►
From YouTube: April 22, 2021 Bloomington Planning Commission Meeting
Description
Bloomington Minnesota Planning Commission Meeting
A
A
Good
evening
and
welcome
to
the
april
22nd
bloomington
planning
commission
meeting,
the
planning
commission
advises
the
city
council
on
development
proposals,
development
standards,
long-range
planning
and
transportation
issues.
Some
of
the
items.
The
planning
commission
has
the
final
decision
authority.
Others,
the
city
council,
will
make
the
final
decision.
A
A
B
Sure,
mr
chairman,
commissioners,
good
evening
this
is
our
25th
remote
planning,
commission
meeting.
Since
the
pandemic
began.
We
have
just
two
people
here
in
the
chambers
this
evening.
Everybody
else
is
remote
and
but
you
can
still
definitely
call
in
to
testify.
We
have
three
public
hearings,
so
if
you'd
like
to
testify
just
call
the
number
on
the
screen.
A
A
C
C
And
as
we
discussed
at
that
time,
the
property
is
zone
r1,
which
has
a
maximum
of
just
under
four
units
per
acre,
but
the
medium
density
residential
had
a
minimum
of
five
units
per
acre.
So
at
that
time
we
were
discussing
the
comprehensive
plan
amendment
a
text
amendment
which
would
add
language
that
would
say
that
this
would
be
appropriate
to
go
below
that
minimum
if
net
density
was
increasing
if
it
was
on
a
local
street
and
if
it
the
new
lot,
is
adjacent
to
a
single
family
on
both
sides.
C
C
So,
looking
at
what
is
being
proposed,
you
can
see
they'll
have
basically
just
a
line
down
the
middle
to
create
that
second
lot,
that
fronts
108th
street.
So
some
things
that
we
look
at
for
the
r1
standard
is
minimal
mod
size.
Both
lots
meet
minimum
watt
size.
The
minimum
lot
width
for
this
area,
the
prevailing
lot,
which
happens
to
be
also
the
minimum
lot
width
for
our
r1
zoning,
which
is
80
feet.
The
proposed
lot
width
would
be
118
feet,
so
we're
okay
there
and
then
minimum
setbacks.
C
We
want
to
be
able
to
if
we're
creating
a
new
lot
made
a
buildable
lot,
and
you
can
see
here-
and
it's
kind
of
hard
to
see
here,
so
I
tried
to
make
it
a
little
bit
bigger
on
the
screen,
but
this
was
included
in
your
packet,
the
square
on
the
south
lot,
the
new,
lock
kind
of
the
buildable
area.
So
there's
plenty
of
area
to
build
on
this
new
proposed
lot
and
the
existing
lot
doesn't
create
any
new
non-conformities.
C
So
as
part
of
the
conditions
of
improvement
or
of
approval,
we
have
right-of-way
dedication.
These
are
all
pretty
typical
and
standard
that
we
do
with
our
plats
drainage
and
utility
easements
sidewalk
or
bikeway
easements
on
old
shock
fee.
You
know:
we've
got
sidewalks
park
dedication
as
part
for
the
new
lot
and
the
sewer
availability
charge
the
sac
charge
and
then
other
applicable
codes
would
be
free
preservation.
C
I
included
here
the
the
sidewalk
waiver,
so
on
108th
street
there
isn't
currently
a
sidewalk.
We
do
have
a
requirement
that
new
developments
incorporate
a
sidewalk,
but
we
think
this
might
be
appropriate
to
petition
council
for
a
waiver.
This
is
just
something
that
we
would
recommend
to
the
applicant
when
they
get
to
that
part
of
the
process,
so
that
they'd
be
able
to
construct
the
sidewalk
when
appropriate.
B
C
C
C
C
There
is
adequate
public
infrastructure
to
serve
the
new
lot.
There's
a
road
there's
utilities,
our
stormwater
standards,
are
applicable
from
previous
coverage.
Emergency
services
is
only
adding
one
lot
so
still
into
an
existing
neighborhood,
so
not
in
issues,
schools
etc.
So
there
aren't
any
additional
issues
created
with
the
new
development.
C
Here's
the
final
plot
and
for
the
final
plot,
the
findings
are
that
it's
not
in
conflict.
With
the
preliminary
plan
I
will
say,
including
your
packet,
we
did
have
correspondence
from
one
resident
who
was
in
support
of
the
application,
pretty
simple
letter
just
saying
stating
they
work
in
support
and
that's
the
only
correspondence
we've
received
so
far.
A
B
A
B
A
All
right,
thank
you,
mr
peas.
All
right
planning,
commission
members,
seeing
that
there
is
nobody
from
the
public
that
would
like
to
speak
to
this
item,
but
entertain
a
motion
to
close
a
public
hearing.
Commissioner
roman
moves
all
right.
We
have
a
motion,
closed
public
hearing.
Is
there
a
second
commissioner
cookton.
F
A
B
A
G
You,
mr
chair,
pretty
straightforward:
we
discussed
it
a
fair
bit
during
the
comp
plan
amendment.
My
only
comment
is
I'm
not
in
favor
of
either
recommending
or
encouraging
a
waiver
of
sidewalk
we've
had
projects
before
where
sidewalks
may
not
have
one
on
either
side
and
that's
our
requirement.
So
that's
my
only
comment.
Otherwise,
I'm
supportive
of
this.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
commissioner,
roman
any
other
commissioners
that
like
to
speak
to
this
item.
I
myself
will
say
I'm
also
in
support
of
this
preliminary
and
final
plot,
and
obviously
we
did
work
on
this
a
couple
months
ago
and
I
think
we're
generally
familiar
with
it.
It's
good
to
see
an
additional
home
being
built
in
bloomington
all
right,
commission
members,
any
further
discussion,
otherwise,
I'd
entertain
a
motion.
D
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
in
case
pl
2021-6-0.
Having
been
able
to
make
the
required
findings,
I
moved
to
recommend
approval
of
a
type
3
preliminary
and
final
plat
to
create
two
lots
from
an
existing
lot
for
a
new
single-family
home
at
4223,
west
old
shakopee,
subject
to
the
conditions
and
code
requirements
attached
to
the
staff
report.
A
F
A
All
right,
commission
members,
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
to
move,
to
recommend
approval
of
a
type
three
preliminary
and
final
plot
to
create
two
lots
from
an
existing
lot
for
a
new
single
family
home
at
4223,
west
old
shakopee,
subject
to
the
conditions
and
code
requirements
attached
to
the
staff
report.
Any
further
discussion,
not
seeing
any
all
those
in
favor
say
aye
by
roll
call.
Commissioner
corman,
commissioner
roman
aye,
commissioner
albrecht
aye
commissioner
abdi.
A
Cook
done
all
right
and
I
for
myself
motion
passes.
This
item
will
now
move
to
the
may
3rd
city
council
meeting
as
a
consent
agenda
item
all
right.
That
concludes
item
number
one
for
tonight,
item
number,
two
final
site
and
building
plan
for
96.41
james
avenue.
Mr
centenario.
I
believe
you
have
the
staff
report.
A
H
A
H
You,
mr
chair
item,
number
two
on
your
agenda
is
for
final
sight
and
building
plans
for
a
building
addition
to
an
industry
existing
industrial
building
at
9641
james
avenue.
So
here
we
have
the
site.
You
can
see
it.
It
looks
vacant
in
this
particular
image,
but
for
the
past
several
years
this
site
has
been
used
by
or
owned
and
used
by
a
landscape,
contracting
business,
and
so
you
might,
you
might
have
driven
past
it
and
seen
a
lot
of
landscape,
material
and
trucks.
H
Well
that
you
know,
thankfully,
that
business
was
successful
and
needed
more
space,
so
they
relocated
to
a
different
site
within
bloomington
and
sold
this
site
to
the
applicant
and
the
applicant
is
archetype
signs
and
they
are
located
immediately
north
at
9611..
So
you
see
the
large
building
to
the
north.
They
operate
their
office
and
production
facility
at
that
site,
so
they
need
to
expand
and
they
purchased
the
site
that
we're
discussing
today.
H
So
here
you
can
see
just
a
street
view
image
of
the
building
on
the
corner.
So
obviously,
you
can
see
the
relationship
between
archetype
their
existing
facility
and
the
landscaping
business
that
used
to
be
at
the
site.
So
it's
a
it's
a
smaller
building
and
in
the
rear
or
the
east
of
the
building
was
used
for
landscaping,
materials
and
trailers
and
such
which,
which
with
some
parking
area
in
the
front
along
james
avenue.
H
H
H
H
Over
six
seven
street
trees
or
boulevard
trees,
so
pretty
significant
changes
in
terms
of
building
elevations
again
the
you
can
see
the
existing
building
in
just
white
and
then
you
see
the
addition
which
is
proposed
to
be
black
and
which
is
a
really
common
material
for
industrial
buildings,
and
so
we
do
have
a
couple
standards
related
to
black.
We
do
not
allow
like
your
your
traditional
flat
faced
black.
It
has
to
be
more
decorative,
and
so
the
applicant's
been
aware
of
that
and
they
are
they're
comfortable
with
that
requirement.
H
A
A
G
Thank
you,
commissioners
and
chair.
