►
From YouTube: September 12, 2022 Bloomington City Council Meeting
Description
September 12, 2022 Bloomington Minnesota City Council Meeting
0:00:00 Start
0:02:00 Approval of Agenda
0:04:51 2.1 Latinx/Hispanic Heritage Month Proclamation
0:08:02 2.2 POW/MIA Recognition Day Proclamation
0:10:38 2.3 Introduction of New Employees
0:12:55 Consent Business
0:16:35 3.1 Resolution to Accept Donations
3.2 Acknowledgement of Liquor Tax Penalty and Interest Abatement – Rainforest Café
0:13:51 3.3 Acknowledge Receipt of 2023 Port Authority General Fund and Development Fund Budgets
3.4 2022-101 Special Assessment Adjustments
3.5 Approve First Amendment to Memorandum of Understanding Between City of Bloomington and Bird Rides Inc.
3.6 Schmitt Music Sign Variance
3.7 Purchase of Plow Trucks
3.8 Resolution - Grant Agreement with Minnesota Department of Natural Resources: Pond Dakota Restoration Project
3.9 Admin Variance for Enclosed Porch
3.10 FEMA Assistance to Firefighters Grant Acceptance
3.11 Amendment #7 to 2022 Part-Time, Temporary, and Seasonal Compensation Plans
3.12 Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes
0:19:57 4.1 Public Hearing: Public Nuisance Abatement Assessment
0:30:21 4.2 Public Hearing: Tree Removal Assessments
0:34:48 4.3 Public Hearing: Weed/Brush Removal Assessments
0:36:14 4.4 Public Hearing: Delinquent Water, Sewer, Storm Water Drainage, Garbage Recycling and Organics Assessments
0:39:38 4.5 Public Hearing: Civil Fines for Property-Related Violation Assessments
0:41:00 4.6 Public Hearing: New Therapeutic Massage Enterprise License – Phoenix Acupressure and Massage
0:42:34 4.7 Public Hearing: New On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License Application – Life Time Fitness
0:44:39 4.8 Public Hearing: Amendment to an On-Sale Liquor License – Nine Mile Brewing
0:48:47 4.9 Public Hearing: Data Center Ordinance
1:29:09 4.10 Public Hearing: Old Cedar Avenue Traffic and Intersection Study
2:28:36 4.11 Public Hearing: Possession of Detached Catalytic Converter Ordinance
2:44:51 5.1 Resolution Adopting Preliminary 2023 Tax Levy
3:21:10 5.2 Resolution Adopting Preliminary 2023 General Fund Budget
3:22:31 5.3 Preliminary approval of the HRA Levy and Consent of the Port Authority Levy for 2023
3:28:32 5.4 Natural Resources Management Plan Update
4:03:47 5.5 City Council Policy & Issue Update
A
Good
evening,
everyone
and
welcome,
I
would
like
to
call
this
bloomington
city
council
meeting
to
order
tonight
monday
september
12
2022.
thanks
for
joining
us
here
in
the
chambers.
Thanks
for
joining
us
online,
we'll
start
our
meeting
as
we
always
do.
If
you
could,
if
you
could,
please
stand
and
join
me
in
the
pledge
of
allegiance.
D
A
A
Thank
you
all
and
once
again
welcome
and
a
first
item
on
our
agenda
is
the
approval
of
tonight's
agenda
and
council.
It
is
a
lengthy
one.
There's
a
lot
of
stuff
here.
We've
got
three
introductory
items:
a
couple
of
proclamations
and
an
introduction
of
a
new
employee,
our
consent,
business
by
council
member
nelson
will
consist
of
12
items.
A
Then
we
move
into
11.
count
them
11
public
hearings
under
item
4,
our
hearings,
resolutions
and
ordinances
and
then
under
our
organizational
business
it
gets
busy
as
well.
We've
got
five
items
there,
including
item
5.1,
which
is
a
resolute
resolution
adopting
the
preliminary
2023
tax
levy,
the
resolution
adopting
the
preliminary
2023
general
fund
budget,
the
preliminary
approval
of
the
hra
levy
and
consent
of
the
port
authority
levy
for
2023
and
the
natural
resources
management
plan
update.
A
B
Thank
you
mayor.
I
guess
I'm
just
wondering
if
there
are
maybe
a
few
of
those
public
hearings
where
there
might
be
some
increased
public
interest
in
participating.
So
I'm
thinking
of
the
old
cedar
avenue
traffic
intersections
or
the
that
study
or
the
data
center
center
ordinance
just
wondering
if
we
want
to
move
them
up
in
the.
A
A
If
not,
I
will
move
tonight's
public
hearing
public
agenda
for
our
for
our
council
meeting
on
this
monday
night.
Second
got
a
motion
in
a
second
to
approve
the
agenda.
No
further
council
discussion
on
this.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion
carries
7-0
and,
as
we
have
talked
about,
we
just
did
talk
about
council,
given
the
length
of
the
the
agenda
and
the
the
number
of
things
that
we
do
have
on
the
agenda.
A
To
ask
you
to
make
sure
that
your
questions
and
comments
are
succinct
and
to
the
point
and
that
we
get
through
our
business
and
our
work
just
as
quickly
as
possible
or
as
as
expeditiously
as
possible.
If
you
could
greatly
appreciated
so
we
have
an
agenda
and
we'll
move
to
item
two
on
our
agenda,
which
is
the
introductory
items,
and
our
first
introductory
items
are
two
proclamations,
so
I
am
going
to
go
down
make
sure
I
have
the
proclamations
I.
D
A
A
2022
happy
to
read
this,
and
this
is
an
annual
proclamation
that
we
do
and
I'm
always
happy
to
do
it,
because
it
really
does
reaffirm
the
city's
commitment
to
embrace
the
latinx
and
hispanic
residents
and
providing
them
with
the
opportunity
to
be
recognized
and
the
opportunity
to
achieve
their
dreams
and
and
their
hopes
and
their
what
they're
hoping
to
accomplish
in
their
lives
and
with
their
families.
Here
in
the
city
of
bloomington,
so
happy
to
make
the
the
proclamation
today-
and
we
have
a
second
proclamation
as
well.
A
Proclamation
national
pow,
mia,
recognition,
day
september,
16
2022,
whereas
throughout
our
nation's
history,
men
and
women
have
bravely
served
our
nation
in
the
united
states
armed
forces
and
fought
to
protect
our
freedom.
And
whereas
many
of
those
who
served
in
conflict
did
not
return
home
and
remain
missing
in
action
or
unaccounted
for.
A
Now,
therefore,
I
mayor
tim
bussey,
do
hereby
proclaim
september
16th
2022
as
pow
mia
recognition
day
in
bloomington,
and
I
direct
that
the
black
and
white
flag,
symbolizing
americans,
prisoners
of
war
and
missing
in
action
be
flown
at
bloomington,
civic
plaza
and
the
public
works
building
in
memory
of
the
sacrifices.
These
members
of
our
armed
forces
have
given,
on
behalf
of
our
nation,
dated
this
12th
day
of
september.
A
This
is
kind
of
an
enjoyable
thing
and
I'm
glad
we
were
continuing
to
do
it
tonight
we
have,
we
have
from
our
public
works
department.
Abdi
abdully,
am
I
pronouncing
that
correctly.
Yeah.
Look
at
that.
How
about
that
thanks
well
good
evening?
Welcome
and
I
know
julie,
you're
gonna
introduce
him.
Thank
you.
G
G
H
A
A
D
A
Second
promotion
by
council
member
nelson
second
by
councilmember
lowman,
to
accept
tonight's
consent
agenda,
as
stated
no
further
council
discussion
on
this.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion
carries
7-0.
Why
don't
we
start
with
item
3.3,
we'll
double
back
to
the
donations
item?
3.3?
Oh,
that
was
councilmember
d'alessandro!
That's
remember.
Alessandro!
Thank.
K
Is
there
a
way
you
can
kind
of
point
us
to
the
high
points
of
what
was
in
the
packet
to
help
us
understand
exactly
what
we
should
see
as
the
differentiator
there
and,
like
I
said,
if
we're
going
to
get
to
more
of
that
later
in
the
evening.
That's
fine,
too,
but
while
we
have
folks
in
attendance
here.
L
Mayor
and
council
member
d'alessandro
in
the
council
packet
tonight
is
two
port
authority
budgets.
In
the
past,
we've
only
had
one,
which
is
their
general
fund
because
of
the
potential
possible
port
authority
levy.
We've
now
created
a
second
one,
which
would
be
a
special
revenue
fund
for
them.
Someone's
addren
one's
a
special
revenue
fund
and
the
development
fund
has
about
a
million
four
in
there
as
a
possible
levy
amount
that
would
come
in,
and
so,
if
there's
changes
in
the
levy
piece
like
that,
this
is
again
a
budget
that
the
port
authority
has
approved.
L
K
Okay,
so
just
to
be
clear,
the
the
the
first
budget
is
the
budget
that
is
identified
by
you
uses
the
dollars
that
are
essentially
operational
to
the
port
authority.
The
second
one,
the
special
levy
budget
is
the
one
we
want
to
focus
on
as
related
or
the
special
budget
is
lo
is
related
to
the
levy
amount
that
we're
going
to
look
at
later
tonight.
K
K
A
Motion
by
council
member
dallas
sandro
second
by
council
member
nelson
to
accept
item
3.3,
honor
consent
of
business
tonight.
No
further
council
discussion
on
this.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
seven
item:
3.1
councilmember
nelson
yeah.
Thank
you
mayor.
D
D
3.1,
as
is
customary,
is
our
acceptance
of
donations,
and,
as
always
our
community
is,
is
very
generous
and
so
want
to
thank
a
few
people
chris
o'donnell,
for
providing
some
food
for
our
public
for
the
bloomington
police
department,
the
weg
millers
for
donating
to
the
animal
control,
which
is
something
that
this
council
has
talked
about
and
taking
a
look
at
how
to
support
them
and
make
some
improvements
there.
The
next
one
twin
cities
pride
for
supporting
our
wonderful
bloomington
pride
event.
D
That
was
here
not
too
long
ago
and
then
last,
I
think,
is
a
important
one.
Just
to
call
recognition
too.
Fong's
made
a
very
generous
donation,
and
I
know
that
they
presented
one
of
the
large
checks
and
the
mayor
happened
to
be
there
at
neighborhood
night
out
to
receive
that.
So,
just
if
you
had
any
additional
comments
on
that,
I.
A
I
don't
I
if,
if
anybody
watching
didn't
see,
I
think
it
was
very
well
publicized
and
very
well
should
have
been
fong's
for
their
64
years
of
existence
here
in
the
city
of
bloomington,
donated
two
checks:
one
thirty
two
hundred
dollars
each
one
to
the
bloomington
police
department,
one
to
the
bloomington
fire
department
and
and
in
addition,
they
also
sponsored
each
year.
We
do
a
drawing
for
a
national
night
out
from
one
of
the
lucky.
A
Neighborhoods
gets
a
catered
meal,
and
this
year,
fong's
insisted
on
being
the
the
organization,
the
restaurant
that
catered
that
meal,
and
so
we
had
the
opportunity
to
go
there
and
to
to
stand
and
have
time
to
talk
with
david
and
eddie
fong
and
to
congratulate
them
on
their
retirement
and
thank
them
for
all
that
they
have
done
for
the
city
of
bloomington,
thank
them
for
the
donations
to
both
the
police
department
and
to
the
fire
department.
We
also
had
very
good
food,
and
it
was.
A
A
We
we
took
a
very
nice
picture.
I
think
you're
right
we
had
the
big
golf
tournament
size
checks
that
we
had
and
we
took
the
picture
and
was
very
fun
but
boy,
a
heartfelt
thanks
to
david
and
eddie
and
the
entire
fong
family
and
everybody
who
worked
for
so
many
decades
at
fong's,
and
it
we're
going
to
miss
you.
We
we
really
are.
We
already
miss
you.
It
doesn't
seem
the
same
driving
past
her
and
seeing
no
one
in
the
parking
lot.
Yeah.
D
Thank
you,
mayor
just
wanted
to
to
make
sure
that
that
recognition
was
there,
and
you
know,
obviously
thanks
to
the
fongs
and
thanks
to
the
community,
for
supporting
a
small
business
in
our
community,
a
local
business
there
for
over
64
years,
so
that
they
could
retire
and
and
move
on
to
the
next
phase
of
their
lives
and
careers.
So
with
that,
I
would
move
approval
of
item
3.1.
A
Motion
by
council
member
nelson
second
by
council
member
coulter
to
accept
item
3.1
on
tonight's
consented
business.
No
further
council
discussion
on
this.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
hi
opposed
motion,
carries
7-0
moving
on
to
item
4
on
our
agenda,
our
hearings,
resolutions
and
ordinances.
As
I
mentioned,
we
have
11
public
hearings
tonight
and
the
first
handful
I
think,
the
first
five
or
so
are
basically
assessments
for
a
variety
of
different
things.
A
I
know
our
our
our
staff
works
toward
resolution
on
all
of
these
and,
as
a
last
resort,
ends
up
cleaning
or
doing
or
mowing
or
correcting
whatever
violation
we
have,
and,
unfortunately,
a
lot
of
those
times
when,
if
that
happens,
then
they
they
have
to
be
assessed
for
the
cost
of
the
work
that
is
done.
I
know
it's
not
the
first
choice,
but
often
it's
what
we
end
up
with,
and
so
those
will
be
a
number
of
the
things
that
we're
talking
about
tonight.
A
L
L
So
in
july
1st,
my
department
and
other
city
departments
get
all
of
the
special
assessment
notices
all
ready
to
go
out
into
the
mail
and
are
mailed
out
august
11th.
We
publish
it
in
the
sun
current
those
that
are
still
outstanding,
not
the
person's
name
but
their
address.
Their
pin,
number
type
of
information
and
the
amount
that
kind
of
peer
pressure
does
help,
get
a
lot
more
funding
and
assessments
paid.
And
then,
by
august
31st
we
had
a
administrative
hearing.
L
L
L
So
there's
public
nuisance
and
those
are
property
conditions
declared
being
nuisance
affecting
public,
please
peace,
well,
fire
and
safety
on
tree
removal
and
there's
always
areas
that
with
a
different
ash,
borer
dutch
elm
oak
wilt,
those
type
of
tree
removals
are
in
that
there's
weed
and
brush
removal,
delinquent
utilities
and
then
civil
fines
on
the
next
slide.
We
don't
have
the
utility
billing
on
on
here,
because
just
the
dollar
amount
of
assessment
would
make
the
graph
unreadable
at
the
lower
levels.
L
So
here's
just
looking
at
the
civil
fines
and
the
furthest
column
to
the
right
is
2022,
and
you
see
that
you
know
all
of
these
seem
to
be
getting
smaller,
except
for
tree
removal.
A
lot
more
trees
with
ml
ash
borer
are
needing
to
be
removed
on
the
next
slide
are
just
the
number
of
properties.
This
one
does
include
utility
billing,
but,
as
you
can
see
in
2022,
there's
11
properties
for
those
trees
making
up
that
28
thousand
dollars,
so
the
numbers
on
trees
again
over
2019,
2020
20
to
21
and
now
in
2022.
L
You
can
see
just
a
variation
of
numbers
areas
there
and
then
on
the
next
slide.
We
just
added
some
more
graphics
on
dollar
amounts
and
how
public
nuisance
and
abatements
pretty
close,
as
things
are
moving
there
next,
one
on
tree
removal
again
just
watching
the
numbers
and
the
changing
and
other
dollars
the
next
one
would
be
on
brush
and
weed
so
that
one
has
a
little
bit
of
volatility.
25
people
to
23.
L
You
know
graphics,
large,
for
just
two
people
different
each
year.
The
next
slide
delinquent
utilities,
as
you
see
here,
the
number
of
properties
about
853
properties.
At
the
point
that
the
envelopes
went
out,
the
door
you'll
see
tonight
that
that
number
is
down
and
726
000
was
outstanding
on
that,
so
moving
on
so
civil
fines.
L
Again,
the
number
of
civil
fines
are
down.
The
dollar
amount
per
find
is
up
a
little
bit
and
moving
on
to
just
moving
on
to
the
public
nuisance
abatement.
So
I'm
asking
for
the
public
hearing
on
the
public
news
and
abatement
item.
If
there's
any
questions
on
the
information
that
you
received
on
just
the
numbers
and
pieces
of
that.
I
Oh,
I
think
I
asked
this
every
year
when
we
look
at
the
fines
or
assessments
that
are
are
given
out.
Has
staff
found
out
any
you
know
any
trends
or
any
you
know,
driving
factors
in
terms
of
you
know
why
these?
Why
we
see
these
numbers
in
each
one
or
is
it
just
a
variety
of
different
reasons,
or
is
there
no
way
of
of
finding
out
what
the
drivers
are.
L
Mayor
council,
member
loman,
all
of
these
are
throughout
the
city.
They're,
not
you
know,
depending
on
where
the
population
you
know,
if
there's
a
heat
map,
it
might
be
more
in
the
northeast
just
because
we
have
a
higher
density
of
people
there,
but
the
trees,
the
weeds,
the
nuisance
are
throughout
the
city,
pretty
scattered.
So
there's
not
real
definition.
Why
someone
can't
afford
a
tree
removal
or
that
type
of
thing
I
mean
the
tree.
A
Okay-
and
I
think
it's
important
to
point
out-
I
mean
I
appreciate
the
dollar
amounts
appreciate
the
numbers,
but
you
consider
I
mean
a
14
civil
out
of
what
26
000
properties
that
we
have
in
the
city
of
bloomington,
and
I
mean,
if
you
throw
a
business
in
there
with
36
000
properties.
If
you
throw
businesses
in
there,
this
isn't
a
huge
number.
This
isn't
an
enormous
number
and,
as
I
said,
I
know
that
our
environmental,
health
and
safety
works
toward
compliance.
K
Thank
you
mayor
it
as
a
follow-up
to
your
question
or
your
comment.
There
is
that
true
of
our
utilities
process
as
well
or
is
that
a
little
bit
more
operationalized,
I
mean
that
environmental
health
wouldn't
be
doing
that.
So
I'm
just
kind
of
curious.
The
largest
number
on
here
obviously
is
utility
delinquency.
A
Yep
you're
right
and
that's
a
good
question
and,
to
be
honest,
I'm
not
sure
I
I
do
believe
that
we
continue
to
work
toward
compliance
and
and
work
with
folks
to
try
and
get
back
pay
on
on
utilities.
But
I
don't
know
to
what
level.
Certainly
it
is
different
money
owed
for
utilities
as
opposed
to
look
just
you
know,
cut
down
the
dead
tree
or
or
cut
your
yard.
That
kind
of
thing
is
a
different
kind
of
conversation
right,
yeah,
mayor.
L
And
council
member
d'alessandro,
we
work
with
all
of
the
customers
should
they
request
our
assistance
to
if
they're,
having
trouble
paying
their
bill
with
outside
organizations
like
veep
to
help
them.
I
believe
veep
in
those
might
help
them
with
one
maybe
two
of
their
utility
bills,
but
not
on
a
consistent
basis.
L
A
A
A
A
M
A
A
To
adopt
the
resolution
adopting
the
assessment
role
for
public
nuisance
abatements,
no
further
council
discussion
on
this.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
7-0
item.
4.2
is
a
public
hearing
regarding
tree
removal
assessments,
counsel,
any
additional
questions.
We
have
one
additional
question
on
tree:
removal
assessments,
council,
member
alessandro.
K
And
it
we
can
table
this
for
maybe
a
longer
term
discussion.
Mr
mayor,
I
don't
I
don't
know,
I'm
wondering
if,
if
the,
if
our
process
for
assessing
these
fees
and
removing
these
trees
includes
replacement
program
and
if
it
and
if
it
doesn't,
can
it
like
I'm
just
kind
of
curious
if
there's
an
option
as
part
of
that
that
we
offer
a
tree
that
won't
get
ash
borer,
for
example,
as
a
replacement
for
the
the
tree
that
we're
removing.
A
L
A
resident
can
choose
from,
but
if
it
is
in
our
public
land
that
the
city
owns,
we
are
replacing
it
with
trees
that
we've
gathered
and
we've
healed
in
and
we've
moved
those
through.
And
if
I
didn't
answer
that
correctly,
julie
long
will
come
up
and
answer
that.
But
I
think
I've
heard
that
before.
But
that
way
and.
A
K
That,
I
guess
my
my
point,
mr
mayor
and
again,
we
can
table
this
for
a
later
discussion,
but
the
idea
that
adding
50
to
this
number
to
give
people
a
tree
at
the
same
time
we're
pulling
it
out
seems
like
it
would
be
a
good
thing
and
we'd
end
up
a
little
bit
more
balanced
in
our
you
know:
removal
replacement
process
as
we're
trying
to
keep
within
our
climate
change
targets
there.
