►
From YouTube: February 3, 2022 Bloomington Planning Commission Meeting
Description
February 3, 2022 Bloomington Minnesota Planning Commission Meeting.
0:00:00 Start
0:03:38 ITEM 1 PL2021-255 (cont. from 1/27/22)
(public hearing) Seagate Technology (applicant) and Seagate Technology Inc. (owner)
7801 Computer Avenue South and 7850 Nord Avenue South
Major Revision to Preliminary and Final Development Plans for a two-story, approximately 81,000 square-foot building addition to an existing technology campus
0:22:57 ITEM 2 PL2021-257 (cont. from 1/13/22 and 1/27/22)
(public hearing) Enclave (applicant)
8200 Humboldt Corporation (owner)
8200 Humboldt Avenue South
Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to change the land use guide plan designation of 8200 Humboldt Avenue South from Office to High-Density Residential; Rezone from B-1 Office to RM-50(PD) Multiple-Family Residential(Planned Development); and Preliminary and Final Development Plans for a four-story, 149-unit apartment building
1:00:25 ITEM 3 PL2022-20
(study item) City of Bloomington
Discuss 2021 Miscellaneous Issues Ordinance
1:43:10 ITEM 4 City of Bloomington
(study item) Consider approval of draft Planning Commission meeting synopses
1:44:32 ITEM 5 City of Bloomington
(study item) Planning Commission Policy and Issues Update
A
Good
evening
and
welcome
to
the
february
3rd
2022
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
final
decision
authority
and
others.
The
city
council
make
that
final
decision,
the
city
or
the
planning
commission
is
made
up
of
seven
volunteers
that
are
appointed
by
the
city
council
for
up
to
three
years
and
a
term
for
a
maximum
of
six
tonight.
We
have
two
continued,
so
we'll
move
through
those,
and
then
we
have
two
study
items.
A
I
pledge
allegiance
to
the
flag
of
the
united
states
of
america
and
to
the
republic
for
which
it
stands:
one
nation,
under
god,
indivisible
with
liberty
and
justice
for
all
all
right
and
again
before
we
start
tonight.
Of
course,
the
planning
commission
is
in
a
hybrid
scenario,
so
we
are
open
to
the
public
here
in
the
chambers,
but
we
also
have
ability
for
people
at
home
to
participate
with
that.
Mr
marker
guard,
would
you
go
through
that.
B
A
C
C
This
just
gives
you
a
general
overview
of
what
is
included
in
the
application.
The
the
building
edition
that
they're
proposing
is
a
two-story
addition
on
the
south
side
of
their
facility.
It's
approximately
81
000
square
feet
in
size,
and
it
would
include
a
skyway
connection
to
another
fabrication.
Addition
within
the
campus.
C
There
are
some
associated
site.
Improvements
proposed
as
part
of
the
project
and
seagate
is
also
requesting
a
proof
of
parking
solution
to
accommodate
some
of
their
required
parking,
as
well
as
pd
flexibility
via
deviation.
So
we'll
talk
about
that
for
those
that
aren't
familiar
with
the
seagate
campus,
it's
located
just
to
the
east
of
highway
100
and
north
of
494,
and
that's
liver
of
bloomington,
that
abuts
edina.
C
C
Aspect
or
a
unique
aspect
to
this
project,
or
to
this
campus
a
couple
things
I'll
note
is,
generally
speaking,
the
access
and
all
of
the
the
main
transportation
that
serves
this
campus
would
all
remain
the
same.
There
is
one
thing
I
do
want
to
point
out
here
is
that
there
is
a
partially
improved
right-of-way
that
stretches
from
west
78th
street
circle
over
to
computer
avenue,
and
we'll
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
that.
C
But
as
long
as
I've
just
got
an
area
map
up
here,
I
just
do
want
to
point
it
out
and
then,
generally
speaking,
the
the
uses
in
this
area
are
a
mix
of
office,
and
we
just
had
the
high
density
motor
vehicle
sales
facility
in
this
area,
so
you're
familiar
with
the
area.
Just
with
that
recent
application.
C
This
just
gets
a
oblique
image
here
kind
of
closer
into
the
campus.
It
gives
you
a
flavor,
it's
a
mix
of
one-story
and
two-story
buildings
in
this
area.
The
shaded
yellow
area
is
where
they
would
remove
surface
parking
in
order
to
stall.
This
building
can
building
edition,
and
then
you
see
the
skyway
connection
over
to
the
east
underneath
here
and
in
here
is
a
truck
dock
or
a
truck
court
where
they
do
delivery
of
various
materials
and
shipping,
and
so
they
still
would
allow
access
to
that
via
the
the
skyway.
C
So
as
part
of
this
project,
they
are
installing
some
new
parking
but
modifying
existing
parking.
In
order
to
install
underground
storm
water
management
facilities
there
on
the
west
side
of
the
campus,
and
so
the
this,
their
existing
surface
lot
doesn't
have
parking
islands
and
a
few
other
things
so
any
area
that
they
touch.
They
would
bring
that
up
to
code
with
respect
to
parking
islands
and
those
types
of
things.
C
A
couple
other
things
I'll
note
just
about
the
staff
report
quickly.
The
the
addition
meets
all
of
our
setback
requirements
in
the
it
zoning
district.
They
are
requesting
a
modest
deviation
for
stairs
and
stoops
on
the
south
side
of
the
building,
and
there
actually
is
allowances
for
stairs
and
stoops
to
encroach
into
setback
areas,
but
not
within
landscape
yards.
C
You
know,
there's
not
a
lot
to
touch
on
with
the
floor
plan
but
as
it
relates
to
parking.
I
do
want
to
just
point
out
a
couple
things.
This
is
the
the
first
level
of
the
building
edition
and
actually
they
call
it
sub
fab
on
the
floor
plan,
but
it
actually
serves
to
house
a
lot
of
equipment
that
is
utilized
on
upper
floors
on
the
upper
floor
of
the
building
edition
and
in
addition
to
that,
you've
got
a
lot
of
equipment,
storage
and
delivery
areas.
C
So
seagate
is
not
a
typical
industrial
or
manufacturing
use.
It's
a
high-tech
manufacturer
in
terms
of
chips
and
other
things,
so
they
have
a
lot
of
unoccupied
space
within
this
building.
There's
a
substantial
amount
of
mechanical
and
chiller
and
air
ventilation,
areas
and
equipment
that
does
and
in
effect,
creates
a
lot
of
dead
space
and
that's
something
that
we've
seen
in
other
similar
campuses.
C
We
have
a
one
or
two
other,
or
I
should
say
a
few
other
comparable
type
uses
in
bloomington
over
in
the
south
loop,
and
this
is
very
similar
to
those
facilities
that
has
a
lower
occupancy
than
a
typical
manufacturing
use.
So
that
just
gives
you
a
flavor
of
the
first
floor,
the
second
floor,
the
the
area,
that's
hatched
on
the
left
in
the
building
addition,
that's
actually
the
fabrication
area
where
the
the
fabrication
activities
would
take
place.
But
then
again
you
have
a
lot
of
mechanical
areas
and
then
you
have
a
locker
room.
