►
From YouTube: April 15, 2021 Bloomington Planning Commission Meeting
Description
Bloomington Minnesota Planning Commission Meeting
A
A
Good
evening
and
welcome
to
april
15th
bloomington
planning,
the
planning
commission
advises
the
city
council
on
development
proposals,
development
standards,
long-range
planning
and
transportation
issues.
Some
of
the
items
the
planning
commission
has
the
final
decision
authority
and
the
city
council
will
make
the
final
decision.
A
The
planning
commission
is
made
up
of
seven
volunteers
and
I
believe
we
have
six
of
us
here
tonight,
so
that
ensures
that
we
have
a
quorum
each
set
each
planning
commission
member
serves
up
to
three
years
at
a
time
and
before
we
begin
tonight
just
a
couple
of
items.
We
have
two
items
on
the
agenda,
but
before
we
begin
tonight
I
will
start
with
the
pledge
of
allegiance.
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.
Before
we
begin
I'm
going
to
have
mr
marker
guard
through
some
of
the
changes
that
we've
implemented
since
undergoing
covid
with
the
planning.
B
Yes,
thank
you,
mr
prepare
tonight
is
our
24th
remote
meeting
since
the
pandemic
began
and
tonight
we're
fully
remote
all
commissioners
and
applicants
and
staff
and
members
of
the
public
are
remote,
but
we
can
definitely
still
take
public
testimony
item.
One
is
a
public
hearing.
So
if
you'd
like
to
testify
during
item
one
just
call
the
number
on
the
screen,
one
eight
eight
eight
seven,
four,
two
five
zero,
nine
five
and
then
once
you
are
on
the
call,
you
would
enter
the
conference
code,
which
is
846.100.1098
and
we'll
have
this
numbers.
B
These
numbers
scrolling
across
the
screen
throughout
item
one
and
we'll
put
them
up
at
the
end
of
item
one
as
well.
So
thank
you,
mr
chair.
A
Typically,
when
there's
a
large
number
of
people,
which
I
believe
tonight,
we
have
a
a
number
of
people
that
wish
to
speak
to
an
item.
We
would
ask
that
we
limit
the
comments.
Your
initial
comments
to
three
minutes
to
allow
everybody
an
opportunity
to
participate,
and
then,
if
everybody's
had
an
opportunity,
we
can
go
back
and
ask
if
there's
additional
comments
that
folks
would
like
to
make
but
again
trying
to
keep
those
comments.
A
Brief
and
to
the
point,
all
questions
that
any
public
may
have
should
be
directed
to
myself
as
the
chair,
as
the
planning
commission
will
ultimately
decide
if
those
comments
are
something
that
the
planning
commission
needs,
additional
information
on
and
we'll
address
those
as
they
come
forward.
A
C
C
Okay,
great,
let's
hope
the
fiber
connections
hold
out
here
and
we
can
conduct
conduct
this
smoothly,
so
you're,
correct,
chairman
solberg.
This
is
a
change
of
condition:
application
on
a
development
that
the
planning
commission,
city
council
previously
reviewed,
last
fall
in
september
and
october
of
2020
respectively.
C
The
development
was
a
15
unit,
townhome
project
at
the
northeast
corner
of
penn
avenue,
south
and
west
86th
street.
So
I
will
show
the
the
site
plan
that
was
associated
with
that
project,
but
just
to
touch
on
again,
a
change
of
condition
is
not
an
application
that
we
process
too
frequently
as
you're
familiar
with
many
of
our
zoning
approvals
or
entitlements
typically
contain
numerous
conditions
of
approval
that
must
be
satisfied
prior
to
any
applicable
building
or
other
site.
C
Disturbing
permits
are
issued
by
the
city,
and
so
this
application
specifically
addresses
or
is
focused
on
one
of
those
conditions
of
approval.
As
we'll
we'll
discuss
just
to
reorient
everyone
to
the
site,
I
believe
all
the
members
on
the
planning
commission
were
on
the
board
when
this
development
came
through.
So
hopefully
everyone
is
still
familiar
with
it
again.
C
This
is
two
parcels
that
were
previously
zoned
for
single-family
residential
use
and
there
was
a
single-family
home
on
the
southern
side,
as
you
can
see
from
this
aerial
photo
that
home
has
since
been
demolished
and
as
part
of
the
development
actions
and
approvals
granted
by
the
city
council.
The
site
is
now
guided
medium
density,
residential
and
zoned
r3,
which
is
the
city's
applicable
zoning
district
for
townhome
development.
C
So
again,
single-family
uses
to
the
east
and
north
and
west
and
penn
lake
park
to
the
south,
again
probably
familiar
with
this
site.
So
I
don't
need
to
touch
on
too
much
more
on
the
the
site,
map
or
location
map.
C
This
is
the
site
plan
that
was
submitted
by
the
applicant
as
part
of
the
final
development
plan
application,
as
I
noted
before,
the
the
site
was
also
re-guided
and
re-zoned.
That
action
was
actually
carried
forward
by
the
the
city
council
at
their
october
fifth
meeting
of
last
year
and
they
continued
their
consideration
of
the
preliminary
and
final
development
plans.
Until
a
subsequent
city
council
meeting
on
october
19th
and
in
the
interim
period,
the
city
council
requested
the
staff
to
provide
follow-up
information
on
a
number
of
specific
items
that
they
wanted.
C
Additional
analysis
completed.
One
of
those
items
had
to
do
with
the
site
secondary
access.
So
if
you
can
see
the
site
plan
from
2020
from
last
fall,
if
you
can
see
my
cursor,
the
access
as
it
went
through
the
public
review
process
in
2020
had
a
full
access.
C
This
was
shown
as
a
right
and
right
out
so
as
in
traffic.
They
refer
to
that
as
a
half
access,
so
would
only
allow
northbound
ingress
movements
turning
right
and
then
northbound
egress
movements,
turning
right
out
of
the
development,
and
so
typically
this
is
done,
as
you
can
see
here,
on
the
right
portion
of
the
slide
via
a
raised
concrete
island
or
curb
that
they
often
refer
to
as
a
pork
chop
or
other
similar
nomenclature.
C
C
So
there
was
a
lot
of
discussion
at
the
city
council
level
about
secondary
access
in
the
initial
phases
of
the
preparation
of
plans.
I
should
mention
hennepin
county
is
or
I'm
sorry,
penn
avenue
south
is
a
hennepin
county
facility,
and
so
certainly
when
another
jurisdiction
has
authority
over
a
roadway,
they
have
to
sign
off
or
approve
any
access
changes
to
their
facility
or
roadway.
C
And
so
what
we'll
talk
about
in
terms
of
what
happened
from
a
process?
Standpoint
centers
around
an
access
permit
that
was
submitted
to
hennepin
county
following
the
city
county,
the
city
council's
approval
of
this
project.
So
as
it
went
through
the
public
review
process,
it
was
hennepin.
County
had
submitted
some
review
comments,
noting
some
concern
about
the
access,
but
it
is
their
standard
process
to
await
receipt
of
an
access
permit
until
a
city
which
is
the
the
zoning
and
land
use
authority
has
completed
their
action.
C
So
they
won't
take
up
access
permits
for
developments
that
have
not
yet
been
approved
by
the
the
city
jurisdiction.
They
can
certainly
provide
review
comments
and
they
did
in
this
case
noting
their
concerns
about
access,
spacing
and
other
considerations,
but
it
formally
went
through
the
city
process
and
there
was
a
lot
of
discussion
on
the
part
of
the
city
council
as
to
what
was
necessary
for
a
secondary
access
as
part
of
consideration
or
discussion
of
this
proposed
site
plan
and
the
final
development
plans
specifically
to
access
and
other
issues.
C
Many
of
them
were
approved
in
a
way
where
future
expansion
could
have
provided
linkages
to
provide
secondary
access,
and
some
of
them
had
internal
turnarounds
or
cul-de-sacs.
In
order
just
to
turn
vehicles
around
in.
In
the
case
of
one
out
of
the
eight
of
the
developments
we
looked
at,
they,
it
just
had
a
dead-end
condition,
so
there
was
no
possible
secondary
access.
C
So,
in
terms
of
consideration
of
you
know
how
staff
looked
at
this,
you
know
we
certainly
went
back
to
all
of
our
education
and
experience
in
these
arenas,
and
we
were
strong
proponents
that
the
development
should
have
secondary
access,
because
having
two
ways
in
and
out
of
a
development
is
always
a
superior
design.
C
You
know,
regardless
of
the
the
number
of
unit
counts,
it
becomes.
It
increases
in
urgency
and
importance
that,
with
the
higher
number
of
units
that
you
have,
but
that
being
said,
the
city's
traffic
engineer
did
do
analysis
of
this
development
in
terms
of
its
trip
generation
and
other
aspects,
and
did
determine
that
the
development
could
function
with
a
single
public
use
access,
but
would
be
preferable
to
have
two
accesses.
C
So
your
delivery
trucks,
your
your
garbage
trucks,
your
snow
plow,
whatever
the
case
may
be
in
terms
of
versus
emergency
personnel,
which
is,
of
course,
fire
police,
ems,
those
types
of
personnel
and
so
under
consideration
by
the
council
at
that
time
was
whether
to
make
the
access
available
for
public
use
or
whether
to
make
an
emergency
only
access.
They
ultimately
decided
to
make
the
access
available
for
public
use.
In
fact,
they
put
a
condition
of
approval
on
the
final
development
plans
that
required
the
access
to
have
a
public
use
component.
C
C
C
The
applicant
submitted
their
access
permit
for
the
established
process
with
hennepin
county
in
order
to
gain
secondary
use
access
that
access
permit
was
subsequently
denied
by
hennepin
county
transportation
staff,
and
that
happened
in
january
of
this
year
and
then
stemming
forward
from
there.
The
applicant
went
through
the
formal
appeal
process,
so
at
hennepin
county
there's,
multiple
formal
steps
in
order
to
pursue
an
appeal
of
a
county.
C
It's
just
like
the
city
staff,
certainly
there's
mechanisms
where
you
can
appeal
a
city
staff
decision,
there's
those
same
mechanisms
at
the
county
in
order
to
appeal
a
a
county
staff
decision,
so
they
went
through
those
steps.
Initially,
they
appealed
the
decision
of
the
the
county
staff
to
the
county
engineer.
C
She
ultimately
denied
that
appeal
and
that
came
down
in
february
of
february
of
2021.
You
can
see
the
date
there
and
then
the
applicant
appealed
the
county
engineers
decision
all
the
way
to
the
the
hennepin
county
board
and
they
subsequently
appealed
or
denied
the
applicant's
appeal
in
order
to
gain
a
public
use
access.