My
name
is
eric
reiners,
I'm
a
principal
at
sra
and
we've
been
assisting
archetype
in
this
in
this
small
project.
Archetype
acquired
a
related
business
specializing
in
metal
finishing
and
a
certain
part
of
the
process
of
of
their
manufacturing,
and
they
are
relocating
that
business
from
chanhassen
to
this
building,
directly
adjacent
to
their
existing
facility.
G
G
You
just
heard
some
of
the
unique
requirements
associated
with
getting
the
building
and
and
sites
up
to
current
codes,
and
I
believe
we've
done
the
best
we
could
with
what
we
got
to
work
with
the
limited
frontage
that
we
had
to
fit
the
landscape
requirements
into
and
and
we're
going
to
do,
our
best
to
to
meld
the
finishing
of
that
building
into
its
site
and
in
context.
So
with
that
I'll
I'll
stand
by
for
any
questions
you
might
have
for
me.
A
A
D
A
B
C
A
And
I,
for
myself,
motion
passes
public
hearing
is
now
closed.
On
item
number.
Two:
commission
members:
any
discussion
on
this
item.
I
will
say
for
myself
I'm
happy
to
see
that
we
have
two
success.
Stories
of
businesses
in
bloomington
certainly
know
the
landscape
business.
That
was
there
and
I'm
happy
to
see
that
this
is
an
expansion
of
an
existing
bloomington
business
and
bringing
more
jobs
to
the
city.
It
gets
a
minimal
change
and
can
support
it
with
the
improvements
to
the
site
plan.
G
G
A
A
D
A
All
right,
commissioners,
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
to
move,
to
approve
the
final
site
and
building
plans
for
a
fourteen
hundred
and
forty
square
foot,
building
expansion
and
site
improvements
to
9641
james
avenue,
south
subject
to
the
conditions
and
code
requirements
attached
to
the
staff
report.
All
those
in
favor
say
aye
by
roll
call.
C
F
A
And
I
for
myself,
motion
passes.
That
is
a
final
decision
unless
an
appeal
is
received
by
4
30
pm
on
april
27th
all
right.
Thank
you,
mr
centenario,
for
that
staff
report.
All
right.
Moving
on
to
item
number
three
tonight,
which
is
bloomington
central
station
phase.
Four,
mr
johnson,
I
believe
you
have
a
staff
report
for
us
and
again
I
do
just
want.
I
Good
evening,
good
evening,
mr
chair
and
members
of
the
planning
commission,
can
you
see
my
screen?
Okay?
Yes,
we
can
great.
Thank
you,
commissioner
albrecht.
So
yes,
before
you
this
evening
is
the
fourth
phase
of
bloomington
central
station.
I
know
the
applicant
is
very
excited
to
present
this
project.
To
you.
Bloomington
central
station,
of
course,
is
a
a
well-known
or
significant
development
in
bloomington,
and
this
is
the
the
fourth
phase
of
a
multi-phase
plan
development.
I
So
they
are
seeking
multiple
zoning
approvals
from
you
this
evening,
a
major
revision
to
the
preliminary
development
plan
for
bcs.
I
will
refer
to
it
a
lot
as
that
bcs
and
final
development
plans
for
phase
four.
So
the
phase
that
they're
bringing
to
you
this
evening
and
then
a
planning
action
there's
also
an
application.
That's
been
made
for
an
airport
zoning
permit.
That
is
an
administrative
action
and
does
not
require
your
consideration
this
evening
and
again,
the
applicant
is
magoff
development.
I
There's
multiple
parcels
involved,
multiple
addresses,
so
I
mentioned
kind
of
the
various
components.
More
specifically,
the
major
revision
to
the
pdp
involves
significant
changes
to
the
northwest
quadrant
of
the
development
we'll
get
into
those,
but
generally
replacing
three
planned
office
towers
and
associated
parking
structures
in
that
portion
of
the
development,
with
multi-family,
residential
and
mixed
with
a
retail
component
multi-family
buildings.
I
I
The
reflections
condominiums,
where
I
just
saw
commissioner
cooked
on
in
his
humble
boat
there
on
the
southeast
corner
and
then
the
hyatt
regency
hotel
in
the
northern
portion
of
the
development,
and
then
you
have
indigo
and
findlay
on
the
east
side
of
the
development
along
34th
avenue.
Of
course,
the
central
park
in
the
center
of
the
development
and
the
portion
of
the
development
we're
gonna
talk
about
tonight
is
in
the
northwest.
I
Those
parcels
are
identified
in
yellow
in
terms
of
surrounding
uses.
You
have
the
metro
office
park
to
the
north
across
american
boulevard
to
the
west.
You
have
one
of
excel's
electrical
substations
here
in
the
area.
The
the
metro
transit
park
and
ride
is
not
far
by
and
then,
of
course,
the
bloomington
central
station
development
to
the
south
and
east.
I
I
My
previous
aerial
was
just
from
2018,
so
the
family
has
just
been
substantially
completed.
You
can
see
here,
which
was
the
second
phase
of
that
residential
after
indigo
and
yeah.
This
kind
of
just
provides
you
an
overview
of
what
is
out
there
today.
The
area
that
we're
talking
about
tonight
is
a
surface
parking
lot.
I
It's
been
used
for
construction,
phasing
and
other
kind
of
uses
to
serve
the
bcs
development,
but
that's
what
it
looks
like
currently
just
providing
a
general
history
of
this
development
again,
the
pdp
was
originally
approved
in
2004,
and
that
was
part
of
the
reflections
condos
action
in
2006.
They
got
approval
for
the
central
park
in
2013,
both
indigo
and
the
hyatt
regency
hotel
were
approved,
and
as
part
of
that
action
with
indigo.
I
That
was
the
last
major
revision
of
the
preliminary
development
plan
in
2018
they
got
approval
of
the
family,
which
has
since
been
constructed
so
that
just
provides
you
a
general
timeline
of
what
has
occurred
out
there
since
2004,
when
this
project
started
to
materialize
get
into
the
existing
preliminary
development
plan.
So
the
whole
site
is
shown
here
on
the
left
side
of
the
slide.
The
northwest
corner
is
blown
up
here
on
the
right
side
of
the
slide.
I
But
you
know
showing
this
is
their
revised
pdp.
Now
this
is
showing
those
residential
buildings
in
that
northwest
corner
here,
showing
another
slide
kind
of
that
area
blown
up,
but
another
critical
factor
that
informed
not
only
the
the
kind
of
market
related
forces,
but
over
this
period
of
time
the
noise
impacts
related
to
msp
international
airport
have
changed
in
this
area,
providing
less
noise.
I
This
area
used
to
be
in
the
70
dnl
noise
contour
area,
which
was
a
higher
level,
and
it
since
has
receded
just
due
to
changes
in
operations
at
msp
in
terms
of
what
runways
they
utilize
for
which
types
of
planes,
in
addition
to
actually
improved
technology
on
the
part
of
plane
manufacturers
as
well
to
generate
less
noise.
But
this
area
no
longer
is
within
that
70
dnl
area.
I
Certainly
it
can
be
a
conflict
noise
you
know
is
going
to
have
the
greatest
impact
on
residential
uses,
so
this
area
was
never
available
for
residential
development
until
these
changes
occurred
and
over
the
last
few
years
here
as
a
result
of
these
changes
at
msp,
so
this
area
is
now
available
for
residential,
it's
very
much
in
keeping
with
the
intent
or
the
the
vision
for
the
hxr
district.
There's
always
been
a
very
strong
emphasis
on
res
high
density
residential
land
uses
associated
with
that
zoning
district.
I
So
this
is
the
the
change
that
they're
proposing
now
is
to
replace
those
three
office
towers,
which
would
have
been
just
shy
of
a
million
square
feet
of
office
space.
What
they're
proposing
to
replace
it
with
is
bcs
phase
4,
bcs
phase,
5
and
bcs
phase
6,
which
would
total
you
know,
900
and
I
believe,
925
residential
units,
as
approved
here
in
the
pdp
and
as
well
as
26
000
square
feet
of
retail
space.
So
they
are
similar
to
the
other
phase
residential
phases
of
bcs.
I
They
are
programming
in
residential
uses
to
give
it
that
mixed
use
component
in
terms
of
analysis
of
these
pdp
revisions,
they
are
slightly
increasing
the
overall
far
of
the
development,
but
hxr
does
build
in
some
bonuses
for
floor
area
and
given
the
affordable
component
of
not
only
phase
four
but
also
phases.
Five
and
six
they're
gonna
greatly
ex
they're,
going
to
have
more
than
enough
floor
area
bonus
to
cover
all
of
these
uses
as
they're
showing
you
in
this
pdp
revision.
I
So
they
will
be
code
compliant
with
respect
to
far
just
to
note
that
the
traffic
division
did
require
a
traffic
study.
Be
done
of
these
changes,
given
the
significant
nature
of
of
the
the
patterns
and
of
these
different
land
uses
and
the
traffic
study
was
completed
and
did
not
identify
any
significant
issues.
So
that's
positive
and
the
only
recommendations
that
came
out
of
the
traffic
study
as
far
as
public
improvements
goes,
fortunately
already
were
part
of
other
planned
city
projects
within
the
south
loop
area
as
part
of
their
cip.
