►
From YouTube: Bloomington Plan Commission, July 10, 2023
Description
Plan Commission Documents:
https://bloomington.in.gov/boards/plan/meetings
A
Thank
you
for
being
with
us
today
for
the
July
10th
meeting
of
the
Bloomington
plan.
Commission
we're
going
to
get
started
today.
We
have
one
remote
commissioner,
so
I
want
to
make
sure.
Thank
you,
Ron
Smith,
for
waving,
and
we
have
two
absences
tonight.
We
knew
Brad
Whistler
was
not
going
to
be
here
so
I'm
in
as
his
Vice
here
today
or
I
will
chair
the
meeting
in
his
absence.
A
So
we
want
to
start.
We
have
a
long
agenda
tonight
and
most
of
you,
I
hope
are
here
to
be
a
part
of
some
of
that
agenda.
We'll
start
the
meeting
at
least
I'm
going
to
go
over
a
quick
review
of
our
agenda
before
we
do.
The
official
role
is
that
okay
yep,
so
we
have
a
long
agenda
tonight.
Some
of
it
will
be
handled
pretty
swiftly
because
of
how
it's
on
our
agenda,
but
we
have
some
minutes
to
be
approved.
We
did
not
meet
in
June,
so
we
have
may
meeting
minutes
to
approve.
A
We
have
some
action
to
take
that
is
related
to
appointing
committee
members.
We
have
an
administrative
manual
update
and
then
we
have
a
petition
tabled
SP
2422
that
will
not
be
discussed
tonight
and
then
we
have
two
petitions,
continued
SP,
2123,
true
storage,
LLC
and
well.
I
should
say
one
petition,
that's
going
to
be
continued,
and
then
we
have
two
petitions
on
the
consent
agenda
and
those
generally
represent
non-controversial.
A
Petitions
that
are
should
be
handled
swiftly
smoothly.
They
should
be
easy
for
us,
but
these
petitions
can
be
removed
from
a
consent
agenda
based
on
any
Commissioners
who
have
a
concern
about
anything
in
them
or
By
Request
of
the
public
to
remove
them.
If,
if
you
want
them
to
be
discussed
and
those
are
SP,
1922
people,
State,
Bank
and
SP
2522
Strasser
construction,
we'll
March
through
that
a
little
more
deliberately
after
we've,
officially
called
Rule
to
see.
If
anyone
wants
those
to
be
discussed
in
full.
A
However,
they're
both
one-year
extensions-
and
we
heard
them
just
actually
almost
a
year
ago-
exactly
so
I-
don't
know
if
there's
anything
contra,
virtual
or
germane
and
those
two.
However,
that's
up
for
us
to
decide.
The
body
of
the
meeting
is
for
the
two
petitions
before
Spud
1823
and
DP
2323.
The
first
is
the
Sudbury
development
Partners
LLC
and
the
second
DP
2323
is
Hopewell
West,
the
Bloomington
Redevelopment
Commission.
A
C
D
A
E
Yeah
I
can
go
ahead,
so
a
couple
of
things
I
believe
that
the
we
do
have
minutes
to
approve
those
are
from
the
May
meeting,
because
we
didn't
have
a
June
Meeting,
those
minutes
weren't
approved.
So
that
was
an
error
on
the
agenda
posted
in
the
packet.
So
if
we
could
approve
the
May
minutes,
which
you
would
have
I
believe
received
as
well
separately
last
month,
that
would
be
great.
E
Then
we
will
do
a
plaque
committee
appointment
for
a
new
alternate
for
engineering
staff.
We
have
an
administrative
manual
update
from
the
hand
department,
and
then
we
are
asking
you
all
to
consider
switching
the
two
petitions
that
are
on
the
agenda,
so
numerically
Sudbury
development
Partners
is
listed
first
and
Hopewell.
West
is
listed.
Second,
for
a
couple
of
reasons,
we
are
asking
that
you
hear
Hopewell
West.
First,
one
I
think
it's
slightly
less
controversial
and
could
probably
go
quicker.
E
So
if
we
can
hear
it
and
get
it
out
of
the
way,
then
you
all
could
focus
on
Sudbury
without
concern
for
our
time
limit.
So,
for
those
who
don't
know,
we
do
have
an
end
time
that
we
have
to
follow,
which
is
9
30..
We
also
have
a
time
that
we,
after
which
we
can't
hear
new
items
which
is
nine
o'clock.
E
So
while
that
it
is
a
little
bit
atypical,
if
we
could
have
just
put
them
on
in
the
swapped
order,
we
would
have,
but
we
put
them
on
in
the
order
in
which
they
are
filed
so
because
Sudbury
intended
to
go
last
month.
Initially
they
have
a
smaller,
a
lower
number.
So
we're
asking
that
you
vote
to
switch
that
and
again
for
the
many
of
you
who
I
assume
are
here
for
the
Sudbury
petition.
E
We
are
expecting
that
the
hope
all
petition
will
go
quickly
and
then
we
can
focus
on
making
sure
we
give
enough
time
and
Credence
to
this
Sudbury
questions,
and
so
we're
asking
that
you
consider
that
tonight.
Thank
you,
oh
I
should
have
said
I'm
the
development
services
manager,
Jackie
Scanlon,
for
planning
Transportation.
Thank.
E
A
Thank
you
Trent,
so
I
I
think
this
is
a
reasonable
request
to
shift
the
items
in
the
agenda,
mostly
because
we
don't
want
to
end
up
not
talking
about
hope
well
and
have
it
not
be
discussed
tonight
just
because
of
a
longer
comment
period
for
the
Sudbury,
which
I
think
we're
anticipating.
But
perhaps
a
question
might
go
out
to
the
audience
here
tonight:
just
a
show
of
hands
how
many
of
you
are
here
to
talk
about
Sudbury?
A
A
Think
one
of
the
concerns,
of
course,
is
that
we
have
advertised
the
the
order
of
the
agenda
in
a
particular
way,
and
people
might
be
have
allotted
their
time
here
tonight,
either
virtually
or
in
person
based
on
what
they
saw
advertised
for
this
event
and
I
don't
want
to
mess
up
people's
evening
based
on
what
they
expected
to
happen.
I,
we
can't
say
for
sure
we're
not
trying
to
dispense
with
the
Hopewell
project
in
Swift
order.
A
A
H
J
A
F
A
You
all
right,
okay,
well,
we'll
hope,
we'll
get
through
this
quickly.
Okay,
so
with
that
agenda
change
in
mind,
let's
try
and
start
speeding
through
our
agenda
here.
So
the
first
order
of
business
is
minutes
to
be
approved
for
again
clarifying.
It
says
on
our
agenda:
none,
but
it's
actually
May
15th.
A
L
B
A
B
E
Let's
see
staff
reports,
resolutions
and
Communications
first,
we,
our
alternate
member
of
the
engineering
staff
for
the
plaque
committee,
has
moved
on
to
another
position,
so
we
need
a
vote
to.
We
would
like
for
you
to
vote
to
appoint
Maria
McCormick,
as
the
engineering
staff
alternate.
She
is
the
current
public
improvements
manager
and
a
number
of
Staff
members
who
have
held
that
position
in
the
past
have
held
the
alternate
position,
so
the
the
main
member
will
still
be
Roy,
ayton
and
then
Maria
would
be
the
alternate.
A
I
M
E
So
the
administrative
manual
is
kind
of
a
companion
for
the
unified
development
ordinance
and
most
of
what's
in
the
administrative
manual,
is
process
or
development
details
that
were
decided
to
be
put
kind
of
in
the
in
the
separate
document
so
that
they
could
be
updated
more
regularly.
Let's
see
if
I
can
make
this
bigger.
E
So
the
change
that
we
are
letting
you
know
about
today,
you
do
not
have
to
vote
on
it.
This
is
just
informational,
for
you
is
related
to
the
way
that
the
workforce
housing
when
someone
is
excuse
me
doing
a
payment
in
lieu
for
Workforce
housing
how
those
numbers
are
derived.
So
the
numbers
that
are
currently
in
the
administrative
manual
are
from
when
we
wrote
the
administrative
manual
and
it
needs
to
be
updated
annually.
E
So
internally,
the
housing
and
neighborhood
development
department
does
update
those
with
new
projects,
but
this
document
needed
to
be
updated
to
reflect
that.
So
again,
you
don't
need
to
vote
on
it,
but
we
just
wanted
to
make
you
aware
that
that
was
happening.
There
is
a
new
staff
person
in
that
position,
who's
being
very
proactive
about
making
sure
that
we're
keeping
all
this
in
line
as
we
take
on
more
and
more
units.
So
that's
great,
so
these
numbers
have
been
updated
and
then
that
also
updates
the
table.
Here
again.
E
E
A
D
Scott
Robinson,
director
of
planning
and
Transportation.
Yes,
it
is
updated
annually.
I
think
we
missed
a
little
bit
of
cycle.
Hud
publishes
these
rates
annually,
I
believe
in
June,
and
so
that's
why
the
timing
is
right.
Now
is
we
need
to
wait
for
HUD
to
publish
the
rates,
and
then
we
calculate
those
rates
to
update
in
the
administrative
manual.
So
we
try
to
get
before
you
every
June
or
July
to
reflect
those
changes.
E
A
You
important
for
us
to
know
and
important
for
us
to
be
not
necessarily
for
us,
but
for
the
city
to
be
transparent
with
people
who
might
want
to
take
advantage
of
this
all
right.
Okay,
thank
you
for
the
information.
We
don't
need
to
vote
all
right,
okay,
so
just
to
pers
any
other
commissioner
reports
or
resolutions.
I
should
have
asked
that
anybody.
E
Have
anything
yeah
I
had
one
more
thing:
Mr
Robinson
I
believe
sent
you
all
an
email
about
fundamentals,
which
is
a
training
opportunity,
but
it
has
the
word
fun
in
it.
So
it's
more
exciting
than
the
other
ones
and
I
believe
there
are
two
opportunities:
August,
2nd
and
3rd
and
August,
9th
and
10th
one
of
our
goals
as
a
department
is
to
have
a
certain
number.
You
know
a
handful
of
Commissioners
or
board
members
do
training
every
year
if
possible.
A
Thank
you
for
that
notice,
and
thanks
for
director
Robinson
for
providing
that
information
to
us
and
support
for
our
participation
all
right,
so
any
Commissioners
have
anything
they
want
to
say:
Mr,
Smith,
okay,
all
right,
okay,
all
right!
So
now
we
have
just
by
order
of
the
agenda.
We
have
a
table
petition
for
SP
2422
so
that
one
just
stays
as
it
is.
We
have
a
petition
continued
to
our
next
meeting.
Sp
21
23
that
stays
and
then
we
have
a
consent.
A
Agenda
is
next
and,
as
I
said
earlier,
the
consent
agenda
is
really
a
space,
a
practice
that
we've
adopted
within
the
last
couple
years
here
to
handle
non-controversial
petitions.
It's
tends
to
speed
the
process,
make
sure
that
we
are
keeping
a
place
for
anything
that
really
just
subscribes
or
or
has
nothing
about
it,
that
that
deserves
or
needs
or
requires
additional
attention.
A
It
kind
of
follows
the
letter
of
our
documents
and
our
processes,
so
the
the
two
that
are
in
this
state
are
both
asking
or
requesting
they're
similar
and
that
they're
both
requesting
one-year
extensions,
since
we
just
saw
these
and
approved
them,
July
11,
2022
they're
still
pretty
recent,
obviously,
but
though
that
they
need
to
request
a
one-year
extension,
because
it
is
now
a
year
later,
so
they
need
to
request
an
extension.
So
this
is
a
non-controversial
issue
on
the
consent
agenda.
A
All
right
I'm
moving
right
along
to
our
petitions
tonight.
So
with
our
agenda
shift
here
we
will
consider
DP,
2323
Hopewell
West,
Bloomington,
Redevelopment,
commission.
This
is
the
property
west
of
South
Rogers
Street
between
West
First
and
West,
2nd
Street.
The
request
is
for
a
primary
plaid
approval
to
create
new
lots
and
a
new
right-of-way
in
the
Hopewell
neighborhood,
with
a
request
for
subdivision
waivers
and
waiver
of
a
second
hearing
and
I
think
we're
going
to
hear
from
our
case
manager
Gabriel
on
this
one.
O
P
P
This
is
the
former
IU
Health
Bloomington
Hospital
site,
or
it's
a
portion
of
that.
The
petition
this
evening
is
for
primary
plot
for
a
subdivision
of
the
portion
of
the
former
Hospital
site,
that's
west
of
Roger
Street
between
2nd
Street
to
the
north
and
First
Street
to
the
South,
and
then
there
are
adjacent
properties,
not
part
of
the
petition
to
the
West.
P
P
Vice
president
Kinsey
pointed
out
to
the
east
of
Rogers,
Street
was
the
area
known
as
Hopewell
Phase
One
East
that
previously
received
primary
plot
approval
actually
twice
by
this
commission.
So
this
is
another
section
of
this
area.
The
petition
this
evening
is
for
a
subdivision
to
to
create
new
lots
and
new
rights
of
way
in
this
area.
It
doesn't
include
any
new
buildings.
P
The
total
area
of
the
petition
is
11.33
Acres,
it's
zoned
mixed
use,
medium
scale,
and
it's
also
within
the
transform
Redevelopment
overlay
in
the
comprehensive
plan.
It's
designated
as
mixed,
Urban
residential
and
also
is
part
of
the
former
Bloomington
Hospital
Focus
area.
That's
discussed
in
the
comprehensive
plan.
Existing
land
use
it's
vacant.
It's
the
side
of
the
former
Hospital.
Most
of
the
buildings
have
been
taken
down.
P
The
petitioner
is
or
excuse
me,
the
owner,
is
the
city
of
Bloomington
in
the
Bloomington
Redevelopment
Authority
or
sorry
Redevelopment,
commission
RDC.
They
hold
a
purchase
agreement
for
the
property
purchasing
from
IU
Health
for
for
these
properties
and
adjacent
ones
as
well,
including
the
ones
in
Hopewell
East
and
the
RDC
has
engaged
the
petitioner
Crossroad
engineers
along
with
Consultants
Bledsoe,
rigger,
Cooper,
James,
brcj
and
Rundle
Ernst
Berger,
Associates,
rea
and
RDC
has
engaged
them
to
provide
engineering
design
for
Hopewell
West,
including
plotting
and
Road
design.
So
the
petitioner
is
a
crossroad
engineer.
P
The
so
the
petitioner
is
requesting
primary
plot
approval
to
reconfigure
the
existing
lots
and
rights
of
way
in
this
portion
of
the
of
the
master
plan
area
and,
excuse
me,
the
the
entire
area
of
the
former
Hospital
site
is
covered
by
in
Guided
by
the
Bloomington
Hospital
site,
Redevelopment
master
plan,
which
was
released
in
January
2021.
So
this
is
for
this
part
of
the
master
plan.
It's
to
recreate
an
urban
pattern
of
streets,
alleys
and
blocks
to
facilitate
Redevelopment.
P
It
creates
new
public
rights
away
for
two
new
north-south
streets.
You
can
see
there
on
the
left
is
Fairview
Street
and
on
the
right
is
Jackson
Street.
Both
of
them
connect
all
the
way
from
second
to
First,
there's
also
an
East-West
Street
West
University
Street,
it's
a
East-West
Greenway,
as
you
can
see
there
in
the
center.
There
are
also
several
alleys
in
each
of
the
portions.
P
P
P
Along
the
west
University
Greenway,
there
are
four
lots
that
are
green
space
Lots
following
the
master
plan
for
the
area.
These
are
intended
to
be
managed
by
a
city
of
Bloomington,
Parks
and
Recreation
as
public
park
space
containing
Park
amenities,
as
well
as
storm
water
drainage
facilities
for
the
neighborhood
on
the
plat,
that's
submitted
here,
they're
labeled
as
common
areas,
they're
common
areas,
two
through
five,
two
three
four
and
five,
the
unified
development
ordinance
defines
common
area
in
a
way
that
explicitly
excludes
anything,
that's
to
be
dedicated
to
the
public.
P
P
P
Are
there
questions
about
so
I'm
going
to
be
talking
about
all
the
things
that
aren't
quite
straight
to
code,
but
I
don't
want
that
to
distract
you
from
the
fact
that
as
a
whole,
this
is
full
of
code
compliant
things
they're
doing
a
lot
of
things
that
are
exactly
what
the
code,
the
Udo
General
and
also
the
transform
Redevelopment
overlay
is
asking
for,
and
the
master
plan
are
asking
for.
So
it's
a
lot
about
this.
That
is
compliant
I'm,
just
not
going
to
be
talking
about
those.
P
If
you
have
any
questions
about
any
of
those
I
staff
or
the
petitioners
would
would
be
happy
to
address
those
so
going
into
some
of
the
things
they're
asking
for
one
of
the
things
is
that
the
Udo
gives
you
the
authority
to
waive
the
petition
fee
because
it
is
supported
by
the
city.
In
this
case
the
owner
is
the
Redevelopment
commission,
the
RDC,
so
it
staff
recommends
that
you
waive
the
fee.
No
fee
has
been
collected
yet
so
that's.
That's
one
part
of
it:
they're
also
requesting
several
subdivision
waivers.
P
So,
as
you
may
recall,
subdivision
waivers
are
a
request
to
do
something
a
little
bit
different
from
the
standards
that
are
listed,
subdivision
standards
that
are
listed
in
the
Udo,
but
you
have
the
authority,
as
the
planned
commission
to
Grant
those
to
to
be
a
little
bit
different.
So
the
first
one
is
the
parent
track
size.
Maximum
the
maximum
in
the
tro
is
three
acres,
and
this
is
proposed
to
be
11.33
Acres,
and
this
is
really
because
this
is
this.
P
Along
with
Hopewell
East,
which
came
through
before
the
tro
was
established,
they're
really
unique
parts
of
the
Redevelopment
process.
It's
it's
a
stage
that
calls
for
a
wholesale
re-design
of
the
streets
and
lots
in
the
area
to
create
a
new
grid.
The
relatively
larger
area
covered
by
the
plot
is
a
necessary
and
integral
aspect
of
the
proposal.
P
There's
also
a
requirement
in
the
tro
that
100
of
lots
be
served
by
alleys.
The
Lots
The
Green
Green
Space
Lots
along
the
west
University
Greenway,
do
not
have
alley
access.
This
is
in
recognition
of
they're,
not
meant
to
be
developed
with
buildings,
they're
going
to
be
park
space
essentially,
and
so
the
access
requirements
are
going
to
be
different
and
the
petitioner
believes
that
it
better
serves
the
goals
of
development
to
not
have
alley
access
to
those
lots,
and
the
plot
does
show
proposals
for
pedestrian
easements.
P
P
It
just
shows
you
what
a
rounded
Corner
looks
like
the
Udo
expects
that
at
intersections
of
streets
and
alleys,
that
property
Corners
be
rounded,
to
give
more
opportunity
to
use
right-of-way
along
the
corner,
as
the
city
desires
for
transportation
and
and
other
uses
of
the
right-of-way
what's
proposed
is
this
is
not
a
very
clear
clip,
but
it's
zooming
in
on
a
corner
of
one
of
the
proposed
Lots.
This
is
from
the
proposed
primary
plot
here,
and
you
can
see
that
all
the
corners
are
right.
Angle,
square
corners.
P
The
next
subdivision
waiver
is
for
tree
plot
width
in
the
transportation
plan.