C
Through
this
process,
the
applicant
was
working
with
hennepin
county
staff
through
the
process
to
determine
what
alternatives
still
yet
would
exist.
Should
the
appeal
be
denied
and
hennepin
county
has
determined
that
an
emergency
only
access
still
is
available
and
acceptable
to
serve
this
development
here
to
penn
avenue
south.
C
So
this
just
in
effect
memorializes
the
the
change
of
use,
condition
of
the
secondary
access
to
penn
avenue
from
a
secondary
access.
That's
available
for
public
use
to
a
secondary
access,
that
is,
for
emergency
vehicles
only
as
part
of
their
application.
They
have
submitted
a
revised
site
plan
on
the
left
side
of
the
screen.
You
see
the
full
site
plan.
C
In
terms
of
I
mean,
certainly
we'll
focus
on
the
access
to
penn
avenue,
but
you
can
see
that
this
hammerhead
turnaround
here
on
the
north
side
of
the
development
has
been
slightly
revised
or
modified
in
order
to
help
facilitate
turnaround
movements
in
the
area
and
then
with
the
emergency
access
again.
This
is
a
the
emergency.
Only
as
you
can
see,
the
right
and
right
out
condition
has
been
removed.
C
They're
now
showing
a
narrower
driveway
that
tapers
to
the
northwest-
and
this
is
it's
designed
that
way
specifically
to
allow
egress
movements
to
the
north
and
in
an
emergency
situation,
because
the
the
closest
fire
station
to
this
site
is
to
the
northwest
located
in
the
northwest
in
an
emergency.
This
would
allow
fire
and
other
emergency
apparatus
and
personnel
to
enter
the
site
from
the
north
going
across
penn
avenue.
C
So,
in
terms
of
you
know
the
specific
design
criteria
the
county
has
provided
some
design
standards
that
they
would
like
to
see.
It
is
common
to
have
many
of
these
emergency
access.
Emergency
only
accesses
to
have
some
form
of
barrier
the
bloomington
fire
department
has
had
not
the
greatest
experience
or
luck
with
those
forms
of
access
in
terms
of
providing
a
barrier
and
the
reason
isn't
it's
not
solely
based
on
you
know
their
inability
or
slowing
down
their
response
or
able
to
get
through.
C
They
have
damaged
some
of
their
equipment
on
some
of
those
breakaway
bollards
and
other
types
of
barriers.
But
that's
that's
only
one
aspect
to
it.
Another
aspect
to
it
is
obviously
fire
is
not
the
only
group
that
would
be
utilizing
this
axis,
so
police
and
ems.
You
know
if
you're
thinking
about
rollaway
gates
or
things
that
require
keys
or
something
along
those
lines.
Ems
typically
doesn't
have
that
same
level
of
access
that
fire
would
then,
in
addition
to
that,
the
the
emergency
accesses
that
do
exist
that
are
that
do
have
barriers.
C
Fire
has
had
bad
experience
in
terms
of
the
maintenance
of
those
accesses,
because,
if
there's
a
gate
there,
it's
the
first
thing
that
go
by
the
wayside
in
terms
of
snow
removal
and
other
maintenance
on
that
part.
So
when
thinking
about
the
design
criteria,
you
know
the
first
thing
that
everyone's
going
to
think
about
is
you
know,
is
this?
Is
there
a
barrier?
C
Certainly
signage
is
a
big
important
part
of
that
and
then
also
a
surmountable
curbing
and
the
curbing
is
important,
because
if
you
have
a
standard
passenger
vehicle,
you
probably
don't
want
to
chance.
You
know,
depending
on
the
the
specific
angle
or
design
of
the
curbing,
you
probably
don't,
want
a
chance
jumping
over
that
at
a
at
a
decent
rate
of
speed
when
we're
talking
about
an
ingress
movement
but
even
just
leaving
the
development.
C
You
know
it
serves
as
a
as
a
strong
reminder
that
it's
not
for
their
use
and
then,
as
I
said
before,
you
know,
do
not
enter
signage,
do
not
exit
emergency
use.
Only
all
of
those
things
are
a
part
of
that
discussion
as
well,
and
so
with
the
way
the
condition
is
structured.
Now
you
know
they
have
to
gain
the
approval
of
three
different
parties.
They
need
the
approval
of
the
city
engineer,
they
need
the
approval
of
the
fire
marshal
and
they
also
need
the
approval
of
hennepin
county.
C
What
they're
showing
here
is
there's
been
a
strong
indication
on
all
three
of
those
parties
that
it
would
be
in
line
with
what
would
be
acceptable
with
those
parties
but
again
they're.
You
know
they're
still
working
through
the
exact
specifics
of
you
know
what
what
details
and
engineering
details
that
they
would
have
to
work
out,
so
that
condition
remains
in
place
intentionally
in
order
to
finalize
the
exact
design.
C
I
should
note
that,
as
part
of
the
application
they
did
submit
auto
turn
exhibits
and
what
auto
turn
does?
Is
it
models?
The
turning
movements
of
various
vehicles?
You
can
do
an
auto
turn
exhibit
on
any
number
of
different
vehicles.
The
exhibits
that
they've,
provided
you
are
the
bloomington
ladder
truck.
C
And
so
this
is
going
to
be
part
of
the
discussion.
Is
you
know
their
ability
to
do
that?
The
auto
turn
demonstrates
that
they
can
turn
bigger
vehicles
around
in
here
utilizing
that
hammerhead,
but
just
to
note
those
those
exhibits
do
rely
on
high
operator
skill
level,
number
one
and
do
and
do
model
ideal
conditions,
so
no
obstructions
etc.
C
So
should
the
emergency
access
you
know
be
permitted
and
go
forward.
You
know
it'll
be
important
on
the
part
of
the
development
in
order
to
maintain
the
access
from
the
snow,
removal
and
signage
and
and
other
elements
number
one,
but
also
to
ensure
that
those
obstructions
are
not
present
so
that
larger
vehicles
can
turn
around
without
much
difficulty.
C
So
those
are
the
things
I
wanted
to
touch
on
with
respect
to
the
design.
You
know
just
in
terms
of
alternatives.
C
So
the
model
shows
it
can
be
done,
you
know,
will
it
always?
Will
it
always
be
easy,
well,
that'll,
be
incumbent
upon
the
development
or
to
to
not
allow
obstructions
to
occur
within
that
drive
aisle
getting
to
the
recommended
conditions
of
approval.
We
are
recommending
two
conditions
that
pertain
to
the
recommended
recommendation
to
allow
this
change
of
condition,
and
it
pertains
to
the
things
that
I
just
spoke
about.
I
won't
read
these
verbatim,
but
basically
a
quick
highlight
on
these
two
conditions.
C
One
is
that
these
restrictions
or
provisions
pertaining
to
the
maintenance
and
ongoing
clear
area
for
the
access
be
written
into
the
hoa
covenants.
For
this
development
that
the
development
beyond
legal
notice,
that
is
their
responsibility
to
maintain
it
and
then
two
just
an
ongoing
condition
that
the
snow
removal
that
the
obstructions
and
that
signs
be
maintained
on
an
ongoing
basis
as
well.
C
Now,
certainly,
we
have
developments
all
over
town
and
they
are
subject
to
any
number
of
conditions,
approval
or
or
code
requirements
for
that
matter,
ranging
from
single
family
homes
all
the
way
up
to
you
know,
multi-family
to
commercial
office,
etc.
All
of
them
are
subject
to
conditions
and
code
requirements.
C
You
know:
should
there
be
issues
with
compliance,
then?
Certainly
it
would
be
turned
over
as
a
typical
or
standard
code
enforcement
pathway
or
mechanism.
So
those
are
the
conditions
we
did
receive
three
emails
regarding
this
case.
C
They
do
note
concern
about
allowing
this
emergency
access,
as,
in
addition
to
general
concern
about
the
development
there's
a
number
of
different
issues
that
there
were
questions
about,
so
I
did
send
those
along
in
the
packet
and
forward
those
to
planning
commission.
Hopefully
you
receive
them,
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
this
change
of
a
condition.
C
C
C
1-888-742-5095,
the
conference
code
is
eight
four,
six
one,
zero
zero
one,
zero
nine
eight,
and
I
can
leave
this
slide
on
the
board
for
up
for
a
minute
here
in
case
anyone
needs
to
reference
it.
Thank
you
chairman.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
mr
johnson.
Commission
members.
Are
there
any
questions
for
staff
on
this
particular
topic
in
front
of
us.
A
What
we're
really
being
asked
is
is
to
look
at
that
change
in
that
condition
of
number
seven,
we're
not
necessarily
being
asked
to
look
or
to
make
comment
on
the
site
plan
that
was
already
approved
back
in
was
it
november
of
last
year.
Is
that
correct.
C
Yeah,
that's
correct
chairman
solberg,
thanks
for
the
question,
as
you
know,
odd,
as
it
is
to
the
normal
applications
you
guys
deal
with
this
one
is
very
narrow
in
scope
and
scale.
It's
specifically
focused
on
this
change
of
condition
language
only
and
certainly
that
does
impact
or
affect
in
terms
of
revising
the
site
plan
in
some
ways.
C
But
the
the
final
development
plans
for
this
project
were
approved.
Subject
to
a
you
know,
lengthy
list
of
conditions
that
are
typical
of
any
development.
You
know,
stormwater
management
must
be
approved.
Those
types
of
things
but
you're
correct
that
the
approvals
were
granted
last
fall.
Tonight's
discussion
and
action
pertains
only
to
this
condition:
number
seven
that
relates
to
secondary
access
to
penn
avenue.
D
Mr
chairman
commissioners,
thanks
for
having
me
with
you
tonight,
I
can't
see
myself
on
my
camera.
If
you
can't
either
that's.
Let
me
know,
in
any
case
not
seeing
me
is
not
a
bad
thing,
but
in
terms
of
your
question
there,
the
number
of
trips
generated
is
actually
fairly
low
from
this
development.
D
There's
110
trips
per
day
that
breaks
down
throughout
the
day,
but
in
the
the
peak
hour
when
the
road
is
at
its
busiest
it's
going
to
generate
seven
trips
during
that
am
rush
hour
and
about
eight
trips
in
the
evening
peak
hour
and
those
won't
have
a
significant
impact
on
the
adjacent
streets.
D
Penn
avenue
is
a
higher
volume
roadway.
This
is
taking
access
off
of
86th
street.
Of
course,
the
signal
there
cycles
fairly
rapidly.
There
are
rarely
any
kind
of
long
queues,
there's
just
generally
a
few
cars
waiting
at
that
signal
at
any
given
time,
and
so
there's
abundant
gaps
in
the
traffic
flow
on
86th
street
and
there's
no
significant
delay
at
the
signal.
