►
From YouTube: June 22, 2023 Bloomington Planning Commission Meeting
Description
June 22, 2023 Bloomington Minnesota Planning Commission Meeting
0:00:00 Start
0:04:45 ITEM 1 PL2023-63
(public hearing) Penn American Property Group LLC (owner) Itton Ramen (user)
2137 W 80th ½ Street
Conditional Use Permit for outdoor seating at an existing restaurant.
0:10:57 ITEM 2 PL2023-64
(public hearing) Valentin Romero (owner)
8101 Wentworth Avenue South
Variance to reduce the front yard setback along W. 81st Street from 30 feet to approximately 19 feet.
0:19:58 ITEM 3 PL2023-68
(public hearing) HRA City of Bloomington (owner)
Stuart Development Corporation (Developer)
1801 American Boulevard West
Comprehensive Plan Amendment to reguide 1801 American Blvd. W. from the Community Commercial to the High-Density land use designation; Rezoning 1801 American Blvd. W. from C-5(PD) Freeway Mixed Use (Planned Development) to RM-100(PD) High-Density Residential (Planned Development); Preliminary and Final Development Plans for a four-story, 99-unit apartment building at 1801 American Blvd. W.
0:57:58 ITEM 4 City of Bloomington
(study item) Discuss Potential Lyndale Avenue Rezonings from B-2 to B-4.
1:31:14 ITEM 5 City of Bloomington
(study item) Discuss Potential Mural ordinance.
2:26:14 ITEM 6 City of Bloomington
(study item) Planning Commission Policy and Issues Update.
A
A
A
Good
evening
and
welcome
to
the
June
22nd
2023
meeting
of
the
Bloomington
Planning
Commission,
the
Planning
Commission
is
made
up
of
seven
volunteer
Bloomington
residents
appointed
by
the
city
council.
Today
we
have
four
which
is
a
quorum.
The
commission
advises
the
city
council
on
development
proposals,
development
standards,
long-range
planning
and
transportation
issues.
Our
work
is
informed
by
the
city's
comprehensive
plan,
various
District
plans
and
the
city
code
for
some
items.
The
commission
makes
a
recommendation
with
the
city
council
having
final
decision-making
Authority.
A
D
Chair
Roman
Commissioners.
We
have
three
public
hearings
this
evening
and
just
as
you
can
testify
here
in
person
in
the
chambers,
if
you
are
watching
from
home,
you
can
also
testify
remotely
to
do
that.
What
you
would
do
is
call
the
number
on
the
screen
and
enter
in
the
access
code
and
then
we'll
be
able
to
patch
you
through
to
testify.
We
will
have
this
number
shown
periodically
throughout
the
public
hearing
items
on
the
screen.
A
E
Hello
yeah.
So
this
item
is
a
conditional
use
permit
for
outdoor
seating
at
Eton
Ramen,
which
is
located
at
2137,
West
80th
and
a
Half
street.
As
you
may
remember,
this
was
continued
from
the
last
meeting
because
we
received
an
email
with
concerns
from
one
of
the
two
property
owners
in
the
past
two
weeks,
the
applicant
and
that
property
owner
came
to
an
agreement
and
tonight
there's
a
revised
application
in
front
of
you.
E
This
aerial
shows
the
proposed
site
outlined
and
read
the
subject.
Property
is
zoned
C5,
which
is
freeway
mixed
use
with
the
plan
development
overlay
and
it
is
designated
Regional
commercial.
In
the
comprehensive
plan
there
are
retail
uses
to
the
north
and
east
and
multi-family
housing
to
the
South
and
West.
E
Here
you
can
see
the
site
plan
with
the
tables
in
red,
so
the
applicant
is
proposing
three
tables
and
12
seats
outside
of
their
restaurant.
The
outdoor
seating
is
a
conditional,
limited
use,
while
restaurants
themselves
are
just
a
limited
use,
so
the
maximum
limited
uses
allowed
for
the
building
is
25
of
the
total
floor
area
and
the
current
limited
uses
Together
Fall
at
approximately
5.7
percent
of
the
total
four
area.
E
This
picture
shows
that,
outside
of
the
building
kind
of
where
the
seating
will
be
located,
you
can
see
that
the
wider
than
usual
sidewalk
allows
the
proposed
seating
to
still
maintain
the
required
by
foot
clearance
for
the
sidewalk
and
door.
The
seating
is
located
under
the
roof,
which
should
provide
noise
abatement.
E
D
A
D
F
F
G
Cooked
in
Mr,
chair
I'm,
also
in
support,
I
appreciate
the
building
owner
and
the
Tenant
working
this
out
and
bringing
an
application.
Every
everybody's
happy
with
before
us
and
I'm
prepared
to
make
a
motion,
please
in
case
pl2023-6-3
having
been
able
to
make
the
required
findings,
I
moved
to
adopt
a
resolution
approving
a
conditional
use
permit
for
a
restaurant
with
outdoor
seating
at
2137,
West
80th,
one
half
Street,
Unit
D,
subject
to
the
conditions
and
code
requirements
attached
to
the
staff
report.
Second,.
F
A
You
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
to
recommend
recommend
approval
of
a
conditional
use.
Permit
is
there.
Actually
that
is
a
that's
a
to
approve
a
conditional
use
permit
at
the
subject
property
any
further
discussion,
all
those
in
favor
say
aye
aye
opposed
the
motion
carries.
This
is
a
final
decision
unless
an
appeal
is
received
by
4
30
pm
on
June
27th.
Thank
you.
A
H
H
H
So
the
proposal
that
we
have
here
is
this
proposal
was
initiated
when
Mr
Valentin
Romero
who's
in
our
audience
this
evening
expressed
interest
in
a
project
which
would
demolish
the
current
single-family
home,
that
is
on
the
site
of
his
property.
Mr
Romero's
plan
is
to
demolish
the
house
and
construct
which
was
constructed
in
1947
and
replaced
it
with
a
two-story
house
that
effectively
matches
the
same
floor
print
as
the
house
that
it
is
replacing.
H
H
The
proposed
building
would
move
the
property
30
feet
from
the
West
setback.
To
meet
that
requirement.
It
would
also
meet
the
requirement
to
the
South,
which
requires
a
10-foot
setback,
and
then
it
also
adds
a
garage
which
is
a
fixing,
a
non-conformity
that
currently
exists
and
it
improves
on
the
non-conformity
which
exists
on
the
north
side
of
the
property.
H
With
this,
there
are
recommended
conditions
which
are
very
standard
for
residential
building.
Developments
of
note
is
number
four
which
recognize
that
there
is
an
unknown
well
and
so
that
there
must
be
a
there
must
there
must
be
sealed
prior
to
demolition
by
a
contracted
or
a
contracted
licensed
well
contractor,
and
that
the
reduced
setback
must
be
as
shown
or
greater
than
shown
on.
The
approved
plan
in
the
file
staff
does
recommend
your
recommendation
for
approval
for
the
reduced
front
yard
setback
along
West,
81st
Street,
as
it
is
shown,
thank.
A
I
Well,
I
I
just
want
to
to
get
this.
This
project
like
approved,
because
we
like
to
do
like
regular
size
house,
because
the
setbacks
we
have
it's
gonna,
be
like
a
really
small
line
on
the
how
like
a
skinny
house,
so
it
it
means
it's
gonna.
We
try
to
try
to
get
approved
there.
So
I
don't
know
if
it's
gonna
be
like
a
big
deal
for
for
the
city
to
let
us
get
the
line,
that's
all
I
can
can
say.
Okay,
any.
A
A
K
A
H
J
Thank
you,
chair
I
was
just
going
to
say
that
this
I'm
ended
in
support
of
the
application.
I
think
the
staff
reported
a
really
good
analysis
of
the
conditions
of
the
site,
especially
about
the
district
lot
size
requirement
that
for
the
area
for
the
district,
it
is
about.
1100
square
foot
required
lot
size,
but
this
is
about
7
500
square
foot
less.
It
is
already
a
substandard
lot.
It's
a
corner
lot,
so
I
think,
like
the
applicant
said,
it
would
be
impossible
to
build
a
decent
sized
home
using
the
required
setback.
A
Yeah
I
will
I'm
trying
to
think
in
the
five
years
that
I've
been
on
the
commission.
We've
had
we've
had
very
few
requests
for
variances
and
I
can
remember,
none
that
we
have
approved,
and
mostly
it's
been
because
they've
been
for
the
convenience
of
somebody
or
something
that
wasn't
really
a
deal
breaker
if
they
didn't
get
it,
it
was
just
would
have
been
nice
to
have
in
this
situation.
A
You've
got
a
lot,
that's
constrained
by
its
size,
but
then
it's
doubly
constrained
by
it
being
a
corner
and
I'm
sensitive
to
the
corner
aspect
and
I
also
acknowledge
that
even
at
the
reduced
setback,
it
would
still
be
consistent
with
the
neighboring
home
so
visually.
It
would
be
consistent.
So,
for
those
reasons,
I
can
support
the
staff's
recommendation.
F
Thank
you,
chair,
I,
just
wanted
to
add
one
thing,
I'm,
also
in
support
and
I
just
appreciate
that
this
is
a
non-conformity.
Improvement
I
think
that's
a
really
important
that
we
are
looking
to
find
those
non-conformities
and
making
the
the
improvements
so
that
we
are
able
to
address
properties
consistently
over
a
period
of
time.
Thank
you.
F
In
case
pl2023-6-4,
having
been
able
to
make
the
required
findings,
I
moved
to
recommend
approval
of
a
variance
to
reduce
the
front
yard
setback
along
West
81st
Street
from
30
feet
to
18.9
feet
for
a
new
single
family
dwelling
at
eight
one,
zero
one
Wentworth
Avenue
South,
subject
to
the
conditions
and
code
requirements
attached
to
the
staff
report.
Second,.
A
A
The
third
item
is
another
public
hearing.
This
is
for
a
comp
plan
Amendment.
So
there's
several
things
going
on
here.
So
give
me
a
moment
to
consult
my
cheat
sheet.
There
is
a
comp
plan,
Amendment
a
rezoning
and
preliminary
and
final
development
plans
for
residential
development,
independent
American,
district
and
planner
centenario.
Has
this
item.
L
Go
ahead.
Thank
you,
chair
Roman,
so
item
three
on
your
agenda
tonight,
a
variety
of
entitlements
that
the
applicant
is
seeking,
but,
as
you
mentioned,
it
includes
a
comprehensive,
comprehensive
plan,
Amendment
more
specifically
changing
the
future
land
use
guide
plan.
Currently
the
site
as
you'll
see,
is
a
commercial
oriented
and
the
applications
for
residential
development.
L
So
this
is
a
very
prominent
site,
Knox
and
American,
and
even
more
so
because
along
Knox
is
the
Orange
Line
brt
stop
so
very
well
served
by
transit,
very
prominent,
visible
site
and
that
that
came
into
play
as
staff
did
our
review
to
try
and
ensure
that
there
was
an
urban
character.
That's
consistent
with
the
district
plan
of
a
few
images
of
existing
conditions.
So
this
is
on
the
northwest
corner
of
the
site.
Looking
Southeast,
you
can
see
the
district
in
the
background.
That's
a
recently
completed.
L
Four-Story
apartment
building
the
applicant
was
part
of
that
development
team
and
essentially
you
see
the
the
vacant
site
as
it
is
today
it
used
to
be
a
bank
drive-through
Bank.
We
did
have
a
proposal
for
a
drive-through
restaurant
several
years
back
that
didn't
materialize
and
we
have
a
application
today
for
a
high
density
residential
development
there's
another
image
again.
The
district
is
in
the
background.
L
Yet
another
image
this.
This
is
from
the
corner
of
the
district,
looking
Northwest
so
again,
you're
looking
North
at
the
Orange
Line
brt
and
then
the
80th
and
half
Street,
which
is
a
private
road,
but
nonetheless
is
a
priority
in
terms
of
having
a
building
frame,
the
street
80th
and
a
Half
street.
