I'd like to call uh the meeting of the Richfield Planning Commission to order. The first thing on our agenda would be the approval of the minutes. Commissioner Charlesson moves to approve. Is there a second? Commissioner Canaly seconds. All those in favor of
approving the minutes. I opposed. All right. The next thing on the agenda would be approval of the minutes of the joint planning commission and work and council work session from February 24th. Commissioner Felson moves to approve. Is there a second? Commissioner Hoie
seconds. All those in favor? I All right. The next thing would be to approve the agenda for the rest of the meeting. Is there a motion to approve that? Commissioner Charlesson move to approve. Is there a second? Commissioner Canaly
seconds. Right. All those in favor of approving the agenda, please say I. I. Opposed. All right. Uh and now the first uh portion of the meeting for this evening is a public hearing to consider a request for site plan approval, a preliminary plat, a final plat, and a
variance. What? It's not on the It's third. Oh, I see it. Yep. I'm sorry. The next thing on the agenda would actually be our open forum, which is an opportunity for members of the public to address the planning commission typically on items
that are not on the regular agenda. Did we receive any comments uh beforehand? Say my name and address. Oh, yeah. Sure. All right, good evening. Uh, Stephanie Kolkowski. I'm a Richfield resident living on Lake View
Avenue. I'm here today with a heavy heart to share the tragic loss of my husband Henrik's cousin Lauren earlier this month. She and her partner Michael were intentionally and violently struck by a vehicle while crossing Emerson A and 26th Street in
Minneapolis. Two additional people were struck on this same day by the same driver only 5 minutes prior. Lauren was only 32, yet she was one of the most compassionate and smartest people I will ever know. Outside of her demanding career in patent law, she dedicated her
time generously to others. She loved using her animal experience earned from her Yale PhD in microbio to volunteer at Komao Conservatory on the weekends. More recently, she showed her deep commitment to our community by courageously protesting, even by herself, for
fairness and the rights of others. While we are grieving, my husband and I are also more determined than ever, to advocate for safer communities for pedestrians and cyclists in Minneapolis. I share Lauren's story with all of you
today to highlight the importance of prioritizing pedestrian safety in our city's planning and development. Her death must serve as a catalyst for tangible safety improvements. I believe that sharing the human impact of such
tragedies is a powerful reminder of our collective need for safer infrastructure and policies. As members of the planning commission, we have a vital role in shaping a city that protects all of its residents. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Is there anyone else here to address the planning commission for open forum? Were there any other uh comments received? Pler Crosby. No, there were not. Thank you. Thank
you. All right. Um, now we can move on to our public hearing uh to consider a request for site plan approval, a preliminary a preliminary plat, a final plat, and a variance for 42 units of multifamily housing at 6501 and
6525 Penn Avenue. Uh, do we have a report from the city staff? Yes, we do. Thank you. Chair JL Companies has submitted an application for land use approvals to construct a five-story 42 unit housing development on HA owned land north of
Dunkin Donuts at the southeast corner of 65th Street West and Penn Avenue South. As a Minnesota Housing Finance Agency funded project, this um this project is geared towards low-income families looking for safe and affordable housing.