That's
gonna,
those
cars
are
gonna,
have
to
navigate
their
way
through,
and
so
no
the
with
the
trips
being
generated,
the
existing
road
and
intersection
network
should
handle
those
trips
without
issue.
A
D
And
just
one
follow-up
to
your
question
too:
there's
sufficient
vehicle
storage
between
the
signal
in
this
driveway
that
cued
vehicles
should
not
overlap
when
we
do
have
that
on
our
busier
roads.
We
do
get
some
concerns,
but
in
this
case,
there's
more
than
adequate
storage
for
that
approach
to
penn
avenue
that
we
don't
expect.
You're
gonna
have
to
thread
your
way
through
any
kind
of
waiting
vehicles
for
the
light.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
mr
roberts.
That
definitely
answers
my
question
appreciate
it
all
right,
commission
members,
any
additional
questions
or
any
other
questions
for
staff.
A
All
right,
not
seeing
any
at
this
time,
we'll
move
on
to
the
applicant
mr
marker
guard
is
the
applicant
on
the
call
with
us
tonight.
B
Yes,
mr
chair,
mr
steve
ferlang
is
here
as
an
applicant.
E
E
The
first
one
is:
is
our
our
fault
in
getting
to
this
point
as
a
developer
was
a
greater
collaboration
with
the
county,
and
if
I
could
restart
the
process,
I
probably
would
have
brought
more
complete
site
plans
to
the
county
early
on
before
we
went
before
your
commission
the
first
time
so
good
lesson
for
the
next
one.
E
So
if
the
occupants
of
this
association
do
attempt
to
utilize
that
emergency
access-
and
there
are
others
in
the
association
that
notice
that
they
can
report
them
to
the
association
board
and
action,
can
be
taken
there,
the
the
the
burden
upon
the
city
with
having
this
be
in
emergency
access,
as
has
been
brought
up
in
comments
before,
is
that
what?
If
vehicles
are
using
this
emergency
access
for
public
use?
When
they're
not
supposed
to
be?
E
Is
that
going
to
cause
an
issue
for
city
planning,
and
at
least
we
can
help
control
that
somewhat
from
the
unit
owner
perspective,
with
board
oversight
within
the
association?
E
I
guess
the
last
point
I
have
is
mr
johnson
noted
that
it
would
take
a
skilled
or
highly
skilled
driver
to
be
able
to
turn
around
a
large
vehicle
in
the
hammerhead,
but
there
is
still
additional
space
for
an
unskilled
driver.
If
you
wanted
to
call
it
that,
because
the
curbs
are
surmountable
and
so
an
unskilled
driver
might
might
cause
a
little
bit
of
damage
in
the
sod
or
something
like
that,
but
there's
still
additional
room
around
the
structures
if,
if
they
weren't
able
to.
E
But
our
auto
turn
diagrams
do
show
that
the
largest
of
vehicles
that
would
be
entering
the
site
would
be
able
to
make
a
turn
around
in
there
with
the
revised
drive
aisle,
and
the
last
thing
is
we'll
certainly
collaborate
with
the
county
highway
engineer
and
the
city
fire
marshal
to
make
sure
that
the
final
designs
are
acceptable
to
both
of
them.
A
F
E
Owner-Occupied
commissioner
cookman
and
mr
chair,
the
bylaws,
are
going
to
have
restrictions
on
the
number
of
allowed
rental
units
at
20
percent
of
the
association.
So
no
more
than
three
of
the
units
will
be
allowed
to
be
rentals,
and
then
we
also
believe
the
market
forces
will
drive
these
to
be
owner
occupied.
Just
the
price
point
compared
to
predominant
market
rents
will
be
prohibitive
for
investors
to
acquire
them
and
rent
them.
A
All
right,
not
seeing
any.
Thank
you,
mr
furlong,
for
your
information
tonight.
At
this
point,
we
will
open
up
the
public
hearing
on
this
item
and
mr
marker
guard
do,
I
believe
we
have
a
number
of
people
that
have
pre-registered.
B
Yes,
mr
chair,
we
did
have
six
people
pre-register,
so,
mr
pease,
I
will
unmute
you
now.
You
could
patch,
through
the
first
column,.
G
Yes,
at
this
time,
I
have
eight
callers
on
the
line.
The
first
one
will
be
andrew.
I
think
it's
stool
t-h-u-l,
mr
thule,
you
should
be
live
ready
for
your
presentation.
A
Yes,
we
can
hear
you
just
to
let
you
know
I
announced
at
the
beginning
of
the
meeting
and
we'll
give
you
three
minutes
to
give
us
your
information
and
then
in
the
respect
of
others.
That
may
want
to
speak,
we'll
we'll
go
to
them
next
and
if
you
have
more
you'd
like
to
add,
then
please
get
back
in
line
and
call
mr
p's
through
the
the
system.
H
Yeah
real
quick
before
I
start,
we
lost
you
guys
the
voice
on
our
honor.
All
of
our
phone
was
lost,
so
I
just
wanted
to
make
mention
of
that
before
the
three
minutes
start.
So
if
you
just
see
some
colors,
hopefully
encourage
them
to
call
them
like.
I
said
we
lost
almost
all
volume,
so
I
was
pulling
it
from
youtube.
So,
while
you
guys
are
talking.
H
It
was
almost
right
at
the
start
of
the
meeting
you
know
so.
I've
been
going
about
through
25
minutes
without
volume
on
my
phone.
A
Okay,
all
right!
Well,
thank
you
for
that
and
we'll
do
mr
marker
guard.
If
we
can
maybe
check
with
tech
staff
and
see
what
we
can
figure
out,
if
that
was
a
individual
or
a
smaller
bandwidth
issue,
or
if
that
was
larger
and
then
let's
say.
G
If,
if
chairmanship,
if
I
can
just
check
with
somebody
to
make
sure
that
they're
hearing
it
now
give
me
a
second
and
david
clarke,
I
unmuted
you
are
you
hearing
the
meeting
on
the
phone
now
I.
G
Okay,
I
I
think
the
problem
is
corrected.
I
saw
what
happened
I
apologize
for
that.
I
will
mute
mr
clark
I'll
bring
him
on
after
mr
tool
is
done
with
this
testimony.
Okay,
all
right!
Well,
okay,
at
that.
A
Point
we
will
we'll
begin
your
time,
mr
thule
I'll
go
ahead
and
begin.
H
Yeah
yeah,
thank
you
guys
for,
for.
Let
me
present
in
front
of
the
do
you
guys
have
my
my
the
sheet.
You
can
pull
up
that
I
kind
of
documented
too
okay.
I
believe
we
have
that
in
front
of
us.
H
Oh
okay,
cool
cool,
great!
Now
I
see
it
so
the
fire
truck
heading
cell
phone
up
there.
H
So
if
a
fire
truck
comes
into
that
entrance,
my
big
concern
is
that,
if
that
fire
truck
comes
down
that
that
that
emergency
only
exit-
let's
say,
there's
a
ups
truck
right
and
if
you
look
at
the
hammer
handle
there
on
the
end,
potentially
with
only
six
parking
stalls
at
the
front
side
of
the
property,
you
could
get
people
backing
in
that
area
if
there's
a
birthday
party
or
such
or
potentially
using
that
driveway
as
a
parking
area.
So
I'm
really
concerned
about
the
access
for
emergency
vehicles
up
on
the
penn
avenue
side.
H
The
other
thing
is:
if
you
look
at
my
other
side
there,
I
have
like
a
fedex
truck
kind
of
parked
near
the
86th
street
side
and
maybe
like
an
amazon
truck
in
there.
What's
gonna
happen
is
the
residents.
If
there's
want
to
get
out
of
the
access,
I
believe
that
they're
gonna
use
the
emergency
access
as
an
emergency
inlet
as
an
exit
right
and
no
matter
what
you
guys
do
to
try
to
mitigate
it.
H
I
think
that
a
gate
or
rope
or
whatever-
or
you
know
like
something
like
that
somebody
could
cut
it
or
move
it,
and
people
will
take
their
four-wheel,
drive
trucks
or
cars
and
go
over
or
off
that
on
the
penn
avenue.
It's
an
extremely
dangerous
area,
because
86th
street
and
penn
has
a
big
high
hill
on
top
of
it,
and
people
go
extremely
fast
down
penn
avenue,
so
people
are
exiting
out
of
there.
H
I
think
there's
a
big
safety
concern
on
that
side
of
the
property
right,
so
that
that's
one
of
my
concerns,
my
other
concern,
maybe
inside
the
property.
You
know
if
you're
talking
about
exits
and
entrances
and
stuff
like
that,
is
the
the
people
cutting
over
you'll
see
a
little
car
on
the
left-hand
side
of
the
diagram,
taking
a
right
into
the
property
that
does
back
up
there
quite
frequently.
If
it's
a
busy
busy
day
now,
kova
has
been
down.
So,
there's
obviously
not
a
lot
of
traffic
count.
H
You
guys
mentioned
seven
trips,
there's
a
lot
more
trips
when
traffic
is
at
full,
full
steam
or
full
head.
So
I'm
concerned
that
people
are
going
to
cut
through
the
property,
and
I
see
this
over
on
mendel
avenue
over
by
cub
foods
in
the
town
home
area
over
there
right
now,
there's
signs
there
that
say
it's
not
a
through.
You
know
no
through
the
people
do
go
through
so,
and
you
know
if
there's
kids
playing
in
the
driveways
or
whatever
in
that
area,
I'm
extremely
concerned
about
the
safety
and
people
cutting
over.
H
You
know
through
the
property
and
just
jotting
through
to
that
that
exit,
so
the
other
thing
is
say,
there's
a
moving
truck
in
there
and
they
were
backed
into
a
driveway
or
if
there's
cars
parked,
because
I
understand
that
road
is
24
feet
wide,
as
I
understand
is.
That
is
that
correct,
commissioner,
is
that
24
feet
wide
that
road.
H
So
yeah,
so
if
it's
24
foot
wide
road,
let's
say
we
get
a
car
parked
on,
you
know,
say
the
driveway's
full
at
a
residence
and
we've
got
cars
parking
on
one
side
or
the
other
right
of
the
street,
and
that
should
really
be
classified
as
a
fire
lane
per
se
up
and
down.
There
should
be
no
parking.
There
needs
to
be
easy
accessibility,
so
I
see
lots
of
you
know:
amazon
trucks,
fedex
trucks,
ups,
trucks,
really
following
up
that
entire
intersection.
H
You
said
that
was
so
from
a
safety
standpoint.
The
commission
really
really
needs
to
look
at
this,
and
this
doesn't
look
safe.
