►
From YouTube: December 2, 2021 Planning Commission Meeting
Description
Planning Commission Meeting
A
A
Virtually
the
planning
commission
advises
the
city
council
of
different
different
proposals,
development
standards,
long-range
planning
and
transportation
issues,
some
items,
the
planning
commission
has
final
authority
and
others.
The
city
council
will
make.
The
final
decision
planning
commission
is
made
up
of
seven
volunteers,
and
there
are
seven
of
us
here
tonight.
So
we
do
have
a
quorum,
and
tonight
we
have
four
items
in
front
of
us,
none
of
which
are
public
hearings.
But
before
we
start
the
meeting
tonight,
we'll
begin
with
the
pledge
of
allegiance.
A
B
Okay,
great
well
tonight
we're
here
to
discuss
next
year,
2022's
planning
commission
work
plan.
This
is
something
that
we
do
every
year
planning
commission.
B
Provides
recommends
to
the
city
council,
a
plan
of
action
on
the
city
council
ultimately
then
adopts
that
for
the
next
year.
So
just
a
little
recap
here
that
you
know:
we've
been
in
2021
like
2021,
like
2020,
I'm
dealing
with
these
hybrid
meetings
and
some
other
things,
televising,
study
meetings,
etc.
B
Also
like
in
in
2021
carrying
over
into
2022
last
year,
we
shifted
20
of
one
of
our
long-range
planners
position
to
the
hra.
That
was
a
budget
adjusting
measure
and
we
are
going
to
continue
to
do
that
again
this
year.
I
guess
the
good
news
is
that
we
work
on
a
lot
of
projects
that
are
housing
related
and
so
there's
some
overlap
there.
So
so
that's
that's
the
good
news.
B
There's
also
the
potential
this
hasn't
been
approved
yet,
but
that
there
might
be
another
planner
position
opening
up
in
2022.
So
that's
something
to
possibly
look
forward
to.
B
So
this
is
a
just
a
quick
overview
of
our
staff
structure
and
it
really
hasn't
changed
in
the
last
year.
B
And
I
just
lost
my
little
there.
We
go
sorry
a
list
of
accomplishments
that
you
guys
worked
on
in
the
last
year,
which
was
another
busy
year
and
as
usually
occurs,
there's
a
lot
of
our
projects
are
multi-year
projects,
and
so
they
aren't
completed
in
a
single
year
and
they
get
carried
over.
B
So
this
is
a
listing
of
those
projects
just
want
to
say
that
there's
been
a
substantial
amount
of
work
done
on
most
of
these,
some
of
them
didn't
get
going
until
this
fall,
but
anyway,
we'll
get
into
that
a
little
bit
more.
When
I
show
you
the
schedule.
B
So
here
there
are
a
couple
of
new
projects:
there's
actually
four
projects
that
are
supposed
they're,
mostly
new,
although
some
of
them
are
on
go
have
have
begun,
but
their
planning
hasn't
gotten
really
involved
with
them,
so
they're
primarily
going
to
be
2022
projects
and
I'm
hearing
a
little
bit
of
feedback.
Can
you
guys
all
hear
me?
B
B
Okay,
very
good
I'll
just
continue
and
then
there's
several
projects
that
planning
is
involved
in
that
are
ongoing
projects
and
there's
kind
of
city-wide
initiatives.
B
So
I'm
going
to
just
kind
of
quickly
go
through
each
one
of
the
projects
that
is
on
our
plate
and
give
you
a
little
bit
of
a
synopsis
of
it
and
a
status
update.
So
the
sign
ordinance
update.
We
really
got
going
on
this
in
earnest
this
year.
B
However,
there's
been
some
changes
in
our
legal
department
and
also
there's
a
major
pending
sign
case.
That's
going
to
go
in
front
of
the
supreme
court.
B
The
outcome
is
anticipated
in
june,
but
that
could
have
some
significant
impacts
on
our
sign
regulations.
At
any
rate,
so
far,
there's
been
a
lot
of
work
done
to
identify
what
needs
to
get
changed,
there's
several
things
that
have
to
be
cleaned
up
in
response
to
previous
law
cases,
as
well
as
just
some
of
the
organization
and
redundancy
within
our
sign
code.
So
we're
trying
to
clean
that
up.
B
So
we've
got
a
pretty
good
working
framework
outline
of
this
project,
but
we
really
want
to
wait
until
we
get
the
new
city
attorney
on
board
to
start
really
digging
back
into
this
reviewing
single
and
two
family
standards.
This
is
well
underway
and
mike
palermo
will
be
bringing
this
to
planning
commission's
study
meeting
in
january
the
adu
standards.
You
took
a
look
at
this
at
a
study
session
back
in
october
and
we're
kind
of
pairing
this
up
with
the
single
family
standards.
B
Actually,
I
think
you
saw
those
october
as
well,
so
this
will
be
moving
forward
concurrent
with
those
residential
single
family,
residential
standards.
B
B
The
food
truck
standards-
you
guys
last
saw
this
in
march
of
2020
right
before
the
pandemic
really
took
hold,
and
at
that
point
in
time,
and
you
recommended
adoption
or
approval
of
the
code
amendments
and
then
the
council
put
it
on
hold
for
a
while.
So
staff
has
pushed
this
back
up
onto
the
agenda
to
hopefully
get
it
through
to
council
hearings
and
adoption
before
the
next
summer.
This
coming
summer's
food
truck
season.
B
B
Residential
livability
standards-
this
is
really
kind
of
a
continuation
of
the
industrial
impact
study.
That's
what
we're
calling
it
but
realize
that
when
it
comes
right
down
to
it,
it's
all
about
trying
to
deal
with
some
of
these
impacts
of
more
intensive
uses
like
industrial,
but
also
there's
commercial
uses
when
they're
in
close
proximity
to
residential.
So
without
the
new
term,
the
new
name
was
a
little
bit
more
more
fitting.
B
So
one
of
the
new
projects
that
we're
looking
at
is
coming
up
with
some
single
room
occupancy
standards.
So
this
is
something
that
we'll
be
doing
in
conjunction
with
the
hra
and
so
single
room
occupancy
is
a
type
of
housing
generally
much
more
affordable
than
other
kinds
of
housing,
and
so
we're
looking
at
always
looking
at
expanding
our
our
option
of
housing
that
we
provide
in
the
city.
And
so
this
is
one
of
the
things
that
we
want
to
take.
A
look
at.
B
And
the
soft
loop
aur
this,
actually
some
work
got
started
on
that
this
year.
We
talked
about
this
a
little
bit
last
year,
but
every
five
years
the
south
loop
aur,
needs
to
be
updated
in
order
for
it
to
remain
in
effect,
and
so
we,
you
know
kind
of
update
any
kind
of
any
any
of
the
development
forecasts,
because
it's
always
a
bit
of
a
guessing
game
and
things
change.
B
We
things
become
more
certain
and
we
adapt
the
forecast
to
the
most
current
thinking
and
then
we
just
have
to
follow
through
and
clean
up
all
the
other
pieces
of
this
document.
It's
a
type
of
an
eaw
for
a
whole
area,
and
the
idea
is
that,
by
having
this
in
place,
an
individual
project
by
having
the
aur
in
place,
an
individual
project
that
might
by
itself
trigger
a
separate
eaw,
would
not
have
to
do
a
separate
eaw,
provided
that
the
scale
of
the
project
was
already
considered
and
covered
by
the
aur,
but
with
aur.
B
The
concept
is
that
we,
our
forecasts,
anticipate
what
we
think
might
be
the
maximum
amount
of
development
or,
what's
already
been
entitled
via
planned
developments.
For
instance,
at
bloomington
central
station
or
the
mall
of
america,
those
are
kind
of
the
big
ones
that
have
land
developments
that
are
approved
or
entitled.
Essentially,
so
this
needs
to
be
done
by
may
that's
the
five
year
expiration,
so
you'll
be
seeing
this
in
the
first
quarter
or
two
of
2022.
B
Another
project
that
has
begun
and
will
go
into
22
is
the
hotel
and
office
conversion
study,
and
this
was
really
instigated
by
some
inquiries
that
we
had
gotten
and
actually
a
project
that
you
reviewed
to
convert
a
portion
of
a
hotel
to
residential
we're.
Also
seeing
that
office
there
might
be
an
office
to
do
that.
There
might
be
a
market
to
do
that
with
some
office
buildings
as
well.
So
we've
expanded
this
to
be
a
hotel
and
office.
B
Sean
is
working
on
this
and
is
has
done
quite
a
bit
of
analysis
to
identify
some
of
the
properties
that
are
most
affected
and
and
what
are
the
characteristics
that
would
make
for
good
residential
development.
The
idea
is
that
we
would
come
out
of
this
with
some
criteria
or
for
some
standards
so
that
when
and
if
we
are
approached
with
a
request
for
a
conversion,
we
would
have
some
things
in
place.
So,
for
instance,
if
a
property
needed
to
be
rezoned,
we
would
have
some.
B
We
will
have
done
some
analysis
to
determine
whether
or
not
we
think
it's
a
site,
that's
appropriate
for
a
conversion.
Anyway,
sean
isn't
anticipating
getting
you
something
to
review
in
january.
At
a
study
session.