The
minimum
tree
plot
width
is
five
feet
and
that's
what
they're
showing
so
this
is
zooming
I
do
want
to
highlight.
This
is
zooming
in
on
one
of
the
four
Street
cross
sections
for
the
internal
streets
that
are
shown
in
the
building
plans.
P
So
this
is
the
minimum
five
feet.
Is
the
minimum
tree
pot
width?
That's
provided
in
these
plans.
The
tree
plot
width
varies
and
along
the
west
University
Greenway
it's
up
to
40
feet.
So
in
some
places
it's
well
above
so
the
the
maximum.
Sorry,
the
minimum,
according
to
the
transportation
plan,
is
five
feet
which
is
what's
shown.
However,
the
tro
amen,
the
minimum
requirement
is
at
least
seven
feet
or
what's
in
the
transportation
plan,
whichever
is
greater.
P
Mentions
that
requiring
the
tro
minimums
would
require
additional
right-of-way
dedication
in
some
locations
and
that
would
exceed
the
minimum
right-of-way
with
requirements.
That's
in
the
transportation
plan
and
the
number
the
number
of
required
Street
shoes
will
remain
the
same.
Even
if
the
waiver
is
granted
granting
the
waiver
will
not
be
detrimental
to
the
public
is
unique
because
of
the
constraints
of
right-of-way
location
created
by
existing
facilities.
That
will
remain
and
complies
with
the
intent
of
the
transportation
plan.
P
P
P
P
The
proposed
finding
is
that
again,
it's
essentially
the
same
language
as
the
previous
one
about
tree
plots
requiring
the
tro
minimums
would
require
additional
right-of-way
dedication
exceeding
the
minimum
right-of-way
with
requirements
from
the
Transportation
plan.
Granting
the
waiver
will
not
be
detrimental
to
the
public
is
unique
because
of
the
constraints
of
right-of-way
location
created
by
existing
facilities
that
will
remain
and
complies
with
the
intent
of
the
transportation
plan.
P
P
However,
the
plan
commission
can
can
waive
the
second
public
hearing,
and
the
petitioner
has
requested
that.
That's
based
on
the
idea
that
tonight
there
should
be
enough
time
to
to
adequately
air
any
issues
and
resolve
any
questions
that
people
have.
So
that's
a
part
of
the
request
is
to
waive
the
second
hearing
so
on
to
another
aspect
of
the
plot.
The
transportation
plan
calls
for
a
new
connection
labeled
as
nc45nc
for
new
connection
quote,
to
create
a
new
East-West
connection
from
South
Walker
Street
to
South
Rogers
Street
between
East,
1st
Street
and
East,
2nd
Street.
P
You
can
see
down
there,
sort
of
in
the
bottom
of
the
image
a
little
fuzzy
nc45
and
that
magenta
line
vertical
magenta
line
to
the
right
is
Rogers
Street
and
then
the
vertical
Gray
Line
to
the
left
is
Walker.
Street
and
Walker.
Street
is
quite
a
bit
West
of
this,
so
the
transportation
plan
calls
for
a
new
connection
all
the
way
through.
When
that
happens
with
any
subdivision
proposal.
P
The
Udo
requires
that
the
street
right-of-way
be
taken
all
the
way
to
the
edge
of
the
subdivided
tract
and,
if
necessary,
an
appropriate
substitute
stub
Street
could
be
put
in.
So
here
we
have
so
there's
mc45
here.
This
is
zooming
in
on
a
portion
of
the
plot.
In
the
center
of
the
image
vertically
is
Fairview
Street
and
you
can
see
University
Street
Greenway
coming
in
from
the
right
and
it
ends
at
fairy
sheet,
doesn't
continue
to
the
West.
P
So
the
requirement
of
the
transportation
plan
would
be
for
a
new
right-of-way
dedication
along
there
and
you
notice
it's
a
weird
shape,
because
the
RDC
does
not
have
control
over
that
property.
That's
that's
below
it
there
that
cuts
into
that
area,
so
the
right-of-way
dedication
should
be
in
line
with
West
University
Street.
P
P
If
at
a
later
time
that's
developed,
it
could
be
vacated
or
there
could
be
so
that
it
would
become
a
part
of
the
developable
lot
to
the
west
or
there
could
be
encroachments
on
it
or
it
could
simply
remain
a
wider
green
space,
but
having
it
as
simply
a
lot.
There
doesn't
doesn't
seem
ideal,
so
staff
recommends
a
condition
as
part
of
the
additional
right-of-way
Dedication
that
this
be
simply
converted
to
a
right-of-way.
P
Another
issue
is
along
Roger
Street
on
the
west
side
of
the
Platte.
There
is
a
proposed
concept,
or
maybe
proposed
is
already
too
strong
a
word,
but
there
is
a
concept
designed
for
how
to
use
how
to
redesign
that
street
and
have
all
the
facilities
that
we
want
to
see
in
their
bicycle
facilities
of
sidewalks
tree
plot.
P
This
concept
design
was
referenced
in
the
staff
report
and
it
said
attached,
and
then
it
wasn't
actually
in
the
packet.
So
any
members
of
the
public
who
wanted
to
look
for
it.
You
wouldn't
have
seen
it
because,
due
to
due
to
staff
error,
it
wasn't
in
there
so
I
sent
it
to
the
Commissioners
earlier
today,
and
it's
up
here
on
the
screen
for
everyone
to
see
as
well.
P
Zooming
in
so
roughly
the
part
on
the
left
is
south
of
University
Street
pardon.
The
right
is
north
of
University
Street
on
the
left.
It's
narrower
because
of
constraints
of
existing
buildings
and
the
topography
and
the
right-of-way
Dedication
that
they're,
showing
on
the
plot,
as
required
by
the
transportation
plan,
is
plenty
enough
to
fit
all
that.
So
that's
not
a
problem.
It's
north
of
University
Street,
as
you
can
see,
on
the
right
and
we'll
zoom
in
here
oops.
P
P
If
you
add
up
all
these
widths
and
then
have
a
foot
on
either
side,
it's
required
by
the
Udo.
We
need
82
feet
and
due
to
the
existing
width
from
the
center
line
of
the
road
on
the
east
side
as
part
that
was
plotted
as
part
of
Hopewell
Phase
One
East
going
42
feet
from
the
center
line,
as
shown
on
the
plot
and
is
otherwise
required
by
the
transportation
plan,
doesn't
give
us
enough
room
so
based
on
wanting
to
achieve
something
like
this.
P
It
seems
that
more
right-of-way
dedication
would
be
necessary.
However,
the
staff,
as
you
read
in
the
staff
report,
we
didn't
put
that
as
necessarily
A
recommended
condition.
If
there
can
be
some
proposal
for
how
to
configure
the
facilities
and
the
different
turning
lanes
and
travel
Lanes
within
the
available
right-of-way,
with
only
42
feet
of
dedication
from
Center
Line,
that
could
be
okay
as
well.
So
that's
that's
an
issue
there.
P
Now
this
is
about
the
lot
depth
to
width
ratio.
The
requirement
is
that
Lots
be
have
a
depth
to
width
ratio
not
exceeding
four
to
one
in
the
staff
report.
It
said
it
noted
that
Lots
19
through
25
are
long
and
narrow,
but
said
that
they're
depth
to
width
ratio
is
just
under
four
to
one.
That
was
a
division
error.
P
In
truth,
they
are
just
over
four
to
one.
So
we're
adding
on
you'll
see
in
a
moment
a
slide,
we're
proposing
an
additional
condition
of
approval.
That
would
say
the
seven
lots
that
are
number
19
through
25
and
are
currently
each
35
feet
wide
should
be
reconfigured
to
be
six
Lots
so
that
all
of
them
are
wide
enough
to
have
to
not
exceed
the
four
to
one
depth,
to
width
ratio
with
a
depth
of
154
and
a
half
feet.
P
Two
through
common
area,
5
on
the
primary
plot,
shall
be
correctly
labeled
as
Lots
on
the
secondary
plot
number.
Three
that
the
secondary
plot
should
provide
public
right-of-way
for
West
University,
Street
West
of
South
Fairview,
Street
and
c45
in
the
transportation
plan
to
provide
the
opportunity
for
a
future
Street
connection
to
the
West,
the
332
foot,
long
portion
of
the
proposed
common
area,
one
partial,
shall
be
included
in
the
Fairview
Street
right-of-way
and
the
northern
portion
may
need
to
be
absorbed
into
lot
too,
and
the
fourth
is
new.
P
A
Q
My
name
is
Deb
Coons
and
I'm,
a
JS
held
as
and
I'm.
The
project
manager
for
Hopewell
also
represent
the
RDC
as
their
project
manager.
So
I
wanted
to
just
thank
the
commission
for
considering
this.
You
know,
John
Zody
is
here
as
well
and
he
can
speak
eloquently
about
this.
But
you
know
this
is
an
exciting
time,
because
the
master
this
proposal
is
based
in
the
master
plan
that
was
done
several
years
ago
for
Hopewell.
Q
So
with
that
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
Crossroads,
but
I
wanted
to
mention
that
the
other,
maybe
one
other
last
thing,
because
there
are
two
existing
buildings.
If
you
haven't
been
by
the
site
lately
go
by
the
Legacy
Hospital
is
down.
All
we
have
left
is
what
we
want
is
the
garage
and
the
core
building
and
we
will
be
working
with
the
garage
consultant
to
get
the
access
into
that
garage
fine-tuned
as
we
go
forward,
but
I'll
let
Crossroads
develop
and
address
the
conditions.
R
Thank
you.
Everybody
Gabriel
I
appreciate
you
kind
of
going
through
all
that
for
us
I
guess
at
this
time.
If
there's
any
particular
question.
Oh
sorry,
Andrew
wolf
with
Crossroad
Engineers.
Sorry
about
that.
If
there's
any
particular
questions
about
the
the
waivers
that
we're
requesting
I
can
talk,
maybe
a
little
more
in
detail.
If
there's
any
specific
questions
about
about
those,
but
at
this
time
I
guess
I'll,
just
kind
of
open
up
for
questions.
S
P
P
L
P
L
P
R
L
P
And
the
easement
will
specify
what
can
be
what
can
be
there
or
what
cannot
be
there
and
once
you're
out
of
the
easement
you're
out
of
the
easement.
So
a
normal
pedestrian
easement
would
require
pedestrian
access
throughout
the
entire
easement,
but
is
one
inch
in
from
that
they
could
have
a
building
wall.
All
right
I
mean,
of
course,
they're
they're,
approximately
along
property
lines,
so
there
would
also
be
side
setbacks
that
would
come
into
play,
but
as
far
as
the
easement
itself,
once
you're
out
of
the
easement
you're
out
of
easement.
L
E
E
You
know
in
set
locations
that
make
sense
also
physically
on
the
ground,
to
split
the
blocks
up.
We
ask
that
they
place
the
easements
in
actual
locations
this
time,
as
opposed
to
as
opposed
to
floating
one
benefit.
I
mean
obviously
we'd,
be
better
for
anyone
developing
here
to
get
to
decide
where
to
put
it.
E
I
think
one
benefit
for
the
community
is
an
expectation
of
knowing
where
they're
going
as
well
as
us
as
a
department
not
getting
into
long
drawn
out
discussions
as
these
properties
develop
of
oh
I
want
to
put
my
easement
through
my
Portico.
Doesn't
that
count
and
where
then,
to
the
public
those
things
don't
read
as
public
we're
here
they're
set
and
we
know
where
they
are
before
development
occurs.
E
So
that's
we
did
encourage
them
to
do
that,
but
in
your
line
of
thinking,
yes,
as
they
also
had
originally
asked
if
they
could
leave
those
off
and
through
through
a
purchase
agreement,
since
we
are
the
property
owner,
just
require
some
sort
of
easement
at
the
time
of
sale,
but
we
prefer
to
do
it
this
way.
But
if
you
all
prefer
to
take
that
off,
of
course,
that's
your
prerogative
to
do
that.
So.
L
R
Worked
directly
with
staff
on
the
placement
of
those,
some
things
to
consider
with
a
more
of
a
flexible
location
is
there's,
obviously,
some
some
really
topography
or
some
typographical
challenges,
site
challenges
that
we
have
to
contend
with.
So
we
need
to
be
really
sensitive
to
that
when
we
think
about
placement
of
these
we've
evaluated
their
placement
as
they
currently
stand
and
to
meet.
You
know,
ADA
compliance
and
those
sorts
of
things
we
needed
to
pick
an
area
that
we
could
grade
to
those
as
soon
as
you
start
moving
some
of
those
you're
you're.
L
I
Q
To
answer
that
yeah
Deb
Koontz
JS
held
project
manager
of
Hopewell.
Yes,
it
is
intended
to
be
a
public
garage.
However,
we
do
expect
also
that
several
developers
they
may
want
the
opportunity
to
lease
spaces
as
part
of
that
housing.
In
fact,
some
of
that
is
coming
with
the
core
building,
but
we
intend
for
it
to
be
a
public
Rush.
Okay,.
R
I
Q
Q
That
is
not
big
expansive
programmed
areas
right,
but
there
is
a
a
wetland,
Garden
so
opportunity
to
see
nature
right
and
go
experience
that,
but
we've
it's
been
working
hand
in
hand
with
parks
on
what
that
looks
like
and
how
that
management
would
go
currently
on
Phase,
One,
East
or
Hopewell
East,
and
so
we
see
this
as
being
a
parallel
to
that
good.
Great.
P
You
on
the
north
side
of
the
University
Street,
there
are
44
44.1
feet
wide
and
extend
the
entire
block
on
the
South
Side
they're
kind
of
somewhat
triangular
shaped
to
add,
according
to
the
master
plan
and
sort
of
you
know,
add
more
feeling
of
space
at
that
intersection.
So
they
go
from
15
feet
to
about
50
feet
on
either
side.
So
we're
talking,
you
know
around
40
feet,
40
to
50
feet
of
width
for
those
and
then
extending
the
entire
blocks.
I
Thank
you,
and
just
looking
at
I
am
on
277
of
the
packet.
Just
when
we
look
at
this
and
we
look
at
Lots,
say
18
through
26
are
small
and
then
of
course,
Lots.
Seven
and
eight
are
quite
big.
Three
four
five
and
six
to
the
north
are
small
just
for
the
general
Public's
understanding,
because
we're
way
down
in
the
weeds.
What
would
one
intend
to
see
say
on
Lots
18
through
26.
R
The
master
plan
identified
a
specific
kind
of
layout
of
a
Housing
Development
off
the
top
of
my
head.
I,
don't
remember
exactly
what
the
what
the
configuration
was,
but
it
was
homes
along
the
south
side
and
the
idea
behind
the
the
multiple
Lots
is
it's
easier.
If
a
developer
would
come
in
and
maybe
have
a
little
bit
of
a
different
Vision,
it's
easier
to
combine
and
kind
of
alter
versus,
add
more
down
the
road.
So
that's
kind
of
the
premise
behind
having
a
little
bit
more
options
than
less
okay.
P
I
E
P
A
R
Well,
the
way
the
a
long
University
in
in
particular,
the
idea
is
to
also
have
like
you
know
the
tree
grates
that
you
can
walk
around
and
things
of
that
nature.
So
I
think
from
from
a
walkability
standpoint,
you're
not
really
losing
all
that
much
because
all
the
greats
and
stuff
will
be
ADA,
Compliant
you'll
be
able
to
cross
over
them
and
things
then,
just
from
a
walkability
standpoint,
you're
not
going
to
lose
anything.
R
The
nature
of
the
plantings.
They've
not
been
specifically
nailed
down
at
this
point,
but
we'll
be
working
with
our
Rea
to
identify
site-specific
plantings
that
are
conducive
to
Urban
environments.
So
you
don't
have
the
the
root
growth
issues.
We
will
most
likely
be
designing
more
structural
underground
planters
that
Force
the
the
roots
to
grow
down
into
the
ground
versus
out
a
lot
of
those
details
haven't
been
fleshed
out,
but
those
are
the
the
goals
of
the
project
to
alleviate
some
of
those
concerns
of
maybe
losing
a
foot
or
two
of
with.
F
Let's
see,
can
you
hear
me:
okay,
I
I,
just
what
was
the
impact
of
on
some
of
the
waivers
that
talked
about
that
we
would
need
to
acquire
more
right-of-way
can
I,
don't
know
Miss,
Scanlan
or
whoever
it's
appropriate
speak
about
that
just
a
little
bit
for
that
area.
What
is
what
impact
does
that
have?
F
F
D
R
There's
a
few
site
challenges
with
a
core
building,
staying
where
it
is
the
alignments
of
the
existing
Fairview
street
that
we're
trying
to
tie
into
at
a
90
degree
angle
and
directly
across
from
as
well
as
the
planned
improvements
along
First
Street
have
provided
some
site
constraints
horizontally.
As
far
as
specific
widths.
R
R
F
A
A
All
right,
anyone
from
the
public
who
would
like
to
comment
on
the
Hopewell
project,
we've
just
discussed
if
you
have
a
question
or
comment
or
if
you're
online
and
have
a
question
or
comment,
please
raise
your
hand
and
you'll
be
afforded
five
minutes.
I
think
we're
at
here
for
your
comments.
Anybody
have
anything
and
if
you
could,
when
you
approach
the
podium
or
get
to
speak
on
a
zoom,
if
you
could
say
your
name,
that
would
be
great.
C
Good
evening
my
name
is
Dave
Askins
with
the
b-square
bulletin
and
I
have
a
question.
There
was
one
of
the
waivers
involved,
the
radii
of
the
corners
they're
required
to
be
rounded,
but
they're
proposed
to
be
squared
off,
and
you
know,
I'm
a
big
fan
of
squares.
Actually
so
I
don't
have
anything
against
squares.
C
T
Randy
Cassidy
all
my
comments
at
this
particular
time
are,
on
a
personal
basis,
I
happen
to
be
on
the
Redevelopment
commission,
but
we
have
our
representative
here
on
regards
to
that.
The
two
things
I'd
just
like
to
comment
in
regards
to
on
this.
This
is
a
very
important
project.
We're
looking
forward
to
trying
to
make
Hopewell
an
affordable,
walkable
place
for
our
community
as
a
whole.
The
two
things
as
we
go
through
this
plating,
which
is
a
detailed
situation,
is
on
an
issue
of
transparency
and
Community
effort.
T
The
aspect
of
asking
for
a
waiver
while
I
appreciate
that
and
I
know
it's
one
entity
to
another.
We
should
also
take
into
consideration
the
aspect
of
what
we
ask
all
the
other
individuals
in
our
community
as
they
come
to
petition
on
this
and
the
aspect
of
a
second
waiver.
You
know
the
waiver,
that's
up
to
you
guys,
but
there's
a
lot
of
questions
and
answers
and
I,
don't
know
anything
about
squares
and
rounded
I
just
know.
There's
a
lot
of
things
on
here.
We've
got
a
lot
of
good
things
that
are
going
just.
A
A
B
A
See
anything
not
seeing
anything
okay
so
now
we're
back
to
Commissioners
comments
or
additional
questions,
I
suppose
we
could
put
forward
the
question
that
one
of
our
public
commenters
Dave
Askins,
raised
about
the
radii.
If
an
interesting
question
about
how
right
angles
actually
accommodate
better
accommodate
the
goals
of
the
project,
if
you
could
clarify
that
would
be
great.
R
R
A
I
So
so,
on
the
the
tree
plot
and
The
Pedestrian,
commissioner
Smith
asked
the
question
about
the
right-of-way
and
they
seem
to
both
have
the
exact
same
language
and
I.
