS IT HELPS BALANCE THE ECONOMIC IMPACT
OF HAVING DEDICATED LEVELS OF AFFORDABILITY. SO WHAT'S REFLECTED IN THIS ORDINANCE IS TRYING TO MATCH SOME OF THOSE OBJECTIVES THAT ARE APPLICABLE TO MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL WHERE WHERE IT
MAKES SENSE IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE FOR PARKING FOR EXAMPLE BECAUSE THERE'S A LOWER PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR CO-LIVING BUT THE THE THE PURPOSE OF THE INCENTIVES IS
TO BASICALLY GET THE GET THE LEVELS OF AFFORDABILITY THE CITY IS SEEKING AND KIND OF OFFSET THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THAT AS WELL AS TRY AND ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT
COMMUNITY TO PROVIDE MORE AFFORDABILITY BY HAVING TIERED OFFSETS AS A CITY PROVIDE LIKE ANY LIKE RFP THAT DEVELOPERS
CAN APPLY FOR TO HELP OFFSET EVEN IF THEY STILL HAVE LIKE EXTRA COSTS OR SOMETHING OR IT'S NOT FOR THAT. CHAIR COMMISSIONER, YOU SAID TYPICALLY WHEN THE CITY DOES AN RFP FOR DEVELOPMENT IT'S
WHEN THEY HAVE SITE CONTROL, WHEN THEY OWN A PROPERTY AND THEY'RE RELEASING IT TO WORK WITH A DEVELOPER TO ACHIEVE CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT GOALS. A LOT OF THE APPLICATIONS WE SEE ARE JUST PRIVATELY OWNED
PRIVATELY AND ARE BROUGHT FORWARD BY PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT AND THAT'S WHERE THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING HOUSING POLICY IS MORE RELEVANT WITH RESPECT TO THE INCENTIVES VERSUS AN RFP SITUATION.
THANK YOU. YEAH, I HAVE A COUPLE VERY QUICK QUESTIONS. FIRST I WILL START WITH THE RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY.
WHAT IS CONSIDERED CARE AND IS THAT INCLUDE DRUG AND ALCOHOL TREATMENT FACILITIES THAT LIKE
A HALFWAY HOUSE KIND OF THINGS THAT IS THAT INCLUDED NO. CHAIR ALBRECHT THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION. SO THERE WAS A PART
OF RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY DEFINITION THAT WE'RE KIND OF DELETING. IT'S CROSSED OUT IN THE ORDINANCE THAT SAYS A FACILITY PROVIDES CARE TO PERSONS
BECAUSE OF PHYSICAL, MENTAL OR EMOTIONAL DISORDERS. SO THAT'S KIND OF THE CARE THAT WE'RE THINKING OF. YEAH, I THINK SOBER HOMES ARE
A DIFFERENT THING FOR SURE ALTHOUGH IF I CAN ADD TO THAT IT DEPENDS ON THE LEVEL OF CARE THAT IS PROVIDED TO SOMEONE. THE KEY PHRASE IN THIS DEFINITION IS THAT THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO LIVE INDEPENDENTLY.
SO THERE CERTAINLY ARE SOBER HOMES AS THEY'RE COMMONLY REFERRED TO WHERE THAT IS THE CASE THAT PEOPLE HAVE THE ABILITY TO LIVE INDEPENDENTLY. THEY'RE GETTING SOME LEVEL OF MINIMAL MUTUAL SUPPORT OR
AID FROM A NONPROFIT OR SOME OTHER ENTITY WHO HAS SPECIALIZES OR HAS PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE IN THAT ARENA. BUT IF PEOPLE ARE LIVING INDEPENDENTLY THAT WOULD NOT CONSTITUTE A RESIDENTIAL CARE
FACILITY. IT WOULD JUST BE LIKE RENTING ANY KIND OF DWELLING ANYWHERE SIMILAR TO SOME GROUP HOMES IN FACT ARE ALSO NOT LICENSED.
IT REALLY DEPENDS UP KEVIN'S ON ON THE CALL HERE MR. TUSK AS CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT THERE IS THERE IS SOME LEGISLATION THIS YEAR THAT IS ATTEMPTING
TO GET THAT THE HANDS AROUND THE PROBLEM OF SOBER HOMES BECAUSE CITIES DON'T REALLY KNOW WHEN THEY COME INTO EXISTENCE OR WHEN THEY'RE OPERATING IN THE CITY. OFTENTIMES THEY HAVE MORE THEY
WANT TO HAVE MORE TREATMENT, TREAT MORE PEOPLE THAN WOULD BE ALLOWED UNDER THE CITY CODE ESPECIALLY IF THEY'RE IN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. >> SO THERE'S A GOOD WHAT I
THINK IS A GOOD BILL THAT WILL MAKE THEM NOTIFY CITIES SO WE CAN GET OUR ARMS AROUND THE PROBLEM. >> OTHERWISE IT'S HARD TO IT'S HARD TO FIND OUT WHERE THEY'RE OPERATING BECAUSE THEY CAN KIND OF COME IN.
THEY DON'T REALLY NEED A STATE LICENSE SOME OF THEM. SO THAT WOULD BE A GOOD GOOD LEGISLATION FOR US AND I HOPE IT PASSES. BUT JUST TO ADD A LITTLE SALT AND PEPPER ON THAT.
>> THANK YOU. MR. KOSKY I, I, I TRACK A LOT OF LEGISLATION THAT'S NOT ONE ON MY RADAR BUT I WILL START TRACKING THAT NOW. THANK YOU. MY SECOND QUESTION IS ABOUT
THE OPPORTUNITY HOUSING ORDINANCE AND THE STORAGE SPACE NOT HAVING REDUCTION IN STORAGE SPACE BEING ONE NOW
ONE OF THE CHANGES IT'S ONE OF THE CHANGES TO THE OPPORTUNITY HOUSING ORDINANCE SPECIFICALLY FOR CO-LIVING IS THAT ONLY EXTERNAL STORAGE
SPACE OR IS THAT INCLUDED IN INTERNAL STORAGE SPACE? CHAIR ALBRECHT SO WHEN THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT STORAGE SPACE
THAT MEANS INTERNAL OR EXTERNAL. WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT? I'M THINKING ABOUT LIKE WITHIN THEIR ROOM OR UNIT VERSUS EXTERIOR. I KNOW WE'VE HAD SOME
MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENTS COME IN AND THEY HAVEN'T MET THEIR THERE WOULDN'T BE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING BUT EXTERIOR OF THEIR IN A UNIT YES SOMETHING LIKE A GARAGE OR
SOMETHING THEY HAVEN'T MET THAT THAT THRESHOLD IS THAT IS IT EXTERNAL TO THE UNIT OR IS IT OR CAN IT BE INTERNAL TO
THE UNIT AND THEN WAVING THE EXTERNAL USE? CHAIR ALBRECHT GOOD QUESTION. >> I THINK IT WOULD BE EITHER
OR PLAIN TO MANAGER JOHNSON WANT TO YEAH THAT CHAIR ALBRECHT SO THE REASON THAT THAT THAT INCENTIVE IS NOT INCLUDED OR APPLICABLE TO CO-LIVING IS BECAUSE CO-LIVING IS NOT SUBJECT TO THOSE STORAGE REQUIREMENTS. IT'S ONLY SUBJECT TO
MULTIFAMILY. SO AND I KNOW THIS GETS CONFUSING WHETHER IT'S BASED IN THE BASE ZONING DISTRICT OR WHETHER IT'S THE USE BUT IN THE CASE OF OPEN SPACE FOR EXAMPLE FOR A DEVELOPMENT
THAT'S ROOTED IN WHAT BASE ZONING DISTRICT THE DEVELOPMENT IS IN NOT THE USE THIS IS DIFFERENT THE STORAGE REQUIREMENT IS SPECIFIC TO MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENTS AND
THAT SAME REQUIREMENT IS NOT PROPOSED TO BE ADDED TO CO-LIVING SO THERE'S NO NEED TO ADD INCENTIVE BECAUSE THE REQUIREMENT DOES NOT EXIST. VERY HELPFUL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ? COMMISSIONER ISA I THINK IT'S A QUESTION AND MAYBE MORE SO A COMMENT BUT IF IF CERN UH I
FEEL LIKE THE DEFINITION OF A OR HOW WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COMMUNAL LIVING AND LIKE HOW WOULD THE CITY OBJECTIVELY PROVE IF LIKE SOMEONE IS MORE INDEPENDENT YOU KNOW BECAUSE I
KNOW YOU MENTIONED LIKE OR I THINK IT WAS OF PLANNING MANAGER JOHNSON YOU MENTIONED THAT IT DEPENDS IF THEY'RE MORE INDEPENDENT IT DOES THAT MAKES SENSE BUT THEN HOW WOULD
THE CITY OBJECTIVELY PROVE IT? ONE IDEA I HAD IS LIKE THEIR CERN LICENSE LIKE ASSISTED LIVING FOR EXAMPLE WHERE IT'S LIKE SPECIFICALLY LIKE UNDER A SPECIFIC SUBDIVISION IN LIKE
144 G AND THEY BASICALLY OR ASSISTED LIVING IS MORE MENTAL HEALTH PHYSICAL HEALTH IT'S MORE MUCH MORE THE PEOPLE ARE
MUCH MORE NEED OF NEED OF CARE VERSUS LIKE 244 G WHICH IS LIKE UNDER SOBER HOMES. I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S ALSO UNDER SINGLE FAMILIES BUT IT'S ALONG THE LINES OF SOBER
HOMES, RIGHT? WHY DOES IT THE CITY JUST SAY HEY, WITH THIS SPECIFIC SUBDIVISION WHEN IT COMES TO THIS LICENSE IT'S YOU KNOW, THESE ARE LIKE DIVIDED BY
LICENSE TYPES. YOU KNOW, INSTEAD OF BECAUSE I COULD SOMEONE COULD ARGUE HEY, MY PEOPLE ARE INDEPENDENT SO LIKE LEAVE ME ALONE, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? AND AND I FEEL LIKE THAT'S A
THE IMPORTANT DETAIL THAT COULD BE HASHED OUT WITH THAT. YEAH. CHAIR COMMISSIONER YOU SAY SORRY FORGIVE ME EMILY IF I CAN RESPOND TO THAT ONE AND KEVIN, IF YOU WANT TO CHIME IN TO WELCOME YOUR THOUGHTS AS WELL.
BUT I THINK GENERALLY SPEAKING THE REASON WHY YOU CAN'T JUST INHERENTLY ROUTE IT OR TIE IT TO A STATE LICENSE IS THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN TYPES OF SUPPORTIVE HOUSING THAT
DON'T REQUIRE A STATE LICENSE. BUT DEFINITELY THE RESIDENTS ARE NOT ABLE TO LIVE INDEPENDENTLY. SO THE MORE KIND OF CONNECTIONS YOU DRAW RELY UPON STATUTE STATUTES CHANGE OVER TIME.
IT ALSO CALLS UPON THE CITY TO CONTINUE TO UPDATE ITS CODE TO KIND OF TAKE ACCOUNT FOR ALL THESE CHANGES SOUND AS IF STAFF ISN'T CAPABLE AND THE CITY ISN'T CAPABLE TO DO THAT. BUT SUFFICE TO SAY NOW THERE
ARE CERTAIN TYPES OF SUPPORTIVE HOUSING SITUATIONS WHERE PEOPLE CANNOT LIVE INDEPENDENTLY AND NO STATE LICENSE IS REQUIRED. KEVIN WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT STATEMENT?
>> I'M JUST GETTING A SECOND OPINION THERE. YEAH. CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS I DO AGREE WITH THAT. AND THEN PART OF THIS AS WELL IS THAT THERE ARE SO MANY DIFFERENT TYPES OF LICENSES THAT THINGS GET VERY CONFUSING
VERY FAST AT THE STATE LICENSING LEVEL THEY HAVE MULTIPLE DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES WHETHER IT'S ASSISTED LIVING YOU HAVE GROUP HOMES, THERE'S
DIFFERENT TYPES OF YOU KNOW, COMMUNITY SETTINGS. SO THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO KIND OF CONSOLIDATE ALL THOSE DIFFERENT THINGS INTO SOMETHING MORE SIMPLY THAT WE CAN ENFORCE THAT OUR
CODE DOESN'T HAVE TO CONTINUALLY BE UPDATED WHEN THAT WHEN STATE LICENSING DOES MATTER IN CONNECTION WITH THE RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY IS IS THERE CERTAIN ZONING
ENTITLEMENTS THAT ARE GRANTED UNDER STATE LAW FOR GROUP HOMES AND SINGLE FAMILY ZONES AND THERE IS ALSO ENTITLEMENTS FOR LARGER RESIDENTIAL CARE
FACILITIES IN MULTIFAMILY DISTRICTS. SO THAT'S WHERE IT MATTERS AND THOSE ARE ACCOUNTED FOR IN OUR USE TABLES I THINK IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES THEY ARE
PERMITTED AS OF RIGHT IF THEY'RE UNDER SIX, SIX OR LESS AND I THINK THEY'RE THEY HAVE TO BE CONDITIONAL ON MULTIFAMILY ZONES IF THEY ARE BETWEEN 7 AND 16 I BELIEVE DON'T QUOTE ME ON THAT BUT WE
DO ACCOUNT FOR THAT. BUT OTHER THAN THAT, THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO KIND OF NOT HAVE SO MUCH COMPLEXITY IN OUR CODE. I'D SAY AS WELL. >> SO THERE'S A METHOD BEHIND
IT IF I CAN ADD ONE LAST THING ON THE ZONING PIECE IS JUST THAT WHEN YOU ARE A RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY WE HAVE USE STANDARDS FOR THAT TOO AND THAT INVOLVES OPERATIONAL PLAN OR MANAGEMENT PLAN SITUATIONS WHERE THERE'S
MORE STAFFING INVOLVED. AND SO YOU KNOW I AGREE THERE COULD BE SCENARIOS WHERE IT'S KIND OF IN THE GRAY AREA OR THE IN-BETWEEN OR CLOSE CALL SITUATION BUT JUST A SPACE TO
SAY WHY IS IT IMPORTANT? IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE THERE'S DIFFERENT USE STANDARDS THAT ARE APPLICABLE TO EACH. THANK YOU GUYS. ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ?
COMMISSIONER WHITE. LAST ONE I PROMISE. SO I'M JUST CURIOUS YOU MENTIONED THAT THE PARKING I THINK IT WAS POINT FIVE SPACES
PER PER UNIT THAT WE WERE GOING TO KIND OF PUT THAT IN AND SEE WHAT HAPPENED AND CONSIDER CHANGING IT LATER. WHILE I'M I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THE LOWER PARKING REQUIREMENT AND I'M I'M
ACTUALLY SUPPORTIVE OF THAT I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THE WE CAN ALWAYS CHANGE IT LATER PIECE AND I'M WONDERING IF WE'VE EVER TAKEN THAT APPROACH WITH ANY OTHER DEVELOPMENTS.