Affordability levels would range from 30 to 60% of area median income. The proposal includes a unit mix rang ranging from one to four bedrooms, an enclosed parking garage, an exterior parking lot, and ground level common areas and
amenities. The subject property is zoned mixeduse community and lies within the Penn Avenue corridor overlay overlay district. Site plan approval is required for all new buildings in the mixeduse districts that are not otherwise approved through a conditional use
permit or planned unit development except for a retaining wall that exceeds height requirements along the east property line which is unrelated to the building itself. The proposed site plan complies with all aspects of the zoning
code. A preliminary plat is required to combine the two parcels into one development site. Although a final plot typically comes later, the applicant has submitted both for approval at this time. The variance as as far as the
variance, the variance being requested is a 7 and 1/2 ft variance from the 6T maximum retaining wall and fence height to allow a 13.5 ft tall combined retaining wall and fence along the east property line of the site. As explained
in the policy section further below, the request is reasonable and is based on unique on-site grading differences. Staff finds that the proposed project meets the intent and policies of the comprehensive plan, the Penn Avenue corridor overlay district,
and all other zoning code requirements except as noted by the retaining wall height variants. Consequently, staff supports all aspects of the request and recommends approval subject to the conditions listed in the draft resolutions of approval. We did receive
one email from a resident in the area. Um, they had a lot of questions, but not really any anything that I would mention. I believe they're actually here, so they might speak during the public hearing. And, um, the applicant is also here if you'd like to hear from them as well. Thank you. Any questions
for city staff before we ask the applicant? Is the applicant here? Uh, if you would like to please come forward and uh say your name and address for the record. My name is Johnny Opara, president CEO of Geo Companies and it's
a pleasure to be here. Address is 510 Brunson Street 100 St. Port Minnesota 55130. This um plot has been under uh has had various plans and has been under or at least one of them has been under control of different
um parts of uh the city for quite a while. What is spurring on the additional plot and the um proposed development? Are you asking in terms of mer what is what what what has come together so that
this is working now so that we have this plan? What is coming together? Yes. In terms of us moving forward with this project, correct? Yeah. So I would say that collectively our vision is to deliver 42 homes of affordable housing in this community. Uh we've been working
with the city of Richfield uh since last year. Uh we received if not the largest tax credit award through Minnesota housing in terms of their belief in this project for our ability to deliver really high quality housing that also will stand the test of time. Our interest in this city goes back to CO in
my conversations with um assistant community development director Julie Urban as well as development director uh Melissa as well. But um I think our interest in terms of partnering with this great city is to pick this blighted
land that has not been um used in its um um fullness and be able to deliver something that's going to be a part of this community. Adding value, right? and bring in one, two, three, and fourbedroom units uh to this community
for families, folks that are making lower incomes, folks that are working regular jobs, but also will have access to transit, access to Highway 100, all the different amenities that are nearby. And I think that this is a project that will not only stand the test of time, but also too prove that we are doing our
part as developers and our team to help change the narrative around affordable housing. I'm in this business not necessarily because I want to continue to deliver um housing that's going to be pretty. It's mainly because I want to make sure that I want to tap into folks
that uh grew up just like me in affordable housing, but also too talk to those folks that like my father who needed access to high quality housing for those families and for those individuals to be able to have access in this community. So for me it's really personal and also too my uh condolences
to your friend Commissioner. Uh that's um really unfortunate and we take that very seriously in terms of the pedestrians to make sure that they have the ability to walk uh in a community that they feel safe and that um we're being mindful of the traffic and all that. But uh more moreover I would say
that this is a project that um we're really proud of. Uh we've uh engaged the community uh by you know taking uh similar comments by putting together a indoor tot lot which is in my opinion may have not been done before. Basically almost two stories within the apartment
building and letting folks know that during you know the winter months when they may have access to um a nearby wreck you know which is I believe a mile or two miles away now they have access into it in their building. In addition to that, a washing, dryer, and every
unit, balconies, underground parking, um, fitness center, business center, on-site management, supportive services. I mean, we're spending investing almost $24 million on this site. So, at the end of the day, we feel that this is going to be a project that's going to not only
add value to this community, but really stand, you know what, we believe in the city of Richfield and uh we're committed to being a long-term owner and operator in this community. Thank you very much. Thank you. Um, if you don't mind, um, we may, if it's all
right, we may call you up to address if there are some questions, uh, after other comments that you might be able to answer. Absolutely. My pleasure. Oh, sure. Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah, we'll do that. All right. Is there uh anyone uh a resident or anyone else here to speak to this hearing? Yeah, please approach. Yeah, we open the public
hearing. Hi. Hi. Good evening. Um my name is Michael Gormley. I'm a resident of 6444 Newton Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota 55423.