C
The
fabrication
area
has
to
be
a
clean,
a
completely
clean
and
controlled
environment
and
then
on
the
the
right
side
of
the
slide
there
you
see,
the
skyway
connection
actually
have
clean
and
dirty
corridors
is
what
they
refer
to
them,
and
that's
so
you
can
navigate
in
between
controlled
environments
over
in
other
parts
of
the
building.
If
you
will,
I
just
want
to
point
some
of
that
out
and
we'll
talk
about
how
that
relates
to
the
request,
as
it
pertains
to
parking
talk
about
it
right
now.
C
So
the
city
code,
first
of
all,
on
the
basis
that
this
facility
is
partially
in
bloomington
and
partially
in
edina,
we
actually
had
to
work
with
the
applicant
to
identify
what
all
the
parking
requirements
are
in
the
jurisdiction
of
edina.
So
they
did
go
about
that.
We
did
verify
those
numbers,
and
so
the
the
calculations
that
you
see
in
your
table
that
I'll
bring
up
on
the
next
slide
actually
reflect
both
the
parking
requirements,
the
city
of
edina
and
the
city
of
bloomington,
and
so
that
gets
us
to
an
overall
parking
requirement.
C
That
we'll
show
you
on
the
table
they're
proposing
to
provide
around
1400
some
parking
stalls
with
the
consideration
of
170
net
proof
of
parking
stalls.
So
you
see
along
the
eastern
boundary
of
the
campus
here,
they're
showing
surface
parking
all
along
that
drive
aisle
and
then,
in
addition
to
that,
they're
showing
expansions
of
parking
in
their
existing
surface
parking
lot
south
of
the
building
through
proof
of
parking
as
well.
C
So
one
of
the
things,
the
reason
that
that
exists
is
that
at
some
point
in
the
past,
as
part
of
mndot
and
other
jurisdictions,
just
future
plans
for
494
expansions
and
improvements.
It
was
thought
at
one
point
that
there
was
the
potential
for
the
frontage
road
within
this
area
in
order
to
to
be
abandoned.
In
order
to
expand
494.
C
C
Now
this
whole
corridor
is
in
is
in
some
future
phase
or
another
to
be
improved
in
order
to
improve
operations
at
some
point,
and
this
area
is
in,
I
believe
I
was
speaking
with
julie
long
about
the
city's
engineer.
It's
even
either
phase
three
or
four-
I
don't
recall
specifically,
but
she
mentioned
it's
probably
somewhere
between
10
and
15
years
out
is
when
they
would
look
that
and
obviously
they
would
have
to
secure
funding
in
order
to
do
those
improvements.
C
C
They
can
keep
494,
improve
it
without
gaining
without
needing
more
right
away
to
abandon
the
frontage
road.
So
at
this
point
in
the
planning
process
for
future
494
improvements,
the
frontage
road
would
remain
and
it's
in
a
very
far
away
phase
at
this
point,
and
so
it's
likely
that
this
connection
would
never
be
needed.
C
So
those
are
the
things
I'll
point
out
there,
I'm
getting
to
the
compliance
table.
You
can
see
in
combination
with
the
170
proof
of
parking
stalls
and
the
actual
parking
that
is
at
the
campus
today
they
would
be
requesting
a
9.3
percent
deviation
from
the
city's
parking
requirement
and
staff
is
supportive
of
that.
For
a
couple
reasons.
C
A
this
property
has.
This
facility
has
significant
mechanical
air
ventilation
and
unoccupied
spaces,
as
I
mentioned
before.
So
it's
not
a
typical
manufacturing
use.
In
that
regard
b.
It
has
a
lower
employee
count
on
the
basis
of
all
of
those
spaces
than
a
typical
manufacturing
use.
So,
for
example,
in
the
seagate
materials
they
mentioned
that
they
would
have
45
employees
per
shift
in
the
new
building
edition.
C
If
this
were
a
typical
manufacturing
use
according
to
bloomington's
gross
parking
requirements,
this
new
space
would
require
120
parking
spaces
for
an
addition
that
seagate
is
telling
us
is
going
to
be
staffed
by
45
employees
per
shift.
That
just
gives
you
an
idea
of
how
the
city's
gross
parking
requirements
do
not
do
not
mirror
well
this
unique
facility,
if
you
will
and
then
a
third,
as
I
mentioned,
the
backup
gross
parking
supply
and
we're
not
entering
this
into
the
record
by
any
means.
C
But
the
city
participated
in
a
parking
study
of
a
comparable
facility
on
the
east
side
of
bloomington
in
the
south
loop,
as
I
mentioned
not
long
ago,
I
think
it
was
in
2019
and
that
study
supported
a
parking
deviation
upwards
of
over
40
percent.
So
that
just
gives
you
an
idea.
Not
every
facility
is
the
same.
The
seagate
facility
does
have
more
office
than
the
facility
that
was
studied,
but
it
is,
it
does
have
similar
manufacturing
equipment
and
mechanical
needs.
C
So
it's
a
good
data
point
if
you
will
so
on
the
basis
of
all
those
things,
staff
is
supportive
of
the
the
deviation
being
requested
and
sought
by
seagate
and
if
parking
demand
were
to
ever
exceed
what
they're
anticipating
we
would
have
that
proof
of
parking
to
execute
against.
To
add
additional
parking
to
this
campus.
C
C
One
thing
I'll
go
back
here,
just
sorry,
just
with
respect
to
screening,
there
is
an
outdoor
equipment
yard
and
the
you
know
for
the
potential
for
new
rooftop
equipment
as
well.
Those
things
do
need
to
be
screened,
so
just
a
point
on
that.
We
usually
touch
on
that
with
the
landscaping
there's
some
other
miscellaneous
things
that
have
to
be
resolved
as
part
of
that
application
and
staff
has
added
conditions
of
approval
that
address
all
these
things.
Hopefully
it's
straightforward.
C
If
there's
any
questions
about
a
specific
thing,
I'm
happy
to
return
to
it,
but
other
than
that
we
have
not
received
any
public
correspondence
about
this
application.
Just
to
note
that
for
the
record
but
other
than
that
staff
is
recommending
approval-
and
I
believe
seagate's
staff,
as
well
as
their
architect
and
engineer,
are
so
also
available
for
questions.
A
A
A
And
I'm
not
seeing
anything
for
you
now,
mr
leopard,
I
appreciate
you
being
available
for
any
questions
we
may
have.
Thank
you
all
right
at
this
point,
commission
members
will
go
ahead
and
continue
the
public
hearing
on
this
item,
and
with
that,
mr
marker
guard,
is
there
anybody
online?
That
would
like
to
speak
to
this
item.
A
A
E
A
A
F
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
don't
have
much.
This
seems
pretty
straightforward.
I
appreciate
the
staffs
time
and
understanding
the
applicant's
perspective
on
the
parking
deviation.
I
think
that
makes
sense,
especially
with
a
facility
like
this,
and
I
think
you
know
seeing
the
problems
we've
had
in
our
ability
to
deliver
goods
in
the
united
states,
because
we
don't
make
enough
of
these
kinds
of
things
in
the
united
states.