B
The
natural
resources
management
plan-
this
is
a
project
that
our
role
is
actually
quite
small
and
limited,
but
this
project
is
being
led
by
the
parks
division
and
they
started
this
in
september
october
and
they're
planning,
and
this
project
initially
was
going
to
be
much
bigger
than
it
is,
and
they
decided
to
put
it
into
two
phases,
and
this
first
phase
is
going
to
wrap
up
in
q1
2022.
B
It's
basically
inventorying
prioritizing
the
natural
resources
throughout
the
city,
sort
of
like
what
was
done
in
the
river
valley
a
few
years
ago.
The
next
phase
of
this
project
would
occur
in
a
couple
of
years.
It's
a
couple
years
out,
and
that
would
be
a
much
bigger
project.
It
would
be
similar
to
the
river
valley,
came
up
with
management
strategies
and
just
got
into
a
lot
more
detail
and
an
action
plan
for
for
addressing
the
natural
resources
and
their
management.
B
B
But
there
will
be
more
in
a
couple
years
and
and
planning
will
get
involved
in
that
second
half
another
project
here
that
has
begun
to
some
extent
and
this
is
being
led
by
works.
So
this
is
the
98th
street
corridor
study
35w,
interchange
study.
B
B
The
the
big
idea
here
with
this
project
is
to
assess
or
to
come
up
with
a
updated
interchange,
design
for
98th
and
35w
and
in
the
process
determine
whether
or
not
the
parcels
that
you
see
in
blue
there
where
the
transit
station
is,
those
parcels
were
purchased
with
right-of-way
acquisition
fund
dollars
and
if
they
are
no
longer
needed
to
accommodate
a
future
interchange
reconstruction,
they
can
be
released
for
redevelopment,
and
so
that's
really
one
of
the
main
outcomes
that
we're
looking
at
with
this
study,
but
also
looking
at
just
enhancements,
particularly
pedestrian
enhancements
throughout
this
corridor
and
and
safety
enhancements
throughout
the
corridor.
B
So
the
public
works
is
leading.
This
and
planning
is
on
the
work
team.
The
rfp
was
just
released,
they're
hiring
a
consultant.
We
also
got
a
live
lcda
liberal
communities
grant
to
help
fund
this
project.
That
was
through
the
met
council,
so
rfp
just
went
out.
We
anticipate
having
a
consultant
hired
and
starting
up
on
this
project
in
earnest
in
mid-february.
B
Mapping
and
this
is
being
led
by
the
sustainability
staff
over
in
public
works
and
they're
they've
been
working
pretty
closely
with
our
public
health
staff,
who
have
been
compiling
lots
of
data
that
can
be
mapped,
and
the
idea
here
is
to
correlate
environmental
data
things
like
soils
and
water
and
such
and
some
health
data
things
like
asthma
incidence,
our
rates
of
asthma,
also
things
like
heat,
like
lack
of
shade
those
kinds
of
things
and
correlate
that
with
some
of
the
demographic
information,
so
looking
at
where
there's
lower
income,
neighborhoods
or
racial
diversity
or
or
some
other
characteristics,
and
to
identify
those
areas
in
the
city
that
have
the
highest
risks
in
terms
of
environmental
or
health
kinds
of
impacts.
B
The
this
would
be
a
tool
that
would
be
used
to
you
know
if
there
was
grant
funding,
for
instance
that
came
available
so
that
we
could
help.
We
could
prioritize
the
areas
that
we
really
want
to
invest
in
and
and
try
to
make
some
some
changes
to.
So
so
that's
the
idea
behind
this
project.
B
Another
new
project
is
the
creation
of
a
transitional
industrial
zoning
district,
or
perhaps
it
would
be
an
overlay.
This
was
a
project
that
was
brought
up,
in
particular
in
the
lindell
retrofit
study,
and
it
kind
of
grew
out
of
a
study
a
few
years
back
where
we
were
looking
at
industrial
properties,
and
we
identified
quote
unquote
transitional
industrial
versus
protected
industrial.
B
B
How
might
a
new
use
fit
because
we
want
to
make
sure
that
the
protected
industrial
is
protected
and
some
of
those
protected
industrial
uses
have
impacts
as
you'll
be
hearing
more
about
tonight
or,
as
you
already
know,
what
you've
heard
about,
and
so
we
want
to
make
sure
that
in
these
transitional
areas,
the
the
if
we
loosen
up
the
uses
if
we
allow
a
broader
range
of
uses
and
if
we
allow
more
sensitive
uses
in
there,
that
there's
adequate
standards
in
terms
of
buffering
and
other
kinds
of
design
kinds
of
things,
so
that
we
make
sure
that
we're
not
creating
a
an
issue
but
we're
also
allowing
for
maybe
more
productive
reuse
of
some
of
these
areas.
B
So
so
that's
the
idea
behind
behind
this,
and
at
this
point
you
know
we're
thinking
about
the
focusing
really
along
windale.
But
one
of
the
things
we
would
need
to
do
is
is
take
a
look
at
it.
You
know
how
limited
in
scope
we
want
this
to
be.
B
Rezonings
so
far,
we
don't
have
any,
certainly
that
our
city
initiated
planned
for
2022,
but
you
know
things
can
happen
so,
but
at
this
point
there's
nothing
ordinance
amendment.
So
these
are
some
of
these
ongoing
things.
So
the
annual
miscellaneous
issues
ordinance
that'll,
be
coming.
We
usually
try
to
get
to
you
by
the
end
of
the
year,
but
there
was
just
some
scheduling
things
so
we're
going
to
get
back
to
you
earlier
in
in
the
next
year.
B
Sustainable
building
and
design
practices
and
standards-
and
this
is
this-
is
a
project
that
has
also
been
kind
of
ongoing
and
is
being
led
again
by
the
public
works
sustainability
staff.
Last
year
we
or
this
year,
I
should
say
we
focused
a
lot
on
energy
kinds
of
things,
so
energy
benchmarking
and
moving
forward.
This
is
really
about
creating,
perhaps
a
policy
that
says
something
like
you
know.
B
If,
if
there's
public
funding
going
into
a
project,
the
project
needs
to
meet
lead
or
some
similar
kind
of
standards
in
in
its
development.
So
so
it
would
be
really
tied
to
funding,
but
that
would
be
like
a
policy,
but
the
flip
side
of
that
is
that
we
need
to.
In
order
to
implement
such
a
policy,
we
need
to
make
sure
that
there's
staff
on
in-house
who
understand
enough
about
lead
or
those
other
similar
programs
to
be
able
to
enforce
that
policy.
B
So
what
this
project
looks
like
similar
to
the
energy
benchmarking
project
is,
we
would
be
teaming
up
with
the
county,
who
would
provide
like
a
series
of
educational
workshops
with
a
group
of
staff
from
across
the
the
city
ones?
B
That
would
be
most
likely
to
be
involved
in
implementation
of
a
sustainable
building
policy
and
that
work
would
the
outcome
of
that
work
would
be
one,
a
policy
that
would
be
presented
for
adoption
or
or
and
then
also
educating,
staff,
providing
some
internal
staff
capacity
to
actually
be
able
to
implement
this.
B
So
this
is
a
little
bit
different
than
say
individual,
trying
to
change
our
code
to
add
individual
new
standards,
there's
a
lot
of
standards
that
are
out
there
via
these
different
kinds
of
programs,
and
so
we're
not
sure
it
makes
a
lot
of
sense
to
recreate
the
wheel.
B
But
if
there
are
individual
standards
that
come
up
that
for
modification,
let's
just
say
our
requirements
regarding
natural
landscaping
and
the
percent
that
you
can
have
in
your
yard,
for
instance,
if
that's
something,
that
is
something
that
maybe
we
should
take
a
look
at.
I
mean
some
of
those
smaller
individual
kinds
of
standards.
We
could
probably
look
at
as
part
of
the
miscellaneous
issues
ordinance
and
wouldn't
need
a
full-blown
separate
study.
B
Commercial
node
redevelopment
this
too
has
grown
out
of
been
kind
of
a
standing
item,
since
we
did
that
commercial
node
study
it
back
about
five
years
ago,
we're
looking
at
this
being
pretty
much
driven
by
private
sector
so
where
people
are
approaching
the
city
with
some
interest
in
in
redevelopment.
That's
when
when
we
would
get
involved-
and
this
too
would
be
kind
of
a
joint
effort
with
hra
and
planning-
and
you
know
perhaps
others
at
the
city.
B
Health
and
all
policies-
this
is
a
work
group
that
has
was
started
earlier.
This
year
is
so
far
it's
it's
been
a
little
slow
to
get
to
really
get
fully
established.
I
think
that
you
know
there's
lots
of
things
going
on,
so
this
this
one
is,
is
moving
fairly
slowly
going
forward,
but
that
said,
they
do
want
planners
to
be
at
the
table,
and-
and
so
we
do
have
a
planner
assigned
to
to
be
on
the
interdepartmental
work
group,
and
so
there
are
some
hours
assigned
to
this
effort.
B
We've
got
a
lot
going
on
with
regard
to
housing,
as
as
I
mentioned,
and
and
we
do
have
a
portion
of
one
of
our
planners
who's
dedicated
to
the
hra,
so
that
fits
nicely
with
a
lot
of
these
things
that
are
going
on,
and
certainly
the
city
has
been
really
ramping
up
its
efforts
around
housing
in
the
last
few
years
so
and
I'm
sure,
you've
seen
notice
that
similarly,
there's
lots
of
things
going
on
with
regard
to
engagement
and
especially
equity
at
the
city
level.