Um, Commissioner Kowokowski, I'm really sorry to hear about the tragedy that befell your family and I'm here to talk to the commission about that specific issue. I represent a number of folks who live right in the area where this
um multif family housing project is going to go up and we live on a street that is extremely narrow that currently has no sidewalk on either side whether it's 65th Street Oliver or between Oliver and Penn there's no sidewalks and
we're inviting a building that's going to have 42 apartments some with multiple full bedrooms, three, four bedrooms and there at the current time is not planned to
have, in my opinion, sufficient parking on site. So that's going to drive folks onto the street or other areas for parking. Once you start getting the parking on the street, at the moment there isn't any kind of limitation for
where the cars can park. So, the potential for um individuals blocking um intersections, um individuals parking on both sides of the street, and having our community, people going walking their dogs, biking down the street with their
kids, etc. It presents a serious problem from a safety perspective for other cars being able to see the pedestrians and bikers on 65th Street, on Oliver, on Newton. Second, during the rush hour periods,
there is substantial alternative traffic coming off of 66th Street and driving down 66 65th Street at excessive rates of speed. They don't stop at the stop signs. I understand that that's not the issue of this
particular committee, but it is an issue of Richfield and it is an issue of the planning commission to understand that when you agree to have a new project go up, whether it's 42, 100, 25, that if
the community is not prepared to actually absorb the new traffic, the new parking, the new uh you know, etc. in a way that is safe for the people who already live there, then we are at a
disadvantage. I think that the plan that Jo Companies has put it together is terrific. I've seen the um the uh the drawings. I understand the importance of um uh affordable housing. I work in that
business myself doing communications okay for a lot of folks who are very committed to making sure that there is highquality housing for people of all income levels. So the issue here is not the housing or the proposal for the
multifamily building itself but rather at the current time none of the proposals none of the information that has been made available addresses the issues that numerous people from our community has actually put forth. Parking has not really been
addressed. Um you know on street parking has not been addressed. potential pedestrian issues and traffic has not been addressed. And I'm here today to basically say, what are we going to do about that? What does the planning commission, what is your responsibility
to make sure that the people who are in the community already before this uh building goes up get to continue living in the safe, pedestrianfriendly kind of environment that we currently live in because we don't have a lot of on street
parking. We don't have um sidewalks, so we do a lot of walking and biking in the middle of the street. I see people go up and down 65th Street all the time on the street, you know, trying to avoid cars. You throw on a bunch of cars on the parked on the street and people are
going to have a lot harder time doing that safely. And Sam made up a good point. He said, "Well, maybe we'll have to do it where, you know, people slow down and they go through and and so forth and kind of move to one side." That's true. But in Minneapolis, there are sidewalks on both sides of most
streets. We don't have that in Richfield. In fact, the only sidewalks that that I am more aware of are on the major thorough affairs. Other things we can talk about things like um parking arrangements right across the street from um the uh the proposed building.
There are plenty of parking lots. There's the liquor store, which has a public parking, meaning it's it's technically owned by the city of Richfield. There are ways I think that these things could be addressed, but none of them have been actually sort of proposed or understood
and the concerns that we have as a community have not really been um reflected in any of the plans that we have seen. So, uh I would call on the commission to basically understand how are we going to solve this? How are we going to make sure that the streets in the community around
um the project remain safe considering there are going to be more cars and more traffic that currently it doesn't seem like the community can really handle. Thank you for letting me share.
Is there anyone else here to speak to this? Yes. My name is John Peterson. I'm over at 6445 Oliver Avenue South over in Richfield. Uh my condolences, commissioner, on the loss of your family member. Um just reiterating what Michael
said, same thing is there's not been any sort of traffic study that I've seen in terms of how that flow works. Um as it is, I think um Penn actually narrowed down to one lane per direction a couple years back. So they that's already a bottleneck as
it is uh with um right as you pass the Duncan, it bottlenecks into one lane. So that's an issue coming out of the neighborhood. So again, just adding to that traffic with people literally stepping out of their door, you know, in the dozens in the morning essentially
with this new project. Um, and then, you know, you add that to 65th, people coming down 66, taking 65th as a as a throwaway. Um, I can see traffic just, you know, taking the safety out of it. traffic backing up all the way to Morgan
and beyond just on that one stop sign. Um and then of course then you do add the safety piece back into it. Um and just the with the rate of speed that people travel down that way. Um and you know again not stopping at stop signs.