IT JUST ALWAYS FEELS A LITTLE BIT IFFY AS WITH SOMETHING LIKE PARKING WHICH IS KIND OF HARD TO ADD LATER ONCE THE BUILDING'S BEEN BUILT OR THE PROPERTY'S BEEN DEVELOPED OR
YOU KNOW THINGS GET TOO FAR DOWN THE ROAD. SO I JUST AM CURIOUS WHETHER WE'VE DONE THAT WITH OTHER OTHER ORDINANCES. SO YEAH. CHAIR COMMISSIONER WHITE,
THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO CLARIFY. I DIDN'T MEAN LIKE WE WOULD GO BACK TO A DEVELOPMENT AND MAKE THEM INCREASE THE PARKING. I MEAN MOVING FORWARD WE WOULD
IF IF WE SAW, YOU KNOW, A PATTERN THAT WASN'T WORKING OUT WE COULD CHANGE THE ORDINANCE FOR LIKE THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS. BUT BUT NO, WE WOULDN'T NECESSARILY GO BACK AND SAY
YOU HAVE TO ADD THIS PARKING NOW I THINK THIS LIKE TOPIC AND ORDINANCE IS TRICKY BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF PEER CITIES TO COMPARE TO
SO WE ARE KIND OF LOOKING AT WHAT WE HAVE PARKING STANDARDS FOR EXISTING MULTIFAMILY AND TRYING TO KIND OF FIT WHAT WE SAW FROM OTHER CITIES INTO THE
BOOMING CONTEXT. BLOOMINGTON CONTEXT WE KIND OF FELT THAT'S BEST ESPECIALLY FOR THIS TYPE OF LIVING WHERE WE'RE WANTING TO BE LESS EXPENSIVE AND YOU KNOW ADDING
MORE MORE PARKING IS NOT GOING TO ALLOW A DEVELOPER TO HAVE LOWER COSTS AND THEN PASS THAT ON TO THE RENTERS. BUT I DEFINITELY DO GET YOUR CONCERN ABOUT IT'S LIKE WISHY
WASHY LIKE OH WE CAN GO AT IT LATER BUT I THINK IT'S PART OF WE HAVE TO WAIT TO KIND OF SEE WHAT THE MARKET DOES. MADAM CHAIR AND JUST BECAUSE I
DID UNDERSTAND YOU DID WORK CLEAR THE FIRST TIME IT WAS JUST MORE A MATTER OF WHEN YOU MAKE THE RULES AND PEOPLE BUILD SOME STUFF AND THEN YOU CHANGE THE RULES FOR THE PEOPLE THAT COME AFTER THEM. PEOPLE TEND TO GET A LITTLE
FUZZY. SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE DOING OUR DUE DILIGENCE UPFRONT SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. >> CHARLOTTE IF I CAN JUST SPEAK ON THE BROADER LANDSCAPE OF ZONING AND THE CONSTANT
INNOVATION THAT HAPPENS AT THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON IF A PROPERTY BECOMES NONCONFORMING IT'S LEGALLY NONCONFORMING SO THEY HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO OPERATE AS LONG AS THEY'RE CONTINUING TO DO SO IN THE WAY THAT THEY WERE APPROVED AND
MEETING THEIR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, ETC. IT'S NOT UNCOMMON THAT WE HAVE FACILITIES THAT ARE LEGALLY NONCONFORMING. THEY JUST CAN'T EXPAND WITHOUT MEETING WHATEVER THE NEW
STANDARD IS EFFECTIVELY. SO THAT IS A CHALLENGE. BUT I ECHO EMILY'S COMMENTS THAT IT'S HARD TO FIND PEER TO PEER COMMUNITIES DOING THIS USE THAT HAVE THE SAME
CHARACTERISTICS AS BLOOMINGTON . TO THAT POINT I THINK WE HEDGED OR MORE ON THE CONSERVATIVE SIDE OF THE EQUATION IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S A LOW PARKING REQUIREMENT IN THIS ARENA.
IT'S ACTUALLY HIGHER THAN ALL OF THE OTHER DATA POINTS THAT WE FOUND AND THERE'S REASONS FOR THAT AND I HAVE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT. BUT I THINK IT IS DEFINITELY ADJUST AND SEE AND KIND
OF MONITOR IT AS WE GO KIND OF SITUATION. COMMISSIONER, YOU SAW LAST TIME ON THIS TOPIC BUT JUST TO COMMENT THERE ACTUALLY I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS HEARD THERE'S
LIKE THERE GOING TO IF IT'S NOT PROPOSED AND IN THE LEGISLATION IT WILL BE PROPOSED OF LIKE GETTING RID OF MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS AT THE STATE LEVEL. DO YOU GUYS HEAR THAT? YEAH. SO YES, INTERESTING JUST TO
KEEP IN MIND SO THAT IS ONE BILL I AM TRACKING BUT MY ONLY COMMENT TO THAT SORRY AND I DON'T MEAN TO JUMP IN TOO MUCH HERE I'M SORRY BUT THE THE ONE COMMENT I WOULD MAKE TO THAT IS THAT YES, WE'RE TRACKING
THAT LEGISLATION AND WOULD MAKE THIS DISCUSSION MOOT IF THE LEGISLATION DID PASS. I THINK THE LAST COMMENT I WOULD MAKE ABOUT THAT IS THAT I THINK PROFESSIONALS ARE STARTING TO UNDERSTAND THE
COST OF PARKING IN DIFFERENT WAYS THAN WE USED TO WITH RESPECT TO STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND HEAT ISLAND EFFECT AND SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS. AND SO I THINK YOU KNOW KIND OF LENDING ITSELF MORE TO THAT
MARKET APPROACH IS KIND OF INFORMED BY SOME OF THOSE THINGS NOT JUST TRYING TO REDUCE COST DEVELOPER COST THAT MAKES SENSE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. THIS THE CITY IS THE APPLICANT ON THIS ITEM SO I WILL GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC
HEARING AND THERE'S NO ONE IN THE CHAMBERS CURRENTLY. MR. JOHNSON IS THERE ANYONE ONLINE? SORRY, MR. BROOKS OR ANYONE ONLINE?
CHAIR ALBRECHT EVERYONE ONLINE IS STAFF. ALL RIGHT. LOOKING FOR A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING REMOVED
MOVED SECOND. >> ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I I THOSE OPPOSED NO MOTION
CARRIES DISCUSSION. COMMISSIONER COOKSON THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. IF I COULD START WITH A BIT OF COMMENTARY ON COMMISSIONER WHITE'S QUESTION. ABSOLUTELY. COMMISSIONER WHITE YOU
MENTIONED SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THIS SORT OF WAIT AND SEE APPROACH OR WILL OR WILL COME BACK TO IT TYPE APPROACH. IT REMINDS ME A LOT OF WHEN WE WERE DEVELOPING THE OPPORTUNITY HOUSING ORDINANCE
AND WE WE HEARD A LOT OF THE SAME THINGS FROM STAFF OF LIKE WELL WE THINK WE'VE GOT IT ALL RIGHT HERE BUT WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO CHECK BACK IN. IT HAS SPOOKED ME A LOT BUT THAT'S WHY WE PROCEEDED IN AND ENDED UP WORKING OUT FINE. IT SEEMS LIKE WE CHECK IN ON
THE LHO LIKE EVERY YEAR WE MAKE A FEW CLEAN UP ITEMS. THERE WAS NEVER ANY DISASTERS AT LEAST NONE THAT I'M AWARE OF AND IT WORKED OUT FINE. SO I THINK I'M COMFORTABLE WITH IT HERE AND I THINK I WOULD OFFER EVEN ITEM ONE
TONIGHT THE SIGN ORDINANCE TOOK THE SAME APPROACH OF WE THINK WE'VE GOT IT RIGHT. WE'LL CHECK BACK IN IN A YEAR. WE'VE MADE A FEW LITTLE TWEAKS IT WAS ALL FINE SO IF THAT GIVES YOU ANY COMFORT OF THIS SORT OF COOL WE'LL CHECK
IN LATER ON IT. I THINK IT WORKS OUT PRETTY WELL. MY ONLY COMMENT ON THE APPLICATION BEFORE US IS I'M STILL NOT A FAN OF THE 0.5
PARKING I'M NOT PERSONALLY A DEVELOPER BUT I THINK OUR MOST TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENTS IN BLOOMINGTON ARE NOT THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE GOING TO SEE THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT. AND SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT
REDUCED PARKING WE USUALLY MAKE THE ARGUMENT OF WELL THOSE PEOPLE ARE TAKING PUBLIC TRANSIT. WELL THE MOST DENSE PUBLIC TRANSIT NEIGHBORHOODS WE HAVE IN BLOOMINGTON WE TEND CENTRAL
STATION AND AMERICAN MAYBE NORMANDALE LAKE OFFICE PARK. I DON'T THINK THOSE ARE THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE GOING TO SEE THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT. AND SO I DO HAVE A LITTLE CONCERN THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE UNDER PARKED AND IF I HAD IT
MY WAY I THINK I WOULD BE AT 1.0 AND WAIT AND SEE WITH THE 1.0 INSTEAD OF GOING WITH 0.5 AND AND CHECKING IN ON THAT NUMBER. SO I'M STILL A 1.0 FAN BUT IT'S I'M NOT GOING TO DIE ON
THAT HILL. SO EVERYTHING ELSE I'M IN FAVOR OF WITH THIS APPLICATION AND I'LL BE SUPPORTING IT. COMMISSIONER WHITE YEAH.
THANK YOU AND THANK YOU FOR THE REASSURANCES. THE NEWER KID ON THE BLOCK I, I APPRECIATE HISTORICAL REFERENCE SO I THINK I THINK THIS IS A POSITIVE MOVE.
I THINK YOU KNOW EXPLORING NEW TYPES OF HOUSING AND CREATING THESE OPPORTUNITIES FOR NEW KINDS OF DEVELOPMENT IS A REALLY IMPORTANT THING FOR BLOOMINGTON'S FUTURE AND I THINK THIS IS A RESPONSIBLE
WAY TO APPROACH IT. I APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT THE STAFF HAS PUT INTO IT. I ALSO SHARE SOME SIMILAR CONCERNS ABOUT THE PARKING. I'M GENERALLY A BIG FAN OF LESS PARKING THAN MORE
BECAUSE I LIKE TO PUSH PEOPLE TOWARDS PUBLIC TRANSIT WHERE POSSIBLE BUT I REALIZE THAT OUR SYSTEM ISN'T AS GOOD AS IT SHOULD BE AND SO I DO SHARE SOME OF THAT CONCERN AS WELL.
HOWEVER, YOU KNOW I'M GOING TO I DO TRUST THE STAFF TO TO DO THE DUE DILIGENCE THERE. SO GENERALLY I THINK THIS IS THIS IS GOOD AND I'M GLAD TO HEAR THAT THE BUILDING CODES
COVER BATHROOMS FOR OTHER COMMENTS. MY ONLY COMMENT REGARDING THE PARKING IS I ALWAYS THINK WHEN
I HEAR PARKING REQUIREMENTS I HEAR THAT THEY'RE REQUIRED TO OFFER POINT FIVE STALLS PER UNIT. BUT THEN I HAVE TO REMIND MYSELF THAT THAT IS THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT AND THAT
BASED ON THE MARKET AND WHAT THE DEVELOPER AND THE LOCATION AND ALL THAT JAZZ AND THAT COMPANY PERSON AND WHOEVER IT
IS CAN DECIDE TO PARK AT ONE POINT NOW BECAUSE I DO HAVE A HESITATION AS WELL LIKE WHOA POINT FIVE BUT I JUST HAVE TO REMIND MYSELF EVERY TIME IT'S
THAT'S JUST THE MINIMUM. IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO ACTUALLY BUILD. SO I THINK THAT YOU KNOW, A ONE YEAR LOOK BACK ON THIS
SIMILAR TO THE SAME CODE PROBABLY ISN'T LONG ENOUGH BECAUSE I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE HOW QUICKLY WE WILL SEE THESE TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTS. BUT I AGREE THAT TAKING A LOOK
AT THIS INTO THE FUTURE AND I'M SURE CITY STAFF WILL DEFINITELY KEEP US ABREAST OF WHAT'S THERE ANY DEVELOPMENTS AND WE MIGHT SEE SOME SO IT'LL BE INTERESTING
TO SEE HOW THIS PLAYS OUT. BUT I AM I AM IN SUPPORT. I THINK THIS IS A MOVE IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION TOWARDS THAT 30% AM I WHICH I KNOW THE
ENTIRE REGION, THE STATE THE COUNTRY IS REALLY LACKING AND WE CAN'T BUILD NATURALLY OCCURRING AFFORDABLE HOUSING TURNS OUT.
SO THIS IS THIS IS THE ONLY WAY TO DO IT RIGHT LOOKING FOR A MOTION COMMISSIONER WHITE I MOVED TO RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE
ESTABLISHING A DEFINITION OF CO-LIVING UNIT AND CO-LIVING DEVELOPMENT AND STANDARDS FOR EACH REMOVED WE'RE MOVING CONGREGATE LIVING FACILITY AND BOARDING HOUSE USES FROM THE USE TABLE AND
MODIFYING THE DEFINITION OF FAMILY IN THE CITY ZONING ORDINANCE THEREBY AMENDING CHAPTERS 914 AND 21 OF THE CITY CODE.
SECOND WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR THE RECOMMENDATION IN FRONT OF YOU. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I I THOSE OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ON TO OUR STUDY ITEMS FOR THIS EVENING. ITEM THREE I APOLOGIZE THE LAST ITEM ITEM TO THAT WE'LL
MOVE ON TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON APRIL 28TH AS A PUBLIC HEARING. >> ALL RIGHT. ITEM THREE IS OUR STUDY ONE OF OUR STUDY ITEMS IT IS ON
OFFICE CONVERSIONS PLANNER RAMBLER OLSON YOU HAVE THE STAFF REPORT.
OKAY . ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD EVENING. YEAH. SO THIS ITEM IS LOOKING AT THE
BROADER PHENOMENON OF CONVERTING OFFICE BUILDINGS INTO NON OFFICE USES AND THAT NECESSITATES A LITTLE BIT OF THE OVERVIEW OF THE OFFICE MARKET AND THE VACANCY RATES
EXPERIENCED BY THAT PARTICULAR MARKET. SO THAT'LL BE THE FIRST POINT THAT WILL BE DISCUSSING IN THE STUDY ITEM. THEN WE'LL LOOK AT YOU KNOW
WE'LL DO A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE ISSUES THAT COMPLICATE OR AND OR RESTRICT OFFICE CONVERSIONS. THERE ARE SEVERAL DEFINITELY THAT ARE RELEVANT TO
BLOOMINGTON AND THEN WE'LL DISCUSS SOME OF THE STRATEGIES AND INTERVENTIONS THAT SOME CITIES HAVE USED RESEARCHERS HAVE PROPOSED IN ORDER TO STIMULATE DEMAND FOR OFFICE
CONVERSIONS AND THEN WE'LL JUST LEAVE AT THE END FOR SOME QUESTIONS THAT WE PREPARED FOR YOU ALL TO HELP GUIDE THE NEXT STEPS IN THIS PROCESS.
SO LOOKING AT THE VACANCY RATES OR YOU KNOW, A BRIEF SNAPSHOT OF SORT OF ONE SINGLE AREA. YEAH. SO A BRIEF SNAP SNAPSHOT
OF OFFICE VACANCY AT THE LOCAL AND REGIONAL LEVEL YOU SEE AT BLOOMINGTON IT'S BETWEEN 17 AND 20%. THAT COMES FROM OUR ASSESSING DIVISION THAT'S UP FROM 12% AT
THE AT THE END OF 2019 AND THAT ESTIMATE CAME FROM COSTAR THAT WE LICENSED THROUGH THE SUBURBS OR AS A WHOLE ARE
LOOKING BETTER THAN BLOOMINGTON SPECIFIC THEY'RE ABOUT 11.1% A LITTLE OVER 11% AT THE END OF 20 THE FOURTH QUARTER OF 2024.