Just
think.
If
you
would
entertain
me
and
explain
it
one
more
time
why
you
are
asking
to
not
have
to
have
the
amount
of
right-of-way
that
one
would
expect
and
it
seems
to
be
the
same
for
The
Pedestrian
facility
and
the
tree
plot.
P
So
the
required
width
of
the
right-of-way
according
to
Transportation
plan
and
as
required
by
the
Udo,
is
60
feet,
and
within
that
60
feet
it
would
certainly
be
possible
to
have
eight
foot
sidewalks
and
seven
foot
tree
plots
and
parking
on
both
sides,
and
then
you'd
have
room
for
maybe
one
car
to
travel
down.
So
there's
got
to
be.
P
Yeah
for
the
sidewalk
and
down
to
five
feet
for
the
tree
plot,
So
It,
ultimately
just
comes
down
to
how.
How
do
they
plan
to
use
that
right-of-way
space?
The
required
right
away
is
width
is
60
feet
along
here.
If
they
wanted
to,
they
could
certainly
go
over
that
that
would
be
allowed.
That
would
reduce
the
developable
area
of
the
Lots.
That's
you
know
a
trade-off
question
that
as
the
as
the
the
owner,
the
RDC
can
can
sort
of
play
off
of.
P
But
you
know
thinking
about
the
city
developing
this
as
a
as
you
know,
the
city
is,
is
putting
on
the
hat
of
the
developer
and
so
interested
in
getting
the
kind
of
development
that
the
city
wants,
but
maximizing
the
opportunities
for
that
development.
There's
an
incentive
to
not
provide
to
not
give
more
right-of-way
to
itself,
but
not
give
more
right-of-way.
They
would
really
be
necessary
and
a
good
design,
so
so
they're
making
that
trade-off.
I
P
I
mean
officially,
we
have
to
receive
a
check
from
Crossroads
engineer,
I,
believe,
and
then
you
know
if
they
want
to
just
eat
that
cost
I,
guess
that
would
be
up
to
them,
but
I
believe
their
contract
with
RDC
allows
them
to
pass
that
through
so
functionally
I
believe
it
would.
It
would
come
out
of
a
city.
Q
So
for
the
RDC
they
have
a
contract
with
Crossroads
engineer
and
as
part
of
that
contract,
there's
a
reimbursable
expense
for
that
fee.
The
crossroads
contract
is
funded
by
the
Tiff,
and
so
the
money
would
actually
be
paid
ultimately
through
the
Tiff
it
would
be
paid
by
CrossRoads.
Crossroads
will
reimburse
it
to
RDC
that
money
would
come
out
of
the
Tiff
pay
Crossroads.
So
essentially
it
goes
through
two
hands,
but
essentially
it's
the
city
paying
the
city.
A
I
Just
I
get
that
it's
the
back
and
forth
and
so
like.
Why
do
it?
But
it's
the
Optics
of
it
and
I,
don't
think
it's
a
real
good
luck
for
us
to
waive
the
fee,
because
we
don't
waive
it
for
anyone
else.
Even
though
it's
money
in
and
out
it
would
be
annoying
to
have
to
deal
with
all
the
roundabout
I
just
think
from
a
public
perspective.
We
should
apply
the
same
rule.
That's
just
my
thought.
L
No
I
wholeheartedly
want
a
walkable
neighborhood,
so
I
really
like
incorporating
the
sidewalks
I.
Just
don't
want
to
create
any
hurdles
for
a
developer
and
helping
this
to
be
developed.
I
do
really
like
the
flexibility
and
lots,
and
the
variety
of
lots.
I
really
think
that's
going
to
help
develop
that
area
and
give
a
lot
of
different
options
to
different
people
who
want
to
invest
in
this
area.
So
I
will
support
adopting
this
yeah.
S
Ahead,
a
few
quick
comments,
one
on
the
fees
just
I'm
not
familiar
with
all
fees
and
city
code
and
that
the
city
collects
but
I'm
also
the
ones
that
I
am
most
familiar
with.
That
is
very
common
that
the
code
explicitly
doesn't
require
one
Department
to
pay
another
department,
just
that
just
is
kind
of
common
in
a
lot
of
sense.
So
just
this
feels
very
similar
to
that
to
me,
but
just
open
to
the
Planning
Commission
to
vote
on
that.
S
S
Dedication
piece-
and
so
that's
a
bit
of
that
conflict
and
so
potentially
Alternatives
do
exist
where
extra
right
away
could
be
dedicated
or
some
elements
of
the
cross-section
could
also
be
eliminated
like
on
street
parking,
and
so
there's
a
lot
of
high
level
discussion
and
trade-offs
and
I.
Think
there's
a
big
argument
that
on
street
parking,
creates
a
more
comfortable
walking
environment
as
well.
So
what
is
there's
just
some
really
good
questions
and
debate
and
that
topic
and
then
I
guess
one
thing
that
I
don't
think
we
really
heard
or
spoke
much
about.
N
A
Okay,
thank
you
and
sometimes
I
feel
like
there's
a
question
Andrew
in
your
comment
about
the
the
sidewalks
and
the
trade-offs
and
to
me
it's
a
question
of
how:
where
is
the
right
place
for
that
to
be
debated?
Is
it
here?
Is
it
at
the
city
council
meeting?
Is
it
where,
where
would
that
be
further
debated
or
considered.
E
A
E
Is
the
condition
of
approval
where
they
have
to
vacate
the
other
rights
of
way,
the
old
alleys
from
the
turn
of
the
century
Platte?
So
they
will
probably
discuss
some
of
these
things.
But
you
all
are
the
decision
makers
about
these
waivers
and
whether
or
not
you
think
they're
appropriate
they
won't.
They
will
not
technically
weigh
in
on
those
items.
I
I
Yes,
it
is
okay,
so
for
me
I
guess
it
doesn't
feel
like
City
departments
which
I
totally
agree
with
this
just
feels
different
and
it
may
just
be
accounting,
but
it
feels
like
it's
a
necessary
flow
that
needs
to
occur
out
of
deference
and
fairness
to
all
the
other
people.
We
ask
in
the
community
to
do
that
so,
but
I
do
appreciate
that
perspective.
So
thank
you.
Q
A
U
J
I
I
E
Correct
me,
if
I'm
wrong,
but
based
on
what
the
petitioner
said,
the
money
will
come
from
the
Tiff,
so
the
money
comes
from
tax
money
and
then
it's
going
to
go
into
the
general
fund,
all
the
money.
Anyone
who
does
a
petition
or
permit
with
us
and
pays
us
any
money
doesn't
come
to
the
department
at
all,
no
matter
how
many
we
get,
we
don't
get
to
have
new
people
or
anything
it
just
all
goes
into
the
general
fund
and
then
is
used
by
the
administration
how
they
see
fit.
E
So
it's
not
even
like
someone
gave
the
example
of
taking
money
from
a
different
department
which
is
all
kind
of
under
the
administration's
budget.
It's
actually.
It
sounds
like
coming
from
Tiff
money
from
tax
money
and
then
coming
into
the
general
fund
in
this
case.
If
that
means
anything
to
anyone,
things.
G
Questions
by
hand
raised
I've
been
waiting
patiently
thanks,
Jackie
I
was
actually
going
to
make
that
same
comment
that
it's
coming
from
the
Redevelopment
fund
and
going
most
likely
to
General.
So
you
know
I
do
think
Tiff
money
is
a
dedicated
type
of
use.
So
there's
that
to
consider
didn't
really
want
to
weigh
into
there
or
into
that
discussion.
I
was
just
kind
of
really
curious
about
where
the
funds
were
coming
and
I
figured.
They
were
coming
on
out
of
the
Tiff.
So
I'm
glad
that
that's
been
clarified.
G
My
question
is
actually
to
Mr
seaboard's
kind
of
Point
Andrew.
You
said
there
could
potentially
be
another
condition,
but
if
you
were
going
to
maybe
consider
one,
what
would
that
be
I'm
kind
of
curious
if
you
wanted
to
expand
on
that
anymore,
because
if
you
had
thought
out
of
a
another
potential
condition
for
that
dedication
and
right
away,
I'd
be
very
curious
to
hear
that.
S
P
P
There
is
some
language
on
the
top
of
page
266
of
the
packet.
It's
page
10
of
the
staff
report
Within
the
packet
I'll
just
read
it
here.
The
secondary
plot
shall
provide
eight
additional
feet
of
right-of-way
dedication
along
South
Rogers
Street
between
West,
2nd
Street
and
West
University
Street,
to
bring
the
total
right-of-way
dedication
in
this
segment
to
50
feet
from
the
established
apparent
Center
Line
of
the
roadway.
So
that's
one
possible
language
that
could
be
used
for
such
a
condition.
A
A
Yeah,
if
thank
you,
if
we
can
see
the
conditions,
the
proposal
and
then
or
the
recommendation
and
then
the
conditions-
and
this
one
includes
the
fourth
condition
and
then
the
possibility
of
what
we
just
discussed
was
the
secondary
platoon
provide
eight
additional
feed
of
right-of-way
dedication
is
an
idea
here.
That's
part
of
this,
perhaps
adding
another
condition.
A
P
P
A
A
V
S
For
it,
I
think
the
first
slide
here
says:
I
propose
that
we
adopt
the
proposed
findings.
I'll
propose
we
waive
the
application
fee.
We
waive
the
second
hearing
and
approve
the
primary
plot
of
dp-23-23,
with
all
Associated
waivers
and
with
the
follow
with
the
three
conditions
that
were
in
the
staff
report
and
the
two
that
have
since
been
added
in
the
presentation
condition.
S
P
Statement
I
just
want
to
highlight
that
previously
Mr
seibor
had
mentioned
the
possibility
of
having
language
saying
something
about
shall
discuss
with
Planet
transportation
staff.
You
could
do
something
like
that.
This
is
more
clear-cut
that
there
has
to
be
eight
feet.
So
that's
up
to
your
discretion.
A
A
I
J
A
S
I
E
J
K
L
F
A
Right
so
this
passes
7-0.
Thank
you
for
all
of
everyone's
work
on
this
I
know.
It
was
a
lot
of
detail,
a
few
we're
all
supportive
of
Hope.
Well,
we
want
this
process
or
the
project
to
continue.
So
thank
you,
everybody,
okay.
That
was
a
long
one
folks
longer
than
yeah.
So
sorry,
okay,
all
right!
No
apologies!
This
is
this
is
good
work.
Okay!
So
now
we
actually.
U
U
U
U
U
A
Okay,
thank
you,
yeah,
all
right,
all
right!
Thank
you
all
for
sticking
around
and
for
continuing
with
us
we'll
get
started
on
the
second
item
on
our
agenda
petition:
PUD,
1823,
Sudbury
development,
Partners,
LLC,
south
Weimer
Road,
or
why
is
it
Weimer
Weimer
I
never
get
this
right,
we'll
we'll
address
this
property,
a
request
or
rezone,
approximately
140
acres
to
planned
unit
development
and
a
request
for
approval
of
a
district
ordinance
and
preliminary
plan.
This
is
not
the
only
time
we'll
be
talking
about
this
proposal.
E
Maybe
like
uses
and
areas
and
things
like
that
and
then
some
of
the
and
then
we
would
come
back
again
in
September
because
as
you'll
see
when
I'm
talking
about
it,
some
of
the
things
like
phasing
we
just
they
won't
be
able
to
be
answered
anytime
soon
because
of
we
need
information
from
CBU
and
things
like
that.
So
they'll
be
here
in
September,
either
way
so
I
think
it's
probably
going
to
be
valuable
for
us
all
to
just
mentally
plan
to
come
back
in
August
as
well.
Yeah.
A
So
I
think
this.
This
is
important
for
our
audience
here
in
the
room,
and
perhaps
online
to
know
is
that
tonight
is
not
the
only
occasion
to
talk
about
this
and
I.
Don't
know
if
that's
good
news
or
bad
news,
but
tonight
is
not
our
only
chance.
So
again,
as
Ms
gallon
indicated,
we
will
start
with
some
really
high
level
conversations,
so
we
may
as
well
just
kick
off
all.
E
Right
here
we
go
to
get
started.
Thank
you,
everybody.
For
being
here,
we
are
looking
at
a
petition
from
Sudbury
Partners
LLC.
It
is
PUD
1823,
the
general
location
is
obviously
off
of
South
Weimer.
The
property
is
located
east
of
Weimer
south
of
the
Terminus
of
South
Adams,
north
of
the
Summit
Woods
development
and
east
of
RCA
Park,
and
the
Monroe
County
government-owned
project
or
seasoning
property.
That's
been
discussed
for
a
potential
jail.
The
property
is
currently
largely
zoned
PUD.
E
V
E
Not
missing
anything
here,
okay
and
then
down
here
as
well.
We
have
breaking
away,
which
is
a
road
stub
here
and
a
city
path
that
also
stubs
to
the
property,
so
the
site
is
just
under
139
Acres.
Again,
as
I
mentioned,
it's
the
remaining
portion
of
the
partially
developed
1999
Sudbury
PUD,
the
petition.
The
petitioner
is
requesting
a
map
Amendment,
which
is
what
we
commonly
refer
to
as
a
rezone
of
the
property
to
a
new
PUD.
E
E
E
Okay,
so
again,
let's
start
with
kind
of
a
high
level
petition
overview
like
we
did
in
the
staff
report.
They
are
requesting
a
map
Amendment
and
District
ordinance
and
preliminary
plan
they're,
proposing
a
new
PUD
with
five.
What
we
are
calling
neighborhoods
and
they've
named
them.
So
you
can
see
those
five
here
new
rights
of
way,
so
some
that
appear
in
the
transportation
plan
which
are
required
to
be
built
and
then,
of
course,
other
small
local
roads
to
connect
the
developments
within
this
development
and
to
the
surrounding
areas.
E
They
are
proposing
in
the
five
areas
anywhere
from
4450
to
6
000
new
units,
that's
dwelling
units
and
if
you
look
through
their
proposed
District
ordinance,
that
is
dwelling
units
of
different
scales
so
from
single
family
through
multi-family
and
then
some
of
what
we
have
called
in
the
past,
largely
referred
to
as
missing
middle.
So
some
plexes
as
well
small
townhouses
attached
paired
homes
and
small
apartments.
They
have
indicated
that
they're
planning
across
the
board
for
this
area,
as
well
as
some
senior
and
assisted
living
the
develop
proposal.
E
Something
we'll
hopefully
hear
clarified
from
the
petitioner
in
the
in
the
different
documents
that
we
have
should
be
they
plan
for
the
property
to
be
developed
over
the
next
eight
to
nine
years.
They
are
planning
to
leave
land
for
a
Trailhead
for
the
Duke
Energy
easement
project
that
the
city
of
Bloomington
is
doing
so
you
can
see
these
lines
here.
This
is
the
Duke
power
line.
E
So
this
is,
let's
see,
can
I
zoom
in
on
this
new
Adobe
is
not
something
I'm
familiar
with
not
into
it
hold
on
just
a
sec,
so
this
was
in
the
packet
as
well,
but
this
is
their
proposed
roadway
plan
with
some
connections
to
the
outside
roads
to
for
scale.
So
in
the
transportation
plan
there
are
three
roads
on
this
property
and
I'll
show.
Those
later
one
is
the
extension
of
Sudbury.
So
Sudbury
goes
to
roughly
this
location.
E
A
connection
here
on
the
southern
end,
this
green
line
as
I
mentioned
breaking
away
down
here
previously,
a
connection
there
as
well
as
a
trail
connection
to
the
trail
that
runs
alongside
of
that
road
and
then
again,
we'll
look
at
the
transportation
plan
here
shortly,
but
they
are
proposing
this
potential
future
connection.
They
obviously
don't
own
this
portion,
but
would
stub
to
the
end
of
their
property
for
a
potential
vehicular
connection
to
Wapahani
at
some
time
in
the
future.
E
Okay,
so
the
petitioner
has
provided
this
preliminary
building
layout
again,
I'm
sure
that
they
will
speak
to
this
in
more
detail
than
I
have.
But
my
understanding
is
that
the
building
sizes
don't
necessarily
denote
a
design.
At
this
point,
each
building
design
indicates
a
number
of
units
that
they
would
be
proposing
to
build
in
that
location,
not
necessarily
to
the
shapes
and
sizes
shown
here,
but
obviously
in
some
way
related
to
them,
and
that's
why
they
are
the
shapes
that
they
are
so
indicating.
You
know.
E
We
have
a
number
of
comments
on
this
that
I'll
get
into
here
shortly,
but
their
idea
is
to
have
this
green
space
here,
open
in
the
middle
along
the
southern
side
of
Sudbury
and
then
obviously
leaving
the
existing
Waterway
here
open
with
some
Crossings
of
it,
but
not
having
development
near
it.
And
then
the
Waterway
and
flood
plain
on
the
West
Side
along
Weimer
to
be
undeveloped
as
well.
E
So
I'll
briefly
go
over
each
again
what
I'm
calling
neighborhoods
we're
still
kind
of
working
on
that
nomenclature.
The
first
is
called
Shasta
Meadow.
It's
this
one
here
on
the
West
side,
it's
almost
26
acres
and
the
two
zoning
districts
that
they
have
picked
for.
That
area
are
rh1
and
rh2.
So
for
those
who
aren't
familiar
in
a
plan
unit
development,
it
is
recommended
that
you
choose
base
zoning
districts
that
are
already
in
the
code.
So
RH
and
MN
are
existing
zoning
districts
in
our
code
and
one
is
residential.
E
High
density,
multi-family
and
the
other
is
mixed-use
neighborhood
scale,
and
then
you
can
propose
alternatives
to
some
standards
in
those
districts
to
meet
the
goals
of
your
plan
unit
development.
So
in
this
case
they've
chosen
those
two
and
they've
split
the
high
density
into
two
scales,
so
in
this
particular
Corner
they're
choosing
to
focus
on
the
two
residential
areas
that
they
have
districts
that
they
have
chosen
to
include.
E
So
this
is
the
first
district
that
they
would
be
expecting
to
be
able
to
develop
so
again
planning
to
do
rh2
here
on
the
outside
and
rh1
on
the
inside
I'm,
showing
you
all
these
things,
because
they're
in
the
current
plan
I
do
think
this
will
change.
We
have
given
some
feedback
about
this
being
kind
of
confusing
that
there
may
be
too
many
of
these
small
districts
like
how
here
there's
A1
a
b
and
AC,
because
in
the
use
table
they
each
have
their
own
sets
of
uses.
E
So
some
of
the
comments
that
we
have
had
here
that
we
haven't
gotten
a
lot
of
response
yet
about
is
why
do
these?
Why
can't
these
be
more
traditionally
gridded
East-West
north
south,
since
there's
already
going
to
be
a
large
East-West
and
North
South
Road?
Here
we
understand
that
there
are
some
environmental
considerations
to
the
West.
Can
they
be
mitigated?
Can
you
build
over
an
extra
connection
to
weemer?
Those
are
some
of
the
questions
we've
asked
for
this
area,
so
the
second
area
is
on
the
southern
end.
E
So
here,
they're
planning
three
to
five
stories
and
again
the
fire
station
and
Trailhead
in
this
location,
I
think
it's
on
a
noted
on
a
separate
map.
We
believe
that
there's
some
tree
protection
that
probably
needs
to
happen
here
in
the
southern
portion
based
on
some
site
visits
done
by
staff.
So
we
are
still
working
with
the
petitioner
on
that.