I
There's
questions
about
the
staff
report.
Brian
hansen
is
on
the
call
tonight,
if
there's
any
questions
about
that,
in
addition
to
the
other
major
or,
I
guess
the
more
permanent
or
components
of
their
the
pdp
revisions,
there
is
an
interim
phase
sheet
shown
and
the
reason
being
is
that,
on
a
permanent
basis,
surface
parking
is
highly
discouraged
in
the
hsr
zone
industry.
It
actually
caps
and
limits
the
amount
of
surface
parking
you
can
have
as
a
permanent
condition.
I
Certainly,
there's
a
lot
of
surface
parking
out
here
currently
and
that's
what
this
development
seeks
to
reduce.
Overall
is
the
amount
of
surface
parking
in
the
area,
but
this
does
include
an
interim
phase
sheet,
showing
additional
parking
highlighted
in
yellow
and
the
reasons
for
that
has
to
do
with
just
creating
additional
parking
supply
on
the
interim
basis
for
the
hyatt
regency
hotel
until
such
time
that
a
parking
ramp
could
be
constructed
in
closer
proximity
to
the
hotel
as
part
of
future
phases
of
bcs.
I
There's
an
office
building
and
a
ramp
planned
for
this
area
surrounding
the
hotel,
and
so
until
that
phase
of
development
comes
to
fruition,
they
would
prefer
to
just
add
a
small
amount
of
surface
parking
on
this
outlet.
Queue
area,
as
shown
in
yellow
staff,
is
fine.
That
does
staff
does
find
that
acceptable
again,
just
as
an
interim
phase,
the
permanent
pdp.
Ultimately,
what
is
approved
is
not
does
not
change
with
respect
to
this
just
interim
phasing
approval
or
request.
I
So
just
a
note
about
that.
This
is
the
final
development
plans
of
the
six
story:
405
unit
apartment
building
and
again
you
can
see
here
in
the
northeast
corner
of
the
development.
This
is
the
proposed
grocery
store.
I've
tried
to
get
it
out
of
the
applicant
as
to
who
the
plan
tenant
is.
They
have
not
revealed
that
quite
yet,
although
maybe
they're
more
receptive
to
your
questions
than
mine,
but
they
are
showing
the
grocery
in
the
northeast
corner.
I
So
that'll
take
up
two
stories
and
is
a
significant
space
and
a
would,
you
know,
be
a
great
benefit
to
this
area
and
south
loop
in
general
in
terms
of
other
components
of
the
residential
development.
You
know
it's
very
similar
to
what
you
see
at
indigo
and
findlay
in
terms
of
that,
the
the
structured
parking
ramp
is
in
the
the
center
of
the
development
and
the
residential
components
of
the
building
wrap
the
structured
parking
within
the
in
the
center.
I
I
You
know
these
are
highly
heavily
landscaped
and
nice
amenity
areas
within
the
development
along
the
south
here
and
we'll
talk
about
kind
of
other
components
of
the
project
in
a
minute,
but
the
what
they're
proposing
here
is
a
kind
of
a
shared
use
type
corridor.
Certainly
the
majority
of
the
time
it's
intended
to
be
a
pedestrian
and
bicycle
corridor
along
the
light
rail
tracks
on
the
south
side,
but
also
serves
as
emergency
access.
Should
the
fire
department
need
to
utilize
that
facility.
I
Here
they
are
constructing
east
80th
and
a
half
street
on
the
north
side
of
the
development
they're
showing
typical
parallel
street
parking
on
the
northwest
corner,
90
degree
parking
on
the
northeast
corner.
Again.
This
is
really
that
grab-and-go
quick
surface
parking
for
the
grocery
store
a
little
bit
of
an
innovative
or
unique
design.
It
is
a
slightly
elevated
parking
deck,
so
there's
just
a
very
slight
or
subtle
incline
as
you
go
up
and
down,
and
that's
intended
really
to
slow
people
down
as
they're
going
through
there.
I
They
anticipate
a
lot
of
pedestrians
in
that
area,
so
that
is
a
benefit.
So
yes,
constructing
east,
80th
and
half
street
this.
The
parking
ramp
would
have
two
means
of
ingress
and
egress.
There's
a
driveway
over
here
on
the
east
side
and
then
there's
access
here
on
the
north
side.
The
truck
dock
that
serves
the
proposed
grocer
is
here.
I
So
other
elements
of
the
final
development
plans.
They
are
constructing
31st
avenue
south
as
well,
in
between
american
boulevard
and
down
to
this
turnaround,
as
you
can
see
here,
connection
across
the
light
rail
tracks,
which
is
you
know,
part
of
the
of
course.
The
future
vision
and
future
phases
would
be
made
all
the
way
down
to
east
old
shakopee
road
at
full,
build
out
of
this
phase
development.
I
So
in
terms
of
compliance
with
the
city's
opportunity,
housing
ordinance,
this
apartment
has
405
units
so
to
meet
the
minimum
requirement,
they
would
have
to
provide
36
units
at
affordable
to
families
with
incomes
at
60
percent
of
the
area
median
income.
They
are
proposing
to
meet
the
minimum
requirement,
they're
not
proposing
fee
in
lieu
of
or
any
of
those
other
tools
as
part
of
providing
those
units.
I
They
are
eligible
for
two
or
they're
eligible
for
multiple
oho
tools
and
incentives
under
that
ordinance,
but
they
are
taking
advantage
of
making
requests
related
to
two
of
them.
So
there's
two
requests
specifically
pertaining
to
their
60
percent
ami
units.
One
one
deals
with
the
parking
reduction
they're
actually
exceeding
the
maximum
reduction
with
additional
flexibility
through
the
plan
development.
I
Now
the
oho
would
only
grant
them
eligibility
towards
a
50
reduction,
so
they
are
seeking
an
additional
25
percent
reduction
to
the
overall
amount
of
storage
units
for
the
apartment,
and
so
what
that
translates
to
is
code
would
require
if
granted,
oho
incentives
and
tools
they
could
have,
they
would
have
to
have
203
storage
units
they're
showing
102.
So
again,
25
percent
of
the
total
baseline
requirement
the
unit
mix
of
the
building.
I
I
As
far
as
the
units
themselves.
Again,
you
see
the
grocery
store
up
in
the
northeast
corner
again
the
parking
ramp.
So
this
parking
ramp
is
a
shared
parking
here
on
the
ground
level.
So
there
is
some
parking
assignment
as
far
as
guest
parking
for
the
apartment
building,
as
well
as
retail
parking,
so
they
are
planning
for
that
in
terms
of
providing
some
signage
and
communication
as
to
provide
you
know,
maintaining
ease
of
access
for
the
grocery
store,
it's
important
for
that
retail
environment.
I
I
So
this
gives
you
a
sense
of
on
the
left
side
of
the
slide
kind
of
looking
to
the
northwest
towards
that
grocery
tenant
space.
You
can
see.
That's
a
two-story
at
that
area.
The
northeast
port
or
the
upper
right
portion
of
the
slide
is
just
the
the
apartment
structure.
Looking
west
the
slide
on
the
image
on
the
left
would
be
the
view
from
30th
avenue.
I
So
this
is
looking
east
and
then
the
view
in
the
bottom
right
portion
of
the
slide
is
from
the
south
from
the
kind
of
you
can
see
that
pedestrian
way
on
the
south
side
adjacent
to
the
light
rail
tracks
so
certainly
a
very
attractive
building,
similar
to
indigo
and
friendly
and
very
complementary
in
terms
of
parking.
So
they
are
seeking
a
pd
flexibility
for
the
amount
of
parking
that
they
would
provide
above
and
beyond
the
oho
reduction.
So
again,
oh
does
grantham
a
20
reduction
to
their
total
parking
requirement,
but
that
that
reduction.
I
I
should
note
only
applies
to
the
residential
component
or
use
of
the
of
the
total
parking
requirement.
It
doesn't
apply
to
the
grocery
component,
and
so
based
on
that
they
would
be
required
to
provide
706
parking
stalls.
They
are
proposing
622
parking
stalls.
However,
that
does
not
encapsulate
all
the
on-street
parking
that
it
it.
It
stems
from
the
amount
of
street
parking
that
they're
proposing
that
would
be
assigned
to
this
development
technically.
I
Other
future
phases
of
bcs
would
be
assigned
that
remainder
of
that
parking
in
future
phases
whenever
those
were
built.
So
that
being
said,
it
results
in
11.9
percent
overall
deviation
from
the
city's
parking
requirement.
Staff
is
supportive
of
the
deviation
requested
based
on
multiple
factors.
First
of
all,
again
those
additional
37
on
street
parking
stalls.
So
it's
a
total
supply
of
65.
All
of
those
will
be
constructed
with
the
project
they
are,
they
are
there
and
they
certainly
would
not
be
prohibited
from
using
those
stalls.
I
If
you
considered
those
stalls,
the
the
parking
deviation
would
drop
to
6.7
percent.
Another
key
factor
is
the
element
of
shared
parking
within
the
development,
so
certainly
there
might
be
some
communication
and
signage
that
relates
to
parking
on
site
for
various
uses,
but
with
any
mixed
use
component.