IT'S THE CORE CITIES THAT ARE STRUGGLING THE MOST MINNEAPOLIS AT 23.5% AND THERE THAT'S MOVING UP FROM NOT MUCH BUT STILL MOVING UP FROM THEIR
VACANCY RATE IN 2023. AND THEN ST PAUL IS REALLY GETTING HIT HARD 28.8% IN 2024. THE THE SMALLEST
OF IMPROVEMENTS FROM 2023 BUT NONETHELESS GOOD JOB ST PAUL. THE TWIN CITIES REGION AS A WHOLE STANDS AT ABOUT 15.8%
IN 2024 AND THAT'S UP FROM FROM THEIR RATE IN 2023. IT WAS HARD TO GET CONSISTENT DATA ON THIS. SO THIS WAS THIS IS THE BEST I
COULD THAT STAFF COULD FIND AND BUT NONETHELESS IT REFLECTS THAT THERE IS A HUGE ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED OR THAT NEEDS TO BE
OBSERVED AND TAKE NOTE OF JUST WORKING. OKAY. SO GETTING TO OFFICE VACANCIES
SPECIFICALLY IT'S GENERALLY AGREED THAT THERE YOU KNOW, OFFICE VACANCY IS HEALTHY ABOUT A RATE FROM 5 TO 10% THAT AFFORDS TENANTS A LOT
OF FREEDOM TO ADJUST THEIR FOOTPRINT IF THEY NEED TO DOWNSIZE OR EXPAND. SO HAVING THAT ACCESS MAKE EXCESS SUPPLY OF OFFICE SPACE IS GOOD FOR THEM.
IT ALSO ALLOWS THEM TO SEEK BETTER LOCATIONS AND TO NEGOTIATE BETTER LEASE TERMS. ALONG THAT NOTE THEY CAN EXERT PRESSURE ON THEIR LANDLORDS AND THEY CAN GET MORE MORE
OF A RESPONSIVE FEEDBACK FROM THEM AND THEY CAN ALSO THEY HAVE A STRONGER FOOTING WHEN THEY'RE NEGOTIATING RENTS WITH THAT EXCESS OFFICE SUPPLY. SO IT IS GOOD IT'S NOT NECESSARILY BAD.
IT'S WHEN YOU GET ABOVE 10% THAT YOU KNOW, TROUBLES AFOOT AND THAT'S WHAT THE REGION IS EXPERIENCING RIGHT NOW WITH THE GROWTH OF OFFICE VACANCY,
THERE ARE SEVERAL CAUSES TO OFFICE VACANCY. I'M SURE YOU'RE ALL AWARE OF THEM. THE THE BIGGEST ONE THAT PROBABLY IS HIGHLIGHTED A LOT IN THE MEDIA IS REMOTE WORK. THE GROWTH AND THE
PROLIFERATION OF REMOTE WORK. IT'S NOW SEEN AS A BENEFIT FOR EMPLOYERS AND A LOT OF EMPLOYEES DEMAND IT SO THEY'RE TRYING TO MEET THOSE EMPLOYEES AND YOU KNOW, YOU
KNOW WHAT MAKES THEM COMFORTABLE AND WHAT MAKES THEM WANT TO CHOOSE TO WORK THERE. SO AND THEN WITH THAT ACCESS OFFICE SPACE THAT COMES FROM REMOTE WORK A LOT OF TENANTS
ARE FINDING IT AN OPPORTUNE TIME ECONOMIZE AND SHRINK THE FOOTPRINT, ADJUST TO WHAT THEIR OPERATIONS CAN HANDLE AND WHAT ARE THE BETTER COSTS FOR THEM.
AND THEN WITH THAT THERE IS A RESULT OF AN OVERSUPPLY OF OUTDATED OFFICE SPACE JUST OFFICE SPACE THAT'S NOT MEETING NEEDS AND THERE'S A LOT OF TENANTS THAT ARE CRAVING HIGHER QUALITY SPACES
CLASS SPACES FOR INSTANCE DOING A I THINK IT'S SHOWING MORE LIFE THAN CLASS B AND C BECAUSE IT PROVIDES CERTAIN AMENITIES THAT TENANTS ARE LOOKING FOR.
SO THERE'S THE OFFICE MARKET IS FASCINATING. IF ANYTHING COMMISSIONER COOKED IN YOU REQUESTED SOME
INFORMATION COMPARING THE SUPPLY AND DEMAND OF HOUSING WITHIN BLOOMINGTON SPECIFICALLY WE WERE ABLE TO GET THE AMOUNT OF NEW UNITS
BEEN ADDED YEAR OVER YEAR FROM BETWEEN 24 AND 2024 AND THAT'S WHAT THIS CHART IS SHOWING. SO THIS IS SHOWING LETTING YOU KNOW HOW MANY UNITS ARE COMING ONLINE EACH YEAR.
IT'S NOT SHOWING THE GROWTH NECESSARILY FROM A BASELINE BUT NONETHELESS THERE IT IS SHOWING HOW MANY UNITS ARE BEING ADDED EACH YEAR TO YEAR . COMPARE THAT TO HOUSING DEMAND .
UM HOUSING DEMAND WAS KIND OF HARD TO GET AT AND WE WERE TRYING TO FIND THE BEST PROXY WAY TO MEASURE HOUSING DEMAND. THIS SEEMED THIS WAS TO OUR EYES THE THE BEST WAY TO
CONVEY DEMAND WITHIN BLOOMINGTON YOU'LL SEE THE NUMBER OF DAYS IN THE MARKET FOR A YEAH FOR HOUSES THAT ARE EARNED FOR PROPERTY THAT'S ON
SALE OR HOUSES THAT'S ON SALE. WE HAVE DATA GOING BACK TO 2018 AND THERE'S AN INVERSE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE HOW MUCH OF THE ORIGINAL ASKING PRICE
IS BEING MET WHEN THOSE SALES OCCUR AND YOU KNOW THERE WAS A IT PEAKED IN 2022 AND THEN AND THEN THEY BOTH WENT THEIR SEPARATE WAYS THE YEARS AFTER BUT NONETHELESS YOU SEE THAT
NICE INVERSE RELATIONSHIP HOW WE COMPARE THAT TO THE SUPPLY IT GETS THAT'S KIND OF A HARD ANALYSIS TO DO ON OUR PART. IT GETS KIND OF MUDDY BECAUSE
HOUSING SUPPLIES VARY IN FITS AND STARTS AND SO IT'S NOT VERY CLEAN. WE COULD MAKE SOME EDUCATED GUESSES BUT NONETHELESS WE HAVE THAT DATA AVAILABLE AND IF FOR YOU ALL TO DISCUSS WHEN
THE TIME IS APPROPRIATE SO LOOKING AT CITIES THAT HAVE SEEN CONVERSION AS A AS A WAY TO MANAGE HIGH OFFICE AN OFFICE VACANCY THERE'S BEEN
SOME NOTABLE EXAMPLES. MINNEAPOLIS FOR INSTANCE IT WAS REPORTED ON LAST YEAR THEY COMMISSIONED A STUDY LOOKING AT OFFICE FOR RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS FROM THE CENTER
FOR URBAN AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS TO THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA AND THAT STUDY CONTAINED, YOU KNOW, NOT ONLY A HISTORY OF, YOU KNOW, OF WHERE THE VACANCY
RATE OR WHY THE VACANCY RATE IS WHERE IT IS BUT ALSO PROVIDED SEVERAL WAYS TO ADDRESST, YOU KNOW, THROUGH VARIOUS INTERVENTIONS.
WE'VE ADAPTED SOME OF THOSE IN THE STAFF REPORT AND FROM THAT REPORT THEY WERE ABLE TO FORMULATE POLICY INITIATIVES
TO INCENTIVIZE CONVERSIONS. SOME OF THOSE THAT ARE BULLETED INCLUDE STREAMLINING THE APPROVAL PROCESS REQUIRING LESS EXTENSIVE TRAFFIC STUDIES AND THIS MIGHT I MEAN THIS IS
RELEVANT BUT IT'S MIGHT SEEM CONTROVERSIAL TO BLOOMINGTON SPECIFIC IS PAUSE THEY'VE PAUSED THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS IN THEIR
INCLUSIONARY ZONING ORDINANCE SO THAT THAT THAT'S ONE METHOD THAT THEY'VE POSITED FOR I THINK THE NEXT FIVE YEARS SO I IMAGINE THEY'LL REEXAMINE IT
AFTER FIVE YEARS TO SEE HOW SUCCESSFUL IT IS IN TERMS OF GENERATING THESE OFFICERS RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS ST PAUL THEIR DOWNTOWN ALLIANCE PARTNERED WITH GENSLER, AN
ARCHITECTURE DESIGN FIRM TO STUDY 20 DIFFERENT OFFICE BUILDINGS AND THEY WERE ABLE TO IDENTIFY TEN THAT WERE GOOD CANDIDATES FOR CONVERSION. THERE'S ALSO OH I SHOULD HAVE
ADDED MORE THAN THAT. SORRY BUT IT'S IN THE STAFF REPORT AND THEY ALSO ARE GOING TO BE CONSIDERING THIS SAME RAFT OF OF CODE AMENDMENTS AND
INITIATIVES THAT MINNEAPOLIS HAD ADOPTED IN ORDER TO MAKE OFFICE TO RESIDENTIAL A MORE ATTRACTIVE OPTION FOR DEVELOPERS OR PROPERTY OWNERS .
WE DID REACH OUT TO PEER CITIES TO JUST GET A SENSE OF HOW THEY'VE ADDRESSED THE OFFICE VACANCY ISSUE WITHIN THEIR OWN COMMUNITIES.
WE CONTACTED SEVEN AND THE FOCUS OF THE SURVEY. THE QUESTIONS THAT WE POSED WERE FOCUSED ON EXISTING AND PLANNED OFFICE CONVERSIONS IF THEY'VE HAD ANY. WERE THEY ABLE TO RECOUNT ANY
REASONS FOR WHY THESE CONVERSIONS HAPPENED IF THERE WERE ANYTHING SPECIFIC BEYOND THEY'RE JUST VACANT AND THEY WEREN'T ABLE TO FILL THEM THAT HAPPENED, YOU KNOW, FOR ANYTHING FOR ANY REASON WHY THERE WAS A CONVERSION THAT
THAT WAS MAINLY THE REASON IS THAT THEY WERE THEY JUST HAD EXCESS VACANCY AND SO THEY NEEDED TO FIGURE OUT SOMETHING ELSE TO DO WITH THAT SPACE. WAS THERE ANYTHING THAT THEY
NOTICED ABOUT THE SUCCESS OF THE DEVELOPMENT POST CONVERSION, ANYTHING THAT THEY COULD TELL US? YOU KNOW, IT COULD BE ANECDOTAL OR IT COULD BE QUANTITATIVE THEM THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE AND SPECIFIC TO
THEIR COMMUNITY. HOW DO THEY INTERPRET THEIR ZONING CODES FAVOURABILITY TO CONVERSIONS? AND SO WE POSED ALL THOSE QUESTIONS THESE ARE JUST A
SUMMARY OF THE RESPONSES WE GOT. A NOTABLE IS THAT OFFICE CONVERSION REQUESTS THEY'RE THERE BUT THEY'RE VERY INFREQUENT AND THEY'RE HANDLED ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS AND
THERE'S DIFFERENT WAYS THAT THEY'VE ADDRESSED OFFICE CONVERSIONS. BURNSVILLE THEY USE THEIR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WHICH HAD FLEXIBILITY WHICH IS SIMILAR TO OUR PLAN
DEVELOPMENT IN IN BLOOMINGTON AND THOSE HAVE ALLOWED THEM TO CONVERT OFFICE BUILDINGS OR INDUSTRIAL PURPOSES TO NON OFFICE OR NON INDUSTRIAL MINNETONKA THEY I MEAN BACK
IN THE 2000S THEY PROVIDED ASSISTANCE TO OFFICE TO CONDO DEVELOPMENT IN PRAIRIE THEY EXPRESSED OPENNESS TO SUPPORTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AND IF OFFICE
RESIDENTIAL SATISFIES THAT THEN THEY WOULD DEFINITELY BE WILLING TO CONSIDER IT ROSEVILLE AND EDEN PRAIRIE INTERESTINGLY THERE THEY'RE WAITING OUT THE THE TURMOIL
WITHIN THE OFFICE MARKET TO SEE IF IT RECOVERS AND THEN THEY WANT TO HAVE THAT OFFICE SPACE AVAILABLE FOR WHEN IT DOES RECOVER. SO THEY'RE NOT EAGER TO REZONE OR TO PURSUE ANY POLICIES THAT
WOULD ENCOURAGE CONVERSIONS. ST LOUIS PARK MAYBE NOT DIRECTLY ADDRESSING OFFICE TO RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS THEY ARE EXPANDING MULTIFAMILY
DEVELOPMENTS THAT USE TO COMMERCIAL ZONES AND YOU KNOW FROM THAT YOU CAN EXPECT THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR OFFICE FOR
RESIDENTIAL THE BENEFITS TO OFFICE CONVERSIONS ARE SEVERAL AS THE FIRST OF ALL THE POINT MAKES MAKES CLEAR IT BRINGS
NEW LIFE TO UNDERUTILIZED BUILDINGS AND ALSO CAN REVITALIZE THE SPACES AROUND THEM SO IT BRINGS RENEWED FOCUS AND ATTENTION TO THOSE BUILDINGS. SO THAT'S IMPORTANT.
IT ALSO OFFERS A SUSTAINABLE PATH TO EXPANDING TO OTHER USES SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO TEAR DOWN A BUILDING IF YOU WANT TO IMPLEMENT ANY NEW USE ON THE PROPERTY YOU CAN JUST USE THE STRUCTURE AS IS DO SOME
INTERIOR WORK TO ACCOMMODATE THAT USE AND SO IT REALLY SAVES A LOT ON DEMOLITION WASTE AND IT'S IT IS IN AGGREGATE MORE SUSTAINABLE. IT MAY LEAD TO SPILLOVER
EFFECTS ACTUALLY TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES IF YOU'RE REVITALIZING ONE BUILDING THAT COULD TIE UP REVITALIZING OTHER BUILDINGS IN THE AREA IF
IT IF IF HEAD OFFICE CONVERSION IS ALMOST ENDEMIC TO THE AREA THEN OR OFFICE VACANCY SORRY THEN IT COULD STIMULATE DEMAND FOR THOSE OFFICE SPACES SO IT DOES HAPPEN. IT COULD LEAD TO SPILLOVER
EFFECTS AND FOR THOSE STRUCTURES THAT HAVE SOME HISTORICAL VALUE IT PRESERVES THEM SO WE MAINTAIN THOSE STRUCTURES JUST FOR THE
BENEFIT OF THE HISTORICAL VALUE THAT THEY PROVIDE THE COMMUNITY. SO IN LIGHT OF THOSE BENEFITS
OF OFFICE CONVERSIONS, WE NONETHELESS HAVE TO CONFRONT THE PRACTICAL AND LEGAL CHALLENGES THE PRACTICAL MEANING, THE PHYSICAL STRUCTURE, THE DESIGN OF THE STRUCTURE MORE FOCUSED ON BUILDING TECHNOLOGY AND
BUILDING CODE OFFICE BUILDINGS FOR THE PAST HALF CENTURY THEY FEATURE DEEP FLOOR PLATES SO THE CORE OF THE OF A FLOOR IS
FAR REMOVED FROM THE EXTERIOR WALLS WHERE YOU WOULD FIND NATURAL LIGHT AND IF WINDOWS ARE OPERABLE A NATURAL OR AIR FLOW THEY HAVE OLD MECHANICAL
ELECTRICAL OR PLUMBING SYSTEMS SO THOSE WOULD NEED TO BE BROUGHT UP TO CODE AND FIRE SAFETY SYSTEMS WOULD ALSO NEED TO BE UPGRADED ALSO THERE'S
JUST THERE'S THERE'S NO WAY TO SEE WHAT'S IN THE WALLS OR THE FLOOR. THERE'S A LOT OF SURPRISES THAT CAN REALLY CATCH A LOT OF DEVELOPERS OFF GUARD WHEN
THEY'RE NOT SURE WHAT IS IS HIDING IN THOSE WALLS OR OR FLOORS SO THAT'S A BIG CONCERN AND IT'S IT PROBABLY LEAVES A LOT OF THEM CHILLY TO THE IDEA
OF CONVERTING AN OFFICE SPACE FOR THE LEGAL LEGAL SIDE OR THE LEGAL CHALLENGES THAT IMPACT OFFICE CONVERSIONS. THERE'S THERE'S A LOT OF EXAMPLES I'VE HIGHLIGHTED
THREE THERE'S PARKING REQUIREMENTS IS THERE ENOUGH PARKING BEING PROVIDED AND IF NOT IS THERE ENOUGH SPACE TO EXPAND PARKING TO MEET THE NEW USE?