So
when
you
see
the
development
pattern
that
they
have
planned,
it
may
end
up
being
smaller
than
what
they
have
originally
started
with.
This
is
the
other
area.
E
They
think
they
could
start
developing
immediately.
So
delivery
on
this
portion
is
also
2025
to
2026
and
obviously
built
around
this
connection
to
atoms
to
the
South
so
again,
including
those
two
residential
districts,
and
then
the
area
shown
for
the
fire
station
and
Trailhead
would
be
here
on
the
east
side
of
new
Adams,
and
then
there
would
be
some
other
small
local
Road
Network
here
with
the
connection
to
breaking
away,
which
already
exists
to
the
South
Area
3
is
just
over
31
acres,
and
this
is
where
we
see
our
first
inclusion
of
mixed-use
neighborhood
scale.
E
So
that's
going
to
be
primarily
mixed
use,
slash
commercial
Focus,
so
here
in
the
description
they
call
high
density
mixed
use.
Again
they
have
a
varied
list
of
residential,
including
the
senior
assisted
living
and
some
limited
commercial.
These
buildings
are
meant
to
be
three
to
six
stories.
Again,
we
have
identified
some
tree
preservation
in
the
southern
portion
that
may
need
to
occur,
so
we're
still
working
with
the
petitioners
on
that
and
delivery
of
this
area
has
is
indicated
to
be
between
near
the
end
between
2028
and
2029..
E
So
that's
something
we're
working
on
with
the
petitioner
again.
Here
are
more
of
the
traditional
Street
grid,
which
the
comprehensive
plan
does
call
for
a
question.
We've
posed
to
the
condition
to
the
petitioner,
based
on
some
comments
that
were
made
by
one
of
their
Professionals
in
a
meeting
about
the
scale
of
this,
a
Waterway
here
that
it's
maybe
not
quite
as
big
as
you
might
think
it
would
be
based
on
kind
of
some
of
the
discussion
and
images
is
that?
Can
we
have
more
vehicular
or
pedestrian
connections
across?
E
So
could
this
be?
Why
are
these
Offset?
You
know
we're
trying
to
look
into
the
future
and
you
know,
use
some
sort
of
well
understood
and
proven
roadway
design
for
Connection,
in
one
of
which
is
gridded,
and
it's
called
for
the
comprehensive
plan
so
working
with
them
on
that,
and
then
this
is
the
large
area
in
the
middle.
It's
called
Everest
center,
it's
almost
35
and
a
half
acres
and
the
focus
here
is
MN.
E
So
this
would
be
the
most
intense
area
varied
residential
listed
in
the
use
table
and
description
also
varied
commercial
uses.
The
open
space
I
mentioned
earlier
in
the
Middle,
with
some
green
space
parking
facilities,
which
we'll
discuss
under
uses
a
little
bit
more
that
they
would
like
to
add
to
their
allowance
that
that
aren't
allowed
in
other
places
in
the
city
and
five
to
eight
stories
is
what
they're
indicating
here
with
delivery
from
2026
to
2028..
E
So
again,
this
entire
area
is
shown
as
MN
we'll
discuss
this
a
bit
later.
But
one
of
our
concerns
is
the
interface
here
between
the
new
development
and
the
existing
development
of
Arbor
Ridge
directly
across
Sudbury.
So
having
the
discussions
about
the
intensity
of
this
development
immediately
adjacent
to
the
paired
homes
across
the
street,
so
here
fairly
gridded,
which
is
great
and
but
again
this
is
kind
of
off
off
kilter
a
little
bit.
It's
not
actually
East
West.
E
E
Okay,
so
I
mentioned
earlier
that
this
was
in
the
comprehensive
plan
as
neighborhood
residential,
and
you
can
see
that
here.
You
can
also
see
by
this
green
dashed
line
that
this
is
also
considered
a
focus
area,
which
was
something
that
I
neglected
to
put
in
the
staff
report.
So
let
me
see
if
I
can
briefly
I
think
I
called
that
up.
It's
called
the
West
Fork
Clear
Creek
Focus
area.
E
Again,
it's
identified
largely
because
it's
undeveloped,
one
of
the
larger
undeveloped
areas
in
the
city-
and
you
know,
planning
for
developing
in
this
area
to
be
more
kind
of
complex
and
maybe
simpler
than
some
of
the
other
neighborhood
residential
or
not,
as
simple
excuse
me
as
some
of
the
other
neighborhood
residential
development,
which
is
largely
infill
or
small
scale.
So
that's
something
we'll
want
to
look
to
as
we
move
through
these
meetings
as
well.
E
I
think
I'm
trying
to
find
my
shared
screen
here.
We
go
okay,
so
I'm
just
going
to
generally
go
over
these
issues
and
concerns.
They
were
mostly
in
the
packet
and
then
answer
any
questions
that
you
all
may
have.
So
the
first
is
our
general
ped
organization.
I
spoke.
We
spoke
about
this
in
the
written
report
as
well,
but
planning
developments
are
great.
E
They
are
great
because
they
offer
the
opportunity
for
unique
and
Innovative
development
and
the
opportunity
for
the
city
to
maybe
get
new
and
exciting
types
of
development
that
can't
be
achieved
through
the
regular
zoning
code.
In
this
instance,
this
pieces
so
large
that
it
probably
it
does
make
sense
for
it
to
be
a
planned
unit
development.
E
We
just
want
to
make
sure
that
in
eight
years
when
staff
is
administering
this
Planning
Development-
and
you
know
we
have
as
many
planned
Commissioners
who
will
still
be
here-
and
those
of
you
who
won't
that
they'll
be
able
to
understand
what's
going
on
here
so
in
a
typical
plan.
Unit
development
developer
will
identify
those
things
that
they
want
to
be
different,
and
so
they
say
you
know,
for
example,
that
they
want
to
use
the
MN
zoning
District,
except
for
and
then
you
list
six
things
that
you
want
to
do
differently.
E
So
the
petitioner
has
done
that
a
bit.
What
they
have
done
is
take
kind
of
whole
cloth
sections
from
the
Udo
and
then
make
small
changes
in
it.
So
from
a
staff
perspective,
you
know
even
just
reviewing
it
for
this
meeting.
I'm
re
I'm
reading
it
against
the
Udo
to
make
sure
that
I'm
not
missing
something
that
we
don't
normally
talk
about,
or
you
know
hasn't,
come
up
a
lot
lately,
that's
not
on
the
tip
of
my
brain
and
so
every
time
someone
has
to
do
a
review
here.
E
That's
what
they're
going
to
have
to
do,
which
is
fine,
except
that
a
lot
of
what
they've
included
isn't
different
because
they're
hoping
to
freeze
some
of
the
Udo
in
time
so
they're.
So
it's
really
three
tiers
in
my
mind,
it's
the
things
that
are
different,
it's
the
things
they
want
to
keep
the
same,
but
the
problem
is
that
the
Udo
also
says:
if
there
are
items
that
are
not
specifically
called
out
in
the
Pud,
then
staff
has
to
revert
to
the
Udo
to
to
see
what
the
rule
is
and
that's
fine.
E
Do
they
really
want
this
140
acres
to
be
exempt
from
from
that,
because
the
petitioner
wants
to
be
able
to
themselves
as
developer
and
as
selling
this
property
to
someone
else
to
be
able
to
say
these
are
definitely
the
regulations,
no
matter
what
I'm
not
sure
that
that's
going
to
happen,
but
we've
told
them
they
can
propose
that.
But
we
would
prefer
that
it
be
really
narrowed.
E
They
didn't
change
anything
in
them
and
so
I
we
are
still
working
with
them
to
have
that
be
it
needs
to
be
clear
than
it
is
so
when
you
read
through
it
I'm
sure
I'm
sure
you
did,
that
may
have
felt
confusing
or
kind
of
overwhelming
it's
a
lot
of
information
and
a
lot
of
it
is
repeat
so
kind
of
trying
to
Pare
that
down
as
we
move
forward
and
I
think
they're
already
working
on
that.
But
here's
the
example
I
mentioned
earlier.
E
These
are
the
15
use
sections.
You
know.
If
you
cut
these
up
and
map
them
out
by
similarities,
they
really
are.
There
really
are
less
where
there
are
just
one
or
two
things
that
are
different
and
so
I
think
they're
working
on
bringing
those
down
to
be
more
to
be
more
similar
to
the
dimensional
standards,
which
are
done
just
for
the
three
districts
of
MN,
rh1
and
rh2.
So
again
we're
working
with
them
on
that
that's
kind
of
a
big
deal
to
us.
E
E
They
have
in
a
number
of
places
and
I
won't
go
into
Super
detail
about
this,
but
we
but
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
If
you
have
detailed,
questions
have
proposed
slightly
reduced
standards
for
Environmental
Protection,
so,
for
example,
on
the
riparian
buffer
District
in
our
code,
each
zone
is
25
feet
for
a
total
of
75..
E
We
propose
to
you
all
in
the
council
number
of
years
ago
to
start
that
measurement
from
the
middle
of
the
stream
as
opposed
to
the
bank,
because
we
don't
have
very
many
wide
banks,
so
we're
not
losing
much
ground
there,
so
it's
already
slightly
reduced
than
some
in
the
community
would
would
like
and
they're
proposing
to
reduce
zone
three.
So
we
have
said
you
know
why.
How
is
that?
How
is
that
helping
the
community
goals?
E
So
that's
there
are
a
couple
of
those
in
in
the
environmental
section,
but,
as
you
can
see,
and
I
said
before,
this
area
really
is
pretty
environmentally
constrained
and
so,
for
example,
they're
proposing
a
different
percentage
for
how
much
of
the
area
over
18
percent
you
could
have
Disturbed
again.
Who
is
that
helping
besides
the
developer-
and
we
do
want
to
help
see
this
developed?
We
are,
you
know,
glad
to
see
this
being
done,
but
we
need
to
balance
the
community
goals
as
well.
This
sorry,
this
is
one's
kind
of
fuzzy.
E
This
is
the
from
their
report
for
cars,
location
and
then
tree
preservation
area.
Again,
as
I
mentioned,
there's
some
treats
obviously
here
that
they've
indicated
and
some
trees
here
on
the
south
end
as
well,
so
working
with
them
to
prioritize
those.
So
I
was
able
to
pop
out
there
today
and
walk
around
the
fringes
on
all
that.
There's
all
those
public
rights
of
way
that
about
it,
which
is
great-
and
you
can
see
this
is
from
the
I
believe
this
is
from
the
southwest
pin
of
the
property
facing
Northeast.
E
E
So
lots
of
green
here
already
and
just
wanting
to
make
sure
that
we're
doing
our
best
to
figure
out
how
to
preserve
those
environmental
things
that
are
still
there.
So
number
three
is
right
of
way.
Connections,
as
I
mentioned
before
you
know,
having
a
serious
discussion
about
whether
or
not
another
connection
to
weemer
could
be
done
through
the
floodplain
here
and
whether
or
not
that
needs
to
be
considered.
E
You
know,
Sudbury,
isn't
a
new
connection
that
already
exists.
Some
people
live
off
of
that
road.
Now
they
will
be
doing
the
Adams
Street
connection
to
the
North
and
South,
as
I
mentioned.
Adams
doesn't
actually
go
through
to
the
South.
Yet
we
anticipate
that
to
happen
in
the
next
few
years,
but
you
just
never
know
so
starting
development
with
only
you
know
two
exits
of
this
number
of
units,
because
Wapahani
again,
this
connection
they're
proposing
here
would
have
to
go
through
someone
else's
development.
E
Oh
I'm,
sorry,
three
connections
because
they'd
be
doing
breaking
away,
just
something
to
consider
for
you
all
and
to
maybe
that's
something
excuse
me
that
they
will
do
a
traffic
study,
and
that
may
happen
before
it
gets
out
of
here.
There'll,
be
something
for
you
all
to
think
about.
It
will
definitely
happen
before
it
goes
to
council
and
something
that
that
may
have
an
effect
on
or
something
that
will
be
part
of
that
discussion
is
number
of
exits
in
the
effect
on
the
surroundings.
Of
course.
E
So
the
kind
of
weird
blue
outline
is
the
parcels
in
question
and
then
the
lines
underneath
are
from
the
Transportation
plan.
So
when
they
go
to
do
a
subdivision,
when
you
go
to
do
a
subdivision,
you're
required
to
Plat
and
build
those
roads
on
your
property
that
are
in
the
transportation
plan,
so
they
will
plot
and
build.
This
is
Sudbury
and
this
is
atoms
and
they
have
agreed
to
build
it.
On
their
parcel
here
as
you've
seen
in
the
other
drawings,
this
connection
on
the
south
end
is
the
one
we're
still
talking
to
them
about.
E
They
would
like
to
do
a
stub
as
I
mentioned,
not
exactly
where
it
shows
in
the
transportation
plan,
because
connecting
to
weemer
may
not
make
a
lot
of
sense.
It
will
probably
change
in
the
course
of
potentially
in
the
course
of
the
development
of
this
property.
So
Wapahani
is
out
here
to
the
West,
so
maybe
with
the
idea
of
having
it
go
directly
west
sometime
in
the
future,
that's
something
that
we
are
still
discussing
so
again.
E
The
other
option
could
be
just
bringing
it
straight
out
to
Weimer
north
of
the
trail
so
again
areas
of
concern
for
right-of-way
connections.
Why
isn't
it
traditionally
gridded
and
why
no
additional
access
on
wemur,
so
I
put
in
some
images
here,
so
you
can
see
the
roads
that
are
built
around.
This
are
clearly
built
to
connect
this
at
some
point,
not
all
of
them,
but
most
of
them.
So
this
is
Adams
on
the
North
End
of
the
development
site
facing
north.
So
this
is,
you
know,
obviously,
a
very
well-developed
Road
mature
trees.
E
It
has
sidewalks
on
both
sides.
They
would
be
connecting
to
this,
which
would
be
great
for
a
great
connection
through
the
city.
Let's
see
this
is
Sudbury,
not
a
small
Road.
Obviously
you
can
see
it's
quite
big
and
it
is
a
general
Urban
in
our
transportation
plan.
So
the
rest
of
the
connection
that
they
make
would
also
be
large
as
well
again,
this
road's
been
here
for
a
while
large
developed,
trees
sidewalks
on
both
sides,
and
then
you
can
see.
E
E
This
is
the
breaking
away,
stub
that
was
built
in
the
last
couple
of
years,
I
believe
also
by
The
Ridge
Group
and
then
the
end
of
the
trail
as
well.
So
this
is
facing
north
on
the
southern
side
of
the
development,
the
proposed
development,
and
then
this
is
Adam
Street
from
the
pictures
I
was
showing
this
is
facing
south.
So
on
to
the
property.
E
E
This
is
further
south
of
the
development
on
weemer.
This
is
a
one-lane
bridge
it
you
cannot
pass
it
with
two
cars
and
so
something
to
be
considered
so
when
they
do
their
traffic
study
I'm,
showing
you
these
things,
because
these
are
the
kinds
of
things
that
they'll
consider
and
have
to
think
about.
What
is
their
development
going
to
do?
What's
the
effect
it
going
to
have
on
all
of
these
things?
And
how
much
are
we
as
a
city
going
to
say
you
know
you
will
be
impacting
this?
E
E
We,
you
can't
do
a
PUD
in
Bloomington
anymore,
unless
you're
reading
that
standard
with
your
units,
so
I
think
one
thing
that
needs
to
be
clarified
in
discussions
that
we
need
to
have
because
they
would
still
like
to
include
incentives.
They
would
like
to
alter
them,
for
example,
in
the
Udo
for
sustainable
incentives.
You
have
to
meet
all
of
these.
All
of
these
particular
requirements.
I
believe
there
are
six
or
you
can
get
like
a
certification
like
a
lead
standard
certification.
Those
are
your
options.
E
They
would
like
to
reduce
it
to
three
meaning
three
of
the
standards.
You
may
recall
that
we
used
to
allow
four
and
then
we
changed
it
to
all
six,
because
four
was
just
too
simple
and
so
a
number
of
the
developments
that
we
saw
using
incentives,
weren't
doing
any
affordable
housing
and
we're
just
doing
sustainability
because
it
wasn't
complicated
to
meet
so
that's
kind
of
One
Piece
the
other
pieces,
and
we
can
hear
from
them
tonight.
E
I,
don't
I
feel
like
it's
unclear
whether
or
not
the
15
that's
required
for
their
PUD
is
doubling
as
the
15
for
their
incentives
or
whether
or
not
we're
going
to
get
some
percentage
more
than
the
15
required
for
the
buildings
being
taller,
and
maybe
it's
appropriate
for
those
things
to
be
paired,
but
their
base
Heights
are
so
much
bigger
than
our
base.
Heights
they're,
like
in
the
MN,
for
example,
the
regular
base,
the
regular
Max
heightened
MN,
is
a
number
three
or
so
stories
lower
than
it's
three
sorry.
E
I
I'm,
just
I'm,
either
not
understanding
it
or
that
doesn't
make
a
lot
of
sense
to
me
so
we'll
hear
from
them
tonight,
but
you
know
to
get
a
10-story
building
and
not
give
an
additional
percentage
of
units
when
a
typical.
Our
typical
code
would
only
allow
you
a
building
half
that
size
with
that
same
percentage
feels
odd,
but
you
know
the
numbers
may
work
out
in
such
a
way
that
they
can
explain
that.
That
makes
sense,
and
we
just
haven't
had
that
detailed
conversation.
E
Yet
so
something
that
we'll
need
to
think
about
is
how
to
make
sure
that
we're
properly
phasing
those
incentives.
You
know
they
they're
saying
15
per
area.
Do
we
do
caps
on
areas?
We
want
to
make
sure
that
we
are
thinking
about
the
triggers
and
the
the
phasing
not
only
as
areas
but
as
temporarily
as
well.
You
know
with
the
original
Sudbury
PUD
all
of
the
triggers
for
public
incentives
were
development
based,
so
they
hit
those
thresholds
and
then
they
just
stopped
building,
and
then
they
didn't
build
the
other.
E
They
didn't
build
the
public
improvements,
so
we
want
to
try
to
avoid
that
here
and
then
one
more
thing
for
the
incentives,
I
believe
is
the
idea
of
including
beds
and
Facilities,
such
as
nursing
homes
or
assisted
livings
toward
a
unit
count
so
saying.
If
you
had
10
beds
where
the
recipients
were
on
Medicaid,
can
that
count
as
10
units
toward
your
minimum
for
that
area,
so
that
would
be
different
for
us.
So
that's
something
for
you
all
to
consider
as
well.
E
Okay,
and
so
then
this
I
touched
I'm
almost
done
I
swear
and
then
this
I
touched
on
location
of
areas.
Briefly
before,
where
we
said
in
this
area
on
the
east
side,
is
there
some
concern
about
having
mixed-use
neighborhood
here
the
circle
and
the
yellow
on
the
east
side
and
the
circle
on
the
bottom?
Those
seem
like
tree
preservation
areas
from
our
analysis,
so
you
know,
are
we
getting
rid
of
both
of
those?
E
So
I
wanted
to
include
this
here.
This
is
from
just
inside
the
stub
of
Sudbury
facing
north.
So
these
are
the
roofs
of
the
paired
homes
immediately
North,
so
Sudbury,
again,
quite
a
large
right-of-way.
There
will
be
some
separation.
There
always
plan
to
connect.
It's
not
like
you
know.
That
was
always
a
that
was
always
part
of
the
original
plan
before
Arbor
Ridge
was
ever
built,
but
I
do
think
it's
something
to
consider.
