►
From YouTube: July 14, 2022 Bloomington Planning Commission Meeting
Description
July 14, 2022 Bloomington Minnesota Planning Commission Meeting
0:00:00 Start
0:03:30 ITEM 1 City of Bloomington
Oath of Office-Commissioners Korman, Albrecht and McGovern.
0:04:42 ITEM 2 PL2022-118
(public hearing) Oxboro Bloomington Retail Center LCC (owner)
Aroma Indian Cuisine (user)
501 W 98th Street
Conditional use permit for an outdoor patio for an existing restaurant.
0:10:47 ITEM 3 PL2022-116
(public hearing) Mark Anthony Properties (owner)
BTC Fitness (user)
9901 Lyndale Avenue South
Conditional use permit for a health club in an existing multi-tenant building.
0:17:28 ITEM 4 PL2022-121
City of Bloomington
(public hearing) City Code Amendment to update standards related to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), thereby amending Chapters 9, 14, 19, and 21 of the City Code.
1:16:53 ITEM 5 PL2022-127
(public hearing) Rosa Development Company (owner)
William Griffith (applicant)
3700 and 3750 American Blvd East
Interim Use Permit for Park 'N Fly remote airport parking facility and modifications to conditions of approval. Recommended for continuance.
1:18:16 ITEM 6 City of Bloomington
(study item) Planning Commission Policy and Issues Update
A
Microphone
on
good
evening
and
welcome
to
the
July
14
2022
meeting
of
the
Bloomington
Planning
Commission,
the
Planning
Commission
is
made
up
of
seven
volunteer
Bloomington
residents
appointed
by
the
city
council
in
our
first
order
of
business
tonight,
we'll
be
swearing
in
three
for
a
three-year
term.
The
commission
is
advisory
to
the
council
for
most
items.
The
commission
makes
recommendation
and
the
city
council
has
final
decision
making
Authority.
A
In
certain
cases
the
Planning
Commission
can
approve
or
deny
an
application
subject
to
appeal
to
the
city
council
and
on
tonight.
We
have
two
final
decisions
and
one
item
that
will
move
on
to
the
planning
or
to
the
city
council
for
each
item,
there'll
be
a
staff
report,
an
opportunity
for
the
applicant
to
present
and
then
time
for
any
member
of
the
public
to
provide
testimony.
A
A
B
B
A
Thank
you.
Our
first
item
on
the
agenda
is
the
oath
of
office.
We
have
three
Commissioners
who
have
been
appointed
to
a
three-year
term
that
started
on
July,
1st
Commissioners,
corpsman
and
Albrecht
are
returning
for
a
new
term,
and
commissioner
McGovern
is
joining
us
for
a
first
term.
So
I
would
ask
those
three
to
raise
their
right
hand
and
repeat
after
me,
I
state,
your
name.
A
A
D
The
subject
address
is
501
West
98th
Street,
the
building
is
the
oxboro
center
Festival
Foods,
building
I'm
sure
you're
all
familiar
with
that
building.
This
is
aroma
Cuisine
and
their
patio
and
tenant
spaces
is
highlighted
in
yellow
on
your
screen
on
the
left.
Side
of
your
screen
is
the
submitted
C
plan
they're,
proposing
24
seats
outdoor
patios
require
a
cup
a
couple
years
ago.
D
The
city
reviewed
and
approved
restaurant
standards,
which
made
restaurants
in
all
Bloomington
permitted
uses,
with
the
exception
of
restaurants,
with
an
outdoor
patio
which
require
a
conditional
use
permit
also
the
tenant.
They
operated.
A
a
patio
during
the
pandemic
under
a
temporary
temporary
patio
permit,
and
this
cop
tonight
would
make
it
a
permanent
use.