I
am
pleased
to
see
this
kind
of
expansion
of
any.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
commissioner,
roman
and
maybe
I'll
just
add
quickly.
I
know
mr
johnson
addressed
it
with
the
pd
flexibility.
Certainly
the
step
stair
step
area
in
the
landscape
yard,
I
think,
is
acceptable
as
a
very
minimal
flexibility
for
the
type
of
development
in
in
the
landscaped
area.
So
I
am
supportive
of
that
as
well
any
other
commissioners
with
thoughts.
Otherwise,
I
would
entertain
emotion.
A
A
Right,
commission
members,
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
in
front
of
us
to
make
the
required
findings
to
recommend
approval
of
a
major
revision
to
the
preliminary
and
final
development
plans
for
a
two-story,
approximately
eighty
one
thousand
square
foot
building
addition
to
an
existing
technology
campus
located
at
7801
computer
avenue
and
7850
nord
avenue
south
subject
to
the
conditions
and
code
requirements
attached
to
the
staff
report.
Is
there
any
further
discussion
on
this
item
not
seeing
any
all
those
in
favor
say
aye
by
roll
call?
Commissioner
goldsman
aye,
commissioner
corman
aye.
D
A
And
I
for
myself,
motion
passes.
This
item
will
move
forward
to
the
city
council
at
their
february
14th
meeting
on
the
consent
agenda
again
this
will
move
forward
to
the
february
14th
city
council
meeting
on
the
consent
agenda.
Moving
forward
to
item
number
two,
mr
centenaria,
you
have
a
staff
report
for
us.
H
I
do
thank
you,
mr
chair
item.
Two
on
your
agenda
is
a
redevelopment
proposal
at
8200,
humboldt
avenue
south
we
had
planned
on
having
a
public
hearing
a
few
weeks
ago,
but
to
fine-tune
the
application
to
present
to
you.
The
the
applicant
asked
to
continue
that
a
little
bit
there's
several
components
to
the
application.
One
is
a
comprehensive
plan.
Amendment
8200
humboldt
as
I'll
detail
shortly,
is
an
office
building
and
is
guided
and
zoned
for
office
uses.
H
So,
in
addition
to
the
comprehensive
plan
amendment,
there
is
a
rezoning
proposal
to
multi-family
residential
and
then
the
applicant
is
proposing
preliminary
development
plans.
Final
development
plans
for
a
four-story
149
unit
apartment
building,
so
I
think
we're
all
familiar
with
the
site:
8200
humboldt
avenue
south
it's
we
see
a
lot
of
redevelopment
proposals
in
land
use
transition
areas,
and
this
is
one
of
those.
So
this
site
is
just
west
of
and
along
interstate
35w.
H
I
can
see
it
outlined
in
red
and
then
the
north
boundary
is
west
82nd
street.
So
you
see
a
pretty
pretty
quick
transition
between
the
interstate
and
single-family
residential.
We
have
an
office
tower
to
the
north,
the
interstate
to
the
east
and
a
single-family
residential
to
the
to
the
west
and
to
the
south.
H
So
a
couple
images
of
the
existing
conditions,
so
the
the
office
building
is,
is
about
50
years
old,
built
in
1972,
a
three-story
office
building
one
level
of
structured
parking
beneath,
and
you
can
see
it's
largely
surrounded
by
surface
parking
to
the
the
north,
the
west
and
to
the
south
another
image
there.
You
know,
I
consider
it
fairly
typical
of
this
era
of
office
development.
H
H
So
they,
as
I
mentioned,
the
existing
land
use
designation,
is
office
and
and
that's
very
much
in
keeping
with
of
an
office
use,
of
course,
but
the
in
order
to
accommodate
a
multi-family
or
high-density
multi-family
development
that
would
need
to
be
changed
to
high-density
residential.
You
don't
look
very
far
to
find
a
high-density
residential
designations.
H
It
is,
it
is
within
walking
distance
to
those
those
stations,
so
that
is
a
factor
in
considering
the
the
rezoning
and
the
land
use,
designation
change
so
going
to
the
site
plan
again.
149
units
and
the
mix
of
the
unit
mix
is
pretty
typical.
For
what
we
see
I
mean
the
majority
of
the
units
would
be
a
studio,
alcohol,
alcoves
or
one
bedrooms,
a
pretty
good
chunk
of
two
bedroom
units
and
then
seven
three
bedroom
units,
so
a
smaller
proportion
of
the
three
bedroom
units.
H
This
is
a
of
course,
the
affordable
housing,
ordinance
or
opportunity.
Housing
ordinance
is
applicable
here,
and
so
we
do
have
an
affordability
requirement.
That
requirement
is
nine
percent
of
the
units
affordable
to
those
earning
up
to
sixty
percent
of
the
area
median
income.
The
applicant
is
proposing
a
higher
level
of
affordability
than
that
14
units
at
50
percent
area
meeting
income,
so
they
are
seeking
tax
increment
financing,
which
is
going
through
a
separate
process
and
the
level
of
affordability
might
evolve
a
little
bit.
H
I
know
the
applicant
may
be
seeking
a
different
tax
increment
financing
mechanism
and
offering
additional
affordability.
So
I
I
don't
believe
this
will
be
the
last
time.
The
planning
commission
reviews
this
project
in
some
form,
but
suffice
it
to
say
it
as
what
is
being
presented
to
you
tonight
is
exceeding
the
oho
requirements,
as
outlined
in
city
code.
H
Is
the
minimum
setback
requirement,
which
is
40
feet
from
the
property
boundary?
Those
yellow
rectangles
are
the
areas
of
the
building
that
would
deviate
from
that
setback
requirement
and
that
green
area
is
the
portion
of
this
portion
of
the
building,
essentially
open
space
between
the
street
and
the
building,
and
that
exceeds
the
requirement.
H
And
so,
given
the
courtyard
design
of
this
building,
you
have
a
relatively
modest
deviation
or
encroachment
into
that
setback
area.
But
then
there's
really
substantial
open
areas.
Well
beyond
that,
and
we
actually
feel
that
this
design
is
less
impactful,
aesthetically
or
visually
than
if
it
were
to
be
a
straight
monolith,
building
at
a
40-foot
setback.
We
think
this
design
is
more
interesting
and
actually
reduces
the
potential
visual
impact
to
the
single-family
neighborhood
to
the
to
the
west.
H
One
of
the
reasons
why
the
there
was
a
bit
of
a
delay
in
bringing
this
application
before
you
is.
You
know
again
right
away
on
all
four
sides,
and
there
is
some
grade
between
this
site
and
interstate
35
to
the
east,
and
so
some
some
retaining
structures
would
be
would
be
required
to
allow
for
a
parking
surface
parking
and
the
the
retaining
wall.
H
We
felt
needed
to
be
adjusted
to
ensure
that
there
weren't
impacts
to
mndot
right
of
way,
which
would
certainly
lengthen
the
review
process
and
may
not
be
approvable
frankly,
and
so
they,
the
applicant,
adjusted
their
plans.