It's
in
that
the
plan
dictates
that
80th
and
a
half
in
Knox
are
priorities
from
a
Urban
Design
perspective
versus
American
Boulevard.
L
So
the
re-guiding
pretty
self-explanatory.
It's
currently
guided
Community
commercial,
and
so
it's
a
commercial
oriented
guide
plan
designation.
But
this
is
a
100
residential
development,
and
so
it
doesn't
need
to
be
re-guided
to
high
density
residential,
because
this
site
really
stands
alone
relative
to
the
other
phases
of
the
pen,
American
Redevelopment
areas,
and
along
with
that,
would
be
our
first
arm
100.
We
do
not
have
a
property
in
Bloomington
Glenn
unless
you
I'm
mistaken
this
site
Falls
within
the
density
ranges
of
rm100
50
to
100
dualing
units
per
acre.
L
L
So
going
on
to
the
site
plan
to
orient
viewers,
American
Boulevard
West
is
along
the
north.
We
have
80th
and
a
half
to
the
South
and
then
Knox
Avenue
to
the
East
and
again,
the
Orange
Line
brt
station
is
along
Knox,
Avenue,
immediately
east
of
the
building
and
and
what
is
the
the
ramp
down
to
the
Structure
Parking
and
so
again.
L
Looking
at
the
district
plan
really
wanted
to
encourage
a
building
that
was
closer
to
80th
and
a
half
and
Knox
Avenue
to
try
and
frame
those
streets
and
provide
a
more
pedestrian
friendly
environment
than
what's
there
today,
walking
along
a
vacant,
lot
really
isn't
the
most
comfortable
environment
and,
for
the
most
part,
the
the
application
is
a
very
straightforward
application.
From
a
code
perspective,
the
application
is
compliant
with,
with
the
vast
majority
of
standards
that
we
have,
including
some
of
the
incentives
through
the
opportunity,
housing
ordinance.
L
So
I
think
I
didn't
mention
on
a
previous
slide.
But
this
this
development
would
include
nine
units
affordable
at
a
50
Ami
income,
so
it
exceeds
the
minimum
requirement.
But
there's
really
only
one
small
thing
that
we
just
didn't
agree
with
with
the
applicant
and
that
is
related
to
a
parking
lot:
landscape
yard
and
that's
Along,
American,
Boulevard,
West,
and
so
the
code
standard
is
20
feet
and
very
few
landscape
yards
in
this
area
have
a
20-foot
setback.
L
So
there
are
definitely
some
existing
conditions
that
that
aren't
code
complying
and
the
applicant
is
proposing
a
six
foot.
As
you
can
see
on
the
image,
so
the
area
that
I
have
highlighted
is
the
landscape
yard
that
you
know
we're
just
disagreeing
on
where
a
six
foot
is
proposed
and
the
code
requirement
is
20.,
so
staff
is
our
recommendation.
L
But
the
applicant
has
made
a
good
point
that
this
is
really
consistent
with,
what's
already
in
the
district,
so
just
kind
of
zooming.
In
a
little
bit
on
that
area,
the
setback
from
the
property
line
is
six
feet.
The
boulevard
between
the
back
of
the
curb
to
the
sidewalk
is
nine
feet
and
I
just
keep
that
in
the
back
of
your
head
right
across
the
way,
looking
towards
Red
Lobster,
it's
even
a
smaller
landscape
yard,
and
so
this
is
these
are
the
existing
conditions.
L
The
boulevard
between
the
back
of
the
curb
and
the
sidewalk
is
only
seven
feet
and
the
landscape
yard
is
less
than
five
feet,
so
it's
even
it's
even
smaller
than
what
the
applicant
is
proposing
and
it's
understandable
that
the
applicant
wanted
the
parking
to
be
more
or
less
in
line
with,
what's
already
there
across
the
way.
So
it's
a
it's
a
perfectly
understandable
request,
just
as
staff
we're,
not
supportive
of
that.
We
think
there
should
be
a
little
more
of
a
landscape
buffer,
Along,
American,
Boulevard
West,
so
going
to
the
landscape
plan
generally.
L
One
thing
that
the
applicant
did
propose
in
response
to
our
concern
about
landscape
buffers.
It's
not
shown
on
this
plan,
but
a
different
graphic
shows
a
fence
like
a
small
three
foot
fence
to
provide
a
little
bit
more
of
a
visual
buffer
between
the
sidewalk
and
the
parking
lot.
That
could
certainly
help
again,
that's
not
something
that
the
stats
would
prefer,
but
it
is
something
that
the
applicant
is
considering.
But
overall,
the
Landscaping
plan
meets
the
quantity
standard
for
landscaping.
L
I'll
have
another
graphic,
there's
a
lot
of
low-lying
landscaping
along
Knox
Avenue,
where
the
brt
station
is
located.
So
there
would
be
a
more
pleasant
environment.
You
know
actual
Landscaping
instead
of
just
weeds,
and
that's
what
you
see
here.
So
this
is
one
of
the
renderings
on
the
right.
Real
life
never
looks
as
good
as
the
renderings,
where
things
are
big
and
Lush
and
green,
but
nonetheless
it
gives
you
a
flavor
for
what
what
this
would
look
like.
L
You
know
how
the
building
would
relate
to
the
sidewalk
and
how
it
would
relate
to
the
bus,
the
brt
station,
and
it
looks
in
our
opinion.
It
looks
really
good,
so
you
see
that
the
Landscaping
would
provide
a
little
bit
of
a
landscape
buffer
and
then
you
have
the
building.
So
it's
much
much
greater
of
enclosure
compared
to
what's
there
today,
which
is
nothing
foreign.
A
couple
more
images
on
the
top
is
the
South
elevation
along
80th
and
Half
street.
L
So
again,
you're
seeing
a
building-
that's
pushed
closer
to
the
street,
there's
already
pedestrian
lighting
and
sidewalk
on
site,
where
there's
the
angled
parking.
But
again
this
is
much
more
urban
in
character,
which
is
consistent
with
the
Pan
American
District
plan,
and
the
lower
image
is
a
little
a
little
broader
view
of
Knox
Avenue.
Where
you
see
the
building
as
it
relates
to
next
Avenue.
L
Two
more
building
elevations
that
were
included
in
the
in
the
materials.
The
top
is
well
they're,
both
they're,
both
north
building
elevations,
just
different
Vantage
points,
but,
as
you
can
see,
there's
a
there's,
a
pedestrian
connection,
more
or
less
in
the
center
of
the
site
between
American
Boulevard
and
the
building
itself.
So
that's
something
we
we
require
and
it
is
included
in
the
application,
but
it
we
think
it's
well
located
and
with
that
we
are
recommending
approval
again.
L
I
would
note
that
one
discrepancy
in
terms
of
the
the
landscape
yard
that
we
can
discuss,
that
is
a
recommended
condition
of
approval,
that
a
minimum
of
10
foot,
landscape
yard
is
included
or
the
plan
is
modified
to
incorporate
that.
But
otherwise
Steph
is
supportive
of
the
application
and
the
recommended
motions
are
before
you.
J
J
J
I
guess
what
I'm
trying
to
ask
is:
are
we
are
there
potential
for
other
sites
to
be
rezoned
for
allowing
more
residential
on
the
corridor
instead
of
supporting
applications
that
are
like
mixed
use,
for
example,
that
allow
commercial
and
I
don't
know
how
walkable
this
area
is
for
me
to
like
suggest,
you
know
focusing
more
on
mixed-use
property
development
on
this
site,
but
I,
don't
know
if
you
understood
the
question
here,
but
is?
Is
it
a
good
idea
to
just
do
a
commercial
Corridor
main
predominant
commercial
quarter
to
just
do
development?
L
Understood,
chair
Roman
and
Chris
Robby,
I,
I,
think
I
I
think
I
understand
the
comments,
but
I
guess
my
response
would
be
I.
Think
all
we
have
to
do
is
look
north
of
American
Boulevard
and
see
tremendous
potential
for
redevelopment
in
a
variety
of
sectors,
whether
that's
100,
Commercial,
development,
100,
residential
and
mixed,
so
they're
in
terms
of
land
availability.
L
I
do
not
believe,
that's
an
issue
to
support
a
variety
of
different
types
of
development
types,
but
we
do
think
that
for
this
site
in
particular
having
a
99
unit
apartment,
building
right
along
a
Transit
line
is
an
appropriate
is
an
appropriate
phase
of
development
in
this
in
this
area,
and
so
we
are
we're
supportive
of
the
of
the
comp
plan
change
moving
forward.
Our
hope
is
that
South
Town
will
have
phase
redevelopments
of
its
own
and
we
can
help
work
through
what
that
would
look
like.
J
Just
a
quick
follow-up
in
terms
of
like
the
does
the
city
of
Bloomington
support
with
its
commercial
or
residential,
like
moving
closer
to
the
buildings,
is
that
something
that
we
I
think
was
discussed
briefly
about
the
the
Lindale
and
I
think
we
might
get
into
that.
But
the
Lindell
District
area
like
having
more
commercial
on
the
street
level
or
like
properties
built
closer
to
the
street
and
maybe
having
parking
in
the
back,
was
there
any
discussions
about
whether
moving
parking
to
the
back
or
is
it
because
this
property
is
residential?
J
It
was
getting
more
convenient
and
safer
or
better,
whatever
the
term
may
be,
to
have
parking
more
on
the
front
than
I
would
expect
I
see
some
of
that
some
of
those
types
of
development
more
in
Minneapolis,
where
you
know
it's
encouraged
more
to
always
have
buildings
right
on
the
property
line
on
the
street
side,
then,
and
then
allow
parking
in
the
back
or
incorporated
into
the
development.
There
is
ample
land
here,
but
was
there
any
discussion
to
encourage
parking
in
the
back
and
having
front-facing
property
and
parking
sure.
L
I
L
Buildings
closer
to
the
street
and
so
staff.
In
our
discussions,
the
applicant
prioritize
pushing
the
building
closer
to
Knox
and
80th,
and
a
half
American
Boulevard
is
really
tertiary
and
it's
you
know,
hierarchy
of
importance.
Given
that
you
know,
there's
a
lot
of
surface
parking,
Along,
American,
Boulevard
in
the
city
of
Bloomington
and
80th
and
half
is
unique.
L
Is
that
it's
intended
to
be
more
pedestrian
oriented
with
angled
parking,
wider
sidewalks,
pedestrian
lighting,
Landscaping
and
our
preference
would
have
been
for
a
more
like
L-shaped
building
as
I
identify
in
the
staff
report,
so
that
Knox
Avenue
had
more
of
a
building
enclosure
and
then
parking
would
be
kind
of
behind
the
L.
If
you
will,
but
you
know,
I
think,
given
the
the
priorities
of
the
district
plan
and
just
the
need
for
some
surface
parking
to
make
the
project
work,
the
surface
parking
inevitably
was
going
to
be
along
American
Boulevard.
L
There
is
a
chair,
Roman,
commission
I
can
show
you
the
floor
plan
if
you'd
like
to
see
what
that
will
look
like,
but
yes,
I'm.
Sorry,
there
is
one
level
of
structured
parking,
50
stalls
and
so
that
that
does
meet
the
code
requirement
once
the
opportunity
housing
ordinance
incentivist
is
taking
a
consideration
where
they
are
they're
allowed,
a
reduction
and
and
with
that
the
requirement
is
50
stalls.
So
they're
meeting
that
requirement,
but
yeah
there
is
one
level
of
structured
parking.
L
But
in
terms
of
the
ratio
of
parking
you
know,
I
don't
know.
I
I
could
try
to
do
some
math
in
my
head,
but
I
would
fail.
But
what
I
can
say
is
that
it's
actually
you
know
once
we
have
the
once
we
take
the
oh
incentive
and
apply
it.
This
site
actually
exceeds
the
minimum
by
by
a
fair
amount
by
21
stalls,
which
is
which
is
pretty
rare.