So
we
can
throw
it
out
there
for
later,
but
seems
like
an
easy
thing
to
do.
They're
already,
there.
A
K
D
Thank
you,
mary,
and
I
know
this
is
something
we've
talked
about
in
the
past,
but
I'm
just
wondering
if
there's
been
any
consideration
on
the
dead
tree
portion
of
this.
I
remember
council,
member
beloga
had
often
spoke
about
this
and
there's
a
number
of
dead
trees,
but
I
think
we
can
go
after
diseased,
easier
and
yeah.
Have
we
taken
a
look
at
what
our
ordinances
are
to
to
remove
those
hazards
from
falling
down
on
houses
and
cars
and
stuff.
A
A
Last
call
in
the
council
chambers
knowing
coming
forward
council.
I
look
for
a
motion
to
close
the
public
hearing
item
4.2,
so
moved
motioned
by
council
member
martin,
second
by
council
member
d'alessandro
to
close
the
public
hearing
on
item
4.2.
No
further
council
discussion.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
bye
opposed
motion,
carries
7-0
council
any
questions.
If
not,
I
would
look
for
action
item
4.2.
G
A
Motion
by
council
member
martin,
second
by
councilmember
d'alessandro,
to
adopt
the
resolution
adopting
an
assessment
role
for
delinquent
tree
removal
costs
no
further
council
discussion
on
this.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
7-0
item.
4.3
is
a
public
hearing.
This
is
on
a
the
weed
and
brush
removal
assessments.
Council.
Any
clarifications
needed
from
islam
on
this
one
or
excuse
me
from
ms
economy
shoulder
on
this
one,
seeing
none.
I
will
open
the
public
hearing.
This
is
a
public
hearing
on
item
4.3,
weed
and
brush
removal
assessments.
A
A
A
Second
motion
by
councilmember
d'alessandro,
second
by
council
member
martin
to
close
the
public
hearing
on
item
4.3.
No
further
council
discussion
on
this.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
7-0
counsel,
any
additional
questions
or
comments.
If
not
I'd
look
for
action.
K
A
A
K
You
I
appreciate
it,
mr
mayor,
so
my
I
guess
as
I,
and
maybe
this
isn't
something
we
can't
answer
right
now,
but
I'd
like
to
know
a
little
bit
more
about
it,
the
the
the
breakdown
of
this
for
folks,
you
mentioned
that
folks
are
on
a
plan
with
us
they're
not
on
this
list,
so
that
must
mean
that
they're
not
what
is
the
commercial
versus
residential
breakdown
of
this?
If
we
have
that
and
if
so
then
do
we
have
like
a
net
like
how
far
out
it
is?
K
K
K
90
plus
yeah
for
sure,
okay,
mr
may
we
I'll
put
it
in
our
business
at
the
end,
then
maybe
we
could
look
at
that.
I'm.
What
I'm
interested
in
is
understanding
whether
this
is
a
long
tail
related
to
pandemic,
and
you
know
economic
challenges
for
majority
of
our
residential
customers,
or
do
we
have
like
commercial
properties
get
who
are
struggling
because
their
people
aren't
back
to
work
or
whatever
if
we
could
get
any
kind
of
insights
as
a
result.
Thank
you.
L
K
L
L
A
A
A
Second
motion
by
council
member
carter,
second
by
council
member
coulter
to
close
the
public
hearing
on
item
4.4,
no
further
council
discussion
on
this.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
7-0
council.
Any
clarifications
needed
anything
else
on
this.
If
not
I'd
look
for
action
on
it.
Councilmember
carter.
A
A
A
If
not,
I
will
open
the
public
hearing
on
item
4.5
public
hearing
for
civil
fines
for
property
related
violation
assessments.
Anyone
in
the
council
chamber
is
wishing
to
speak
on
item
4.5,
no
one
coming
forward.
Mr
sable,
mr
mayor,
no
new
callers,
thank
you,
council!
No
one
on
the
phone,
no
one
coming
forward.
I
look
for
a
motion
to
close
the
public
hearing
at
item
4.5.
A
K
A
Motion
by
councilmember
dallasondo,
second
by
council
member
martin,
to
adopt
the
resolution
adopting
an
assessment
role
for
unpaid
civil
penalties
and
fines.
No
further
council
discussion
on
this.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
seven
zero.
Thank
you,
mr
connor.
Michelle.
Thank
you
for
this
and
thanks
for
bringing
this
forward.
Thank
you,
council,
for
working
through
that
now
we'll
head
forward
on
our
public
hearings.
Just
item
4.6.
G
A
A
A
B
A
Motioned
by
council
member
carter,
second
by
council
member
martin
to
approve
the
therapeutic
massage
enterprise
license
for
phoenix
acupressure,
massage
llc.
No
further
council
discussion
on
this.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
7-0
item.
4.7
is
a
public
hearing
on
a
new
on-sale
intoxicating
liquor
license
application
this
for
lifetime
fitness.
Mr
juncker,.
G
Mr
mayor
and
council
lifetime's
just
wrapping
up
some
remodeling,
if
you
will,
over
at
their
facility
on
the
west
side,
all
surrounding
their
new
pickleball
setup
and
with
that
is
a
little
restaurant
and
lounge
area,
and
so
they
wanted
to
go
with
full
liquor.
License.
Look
checking
into
this.
It
looks
like
they've
done
this
at
a
few
of
their
other
locations,
so
we're
kind
of
coming
late
to
the
game.
On
that
one.
K
A
My
question
is:
spending
a
half
hour
on
the
treadmill
and
then
spending
time
polishing
the
guns,
and
then
you
go
knock
back
a
beer
or
so
that
doesn't
seem
to
make
a
lot
of
sense.
But
I'm
not
going
to
question
it
not
going
to
question
it
council.
I
will
open
this
public
hearing
item
4.7.
It's
a
new
on-sale
intoxicating
liquor
license
application
for
lifetime
fitness.
Anyone
in
the
council
chamber
is
wishing
to
speak
to
it
in
4.7,
no
one
coming
forward.
Mr
disable.
Anyone
on
the
line,
I'm.
A
No
one
down
the
line:
no
one
coming
forward:
counselor
I'd,
look
for
a
motion
to
close
item
4.7
the
public
hearing
so
moved
motioned
by
council
member
martin,
second
by
councilmember
d'alessandro
to
close
the
public
hearing
on
item
4.7.
No
further
council
discussion
on
this.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
seven
zero
counsel.
Any
questions.
If
not,
I
look
for
action
on
item
4.7
mayor.
I
can
make
that
motion.
Let's.
A
Council
member
martin,
with
a
motion
sent
by
council
member
d'alessandro
to
approve
the
on-sale
intoxicating
liquor
license
for
lft
club
operations,
company
doing
business
as
lifetime
fitness.
No
further
discussion
on
this
council.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
7-0
item.
4.8
is
a
public
hearing.
This
had
an
amendment
to
the
on-sale
liquor
license
for
nine-mile
brewing
mr
juncker,
mr.
A
M
You
mayor
excuse
me
to
that
point
I
mean.
Has
there
been
any?
I
don't
know
if
this
is
even
possible,
but
has
there
been
any
discussion
or
thought
about
some?
I
mean
some
kind
of
regular
amendment
to
their
license
so
that
you
know
they
they
maybe
have
a
set
number
of
days
or
something
like
that
where
they
do
this
rather
than
having
to
come
back
to
us
every
single
time
they
want
to
have
some
kind
of
party
in
their
back
parking
lot
there.
Mr.
G
Junker,
mr
mayor
and
councilmember
coulter.
No,
there
hasn't
again.
A
liquor
license
is
for
a
specific
compact
and
contiguous
space.
So
any
time
this
little
bubble
occurs,
an
establishment
needs
to
apply
for
that
amendment.
It
needs
to
be
on
on
record
with
us,
so
in
case
a
state
inspector
anybody
else
comes
by
and
sees
that
boundary
is
adjusted
for
that
time
frame
that
we
all
are
on
the
same
page
and
then
looking
for
those
same
boundary
lines
that
you
would
so
again
some
sort
of
snow
fence
or
cones
or
things.
G
M
Sure
I
I
I
guess
my
point
is
just
that
it.
It
seems
a
little
silly
to
me
that
for
them
to
have
to
come
back
to
the
city
council,
every
time
I
mean
they
had
a
half
birthday
party,
I
think
they're
probably
going
to
want
to
do
this
on
a
more
regular
basis.
If
they,
I
don't
know
if
it's
possible,
but
if
there
is
something
that
can
be
done
just
to
kind
of
streamline
things
a
little
bit.
G
Mr
mayor
councilman
colter,
the
only
thing
we
have
started
a
little
bit
internal
discussion
on
is
some
of
the
things
we
could
streamline
yeah
massage
do
I
have
to
come
every
every
time
to
ask
you
guys
for
massage.
I
don't
for
the
body
art
you
know
and
and
liquor
amendments
where,
where
does
that
fall?
I'm
already
doing
the
event?
Can
I
just
do
the
liquor,
so
you
know
liquor
that
we
always
seem
to
want
council's
approval.
Does
it
need
to
be
a
full-blown
hearing
or
advertising?
G
B
Thank
you
mayor.
My
question
was
in
a
very
similar
vein
and
I
would
be
supportive
of
hearing
more
about
those
conversations
at
the
council
level
just
to
make
it
a
little
bit
more
streamlined
and
easier,
because
I
agree
because
it
seems
a
little
silly
to
you
know
require
them
to
come
back
to
us
every
single
time.
They
have
an
event.
A
A
A
M
A
A
J
Boosie
good
to
see
all
you,
council
members,
so
just
a
little
bit
of
background
about
this
item.
This
is
a
city-initiated
city
code,
amendment,
the
origin
or
the
background
to
this
ordinance
stems
from
the
residential
livability
ordinance
discussion
that
took
place
in
april
of
this
year
and
as
part
of
that
effort,
you
reviewed
an
ordinance
that
dealt
with
exterior
lighting
noise
and
screening
updates.
It
was
informed
by
trying
to
alleviate
conflicts
between
industrial
and
residential
uses.
J
So
as
part
of
that
discussion,
because
of
recent
development
that
had
happened
in
some
locations
in
the
city,
there
was
some
discussion
around
the
impact
of
data
centers
on
residential
areas.
So,
as
part
of
that
discussion,
you
directed
staff
to
do
some
research
and
develop
an
ordinance
to
identify
that
as
the
use
in
our
zoning
code.
So
that's
this
item
before
you
this
evening
on
the
screen
before
you
is
the
proposed
definition.
J
The
two
things
I
want
to
highlight,
with
the
definition
really
have
to
do
with
what
the
the
baseline
size
or
area
that
we're
proposing
for
the
the
use
we're
setting
it
at
10
000
square
feet,
and
the
reason
that
that's
relevant
is
that
there
is
a
correlation
between
the
size
of
these
facilities
and
where,
in
the
the
impacts
with
respect
to
noise
and
other
nuisance,
characteristics
really
kick
in.
That
has
to
do
with
the
amount
of
cooling
and
other
equipment
associated
to
to
maintain
these
facilities.
J
So
I
want
to
highlight
that
we
don't
think
it
should
be
relevant
or
applicable
to
smaller
facilities,
because
they
simply
have
lesser
equipment
and
then
also
underlying
primarily,
there
are
other
uses
in
the
city
like
tech,
campuses,
high-tech
manufacturing
and
others
that
do
do
host
some
of
this
equipment
in
their
facility.
But
certainly
when
you
think
about
what
the
definition
of
a
principal
use
is
they
don't
meet
that
definition
in
terms
of
that's,
not
the
pure
sole
function
of
those
facilities.
J
So
just
want
to
highlight
those
two
aspects
of
the
definition
in
terms
of
where
we're
proposing
to
allow
this
use.
It
would
be
a
conditional
use
in
the
i2
i3
and
ip
zoning
districts.
Those
are
our
most
common
industrial
zoning
districts
and,
if
you
think
about
what
use
data
center
is
most
similar
to
it's
most
similar
to
a
warehouse
use,
it
just
happens
to
be
storing
equipment,
and
so
warehouse
is
certainly
allowed
in
those
districts.
J
We
are
proposing
it
as
a
conditional,
limited
use
in
c4
it
and
fd2,
and
I
will
also
note
that
some
of
the
what
informs
where
it
would
be
allowed
in
this
ordinance
has
to
do
with
where
some
of
our
existing
data
centers
are
in
the
community
as
well
and
just
to
note
about
limited
uses
in
the
zoning
code.
That
means
it's
limited
to
25
percent
of
gross
floor
area
of
a
building,
so
in
other
words
in
those
districts.
J
So
here
is
a
list
of
the
performance
standards
that
are
included
in
this
ordinance.
I
just
want
to
more
focus
on
the
locational
standards
so
getting
in
front
of
some
of
the
use
nuisance
characteristics
that
have
happened
between
data
centers
and
residential
uses,
we're
proposing
a
500
foot
buffer
between
new
data
center
sites
and
residential
sites,
and
that
would
be
measured
from
the
property
boundary
of
the
data
center
site
to
the
nearest
residential
property
line
as
the
crow
flies
so
without
intervening
regard
for
intervening
structures.
J
J
The
reason
that
we're
going
with
this
methodology
is,
we
don't
know
to
the
extent
of
where
they
would
locate
the
outdoor
equipment,
so
a
little
bit
of
that
is
forecasting
and
so
having
that
buffer
from
the
residential
boundary
kind
of
alleviates.
Some
of
that
nuance
and
the
the
analyzation
game,
in
terms
of
where
you're
going
to
cite
these
things
and
okay,
now,
data
center's
allowed
just
because
I'm
putting
generators
over
in
this
location
as
opposed
to
this
location.
I
would
also
add
it
through
this
methodology.
J
J
So
the
areas
that
are
not
eligible
are
further
are
closer
to
the
residential
uses
that
surround
it.
That
does
not
mean
that
there
aren't
still
opportunities
you
know
associated
with
this
ordinance.
We
counted.
We
did
a
again
on
the
basis
of
this
preliminary
analysis,
still
over
140
parcels
in
bloomington.
That
could
still
host
a
data
center
if
these
rules
were
to
be
adopted
and
just
a
point
about
well,
I
think
that's
my
next
slide
actually
yeah
so
a
point
about
existing
data
centers
in
town.
J
J
There
is
one
of
these
facilities
that
is
in
close
proximity
to
residential
uses,
and
I
want
to
be
clear
that
that
would
mean
that
the
data
center
piece
of
that
facility
that
would
then
be
legally
non-conforming,
meaning
it
can
remain
as
long
as
it
remains
occupied
or
does
not
get
unoccupied
for
365
days
and
can
continue
to
operate
as
is,
and
they
could
also
expand
other
legal
uses
on
the
site
office.
Warehouse
other
uses
that
are
allowed
in
that
zoning
district.
J
They
just
can't
expand
the
data
center
component
of
it.
I
would
note,
as
part
of
this
slide,
just
talk
about
our
engagement
efforts
a
little
bit.
We
did
provide
notification
to
all
the
property
owners
and
these
subject
sites
associated
with
this
because
of
the
recency
of
the
verizon
facility,
and
that
that
was
the
site
that
was
close
to
residential
uses.
We
did
do
more
direct
engagement
with
them,
and
so
they
were
fully
aware
of
the
ordinance.
Ultimately,
they
chose
to
to
not
engage
further
with
the
matter,
but
we
did
do
engagement
with
them.
J
K
I'll
try
to
keep
them
brief.
I
know
we're
doing
really
well
on
time.
I
don't
want
to
be
the
reason
we
fall
off
that
cliff.
Thank
you
for
this,
mr
johnson.
I
really
appreciate
it.
I
had
a
couple
of
of
first
off.
I
believe
that
the
six
existing
data
centers
that
you
described
or
potential
data
centers
they're
grandfathered
in
correct,
so
we're
not
gonna
we're
not
we're
not
gonna
try
to
do
any
kind
of
change
or
enforcement
of
the
existing
data.
Centers
as
a
result
of
this
ordinance
is
that
right,
mayor.
J
K
J
J
It's
moving
around
certain
metro
areas
too,
which
is
another
thing
to
follow,
but
in
terms
of
the
amount
of
generators
and
cooling
equipment
that
there
is
a
relationship
between
how
much
of
it
needs
to
be
hosted
outside
a
facility
and
the
size
of
the
facility,
because
certainly
the
bigger
the
facility,
the
more
servers
and
the
more
other
equipment
that
has
to
be
cooled
on
the
inside
and
so
in.
In
doing
that,
research
of
kind
of
other
communities,
some
of
them
set
that
minimum
buffer
somewhere
and
it
was
usually
five.
J
Ten
twenty
a
thousand
square
feet.
We
felt
ten
thousand
square
feet-
was
a
good
number
for
bloomington
on
the
basis
of
the
facilities
we
have
here
and
then
kind
of
dating
back
to
the
original
discussion
in
april.
Also,
I
think,
where
setting
the
bar
too
low,
I
think
it
could
have
the
potential
to
sweep
in
facilities
that
really
don't
have
nuisance
characteristics
associated
with
them.
J
K
Okay
and
last
question:
is
there
any
this
doesn't
preclude
any
other
definitional
or
requirements
that
we
have
from
a
planning
perspective?
So,
for
example,
data
centers
oftentimes
have
to
have
very
specific
fire
control
mechanisms,
and
things
like
that.
I
don't
see
that
listed
here.
Does
it
need
to
be
in
here
or
do
we
have
other
areas
of
our
ordinances
that
are
covering
that
kind
of
thing
already.
J
Thanks
mayor
councilmember
d'alessandro,
yes,
the
fire
code
would
handle
those
things.
I
know
you
had
questions
about
energy
usage
too,
and
those
are
all
good
considerations.
Yeah,
the
typically
the
fire
suppression
and
all
those
elements
are
not
in
the
zoning
code.
Typically,
they
would
be
reviewing
those
elements
as
part
of
a
building
permit.
Okay,
review
of
the
fire
yeah
by
the
fire
prevention
by.
K
The
fire
department-
okay,
great
yeah,
it's
so
specific
that
there's
probably
some
things
there.
So
thank
you
for
this.
I
appreciate
it
and
I
don't
have
any
other
questions.
I
will
comment
that
it's
no
surprise
that
the
folks
were
late
near
verizon.
If
we're
recommending
a
500
foot
buffer
and
they
now
have
a
90
90-foot
one,
you
can
imagine
what
they're
dealing
with,
and
so
I
think
it's
really
important
that
you
know
I
I
would
be
open
to
even
reconsidering
if
we
could
figure
out
how
to
help
them
further.
Frankly,
thanks.
B
Thank
you
mayor.
I
really
appreciate
the
work
that
you've
done
so
thank
you.
I
know
that
there
was.
I
recall
that
there
was
a
resident
who
had
emailed.
I
think
that
she
has
probably
been
pretty
engaged
in
paying
attention
to
these
conversations,
and
she
mentioned
that
there
had
been
some
improvements
in
technology
and
potentially
equipment
that
traditionally
had
been
outdoor.
B
That
could
now
be
indoor
equipment
and
whether
we
would
want
to
change
language
to
and
not
incentivize,
but
ask
for
considerations
that
they
do
that
when
they
can
and
so
do
you
have
any
more
information
on
that.
Did
you
do
any
research
on
kind
of
technology
changing,
and
I
am
wondering
if
maybe
we
want
to
put
some
kind
of
language
that
indicates
our
preference
for
these
kind
of
more
noisy
devices
and
equipment
to
be
indoor
when
they
are
able
to
be
indoor.
J
So
I
think
my
response
to
that
would
be
if
that's
something
that
really
becomes
more
of
a
trend
as
opposed
to
in
the
minority
or
an
aberration,
that
we
start
to
host
all
this
equipment
indoors,
then
it
becomes
less
of
a
nuisance.
That's
when
I
would
encourage
you
to
come
revisit
this
ordinance
at
that
time
to
either
a
incentivize
it
somehow
or
b,
potentially
lower
those
buffers
or
remove
that
requirement.
Certainly
any
ordinance
can
be
changed
over
time
as
the
conditions
on
the
ground
change.
F
D
Thank
you
mayor
just
following
up
on
council
member
carter's
question.
If
somebody
did
come
forward
with
a
data
center
that
utilized
indoor
equipment
that
mitigated
the
nuisance,
that
I
think
residents
and
the
council
is
concerned
about,
is
there
a
process
by
which
they
could
get
a
variance?
Would
that
be
eligible
to
get
a
variance
for
that
type
of
situation?.