D
E
E
A
A
F
G
A
F
Chair
I'd
like
to
make
a
motion,
if
I
can
sure,
thanks
in
case
pl2022-118,
having
been
able
to
find
to
make
the
required
findings
and
move
to
adopt
a
resolution
approving
a
conditional
use
permit
for
a
24-seat
outdoor
patio
for
an
existing
restaurant
at
501,
West,
98th,
Street,
subject
to
the
conditions
and
code
requirements
attached
to
the
staff
report.
Second,
thank.
A
A
A
D
You
chair
so
yeah.
This
is
a
conditional
use
permit
for
a
health
club
and
an
existing
multi-tenant
building,
like
you
said,
moving
just
a
little
bit
further
south.
So
the
address
is
9901.
Lindale
Avenue
surrounding
uses
is
kind
of
a
mixture
of
residential
and
Retail
uses,
with
Nativity
of
Mary,
just
across
Lindale
Avenue
and
on
the
left.
Side
of
the
screen
is
the
approximate
tenant
space.
Btc
Fitness
is
approximately
a
thousand
square
feet
and
they
would
provide
Fitness
training
for
one
to
three
people
in
small
group
sessions
and
on
the
right.
D
I
have
their
submitted
floor
plan
which
identifies
different
equipment
on
their
in
their
space
and
then
just
two
miscellaneous
items
that
have
to
be
buttoned
up
before
they
get
their
building
permit.
They
have
to
show
identify
a
sidewalk
connection
between
the
building
and
the
street,
as
well
as
show
a
trash
location
indoors
for
the
subject
tenant
and
with
that
we
are
recommending
approval.
Another
brief
presentation
again
tonight
and
the
applicant
I
believe
is
in
attendance
as
well.
A
H
D
Chair
Roman,
commissioner
cookton.
Thank
you
for
asking
that
question.
So,
with
this
application
for
the
conditional
use,
permit,
I
did
Identify
some
landscaping
materials
that
have
deceased
over
time,
because
they're
not
located
close
to
the
tenant
space,
we're
not
requiring
them
to
replace
it
with
this
conditional
use.
Permit
application.
However,
since
I
identified
the
violation
the
property
owner
should
address
it
and
replant
any
deceased
material.
H
D
I
A
A
G
F
F
A
I
think
those
the
the
Landscaping
thing
I
trust
that
staff
will
refer
that
through
Environmental.
The
Environmental
takes
care
of
that
and
again
I
also
agree
that
it's
it's
good
to
have
different
types
of
facilities
of
this
nature.
You
know
we
have
everything
from
the
big
box
kind
of
DIY
up
to
these
more
one-on-one
small
group
and
I.
Think
it's
great
that
we
can
provide
different
levels,
and
hopefully
our
community
can
support,
make
this
business
successful
so
I
to
them
in
favor.
A
C
A
K
That's
in
front
of
you
tonight
in
2009,
the
city
passed
an
Adu
ordinance
that
ordinance
at
the
time,
restricted,
adus
to
be
attached
to
the
primary
dwelling
unit
or
be
located
within
so
building
out
the
spaces
within
the
primary
dwelling
unit
in
2019,
the
ordinance
was
updated
to
address
minimum
lot
size
and
the
Adu
size
to
all.
This
was
in
the
effort
to
offer
more
opportunity
to
those
properties
that
are
zoned,
R1
and
rs1
to
construct
adus
on
their
property.
K
It
was
at
that
time
that
the
staff
received
instruction
when,
when
this
or
when
the
2019
ordinance
was,
was
brought
to
the
city's
attention
to
explore
the
I
ordinance
Amendment
language,
that
or
sorry
ordinance
language
that
would
amend
city
code
to
allow
detached,
adus
plus
some
other
standards.
That
would
also
in
the
effort
to
expand
the
opportunities
for
Adu
Construction.
K
Some
other
background
will
show
that
staff
engage
the
public
through
a
variety
of
means
back
in
December
or
I'm.