L
F
L
Sure
Roman,
commissioner
anecdotally
I,
haven't
heard
one
way
or
another
about
the
district
you
know
visiting
this
morning
as
I
was
taking
pictures.
The
vast
majority
of
the
north
side
of
80th
and
a
half
was
vacant,
and
then
inquired
two
here
and
there,
which
I
think
is
the
intent,
is
that
the
those
stalls
on
the
north
side
of
that
street
were
intended
to
be
delegated
for
this
phase
of
development.
A
L
A
And
again,
the
reason
I
was
asking:
oh
we're
on
the
discussion
phase,
but
kind
of
the
question
of
would
the
angled
parking,
given
that
it's
overparked
and
we
have
lots
of
issues
with
over
parking
in
the
city
and
we're
next
to
a
major
arterial
bus
line
with
the
angle
parking
potentially
be
a
way
to
achieve
that
additional
yard
front
yard.
If
you
will
that's.
L
M
M
M
As
far
as
the
parking
goes,
I
know
that
we
discussed
kind
of
a
little
bit
about
the
the
design
reasons
why
we
wanted
it
and
the
linear
parking
and
the
existing,
but
I
also
want
to
talk
about
just
the
demand.
We
we've
been
in
this
area
and
we
know
we
know
our
buildings
and
what
we
need
to
park,
and
it's
rare
he's
right
that
I
don't
come
in
here
and
say:
can
I
have
a
reduction
in
parking?
M
B
C
M
Right
now
could,
potentially
once
the
orange
line
is
at
full
capacity,
be
some
of
those
stalls
could
be
taken
during
the
day
for
people
that
ride.
You
know
Park
and
Ride.
It's
not
supposed
to
be
that,
but
it's
tough
to
police,
and
so
we
don't
want
to
be
in
a
position
where,
just
because
we
are
and
we're
providing
pretty
much
per
code
parking
on
this
plan
here
and
we're
just
not
taking
the
surface
part
reduction
that
comes
with
the
opportunity
housing.
So
we
feel
what
we're
asking
for
is
what
we
need,
because
we
don't.
M
The
last
thing
we'd
want
to
do
is
is
have
something
that
isn't
happening
now
later,
a
fact
not
only
this
project,
but
the
district
and
Red
Lobster,
and-
and
so
it's
a
little
bit
preventative.
But
yet
we
feel
that
we
have
the
need
for
this
parking
for
just
this
development
alone.
So
I
might
be
at
back
some
other
day
asking
for
a
reduction
in
parking,
but
this
one
building
decode
makes
sense
for
us,
as
operators
and
I
think
it
benefits
our
our
project
here
and,
and
the
Penn
American
District
as
a
whole.
M
Being
short
is
not
something
that
we
want
to
end
up
with
and
for
our
residents
to
have
to
deal
with
and
drive
around
and
look
for
parking
either.
So
that's
kind
of
the
basis
behind
that
we
brought
together
the
same
kind
of
team
and
architect
for
this
project.
We
they
were.
We've
worked
with
the
SG
since
2008
on
the
three
projects
to
perform
some
consistency
throughout
the
district
and
I
think
they
did
a
great
job
with
what
we
have
planned
here
and
again.
M
Thanks
for
your
consideration
tonight
and
we've
got
our
team
available
on
on,
looks
like
most
of
them
are
on
the
phone
as
well,
and
then
Neil's
here
to
talk
about
any
specifics
in
the
design,
but
we're
we
like
the
area
we've
been
here,
the
office
near
here
and
the
walkability
that
you
talked
about.
We've
we've
spent
in
each
project
with
the
wide
sidewalks
and
and
getting
some
retail
down
at
the
other
end,
and
so
we've
set
this
up
to
do
what
the
original
plan
is
and
and
people
it's
been
well
received.
J
M
We've
got
the
52
stalls
below
and
Market,
depending
on
Market
I
mean
this
is
two
years
away
from.
Probably
you
know,
once
you
get
approvals
and
and
to
build
it
so
at
the
district
we
do
charge
for
for
parking.
I
think
it's
75
dollars.
Market
has
in
recent
years
has
gone
to
charging
for
parking
even
out
in
the
suburbs,
a
little
more.
It
was
concentrated
downtown
but
you're,
seeing
it
on
most
new
developments
where
there
is
a
fee,
so
yeah
there'll
be
a
charge.
A
It's
not
so
much
a
question
as
a
comment,
but
I
would
encourage
you
to
monitor
the
parking
situation
if
it
means
that
you
need
to
eventually
install
some.
You
know
card
keyed,
Gates
or
something
because
the
Haydn
ride
is
what
is
a
thing
and
given
that
the
in
we
intend
for
people
to
be
park
and
ride
on
the
other
side
of
the
freeway
and
and
so
given
that
you
are
the
the
primary
landlord
in
this
area.
M
M
F
M
Well,
that
that's
what
we're
talking
the
15
stalls
in
that
corner,
where
the
that's,
what
we're
talking
about
I,
think
but
putting
that
buffer
in
I
I,
think
we
lose
those
stalls
and
that's
where
we're
not
only
in
the
design
and
the
alignment.
But
the
need
is
what
I'm
trying
to
keep
through
some
encroachment
agreement
or
something
if
you
look
all
the
way
down,
American
Boulevard
on
both
sides
that
that,
like
you,
mentioned
that
buffer
isn't
really
there
on
any
of
the
developments
and
as
close
as
Red
Lobster.
M
All
we're
doing
is
just
lining
up
the
other
side
of
that
private
drive
so
visually.
It
appears
to
work
and
again
I
get
that
you
know
they'd
like
to
see
this
this
buffer,
but
in
this
instance
we're
asking
for
an
encroachment
agreement
just
to
get
that
parking
in
and
not
do
the
bumper
and
have
it
line
up.
A
D
C
Yeah
I
mean
and
there's
just
more
questions
and
I
apologize,
I'm,
I'm,
really
unfamiliar
with
this
process
as
a
whole
and
I
I.
Believe
the
gentleman
answered
my
question,
but
you
know
what
stage
are
we
in?
Has
this
been
approved
and
if
so,
how
long
will
will
it
take
for
building?
To
actually
start?
Was
that
the
two
years
that
he
quoted.
C
A
L
Was
just
gonna
say,
chair,
Roman
yeah,
you
know
that
we're
in
terms
of
this
the
timeline
of
the
total
process.
You
know
they've
applied,
we've
we're.
We
have
we're
in
a
public
hearing
right
now
before
Planning
Commission,
there's
still
another
meeting
with
city
council
they're
the
ultimate
decision
maker,
it's
just
for
the
benefit
of
the
caller.
L
There's
still
some
public
process
yet
to
be
had
then
there's
usually
a
period
where
they
they
they're
doing
financing,
they're
doing
number
crunching,
and
so
you
know
we'd
look
to
the
applicant
best
case
when
they
would
start
construction,
but
you
know
it
it
may
not
be
for
a
year
or
until
next
spring.
You
know
until
they
actually
start
a
physical
construction
of
the
project.
A
F
A
A
I
I
think
the
it
seems
like
a
good
project.
You
know
it
might
have
been
nice
to
have
some
retail
on
this
end,
but
I
also
know
that
the
retail
on
the
other
end
is
is
busy,
but
not
you
know
not
as
busy
I
mean
there's
the
the
area
in
the
middle
will
eventually
redevelop
over
time
and
that
may
fill
in
there.
We
don't
have
any
Resident
or
retail
on
the
south
side
of
80th
and
a
half.
So
it's
not
inconsistent
with.
A
L
Roman,
commissioner
Albrecht
there's
no
magic
behind
the
10
foot
number,
it's
something
that
we
have
seen
to
be,
at
least
in
our
from
our
perspective,
sufficient
enough
of
a
buffer
to
support
Landscaping
over
a
long
period
of
time,
whereas
the
the
narrower
it
gets.
The
more
the
higher
the
likelihood
that
Landscaping
struggles,
especially
along
public
streets,
where
there's
salt
snow,
just
gets,
beat
up
and
so
having
a
little
bit
more
of
a
buffer
I
think
gives
the
plantings
more
chance
of
success,
but
whether
it's
10
feet
11
feet
9
feet.
D
Chair
Roman,
commissioner
Albrecht
one
thing
to
point
out
too
on
that
matter.
Is
that
even
at
10
feet
you
still
could
have
parallel
parking
stalls.
You
could
no
longer
have
90
degree
stalls,
but
parallel
stalls
would
be
possible,
so
the
number
of
stalls
would
go
down,
but
it
wouldn't
go
from
15
to
zero.
A
Foreign,
it's
forgotten
that
that
was
one
of
the
items
that
was
in
the
in
the
report:
I
I,
guess
I'm
in
alignment
with
what
you're
talking
about.
Commissioner
Albrecht
is
six
or
Twenty.
If
you
will
because
I
you
know,
although
someday
the
Red
Lobster
will
redevelop,
we
don't
know
if
that
will
be
in
a
year
or
20
years,
and
it
does
from
the
photos
we
saw.
F
Thank
you,
chair,
I
I
also
am
kind
of
swayed
towards
the
six
feet.
Only
I
would
feel
differently
if
the
building
was
on
the
North
End
of
the
site,
because
I
do
think
that
that
vegetation
buffer
is
important,
but
with
parking
less
so
particularly
because
it
is
commercial
across
the
street
and
also
Surface
Pro
parking
across
the
street.
J
The
yellow
side,
yep
I,
thought
the
pla
Mrs
centenario
was
saying
that
the
six
foot
is
consistent
with
existing
sidewalks
on
the
other
side.
So
for
me,
I
was
cool
with
that
I.
The
district
might
require
20
feet,
but
I
think
with
the
how
it's
shown,
if
you
require
24
to
just
look
off
considering
the
shape
of
the
lot
as
well
too
so
I
was
fine
with
six
feet
unless
yeah.
L
The
right
across
the
private
Drive
the
entrance
way
the
at
the
Red
Lobster,
it's
just
a
slightly
narrower
than
what
the
applicant
is
proposing
before
you
just
for
to
make
sure
we're
very
clear
on
if,
when
you
make
a
motion
for
the
last
motion
related
to
the
preliminary
final
development
plans,
if
that's
the,
if
that's
the
way,
you
are
swayed
just
to
make
sure
we're
clear
on
what
the
recommendation
is.
If
you
want
to
just
accept
what
the
applicant's
proposing
I
would
encourage
you
to
strike,
recommended
condition.
F
I
have
one
more
comment.
Thank
you.
One
more
comment
to
make
I
do
appreciate
that
staff
is
looking
at
increasing
the
vegetation
on
the
site.
I
do
think
that
it
is
important,
so
I,
don't
I,
won't
don't
want
to
negate
the
fact
that
10
feet
I
understand
the
goal
of
10
feet.
I.
Just
think
that
when
we
talk
about
this
a
lot
is
it's
either
a
code
or
it's
a
variance
and
seems
like
this.
It
works
at
six
feet,
and
so
that's
the
way
that
I
think
we
should
move.
F
N
F
F
Sure
in
case
pl2023-68
I
move
to
recommend
the
city
council
approved
preliminary
and
final
development
plans
for
a
four-story
99
unit
apartment
building,
located
at
1801
and
1851
American
Boulevard
West,
subject
to
the
conditions
and
code
requirements
attached
to
the
staff
report,
striking
condition.
Four
second
thank.
J
A
D
J
A
O
Hey
chair
members
of
the
Planning
Commission
item
number
four
is
a
study,
a
study
item,
examining
a
set
of
properties
that
are
proposed
to
be
rezoned
within
the
node
areas
of
Lindale
Avenue
and
the
node
areas
are
referring
to
the
Lindale
Suburban
or
Lyndale
Avenue
Suburban
retrofit
plan
I'll
get
to
that
in
a
moment
yep.
So
it's
a
total
of
28
Parcels
under
consideration
and
the
intersections
are
86th
Street
and
98th
Street.
O
O
Also,
you
know
further
supporting
this.