There's
always
going
to
be
some
element
of
informal
efficiencies
that
are
at
play
with
respect
to
shared
parking,
and
that
is
an
identified
area
that
supports
parking
deviation
in
the
city's
parking
ordinance.
I
I
In
addition
to
the
linkages
to
mass
transit,
which
are
also
supported
by
code
in
terms
of
parking
reduction,
there
is
still
yet
a
backup
parking
supply.
If
you
recall
that
kind
of
overhead
or
oblique
photo,
there
still
is
a
significant
amount
of
surface
parking
located
to
the
north,
and
certainly
that
won't
be
there
forever.
I
But
in
the
interim
period
it
provides
kind
of
a
backstop
in
case
there
is
some
some
challenges
with
parking
and
so
just
to
note
that
the
hyatt
regency
hotel-
and
this
is
as
a
result
of
previous
approvals
within
the
development
and
something
that
we're
tracking
the
hyatt
regency-
does
have
rights
to
123
stalls
elsewhere
in
the
development
and
it's
kind
of
moved
around
as
different
phases
have
been
developed,
but
currently
it's
assigned
to
that
northwest
phase,
and
so
there
are
286
parking
stalls
in
that
surface
parking
lot.
So
even
subtracting
the
123
stalls.
I
That
being
said
in
consideration
of
that
as
part
of
the
consideration
of
the
pdp
additional
analysis
of
total
parking
of
street
parking
within
bcs
should
be
done
and
will
be
done
in
advance
of
phases.
Five
and
six
that
could
was
that
could
be
in
the
form
of
a
formal
parking
study
it
could
just
be.
It
really
depends
on
what
the
developer
brings
to
the
table
in
terms
of
parking
supply
associated
with
those
specific
projects.
I
I
Staff
is
comfortable
with
the
level
of
parking
that
they
are
requesting
here
and,
in
effect,
hxr
is
one
of
those
districts
where
over
parking
a
site
is,
you
know,
strongly
discouraged,
you
don't
want
to
over
park
this
development,
and
so
in
totality
we're
supportive
of
the
deviation
that
they're
requesting
landscaping
all
code
compliant.
The
only
thing
we'll
have
to
track
continue
to
move
forward
is
again.
I
The
mcgaff
to
their
credit,
has
been
helpful
in
working
with
fire,
with
respect
to
that
southern
access
to
ensure
that
they
have
adequate
access
to
the
the
the
courtyards
and
other
areas
of
the
development.
So
we'll
work
with
the
fire
marshal
one
last
time
to
make
sure
that
they
have
the
access
they
need.
I
Another
point
about
landscaping
before
I
forget
that
there
is
a
a
south
loop,
streetscape
master
plan
that
the
city
did
commission
some
years
ago
and
just
to
note
that
the
planned
landscaping
for
31st
avenue
again
a
private
roadway,
is
in
keeping
with
the
guidelines
or
the
recommendations
of
that
study
or
that
planning
effort.
That
was
done.
I
I
I
So
in
order
to
accommodate
that
in
a
way
that
the
grocery
tenant
you
know,
finds
acceptable
and
operationally
works
with
respect
to
the
with
respect
to
the
drop
off
and
loading
area,
they
are
requesting
a
deviation
to
that
ground
level
window
requirement.
Now
they
are
proposing
to
make
up
that
balance
on
the
basis
of
providing
opaque
or
colored
glass,
as
well
as
art,
permanent
art,
and
so
that
what
they're
showing
you
in
their
project
description.
I
These
are
images
captured
from
their
project
description
where
they're
counting
some
of
these
areas
of
translucent
or
colored,
glass
or
glazing,
as
well
as
these
permanent
art
areas.
In
order
to
meet
that
50
requirement.
Now,
technically,
that's
not
complying
with
code,
but
that's
why
they're
seeking
the
deviation,
but
given
the
kind
of
characteristics
of
a
grocery
use
staff
thinks
this
deviation,
makes
sense
and
is
supportive.
I
Moving
on
to
their
last
request
for
deviation.
This
was
mentioned
earlier.
This
has
to
do
with
residential
storage.
This
is
the
one
component
of
the
application
that
the
applicant
and
staff
are
not
in
perfect
alignment,
and
there
are
some
reasons
for
that.
Hopefully
good
reasons,
but
staff
did
provide
you
in
our
staff
report
kind
of
arguments
for
in
favor
of
residential
storage
and
against
residential
storage.
I
Now
staff
would
argue
that
those
you
know
kind
of
levels
of
demand
that
they
have
recorded
and
experienced
are
do
have
some
connection
to
you
know
fees
that
are
charged
with
respect
to
on-site
storage.
There's
a
lot
of
different
arguments
for
and
against
providing
storage
within
the
within
developments.
It
certainly
adds
cost
or
takes
away.
You
know,
area
for
that
could
be
utilized
for
amenity
or
additional
units
and
those
types
of
things.
I
One
of
the
the
reason
that
staff
isn't
being
supportive
of
that
deviation
at
this
time
is
that
the
city
recently
adopted
an
ordinance
revisions
to
our
opportunity.
Housing
ordinance
that
further
incentivized
the
creation
of
affordable
housing
units
by
further
reducing
or
by
by
further
reducing
the
amount
of
required
storage.
So
there
is
a
means,
or
a
pathway
in
city
code
for
the
applicant
to
achieve
the
requested
reduction
in
on-site
storage
without
flexibility.
I
I
So
that's
something
you
did
look
at
so
given
that
there
is
a
pathway
in
city
code,
and
this
is
something
that
the
city
looked
at
so
recently,
it's
not
so
much
it's
it's
not
such
a
component
that
we
think
that
the
applicant
is
completely
you
know
out
of
turn
or
that
their
analysis
is
completely
incorrect.
It
just
so
happens
that
the
the
city
just
recently
adopted
new
policies
that
allowed
a
pathway
towards
this
and
created
an
opportunity
to
pursue
further
reductions
in
storage.
I
If
the
planning
commission
thinks
that
you
know
a
75
reduction
in
residential
storage
is
appropriate
for
this
project,
it's
something
that
staff
would
probably
want
to
come
back
and
just
take
a
further
look
at
with
respect
to
study
of
our
ordinances
and
our
peer
communities
and
doing
different
types
of
development.
Again,
the
storage
requirement
has
been
a
long
standing
positive
thing
for
multi-family
development
in
bloomington.
I
Not
all
cities
require
it,
some
of
it
treat
it
more
as
an
amenity
like
fitness
room
or
you
know
other
other
amenities
within
a
residential
building.
But
members
of
the
the
planning
staff
do
think
that
it
provides
a
strong
benefit.
I
shouldn't
just
say
the
planning
staff
environmental
health.
Other
divisions
within
the
city
are
strongly
supportive
of
providing
on-site
storage
for
residents.
I
So
that's
the
rub.
That's
the
only
spot
that
the
applicant
and
staff
differ
and
certainly
seek
your
opinion
and
discussion
on
that
item
other
than
that
we're
supportive
of
the
other
deviations
that
they're
supporting,
as
well
as
the
oho
incentives
and
tools
that
they
are
requesting
in
terms
of
reducing
storage
to
50
percent
and
reducing
parking,
as
well
as
the
pd
flexibility
on
the
window,
glazing,
and
so
you
know
similar
to
other
residential
projects.
I
I
A
D
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
Mr
johnson,
will
you
go
over
the
31st
avenue
connection
again
is
that
you
mentioned
that
it
will
not
be
a
full
connection,
north
and
south,
so
I'm
assuming
that
the
parking
lot
of
the
health
partner's
site
is
not
going
to
be
connected
to
the
full
31st
avenue.
Would
you
just
go
over
that
again
that
week.
I
Yeah,
so
this
is
the
thank
you
for
that
question.
Chairman
solberg
christian
albrecht.
This
is
the
proposed
preliminary
development
plan,
so
this
would
show
you
the
final
condition
of
what
would
result
from
the
project.
Currently,
what
they're,
showing
now
is
they're
connecting
american
boulevard
to
the
south,
they're
constructing
31st
avenue
from
american
boulevard
to
the
south
to
this
turnaround.
I
The
future
phases
of
health
partners
are
located
to
the
south
of
here,
and
so,
when
those
future
phases
of
office
development
were
to
proceed,
they've
done
they've
done
some
of
the
development
they've
done
the
parking
ramp
if
you're
familiar
with
the
area.
They've
constructed
this
ramp,
but
this
future
health
partners
expansion
office
has
not
been
constructed
yet
so
that
would
be
pushed
through
and
constructed
as
part
of
a
future
phase
of
development.
I
A
I
Further
questions,
there's
kind
of
a
there's,
a
zoom
in
of
the
well.
That's
that's
still
the
preliminary
development
plan,
I'm
sorry
there
you
go
there's
the
final
development
plans.
That
shows
you
the
proposed
condition
of
that
turnaround,
so
the
street
would
terminate.
This
is
this
street
here
to
on
where
my
cursor
is,
is
the
north
side
of
the
park
and
in
between
the
hotel.
A
I
Yeah,
chairman
solberg,
commissioner
roman,
I
don't
believe
so.