B
B
So
those
are
again
we
put
ours
towards
this
because
because
we
take
it
seriously
and-
and
it
takes
time
to
do
all
of
this
stuff-
and
we
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
not
over
promising
the
other
kinds
of
projects
that
we
can
do,
because
we
know
that
these
ongoing
initiatives-
these
city-wide
initiatives-
are
really
important,
and
that
brings
me
to
the
transportation
on
the
transit
initiatives
and
julie
long.
Our
city
engineer
is
here,
and
she
will
provide
an
overview
of
this.
C
Thanks
julie,
so
these
are
our
transportation
and
transit
initiatives.
They
don't
include
any
of
our
construction
projects
and
in
preparation
for
the
494
project
that
will
be
coming
in
2023.
C
We
have
several
projects
in
2022
trying
to
get
out
ahead
of
that
construction
project
which
will
impact
our
community,
so
we're
still
looking
to
get
the
strategic
transportation
plan
going,
but
we've
had
a
lot
of
other
priorities
come
to
us
in
2021
and
we're
fearful
that
that's
going
to
happen
again
in
2022,
but
we
got
started
on
it,
but
we
didn't
make
as
much
progress
on
it
as
we
would
have
hoped.
C
We
have
some
bike,
ped
planning
projects
that
julie
had
mentioned
earlier,
the
98
street
corridor
study
or
the
interchange
study.
Excuse
me
we'd
also
like
to
do
a
35w,
parallel
route
study
that
connects
the
two
orange
line
stations
at
some
sort
of
route.
Parallel
to
35w.
We
don't
know
exactly
what
route
that
would
be.
C
We're
also
looking
at
a
study
on
old
cedar
avenue,
because
we
have
a
pavement
management
program
street
proposed
in
23.
So
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
rebuild
the
road
appropriately
and
that
includes
the
old
cedar
and
old
choco
p
intersection.
We've
been
working
with
hennepin
county
to
scope
that
appropriately
and
then
we
have
some
regional
issues.
C
Mndot
has
the
trunk
highway
77
study,
that's
underway
and
that
that
big
one
it
looks
tiny
on
a
bullet
point,
but
that
494
project,
one
with
the
visual
quality
stan
standards
and
the
transportation
management
plan
that
that's
going
to
take
a
lot
of
staff
time
as
well.
So
those
are
kind
of
our
studies
that
we're
looking
at-
and
I
know
council
wants
to
also
look
at
some
neighborhood
traffic
initiatives
and
I
think
that
will
spin
out
some
of
the
pavement
management,
road
standards
and
different
policies
that
we
talked
about
probably
a
month
ago
or
so.
C
But
we
may
not
be
ready
to
do
those
in
2022.
Those
may
have
to
wait
to
2023
because
one
of
the
realities
of
the
engineering
division
in
bloomington
is
we
have
five
retirements
coming
up.
The
first
one
starts
tomorrow,
so
between
now
and
next
august,
we're
going
to
see
significant
staff
change
and
we
don't
want
to
over
promise
and
then
not
deliver
so
julie,
I'll
turn
it
back
to
you.
B
Thanks
julie-
and
I
just
wanted
to
say
too
that
the
planning
division
assists
on
a
lot
of
these
work
groups
that
are
involved
with
these
projects.
But
we
don't
lead
the
project
so
so
we
play
more
of
a
supportive
role.
So
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
that
was
understood.
B
So
this
is
our
attempt
at
putting
things
into
the
context
of
a
calendar
and,
as
you
can
see,
what
I've
put
in
green
here
are
the
the
projects
that
have
already
begun,
and
so
obviously
that
was
our
first
priority
for
completing
in
2022.
B
So
you
can
see
that
there's
a
lot
of
activity
in
the
first
quarter
or
two
of
2021
to
wrap
up
things
that
are
underway
right
now.
So
so
that's,
I
guess
you
know,
that's
you'll
be
seeing
a
lot
of
that,
as
as
I
mentioned
before,
a
lot
of
stuff
coming
to
you
in
january
and
february,
and
then
in
the
the
last
half
of
the
years
when
we
would
probably
get
started
and
more
focused
on
these
newer
projects
that
we
introduced.
B
These
there's
four
projects
really
two
of
them
are
already
kind
of
underway,
but
but
those
are
the
new
projects
and
then,
of
course,
we've
got
these
these
other
projects
that
just
continue
all
year
and
they
sort
of
ebb
and
flow.
B
So
we're
always
trying
to
do
a
better
job
of
community
engagement,
and
this
is
the
engagement
spectrum
from
the
international
association
of
public
participation.
Iap2
you've
probably
seen
this
before.
I
think
I
showed
this
last
year-
try
to
show
a
couple
of
different
sorts
of
projects
as
examples
of
how
this
might
fit
in
almost
everything
that
we
do
includes
inform
and
consent,
because
that
gets
into
the
the
website.
B
It
gets
into
public
hearings
and
and
such
we
get
into
involved
when
we
start
doing
a
direct
outreach
to
specific
groups,
affected
people
entities
or
have
industry
work
groups,
for
instance,
or
have
a
lot
of
highly
engaged
kind
of
public.
B
Event
kind
of
things
like
we
had
with
with
lindale
retrofit
that
design
week,
so
many
of
our
projects
include
that
level,
but
not
all
of
them.
It's
few
that
we
actually
get
into
the
far
end
of
the
spectrum.
B
So
this
is
a
kind
of
a
a
stab
at
trying
to
show
where
the
types
of
engagement
that
are
involved
with
the
various
projects
that
we're
looking
at
here
that
started
in
21
and
will
be
included
in
22.
So,
as
you
can
see,
most
of
them
fall
into
the
inform
consent,
involve.
B
And
then
future
projects
we've
got,
we
always
keep
a
list
and
keep
adding
to
it
of
projects
to
think
about
for
the
future,
and
they
include
things
like
the
south
loop
district
plan
update
that
was
adopted
back
in
2012,
I
believe-
and
so
it's
due
for
a
dusting
off
some
of
the
ones
that
we've
had
on
our
plate
for
a
while.
This
temporary
structure
standards,
updating
the
legal
sections
and
the
code
short
term
rentals.
B
That
was
another
project
that
it
kind
of
got
put
in
the
parking
lot
when
covet
hit
restructuring
the
zoning
code.
That's
kind
of
happening
as
we
do
all
of
these
various
sections
of
the
code
that
we're
updating
and
then
some
of
the
bigger
sort
of
new
projects
that
we've
we've
got
on.
Our
list
here
are
on
a
what
we're
calling
american
boulevard
corridor
plan.
B
B
Additionally,
much
of
the
corridor
has
been
covered
by
other
planning
efforts,
whether
it
was
the
normandale
district
plan
or
the
southern
district
plan,
or
even
the
glendale
retrofit,
but
then
in
between
lindale
and
cedar.
Essentially,
we
really
haven't
looked
very
closely
at
it.
So
that's
what
this
project
would
do
is
really
take
a
look
at
that
we've
had
on
our
future
project
list.
That's
rezoning
the
remainder
of
the
494
corridor
for
a
long
time.
B
Another
project
that
is
on
our
list
and
would
be
led
by
the
parks
division
is
the
minnesota
river
valley,
trail
connections.
This
was
a
project
that
was
recommended
with
the
minnesota
valley.
Strategic
plan
parks
has
this
on
their
to-do
list
for
23
or
24,
and
so
that's
kind
of
where
they'll
be
leading
it,
and
so
we'll
we'll
take
the
cue
and
timing
from
them.
B
Another
update
is
the
alternative
transportation
plan,
at
least
that's
what
we're
we're
terming
it
at
this
point.
But
the
idea
here
is
so
this:
the
atp
was
last
updated
in
2016.
B
and
it
does
a
great
job
of
identifying
alternative
roads.
You
know
routes
for
bike,
bike
lanes
or
bypass,
etc
and
transit,
but
it
stops
short
of
getting
into
any
of
the
sustainability
things,
so
we
don't
have
any
goals,
for
instance,
for
vehicle
miles,
travel
or
or
greenhouse
gas
emission
reduction.
B
Those
kinds
of
things
and
and
and
kind
of
putting
that
sustainable
lens
on
the
atp
is
really
what
this
is
something
that
the
sustainability
commission
is
very
interested
in,
and
so
we
thought
it
made
sense
to
kind
of
call
it
a
alternative
transportation
plan
update,
and
that
is
about
it
for
our
future
projects.
B
And
so
that
brings
me
to
just
a
couple
of,
I
guess:
icebreaker
questions
to
start
our
discussion
generally
we're
looking
here
to
get
some
direction
from
you
on.
If
there's
any
any
projects
that
you
don't
think
we
should
continue
to
consider.
B
Are
there
projects
that
you
think
should
get
added
and
are
there
any
projects
that
should
be
prioritized
and
if
so,
what
other
projects
should
be
delayed
and
with
that
I'm
just
gonna
say
give
you
the
caveat
of
so
there's
four
new
projects,
although
two
of
those
are
really
already
underway,
so
they're,
not
really,
we
can't
really
yank
them
off,
so
you've
really
got
two
projects
that
could
really
where
you've
got
the
most
flexibility
to
say.