You
know,
and
if
especially,
if
you
go
down
to
like
one
except
for
one
entry,
I
can
see
people
you
know
trying
to
trying
to
go
down
and
and
have
a
truck
in
the
way
and
they're
like
okay,
the
truck's
in
the
way
blah
blah
blah
they
might
even
try
to
enter
on
the
penn
avenue
side.
H
You
know
so,
even
though
there's
a
curve
to
try
to
mitigate
this,
like
I
said,
I've
seen
this
in
bloomington
already
the
one
on
glendale
avenue.
You
know
the
town,
home
and
linda
laby
don't
be
be
used
and,
and
it's
not
a
through,
but
people
will
use
it
through
as
a
through
to
kind
of
cut
through
and
that's
just
the
other
thing.
H
Maybe
I
can
mention
this:
there's
not
a
sidewalk
inside
the
the
property
per
se
up
and
down
that
road,
and
I
know
probably
one
couldn't
be
built
into
it,
but
everybody's
going
to
have
to
walk
down
the
road.
It
looks
like
all
right,
mr
dole.
H
A
All
right,
thank
you,
mr
tool.
We
appreciate
your
comments
all
right,
mr
pease.
Do
we
have
another
individual
from
the
public
that
would
like
to
speak.
I
Okay,
thank
you.
I
don't
have
a
visual
presentation
I'll
just
make
some
comments.
I'll
keep
the
brief
here.
You
know
I
really
started
paying
attention
to
this
whole
complex
last
fall
when
it
was
well
underway-
and
I
guess
I
wish
I
would
have
known
sooner
about
it,
but
it
really
is
a
case
of
you
know,
trying
to
stuff
ten
pounds
of
dirt
into
a
five
pound
bag.
There's
just
way
too
much
going
on
in
there.
I
In
terms,
if
you
look
at
the
the
entire
you
know,
the
entire
structure
is
is
way
too
much
into
too
small
of
a
space,
and
that
shows
up
in
these.
The
question
of
these
two
exits
is
why
the
city
put
that
requirement
on
this.
I
You
know
it's
it's
it's
amazing
to
me
that
this
was
planned
and
put
into
motion
before
even
knowing
the
position
of
the
county,
and
now
the
county's
come
back
with
several
denials
for
appeal
to
make
this
an
emergency
exit
only
because
it's
not
feasible
to
have
two
exits
so
now
we're
down
to
one
exit,
and
it's
just
there's
way
too
much
activity.
Your
estimates
are
way
too
low
on
traffic
activity.
I
Coming
in
and
out
of
there
there's
seems
to
be
no
accounting
for
snow
pile
up
and
where
you're
going
to
put
all
the
snow
which
is
going
to
further
block
access.
This
is
a
safety
hazard.
There's
safety
concerns
all
over
the
place,
there's
not
enough
parking
in
there.
So
you
have
to
have
people
parking
across
the
street
at
a
public
facility
crossing
the
street
by
foot.
There's
no
crosswalk!
I
You
got
people
that
are
going
to
be
coming
out
of
that
emergency
exit
on
on
ken
and
that's
a
safety
hazard.
You
know
the
first
time
somebody
gets
rear-ended
and
and
and
potentially
harmed
or
hit.
You
know
injured
from
that.
That's
it's
going
to
point
directly
back
to
this
entire
planning
process.
It's
been
a
faulty
planning
process,
there's
all
sorts
of
assumptions
that
have
been
made
about
about.
I
You
know
turning
radiuses
and
and
and
number
of
parking
spots
available
for
for
this
size
of
a
complex
I
mean
you
take
15
town
homes
and
you
have
an
average
of
two
three.
Maybe
four
people
in
each
one
you're
talking
50,
60,
70
people,
gentlemen,
that
you're
trying
to
put
into
a
space
that
was
planned
for
two
residences.
J
I
Okay,
the
citizens
are,
you
know,
the
residents
of
this
area
are
still
furious,
that
this
whole
thing
has
even
gotten
to
this
point
and
now
we're
changing
the
the
the
goal
posts
once
again
and
we're
going
to
bring
this
down
to
one
entry
and
exit
to
this
this
place,
and
it
is
it's
unacceptable.
It
is
absolutely
unacceptable.
I
This
needs
to
go
back
to
the
drawing
boards
and
it
needs
to
be
downsized
to
where
there's
a
safe
environment
for
everybody
involved
here,
including
kids
people
in
the
streets,
cars
emergency
vehicles,
it's
unacceptable
the
way
it
is
gentlemen,
you
have
to
go
back
to
the
drawing
boards.
I'm
sorry,
but
that's
that's
what
I
believe
and
that's
what
everybody
else
I've
talked
to.
There's
not
one
resident
that
supports
this,
and
it's
clear,
as
is
his
day
to
us,
doesn't
take
an
engineer
to
figure
out
that
this
is
a
faulty
design.
A
All
right,
that's
all.
I
got
mr
clark
for
your
comments.
We
appreciate
those
again
tonight
as
usual.
All
right,
mr
pease,
do
we
have
our
next
caller.
G
Yes,
chair
carol
cramer,
your
line
is
unmuted.
You
may
begin
your
presentation.
K
Well,
I
think
the
whole
project
will
go
down
as
a
failure
of
the
council
if
this
goes
through
the
biggest
one
in
our
history.
Probably
you
don't
just
ignore
the
will
of
the
residents
and
hope
that
the
hennepin
county
will
go
along
with
the
two
exit
plan
and
then,
when
it
gets
denied,
go
down
to
one
access
point.
K
Zoning
codes
are
put
in
place
for
a
reason.
I
know
that
mainly
to
protect
residents,
the
city
residents
from
an
over-ambitious
city
council,
just
like
in
cases
like
this
and
the
only
time
you
should
be
changing.
Zoning
is,
if
there
is
support
from
the
residence
or
lack
of
opposition,
seems
to
me
there's
a
lot
of
opposition
here
and
yet
you
went
ahead
and
violated
the
will
of
the
residents
by
forcing
us
to
accept
this
permanent
change.
K
The
original
design
that
was
approved
required
to
entry
and
exit
186
and
one
in
10.,
however
hennepin
county
just
denied
the
pin,
access
and
limited
to
emergency
access.
Only
the
developer
has
appealed
this
decision
twice,
not
once
but
twice
and
then
denied
twice,
not
once
but
then
denied
twice
and
now
he's
petitioning
the
planning
commission
to
go
down
to
one
access
point
unto
86..
K
K
I
don't
believe
it's
going
to
work.
I
think
it
needs
to
go
back
to
the
r2
low
density
zoning
and
require
a
complete
rework
of
this
entire
project
for
the
safety
of
the
residents
that
live
here
and
the
residents
that
may
be
able
to
live
in
the
area
that
was
for
two
homes
and
now
many
more
many
more
people.
A
All
right,
thank
you.
Miss
kramer,
yeah!
That's
that's
your
time.
If
you
have
additional
comments
again,
as
I
said,
please
sign
up
and
we'll
come
back
to
you.
Thank
you
all
right,
mr
pease.
Is
there
another
caller.
K
Oh,
oh
good,
good,
good,
hi,
good
evening
planning,
commission,
my
name
is
kate
white
ford
and
I've
lived
in
bloomington
for
more
than
three
years
now,
when
I
moved
here,
I
was
looking
forward
to
settling
down
a
nice
quiet,
low
density
zone.
However,
last
year,
this
city
council
privileged
learning
change
for
the
two
property
186
and
10
from
low
density,
which
I
moved
in
for
to
medium
density
order
to
accommodate
townhome
development
on
this
site.
Even
though
over
600
I
was
thought
I
was
finding
a
petition
to
opposing
the
development.
K
He
went
away,
anyways
completely
ignoring
community
wines.
You
will
destroy
part
of
this
neighborhood
with
this
project.
How
can
planning
community
commission
and
city
council
be
slowly
responsible
for
this
property,
though?
Furthermore,
the
original
purpose
will
require
two
entry,
86th
and
penn
avenue.
However,
the
county
denied
it
10
embodied
access
allowing
any
emerging
taxes,
the
developer
killed
a
decision
was
united
once
and
but
twice
that
was
good.
K
However,
now
is
they
have
petitioning
planning
commission
to
accept
only
one
entry
or
exit
point
in
86
history,
which
is
not
acceptable,
which
we,
which
the
result
the
residents
and
taxpayers
will
not
accept.
These
changes,
though
I
have
asked
the
city
council
to
resign
the
joining
change
back
to
low
density
housing
or
require
wholesale
change
to
the
development
in
order
to
accommodate
all
of
the
traffic
and
extra
room
for
maneuvering
emergency
exits,
all
those
people
all
the
vehicles.
K
At
this
point,
no
change
has
been
made
to
the
engineering
of
the
site,
and
that
is
not
acceptable.
Finally,
my
backyard
is
already
flooding
from
the
upper
pen
leg.
What
is
going
to
happen
when
all
the
extra
runoff
goes
into
my
leg
and
who
is
going
to
pay
for
that?
It
is
bloomington
going
to
compensate
me
for
installing
a
burn
to
protect
my
house.
K
There
is
a
lot
of
ill
will
in
our
neighborhood
towards
this
planning,
commission
and
the
city
council
for
the
railroading,
the
project
that
never
had
any
support.
You
are
destroying
our
neighborhood
by
suffering,
15
house
15,
pound
home
into
the
spot,
meant
for
two
single
home
at
the
family
homes.
This
demonstrates
a
lack
of
respect
for
the
residents
and
complete,
disconnecting
our
wishes.
K
A
J
Thank
you
not
even
on
paper.
Does
this
15
unit
development
look
good?
This
lot
was
intended
for
a
single
family,
maybe
a
two
family
home,
and
that's
it.
It's
absurd
or
excuse
me,
observe
to
even
consider
building
15
units
in
this
space
at
the
most.
It
should
not
exceed
four
units
on
this
lot.
Besides
dumping
this
project
in
an
area
surrounded
by
a
family
home.
Where
are
you
expecting
these
residents
to
park?
This
has
been
brought
up
multiple
times
by
the
rest
of
the
callers.
J
J
This
development
is
going
to
be
very
disruptive
to
the
neighborhood
of
livability
to
the
residents
that
are
surrounding
this
unit,
and
can
the
nine
of
you
honestly
say
that
you
would
want
to
be
the
people
living
next
to
this
development,
not
even
on
paper.
Does
it
look
good?
You
guys
have
already
addressed
the
issue
with
good
driver
versus
bad
driver
now,
throw
in
there
ups
trucks,
fedex
trucks,
amazon,
trucks
that
are
on
a
time
limit
to
get
their
deliveries
out,
safety's
been
brought
up.