We
before
the
oho
was
developed.
We
were
cons,
I
shouldn't
say
consistently.
There
was
multiple
instances
of
supporting
reductions
in
storage
down
to
a
50
level
and
that's
ultimately,
what
was
adopted
into
the
oho
was
kind
of
being
consistent
with
some
of
that
pd
flexibility
that
the
city
was
approving,
leading
up
to
that
there
were
reductions
in
storage
approved
for
both
for
sure
for
friendly.
I
G
I
A
All
right,
thank
you,
commissioner
roman.
I
think
you
asked
the
question
I
was
going
to
ask
myself
and
just
a
little
bit
of
maybe
some
history
on
what
the
finley
or
indigo
what
we
had
granted
for
any
kind
of
parking
flexibility
trying
to
understand
that
in
relationship
to
how
successful
those
have
been.
So
if,
if
we're
able
to
come
up
with
at
some
point
during
discussion,
that
would
be.
That
would
be
helpful.
E
Great,
I
chairman
silberg
and
commissioners,
mr
marquez,
mr
johnson,
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
speak
on
behalf
of
this
project
and,
as
as
mr
johnson
said,
we're
very
excited
about
this
one
like,
like
others,
but
we
we
feel
like
this
is
a
great
opportunity
not
just
for
magath
but
but
for
the
south
district
and
and
also
the
city.
Just
generally,
it's
been
a
really
great
process,
as
it
usually
is
working
with
staff.
E
You
know,
nick
and
all
the
other
departments
have
been
super
helpful
public
works,
fire,
etc.
So
we're
just
wanna
express
our
thanks
for
that.
I,
if
there's
an
opportunity,
if
you
don't
mind,
I'd
like
to
share
a
very
you,
know
a
brief
deck.
If
I
might
just
to
walk
through
a
couple
items
and
just
give
you
a
just
give
it
a
feel
for
where
we're
going
with
the
project.
E
E
And
we
think
we
think
there's
a
there's
a
great
theme
here
and,
and
we
want
to
go
a
little
bit
farther
with
it
and
create
a
almost
like
a
lifestyle,
a
place
that
people
can
live
and
and
feel
like
they're
paying
attention
to
getting
outdoors
and-
and
so
that's
just
generally,
the
theme
of
it
and
and
and
that'll
be
the
marketing
of
it.
And
that's
that's
where
we
come
from
on
it.
E
E
Shane
redling
in
the
port
and
myself,
and
also
others
on
our
team,
have
have
met
with
those
grocers
when
we
were
doing
the
family
and
trying
to
make
something
happen,
and
I
know
the
city's
been
at
it
for
15
years.
So
this
is.
This
is
a
really
unique
opportunity
we
have
to
to
to
to
pull
in
a
pull
in
a
grocer
I'll,
just
sort
of
share.
Some
more
images
of
the
grocery
element
which
will
be
on
the
northeast
corner
gives
gives
gives
the
store
some
exposure
from.
B
E
The
other
developments
in
the
area,
but
also
you
see
the
grocery
word
on
the
side
of
the
building
in
the
in
the
in
the
image
in
the
lower
right.
The
intention
there
is
not
to
overwhelm
the
neighborhood
with
signage,
but
rather
to
afford
the
grocer
the
greatest
success
by
having
some
visual
exposure
up
on
american
boulevard.
E
E
We
expect
it'll
have
a
little
bit
of
indoor
outdoor
cafe
experience
where
people
can
grab
some
food
and
enjoy
it
outside
or
inside
of
the
weather's,
not
as
not
as
favorable,
but
it's
it's.
Its
product
line
will
serve
not
only
people
in
the
building
upstairs
but
other
residences
at
pcs
and
generally
in
the
area,
with
all
the
growth
going
on,
but
also
to
serve
businesses.
E
Employees
to
have
another
place
to
walk
across
the
street
folks
in
the
south
loop,
who
are
spending
a
little
extra
time
in
the
extended
stay
or
any
of
the
hotels,
and
it
is
intended
to
have
a
liquor
store
as
well,
which
is
an
added
offering
so
so
we're
pretty
excited
about
that.
I
want
to
jump
back
a
slide
not
to
go
backwards,
but
part
of
part
of
the
theme
of
this
building
is
really
to
to
have
a
little
bit
more
edge
to
it.
E
Maybe
a
little
bit
of
a
nod
to
the
you
know,
light
industrial
that
used
to
be
out
here,
but
also
have
some
of
the
same
refinement
and
sophistication.
So
those
lighter
areas
that
you
see
up
above
are
actually
a
high
quality,
corrugated
corrugated
metal
look,
but
but
tempered
by
more
of
a
charcoal,
smoother
material
on
on
some
of
the
darker
areas.
You're
seeing
there,
you
can
also
see
some
of
the
windows
and
the
nature
of
those
windows
are
a
bit
of
a
nod
to
more
lofty
or
industrial.
E
E
I
happy
to
field
any
any
questions.
I
do
want
to
jump
to
the
storage
topic
and
talk
a
little
bit
about
some
market
factors
our
thoughts
around.
Why?
What
why
we
continue
to
encourage
the
city
to
have
a
look
at
at
what
the
rest
of
the
metro
and
its
pure
communities
are
doing
around
the
topic
of
storage?
Put
simply
they're
they're,
leaving
that
to
the
private
players.
Who
are
you
know,
building
these
communities
around
the
metro
and
other
markets
as
well?
E
We
we've
done
market
surveys.
We
did
back
when
we
were
entitling
the
family
to
reduce
the
storage,
to
address
the
storage
requirement
there
that
supported
a
reduction
to
50
I'll
share
some
data
with
you
on
how
that
is
going
and
some
further
data.
We've
gathered
on
other
suburban
projects
that
that
support
and
even
further
reduction,
not
only
in
terms
of
what
the
rest
of
the
market
is
saying,
but
also
specific
to
where
the
demand
is.
You
know
we,
we
have
an
ongoing
public
private
partnership
with
the
city.
E
It's
a
bloomington
central
station
is
is
multiple
projects.
It's
a
it's
a
redevelopment
tip
district
there.
There
are
good
policy
reasons
why
the
city's
chosen
to
provide
some
subsidy
support
for
projects
the
challenges
these.
We
don't
see
a
good
choice
in
adding
cost
and
components
to
a
project
for
which
there
aren't
demand
and
which
merely
add
to
projects-
and
you
know
really
directly-
would
otherwise
boost
the
need
for
additional
subsidy
where
there
just
isn't
the
demand
for
it.
E
So
you
know,
half
the
building
is
a
pretty
good
sample
and-
and
you
know
with
with
25
we're
actually
building
in
essentially
what
amounts
to
you
know
being
able
to
accommodate
a
40
increase
in
demand
over
what
we
have
and
additionally,
as
as
additional
comfort,
you
know
to
the
extent
there
are
concerns
at
the
staff
level.
We
do
have
space
in
the
building
in
the
event
demand
exceeded
by
more
than
50
of
what
we're
seeing
at
the
family.
E
For
example,
we
would
have
space
to
add
more
storage
if
it
was
necessary.
We
just
feel
strongly
that
you
know
it's.
You
know
the
development
community
makes
makes
the
predominance
of
the
investment
and
carries
therefore,
the
predominance
of
the
risk.
There's
a
considerable
data
out
there
that
that
supports
this
I'll.
E
E
Otherwise,
being
a
really
easy
and-
and
pro
you
know,
the
city
city
staff
always
talks
about
in
the
port
talk
about
being
community
builders,
that's
their
job
and
there's
just
not
another
community.
We
can
point
to
that.
That
would
otherwise
impose
a
you
know:
500
to
600
000
cost
burden
to
a
project
of
this
scale,
and
just
so
you
know,
as
as
the
city
considers
ordinance,
we
would
encourage
considering
that
so
just
to
wrap
up
with
some
concrete
data.
E
Great
start
property
management
is,
you
know
by
far
by
I
think,
by
a
factor
of
three
or
four
or
five
is
the
biggest
property
management
firm
in
the
country.
They
manage
something
like
six
or
seven
hundred
thousand
units.
They
took
a
look
for
us,
they
managed
the
penalty.
They
took
a
look
for
us
at
some
similar,
suburban
assets
that
they're
managing
and
when
you
combine
them
all
the
average
usage
there
is
13.
E
Each
of
those
projects
is
supplying
varying
levels,
but
but
that's
the
outcome
at
the
fenway,
as
I
said
before,
we're
just
over
70
47
occupied
and
right
now,
that's
161
units
and
only
23
of
those
apartments
are
renting
storage.
That
puts
us
at
14.
I
think
we
might
be
it's
rounded
to
it's
rounded,
to
double
digits,
so
I
think
it's
14.2
candidly,
but
it's
always
the
entire
time.
We've
been
releasing
it
for
the
past
year.
It's
been
sub
15,
so
we
feel
like
25
is
prudent.
E
It
leaves,
as
I
said,
a
buffer
of
40
demand
growth
without
spending
a
dollar
extra
in
construction
costs,
and
if
we
arrive
at
a
place
where
there's
more
demand
for
it,
we
have
the
space
in
the
building
to
to
to
expand
that.