B
You
know,
hold
off
on
this
and
do
something
else,
and
those
two
projects
are
the
sro
standards
and
the
transitional
industrial
zombie
district.
So
I
just
wanted
to
throw
that
out
and
with
that
I
guess
I
will
turn
it
over
to
you
all
for
discussion.
A
A
Maybe
I'll
just
go
ahead
and
open
this
up
to
commissioners
on
their
thoughts
of
any
projects
that
should
be
added
or
removed
from
the
list
or
questions
regarding
the
presentation
here
that
we've
just
heard,
and
maybe
I'll
just
go
ahead
here.
First
with
one
and
because
we've,
I
think,
had
some
communications
ongoing
with
met
council
recently
about
american
boulevard
brt,
I
don't
necessarily
see
that
in
the
23
or
23
and
beyond.
A
It
would
be,
I
think,
useful
to
have
that
in
there
as
a
commitment
from
the
city
again
that
we
are
continuing
to
work
on
that.
So
that's
one
that
I
would
add
that
we
would
like
to
see
and
and
then
maybe
just
a
question
for
miss
long
on
your
part
of
the
presentation
and
really
the
strategic
plan,
and
I
just
want
to
verify
what
you're
talking
about
there
is
in
in
potentially
in
22,
but
because
of
retirements
in
the
next
year
or
two
years.
A
You
would
be
working
on
more
of
that
guidance
and
policies
in
which
our
transportation
network
is
developed.
Is
that
what
what
the
strategic
plan
is
really
going
towards,
or
is
it
and
I'm
I'm
harkening
back
to
that
discussion?
We
had,
I
think,
two
months
ago
about
how
we
approach
sustainability
within
transportation.
How
we
determine
maybe
amenities
associated
with
our
transportation
plan
or
with
our
transportation
system
as
well,
so
just
want
to
verify
that's
kind
of
the
thought
process
that
you're
looking
at.
A
Okay,
so
that
that
really
is
the
umbrella
plan
that
would
drive
some
of
those
more
distinct
improvements
at
the
neighborhood
level
and
so
on.
C
Correct
and
it
would
have
the
health
and
all
policies,
it
would
have
the
racial
equity
component.
It
would
have
the
sustainability
so
that
we're
able
better
able
to
judge
our
projects
amongst
themselves,
because,
right
now,
it's
hard
to
judge
are
we.
You
know
your
trail,
your
a
residential
street
you're,
an
arterial
like
what
is
what
are
the
criteria
we're
using
and
how
do
we
judge
them
amongst
themselves
across
transportation
needs
of
the
community.
A
All
right,
thank
you
for
that
with
that
I'll.
Maybe
I'll
just
pass
this
over
to
other
commissioners
thoughts.
D
D
Would
that
include
then
updates
to
other
policies
to
align
them
such
as
I
know
when
you
were
before
us
a
few
weeks
ago
we
talked
about
the
streets
policy
that
was
adopted
in
2002,
and
it's
it's
probably
needs
updating
to
be
in
alignment
with
where
we're
headed
you
would
you
envision
something
like
that
being
an
outcome
of
that
process
at
the
tail
end,
or
would
that
be
something
that
maybe
in
2023
would
be
a
specific
priority
that
we'd
have
to
propose
as
an
album.
C
Commissioner,
roman,
we
haven't
quite
figured
that
out,
we
are
trying
to
decide.
Do
we
come
back
to
planning
commission
and
say,
could
you
help
us
with
our
scoping
of
this
rfp
or
is
it
an
outcome
of
it?
To
be
honest,
I
don't
know
that
answer
we're
looking.
D
D
Yeah,
I
will
speak
for
myself.
I
don't
I
don't
have
a
preferred
way.
My
preference
is
that
we
do
it.
So
I
I
look
for
you.
You
know
the
workload.
You
know
your
capacity,
you
know
with
transition.
On
the
other
hand,
with
new
people
coming
in,
you
might
have
new
eyes
and
new
ideas
on
this,
so
it
may
also
be
an
opportune
time
to
do
some
of
that.
D
So
I
don't
have
a
strong
opinion,
but
I
do
have
a
strong
opinion
that
we
update
it
and
where
that
fits
in
your
schedule,
whether
it's
22
or
23,
I
just
my
personal
goal-
is
to
have
us
do
that
before
my
time
ends-
and
you
know
june
of
2024,
mr
chair,
if
I
could
another
item
go.
D
D
I
guess
personally,
I'm
not
so
sure
that
the
industrial
transition
is
a
major
issue.
Maybe
it
is-
and
we
just
haven't
heard
about
it,
but
I
would
think
things
that
have
a
bigger
impact
like
the
american
boulevard
corridor,
for
example,
would
I
would
put
that
higher
on
a
priority
list
than
the
industrial
transition,
but
again,
maybe
that's
something
that
I
haven't
heard
a
lot
about
from
the
community
and
maybe
it
should
be
higher.
I
trust
their
judgment
on
that.
Those
are
my
only
observations.
E
Thank
you,
chair,
miss
farnam,
when
you're
presenting
about
the
equity
partner,
at
least
when
I
was
reading
the
report
and
sorry
I'm
thinking
out
loud
here.
Nothing
is
formed
in
a
form
of
a
question,
or
maybe
it
could
be
a
statement,
but
thinking
out
loud.
I
I
want
to
try
to
see
if
I
could
fit
homelessness
anywhere,
considering
what
we've
been
through
the
last
two
years
almost
and
with
the
coveted
situations
necessarily
not
going
away
anytime
soon.
E
Should
we
see
more,
you
know
sparks
of
homelessness
and
not
necessarily
just
in
our
community,
but
also
bleeding
out
from
you
know
the
tunes
from
the
minneapolis
sample
area
up
to
the
because
of
the
blue
line,
the
trans,
the
transits
of
I've,
seen
some
of
that.
I
guess
without
having
to
mumble
a
lot.
How
do
we
address
homelessness
or
are
there
any
plans?
E
B
E
Thank
you
and
when
you
said
that
I'm
like
well,
that
would
have
been
a
really
cool
thing
for
if
something
like
that
existed
in
bloomington,
then
the
county
or
anybody
else
could
fund
a
project
like
that
that
could
house
you
know.
Potential
homelessness,
address
homelessness,
housing
issues,
so
I
guess
trying
to
tie
that
with
homelessness,
and
it
doesn't
necessarily
have
to
serve
as
homelessness.
E
B
Sure,
thank
you,
mr
chair
and
commissioner
alti.
Well,
I
think
in
general
homelessness.
We,
however,
we
deal
with
it.
The
lead
is
going
to
be
the
hra.
It's
they're
they're,
the
ones
who
really
are
the
lead.
All
of
our
housing
related
step
planning
is
a
support,
function
to
that
and
I'll
say
a
little
bit
more.
B
I
know
that
the
county,
too
does
a
lot
and
we
work
with
the
county
with
regard
to
homelessness
and
the
point
to
your
point
about
the
single
room
occupancy.
Yes,
that's
something
that
is
gaining
a
lot
of
attention
at
the
county
level.
I
know
minneapolis
is
working
on
a
pilot,
there's
several
other
communities
that
are
starting
to
look
at
this
as
the
single
room
occupancy
as
a
one
tool
that
can
help
address
some
of
the
very
very
low
income
housing,
shelter
issue
which
is
related
to
homelessness
right.
B
So
but
the
specific
things
that
we
do
with
regard
to
homelessness,
I
think
it's
really
that's
more
in
the
realm
of
the
hra
and
working
with
the
county,
the
more
of
the
social
service
providers,
but
I
don't
know
glenn
if
you
have
any
knowledge
of
any
things
that
the
county
is
working
on
or
you
know.
B
Obviously
we
were
working
with
the
county
last
year
with
all
of
those,
the
the
hotel,
the
use
of
the
hotels,
etc,
and-
and
so
I'm
not
sure,
of
the
status
of
all
of
that
stuff,
but
maybe
mr
marker
can
fill
in
a
little
on
that.
F
Sure,
mr
chair
commissioners,
yeah
a
couple
things
underway.
One
is
that
in
2022
the
hra
is
looking
at
a
needs
assessment
in
regards
to
homeless
shelter
uses,
so
that
is
underway.
F
F
So
you
could
imagine
that
could
include
tiny
homes,
small
home
type,
land
uses
that
could
definitely
help
on
that
issue.
So
so
those
initiatives
are
definitely
underway.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
commissioner
abdi
any
more
on
that
or
any.
E
A
All
right,
commissioner,
albrecht.
G
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
It
occurred
to
me
when
reading
about
the
sro
standards
that
there
is
probably
good
synergy
between
that
and
the
opportunity
housing
ordinance.
I
know
not
explicitly.
G
We
shouldn't
be
saying
explicitly-
that
there
would
be
incentives
for
developers
or
that
type
of
housing
to
be
built,
but
the
study
of
that
or
the
potential
add
of
sros
to
the
opportunity
housing
ordinance
would
probably,
if
that's
the
direction
in
which
the
city
would
like
to
go,
we
will
likely
need
to
get
developers
who
have
not
done
that
type
of
housing
that
hasn't
been
developed
in
the
twin
cities.