E
So
those
types
of
questions
and
again
I
wanted
to
include
this
one
from
the
same
location
where
you
can
see
those
tree
stands
and
how
thick
they
are
along
the
Eastern
portion.
Okay,
so
my
last
one
is
phasing
which
I
mentioned
they
did
in
their
in
their
report
propose
some
phasing.
We
are
still
discussing
that
phasing
is
really
difficult
to
discuss
at
this
stage,
because
a
lot
of
it
depends
on
how
much
how
they
can
attach
the
utilities,
and
we
won't
know
that
until
the
end
of
August.
E
So
we
wanted
to
come
here
to
start
the
conversation
with
you
start
the
conversation
with
the
public
of
what
the
issues
and
questions
are
we'll
likely
come
back
again
next
month
with
some
more
details
about
whatever
those
may
be,
but
then
in
September
have
a
more
you
know,
a
complete
package,
hopefully
of
saying
this
is
what
we're
planning
to
do
with
the
phasing.
This
is
where
all
the
districts
are
going
to
be.
E
This
is
have
it
be
done
by
then
that's
the
idea,
and
of
course,
if
you
need
more
time,
then
then
you'll
take
more
time.
So
that
is
for
your
review.
We
haven't
I,
don't
think
really
kind
of
signed
off
on
that
we're
trying
to
figure
out,
as
I
mentioned
before
a
way
for
you
know,
Adams
and
Sudbury
have
to
be
built
up
front,
so
they're
part
of
the
transportation
plan
when
they
plan
it
a
clock
starts,
and
they
have
to
build
it
within
a
certain
number
of
years.
E
Those
areas
don't
necessarily
serve
the
areas
that
they
want
to
develop.
First,
but
that's
you
know
their
choice
to
develop
it
that
way.
So
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
get
those
improvements
if
we're
adding
people
into
this
area,
and
so
that's
something
that
we're
trying
to
figure
out
how
to
make
that
happen.
E
So
again,
this
is
some
of
their
submitted
information
related
to
the
utilities
and
are
some
of
our
goals,
making
sure
that
we're
achieving
those
Community
benefits,
especially
related
to
Safe,
vehicular
and
pedestrian
connection,
and
having
to
wait
on
these
utility
connection.
Answers
from
CBU
is
a
big
deal
at
this
point,
so
we
are
excited
to
see
this
PUD
developed.
We
have
seen
The
Ridge
Group
do
project
here
in
town
that
went
well.
They
worked
with
the
city
on
the
trail
that
I
showed
earlier.
E
That's
south
of
this
development
we
are
just
were.
It
is
such
a
large
and
impactful
development
that
we
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we
are
digging
down
as
deep
as
we
need
to
to
get
as
many
answers
and
plans
up
front
so
that
everyone
who
is
interested
can
know
what
they're
expecting
here
and
that
we
can
make
sure
that
we
are
focusing
on
what
is
not
only
good
for
the
developer,
but
also
good
for
the
community.
E
So
we're
recommending
to
you
that
you
forward
the
petition
to
the
required
second
hearing,
which
we
think
will
likely
be
in
August
and
you
could
I
think
Mr.
Ricker
can
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
you
could
continue
to
August
and
then,
if
we
had
to
amend
that
agenda,
we
still
could
I
can
answer
any
questions.
Thanks.
W
Good
evening,
Angela
Parker
here
from
Carmen
Parker
for
the
petitioner
we're
pleased
to
be
here.
We
really
are-
and
we
appreciate
Jackie's
report,
because
that
was
not
an
easy
one,
and
we're
also
pleased
to
have
so
many
other
people
here
so
because
the
goal
tonight
is
to
really
get
some
feedback
and
push
the
pause
button.
We've
been
working
on
this
for
months
and
months
and
months
and
and
having
the
high
level
review
here
is
really
important
to
us
in
terms
of
the
process
and
incorporating
a
lot
of
that
feedback.
W
W
T
W
Jackie
brought
up
the
environmental
features.
This
definitely
has
some
environmental
considerations
that
we're
trying
to
really
tune
into
with
some
Precision.
Our
team
will
talk
about
that
in
a
couple
of
minutes,
but
I
wanted
to
start
just
with
a
little
bit
higher
view
of
you
know
what
would
happen
if
this
weren't
a
PUD,
because
the
staff
report
describes
some
of
the
adjacent
development,
and
so
we
try
to
think
about.
What's
you
know?
How
do
we
transition
from?
What's
all
around
this
site
to
the
site
and
and
take
into
consideration?
W
This
is
I
mean
it
was
first,
a
PUD
actually
in
1995.,
there's,
probably
not
very
many
people
in
this
room
who
remember
Don
Hastings,
who
was
the
planning
director
at
the
time,
so
this
has
been
swirling
around
in
various
stages
for
about
25
years,
almost
30
years,
and
when
the
city
did
its
rezoning
and
eliminated
some
puds
and
went
through
that
process.
This
one
stayed
in
place
and
I
think.
The
reason
it
stayed
in
place
is
because
it's
important
that
this
be
developed
under
the
comprehensive
plan
as
a
PUD.
W
So
we've
looked
at,
of
course,
the
existing
planning
documents.
There
was
a
2019
study
visioning
specifically
for
this
project,
which
was
the
Schmidt
study.
I,
don't
know
if
you've
seen
that
and
we
can
certainly
provide
copies
to
the
plan
commission
if
you
haven't,
but
it
really
calls
for
this
idea
of
mixed
uses
and
neighborhood
centers,
and
so
our
proposal
Works
to
accomplish
that
objective
in
the
comprehensive
plan,
as
Jackie
pointed
out,
calls
for
Neighborhood
Center
mixed
residential
and
is
a
focus
area.
W
That's
really
largely
focused
on
residential,
but
we've
really
got
to
incorporate
this
idea
of
Supportive
Services
and
Commercial
development.
That
goes
with
that
public
infrastructure.
We're
happy
to
work
with
the
Bloomington
Fire
Department
to
really
look
at
locating
a
fire
station
there
as
part
of
this
project
to
really
help
in
that
area,
because
there's
not
one
and
so
there's
going
to
need
to
be
one
and
also
deal
with
the
extension
of
the
trail
systems
and
provide
that
Trailhead
that
was
referenced
earlier.
W
The
utilities
infrastructure
is
going
to
be
in
important
consideration
and
you'll
hear
a
bit
more
about
that
later
tonight
as
well,
and
if,
if
we
looked
at
just
a
traditional
like
what
would
this
be
zoned,
if
you
were
going
to
Zone
at
something
and
it
wasn't
a
PUD
and
and
I
think
we
lose
a
lot
because
we
don't
have
the
infrastructure
commitments,
the
affordable
housing
commitments,
the
owner
occupancy
commitments,
the
Conformity
and
development
standards,
and
we
really
have
this
huge
parcel
of
property.
That's
pretty
overwhelming.
W
So
our
goal
was
to
really
develop
this
in
phases
and
tranches
that
make
sense
based
on
putting
infrastructure
in
place,
putting
roads
in
place
dealing
with
utilities
and
I
want
to
talk
a
little
bit
briefly
about
what
the
petitioner's
commitment
is
here.
So
the
commitment
to
the
Pud
and
moving
forward
is
we
there's,
really
highly
desired
and
needed
mix
of
housing
types,
and
so
this
covers
the
whole
gamut
of
housing
types.
There
is
a
commitment
to
Affordable
units
and
owner
occupancy.
W
Those
are
required
if
we're
going
to
be
a
PUD,
it
wasn't
in
the
original
PUD,
but
we're
obviously
going
to
incorporate
that
and
I
think
we'll
see
higher
levels
than
the
minimums
that
were
talked
about
earlier.
The
neighborhood
center,
which
is
retail
office,
commercial
and
Supportive
Services,
as
Adams
and
Sudbury
you've
heard
about
the
fire
station,
the
trailhead.
It's
it's
really
our
goal
to
recast
the
vision
of
what
this
PUD
could
be
and
and
then
put
it
in
motion
and
start
phasing
it
with
this
development
plan.
W
The
principles
that
are
articulated
in
the
2019
Schmidt
Vision
plan
in
the
city's
comp
plan
include
these
high-value
design
features.
It's
designated
residential
neighborhood
residential
in
the
comp
plan.
We're
really
looking
to
add
public
space,
a
district
Center,
Green,
Space,
Trails
tree
preservation,
Environmental
Conservation,
is
a
part
of
our
plan.
We
want
to
create
neighborhoods
that
promote
mixed
uses,
walkability
affordability,
owner
occupancy
and
increase
the
housing
stock.
The
Pud
is
the
right
path
to
give
effect
to
this
scale
of
development
on
this
multi-year
project
and
the
requirements
to
do
so
are
met
here.
W
I
think
the
discussion
is
is
in
these
overarching
vision
and
the
values
about
what
we
want
to
accomplish
in
this
plan,
and
and
how
do
we
get
there
so
we're?
We
really
are
looking
forward
to
your
comments
and
feedback
and
and
hope
that
we
can
get
that
tonight
and
really
listen
to
what
your
concerns
and
ideas
Envision
are
are
for
this
I
mean
this
is
a
massive
scale.
W
Development
there's,
as
the
staff
report
points
out,
they're
not
there
are
not
a
lot
of
these
opportunities
left
in
the
city
of
Bloomington
right
now,
so
we
really
want
to
make
sure
we
do
it
the
right
way
and
so
hitting
the
pause
button
here
to
to
really
listen
is
important
to
us.
So
I
want
to
very
quickly
introduce
the
team
and
then
call
on
another
person
to
come
up.
W
So
we
have
Tyler
Ridge
here,
who
is
one
of
the
co-developers
from
The
Ridge
Group
Adam
canola
is
with
him
from
The
Ridge
Group
Travis
vinsel,
who
many
of
you
know
from
Sullivan
development
is
a
co-developer.
We
have
our
architect
Billy
panko
here,
as
well
as
our
lead
engineer
from
stantec
Jared
Ward.
So
that's
the
team-
that's
here
tonight,
that's
only
part
of
the
team,
as
you
can
imagine,
with
the
project.
This
sizable
and
I'd
like
to
call
for
Tyler
to
come
up
and
talk
next.
Thank
you.
M
Evening,
Mission
members
appreciate
everybody's
time
tonight.
I
know
it's
been
a
long
night
and
we'll
try
to
get
through
this
again
to
reiterate
we're
here.
Looking
for
your
feedback,
looking
for
your
input,
we've
kind
of
Hit
the
pause
button.
Well,
not
the
engineering
front,
but
we
as
planning
and
uses
of
Hit
the
pause
button
to
get
your
feedback
and
really
make
this
something
we
can
all
be
proud
of.
M
Tyler
Ridge,
president
of
the
Ridge
Group,
also
managing
member
of
Sudbury
development,
Partners
LLC,
leading
the
team
put
together
the
team
really
that
led
to
charge
on
purchasing
this
once
in
a
lifetime
property.
There's
not
many
times
you
can
put
together,
140
Acres
develop
in
a
top
three
Market
in
the
state.
This
is
one
of
those,
so
we
were
aggressive
and
went
after
it.
We
closed
on
January
31st
of
2023.
After
several
meetings
with
various
departments
with
the
city,
the
mayor's
office
planning,
Alex
Crowley,
Jeff
Underwood,
you
name
it.
M
M
So
that's
that's
where
we're
at
on
the
land
that
does
not
include
pre-development
cost,
but
significant
investment,
an
area
we
believe
in
an
area
we're
proud
to
be
in
and
again
appreciate
your
time
from
inception,
really
the
city's
Vision,
the
city's
needs
and
our
vision
for
the
property,
aligned
and
I
still
think
today
that
a
line
now
we
still
have
a
lot
of
detail
to
get
through.
As
you
know,
Jackie's
questions
we've
been
talking
about
these
for
going
on
six
to
seven
months,
meeting
weekly
with
Jackie
meeting
weekly
with
the
city.
M
It's
a
lot
to
get
through.
It's
it's
a
difficult
process,
but
we're
committed
to
do
so.
We
got
the
team
to
do
so,
and
the
need
for
this
housing
and
infrastructure
can
only
happen
if
the
city
participates
in
the
the
main
backbone
or
the
public
improvements
and
utilities
which
we
saw
in
the
transportation
plan
and
Adams
and
Sudbury
Lane,
and
whether
it's
Wapahani
or
Countryside,
or
whatever
we
figure
out
on
the
southern
portion.
But
we
will
need
support
on
these
roadways.
We
have
initial
estimates
very
expensive
to
get
this
done,
I
mean
I.
M
Think
atoms
is
1.3
miles
long,
so
I
mean
just
to
put
in
perspective
how
large
this
development
is
1.2
or
1.3,
but
a
large
development
so
again,
I'll
bring
up.
Someone
smarter
me
knows
more
about
the
development
in
Travis,
but
we
want
to
thank
everybody
for
your
time.
Thank
the
mayor's
office,
think
planning
utilities,
Transportation
parks
and
everybody
else
that's
been
dealing
with
us.
So
we
appreciate
everybody's
time.
V
Thanks
Tyler
Travis
Mensel
with
settlement
Development
I've
asked
for
you
to.
Let
me
have
a
few
minutes
extra
if
I
go
over
because
I
don't
want
to
address
a
lot
of
staff's
comments,
but
there's
a
couple
I'd
like
to
address
so
I
might
go
a
couple
minutes
over
I
think
for
a
project
this
size.
If
I
can
go
just
a
couple
minutes
over
that'd
be
great
but
I
might
be
close.
Jackie
Jackie
will
put
me
to
the
test,
see
if
I
can
do
it
here.
So
you
know
we
really.
V
When
we
took
a
look
at
this
property,
we
really
wanted
to
come
across
a
broad
approach
to
providing
A
diversity
of
housing
that
would
really
be
impactful
for
Bloomington.
We
haven't
had
the
opportunity
to
do
that
for
a
long
time
in
the
this
community.
I
think
the
last
time
that
we
did
a
development
anywhere
close
to
this
I
was
on
your
side,
setting
up
there
at
that
seats
and
having
several
meetings
and
I
think
it
took
three
or
four
to
get
through
the
process.
V
V
If
you
start
to
look
at
how
these
five
neighborhoods
overlay
in
the
context
of
the
existing,
we
obviously
have
some
different
pressures,
and
so
when
we
look
at
district
one
there,
we
are
considering
how
to
add
another
use
table
that
will
bring
down
the
scale
of
some
of
that
development
in
that
area
and
put
more
concentrate
on
smaller
scale.
Owner-Occupied
affordability
within
district
one,
as
well
as
within
District
Two,
so
look
for
that
to
come
forward
so,
instead
of
three
zoning
districts,
I
think
we'll
end
up
with
five.
V
At
the
same
time
in
area
three,
where
staff
has
said,
does
the
MN
need
to
extend
that
far
I
think
you'll
see
us
also
bring
that
down
and
scale
and
size
a
little
bit
in
that
area,
so
that
our
MN
district
will
be
closer.
Look
for
us
to
add
some
Conservancy
areas
that
you
don't
see
here
that
we'll
talk
about
and
also
look
for
us.
So
a
little
bit
history.
V
The
alignment
of
Sudbury
has
changed
several
times
over
the
last
four
or
five
months
and
is
now
the
boundary
to
the
north
between
us
and
Arbor
Ridge.
With
that
area,
five
has
changed
and
we
look
to
see
some
changes
to
how
that
Frontage
interacts
with
the
neighboring
property
to
the
north
to
bring
down
that
scale
as
Jackie
and
staff
have
pointed
out.
V
So
we
might
not
change
the
uses,
but
we
might
very
well
change
the
scale
along
a
long
Sudbury
on
the
south
side
to
give
more
of
a
buffer
between
the
existing
development
to
the
North
in
our
project.
If
you
want
to
move
on
to
the
next
slide,
staff
showed
you
this.
This
is
just
a
scale
drawing
of
building
types
that
can
fit
on
the
site.
If
we
look
at
this
to
the
South,
we
do
believe
there'll
be
a
preservation
area
along
atoms
at
the
South.
V
We
obviously
agree
that
there
will
be
a
fire
station
and
it
won't
be
a
big
Square
building
like
the
one
you
see
there,
it
will
be
a
scale
inappropriate
from
the
fire
department
and
we
will
look
for
transition
along
the
north,
but
we
want
to
talk
about
what
we're
getting
out
of
this
too.
At
the
same
time,
the
next
slide
Jackie
you'll,
see
that
we're
getting
some
public
space.
This
is
something
that
Bloomington
has
often
talked
about.
They
wanted
to
have
in
a
new
development,
but
hasn't
been
had
the
opportunity
to
get
this.
V
So
we
believe
that
this
ever
center
community
space
with
its
Green
Space,
it
connects
to
the
trail
and
flows
between
the
neighborhoods
and
the
mix.
Center
District
will
be
a
really
positive
aspect,
not
only
for
those
that
live
on
this
140
Acres,
but
those
that
live
adjacent
to
it
on
that
side
of
the
community.
That
don't
have
a
lot
of
opportunities
today
to
have
a
community
center
and
have
these
kind
of
aspects
that
they'll
have
those
there.
V
We
do
anticipate
that
when
someone
uses
all
those
incentives
that
will
be
exceeding
what's
required
by
the
Pud,
it
may
do
that
in
a
variety
of
ways
and
we're
still
working
with
staff
and
to
come
together
with
those
proposals
as
well
again
talking
about
public
spaces.
We
envision
the
fire
station,
the
trailhead
it's
exciting.
V
Let's
talk
a
little
bit
about
housing,
diversity
types!
You
can
start
to
see
on
the
next
slide
that
we
have
in
this
depiction
a
much
more
gridded
small
lot
areas
than
what
you
see
on
the
larger
scale.
So
as
we're
refining
this,
we
are
going
to
have
that
diversity
of
housing
types
located
throughout
the
four
neighborhoods
that
surround
the
Everest
District.
V
This
is
a
zoom
in
on
Shasta
Meadow,
the
one
to
the
west,
where
you
can
see
that
we're
preserving
the
wetlands
to
the
West
along
Weimer
road,
but
then
having
a
scaled
neighborhood
that
has
alleys
and
streets
and
and
opportunities
for
smaller
scale
development,
as
well
as
a
mixture
of
residential
uses
along
the
perimeter
same
with
the
nollie
woods.
On
the
next
slide,
you
can
see
how
that
is
going
to
preserve
some
trees,
as
well
as
have
some
residential
uses
and
interaction
in
a
mixed-use
environment.
V
I
want
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
environmental
preservation
that
we're
anticipating
the
yellow
you
see
here
is
either
tree
preservation,
Wetlands
preservation,
the
stream
preservational
through
the
center
of
the
site
or
cars
features,
and,
as
you
can
see
these,
when
you
lay
these
in
here
and
we're
going
to
try
to
preserve
as
much
of
this,
we
can.
We
have
some
conflicts.
Those
conflicts
specifically
in
the
next
slide
are
where
we
are
connecting
atoms
Sudbury
with
the
inner
of
the
development
and
at
these
places,
is
a
convergence
of
trees,
slopes
and
karst.
V
Would
it
be
easier
to
take
atoms
off
our
property
and
through
the
county
land
and
through
the
community
park,
as
it's
shown
in
the
transportation
plan?
Yes,
and
we
might
not
have
the
environmental
features,
but
you
wouldn't
have
the
benefit
of
atoms
in
this
project
and
someone
developing
any
as
well.