We
just
don't
see
the
justification
for
adding
something
that
is
class
burden
and
not
proud,
not
at
demand
so
that
that's
all
I've
got
and
happy
to
field.
Any
questions
or
have
discussion
if
people
have
questions.
A
A
A
G
Chair,
mr
higgins,
out
of
curiosity
absent
using
that
space
for
storage
I
mean
empty
space,
doesn't
generate
revenue,
so
absent,
building
storage
in
that
space
are
there
plans
for
that
space
because
I
I
appreciate
the
idea
that
you
know
it
could
be
added,
but
if
it's
not
going
to
be
added,
there
clearly
should
be
some
use
of
it.
That's
going
to
generate
income.
E
E
Building
staff
on
various
floors
will
keep
cleaning
materials
and
supplies
to
to
do
their
tasks
of
maintaining
a
building.
There
may
be
some
equipment
in
there
and
we
also
you
know
we.
You
know
one
storage
topic
I
mean
we
haven't
over.
You
know
aligned
with
the
theme
of
the
building,
but
is
also
storage.
We
have
an
oversized
bike
and
we're
calling
it
sort
of
bike
and
ford
storage,
because
that
plays
on
what
we're
trying
to
accentuate
as
a
theme,
but
that's
an
oversized
space
as
well.
E
That
theoretically
could
pivot
some
portion
of
this
space
for
for
storage,
lockers
and
also,
as
I'm
sure,
you've
seen
it
a
number
of
projects.
One
example
within
bloomington,
I
think,
is
genesee
over
by
southtown
and
the
fresh
time.
You
know
there
are
these.
You
know
you
can
put
these
cage
lockers
on
the
walls
above
parking
spaces,
so
that
you
know
there
are
a
number
of
different
options
that
could
fulfill
additional
demand
if
it
arrives
that
rises,
but
even
when,
in
what
we're
proposing
there's
a
40
buffer.
E
F
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
Mr
higgins,
the
question
is
still
under
the
storage
conversation.
I
mean.
I
concur
with
staff's
recommendation
here,
and
I
appreciate
that
there
would
be
space
for
expansion.
Should
there
be
a
need?
A
question
I
had
is
just
for
say:
you
run
out
of
space
and
residents
who
currently
or
may
not
have
space
for
rental
end
up
stacking
up
their
balconies
for
storage,
and
that's
not
aesthetically
pleasing
you
know.
Does
the
project
management
of
the
building?
Do
you
go
and
and
for
how
do
you
like?
F
Would
you
enforce
that?
Or
is
that
an
enforceable
thing
at
the
management
side,
or
I
guess
that's
one
question
and
then
the
other
question
I
had
was
you
know
with
all
the
housing
projects
that
were
built
in
this
campus
area
in
the
south
loop?
I
know
there
are
some
condos.
There
are
several
apartments
built.
F
Has
there
been
have
you
done
an
inventory
of
all
existing
residential
buildings
just
within
the
south
loop
area,
to
kind
of
determine
if
folks
are
maximizing
the
usage
of
the
storage
provided
in
their
buildings
to
kind
of
see
if
there
is
actually
been
a
need
for
it?
I
know
you've
done
a
neighboring,
suburban
property
sites,
I
should
say,
but
has
there
been
a
look
at
just
what's
surrounding
the
area
of
development.
E
Commissioner,
abbey,
I
appreciate
your
questions
on
the
on
the
topic
of
the
balconies.
Absolutely
you
know
our
our
building
management
and
building
rules.
Don't
allow
tenants
to
have
you
know
personal
items
on
balconies.
You
know
folks
are
certainly
allowed
to
have.
You
know
a
small
sort
of
patio
table
and
chairs.
You
know
some
people
might
have
a
small
plant,
but
it's
it's
not
a
it's
not
allowed
to
be
storage
in
those
spaces.
Because
it's
you
know
it's
it's
it's
both
unsightly
and
at
a
certain
point
it
becomes.
E
Indigo
apartments
has
has
maintained
occupancy
in
the
90s
percent
range
they've
got,
I
think,
they're
at
95
or
96
at
the
fendly.
Where
we
have
you
know,
50
storage
ratio
and
only
14
of
the
people
are
taking
it.
You
know
we've
rented
in
the
last
three
months,
85
apartments,
so
you
know
half
of
our
occupancies
ostensibly
come
in
the
last.
E
You
know
pretty
close
to
the
last
three
months
and
people
are
coming
in
and
moving
in
and
again
14
of
them
are
taking
storage,
so
nobody's
getting
nobody's
walking
away
because
because
of
the
storage
question,
it's
it's
just
not
what's
happening,
and
I
would
say
you
know:
u.s
balconies
tenants
aren't
allowed
to
store
a
bunch
of
stuff
in
the
garage
either
by
their
parking
spots.
That's
also
not
a
lot.
F
E
That's
a
good
question:
we
don't
we
don't
have
it
set,
but-
and
I
appreciate
it-
I
didn't
calculate
an
average
here,
but
certainly
the
average
here
is
probably
somewhere
in
the
70
range.
I
suspect
something
like
that:
70
or
80,
and
at
the
penalty
it's
50,
so
I
suspect
it's
somewhere
in
that
neighborhood
still
below
what
these
suburban.
D
E
Yeah
so,
commissioner,
albrecht
appreciate
the
question
units
units
range
and
and
what
kind
of
stores
they
have?
We
have
these
anywhere
from
decent
size
to
large
walk-in
closets,
a
lot
of
our
a
lot
of
our
core
size.
You
know
middle-sized
units
have
walk-in
closets
when
you,
when
you
do
an
alcove
or
you
know
what
a
lot
of
people
know
as
a
studio
size
apartment
those
aren't
of
a
signs
where
you
could
do
a
walk-in
closet.
E
You
know
those
are
in
the
low
to
low
to
mid
or
high
500
square
foot
range,
but
it's
also
a
practical
reality
that
that
folks,
who
are
deciding
to
live
in
a
smaller
apartment,
have
less
have
less
stuff
and
make
that
choice
and
that's
what
we're
finding.
So,
it's
usually
a
closet
or
two.
Some.
You
know
on
the
mid
and
larger
units
where
there
are
more
people.
E
And-
and
I
and
I
should
add
also
I
mean
these-
you
know
the
kitchens
or
conventional
kitchens
with
a
lot
of
cabinets.
A
number
of
the
unit
types
have
have,
what
are
loosely
called.
You
know
pantry
cabinets,
so
it's
a
you
know:
full
height
off
the
end,
for
example,
of
a
kitchen
that
might
otherwise
not
have
one.
So
that's
there's
a
sampling
of
those
as
well.
D
E
Yeah,
commissioner,
albrecht
I'll
try,
I
actually
don't
have
a
site
planet
present,
but
if
you,
if
you
look
at
this
lower
left
image
and
this
this
lower
right
image,
I
can
speak
to
a
couple
of
opportunities
here
on
the
lower
left.
You
can
see
a
vehicle
in
the
courtyard
and
there's
sort
of
a
dark
opening
in
the
building.
That's
actually
the
entrance
to
the
to
the
parking
garage
and
the
first
level
of
the
parking
garage
is
intended
to
have
visitor
parking
to
serve
the
building
and
also
the
grocer.
E
E
The
reason
I
mentioned
tabletop
is
the
intention
is
we're
we're
creating
an
awareness
out
there
that
when
you
come
to
this
area,
there's
a
bit
of
a
slowdown,
so
it
it
it
bumps
up
a
handful.
You
know
six
eight
ten
inches
or
something
like
that,
so
that
cars
will
feel
that
as
they
come
in
and
slow
down,
there's
also
some
visual
impediments.
E
So
at
the
back
of
the
of
the
parking
spaces,
there's
there's
a
band
that
will
look
like
the
street
is
more
narrow
and
it's
intentionally
a
a
visual
effect.
That's
been
shown
to
be
to
be
productive
in
slowing
folks
down,
so
there's
a
primary
interest
there,
which
would
be
a
shared
vestibule
between
the
the
liquor
store
in
the
grocery,
which
you
would
commonly
experience
kind
of
at
a
lot
of
grocery
stores.
Today
in
the
market
that
have
book.
E
Excuse
me
both
those
functions,
so
you
we
would
anticipate
that
most
people
would
pull
in
to
that
surface.
You
know
surface
80th
and
a
half
parking
but
there'll
be
a
considerable
supply
of
parking
within
the
first
level
of
the
garage
as
well
for
people
who
want
to
sort
of
get
in
there
and
maybe
out
of
the
weather
or
something
like
that.
F
G
E
E
G
G
A
D
E
E
You
know
the
hope
of
this
whole
urban
design
out
there
is
that
this
is
heavily
focused
on
the
people
who
live
and
work
at
bcs
and
the
broader
south
loop.
But
in
any
event,
most
people
would
come
in
probably
80th
and
a
half
either
from
30th,
whether
they're
coming
east
on
lindell
or
coming
south
on
30th
from
american,
and
they
would
come
into
the
western
end
of
80th
and
from
there
they
would
either
choose.
I
mean
we
would
have
it
well
signed.