J
Yes,
mayor
counselor
nelson,
I
don't
believe
there
would
be,
and
the
reason
being
is
that
this
would
that
would
be
akin
to
a
use
variance
which
is
not
allowed
by
state
statute.
So
I
don't
believe
there
would
be
a
relief
valve
in
that
instance.
I
think
I
would
just
encourage
them
to
find
a
different
site,
oh
quickly,
unless
the
rules
were
changed
at
a
future
date.
They.
D
J
J
Yeah,
mayor
councilman,
nelson,
that's
a
good
question.
As
of
just
today,
I've
taken
a
number
of
meetings
about
the
lindale
industrial
transitional
zoning
district.
So
that's
something
we
are
working
on.
I
don't
foresee
that
data
centers
would
be
in
allowed
use
in
the
transitional
industrial
zoning
district
for
lindale,
but
you're
not
incorrect
to
show
there
that
there
are
a
few
facilities
or
a
few
potential
eligible
sites.
J
The
one
thing
I
will
say
about
the
sites
of
the
i3
zoned
sites
along
lindale
is
they
tend
to
be
smaller
and
so
they'd
probably
be
more
difficult
to
develop
a
data
center
on
so
a
little
bit
off
the
cuff.
But
at
this
point
I
wouldn't
express
a
major
concern
about
that.
There
is
residential
uses
in
a
lot
of
the
areas
around
lindale
in
certain
locations,
but
there
are
a
few
eligible
sites,
but
I
think
I
think
it
would
have
involved
assembling
a
number
of
properties
to
get
a
data
center
of
any
substantial
size.
So.
I
I
J
Yeah,
council
member
excuse
me
mayor
councilmember
lowman.
The
rub
there
is
that
our
definition
of
general
public
utility
facility
is
a
you
know.
It
represents
a
utility
facility
from
20
30
years
ago,
where
everyone
had
landline
telephones,
so
telephone
service
is
a
public
utility,
and
so
many
some
of
the
of
those
facilities
that
identified
in
the
slide
and
they're
in
the
staff
report
do
are
owned
by
companies
that,
on
some
level,
still
provide
that
service.
I
can't,
without
going
into
those
buildings,
know
exactly
what
services
or
what
equipment
they're
hosting
in
those
facilities
today.
J
So
if
they're
still
hosting
telephone
equipment
today,
technically
they
would
be
still
under
that
umbrella
of
general
public
utility
facility,
which
is
allowed
in
all
of
our
zoning
districts.
But
if
they're
not,
then
they
could
be
swept
up
in
this
data
center
definition.
That
being
said,
if
they're
not
providing
that
service
anyway,
some
of
those
sites
are
zoned,
r1,
b2,
they're,
they're,
already
legally
non-conforming.
It's.
I
I
I
just
want
to
be
sure
that
this
isn't
going
to
create.
You
know
a
different.
You
know
situation
is
my
understanding
correctly.
I
didn't
see
anything
in
here
when
I
was
looking
at
the
ordinance
did
staff
look
at
that
just
because
I'd
hate
to
have
something
happen,
and
you
know
on
a
big
magnitude
and
then
you
know
we're
putting
this
in
place
and
then
this
would
prevent
that.
D
Thanks
mary
sorry
for
the
follow
up
here,
but
councilmember
lohman
just
made
me
think
of
something:
would
anything
in
this
impede
the
development
and
roll
out
of
higher
speed
internet
within
the
community?
I
know
we
had
someone
come
into
our
study
session
and
ask
about
that
and
had
concerns
and
candidly,
not
knowing
all
of
the
technology
that
goes
into
that.
Would
this
be
problematic
for
them?
I
don't
I
mean
I
see
centurylink
on
the
sheet,
but
I
don't
see
verizon
or
any
of
the
other
potential
carriers.
J
So
no,
I
don't.
I
don't
think
that
would
be
the
case.
Certainly
there
still
is
switching
stations
and
other
smaller
areas
at
t.
I
know
that's
not
necessarily
just
related
to
internet,
but
at
t
has
one
off
lindale,
for
example,
which
is
really
just
an
office,
and
small
data
room
and
again
wouldn't
meet
this
definition.
K
I
will
take
a
shot
at
being
your
internet
nerd
for
a
second,
no,
I
think
you're
right,
mr
johnson,
the
there's
data
centers
are
mo,
at
least
in
my
experience
as
a
as
a
30-year
vet
of
this
industry.
They're
meant
for
processing
the
data,
that's
different
than
transporting
the
internet
service
right,
so
the
the
centurylink
facilities
are
probably
what
they
call
cos.
There's
central
offices
and
they
are
intended
really
to
be
the
switches.
K
If
you
go
way
back
in
time,
they
literally
were
the
switches
and
now
they're,
not
those
things
anymore,
and
there
is
there.
There
are
computers
that
are
serving
serving
that
right.
So
there's
your
ip
connections
and
other
things
like
that
that
that
transport
layer
right
of
the
internet
service.
This
is
about
things
like
amazon,
web
services,
hosting
your
e-commerce
websites
and
that
kind
of
thing,
and
so
it's
it's
literally
up
the
stack
of
internet.
It's
weird
it
that
there's
actually
one
there's
a
physical
player
and
then
there's
software
layer
and
all
kinds
of
things.
K
So
we
could
narrow
down
on
that
over
a
beer
at
some
point,
but
I
think
I
think
this
does.
I
think
this
will
not
prevent
us
from
getting
transportation
nodes
if
we
needed
to
because
they
would
be
much
smaller
in
format
and
they
would
not
have
the
same
usage
requirements
in
terms
of
energy
and
fire
and
all
that,
as
I
can
understand
it.
So
hopefully
that's
helpful
thanks.
Yes,
thank
you.
A
K
A
F
F
Okay,
all
right
well
I'd
just
like
to
just
to
read
this
because
I'd
like
to
thank
you
in
person
for
your
decision
to
develop
this
definition
and
standards
for
the
data
center
operation.
I
I
really
appreciate
the
work
that
everyone
has
put
into
this
and
I
think
they
will
go
a
long
way
in
providing
some
measure
of
control
and
protection
for
bloomington
residents
and
the
surrounding
neighborhoods.
F
Indeed,
it
was
the
very
residents
who
sounded
the
alarm
more
than
two
years
ago
concerning
this
nuisance.
We
deserve
to
be
included
from
the
very
beginning
in
this
important
action.
When
I
first
mentioned
this
in
april,
city
attorney
manderscheid
said
that
she
thought,
including
language
that
I
suggested
was
possible.
I
mean
the
the
the
significant
the
import
of
what
I
suggested,
not
my
actual
words.
F
I
request
that
this
be
done.
Lastly,
although
not
lasting
importance,
I
want
to
emphasize
the
necessity
of
the
council's
duty
to
safeguard
the
health
and
welfare
of
bloomington
residents.
You've
already
talked
about
someone.
I
knew
read
it
because
she
talked
about
the
technology
that
existed
to
place
indoors,
equipment
that
was
pre-indoors
equipment.
That
was
previously
outdoors
and
also
there's
some
other.
F
A
Anyone
else
in
the
council
chambers
anyone
in
the
council
chambers
wishing
to
speak
no
one
coming
forward
counsel.
I
would
look
for
a
motion
to
close
the
public
hearing
on
item
4.9,
so
moved
second
motion
by
council
member
lowman,
second
by
council
member
martin
to
close
the
public
hearing
on
item
4.9.
No
further
council
discussion
on
this.
A
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
seven
zero,
so
council
questions,
I
think
the
first
question
I
had
to
ms
manderscheid
specifically
to
the
question
that
ms
fletcher
brought
up
about
complaints
being
able
to
trigger
a
review.
Is
that
was
there
a
reason
why
that
wasn't
included?
Is
that
not
doable?
Is
it?
Does
it
get
us
into
legal
trouble?
F
Wasn't
a
part
of
the
conversations
at
the
staff
level?
I
did
reach
out
to
our
assistant
city
attorney,
who
had
conversations
with
nick
and
the
planning
staff,
and
he
said
that
there
was
discussion
about
tying
the
new
designation
to
the
noise
standard,
but
there
were
not
specific
changes
to
that
section.
Nick
do
you
want
to
provide
any
additional
context.
J
Yeah,
thank
you,
melissa
mayor.
The
only
thing
I
would
add
is
that
I
recognize
miss
fletcher
and
I
appreciate
her
providing
her
testimony
dozen,
that
the
current
standard
doesn't
match
what
she
is
suggesting
or
requesting,
but
I
did
bring
up
this
ordinance
here.
It's
on
your
screen
just
to
note
that
a
city
official
does
have
the
ability
to
request
an
nis
as
it
relates
to
operation
of
a
noise
source.
J
A
So
basically,
the
complaint
based
review
is
just
a
couple
more
steps
than
what
I
think
ms
fletcher
was
describing,
rather
than
just
a
resident
based
complaint,
leading
to
a
review
residents
complaining
perhaps
to
our
environmental
health.
Folks
who
then
review
the
situation
by
noise,
monitoring
and
noise
testing
and
then
insisting
or
requiring
a
full
review
is
that.
Is
that
what
I'm
understanding.
J
Yeah,
I
think,
that's
correct.
I
haven't
been
on
site
doing
some
of
these
noise
testing,
but
this
equipment
is
fairly
sensitive
and
it
really
is
dependent
on
catching
you
not.
I
don't
want
to
use
the
term
catching
but
being
there
at
the
right
time
in
order
to
really
take,
in
the
full
extent
of
the
noise
source
and
the
duration
of
the
noise
sort,
that's
kind
of
the
two
things.
J
D
Thank
you,
man,
just
a
quick
follow-up
in
in
looking
at
the
language
here.
It
seems
like
this
allows
us
to
be
proactive
that
either,
if
staff
has
concerns
or
residents,
have
concerns
that,
if
someone's
gonna
it
says,
change
zoning
planning
of
the
structure
or
other
aspects,
including
adding
generators
or
ventilating
equipment,
we
could
proactively
request
that,
based
on
either
the
professional
opinion
of
our
staff
or
concerns
of
residents,
am
I
reading
that
ordinance
correctly.
J
Yeah,
mayor
counselor,
nelson,
that's
correct,
similar
to
also
air
handling
equipment
is
technically
subject
to
city
approval
in
terms
of
citing
those
things
where
these
often
get
reviewed
or
where
we
encounter
these
projects
typically
is
through
a
mechanical
or
a
building
permit
or
one
of
those
levels
of
permits.
So
it
does
require.
K
J
Compliant
to
the
yeah,
forgive
me
for
the
formalities
mayor
busy,
councilman
d'alessandro.
It
met
my
understanding,
based
on
the
report
submitted
us
that
it
met
the
noise
source
requirements
at
that
time.
I
see
we've
since
adopted
different
standards
with
respect
to
locating
generators
and
outdoor
equipment
in
certain
locations,
which
would
have
had
a
different
potential
impact
on
that.
K
So
then,
my
my
question
about
the
ordinance,
then
would
be
do
we
want
to
include
in
this
conditional
use
some
requirement
that
that
there
is
measurement
or
some
you
know,
so
that
we
do
have
on
record
that
we
or
does
that
already
happen
as
part
of
this
like
how?
How
can
we
kind
of
close
the
loop
so
that
the
we
guarantee
that
a
a
review
of
this
kind
is
maybe
not
to
the
extent
of
like
you
said
an
nis,
because
I
know
it's
expensive,
but
can
we
can?
K
J
It
just
happens
to
be
a
higher
decibel
level
than
near
when
you're
near
residential
uses,
so
depending
on
the
equipment
being
proposed
and
the
size
of
the
facility
where
they're
locating
outdoor
equipment,
the
city
code
does
have
provisions
within
it
which
allow
staff
to
require
an
nis
as
part
of
that
conditioning,
use,
permit
process
or
just
part
of
a
building
permit
for
any
addition
of
an
existing
facility.
So
I
think
those
things
are
in
place
again.
The
question
is
just
ongoing
enforcement
of
them
and
having
attention
paid
to
noise
that
it's
an
ongoing
issue.
K
I
don't
know
if
that
makes
sense
or
not,
but
meaning
meaning
that
they
don't
have
to
connect
the
dots
between
the
noise
code
and
this
code
and
that
code
and
this
particular
data
center
thing
and
tie
it
all
in
and
not
if
it's
a
data
center,
you
got
to
do
these
things,
I'm
just
wondering.
If
that's
the
thing
we
should
be
considering.
A
I
I
understand
what
you're
saying
councilmember,
I
think
I
mean
the
way
I'm
reading
it.
It's
not
necessarily
a
connection
of
dots
or
it's
basically
calling
the
city
and
saying
that
building
is
way
too
loud.
You
know
and
then
to
be
able
to.
If
that
triggers,
then
the
the
the
city
official
here
in
our
noise
impact
statements
portion
of
it
to
go
out
there
and
and
to
evaluate
the
situation
so.
K
Yes,
is
that
what
you're
thinking
or
no
I'm
actually
thinking
in
advance,
so
as
part
of
the
planning
process?
If
somebody
comes
if
this
zoned
this
way,
one
of
the
conditions
to
be
met,
if
you
are
putting
a
data
center
in,
is
that
you
do
something
about
this,
like
that,
you
give
us
an
assessment,
and
that
will
always
do
that
for
data
centers,
so
that
we
don't
have
to
worry
that
maybe
once
and
twice
it
doesn't
happen
or
whatever
is
all
I'm
suggesting.
A
F
J
Yeah,
mayor
council
members
city
attorney
manor
shed.
I
guess
what
the
question
that
you're
you're
really
drilling
into
is
the
is
about
the
discretion,
whether
it
be
staff,
discretion,
planning,
commission
discretion,
city
council
discretion
as
a
conditioning's
permit
is
going
through
the
approval
process.
That's
a
lot
of
stops
along
the
way
for
someone
to
have
the
ability
to
raise
their
hand
and
say
you
know
what
I'm
concerned
about
noise.
We
need
to
have
an
nis,
so
hopefully
those
checks
would
provide
the
surety
that
that
would
not
get
fully
through
the
process.
J
Without
that
level
of
analysis
being
done,
your
miss
manor
site
is
correct
that
they
we
have
required
them
for
recent
car
washes
as
well.
But
that
being
said,
I
mean
there's
a
multitude
of
different
uses
that
might
have
the
potential
to
have
noise
sources,
there's
other
types
of
industrial
uses
that
also
have
generators
and
mechanical
equipment.
So
I
think
what
you're
asking
is
should
for
this
particular
you.
Should
we
just
kind
of
eliminate
that
discretion,
whereas
there's
still
this
discretion
exists
for
other
uses?
J
I
always
attempt
to
try
and
be
as
consistent
as
I
can
as
possible
and
take
into
the
local,
the
local
existing
conditions
around
surrounding
a
site
as
to
kind
of
how
we
apply
the
city
code
and
where
things
are
required.
Obviously,
there's
cost,
as
you
said,
associated
with
these
as
well,
but
I
think
my
answer
to
that
would
be.
Is
that
you're
getting
through
a
lot
of
stops
along
the
way
for
it
to
be
missed,
is
kind
of
what
my
perspective
is.
I
I
So
residents
do
have
a
better
understanding
when
these
things
come
in
their
neighborhood
neighborhoods
and
just
being
sure
that
we
maybe
look
at
that
process
by
which
that
you
know
here,
you
go
here's
some
things.
You
can
look
at
from
a
coding
perspective
and
some
things
that
you
know
that
you
need
to
be
considerate
as
as
these
things
come
into
your
neighborhood.
So
those
would
be
the
two
things
I
would
add
to
this.
But
if
there's
anything
else,
I'd
be
happy
to
move
the
salon.
A
I
think
the
final
question
I
had
again
to
ms
fletcher's
point
about
requiring
equipment
to
be
moved
indoors.
I'm
given,
as
she
admitted
and
she
wrote
to
us
it's
kind
of
a
new
and
involving
kind
of
technology.
I
I
would
be
hesitant
to
make
those
requirements
until
it
kind
of
shakes
out
or
until
we
know
more,
as
as
you
know
it
has
been
said,
we
can
always.
A
G
A
Motioned
by
council
member
loman,
second
by
council
member
martin
to
adopt
the
ordinance
as
described
related
item
4.9
in
tonight's
agenda
council.
Any
additional
questions
on
this
additional
comments.
Hearing
none
all
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion-
carries
7-0
council
member
lowman.
A
A
I
appreciate
the
work
that
went
into
this
and
the
and
the
thought
that
went
into
this
and
I
know
the
input
from
the
residents
and
the
input
from
the
council,
and
I
know
the
discussion
that
has
gone
on
for
for
a
few
months
now,
but
I
think
it's
a
good
ordinance,
a
good,
strong
ordinance
and
also
an
ordinance
that
gives
us
an
opportunity
to
adapt
and
evolve
as
we
move
forward
as
well.
So
well
done.
Thank
you.
J
D
Councilmember
nelson
yeah,
thank
you
mayor.
Can
I
just
make
a
quick
comment
about
this,
please
I
know
when
the
verizon
came
before
this
council.
A
lot
of
people
were
very
apprehensive
about
that
decision,
but
we're
locked
in
by
law-
and
I
think
one
of
the
comments
that
the
council
unanimously
agreed
with
at
the
time
is
the
feedback
from
residents
was
heard
and
appreciated,
and
even
though
it
wasn't
the
ultimate
decision
they
wanted
on
that
issue,
it
would
lead
to
improvements
for
the
entire
city,
and
so
I'd
like
to
thank
miss
fletcher
gary.
A
A
G
A
N
Thank
you
yeah,
so,
as
jeremy
mentioned
here
tonight,
to
talk
about
old
cedar
avenue.
So
this
is
a
project
that
we've
been
working
on
since
earlier
this
year
and
also
jerry
mentioned.
We
were
here
back
in
may
to
present
kind
of
our
initial
thoughts
and
what
we
were
seeing
from
that
so
from
there
we've
taken
that
input
had
discussions
as
a
study
team
and
come
up
with
our
final
recommendations
which
which
we
presented
to
planning
commission
last
week,
so
we're
here
to
present
the
recommendations
and
ultimately
get
city
approval.
N
So
here's
a
quick
agenda,
I
mean
overall,
we
just
want
to
refresh
everyone's
mind
about
what
the
project
was,
since
it's
been
a
few
months
since
we
were
here
last
so
just
reminder
on
what
we
were
looking
at
and
then
from
there
talk
about
the
concepts
and
alternatives
that
were
evaluated
and
what
the
ultimate
findings
were
from
those
evaluations
and
how
the
different
alternatives
rank
and
kind
of
compare
to
each
other
public
engagement.
That
was
also
a
big
part
of
the
project.
N
So
there
were
several
rounds
of
public
engagement
through
mailers
online
engagement,
as
well
as
a
actual
in-person
open
house.
So
I
just
want
to
highlight
what
we
heard
from
the
public
and
how
that
was
incorporated
into
the
recommendations
that
we're
presenting
tonight
and
then
last
item
is
again
just
presenting
those
recommendations
for
city
approval.
N
So
project
overview,
there's
I'd,
say
two
parts
of
this
project,
so
the
first
one
is
actually
going
to
construction
next
year.
So
it's
a
pavement
preservation
project
on
old
cedar
avenue
from
86th
street,
down
to
east
old
shakopee
on
the
south
end
and
really
that
part
is
looking
at
reutilizing
the
existing
roadway,
that's
in
place
and
identifying
what
can
be
done
to
potentially
better
utilize
that
roadway
for
all
users
of
the
corridor.
So
looking
at
vehicles,
pedestrians,
bikes,
transit,
so
that
project
is
slated
for
construction
next
year.
N
So
that
was
the
first
part
of
the
studying
project
that
we're
looking
at
here
and
then.
The
second
part
is
the
intersection
on
the
south
end,
so
old,
cedar,
avenue
and
east
shakopee
road.
Looking
at
that
intersection
and
seeing
what
can
be
done
to
improve
mobility
and
safety
through
that
intersection.
So
today
it's
a
skewed
intersection
that
has
some
crashes
occurring.
N
So
this
project
is
looking
at
to
see
what
can
be
done
for
that
or
just
a
reminder
that
this
project
isn't
funded
and
it's
not
slated
for
construction
until
2027
or
potentially
after,
depending
on
when
funding
comes
through
for
it.
So
that
would
be
the
second
part
of
the
project
is
a
bit
more
looking
at
the
planning
level
about
in
the
future.
What
can
be
done
there.
N
So
just
a
refresher
here
so
for
the
old
cedar
avenues.
So
that's
the
stretch
from
86
down
to
east
shakopee
road.
There
were
two
alternatives
that
were
analyzed
and
evaluated
to
determine
really
what
is
the
best
use
of
that
existing
pavement
so
alternative
a
on
the
top
here.