This
proposal
are
a
couple
of
actions
that
took
place
prior
to
the
retrofit
plan
in
2019,
the
city
adopted
the
98th
Street
Station
area
plan
and
also
the
comprehensive
plan.
They
both
envisioned
more
Transit
supportive
development,
mixed
uses,
higher
densities
again
reflecting
what
the
before
district
will
allow
if
implemented
as
proposed
by
staff.
O
Oh
I
should
mention
so
as
part
of
that
98th
Street
Station
area
planned
there
were
subsequent
rezonings.
The
image
to
the
right
shows
about
eight
parcels
that
were
rezoned
from
B2
to
B4,
again
in
in
furtherance
of
the
the
Retro
or
not
the
I.
Guess
it
wasn't
the
retrofit
plan
at
the
time,
but
the
vision
that
was
described
in
that
station
area
plan
there
are
three
land
uses,
guiding
the
parcels
under
consideration.
O
There's
the
general
business
land
use
category,
that's
retail
service
and
services
such
as
neighborhood
supermarkets,
shopping
centers,
drug
stores
and
the
like.
Community
commercial
is
General
business,
plus
additional
larger
scale
service
and
Retail
uses
hotels,
medium-sized
shopping,
grocery,
centers
and
stuff
like
that
or
and
locations
like
that,
and
then
there's
one
parcel
in
particular
that
is
guided
public.
O
O
So
if
If
This
rezoning
Were
to
if
it
were
to
go,
be
adopted,
the
city
might
want
to
consider
re-guiding
that
parcel
from
public
to
something
more
supportive
of
the
B4
District
right
now.
Metro
Transit
doesn't
have
solid
plants
in
place
to
redevelop
that
lot,
but
I
think
there
was
some
they
there
were
some
Concepts
that
they
were
considering,
which
had
mixed
use.
Development
occupy
the
site
with
the
park
and
ride
facilities
on
the
the
ground
floor,
and
then
there
was
some
retail
and
then
residential
above.
So
that's
a
concept.
O
No
firm
plans,
though
in
place
current
zonings,
as
I
mentioned,
is
B2
or
General
commercial
here
one.
Second,
that's
out
of
the
way
it's
designed
to
provide
for
a
wide
variety
of
retail
and
other
commercial
uses.
The
goals
are
to
ensure
locations
are
distributed
throughout.
The
city
are
available
for
Native,
retail
and
Commercial,
and
that
includes
Auto
oriented
so
right.
There
you
see
the
conflict
between
B2
and
what's
described
in
the
Lindale
retro
Lindale
Avenue
retro
plan.
B
O
Here's
the
current
zoning
again,
oh,
it's
all
B2,
that's
the
reason
why
we're
here
and
you'll
see
on
for
the
98th
Street
node
those
lots
that
were
rezoned
to
B4
on
the
80s
86th
Street
node.
It
should
be
noted,
like
the
properties
on
the
east
side
of
Lindale
Avenue.
Those
were
recently
rezoned
to
transitional
industrial.
A
feature
of
that
a
district
is
that
it
does
allow
residential
opportunities
so
we're
trying
to
reflect
those
residential
opera
or
we're
proposing
to
reflect
those
residential
opportunities
on
both
sides
of
Lindale
Avenue.
O
This
is
a
comparison
of
oh
I,
I
apologize,
it's
it's
not
labeled
well,
nonetheless,
so
that
middle
column
is
B2
and
the
column
on
the
very
far
right
is
B4.
I'll
make
that
adjustment
later.
But
some
differences
to
highlight
in
terms
of
standards
are
that
there's
a
higher
far
for
B4
if
residential
is
included.
O
So
with
any
rezoning
project.
Non-Conformity
is
an
interest
just
making
sure
that
the
if
there
is
non-conformities
created
they're
minimized
to
the
greatest
degree
possible,
it
was
included
in
the
staff
report
a
table
or
an
exhibit.
That
was
highlighting
what
parcels
according
to
their
use
are,
would
be
non-conforming
if
the
rezoning
were
to
go
through
and
I
believe
it
was
five
Parcels
out
of
the
28..
O
One
of
those
Parcels
has
multiple
uses,
but
both
uses
actually
are
not
allowed
in
the
B4
zoning
District.
So
it
kind
of
works
out
that
way.
Just
to
note
that
non-conformities
are
created
on
a
lot
when
it
does
not
meet
standards
of
the
underlying
zoning
District.
But
a
legal
non-conformity
is
established
when
all
the
lock
conditions
have
received
all
the
required
approvals.
They
can
continue.
So
if
this
rezoning
were
to
go
forward,
those
Parcels
that
you
know
would
have
a
non-conforming
use
or
any
other
non-conforming
feature.
O
If
that's
building
design
or
a
lot
characteristic,
they
could
continue,
but
they
would
not
be
allowed
to
expand
that
non-conformity,
and
it
should
be
noted
that
the
legal
non-conforming
stat
is
it's
important
to
note
that
it's
it
runs
with
the
land.
It
doesn't
go
with
the
property
owner.
So
if
someone
else
were
to
move
in,
they
wouldn't
have
to
suddenly
bring
their
property
into
compliance.
They
would
they
would
have
legal,
not
conforming
status.
O
Staff
did
engage,
or
we
attempted
to
engage
property
owners
and
other
folks
that
work
in
the
area.
We
decided
on
a
consult
level
of
participation
and
with
that
we
set
up
a
let's
talk,
Bloomington
page,
to
host
products
of
this
process
early
may
we
sent
out
mailer,
so
we
informed
people
that
this
process
was
kicking
off
and
that
there
are
multiple
ways
for
them
to
engage
staff
if
they
have
any
questions
or
if
they
have
any
comments
or
concerns
that
they
would
like
us
to
address.
O
We
visited
each
property
in
early
may
as
well
to
again
have
that
face-to-face
interaction
and
see
if
we
could
and
talk
about
the
opportunities,
but
also
address
any
concerns
that
they
may
have
at
the
latter
half
of
may
we
held
two
open
houses,
a
virtual
one
and
an
in-person
one.
The
virtual
one
was
quote
unquote
a
bust,
not
too
many,
no
one
attended,
but
that's
fine,
the
in-person
one
there
were.
O
There
were
a
few
people
who
attended
but
I,
guess
of
what
what
I
take
from
that
or
I
guess,
just
speaking
on.
My
own
behalf
is
just
that
it
it
hasn't
generated
in
controversy
at
the
time,
so
nonetheless,
we
we
were
able
to
have
some
conversations
with
folks.
We
did
receive
actually
a
I
should
have
mentioned.
We
did
receive
an
email
and
support
of
the
rezoning,
and
that
was
for
that's
kind
of
hard
to
point
out.
O
O
Next
steps
we'll
have
a
city
council
study
session,
we'll
we'll
bring
up
the
same
issues
that
we're
discussing
tonight,
but
we're
also
going
to
bring
a
resolution
to
initiate
that
rezoning
so
begin
that
rezoning
process
mid-august
we'll
have
a
public,
we're
tentatively
scheduling
a
expecting
a
public
hearing
at
that
Planning
Commission
meeting
and
then
the
first
city
council
meeting
in
September
we'll
have
another
public
hearing
to
hopefully
move
forward
with
the
staff's
recommendation.
But
with
that
I
can
take
any
questions
that
you
may.
A
Have
thanks
for
that
I
have
a
question
partly
for
myself
and
also
partly
just
for
anyone
who
might
be
following
along
back
a
couple
slides
when
you
talked
about
the
replace
but
not
expand
kind
of
there.
You
go
so
repair
replacement,
restoration,
but
not
expansion.
So
if,
for
example,
I
ran
one
of
these
businesses
that
was
in
yellow
on
here.
G
A
Just
pick
one
say:
I'm
running
a
vehicle
repair,
minor
Valvoline
and
the
building
is
scraped
and
replaced,
and
maybe
it's
retail
with
residential
above,
but
the
retail
component
is
not
any
bigger.
Is
that
considered
a
replacement,
or
is
that
considered
an
expansion,
because
the
business
itself
is
not
expanding
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
how
restrictive
is
this
on
those
businesses.
A
If
we
leave
the
business
from
if
we
rezone
this
yes,
the
business
is
allowed
to
continue
yep
for
these
things
that
you
say
which
are
which
I
you
know.
We
know
that
those
are
the
case
if
that
facility
was
to
be
removed,
but
rebuilt
would
that
business
be
able
to
continue
in
a
similar
size
that
be
considered
a
replacement.
I
guess
is
the
question.
A
It's
okay!
If
you
don't
have
an
answer,
it's
just
I'm
trying
to
understand
yeah
that
you
know
there
I
understand
that
there
are
different
types
of
businesses
that
you
want
in
certain
zoning
areas,
but
I'm
just
trying
to
get
my
head
around.
Is
there
a
path
where
those
businesses
might
again
they?
You
know
a
valve
is
probably
a
bad
example
of
both
four
stories
of
residential
but
yeah.
O
Chair
Roman
I
believe,
if
the,
if
it's
the
it's
it's
the
non-conformity,
that's
not
being
expanded
but
sure
whatever's
added
is
different
in
compliance,
it's
different,
but
it's
in
compliant
or
compliance
it's
a
similar
use.
Then
that
would
be
appropriate,
but
it
wouldn't
be
expanding
the
Valvoline
you
shouldn't
be
adding
another
maintenance,
Bay
or
anything.
It
would
be
maintaining
that
footprint,
and
so
there
wouldn't
be
any
additional
traffic.
It
wouldn't
be
an
increase
of
that
non-conforming
use.
A
A
F
O
O
Setting
up
that
distinction
between
the
two
Community
commercial
is
assuming
all
the
uses
that
are
allowed
in
general
business,
but
adding
that
larger
scale
service
again
owing
to
that
larger
lot
size
needed
to
accommodate
some
of
the
uses
that
are
allowed
within
the
B4
District
or
just
within
I'm.
Sorry,
the
commute
sorry
talking
about
land
use
within
the
commercial,
those
lots
that
are
guided,
Community
commercial,
so
the
we
have
the
guided
land
use.
O
But
then
we
have
the
the
zoning
underlying
zoning,
that's
restricting
or
not
restricting
but
narrowing
on
the
the
types
it
uses
so
you'll
see,
for
instance,
under
General
business
gas
stations,
I
believe
those
other
uses
would
be
appropriate
for
the
B4
zoning
District
except
gas
stations.
Those
would
not
be
appropriate
or
those
I'm
not
appropriate,
not
be
allowed,
so
those
are
not
allowed
uses.
So
it's
trying
to
find
the
harmony
between
the
general
business,
land
use
guidance
and
the
B4
District
that
we're
proposing
I
hope
that
answered
your
question.
B
J
O
O
How
did
they
just
sorry?
It
was
a
key
task,
I
believe
that
was
the
term
that
they
used
in
the
retrofit
plan.
This
was
a
key
project
in
order
to
implement
the
retrofit
plan.
So
if
there
was
any
deviation
from
that
plan,
I
believe
that
I
mean
that's
a
that's
reconsidering
policy.
That's
already
been
established,
and
there
might
be
good
reason
to
do
that.
If
you
had
a
a
very
clear
majority
up
to
20
out
of
28
properties
that
did
not
did
not
or
were
not
in
support
of
this
rezoning.
O
That
would
be
quite
a
concern
and
I
suppose
that
would
be
good
evidence
to
maybe
reconsider
the
policies
but
from
I
wasn't
here
for
those
previous
projects,
but
I
believe
there
were
extensive,
Community
engagement
activities
that
were
that
were
never
done
throughout
those
planning
processes.
So
my
I
imagine
that
they
they
received
the
buy-in
and
then
the
city
council
was
pretty
confident
to
adopt
those
policies.
But
you
know
it's
been
a
few
years:
I
guess
things
change
but
yeah.
That
would
be
a
repo
policy
reconsideration.
That's
for
sure,
I.
G
Thanks
for
sure,
Mr
Raymond
Olsen
this
evening.