Sorry,
October
of
last
year,
staff
held
a
joint
meeting
with
the
Planning
Commission
and
the
HRA
for
a
study
session
to
look
at
the
existing
ordinance
and
what
sort
of
changes
might
need
to
occur
in
order
to
facilitate
an
more
Adu
construction
and
if
there
were
other
any
other
standards
aside
from
detached
adus
that
might
help
in
that
effort.
K
The
same
study
session
was
held
with
City
Council
in
February
of
this
year,
staff
also
worked
with
our
engagement
team
with
the
city
to
set
up
a
let's
talk.
Bloomington
page
where
we
can
encourage
people
to
provide
their
commentary
online
and
review
material
that
staff
had
prepared.
That
would
inform
them
of
the
conversations
regarding
detached
adus
and
any
other
code,
Amendment
language
that
the
city
was
considering.
K
Staff
also
held
a
space
at
the
winter
Farmers
Market,
where
we
solicited
comments
and
engaged
residents
on
the
proposed
code.
Amendments
and
specifically
detached
adus
you'll,
see
the
board
to
the
right
shows
some
of
that
commentary
and
overall
pretty
positive.
There
were
some
comments
that
were
you
know
that
relates
some
concern,
some
unfamiliarity
with
adus
and
how
that
might
affect
their
property
taxes,
but
nonetheless,
all
that's
before
you
and
we
think
we
crafted
something
that
still
gets
to
what
the
what
the
city
objectives
were,
as
well
as
addressing
concerns
expressed
by
residents.
K
We
also
by
we
I
mean
staff
also
met
with
or
held
a
meeting
at
Creekside
Community
Center
met
with
residents
there.
That
was
noteworthy
because
a
lot
of
those
residents
are
within
the
retirement
age
and
so
a
benefit
of
having
adus.
Is
it
either
allows
someone
to
downsize
into
a
smaller
unit,
something
more
applicable
to
their
to
their
lifestyle?
K
In
preparing
the
the
ordinance
Amendment,
the
staff
went
through
an
analysis
and
looked
at
current
code
and
what
might
need
to
change
in
order
to
address
the
the
any
sort
of
concerns
with
existing
code
language
and
also
to
also
bring
detached
adus
into
the
fold
of
what's
allowed
within
the
city.
So,
as
you'll
see,
we
we
looked
at
the
definition
of
accessory
dwelling
unit,
Within
city
code.
K
K
A
K
Terrific
I
also
provided
the
definition
of
manufactured
home,
that's
currently
in
city
code,
something
that
stood
out
to
us
was
that
this
definition
of
manufactured
home
identified
those
structures
that
are
on
a
chassis.
So
that
means
there's
there's
Mobility
at
all
times,
and
if
this
was
a
policy
question
to
allow
those
types
of
structures
within
within
a
single-family
neighborhoods
just
wanted
to
bring
that
to
your
attention.
K
K
K
I'd
like
to
revise
that
actually
I
hope
everyone
caught
that
I'm
sorry
a
little
dyslexic
on
the
slide.
The
area
does
not
count
toward
the
next
accessory
structure
area
and
it
does
count
toward
the
number
of
accessory
structures.
Sorry
I
went
in
front
of
several
eyes
and
we
all
missed
it
anyways.
So,
if
you
I'll
continue,
it
must
meet
the
setbacks
of
primary
dwellings,
so
the
30-foot
rear
setback
and
the
front
yard
and
the
side
yard
setback.
So
it's
basically
subjected
to
all
the
setback
restrictions
that
we
already
imposed
on
single
family
homes.
K
K
So
with
that
and
I'm
provide
I'm
happy
to
provide
more
detail
on
some
of
those
revisions
and
some
of
the
thought
that
went
behind
those
revisions,
but
nonetheless,
staff
recommends
approval
of
the
ordinance
and
the
motion
is
in
front
of
you
if,
if
you
so
choose,
but
otherwise
I'm
available
to
take
questions.
Thank.
A
A
K
So
we
we
didn't
investigate
that.