SO THAT'S A CHALLENGE THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO ADDRESS. THERE'S THE RISK OF CREATING NONCONFORMITY IS IF YOU GO FROM ONE USE TO ANOTHER DOES THAT IS THAT USE GENERATING
SOME NONCONFORMITY IS THAT ARE GOING TO BE AT OR THAT ARE GOING TO CHALLENGE THAT CONVERSION ON THE AND ALONG THAT SAME LINE OF ARGUMENT
REZONING DOES TO ALLOW A USE DOES THAT REZONING THEN CREATE NONCONFORMITY SO NONCONFORMITY CAN ALSO BE A CHALLENGE TO OFFICE CONVERSIONS AND THEN THERE'S THE OPPORTUNITY HOUSING ORDINANCE IT'S IT'S
BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL IN IN ADDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO THE CITY'S HOUSING SUPPLY BUT IT DOES CREATE ANOTHER LAYER A LAYER OF COMPLEXITY TO
CONVERSIONS THAT A DEVELOPER WOULD HAVE TO MEET ESPECIALLY IF THEY'RE PROPOSING TO CONVERT FROM OFFICE TO RESIDENTIAL AND THAT CONVERSION RESULTS IN 20 OR MORE UNITS WHERE THEY HAVE TO DESIGNATE SO MANY OF THOSE
UNITS AS AFFORDABLE TO 60% OF THE AREA MANY MEDIAN INCOME. SO THAT'S ANOTHER CHALLENGE THAT REALLY HAMPERS CONVERSIONS BUT NONETHELESS
OF THE TWO THAT ARE ON THE SLIDE, THE THE TWO TYPES OF CHALLENGES, IT'S MUCH EASIER FOR THE CITY TO ADDRESS THE LEGAL CHALLENGES AS THE PRACTICAL OR MORE WITHIN THE REALM OF KIND OF BUILDING
TECHNOLOGY AND BUILDING CODE. SO SOME OF THE REGULATORY ACTIONS THAT WERE SUMMARIZED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND THIS IS BY NO MEANS A COMPLETE LIST THERE'S PROBABLY QUITE A BIT BUT JUST SOME OF THE FEW SOME
OF THEM THAT STOOD OUT TO STAFF AS WE WERE COMPOSING THE STAFF REPORT AGAIN THIS WAS TOUCHED ON EARLIER BUT FLEXIBLE PARKING STANDARDS IF A NEW USE DOESN'T HAVE THE PARKING, DO THEY HAVE THE CAPACITY TO MEET THE PARKING
IF THEY DON'T HAVE THE CAPACITY, WELL THEN THAT BASICALLY SHOOTS THAT CONVERSION PROJECT IN THE FOOT . SO IS THERE A WAY TO BUILD IN SOME FLEXIBILITY INTO OUR
PARKING STANDARDS SO THAT CONVERSIONS CAN STILL HAPPEN? FOR INSTANCE, IF A DEVELOPMENT IS PROPOSED WITHIN A WALKABLE DISTANCE OF A STRUCTURE PARKING COULD WE COUNT SOME
OF THOSE STALLS TO MEETING THE PARKING REQUIREMENT AT THIS CONVERTED OFFICE BUILDING? WHAT IF THEY'RE WITHIN A CERTAIN DISTANCE OF A HIGH FREQUENCY TRANSIT STOP OR A TRANSIT STOP OF A HIGH
FREQUENCY ROUTE? COULD THAT ALSO BE CONSIDERED AS FLEXIBILITY FOR THEM TO ACHIEVE THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE SATISFACTORY TO THE CITY?
ANOTHER REGULATORY ACTION WE COULD CONSIDER IS JUST EXPANDING THE USES ALLOWED IN COMMERCIAL OFFICE DISTRICTS. UM I HAVE MAPPED HERE ALL
THOSE COMMERCIAL OFFICE DISTRICTS EXCLUDING THE C FIVE DISTRICT BUT THERE'S ABOUT 107 OFFICE DEVELOPMENTS THAT WE
WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO FIND USING ASSESSING DATA OF 55 OF THOSE OFFICE PROPERTIES ARE IN DISTRICTS THAT ALLOW MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL 52 ARE
IN DISTRICTS THAT DON'T ALLOW MULTIFAMILY SO THERE ARE 52 OFFICE PROPERTIES THAT ARE MISSING OUT ON THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE CONVERTED TO RESIDENTIAL
BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT IN DISTRICTS THAT ALLOW MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT AND MAYBE THAT'S FOR GOOD REASON BUT NONETHELESS THAT'S SOMETHING TO HIGHLIGHT ABOUT HOW USES ARE BEING HOW USE
RESTRICTIONS CAN AFFECT THE VIABILITY OF A PROJECT AND A COMMISSIONER COOKED IN YOU WANTED A MAP OF THE CR1 AND
SEE US ONE ZONING DISTRICT SO I MADE THIS MAP RESPONDING TO THAT REQUEST I ALSO INCLUDED THE B1 B2 DISTRICTS BECAUSE AS
YOU KNOW AS AS I'LL BE DISCUSSED LATER ON THE REPORT ONE OF THE OR ONE OF THE QUESTIONS WE'RE GOING TO BE POSING TO YOU IS IF WE SHOULD BE ALLOWING MULTIFAMILY
RESIDENTIAL IN IN CERTAIN COMMERCIAL OFFICE DISTRICTS BB1B2 WE ADDED AFTER THE PACKET WAS PUBLISHED SO APOLOGIES FOR THAT BUT NONETHELESS THIS SHOWS THE
DISTRIBUTION OF THOSE AREAS THAT ARE ZONED ACCORDING TO THE LEGEND ON THIS SLIDE AND GOING FORWARD WITH SOME OTHER
REGULATORY ACTIONS STREAMLINE REVIEW I'M I THINK YOU'RE ALL FAMILIAR WITH THE IDEA OF STREAMLINING THE REVIEW PROCESS JUST MAKING IT LESS BURDENSOME FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE CONVERSION PROPOSALS IN FRONT OF THE CITY AND LESS HOOPS TO
JUMP THROUGH AND MAYBE EVEN PRIORITIZING THEIR APPLICATIONS BECAUSE MAYBE THERE'S A POLICY THAT SEES THIS AS A AS A PRIORITY
AMENDING THE OPPORTUNITY HOUSING ORDINANCE MAYBE MAYBE SOMETHING TO CONSIDER MAYBE ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT
MINNEAPOLIS ADOPTED IN TERMS OF PAUSING THE ENFORCEMENT OF THOSE AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS ON OFFICE TO RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS. NONETHELESS, I MEAN I KNOW
THERE PROBABLY A LOW APPETITE FOR THAT BUT JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT IN FRONT OF YOU TO CONSIDER AND ALLOW CO-LIVING AS A NEW RESIDENTIAL ARRANGEMENT AS A PLANNER
ASPECT AND DISCUSS WITH YOU ALL THIS HAS CERTAIN PROPERTIES THAT ARE REALLY CONDUCIVE TO ACTUALLY CONVERSION PROJECTS. THEY'RE VERY FLEXIBLE BECAUSE
YOU'RE MAINLY CONCERNED ABOUT PROVIDING ALL THE LIVING UNITS AND THEN HAVING AN ADEQUATE FACILITIES TO TO SERVE THOSE LIVING UNITS. SO IT REALLY MAKES IT EASIER
TO FIT ON THOSE ODD FLOOR PLATES THAT YOU WOULD SEE IN YOU KNOW, POST OFFICE OFFICE BUILDINGS.
SO SOME LOGISTICAL ACTIONS TO CONSIDER I'M SORRY THIS IS SO LONG BUT THIS IS A CRAZY REPORT ANYWAY, SO MOVING ON WITH THE LOGISTICAL ACTIONS THAT YOU MAY WANT TO CONSIDER PERHAPS A SURVEY OF OFFICE
PROPERTIES IN BLOOMINGTON, MAYBE WORTH DOING IT WOULD LOOK AT TWO CHARACTERISTICS THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS THE FLOOR AREA FLOOR DIMENSIONS AGAIN GETTING TO THAT FLOOR PLATE DESIGN
LOOKING AT HEIGHT IN THE STRUCTURAL SYSTEM, SEE IF THAT'S CONDUCIVE TO CONVERSION AND ALSO LOOKING AT THE LOCATION CHARACTERISTICS IS IT IS THERE HIGH TRANSIT
ACCESSIBILITY AS A NEAR PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND YOUR EMPLOYERS OR OTHER AMENITIES OTHER ESSENTIALS THAT PEOPLE REQUIRE WHEN THEY ARE DECIDING WHERE THEY WANT TO LIVE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES COULD BE PREPARED
FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE INTERESTED IN CONVERSION PROJECTS. YOU DO HAVE ONLINE GUIDES AND CASE STUDIES FOR THEM TO CONSUME IN CONSIDER AS THEY'RE CONCEPTUALIZING A CONVERSION
PROJECT SOME OTHER TOPICS TO INCLUDE IN SOME OF THE AND THESE GUIDES IN IN AND TOUCHING UPON OR CASE STUDIES THAT TOUCH UPON THE TOPICS
LIKE ZONING FINANCING DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS CONSTRUCTION THAT THEY MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN AND WOULD REDUCE AGAIN THAT BARRIER TO TO PURSUING A
CONVERSION PROJECT. ANOTHER LOGISTICAL ACTION IS JUST DESIGNATING A STAFF PERSON FOR OFFICE CONVERSIONS TO HANDLE THOSE REQUESTS AND
SHEPHERD THOSE OR STEWARD THOSE APPLICATIONS THROUGH THE PROCESS AND THEY CAN BE A POINT OF CONTACT FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE INTERESTED IN CONVERSION OFFICE CONVERSIONS, SOME FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE TOOLS TO JUST MAKE YOU AWARE OF BECAUSE SOME OF THESE IT'S OUT OF THE CITY'S HANDS BUT NONETHELESS IT'S IT WE OUGHT TO BE AWARE OF IT TAXING FROM AND
FINANCING IS SOMETHING WE WE DO HAVE SOME CONTROL OVER LOOKING AT THE TIFF POLICY THAT'S THAT WAS DRAFTED BY THE CITY ALIGNS WITH THE GOALS OF CONVERSION SOME OF THOSE
GOAL THOSE GOALS WERE OUR SUMMARIZED IN THE STAFF REPORT FOR YOUR REFERENCE AND ALSO NOTED IN THE STAFF REPORT IS IT MIGHT NOT BE THE IDEAL
FINANCIAL TOOL TO ENCOURAGE CONVERSION BECAUSE THE GROWTH IN TAX REVENUE MAY BE INSUFFICIENT TO COVER THE DEVELOPMENT. THE REDEVELOPMENTS SORRY WE
CAN GET INTO THAT MORE SPECIFICALLY IF YOU LIKE ALTHOUGH I'M NOT A TIFF EXPERT SO MAYBE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS I'M HAPPY TO THE FORWARD THAT ON TO OUR PORT AUTHORITY THAT ARE THE TIFF EXPERTS AND THERE'S ALSO THE
STATE OF LEGISLATION TO BE AWARE OF THERE'S THE CUB TAX CREDIT THE CONVERSION OF UNSUITABLE UNDERUTILIZED AND VACANT BUILDINGS IF YEAH
SO THAT'S TAX CREDIT WOULD PROVIDE ASSISTANCE TO CONVERT VACANT AND UNDERUTILIZED BUILDINGS INTO SPACES THAT MEET CURRENT NEEDS OR THAT'S THE THAT'S THE INTENDED
PURPOSE OF THAT TAX CREDIT IT'S EQUIVALENT TO 30% OF CONVERSION COSTS. THERE'S OTHER THINGS TO DISCUSS BUT NONETHELESS THAT IS SOMETHING THAT'S BEING DEBATED AT THE CAPITOL AND YOU KNOW TO OTHER FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE TOOLS STAFF INCLUDED THE OPTION OF MAYBE EXPLORING FEE WAIVERS. SOME OF THOSE FEES COULD BE A BARRIER FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE
INTERESTED IN REVITALIZING VACANT OFFICE SPACES. WE DO HAVE A NOTE OF CAUTION THAT IF THIS IS A FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TOOL THAT YOU'RE
ALL INTERESTED IN US EXPLORING FURTHER THAT WE EXEMPT THE SEWER AVAILABILITY CHARGE FROM THAT FROM THAT FEE WAIVER
PLANNING MANAGER JOHNSON CAN TALK ABOUT THAT FURTHER BUT NONETHELESS THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE REQUESTING THAT IF IT BE THAT THERE BE SOMETHING THAT'S NOT CONSIDERED TO BE
WAIVED. THERE'S ALSO HISTORIC STRUCTURE TAX CREDITS. I KNOW IT MIGHT BE HARD TO IMAGINE BUT THERE MIGHT BE HISTORIC OFFICE BUILDINGS WITHIN THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON .
I HAD THE PLEASURE OF GOING TO A SENSIBLE LAND USE COALITION MEETING YESTERDAY WHERE THEY DISCUSSED OFFICE FOR RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS VERY SERENDIPITOUS TO BE ABLE TO BE
ABLE TO TO WATCH THAT PRESENTATION. SOMETHING THAT STOOD OUT TO ME IS THAT AND THIS WAS A AUDIENCE FULL OF OF EMPLOYEES
FOR SUBURBAN COMMUNITIES OR PEOPLE WHO PRIMARILY WORK IN SUBURBAN COMMUNITIES IS THAT EVEN IN THE SUBURBS THERE MAY BE HISTORIC STRUCTURES THAT QUALIFY FOR TAX CREDITS
AND THAT IS A HUGE FINANCIAL BENEFIT TO REVITALIZING VACANT OFFICE SPACES AND OR AT LEAST TO INCENTIVIZE IT. SO IF THEY'RE ABLE TO GET THE
FINANCING RIGHT, THAT'S A HUGE BARRIER THAT'S BEEN THAT'S BEEN OVERCOME SO THAT IS CERTAINLY ONE ONE THING TO LOOK INTO IT DOES REQUIRE
THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE BE A HISTORIC HISTORIC PRESERVATION EXPERT TO KIND OF DO A SURVEY OF OF THE OF THE BUILDING
STOCK IN ORDER TO DETERMINE WHICH WOULD QUALIFY FOR HISTORIC CREDITS HER HISTORIC STRUCTURE TAX CREDITS MOVING ON TO THE NEXT STEPS WELL THIS
WOULD BE A SIMILAR PRESENTATION FOR ANY CITY COUNCIL ON APRIL 14TH OR SOMETIME IN APRIL. I'M SORRY THAT MIGHT BE A DIFFERENT DATE BUT SOMETIME IN APRIL WE'LL BE HAVING A
SIMILAR STUDY SESSION WITH OUR CITY COUNCIL AND YOU KNOW THE FEEDBACK AND DIRECTION WE GET FROM YOU ALL IF IT INCLUDES PREPARING AND PROPOSING
CODE AMENDMENTS WE WOULD ASK THAT THOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS BE SCHEDULED LATER IN THE YEAR. THERE'S A LOT ON THE PLANNING STAFF'S PLATE BUT NONETHELESS WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THOSE
SOMETIME DURING THE YEAR AND YOU KNOW IT WILL BE FOLLOWING FOLLOWING REGULAR NOTICING REQUIREMENTS FOR THESE PUBLIC HEARINGS. AND YOU KNOW, IF WE DID GO THAT ROUTE WE WOULD BE OF COURSE CONSULTING WITH
DEPARTMENTS AND DIVISIONS KEEP YOU ALL ABREAST OF THOSE CODE AMENDMENTS AND ALSO CONSULTING WITH INDUSTRY EXPERTS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE FASHIONING THOSE AMENDMENTS CORRECTLY.