Granted that's a public issue in general. Nobody stops at stop signs these days. Um, but how do we address that piece before we do add in something like this building? Again, very much for, you know, a building of reasonable size um that supports the community,
supports, uh, people joining the community. Um, but I I think more stuff needs to be addressed before we just throw in a five-story building that has more units uh than parking spaces alone and then add to the morning evening
commutes uh to that effect. Thank you. any anyone else? Thank you. I know we had um a couple questions um from within the commission. Um but actually I just wanted to start by I don't see a there's no request for a variance from the uh
parking ordinance. So I I'm assuming that this that this proposal is within the existing parking minimums set for the city. Uh chair and commissioners that is correct. Um they meet the zoning requirement for parking. Um the
developer uh as based on his knowledge uh the site meets uh what he thinks the parking need will be and the bank who's funding the project also is concerned about having a marketable building that um holds value and they are funding the
project with the number of parking spaces but most importantly it meets our code. What is the I I don't remember off the top of my head. What is the um minimum the minimum for that district? It's 1.25 per unit. So there is more than one Yes. parking space per unit.
That's correct. Okay. Thank you. Um Commissioner Kley, you had a question, did you not? Thank you, Chair. Um we we heard from the development the developer, excuse me. He talked about holding uh open meetings with the
neighborhood to collect feedback. And in our notes here, we have we have three community meetings. And I just wanted to ask about what you learned, what you applied to the project, what you
incorporated, some examples like that. Uh Commissioner, thank you. uh we had two community meetings uh and in my opinion uh they taught us a lot you know one of the things we learned
and I want to appreciate the comments from the community uh in terms of um you know I don't live in this community right but I think that uh you know it's it's these types of comments uh that uh give our team an opportunity to kind of
dial back and think about you know what are some things that we can improve upon. And that was actually um the goal of these two community meetings. You know, I mentioned earlier in terms of the concerns surrounding um this being a building that's going to encompass
families, right? The nearest park is about a mile to two miles away, right? So, we, you know, are making an investment of almost $100,000 in delivering um a state-of-the-art tot playground. Think
of um if you go to McDonald's and you see those that will be actually inside of the apartment building, washers and dryers in every unit, balconies every unit. Mentioned um the parking, we have grade parking, we also have underground
parking as well, below grade. So I think those meetings in my opinion give us an opportunity to kind of really understand for the community that that that lives and breathes in this community um each and every day and see things that we probably don't see on a day-to-day
basis. Give us an opportunity to figure out what we can do to improve upon things that maybe uh we didn't think about. And I'll um ask my architect um to kind of share additional uh comments surrounding everything from the
retaining wall um the fact that uh we have instituted uh different ways to address u the potential partnership with Henipin County surrounding the sidewalk uh entering and exiting um the building
itself. Uh the fact that you know we have uh 42 families but we have 46 stalls. So yes, we are meeting the parking um requirement but at the same time that is something that uh not only our team uh takes very seriously but also too if you can't park a building
then who wants to live there right? So uh we are not only investing time but countless resources to make sure that uh we can deliver something that's going to be really precious in this community for the families that that's going that's that's going to live here. um if
approved by the commission. Uh good evening commissioners and chair. My name is Eric Bjor. I'm with Pope Design Group. I'm the architect and project manager for this project. Um just to touch on a couple things that were said by um the public earlier. Uh for this project um the city has
required us to extend sidewalk on 65th. Uh you'll see that in our civil drawings. Um we are extending that all the way down to Oliver as part of this project. So we are including sidewalk. Um and one of the other um transportation items um as part of this
project that uh we've included is uh significant bike parking uh indoor bike parking, secured bike parking storage. So um there are alternative methods for transportation that we've included in this project that um would normally not
be included in a affordable housing project. So, we're pretty excited about this project. We've spent a lot of time and effort and um working with Johnny uh and his team. Um this is a unique project for an affordable um design