This
is
the
existing
four-lane
cross-section.
So
this
is
maintaining
and
perpetuating
what's
in
place
today
of
two
lanes
in
both
the
northbound
direction
and
two
lanes
in
the
southbound
direction
and
then
the
alternative
b.
N
That
is
what
we
would
consider
a
three
lane,
so
that
is
reducing
the
roadway
geometry
from
two
lanes
in
each
direction,
down
to
a
single
lane
in
each
direction
and
then
implementing
a
center
to
a
left
turn
lane
to
facilitate
traffic,
turning
onto
and
off
of
old
cedar
avenue,
as
well
as
utilizing
the
outside
of
the
roadway
for
bike
lanes.
So
that's
what
you're,
seeing
there
on
the
bottom
part
of
this
graph
or
bottom
part
of
this
slide.
N
N
So
with
this
it
removes
the
what
they
would
call
the
dual
threat
where
one
lane
of
traffic
might
stop
for
pedestrian,
but
then
the
outside
lane
doesn't
necessarily
see
that
pedestrian.
So
then
they're
like.
Why
is
that
car
stopping
and
they
continue
through?
So
it
reduces
that
as
well
as
for
pedestrians,
it
reduces
the
number
of
lanes,
they're
crossing
the
number
of
lanes
that
they're
actually
judged
for
gaps,
so
it
reduces
their
exposure,
and
that
makes
it
really
an
easier
task
for
them
to
judge
if
they
should
or
should
not
be
crossing.
N
And
then
the
two
alternatives
there
on
the
south
end
so
again:
east
old
chalky,
road
and
old
cedar
avenue
two
alternatives
were
looked
at
there.
The
alternative
a
is
the
existing
traffic
control,
which
is
a
signal,
but
with
this
we
would
be
modifying
the
geometry
to
provide
left.
Turning
lanes
from
old
shock
p
road
onto
old
cedar
avenue,
as
well
as
implementing
left
turn
phasing.
N
So
by
doing
this
we
would
provide
a
spot
for
those
vehicles
to
be
able
to
queue
and
wait
and
observe
traffic
if
it
is
permissive
phasing,
but
there
also
would
be
that
protected
movement,
and
with
that
we
would
also
be
looking
at
modifying
the
channelizing
islands
there
to
become
more
pedestrian
friendly.
So
we'd
be
looking
at
trying
to
tighten
up
that
geometry,
while
still
allowing
emergency
vehicles
and
other
larger
vehicles
to
progress
through
those
turns
and
then
alternative
b
here,
on
the
right
hand,
side,
this
would
be
if
we
converted
the
intersection
to
a
roundabout.
N
So
with
this
we'd
be
looking
at
what
they
considered
a
multi-lane
roundabout.
So
there
would
be
multiple
lanes
circulating
through
the
roundabout
from
old
cedar
avenue
and
old
shock
view
road
and
then
old,
cedar
avenue
on
the
south.
There
would
actually
tee
into
old
shakopee
as
a
t
intersection
and
that
would
be
stop
controlled.
So
traffic
on
old
cedar
avenue
would
come
to
a
stop
sign
and
then
have
to
wait
for
gaps
on
old
shock
v
road
to
make
their
respective
maneuver.
N
So
that
was
also
looked
at,
and
one
comment
we
had
heard
before
was
the
ability
to
implement
a
four-legged
roundabout
at
this
intersection.
So
we
took
that
back
and
we
evaluated
that
and
further
detail
and
ultimately
determined
just
with
the
the
skew
angle
through
the
intersection,
the
right
of
way
that
it
really
isn't
that
possible
to
implement
a
four-legged
roundabout
at
this
location.
Just
due
to
some
of
the
constraints
that
exist.
N
All
right
so
pivoting
a
little
bit
here
so
from
the
technical
work
on
to
more
the
public
engagement
realm.
So
what
I
indicated
at
the
onset
here
is
there
was
a
few
rounds
of
public
engagement
through
online
engagement.
There
was
the
let's
talk,
bloomington
website,
which
was
active
from
the
onset
of
the
project
and
that
allowed
the
project
team
to
relay
information
to
the
public
about
what
we
were
looking
at
as
well
as
on
that
website.
N
There
was
the
ability
to
take
a
survey,
so
it
was
asking
people
that
visited
the
website
and
survey
how
they're
currently
using
the
corridor.
Are
they
walking
biking
taking
transit?
What
are
their
current
concerns
along
the
corridor?
So
do
they
have
concerns
crossing
the
corridor
as
well
as
a
live
map,
so
that
allowed
users
to
click
on
the
map,
drop,
a
pin
and
provide
a
comment
as
well.
N
So
we
have
all
those
that
information
that
was
completed
back
in
the
march
april
time
frame
and
then
from
there
we
sent
postcard
mailers
to
650
properties
around
the
corridor
three
separate
times
to.
Let
them
know
about
opportunities
to
provide
comments,
whether
that
be
through
the
online
engagement
tool
or
the
open
house
that
was
held
back
at
the
first
part
of
may
at
wright's
lake
park,
which
is
just
north
of
the
core
of
their
corridor
there,
and
you
can
actually
see
the
image
there.
N
So
this
slide
shows
the
public
input
from
the
open
house
on
the
corridor
concept.
So
the
one
on
the
left.
It
might
be
hard
for
everyone
to
see
here,
that's
the
alternative,
a
so
that
is
the
existing
four
lane
cross
section
and
then
the
one
there
on
the
right
is
alternative
b,
which
is
the
conversion
from
the
four
to
three
lanes.
So
that's
the
one
lane
each
direction
with
a
two,
a
center
left
turn
lane
and
the
voting
or
the
support
on
the
bottom
there.
N
So
we
gave
people
a
little
stickers
that
they
were
able
to
stick
on
each
of
these
to
indicate
really
what
was
their
level
support
for
each
concept
and
for
the
corridor.
Here
you
can
see
there
was
strong
support
for
the
existing
four
lane
and
then
not
as
much
support.
I
would
say
for
the
three-lane
concept
there
and
through
talking
through
residents
with
about
the
concepts.
A
common
theme
we
heard
was
the
thought
of.
If
one
vehicle
is
going
slower,
then
everyone
behind
them
is
having
to
reduce
their
speed.
N
So
that
was
I'd
say
the
main
comment
that
we
heard
back
from
the
public
and
talking
to
them
about
what
their
thoughts
were
on
each
concept
and
then
just
coupling
that,
with
the
survey
that
was
completed,
the
survey
that
was
out
earlier
in
the
study
for
people
to
comment
on
online
had
indicated
that
people
were
not
necessarily
feeling
safe,
crossing
ulterior
avenue
due
to
the
geometry.
So
that's
a
kind
of
on
the
flip
side
that
the
some
of
the
support
we
heard
our
early
on
was
more
in
support
of
the
three-lane
concept.
N
And
then
this
slide
shows
the
input
on
old,
cedar
avenue
and
easel
chakvi
road.
So
the
one
on
the
left
is
the
traffic
signal
that
would
be
improved
through
the
addition
of
turn
lanes
as
well
as
left
turn
phasing
and
then
the
one
on
the
right
is
the
roundabout
concept,
and
here
you
can
see
the
there
was
a
lot
of
support
for
the
signalized
alternative
there.
Most
people
were
in
the
strong
support
and
then
on
the
roundabout.
There
was
less
support
on
that.
N
N
There
was
support
for
the
three-lane
cross
section
of
oldest
year
avenue,
so
both
planning
commission,
as
well
as
the
city
council
input
that
we
received
back
in
may
largely
was
in
favor
of
the
three-lane
concept.
So
again
the
four
lanes
aren't
really
necessary.
You
need
from
a
trap
perspective,
so
there's
other
ways
that
we
can
utilize
that
pavement
for
some
of
the
other
modes
of
transportation
and
then,
if
we
jump
to
the
next
slide,.
N
Here
we
discuss
ulti
revenue
and
easel
shock
p
road,
so
that
intersection
this
one,
I
would
say
the
initial
input
from
planning
commission
city
council
back
in
may
was
there.
There
was
support
for
both
alternatives,
the
roundabout
and
the
signalized
alternative,
with
a
bit
more
favor
and
leaning
towards
the
traffic
signal.
This
one
wasn't
necessarily
as
clear-cut.
N
Both
planning,
commission
and
city
council
had
liked
the
pedestrian
connectivity
and
safety
that
would
be
provided
with
some
of
the
improvements
that
we
were
looking
at
as
well
as
recognizing
that
there
would
be
changes
to
access
and
right-of-way
impacts
with
both
concepts.
So
looking
at,
how
do
those
compare
against
each
other
and
then
just
a
reminder
that
shortly
after
we
were
here
in
may
there
was
this
middle
of
the
federal
funding
application,
so
that
was
the
hsip
that
was
submitted
and
we're
still
waiting
for
results
on
that.
N
N
That
then
was
presented
to
planning,
commission
and
also
here
at
city,
council
and
really
the
goal
of
the
study
team
was
to
come
up
with
the
recommendations
that
we
could
put
forward.
That
would
meet
the
needs
and
goals
of
the
project.
So
really,
what
can
we
do
to
better
utilize?
The
existing
pavement
out
there,
as
well
as
improve
mobility
and
safety
at
easter
shock
final
two
year,
avenue
see
what
can
be
done
in
cost
effective
solutions.
N
So
the
next
two
slides
here
show
the
recommendations
that
are
in
the
staff
report,
as
well
as
the
staff
of
recommendations
that
were
presented
last
week
at
planning
commission.
So
through
all
the
technical
analysis
that
was
done.
All
the
public
comments
received
presentations
to
planning
commission
city
council.
The
recommendations
here
are
to
convert
old
cedar
avenue
from
86th
street
to
old,
chuck
b
road
next
year
with
into
a
three-lane
cross-section.
N
And
then
we
are
looking
at
ways
to
provide
pedestrian
refuge
islands
throughout
the
corridor,
so
utilizing
some
of
that
pavement
with
what
can
be
done
that
again
improves
the
crossing
of
pedestrians
across
ulti
revenue,
recognizing.
That
was
an
item
that
the
public
expressed
concerns
with
and
then,
while
thinking
about
90th
street,
that
was
also
an
item
that
we
looked
at.
So
it
is
an
existing
traffic
signal
today.
So
we
are
looking
at
is
so
warranted.
N
N
So
it's
again,
that's
a
piece
of
infrastructure
that
isn't
necessarily
needed,
so
there
would
be
reduced
costs
in
the
future
by
removing
that.
A
couple
things
to
note
with
this
is
there
is
a
90-day
test
period
with
the
removal
of
traffic
signal
and
that's
getting
at.
We
don't
necessarily
want
to
remove
a
traffic
signal
and
have
things
not
work
and
then
not
have
a
track
signal.
We
turn
back
on
so
there's
a
nine-day
test
period
where
we'd
be
looking
at
temporarily
bagging
the
signal
head,
so
they
would
have
bags
over
them.
N
People
wouldn't
see
the
indications.
The
stop
signs
would
go
in
place
and
then
from
there
it
can
be
monitored
and
to
see
if
there's
any
concerns
with
how
that
operates.
Any
public
input
that
there
are
concerns
out
there.
So
it
allows
some
flexibility
if
things
don't
exactly
work
out
as
intended,
that
there's
still
that
opportunity
to
re-evaluate
that.
N
N
So
what
you're
seeing
on
the
screen
here
is
the
concept
as
we
are
at
today,
through
refinements
with
bloomington
public
works,
as
well
as
huntman
county,
taking
all
this
input
and
really
coming
up
with
the
most
desirable
geometry
that
we
kind
of
within
the
constraints
that
we're
working
with.
So
these
are
the
two
recommendations
that
were
presented
to
planning
commission
last
thursday.
G
Thank
you
mayor
just
did
two
real
briefly
here,
so
I
I
understand
the
traffic
levels
on
old
cedar.
Now
it
would
be
fine
with
the
three
lane
of
the
turn
in
the
middle,
considering
the
growth
we're
seeing
in
south
floo
potential
redevelopment
at
the
intersection
we're
talking
about
here.
How
much
of
an
increase
in
those
volumes
would
we
need
to
see
to
justify
the
four
lanes?
Is
this
a
conversation
we're
never
going
to
have
or
when
would
we
maybe
need
to
go
back.
N
Yeah
good
question:
councilmember
martin,
thank
you
and
we
think
about
that.
We
looked
out
20
years,
so
we
looked
out
to
what
are
the
traffic
levels,
we're
anticipating
in
roughly
20
45,
so
once
this
price
complete
looking
out
20
years,
which
is
the
typical
design
life
of
a
project
of
a
roadway
and
we're
not
anticipating
a
four
lane
needed
in
that
time
frame.
So
we
looked
at
what
is
the
the
regional
travel
demand
model
which
is
used
to
taking
into
account
all
the
social
economic
data?
So
where
are
people
living?
Where
are
they
working?
N
How
are
they
using
the
areas
and
looked
at
what
does
that
mean
for
growth
of
the
corridor
and
we're
seeing
a
fairly
modest
growth?
I
mean
it's
a
fairly
well
built
out
area,
so
we're
not
seeing
a
ton
of
growth
and
with
that
growth,
we're
not
anticipating
the
next
20
years
to
need
that
those
four
lanes-
okay,
gotcha.
G
And
then
just
another
concern
that
I
hear
from
folks
in
the
area,
the
the
entrances
to
the
parking
lots,
especially
up
kind
of
towards
the
north
side
of
the
intersection,
are
just
oddly
placed.
So
you
kind
of
have
to
floor
it
out
of
some
of
those
parking
lots
to
be
able
to
make
the
corner
it's
just
oddly
arranged
as
you
have
walked
us
through.
N
G
G
Just
leaving
it
four
lanes
as
it
is
now,
it's
it's
tough
to
get
across
for
a
pedestrian
now
at
peak
times
a
day.
So
is
that,
as
that
project
comes
a
little
bit
closer,
is
there
more?
Is
there
heavier
pedestrian
assistance?
We
could
be
offering
in
that
vision
as
it
approaches,
or
it
is
kind
of
what
it
is.
N
It
would
allow
for
the
operation
traffic
signal
to
potentially
not
allow
permissive
lefts,
which
makes
it
so
those
drivers
aren't
having
to
judge
gaps
in
traffic
as
well
as
observe,
if
there's
a
pedestrian
there.
So
that's
something
that's
starting
to
be
looked
at
more
across
the
state
and
in
hennepin
county
as
well
is
looking
at
signal
phasing
operations
as
to
what
can
be
done
for
that.
N
So
I
think
there
are
opportunities
with
the
operation
of
the
signal
and
some
of
those
more
advanced
items
you
can
do
with
a
traffic
signal
controller
to
allow
take
some
of
the
stress
away
from.
I
guess
both
pedestrians
and
drivers,
of
making
sure
that
it's
clear
for
drivers
to
go.
So
I
think
those
would
definitely
be
two
items
that
would
be
looked
at
once
we
progress
into
that
stage
of
this
project.
Gotcha.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
K
Thank
you,
mr
mayor
good
evening,
so
two
quick
things.
I
guess
one
related
to
councilmember
martin's
comments.
I
I'm
thinking
with
the
cedar
avenue
bridge
and
it
being
a
north-south
corridor,
we're
talking
about
expanding
the
the
biking,
capability
and
stuff
consideration
of
a
a
bike
or
pedestrian.
Only
turn
signal
as
well
might
be
something
to
consider.
I
didn't
know
if
that
was
something
we
could
think
of.
N
Yeah
good
question:
councilmember
d'alessandro,
that's
more
of
I
would
say
what
would
they
consider
a
final
design
question
where
that's
like
once
we
get
into
what
really?
What
are
the
recommendations
of
the
intersection
like?
Is
it
attracting
a
roundabout,
then
we
would
start
to
look
at
more
of
those
details.
I'd
say
we
haven't
explicitly
evaluated
and
determine
if
those
are
necessarily
needed.
May
I
let
jeremy
comment
on
anything
else
with
regard
to
the
bike
signal.
G
K
Great
thanks,
hopefully
this
one's
more
relevant.
You
mentioned
a
lot
of
discussion
about
your
work
in
community
engagement,
but
you
only
presented
one
section
of
that
data,
specifically
the
the
open
house
data.
Do
you
have
any
information
for
us
on
what
you
gathered
online
via?
Let's
talk,
bloomington.
N
Good
question
councilmember:
yes,
we
do!
That
is
both
in
the
study
report
as
well
as
the
first
time
we
were
here
back
in
may.
We
had
the
slides
that
went
through
how
people
are
using
the
corridor.
So
we're
going
to
share
that
information,
but
yeah
we
do
have
all
the
information
with
regards
to
what
were
the
comments
on
the
map,
as
well
as
the
information
that
people
answered
for
the
survey
so
how
they're
using
the
quarter
or
their
concern.
K
The
reason
I'm
specifically
asking
is
because
I
know
that
there
are
some
questions
from
folks
about
why
you
would
still
recommend
a
three-lane
road
when
everybody
that
you're
presenting
data
from
said,
please
make
keep
it
a
four-lane
road,
and
so
I'm
hoping
you
can
address
that
specific
question
for
us.
Maybe
there
was
other
data
you
gathered
or
whatever
anything
you
could
do
to
help
us
understand
that
that
would
be
great
yeah.
N
Definitely
councilmember
d'alessandro
yeah,
so
the
recommendations
are
a
combination
of
public
engagement.
So
really,
what's
the
public
telling
us
as
well
as
engineering
planning
input
from
bloomington
public
works?
Fire
ems-
and
these
comments
aren't
really
that
atypical
for
what
we
hear
for
a
lot
of
these
four
lanes
to
three
lane
conversions.
N
But
time
and
time
again
we
see
the
benefits
of
the
three
lane
of
when
we're
not
necessarily
in
need
of
a
four
lane
which
we're
well
below
the
thresholds
of
where
we're
starting
to
go
from
a
three
lane
to
four
lane
that
there's
just
tremendous
safety
benefits
for
crashes
that
are
occurring
so
for
the
pedestrians,
particularly
as
we
look
at
the
crossings
of
it,
shortening
those
up
making
it
easier
for
people
to
judge
those
gaps,
bikes
and
pedestrians.
Those
are
some
of
the
most
vulnerable
users
on
the
roadway
that
they're
they're
the
ones
exposed.
N
So
if
they're
in
a
collision,
there's
a
much
greater
chance
for
those
severe
crashes
that
they're
getting
injured
so
through
all
the
research,
that's
been
done
from
these
four
to
three
lane
conversions.
It's
been
shown
that,
when
we're
at
the
traffic
levels
that
we're
at
there's
great
safety
benefits
with
very
minimal
change
in
operations
which
is
again
was
backed
by
the
technical
analysis
completed
specifically
for
this
quarter.
So
we
looked
at
the
operations
of
this
corridor.
N
If
we
go
from,
the
43
lanes
really
are
just
showing
minimal
impact
to
vehicle
mobility,
which
is
ultimately
what
a
lot
of
the
public
comments
were
came
down
to
is
vehicle
mobility?
How
fast
they
can
go
from
point
a
to
point
b
through
the
quarter
and
we're
really
not
anticipating,
really
much
reduction
at
all
in
those
operations
just
due
to
the
traffic
volumes
that
we're
at
right
now.
M
Thank
you,
mayor
and
councilmember
d'alessandro
actually
hit
on
exactly
the
point
that
I
was
going
to
raise
as
well.
First
of
all
just
to
to
clarify
the
the
proposed
4-3
conversion.
That
would
only
be
on
that
stretch
from,
I
think
you
said,
86th
street
to
old
shakopee.
So
the
the
stretch
of
old
cedar
north
of
86th
street
that
would
continue
to
be
foreign
lanes.
Correct.
N
M
And
then,
and
that
at
that
point,
old
shakopee
is
roughly
equivalent
to
92nd
street,
so
we're
talking
about
roughly
six
blocks
or
so,
and
I
I
just
I'm
wondering
if
and
maybe
it's
not
possible
and
but
you
know
you
mentioned
the
the
most
common
concern
that
I
hear
from
folks
when
we
bring
up
4-3
conversions
is
what
happens
when
I
get
stuck
behind
someone
in
that
one
lane
going
in
either
direction?
Are
you
able
to
sort
of
using
using
the
data
and
using
the
research?
M
Are
you
able
in
any
way
to
sort
of
quantify
what
that
re?
That
difference
of
operation
really
is?
I
mean,
I
think
it
it
seems
to
me,
traffic
is
often
one
of
those
things
that
folks
feel
like
is
much
more
observational
than
it
really
is,
and
you
know
when
you're
stuck
behind
that
car,
it
can
feel
like
you're
really
slowed
down,
and
you
know
it's
making
a
big
difference,
but
very
often
it's
not.