A
L
L
This
public
hearing
is
about
a
developer,
who
wants
the
city
of
bloomington
to
eliminate
a
condition,
and
that
is
going
to
create
an
unsafe
situation
for
all
the
future
residents
of
that
development,
as
was
already
mentioned
in
the
history
back
in
2020,
this
commission
considered
the
application,
but
they
passed
it
on
to
the
city
council.
Without
a
recommendation
at
the
city
council,
they
heard
many
residents
speak
out
against
the
project,
along
with
at
least
40
emails
and
letters
and
a
petition
signed
by
over
a
hundred
residents
all
opposing
the
project.
L
Yet
it
was
approved
with
conditions,
and
that
condition
was
to
have
two
entrances
and
two
exits
for
the
public.
Why?
Because
it's
not
safe
to
have
only
one
entrance
and
one
exit
into
a
residential
area.
With
this
many
townhomes
now,
I
can
continue
with
lots
of
additional
facts
on
around
how
this
development
is
too
big,
but
it
always
leads
to
that
one
conclusion:
there
are
too
many
town
homes
in
too
many
buildings
in
two
smaller
space.
L
It
will
only
take
one
moving
truck
or
one
boat,
trailer
or
one
motorhome
to
create
that
hazardous
situation
and
block
the
way
in
or
block
the
way
out
for
residents,
as
well
as
emergency
vehicles
and
speaking
of
emergency
vehicles
that
use
access.
It's
not
adequate,
either
it'll
get
misused
and
it
will
not
be
maintained.
L
L
L
G
Yes,
I
don't
have
a
name,
it's
the
last
four
digits
of
the
phone
number
9890.
If
you
could
state
your
name
and
then
start
your
presentation,
I'd
appreciate
it.
A
M
I
I
agree
with
a
lot
of
the
statements
that
have
been
made
by
some
of
the
other
residents.
I
am
a
resident
close
by
to
the
develop
development
that's
being
proposed,
and
I
had
listened
to
the
planning
commission's
hearing
back
in
the
fall
and
was
also
against
the
way
this
was
planned,
but
given
that
the
city
did
go
through
with
the
rezoning
and
we're
at
this
point,
I
still
have
to
ask
the
board
or
the
commission
a
couple
of
things.
M
M
If
you
drive
down
penn
avenue
and
make
a
right
onto
amelican
boulevard
from
the
south,
there's
a
huge
development
on
american
boulevard
off
of
penn
avenue,
and
I
can't
help
but
wonder
why
that
isn't
enough
to
take
care
of
the
need
for
additional
housing
in
this
area,
so
much
so
that
we
have
to
force
this
plan
on
the
residence
for
15
units
on
a
small
lot
and
you
know,
risk
the
safety
of
the
public
and
the
residents
in
that
area.
That's
my
first
comment.
M
The
other
thing
is
that,
if
we
are
going
to
instead
of
reducing
the
access
points,
which
appears
to
be
the
only
solution
that
anyone
could
come
up
with
which
I
I
have
to
also
ask
the
commission
and
the
planners,
why
that
is
the
only
solution.
That's
on
the
board.
Why
wouldn't
there
be
maybe
a
consideration
of
perhaps
reducing
the
number
of
units
in
the
development
if
we
are
going
to
go
forward
with
this,
to
allow
the
adequate
number
of
access
points
to
support
it
and
support
it
in
a
safe
way?
M
M
If
you
have
one
okay,
I
I
my
concern
is
not
just
the
safety,
but
if
you
had
to
have
multiple
emergency
vehicles
trying
to
get
into
one
access
point,
how
is
that
going
to
be
managed
safely,
having
one
access
point
that
can
only
be
accessed
from
the
north
from
the
north
side
for
emergency
vehicles?
Perhaps
multiple
emergency
vehicles,
fire
trucks,
police
and
so
on?
M
A
G
Yes
chair
at
this
point,
the
last
caller
I
have
is
laura
hunt
hunt.
If
you'd
like
to
start
your
testimony.
N
N
Perfect
just
wanted
to
start
off
by
thanking
chairman
solberg
and
the
commission
for
the
time.
Today
again,
I
appreciate
all
the
work
that's
gone
into
this
plan.
I
know
that
there's
been
a
lot
of
time,
effort
and
energy
spent
trying
to
determine
a
best
course
of
action.
N
So
we
know
we've
heard
from
mr
roberts
in
the
past
that
he's
already
stated
that
it
is
the
preference
of
the
city
staff
that
this
site
have
to
access
and
that,
with
this
being
the
third
densest
development,
I
I
think
that
that
makes
sense
having
more
than
one
access
point,
especially
with
the
density
just
yields
for
a
better
success,
successful
development
when
it
comes
to
the
residents
and
the
surrounding
area
city
staff
did
recommend
that
the
site
have
those
two
access
points
and
included
that
condition
when
this
went
to
council.
N
The
city
council
did
approve
this
on
october
19th,
so
we've
had
this
conversation.
We've
asked
the
questions,
we've
reviewed
all
the
information
and
ultimately
we
came
to
the
determination
that
we
need
this
to
be
public
access.
In
order
for
this
development
to
be
successful,
hennepin
county
then
reviewed
all
the
information
and
they
denied
the
application
and
all
of
the
appeals.
N
So
again,
I
think
we've
had
some
very
educated
and
experienced
folks
take
a
look
at
the
plan
and
determine
that
having
an
emergency
entrance
and
exit
just
isn't
sound
for
this
site.
Again,
I
think
nick's
been
an
amazing
resource.
He's
been
very
helpful
when
it
comes
to
on
information,
development
and-
and
he
himself
stated
in
the
city
council
meeting
that
that
this
was
not
the
best
plan.
N
So
I
think
ultimately,
there
just
isn't
enough
room
when
it
comes
down
to
the
site
plan
itself
for
all
of
the
safety
considerations
and
all
the
different
conditions
for
this
development
to
succeed,
and
at
the
end
of
the
day,
we
really
can't
guarantee
compliance.
There
isn't
somebody
that's
going
to
be
sitting
at
the
corner,
ensuring
that
nobody's
blocking
the
throwaway
nobody's
blocking
the
access
point.
N
There
aren't
cars
parked,
you
know
throughout
the
development,
so
I
think
that
that's
that's
a
a
huge
indicator
in
and
of
itself
is
that
we're
really
going
on
honor
code
and
ultimately
they're
going
to
be
outliers
and
people
who
are
going
to
utilize
that
access
point
for
public
use,
the
mayor
himself
and
several
council
members
said
they
did
not
feel
comfortable
moving
forward
with
this
development
without
that
condition
in
place.
N
So
having
that
that
secondary
access
be
public
use
was
was
talked
about
in
the
october
19th
meeting
and
four
council
members
with
the
mayor
determined
that
it
has
to
have
public
access
again,
I
think
nick
said
it
well
in
one
of
the
meetings
one
problem
creates
another
and
and
ultimately,
when
you
think
about
the
lack
of
space
when
it
comes
to
some
of
these
conditions
and
safety
requirements,
you
know
finding
additional
parking
spaces
leads
to.
Then.
Where
do
we
store
the
snow?
Where
do
we
start?
N
The
snow
leads
to
the
cycle
of
the
parking
spaces.
Having
you
know,
access
for
different
delivery
trucks
to
be
in
and
out
having
access
for,
moving
trucks,
large
trucks
experienced
drivers
not
experienced
drivers.
I
think
there's
just
so
many
variables
and
at
the
end
of
the
day,
I
just
think
the
plan
needs
to
be
rethought,
so
I
think
there's
definitely
opportunity
there,
but
nick
is
right.
It
just
needs.
N
The
plan
needs
to
be
updated
to
accommodate
all
the
coding
conditions,
the
conditions
that
the
city
staff
put
in
place
and
really
to
ensure
the
safety
of
the
surrounding
residents.
N
And
I
just
wanted
to
reintegrate.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
just
to
wrap
it
up.
There
is
no
new
evidence
since
the
city
council
approval
of
the
condition,
there's
there's
nothing
new
to
bring
to
the
table
that
would
yield
support
of
making
this
an
emergency.
Only
access
point
I
think,
if
there
were,
then
that
would
be
a
great
discussion
point,
but
as
of
now,
there
isn't
and
just
to
clarify
point.
N
It
was
actually
600
plus
neighbors,
who
were
in
a
half
mile
radius
of
the
site,
had
signed
the
petition
saying
that
there
was
concern
over
the
density
and
they
did
not
feel
comfortable
with
this
dense
of
a
project
going
in.
So
again,
I
would
just
like
to
say
thank
you
for
the
consideration.
Thank
you
for
the
time.
I
I
hope
that
you
do
think
about
the
impact
of
the
safety
of
the
surrounding
residents
and
the
surrounding
residential
streets
and
neighborhood
when
you
do
go
to
vote
tonight.
Thank
you
again.
A
G
Chair
there's
no
other
new
callers.
Did
you
want
me
to
check
with
a
couple
that
are
on
the
line?
If
they'd
like
to
speak
again,.
E
H
Yeah
yeah,
no
pretty
much
what
everybody
said.
You
know
you
know
just
take
into
consideration
when
you
guys
vote.
You
know
that
this
the
safety
of
residents
is
that
the
primary
thing
and
definitely
like
the
site
clam
me-
looks
way
too
dense.
You
know
for
the
neighborhood,
and
so
again
you
know
safety.
Is
that
utmost
concern
to
me
with
this
property?
So
thanks
for
your
time,
commission.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
mr
tool,
mr
pease,
I
think
another
one.
I
Those
are
the
words
from
the
community.
That's
what
we're
saying
as
a
community
to
you,
the
planning
commission
and
we're
going
to
say
it
again
to
the
city
council
when
they
go
to
talk
about
this,
I
believe
on
the
3rd
of
may.
But
you
know
this
is
this:
has
got
to
go
back
to
the
drawing
boards?
There's
nothing
preventing
you
from
denying
this
request
for
a
change
of
condition.
I
You
don't
have
to
go
forward
with
us.
This
is
feedback
from
people
that
live
in
this
community
that
have
to
live
right
next
door
to
this
property
and
are
going
to
have
to
live.
You
know
next
to
it
for
the
next
10
20
30
years
and
so
going
forward
with
something
that
is
this
unsafe
in
certain
situations
really
leaves
us
the
city
in
a
very
vulnerable
situation,
and
so
you
know
that's
something
to
consider
you
have
the
you.
I
K
No,
the
only
thing
that
I
would
add
is
the
last
few
callers
I
think
of
very
specifically
try
to
get
your
attention
that
the
residents
don't
want.
This
it's
been
said
in
many
different
ways
that
is
not
a
safe
place
for
people
to
be
coming
and
going,
and
it's
just
the
idea
is
too
big
for
what
is
that
for
with
the
land.