I
know
a
few
examples
in
minneapolis
and
st
paul,
but
those
are
older
stock
of
housing.
G
So
I
do
think
that
we
need
to
look
for
if
we're
going
to
move
forward
single
room,
occupancy
standards,
which
I
think
is
a
personally,
I
think,
is
a
high
priority.
I
think
it's
a
great
solution
to
a
lot
of
what
commissioner
abdi
was
was
talking
about,
as
well
as
just
a
good
housing
option
for
folks
who
may
not
necessarily
want
a
full
kitchen
and
they're
in
their
unit.
G
A
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Goldsman.
H
Thanks,
mr
chair,
one
of
the
things
that
I
see
is
really
an
important
project,
and
I
know
it's
really
driven
by
the
developers,
but
our
commercial
nodes
within
our
communities
are
in
our
neighborhoods
are
an
area.
I
feel
that
really
needs
some
attention.
I
think
we
have
some
really
great
opportunities
within
our
commercial
nodes.
Thinking
of
you
know,
penn
and
90th
98th,
and
in
lindale
there
is
one
on
old,
shakkapee
and
bush
lake.
H
There's
some
great
opportunities
there
to
assist
people
that
have
you
know
these
smaller
homes
or
on
new
developments,
for
you
know
more
affordable
housing
to
have
some
amenities
close
by
that
those
residents
can
really
take
advantage
of
and
there's
a
lot
of
older
strip
malls
and
gas
stations
that
could
potentially
be
redeveloped
into
some
types
of
amenities
that
really
can
help
the
residents
and
and
their
families.
H
You
know
some
smaller
local
businesses
bodegas
with
smaller
footprints
than
you
know,
a
large
big
box
store,
I
feel
like
if
the
city
could
invest
in
some
of
those
commercial
node
developments,
it's
one
of
those.
If
you
build
it,
they
will
come
and
a
lot
of
people
like
to
live
in
an
area
that
they
have
those
types
of
amenities
close
by
where
they
can
walk,
or
you
know,
ride
their
bikes
safely
with
their
families.
So
that's
an
area
that
I'm
passionate
about
and-
and
I
think
that
it's
good
to
see
it's
on
the
list.
H
However,
I
know
with
the
market
today,
it
might
need
a
little
bit
more
resources
from
the
city
to
help
move
it
along.
I
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
Overall.
I
like
what
I
see
here
and
I
don't
have
any
any
problems
with
what
I'm
seeing
here.
The
one
item
that
does
stick
out
to
me
that
is
currently
slated
for
2023
is
that
south
loop
district
plan
refresh.
That
is
something
that's
high
on
my
list.
That
needs
to
happen
as
one
who
spends
a
lot
of
time
in
soft
loop.
I've
studied
the
existing
plan
and
I
see
the
way
recent
development
has
gone
and
it
in
some
ways.
I
It
doesn't
look
a
whole
lot
like
what
we
were
hoping
for
in
some
cases,
and
maybe
that
requires
us
to
take
some
action
and
making
sure
that
future
development
as
south
loop
fills
up
particularly
around
bloomington
central
station,
as
the
land
starts
to
starts
to
be
less
of
it,
that
we
get
the
development
we
were
hoping
for,
because
some
of
it
doesn't
look
like
what
the
the
plan
had
envisioned.
I
So
that
is
high
on
my
list
for
us
to
take
a
look
at
that
and
possibly
consider
some
changes
to
ensure
that
we
get
the
development
we
were
hoping.
A
For
right,
thank
you,
commissioner
cook
done
is
that
are
you?
Are
you
suggesting
that
that
should
move
up
or
or
is
2023
still
sufficient
for
you
for
that
priority?.
I
Of
course,
I
would
like
it
moved
up,
but
I'll
leave
it
to.
A
A
A
all
right.
Let's
see,
I
still
see
your
hands
up,
so
I'll
just
make
sure
joanna.
Did
you
have
anything
else?
No,
okay,
all
right!
Commissioners,
the
only
other
thing
too,
I
would
add,
is,
I
think,
miss
long.
You
asked
what
is
our
priority,
maybe
in
the
in
the
strategic
plan,
and
maybe
some
of
that
more
policy
guidance,
and
I
I
would
echo
what
commissioner
roman
has
said.
It's
not
so
much
that
I
think
we
would
be
able
to
tell
the
difference.
A
There's
a
lot
of
technical
pieces
to
that
that
I
think
you
as
staff
probably
know
very
well,
I
think
from
a
policy
standpoint.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
that
gets
in
place
sooner,
so
it
can
help
guide
those
technical
decisions.
Maybe
that's
my
my
preference
on
it,
so
any
other
commissioners
with
other
thoughts
on
on
these
items
here
in
front
of
us.
B
Yes,
thank
you
very
much
for
your
input
for
your
ideas
and
we'll
be
taking
this
forward
to
the
city
council,
hopefully
in
january,
and
having
been
the
final
plan
adopted
in
early
february.
So
thank
you
for
your
time
and
attention
to
this.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
ms
farnham.
Thank
you.
Miss
long
appreciate
that
information
tonight
moving
on
to
item
number
two
discussing
discussion
of
residential
livability
standards,
and
I
believe
mr
james
has
the
staff
report
for
us.
J
Okay,
so
so
this
project
came
about
due
to
a
couple
recent
impacts
that
were
associated
with
specific
uses
over
the
last
few
years,
and
I've
listed
these
uses
here
just
to
refresh
our
memories,
but
no
looking
at
them
more
closely.
There's
really
some
broader
issues
here,
we'll
talk
about
beyond
just
the
individual
use.
J
And
so
this
topic
here
tonight
you
know
that
really
gets
the
heart
of
why
we
have
zoning
in
the
first
place.
You
know
it's
to
separate
mitigate
issues
between
incompatible
uses
between
those
that
are
lower
intensity
and
those
that
are
more
higher
intensity.
J
You
know,
balancing
residential
livability
with
more
of
the
viability
component
of
our
non-residential
uses
more
broadly
well,
note,
too,
there
are
places
in
the
city
where
we
have
an
industrial
that
directly
abuts
residential.
J
So
I'm
thinking
areas
along
you
know
pillsbury
and
wentworth.
The
center
of
the
city
there's
a
few
areas,
just
south
of
american
boulevard
up
there,
and
I
don't
know
if
zoning
is
so
much
the
issue
in
those
areas.
But
I
know
that
we
have
a
lot
of
smaller
parcels
there.
They're
smaller
lots
and
there's
just
a
lot
of
code
non-conformities
that
are
related
to
the
smaller
lots,
which
creates
issues.
J
J
J
Now,
at
the
federal
level,
we
have
more
of
our
laws,
especially
related
to
air
water
pollution,
for
instance
at
the
state
level.
You
know,
there's
some
standards
administered
by
the
pollution
control
agency,
with
our
state
fire
code,
state
building
code
and
really
at
the
local
level.
The
city
here
really
subject
to
a
lot
of
what
the
state
and
federal
regulations
require
of
us
and
oftentimes.
J
We
can't
require
stricter
standards
than
what's
set
in
place
by
those
branches
of
government,
but
sometimes
those
you
know,
federal
and
state
a
little
bit
slower,
moving
slower
to
respond
to
say,
newer
uses
that
come
up
periodically
or
newer
technologies,
and
so
you
know
at
the
local
level
we
address
some
of
the
nuisances
through
environmental
health
standards,
as
well
as
in
our
zoning
code.
J
So
in
the
zoning
I've
listed
a
few
kind
of
broader
areas
of
how
we
mitigate
issues
that
we
have.
Our
zoning
districts
try
to
separate
incompatible,
uses
structure,
setbacks,
help
increase
distance
between
those
incompatible
screening.
You
know
a
variety
of
forms
of
that
and
then
there's
you
know
more
broadly,
just
design
standards,
design,
usually
more
of
the
exterior
part
of
the
buildings.
J
So,
looking
back
at
our
list
of
kind
of
broad
issues
here,
staff
has
been
working
through
this
past
year
and
we've
really
kind
of
centered
in
on
noise
order
and
glare
as
some
of
the
primary
issues
that
have
kind
of
recurred
for
one
reason
or
another
and
a
lot
of
the
other
issues.
You
know
they
certainly
come
up,
but
they're,
usually
you
know
addressed
through
code
enforcement.
J
So,
first,
noise:
this
topic
is
most
recent
to
us
related
to
data
centers
and
some
other
uses,
but
the
issue
here
is
really
that
again
we
have
limited
authority,
the
the
state
sets
the
standards
and
where
we
can't
require
stricter
standards
with
regard
to
like
noise
control
and
decibel
levels
specifically,
so
you
know
nuisances
that
come
from
some
of
those
lower
frequencies
that
don't
trigger
the
higher
decibel
standards.
J
No,
we
can't
set
regulations
around
them
now,
that
isn't
to
say
you
know,
if
there's
a
low
hum,
if
it's
intermittent
or
ongoing,
that
could
certainly
be
a
nuisance,
but
we
can't
regulate
that
specifically
in
terms
of
measurement.
J
The
common
measurement
is
using
decibels.