That
too
far
happy
to
do
that,
though,
and
and
see
how
that
compares
to
other
cities
within
the
metropolitan
area.
But
again
we
relied
on
that
model
language
and
also
just
the
you
know
traditional
or
you
know
where
we,
where
the
the
Manufacturing
Housing
is
actually
located.
J
Thank
you
chair,
so
I
worked
in
Minneapolis
when
we
did
the
Adu
over
there.
Part
of
the
community
engagement
and
a
lot
of
people
did
ask
for,
could
I
bring
something
that
was
already
manufactured
and
just
plotted
on
my
lot
and
just
painted
cute
and
whatnot,
and
it
would
be
perfect
and
some
of
the
conversations
that
I
thought
if
I
remember
correctly,
were
that-
and
this
could
be
a
question
back
to
staff
here-
is,
do
based
on
the
definition
that
you
have
right
now
does
manufactured
structures.
J
J
Would
it
meet
or
disallowing
I
should
say,
go
just
this
definition
here,
the
manufactured
homes.
Do
they
meet
the
definition
of
the
Minnesota
building
code
standards?
I
think
that
was
something
that
we
used
as
a
standard
in
saying
we're
not
going
to
open
a
conversations
about
something
that
it's
not
meeting
the
safety
standards
or
like
of
what
a
livable
space
looks
like
per
the
Minnesota
building
code.
Is
this
definition
and
I
apologize,
I
didn't
read
it?
K
Chair
and
commissioner
I'm
I
I
have
I'll
I
may
have
to
defer
to
the
planning
manager,
our
guard
and
but
I
will
say
that
there
is
reference
to
other
or
within
the
the
revised
standards
to
building
code
language
regarding
occupancy.
So
there
are
some.
There
is
acknowledgment
of
that,
but
as
far
as
the
manufactured
home
definition,
if
that
actually
meets
building
code,
I'll
have
to
defer.
B
The
chair
room
and
commissioner
Abdi
I
believe
the
manufactured
home
would
need
to
meet
building
codes
so
kind
of
some
key
things
in
the
definition
are,
as
chair
Roman
mentioned,
on
a
chassis,
so
prefabricated
home
would
not
meet
art,
bloomington's
definition
of
manufactured
home,
so
then
it
would
be
allowed
as
an
Adu.
You
know
a
prefabricated
Adu
could
be
brought
on
site
and
placed
on
the
site
under
this
definition.
However,
if
it
were
on
a
chassis
as
drafted,
it
could
not.
J
B
B
A
I
think
the
in
my
reading
of
it,
the
intention
is
of
the
intention
of
the
home
at
the
time
of
construction,
is
for
it
to
be
mobile
versus
at
the
time
of
construction,
to
be
moved
once
and
put
in
place.
I
I
believe
that's
what
I
would
read
that
in
a
mobile
home
typically
or
this
we
would
prefer,
as
referred
as
manufactured
here
as
it's
built
literally
on
I,
suppose
a
it's
not
a
truck
trailer,
but
it's
of
something
of
that
nature,
which
is
intended
to
Bear
the
weight
and
be
moved
multiple
times.
C
Thank
you,
Mr,
chair,
I,
Wonder
has
staff
had
conversations
with
I
know,
there's
some
manufactured
home
companies
in
the
state
of
Minnesota
and
in
Wisconsin.
Have
you
had
conversations
of
what
they
be
supportive
of
this
definition,
not
the
manufactured
home
definition,
but
the
accessory
dwelling
unit
definition
itself.
K
Sure
Roman,
commissioner
Albrecht
I
believe
my
the
planner
before
me.
Sean
James
was
in
conversation
with
Adu
manufacturers,
I
think
that
was
to
give
them
some
updates
about
and
also
to
solicit
information
about
the
construction
of
detached
adus,
I'm.
Sorry,
but
I,
don't
know
if
there
was
a
record
kept
of
those
conversations,
I
believe
they
were.