building and we're pretty excited about the amenities and the the u project moving forward. So, we appreciate your consideration. Any other May I ask a question to city staff? Um, Koh, commissioner. Um, first of all, I
guess I want to say express my my sympathy to your perspectives on the traffic. Um, I think as a frequent of 66 in the morning, I see it as well. Um, right now and and I do see how people
will take, you know, side streets and abuse the speed limit. I mean, it's frustrating and I think it should be looked at unfortunately. I mean, it's out of the perview of the planning commission, but I do think it is something that we should pay attention to and have the transportation
commission have conversations about that, about what some ways to curb that are. Um, I do struggle to see a connection of adding this housing to worsening or affecting that traffic in a a meaningful
way on 66th and Penn. Like, that's those are county roads that are trafficked by thousands every day. And so adding 44 pieces of of of of homes for people, I just don't see a strong correlation of that dramatically changing that. I get
that it it is more there and there will be another, you know, people living there, but I don't know if I see a huge correlation, but um when we when we have set these standards for parking like I guess like it feels appropriate that you know 1.25
is met and I and that satisfies my worries. We spent a lot of time having the conversation about whether that's appropriate or not. One question I have for city staff is are there any examples of narrow roads near multifamily that I I'm thinking of um over by uh Richfield
Parkway um just south of that target there. We we've had some conversations about emergency vehicles and stuff getting access there. Has there been any conversations about like parking signs and restrictions during certain times to make sure that we're not overfilling
those roads, whether it's parking on one side of the road versus both? I don't know. Is there has there been any conversation about that or anything we can kind of look at to help lighten that? Um, Chair and Commissioner Hoie, um, we do have a traffic uh, control committee which I sit on, so you would
think I would remember it if there had been, but my memory is not the greatest. Um, we certainly could put a request in or one of the neighbors could uh there's an online form to um to fill out so that I'm not misinterpreting the you know the
uh concerns if the speed or volume or you stop sign compliance or whatever the issues may be. Um and we can look at that collectively with police, fire, engineering, planning and determine if there are um measures that would be
appropriate to address some of the concerns. Sure. So, just to wrap up comments, I agree traffic's an issue. We should address that and look at that and I I would encourage you to submit that request. Um, as far as the parking goes, we we're meeting our our code and
honestly, we can't really if this is in the the code, we we don't have a way of saying we don't like it. Um, they meet the code and so we need to comply with our code and I feel confident in the code and so just wanted to express that sympathy and also have a conversation
with that. Thank you. Uh, thank you, Chair. Thank you for your comments, Commissioner Hoie. Uh just I had some personal comments to respond to your line of questioning about examples in Richfield where we have narrow streets near multif family housing and
uh I can think of a very specific example if I may near Lindale and 65th where we have the new developments of Lyn View and Riley. Uh I'm over there every morning and afternoon to take my kids to
daycare. three of them uh picking them up in the afternoon. Lisa Stewart Daycare, she's wonderful right here in the community. Um what I'm getting at here though is these are narrow streets parked on both
sides near these apartment buildings and I roll up on my bike pulling these kids in and out and I drive when it's snowing and there's ice on the sides and it's navigable. It's safe from
personable personal experience. I'm not out on Lindale combating with that traffic, but in the neighborhood in this specific spot where these apartments have been built, it works. The only problems are turkeys and
dogs. Thank you. Anything else before we would close the public hearing? This one's for the developer. Um, how off like is that 1.25 seem to be adequate for for parking for your other
properties you have? Like do I guess how many cars do families usually have? Um, in your experience, is it around one, greater than one, or would the 1.25 meet that? Thank you, commission. That's a great
question. Um we actually have suitable uh parking for all of our developments. Wangs of comments in Brooklyn Center as well as um the hollows in St. Paul. Um so to answer your question, the city did require uh the city of Brooklyn Center
did require commissioner uh additional parking for the simple fact that we do have four bedrooms. Um I think in total we have almost 100 stalls. That's between grade and below grade. Um and effectively uh those stalls are filled
up in addition to having charging stations which we will have um handicap spots for the the disabled in addition to having guests parking as well. So uh it is definitely suitable. We haven't had any concerns in the city of St.