Are
you
able
to
to
sort
of
quantify
that
in
any
way.
N
Oh
yeah
councilmember
coulter.
That
is
something
that
we
can
do.
I
mean
you
can
make
assumptions
of
if
you're
traveling
three
miles
per
hour.
This
is
how
long
it
will
take
you
if
you're
traveling
at
20.
This
is
how
long
it
would
take
you.
I
mean
it's
a
relatively
short
stretch.
I
would
say
so.
The
impacts
aren't
that
that
severe,
that,
if
you're,
trying
to
really
in
the
full
length,
even
at
reduced
10
miles
per
hour,
your
travel
time
is
going
to
be
impacted.
N
M
N
L
Council,
member
coulter,
kirk
roberts,
traffic
and
transportation
engineer
just
one
quick
clarification.
I
wanted
to
point
out
that
old,
cedar
avenue
north
of
86th
street
is
already
a
two-lane
roadway.
It's
been
a
two-lane
roadway
and
that
will
not
change
with
this
project,
so
I
just
want
to
make
that
one
clarification.
It's
not
four
lanes
north
of
86th
street
and
then
as
to
the
time
it
takes.
That's
the
frequent
complaint
we
hear
with
these
four
to
three
conversions.
Is
somebody
got
behind
someone
who
was
going
slower
than
that
person
really
wanted
to
go?
L
Usually
frankly
that
person's
doing
the
speed
limit
and-
and
it
just
doesn't
feel
comfortable,
and
if
you
compare
the
difference,
if
you're
traveling,
you
know
35
miles
an
hour
versus
30
miles
an
hour
up
that
corridor.
The
difference
in
time
is,
is
20
seconds
or
something
like
that.
So,
on
the
personal
level
that
can
feel
like
a
loss
to
someone
granted,
they
probably
spent
more
time
in
line
for
morning
coffee
than
that,
but
it
can
still
feel
like
that
loss.
M
I
I
So
what
my
cred!
My
question
is
here,
as
I
make
this
as
long
as
possible
when
we
look
at
106th
street
and
heard
second
and
86th
street,
and
those
are
all
conversions
that
have
been
made
if
we
were
to
look
at
those
conversion
maps
over
that
that
period
time.
I
think
some
of
these
would
have
been
further
out
what
type
of
reduction
would
I
have
seen
with
those,
especially
those
those
intersections
where
we've
got,
and
I
know
we're
not
talking
apples
and
apples
here.
I
These
are
different
intersections
with
different
traffic
count
volumes
and
that
type
of
thing,
because
I
think
this
is
at
the
crux-
I
think
where
residents
are
saying
to
myself:
okay,
so
if
I've
got
one
or
two
crashes
happening
there,
are
we
seeing
zero
crashes
when
we
go
across
these
other
intersections
on
106th
street
100
second
86th
street,
or
are
we
still
seeing
crashes?
I
mean
what
what
what
what's
been
the
impact
or
the
evaluation?
Obviously
it's
there
for
old
old
shakopee
road
21
crashes,
we're
going
to
see
a
reduction.
G
G
I
G
N
I
You
know
the
20
there's
a
21
that
are
there
that
totally
makes
sense
yep,
but
there's
six
other
crashes
that
took
place
before
that,
so
that
are
there
in
the
other
other
other
areas
there
so
like
I'm,
seeing
two
on
86th
street
and
old,
shack
or
old
old
old
cedar,
one
on
87th
in
old
cedar,
another
one
on
89th
and
then
another
one.
Another
two
on
90th
equals
equals
six
crashes.
So
would
you
say
fifty
percent
of
those
are
rear-end
crashes
or.
N
It's
a
mix
I
had
to
have
to
circle
back
into
the
full
data
to
see.
I
know,
there's
a
mix
of
rear
end
and
I
think
one
or
two
other
types
of
crashes
we
have
to
circle
back,
but
rear
ends
are
incorporated
into
that.
So
we
would
expect
those
types
of
reductions
as
well
as
with
the
traffic
signal.
If
that's
removed,
traffic
signals
can
also
be
a
source
of
crashes
occurring
so
rear
end
crashes
from
vehicles
having
to
stop
in
red.
I
A
Staff
kind
of
throwing
a
dart
and,
taking
a
guess,
sure
your
earlier
question,
legitimate,
where
we
have
gone
from
four
to
three
specifically
to
put
in
that
center
turn
lane
what
the
reduction
was
from
left
turn
rear,
end
crashes.
I
think
we
could
we
I'm
sure
they
could
come
up
with
that
number
and
intuitively
yes,
that
it
probably
solved
a
good
number
of
those.
A
A
I
N
Councilmember,
for
the
most
part,
we
were
focused
on
a
side
street.
Stop
always
stop
control
versus
a
roundabout
or
traffic
signal.
Once
we
evaluated
the
traffic
signal
and
determine
it
wasn't
warranted.
Typically,
a
traffic
signal
warrant
is
also
can
be
applied
for
a
roundabout,
whereas,
if
we're
not
necessarily
seeing
a
trafficking
warranty
that
probably
indicates
that
traffic
volumes
are
at
a
low
enough
level
that
a
roundabout
isn't
necessarily
needed
for
the
additional
costs
that
they
would
implement
there.
N
So
that
would
again
slow
down
drivers
on
old
city
avenue
and
require
everyone
to
go
through
there
when
we're
not
really
necessarily
showing
that
that's
warranted
there,
because
the
traffic
wasn't
warranted.
So
we're
not
necessarily
seeing
that
track.
Values
are
a
level
to
warrant
around
about
being
installed.
This
location.
D
N
N
D
Okay
with
regards
to
the
bikes:
are
there
any
concerns
because
there's
a
bike
trail,
an
off-road
bike
trail
there.
So
if
you
had
people
in
there
and
then
you
have
people
traveling
on
the
shoulders
on
bikes,
these
have
multiple
different
places
that
a
driver
would
have
to
check
to
make
sure
it's
safe
to
cross.
Are
there
any
concerns
about
that
redundancy.
N
Council
also
knows,
or
council
member
nelson
I'd
say,
this
condition
exists
in
quite
a
few
places
on
the
more
urban
environment
side
where
there
is
the
redundancy
and
that's
something
that's
desire
to
be
provided.
The
bike
or
the
onstreet
bike
facility
is
kind
of,
let's
kind
of
cater
to
more
of
the
hardcore
biker,
the
ones
that
are
they're
gonna
bike,
no
matter
what
so
they
like
to
be
on
the
on-street
cruise,
whereas
the
the
trail
that
provides
kind
of
a
different
environment.
N
So
that's
more
for
the
pedestrians,
as
well
as
more
of
the
casual
riders,
so
the
mom
and
dad
going
out
with
their
kids
at
night
to
bike
they're
generally
more
kind
of
using
the
trail.
So
they
kind
of
meet
a
different
need,
and
we
really
haven't
seen
in
other
areas
where
there's
the
redundancy
of
multiple
areas
for
bikes
to
be
that,
there's
been
a
concern
of
drivers
having
to
focus
in
those
different
areas.
So
I'd
say
we
wouldn't
really
anticipate
that.
L
Just
one
other
comment:
when
it
comes
to
bikes,
bikes
are
already
legal
to
ride
on
the
roadway,
so
they
can
be
there
anytime
and
we
always
want
drivers
watching
and
if
drivers
have
to,
you
know,
put
their
head
on
swivel.
I
don't
think,
there's
a
biker
in
the
world,
that's
going
to
lament
that
issue,
and
so
they
can
be
there
now.
Hopefully,
there
are
more
of
them
there
in
the
future.
L
The
one
really
nice
advantage
to
having
the
bike
lanes
on
the
road
like
this,
in
addition
to
the
trail,
is
those
roads
get
cleared
of
snow
very
quickly
and
we
and
they
get
cleared
very
well,
and
we
do
have
a
lot,
an
increasing
number
of
bikers
using
the
roadway
in
the
winter,
and
so
it's
a
good
accommodation
in
that
respect
as
well.
Okay,.
D
D
L
I'm
just
going
to
jump
in
and
forgive
me
for
up
and
down,
but
that
is
an
important
transit
route.
It
serves
route
539,
which
is
a
key
route
that
goes
from
normandale
community
college
connects
with
the
98th
street
transit
station
and
then
on
over
up
old
cedar
to
the
mall
of
america
transit
station.
So
it's
a
really
critical
route
for
transit.
It's
also
a
potential
bypass
route
for
congestion
when
the
mall
of
america
is
real
busy
and
gets
congested.
L
That's
where
the
red
line
from
mvta
the
red
line
from
down
south
can
jump
off
and
avoid
that
congestion.
So
it's
pretty
key!
This
has
come
up
in
the
past
when
a
bus
pulls
over
on
that
shoulder
to
stop.
Does
that
mean
no
one
can
get
around
there
at
the
time
it
was?
It
was
the
police
stated
that
you
know
if
a
bus
is
stopped
there,
just
like
with
a
garbage
truck?
L
You
can
if
it's
stopped
and
stationary
and
it's
clear
you
can
move
around
that
vehicle
that
garbage
truck
or
that
bus
in
that
two-way
left-turn
lane,
and
that
was
determined.
You
know,
as
far
back
as
when
we
were
converting
86th
street
to
four
lanes
in
this
instance.
There's
actually
a
wider
shoulder
there.
D
Thank
you
last
question
I
had
was
you
know.
I
looked
at
the
the
data
in
terms
of
safety
and
councilman
lohmann
kind
of
walked
through
that
the
delay
and
level
of
service
at
everywhere,
except
for
old,
shakopee
and
old
cedar,
seemed
to
be
about
consistent
with
without
regard
to
the
format
of
the
road.
There
was
minimal
delay
and
they
all
had
a
very
high
level
of
service
at
all
those
other
intersections.
D
I
think
the
safety
issue
was
was
there
more,
but
it
seemed
to
dramatically
improve
based
on
the
conversion
to
three
lanes
at
old
shakopee,
and
I
was
just
trying
to
get
my
head
around
that,
because
one
of
the
things
I
think
he
said
was
some
of
the
issue.
Maybe
with
safety
as
well
as
other
things
is
a
left
turn
lane,
but
I
think,
isn't
there
already
a
left
turn
lane
on
old
cedar
onto
old,
shakopee
road.
There's
a
there's,
a
right
turn
lane
there's
a
straight
lane.
D
There's
a
left
turn
lane,
so
I'm
just
trying
to
figure
out
how
converting
that
section
to
three
lane
makes
it
a
dramatic
improvement
on
the
delay.
I
mean
that
was
significant
in
the
data
that
we
had
on
delay
and
then
it
sounds
like
safety
as
well
could
be
potentially
significant
improvement
there.
So
can
you
help
me
understand
how
that
works.
N
Yeah
councilmember
nelson-
some
of
it's
also
in
regards
to
the
arrivals
on
vehicles
arriving
at
that
intersection.
So
with
this,
we're
looking
at
removal
of
the
intersection
or
the
traffic
signal
on
90th,
so
some
of
those
arrival
patterns
are
changing
there.
So
it's
a
bit
more
random
versus
platoon
coming
from
a
traffic
signal,
so
we
are
looking
at
some
more
of
those
kind
of
network
operations
as
well
as
just
that,
overall
intersection
by
adding
left
turn
phasing.
N
We
are
expecting
a
dramatic
decrease
in
delay,
especially
for
east
old
shakopee
road,
as
those
vehicles
are
no
longer
queued
waiting
for
their
left
turn
lane
blocking
the
vehicles
going
through
there.
Well,
we
are
expecting
that
by
stepping
those
out
into
left
turn
lane.
There's
additional
storage
as
well
as
that
left
turn
phasing.
They
can
go
on
a
green
arrow,
so
we're
expecting
an
overall
decrease
with
those
improvements
as
well.
D
D
Okay
and
then
I
did
actually
have
one
other
question
about
the
interchange
there,
old,
shakopee
and
old
cedar.
You've
got
the
right
hand,
turns
off
of
old
shakopee
onto
old
cedar
in
both
directions
and
how
do
those-
and
maybe
this
is
a
final
design-
question
integrate
into
the
traffic
flow,
because
I
know,
I
think,
we're
doing
normandale
98th
right
now
to
remove
those
types
of
things,
because
people
come
flying
onto
the
road
and
almost
hit
everyone
going
on
the
other
road.
N
N
But
we
are
looking
at
refining
those
channelizing
islands
to
be
more
teed
in,
in
the
sense
that
it's
more
of
a
yield
condition
where
it's
not
as
much
of
a
free
sweeping
right
where
vehicles
can
go
around
there
as
fast
we're
looking
at
teaming
them
up
more
at
a
more
acute
angle.
So
it
requires
vehicles
to
slow
down
more
yield
and
their
sight
lines.
N
A
A
J
G
Is
my
name
is
tim
sandlin
and
I
happen
to
be
the
owner
of
quality
care,
tire
and
auto
slash
cedar,
avenue,
shell
on
the
corner
of
old
cedar
and
old
shakopee?
What
we're
talking
about,
and
I
was
able
to
listen
to
everything
and
unfortunately,
I
had
not
had
any
information
prior
to
today
as
far
as
how
far
we've
gone
with
this
so
far,
but
I
wanted
to
mention
a
couple
of
things
in
this.
If
I
might
we
talk
about
the
safety,
I'm
there
every
single
day,
and
I
see
the
accidents
that
happen.
G
They
happen
right
in
front
of
me.
They
hear
them.
I
really
do
not
think
a
three
lane
would
be
a
good
idea
right
there.
I
already
have
enough
problems
with
cars
because
of
the
traffic
situation
cutting
through
the
lot
customers
walking
around.
You
know
potential
for
accidents-
and
you
know
this
this
also.
This
light
brings
into
the
construction,
possibly
in
27,
where
it
looks
like
a
bunch
of
medians
will
be
built
where
it
becomes.
G
I
only
have
access
for
right
turn
in
and
right
turn
out,
which
kind
of
limits
my
availability
for
sales,
but
that's
at
another
date.
So
mainly
I'm
just
talking
more
about
this
one
that
the
safety.
At
that
light.
I
agree.
We
have
to
do
something,
people
don't
watch,
but
the
majority
of
the
accidents
happen.
As
I
see
cars
blowing
this
the
light
trying
to
get
through,
I
see
cars,
getting
our
customers,
people
getting
very
impatient,
trying
to
go
south
on
old
cedar
to
get
on
to
old
shock
fee
to
head
home
on
cedar
avenue.
G
It
turns
into
just
a
parking
lot
at
that
corner
to
old
sort
of
cedar
avenue.
So
really
those
are
just
some
concerns.
I
have
especially
being
a
business
owner.
You
know
it's
going
to
affect
us
tremendously
too,
and
I
think
the
roundabout
is
a
much
more
more
safer
option
I
feel
than
this
flight
and
that's
what
I
have
to
say
for
right
now.
A
A
A
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
7-0,
so
council
a
lot
of
questions,
a
lot
of
good
questions
about
a
good
discussion
on
this,
and
I
think
a
lot
of
information
that
we've
heard
over
the
course
of
frankly,
more
than
just
a
couple
of
months,
because
I
remember
a
discussion
on
this
intersection
a
couple
of
years
ago.
To
be
honest,
I
think
we
had
that
we
kicked
off
this
discussion.
Then,
personally,
I
I
think
a
couple
of
things
to
break
it
down
into
a
couple
of
things.
A
The
the
intersection
itself
obviously
needs
something
done
with
it.
I
drive
it
fairly
frequently
and
that
left
turn
from
east
old
shakopee
to
to
north
old
cedar
is
terrifying,
and
it
really
is,
and
regardless
of
the
time
of
day
and
with,
if
people
realize
they're
in
the
wrong
lane,
and
somebody
in
front
of
them
is
turning
left
and
they
they
dodge
out
of
there
and
it's
it's
a
mess
and
to
have
those
dedicated
left
turn
lanes
within
that
intersection.
I
think,
will
be
entirely
helpful.
A
It
absolutely
will
doing
the
old
cedar
avenue
from
four
lanes
to
three
in
that
stretch
that
we've
been
talking
about
here,
we've
been
having
this
discussion
about
different
roads,
different
sections
in
bloomington.
For
some
time
now
and
frankly,
we
we
keep
hearing
similar
concerns.
It's
going
to
slow
us
down,
it's
not
going
to
make
a
difference.
Why
are
you
putting
bike
lanes
in
and
all
this
kind
of
thing?
A
A
Yes,
it
will
and
nine
times
out
of
ten,
that's
probably
a
good
thing,
and
I'm
glad
to
see
that
in
a
lot
of
cases-
and
I
think
if
it
even
if
it
brings
it
down
a
mile
or
two
an
hour
and
makes
it
a
little
bit
more
pedestrian
friendly
a
little
bit
more
bicycle
friendly
a
little
bit
safer.
I
think
it's
worth
it
and
the
the
center
left
turn
lanes.
A
I
think
we
have
seen
the
the
improvements
that
come
with
that
to
council
member
lowman's
point:
let's
see
the
data,
let's
see
the
actual
data,
I
think
just
anecdotally.
You
can
see
that
anytime,
you
drive
there.
The
opportunity
to
be
in
a
safe,
protected
left
turn
lane
if
you're,
making
a
left
is,
is
much
better
than
being
in
a
lane
of
traffic
trying
to
make
a
left
turn.
So
I
appreciate
the
work
that
has
gone
into
this.
I
appreciate
the
the
public
engagement
that
has
gone
into
this.
A
There
is
literally
minimal
change
in
in
patterns
in
behaviors
in
speeds,
but
what
there
is
a
big
change
in
is
the
safety
of
the
of
the
corridor,
so
I
think
this
makes
good
sense
and
I
think
this
is
a
good
first
step
and
we,
just
you
know,
sneak
preview
to
everybody
watching
one
of
the
things
we
heard
in
our
listening
session
tonight
was
somebody
saying
how
do
we
make
bloomington
more
pedestrian
and
bicycle
friendly?
Well,
this
is
one
of
those
examples
where
that
would
happen
so
council,
any
additional
thoughts.
Council,
member
coulter.
M
Thank
you
mayor.
Well,
I
think
you
said
it
really
really
well,
I
I
obviously
asked
about
the
the
four
or
three
conversions
and-
and
I
would
argue
frankly
in
my
now
almost
five
years
on
the
city
council,
I
would
say
we
probably
hear
more
about
traffic
safety
about
pedestrian
and
cyclist
safety
than
we
do
about
4-3
conversions.
I
think
folks,
you
know,
like
you
say,
folks,
get
upset
in
theory
when
they're
proposed
and
then
in
practice,
when
they're
put
into
place,
they
find
there's
just
very,
very
minimal
change.
L
M
G
G
K
I
hardly
agree
on
that.
Thank
you
mayor
and
thank
you
councilmember
martin.
I
I
did
want
to
make
one
other
recommendation.
If,
as
we
think
about
this,
I
noticed
in
the
in
the
documentation
that
there
was
a
speed
data
review
and
this
road
is
40
miles
an
hour
in
the
area
that
we're
talking
about
that.
That
just
seems
like
a
lot
for
a
three-lane
highway,
especially
when
you're
putting
that
much
pedestrian
and
bicycle
traffic
on
it
on
purpose,
which
I
think
is
wonderful,
as
you
know
I'll,
be
a
support
of
that.
L
Mr
mayor
council,
member
d'alessandro,
so
we
are
actually
coming
back
to
the
council
next
week
to
talk
to
you
about
speed
limits
and
changing
the
speed
limits.
The
intent
right
now
is
to
focus
on
the
speed
limits
for
our
local
unclassified
roadways.
Old
cedar
is
a
classified
roadways
collector
when
we
advance
the
changes
needed
to
change
the
local
speed
limits.
L
We
will
also
put
the
infrastructure
in
place
in
our
city
code
to
give
us
the
authority
to
change
speed
limits
on
our
collectors
and
arterials,
and
so
at
that
point
we
will
have
the
authority
to
change
the
speed
limit
on
old
cedar
avenue,
so
it
is
coming.
We
can't
do
it
right
now,
but
we
will
set
it
up
to
do
in
the
future.
K
I
Member
lohman,
thank
you
mayor.
I
I
think
my
colleagues
and
I
think
you've
stated
very
well
why
you
support
these
particular
changes
and
I
do
think
these
changes
are
necessary.
We
need
to
make
some
some
types
of
changes
here,
I'm
just
not
there
yet
tonight,
so
I
will
not
be
supporting
this
as
it's
currently
constructed.
I
You
know
I've
never
seen
a
3-4
conversion
get
turned
back.