W
W
These
these
are
things
we're
working
on
right
now,
one
is
Travis
referred
to
the
district
additional
District
types
that
we're
probably
going
to
end
up
with
five
to
really
narrow
that
that
housing
option
in
you
know
less
intense
mixed
use
areas.
We've
got
a
site
visit
with
the
environmental
commission
this
week
on
site,
so
we're
looking
forward
to
that
we're
meeting
with
Arbor
Ridge.
A
lot
of
you
are
from
Arbor
Ridge.
So
thank
you
for
being
here
we're
meeting
with
your
board
on
Monday
next
week,
Tuesday
sorry,
wrong
day.
W
We've
already
met
with
him
once
to
really
talk
about.
You
know
the
things
they're
concerned
about
which
are
traffic
and
the
transition
to
their
neighborhood
and,
of
course,
we
would
all
be
concerned
about
this.
We
want
to.
We
want
to
hear
their
feedback
as
well
we're
working
with
economic
development
and
hand
in
the
city
to
really
work
on.
W
You
know
how
do
we
deal
with
City
support
and
funding
for
infrastructure,
because
that's
a
really
important
ingredient
here,
so
you
should
just
know
that
it
was
referenced
about
the
utility
infrastructure
study
that'll
be
done
by
the
end
of
July,
we'll
have
more
information
in
August,
that's
really
going
to
affect
that
triggers
and
timing
and
phasing
and
all
of
those
things.
There's
a
housing
study.
W
That's
about
to
come
out
that
we
think
will
give
us
some
important
information
about
housing
and
what
the
needs
are,
so
that
we
can
zero
in
on
that
in
a
more
effective
way.
We've
talked
about
traffic
studies
and
we've
got
a
consultant
on
board
to
really
help
us
start
evaluating
that
question
in
some
of
the
problem
areas
near
and
adjacent
to
that
site
and
then
back
to
that
whole
trigger
question
and
how
we
deal
with.
X
W
So
those
are
all
things
that
we're
working
with
planning
on
we're
extremely
grateful
and
I
have
to
say
it
again.
It's
been
said
to
Scott
and
Jackie
and
their
staff
and
the
other
departments
that
we've
worked
with,
we
meet
with
them
every
week
and
I'm
sure
they're,
sick
and
tired
of
us,
but
we
really
truly
do
appreciate
and
feel
like.
We've
made
a
lot
of
good
progress,
we'd
like
to
see
that
continue.
So
with
that
we'd
love
to
hear
your
thoughts
and
questions
that
we
can
respond
to.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
all
for
that
great
thorough
presentation,
staff
and
and
petitioners
alike.
I
know,
there's
a
lot
to
talk
about
here,
and
we
are
already
indicating
that
this
will
cover
several
meetings
and
I.
Don't
know
what
the
logical
approach
is
to
this
I
certainly
want
to
make
sure
we
afford
time
for
people
who
are
here
today
who
want
to
speak
on
behalf
of
this.
So
I
don't
want
the
Commissioners
to
chew
up
all
the
time.
Although
that's
kind
of
how
things
work,
we
get
to
ask
questions
for
a
little.
J
Michael
Rooker
City
attorney
your
rules
do
not
indicate
that
there's
any
limit
on
the
time
that
Commissioners
are
allowed
to
ask
questions
to
staff
or
the
petitioner.
You
certainly
could
create
your
own
protocol.
If
you
want
for
this
petition
on
this
night,
you
have
some
other
options,
of
course,
as
well,
just
for
the
benefit
of
the
members
of
the
public.
The
plan
commissions,
rules
and
regulations
state
that
each
member
of
the
public
is
entitled
to
five
minutes
of
public
comment.
We
have
a
lot
of
public
interest
in
this
particular
petition.
J
There
are
going
to
be
at
least
there
is
going
to
be
at
least
one
additional
meeting.
I
think
on
this
petition,
possibly
too,
where
there
will
be
additional
opportunities
for
public
comment,
sometimes
in
the
past,
what
a
body
will
do
or
what
this
commission
has
done
when
there's
a
lot
of
public
interest
and
there
are
going
to
be
subsequent
meetings
because
you
might
vote
to
reduce
the
amount
of
public
comment
time
per
speaker
to
three
minutes
so
that
everybody
has
an
opportunity
to
speak.
You
also
have
the
option
of
extending
that
time.
J
A
J
A
All
right,
I'm
not
going
to
presuppose
we're
going
to
exceed
our
limit
first.
So
why
don't
we
begin
with
some
questions
and
again
public
who
are
here.
I
do
think
that
we're
trying
to
all
achieve
some
greater
understanding
about
this
and
and
make
the
requested
suggestions
to
the
petitioners
about
what
they
want
to
see
in
this
as
well.
So
all
right,
I'm
going
to
just
start.
Maybe
I'll
start
to
the
left
here.
Anybody
on
the
left
hand
side
has,
if
you
sure
that
would
help
us
yeah
yeah.
Thank
you.
A
S
E
I
avoided
some
of
the
kind
of
the
more
specific
things.
So
sorry,
this
one
was
was
important
to
mention.
So
this
goes
to
the
question
of
setting
kind
of
time
limits
for
things.
So
one
of
the
things
that
they
would
like
to
do
is
allow
for
surface
parking
as
the
properties
develop.
So
the
idea
would
be
you
know,
as
one
or
two
multi-family
or
attached
pair
attached,
homes,
properties
develops,
a
separate
property
could
be
developed
just
as
a
parking
lot.
E
It
would
be
built
to
our
parking
lot
standards
of
landscaping
and
all
those
types
of
things
as
amended
by
the
Pud,
and
then
we
would
have
a
sunset
on
that.
So
it
would
be
we
you
all.
We
all
would
have
to
determine
an
amount
of
time.
So
the
idea
is
that
they
want
to
have
that
until
the
kind
of
density
of
people
there
reaches
a
certain
level
that
then
they
would
build
structured
parking,
so
the
I.
E
So
if
all
went
well
on
the
development
side
in
the
course
of
whatever
number
of
years
we
set
in
the
use
specific
standards,
for
example,
if
we
said
three
years,
if
all
is
going
well
with
their
development
in
three
years,
then
at
the
three-year
Mark
they
would
be
getting
a
site
plan
to
build
a
parking
garage
there
and,
if
they're
not
ready
to
do
that,
they
would
still
have
to
take
out
the
parking
lot
and
just
put
it
back
to
grass,
so
we're
working
with
them.
On
that,
it's
very
atypical.
E
Obviously
you
know
in
Bloomington
we
don't
allow
just
service
parking
for
on
its
own.
So
it's
something
that
we're
kind
of
exploring
with
them
that
we
wouldn't
consider
without
some
sort
of
like
I,
said
Tipping
Point,
where
a
time
not
a
Tipping
Point.
Sorry
a
point
in
time
that
it
would
have
to
come
out
whether
they
were
ready
to
you
know,
make
it
more
intensely
developed
or
not,
and
then
they
had
a
second.
They
had
a
second
use
of
similar
off-site
parking
surface
parking
lot
shared.
E
That
would
basically
be
doing
shared
parking,
which
we
do
allow
and
encourage.
But
on
like
a
third
lot,
as
opposed
to
on
and
development
sites,
a
lot,
so
that's
something
where
kind
of
working
with
them
on
splitting
those
definitions,
what
are
the
two
things
mean
and
then
is
that
reasonable,
and
can
we
figure
out
a
way
to
do
it?
That's
not.
You
know
detrimental
to
the
area.
S
My
other
question
maybe
relates
to
that,
but
it
and
I'm
not
sure
if
it's
first
staff
or
the
petitioner,
but
it's
just
the
discussion
about
time
frames,
so
whether
it's
a
parking
lot
that
has
a
certain
time
frame
or
we're
just
looking
at
the
general
delivery
time
frames
that
were
being
shared
like
I
guess.
What
does
that
mean
like
what
is
a
delivery
time
frame?
Is
that
when
something
starts
or
is
that
from
start
to
finish,
is
it
just
the
best
guess?
Is
there
accountability
just
trying
to
understand
what
that
means.
V
Great
questions:
what
does
timing
mean
so
in
the
broad
scope?
It
will
take
us
about
12
months
to
develop
any
land
and
get
the
infrastructure
in
and
then
it'll
take
about
24
months
to
build
any
product.
On
top
of
that,
so
we're
if
we
start
next
spring,
we're
three
years
out
to
providing
projects.
So
when
we
start
about
timing,
we
talk
about
when
it's
delivered.
When
that
project
is
piece
of
property
is
done
so
when
you
see
2628,
that's
product
being
delivered
during
that
time
period
of
2026
to
2028..
V
So
when
we
talk
about
a
time
frame
associated
with
the
surface
lot,
we
would
say
we
might
build
a
surface
lot
for
the
purposes
of
constructing
other
buildings
and
and
having
residents
park
for
a
period
of
time.
Once
it
was
done,
it
was
as
signed
off
by
staff,
then
it
would
have
a
period
at
which
it
could
be
there
to
which
it
either
had
to
be
turned
back
into
grass
converted
to
a
parking
structure,
or
somebody
might
purchase
that
piece
of
property
and
build
a
building
with
parking
and
self-sufficient
on
it.
V
So
we
have
some
flexibility
there
of
how
it
goes
same
with
the
shared
parking
we
allow
share
parking
now,
but
it's
either
owned
by
one
or
the
other
of
the
sharees.
It's
not
jointly
owned
by
the
two,
so
we're
envisioning
the
there
might
be
a
shared
lot
that
is
owned
by
two
individuals.
Separate
LLC
or
entity
owns
it
and
they
share
that
parking
lot
as
opposed
to
I,
owning
it
and
sharing
it
with
you.
But
again
that
would
not
have
the
fixed
time
necessarily
that
we
would
be
using.
A
N
E
Okay,
yes,
and
then
I
will
like
prepare
a
little
table
for
this
next
time.
I
didn't
end
up
having
time
today,
so
basically,
under
our
current
zoning
in
the
district
that
they've
chosen
in
MN,
the
height
Max
is
three
stories
and
then
the
incentives
that
we
offer
in
chapter
four
would
allow
for
an
extra
two
and
a
half
stories
if
you're
doing
both
affordable
and
sustainable.
E
So
that
puts
you
at
five
and
a
half
stories
which
means
five
stories
and
then
a
six
story
that's
set
back,
but
in
their
base
zoning
districts
or
in
their
base.
Zoning
Heights,
for
example,
for
the
MN
it's
kind
of
confusing
because
they
say
different
things
in
different
parts
of
the
narrative,
but
it's
basically
like
five
to
eight
stories
for
the
MN.
E
So
that
means
you
know
just
in
their
PUD
if
you're
building
an
MN,
whether
or
not
you're,
putting
affordable
or
sustainable
on
that
in
that
building
at
all,
you
can
build
eight
stories
and
then,
if
you
choose
to
do
the
incentives,
you
can
get
the
extra
two
and
a
half
floors
so
now
you're
at
10
floors.
You
know
with
a
with
half
on
the
back
so
11
stories.
E
So
our
concern
is,
you
know
there
there's
of
course
the
concern
is
that
appropriate
height
wise
period,
but
also
what
is
kind
of
the
Ben.
What
is
the
benefit
to
the
community
of
allowing
something
that's
twice
the
size
of
what
we
would
normally
allow,
if
you're
doing
both
incentives
like
what
it?
What
are
we
kind
of
getting
from
that
I
guess.
E
So
we
are
just
saying
we
need
to
you
all
and
US
need
to
kind
of
really
look
at
it
and
try
to
parse
out
like
what
what
the,
what
the
possible
outcomes
are
based
on
what
they're
proposing
for
their
District
ordinance
for
their
own
rules
to
make
sure
that
we're
comfortable,
saying,
okay,
11
stories,
if
you're
doing
you
know
30
percent,
affordable
or
11
stories,
if
you're
doing
a
gold
level,
you
know,
are
we
going
to
write?
Are
we
going
to
propose
to
them
different
different
incentives
than
what
they
have
included?
N
Okay,
my
second
question
is
so,
and
this
is
for
the
developer.
What
do
you
envision
here,
owner
occupied
I,
see
that
you
have
you
know
the
smaller
homes
single-family
homes
to
on
the
first
phase,
but
then
I
see
a
lot
of
square
buildings?
Are
they
is?
Are
those
rentals?
Are
you
looking
for
people
owning
their
own
Flats
I
mean?
What
do
you
have
in
mind
here?
We.
V
Really
are
encouraging
and
designing
our
project
to
be
a
diverse
type
of
housing
type,
so
they're
in
the
taller
buildings.
There
would
be
opportunity
for
condo
ownership
and
ownership
that
wouldn't
be
a
traditional
I
own,
my
land
and
the
grass
around
it
house,
but
an
ownership
opportunity,
that's
much
more
of
an
urban
style
of
home
ownership
being
a
condo
as
well
as
some
apartments
as
well
as
assisted
living
and
those
kind
of
facilities
as
well.
In
the
bigger
buildings.
We
don't
anticipate
those
bigger
buildings,
we'll
have
big
Footprints,
like
you
see
there
as
squares.
V
Those
are
massing.
Okay,
how?
How
much?
How
many
units
and
parking
garages
can
we
get
on
those?
They
would
be
smaller
Footprints,
but
they
would
be
a
variety
type
of
housing
options.
We
have
a
commitment
to
provide
housing
options
that
allow
for
ownership.
It's
really
hard
for
us
to
legislate
in
a
zoning
ordinance
that
someone
own
it,
but
we
can
design
the
buildings
and
do
covenants
that
require
them
to
be
capable
of
individual
ownerships
for
individual
housing
units.
Does
that
answer
the
question.
K
Yeah
I'll,
just
honestly,
I'll
save
my
time
and
let
the
public
speak
to
this.
What
I
would
say
is
I
the
studies
of
housing,
utility
infrastructure.
That's
probably
where
I'll
come
with
questions,
because
that's
going
to
be
a
lot
more
data
we
can
drill
down
on
I
will
say:
I
think
this
is
a
very
high
risk.
High
reward
opportunity
for
the
developers
and
the
community.
I
give
you
credit,
because
it's
been
sitting
for
25
years
on
developed
so
but
I'll
just
defer
time.
L
I
know
we're
going
to
a
couple
of
times,
but
I
guess
I'll
just
start
with
I
know:
you're
looking
at
the
environment,
looking
at
the
high
level,
the
environmental
features
that
you're
talking
about
part
of
this
is
in
the
flood
zone.
Is
that
correct?
Okay
I
know,
that's
been
Rewritten,
just
we
haven't
seen
the
maps
yet
and
I
see
that
you
have
those
I
guess
the
wetlands.
So
is
that
what
you're?
Speaking
of
the
the
flood
area
in
there.
V
Yes,
so
the
area
along
Weimer
road
is
both
flood
zone
and
wetlands,
and
that
is
the
a
large
preservation
area
along
weemer,
which
is
here
in
the
dark,
blue
and
the
light
blue.
The
dark
blue
represents
the
stream
Center
Line
and
75
feet
on
both
sides,
as
does
the
blue
through
the
center
of
the
site.
That
represents
that
stream
and
the
75
feet
on
both
sides
of
it
and
that's
where
we
get
into
those
pinch
points
and
we're
proposing
in
specific
areas
and
I.
V
I,
really
believe
that
we
will
come
back
and
circle
on
the
map
in
this
area.
We
want
that
last
Zone
to
be
something
less
than
25
feet,
so
that
we
might
not
have
that
full
75
feet
here.
I
believe
that
in
in
turn,
we're
going
to
be
able
to
give
more
than
75
feet
in
other
places,
and
so
hopefully
we
won't
have
to
draw
a
jagged
legal
description
that
looks
just
like
that
and
that
we
actually
preserve
more
riparian
area
in
total.
But
in
certain
areas
you
know
we're
just
trying
to
be
really
straightforward.
V
Today,
saying
we're
building
a
lot
of
Roads
Crossing
Creeks.
A
lot
of
environmental
features
and
we
get
down
to
the
nitty-gritty,
there's
going
to
be
places
that
we're
going
to
have
pinch
points
and
we
want
to
be
up
front
and
say
we
want
to
address
that
here
now
and
let
you
know
that
we're
going
to
do
that.
I
I
have
to
put
I,
have
two
quick
questions.
Thank
you
to
Commissioners,
because
a
lot
of
my
questions
have
been
asked
about
ones
for
staff.
One
is
for
the
petitioner
Miss
Scanlon.
Can
you
you
mention
a
couple
times
that
the
roads
aren't
in
a
grid?
Were
you
referring
to
like
a
north-south
grid?
Okay,
and
what's
the
value
of
that.
E
The
because
the
two
roads
we're
getting
for
the
transportation
plan
are
already
north,
south
east
west.
So
it's
like
the
main
roads
we're
getting
are
generally
east
west
north
south,
and
then
the
roads
inside
are
like
off-centered,
and
so
maybe
that's
useful
and
valuable.
We
just
want
to
have
that.
Come
we
just
want
to
keep
having
that
conversation
so
like,
for
example,
the
roads
in
area.
Three
on
the
east
side
are
all
north
south
east
west,
in
line
with
how
Sudbury
is
there
and
just
wondering?
Can
that
be
extended
across
okay.
I
I
guess
it
just
changes,
sort
of
the
Lots.
If
you
were
going
to
do
that
and
force
it
on
the
other
areas,
they
now
become
skewed
because
they
are
square.
But
okay,
second
question
is
for
the
petitioner
and
it's
really
about
the
format
and
Ms
scanlon's
comment
about
the
Udo
basically
being
put
in
with
changes.
I
think
it
was
done
to
be
helpful
and
comprehensive.
I
I
think
it's
really
confusing
because
I'm
not
totally
sure,
what's
different
to
her
point
so
I'm
looking
for
next
time,
and
you
could
tell
us
why
you
did
it
and
I'm
sure
there's
a
good
reason,
but
something
where
I
mean
it's.
What
we're
used
to
it's
here's,
how
we're
changing
it
from
the
Udo,
but
everything
else
is
the
same
because
I'm
not
really
sure.
What's
what,
for
example,
there's
a
mention
here,
the
the
bikes
there's
not
so.
V
So,
thank
you.
It
is
a
good
question
and
it's
just
complicated
because
usually
our
PDS
have
one
or
two
uses
and
don't
have
a
whole
lot
of
this
and
are
not
being
developed
over
a
eight
nine
year
period
and
we're
trying
to
anticipate
what
that
is,
and
we're
also
trying
to
do
a
development.
That's
cohesive!
V
If
you
look
at
Adams
Street
to
the
South
and
you
look
at
Adams
Street
to
the
north,
where
we'll
connect
they're,
not
the
same.
That's
because
there's
different
organizations
that
have
different
rules
over
a
period
of
time
and
created
a
different
standard.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
the
standard
for
this
project-
it's
a
PUD,
that
when
you
choose
to
live
in
this
community,
you
know
what's
going
to
be
across
the
street.
V
V
If
we
default
to
the
Udo
and
the
discussion
of
earlier
tonight
goes
forward
and
you
change
the
tree
plot
subdivision,
one
has
five
foot
sidewalks
in
subdivision:
two
has
six
foot
sidewalks.
We
don't
want
that.
We
want
consistency
across
the
board.
So
that's
what
we're
trying
to
do
so
we
are
going
to
put
together
a
document
that
goes
down
and
bullet
points
what's
different,
but
let's
take
a
citing.
For
example,
we
tried
to
simplify
the
siding
exterior
materials.