Paul. In fact, in front of the building, we actually have um additional parking not only for residents but for guests as well. So, uh, there hasn't been any concerns, um, for our company in terms of, um, our residents not having access,
uh, to adequate parking or their guests. But I know this is a tight site, 0.89 acres, almost a 70,000t building. I think that with 42 units and 46 stalls, you know, based on the fact that our investor and um, our lender, if there
was concerns surrounding uh, parking, they definitely would have brought it up to our attention. But that's a great question. Thank you, Commissioner. All right. If there's nothing else, I would entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Commissioner Hoie motions to close the public hearing. Commissioner Charlton
seconds. All those in favor, please say I. I. Opposed? All right. Uh we would need a motion to proceed with the staff recommended action. Commissioner Hoie motions that we accept
the recommended action by the staff. All right. So there has been uh a a motion to um consider the slate plan approval preliminary plat final plat and a variance for the 42 units of multif
family housing at 6501 and 6525 Penn Avenue um and follow the staff recommended actions. Is there a second? Commissioner Surma seconds. All right. Any discussion? All right. All those in favor please say
I. I. I opposed. I All right. Uh the next item on the agenda is the uh consideration of a resolution finding that the disposition of outlaw A Wexler's second edition by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority is consistent with the comprehensive
plan. Is there a report from staff? Thank you, chair and commissioners. Um, after the roundabout at Richfield Parkway and 66th Street was constructed in 2008, the remnant some remnant land was transferred to the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority. The city would now like to sell that land to the adjacent property owner, which is Professional Dental Properties LLC. The property is irregularly shaped and is not developable as a standalone
parcel. The HA has conducted an appraisal and has authorized the sale of the property and the planning commission must review this sale for consistency with the comprehensive plan. Both the dental parcels and the
remnant parcels are guided community commercial and are zoned C2. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the resolution finding that the disposition of outlaw a Wexler's second edition by the housing and redevelopment
authority is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Thank you. Any questions? Yeah, I I looking at the parcel um it appears that there is parking on the southern part portion of the parcel. Could you explain what that's currently
used for? Um, yes. I I knew somebody was going to ask that question. It is currently being used by the dental office and it has been um leased from us for uh the dentist's parking um I think
pretty much since like 2008. So yeah, it'll just continue to be used in the same way that it has been being used for the past however many years. Any other questions? I have a question.
Um, Commissioner Hoie, uh, when you say that the land is not developable, what I mean, I I understand it's a regular lot, but like the parking lot portion, there's no opportunity to really put anything there or what determines that it's not developable, just so I understand. Um, the setbacks and, you
know, parking that you would need for a building of a certain size and Sure. Yeah. So, in the perfect reality, if we had all the proper setbacks and parking and stuff, we'd have like a 20 by 20 building that has one stall underneath it kind of thing. Yeah. You'd have a shed. Okay, cool. Just making sure I
understand that. Thank you. Mhm. It's a very awkward lot. All right. If there are no other questions for staff, we do need a motion to approve the resolution finding that the disposition of outlaw a
Wexler's second edition by the housing and redevelopment authority is consistent with the city plan. Move to accept that. Is there a second? Kolkowski seconds. Any discussion? All those in favor, please say I. I
opposed. All right. Uh on the agenda next would be liaison reports community services advisory commission. Um do you have a report for that? Is that Brett? Okay. Um I do not have a report for city council. It's
been so long since the last meeting that we had. Um how about housing and redevelopment? That one is Brett, I think. I'm sorry. I was not used to my leazisonship being first. Um
uh okay. So at the last meeting um in the April the the notes from um the maze meeting for the April meeting the um splash pad project is progressing and they're scheduled open June 6th which is exciting. Um they're interviewing folks for the pool liner to be done. Um