I
I
still
hear
folks,
you
know
that
are
106th
street
and
I'm
still
waiting
for
the
data
you
know
on
those
other
other
streets.
I've
asked
that
on
a
number
of
occasions,
so
I'm
just
going
to
withhold
my
my
vote
this
time
coming
through,
but
I
do
recognize
that
there
are
some
safety
changes.
I
I
think
there's
enough
support
here
tonight
to
get
this
intersection
changed
not
in
a
manner
in
which
that
I'm
supportive
of
the
speed
limits
pieces
are
also
another
component
of
why
I
object
to
this
and
we're
not
going
to
deal
with
that
again
tonight.
So
for,
for
those
reasons,
stated
and
some
other
reasons
that
are
I've
stated
in
the
past
other
meetings,
I
don't
need
to
reiterate
all
that.
I'm
not
going
to
be
supporting
this
tonight.
Thank
you.
B
I
will
be
brief
in
the
interest
of
time.
I
will
be
supporting
the
recommendations
from
staff
and
for
the
reasons
already
well
articulated
tonight.
I
will
also
say
I
thought
it
was
very
interesting
that
the
gentleman
the
caller
also
was
more
supportive
of
the
roundabout,
which
actually,
I
would
love
to
see
a
roundabout
there.
But
I
also
appreciate
the
expertise
that
staff
bring
to
this
and
the
analysis.
B
I
appreciated
the
chart
in
the
packet
that
kind
of
had
the
green
and
the
yellow
and
the
red
that
really
articulated
well
kind
of
the
pros
and
cons
of
both
approaches.
So
so
again,
we'll
be
supportive
of
the
staff
recommendation
moving
forward
and
just
really
appreciate
all
of
the
analysis
and
thoughtfulness
that
has
gone
into
this.
A
By
council
member
martin,
second
by
council
member
carter
to
approve
and
adopt
the
recommendations
of
the
study,
as
stated
in
item
4.10,
no
further
council
discussion
on
this.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
aye
motion,
carries
6-1
with
council
member
lowman
in
opposition
again.
Thank
you
very
much
thanks
to
our
staff,
thanks
to
our
consultant,
thanks
to
our
folks
who
have
worked
on
this,
because
I
think
it's
it's
an
important
step
forward,
especially
in
this
area.
Well
done.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
And
our
last
public
hearing
of
the
evening
this
is
item
4.11
and
it's
a
public
hearing
regarding
an
ordinance
addressing
the
possession
of
a
detached
catalytic
converter.
Mr
zuniga,
this
has
been
a
big
topic
recently
across
the
metropolitan
area
and
here
in
bloomington,
and
I'm
glad
to
see
that
we're
moving
forward
with
this
good
evening
welcome.
H
Thank
you,
mayor
council
members
yeah.
As
you
said,
mr
mayor,
this
is
an
ongoing
issue
for
the
twin
cities.
It's
an
ongoing
issue
for
law
enforcement
agencies
within
the
twin
cities,
and
bloomington
is
no
exception.
This
is
an
issue
that
our
officers
face
on
a
routine
basis,
and
so
what
we're
really
looking
to
do
is
give
the
officers
a
new
tool
that
they
can
utilize
when
they
stop
someone
with
multiple
catalytic
catalytic
converters
in
their
possession.
H
So
right
now
there
is
no
state
law
that
criminalizes
or
regulates
the
possession
of
a
detached
catalytic
converter,
and
so
what
you've
seen
is
cities,
especially
within
the
metro
area,
starting
to
adopt
ordinances
to
to
give
their
officers
some
tools
mike.
If
you
want
to,
and
so
really
what
this
this
ordinance
does.
H
Section
325e
21,
which
is
the
state
law
that
regulates,
scrap
metal
dealers
and
require
certain
report
or
recording
requirements
when
they
receive
scrap
metal,
including
catalytic
converters,
such
items
as
the
weight
of
the
the
metal,
the
identification,
any
numbers
that
are
associated
with
the
with
the
catalytic
converter.
So
if
the
person
can
provide
that
they've
proved
for
verification
that
they
complied
with
that
state
law,
they
would
not
be
guilty
of
a
misdemeanor,
and
so,
like
I
said,
it's
a
really.
A
H
If
they
obtained
it
from
a
scrap
metal
dealer,
they
will
have
a
receipt
that
will
detail
all
that
information.
You
know
our
bloomington
police
department
has
a
tagging
program.
If
you
will,
that
provides
proof
of
the
ownership
that
associates
that
particular
catalytic
converter
with
a
vehicle,
and
so
if
the
person
is
in
possession
of
that
information,
that's
also
also
proof
that
they're
in
lawful
possession
as
well
or
if
they
just
simply
purchase
it
from
a
reseller.
A
H
M
Mayor,
excuse
me
just
a
quick
follow-up
on
that
one,
just
I'm
not
seeing
in
here
and
forgive
me
if
you
cover
this
while
it's
out
of
the
room,
if
say
someone
gets
pulled
over
in
their
car
and
they
have
a
catalytic
catalytic
converter,
are
they
I
mean
if
they
don't
have
the
receipt
on
them?
Are
they
given
a
certain
amount
of
time
to
produce
that,
or
I
mean
do
they
have
to
have
it
right
on
them
when
they
have
the?
When
they're
found
with
the
catalytic
converter.
H
D
H
D
H
H
H
Married
council
member
nelson
was
certainly
deferred
to
ms
manderscheid,
but
in
our
ordinance
there's
only
one
instance,
where
a
violation
of
the
ordinance
is
a
gross
misdemeanor
and
that
is
having
to
deal
with
public
contracts
and
employees
and
council
members
having
a
financial
interest
in
that.
So
I'll
defer
to
ms
demandership.
B
K
This
might
be
a
question
for
deputy
chief
claussen,
I'm
curious
as
to
whether
or
not
we
have
data
that
suggests
that
this
could
have
prov
you
know
could
have
I
don't
know
we
could
have
if
we
had
this
in
place
earlier
like
how
many
of
these
were
experiencing.
I
guess
is
what
I'm
asking
is
this
I
I'm
hesitant
to
I.
I
certainly
support
this
and
I
am
hesitant
to
put
a
law
on
the
books
that
you
don't
feel
actually
has
any
teeth.
K
F
K
A
D
Just
a
quick
follow-up
on
that
would
it
be
possible
once
we
have
possession
of
it
to
investigate
if
it
was
stolen,
I
mean
I
know
more
and
more
people
are
marking
them
now
and
then,
if
that
was
determined,
would
there
be
potential
for
additional
charges
for
possession
of
stolen
property?
That
type
of
thing.
H
I
A
G
A
F
Yeah
mayor,
I
can
answer
that
the
cadillac
careers
are
not
marked
individually.
The
state
has
rolled
out
a
grant
program
where
they're
trying
to
assist
in
prevention
of
theft,
where
individuals
can
take
their
car
and
have
their
catalytic
converter
marked,
but
that's
an
involuntary
basis
and
it's
it's
not
every.
B
G
G
Well,
it
comes
with
the
car
you,
the
car
manufacturer
records
it
every
shop
that
installs
one
changes
that
record,
and
now
you
have
complete
proof
if
you've
got
a
serial
number.
If
your
car
has
one
stolen
from
it,
do
you
know
the
serial
number,
so
I
I
strongly
recommend
doing
that,
but
I
strongly
recommend
passing
this.
If
it'll
help
the
police,
because
it's
been
endemic
in
my
neighborhood-
and
I
even
wonder,
is
it
a?
Are
you
breaking
the
law?
A
M
Coulter,
thank
you
mayor.
I
will
try
and
keep
my
comments
free,
but
I
to
me
this
just
feels
like
another
example
of
cities
having
to
step
in
where
the
state
has
not,
and
that's
it's
really
frustrating
to
me.
You
know
all
the
questions
and
issues
that
we
raised
and
that
were
raised
by
our
commenter
here.
M
All
of
them
would
be
better
addressed
by
the
state
of
minnesota.
It
would
be
more
effective.
There
could
be
escalating
penalties.
The
magnitude
of
the
problem
is
such
that
it's
just
much
better.
If
the
state
puts
this
within
statute-
and
it's
incredibly
frustrating
to
me
that
they
have
not
so
I'm
glad
we
are,
we
are
taking
this
step.
I
do
obviously
support
the
ordinance,
but
I
just
I
just
feel
like.
We
need
to
be
incredibly
clear
with
the
state
legislature
that
they
need
to
step
up
and
take
action
on
this.
C
I
K
Mr
mayor,
I'm
curious
if
we
could
potentially
see
some
data
on
this,
maybe
since
they
might
be
tracking
it.
Since
we
put
this,
I
will
be
supporting
this
if
it
passes
tonight,
then
I'd
love
for
us
to
be
tracking
this
as
a
line
item
in
our
police
report,
if
possible.
Just
so,
we
can
give
people
some
insight
into
how
we're
doing
in
potentially
solving
some
of
this
at
our
level.
If
that's
possible.
K
A
We
have
a
motion
and
a
second
to
adopt
an
ordinance
for
amending
chapter
12
of
the
city
code
related
to
the
possession
of
catalytic
converters.
No
further
council
discussion
on
this.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
seven
zero
council
member
d'alessandro.
Some
republicans.
A
Motion
by
councilmember
alessandro,
second
by
council
member
carter
for
summary
publication.
No
further
council
discussion
on
this.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
7-0
very
good.
Thank
you
very
much,
and
that
concludes
item
four
on
our
agenda,
our
hearings,
resolutions
and
ordinances.
A
O
O
So
this
is
that
same
tax
model
and
if
you
recall,
the
initial
working
model
that
we
were
looking
at
for
the
tax
levy
was
around
19
increase
from
2022,
and
so
after
making
reductions,
we
were
at
11.58
and
some
of
the
reductions
they
were
in
the
general
fund.
But,
as
you
can
see
here
as
well,
we
had
a
50
000
reduction
for
fire
pension
and
also
50
000
reduction
for
aquatics.
O
We
had
a
reduction
where
we
didn't
have
any
money
set
aside
for
strategic
priorities
and
the
debt
service
was
also
reduced.
We
were
able
to
use
some
funding
to
to
abate
one
of
the
debt
service
payments
to
bring
that
down
as
well,
but
it
was
still
at
11.58
percent,
and
so
this
next
slide
when
we
were
going
through
the
levy
and
the
budget
on
august
22nd,
there
was
a
wish
from
council
to
see
this
tax
levy
in
a
different
way,
and
I
don't
know
if
I've
done
this
before
looking
at
the
tax
levy.
O
We,
since
those
are
all
in
the
general
fund
with
a
lot
of
these
departments
here
we
don't
actually
charge
that
back
because
we're
all
in
the
general
fund
together.
But
when
we
look
at
our
tax
levy
when
we're
presenting
it
to
the
public
and
showing
the
cost
of
service
public
services,
we
allocate
that
out
as
overhead.
So
that's
what
you're
seeing
here
is
that
allocation
of
finance
and
legal
and
administration
department.
O
So
when
you
look
at
it
like
this,
the
as
you
can
see,
the
majority
of
the
7.9
million
dollar
increase
is
in
police
and
fire
and
debt
service.
So
when
you
take
those
together,
that's
about
6.1
million
dollars,
and
so
the
remaining
1.8
million
dollars
is
in
community
development,
community
services
parks
and
rec
public
works.
O
O
So
then,
we've
talked
about
this
quite
a
bit,
and
the
mayor
has
talked
about
this
in
his
council
minute
and
many
other
times
when
addressing
the
public.
But
this
budget
is
a
large
investment
in
public
safety,
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
give
you
some
more
concrete
examples
and
dollar
amounts
that
are
that
are
driving
this
increase.
So
we'll
start
off
with
police
and
from
that
previous
slide,
that
I
was
looking
at
the
the
overall
11.58
percent
increase
in
the
tax
levy
that
we
were
initially
looking
at.
O
So
3.96
percent
of
that
is
252
000
for
it
that's
salaries
and
benefits,
and
it's
fully
loaded,
but
for
two
additional
police
officers
and
then
118
000
against
again
a
fully
loaded
with
salary
and
benefits
in
it.
For
a
new
dispatch
training
supervisor,
then
514
thousand
dollars
for
the
the
axon
contract.
The
body
cameras
squad
cameras
that
has
come
down
a
bit
from
the
last
time,
so
a
little
bit
lower.
But
it's
still
a
lot
more
than
we
had
before
and
then
375
000
increases
for
police
and
supplies,
training
and
services.
O
500
000
is.
We
did
use
american
rescue
plan
funds
this
year
to
help
with
our
police
payroll,
and
so
that's
just
for
2022,
so
we
don't
have
that
additional
resource
in
2023,
so
it
is
creating
a
bit
of
a
structural
imbalance
for
2023,
so
that
is
something
that's
adding
and
then
just
with
the
increases
the
contract
for
the
existing
police
employees,
it's
about
a
million
dollars
and
then,
if
we
go
to
the
next
slide,
this
is
the
breakout
for
fire.
So
this
is
the
3.52
percent
of
that
initial
tax
levy
increase.
O
So
we
did
already
add
four
additional
firefighters
in
2022
to
dish
to
address
the
current
needs,
so
that's
again
fully
loaded
salaries
and
benefits.
Then,
in
addition
to
that,
in
the
2023
budget
there
is
six
additional
firefighters
and
thirteen
thousand
dollars
and
then
there's
also
a
three
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollar
increase
for
the
small
fire
equipment.
O
Five
hundred
twenty
five
thousand
dollar
increase
for
large
fire
equipment.
Two
hundred
fourteen
thousand
dollar
increase
for
the
hourly
rate
for
the
paid
on
call
firefighters
and
then
for
the
existing
full-time
firefighters,
125
000
increase.
So
we
just
wanted
to
give
you
a
little
more
detail
of
what's
really
driving
this
and
then
also
even
for
the
debt
service.
A
big
portion
of
that
is
for
public
safety,
so
880
000
of
that
increase
for
debt
service
is
directly
related
to
fire
station
number.
Four.
O
And
so
the
next
piece
of
information
just
wanted
to
share
that
came
up
at
the
last
meeting.
Was
we
didn't?
Have
the
graph
of
our
median
value
home
comparison,
other
cities
that
a
lot
of
times
we
do
we
do
share.
So
we
have
that
to
show
you
here
on
this
next
slide,
and
so
this
is,
we
don't
have
the
the
numbers
are
still
very
preliminary
for
2023,
but
we
just
wanted
to
show
you
where
we
ended
2022..
These
are
the
final
property
tax
numbers
for
these
cities
and
the
median
value
home
comparison.
O
O
So,
let's
talk
about
for
tonight
our
what
we're
recommending
for
the
proposed
2023
preliminary
tax
levy.
So
if
you
go
on
the
next
slide
overall,
these
are
options
that
we're
going
to
be
looking
at
from
now
until
november
and
when
december
5th
is
the
truth
and
taxation
public
hearing.
But
we
have
the
november
21st
meeting
set
aside
just
for
budget,
but
what
we'll
be
looking
at
is
these
are
potential
options
that
could
reduce
the
levy
so
we'll
be
looking
at
the
lodging
tax
revenue
and
admission
tax
revenue
very
closely
they've
been
doing
very
well.
O
We
had
two
really
good
months
recently,
so
that
potentially
could
be
increased
based
on
forecasts.
If
that
makes
sense
we
you
know
we
want
to
be
conservative
when
we're
budgeting
revenues,
but
if
it
looks
reasonable
that
could
possibly
be
something
that
could
help
take
some
pressure
off
the
property
tax
levy.
O
There
was
some
talk
about
funding
kind
of
one-time
expenditures,
capital
expenditures
from
strategic
priorities
that
we
could
possibly
do
and
then
there's
always
the
option
of
reducing
service
levels.
I
think
what
the
mayor
has
talked
about,
what
we're
going
to
stop
doing
so
go
to
the
next
slide,
so
knowing
that
this
is
the
highest
that
the
levy
can
be
for
a
preliminary
levy
and
that
we
can
still
bring
it
down
before
the
end
of
the
year.
We
are
recommending
a
ten
and
a
half
percent
preliminary
levy.
O
O
If
we
do
get
the
safer
grant,
which
could
be
another
thing
that
could
change
things
as
far
as
what
our
property
tax
levy
is.
How
we
want
to
handle
that
with
the
grant
planning,
for
example,
it'll,
be
funded
for
three
years.
But
then
we'll
have
you
know
the
18
firefighters
that
the
grant
will
cover
we'll
need
to
absorb
and
how
we
want
to
plan
for
that,
so
it
doesn't
all
come
in
in
it
and
we'll
need
to
fund
it
in
year.
Three,
four
we're
also
going
to
talk
about
the
internal
service
fund.
O
That's
for
public
safety,
which
is
the
public
safety
technology
and
equipment
fund
and
the
fire
pension
special
revenue
fund.
So
that's
going
to
be
we're
going
to
start
off
with
public
safety,
then
october.
17Th
is
already
the
day
that
we
planned
for
utility
funds
and
the
rates,
but
we're
also
going
to
talk
about
fleet
facilities
at
night
and
and
the
public
works
in
the
general
fund.
We
are
going
to
talk
about
sidewalk,
snow
plowing.
O
That
was
something
that,
from
the
initial
budget
request,
there
was
a
need
that
public
works
saw
to
add
to
add
to
the
fleet
for
additional
sidewalk
snow
plows,
and
that
would
equal
that
was
eight
hundred
thousand
dollars,
so
that
was
kind
of
one
of
the
first
things
we
brought
out,
but
there's
to
for
them
to
share
their
reasons.
For
wanting
to
do
that
and
just
have
a
talk
about
sidewalk
snowplowing
and
what
we
do
with
that
and
then
also
to
talk
more
about
sustainability
and
natural
resources.
So
that's
that's
public
works
night.
I
I
So
now
you
have
this
additional
dollars
in
the
in
the
previous
year.
Why
couldn't
you
just
take
that
to
spend
down?
You
know
what
you
got
coming
up
in
in
this
year
and
if
for
those
folks
who
you
know,
didn't
watch
the
last
meeting,
I
wonder
if
the
manager
has
a
more
short
succinct
way
of
saying
that
you
know
why
we
went
through
that
you
know,
and
then
I
would.
E
E
Kari
mentioned
during
the
presentation,
the
the
the
structural
imbalance,
and
that
is
the
driving
factor
in
whether
we
would
consider
doing
something
like
you
suggest
or
like
people
ask
we
currently
have
a.
What
I
would
say
is
a
slight
structural
imbalance
in
our
budget
for
the
next
three
years.
Council
is
well
aware
that
we've
programmed
a
essentially
a
subsidy
of
about
1.1
million
dollars,
supported
by
our
strategic
priorities
fund
that
was
done
intentionally
to
try
and
mitigate
the
impact
of
tax
levy
increases
on
residents,
we're
proposing
to
continue
that
for
a
couple
years.
E
What
kari
suggested
is
that
the
reduction
from
our
working
budget
proposal
last
month
at
11.58,
to
get
to
the
10.5
percent,
is
by
increasing
that
the
tax
levy
stabilization
line
item.
What
that
does
is
increase
the
amount
of
structural
imbalance.
So
I
don't
think
that
we
are
going
to
come
back
to
you
in
december
and
say
that
that's
our
final
recommendation,
we're
using
it
as
a
placeholder
right
now,
so
that
the
left
and
the
right
side
of
the
ledger
match
up.
E
So
when
we
were
talking
about
those
investments
earlier
in
the
summer
that
the
council
chose
to
make
using
that
amount
of
money
to
try
to
buy
down,
the
levy
would
only
push
out
the
problem
to
the
next
year
that
we
would
have
to
solve
again.
Frankly,
when
we're
a
little
bit
less
flush
than
we
were
this
year.
E
A
good
amount
of
that
positive
budget
variance
was
the
result
of
a
couple
of
years
of
federal
funding
that
came
through
the
city
and,
frankly,
effort
by
our
departments
to
hold
down
their
costs
as
much
as
possible,
and
so
the
the
federal
funding
is
no
longer
flowing
right
now.
So
we're
not
expecting
that
we
will
see
positive
budget
variants
anywhere
near
what
we
saw
this
year.
I
E
I
would
say:
council
member
loma,
there's
a
combination
there,
so
what
we,
what
we
were
able
to
do
with
the
recommendations
that
we
made
in
council
adopted,
had
more
flexibility
than
the
federal
funding,
because
the
federal
funding
actually
provided
some
offsets
for
us.
That
freed
up
money
that
wasn't
as
constrained
as
what
the
federal
funds
were.
I
Thank
you
for
that
clarification,
and
then
my
I
guess
my
last
question
and
then
I'll
make
a
brief
comment
is
that
you
know
mayor
you
talk
about
investments
in
in
our
in
our
future,
and
I
know
that
another
council
member
here
talks
about
that.