SO SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU ALL TO CONSIDER BASED ON THE STAFF REPORT THERE WERE THOSE THREE BUCKETS OF INTERVENTIONS OR ACTIONS THAT WE WERE PROPOSING
AND THAT'S WHAT THESE QUESTIONS BASICALLY RELATE TO SHOULD STAFF INVESTIGATE THE FOLLOWING REGULATORY ACTIONS? THAT MEANS ALLOWING MULTIPLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL IN CR1C. S1B1 AND B TWO DISTRICTS YOU'LL SEE STAFF'S RESPONSE TO THAT THAT PROPOSAL SHOULD WE STREAMLINE, REVIEW AND
PERMITTING IN PERMITTING OF OFFICE CONVERSION PROJECTS AGAIN IF IT RESULTS IN LESS REGULATORY COMPLEXITY STAFF IS ALL ABOUT IT. WE WOULD DEFINITELY SUPPORT THAT.
WE WANT TO AVOID THE POSSIBILITY OF SETTING UP A SEPARATE PERMITTING STRUCTURE FOR OFFICE CONVERSIONS AS OPPOSED TO EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WE HAVE TO REVIEW.
WE DON'T WANT TWO LANES THAT TO ME OR THAT TO OUR EYES WOULD DEFINITELY INCREASE THE REGULATORY COMPLEXITY AND IN THAT I MEAN THEY ARE JUST
SOMETHING WE WANT TO AVOID. SHOULD WE AMEND THE OPPORTUNITY HOUSING ORDINANCE OR PAUSE ENFORCEMENT OF THOSE AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THAT ORDINANCE STAFF DOES NOT SUPPORT WE COULD
REEVALUATE THAT AT A LATER TIME IF WE JUST SEE OFFICE VACANCIES GETTING WORSE AND PROLONGING FAR INTO THE FUTURE IN WHICH CASE MAYBE A SHOT
IN THE ARM WOULD BE HOW TO ACCOMMODATE OFFICE CONVERSIONS IN LIGHT OF THE OPPORTUNITY HOUSING ORDINANCE. SO MAYBE WE JUST WANT TO STOP
THERE AND I CAN TAKE A BREATH AND YOU ALL CAN ASK ME SOME MORE QUESTIONS IF YOU'D LIKE OR DISCUSS THOSE QUESTIONS. THAT'S COMMISSIONER CURRY. THANKS. SURE. YEAH.
HOW DID THE CITY COME UP WITH THAT 17% VACANCY RATE? BECAUSE THAT WAS A DIFFERENT SOURCE THAN ALL OF THE OTHER SOURCES.
YES, CHAIR COMMISSIONER, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. THE DATA AND THE DATA WE GOT FROM COSTAR ACTUALLY SHOWED THAT THE VACANCY RATE AT ABOUT
14% BUT EVEN PRIOR TO THAT ASSESSING ESTIMATED OUR VACANCY AT ABOUT 17 TO 20. THEY EVEN FIGURE IT MIGHT BE HIGHER SOMETIMES IT'S HARD TO GET ACCURATE DATA RELATED TO
VACANCY BECAUSE PROPERTY OWNERS AREN'T AS FORTHCOMING WITH THAT INFORMATION AND THEY'RE VERY PROTECTIVE OF IT. IT'S ALMOST PROPRIETARY IN THEIR EYES AND SO IT SKEWS
WHAT THE ACTUAL VACANCY RATE MIGHT BE AND SO IN THIS CASE IT ACTUALLY MIGHT BE MORE THAN WHAT'S PRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT. IT MIGHT BE IN AN EXCESS
OF 20%. SO IT'S THAT'S HOW THEY ESTIMATED IT. I WOULD HAVE TO POSE THAT QUESTION TO THEM. I DIDN'T REALLY SCRUTINIZE THEIR METHODOLOGY.
I JUST TOOK THE NUMBER AS THEY PROVIDED IT. OKAY. YEAH. I HAVEN'T REALLY PAID ATTENTION TO THE OFFICE MARKET FOR LIKE TEN PLUS YEARS BUT JUST BASED ON WHAT I HEAR FROM FOLKS IT'S I THINK IT SOUNDS
LIKE THE BLOOMINGTON OFFICE MARKET IS ACTUALLY PRETTY DECENT. SO I THINK KNOW I GUESS IS WHAT I'D RECOMMEND IS YOU CAN GO TO MINCOR WHICH IS LIKE A
COMMERCIAL REALTOR ASSOCIATION AND THEY LIST ALL OF THE AVAILABILITIES FOR EVERY BUILDING. SO AND MINCOR I WOULD THINK WOULD ALSO YOU KNOW MAYBE BE SUPPORTIVE OF MUNICIPALITY
TRYING TO GET SOME DATA SO SO I GUESS I WOULD JUST DOUBLE CHECK THAT BUT YEAH I, I GUESS I WOULD DOUBLE CHECK THAT DATA
BEFORE DOING THAT BECAUSE I THINK ALL OF THE OTHER SUBURB AND OFFICE NUMBERS WERE MUCH LOWER. SO IT'S KIND OF SURPRISING TO SEE BLOOMINGTON AT SUCH A HIGH
NUMBER. WELL I'M SORRY IF I MADE THAT THAT THAT CAVEAT I PROVIDED ABOUT THE RELIABILITY OF THOSE NUMBERS AS PROVIDED AS
BLOOMINGTON SPECIFIC. MAYBE WE SHOULD ALSO EXTEND THAT CAVEAT TO THE REST OF THOSE ESTIMATES ESTIMATIONS THOSE VACANCY ESTIMATIONS BECAUSE AGAIN THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT IS THAT
SOMETIMES PROPERTY OWNERS ARE JUST NOT VERY FORTHCOMING. YEAH. SO IT'S IT'S HARD TO GET AND THEN SUBLEASES MIGHT ALSO COMPLICATE THE PICTURE TOO. YEAH, DEFINITELY. YEAH THERE'S DEFINITELY SOME SUBLEASES OUT THERE.
I HAVE YOU GUYS TALK TO ANY LANDLORDS OR BROKERS AT ALL TO SEE WHAT THEY THINK ABOUT DOING THIS OR WHAT THEIR GUT IS ON ON THE MARKET IN GENERAL.
CHAIR COMMISSIONER WE DID NOT REACH OUT TO ANY BROKERS OR PROPERTY OWNERS ABOUT THE THIS THIS RESEARCH ONCE WE WOULD
YOU KNOW GET DIRECTION FOR YOU ALL IF YOU WANTED TO FORMULATE SOME ACTUAL STRATEGIES THAT YOU CONSIDER FOR ADOPTING AND THEN WE WOULD ENGAGE THEM TO SEE HOW BEST TO CRAFT THOSE.
BUT RIGHT NOW THERE'S JUST A THERE'S A HUGE LITERATURE STUDYING THIS. YEAH. AGAIN FROM LIKE CURE REPORT IT'S WEIRD FROM THAT CURE
REPORT AND AND ALSO OTHER RESOURCE SOURCES THAT WERE CONSULTED TO TO DRAFT THE STAFF REPORT AND A LOT OF THEM
ARE ALSO CONSULTED IN MEDIA REPORTS ON THE PHENOMENON OF OFFICE VACANCY AND REVIVING THE OFFICE MARKET SOMETIMES THROUGH OFFICE CONVERSION. SO WE RELIED ON THOSE RESOURCES A LOT BUT THEY WOULD
DEFINITELY BE ENGAGED ONCE WE CAME UP WITH OUR ONCE WE GOT DIRECTION ON STRATEGIES TO TO
TO PURSUE YEAH I JUST I WONDER AND SORRY THAT KIND OF WHATEVER I JUST WONDER YOU KNOW LIKE YOU HAD POINTED OUT EARLIER IN THE IN THE
PRESENTATION THE OTHER MARKETS WERE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS EVEN THE ONE IN MINNETONKA THAT WAS LIKE IN THE 2000S I THINK THAT'S LIKE CLOUD NINE THE CLOUD NINE DEVELOPMENT OFF
OF HIGHWAY 169 AND THAT THERE JUST HAVE NOT BEEN THAT MANY OVER I MEAN HOW MANY DECADES RIGHT YEAH SO I JUST MY FIRST QUESTION IS LIKE IS IT WORTH
ALL OF THE TIME THAT IT WILL TAKE THE CITY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT TO DO RIGHT THE CASE BY CASE BASIS I MEAN IT COULD SPIN AND SPIN FOR A LONG TIME
AND END UP WITH LIKE ONE BUILDING WHICH THAT ONE BUILDING CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE. BUT THERE MIGHT BE A MUCH SIMPLER WAY TO APPROACH IT THAN GETTING INTO ALL OF THE
YOU KNOW, ALL THE REGULATORY ASPECTS OF IT, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? SO YEAH, SURE COMMISSIONER WE DO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF CAUTION AS YOU KNOW AS
YOU'RE CONSIDERING WHAT DIRECTION WE SHOULD GO THAT YOU KNOW WE HAVE RESOURCES THAT YOU KNOW AT THE CITY THAT ARE DEDICATED TO A LOT OF DIFFERENT PROJECTS AND NEEDS AND PRIORITIES THAT THE
CITY HAS IDENTIFIED. AND SO IF THIS TAKES AWAY FROM THAT, YOU SHOULD HOPEFULLY IN ANY SORT OF DIRECTION WE'RE GIVEN IS CONSIDERED IN IN
RESPECT TO THOSE OTHER PRIORITIES AND ALSO RECOGNIZING JUST HOW LIMITED CONVERSION PROJECTS ARE IN THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON THEY COULD GROW IN POPULARITY AGAIN.
THERE IS A TAX CREDIT THAT IS BEING PROPOSED THAT SPECIFICALLY DIRECTED TOWARD CONVERSION PROJECTS SO THAT ACTUALLY WE COULD BE GETTING AHEAD OF THE CURVE IF WE
PURSUE SOME OF THESE INITIATIVES AND INTERVENTIONS. BUT NONETHELESS IT'S VERY RARE AND AND THERE'S BEEN NO OFFICE OF RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS AT ALL WITHIN THE CITY
OF BLOOMINGTON. AND AS YOU NOTED, IT'S INCREDIBLY RARE WITHIN THE METRO. IT'S INCREDIBLY HARD TO DO WITHIN EVEN THE DOWNTOWN OF MINNEAPOLIS. SO JUST SO YOU'RE ALL AWARE
OF THOSE CAUTIONS AS AS WE CONTINUE THIS DISCUSSION. YEAH I WASN'T I'M NOT TRYING TO LIKE DOESN'T I DON'T WANT TO MAKE IT I'M TRYING TO DISINCENTIVIZE THE CITY FROM
DOING ANYTHING I THINK THERE'S JUST MAYBE SOME SIMPLE STEPS TO TAKING A LOOK LIKE I WAS THINK OF IT LIKE LIKE BUSINESS PLANNING LIKE IF YOU'RE IN THIS AREA WELL WHAT IS THE WHAT IS THE ACTUAL MARKET SIZE
OF OPTION OF YOU KNOW OF OPPORTUNITIES LOOK LIKE FOR THE CITY TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS? IS IT 20 BUILDINGS? IS IT TEN BUILDINGS? IS IT TWO BUILDINGS LIKE IF
IT'S FIVE OR LESS I THINK YOU KNOW THINGS GET PRETTY PRETTY NARROW. SO THAT'S JUST MY OVERALL THINKING. SURE. CAN I ADD ONE COMMENT TO THAT?
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER CURRY. WHAT I WOULD ADD TO THAT IS I THINK STAFF IS COGNIZANT OF THE RESOURCE RESOURCES THAT ARE NEEDED FOR SOME OF THIS VARIOUS TASKS OR INTERVENTIONS. IN FACT I THINK WE TALKED
ABOUT THAT ONE OF THE TASKS THAT SOME CITIES ARE DOING IN TERMS OF ASSESSING THEIR OFFICE BUILDINGS IS A MORE RESOURCE INTENSIVE TASK. YOU KNOW LOOKING AT EACH INDIVIDUAL ONE TO STUDY THEIR FLOOR PLATE, TO STUDY THEIR
CLEAR INSIGHTS TO STUDY THEIR PARKING THAT'S A MORE RESOURCE INTENSIVE TASK SAY VERSUS JUST DOING A SIMPLE ORDINANCE THAT MAKES MULTIFAMILY PERMITTED IN A NEW ZONING DISTRICT THAT IS A LESS RESOURCE INTENSIVE
TASK. SO I THINK IT'S GOOD TO BE COGNIZANT IN TERMS OF TO TO THE MARKET AS YOU TALKED ABOUT IN TERMS OF THE RESOURCES NEEDED FOR THE PER THE
INTERVENTION, IS IT APPROPRIATE SO WE WELCOME THAT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE AT LEAST RIGHT NOW IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S A LOT THAT'S HAPPENING
AT THE LEGISLATURE THAT COULD HAVE A BIG IMPACT ON THIS INCLUDING THE BILL AROUND REQUIREMENT OF ALLOWING MULTIFAMILY AND MIXED USE
DEVELOPMENT IN ANY COMMERCIALLY ZONED DISTRICTS. UM I'VE BEEN WATCHING THAT BILL VERY CLOSELY AND IT SEEMS
TO HAVE GOTTEN A LITTLE BIT MORE TRACTION AS A SEPARATE BILL THIS YEAR IN COMPARISON TO WHAT HAPPENED LAST YEAR.