there's been an RFP issued for um that will be issued soon for the park portion of of the Vets Park project. Um and they're also applying for some grant money for solar panels on the arena. So things are progressing over there. Um earlier today, I believe was the groundbreaking at Wood Lake, which is
exciting. Um yeah, that's kind of the gist of it. All right. Thank you. Uh school board. No report. All right. Uh transportation Yes. So, uh, thank you, Commissioner Hoie, for mentioning the ground, uh,
groundbreaking at Wood Lake earlier today. I was fortunate enough to attend that, take part in the groundbreaking, uh, with many dignitaries, including Senator Tina Smith. So, that was a very fun and joyous event to, uh, celebrate this new um, asset for our community coming in um, later next year. The transportation committee had uh, two
meetings since we last met because we haven't met, I don't believe, since February. It's been a while. So, a number of things that have been discussed at recent transportation committee meetings um including giving feedback to Metro Transit on their proposed network now plan for restructuring bus service and uh
priorities for the next several years. There were a lot of opinions on um express service and park and ride service in Richfield and where those should be um and giving feedback on those proposals. Uh there was also a presentation and discussion on the Nicollet Avenue reconstruction uh that
Henipin County is spearheading between 66th Street and uh 77th Street that's supposed to begin construction next year. Uh 60% design plans were uh released in April and the city gave uh feedback and comments on those and it's
anticipated that the 90% design plans will be available either late this summer or early in the fall. uh 494 uh phase two project. So once this current one is done, there's proposed to be another project that would begin immediately
thereafter. Um there was a presentation on this which would include a reconstruction of the main line of 494 east of 35W and several more uh bridge projects. It's anticipated that that will come to the city of Richfield for municip for municipal consent probably
sometime this fall. So, you can expect more about that before the city council um later this year. Uh there was also discussion of several safe routes to school projects improving pedestrian safety along 70th Street and 73rd Streets in the eastern part of the city. And also an update on
the fact and coming up this weekend, the Portland Avenue Bridge over 494 will be closing this weekend for approximately six months while that bridge is demolished and reconstructed um and reopening sometime this fall. So, prepare for that. Uh, Chamber of Commerce, no report. And
sustainability. Uh, Richfield is going to update the climate action plan since it's been 5 years since the last one. Uh, there will be new solar panels being put on public buildings owned by the city and 9M Creek WHED has identified Richfield as a priority area. So,
there'll be more outreach from them uh, regarding rain gardens and salt reduction. Thank you. Uh now we have reports from the city planners. Thank you, chair and commissioners. Um I uh in the staff agenda you or in
the agenda I mentioned that uh we're working on transitioning to a new agenda software. So um city council packets will be um implemented first and then the fun begins for the rest of us in the
commissions. Um, there is a state of the community uh event on the 11th of June and I want to thank uh Matt I for volunteering with me at that. I just found out that you're going to I really appreciate that. So, if you all have a
little bit of time in your evening, stop by and say hi um here at city hall um both in the lobby and out in the courtyard. Um, and there will also be a joint planning commission, city council,
and HA work session on June 10th, the day before um on uh a sketch plan for the Legion uh vet the vets park site. Um so uh that
starts at 6:00 pm and it's the only item on the on the work session. So, 6 p.m. sharp. Um, there was um a first reading of the short-term rentals ordinance um on the 13th and a second reading uh just
last night. The um limitation uh for short-term rentals was lowered from 7 days down to no less than a 5-day stay. And that is that limitation only applies when the owner does not live on site. If
the owner lives on site, and that means anywhere on the property, doesn't have to be in the same building. You know, they could rent out their ADU if they're living in the main house. If they live on site, then they can have uh stays as short as they want. They because they're
there monitoring the the um the guest. Um and and that's all I have. Any questions? Okay, thank you. Um, our next meeting then is June 23rd
and of course we have the um the work session as the planner Crosby said on June 10th. Um, is there a motion to adjurnn? So moved by Commissioner and a second. Commissioner Charlesson seconds. All
those in favor please say I. I. opposed. Stand adjourned.