This
is
a
study
item.
So
if
I
were
a
property
owner
and
I
really
disliked
this
I
wouldn't
have
an
opportunity
to
speak
before
us
tonight,
so
for
those
watching
at
home
and
or
who
may
own
a
business
in
this
Corridor.
Can
you
and
forgive
me
if
you
already
talked
about
it,
walk
through
sort
of
the
global
process
of
this?
Presumably
this
will
come
back
before
as
a
public
hearing
folks
will
have
a
chance
to
testify
before
us
in
the
city
council.
G
O
Yes,
chair
Roman,
commissioner
cookton
yeah
just
to
recount
I
think
yeah.
This
slide
lays
out
the
process
from
from
here
on
out,
just
to
recap
that
we
did
we.
We
started
the
engagement
back
in
early
May
when
this
project
formally
kicked
off
and
we
provided
numerous
avenues
for
people
doing
to
provide
feedback
or
Express
their
concerns,
have
their
concerns
addressed
by
staff
or
have
those
concerns
taken
into
consideration.
O
O
G
O
G
G
That
certainly
affects
my
decision
and
so
I
I'm
in
no
position
to
say
whether
I
like
it
or
not,
but
I
think
it's
a
positive
step
in
the
in
the
right
direction
and
certainly
it
seems
to
align
with
the
Lindell
Avenue
retrofit
plan,
which
I
am
supportive
of
so,
although
I'll
Reserve
final
judgment
when
we
can
have
a
public
hearing
and
and
hear
from
our
residents
and
our
business
owners,
I
think
what
we've
seen
here
this
evening.
What
I've
seen
you
this
evening
is
is
just
fine.
A
Yeah
I
would
say,
I
think
you're
heading
in
the
right
direction.
I
think
doing
this
sooner
than
later
is
good
we've.
You
know,
we've
had
projects
that
have
come
along
and
in
one
of
these
nodes
that
actually
had
projects
in
both
of
these
nodes,
one
that
we
did
not
move
forward
on,
because
it
wasn't
consistent
with
the
vision
and
one
that
the
vision
wasn't
finished,
but
the
the
developer
was
willing
to
kind
of
go
along.
What
we
were
thinking
so
I
I
am
I,
think
you're
heading
in
the
right
direction.
A
G
One
further
question:
Mr
chair,
so
globally,
we've
done
some
work
along
this
Corridor
for
transitioning
to
this
new
transitional
industrial
Zone,
and
we
did
that
work.
Now.
This
chunk
of
the
pie
is
being
taken
up
in
terms
of
the
Lindell
Avenue
retrofit
plan.
Is
there
more
rezonings
re-guidings
coming?
Is
this
sort
of
the
last
piece
of
that
I
apologize
for
catching
off
guard?
But
where
are
we
at
in
the
long
term
process
of
the
Lindell
Avenue
retrofit
strategy.
O
Chair
Roman,
commissioner
cookton
I'm,
going
to
have
to
defer
to
my
other
planning
colleagues.
They
are
a
little
bit
more
familiar
with
what
came
out
of
that.
This
seems
to
be
guided
primarily
by
the
retrofit
plan
and
the
action
items
that
were
described
in
in
that
document,
so,
if
I
may
have
to
defer
to
them
to
see
what
else
is
on
the
plate
after
this
project.
D
G
O
O
D
A
N
Yeah,
chair
Roman,
Nick
Johnson,
if
I
may
just
add
a
little
bit
of
additional
information
about
Kendall
Lindale
going
forward.
I
appreciate
the
question
the
way,
the
way
that
we
have
a
a
staff
working
group
who's
established
to
kind
of
continue
keeping
momentum
going
on
Lindale,
so
Tom
and
I
are
members
of
that
group.
Brian
is
a
group,
a
member
of
that
group
there's
a
few
other
key
players
who
are
involved
in
trying
to
keep
the
momentum
going.
But
it's
good
a
good
way
to
think
about.
N
Lindale
is
very
much
the
public
Space
versus
the
private
space.
So
these
rezoning
actions
with
transitional
industrial
and,
of
course,
this
B4
action
is
very
much
in
line
with
that
private
space.
How
to
reconsider
the
rules
and
regulations
around
the
private
space?
Other
things
that
the
city
could
be
proactively
doing
on
the
private
spaces,
trying
to
secure
funding
for
potentially
Brownfield
or
other
environmental
issues
that
do
exist
along
the
area.
N
Some
of
the
areas,
industrial,
there's
other
policy
that
the
city
could
consider
to
try
and
kind
of
mitigate
land
use
conflicts
along
those
lines
on
the
the
street
side
of
it.
So
Tom's,
right
that
the
plan
does
include
a
lot
of
potential
kind
of
like
at
a
vision
or
at
a
high
level,
a
lot
of
changes
to
the
Lindale
Avenue
Corridor.
The
next
logical
step.
N
You
know
as
hard
as
we
can
on
that,
because
we
want
to
support
the
vision
of
Lindale
retrofit
as
well
so,
but
the
next
logical
step
is
doing
a
corridor
study
of
Lindale
and
that's
where
you
really
get
to
that
5
000
foot
level,
I'm
using
Kirk,
Roberts
kind
of
terminology
that
he's
expressed
to
me.
But
right
now
the
plan
kind
of
the
roadway
segments
as
Tom
said,
and
the
plan
is
very
much
just
a
vision
it
doesn't.
It
doesn't
account
for
a
very
detailed
Transportation
study
of
the
corridor.
N
It's
it's
a
there's,
a
there's,
a
lot
going
on.
In
the
corridor
there's
trucks
you
know,
so
you
have
to
balance
some
of
those
things
with
the
other
multimodal
goals
for
the
quarter
associated
with
the
vision.
So
they
have
to
do
a
more
detailed
study
of
it
to
really
move
that
next
step
to
know
what
they
potentially
could
construct
in
the
future.
So
hopefully
that
provides
a
little
bit
more
info
about
kind
of
the
broader
picture
of
retrofit
Beyond.
Just
this
b2b4
study.
G
Yeah
thanks
Mr
Johnson,
and
it's
never
too
early
to
think
about
that.
2024
work
plan
Mr
chair,
so
you
can
Count
Me
In
as
a
proponent
of
a
corridor
study
for
Lindale.
It's
a
priority,
at
least
for
me
on
this
commission
and
my
sense.
It
is
for
other
folks
as
well,
not
to
speak
for
them,
but
it's
something.
I
certainly
have
interest
in
and
and
I
appreciate
that
we
are
trying
not
to
lose
momentum
on
it.
So
thank
you
for
that.
A
N
N
I
want
to
point
out
that
Kevin
taskey
with
legal
and
Alejandra
palinka,
the
director
of
creative's
place
making
are
also
on
the
call.
So
this
element
this
next
item,
that
we'll
discuss
very
much,
especially
with
your
role,
is
land
use
and
Zoning
Advisory
Board
to
the
city
of
Bloomington
or
to
the
city
council.
Very
much
is
within
that
space,
but
this
one
is
one
that
crosses
over
into
other
lanes
and
spaces
as
well.
N
Okay,
so
what
we're
here
to
discuss
this
evening
is
some
potential
city
code
amendments
as
well
as
a
supportive
policy
that
would
kind
of
reimagine
how
the
city
regulates
murals
in
Bloomington
and
we'll
talk
about.
Why
that's
necessary
here
and
kind
of
what
our
vision
is
for
that.
So,
first,
just
a
little
bit
of
background,
if
we're
all
kind
of
starting
from
the
same
place,
just
a
context.
N
N
They
do
build
community
in
kind
of
unseen
ways,
but
that
some
of
those
things
and
we'll
talk
about
that
with
the
standards
do
have
to
be
balanced
with
some
kind
of
Maintenance
of
Community
aesthetic
appearance
standards,
but
also
kind
of
public
health
safety,
welfare
considerations.
So
that's
kind
of
you
know.
That's
really
strikes
at
the
heart
of
what
this
policy
is
attempting
to
do.
N
The
main
reason
that
we're
here
in
why
City
coder
amendments
is
that
the
current
zoning
code
is
not
particularly
friendly
to
murals
and
the
primary
reason
for
that
has
to
do
with
the
Coatings
restriction
within
our
exterior
materials
standards.
So
we'll
talk
about
that
in
a
little
bit
more
specific
detail
when
we
get
there
in
terms
of
what
brought
us
to
this
point
kind
of,
why
we're
moving
ahead
with
presenting
you
a
draft
ordinance
this
evening?
N
If
you
recall,
in
January
of
this
year,
the
on
the
the
city's
work
plan
for
this
year,
the
Planning
Commission
work
plan
for
this
year
is
the
sign
ordinance
and
when
we
were
studying
the
sign
Ordinance.
One
of
the
things
that
we
discussed
was
murals
as
part
of
that
discussion
and
at
that
time,
and
maybe
as
part
of
previous
efforts
to
murals
and
signs,
were
kind
of
always
linked
to
one
another.
From
a
regulatory
framework
or
at
least
in
kind
of
the
the
minds
of
folks
working
on
it.
And.
I
N
We
started
to
think
about
it
more.
We
actually
came
to
the
conclusion,
and
some
of
the
case
law
has
also
drawn
kind
of
driven
us
to
this
point
as
well
just
around
expression.
But
ultimately
we
got
to
the
conclusion
that
that
these
things
don't
necessarily
have
to
be
closely
aligned
or
coupled
they
can
be
decoupled.
They
do
need
to
talk
to
one
another.
N
So
in
terms
of
a
timeline
of
what
we're
looking
at.
So
the
work
of
murals
is
very
much
in
terms
of
the
commissioning
of
them.
More
recently
in
Bloomington
has
very
much
been
on
the
the
efforts
and
responsibilities
of
creators.
Creative
Place,
making
they
have
an
advisory
commission
similar
to
planning
commissions
staff,
did
present
this
the
the
kind
of
structure,
not
the
specifics,
but
the
structure
of
this
policy
at
the
last
creative
Place
making
commission
and,
generally
speaking,
they
were
very
supportive
of
our
approach.
N
They
were
excited
that
there's
the
potential
for
greater
opportunity
to
pursue
this
I
forgot
to
say
a
very
important
point
about
the
background.
Once
again,
when
we
looked
at
this
in
January
I
said
you've
talked
about
it.
Both
the
Planning
Commission
and
city
council
were
unanimously
supportive
of
pursuing
policies
that
open
the
door
for
more
murals,
pretty
important
point
that
I
forgot
and,
as
you
recall,
that
polling
activity
we
did
with
the
clickers
allow
of
those
were
split
votes.
N
N
The
commission
members
were
very
supportive
of
that,
so
we're
here
before
you
this
evening
to
do
a
study
session
to
really
bring
a
draft
ordinance
before
you
to
answer
your
questions,
to
get
your
feedback
on
whether
or
not
it's
on
the
right
track
from
a
land
use
and
Zoning
perspective,
and
then,
if
it
is
in
case
so
commercial
cooking,
you
asked
what
are
we
looking
for
we're
looking
for
kind
of
similar
feedback?
Are
we
on
the
right
track?
N
N
The
Landscaping
ordinance
has
the
hard
and
fast
rules
within
the
Landscaping
provisions
of
our
city
code,
but
it
also
has
an
administrative,
supportive
policy
that
is
adopted
by
city
council
originally
and
is
referenced
embedded
in
city
code,
but
has
a
lot
of
elements
to
it
that
are
more
advisory
or
design
guidelines
or
recommendations.
So
what
would
that
be
in
the
area
of
landscaping?
What
would
that
be
would
be
like
tree
species?
You
know
what
are
more
salt,
tolerant
material
versus
not
for
parking
lots,
for
example.
N
So
this
when
we
started
considering
this-
and
this
is
not
an
area
of
public
policy
that
is
widely
developed
all
around
the
country-
not
every
Community-
has
a
murals
ordinance
or
a
murals
policy.
It's
very
much
more
kind
of
on
the
Leading
Edge
I.