That
is
there.
J
Yes,
I
would
I
just
want
the
this
council
or
this
committee
to
put
yourself
next
to
this
development.
Do
you
would
you
want
your
family
living
next
to
this
development?
Would
you
want
your
family
living
in
this
development?
Don't
push
this
through,
because
the
council
wants
you
to
think
about
the
people
living
there.
J
G
K
K
K
M
Yes,
this
is
michelle
abeda
and
I'd
like
to
add
a
comment:
I'd
like
the
commission
to
reconsider
the
solution.
K
C
M
A
Okay,
all
right
go
ahead
and
patch
laura
hunt
through
please.
N
All
right,
so
thank
you.
I
just
I
just
want
to
again
thank
you
and
just
say
ultimately,
there's
just
too
many
variables
and
questions
without
concrete
solutions
when
it
comes
to
safety.
Ultimately,
I
would
say
just
trust
your
gut
we've
already
had
these
discussions.
The
city
council
has
already
reviewed
hennepin
counties
reviewed
and
I
would
say
please
keep
in
mind
that
their
gut
instinct
was
to
say
no,
that
the
secondary
access
needed
to
be
public
and
a
great
example
of
that
is
that
when
you
think
about
first
responders,
there
never
is
just
one.
N
First
responder,
you
see
a
fire
truck
an
ambulance,
a
police
car,
sometimes
multiple
of
each
of
those
and
and
how
are
those
access
points
going
to
ensure
accessibility
to
all
those
first
responders,
and
then
residents
coming
in
and
out
so
just
keeping
in
mind
that
again,
I
think
we
have
an
opportunity
to
take
a
re-look
at
the
plan
create
something
with
a
little
bit
more
accessibility
when
it
comes
to
public
use
there
and
and
and
decreasing
the
density,
and
then
I
think,
we're
back
to
a
situation
where
we
have
a
viable
plan
moving
forward.
A
All
right,
thank
you.
Mr
pease
appreciate
running
the
switchboard
tonight.
All
right,
commission
members
seen
no
other
public
at
this
point
that
wish
to
speak
to
this
item.
I'd
entertain
a
motion,
close
public
hearing,
commercial,
roman,
so
moved
all
right.
We
have
a
motion
to
close
the
public
hearing.
Is
there
a
second
commissioner
cook
done.
F
A
M
M
A
Commission
members,
it's
now
open
for
discussion,
any
thoughts
or
comments
on
the
application
before
you
and
again,
as
I
had
clarified
with
mr
johnson
early
on
in
the
process,
we
are
being
asked
to
look
at
a
very
narrow
scope
of
changing
the
condition
that
previously
required
a
public
access
to
now
a
new
condition
that
would
allow
an
emergency
access
only
and
while
that
is
a
very
narrow
focus,
I
think
the
you
heard
from
the
public
certainly
concerns
and
thoughts
about
what
does
that
difference
in
access
mean
to
really
the
safety
and
the
viability
of
the
the
development
as
a
whole.
A
So
I
know
we
had
a
lot
of
discussion
on
this.
When
this
originally
came
before
us.
Some
people
were
in
favor
of
a
second
access.
Some
people
were
not
so
maybe
we
just
start
with
that,
and
commissioner
roman.
O
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
One
piece
of
information
I
wanted
to
gather
in
in
response
to
what
I
was
heard
in
some
of
the
public
comments,
and
I
went
back
to
my
materials
from
september
10th
and
I
couldn't
find
it
in
there.
So
perhaps
I
think
it
appears
that
mr
furlong
is
still
on
the
line,
but
the
visual
you
know
for
the
purpose
of
the
drawing
shows
one
car
in
each
driveway
can
if
he
could
refresh
us.
O
A
Yes
can
staff
or
mr
p's,
if
you
can
allow
mr
furlong
to
answer
that
question.
E
O
So,
depending
on
how
obviously,
each
owner
may
choose
to
use
their
garage
in
different
ways,
but
is
designed
intended
for
parking
spaces
per
property
or
per
home?
That's
correct!.
A
O
Or
no
other
questions
I
just
wanted
to
get
that
clarification
before.
I
formed
further
comments.
A
All
right,
thank
you
and
if
I
can
ask
staff
just
for
clarification
again
on
how
wide
that
street
is
maybe
there's
an
ability
to
look
at
that.
While
we're
discussing
commissioner
goldsman.
P
Thanks,
mr
chair,
I
just
want
to
clarify
as
well
that
it
looks
like
there
are
six
guest
parking
spots
as
well
towards
the
interest
on
86.
Is
that
correct.
A
A
All
right,
other
commission
members
thoughts,
certainly
much
to
talk
about.
I
think
here
in
regard
to
the
application.
Commissioner,
roman.
Thank.
O
You,
mr
chair
I'll,
start
off
with
some
initial
thoughts
for
those
who
were
engaged
in
this
topic
in
the
fall.
You
may
recall
that
my
main
concern
was
the
issue
of
the
intersection
and
penn
avenue.
O
In
my
opinion,
improved
safety
on
penn
avenue,
I
think
we're
hearing
some
questions
about
other
other
things.
So
you
know
and
to
the
point
of
you
know,
how
do
you
keep
people
from
using
that?
Well
I
mean
if
the
developer
wants
to
be
serious
about
it.
You
know:
we've
all
been
to
rental
car
places
where
you
go
the
wrong
way.
O
Your
tires
are
done,
so
I
don't
know
if
that's
used
in
developments
or
not,
but
if
we're
serious
about
protecting
safety
of
people
not
using
the
pen
avenue
entrance,
then
you
know
there
are
ways
to
do
that.
Again.
I
think
you
know
we
heard
comments
again
today.
We're
not
asked
about
the
zoning
of
the
property.
You
know
this
body
when
there
was.
I
think
there
were
six
of
us
there
that
day
and
we
had
a
split
vote.
You
know
this
body
was
agnostic
on
the
rezoning.
O
There
were
some
in
favor
some
opposed,
and
so,
but
we're
not
asked
to
today
to
look
at
returning
this
to
low
density
and
I
think,
even
if
it
were
low
density,
that
an
intersection
or
that
entrance
at
penn
still
is
unsafe,
whether
it's
one
house
or
15.
O
and
so
emergency
only
at
penn,
in
my
opinion,
is
a
safety
improvement.
It
doesn't
mean
that
there
aren't
other
issues
that
have
been
raised.
That
remain
a
question,
and
I
do
think
the
question
about
you
know.
You
know
one
of
the
callers
talked
about
assumptions.
Well,
that's
what
we
have
to
work
with
when
we
do
plans.
O
We
have
the
assumptions
of
people
who
are
experts
in
these
areas,
and
you
know
we
did
hear
that
you
know
the
turnaround
is
is
statistically
accurate,
but
I
don't
know
if
you
know
folks
felt
like
it
was
realistically
accurate
and
so
what
whatever?
That
means,
whether
that
means
more
space
is
needed
for
a
bigger
area
to
turn
around
at
the
north
part
of
the
property.
You
know,
I
know
where
we
were
concerned
about
protecting
berms,
that
shielded
the
properties
to
the
east
and
to
the
north.
O
I
think
those
are
still
important
for
the
reasons
that
they
were
when
they
were
proposed.
Initially.
O
I
lost
my
my
next
train
of
thought
in
there.
You
know,
I
think.
A
Thank
you,
commissioner
roman
commissioner
albert.
Q
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
I
echo
commissioner
roman's
thoughts.
I
think
we
were
both
of
us
actually
were
on
the
same
page
about
that
pen
in
and
out,
and
your
ability
to
actually
see
cars
coming
and
going,
and
I
think
that
this
is
an
improvement
regarding
safety.
So
I
would
agree
with
commissioner
roman
on
that.
Q
Q
I
I
guess
from
my
perspective,
we
then
have
to
make
you
know:
decisions
the
the
council,
the
developer.
Q
Overall,
the
community
has
to
make
a
decision
on
what
and
what
this
parcel
looks
like
and
what
what
actually
can
be
built
here,
because
I'm
I
hear
from
the
community
that
they
it's
traffic,
it's
people
coming
in
and
out
from
multiple
places
is
better
than
just
one,
but
if
we
just
have
one
entrance
and
exit
to
the
site,
that
seems
more
like
a
a
lower
density
phenomenon.
Q
I
guess
I
I'm
not
exactly
sure
where
I'm
going
with
this
other
than
the
fact
that
if,
if
this
parcel
is
a
medium
density,
zoned
parcel
now
which
it
is
and
hennepin
county
is
not
allowing
an
entrance
and
exit
on
penn
avenue.
Then
it's
a
medium
density,
zoned
parcel
that
only
can
have
one
entrance
and
exit
public
two
available
to
the
public.
A
All
right,
commissioner,
albrecht
and
I
think
you're
you
know
your
question
is
something
that
I
am
mulling
over
as
well
as
I
think
about
this,
and
what
are
the
options
that
are
presented
before
us
again?
The
question
of
a
write-in
write
out
a
desirable
second
access
to
a
development
that
is
as
dense
as
this
is
is
not
allowed.
A
We
know
that
from
hennepin
county
now,
and
so
the
question
before
us
now
is-
is
the
full
access
at
86
and
a
emergency
access
on
pen
sufficient
for
the
development,
and
the
question
really
is
again
between
us
is,
is
is,
will
we
say
no
a
dual
access
or
a
full
access
is
what
is
needed
for
this
level
of
development,
or
is
it
okay
to
have
that
emergency,
and
I
think
that
changes
the
subject
for
me
when
I
think
about
this.
A
From
the
perspective
of
we're
not
being
asked
at
where
the
access
is
other
than
to
know
it's
not
allowed
currently
on
pen
as
a
full
access,
we
aren't
commenting
on
the
number
of
units.
We
know
that
it
is
a
medium
density
development
which
has
a
range
of
units
that
can
be
built
within
it,
so
it
comes
back
to
us.
Do
we
think
it's
appropriate?
A
What
we
understand
now
with
the
information
we
know
that
an
emergency
access
is
appropriate,
and
I
start
this
is
where
I
start
going
back
and
forth
15
units.
I
think,
from
the
discussion
we
had
last
time.
There
was
a
lot
of
question
about
that.
Just
the
numbers
that
come
out
of
this
type
of
unit
and
ultimately
were
split
on
some
of
that
access,
but
it
was
a
an
access
question
of.
Is
it
safe
on
the
roadway?
A
So
I
hope
I
had
some
logic
in
my
ramblings
there
for
everybody
to
think
about
and
I'll
go
ahead
and
leave
it
at
this
point,
because
I'm
interested
in
hearing
again
what
others
are
thinking
on
this
development
on
this
condition.