We
wanted
to
ensure
that
the
retaining
wall
was
no
greater
than
four
feet
because
there's
different
standards
once
it
gets
above
four
feet,
then
it's
required
to
meet
structure,
setbacks
and
again,
that's
40
feet
from
the
property
line,
so
that
that's
a
pretty
significant
deviation.
H
This
retaining
wall,
as
is
even
though
it
does
not
exceed
four
feet,
does
require
a
deviation
because
there
is
a
10
foot
setback
even
for
a
low
retaining
wall,
but
frankly
that
there's
some
retaining
wall
is
is
necessary.
It's
either
have
a
retaining
wall
or
reduce
the
surface
parking
substantially,
which
may
not
work
for
the
development
overall.
So
again,
we
are
supportive
and
and
appreciate
the
applicant's
adjustments
based
on
staff's
comments.
H
You
know
and
again
once
you,
you
move
one
lever
and
something
else
changes,
and
you
know
when
they're
the
applicant
was
adjusting
the
retaining
wall.
The
parking
lot,
they
narrowed,
the
sidewalk
with
a
little
bit,
and
so
one
adjustment
that
were
that
would
be
a
code
requirement
and-
and
we
are
suggesting
has
to
take
place-
is
to
maintain
a
minimum
of
five
feet
clear
for
a
sidewalk,
and
you
can
see
a
six
foot
dimension
there.
H
So
you
might
ask
well
what
why
does
it
need
to
change
and
we
want
all
parking
stalls
that
are
along
sidewalks
to
account
for
vehicle
overhang
and
the
standard
we
use
is
two
feet
so
to
account
for
vehicle
overhang,
but
then
maintain
a
clear
walking
with
the
five
feet.
We
want
to
see
a
seven
foot
wide
space,
and
so
some
a
little
bit
more
work
is
needed
here,
we're
supportive
of
a
variety
of
solutions.
Maybe
it's
reducing
the
drive
lane
by
foot
or
potentially
reducing
the
parallel
stalls
by
foot.
H
H
The
one
comment
we
did
not
get
receive
department,
transportation
comments
in
time
for
the
packet,
but
one
thing
that
they
commented
on
was
they
were.
They
are
showing
some
trees
in
again
in
mndot,
right
of
way,
which
is
something
that
they
identified
would
have
to
change,
and
so
that
that's
a
minor
modification
that
would
have
to
happen
as
part
of
the
revisions
to
the
landscape
plan.
Excuse
me,
but
we
think
that
that's
pretty
simple,
a
pretty
simple
revision.
H
A
couple
images
of
the
building
so
we're
talking
about
a
four-story
building.
You
can
see
the
the
courtyard
design
where
you
don't
have
a
solid
wall
along
the
street,
and
so
not
only
is
it
aesthetic
pleasing,
but
it
also
creates
those
courtyard
spaces
for
residents,
because
that's
where
the
amenity,
many
of
these
spaces
are
being
proposed
along
the
lower
level.
H
The
mix
materials
are
pretty
similar
to
what
you've
seen
before
a
lot
of
brick
facing
the
street,
which
is,
of
course,
a
permitted
material
and
then
a
combination
of
glass,
of
course,
metal
panels
and
fiber
cement
panels.
So
they
do,
they
do
get
to
take
advantage
of
some
incentives
related
to
materials.
The
oho
has
some
allowances,
but
again
because
this
development
is
along
streets
there,
it
isn't
a
it,
doesn't
give
them
a
lot
of
flexibility,
because
the
incentive
does
not
apply
to
street-facing
facades.
H
Another
image
on
the
this
is
from
the
northeast
corner
of
the
site.
You
can
see
a
small
club
room
on
the
top
level
and
then
along
the
east,
and
so
this
image
this
three-dimensional
image
would
need
to
be
adjusted.
The
the
mini
cooper
in
the
foreground
is
would
become
a
parallel
stall,
so
it's
just
a
rendering
change,
but
you
can
see
the
the
east
side
of
the
building
is
at
grade.
So
the
surface
parking
is
that
great
with
that
we
are,
we
are
recommending
approval
and
because
of
the
applications
before
you
there's
three
motions.
A
G
H
H
It
is
a
factor
on
our
site
plan
review,
and
so
we
generally
look
for
spaces
where
snow
storage
could
be
located,
and
you
know
essentially
you're
looking
for
relatively
open
areas
where
you
know,
plow
could
could
just
snow
and
given
that
mndot
isn't
going
to
want
snow
on
in
their
right
of
way,
it
would
be
need
to
be
identified
on
site
or
stored
on
site
and
the
two.
The
two
most
obvious
areas
are
the
green
space
to
the
north
of
the
north
side.
H
That
is
a
pretty
substantial,
green
space
and
without
a
you
know,
really
park
improvements,
landscape
of
course,
but
there
wouldn't
be
an
obstruction
to
keep
snow
from
being
stored
there
and
then
the
southeast
corner,
where
there's
another
open,
open
space
where
snow
could
be
stored
so
that
the
parking
facility
is
isn't
tremendous.
And
so,
generally
speaking,
we
were
comfortable
with
the
spaces
that
would
be
made
available
for
snow
storage.
F
H
Sure,
mr
chair,
commissioner,
roman,
we
don't,
we
do
not
have
the
shadow
study
for
what
the
shadows
would
have
been
or
would
be
at
the
required
setback
we
just
based.
The
shadow
study
was
based
on
the
proposal
before
you
sure,
and
you
know,
even
though,
but
certainly
the
there
are
some
shadow
impacts,
especially
on
the
winter
solstice.
H
E
E
Is
there
fencing
or
screening
to
prevent
thinking,
kids
playing
out
in
that
green
space
from
them?
You
know
going
out
into
the
streets
or
even
getting
into
35
w,
just
thinking
about
some
of
the
residents
and
kids
and
thinking
about
how
we
can
prevent
you,
know
an
accident
or
something
to
happen
with
kids
in
that
space.
H
Yeah
sure,
mr
share,
commissioner,
we
definitely
want
there
to
be
some
barrier
when
you
have
a
potential
fall
risk.
So
you
know,
one
area
certainly
is:
is
the
entrance
into
the
parking
structure?
That's
a
pretty
significant,
retaining
wall
there
and
then,
and
so
that's
just
an
example
of
where
we
would
want.
H
It
is
a
fair
ways
away
from
the
street
and
you
there
would
be
a
an
eight
foot
wide
sidewalk
between
that
green
space
and
the
street,
and
so
whether
it's
their
landscaping
is
sufficient
to
provide
that
visual
barrier
or
if
there
actually
needs
to
be
something
like
a
physical
fence
that
either
would
be
alternatives
for
the
applicant
to
take
advantage
of.
But
you
know
they
have
liability
to
be
con
concerned
with.
So
they
may
have
some
thoughts
on
on
how
best
to
manage
it.
A
F
F
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
mr
bachman,
I'm
just
curious
what
your
engagement
with
the
neighbors
has
been
and
what
you've
heard
from
them.
We've
actually
had
two
neighborhood
meetings
with
them.
We
had
one
last
year
and
then
had
another
one
in
january
to
just
kind
of
give
everybody
an
update,
because
the
plan
had
changed
slightly
and
just
wanted
to
get
everybody
kind
of
up
to
speed.