You
know
you
know.
Spending
on
certain
priorities
is
a
you
know
as
a
values
or
a
budget
kind
of
kind
of
decision,
and
I
know
that
in
the
past
we've
had
a
paradigm
of
trying
to
provide
the
lowest.
I
A
Well,
I've
said
a
number
of
times
in
the
past
council,
member
that
it's,
as
you
said
for
many
years,
the
the
goal
and
the
the
priority
for
the
bloomington
city
council
for
city
staff
for
the
residents
of
bloomington
was
to
keep
that
tax
levy
as
low
as
possible.
And
it's
a
it
was
a
good
goal
and
it
worked
well
for
bloomington
for
a
number
of
years.
A
We
have
some
costs
that
are
have
caught
have
caught
up
to
us,
whether
it's
in
our
in
our
physical
buildings,
whether
it's
the
fire
stations,
bloomington
ice
garden,
creekside
community
center,
whether
it's
in
some
of
the
services
that
we
provide
we're
a
city
of
90
000,
and
we
we
don't
have
a
full-time
fire
department,
which
is
we.
We
heard
a
good
presentation
within
the
past
couple
of
weeks
about
how
that's
that,
that's
an
issue
and
a
significant
issue
for
what
it
means
for
fire
protection
in
the
city
of
bloomington.
A
There
are
consequences
to
that
in
terms
of
the
services
that
are
able
to
be
provided
in
terms
of
the
the
facilities,
the
programming
that
we
have
within
the
city
and
then,
ultimately,
if
you
as
you
play
that
out,
how
appealing
and
how
attractive
bloomington
is,
is
a
place
to
live
for
people
in
the
in
in
the
twin
cities.
And
so
it's
a
it's
a
discussion
that
we
have
to
have,
and
this
is,
as
I
have
said,
and
was
not
shy
about
saying.
This
is
a
big
number.
I
agree
with
that
completely.
A
The
fact
that
the
vast
majority
of
it
is
for
public
safety,
I
think,
says
something
in
terms
of
our
priorities
and
what
we
want
to
be
moving
toward
as
a
community
and
the
fact
that
that
big
number
is
the
result
of
some
decisions
that
were
made
in
the
past
that
we
have
to
account
for
at
some
point
and
now
is
that
time
to
account
for
those,
and
so
it's
it's
difficult.
This
is
a
difficult
conversation
without
question,
but
I
think
it's
an
important
conversation
that
we
need
to
have
as
a
community.
A
This
is
this
is
not
just
the
seven
of
us
in
in
in
kari
and
and
and
jamie
making
these
decisions.
This
is
a
community
decision
and
discussion
that
we
have
to
have
I'll.
I'll,
be
honest.
I've
heard
from
a
number
of
folks
who
have
said
this
makes
this
makes
sense.
It's
a
it's
a
bitter
pill,
it's
kind
of
a
tough
tough
one
to
take,
but
it's
something
that
makes
sense
and
we
have
to
move
forward
on
I've
heard
from
a
lot
of
people
who
have
said
that
I've
heard
from
a
lot
of
people.
A
I
Thank
you
mayor,
and
you
know
I
promise
I'd
be
brief.
I
will-
and
I
think
that's
probably
the
the
the
dilemma
that
I'm
balancing
with
in
my
mind,
is
when
I
came
on
council.
You
know
we
talked
about
a
balance.
You
know
in
terms
of
the
you
know,
in
terms
of
trying
to
drive
that
rate
down,
and
now
we
have
this
new
paradigm,
I'm
trying
to
figure
out.
You
know
where's
upwards
down,
you
know
trying
to
figure
out.
You
know
how
do
we
measure
success?
I
M
M
And
we'll
go
from
there
and
I
appreciate
councilmember,
loman
and
mayor
both
of
you
setting
me
up
to
say
it,
but
not
actually
saying
it
the
way,
I
always
say
it,
which
is
that
this
is
obviously
one
of
those
examples
where
budget
decisions
are
policy
decisions,
and
you
know
one
of
the
things
that
we
have
heard
countless
times.
Those
of
us
who
were
on
the
ballot
last
year
certainly
heard
it
quite
a
bit
is
folks,
are
willing.
O
M
Sure
so,
with
within
reason,
they're
roughly
the
same
is
the
overall
proportion,
I
think,
is
what
I'm
I'm
getting
at,
and
I
I
mean
that's.
I
think
the
point
that
I'm
making
is
that
these
are
these
are
actions
what
you're
taking
these
are
things
that
frankly,
we
just
need
to
do,
and
I
think
you
know
certainly
with
the
with
the
the
police
department
numbers
but
honestly,
particularly
with
the
fire
department
numbers.
We
are
just
to
a
point
now,
where
we,
we
simply
can't
put
this
off
anymore.
M
M
Roughly
84
percent
of
this
levy
increase
is
going
to
public
safety,
and
you
know
this
is
in
addition
to
things
that
we
just
have
to
do
right
now,
because
we
have
to
do
them.
You
know
this
is
just
one
of
those
sort
of
core
basic
things
that
local
governments
have
to
do,
and
I
think
folks
in
our
community
rightly
expect
that
we
do
them
well
that
we
do
them
efficiently
and
that
we're
providing
the
services
that
that
the
community
needs,
and
I
think
that's
what
this
budget
does.
I
don't
like
the
10.5
number
either.
M
I
am
particularly
concerned
about
the
the
continued
shift
that
we're
seeing
onto
residential
property
taxpayers
from
commercial
industrial,
but
I
think
this
is
a.
This
is
a
good
starting
position,
but
I
think
mayor
to
your
point
as
well,
this
is
a
conversation
that
we
need
to
have
as
a
community
and
we
need
to
be
willing
to
say
you
know
you
you
have
said
as
a
community,
you
are
willing
to
invest
more.
You
are
willing
to
pay
more
to
do
these
things.
B
Thank
you
mayor.
Well,
thank
you
kari.
This
was
super
helpful.
I
also
appreciate
it's
very
succinct
but
very
clear
and
really
told
the
story
with
for
where
we're
at
right
now,
and
so
I
guess
just
to
kind
of
reiterate
and
clarify
what
you've
said,
but
for
those
who
are
listening,
I
just
want
to
emphasize
the
point.
B
We
have
the
preliminary
levy
that
we're
setting
tonight.
It
means
we
cannot
go
above
it
moving
forward,
but
we
will
go
below
it.
I
mean
I
guess
I
can't
really
say
that,
but
I
expect
that
we
will
go
lower
and
then,
over
the
next
couple
months,
we're
going
to
have
budget
discussions
per
department
where
we
will
be
discussing
proposals
from
staff
to
increase
fees
or
reduce
service
levels
or
expenditures
in
other
ways
and
kind
of
have
those
have
some
policy
discussions
during
those
times
to
look
at
other
options.
B
D
Yeah,
thank
you
mayor
I'll
sort
of
reiterate
some
of
what
I
said
last
time,
but
you
know
I
still
continue
to
be
concerned
about
those
in
our
community
that
are
facing
escalating
rents,
the
people
that
are
owning
homes.
You
know,
particularly
those
that
are
the
less
expensive
homes
in
our
community,
are
increasing
at
the
fastest
rate,
because
there
just
aren't
a
lot
of
entry-level
houses,
so
they're
going
to
be
disproportionately
impacted
by
this.
D
D
That's
eight
percent
of
ten
and
a
half,
and
that
leaves
two
and
a
half
percent
of
this
increases
from
other
things,
and
I
asked
the
city
manager
earlier
today.
What
were
we
talking
about
last
year
when
we
were
doing
ours-
and
we
were
talking
about-
I
think
our
modeling
was
at
four
and
a
half
percent,
and
so
you
know
we
look
at
the
increases
for
public
safety.
That's
what's
driving
this
clearly,
you
know
we
are
actually.
It
looks
like
in
the
other
areas.
D
We
have
consistently
heard
about
the
the
needs
of
the
police
department
and
things
like
that,
and
we
have
consistently
supported
their
requests
over
the
last.
Several
years-
and
so
I
think
this
is
a
continuation
of
that
policy,
but
you
know
it's
not
it's
not
a
small
thing
that
the
impact
that
this
will
have
on
on
some
people
in
our
community,
particularly
those
least
able
to
to
address
those
on
fixed
incomes,
those
on
lower
incomes-
and
you
know
we
will
be
mindful
of
that
as
we
go
through
this
process.
A
If
not
counsel,
we
do
need
to
adopt
the
resolution
establishing
the
preliminary.
The
preliminary
2023
tax
levy
increase
to
10.75
percent.
Excuse
me,
10.5
percent.
It's
way
too
late
already.
I
do
want
to
stress
again.
This
is
the
maximum
amount
that
we're
able
to
levy.
By
adopting
this,
that
doesn't
mean
it
couldn't
come
down,
but
we
that
this
would
be
the
maximum
amount
that
we'd
be
able
to
levy.
A
K
I
just
have
one
one
quick
question:
is
it
possible
for
us,
as
we
think
about
over
the
course
of
the
next
couple
of
months
the
changes
to
the
budget
that
might
occur
because
we
get
more
revenue
than
we
think
we
will
or
whatever
that
we?
We
don't
apply
that
to
the
numbers
for
pi
for
police
and
fire,
because
because,
if
anything,
what
I
want
to
see
happen
is
that
that
num,
the
percentage
of
the
total
that
is
for
calling
this
a
public
safety.
K
You
know
levy
the
percentage
that
goes
to
that
should
proportionately,
go
up.
If
we
make
changes,
it
shouldn't
go
down,
and
so
you
know
where
we
allocate
those
additional
revenue
dollars,
and
things
like
that
should
go
to
these
other
places
to
continue
to
drive
it
down,
but
it
shouldn't
necessarily
change
the
investment
dollars.
We're
making.
Does
that
make
sense?
K
A
A
A
I
A
Second
motion
by
council
member
loman,
second
by
council
member
martin,
to
establish
to
adopt
a
resolution
establishing
the
preliminary
2023
tax
levy
increase
at
10.5
percent.
No
further
council
discussion
on
this.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
seven
zero
item,
5.2
kind
of
works
hand
in
glove
with
the
the
levy
proposed
levy
is
the
preliminary
preliminary
2023
general
fund
budget.
O
I
A
A
O
Yes,
and
so
this
is
the
first
time
there's
been
a
port
authority
levy.
There
has
been,
of
course,
an
hra
levy
and
that's
typically
just
on
consent.
So
it
hasn't
been
part
of
this
presentation,
but
since
things
are
a
little
different
now
and
you've
had
many
presentations
about
the
the
plan,
I'm
just
recapping
that
here,
for
if
people
are
tuning
in
that
haven't
seen
this
before,
but
so
just
some
highlights
with
this.
O
Just
to
recap
that
on
august
23rd
the
hra
board
adopted
this
resolution
for
the
hra
levy
preliminary
levy
and
that
on
september
6,
the
board
of
commissioners
of
the
port
authority
adopted
a
resolution
approving
this
tax
levy,
1.4
million.
So
this
decision
is
contingent
upon
the
council
tonight
via
resolution,
I'm
approving
this
this
evening.
A
It's
just
now
breaking
it
between
the
hra
and
the
port
authority
and
giving
both
of
the
organizations
a
bit
different
way
of
doing
business,
and
we
heard
this
presentation
about
a
month
or
so
ago
about
how
the
hra
is
going
to
focus
their
work
on
on
housing
and
the
port
authority
is
going
to
focus
their
new
work
on
economic
development
across
the
city,
not
specifically
in
the
south
loop.
Did.
I
summarize
that
correctly,
yes,
mirror
that.
K
I
just
quick
clarification,
mr
mayor,
so
in
2022
the
hra
levy
was
maxed
at
the
2.7
million,
or
so
is
that
what
we're
saying?
I
just
want
to
be
clear
that
that
the
number
the
total
number
isn't
changing.
It's
just
that
they're
getting
split
between
the
two
authorities.
Okay,
thank
you
for
that.
Second
question
is:
is:
does
the
port
authority
have
a
maximum
like
the
hra
does?
K
K
M
M
Councilmember
colter
all
right
if
for
no
other
reasons,
and
then
the
mayor
doesn't
have
to
say
the
word
preliminary
again
tonight,
thank
you.
I
will
move
to
adopt
a
resolution
approving
the
preliminary
levy
for
year
2023
pursuant
to
minnesota
statute.
Section
469.053,
subdivision
4
by
the
port
authority
of
the
city
of
bloomington.
A
Second
got
it:
motioned
by
council.
Member
colts
are
second
by
council
member
lowman
to
approve
a
levy
for
2023
for
the
port
authority
of
the
city
of
bloomington
minnesota.
No
further
council
discussion
on
this.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
7-0
council
member
coulter.
Thank.
A
Second
motion
by
council
member
coulter,
second
by
council
member
lowman,
to
approve
a
preliminary
levy
for
2023
regarding
the
housing
and
redevelopment
authority
in
the
city
of
bloomington.
No
further
questions,
no
further
council
discussion.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
7-0.
A
A
C
F
These
are
the
priority
park
elements
that
we
identified
in
the
park
system
master
plan,
which
was
about
an
18-month
effort
that
the
council
adopted
about
a
year
ago.
We
heard
natural
resources
as
a
priority
theme
from
the
you
know,
a
significant
public
engagement
effort
that
occurred
from
other
surveys
and
engagement
events
that
we
do
throughout
the
city.
We
hear
natural
resources
as
quite
a
strong
theme,
also
from
the
engagement
in
the
park
system,
master
plan,
trails
of
mobility,
new
park,
amenities
and
equity
were
were
identified
as
priority
themes.
F
Section
4
of
the
park
system
master
plan
has
an
action
plan
with
the
priority
themes
and
specific
action
steps
for
each
of
those
priorities.
Tonight,
the
plan
before
you
is
in
direct
response
to
the
action
plan.
That's
provided
in
the
park
system,
master
plan,
the
priority
park,
elements
specifically
addressed
by
this
work
and
other
natural
resources.
Work
that
are
ongoing,
include
the
natural
resources
element,
organizational
structure
and
sustainability.
F
F
C
All
right
next
slide,
so
this
is
the
first
of
many
maps
we'll
share
with
you
tonight.
This
just
shows
all
the
park
land
in
bloomington
that
was
involved
in
this
work.
It
includes
some
of
the
properties
that
we
own,
that
are
storm
water
areas
and
ponds
and
not
really
totally
parks,
but
just
an
overview
of
all
bloomington's
parks.
C
The
next
map
we're
going
to
show
you
is,
you
can
think
about
what
was
there
as
far
as
vegetation.
So
this
is
a
historic
plant
community
map
produced
by
the
minnesota
dnr.
It
basically
shows
pre-settlement
vegetation
as
as
gathered
from
the
notes
of
the
original
land
surveyors
that
surveyed
minnesota.
C
C
C
So
this
this
map
is
going
to
show
us
what
was
there,
and
these
are
all
attributes
that
that
were
used
in
in
in
creating
the
prioritization.
So
what's
the
current
condition
red
is
bad.
Green
is
good.
If
you
look
really
close,
you'll
see
a
few
green
spots,
the
red
definitely
pops
out
more
and
there's
more
of
it.
This
is
another
dnr
provided
map.
C
The
next
one
here
is,
you
know,
are
these
areas
connected
to
one
another
is?
Is
there
some
association
between
one
park
area
and
another
one,
it's
an
important
consideration
in
that
having
connectivity
gives
weight
and
that
you
could
possibly
re-establish
a
larger
functional
ecosystem
if
these
restoration
efforts
were
close
by
so
this
is
the
conservation
corridor.
The
conservation
corridors
identified
by
the
dnr
are
in
green
along
the
river
valley
and
then
up
along
the
creek.
C
C
C
C
C
So
tonight
we'll
use
moyer
park
moyer
central
at
harrison
park
as
an
example.
It
was
one
that
rose
to
the
very
top
of
the
list.
It
was
tied
with
bush
lake
and
we'll
look
at
three
maps.
Three
more
maps,
one
will
be
the
habitat
quality
that
was
found
to
be
there
at
site.
Now
the
next
will
be
the
target
plant
communities
and
the
third
map
will
be
the
phasing
or
the
the
restoration
planning.
If
you
will
for
that
park,.
C
So
the
first
map
here
is
the
habitat
quality.
Once
again,
green
is
good.
Red
is
bad.
You
can
see
down
on
the
lower
portion
of
the
park
there
is.
There
is
a
high
quality
prairie
remnant
on
the
bluff,
and
so
this
was
a
combination
of
historical
data
that
we
got
from
the
dnr
through
their
produce
maps
and
field.
Varicate
verification
by
our
consultant.
C
So
identified
the
target
plant
communities
based
on
the
stuff.
That's
in
that
little
box
there,
so
management
goals
for
the
area.
Historic
plant
communities
were
considered
existing
site
conditions
like
the
slope
aspect,
the
the
soil,
the
sunlight
and
any
past
disturbances
that
maybe
could
be
overcome
easily
or
could
be
more
difficult
and
any
existing
species
that
are
rare
and
you
want
to
preserve.
C
C
C
Just
for
perspective
and
we'll
talk
more
about
costs
in
this
slide,
so
using
average
costs,
which
is
how
we
arrived
at
that
last
figure
from
recent
restorations
and
maintenance
work
in
today's
dollars
for
the
entire
plan.
The
cost
is
estimated
at
approximately
four
million
dollars
over
20
years
to
restore
and
maintain
now
you're
phasing
in
the
restoration.
So
idea.
C
It's
important
to
understand
that
as
you
restore
areas,
then
your
follow-up
maintenance
increases,
as
as
you
work
through
the
plan-
and
we
know
that
natural
resources
management
in
an
urban
area
is
is
a
is
a
long-term
commitment
and
they
may
be
more
self-sustaining,
but
they
are
not
entirely
self-standing.
They'll
always
need
some
follow-up,
maintenance
and
treatment
for
years
to
come.
F
C
Programmed
or
used-
and
we
just
began
mowing
them
less
frequently,
basically
and
now,
we're
converting
them
to
prairie,
so
we've
still
got
20
sites
left
to
go.
It
totals
24
acres
now
and
it's
been
a
a
program.
That's
helped
save
time
and
fuel
and
greenhouse
gas
and
wear
and
tear
and
equipment
over
the
years
and
then
currently
guys
like
wade
and
rick.
C
Here
they
they
restored
and
and
maintain
those
those
levels
of
natural
areas
listed
there,
132
acres
or
so
of
prairie
right
now
and
42
acres
of
woodlawn
woodland,
including
including
that
that
bluff
prairie
remnant
that
I
think
wade
did
a
video
with
communications.
This
week
and
it'll
be
part
of
september's,
discover,
bloomington
episode
talking
about
those
very
prairie
areas
in
central
park
that
showed
up
as
green
and
as
a
first
priority.
C
C
The
area
for
that
project
is
indicated
in
the
red
hash
marks
right
around
the
pond
house
and
the
pond
site,
it's
flanked
by
20-acre
projects
on
either
side
that
we've
done
within
the
last
five
years
or
so,
and
so
it
really
fits
the
mold
of
the
plan
to
continue
existing
work.
This
is
a
high-value
site,
both
culturally
and
programmatically,
for
the
city
and
then
ecologically.
This
has
got
some
really
neat
features.
C
F
Concluding
with
next
steps,
the
packet
included
a
list
of
work.
That's
in
progress
right
now,
including
the
project
dave,
just
highlighted
it
included
new
projects
that
are
prioritized
with
this.
Within
this
plan,
you'll
recall
the
park
system.
Master
plan
talked
a
lot
about
how
we're
integrating
natural
resource
restoration
into
all
our
park
improvement
projects,
the
2024
park,
improvements
are
doing
that
and
that
work
is
in
progress
as
well.
F
Volunteers
have
contributed
substantially
to
our
natural
resources
efforts
so
far
and
are
a
big
part
of
implementation
of
this
work.
I
think
you
know
today
we
respond
to
requests
and
and
do
our
best
to
program
those
people
into
where
we
think
it
makes
sense
ecologically.
This
plan
will
help
us
guide
those
volunteers
better.
F
F
This
will
help
us
with
asset
management
of
the
work.
Dave
talked
about
provide
an
understanding
of
resource
allocation
and
needs
towards
this
work,
combined
with
the
operations
and
maintenance
plan
to
understand
resource
allocation
and
needs
across
the
park,
maintenance
division
that
incorporates
all
their
work,
including
natural
resources
and
then
improved
internal
and
external
communication
about
the
work.