There
are
several
different
zones
that
have
different
materials,
so
we're
consistent
in
all
our
zones.
V
We
have
the
same
consistency,
materials
that
could
be
used.
We
want
to
lock
that
in
plan
commission
may
decide
three
years
from
now
that
every
building
has
to
have
Limestone
on
it.
We
don't
want
to
be
subject
to
that
change.
We
want
to
lock
it
in
we're
building
this
development
over
nine
years,
limestone's
a
possibility,
but
we're
not
we're
locked
into
that.
We
know
what
we're
what
we're
planning
here
for
the
future.
V
We
had
a
whole
bunch
of
landscaping
in
there
we
took
it
out
and
we're
defaulting,
so
we
had
a
lot
more
environmental
in
there
and
we
took
it
out
so
we're
continuing
to
work
with
that
I
think
we
will
have
some
more
that
come
out,
but
I
think
we'll
have
parts
that
are
in
there,
because
we
want
to
codify
that
so
that
we
know
the
community
knows
that
this
is
the
standard
of
summit.
District,
so
I
hope
that's
helpful
and
we're
working
on
that
bullet
point
of
here's.
What's
different
foreign.
I
F
I
think
I'd
like
to
thank
everybody
for
that.
It's
really
looks
like
a
great
project.
I
think
my
concern
was
from
the
pictures
on
the
slides
that
showed
lots
of
big
apartment,
complex,
looking
things
in
it
and
you
know
what
was
on
the
screen
and
I
think.
Maybe
what
Mr
venzel
was
saying.
You
know
we
that
it
was
going
to
be
a
variety
of,
and
you
know
mixed
different
residential
things
and
and
that's
the
goal.
F
V
V
That's
then
reflected
in
The
Narrative
of
the
report,
I
think
as
we
move
forward,
and
we
refine
that
we
will
start
to
show
you
pictures
of
what
actual
buildings
are
going
to
look
more
like
we're
not
going
to
design
every
building
where
you
know
this
is
a
long
time
project
we're
not
going
to
be
able
to
show
you.
This
is
what
this
building
on.
G
Yes,
I
I
have
something
to
say
a
lot
of
the
questions.
I
had
were
already
asked,
so
I
just
have
a
really
brief
comment
and
I'll
just
go
ahead
and
read
it.
I
was
just
thank
you
for
proposing
a
PUD
for
this
area,
but
140
acres
for
Planned
unit
development
needs
to
have
a
public
benefit
to
the
community.
This
plan
could
provide
that
benefit,
but
phasing
and
triggers
are
difficult
to
minister,
the
language
that
triggers
different
types
of
developments
or
build
outs
or
moving
to
the
next
phase
need
to
be
very
detailed.
G
G
We
need
a
PUD
that
is
predictable,
that's
basically
what
I'm
getting
at
also
I
do
think.
Environmental,
Protections
and
developments
can
coexist.
So
again
that
goes
back
to
the
plan
that's
being
proposed
and
when
you
get
to
that
part
of
it,
just
those
details
are
going
to
be
extremely
important
and
that's
my
comment.
A
Thank
you
I
think
this
could
probably
be
turned
into
questions
for
this
stage
of
the
of
the
presentation
or
the
the
meeting,
but
I'm
going
to
let
them
go
for
right
now.
I
have
I'll
restrained
myself
to
two
questions
right
now.
One
is
about
the
Arbor
Ridge
interface
and
I
would
like
to
hear
a
little
bit
more
about
some
of
the
thinking
behind
how
that's
going
to
be
decided
and
how
that
might
what
factors
might
consider
into
what
gets
built
close
to
Arbor
Ridge
yeah.
V
So
I
think
two
things
one
is
we
want
to
continue
to
talk
with
Arbor
Ridge
we've
had
one
meeting
we're
going
to
have
more,
so
we'll
look
for
input
from
them.
That
will
help
us
design
that
and
I
think
it
will
be
either
expressed
in
two
ways.
One
is
a
zoning
classification,
zoning
type
District,
whatever
we
end
up
calling
it
that
is
along
that
Frontage.
That
is
specifies
what
that
transition
is
in
the
current
Udo.
V
We
have
transition
zones
I'm,
not
sure
we
need
another
transition
zone
here,
other
than
calling
it
out
so
I
think
that's
one
way.
We
might
do
it
another
way
we
might
do.
It
is
an
overlay
type
of
thing
where
it
just
says
the
buildings
on
this
half
of
the
block
or
this
side
of
the
street.
You
know
have
a
different
height
or
have
a
different
density
or
intensity
that
we
use
to
help
buffer.
That
I
think
it'll
be
one
of
those
two
things.
It
is
a
street.
V
That's
going
to
create
most
of
that
buffer,
so
I,
don't
think
we're
talking
about
a
big
distance
of
green
space
or
Landscaping
than
we
might
see.
I
think
we
might
talk
about
elevation
of
the
existing
grade
there.
There
is
some
existing
grade
that
could
come
down
so
that
when
we
instead
of
building
on
top
of
the
hill
across
the
street
from
Arbor
Ridge,
we
could
be
talking
about
okay.
How
can
we
start
at
a
a
level
that
is
more
consistent
with
their
starting
level?
A
V
So
we're
kicking
off
the
traffic
analysis.
I
think
Thursday
morning
am
I
right
Andrew.
If
I
can
remember
my
dates,
we
think
it's
imperative
that
we
first
decide
decided
when
Sudbury
and
Adams
are
going
to
be
built,
and
then
we
engage
a
construction
traffic
consultant.
That
knows
the
time
frames
of
the
development.
Based
on
that.
V
The
second
piece
is:
we
have
to
have
our
phasing
worked
out
and
our
timing
and
our
months
of
phasing,
so
we
can
provide
that
to
the
traffic
and
Analysis
that
says:
okay,
this
is
Phase
One
and
it's
coming
from
this
direction
because
of
sewer
not
because
of
roads-
and
these
are
the
roads
that
are
going
to
be
in
place
now
tell
us
how
that
affects
the
traffic.
So
that's
why
it's
sort
of
falling
behind
again.
This
isn't
an
existing
parcel
with
two
entrances
on
one
road.
V
A
Yeah,
yes,
complicated:
okay,
that's
right!
Okay,
all
right!
Why
don't
I
don't
know
if
anybody
has
a
burning
question,
but
I'm
I
am
very
interested
to
hear
what
community
members
have
to
say
about
this.
So
are
we
okay?
If
we
suspend
our
questions
right
now
and
then
and
I?
Think
we'll
probably
have
some
more
comments
as
we
move
through
here,
but.
E
You
could
ask
sometimes
to
do
it
Council,
how
many
of
you
are
planning
to
speak
and
then
you
can
decide
if
you
want
to
do
three
or
five
minutes
and
also
by
9
15
you'll
want
to,
or
you
could
do
it
now
talk
about
extending
your
time.
You
all
have
to
unanimously
agree.
Otherwise
we
have
to
at
9
30..
We
would
recommend,
obviously,
that
you
extend
it
to
make
sure
that
everyone
can
at
least
speak.
We
just
like
to
be
here
so.
A
E
A
E
A
Don't
anybody
has
a
better
idea?
Why
don't
we
get
started
we'll
go
through
the
folks?
Sometimes
it
Spurs
somebody
else
to
want
to
talk
so
I.
Don't
feel,
don't
feel
that
because
you
didn't
raise
your
hand
that
you're
you
know
eliminated
here,
so
you
can
still
speak
if
you
decide
you're
motivated
but
we'll
try
and
we'll
keep
it
definitely
at
five
minutes.
But
you
know,
if
you
can
take
less
make
your
point
all
right.
Are
we
good
and
the
way
it
works?
A
Is
you
approach
the
podium
and
you
know
we
can
kind
of
form
a
line
if,
if
that's
necessary,
but
whoever
wants
to
get
up
and
dash
to
the
podium
first,
you
can
do
that
and
remember
just
to
state
your
name
and
then
you
know
the
clock
will
start
all
right.
It
looks
like
we
have
a
couple
folks
coming
around
here:
good
they're,
getting
themselves.
A
O
Just
my
name
hi,
my
name
is
Kelly
Wesley
I'm
here
as
a
homeowner
at
Ann,
Arbor,
Ridge,
I'm,
also
a
board
member
for
the
HOA,
and
my
concern
and
I
think
it's.
The
concern
of
most
of
our
neighbors
is
Sudbury
is
going
to
be
going
along
the
back
of
our
division
of
our
subdivision
and
right
now.
As
you
know,
we
have
a
beautiful
view
and
we're
not
going
to
have
that
anymore.
O
We
understand
that,
but
the
fact
that
the
taller
buildings
are
going
to
be
the
ones
closest
to
us
is
a
very
big
concern
for
us.
That
makes
we
definitely
oppose
that
we
do
have
an
apartment
building
on
the
other
side,
but
there
is
a
conservancy
and
that
completely
blocks
that
view
you
know.
Is
there
going
to
be
some
sort
of
barrier
visible
barrier
to
block
that
view,
or
is
there
some
reason
why
those
taller
buildings
have
to
be
in
that
location?
Can
they
be
in
a
different,
different
location,
farther
away
from
our
neighborhood.
Y
Y
As
Travis
and
Angela
said,
we've
met
with
them,
we're
continuing
to
talk
with
them,
and
they
have
assured
us
that
that's
one
of
the
things
that
they
are
you
know
going
to
do,
but
we
want
to
make
sure
that
it's
a
a
generous
buffer
between
our
small
48
unit
neighborhood
and
this
huge
neighborhood,
that's
going
to
be
built
again.
The
height
is
really
a
concern
to
me
when
we
talk
to
Angela
and
Travis.
Y
We
know
we
won't
continue
to
be
isolated,
but
at
the
same
time
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
don't
have
people
coming
through
our
neighborhood
a
lot,
especially
you
know
more
than
we
could
really
handle,
because
it
is
a
very
small
neighborhood.
So
we
want
to
make
sure
that
the
roadways
are
are
adequate
to
handle
this
very
huge
development.
Thank
you.
X
X
It
is
not
adequate
for
construction
Machinery
to
be
traveling
up
and
down
weemer
on
the
south
end
of
Weimer
from
Tap
Road
or
you
could
call
it
Country
Club
Road
or
it's
got
three
names
or
something
that
direction
it's
the
one
lane
bridge
to
get
up
to
Sudbury
and
from
Bloomfield,
Road
and
Weimer.
There
is
a
such
a
steep
embankment
that
one
summer
it
was
so
hot
somebody
with
a
U-Haul
embedded,
the
the
frame
of
the
trailer
in
the
road,
because
it's
so
steep
that
they
bumped
into
it.
X
So
it's
I,
don't
I,
there's
no
construction,
there's
no
cement
truck,
there's
no
giant
hauling
machine,
there's
no
caterpillar!
That
is
going
to
be
able
to
make
it
to
Sudbury,
which
is
yes,
a
very
wide
road,
but
no
trucks
gonna
get
there.
If
they
have
to
come
up,
they
can't
come
up
the
Bloomfield
Road
and
they
can't
come
over
the
one
lane
bridge.
So
we
really
need
to
focus
on
access
to
even
get
to
the
existing
portion
of
Sudbury
before
we
can
start
talking
about
construction
and
where
all
that
equipment
is
going
to
go.
H
My
name
is
John
Scott
and
I
live
in
the
Outreach
development
I'm
going
to
have
to
back
Debbie
up
on
her
statement
as
to
Weimer
Road
and
Bloomfield
Road
I
happen
to
be
a
car,
collector,
I,
ship,
a
few
cars
and
every
time
I've
had
to
ship
a
car.
A
truck
has
not
been
able
to
come
into
the
neighborhood.
They
cannot
cross
the
bridge
at
the
lower
end
of
Weimer
and
they
cannot
make
the
turn
from
Second
Street
in
no
matter
which
way
without
getting
hung
up.
H
H
What's
the
procure
of
them
from
deciding
to
sell
off
packages
three
four
and
five,
you
know
that
whoever
buys
three
four
and
five
is
going
to
come
in
and
ask
you
for
variances
he's
not
going
to
abide
by
what
he
bought.
These
people
haven't
abide
by
what
they
buy.
They
knew
that
under
the
president
pod,
they
could
probably
get
maybe
3
000
units
in
there.
If
you
can't
make
your
money
on
the
3
000,
then
you
shouldn't
have
bought
the
land,
so
my
whole
thing
is
density.
H
H
Not
only
are
you
making
changes
to
the
area
of
Sudbury,
but
you
are
opening
up
to
change
the
whole
pod
development
throughout
the
city,
so
I'm
against
the
size
and
yep
I
hate
to
say
it,
but
with
all
the
photos
it
reminds
me
of
all
the
Army
bases,
I've
lived
on
and
the
board
approved
a
development
which
is
very
similar
is
consisted
of
town
houses,
one
high-rise
and
duplexes
and
singles
drive
through
it
and
you
will
not
want
to
live
there.
Thank
you.
Z
My
name
is
Vivian
furnish.
Thank
you
plan,
commission,
commissioner
staff
for
this
opportunity.
I
will
shoot
off
my
quick
questions
first
and
then
leave
the
comments
towards
the
end.
So
first
the
traffic
study.
How
many
days
are
you
conducting
that
study?
That's
my
first
question:
are
you,
as
Jackie
has
pointed
out,
are
you
going
to
account
for
well?
Z
If
you're
familiar
with
the
area,
you
you
dig
four
feet
and
you
can
hit
water
possibly,
and
so
it's
going
to
be
very
difficult
to
start
at
a
lower
height,
and
so
it's
it's
just
not
yeah.
So
it'll
be
ideal,
at
least
for
us
to
have
the
environmental
study
done
before
any
of
this
begin,
and
then
my
comment
is
so:
if
you
think
about
I
was
just
going
doing
some
quick,
stat
research.
Bloomington
has
a
land
area
of
23
square
miles.
You
convert
that
into
acreage.
Z
That's
14,
000
Acres,
roughly
140,
is
about
one
percent
of
that
Bloomington
right
now
currently
has
about
40
000
units
housing
units-
that's
probably
a
higher
number
than
what
it
actually
is.
Forty
thousand.
This
is
going
to
plan
for
4
500
to
6
000
units,
so
that's
anywhere
between
12
to
15
of
the
total
units,
so
you're
building
on
one
percent
of
the
land
15
of
the
units
does
that
make
sense
to
anybody
from
a
traffic
standpoint
that
doesn't
quite
make
sense
to
me,
plus
you're,
trying
to
attract
people
to
come
in.
Z
You
know
there
might
be
commercial
usage.
Restaurants
in
that
Center
people
from
outside
of
this
neighborhoods
are
going
to
come
in.
So
that's
bringing
more
than
15
of
the
residents
from
Bloomington
into
this
area.
Plus
the
more
people
know
about
this
area,
the
more
they're
going
to
use
the
road
from
all
different
directions.
So
that's
just
a
lot
a
lot
of
people
on
one
percent
of
our
current
acreage.
Z
So
my
second
long
comments
is
Bloomington.
The
city
of
Bloomington
has
done
a
housing
study
and
I
just
did
a
quick,
Google
search
too
and
I.
Don't
quite
remember
the
numbers,
but
you
said
in
the
housing
study
in
the
next
10
years.
You
anticipate
having
2
900
to
2
900
units,
but
this
is
going
to
add
4
500
to
600
units
in
the
next
eight
years.
Z
That's
growing
a
little
faster
than
what
you
have
anticipated
and,
as
you
have
said,
this
area
has
set
vacant
for
many
years
and
if
we
were
able
to
plan
for
extra
units
all
these
past
25
years
and
still
allow
Bloomington
to
grow
at
such
a
fast
pace
compared
to
other
cities
in
Indiana,
then
we
have
found
a
way
to
allow
for
extra
units.
So
why
the
rush
to
develop
this
many
units
in
the
next
eight
years,
that's
twice
or
three
times
the
planned
phase,
speed
that
you
have
anticipated.
Z
My
third
long
comment
is,
when
you
think
of
a
eight
to
ten
story,
build
story
candle
where
people
were
just
dying
to
buy
they're
dying
to
own
as
a
part
of
their
property.
Where
would
that
counter
be
will
not
be
on
a
beach
in
Florida
right,
Gulf,
Coast
somewhere
is
Bloomington
that
place
that
you
see
I,
don't
really
see
that
and
people
coming
into
Bloomington.
Yes,
we
have
people
that
connect
they're
connected
to
IU
they're,
not
from
Indiana
coming
to
Bloomington,
for
different
reasons.
Z
They
might
be
more
used
to
owning
spending
tens
of
thousands
of
dollars
owning
the
owning
a
piece
of
property
that
don't
have
grass.
Yes,
they
might
be
more
used
to
that,
but
the
people
in
Indiana
are
not
going
to
spend
that
much
money
owning
a
flat
apartment
in
this
part
of
Bloomington.
That's
really
not
connected
to
a
lot
of
different,
attractive
areas,
just
to
be
honest
right.
Z
It's
kind
of
kind
of
industrial
if
you're
familiar
with
the
land,
there's
a
junkyard
filled
with
cars
nearby
to
the
north
you're
going
to
have
a
County
Jail
you're,
going
to
have
just
a
lot
of
different
variety
of
places
around
here.
Are
people
going
to
spend
this
money
buying
a
condo
in
Bloomington?
So
that's
all.
Thank
you.
AA
AA
That's
a
very
dangerous
intersection
and
we've
almost
had
people
basically
run
into
our
house
trying
to
avoid
each
other
and
stuff.
Weimer
is
not
excuse
me,
local
swimmer,
I'm
from
out
of
town,
so
yeah
Weimer
does
not
handle
it's
not
good
enough
big
enough
to
handle
the
traffic
now
and
so,
and
that
intersection
I,
don't
know.
You're
I
can
easily
see
probably
you're
going
to
have
to
have
a
circle
or
something
there.
AA
Eventually,
if
you're
going
to
up
the
traffic
from
what
it
is
now-
and
you
know,
we
really
don't
want
to
live
on
a
circle-
so
I
mean
this.
If
this
goes
through,
we
probably
will
be
leaving.
We
don't
want
to
be
around
that.
You
know.
So
that's
that's
one
personal
side,
oh
I
was
appealed
to
you
personally.
Please
personally
take
an
interest
in
this.
Please
come
out
and
look
at
the
land
you
can
park
every
all
my
neighbors.
AA
If
you
came
out
and
parked
in
their
driveway-
and
you
said:
hey
I'm
on
planning,
board
and
I
want
to
go
out
here
and
look
this
up.
They
they
would
not
be
offended.
They'd
be
happy
that
you
took
the
personal
interest
to
come
out
and
take
a
look
and
really
look
at
that
land
and
see
it
really
is
environmentally
fragile.
Okay,
it's
not!
It
wasn't
good
Farmland,
quite
frankly,
because
it
was
all
hilly
and
you
can
actually
see
erosion.
If
you
actually
go
turn
a
look
at
it.
AA
B
AA
And
then
there's
a
lot
of
flooding
that
occurs
when
we've
had
these
big
any
day
that
it
rains
a
lot
drive
down
the
road
and
see
I
mean
there's,
there's
flooding
that
happens,
it's
really
bad
down
on
South
Weimer,
but
it's
also
bad
along
at
where
the
Creeks
cross
it
comes
out
of
my
our
property
crosses
Weimer.
So
you
know,
if
you're
going
to
go
through
with
this,
my
appeal
is
really
make
them.
Do
it
right
really
make
them?