They
were
friendly
and
informative,
but
I
don't
know
if
this
particular
definition
was
presented
to
them
and
if
they
had
any
objections,
I
think
they
would.
B
Chair
Roman,
commissioner
Albrecht,
just
to
add
on
to
that
I
know
there
was
conversation
with
Adu
kind
of
pre-fabricated,
Adu
manufacturer
at
least
one
which
would
be
allowed.
However,
I
don't
think
there
was
discussion
with
you
know
more
traditional
mobile
home
style
of
manufactured
home
manufacturers
to
date.
H
K
B
B
H
A
About
that
yeah
I
think
I
would
build
on
what
commissioner
cookton
is
not
necessarily
talking
about
modifying
this
language,
but
I.
Think
there's
a
few
of
us
who
spent
a
lot
of
time
on
the
issue
of
RVs
and
where
they
may
or
may
not
be
parked,
and
the
question
I
think
that
if
I
I
don't
want
to
speak
for
you,
but
what
I
hear
I
think
I
hear
you
saying
is
that
the
legally
parked
RV
being
used
as
an
Adu
I
think
that's
the
and
I.
Don't
recall
if
our.
B
A
A
F
Mr
chair,
you
know,
as
we've
talked
through
this
I
I've
I
would
support
the
languages.
It
stands
today
having
something
that
is
prefabricated
for
use
of
putting
on
a
property
and
not
to
have
it
move
multiple
times
or
having
the
intention
to
move
it
multiple
times.
I
think
is
the
direction
that
I
would
go.
I
look
at
it
very
similarly
to
somebody
that
has
a
shed
in
their
backyard.
A
lot
of
the
sheds
that
you
can
buy
now
are
pre-fabricated.
They
look
great
we'd,
never
intend
them
to
move
now.
A
J
You
chair,
I'm,
still
grappling
with
this
piece
here.
I
generally
would
not
be
in
support
of
an
accessory
structure-
that's
movable
because
once
you
approve,
because
this
thing
is
going
to
require
setbacks.
So
if
you
approve
it
and
it's
good
to
go
after
inspections,
you
allow
you
know,
people
to
start
occupying
it
and
then
the
resident
or
the
property
owner
changes
the
new
owner
comes
in
and
they're
like.
J
You
know
what
I
don't
like
that
thing
in
there
in
that
corner,
I'm,
going
to
move
it
somewhere
else,
moving
much
closer
to
a
property
line.
You
know
how?
How
does
staff
or
the
city
assure
that
the
structure
will
not
be
will
be
in
compliance
in
the
future?
I
guess
that
would
be
I
guess
I
would
be
in
support
of
making
it
into
a
question.
I
apologize
is
the
consideration.
Then,
then,
how
would
you
ensure
that
this
structure
will
now
move
in
the
future?
Should
this
definition
stay
if
I'm
not
misreading?
This.
K
Chair
Roman,
commissioner
Abdi,
it
would
still
come
to
staff
in
terms
of
a
building
permit
application
where
we
would
review,
citing
and
and
make
sure
that
it
complied
with
the
city
code.
So
at
that
point
we
would
and
then
it
would
go
through
a
building
inspection
where
there
would
be
on-site,
a
review
of
where
it's
located
and
making
sure
that
it
complied
with
approved
plans.
J
Follow-Up
chair:
what
if
I
wanted
to
move
it
again
because
it
says
if
it's
not
on
a
permanent
structure.
So
if,
if
the
structure
would
can
the
structure
be
moved
again
and
would
that
require
City
approval
and
how
would
the
current
or
future
users
know
whether
the
structure
requires
new
city
approvals.
K
K
J
K
J
Yes,
if
I
can
remember
what
I
said,
I
think
it's
just
back
at
and
I'm
still
not
very
much
understanding.