F
Thanks,
mr
chair
and
I'm
gonna
do
a
bit
of
rambling
myself
here,
as
this
is
not
a
slam
dunk
for
me,
in
fact,
I'm
quite
torn.
I
thought
about
it
a
lot
last
night.
It's
all
I
thought
about
last
night
and
it's
a
tough
one.
I
I
I
was
in
support
of
this
the
first
time
I
came
before
us
and
I'm
I'm.
F
I
have
a
harder
time
with
where
we
are
today
versus
where
we
were,
and
so
I
have
some
notes
here
and
perhaps
they'll
just
get
out
of
my
mind
why
I'm
torn,
and
so
I
have
some
reasons
why
I
am
in
favor
of
this
and
some
reasons
I'm
not
in
favor
of
this,
and
so
one
of
the
things
I
think
about.
F
Is
these
turnaround
distances
or
the
turnaround
exhibits
we've
seen
as
discussed,
those
were
under
ideal
conditions
and
a
certain
set
of
circumstances
and
who's
to
say
that
a
fedex
truck
couldn't
come
in
during
a
heavy
snowfall
and
it
just
hasn't
been
plowed
yet
or
the
what
you
know.
What's
the
probability
that
all
perhaps
I'll
be
a
rare,
someone
has
parked
illegally
in
the
drive
aisle
and
it's
garbage
pickup
morning,
and
that
happens
and
now
the
truck
can't
get
through.
So
what
are
those
probabilities?
F
Is
that
a
probability
I
could
be
comfortable
with
that's
something
I
think
the
other
thing
that
gives
me
pause
is
that
you
know
when
we
talk
about.
F
What's
the
likelihood
that
somebody's
going
to
park
illegally
in
that
turnaround
area
on
the
north
side,
all
of
the
guest
parking
spaces
are
on
the
south
side
of
the
development,
and
so,
if
I
have
a
friend
that
lives
in
the
very
north
easternmost
unit
and
I'm
just
dropping
something
off
or
helping
him
move
in
a
tv
etc,
I
may
be
more
likely
to
pull
on
the
old
flashers
and
and
stick
my
car
in
there
for
10
minutes
thinking.
F
So
that's
something
that
gives
me
pause,
but
there
are
outweighing
factors
as
well,
and
so
I
asked
I
asked
the
developer
if
these
were
renter-owned
or
owner-occupied
units
and
I
think
there's
a
difference
there
and
I
sort
of
wish
the
answer
had
been.
No.
These
will
be
exclusively
owner
occupied
because
I
think,
generally
speaking-
and
this
is
you
know,
it's
always
generally
speaking
right,
but
I
think,
generally
speaking
owner
occupy
develops.
F
Mints
are
going
to
have
a
greater
awareness
of
what
the
community
rules
are
and
perhaps
a
greater
respect
for
those
community
rules,
because
you
live
there
and
it's
yours
and
you
want
it
to
be
a
certain
way
and
you're
more
connected
to
the
hoa,
and
you
know
what
the
rules
are
and
if
I
am
an
owner,
I'm
probably
more
likely
to
know
those
rules.
And
if
I
see
my
my
guest
parking
in
a
legal
spot,
I
think
I'm
more
likely
to
say
hey.
You
got
to
move
your
car
versus.
F
If
I'm
a
renter,
I
maybe
don't
care
as
much
or
maybe
I
just
don't
know
the
rules,
because
I'm
sort
of
one
step
removed
from
the
hoa,
and
I
may
not
even
realize
that's
illegal
parking.
So,
although
I
wish
the
answer
was,
these
are
all
owner
occupied.
I
guess
I'm
encouraged
that
most
of
them
will
be
and
not
to
get
too
far
aside
here,
if
we're
really
getting
squeamish
and
are
looking
for
perhaps
there's
a
condition
to
be
made
that
these
must
be
owner
occupied
and
that
they
are
not
allowed
to
be
rented.
F
Maybe
that's
a
condition
we
could
put
on
the
application,
not
necessarily
proposing
that
but
I'll
throw
it
out
there
for
consideration.
If,
if
that,
helps
anybody,
the
last
thing
well,
the
last
two
things-
and
I
think
I've
saved
these
for
last,
because
this
is
what's
weighing
most
heavily
on
my
mind.
F
We
have
other
townhome
developments
in
the
city
of
bloomington
and
in
fact
I
drove
through
two
of
them
last
night
to
see
if
I
could
get
a
greater
comfort
level
with
what's
being
proposed
here,
and
I
took
the
two
most
dense
townhome
developments,
they're,
both
on
old
shakopee
road
over
here
and
I
drove
through
both
of
them
and
one.
I
had
a
very
good
experience
in
turning
around
on
had
no
issues.
F
Almost
every
single
guest
parking
spot
was
open
and
I
thought
it
was
quite
easy
to
get
through
at
the
other
developments.
I
must
say
it
was
quite
difficult
to
get
through.
That
was
the
development
very
near
kennedy
high
school.
I
thought
it
was
actually
quite
difficult
to
make
a
turnaround
in
that
area.
However,
what
the
application
before
us
is
a
significant
design
improvement
over
the
town
home
development.
Next
to
kennedy
there
there
seems
to
be
no
turnaround
area
at
the
town
homes
at
kennedy.
This
one
has
a
dedicated
turnaround
area.
F
I
think
this
is
a
significant
improvement
to
that
town
home
development.
So
that
gave
me
some
comfort
level-
and
mr
johnson
didn't
mention
it
tonight,
but
it
was
included
in
the
staff
report
that
we
have
not.
F
Has
not
had
complaints
with
these
other
townhome
developments,
almost
all
of
them.
I
believe
seven
of
the
eight
most
similar
do
not
have
turnaround
spaces
today
or
I'm
sorry,
two
egresses
today
and
the
city
has
not
had
complaints,
and
I
think
when
you're
talking
about
you
know
how
can
we
predict?
What's
going
to
happen?
I
think
data
helps
you
predict
what's
going
to
happen
and
when
you
have
similar
use
cases
in
the
city
that
are
there,
they're
functioning,
there's
people
living
there,
they're
getting
amazon
trucks
etc,
and
the
city's
not
getting
complaints.
F
That
certainly
gives
me
a
comfort
level
that
well
you
know
these
turn
on
exhibits
and
these
designs.
These
engineering
designs
are
working
and
we're
not
getting
complaints.
So
that
gives
me
some
comfort
level
and
related
to
that.
The
final
point
I'm
going
to
make
here
is
many
years
ago,
our
our
great
commissioner
solberg
said.
F
I
trust
those
guys
and,
ladies
with
the
letters
pe
after
their
name
and
I
take
the
same
approach
when
you
talk
about
an
engineering
analysis,
there
are
certain
qualifications
and
stipulations
you
have
to
follow
and
that's
what
the
industry
standard
is,
and
I
personally
not
having
a
any
expertise
or
any
expertise
in
turnaround,
exhibits,
etc,
roadway
design.
F
R
F
Not
and
those
pes
are
saying
that
it
indeed
is
acceptable,
I'm
going
to
trust
that
in
this
case,
because
I
have
no
no
tools
in
my
tool
belt
not
to
and
so
for
all
of
those
reasons
I'm
still
a
little
torn
but
and
so
I'm
just
going
to
say,
I'd
like
to
hear
what
other
commissioners
have
to
say.
P
Thanks,
mr
chair,
it's
always
hard
to
follow
mr
cookton's
comments,
because
they're
always
so
well
thought,
but
I
actually
was
thinking
right
around
the
same
lines
that
commissioner
hooked
on
was
following.
So
just
to
be
frank,
when
this
original
application
came
to
us,
I
was
not
a
present,
so
I
I
was
not
able
to
attend
that
day,
as
I
had
my
my
second
child
on
the
10th
of
september,
but
reviewing
what's
in
front
of
us
again
parking
turn
around.
P
I
always
think
about
where,
where
are
other
properties
within
the
city
that
somehow
fit
these
similar
situations
and
standards
and-
and
I
thought
about
existing
townhouse
developments
or
other
types
of
developments
that
I
think
are
similar
one
of
the
developments
I
think
commissioner
cookton
said,
which
is
off
of
old
shakopee,
very
familiar
with
that,
as
it
drops
down
into
the
nine
mile
creek
area,
where
I
very
close
to
where
I
live,
and
I
see
the
flow
of
traffic
work
very
well,
it's
a
very
narrow
street,
but
there's
a
it's
quite
spacious
from
that
perspective,
so
I
think
it's
similar,
however,
that
one
does
have
an
in
and
out.
P
So
it's
not
quite
the
same
while
we
were
talking.
I
was
looking
at
another
property
and
this
one's
actually
right
off
of
france
and
roughly
100th
street.
It's
actually
an
apartment,
complex
off
a
drew
avenue,
and
looking
at
that,
just
from
an
aerial
view
on
my
screen
here,
it
actually
is
an
apartment
complex
with
one
in
and
one
emergency
out
and
I've
seen
a
chain
across
that
emergency
out
drive
aisle
into
france
avenue.
P
One
of
the
differences
that
I
see
in
this
property
is
well
it's
an
apartment,
complex
versus
you
know,
15
unit
townhouse.
However,
it
does
have
a
turn
around.
P
It
actually
looks
like
almost
like
a
cul-de-sac
with
an
island
in
the
middle,
where
it
allows
those
those
cars
to
turn
around
and
looking
at
this
development
there's
actually
about
five
different
apartment
complexes,
so
the
volume
of
traffic-
I
I
believe
in
this
apartment
complex,
is
much
higher,
obviously,
a
larger
land,
mass
and
more
people,
but
thinking
about
that
emergency
exit,
it
is,
it
is
existing
within
the
city,
so
it
sets
some
type
of
precedence.
P
I
I
agree
with
commissioner
cookton
that
you
know
we
are
looking
at
the
drive
aisle
we're
looking
at
the
emergency
exit
as
part
of
our
application
here
and,
as
being
you
know,
looking
at
this
from
from
the
fresh
eyes,
you
know,
I
think,
like
commissioner
roman
mentioned
is
this
is
an
improvement,
at
least
on
the
axis
of
of
penn
avenue.
You
know
having
lots
of
traffic
on
penn
avenue
in
and
out.
I
think
the
86th
street
is
a
more
valid
option.
P
A
City
all
right,
thank
you,
commissioner.
Goldsman
all
right.
Other
commission
members
have
other
thoughts
on
this
before
we
yep,
commissioner
roman.
O
Thank
you,
mr
chair
yeah.
Just
building
on
what
folks
have
said
you
know,
I
think
for
me.