J
You
know
source
of
noise
that
ideally
a
lot
of
our
noise
and
odor
too,
which
ideally,
it's
all
kept
internally
and
you
know
it
might
escape
through
building
openings,
such
as
loading
docks.
We
have
standards
around
or
you
know
if
there's
some
other
outdoor
operation,
but
one
of
the
common
issues
is
when
there's
outdoor
mechanical
equipment.
So
when
there's
like
ear
handling
units
or
generators,
there's
no
structure
to
keep
that
in
place.
We
do
usually
require,
like
a
wall,
a
sound
wall
of
sorts,
but
again
that
sound
wall
is
only
as
good.
J
Typically
as
as
it's
designed
to
block
noise
and
it's
it's
designed
to
meet,
you
know
the
state
standards,
so
there's
limitations
there
and
not
all
the
noise
impacts
are
from
industrial.
We
do
receive
complaints
periodically
about.
You,
know
noise
related
to
restaurants
or
outdoor
patios
or
other
like
outdoor
commercial
uses,
but
we
do
have
standards,
setback
standards
around
those,
and
I
think
time
of
operation
too
so
again,
data
centers
is
the
most
recent
example
here.
J
J
So
is
a
really
tricky
issue,
because
it's
difficult
to
measure
you
know
in
the
measurement
there
there's
I've
listed
one
there's
no
scientifically
valid
way
to
measure
odor.
It's
it's
really
subjective.
You
know
what's
a
nuisance
and
what
is
not
a
nuisance,
and
you
know
if
it's
related
to
air
pollution,
then
certainly
we
can
you
know,
measure
particles
and
in
the
air,
but
indirectly,
if
there's
no
pollution,
then
we
can't
really
regulate
odor
or
we
we
can't
measure
it.
J
At
least
we'll
say
we
do
have
a
standard
pertaining
to
restaurants
and
food
processors
that
we
adopted
a
few
years
ago,
and
so
that
requires
might
recall
that
those
food
processing
bit
structures
or
restaurants
that
vent
odors
outside
if
they're
near
enough
to
residential,
then
they're
required
to
have
a
like
odor,
scrubber
or
mitigation
equipment.
J
Now
that
said,
we
don't,
I
guess
the
variable
with
that
is.
We
don't
require
a
certain
amount
of
mitigation,
because
we
can't
measure
that
order.
J
J
And
then
recent
examples
I
list
restaurants
and
something
that's
come
up.
It
was
before
my
time,
but
a
hot
topic
at
that
time
was
coffee,
roasters,
and
so
that
was
an
issue
that
was,
you
know,
difficult
to
regulate.
J
And
then
lighting
this
one,
the
issue
is,
you
know
those
overnight
lights.
We
don't
really
regulate
the
overnight
lighting.
That's
coming
from
inside
that
wouldn't
be
an
issue,
but
it's
an
issue
where
we
have
the
glass
facades
on
buildings,
especially
when
those
buildings
are
multi-story
lit
up
all
night.
You
know.
Suddenly
we
have
lighting
that
wasn't
there
before.
J
So
this
is
directly
related
to
self
storage
facilities
and
we
did
recently
adopt
standards
just
for
self
storage
uses.
However,
it
isn't
difficult
to
imagine
some
other
retail
or
or
maybe
commercial
type
of
use.
That
would
have
no
similar
situation
with
those
glass
facades
lit
up
through
the
night.
J
So
again,
we've
highlighted
noise.
Odor
lighting
is
really
the
key
issues
as
part
of
this
project
and
we've
really
focused
more
on
looking
at
our
strategies.
In
the
upcoming
slides,
we
focused
more
on
outdoor
mechanical
equipment,
so
thinking
you
know
some
of
those
outdoor
noise
motor
producers
like
air
handling
units
or
generators,
diesel
generators
and
then
that
overnight
lighting
from
multi-story
buildings
that
all
said
the
strategies
we'll
talk
about.
They
are
all
really
limited
in
effectiveness.
J
Due
to
some
like
out
of
variables,
we
can't
control
so
thinking.
You
know
different
environmental
conditions,
such
as
topography
and
wind
limit
how
effective
some
some
of
the
strategies
are,
but
again
in
the
next
slides
here
I've
separated
the
strategies
into
screening.
You
know
increasing
distance,
some
of
the
design
considerations
and
then
I've
added
one
here,
just
application
process,
noting
that
with
any
application,
there's
a
lot
of
back
and
forth
with
developers
and
staff
trying
to
address
issues.
So
maybe
there's
something
there.
We
can,
you
know,
consider
best
practices
or
policies.
J
So
a
couple
screening
considerations
and
a
quick
preface
before
I
go
through
all
of
these.
Some
of
these
really
intended
to
address
noise
or
odor
more
directly.
Others
are
really
all
about
lighting.
I
I
didn't
list
it
here.
You
can
kind
of
use
your
imagination
or
ask
me,
but
no
screening,
I
think,
is
intended
to
block
all
three.
J
So
we
do
have
existing
standards
and
those
existing
standards
are
shown
here
so
generally
where
perimeter
screening
is
required,
it
would
need
to
be
one
of
these.
I
think
there's
three
really
pictured
here.
So
you
know
berm
wall
or
vegetation,
there's
ways
to
enhance
that.
You
know
we
could
require
two.
You
know
fence
and
vegetation
where
we
could
require
that
the
vegetation
be
a
certain
distance,
wide
and
so
dense
with
plants.
J
If
we
wanted
to
really
kind
of
beef
up
what
that
buffer
looks
like
another
option
would
to
just
instead
of
looking
at
perimeter,
screening
around
the
site
to
just
screen
that
mechanical
equipment
itself.
Now
really
the
screening
we
see
today
is
related
to.
What's
the
you
know,
it's
it's
there
to
meet
the
state
statute
requirements.
J
So
increasing
distance
there
are
a
few
ways
to
do
that,
so
we
could
increase
the
just
structure,
setbacks
themselves,
I've
pictured
here
the
verizon
side.
Again,
it's
just
south
of
old
shakopee
road
there.
J
So
today,
that
structure
is
around
270
feet
from
a
residential
property
line
and
we
only
require
that
industrial
structures
be
100
feet
away
from
residential
property
lines.
That's
typical!
Anyway.
J
J
J
Staff
does
not
recommend
doing
this.
While
this
site
is
pretty
large
and
you
can
imagine
how
maybe
other
development
scenarios
could
occur
here
with
other
industrial
sites,
it
would
be
quite
limiting
to
increase
those
setbacks,
so
it
would
be
a
barrier
for
redevelopment.
J
Option
two
here,
so
we
could
require
that
that
outdoor
equipment
not
be
placed
closer
to
residential
than
the
existing
primary
structure,
and
this
is
kind
of
how
we
handle
sheds
in
our
residential
areas.
You
know
they
can't
be
closer
to
the
road
than
the
house
is
so
we
could
do
something
like
this
in
industrial
areas.
You
know
limit
placement
of
equipment
between
the
building
and
the
road
or
between
the
building
and
residential
doable.
It's
it's
certainly
a
barrier
and
more
costly,
no,
not
convenient
for
for
businesses.
J
You
know
it's
usually
ideal
to
locate
that
cooling
equipment
right
adjacent
to
the
room.
That
needs
to
be
cooled,
so
it
would
require
you
know,
reconfiguration
of
the
site,
so
it
would
be
limiting
it's
an
option.
Again.
This
site
has
a
little
bit
more
room,
perhaps
to
work
with
than
some
of
our
other
smaller
industrial
sites.
J
No,
it
might
actually
if,
if
the
equipment
is
placed
in
the
yellow
spot,
it
might
actually,
you
know
open
up
those.
Those
areas
where
sound
or
odor
could
could
more
easily
reach
that
residential.
So
none
of
these
are
recommended
by
staff.
J
Couple
design
considerations
then
so
one
option
one
we're
really
talking
about
order
here
we
could
direct,
no
vents,
like
those
pictured
here
to
be
directed
away
from
residential.
J
We
have
required
this
through
a
conditional
use
permit
in
the
past.
You
know
case
by
case,
but
again
it's
really
limited
effectiveness
based
on
those
environmental
conditions,
so
might
help
somewhat.
But
if
the
vents
on
the
side
of
a
building
and
that
side
is
adjacent
to
residential,
it
has
limited
applicability.
J
So
we
we
like
that
option
now,
as
kind
of
case
by
case
with
those
conditional
use
permits,
but
not
as
a
code
amendment
option
two
we
do
recommend
as
a
code
amendment
and
just
requiring
motion
activated
lighting
really
for
any
use.
That
has
those
types
of
you
know:
glass,
facades
or
interior
light
is
escaping,
and
where
that
uses
you
know
adjacent
or
nearby
residential.
J
What
that
process
looks
like
in
a
general
note,
but
one
thing
that
came
up-
and
this
is
a
staff
recommendation
here-
is
on
case
by
case
we've
updated
our
noise
code
and
we've
stated
that
the
city
has
discretion
to
require
a
noise
study
with
any
rezoning
or
new
development
or
change
in
operation,
and
so
we'd
recommend,
as
part
of
that
study,
that
the
preparer
identify
the
least
impactful
location
for
that
mechanical
equipment
and,
of
course,
the
the
location
that's
code
compliant
to,
and
so
they
would
work
with.