SO IN TERMS OF THE STAFF TIME AND CAPACITY I KIND OF ECHO COMMISSIONER CURRY'S RESPONSES. IT FEELS LIKE THIS IS A GREAT CONVERSATION TO HAVE BUT I
WOULD WAIT UNTIL THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION IS OVER GIVEN THAT THERE MIGHT BE SOME SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES INCLUDING A HOUSE FILE FOR FIVE SEVEN
WHICH I HADN'T HEARD ABOUT BUT I WILL LOOK INTO UM I KNOW WE LOST YOUR PRESENTATION ON THE
SCREEN BUT OH DID I? I'M SORRY. OH, THAT'S OKAY. UM, IN TERMS OF YOUR OTHER QUESTIONS SO FOR NUMBER THE
FIRST ONE I SUPPORT IT BUT I THINK WE SHOULD WAIT UNTIL THE LEGISLATURE DECIDES WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO AND IF THAT'S GOING TO BE A REQUIREMENT OR NOT. >> I THINK THERE'S SOME I THINK THERE'S A BILL AND
STREAMLINING AS WELL. I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY IF THAT IS IF PERTAINS SPECIFICALLY TO PERMITTING OF OFFICE CONVERSION PROJECTS BUT I KNOW
THAT THERE'S A BILL ON THAT ONE AS WELL AND IN TERMS OF THE OPPORTUNITY HOUSING ORDINANCE, IF THIS IS A SERIOUS PROJECT THAT THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON WANTS TO BE
SORT OF FIRST TO THE GATE ON, I WOULDN'T NECESSARILY PAUSE ENFORCEMENT OR AMEND BUT I WOULD UP INCENTIVIZING USING THE THE OPPORTUNITY HOUSING
ORDINANCE IF THAT MEANS DECREASING PARKING REQUIREMENTS, DECREASING WHATEVER NEEDS TO BE IF THIS IS REALLY ON THE TABLE OR SOMETHING WE WANT THE CITY
OF BLOOMINGTON TO GO FORWARD WITH I THINK THE OPPORTUNITY HOUSING ORDINANCE AND HAVING SOME INCENTIVES TO ACTUALLY
GET THIS DONE SEEMS LIKE IT SEEMS LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY HOUSING ORDINANCE IN COMPARISON TO SOME OF THE OTHER THE STRICTER INCLUSIONARY ZONING ORDINANCES
ACROSS THE TWIN CITIES SEEMS TO BE MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE IN THE CREATION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS AND IF THAT IF THAT IS ALSO THE CASE THEN
POTENTIALLY THE OR COULD BE EFFECTIVE IN PRODUCING THESE OFFICE CONVERSIONS IF THERE IS APPETITE FOR IT. SO THAT'S MY THOUGHTS. COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM THANK
YOU CHAIR. PLANNER RAMBLER OLSON MY ONLY QUESTION I HAD ON THE THE MATERIALS PRESENTED TONIGHT WAS WE A LOT OF SUBURBAN CITIES WHERE IN OUR PEER GROUP
WAS MINNEAPOLIS ENGAGED AT ALL OR WAS IT JUST TOO BIG OF A CITY TO KIND OF BE CONSIDERED A PEER GROUP? CHAIR COMMISSIONER, WE DID
ENGAGE THEM WHETHER I MEAN A LOT OF WHAT THEY WHAT THEY DID WAS ALREADY HAS ALREADY BEEN COVERED KIND OF IN POPULAR MEDIA AND IS EVEN DETAILED ON
THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS WEBSITE. SO THE CONVERSATION WE HAD WITH A PRETTY HIGH LEVEL STAFF WITH THE CITY THAT WAS YOU KNOW THAT WAS IN CHARGE
OF DRAFTING THOSE THOSE AMENDMENTS AND POLICIES AND IT WAS IT WAS A FRUITFUL CONVERSATION IN THAT IT JUST KIND OF REINFORCED WHAT WE
READ ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT MOTIVATED THEIR PURSUIT OF THESE INITIATIVES AND AMENDMENTS AND SO KIND OF GIVING THAT BACKGROUND AND
THEN AGAIN RECAPPING WHAT THEY ACTUALLY DID FOR OFFICE CONVERSIONS PRIMARILY WITHIN THEIR CBD. SO I MEAN THERE'S OFFICES ALL THROUGHOUT MINNEAPOLIS BUT IT
IS FOCUSED HEAVILY ON THEIR CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT. SO WE DID REACH OUT BUT A LOT OF LIKE THAT CONVERSATION WAS ALREADY CAPTURED IN SOME OF THE RESEARCH WE ALREADY DID
. SO WE'RE NOT REALLY SPECIFICALLY REFERENCING THAT CONVERSATION BUT WE DID REACH OUT. WE WEREN'T WE DID NOT WE DID NOT REACH OUT TO ST PAUL AGAIN, THAT WAS THEIR DOWNTOWN
ALLIANCE THAT YOU KNOW, THEY DID THAT STUDY OF THE 20 OFFICE BUILDINGS THAT YOU KNOW, FIND IF THERE GOOD CANDIDATES FOR CONVERSION AND THEN RESEARCH OR YOU KNOW JUST
LOOKING AT ARTICLES SEEING SOME OF OUR COUNCILMEMBERS PROPOSING TO BRING UP ORDINANCES THAT WOULD MAKE CONVERSIONS AN EASIER PROCESS
FOR THE CITY AND BUT WE DIDN'T ENGAGE ANY SPECIFIC OFFICIAL OR STAFF FROM ST PAUL THANK YOU. THAT QUESTION ANSWERED WITH
YOU CHAIR ON THIS I THINK WE SHOULD WAIT TO SEE HOW THE DUST SETTLES AT THE CAPITAL AND REASSESS YOU KNOW AND JUST LIKE I SEE WHERE THE WHERE THE
WHERE EVERYTHING ENDS UP BEFORE WE REALLY PUT A LOT OF STAFF TIME TOWARDS IT JUST GIVEN THE CURRENT MARKET DEMAND. THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER THOUGHTS? OH, COMMISSIONER. CAPTAIN THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. SO MY OVERALL SENTIMENT ON THIS IS THAT I AGREE WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND I'M
PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING AND I THINK MY OVERALL STATEMENT WAS THAT ALTHOUGH THIS IS A GOOD THING TO DO, I THINK THERE ARE OTHER GOOD THINGS CITY STAFF CAN DO.
AND I, I TRIED TO SAY THIS MORE ELOQUENTLY ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE RECENTLY. IT JUST DIDN'T SEEM TO WORK VERY WELL. BUT I THINK IF THERE'S LIKE I AGREE WITH THIS AS A CONCEPT BUT IT'S JUST A LOT OF STAFF
TIME FOR SOMETHING I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO HAVE THAT MUCH OF A REAL WORLD IMPACT AND I'D RATHER SEE OUR STAFF WORK ON OTHER THINGS THAT ARE ALSO GOOD THAT WILL HAVE MORE OF A REAL WORLD IMPACT. AND SO I'M GENERALLY
IN AGREEMENT WITH ALL OF THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS HERE. THE CR1C1 DOESN'T REALLY MOVE THE NEEDLE FOR ME. FINE I SUPPOSE STREAMLINING REVIEW SEEMS LIKE OBVIOUS
THING AMENDING THE NO. I FEEL PRETTY STRONGLY THAT WE SHOULD NOT RELAX THE AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS OF THE SHOW. I AGREE WITH STAFF ON THAT. TO GENERAL RICK'S POINT I
THINK IF THERE'S SOME WAY TO INCENTIVIZE IT THROUGH THE SHOW I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE. BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND STAFF'S CONCERN THAT HAVING TWO SETS OF RULES OR TWO TABLES OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO FRAME IT
AS FOR THE SHOW CREATES COMPLEXITY AND THAT MAY BE ILL ADVISED SO I WOULD UNDERSTAND THAT AS WELL. SO I WOULDN'T RELAX THE WHOLE BUT IF THERE'S SOMETHING SIMPLE THAT'S CREATIVE AND MORE SPECIFIC TO AN OFFICE
CONVERSION THAT INCENTIVIZES IT, I COULD PROBABLY GET BEHIND IT. BUT IN GENERAL, YOU KNOW THIS SEEMS LIKE SUCH A LOW HANGING FRUIT OH MY GOSH, WE'VE GOT ALL THIS OFFICE SPACE AND WE
NEED SO MUCH HOUSING WHY DON'T WE PUT THOSE TWO TOGETHER AND THEN EVERYTHING I'VE EVER LOOKED INTO IT ABOUT IS THIS JUST NOT A GOOD IDEA? LIKE I WISH IT WAS A GOOD IDEA BUT IT JUST ISN'T THAT GOOD OF AN IDEA LIKE HOTELS TO
RESIDENTIAL MAKES WAY MORE SENSE THAN OFFICE. THE HOTELS DO AND EVEN HOTELS TO RESIDENTIAL DOESN'T REALLY WORK THAT WELL. AN OFFICE TO RESIDENTIAL
REALLY DOESN'T WORK THAT WELL AND IN THE VERY LIMITED EXECUTION OF THIS IN THE TWIN CITIES THAT I'VE READ ABOUT YOU KNOW NOT WITH A GREAT DEAL OF SCRUTINY BUT IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THEY'D HAVE HUGE
SUBSIDIES TO EXECUTE THESE PROJECTS LIKE NO MARKET JUSTIFICATION, YOU KNOW, LIKE THE MARKET COULD NEVER SUPPORT THIS ON ITS OWN. IT'S HAD THESE ENORMOUS
SUBSIDIES AND SO LIKE THE SUSTAINABILITY OF THIS WORKING LONG TERM DOESN'T REALLY SEEM TO BE THERE. AND SO AGAIN I JUST THINK THAT THE PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS FROM A LONG TERM STANDPOINT IS IT REALLY THERE?
AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO THINK LIKE MAN WE'VE BEEN BUILDING HOUSING FOR LIKE A DECADE HARD AND EVENTUALLY THE MARKET'S GOING TO CATCH UP AND SO LIKE
I DON'T KNOW LIKE I KNOW IT'S TOUGH AND THERE IS A DEMAND FOR HOUSING BUT I THINK EVENTUALLY WE'LL CATCH UP AND HAVE WE JEOPARDIZED OTHER THINGS TOO TO ACCOMMODATE THE NEED FOR HOUSING NOW SO ALL THAT TO SAY I'M PRETTY MUCH
IN ALIGNMENT WITH ALL THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS ON THIS. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CURRY THANKS CHAIR. JUST ONE MORE QUICK QUICK
THOUGHT AGAIN, I THINK IF YOU TAKE A LOOK IF YOU'RE ABLE TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT THE ACTUAL VACANCY RATES ARE OF INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS AND FIND A SMALL SET AND THEN YOU CAN TAKE A MUCH MORE TARGETED
APPROACH AND ACTUALLY WORK WITH THE THE OWNERS OF THAT BUILDING IF THEY'RE YOU KNOW, MAYBE NOT PAYING THEIR PROPERTY TAXES OR SOMETHING AND JUST KIND OF GET TO THE GET TO THE END A LOT QUICKER
BY IDENTIFYING THAT THAT SMALL SET OF FOLKS THAT YOU REALLY WANT TO WORK WITH. COMMISSIONER WHITE THANK YOU
MADAM CHAIR. YEAH. IN GENERAL I AGREE WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. I ALSO AGREE WITH WHAT'S BEEN SAID ABOUT NOT SPENDING A LOT OF TIME ON THIS RIGHT NOW.
I THINK THAT IF THE NEEDS THERE YOU'VE GOT SOME GREAT HOMEWORK HERE AND WE COULD BE READY TO MOVE QUICKLY SHOULD THE NEED SUDDENLY ARISE. I THINK WAITING TO SEE WHAT
THE LEGISLATURE DOES ALSO MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. BUT MY BIGGER CONCERN IS, YOU KNOW, THE THE THE RESEARCH THAT I'VE SEEN LIMITED THOUGH THAT IS IS THAT THESE ARE NOT
LIKELY TO BE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONVERSIONS AND THE THE PERSONAL EXPERIENCE THAT I HAVE HAD IN A VERY LIMITED WAY WITH SEEN OFFICE SPACE OR
HISTORICAL BUILDINGS CONVERTED INTO RESIDENTIAL IS THAT THEY ALMOST ALWAYS END UP HIGH END CONDOS AND HIGH END HOUSING AND YOU KNOW THAT'S HOW THE
MATH WORKS AND SO YOU KNOW WHILE I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE A WHOLE BUNCH OF NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING, I'M SKEPTICAL THAT THAT THIS IS
THE SOURCE OF IT. SO AGAIN, I THINK I APPRECIATE THE STAFF DOING THE WORK AND GETTING US THIS FAR AND I THINK THIS IS A GOOD PLACE TO TO PAUSE AND WAIT TO SEE WHAT
DEVELOPS. CHAIR COMMISSIONER, I AM KIND OF SMILING BECAUSE I PUT A LOT OF WORK INTO IT BUT I KNOW THAT I TAKE YOUR POINT UM AND IT'S SO MAYBE NOT SO MUCH WORK
IN THE FUTURE IS PROBABLY ADVISED BUT IT'S REGARDING THE AFFORDABILITY COMPONENT AT THE PRESENTATION YESTERDAY IN FRONT OF A IT WAS SHERMAN
ASSOCIATES THAT WAS PRESENTING AT THIS SENSIBLE LAND USE COALITION MEETING. THEY ARE IN THE MIDST OF FINISHING UP ONE PROJECT IN ST PAUL THE LANDMARK TOWER AND THEN THEY'VE DONE THE GROOVE LOFTS IN DOWNTOWN
MINNEAPOLIS I BELIEVE THE GROOVE LOFTS I MEAN THAT THAT WAS A WEIRD FLOOR PLATE BUT THEY HAD TO MAKE IT AFFORDABLE. GRANTED THEY HAD A A HUGE MENU OF SUBSIDIES AND IT WAS YOU
KNOW IT WAS A HISTORIC STRUCTURE. THEY GOT THOSE TAX CREDITS. I CAN'T EVEN I YEAH, I CAN'T RECALL ALL THE FINANCING THAT
HELPED I THINK THEY WERE ABLE TO RECEIVE TO EXECUTE THIS PROJECT BUT THEY DO SAY BUT IN AS A BENEFIT THAT I NEGLECTED TO MENTION BECAUSE
ON THAT ONE SLIDE I'M NOT SURE WHY I MENTION OR NEGLECTED TO MENTION IT IS THAT THERE'S A BENEFIT TO THE DEVELOPERS THAT THEY DON'T NEED TO BUILD THE BUILDING THE BUILDINGS THERE SO THAT DOES REDUCE SOME OF THE COST AND THEN IT DOES PLAY INTO THE AFFORDABILITY
FACTOR. GRANTED YOU STILL NEED TO SUPPORT THAT WITH OTHER FORMS OF ASSISTANCE AND TO REALLY GET TO THAT YOU KNOW 60% AM I BUT NONETHELESS I MEAN THERE
ARE PRIDE THERE ARE EXAMPLES OF CONVERSION PROJECTS THAT ARE ABLE TO ACHIEVE THE AFFORDABILITY. BUT I MEAN AS YOU KNOW AND YOU KNOW OR AS I'VE REPEATED A LOT IS THAT IT COMES WITH A LOT
OF SUBSIDY. SO IT'S A IT'S A TRICKY PICTURE TO BE SURE. RIGHT. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND I ABSOLUTELY AGREE AND I DON'T THINK THE WORK WILL GO TO WASTE JUST TO BE CLEAR LIKE I
THINK THAT IT'S IT'S GREAT TO HAVE THIS IN THE POCKET AND READY TO GO AND READY TO MOVE FORWARD WHEN THE TIME COMES. I AND I APPRECIATE THE
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE STAFF ABOUT WHERE TO SPEND TIME IN ORDER NOT TO SPEND TIME IN THE FUTURE. SO I THINK THAT YOU GUYS ARE RIGHT ON AND I APPRECIATE YOU BEING RESPONSIBLE WITH YOUR TIME.