A
All
right,
thank
you
all
right
and
just
to
clarify
again,
mr
higgins,
so
that
tabletop
on
the
north
side
of
the
development
is
that
the
only
tabletop
that's
being
developed
as
part
of
the
development.
Or
do
you
have
some
on
that
east
side?
I
can
imagine
as
a
grocery
store
that
will
potentially
create
a
lot
of
pedestrian
traffic.
So
I'm
wondering
if
that's
also
on
the
east
side,.
A
A
A
G
A
Albrecht,
I
think
I
heard
a
is
it
was
that
a
second
I'm
sorry,
it
was
sorry
second,
okay,
all
right
there
we
go.
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
I
I
was
looking
down
and
I
didn't
know
if
you
said
something
and
I
missed
it
or
not.
So
all
right,
commission
members,
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
to
close
public
hearing
any
further
discussion
before
moving
all
right.
All
those
in
favor
closing
public
hearings
say
aye
by
roll
call.
Commissioner
corman.
A
F
A
And
I,
for
myself,
motion
passes
public
hearing
is
now
closed.
On
item
number:
three:
all
right:
commission
members,
discussion
on
the
items,
some
of
the
topics
before
us
so
again,
a
major
discussion
for
us
was
the
level
of
parking
and
just
to
clarify
for
everybody
to
make
sure
condition.
18,
as
written
in
the
staff
report,
would
require
50
percent
a
minimum
of
203
residential
storage
spaces.
So
I
want
to
make
sure
everybody's
aware
of
that.
A
D
D
I
don't
know
what
that
amount
is,
but
I
do
have
a
curiosity,
which
is
why
I
asked
the
question
about
existing
storage
in
the
unit
given
that
units-
and
I
think
I've
mentioned
this
at
other
meetings
before
as
well-
units
have
different
layouts
and
different
storage
in
the
specific
units.
Some
have
a
lot
of
storage,
some
have
huge
closets,
some
have
smaller
closets
and
not
a
lot
of
storage,
and
so
then
require
that
off-site
storage.
I
think
that
needs
to
be
part
of
this
conversation.
D
A
All
right,
thank
you,
commissioner
albrecht.
So
if
I
understand
your
comment
is
as
much
about
having
information
about
the
storage
in
the
individual
units
themselves,
so
for
for
future
discussion
and
maybe
future
information
for
staff
to
bring
forward
to
us.
Okay,
all
right,
good,
good
comments,
commissioner
roman.
G
G
That
may
be
some
next
step
in
this
is
that
you
know,
storage
is
required
when
x,
y
or
z
are
not
required
when
x,
y
or
z.
You
know
and
another
thing
that
came
to
mind
again
if
we
want
to
go
to
the
25
percent,
as
has
been
requested
and
we're
hearing
that
the
take
rate
is
lower,
obviously
probably
long
term
the
applicant
is
not
being
in
the
developing.
G
Should
the
25
turn
out
to
be
challenging,
which
again
would
be
a
way
to
try
this
out
in
a
way
that
doesn't
you
know
the
applicant
did
say
that
there
are
places
that
they
know
they
can
convert,
and
I
was
I
felt
better
about
that,
knowing
that
you
know
it
wasn't
just
that
yeah
we've
got
this
area
over
here
that
we
would
probably
turn
into
some
other
amenity,
or
you
know
another
condo
or
whatever
it
may
be.
You
know.
G
Certainly,
I'm
glad
to
see
some
level
of
grocery.
I
what
you
know
what
that
grocery
is
is
certainly
not
a
for
me
to
play
winners
and
losers.
On
that
I
was
concerned
by
the
size
of
this
of
the
footprint.
I
had
a
preconceived
notion
of
what
that
store
may
be.
The
applicant
talked
about
some
of
the
services
and
amenities
that
they're
planning
to
offer,
which
implies
one
of
the
more
higher-end
groceries,
but
I
haven't
won,
given
what
we've
seen
elsewhere
in
the
metro.
I
might
my
only
comment
again.
G
This
is
not
a
for
or
against
the
project.
I
I'm
inclined
to
support
the
project,
but
you
know
this
is
not
an
area
that
probably
is
going
to
support
two
grocery
stores,
so
I
really
hope
that
it's
a
grocery
store
that
is
truly
full
service
and
not
a
boutique
specialty
grocery
store
that
provides
some
some
groceries
and
some
fun
things,
but
not
really
enough
to
serve
the
neighborhood
and
again.
That
is
not
what
we're
in
the
business
of
choosing
and
winners
and
losers
on
the
planning.
G
F
Thank
you
chair.
I
concur
with
the
other
commissioner's
feedback
on
the
self.
The
storage
portion,
I'm
still
a
little
bit
confused.
I
would
like
policy
consistency
as
you
improve
projects,
and
I
you
know
with
the
applicant
mentioning
that
there
is
potential
space
to
expand
the
units
for
storage.
That
is
and
then
also
the
fact
that
they
do
enforce
balcony
storage.
Should
there
be,
you
know,
folks
who
are
just
storing
using
using
the
balconies
as
storage
facilities.
F
You
know
I'm
still
hesitant
and
maybe
I'll
just
seeking
a
little
bit
clarification
from
the
comment
that
staff
made
earlier
when
they
were
presenting
about
the
recently
adopted
policy
or
is
it
an
ordinance
about?
You
know,
incentives
to
further
reduce
storage
requirements
to
have
more
affordable
housing.
You
know,
without
that
you
mentioned
that
without
that
ordinance
that
we
recently
adopted,
we
have
never
reduced
storage
to
the
lowest
to
the
to
what
the
applicant
is
requesting.
So
I
guess
for
consistency,
policy,
consistency
and
project
approvals.
F
I
would
like
to
be
on
that
that
there
that's,
where
my
comfort
level
is
to
improving
a
project
so
that
you
know
we
don't
have
scattered.
We
don't
have
consistency
in
what
the
city's
visions
are
in
improving
projects
like
these.
So
maybe
I
don't
know
if
that's
a
little
bit,
if
that's
any
clear,
first
staff
to
kind
of
touch
base
on
just
you
know,
refresh
folks
watching
at
home
or
for
me
at
least
what
you
mentioned
about
the
policy
conflicts.
B
Mr
chair
and
mr
johnson,
if
you
could
pull
up
the
slide,
that
has
the
pros
and
cons
as
I
walk
through
it.
But
very
recently
the
city
adopted
some
code
amendments
to
the
opportunity,
housing
ordinance,
which
did
provide
a
pathway
to
reduce
the
in
building
storage
down
to
25
percent
of
the
citywide
requirement,
and
that
pathway
is
to
provide
additional,
affordable
housing.
F
A
B
A
Okay,
thank
you
all
right.
Let's
see
any
further
questions
or
discussions
other
all.
As
long
as
nobody's
got
their
hand
raised,
you
know,
so
we
did
go
through
a
process
recently
to
allow
a
greater
percentage,
and
I
think
one
of
the
things
that
as
the
applicant
talked
initially,
I
was
very
much
in
support
of
the
50,
and
I
think
I
I
still
am,
but
maybe
there's
a
different
way
for
the
planning
commission
to
think
about
that.
A
A
Otherwise,
as
far
as
the
rest
of
the
the
development
certainly
happy
to
see
a
grocery
store
proposed
as
part
of
this
we've
heard
this
in
a
lot
of
our
other
developments
in
the
south
loop
area
that
we
are
in
need
of
that.
I
think
you
know.
The
nice
thing
here
is
again
access
to
transit,
which
I
think
again
is
supportive
of
that
reduction
in
parking,
that's
being
asked
for,
and
then.
A
Lastly,
I
think
just
overall
we're
seeing
the
vision
of
the
south
loop
being
built
out
and
can
definitely
again
support
that
change
from
office,
which
we've
heard
and
seen
over
the
past
couple
years,
and
especially
over
the
last
year,
really
take
a
down
turn.
So
I'll
kind
of
leave
it
at
that,
and
if
there's
any
other
discussion
from
planning
commission
members,
commissioner
roman.
G
A
A
E
Yes,
chairman
and
commissioner
roman-
that's
certainly
something
that
was
a
consideration
for
us
and
I
apologize
for
not
including
in
my
remarks
about
the
challenges
as
a
practical
matter.
Part
of
the
redevelopment
fifth
district
and
and
public-private
partnership
on
this
particular
phase
of
housing
happens
to
have
substantial
subsidy,
not
purely
for
for
the
residential
units
and
those
affordable
units
that
we
are
providing.
E
But
it's
also
been
proven
out
over
the
last
15
years
of
effort
by
the
city.
Some
of
those
years
are
also
efforts
by
magov
to
attract
a
grocer
to
this
location.
So
a
substantial
portion
of
the
subsidy
that's
going
to
the
overall
project,
is
going
to
support
the
grocery,
not
just
the
the
housing
in
inclusive
by
the
way
of
36
units
of
afford,
affordable
at
60
emi
as
it
is
there.
There
just
isn't
the
subsidy
dollars
that
could
be
added
to
the
project
to
go
to
that
next
lower
level
of
income.