J
Staff
to
you
know
identify
the
least
impactful
location.
Now
that
might
be
used
to
inform
the
decision
making
process
or
to
inform
what
type
of
screening
is
needed.
J
So
that's
a
staff
recommendation
option
two
is
about
requiring
a
cup.
If
there's
equipment
near
residential
this
would,
I
guess,
enhance
you,
know
the
process.
It
would
lengthen
the
process
requiring
more
public
hearing,
but
it's
not
recommended
by
staff,
because
it
might
create
false
expectations
that
the
city
could
create
conditions
where
projects
are
already
code
conforming.
J
The
the
intent
is
to
improve
that
process
and
requiring
neighborhood
meetings
is
something
we
definitely
recommend
that
applicants
do
whenever
we
think
the
project
might
be
controversial,
but
we
don't
recommend
it
as
a
code
amendment
because
we're
concerned
it
would
shift
responsibility
away
from
the
applicant
and
what
whatever
their
proposal
is
and
we're
concerned
that
there
would
be
too
much
focus
then,
on
you
know,
staff
and
city
requirements
if
it
became
a
city
code
standard,
but
also
increase
staff
time
demand
on
staff
time
significantly.
J
So
a
couple
last
additional
considerations
here:
one
would
we're
recommending
just
to
create
an
internal
map
where
we'd
identify
know
what
those
known
impacts
are
throughout
the
city,
the
intent
just
being
to
make
everyone
aware
and
try
to
avoid
further
conflict
with
any
proposals
that
come
in.
J
I
admit
you
know
such
a
map.
It
would
be
a
little
subjective,
you
know
what's
impactful
and
what
is
not
and
anything
we
document.
You
know
it
would
be
subject
to
public
view
and
scrutiny.
So
I
suppose
that
could
be
problematic
since
it's
subjective
there
needs
to
be.
You
know
some
disclaimers,
but
it
would,
you
know,
serve
to
inform
staff
and
decision
making
and
then
option
two
on
a
little
different
note
here.
J
So
industrial
is
required
to
screen
from
residential,
and
this
option
too
is
saying
that
we
require
any
new
residential
to
screen
from
existing
industrial.
So
this
becomes
an
issue
when
any
commercial
or
industrial
site
is
rezoned
to
a
residential.
J
Then
suddenly
screening
is
required,
but
we
today
we
don't
require
it
of
residential.
We
only
required
of
industrial.
So,
with
this
option
too,
we're
recommending
a
code
amendment
just
to
require
it
of
either
party,
whoever,
whoever
is
you
know,
putting
the
proposal
forward.
The
redevelopment.
J
So
yeah
just
last
here
summarizing
the
staff
recommendations,
the
noise
study
identifying
the
least
impactful
location
of
equipment
so
codify
the
motion
lighting
standard,
as
well
as
that
residential
screening
requirement
and
then
the
map,
those
known
issues
internally.
J
So
I
did
reach
out
to
residents
specifically
those
that
were
more
vocal
about
the
verizon
project
and
opposition
of
it.
So
I
had
phone
calls
with
a
handful
of
them
to
gather
feedback
on
this
project-
they're
of
course,
especially
interested
in
standards
specifically
pertaining
to
data
centers,
although
they
were
also
in
alignment
with
staff
about
standards
looking
just
at
that
mechanical
equipment,
those
cooling
towers
and
generators.
So
they
generally
agreed
with
that
approach.
J
You
know,
there's
discussion
about.
You
know
desire
that
there
are
more
neighborhood
meetings
or
more
opportunities
for
residents
to
interact
with
the
developer,
and
I
guess
the
last
comment
here
was:
you
know,
interest
in
being
able
to
monitor
noise
more
regularly.
Now.
There's
concerns
that,
since
verizon
is
right
at
the
threshold
with
the
limits
now
periodically,
they
might
exceed
that
and
for
not
constantly
monitoring.
Then
we
don't
it
could
be
difficult
to
enforce.
J
It
is
for
outreach
to
businesses
developers
I
reached
out
to
a
handful.
I
only
heard
back
from
donaldson,
so
I
met
with
them
and
that
their
site
has
pretty
limited
adjacency
to
residential,
so
they
don't
have
too
many
impacts
or
issues
really,
but
they
did
note
that
they
have
a
data
center
themselves
and
honestly,
a
lot
of
uses
like
them
have
what
we
call
it
a
data
center,
so
they've
got
that
mechanical
equipment
to
haven't
had
any
issues.
J
They're,
not,
I
guess
they'd
be
concerned.
If
you
know
if
any
new
standards
would
create
non-conformities
or
limit
their
operation,
although
their
existing
building
is
far
enough
away,
it's
unlikely
with
what's
been
proposed
tonight.
J
You
know
there
was
significant
input.
I
reviewed
through
the
past
public
hearings
with
some
of
these
proposals
as
as
well
as
input
from
environmental
health
staff.
J
So
this
is
scheduled
to
go
to
our
council
study
tentatively
in
a
couple
weeks
here
december
20th,
pending
direction
tonight,
the
you
know
I
could
go
to
ordinance
in
early
next
year,
and
I
did
want
to
note
to
you
know
addressing
the
noise
limitation
in
state
statute
is
proposed
on
the
22
city
legislative
agenda
for
next
year,
so
that
is
about
advocating
to
allow
cities
to
require
stricter
standards
than
the
statute.
So
you
know
frankly,
I
think
that
will
more
directly
address
some
of
the
resident
concerns
of
those
I
spoke
with.
J
A
Thank
you,
mr
james,
for
your
presentation
tonight
and
I
think
part
of
what
you
went
through
just
explains
the
difficulty
when
the
state
preempts
cities,
from
being
able
to
make
decisions
that
are
best
for
their
communities,
certainly
understand
the
difficulties
this
is
posing
for
us.
So
you
know
I
I'm
just
gonna
with
a
couple
things
here.
Certainly
the
motion,
lighting,
multi-family
screening
and
mapping
issues
I
can.
A
I
can
go
100
percent
on
the
noise
studies
is
the
only
one
that
I
throw
a
little
caution
to
and
in
part
it's
because
how
do?
How
do
we,
as
a
city,
move
that
forward
with
existing
sites
that
may
redevelop
that
are
well?
And
I
I
I
looked
through.
I
did
a
google
earth
and
went
through
a
lot
of
the
industrial
today
to
just
see
you
know
when
you
have
building
facades
fronts,
you
have
shipping
locations
and
you
have
residential.
A
How
many
of
these
you
know
what
becomes
the
least
impactful,
maybe
potentially
the
residential
really
then
is
impactful
to
potential
business
and
in
the
facade
and
then
you're
looking
at
other
issues
that
it
may
cause,
and
so
I
I
applaud
the
the
direction
that
we're
going,
but
I
just
struggle
with
how
that
would
be
codified
in
ordinance
to
make
that
work,
and
so
maybe
I'll
just
leave
my
comments
at
that
for
now
and
come
back
later
on,
I
see
commissioner
cookton
has
his
hand
up.
I
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
mr
james,
I
do
have
a
question
about
item
b
here,
which
is
codifying
motion
lighting
adjacent
to
residential.
Can
you
clarify
what
residential
means
is
that
single,
family,
residential
or
would
multi-family
residential
be
included
in
that?
Is
that
a
particular
set
of
zones?
Can
you
help
clarify
with
them.
J
Yeah
yeah,
certainly,
commissioner,
so
you
know
it
couldn't
be.
Neither-
and
this
is
a
study
meeting
and
certainly
open
to
suggestions.
What
we've
done
in
the
past
is
say
anything
zoned
and
used
residential.
J
That
said,
maybe
some
of
our
standards
are
more
specific
to
just
single
family
residential
either.
Also
we
we've
done
both
suppose
I
had
it
in
mind,
I
think
staffed
it
too.
We'd
require
this
for
anything
zoned
and
used
residential.
I
think
that
was
what
was
the
the
matches,
the
cup
language
for
the
lindale
self
storage
that
was
across
the
street
from
a
multi-family
residential,
so
yeah.
I
J
I
For
that
information,
I'd
like
to
disagree
with
that
viewpoint.
I
think
we
should
look
at
that
more
closely.
I
Certainly
recognizing
the
self
storage
presents
because
there's
a
lot
of
vertical
lighting,
and
so
I
see
that
as
sort
of
maybe
even
a
separate
thing,
but
in
a
lot
of
our
multi-family
residential
sort
of
neighborhoods,
if
you
will
south
loop
and
others,
we've
actually
gone
to
great
lengths
to
create
transparency
on
ground
levels
by
requiring
glass
facades
and
any
and
things
like
that,
and
as
you
walk
through
south
loop
and
specifically
around
bloomington
central
station,
having
lit
up
streetscapes
is
actually
part
of
the
character
of
the
neighborhood.
I
The
hotels
are
lit
up
the
gym
across
the
street
at
the
apartment
building
is
lit
up.
You
know
the
coffee
shop
is
lit
up
all
night.
That
actually
is
the
character
of
the
neighborhood.
The
streets
are
lit
all
night
and
I
think,
there's
a
definitely
a
distinction
there
between
a
quiet,
single
family
neighborhood
and
what
I
would
consider
like
a
more
dense
and
active
multi-family
residential
neighborhood,
and
I
would
really
hate
to
lose
that
character
of
the
neighborhood,
which
is
actually
more
active.