>> COMMISSIONER ISA, IT'S SORT OF A COMMENT AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S POSSIBLE I WOULD LOVE TO SEE LIKE A COST BY COST VERSUS COST ANALYSIS OF LIKE A
NEW DEVELOPMENT VERSUS OFFICE USE ACCOUNTING FOR LIKE IN LIKE A TEN YEAR TIME HORIZON TO FOR LIKE REPAIR THINGS LIKE THAT AND KIND OF TO WHAT COMMISSIONER WHITE
MENTIONED I DID NOTICE OR I NOTICED THAT A LOT OF THESE OFFICE CONVERSIONS ARE HIGH END LIKE IF YOU GO TO NORTH LOOP THAT'S WHERE I SEE MOSTLY AND SO AT LEAST VISUALLY IT
LOOKS LIKE IT BUT YEAH I'D LOVE TO SEE THAT AND I FEEL LIKE FOR DEVELOPERS IT MIGHT BE MORE BENEFICIAL OR BENEFICIAL TO THEM BECAUSE YOU
COULD GET A BUILDING FOR REALLY FOR CHEAPER MAYBE FOR DISCOUNTED BECAUSE IT'S NOT BEING USED AS OFFICE AND THEN TAKE ADVANTAGE OF LIKE HISTORICAL TAX CREDITS THINGS
LIKE THAT AND THEN ALSO GET SUBSIDIES AND THEN GET LIKE MARKET RENT SO IT MIGHT BE FROM AFFORDABILITY ASPECT IT'S INTERESTING TO LOOK AT ALSO
FROM A FINANCIAL ASPECT IT MIGHT BE REALLY INTERESTING TO LOOK AT ACTUALLY A TEN YEAR TIME HORIZON. LET'S SEE THE PERCENTAGE OF THE DIFFERENCE IN COST
. MR. JOHNSON THAT'S YOUR APPROACH. IF I CAN JUST MAKE TWO QUICK COMMENTS KIND OF OBSERVING THE DISCUSSION AND THANKS TOM FOR PRESENTING ALL THIS INFORMATION. ONE TWO THINGS THAT OCCURRED
TO ME IS ONE YES, WE CAN REPORT BACK AFTER THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION TO KIND OF PROVIDE YOU AN UPDATE AS TO WHAT PASSED WHAT DIDN'T, WHERE'S THE STATE OF PLAY ON SOME OF THESE THINGS. SO WE CERTAINLY CAN DO THAT AND THAT IS OUR WHOLE LITANY
OF ISSUES NOT JUST ON TONIGHT'S TOPICS ON THE SECOND THING QUICKLY IS THAT I DON'T BELIEVE IN RECENT PAST WE'VE INVITED THE CITY ASSESSOR TO MAKE A PRESENTATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND SOME TIME THEY DO MAKE AN ANNUAL
PRESENTATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL EVERY YEAR IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE OF INTEREST TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION I CERTAINLY COULD INVITE THEM TO DO THAT. I BELIEVE THEY'RE DOING IT ON APRIL 14TH OR AN UPCOMING COUNCIL MEETING.
SO IF THAT'S SOMETHING OF INTEREST AND YOU KNOW YOU KNOW TALKING ABOUT THE DATA, TALKING ABOUT STATE OF PLAY OF DIFFERENT LAND USES IN BLOOMINGTON AND HOW THEY'RE DOING, WE CERTAINLY CAN DO
THAT. SO I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE. COMMISSIONER YOU SIR? YEAH, I'D LOVE TO HAVE LIKE AN EXTRA MEETING OR SOMETHING OR ADD THAT TO THE AGENDA FOR THAT ONE.
YOU KNOW IT'D BE IT BE NICE. I CAN I CAN CERTAINLY MAKE THE REQUEST. ALL RIGHT. >> DO YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR US?
OH, YEAH. YOU KNOW CHAIR SORRY. THERE'S ANOTHER SLIDE. SO THIS IS AGAIN FOLLOWING ALONG THE STRUCTURE OF A
REGULATORY, LOGISTICAL AND FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE THAT WE CAN PROVIDE. THIS ONE IS THE LOGISTICAL ACTIONS SO NICK ALREADY REFERRED TO THIS AS BEING VERY
RESOURCE INTENSIVE. I DON'T MEAN TO COLOR YOUR DECISION ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR ARE ACTION THAT WE COULD TAKE BUT PERHAPS SURVEY AND MAP OFFICE PROPERTY IS KIND OF RECORDING THEIR
CHARACTERISTICS AND MAKING THAT PUBLICLY AVAILABLE. SO IT'S A RESOURCE TO PEOPLE WHO ARE LOOKING FOR A COMPUTER CONVERSION OPPORTUNITIES. NOW GRANTED THAT WOULD REQUIRE
US GOING TO EACH PROPERTY AND OR CALLING EACH PROPERTY AND SEEING IF THEY HAVE SOME SORT OF FLOOR PLAN AVAILABLE WHERE YOU CAN MAKE THOSE MEASUREMENTS AND WE CAN MAKE THAT AVAILABLE IN ONE RESOURCE.
MAYBE IT'S NOT THAT. NO, I KNOW I DON'T WANT TO PREJUDGE BUT NONETHELESS IT SEEMS LIKE IT MIGHT BE YEAH THAT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME SO THAT'S I'LL PUT THAT TO YOU
AND THE SECOND LOGISTICAL ACTION AS A SUGGESTION IS PREPARE AND MAKE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE EDUCATION EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES THAT DEVELOPERS MAY WANT TO CONSUME
BEFORE THEY BEFORE AND WHILE THEY'RE PURSUING A A CONVERSION PROJECT AND I'VE BUCKET OF THESE TWO TOGETHER I HAVE GROUPED THESE TWO
TOGETHER AND AND OR PROVIDE DEDICATED STAFF AS A POINT OF CONTACT FOR CONVERSION APPLICANTS OR APPLICANTS THAT ARE PURSUING OFFICE CONVERSIONS. STAFF DOES SUPPORT BOTH
OF THOSE SO I'LL LEAVE THAT TO YOU AND YOU CAN ASK ME ANY QUESTIONS YOU'D LIKE. I'LL I'LL GO FIRST. I THINK THE I AGREE WITH STAFF
THAT SEEMS LIKE IT'S A BIG LIFT TO SURVEY AND MAP ALL THE OFFICE PROPERTIES PARTICULARLY TO REALLY UNDERSTAND CONVERSION POTENTIAL WOULD BE
DIFFICULT AND I THINK HAVING A DEDICATED STAFF OR EITHER EITHER DEDICATING A STAFF PERSON OR HAVING A PERSON IS THE POINT OF CONTACT IT
PROBABLY MAKES SENSE BUT IT ALMOST MAKES SENSE JUST TO TRACK WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE GETTING ANY INTEREST OUT THERE GENERALLY WHICH I'M SURE YOU'RE ALREADY DOING. SO IT FEELS LIKE THAT ONE'S
PROBABLY ALREADY A BIG CHECKBOX FOR MY PERCEPTION. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS? COMMISSIONER HICKTON I AGREE
WITH STAFF ON BOTH OF THESE. NO FURTHER THOUGHTS RIGHT. >> OKAY. THIRD SET OF QUESTIONS. OH SORRY MR. MCGOVERN. MY APOLOGIES.
I WAS REALLY ON THE FENCE READING THIS AND AFTER LISTENING TO EVERYBODY AND WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR MATTER, I
CONCUR WITH EVERYBODY THAT WE DO NEED TO LOOK AT THIS A LITTLE BIT MORE INTENSELY AND DEEPLY BEFORE WE START ACTING ON IT. OKAY.
ALL RIGHT. SO LAST QUESTION ACTUALLY NOT A SERIES OF QUESTIONS. SO THIS LAST QUESTION IS SHOULD STAFF INVESTIGATE POTENTIAL FEE WAIVERS FOR
OFFICE CONVERSION PROJECTS? UM, I SHOULD SAY PROJECTS. MY APOLOGIES. UM, THERE'S QUALIFIED SUPPORT FROM STAFF UM, AGAIN WE'D WANT
THAT SAC FEE EXEMPTED FROM FROM A WAIVER AND YOU KNOW WE WE WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS WOULD REQUIRE ADDITIONAL ENGAGEMENT WITH OTHER STAFF AT
THE CITY OR OTHER DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS THAT RELY ON THOSE FEES TO FUND OTHER ACTIVITIES THAT ARE YOU KNOW, IT'S IMPORTANT IN THERE ALREADY EVEN GETTING THAT SERVICE AT A
DISCOUNT SO THEN TO COMPLETELY EXEMPT THEM MIGHT BE CHALLENGING FOR SOME OF SOME STAFF AT THE CITY BUT THERE MAY BE APPETITE FOR IT AND SINCE IT'S MAYBE NOT THE MOST
COMMON TYPE OF REQUEST, MAYBE IT'S NOT THAT BIG OF A DEAL TO EXEMPT OR TO WAIVE FEES BUT I'LL LEAVE THAT OLD FOR YOU TO DISCUSS AND DECIDE.
WE GOT A LOT COMMISSIONER COOKED IN MR. ELMER OLSON IS THIS EXCLUSIVE TO OFFICE CONVERSIONS OR ALSO HOTEL CONVERSIONS? CHAIR COMMISSIONER THIS IS FRAMED AS ONLY RELATED TO
OFFICE CONVERSIONS. I DON'T WANT TO PREJUDGE IF WE WOULD EXTEND THIS TO HOTEL TO
RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS ALTHOUGH I WITHOUT THINKING ABOUT IT INTUITIVELY I CAN'T SEE ANY ISSUES WITH THAT. BUT IF PLANNING MANAGER JOHNSON WANTS TO CHIME
IN THAT'S YEAH THAT'S FINE. MR. JOHNSON YEAH SURE I'LL REACT. I AGREE WITH TOM. YOU KNOW IT CERTAINLY COULD BE AN OPTION BUT I THINK YOU KNOW, PERHAPS MORE IMPORTANTLY
IS WHAT TYPES OF FEES ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? LOW HANGING FRUIT IS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FEES. THESE TEND TO BE LOWER REVENUE SOURCES FOR THE CITY. BUT WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT EXEMPTING SIGNIFICANT PORTIONS
OF BUILT SAY BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW FEES OR THOSE UTILITY FEES OTHER THINGS PARK DEDICATION LESS OFFICE PROPERTIES HAPPEN TO BE UNPLANTED SO YOU'RE NOT COLLECTING AS MANY PARK
DEDICATION FEES ON OFFICE PROPERTY TYPE DEVELOPMENT BUT THAT'S WHERE THE MORE SIGNIFICANT LOSS OF REVENUE IS REALIZED IS ON THOSE TYPES OF FEES. SO I THINK YOU CAN DO THINGS
RELATED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FEES, THOSE OTHER TYPES OF FEES THAT'S WHAT TOM IS MENTIONING REQUIRES MORE ENGAGEMENT WITH OTHER CITY PARTNERS AND HAVE MORE POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON REVENUE.
SO THAT'S WHERE I THINK IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE UNCERTAIN. COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM THANK YOU CHAIR I, I ECHO THE SLIDES .
I THINK THAT SAC SHOULD BE EXEMPT FROM CONSIDERATION JUST WILL BE WITH ANY SORT OF CONVERSION YOU'D BE CHANGING OR MORE THAN LIKELY INCREASING FIXTURE COUNTS. SO THAT SAC FEE SHOULD BE
THERE. I AGREE WITH MAYBE A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FEE BEING SOME LOW HANGING FRUIT BUT I THINK A BUILDING PERMIT FEE THIS IS GOING TO BE A HEAVY LIFT FROM A REGULATORY
STANDARD FOR REVIEWING THE PHYSICAL PLANS. SO I DON'T THINK THAT THE CITY SHOULD OFFER EXEMPTION OF BUILDING PERMIT FEES. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.
YOU SIR. COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR THE SAC FEE DOES IT GO I KNOW THE MAC COUNCIL LIKE YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THEM TO DO THAT. DOES IT GO BACK TO THE CITIES ONE THE SPECIFIC CITY BECAUSE
I KNOW YOU MENTIONED LOSS OF REVENUE IN DIFFERENT WITH DIFFERENT FEES AND SECONDLY IF IT DOES THAT MAKE MUCH OF A DIFFERENCE IF LIKE LET'S SAY
THE OFFICE USE WAS WENT TO THE YOU KNOW, PAY TO SAC FEE AND LIKE AN OFFICE YOU HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE USING RESTROOMS YOU KNOW AND AN OFFICE VERSUS IT MIGHT BE SIMILAR TO LIKE A
RESIDENTIAL IF THAT MAKES SENSE AND THERE MAY NOT EVEN BE AN EXTRA SEWER CHARGE. THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTAND FROM WHAT A SACK FEE IS. IT'S LIKE A SEWER AVAILABILITY CHARGE.
SO IS THAT EVEN MAKES SENSE COMPARATIVELY IF YOU COMPARE IT THAT MAKES SENSE. CHAIR COMMISSIONER I HAVEN'T DONE THAT COMPARISON AND I
THINK I MEAN I UNDERSTAND MAYBE INTUITIVE OR MAYBE YOUR INTUITION IS THAT IT YOU KNOW IT KIND OF EQUALS OUT BETWEEN OFFICE USE AND RESIDENTIAL USE .
I'M PRETTY SURE THERE'S MORE WATER USE IN RESIDENTIAL YOU'RE JUST THAT MANY MORE FIXTURES LOOPS. ALL RIGHT, I'LL PUT THAT THERE THAT ADDITIONAL ADDITIONAL
AMOUNT OF FIXTURES IT'S JUST GOING TO LEAD TO MORE WATER USE. SO I THINK THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE DEDICATED TO UPDATING THE SEWER AVAILABILITY TO THOSE DEVELOPMENTS AND SO THAT THAT'S I I'M KIND OF OPERATING
ON AN IMPRESSION AS WELL. SO I CAN'T SAY FOR SURE UNLESS PLANNING MANAGER JOHNSON HAS YOUR DATA. YEAH. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO THIS. SO THERE I'VE BEEN INVOLVED A
LITTLE BIT MORE IN THE SAC FEE POLICY IN THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE OVER THE LAST SIX MONTHS. THE ISSUE WITH THAT IS THAT THE CITY IS VERY INTENTIONALLY SEEKING TO COLLECT A CERTAIN
AMOUNT OF MONEY TO DO SIGNIFICANT SEWER UPGRADES WITHIN THE COMMUNITY NEED TO RAISE $55 MILLION TO DO TO EXECUTE THIS CAPITAL CAMPAIGN. AND SO THERE IS A MET COUNCIL SAC FEE THE CITY HAS NO
AUTHORITY OR ABILITY TO WAIVE MET COUNCIL SAC FEE. WHAT THE CITY SAC FEE IS THAT IF YOU PAY FIVE SACKS TO MET COUNCIL YOU NOW ALSO HAVE TO PAY FIVE SIX TO THE CITY. IT'S AT SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT
RATES. IT'S NOT AT THE SAME THE PER SAC IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT BUT THIS DIDN'T USED TO BE THE CASE. THIS IS OF JUST JANUARY TO 2025. THIS IS A NEW FEE AND SO
CERTAINLY THERE ARE IMPACTS ON DEVELOPMENT RELATED TO THAT. I AGREE WITH THE COMMENTS THAT RESIDENTIAL DEFINITELY IS GOING TO HAVE A HIGHER SANITARY SEWER DISCHARGE THAN THAN OFFICE IS DEFINITELY SO
OFFICE PROPERTIES CAN GET A CREDIT IF THEY'VE PREVIOUSLY PAID SAC SAY IF THE RESIDENTIAL IS 106 THE OFFICE IS 66, THEY GET 60 SAC CREDITS
AND THE CITY WILL HONOR THAT BUT THEY STILL HAVE TO PAY THE 40 IF THAT MAKES SENSE. AND THE REASON THAT WE'RE NOT PUTTING THAT ON THE TABLE OR SUGGESTING THAT IT BE CONSIDERED IS BECAUSE OF THIS
OTHER WORK THAT'S GOING ON TO INTENTIONALLY RAISE THESE FUNDS TO UPGRADE SEWERS. WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE DOING DEVELOPMENT IN MANY OF THESE AREAS IF WE DON'T UPGRADE THE SEWERS. SO IT'S REALLY JUST A KIND OF A NO NO GO ZONE FROM OUR
PERSPECTIVE. COMMISSIONER CARY THANKS CHAIR YOU KNOW, I THINK AGAIN IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT IN THE CONTEXT OF LIKE MAYBE AT MOST LIKE THREE POTENTIAL BUILDINGS THAT
YOU WOULD EVEN CONSIDER TO DO THIS FOR I THINK TIFF WOULD PROBABLY BE A MORE APPROPRIATE WAY TO INCENTIVIZE A DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE YOU'RE ESSENTIALLY JUST TRYING TO INCREASE PROPERTY TAXES FOR THAT OR GET MORE PROPERTY
TAXES OUT OF THAT THAT REAL ESTATE VERSUS WHAT YOU'VE GOT TODAY. SO I WOULD JUST SKIP THE FEE WAIVERS ALTOGETHER AND FOCUS ON THAT.