E
So
it's
a
tough
spot,
can't
do
it
all,
and
it's
been
a
long
time
coming
to
get
this
grocery
and
balancing
that
out
with
36,
affordable
units
we
feel
like
is
is
is
a
pretty
good
success,
but
that's
why
we
couldn't
go
further
with
our
affordability
on
this
particular
project.
But
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
have
you
open
up
the
comments
again
and
respond
to
that
question.
Thanks
very
much.
G
Yeah,
I
think,
coherence
I
think,
through
my
my
evolving
thought
process
on
this.
You
know
I
think
again,
there's
the
the
bigger
question
about
the
you
know:
demand
for
storage
versus
our
standards
and
our
our
code
requirements.
I
think
we
opened
up
some
options
with
the
opportunity
housing
ordinance
for
for
lower
numbers.
G
F
F
I
guess
where
does
that
fall
in
in
the
applications?
Excuse
me.
I
haven't
really
read
this
closely,
maybe
of
the
applications
that
we
are
going
to
be
taking
actions
on
and
I
might
be
jumping
the
gun
with
the
next
step.
To
this
project.
To
this
discussion
is,
I
guess
what
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
is
if
everything,
if
all
the
findings
are
being
met
and
us
having
a
discussion
about
them,
not
meeting
that
certain
threshold.
I
Yeah
chairman
solberg,
commissioner
abby
thanks
for
that
question
right
now,
as
it's
currently
constructed,
it's
not
so
much
of
a
findings
issue.
We
feel
the
project
meets
the
required
findings
of
the
city
code
for
planned
development
approval,
it's
more
so
going
to
be
per
specifically
tied
to
what
conditions
the
city
attaches
to
the
approval.
So,
as
chairman
solberg
mentioned
condition,
number
18
includes
a
a
quantity
specific
of
203
storage
stalls
which
would
meet
that
50
percent
reduction.
A
All
right
all
right,
well
they're
with
commissioner
cookton
sitting
out.
It
is
really
five
of
us
at
this
point
any
further
discussion
on
this
item.
I
know
it's
a
thought
process
we're
all
going
through,
but
it,
commissioner
roman.
I
think
your
point
that
you
just
made
in
your
last
comments
about
what
are
the
incentives
to
get
to
75.
A
A
D
D
I
can
imagine
that
going
to
20
of
the
units
versus
nine
percent
of
the
units
would
be
a
much
much
much
larger
number
that
doesn't
offset
the
the
the
tool
or
the
strategy
that
we
have
in
the
opportunity
housing
ordinance
to
do
that.
But
then
that
that
makes
me
think
of.
Is
it
actually
a
good
tool?
Is
that
actually
going
to
be
enticing
enough
to
developers
to
to
use
that
or
to
actually
trigger
wanting
to
move
from
nine
percent
to
twenty
percent?
D
I
think
maybe
not
is
my
is
my
thought
basis
on
it.
I
think
a
developer
it
sounds
like
mr
higgins
would
based
on
this
project,
would
absorb
the
125
thousand
or
150
000
more
easily,
given
his
what
the
returns
that
he's
looking
for
or
the
investors
are
looking
for
for
this
property
rather
than
the
absorption
of
the
20
units.
So
then
that
leads
me
to
say
from
my
perspective,
I'm
in
support.
Just
on
the
basis
of
I
don't
think
that
the
storage
component
is
a
is
a
enticing
enough.
D
A
B
A
A
A
couple
things
as
I
I
think
about
your
comments,
commissioner
albrecht
is
that
is
something
again.
We
can
go
back
and
look
at,
but
we
do
have
an
ordinance
in
front
of
us
and
that's
part
of
where
I'm
struggling
with
this,
but
to
think
that
that
is
where
we
gave
the
ability
to
get
the
additional.
I
mean
it
was
pretty
clear
in
the
ordinance
to
be
able
to
give
that
that
flexibility.
G
G
More
broadly,
I
agree
with
that
and
that's
absolutely
right,
and
so
I
guess
at
this
point
I
would
say
you
know
our
job
is
to
look
at
what
are
our
standards?
You
know
this
does
go
to
the
council.
If
the
council
is
moved
by
the
25
argument,
I
would
you
know
they
could
make
that
that
shift,
but
that's
kind
of
where
I
am
tonight.
A
A
I
don't
know
it
doesn't
sound
like
at
this
point
that
there's
any
issues
from
planning
commission
members
on
that.
The
second
issue
that
we're
looking
at
is
really
the
final
development
plans
for
the
405
unit
apartment
building,
which
is,
I
think,
probably
where
the
storage
question
lands
and
then
the
last
one
is
really
the
preliminary
and
final
plat
and
again,
I
don't
think
anybody
has
expressed
any
comments
against
that
at
this
point.
So
commission
members
thoughts
or
commissioner
albrecht.
D
A
All
right,
thank
you,
commissioner
albrecht
and
I
think
again,
part
of
the
record
for
the
city
council
is
our
discussion
tonight
and
about
some
of
the
issues,
certainly
that
we're
considering
under
this
tonight
with
the
usage
in
some
of
the
other
facilities
and
the
cost,
the
implications
for
developers
and
so
yeah.
That's
a
good
good
thought.
They
certainly
do
have
the
ability
to
look
at
this.
A
C
D
Yeah,
I
think
I
I
would
agree
as
well
with
the
with
that
that
first
one
I
like
the
different
ideas,
the
the
the
idea
of
the
of
the
grocery
store
too.
It
sounds
pretty
attractive
to
me,
and
I
also
you
know
following
on
commissioner
roman's
comments,
you
know.
Hopefully
this
is
something
that
serves
well
the
community
that
will
be
living
in
that
in
that
particular
area
and
yeah.
When
it
comes
to
the
the
storage
part,
I
would
also
agree
with
following
the
standards.
A
A
A
A
F
Thank
you
any
case
number
pl2021-57.
Having
been
able
to
make
the
required
findings,
I
moved
to
recommend
approval
of
a
major
revision
to
the
preliminary
development
plan
of
bloomington
central
station
to
replace
existing
offices
with
mixed
use,
high
density
residential
buildings,
subject
to
the
conditions
and
code
requirements
attached
to
the
staff
report.
A
A
Second,
all
right,
commission
members,
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
in
front
of
us
that,
having
been
able
to
make
the
required
findings
recommend
approval
of
a
major
revision
to
the
preliminary
development
plan
of
the
bloomington
central
station
to
replace
existing
office
uses
with
mixed
use,
high
density,
residential
building,
high
density
residential
buildings,
subject
to
the
conditions
and
code
requirements
attached
to
the
staff
report.
Are
there
any
additional
comments?
B
F
A
G
Mr
chair,
in
case
pl
2021-57,
having
been
able
to
make
the
required
findings,
I
moved
to
recommend
approval
of
final
development
plans
for
a
six-story
405
unit
apartment
building,
with
an
approximately
fifteen
thousand
square
foot
grocery
space
located
at
8100,
31st
avenue
south
subject
to
the
conditions
and
code
requirements
attached
to
the
staff
report.
All.
A
A
Second,
all
right,
commission
members,
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
in
front
of
us
to
move,
recommended
approval
of
a
final
development
plans
for
a
six
for
a
six-story
405
unit
apartment
building
with
an
approximate
approximate
15
000
square
foot,
grocery
space
located
at
8100,
31st
street
31st
avenue
south
subject
to
the
conditions
and
code
requirements
attached
to
the
staff
report.
Any
further
discussion
on
that
item
not
seeing
any
all
those
in
favor
say
aye
by
roll
call.
Commissioner
corman.
F
D
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
in
case
number
pl2021-57.
Having
been
able
to
make
the
required
findings,
I
move
to
recommend
approval
of
the
preliminary
and
final
plat
of
bloomington
central
station
seventh
edition,
creating
one
platted
lot
and
three
outlots
subject
to
the
conditions
and
code
requirements
attached
to
the
staff
report.
A
F
A
All
right,
commission
members,
we
have
a
motion
and
second
in
front
of
us
to
move,
to
recommend
approval
of
the
preliminary
and
final
plot
of
the
bloomington
central
station
seventh
edition,
creating
one
platted
lot
and
three
outlots
subject
to
the
conditions
and
code
requirements
attached
to
the
staff
report.
Any
further
discussion
on
that.
C
D
D
A
And
I,
for
myself,
motion
passes
all
right:
commission
members,
that
completes
the
three
motions
for
that
and,
as
we
said
before,
this
will
move
forward
to
the
may
3rd
city
council
meeting
as
a
consent
item
all
right.
That
completes
our
public
hearings
for
the
evening.
We
have
one
item
left
and
that
is
consideration
of
the
let's
see
april
8th
planning,
commission
synopsis
and
if
I
recall
right
yes,
I
was
the
only
commissioner
absent
that
evening
and
welcome
back
commissioner
cookton,
all
right.
Commission
members
again,
the
thursday
april
8th
planning
commission
synopsis.
A
A
All
right,
we
have
a
motion
to
approve.
Is
there
a
second
commissioner
albrecht?
Second,
all
right!
Thank
you.
Commission
members,
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
to
approve
the
april
8
2021
planning
planning
con
commission
synopsis
I'll
get
there
and
all
right
all
those
in
favor,
say
aye
by
roll
call.
Commissioner
corman.