Guess
of
it
not
to
say
that
there
aren't
cities
that
have
had
policies
for
several
years,
but
you're
not
going
to
find
murals
Provisions
in
except
very
kind
of
basic
elements
in
a
lot
of
other
cities.
N
The
other
element.
Just
to
that.
More
simply,
is
it
just
because
it's
an
easier
way
to
outline
all
the
administrative
elements
you
know
what
is
all
the
required
content
of
a
mural
permit?
Application
have
to
have
within
it
having
it
in
a
supportive
policy
gives
that
staff
the
ability
to
kind
of
refine
and
change
those
things
as
needed
so
long
as
those
elements
are
not
in
conflict
with
anything.
That's
within
the
city
code.
Obviously
the
city
code,
nothing
within
that
policy
could
be
adopted.
That
would
be
in
conflict
with
that.
N
So
hopefully
that
makes
some
sense.
I
know
it's
not
a
common
approach
to
a
lot
of
the
things
we
deal
with,
but
murals
are
not
a
common
thing
that
we
deal
with
either
so
in
terms
of
the
content
of
the
murals
order
itself,
I'm
just
going
to
touch
briefly
on
the
bolded
items,
but
these
what's
on
your
screen,
Before
You
is
kind
of
the
the
basic
elements
of
what's
contained
within
the
draft
ordinance.
N
So
getting
to
the
definition.
There's
just
a
couple
things
I
want
to
touch
on
I'm
not
going
to
read
this
word
for
word,
but
the
couple
things
I
wanted
to
touch
on
is
that
a
the
definition
attempts
to
make
clear
differentiation
between
murals
and
signage?
That's
an
important
element
and
will
be
important
as
we
adopt
new
science
standards.
N
It
does
include
a
provision
that
uniform,
painting
or
coating
of
an
exterior
building
surface
does
not
constitute
a
mural.
We'll
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
our
area
standards
later,
but
Bloomington
having
a
painting
or
coding
restriction.
We
do
want
to
ensure
that
murals
does
not
become
and
run
kind
of
around
some
of
those
regulatory
provisions,
and
then
we
also
want
to
differentiate
it
from
graffiti.
That
was
important
to
environmental
health
staff
and
makes
perfect
sense
to
me
and
just
for
the
for
the
for
your
benefit
and
for
the
Public's
benefit
graffiti.
N
Obviously,
we
see
things
in
murals
or
on
buildings
that
appears
to
be
graffiti.
That's
not
how
like
from
a
public
policy
perspective
graffiti,
is
an
art
form
colloquially
or
commonly
known
as
but
in
this
sense
graffiti
is
things
that
are
etched
or
painted
on
buildings
without
property
owner
consent.
N
So
I
just
want
to
make
that
clear
distinction
in
that
in
terms
of
now
things
that
are
getting
more
hard
to
the
zoning
code
and
development
things
that
you
deal
with
so
as
I
mentioned,
the
extreme
material
standards
does
have
restrictions
on
painting
and
coding
of
primary
materials,
and
so
what
this
ordinance
would
do
is
it
would
create
an
exception
to
that
coding
restriction
for
murals
that
have
been
approved
as
part
of
a
mural
permit
process.
That's
reviewed
by
staff.
So,
if
you
get
a
mural
permit
approved,
the
design
is
good
to
go.
N
N
The
other
thing
in
our
current
ordinance,
which
and
I
talked
about
kind
of
barriers,
or
that
the
code
is
unfriendly
to
murals.
The
current
code
actually
explicitly
states
that
murals
cannot
be
applied
to
a
primary
Bill
directly
to
a
building
elevation
currently,
and
so
this
would
strike
that
language
that
it
can't
be
directly
applied,
get
into
the
mural
permit
process.
Don't
need
to
linger
here
too
long
but
similar
to
a
sign
permit
someone
before
installing
a
Muriel
would
have
to
get
a
mural
permit.
N
It
would
be
a
reviewed
administratively
it'd
be
a
hundred
dollar
fee,
as
currently
proposed.
The
creative
placement
director
and
planning
manager
would
be
the
two
assigned
authorities
to
approve
that
permit
and
again.
This
is
just
one
of
those
areas.
It's
kind
of
odd,
to
have
two
different
authorities
in
that
regard,
but
this
is
one
of
those
areas
where
you
just
have
two
distinctly
different
areas
of
expertise
and
just
an
administrative
point.
N
This
is
really
where
we
have
to
rely
on
our
legal
colleague
or
colleagues
in
legal
and
I
should
say
that
on
a
preliminary
level,
we
have
had
some
discussions
around
murals
with
the
same
Consulting
attorney,
who
is
working
with
staff
on
the
sign
ordinance,
John
Baker,
with
green
espinal
and
Kevin.
Taskey
and
I
have
been
studying
this
issue
quite
a
bit
laws
or
case
law.
N
Around
expression
has
changed
quite
a
bit
in
the
last
five
to
ten
years,
and
so,
while
we
want
to
make
sure
again
in
the
with
respect
to
prohibited
murals,
this
is
a
perfect
example
of
having
wanting
to
strike
that
balance
of
allowing
for
greater
expression,
but
also
protecting
public
health,
peace
or
public
health
and
safety,
so
prohibited.
Mural
types,
the
city
is
really
at
a
quite
limited
position
to
regulate
content.
N
If
there's
interest
in
that,
but
where
the
city
is
better
positioned
or
more
on
firm
legal
ground
to
restrict
some
of
these
things
according
to
Supreme
Court
decisions
related
to
First,
Amendment
stuff,
so
imitating
an
official
traffic
sign.
Obviously
that
could
be
a
threat
to
vehicular
pedestrian
safety.
If
you
had
a
mural
that
looked
like
a
street
light
right
next
to
an
intersection
or
something
obscuring
or
concealing,
Life
Safety
Equipment,
that's
something
that's
really
important
to
the
fire
marshal.
N
Obviously
you
got
fire
department
connections
or
you
have
alarms,
or
if
you
paint
over
those
things
or
obscure
those
things,
then
Public
Safety
staff
can't
find
that
equipment.
That
would
not
be
an
acceptable
condition.
Then
these
next
three
are
really
reliant
on
some
of
those
legal
arguments,
but
are
important
murals
that
could
incite
or
produce
imminent
Lawless
action,
murals
that
convey
threats
of
violence
at
persons
or
groups.
N
So
I
don't
anticipate
this
to
be
a
problem
in
the
future,
but
should
there
be
any
issues
with
the
content
of
a
mural
that
was
in
clear
violation
of
some
of
these
standards?
Then
the
city
could
use
these
Provisions
to
deny
said
mineral
permit
get
into
the
general
standards
I'm
not
going
to
touch
on
all
of
these
either,
but
I
did
throw
a
number
of
them
on
the
slide.
I
want
to
touch
on
four
of
them,
but
a
maximum
area.
N
I
talked
about
the
potential
for
kind
of
end
around
of
a
building
wants
to
be
coded,
but
so
they
apply
for
a
Merle
permit
because
they
know
it's
their
only
way
to
potentially
coat
on
their
building.
This
area
provision
would
limit
the
maximum
amount
of
coating
to
50
percent
or
murals
on
a
building
would
be
limited
to
50
percent
of
the
elevation
area
in
terms
of
projection
and
that's
not
not
to
be
confused
with
a
visual
projection.
That's
a
different
category
of
art,
kind
of
projection
art,
but
projecting
like
physical
projection
from
the
building.
N
Some
murals
do
involve
three
to
our
three-dimensional
and
do
involve
actually
mounting
objects
or
shapes
or
patterns
of
with
different
objects
on
onto
a
building,
and
so
what
this
standard
would
create
is
a
maximum
projection
of
two
feet.
It
also
includes
a
standard
about
not
encroaching
into
public
easements
of
record,
which
is
important
to
engineering
and
Public
Works
in
terms
of
signage.
N
You
can't
have
mechanical
or
electrical
components
that
create
motion
and
things
within
the
within
the
mural
itself.
We're
suggesting
that,
because
those
are
current
restrictions,
prohibitions
within
our
sign
ordinance,
so
we
do
want
to
try
and
have
some
consistency
between
those
things
when
it
makes
sense
the
I
guess
the
last
thing
I'll
say
about
it,
and
we
discussed
this
at
creative
placement.
Commission
too,
is
that
the
technology
and
the
methods
and
the
styles
of
murals
are
changing
at
a
pretty
fast
pace.
So
it
wouldn't
surprise
me,
as
over
the
next
10
years.
N
If
you
know
this
catches
on
or
if
some
folks
are
interested
in
installing
murals
that
you
know
the
city
might
be
in
a
position
to
have
to
revisit
some
of
these
standards
over
time.
Assuming
that
public
health
safety
welfare
can
be
maintained
with
some
of
those
changes,
but
that
you
know
it's
kind
of
an
arena,
that's
changing
quickly
as
our
as
our
science
for
that
matter,
so
I
won't
go
into
great
detail
about
the
murals
policies
and
procedures
document.
N
That
was
also
in
your
packet
for
your
consideration,
but
what
I
will
say
about
it?
I
kind
of
mentioned
before
this
is
really
the
the
main
opportunity
to
out
to
outline
some
of
those
administrative
procedures.
So
what
what
are
the
required
items
you
have
to
have
in
your
mural
permit
application,
and
then
it's
also
an
opportunity
for
staff
to
communicate
design,
guidelines
and
recommendations
to
artists
or
entrepreneurs
or
building
owners
in
a
way
to
make
sure
that
their
mural
endures,
that
it's
the
the
site
or
the
surface
as
well?
Prepped.
N
Some
maintenance
considerations
as
well
and
I
I
didn't
include
a
slide
about
maintenance,
but
maintenance
is
a
piece
of
this
too
similar
to
other
components
of
permits.
You
do
need
to
have
an
approved
maintenance
plan.
This
code
would
also
give
the
city
the
ability
to
require
repair
of
a
mirror
that
was
fell
into
a
state
of
disrepair.
F
N
N
Well,
it's
not
changing
boundaries,
but
it's
basically
changing
legal
entities.
It's
like
it's
basically
replaces
the
zoning
lot
process,
so
we've
had
a
few
of
those
applications
that
very
specific
Arrangement
that
you
talk
about
has
not
occurred
in
in
those
arrangements.
I
would
assume
that
the
two
people
within
those
roles
would
maintain
a
professional
relationship
in
terms
of
their
review
and
Analysis
and
understanding,
but
from
just
a
city
code
perspective.
D
N
N
Our
original
draft
had
the
director
of
creative
placemaking
being
the
sole
approver
and
for
a
variety
of
other
kind
of
administrative
reasons,
just
in
terms
of
the
authority
of
that
position
as
identified
in
city
code,
it's
not
a
position,
that's
approving
other
development
applications
per
se.
So
the
reason
that's
why
the
planning
manager
was
brought
in
in
that
dual
role
is
that
the
planning
manager
under
city
code
has
the
authority
to
approve
administrative
development
applications
if
that
makes
sense.
N
But
in
addition
to
that
there
was
some
concern
that
we
didn't.
The
city
did
not
want
to
be
up
here
in
a
conflict
of
interest
type
situation,
where
the
the
the
person
signing
off
on
the
permit
serves
the
board
and
commission
who
is
commissioning
a
mural.
If
that
makes
sense,
it's
probably
way
more
information
than
you.
You
don't
know.
F
Yeah
I
mean
my
thought
about
this
was
Art
is
so
people
just
have
different
preferences
and
art
that
they
like
and
don't
like,
and
so
I
just
would
caution
that
there
would
be
a
way
to
not
have
you
know
just
oh,
we
just
don't
like
that,
and
then
that
doesn't
become
a
mural
so
that
that
would
be
my
only
thing.
My
other,
my
other
question
was:
is
there
anything
in
this
about
any.
F
N
Yeah
and
I
I
would
welcome
Kevin
taskey
to
weigh
in
where
he
thinks
I'm
not
filling
in
the
gaps,
but
one
thing
that
we
would
look
at
if
it's.