F
Some
of
the
information
dave
presented
tonight
about
the
acres
that
we're
currently
maintaining
and
acres
being
converted
from
nomo
was
recent
gis
work
that
we're
assembling
as
part
of
this
gis
project
and
we're
excited
to
be
able
to
communicate
better
externally
and
understand
better
internally.
What
all
that
work
is
too.
B
B
So
thank
you
for
all
of
the
work
that
you've
done
so
far
and
I
appreciated
all
the
maps
and
tables
I'm
a
highly
visual
person.
So
I
really
enjoyed
looking
over
those,
and
I
also
really
appreciated
just
the
very
clear
overlay
and
consideration
of
a
variety
of
criteria
as
you
went
through
and
considered
the
different
park
priorities.
B
So
I
have
two
questions
as
it
relates
to
bush
lake
and
I
guess
land
in
the
three
rivers
park
kind
of
district
area.
Do
you
envision
that
we'll
be
partnering
with
them
at
all?
Do
they
do
any
kind
of
work
around
natural
resources,
restoration?
And
I
guess
I'm
just
curious
because
they
are
quite
a
they're,
a
large
agency,
and
I
just
wonder,
given
the
costs
and
the
resource
needs
in
the
bush
lake
area,
would
they
be
a
partner
in
this
potentially.
C
I
can
I
can
mention
one
other
partner,
councilmember
carter
and
then
I'll.
Let
I'll
turn
it
over
to
renee
to
talk
about
regional
park
funding,
so
we
already
partnered
with
nine
mile
creek
watershed
district
on
a
great
deal
of
maintenance
and
management
of
the
shoreline
around
busch
lake.
So
I
look
at
those
number
ones
as
being
probably
sort
of
low
hanging
fruit
and
won't
need
a
bunch
of
extra
work,
they're
already
being
taken
care
of
pretty
closely
I'll.
Let
renee
talk
about
regional
park
funding.
F
Mayor
and
council
member
carter,
partnership
with
three
rivers
park
district
on
managing
natural
resources
in
the
regional
park
has
been
discussed
in
the
master
plan
and
among
staff
in
highland
bush.
Anderson
generally,
the
city
owns
part
of
it.
Three
rivers
owns
part
of
it.
It's
one
unit
of
park
reserve
and
to
date
we
generally
are
managing
our
own
property.
F
We
have
funding
through
the
state
legislature
from
the
clean
water
conservation
funds
that
potentially
can
be
applied
to
land
restoration,
and
you
know
specifically
around
bush
lake.
The
watershed
district
is
a
natural
partner
and
I
think
a
lot
of
that
work
is
covered.
I
think,
looking
at
natural
resources,
management
and
even
other
recreation
opportunities
with
three
rivers
park
in
the
park
system
is
definitely
something
we'll
explore
great.
B
Awesome
well,
then.
My
second
question
was
related
to
the
volunteer
program
that
you
brought
up
so
I'm.
I
was
glad
to
hear
that
because
I
did
wonder
how
we
were
going
to
engage
community
members
and
volunteers
and
neighborhoods,
and
so
I
guess,
as
you
build
that
out
one
of
the
things
that
I
know
when
I
have
gone
out
across
the
city
and
I've
talked
to
people
residents
in
their
homes.
B
I
mean
it
seems
like
invasive
species
comes
up
over
and
over,
not
just
in
you
know
the
city-owned
properties,
but
in
people's
own
backyards,
and
so
just
wanting
to
make
sure
we're
also
educating
the
public
on
kind
of
best
practices
and
providing
tools
which
I
know
we
do
a
lot
of
that
already.
But
just
how
can
we
really
enhance
those
best
practices?
Because,
obviously,
if
we
take
care
of
the
park
lane,
but
then
you
know,
residents
don't
totally
know
how
to
address
the
invasive
species
on
their
own
properties.
B
You
know
it
doesn't
help.
We
need
to
take
kind
of
a
city-wide
approach,
so
I
guess
I
would
just
add
that.
But
otherwise
I
think
this
is
really
awesome.
I'm
super
excited
and
I'm
looking
forward
to
continuing
to
have
the
conversations
and
also
good
luck
on
the
funding
p,
the
funding
opportunities
piece.
I
know
there's
a
lot
of
grants
and
opportunities
out
there
right
now
for
this
type
of
work,
so.
I
Lohman
thank
you
mayor
and
I
want
to
just
start
off
right
away
just
very
quickly
and
thank
the
city
manager.
I
know
that
it
was
maybe
a
year
or
so
ago
that
this
particular
topic
came
up
and
tim
sandra,
and
I
were
on
the
phone
with
you
very
nervous
about
how
this
whole
natural
resources
piece
would
be
handled,
and
I
just
want
to
say
thank
you.
Staff
was
able
to
handle
it
in
a
great
way
and
I
know
there's
a
lot
of
many
hands
involved
with
this
staff.
I
I
Does
some
of
these
costs
make
sense?
Are
there
some
regionality
to
some
of
our
parks?
That
would
make
sense
to
to
go
to
the
legislature
and
ask
that
question
and
not
necessarily
looking
for
an
answer
today.
But
you
know,
as
I
look
at
this
and
I
look
at
that
cost
and
and
some
of
the
things
that
are
out
there,
that's
a
question
that
I
have
as
a
council
member.
I
E
Verbi,
mr
mayor
council,
members
council,
member
lowman,
we
can
certainly
revisit
the
eligibility
for
certain
projects
and
just
to
be
clear
for
everybody.
I
think
you're
talking
about
the
local
option,
sales
tax
and
whether
projects
of
this
nature
would
be
eligible
as
it
to
be
included
for
funding
those.
E
I
Thank
you,
yeah,
just
a
few
other
items
here
and
then
councilmember
carter
brought
it
up
a
little
bit
with
with
those
neighborhoods
that
are
around
the
park.
So,
for
example,
warrior
park
and
central
park
is
an
example.
I
I
know
that
for
bluff
protection,
sometimes
that
you
know
we've.
You
know,
there's
zones
around
that
area.
Where
there's
certain
things
you
can
do
from
the
development
area,
and
I
just
wonder
if
we
might.
I
You
know
if
other
cities
have
done
that
with
their
natural
resource
plans
at
all
where
they
said.
Okay,
we're
gonna
create
a
new
buffer
zone
around
this.
To
try
to
do
some
protection
for
those
areas
that
are
around
there.
So
I'd
be
curious
about
what
other
steps
could
be
taken,
for
example
like
that
that
would
help
people
to
kind
of
guide
them
in
the
direction.
I
You
know
it
takes
resources
and
dollars
to
kind
of
do
that
and
that's
the
ideal
and
then
there's
these
values
like
accessibility
and
equity,
and
you
know
best
uses
of
of
the
property,
and
you
know
I
saw
in
the
plan.
You
know
these
different
priorities.
You
know
in
terms
of
how
we
judge
the
different
areas
and
what
I'm
curious
about
and
just
to
get
to
make
it
more
concrete
in
terms
of
an
example.
I
I
I'm
not
sure
if
you
want
to
take
crack
of
that
now
or
just
we
can
wait,
I'm
happy
to
wait,
but
I
just
wanted
to
thank
you
for
bringing
up
the
pond
house
earlier
today.
That
ticks
one
last
thing
off
the
list.
I
have
to
talk
about
later
on
today
and
that's
a
great
example
of
how
we're
kind
of,
as
as
our
the
college,
I
went
to
augsburg,
we're
militantly
modest
about
the
things
that
we
do
around
sustainability.
I
K
K
Maybe
it's
what
councilmember
lohmann
was
suggesting,
I'm
not
sure,
but
I'd
love
to
see
this
overlaid
with
our
our
zoning
map,
because
I
think
I
think
one
of
the
things
that
I'm
noticing
is
because
we
don't
have
what
the
when
these
things
are
not
connected
together.
We
don't
necessarily
take
specific
natural
resource
priorities
into
account.
K
That
will
probably
hire
a
commercial
pesticide
and
you
know
landscaper
to
like
throw
a
bunch
of
chemicals
into
a
place
that
goes
right
into
the
right
into
the
water
that
we're
trying
to
fix
right.
So
so
I
would
like
for
us
to
maybe
overlay
that
if
we
can
look
at
that
and
and
and
if
that's
related
to
what
councilmember
lohmann
was
saying
like
when
these
things
butt
up
against
each
other,
in
the
same
way
that
when
residential
bump
butts
up
against
industrial,
we
have
to
deal
with
noise.
So
we
have
to
deal
with
lighting.
K
Can
we
think
about
that
as
a
as
a
function?
So
I
think
another
another
map
might
be
in
order.
I
love
that
idea
absolutely
and
then
the
other
thing
I
would
say
is,
I
think
it's
also
really
important
for
people
to
for
the
scale
of
this
to
to
come
into
some
frame
if
possible.
So
you
mentioned,
for
example,
132
acres
of
prairie
and
42
acres
of
woodland
in
the
in
the
pond
lake
area,
20
acres,
20
acres,
now
16
a
total
of
56
acres.
K
K
I
don't
think
it's
even
five
percent
of
bloomington,
and
so
I
think
we
need
to
provide
that
scale
to
people
so
that
when
we
come
back
over
and
over
again-
and
we
talk
about
the
importance
of
these
projects,
we
give
people
an
understanding
of
what
we're
really
trying
to
do.
Convert
10
percent
of
bloomington
as
close
as
possible
back
to
a
state
or
20,
or
what
the
number
is.
So
I'd
love
to
see
that
called
out.
K
G
Councilmember
martin,
thank
you
mayor
a
couple
of
just
clarifying
questions
as
I'm
kind
of
picturing
the
scales
you
hopefully
provided
so
that
land
cover
classification
system,
what's
the
benchmark
that
the
bright
green,
perfect
areas
are
set
to,
so
you
had
mentioned
we're
not
going
to
be
shooting
for
what
it
looked
like
in
the
1830s
here.
Is
that
what
gets
considered
perfect
on
that
scale?
Or
do
we
do?
We
know
what
they
consider
pristine.
C
I
don't
have
the
councilmember
martin,
I
don't
have
that
definition
right
off
hand.
It
is.
It
is,
first
of
all
they're
invasive
free
for
the
most
part
and
they're
going
to
have
unique
historic
plant
communities.
I
can
speak
to
the
one
in
moyer
park
there.
You
know
it
is
a
remnant
prairie.
It
was
because
of
its
steepness
and
its
location.
It
was
never
plowed,
it
was
never
disturbed.
C
G
Yeah,
thank
you
and,
in
terms
of
our
so
the
highest
priority
of
our
parks
listings
of
our
sequencing.
I
guess,
are
we
shooting
to
take
things
to
from
red
all
the
way
to
green?
Is
there
a
different
target
for
how
many
levels
we're
moving
up
depending
on
the
park?
What
should
people
expect
in
terms
of
the
transformation
they're
going
to
be
seeing.
G
G
So
it's
just
kind
of
a
term,
but
I
I
really
like
the
realism
of
the
way
this
has
been
targeted,
the
long
term
approach
to
it
and
I
think,
being
able
to
allow
people
to
say
just
because
it's
not
going
all
the
way
incremental
change
can
can
snowball
and
be
really
noticeable,
and
I
appreciate
how
purposeful
it
is
here.
Thank
you.
Both.
A
Well,
thank
you
thanks
for
the
information
thanks
for
the
work
on
this-
and
I
know
we've
been
talking
about
this
for
a
while.
So
it's
good
to
see
it
come
to
fruition
and
as
councilmember
carter
said,
I
appreciate
the
maps
all
right.
I
like
like
to
see
them
they're
they're,
helpful
and
useful.
So
thank
you
very
much
for
that.
A
I'll
report
out
very
quickly
here,
our
listening
session.
This
evening,
we
heard
from
mr
kent
miller
a
first-time,
first-time
speaker
in
front
of
us.
In
our
listening
session.
I
had
some
good
conversation
about
the
the
way
that
bloomington
streets
are
made
available
and
useful
for
pedestrians
and
bicyclists.
A
He
actually
complemented
the
traffic
flow
in
the
city,
but
had
significant
concerns
about
the
safety
for
non-auto
users,
and
we
had
a
good
discussion
about
our
multi-modal
transportation
in
the
city
of
bloomington,
about
our
our
alternative
transportation
plan
and
a
very
good
discussion
about
a
lot
of
different
things.
It
was
good
to
see
him
and
it
was
a
good
conversation.
A
What's
the
word,
I'm
looking
for
this
one
easements!
Thank
you!
That's
what
I
was
looking
for,
easements
regarding
smith
park
and
the
the
parking
lot
that
went
in
there.
So
in
all,
once
again,
it's
good
to
see
a
new
face
and
to
see
to
meet
mr
miller
and
to
talk
to
him
and
to
hear
some
of
his
concerns
about
the
city
of
bloomington.
So,
mr.
M
Mark,
I
will
be
brief
here
but
to
the
point
about
the
listening
session
discussions.
One
thing
I
have
noticed
is
it's
not
a
frequent
trend.
It
didn't
happen
tonight
because
we
only
had
two
people
come
to
speak,
but
occasionally,
when
we
have
shall
we
say
larger
numbers,
three,
four
or
five
folks,
you
know
the
the
time
that's
allotted
to
individual
speakers
can
be
pretty
small,
five,
six
minutes
and
I've.
M
It
seems
to
me
that
some
folks
come
with
a
longer
list,
maybe
two
three
four
items
that
they
would
like
to
talk
about
and
get
frustrated
when
they're
not
able
to
either
talk
about
all
of
them
or
get
into
the
level
of
specificity
that
they
would
like
to
have
a
discussion
on,
and
I
think
what
this
amounts
to
is
that
if
you
have
a
longer
list,
perhaps
the
listing
session
is
not
the
most
appropriate
way
to
bring
that
to
the
council.
So
I
guess
what
I'm
getting
at
is.
M
Maybe
staff
wants
to
consider,
I
mean
can't
regulate
it
per
se,
but
additional
maybe
instruction
or
suggestions
for
most
efficient
use
of
everyone's
time
when
it
comes
to
these
listening
sessions.
I'm
thinking
specifically
of
one
person
who
came,
I
think
it
was
last
week
who
had
you,
know
a
list
of
three
items,
all
of
which
were
very
substantive,
that
that
they
wanted
to
discuss
and
we
were
barely
only
able
to
talk
about
one
of
them.
M
And
so
I
think
it
would
be
good
to
help
set
expectations
and
perhaps
provide
suggestions
for
how
to
more
substantly
substantively
discuss
things
with
the
council
beyond
the
listening
session,
so
that
we
can
try
and
avoid
some
of
that.
Frustration
that
I've
just
kind
of
noticed
here
and
there
from
folks
who
come.
A
I
appreciate
that
council
member
and
I
I
think
to
mr
briller's
credit.
He
does
that
to
it
to
a
certain
degree,
and-
and
I
know
that,
because
I've
I've
hurt
him
from
my
office
as
he's
tried
to
talk
people
through
what
to
expect
what
to
prepare
for
how
to
you
know
what
what
to
do
basically
during
the
listening
sessions
and
so
agree
with
you,
I
think
we
could
probably
clarify
and
refine
that
a
little
bit,
but
I
think
matt
does
a
nice
job
to
this
point.
A
I've
heard
him
do
a
nice
job
already
and-
and
yes
sometimes,
we
have
too
many
speakers
and
it
does
get
a
little
bit
short.
But,
like
our
speaker
last
time,
it
didn't
preclude
that
speaker
from
coming
back
this
week
when
there
would
have
been
more
time
and
the
ability
to
speak
so.
But
I
appreciate
your
comments
and
I'm
sure
mr
brillard
will
is
taking
copious
notes
over
there
as
we
as
we
go
councilmember
moment,.
I
I
just
said
one
item
I
wanted
to
mention
tonight,
which
was
on
the
the
consent
agenda.
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
the
public
was
aware
of
again
just
another
example
of
how
our
staff
is
finding
ways
in
which
to
fund
some
of
our
necessary
items.
3.10
was
a
fema
assistance
to
firefighter
grant
acceptance.
I
K
Thank
you,
mr
mayor,
so
I
I
will
there
were
a
couple
of
follow-ups
from
that.
I
took
offline,
so
we
could,
if
we
could
just
try
to
maybe
throw
them
out
here.
One
was
the
just
I'd,
love
to
just
understand
the
utility
stuff
a
little
bit
more,
especially
as
it
relates
to
our
our
delinquencies
in
part,
because
I
think,
as
ms
economy
schuler
mentioned,
the
number
stays
fairly
static
and
that's
interesting
right.
Despite
the
trends
over
the
last
few
years.
It's
it's.
It's
stayed
fairly
static.
K
Maybe
we
could
go
back
a
little
bit
further
and
understand
whether
that's
a
trend,
but
also
the
breakup
of
commercial
versus
residential
would
be
interesting
as
councilmember.
Nelson
probably
knows,
people
float
lots
of
things
and
I'm
just
wondering
if
we're
part
of
of
a
larger
you
know
float
if
you
will
from
a
budgetary
perspective,
because
you
know
we,
if
it
gets
pushed
out
to
the
assessment
period,
then
I
can
put
it
in
quarter
four
instead
of
quarter
two
and
you
know
whatever
I
just.
K
I
think
it
would
be
important
to
know,
and
then
the
third
thing,
though,
that
we
don't
talk
about
is
the
opportunity
cost
of
not
having
those
dollars.
So
when
we
don't
have
six
hundred
seven
hundred
eight
hundred
thousand
dollars
in
our
coffers,
when
we
should
have
them,
is
there
interest
dollars?
Is
there
other
things
that
that
is
being
missed
as
a
result
of
that
and
I'd
be
curious
to
know
what
what
that
looks
like
what
the
opportunity
cost
is
of
of
of
the
work.
K
That's
done
to
try
to
track
all
this
stuff
down,
and
also
just
in
interest
dollars
and
other
things
like
that.
That
might
be
of
a
benefit
to
us
to
understand.
So
I
hope
that
that
would
be
okay.
Maybe
it's
not
something
we
it's
not
obviously
a
high
priority,
but
I
think
it's
worth
us
looking
into,
especially
in
light
of
the
fact
that
we've
added
more
to
that
bucket
recently
with
the
organics
roll
out
and
that
kind
of
thing.
The
only
other
thing
I
have
is.
K
I
did
get
contacted
today
this
week
by
someone
I
talked
to
before
that
about
whether
or
not
we
we
are
ever
gonna
consider
paid
parental
leave
for
the
city
of
bloomington
employees
themselves,
and
I
so
I
don't
know
whether
or
not
the
hr
budget
that
we'll
see
you
know
the
administration
budget
that
we'll
see
coming
forward
or
anything
has
any
new
items
in
it
or
anything
like
that.
But
I'd
be
curious
to
to
know
whether
or
not
that's
on
deck.
K
You
know
whether
the
makeup
and
schema
of
that
is
is
inclusive
of
that
or
not
it
is.
You
know
important
to
some
people,
because
people
are
talking
about
it,
so
I
I
want
to
throw
that
out
there
and
find
out
if
we
could
either
address
it
one
way
or
the
other,
as
the
budget
comes
up
for
hr
and
administration.
K
E
Council
members,
council,
member
d'alessandro,
it
has
been
a
conversation
for
several
years.
As
a
matter
of
fact,
it's
I
think
you
probably
understand
it's
a
determined
condition
of
employment,
and
so
it
is
negotiable.
Amongst
our
collective
bargaining
units.
We
have
had
discussions
about
it
in
the
past.
It
has
not
worked
its
way
into
a
final
agreement.
B
E
E
E
Focus
groups
are
starting
up,
so
the
chief
has
asked
of
the
council
members.
If
you
are
interested
in
maybe
identifying
a
handful
of
people
who
might
participate
in
business,
business
and
civic
leader
focus
groups,
so
I'll
forward
out
additional
information
that
the
chief
has
provided
to
us
and
if
there
are
some
folks
in
the
community
that
you
think
would
be
good.
Voices
to
include
we'd
certainly
welcome
your
input
into
that
process.
E
The
second
item
is
just
reiterating
ask
I
had
last
week
I
didn't.
I
didn't
get
any
takers
for
the
audit
committee,
and
I
know
that
I
know
that
some
of
you
are
just
itching
to
do
that
and
I
understand
the
reluctance
to
be
so
eager
in
public,
but
I
would
I
would
strongly
encourage
you
to
share
with
me
your
interest
offline.
A
Council
is
there
anything
else
hearing
nothing.
I
would
entertain
a
motion
to
adjourn
most
in
a
second
to
adjourn
tonight's
meeting.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
motion
carries
7-0.
Thank
you
much
for
your
participation
tonight,
thanks
everybody
for
tuning
in
thanks
to
the
staff.
Well
done
good
meeting
thanks
all.