F
The
neighbors
were
really
nice.
They
asked
a
lot
of
really
good
educated
questions,
but
didn't
seem
to
have,
I
think,
in
a
perfect
world.
They'd
love
it
to
be
a
giant
park,
but
I
I
don't
think
anybody's,
really
in
love
with
the
with
their
view
right
now,
so
I
think
they're
looking
forward
to
having
something
that's
updated
and
gonna
be
a
little
better
taken
care
of.
F
To
address
any
concerns
that
you
heard
yeah,
I
think
we
did
we,
both
meetings
were
were
pretty
well
attended
and,
like
I
said,
very
active
and
engaged
folks,
so
we
were
we're
happy
to
be
able
to
get
their
input.
We
when
we
first
started
designing
it.
We
worked
really
well
with
with
city
with
staff
with
glenn
and
his
team
on
how
to
best
lay
this
site
out.
F
H
Mr
chair,
this
is
bike.
May
I
add
something?
Yes,
please
go
ahead.
Yeah.
I
should
have
included
my
presentation,
but
you
know
when
you
have
a
redevelopment
of
this
scale,
especially
if
it's
multi-family
redevelopment,
we
often
hear
some
concern
from
from
neighbors.
You
know
that
the
there
will
be
traffic
impacts
or
property
value
impacts.
A
Thank
you,
maybe
just
one
question,
because
it
was
brought
up
with
the
commissioners
for
staff,
just
thinking
about
snow
removal.
At
I
mean
I
can
certainly
see
there
are
a
couple
spots,
but
as
I
understood
that
green
space
on
the
north
is
that
I
mean
what
are
your
thoughts
on
that?
Are
you
guys
gonna
remove
most
of
the
snow?
Are
you
we're.
F
From
north
dakota
we
do
snow,
so
yeah
it's,
this
is
gonna,
be
probably
a
truck
site.
I
mean
when
we
have
a
small
amount.
You
know
you
have
two
three
inches
sure
there's
some
areas.
We
can
push
it.
If
we
have
a
good
north,
dakota,
minnesota
blizzard,
there's
gonna
be
trucks
coming
in
to
get
it
out
sure.
Okay,.
D
D
F
D
Think
that's
going
to
be
bad
enough,
but
then
we
add
more
traffic.
I
think
it's.
I
think
it's
going
to
be
impossible
to
get
around
on
82nd
street.
You
know
during
rush
hour
traffic,
but
that's
I
I
don't
know
how
you
can
figure
that
out,
but
it
just
seems
to
me
like.
I
don't
think
the
freeway
plan
is
doing
a
very
good
job
of
figuring
that
out
and
then
adding
this
to
it.
A
A
Although
being
a
long-standing
plan
with
the
city
we
had,
we
had
asked
the
again
the
public
works
staff
to
really
look
into
that
and
and
what
what
are
the
sorts
of
things
that
can
be
done
to
make
sure
that
community
members
that
might
be
on
the
south
side,
trying
to
traverse
to
the
north
side
can
do
it
safely
and
our
own
residents
traversing
through
the
city.
So
please
be
assured
that
our
our
fine
city
engineers
are
working
on
that.
H
Mr
chair,
yes
again,
this
is
like
sorry
for
interrupting
it
go
ahead.
I
would
add
that
there
was
a
traffic
study
prepared
for
this
development
and
again
because
it
was
a
previous
iteration.
It
didn't
study
this
exact
footprint,
but
the
characteristics
overall
from
a
traffic
perspective
were
were
very
similar
and
you
know
the
traffic
engineer,
but
the
traffic
study
didn't
find
any
adverse
impacts
for
this
development
sure
if
it
were
to
come
to
fruition.
So
we
do
have
some
folks
available
tonight.
If
you
want
to
discuss
that
further.
A
A
E
A
F
G
A
E
E
E
G
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
just
wanted
to
make
a
quick
comment
on
this
is
just
a
terrific
transitional
use
between
a
very
busy
35w
corridor
and
the
single
family
homes
to
the
west.
I
think
it's
even
better
than
what
was
there
before
with
an
office
use
which
is
not
always
compatible
with
single
family
homes.
Certainly,
this
is
better
and
I'm
happy
to
see
a
nice
transitional
use
here.
So
I
am
in
support
of
this.
F
F
F
But
I
think
it's
just
a
good
reminder
that
it
would
be
good
to
have
our
traffic
staff
perhaps
give
us
some
more
frequent
updates
on
the
work.
That's
being
done.
I
know
the
last
time
they
were
in
front
of
us
kind
of
the
responsibility
group
was
well.
What
do
you
think
or
what
are
you
worried
about
or
not
I
don't
mean
a
negative
way,
but
what
are
the
things
you're
worried
about
that?
F
You
want
us
to
address,
and
so
I
think
you
know
what
we
heard
tonight
and
when
I
know
I've
observed
my
own
in
my
own
driving
in
that
area,
significant
needs
for
increasing
the
pedestrian
experience.
So,
mr
marker,
maybe
we
could
put
that
on
the
list
at
some
point
in
the
next
few
months
to
have
a
checking
what's
to
happen
and
perhaps
the
more
frequent
ones
as
this
plan
develops
on
that
corridor.
But
as
far
as
this
application
that
I
update
you,
I'm
supportive.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
commissioner,
roman
any
other
commissioners
with
comments,
thoughts
on
this
particular
application
and
in
the
meantime
I
think
I'll
just
add
a
couple
comments.
I
I
do
appreciate
the
applicant
in
this
instance.
Talking
to
the
neighborhood,
that's
very
helpful
for
the
planning
commission
to
understand
where
the
neighborhood
is
coming
from
oftentimes.
These
sorts
of
delve
developments
may
be
right
on
the
edge
of
being
good
in
passing
and
not
passing
through.
The
planning
commission
for
reasons
that
are
really
could
be
solved
with
more
communications
with
with
the
neighborhood.
A
We
do
have
families
that
want
to
live
in
bloomington,
and
this
is
another
way
for
them
to
start
here
and
move
on
to
potentially
move
on
to
other
developments
within
the
city.
So
again
appreciate
that,
as
far
as
the
the
again
minimal
flexibility,
that's
really
able
to
be
achieved,
I
I
appreciate
it
and
that
you
guys
are
able
to
take
advantage
of
it.
A
It's
unfortunate
as
the
you're
limited
with
some
of
it
because
of
the
the
public
right-of-way
on
on
four
sides
of
it,
but
maybe
that's
something
to
think
about
as
we
look
into
future
developments
and
what
the
affordable
housing
the
opportunity
housing
ordinance
allows
for
some
of
our
developments
and
and
just
what
are
we
achieving
or
not
achieving
by
limiting
that.
So
with
that,
I
again
would
support
the
application
for
approval
tonight.
So
any
other
commissioners
with
thoughts
on
this.
G
Thanks,
mr
chair
and
we've
all
said
how
much
we
like
it,
but
I
do
have
one
other
comment.
I
was
pleased
to
see
a
full
supply
of
covered
parking
spaces.