I
A
All
right,
yeah,
certainly,
I
was
not
thinking
about
that.
When
we're
thinking
about
the
motion
lighting,
I
was
thinking
more
on
the
industrial
side,
joining
residential
as
we've
had
a
couple
of
those
in
the
past
and
that's,
I
think
something
that
commission
members
were
looking
for.
So
that's
a
very
good
point,
commissioner,
commissioner.
Cookton
all
right.
Anybody
else,
commissioner,
albrecht.
G
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
to
follow
up
on
that
motion
lighting
comment.
G
I
just
have
a
question
so,
mr
james,
the
the
project
that
was
approved
on
lindale
the
self-storage
facility,
which
did
require
the
conditional
use
of
motion
lighting,
has
there
been
any
feedback
from
the
adjacent
properties
regarding
the
lighting
going
on
and
off,
because
I
know
we
had
discussions
about
that
project
specifically
and
kind
of
went
back
and
forth
on
which
is
which
is
worse,
to
have
light
all
night
long
or
to
have
light
that
goes
on
and
off
and
increments.
G
You
know
when
it's
busy
or
what
you
know
whatever
and
what's
actually
more
of
a
nuisance,
we're
curious
to
know.
Have
you
have
you
gotten
any
feedback
from
community
members
about
that
project
and
the
lighting
specifically.
J
Staff
had
that
discussion
too,
whether
the
on
and
off
was
more
of
a
nuisance,
just
the
on
all
night.
I
guess
I'm
not
aware
well
enough.
If
some
of
these
facilities
have
a
lot
of
overnight
traffic,
the
lighting
would
be
triggered
in
the
first
place.
J
J
G
G
You
know
I
was
leaving
work
at
4
30.
It
was
starting
to
get
dark
and
if
I
was
eating
dinner
with
my
family
across
the
street
and
the
light
kept
on
going
on
and
off
at
five,
you
know
that
might
be
a
nuisance.
Oh
I
I
agree
with
commissioner
cook
done.
I
think
we
need
to
learn
a
little
bit
more
about
this.
One
would
be
my
recommendation.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
commissioner
albrecht
commissioner
roman.
D
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
know
I
remember
one
of
the
issues
we
ran
into
on
the
noise
study.
Question
is
the
models
don't
really
take
into
account
seasonal
variation?
They
don't
take
into
account
a
lack
of
foliage
and
cold
weather,
which
makes
noise
travel
differently
in
the
winter
than
in
july
when
it
might
be
85
degrees
with
tree
cover.
D
So,
as
you
think
about
that
question,
I
remember
that
was
a
sticking
point
on
the
verizon
project,
because
I
mean
those
of
us
who
live
in
minnesota
know
that
it's
very
different
noise
in
the
winter
than
it
is
in
the
summer.
So
I
don't
know
how
we
factor
that
into
the
discussion.
D
My
other
question
c,
I'm
all
for
the
burden
of
screening
falling
on
those
who,
I
think
the
term
of
art
has
come
to
the
nuisance
right.
So
it's
not
the
industrial
property's
fault
that
something
was
built
most
of
them.
That
was,
you
know,
allowed.
But
what
what
is
screening
out?
Like
I'm
thinking
of
the
example
you
have
the
map
there
at
94th
and
lindell?
J
Yeah
thanks,
commissioner
roman,
so
the
screening
goes
back
to
that
perimeter
screening
here
you
require
one
of
these.
Three
and
frankly,
I
don't
think
anyone
does
the
berm
and
so
either
that
five
foot
four
tall,
solid
fence
or
the
evergreen
vegetation
spaced,
as
shown.
D
Yeah,
I
guess
I'm
just
trying
to
decide
who
benefits
from
that
and
if
it's,
if
it's
a
multi-story,
multi-family
development
that
may
be
nice
for
the
people
on
the
first
floor.
But
beyond
that,
is
it
really?
Is
it
helpful
or
is
it
I'm?
I
I'm
trying
to
decide
is
if
it
adds
cost,
it
adds
the
requirement,
but
is
it?
D
What
is
the
benefit
from
that?
So
that's
what
I'm
wrestling
with.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
commissioner
roman
yeah.
I
think
you
know
I
and
maybe
to
your
point
screening
as
I
look
at
that
too.
Just
thinking
back
to
some
of
my
experience
when
I
was
younger
in
europe,
the
screening
was
a
lot
more
vegetation,
so
it
was
taller
because
I
I
always
look
at
this
and
when
we
think
about
this
and
you
have
a
five
foot
screen
or
six
foot
screen,
I'm
sure
commissioner
cookton
could
probably
see
over
it,
but
I
I
can't
so
it
doesn't
benefit
him.
A
But
to
the
point
of
having
that
vegetation-
and
I
think
the
other
piece
that
goes
with
this
is
then
well
what
are
we,
and
maybe
maybe
that's
somewhat
to
your
comment?
What
are
we
screening
and
for
what
benefit
if
it's
a
multi-family
residential
next
to
some
sort
of
industrial
location
and
the
second
and
third
and
fourth
floor
can
see
over?
What's?
A
Is
it
really
just
for
those
walking
on
the
street?
Is
that
what
we're
worried
about
streetscapes,
or
are
we
worried
about
really
that
again,
the
impacts
next
to
residential,
so
very
good
point
to
take
into
consideration.
D
A
Not
see
any
stand
out
right
now,
mr
james,
I
think
we
we
probably
thrown
as
many
questions
at
you
as
maybe
thoughts
about
recommendations
moving
forward.
Hopefully
that's
helpful
or
would
you
like
some
more
discussion.
J
I
think
this
has
all
been
really
helpful
is,
and
so
I've
got
I've
written
down.
Comments
on
abc
is
is
d
generally
favorable
to
the
commission.
A
To
me,
I
guess
I'll
just
say,
mr
james,
knowing
some
of
these
things
and
having
a
record
of
it,
is
helpful
in
any
manner
and
then
just
understanding
context
when
potential
projects
come
forward
is
again
helpful.
I
think
think
back
to
the
verizon
application
and-
and
you
know
the
the
comments
that
the
public
head
on
that
it's
knowing
that
in
advance
may
may
have
changed
some
of
the
dynamics
in
which
the
applicant
developed
their
plan
so
who.
C
A
J
A
Other
commission
members,
commissioner,
albrecht.
G
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
just
want
to
reiterate
what
commissioner
roman
said
about
the
seasonal
changes
in
noise
and
how
that
actually
gets
reflected
in
item
d,
as
as
we
saw
via
the
verizon
project,
the
noise
and
even
odor
was
very
different
between
seasons,
and
so
my
caution,
I
guess,
is
that
if
you
put
something
on
paper
and
that
is
act
accessible
to
the
public.
G
Then
it
needs
to
be
a
accurate
and
be
accurate
during
all
seasons
and
all
weather
in
minnesota,
which
changes
all
the
time.
A
Not
seen
any
mr
james,
hopefully
that
helped
shape
further
discussions
with
the
council
here
yep.
Thank
you
all
right.
Thank
you
appreciate
that
all
right,
commission
members
moving
on
to
item
number
three,
which
is
we
have
three
planning
commission
synopsis
in
front
of
us,
the
first
one
being
from
october
28th
and
all
commissioners
were
present,
the
second
one
from
for
november,
in
which
all
commissioners
were
present
and
the
last
one
which
was
november
18th,
and
only
commissioner
abdi
was
absent
at
that
particular
meeting.
G
A
H
A
A
G
A
I
A
G
I
A
H
A
F
F
The
high
density
motor
vehicle
sales
item
that
you
reviewed
recently
was
approved
by
the
city
council
on
monday
and
then
on
wednesday.
We
received
an
application
that
will
go
january,
6th
for
the
days
in
site,
so
highway,
100
and
494
the
north
eastern
quadrant.
F
So
that
is
on
the
january
6
agenda,
and
then
we
also
tentatively
are
looking
to
have
our
second
discussion
with
the
hra
on
single
and
two
family
dwelling
standards.
You
had
a
concurrent
meeting
recently,
so
this
would
be
the
second
meeting.
We
have
not
received
the
thumbs
up
from
all
of
the
hra
commissioners,
yet
on
that.
F
So
that
item
is
tentative,
but
we're
optimistic
that
it
would
be
on
that
agenda
as
well,
which
is
convenient
because
the
hra
also
owns
the
days
in
sight,
so
they
would
have
two
two
items
relevant
at
that
same
concurrent
meeting.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
mr
markguard,
so
again
january
6,
that
would
be
one
of
the
items
would
be
in
our
continuation
of
that
study.
Meeting
we
had
before
with
hra
so
be
interesting
to
see
how
we
figure
out
how
we
work
that
within
the
facility
here
or
online,
so
with
even
more
people
to
keep
track
of
on
webex
all
right,
commission
members,
anything
you
guys
want
to
bring
up
with
staff
or
in
general,
for
anybody
go
to
the
order
not
seeing
any.
A
It
looks
like
that's
it.
Well,
I'd
like
to
thank
the
public
here
that
was
watching
online
as
there
were
none
in
the
chambers
here
tonight,
and
that
concludes
our
december
2nd
2021
planning
commission
meeting.
Thank
you.