If
the
content
of
the
of
the
mere
proposed
mural
did
not
touch
on
one
of
those
five
clear
prohibited
murals,
the
city
would
not
be
in
a
position
to
deny
that
application
on
the
basis
of
it
being
prohibited.
That
being
said,
what
we
would
have
to
evaluate
is
whether
or
not
the
proposed
content
does
constitute
a
sign.
N
If
it
does
constitute
a
sign,
it
would
most
likely
would
then
be
limited
to
the
10
percent
area
that
we're
proposing,
assuming
you
know
that
the
ordinance
goes
forward
unchanged,
but
that
that's
more
intended
for
commercial
signage,
there's
other
forms
of
signage,
then
there's
other
forms
of
speech
than
commercial
speech.
So
I
don't
know
if
Kevin
you
have
anything
to
add
to
that.
That's
a
good
question,
though,.
K
Yeah,
do
you
mean
chair
Roman
and
commissioner
Albrecht
to
answer
your
question
yeah
once
kind
of
the
the
thing
with
non-commercial
expression?
Is
that
when
cities
get
into
the
the
kind
of
task
of
trying
to
regulate,
what's
kosher,
and
what's
not
the
courts
really
don't
like
that?
So
and
you
know
the
courts
are
kind
of
inconsistent
on
on
how
they
apply
the
First
Amendment
laws.
K
Sometimes
so
you
know
kind
of
the
risk
when
you
open
up
the
door
to
a
lot
of
expression,
is
you
might
get
distasteful
or
you
know
expression
that
might
some
might
consider
out
of
place
or
offensive
or
whatever
it
might
be,
and
that's
kind
of
the
risky
run
with
more
expression.
So
the
more
we
start
regulating
what
content
can
be
in
murals
like
the
harder
courts
will
look
at
it
and
usually
they
strike
down
those
kind
of
ordinance
Provisions
with
content.
K
So
what
you
see
in
the
ordinance
now
is
we
prohibited
several
types
of
content,
but
that's
already
expression,
that's
not
protected
by
the
First
Amendment,
so
things
like
obscene
sexual
content
or
things
that
are
likely
to
produce
violence
or
imminent,
lawful
action
kind
of
those
fighting
words
or
insults
type
words,
that's
all
unregulated.
So
we
can
do
that.
K
But
when
you
start
getting
into
politics
and
the
bounds
of
politics
are
kind
of
evolving
and
what's
political
is
expanding,
you
get
you
get
into
trouble
with
the
courts
that
way,
so
we
kind
of
wanted
to
stay
on
good
first
amendment
ground.
So
that's
a
wordy
answer,
but
I
think
you
know
for
our
purposes
like
like
I
said
it's
just
get
into
the
getting
into
that
content.
Regulation
is
tough
work,
so
I
hope
that
answers
your
question.
A
It's
the
and
I'm
sorry
I
didn't
go
back
to
the
details
of
the
draft
ordinance,
but
it's
the
10
sign
allowance.
Is
there
anything
in
there?
That's
10
or
the
maximum
allowed
under
the
sign.
Ordinance.
Thinking,
for
example,
is
that
10
a
way
to
get
a
bigger
sign
than
you
might
otherwise
be
allowed
to
have.
N
Yeah
true
Roman
good
question,
so
the
signed
ordinance
would
still
be
applicable,
they're
still
subject
to
maximum
area
requirements
of
their
wall
sign,
basically,
as
it's
currently
constituted,
we're
kind
of
moving
more
towards
a
generic
or
general
building
sign
yep
model.
But
yes,
so
they'd
be
subject
to
both
a
sign
is
subject
to
all
the.
What?
If,
if
designate,
if
clear
that
it
does
meet
the
definition
of
a
sign,
then
it's
going
to
be
subject
to
the
signed
ordinance.
So
it's
both
okay.
G
In
yeah,
thanks,
chair,
Mr,
Johnson
I
want
to
go
back
to
the
two
approver
thing
here
so
when,
when
the
two
folks
who
are
approving
this,
their
criteria
for
whether
it's
approved
or
not,
is
really
those
sort
of
bullet
points
of
things
that
are
not
approved.
It
really
can't
be
anything
like
I,
don't
like
this
or
it's
not,
they
have
no
grounds
for
that.
It's
really
does
it
not
offend,
you
know
it.
Does
it
not
meet
these
bullet
points,
and
if
so,
then
it's
a
must
approved
type
of
a
situation
effectively.
N
G
Thank
you
a
different
topic
here.
Could
you
go
back
to
the
general
standards
there
we
go.
The
first
bullet
point
is
the
one
thing
that's
giving
me
pause
about
this
whole
thing
here
the
limited
to
50
of
the
entire
building
elevation
wall
area.
Could
you
just
speak
in
a
little
more
detail
about
that?
One.
N
Yeah
chair
commissioner
cookton,
so
we've
had
internal
discussion
about
that
one
as
well.
The
reason
where
we,
the
reason
why
we
landed
at
50
percent-
and
this
ties
a
little
bit
to
the
definition
too.
So
on
one
side,
you
have
the
creatives,
I'll
call
them
Alejandra
I'll
call
you
the
creative
kind
of
wanting
more
allowance
for
expression
and
the
reason
being
for
that
is
that
there's
a
lot
of
murals
that
have
been
installed
that
are
the
full
building
wall,
100
of
a
single
elevation.
N
So
the
50
me
would
mean
how
we
would
review
that,
basically,
is.
We
would
total
up
the
square
footage
of
all
four
building,
elevations
or
elevation
areas,
as
we
call
them,
and
the
maximum
amount
of
murals
that
you
could
have
would
be
50
of
that
total
on
a
building
and
again,
this
ties
back
to
my
comment
about
not
wanting
this
policy
to
be
a
potential
end
run
around
the
cording
restriction,
and
that
also
ties
to
the
the
point
and
the
definition
about
again.
N
But
what
we
don't
want
to
have
happened
is
someone
to
generically
paint
a
wall
purple
and
yeah
all
one
color
and
say
that
is
my
artistic
expression
and
have
that
be
just
a
way
to
circumvent
kind
of
the
other,
the
other
storied
and
well
supported
standard.
That
Bloomington
is
honored
for
a
long
period
of
time.
So
there's
there's
competing
interests
here,
and
this
is
our
attempt
to
kind
of
thread.
The
needle.
G
Mr
chair:
this
is
the
thing
I
struggle
with
the
most.
If
it's
50,
why
can't
it
be
100
like
if
we're
allowing
it
on
50
and
we're
saying
that's:
okay
and
we're
going
to
put
in
standards
about,
has
to
be
repainted
and
has
to
be
protected
and
all
that
stuff.
Then
why
not
just
let
them
do
a
hundred
and
I
was
thinking
about
the
test
case
of
okay.
J
To
help
me
answer
visualize
that
question
or
how
I
would
respond
to
that
I
think
kind
of
goes.
Has
me
questioning?
Is
there
a
use
restriction?
Is
it
like
can
I?
Is
it
based
on
residential?
It
has
to
be
a
commercial
Corridor,
restricted
on
a
building
or
like
I'm
trying,
maybe
I
missed
it
in
the
staff
before
it.
But
where
are
the
types
of
walls,
I
would
expect
to
see
a
mirror.
Is
that
a
restriction
on
districts
or
I?
Guess
that
would
help
me
kind
of
understand?
N
Chair
commissioner,
Abdi,
that's
a
good
question
and
thanks
for
I
didn't
mention
that
in
my
slide,
so
thanks
for
that's
an
important
clarification
to
make
is
that
as
currently
constructed
we're
not
proposing
to
have
a
locational
limitation
on
where
murals
can
be
deployed.
Some
of
that
is
tied
to
kind
of
how
the
Bloomington
zoning
regime
is
set
up.
N
In
terms
of
that,
we
have
a
lot
of
institutional
uses
that
are
zoned
R1
that
are
zoned
residential,
but
actually
are
non-residential
uses
so
say
if
Parks
and
Rec
or
say
the
fire
department
wanted
to
commission
a
mural
on
the
side
of
their
fire
station.
If
you
eliminated
it
to
commercial
districts
only
then
they
wouldn't
be
able
to
do
that.
The
other
thing
is
I,
don't
know
if
I
should
say
this
part
out
loud,
but
people
can
paint
their
homes
how
they
want
to
now.
N
There's
no
restriction
against
that,
and,
as
Kevin
has
mentioned,
the
city
would
not
be
in
a
would
be
in
a
limited
position
to
regulate
content,
so
you
can
paint
low
density
or
you
know,
single-family
homes
already
currently,
so
we're
not
proposing
a
locational
restriction.
We
think
Murrells
can
be
well
done
in
many
different
settings.
I
should
note
that
some
cities
do
take
that
approach.
J
However,
they
like
is
it
for
the
public
or
is
it
for
themselves
to
put
it
out
there,
you
use
it
as
a
private,
visual
enjoyment
of
the
property
owner
or
not,
but
I
guess
what
I'm
trying
struggling
here
with
is.
My
experience
of
murals
are
like
on
a
publicly
visible
sites.
If
I'm
required
to
get
a
permit
like
how
would
you
enforce
illegally
installed
murals
on
a
non-visible
wall,
whether
it
is
whatever
District
or
whatever
property
use
it
may
be?
But
how
would
you
enforce
something
that
is
not
required
to
be
on
just
primary
I?
N
You
know
those
issues
get
addressed
through
a
enforcement
process
typically,
and
the
goal
is
always
to
try
and
get
them
into
conformance.
So
if,
if
a
mural
was
installed
without
a
mural
permit,
hopefully
that
was
it
was
done
so
in
a
way
that
it
could
be
consistent
with
code
and
maybe
retroactively
would
go
through
a
permit
process
to
resolve
that
kind
of
Enforcement
issue,
but
I
mean
it's
very
similar
to
many
other
things
that
we
deal
with
in
terms
of
violations
of
the
the
zoning
code.
It's
a
typical
enforcement
process.
J
N
Chair
commissioner,
Abby,
that's
actually
a
good.
Clarification,
too,
is
that
the
proposed
50
applies
to
buildings.
Only
not
some
of
the
other
murals
in
Bloomington
currently
have
been
applied
to
screen
walls
or
other
structures
that
are
not
buildings
where
the
coding
restriction
does
not
currently
apply.
J
Sorry
one
last
question
is:
if
a
a
mirror
was
installed,
whoever
is
installing
it
or
the
property
owner
gets
a
permit
is
issued
because
there
is
not
a
public
hearing
or
at
the
time
or
it
is
approved,
and
it
is
Administrative,
it
gets
installed
and
the
neighbor
hates
it.
Is
there
an
appeal
process
to
take
it
down.
N
N
F
It's
the
Subaru
dealership
has
art
mural
whatever
it
happens,
to
be
on
the
side
of
the
building,
but
it
couldn't
have
the
Subaru
low
I.
Remember
we
couldn't
have
the
Subaru
logo
in
the
picture
it
had
to
be
just
dogs
and
canoes
or
whatever
it
happened.
To
be
I
mean
we've
seen
and
they've
changed.
So
my
two
questions
are
clarifying.
D
N
Chair
commissioner
Albrecht,
so
those
are
printed
panels
that
were
actually
mounted
on
the
building
and
good
questions,
good
clarifications,
assuming
that
the
and
they
actually
pursued
a
privately
initiated
city
code
amendment
to
allow
for
signs
as
part
of
murals
strictly
in
the
motor
vehicle
signage
for
Motor
Vehicle
sales
facilities.
We
have
special
use
signage
in
the
sign
code
and
right
now
you
can
have
Signs
Incorporated
in
a
mural.
N
Only
in
that
individual
use
that
doesn't
make
any
sense
to
staff
you're
either
you
either
should
allow
signage
to
be
incorporated
into
murals
or
for
everyone,
or
for
no
one
from
staff's
perspective.
So
they
did
pursue
that.