That
seems
to
be
something
that
has
been
trimmed
out
a
lot
of
some
of
these
applications
we've
seen
recently
that
are
meeting
affordability
goals.
I
was
pleased
to
see
a
full
complement
of
covered
parking.
A
A
All
right,
commission
members,
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
in
front
of
us
to
recommend
that
the
city
council
adopt
a
resolution
approving
a
comprehensive
land
use
guide
plan
amendment
to
re-guide
8200,
humboldt
avenue
south
from
office
to
high
density
residential.
Is
there
any
further
discussion
on
that
item
not
seeing
any
all
those
in
favor
say
aye
by
roll
call?
Commissioner
goldsman
aye,
commissioner
corman
aye,
commissioner
roman
aye,
commissioner
abdi.
G
A
E
E
B
A
E
A
All
right,
commission
members,
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
in
front
of
us
to
recommend
the
city
council
approved
preliminary
and
final
development
plans
for
a
four-story
149
unit
apartment
building,
located
at
8200,
humboldt
avenue,
south
subject
to
the
conditions
and
code
requirements
attached
to
the
staff
report.
Is
there
any
further
discussion
on
that
item
not
seeing
any
all
those
in
favor
say
aye
by
roll
call?
Commissioner
goldsman.
E
D
G
A
An
eye
for
myself
motion
passes
that
item
will
move
for
those
items
will
move
forward
to
the
city
council
at
february
28th
as
a
public
hearing
item
and
again
february
28
city
council
meeting
as
a
public
hearing,
and
with
that
we
appreciate
the
applicants
here
tonight
and
that
concludes
our
public
hearings
for
tonight.
We'll
move
on
to
a
study
session
item
and
I
believe,
mr
palermo,
you
have
a
staff
report
for
us.
D
D
Let's
try
now
there
we
go
okay,
so
this
is
our.
This
is
our
study
session
for
miscellaneous
issues,
so
a
little
bit
more
informal
discussion
so
feel
free
to
jump
in.
If
you
have
questions
or
clarifications
or
issues,
I
think
everyone
here
has
gone
through
the
miscellaneous
issues
before,
but
if
not,
this
is
kind
of
our
annual
update
we're
a
little
bit
later.
D
So
I
think
there
were
16
ordinances
this
year.
So
the
way
we
do
it,
we
kind
of
break
it
down.
I
letter
them
to
for
kind
of
jumping
around
for
us
to
talk
about
a
to
o
and
that
a1
is
more
cleanup
items
that
are
lumped
together
and
they
were
ordered
this
year
at
easiest
the
hardest,
but
I'll,
probably
er,
more
complex
and
I'll,
probably
flip
it.
D
The
way
that
we
talk
about
this
discussion,
but
when
we
get
to
the
public
hearing
this
way,
if
there
is
an
issue
with
one,
we
can
kind
of
pull
it
out.
When
we
make
a
motion
say
I
make
a
motion
for
a
through
k
and
and
an
o
or
you
know
it
allows
us
that
flexibility
moving
forward
rather
than
derailing
the
whole
burn
is
if
it's
all
included
in
one
plus.
These
are
all
kind
of
separate,
distinct
items.
D
So,
from
a
legal
perspective,
we
want
to
make
sure
that
everyone
is
clear
that
clearly
notice
and
kind
of
separated
it
out
so
I'll
start
with
kind
of
the
more
complex
ones
so
moving
backwards.
So
o
is
sidewalk
link
requirement,
and
this
is
one
of
those
situations
where
we
we
are
already
kind
of
doing
this.
D
We
will
require
for
new
new
developments
or
significant
redevelopment
with
conditions
of
approval
that
you
have
a
sidewalk
link
to
the
public
sidewalk,
like
I
said,
we've
been
doing
this
in
our
conditions,
but
this
way
having
it
in
the
code,
it
kind
of
makes
clear
up
front
that
this
is
something
that
we're
likely
going
to
require
when
you
get
a
conditional
use
permit.
We
do
have
this
requirement
for
new
construction,
but
this
will
kind
of
make
sure
that
our
conditions,
conditional
use
permits
are
kind
of
wrapped
in
that
development.
A
D
Right
so
this
one
dogs
on
outdoor
patio,
it's
hard
to
imagine
in
an
outdoor
patio
today,
but
hopefully
by
the
time
this
goes
through
and
summer
comes.
We
can
start
thinking
about
this,
but
right
now
we're
not
dogs
are
not
allowed
on
patios
with
food
establishments
or
where
food
or
beverages
are
served.
So
the
state
does
allow
cities
to
to
allow
this,
but
they
do
have
some
requirements
that
have
to
be
in
our
in
our
code
to
allow
that
so
in
the
proposed
language,
we'll
have
a
permit.
D
So
that's
part
of
time.
Their
inspection
review
they'll
be
kind
of
designated
contact
information,
but
then
we
have
these
kind
of
six
standards
that
are
outright.
They
basically
go
into.
You
know
what
happens
if
there's
waste
from
the
animal
or
employees
are
not
supposed
to
be
touching
the
dogs?
You
know
sanitary
items
here
just
to
make
sure
that
there
is
that
kind
of
environmental
health
aspect
to
it
being
enforced.
D
D
F
D
The
reason
for
that
is
because
not
every
establishment
is
going
to
have
this.
It
takes
that
extra
level
of
review.
So
it's
just
an
extra
indicator
that
this
is
something
that's
going
to
happen
at
this
establishment,
whereas
another
establishment
that
might
have
a
patio
if
they
haven't
gone
through
those
extra
that
extra
permit
process,
they
wouldn't
be
allowed
to
do
that.
So
that's
part
of
why
there's
that
that
that
permit
it's
essentially
another
permit
tacked
on
yeah.
B
Yeah,
mr
chair,
commissioner,
roman,
I
just
wanted
to
note
that
state
statute
does
require
cities
to
issue
permits.
We
can't
allow
it
without
issuing
permits.
What
we've
tried
to
do
is
is
keep
the
expense
as
low
as
as
possible.
Mr
palerma,
I
don't
know
if
you
have
the
fee,
but
I
think
it's
very
low.
It
would
be.
A
Certainly
there
are
some
establishments
across
the
border
and
to
our
north
that
allow,
I
think
dogs
into
certain
facilities
is
bloomington,
allow
that
with
permit
or
is
that
currently
prohibited?
Or
can
you
tell
us
some
on
that?
It
seems
to
me
that,
if
we're
allowing
maybe
on
patios,
we
may
have
other
restaurants
that
it's
virtually
open
to
walk
into.
D
So
at
this
time,
chair
silver,
we
would
not
be
doing
indoor.
I
think,
there's
some
question
on
whether
that's
they're
able
to
do
that.
I
think
it
depends
on
the
type
of
establishment.
I
think
the
food
establishments,
especially-
I
don't
think
they're-
allowed
to
do
that,
but
I
think
with
breweries
there's
a
kind
of
gray
area,
if
I
remember
correctly,
but
at
this
time
I
don't
think
our
environmental
enforcement
who
would
be
kind
of
taking
this
on
they're,
not
they're,
not
ready
to
do
that
indoors.