COMMISSIONER COOK TEN YEAH, I GUESS I'M NOT GOING TO DIE ON THIS HILL FOR THIS ONE. I THINK IT'S FAIRLY INSIGNIFICANT BUT LIKE IN THE SPIRIT OF THERE NOT BEING A
FREE LUNCH IF WE'RE GOING TO GIVE BIT OF A WAIVER TO THE DEVELOPER SOMEBODY HAS GOT TO PAY FOR IT. SOMEBODY'S GOT TO PAY FOR THE STAFF TIME AND THEN SO THAT MEANS OUR RESIDENTS ARE PAYING FOR IT. SO THEY'RE EITHER LOSING OTHER
CITY SERVICES OR THE TAXES GO UP AND SO MY THOUGHT IS IS THIS A BENEFIT TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC OF THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON? I DON'T REALLY THINK SO. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE AN
OFFICE PROBLEM THAT IS LIKE LOWERING THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN BLOOMINGTON. IS IT SOMETHING I'D LIKE TO SEE ADDRESSED BUT I DON'T THINK YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT DRIVING DOWN THE STREET LOOKING AT EMPTY OFFICE BUILDINGS WITH BROKEN WINDOWS.
IT IS SOMETHING WE NEED TO ADDRESS AND SO I DON'T LIKE PUTTING THIS BACK ON THE TAXPAYERS SO I WOULD JUST KEEP IT AS IS NOT GRANT THE WAIVER. MR. CURRY THANKS. SURE. YEAH.
AND REGARDING THE CONDITION OF THE MARKET LIKE 17% IS NOT A IT'S NOT NOT A GOOD NUMBER BUT IT'S NOT A TERRIBLE NUMBER RIGHT? LIKE ST PAUL DOWNTOWN ST PAUL
IS LIKE CONSISTENTLY ABOVE 20% AND THAT'S THAT'S BAD. THAT'S BASICALLY THE GOVERNMENT BUILDING OFFICE BUILDINGS AND THEN MOVING OUT OF THEM AND THEN THEM NOT BEING RELEASED. SO AGAIN LIKE YOU SAID I DON'T
THINK BLOOMINGTON'S REALLY IN THAT BAD OF A POSITION IN GENERAL THAT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE DRASTICALLY HAVE TO THROW RESOURCES AT.
I HAVE A QUESTION. I KNOW THE OFFICE VACANCY IS GOING TO PROBABLY FEEL A LITTLE DIFFERENT NOW THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT STATE
GOVERNMENTS ARE ASKED TO COME BACK INTO THE OFFICE MORE OFTEN. I DON'T KNOW HOW QUICKLY WE WILL SEE THAT TURNAROUND BUT
DO WE HAVE A LOT OF FEDERAL STATE OFFICES THAT WE WOULD SEE AN IMPACT IN THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON? >> CHAIR ALBRECHT I, I, I
DON'T KNOW MR. CHAIR. ALBRECHT I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT NUMBER. THERE'S MORE THAN YOU KNOW ABOUT BUT THERE'S NOT A LOT I GUESS IS WHAT I WOULD SAY. FAIR ENOUGH. MAYBE WE'LL WAIT TO SEE ABOUT
SAY PAUL SO DISTRICT SECRET GOVERNMENT ENTITY OH I DIDN'T MEAN TO FRAME THAT LIKE IT WAS SOME KIND OF CLANDESTINE OPERATION OR ESPIONAGE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
SOCIAL SECURITY OFFICE I THINK THE IRS MAYBE RAN SOME SPACE SOMEWHERE IN TOWN BUT IT'S IT'S NOT A LOT BUT THERE IS A
LITTLE BIT I'D BE CURIOUS TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS IN ST PAUL. COMMISSIONER ISSA SPEAKING OF IRS IS THE IRS OFFICE STILL GOING TO BE THERE AND THEN
WHEN IT IS WELL LIKE THE METRO BUILDINGS BECAUSE I HEARD YOU KNOW THAT FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS LIKE CUTTING DOWN ON I DON'T KNOW YOU KNOW ABOUT THAT, NICK. I DO NOT I DON'T KNOW
PRECISELY. BUT I KNOW IN KIND OF RESEARCHING FOR THIS TOPIC AS WELL AS JUST GENERAL AWARENESS OF THINGS BLOOMINGTON WE HAD THE SAME QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT
THAT THEY WOULD BE VACATING OR TRACKING THINGS OUT OF D.C. ON HOW TO TRACK. ALL RIGHT.
OKAY. >> SO UM, IF THERE ARE ANY ADDITIONAL ITEMS YOU'D LIKE TO DISCUSS UM, THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY THOSE WERE THE
ONLY QUESTIONS I I MEAN THERE WERE A LOT SO I SHOULDN'T SAY ONLY THOSE ARE A LOT OF QUESTIONS. I'M GLAD YOU GOT THROUGH THEM BUT IF THERE IS ANY ADDITIONAL ITEMS THAT WE SHOULD BE AWARE OF, WE'D BE WE'D REALLY
APPRECIATE THAT. COMMISSIONER HUTTON YEAH, THANKS MADAM CHAIR. I FEEL LIKE TIFF WAS BROUGHT UP A FEW TIMES IN THE STAFF REPORT OR IN THE WRITTEN REPORT AND WE DIDN'T REALLY DISCUSS IN THE PRESENTATION HERE. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION WE NEEDED TO HAVE ON THAT?
OH UH, CHAIR COMMISSIONER IT WAS MENTIONED BRIEFLY. IT WASN'T SEEN AS AN IDEAL FINANCIAL SOURCE FOR FINANCING
CONVERSION PROJECTS BECAUSE AGAIN IT'S YOU'RE COMPARING ABOUT THE THE TAX INCREMENT THAT YOU GENERATE FROM REDEVELOPMENT. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THAT MUCH IF STRUCTURE STRUCTURES THERE
AND THEN YOU'RE REVITALIZING IT BY PUTTING A USE IN THERE. HOW MUCH DOES IT ACTUALLY RAISE IN TERMS OF INCREMENT? IT'S NOT A WHOLE LOT. I DISCUSSED THIS WITH OUR COLLEAGUES IN THE PORT
AUTHORITY AS A POTENTIAL WAY TO INCENTIVIZE OR YOU KNOW, TO LOWER THE FINANCIAL BURDEN OF OFFICE CONVERSIONS AND THEY WEREN'T TO BULLISH ON THAT BEING A VERY GOOD FINANCIAL
RESOURCE BECAUSE IT JUST DOESN'T GENERATE THE INCREMENT THAT YOU WOULD NEED TO COVER THE REDEVELOPMENT. SURE. YEAH I'M SURE I AGREE WITH STEPH. I JUST WASN'T SURE IF WE NEEDED TO HAVE ANY MORE
DISCUSSION. MR. CURRY THANKS. SURE. YEAH. I'D ALSO NOTE THAT THERE ARE ASSESSORS OR WHAT YOU COME YOU KNOW PEOPLE WHO VALUE OFFICE
BUILDINGS, APPRAISERS, THINGS THAT WILL BE PAID A FEE TO REDUCE THE ASSESSED VALUE OF THE PROPERTY. SO IF WE HAD BUILDINGS THAT
HAD MUCH LOWER PROPERTY TAX VALUES THAT YOU KNOW, THE LANDLORDS THOUGHT THE BUILDINGS SHOULD BE APPRAISED AT A LOWER VALUE, THERE ARE PEOPLE OUT THERE WHO WOULD WORK WITH THEM TO DO THAT SO YOU'D PROBABLY BE SEEING THOSE
OPPORTUNITIES. YOU PROBABLY BE SEEING PEOPLE FOLLOW THROUGH ON THOSE TWO TO SAVE MONEY ON THEIR PROPERTY. SO JUST A HEADS UP AND CHAIR AND COMMISSIONER I MEAN THIS
IS A RESOURCE THAT'S ACTUALLY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE. THEY COULD USE IT. IT'S JUST IT'S NOT THE IDEAL TOOL IN OUR TOOLBOX. SO THAT'S WHY THERE WAS AN
INCLUDED WITHIN THE PALETTE OF MANY OR THE MENU OF OPTIONS. IT'S JUST THAT IT IS AVAILABLE. IT JUST WAS TO MAKE YOU AWARE THAT IT IS AVAILABLE BUT AGAIN DISCUSSING SOME OF THE DRAWBACKS OF IT AS YOU KNOW
BEING SOMETHING THAT CAN ENCOURAGE OFFICE TO RESIDENTIAL CONVERSION OR I MEAN OFFICE TO NON OFFICE CONVERSION ANY OF THE THOUGHTS
QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE THIS ITEM IS GOING TO BE ON THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ON APRIL 14TH AS A
STUDY ITEM. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE TWO ITEMS LEFT ON OUR AGENDA THIS EVENING.
UH, FIRST ITEM IS A STUDY ITEM . CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE DRAFT FEBRUARY 13TH PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SYNOPSIS EVERYONE WAS IN ATTENDANCE
EXCEPT FOR COMMISSIONER CURRY LOOKING FOR A MOTION COMMISSIONER COOK AND I'M TRYING MOVE TO APPROVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SYNOPSIS FROM FEBRUARY 13TH 2025 AS PRESENTED SECOND.
ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I I THOSE OPPOSED IN ANY ABSTENTIONS STEN ALL
RIGHT. >> WE ALSO NEED TO APPROVE THE DRAFT FEBRUARY 20TH PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SYNOPSIS COMMISSIONER COOKED IN MADAM CHAIR I MOVED TO APPROVE THE
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SYNOPSIS FROM FEBRUARY 20TH 2025 AS PRESENTED SECOND. >> ALL RIGHT WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND AND I SHOULD MENTION THAT COMMISSIONER
WHITE WAS NOT IN ATTENDANCE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I. I OPPOSE RAISED AND ABSTAIN ABSTAIN. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> ITEM FIVE IS ALSO A STUDY
ITEM. IT IS OUR REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION POLICY AND ISSUES UPDATE PLANNING MANAGER JOHNSON THANK YOU CHAIR ALBRECHT I HAVE A FEW UPDATES
TONIGHT. FIRST JUST A ROUND UP OF OUR UPCOMING MEETINGS AGAIN ON APRIL THE 10TH WE'RE PLANNING A PUBLIC HEARING. IT'S ACTUALLY BEEN ADVERTISED SO PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PHASE
ONE MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING ORDINANCE THAT'S THE TWEAKS TO IT USE TO FAMILY DWELLINGS AND TOWNHOME STANDARDS. SO KIND OF THE LOOKING AT THE EXISTING STANDARDS AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK LATER THIS SUMMER WITH THE PHASE TWO
COMPONENT OF THAT. SO THAT'S ON APRIL THE 10TH APRIL 24TH. WE CURRENTLY DON'T HAVE ANY ITEMS PLANNED FOR THIS AGENDA. I WOULD SAY AT THIS POINT THAT MEETING IS LIKELY TO BE CANCELED BUT I'LL FOLLOW UP
LATER ON TO CONFIRM THAT MAY THE 8TH WE'RE CURRENTLY PLANNING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING FOR SMALL BUSINESS CODES AND PROCESSES ORDINANCE. IF YOU RECALL THIS IS KIND
OF A GROUPING OF VARIOUS ITEMS EXTRA MATERIAL FOR USE, ROOFTOP SCREENING, SEVERAL OTHER THINGS. IT WAS KIND OF A A BASKET OF DIFFERENT AMENDMENTS TO THE
CITY CODE. I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT MAY 8TH OR LATER IN MAY WE COULD HAVE THE ANNUAL HOUSING REPORT PRESENTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM THE CITY'S HRA
STAFF JUST TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATED SNAPSHOT OF ALL THINGS BLOOMINGTON HOUSING. THE SECOND UPDATE I HAVE FOR YOU RELATES TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OPENINGS UPCOMING TECHNICAL SO THAT YOUR TERM
CURRENTLY RUNS THROUGH THE END OF JUNE RIGHT NOW THAT'S THE TRADITIONAL SCHEDULE THREE POSITIONS ARE TECHNICALLY GOING TO BE OPEN NEXT TERM TWO PLANNING COMMISSIONERS HAVE ELIGIBILITY TO REAPPLY.
YOU STILL NEED TO DO THAT IF YOU WANT TO COMMIT TO ANOTHER TERM. THE APPLICATION WINDOW OPENS MARCH 31ST AND THE APPLICATION DEADLINE IS MAY 7TH.
SO I JUST WANT TO GET THAT ON YOUR RADAR SCREEN FOR THOSE MEMBERS THAT MIGHT BE WONDERING IF YOUR TERM IS UP JUST CONTACT ME AND I'M HAPPY TO CHAT WITH YOU ABOUT IT AS WELL AS FILL YOU IN ON ANY
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PROCESS. JACKIE DAN PAVICH WITH THE CITY'S COMMUNITY OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT DIVISION IS THE POINT PERSON FOR ADVISORY BOARD AND COMMISSION RECRUITMENT AND APPLICATION PROCESS.
I CAN CONNECT YOU WITH HER AS WELL IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS. SO JUST A NOTE ABOUT THAT. THE LAST UPDATE I HAV IS A TRANSPORTATION UPDATE. THE CITY ENGINEER EARLIER THIS
EVENING EMAILED YOU ALL A REPORT OF CRASH DATA IN THE CITY. THE TEN MOST I WANT TO GET THIS RIGHT HERE I GOT IT THE EMAIL IN FRONT OF ME THE TEN MOST CRASH PRONE INTERSECTIONS
IN BLOOMINGTON BETWEEN 2022 AND 2024. SO THAT'S THREE YEARS OF DATA IN THIS REPORT THAT SHE EMAILED YOU AS WELL AS THE FIVE HIGHEST CRASH RATE.
SO A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT DATA POINT THERE. THE HIGHEST FIVE CRASH RATE INTERSECTIONS IN BLOOMINGTON AS WELL AS A RECOMMENDED ACTION OR AN ACTION IN PROGRESS THAT OUR TRANSPORTATION STAFF IS TAKING
RELATED TO THOSE SPECIFIC LOCATIONS DEPENDING ON THE NATURE OF THOSE CRASHES AND WHAT THEY'RE LEARNING ABOUT THOSE AREAS. SO FOR THOSE OF YOU ENTHUSIASTIC IN MY TRANSPORTATION AND SOME
OF THESE ELEMENTS, PLEASE READ THAT REPORT. AND JULIE ENCOURAGED FOLLOWING UP WITH HER OR KIRK ROBERTS IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS SHE'S STILL ON THE CALL BUT WE DON'T
UNLESS I MISSED SOMETHING I DON'T THINK I NEED TO CALL HER IN BUT SHE WANTED TO SHARE THAT WITH YOU OVER HOPEFULLY WE'RE ALL ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT TRANSPORTATION THAT'S THAT IS
THE MY UPDATES SO THANK YOU FOR THAT OPPORTUNITY. ALL RIGHT ANY UPDATES FROM COMMISSIONERS? ALL RIGHT.
THAT IS THE LAST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA. SO THAT CONCLUDES THE MARCH 27TH 2025 MEETING OF THE BLOOMINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION. >> HAVE A GOOD NIGHT