That
was
their
right
to
do
that
and
that's
totally
fine
the
they
would
be
allowed
to
do
that
assuming
they
met
the
10,
but
also
that,
as
chair
Roman
talked
about
they're,
also
subject
to
maximum
sign
area
requirements
in
the
sign
ordinance.
So
they'd
have
to
be
meeting
both
tests.
N
Not
only
would
any
signage
being
Incorporated.
You
know
their
trademark
logo
or
a
very
vehicle
with
their
logo
on
it.
Not
only
would
they
have
to
meet
the
10
they'd
have
to
not
exceed
their
maximum
signage
allowance,
which
they
already
have
a
very
large
ball
sign,
also
on
the
side
of
their
building,
which
can
you
know,
tend
to
consume
a
lot
of
their
sign
allotment,
so
assuming
they're
passing
all
those
tests?
N
Yes,
but
I
will
just
tell
you
that
Kevin
and
Alejandra
and
I
and
Glenn
too
I
mean
we
can
have
very
lengthy
discussions
about
what
constitutes
signage
as
part
of
a
mural.
It's
not
an
easier
straightforward
thing:
yeah,
hopefully
I
answered
your
question
there,
but
they
did
pursue
a
code
amendment
to
allow
that
privately.
N
I'm,
sorry
so
and
I
will
I
welcome,
Alejandra
to
weigh
into
on
this
question,
but
also
on
the
100
she
might
or
on
the
50.
She
might.
You
know
it
might
be
good
to
get
her
perspective
about
the
maximum
area
restriction,
but
on
the
permanency,
Alejandra
stopped
me
if
you
think
this
is
incorrect,
but
basically
the
mural
permit
approval
would
establish
what
the
lifespan
of
the
mural
is,
what
the
intended
lifespan
is
and
what
the
plan
is
to
remediate
the
mural
upon
kind
of
or
decommission
the
mural.
N
A
I'm
trying
to
get
my
head
around,
and
this
is
something
that
fascinating.
Actually,
this
was
we're
at
the
National
planning
conference
in
Philadelphia,
there
was
a
public
art
Workshop
that
I
participated
in
in
Philadelphia
is
like
the
king
queen
or
the
the
world
headquarters
of
murals,
I,
guess
or
something
it's
it's
they're
they're
known
for
that,
and
we
toured
a
number
of
interesting
things
and
what
they
talked
about.
This
is
where
this
question
is
coming
up,
for
me
was
that
I
don't
want
to
say
it's
all,
but
I
feel
like
it's.
A
Almost
all
new
murals
that
are
going
up
in
the
city
are
actually
they're,
they're
developed
off
the
building,
and
then
they
are
it's
not
what
it
is,
but
it's
like
heat
thermal
transferred
to
whatever
it
is
so
that
when
it
comes
down
what
was
there
the
building,
the
brick
or
whatever
it
is,
is
UN
unscathed.
If
you
will
and
what
I'm
trying
to
get
my
head
around,
you
were
talking
about.
Let's
say
the
10-year
life,
and
you
know
unless
we
have
performance
standards
around.
This
is
the
only
kind
of
paint
you
can
use.
A
How
do
we?
How
are
we
not
left
with
a
building
that's
been
painted?
That
is
worse
than
if
we
had
done
nothing,
and
so
I
want
to
support
what
we're
going
at
here,
but
I'm
wondering
if,
if
how
do
we
do
that
or
is
there
different
ways
we
should
think
about
it?
You
mentioned
earlier
that
you
know
the
technology.
If
you
will
or
the
you
know
that
I
say
technology
broadly
around
mural
application
is
changing
rapidly.
A
So
I
don't
have
an
answer
that
question
about
that.
Since
we're
a
study,
phase
yeah,
you
know
again.
So
if
it
is
that
you
know,
yep
murals
can
be
designed,
but
they
have
to
be
on
certain
surfaces.
They
would
have
to
be
applied
in
a
certain
way.
Maybe
I
don't
know,
but
that
was
it
was
a.
It
was
a
thing
that
I
would
not
have
thought,
because
we
saw
some
buildings
where
you
would
think
that
this
was
done
with
paint
and
it
was
clearly
and
that
gave
them
the
ability
to
replace
it.
J
Thank
you.
The
maintenance
question
kind
of
had
me
thinking
if
there
is
a
who's
on
the
hook
for
maintenance
responsibilities,
if
the
owner
or
the
business
or
the
property
owner
changes
within
that
timeline
that
they
you
had
approved
for
like
is
the
new
owner
or
the
new
business
on
the
hook
for
maintaining
that,
or
is
the
city
going
to
come
in
if
it's
not
maintained
paint
over
it
or
what
does
that
look
like.
N
N
The
one
thing
I'll
say
to
your
comment,
chair
Roman,
is
that
there
is
a
very
and
again.
This
is
another
area
where
Alejandra
can
provide
a
lot
more
expertise
than
I
can,
but
there
is
a
very
wide
range
of
cost
to
these
different
types
of
mural
application
or
installation,
and
so
one
of
the
things
about,
maybe
the
hundred
percent
I,
haven't
seen
a
lot
of
buildings
that
are
100
to
full
mural,
because
it's
so
costly
to
install
that
much
mural.
N
One
of
the
reasons
Alejandra
might
have
seen
that,
but
I
think
the
big
I
don't
want
to
speak
for,
but
the
big
important
piece
on
her
end
of
things
was
not
to
limit
individual
wall.
Elevations
and
I.
Think
the
50
percent
is
provides
quite
a
bit
of
cant
for
canvas
for
lack
of
a
better
term
to
work
with,
but
I
mean
there's.
Certainly
something
could
be.
We
revisit
or
I
mean
it's
a
policy
decision.
N
G
N
Yeah
I,
don't
I
can
pull
up
the
chair,
commissioner,
cooked
and
I
can
pull
up
the
specific
language
I
think
it
talks
about
architectural
continuity
or
complementary
I
believe
maybe
I
could
pull
it
up
specifically,
but
what
we,
what
we're,
really
looking
at
that
with
respect
to
that
is
the
palette
of
materials.
So,
when
they're
building
a
new
building,
is
it
brick?
Well
the
old
other
shopping
center?
J
Thank
you,
chair
for
a
person,
who's
not
artistically
equipped,
I.
Think
for
our
next
presentation,
I'd
love
to
see
you
know
a
little
bit
mentally,
stuck
on
a
what
a
graffiti
would
look
like
that
could
pass
for
a
mural
versus
what
a
mural
is
I
guess
there
are
graffiti
words
that
could
be
sprayed
painted
on
a
wall,
but
there
are
also
artistically
beautiful
arts
of
graffiti.
Are
this
not
considered
mural
or
like
I?
J
J
It
says
a
mural
is
a
separate
and
distinct
from
a
graffiti,
which
is
defined
elsewhere
in
12.7
of
this
code,
I
couldn't
find
the
12.7
of
this
code.
Maybe
I
just
was
scrolling
too
fast,
but
even
then
I
feel
like
as
you're
doing,
engagement
or
coming
to
different
bodies
who
are
not
artistically
equipped,
like
I,
am
I,
think
just
visually
demonstrating
what
the
code
is
trying
to
avoid.
J
You
know
words
thrown
on
a
wall,
that's
a
graffiti
and
that
should
be
taken
down
versus
artistically
drawn,
get
a
permit,
so
I
guess
just
trying
to
figure
out
what
that
looks
like
for
future
presentations.
I
think
it's
as
a
sample
if
it
does
come
up,
if
there
is
any
interest
from
the
commissions
or
the
council,
I
think
that
would
be
really
helpful,
especially
if
the
questions
about
what
a
graffiti
oh
there
you
go,
looks
like.
N
Yeah
this
might
chair,
commissioner
Abby.
This
might
be
a
little
bit
small
text,
but
what
I
would
I
guess
for
the
purposes
of
what
the
city
code
and
the
public
policy
considerations?
It's
not
what
it
looks
like
it's,
whether
or
not
it
has
property
owner
consent,
so
the
city
code
defines
graffiti
as
not
having
the
consent
of
the
property
owner
done
so
in
a
way
that
the
property
owner
did
not
consent
to
that.
N
There
is
also
a
provision
about
kind
of
deemed
a
public
nuisance
by
the
manager
of
environmental
health,
but
from
the
nine
times
99
times
out
of
100,
maybe
not
that
high.
But
it's
going
to
be
the
the
factor
of
not
having
property
owner
consent.
It's
not
what
it
looks
like
in
the
traditional
sense
in
your
mind
of
oh
that's,
beautiful
art
that
is
like
in
a
style
of
graffiti
or
as
graffiti
as
an
art
form
yeah.
Don't
think
about
that
think
about
the
factor
of
not
having
property
owner
consent.
I.
J
Think
that's
why
it's
differentiated
no
I
appreciate
that
I
think
that
was
really
helpful
with
it.
Hopefully,
anybody
watching
this
or
future
artists
trying
to
go
out
create
art,
go
through
the
right
process,
but
also
I
think
this
definition
of
how
you
just
describe
the
distinction
was
really
helpful.
G
A
Would
say,
given
what
we
heard
about
the
general
Coatings
restriction
I
would
be
more
in
favor
of
like
crawl,
walk,
run
approach
to
this
mural
issue,
so
I
would
be
okay
with
the
50
as
a
as
a
starting
point,
but
maybe
that
we
may
find
that
that's
too
restrictive,
but
without
wanting
to
open
the
floodgates
and
everything
right
now,
I
would
I
would
lean
toward
following
staff
on
that.
One
personally,
hello.
P
Commissioners
Nick
I'm,
sorry
I
just
wanted
to
jump
in
and
make
sure
I
answer
any
questions
Nick
might
have
raised.
This
is
the
director
of
creative
Place,
making
and
I
just
I
tracked
a
couple
of
the
questions.
I
just
wasn't
sure
if
the
greatest
time
to
pop
in
but
in
terms
of
the
application
of
of
poly
tab
is
what
it's
called
technically
and
we
actually
have
it
already
installed
at
the
writes:
Lake
Park
mural
facing
rights,
Lake
Park
seasons
of
becoming
by
good
space
Miracles.
They
use
the
polytab
method.
P
So
that's
going
to
be
a
good
example
in
the
future
for
us
to
look
at
what
that
application
of
it's.
Basically,
a
high-tech
canvas
cloth
that
they
adhere
to
the
wall
and
in
terms
of
the
duration
of
murals.
It
really
greatly
varies
in
terms
of
the
wall,
condition
the
paint
used
and
the
maintenance,
and
so
that
can
vary
anywhere
from
a
couple
years
to
over
20
years
or
more
so
it
there's.
You
know
a
lot
of
variability
among
that
and
then
yeah
I
guess
just
in
terms
of
the
hundred
percent.
P
I
certainly
want
to
adhere
and
respect
planning
commissions
concerns.
But
obviously,
being
part
of
the
creative
community
and
understanding
the
large
really
beneficial
impact
that
allowing
for
an
entire
building
to
create
a
mural
would
be
a
really
huge
impact.
But
that
being
said,
I
understand
some
of
the
concerns
that
are
raised
by
by
staff
and
Commissioners.
J
N
N
Yeah,
yes,
I
mean
I,
I
have
chair,
Commissioners
I.
Think
I
generally
feel
head
nodding
that
we're
on
the
right
track
or
that
this
is
a
policy
that
should
be
pursued
and
can
be
supported.
So
if
that's
the
case,
we'll
bring
it
back
to
creative
placement
commission
and
then
we'll
proceed
to
scheduling
some
public
hearings.
Yeah.
A
And
again,
I
would
actually
building
on
when
commissioner
Abdi
had
some
suggestions
about
what
to
do
next
time.
It
would
I
think
I
would
spend
some
time
on
with
something
whether
it's
in
the
pack
or
in
the
presentation
about
what
happens
when
it's
done,
and
how
do
you
make
sure
it's
restored
to
something
that
was
not
worse
than
original.