D
A
I
think
I
I
got
most
of
it.
You
were
breaking
up
a
little
bit,
but
not
quite
prepared
to
look
at
it
yet,
but
could
be
in
the
future
here,
and
I
I
just
asked
that
you
know
we'd
be
consistent
across
the
board,
as
we
look
at
this
or
at
least
consistent
with
some
of
our
our
neighbors
and
the
the
types
of
uses
that
they
allow.
D
All
right,
so
this
next
one
at
this
time,
the
state
of
minnesota
does
not
allow
sports
books
or
betting,
but
it
is
anticipated
that
they'll
likely
approve
that
pretty
soon.
So
this
is
more
in
anticipation
of
that
being
approved
that
you
know.
As
we
look
at
off
track
bedding
or
these
kind
of
bedding
facilities,
it
really
is
just
kind
of
like
any
other
indoor
recreational
use.
So
we
we're
just
going
to
add
that
to
this
definition,
just
to
clearly
hate
where
it
should
be
located.
G
D
So
we
do
have
some
exemptions
in
our
code
for
signage
that
you
don't
have
to
get
a
permit
and
we
do
have
that
for
leasing
signs,
but
they're
pretty
narrowly
tailored
and
you'll
see
them
throughout
town
throughout
the
city,
where
they're
kind
of
permanent
and
pretty
limited
in
size,
but
really
that
first
year,
those
first
two
years
are
kind
of
the
critical
point
for
new
buildings
to
lease
up
as
quickly
as
possible
to
get
that
cash
flow
so
that
we
recognize.
You
know
that
it'd
be
beneficial
to
them.
To
have
this
extra
temporary
signage.
D
A
D
D
F
D
D
So
I
think
it's
kind
of
I'm
trying
to
remember
where
it
came
up,
but
you
can
see
an
example
here
with
like
this
is
the
family,
where
maybe
they
would
encroach
a
little
bit
more
and
it
wouldn't
be
super
impactful.
So
a
dog's
run
is
kind
of
a
fenced
in
area,
but
it's
open
and
consistent
with
kind
of
open
space.
So
it's
not
really
from
staff's
opinion
in
conflict
with
that
landscape
yard
purpose.
D
A
I
mean
the
only
concern
I
would
have
there
is.
Maybe
the
experience
is
in
some
cases.
It's
it's
a
grassy
area.
Some
I've
seen
are
enclosed
by
fence
and
then
you
start
bringing
in
well.
If
it's
not
defined
my
dog
run.
You
know
I
have
a
six
foot
fence
in
the
front
yard
which
may
be
prohibited
anyway,
but
just
wonder
how
how
imaginative
people
can
get
to
say
it's
a
dog
run
so.
D
D
Okay,
item
j,
so
this
was
an
interesting
one
that
just
came
up.
I
think
glendale
caught
this
one
where
we
we
have
this
definition
of
private
stables
for
horses
and
you're
allowed
a
maximum
of
four
horses
in
your
private
stable.
But
you
can
have
a
stable,
that's
six
thousand
square
feet
apparently,
but
we
actually
traced
it
back
and
at
some
point
it
used
to
be
600
square
feet.
D
D
E
D
D
There
there
are
properties
that
could
potentially
meet
it,
especially
along
the
river
valley,
there's
some
kind
of
larger
properties
that
have
the
space
for
this,
and
I
actually
live
in
eden,
prairie
and
right
on
the
other
side
of
169
there's
a
residence
there
that
has
horses,
and
so
there
are
the
likelihood
of
it
coming
up,
is
pretty
low,
but
there
are
some
properties
that
could
that
could
utilize.
This.
B
D
So
the
next
one-
this
is
another
one
where
we
kind
of
had
an
interpretation,
but
it
just
makes
more
sense
to
codify
it
with.
We
do
have
some
prohibitions
on
windows
that
are
facing
private
streets
and
public
streets,
so
you
can't
cover
more
than
25
of
the
window
area
with
kind
of
signage
we
do
allow
for
blinds
and
curtains
to
kind
of
sun
sun
blocking.
D
But
in
this
case
you
know,
this
is
a
kind
of
example
where
you
have
a
completely
blocked
out
with
designs,
we're
seeing
more
of
this
kind
of
film
that
covers
your
window,
that
has
logos
or
some
sort
of
graphic
design,
that's
really
more
of
a
sign
than
it
is
kind
of
that
shading.
So
we
just
wanted
to
include
that
in
that
to
make
sure
that
distinction.
F
F
I
also
think
yeah,
I
don't
know
if
there's
you
know,
blinds
curtains,
you
know
temporary
coverings,
you
know
for
privacy
or
something
that
I
get
that
I
struggle
with
when
we
have
as
we
I
don't
know
if
we
should
have
any
sort
of
nuance
about
in
some
of
our
areas
where
we
have
street
activation.
This
is
intended
to
be
street
activation.
D
D
A
A
And
again,
the
question
comes
up
total
window
area
of
a
building
or
a
business
one
business
if
there's
four
could
be
completely
covered,
while
the
other
three
are
open,
and
I
don't
think
that
would
meet
the
intent
of
what
we
would
like
to
see.
Especially
with
what
commissioner
roman
just
said
about
kind
of
some
of
these
areas,
where
we're
really
trying
to
activate
the
street
versus
maybe
some
others,
it
might
be
more
appropriate.
But.
D
Yeah,
so
london
is
making
a
comment
to
me.
If
you
look
at
each
window
individually,
it's
less
calculation
for
us
to
figure
out,
so
it's
easier
to
enforce
that
way.
Looking
at
each
individual
window
pane
and
maybe
there's
some
update,
I
can
do
this
to
kind
of
make
clear
that
it's
each
window
pane
in
that
window
because
it
does
say
window
area
which
is
kind
of
maybe
a
little
misleading,
so
sure.
H
G
D
D
All
right
this
next
one
kind
of
along
the
lines
of
it's
kind
of
nitpicky,
and
I
apologize
if
you
hear
my
kids
running
out
of
their
baths
right
now,
but
we
do
limit
in
our
mixed
use
districts
the
number
of
drive-through
lanes.
You
might
recall
this
from
the
bank
that
recently
went
in
over
at
oxbow
here,
where
you
have.
We
had
kind
of
the
building,
couldn't
you
between
the
drive
through
clinton
b
between
the
building
and
the
and
the
street,
and
to
create
that
street
activation.
D
But
we
also
limit
the
number
of
drive-through
lanes
to
one
drive
through.
You
know
obviously
limit
that,
but
the
intent
was
not
to
be
one
drive-through
per
site
per
se,
because
you
might
have
a
large
site
like
this,
where
their
their
drive
through
might
still
be
able
to
be
accommodated
and
the
way
it
was
written.
It
could
be
interpreted
either
as
one
drive
to
per
site
or
one
lane.
A
G
D
G
D
If
they
are
in
these
zoning
districts,
they
they
would
technically,
they
probably
are
legally
non-conforming,
because
that
was
kind
of
the
intent.
All
along
was
to
be
one
drive-thru
lane,
but
I'm
trying
to
think
of
yeah
so
like
the
actually
the
wells
fargo
across
the
street
is
legally
non-conforming,
with
its
two
two
or
three
drive-through
lanes,
the
thought
being.