Do
it
right,
please,
you
know
so
all
right.
Thank
you.
AB
Hi,
my
name
is
Rachel
Noble
I'm,
a
weemer
road
resident
Mark's,
my
neighbor
and
Vivian
I
would
just
like
everybody
to
remember.
As
I
know,
we
are
the
two
mile
Fringe,
but
I
bought
my
property
in
1992..
It
was
right
after
Twin
Lakes.
At
that
time
the
law
was.
If
I
didn't
ask
the
right
question.
Nobody
had
to
answer
it.
AB
Now,
what
happened
in
the
end
after
lots
of
conversations
is
that
we
all
the
neighborhood
had
to
come
up
with
a
common
solution
for
anybody
to
address
what
they
did,
that
Creek
takes
on
more
water
now
than
it
ever
was
supposed
to
handle.
I
gave
up
my
driveway
the
county,
not
the
city,
helped
me
the
city,
the
city
utilities,
director,
Mike,
Phillips
I,
believe
his
name
was
basically
said.
Your
two
mile
Fringe
we're
not
going
to
help
you,
the
city,
attorneys
and
everything
said
everybody
has
to
agree
or
we
do
nothing.
AB
So
my
point
is:
we
already
have
a
creek
that
takes
on
too
much
water.
The
city
said
we're
not
helping
you
you're
two
mile
Fringe,
and
so
the
county
came
in
bless
their
lovely
Hearts.
They
took
the
bridge
out.
They
said
they
felt
sorry
for
me.
They
said
the
city
did
this
to
you.
They
made
a
hundred
year.
Flood
Bridge
right
in
front
of
my
house.
I
took
out
my
driveway
got
permission
to
enter
my
property
from
my
neighbor,
so
my
question
is
I.
AB
Ask
all
of
you
I
understand
the
property
is
going
to
be
developed.
I,
don't
have
a
problem
with
that,
but
what
are
you
going
to
do
for
storm
water
drainage?
Is
it
going
to
go
into
the
creek?
Are
you
going
to
make
sure
that
Creek
is
wide
enough
and
maintained
enough,
so
the
water
doesn't
back
up
toward
me
because
I
already
have
too
much
water
coming
at
me
from
Twin
Lakes.
Have
you
ever
been
by
Twin
Lakes
when
it
really
rains
it
becomes
a
big
pool
of
water
that
has
to
go
through
a
creek.
AB
We
have
all
been
told
as
property
owners
that
if
you
touch
your
property,
you
absolve
the
city
of
responsibility.
So
my
only
choice
if
I
fled,
is
to
see
my
neighbor
Mark
and
my
Mark
has
to
turn
around
and
Sue
Kent
Lawson,
who
has
to
sue
the
next
person
who
owns
that
little
tiny
Lake,
that
was
a
spillover
lake
for
Twin
Lakes.
So
now
you
guys
go
to
the
other
side
and
you
do
your
development
and
the
storm
water
goes
into
that
Creek.
AB
All
I
ask:
is
you
think
about
us
little
pee
on
Two,
Mile,
Fringe
people
and
the
water
impact,
because
on
my
property,
you
dig
down
four
feet
and
you
hit
water.
We
are
on
a
water
table,
there's
no
place
for
that
water
to
go
the
Beavers
on
a
regular
basis,
build
dams
and
the
creek
does
not
flow
the
people
myself
up
to
the
lake
Mark
and
the
other
ones.
We
work
really
hard
and
again
thank
you.
County
they
burned
my
property.
AB
We
work
really
hard
to
keep
the
trees
and
the
debris
and
things
out
of
that.
But
what
are
you
going
to
do
when
Sudbury
Road
was
built
that
water
sheared
across
the
road
and
came
right
at
me?
I've
got
erosion
and
I've
got
more
water
coming
at
me
from
across
the
road
from
Sudbury
and
the
apartments.
When
I
talked
to
the
developer,
he
made
a
drainage
pipe
over
there,
but
guess
what
the
property
sold
three
times.
So
nobody
cleans
that
out
it
backs
up.
AB
My
husband
will
go
over
there
and
dig
out
the
ditch
to
hope
to
keep
the
water
on
your
side,
but
invariably
wants
to
go
to
where
that
Creek
is
so
I.
Don't
know
who
wants
to
talk
to
us,
but
I.
Just
ask
in
this
whole
development
picture
that
you
remember.
There
are
some
of
us
that
our
houses
are
on
that
Creek
and
I
can't
control
what
you
do,
but
you
will
control
whether
I
have
a
house
in
five
years
by
your
development
and
I.
AB
Ask
you
think
about
that
and
when
I
talk
to
the
state
about
this,
the
environmental
Agency
for
the
state,
they
taught
me
that
everything
has
to
be
maintained
and
cleaned
out,
and,
and
so
that
doesn't
happen,
but
they
have
no
money
to
enforce
these
things.
They
want
neighbors
to
like
each
other
and
get
along
and
take
care
of
these
problems.
Well
that
doesn't
work
either.
So
please
remember
us
and
thank
you
for
your
time.
AC
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity.
I
am
Devil's
house
I'm,
an
owner
of
Arbor
Ridge
and
also
of
the
board
and
I
just
I
know.
I
can't
expect
answers
from
you
and
that's
fine,
but
I
do
want
to
ask,
are:
are
people
going
to
be
expected
to
come
out
or
come
into
Bloomington
from
out
of
town
new
people
coming
in,
which
is
fine
or
are
the
people
already
here?
AC
My
concern
is:
if
we
get
a
large
influx
of
people
in
the
next
eight
years,
will
the
police
be
added
to
you
know
to
help
with
that.
I
know
that
there's
going
to
be
a
fire
station
which
would
be
awesome
but
I'm
looking
ahead
at
if
there's
more
influx
of
people
I'm
looking
at
safety
security
are
the
Dynamics.
The
Dynamics
of
our
neighborhood
will
change
drastically,
but
just
even
for
the
people
that
are
coming
in
there
and
I
know
that
will
be
a
burden,
perhaps
on
the
police
that
are
already
there.
AC
AC
But
if
you're
on
our
land,
looking
up
to
the
road,
there's
quite
a
hole,
and
it's
concerning
I'm
concerning
for
someone
on
traffic
me
have
a
problem
there
someday.
You
know
the
road
collapses.
Also,
when
I
was
a
kid,
there
was
a
small
it
could
take
about
a
person
in
it.
So
my
father
told
me
not
to
go
near
the
sinkhole,
and
so
we
didn't,
but
now
that
the
water
has
run
for
years
right
down
there.
The
sinkhole
is
huge
and
starting
to
take
trees
and
things
in
it.
AC
So
I'm
with
Rachel
in
the
Watershed
and
everything
else
to
please,
please
think
about
how
things
are
done
there
I'm
concerned
about
the
wetlands.
You
know
down
farther
just
the
oils
everything
coming
off
the
pavement,
all
that
pavement
from
Millennium
I,
don't
know
how
this
will
be
done,
but
I
just
hope
it
doesn't
cause
more
trouble
for
those
living
farther
down
or
again
for
anyone
on
the
creek
and
that
type
of
thing.
Thank
you
very
much.
AC
A
U
E
AD
Can
you
hear
me
I
I,
think
it
okay,
it
doesn't
do
the
video,
but
that's
probably
for
the
I
really
I'm
a
whatever
recent
condo
buyer
in
in
Bloomington
and
I
just
wanted
to
speak
to
the
matter
of
interest
in
some
some
tiny
condos,
like
my
current
one,
is
like
240k.
If
there
had
been
a
little
60k,
one
like
in
a
giant
apartment,
I
would
have
gone
on
that
in
a
Flash.
In
fact,
I'll
take
a
you
know.
AD
I
could
probably
get
you
50
60
pre-orders,
if,
like
that's
on
tap
and
I,
think
that
could
make
a
life-changing
I
was
lucky
enough.
Bank
of
Mom
and
Dad.
We
benefited
from
housing
scarcity,
driven
home
price
inflation
in
Bay,
Area
California,
you
know
in
the
California
Taipei
Taiwan
got
lots
of
cash.
I
just
had
to
point
to
want
to
pick
it
out,
not
so
for
most
people
or
for
many
people
like
housing
scarcity.
AD
AD
You
know,
obviously
that
I
totally
appreciate
that
you
know
the
I
mean
the
not
to
take
away
from
any
of
the
very
serious
like
environmental
things.
I
totally
agree
with
all
that,
and
really
appreciate
like
how
like
neighborly
and
like
public
spirited
people
have
been
like
I'm
sure
that
you,
you
know,
they're
I
mean
you
know,
I
totally
see
the
reasonable
concerns.
I
totally
feel
that
there
are
like
you
know,
whatever
Civic
life
involves
like
the
sacrifices,
and
we
don't
want
too
much
to
like
land
on
any
one.
AD
People
and
I
really
appreciate
how
everyone
has
like
gone
out
of
their
way
to
you
know
kind
of
look
out
for
other
future,
neighbors
and
stuff
like
that
and
like
yeah,
but
you
know,
I
mean
even
I
think
the
police
were
mentioned
right.
Think
about
the
impact
on
you
know,
Ambitions,
on
life
on
crime,
right.
If
work
pays-
and
you
can,
you
know
easily-
you
know
plausibly
hope
to
like
buy
a
home-
maybe
even
have
a
single
parent
like
you're,
not
single
stay-at-home
parent.
AD
This
sort
of
thing
all
the
traditional
American
Dream
thing
things
right.
These
are
things
enabled
by
like
a
good
home
price
to
median
income
ratio
when
housing
scarcity
like
messes
that
up
and
has
it
like
skyrocketed
over
the
past
40
years.
I'm.
Not.
Wouldn't
you
know
that
itself.
I
imagine,
has
some
impact
on
crime,
on
the
social
fabric,
on
the
structure
of
people's
lives,
on
younger
people's
hopes
of
building
up
retirement
savings,
so
I
think
we
all
have
interests
that
can
work
together,
but
I
just
really
want
to
speak
for
the.
AD
Would
people
like
to
buy
really
cheap
condos
and
not
own
cars
like
I
literally,
do
not
know
how
to
drive
I'm
40.,
my
you
know,
I,
just
I'm,
not
one
of
the
naughty
cluttering
of
your
roads.
I
just
want
to
I'm
a
university
Professor
I
want
to
take
take
the
bus
into
into
my
work,
live
frequently
use
that
capital
for
something
more
valuable
than
a
fancy
house.
A
W
Typically,
Angela
Parker
back
again,
thank
you
for
all
the
comments.
We
took
copious
notes
and
we
want
to
respond
to
those
things
and
incorporate
some
of
those
we'll
meet
with
the
HOA
people
at
Arby
Ridge,
so
we're
aware
of
their
concerns.
So
we
do
appreciate
that
we
don't
have
any
more
presentation
material,
but
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
we'll
wrap
up.
We
appreciate
the
comments,
we're
willing
to
hear
all
of
them
that
you
have
so
that
we
can
do
this
right.
So
thank
you
very
much.
W
L
I
I
also
thank
the
public.
It's
probably
some
of
the
most
civil
comments.
We
have
got
from
people
that
were
thoughtful
and
not
super
angry
and
just
really
helpful
to
the
process
for
the
petitioner
I'm
glad
to
hear
you
took
notes,
I
would
expect
that
you
would
and
that
the
way
you
know
we
operate
all
those
questions
that
the
public
asked
we're
all
our
experiences.
I
We're
all
going
to
ask
you
all
of
those
questions
next
time,
so
please
don't
gloss
over
any
because
we
will
be
asking
them
it's
what
we
do
when
the
public
brings
up
points,
whether
we
agree
with
them
or
not.
We
want
to
make
sure
they
get
heard.
I
do
think
there
were
some
a
number
of
really
valid
questions
there
I'm
sure
you
do
as
well
so
I
look
forward
to
that,
and
thanks
for
your
time
and
to
the
public
as
well.
K
Yeah
I
really
appreciate
the
public
comments,
they're,
always
very
vital
for
us
in
the
decision-making
process.
I
think
I
got
your
name
over
here
and
I
apologize
for
that,
but
I
think
that
was
a
very
good
point.
You
made
in
terms
of
the
land
density
of
like
the
one
percent
housing,
the
15
of
the
housing
population.
So
I
would
like
the
petitioners
to
address
that,
because
I
think
that
the
math
makes
sense
right.
K
It's
a
it's
a
highly
dense
compared
to
the
land
that
it's
going
to
cover.
So
if
you
guys
in
this
housing
study
that
we
are
going
to
look
at,
hopefully
at
our
next
meeting,
I'd
like
to
be
you
know,
at
least
that
part
be
addressed
a
little
bit
in
terms
of
how
you
guys
are
going
to
deal
with
these
are
the
units
you
want.
How
are
we
going
to
work
with
that?
N
For
the
petitioners,
I
I
would
like
for
you
to
focus
on
the
Environmental
Studies.
Obviously
this
you
can't
just
look
at
your
land
at
your
piece
of
land.
Only
you
have
to
look
as
a
whole.
What
is
around
you,
the
Twin
Lakes,
is
floods
and
it
brings
water
down
to
your
place
and,
and
why
my
road-
and
there
are,
it-
is
a
flood
way,
not
a
flood
zone,
but
a
floodway
means
it
floods.
All
the
time.
N
So
those
are
things
that
need
to
be
looked
in.
The
creek
I
think
it's
what
they
brought
up
in
terms
of
keeping
the
creek
well
maintained,
and
so
it
maintains
the
water
flowing.
Of
course,
as
you
are
going
to
have
a
storm
drainage
study
done,
I'm
sure
you'll
probably
have
some
detention
ponds
or
Retention
Ponds
or
whatever
it
is
that
it's
required
by
engineering
to
avoid
so
in
Indiana.
Of
course,
water
is
one
of
our
biggest.
N
Assets,
but
also
one
of
our
biggest
problems
so
because
freezing
and
thawing
and
water
everywhere,
so
it
causes
erosion,
so
pay
good
attention
to
your
Environmental,
Studies,
I,
also
I'm
concerned
with
and
I
know.
You
are
as
well
with
the
roads
and
which
roads
to
build
first,
and
how
are
you
going
to
have
the?
How
are
you
going
to
have
the
building
traffic
going
in?
N
Is
it
from
Adams
from
the
south
that
will
come
in?
Is
it
from
Adams
from
the
north
that
comes
in?
Are
you
going
to
use
sudsbury
to
go?
Of
course
we
just
found
out
that
weimaro
does
not.
You
know
a
very
good
road
for
trucks
and
big
heavy
equipment
so
anyway,
I
several
things
for
you
to
think
about.
I
am
listening
to
what
you're
saying
talking
about
the
public
and
I
will
be
asking
those
questions
next
in
the
next
meeting.
Thank
you.
S
S
So
just
keeping
that
in
our
mind
and
I
think
one
thing
that
would
maybe
be
interesting
and
it
maybe
gets
the
point
of
the
density
and
the
number
of
units.
Just
just
for
reference
like
I'd
be
curious,
you
know
what
does
the
current
zoning
ballpark?
What
how
many
units
would
that
allow
versus
what
is
being
proposed?
S
What
is
the
height
of
the
buildings
do,
and
how
does
that
impact
that
number
account?
What
would
the
base
just
standard
Udo
just
ballparking
like
what?
What
is
what
are
the
incremental
changes
and
and
what
what's
driving
that
or
what's
the
community
benefit
to
that
change?
That's
where
I'm
at
right
now.
A
U
F
G
I
think
that
the
opportunity
we
have
here
could
be
very
significant
for
the
city,
but
again
I
guess
just
to
go
back
to
my
last
comment
is
we
need
a
PUD,
that's
predictable.
We
need
to
make
sure
we
incorporate
that
public
benefit
and
then
also
you
know,
have
the
right.
Environmental
Protections,
but
you
know
I
really
applaud
them
for
coming
here
and
being
straightforward,
letting
us
know
from
the
jump
what
they
need
and
what
they're
asking
for.
So
we
can
provide
good,
focused
feedback.
So
that's
my
comment.
A
A
You
know
the
staff
has
done
a
lot
of
work
to
identify
what
these
questions
are,
and
you
know
they
have
all
of
these
interests
that
are
identified
here
with
that
are
environmental
and
specific
to
traffic
and
assuring
that
the
work
gets
done
and
I.
Think
this
whole
issue
of
density
and
affordability
is
a
really
significant
one.
So
you
know
your
best
approach
would
be
to
really
go
through
and
answer
all
of
these
questions
or
have
some
answers
for
these
now.
A
A
What
is
it
that
we're
allowing
and
what
are
we
giving
up
so
I
think
the
more
you
can
specify
what
it
is
that
you
want,
and
what's
so
important
to
this
development,
that
you
really
can't
proceed
without
those
important
elements
that
that's
a
very
an
important
place
to
start,
and
you
know
I
know
the
staff
has
some
excellent
ideas
about
how
to
create
a
you
know,
essentially
you're
creating
a
PUD
Udo
of
your
own.
So
how
do
you
do
that
in
a
way?
A
That's
understandable
for
the
future,
so
I
think
that's
what
we're
this
is
a
long-term
project
and,
as
Jack
Scanlon
already
indicated,
we
need
to
be
able
to
make
sure
that
Commissioners,
who
are
sitting
here
eight
years
from
now,
can
continue
to
hold
to
this
same
standards
and
we're
not
going
to
get
a
lot
of
exceptions
and
and
understand
what
it
is
that
we've
agreed
to
so
I
think
that's
really
important.
A
lot
of
those
are
real
nitty-gritty
details.
A
The
other
thing
on
a
bigger
scale,
I
think
it's
helpful
for
us
to
have
a
little
bit
more
vision
for
what
you're.
Trying
to
what
you
see
here
and
I
know
you
can't
get
specific.
This
is
too
early
in
the
process,
but
as
I
look
at
some
of
the
images
for
Everest
Center
and
the
ever
center
community
space
that
are
included
in
the
packet
that
we
are
provided.
I
think
that
helps
all
of
us
understand
a
little
bit
more
about
the
kind
of
density,
the
kind
of
place
and
space
we're
talking
about.
A
So,
having
a
little
bit
more
discussion
about
that
and
what
you
see
happening
in
this
space,
I
think
would
be
helpful.
The
last
thing
I'll
say
is:
I
really
have
some
strong
concerns
about
the
environmental
impact
that
we
heard
a
lot
more
elaboration
from
the
public
today.
The
effect
that
it
has
on
the
existing
developments
is
quite
serious
and
I
I
do
want
to
see
more.
A
Given
the
odd
angles
of
this,
we
we
want
this
space
to
be
seamless
in
some
ways.
I
mean
I.
I
guess
I
need
to
understand.
Are
each
of
these.
You
know
ever
Center
in
the
Shasta
Meadow
designed
to
look
different
and
therefore
it
makes
sense
for
some
of
the
roads
to
be
oddly
situated,
or
does
it
really
behoove
it
to
be
much
more
gritted,
so
I
need
to
understand
why
there
are
differences
in
that
kind
of
Road
structure?
A
Okay,
that
might
be
it
for
me
right
now,
a
few
that
was
a
lot.
Okay,
sorry
we're
taking
us
right
to
the
end
all
right!
Anybody
else
have
anything
for
the
good
of
the
order.
I
mean
we're
trying
to
make
this
productive,
not
waste
people's
time
and
make
sure
that
the
public
knows
where
they
when
and
what
they
could
help
comment
on
so
I
I
guess
I
would
invite
anyone
coming
to
future.