So
the
only
thing
I'm
reading
here
is
that
the
difference
that
I'm
imagining
is
this
structure
is
going
to
allow
for
potential
movement
in
the
future,
like
it's
going
to
come
and
be
placed
on
a
site,
and
it's
not
going
to
be
sitting
in
a
foundation
or
or
a
concrete
thing.
That's
not
going
to
be
movable
if
this
structure
that
may
be
considered
Adu.
B
Chair
Roman,
commissioner
Abdi
yeah
as
a
planar,
Emler
Olson
said
we
would
have
difficulty
unless
we
would.
You
know
somehow
learned
about
that
through
you
know,
notice
from
a
neighbor
or,
but
we
probably
wouldn't
know
if
it
moved
around
on
the
lot
now,
it
does
need
to
be
connected
to
utilities,
so
that
would
be
they're.
Actually,
we
would
probably
have
a
permit
process,
so
we
could
potentially
find
out
through
that
permit
process.
If
we
permit
came
in
to
move
the
utilities
around
on
the
site.
J
A
license
would
be
required
for
such
use,
correct
and
possibly
inspection
would
be
required
for
and
then
hopefully
that
would
ensure
the
maintenance.
The
maintaining
of
the
structure
in
in
set
place
that
it
was
approved
at
it
structured
if
the
owner
lives
in
it,
then
a
license
would
not
may
not
be
required
correct,
and
if
the
owner
rents
out
their
primary
residence,
then
the
license
would
be
for
the
primary
residence,
not
the
accessory
dwelling
unit
in
the
backyard.
J
B
Yeah,
chair
Roman,
commissioner
Romney.
There
would
be
an
approval
process,
it
would
be
an
administrative
review,
so
we
would
have
plans
that
we
would
verify
that
everything
that's
code
standard,
then
yeah.
If
it
were
to
be
moved
from
there
without
our
knowledge,
I'm
guessing
you
know
the
permit
process
to
change
the
utilities
would
probably
be
the
way
we
would
learn
about
it.
F
Thanks
Mr
chair
to
follow
up
on
commissioner
abdi's
question:
what
if
a
resident
decided
to
remove
the
manufactured
home
from
if
we
were
to
allow
it
and
then
they
would
just
decide
to
move
it,
so
there
would
be
a
slab
of
concrete
and
then
utilities,
potentially.
What
would
that
Downstream
impact
be
if
we
were
to
allow
the
manufacturing
home
so
not
just
moving
it,
just
removing
it?
All
together
is
another
question.
I.
B
Think
material
and
commissioner
yeah,
so
there
would
be
more
than
likely
a
permit
process
and
I
think
it's
called
a
demolition
permit,
even
though
you're
not
demolishing
the
structure.
But
the
fact
that
you
are
removing
the
manufactured
home
from
the
site,
I
think
technically
requires
what
we
call
a
demolition
permit
and
then
there's
review
on
the
utilities
that
they're
properly
capped
and
stuff
like
that.
G
K
If
I
understand
the
correct
question,
it's
if
we
were
to
allow
manufactured
homes
within
the
the
range
of
housing
structures
that
would
qualify
as
an
Adu,
what
would
be
the
impact
staff
did
not
ponder
that
when
we
were
drafting
the
language
about.
If
it
was
a
movable
structure,
it
was
again
we
operated
from
the
definition.
K
That
we
drafted
here
that
excluded
manufacturer
homes,
so
it
was
it
was
it
was
taken
or
it
was
assumed
that
there
would
be
a
permanent
foundation.
The
structure
would
be
affixed
to
the
permanent
foundation,
so
any
sort
of
impacts
would
already
have
been
caught
by
the
setback
standards
and
any
other
standards
that
we
imposed
on
the
Adu.
The
the
research
into
other
communities
did
not
look
into
movable
Adu
structures.