If
that
ever
redevelops,
they
would
have
to
come
into
conformance
with
one
drive-through
lane.
D
D
So
th
these
standards
are
intended
to
in
this
case.
You
know
this
example
rather
than
the
drive
through
wrapping
around
the
bank
and
with
you
know,
a
double
drive
through.
You
know
we're
trying
to
encourage
that
pedestrian
aspect
in
these
mixed-use
districts,
so
the
b4,
the
c3
and
the
c5
and
lx,
which
is
where
we
are
trying
to
create
that
pedestrian
activity
and
kind
of
reduce
that
car
dependency.
But
if
we're
encouraging
multiple
drive-through
lanes,
you
know
you're
just
driving
more
traffic
through
there.
G
B
B
So
we
we
don't
view
this
as
a
change,
but
rather
a
clarification
that
would
match
our
interpretation
and
since
we've
had
these
districts,
we've
have
not
had
any
sites
that
have
more
than
one
drive-through
lane
within
the
districts
now
there
may
have
been
some
that
were
there
when
they
were
rezoned,
but
they
would
already
be
legally
non-conforming.
Today.
D
D
D
Just
acknowledging
that
not
all
circular
driveways
require
a
second
curb
cut,
but
the
more
important
part
of
that
is
also
that
the
main
part
of
the
driveway
can
be
right
wider,
but
on
that
kind
of
secondary
part,
where
it
loops
back,
it
needs
to
be
limited
to
12
feet.
So
this
is
something
that
we
are
in
the
code
kind
of
now,
but
it
gets
lost
because
of
that
second
curb
cut
discussion.
D
D
D
D
D
And
then
this
one,
we
define
pet
services
facility.
What
we
had
in
our
list
is
kind
of
what
is
a
pet
services
facility,
animal
sales,
veterinary
care.
We
just
had
sales,
which
kind
of
just
kept
it
a
little
too
broad
and
open
for
someone
to
say
well,
I'm
doing
general
retail
sales,
I'm
a
pet
services
facility.
D
We
we
didn't
want
just
general
retail
in
there
you
can
still
kind
of
do.
Sales
accessory
are
customarily
incidental,
like
at
a
veterinary
clinic.
You
know
they
do
some
food
sales
or
pharmaceutical
sales.
That
would
still
be
allowed,
but
we
didn't
want
to
keep
it
open
as
the
general
sales
that
make
sense.
D
D
Reference
was
missing
in
our
use
table.
We
do
actually
have
a
performance
standard
section
that
we
wanted
to
reference
in
that
in
our
use
table,
our
crematorium
crematorius
was
in
the
raw
referencing
outdated
standard
that
was
moved
from
19
to
21,
so
that
was
pointing
to
the
wrong
section
of
the
code.
D
Similar
situation
with
service
standards
was
pointing
to
the
wrong
section
of
the
code
and
our
exterior
storage
performance
standards
were
incorrectly
referenced
as
well.
So
sometimes
we
move
these
around
and
we
try
and
catch
as
many
as
we
can,
but
sometimes
it
just
gets
lost
because
they're
buried
somewhere
yeah.
It
just
kind
of
happens
from
time
to
time.
F
Find
was
one
of
the
applications
tonight
there
was
a
reference
to
thin
brick
being
considered
a
secondary
material,
and
I'm
wondering
if,
given
the
changes
in
technology,
if,
if
it's
appropriate
too-
or
this
is
maybe
this
isn't
the
time
we
should,
we
still
maybe
needs
more
study
than
it
would
be
next
year.
But
I
know
projects
that
we
do
at
the
university
have
we
use
thin
brick
a
lot
and
it's
just
as
good
as
as
regular
bricks.
D
So,
to
give
you
a
little
a
little
peek
into
how
we
remember
all
of
these,
we
actually
have
a
spot
in
our
intranet,
where
we
can
make
a
comment
and
at
the
when
it
comes
to
that
time
of
year,
I
kind
of
go
through
them
all,
and
so
I
can
add
that
into
that
list,
so
that
we
remember
it
and
do
a
little
more
research
on
that
and
make
sure
it
comes
back
at
the
next
round.
If
that
works.
For
you
that's.
F
F
A
A
All
right
with
that,
let's
move
on
to-
oh,
oh,
I
think
yeah
but
missing
it
on
my
planning.
Commission
synopsis
should
probably
go
to
that
next
before
policy
and
issue
update.
So
commission
members,
we
have
a
planning
commission
synopsis
in
front
of
us
for
february
3rd
and,
if
I
recall
correctly,
commissioner
goltzman
and
commissioner
corman
were
absent
during
that
meeting,
but
we
still
do
have
a
quorum.
That
would
be
able
to
approve
the
planning
commission
synopsis.
F
A
A
B
B
A
conditional
use
permit,
find
the
site
and
building
plans
for
a
new
school
on
lindale
avenue
and
then
the
second
item
is
a
study
discussion
on
hotel
and
office,
conversions
to
residential
and
then
two
weeks
beyond
that
on
march
3rd.
We
just
have
one
item
so
far
on
the
agenda,
and
that
is
the
miscellaneous
issues:
ordinance
public
hearing
the
study
item
you
just
discussed.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
commission
members,
anything
else,
you'd
like
to
be
brought
up
for
staff
for
consideration
or
discussion,
I'm
going
to
bring
up
just
one
item
and
only
because
we
brought
it
up
today.
A
couple
years
ago.
We
we
did
discuss
charging
stations
and
I
just
I
don't
recall
we
had
some
discussion
about
definitions
and
things
like
that
and
I'm
just
thinking
as
certainly
charging
stations.
At
that
point,
I
think
we're
kind
of
well.
They
they
didn't.
A
They
hadn't
received
the
amount
of
federal
attention
number
one
and
or
stayed
attention
for
implementing
quite
like
they
have
in
this
last
year.
So
I'm
wondering
if
there's
anything
we
need
to
be
thinking
about
in
the
future,
for
the
city
of
bloomington,
for
elec
vehicle
like
electrification
so
or
requesting
a
met
council
for
that
as
well.
So
with
that,
commissioner
goldsman.
E
Thanks
mr
chair,
I
just
wanted
to
brush
up
on,
and
I
need
to
do
a
little
bit
more
research
for
myself
as
well.
As
I
know
a
few
years
ago
we
talked
about
food
trucks
and
having
standards
around
food
trucks
here
in
bloomington.
I
know
right
now,
it's
the
winter
time
but
come
spring
and
the
new
brewery
coming
in
that
might
be
a
topic.
E
We
just
want
to
make
sure
we're
on
top
of
before
before
the
warm
weather
comes,
and
then
the
other
topic
that
I
remember
I
was
talking
about
in
some
study
session
was
really
around
the
electric
scooters
or
bike
share
programs.
I
know
some
of
our
cities
had
some
show
up
a
few
years
ago
on
their
corners,
and
I
know
we
talked
a
little
bit
about
having
standards
around
those
and
so
as
we
get
closer
and
closer
to
summer.