I
would
want
to
see
some
sort
of,
and
I
heard
mr
johnson's
comments
about
how
certain
kinds
of
I'll
use
the
word
barriers
for
lack
of
a
better
word.
Certain
kinds
of
barriers
to
misuse
of
an
emergency
exit
can
cause
damage
or
problems
for
emergency
vehicle
access,
and
so
I
I
respect
that
that
concern,
but
I
would
want
to
see
some
sort
of
more
barrier
than
just
a
surmountable
curb
personally,
you
know.
O
I
know
we
heard
from
the
public
about
wanting
to
downscale
this
and
again
I
think
that's
not
our
primary
focus
here,
but
given
that
the
you
know-
and
commissioner
cookson
mentioned-
that
you
know
the
the
ideal
conditions
for
the
turnaround,
you
know-
and
you
know
this
is
minnesota.
O
You
know
we
have
ideal
conditions
in
certain
times
of
the
year,
so
I
would
feel
a
lot
more
comfortable
with
more
of
a
special
goals
was
talking
about
kind
of
the
circle
kind
of
turning
off
mini
cul-de-sac,
kind
of
a
thing
now
that
might
mean
that
one
of
the
homes
in
the
northwest
corner
or
maybe
two
of
the
home,
but
have
to
be
reoriented
into
one
home.
O
I
can
be
more
comfortable
with
this,
but
as
it's
proposed
now,
it's
not
something
I'm
comfortable
with
putting
forward
anyway.
I
think
one
of
the
callers
mentioned
that
you
know
they.
You
know
we
shouldn't
put
this
forward,
because
the
council
wants
us
to
anyone
who
has
followed
this
commission.
O
I
think
is
well
aware
that
the
commission
and
the
council
are
not
always
in
alignment,
and
so
folks
can
rest
assured
that
you
know
we
have
parameters
for
what
we
are
allowed
to
consider,
and
there
are
certain
things
that
we
can
and
can't
rule
on.
As
a
planning
commission,
the
city
council
has
much
more
latitude,
but
the
planning
commission
doing
the
bidding
of
the
council.
If
you
will,
as
may
have
been
suggested,
I
think
is
not
something
that
the
public
has
to
worry
about.
O
It's
like
we
may
have
lost
commissioner
solberg.
So
in
the
moment,
as
vice
chair,
I
will
call
on
commissioner
corman.
R
Thank
you,
mr
chair
wow.
This
is
very,
very
complex
and
I
was
just
looking
back
in
my
in
my
emails
from
september
10th,
because
I
was
thinking
okay,
I
don't.
I
don't
believe
I
was
present
that
day
and
I
I
do
see
an
email
being
sent
that
said
that
I
wasn't
gonna
be
able
to
be
there
that
day.
So
this
is
like,
I
just
said
it's
very
complex.
I'm
also
feeling
uncomfortable
with
supporting
this
plan
as
it
is,
as
it
is
presented.
R
Listening
to
the
callers
and
listening
to
their
concerns.
There
is
a
there's
again,
a
good
amount
of
of
residents
who
are
expressing
a
concern,
and
I
and
I
respect
those
those
comments
and
I
respect
them
because
those
are
coming
from
the
people
who
actually
live
in
the
area
who
are
who
get
to
experience
every
day
coming
and
going
and
who
are
concerned
about
the
safety
of
their
own
people
in
that
area,
and
I
will
be
deeply
concerned
about
the
safety
of
of
the
children,
especially
well.
R
R
So
when
it
comes
to
the
emergency
only.
I
also
heard
someone
saying:
well
you
put
that
emergency
only
axis
and
and
then
not
everybody
will
end
up
respecting
that
and
if
you
and
I
would
have
to
sort
of
agree
that
that
could
possibly
happen
right,
because
there
would
always
be
someone
who
might
maybe
take
advantage
of
the
fact
that
there
is
other
way
that
they
can
possibly
use.
R
Even
if
it's
not
the
right
way
or
the
way
they
should
go
so
just
like,
like
commissioner
roman
said
I,
I
will
feel
more
comfortable
if
there
were
other
other
things
that
in
place
to
guarantee
that
people
would
have
that
that
people
will
feel
safe
and
that
they
would
actually
be
safe.
You
know
when
it
comes
to
winter.
That
is
true.
You
get
a
certain
amount
of
snow
and
then,
on
top
of
that,
you
get
eyes.
People
end
up
walking
in
different
directions.
R
You
know
not
necessarily
on
the
sites
to
be
safe
and
if
there
are
cars
going
in
the
wrong
direction
too
or
if
it's
too
much,
then
once
again
you
are
putting
people
at
risk,
and
so
in
this
case
I'm
gonna
say
usually
yeah.
Of
course
I
trust
the
planners.
I
trust
our
our
staff
too,
but
in
this
case
I'm
gonna
say
that
I
am
gonna
listen
to
the
community.
I
think
those
are
valid
concerns,
so
I
really
don't
feel
comfortable
supporting
it,
as
as
it
is.
A
Thank
you,
commissioner
corman,
and
I
appreciate
you
guys
being
able
to
move
on
while
I
fell
off
the
radar
here.
So
thank
you
any
additional
comments
from
commission
members.
At
this
point,
I
think
I
have
a
general
sense
of
where
the
commission
is
leading.
Commissioner
albrecht.
Q
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
a
couple
more
comments.
Thank
you,
commissioner
corman.
I
I
too
am
hearing
from
the
public,
and
I
want
to
just
thank
the
folks
who
had
testified
this
evening.
We
we
hear
you
and
again,
like
mr
roman
said
you
know
we
tend
to
we.
We
are.
We
do
have
our
own
voice
and
and
make
a
recommendation
to
the
council
who
acts
based
on
what
they
what
they
believe
they
they're
doing.
Q
So
the
only
thing
that
I
want
to
mention
and
that
I
think,
is
important
as
part
of
this
conversation,
which
is,
I
think,
one
of
the
members
of
the
public
mentioned
a
a
nearby
development
being
being
enough
housing
for
this,
and
I
think
one
thing
that
I
I
think
as
a
as
a
planning
commission
member,
I
think
it's
important
for
not
only
us
as
a
commission
to
understand,
but
also
the
public,
that
there
is
a
considerable
demand
for
housing
and
that,
even
if
we
developed
on
every
every
parcel
we've
crammed
as
many
units
as
as
possible
into
every
nook
and
cranny,
we
still
would
have
a
large
demand
part
of
what
the
2040
plan
is.
Q
The
comp
plan
for
the
city
of
bloomington
is
expanding
choice,
so,
yes,
there
are
developments
happening.
There
is
that
we
are
meeting
some
level
of
demand
of
housing
within
the
city,
but
it's
still
not
enough,
and
so
that
is
part
of
the.
I
think
the
original
conversation
here
was.
You
know
this
is
a
great
opportunity
to
have
a
lot
more
families,
a
lot
more
people.
Q
You
know
living
not
to
mention
a
lot
more
choice
there.
Yes,
we
do
as
a
city
of
bloomington
have
units
that
are
that
are
for
sale,
but
again,
if,
if
you're
following
the
housing
market,
there
there's
just
not
a
lot,
and
so
this
is
just
an
opportunity
for
someone
who
who
maybe
wants
to
own
a
house
but
doesn't
want
to
do
yard
work
so
that
I
just
want
to
make
that
clear
that
this
is
not.
Q
The
expanding
choice
is
an
important
part
of
this.
But
all
of
that
aside,
the
question
here
and
the
question
that
we
weigh
in
on
and
the
only
one
that
we
can
kind
of
answer
at
this
point
or
have
an
opinion
on,
is
whether
or
not
the
the
requirement
put
on
by
the
city
council
to
have
a
public
in
and
out
at
penn
can
or
should
be
changed
to
just
be
in
emergency
access,
and
I
lean
towards
yes,
I
think
that
this
is
safer
for
both
the
people
who
are
driving
in
this
area.
Q
The
people
who
currently
live
in
this
area
and
and
the
people
who
the
the
future
people
who
will
live
in
in
these
units.
Yes,
there
will
be
some
people,
I'm
sure
who,
will
you
know
disobey
what
what
what's
required
here,
but
I
believe
that
you
know
I
assume
positive
intent.
I
hope
that
people
would
have
as
an
hoa
would
keep
hold
people
accountable,
and
that
would
be
part
of
the
rules,
but
I
do
think
that
that
is
that
this
makes
this.
This
is
oh,
this
is
okay,
in
my
view,.
A
Thank
you,
commissioner
albrecht
did
commissioner
goltzman.
Did
I
see
your
hand
was
up
at
one
point?
Okay,
no,
no,
additional
comments.
All
right!
Commission
members,
again,
I
think
kind
of
see
where
each
individual
on
the
commission
is
starting
to
lead
any
further
comments,
or
I
would
entertain
motion
either
way
from
commission
members.
F
A
P
P
R
Q
A
Make
sure
I
have
these,
we
have
three
against
and
three
four,
the
res,
the
recommendation
or
the
motion.
A
At
this
point,
I
will
just
call
on
a
second
motion
if
we
can,
if
there
is
by
the
planning
commission,
just
to
verify
those
in
the
opposite.
Commissioner,
roman
thank.
O
You,
mr
chair,
I
will
again
this
is
echoes
of
september,
so
in
the
interest
of
completion,
I
will
make
another
motion.
If
I
may.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
commissioner.
Roman
members.
We
have
a
motion
in
front
of
us.
Is
there
a
second
I'll
go
ahead
and
second,
that
motion
all
right?
Commission
members,
we
have
a
motion
in
front
of
us
and
a
second
to
recommend
denial
of
a
changing
condition
for
a
change
of
condition
and
approval
change,
of
condition
for
number
seven
in
case
pl
20-20-133,
not
allowing
emergency
access
to
penn
avenue.
P
M
P
A
Commissioner
cookton
nate
and
I
for
myself
again
we
have
a
three
three
motion
in
front
of
us
or
three
vote
in
front
of
us.
This
item
will
move
forward
to
the
may
third
city
council
meeting
with
a
recommendator,
with
a
split
vote
recommendation
to
the
city
council.
A
A
All
right,
so,
commission
members,
we
have
the
march
25th
planning
commission
synopsis
before
us
for
approval,
and
I
will
let
you
know
who
was
in
attendance
in
a
moment.
A
Q
M
P
M
Q
A
Commissioner
cookton
hi
and
I
for
myself
motion
passes
those
planning.
Commission
synopsis
are
now
approved,
planning.
Commission
members.
We
will,
if
I
can,
have
you
hang
on
for
a
couple
minutes
just
after
this,
we
will
go
through
a
brief
review
of
upcoming
planning
commission
items
for
upcoming
months
and
with
that
there
being
no
further
business.
This
meeting
is
now.