K
Staff
is
unaware
of
any
communities
that
allow
that
or
how
widespread
of
a
practice
that
is
again
following
you
know,
looking
at
the
definition
before
you
that
came
from
a
National
Organization
that
that
is
a
model
language
used
by
a
lot
of
communities
in
the
United
States,
where
they
do
exclude
mobile
homes,
and
so
there
isn't.
There
is
an
acknowledgment
of
possibly
those
structures
that
could
be
that
could
be
moved,
but
to
control
for
that
those
are
excluded
and
instead
it
it.
K
But,
oh
I'm,
sorry.
Sometimes
my
thoughts
are
just
coming
to
me,
but
I
guess
that
yeah,
so
that
that
last
point
I
want
to
make.
Is
that
there's
a
cost
efficiency
Now
with
off-site
manufacturing,
because
it
is
just
so
much
easier
to
do
with
CNC,
Machining
and
and
other
sort
of
building
practices
so
that
any
sort
of
cost
savings
you
would
have
seen
with
a
more
mobile
manufactured
housing
is
met
with
off-site
Fab
or
prefabrication
and
Fabrication
on
site.
C
K
C
C
C
A
There
I
have
a
question
for
staff,
as
I
was
reading
through
the
the
staff
report.
We
talk
about.
We
reference
a
standard
we
have
in
our
code
about
35
percent
impervious
surface
and
now
that
we're
entertaining
the
idea
of
detached
adus
are
there
areas
in
the
city
where
the
ability
to
have
a
detached
Adu
might
be
limited
by
the
size
of
the
lot
in
relation
to
the
existing
home,
for
example,.
K
K
So
this
slide
I
believe
addresses
your
question.
It
shows
those
lots
that
are
that
that,
through
analysis
show
an
impervious
surface
amount,
30
or
greater.
We
chose
30
percent
because
it
allows
the
addition
of
the
of
the
detached
Adu
plus
any
other
related
impervious
surface
walkways,
maybe
small
patio
outside
either
door.
K
K
You
see
the
census
tracts
that
that
make
up
the
city
and
the
percentage
of
the
bipoc
population
for
each
census.
Tract
I'll
draw
your
attention
again
to
the
east
side,
where
again
visually,
although
this
hasn't
been
proven
through
any
rigorous
analysis
but
visually
it.
Looking
at
those
lots
on
the
east
side,
they
do
overlap
the
the
census
tracts
with
the
highest
percentage
of
bipoc
population,
so
that
does
suggest
there
are
limitations
to
adding
adus
in
that
portion
of
the
city.
K
The
reason
why
I'm
bringing
that
up
is
because
there
are
revisions
being
considered
or
updates
to
standards
for
single-family
homes
or
single-family
properties,
and
that
may
include
a
deal
extending
the
the
assessment
of
impervious
surface
to
those
single-family
Lots.
So,
as
you
see
here
in
this,
looking
at
the
standard
and
previous
surface
area
must
not
exceed
45
percent.
K
If
impervious
surface
area
exceeds
35
percent
storm
and
and
storm
water
storm
water
management
plans
meeting
the
requirements
of
chapter
16
of
the
city
code.
This
can
be
done
through
an
administrative
approval
by
the
city
engineer.
So
any
time
anything
between
35
and
45
percent
could
be
administratively
approved.
K
A
In
the
draft
stage,
that's
helpful
and
I.
Actually
thank
you
for
this
map.
Actually,
this
actually
makes
me
feel
better,
because
I
see
that
it's
distributed,
the
the
30
or
greater
is
actually
distributed
more
throughout
the
city
than
I
suspected.
It
might
have
been.
So
thank
you
for
that.
Other
questions
for
staff
question
I
cooked
in.
H
Thank
you,
Mr
chair,
I'd,
like
to
get
away
from
the
manufactured
home
thing
for
a
little
bit
and
take
a
breath
on
that.
I
would
like
to
ask
about.
You
know
a
lot
of
the
feedback
the
city
received
on
this
was
a
concern
about
nuisance,
and
what
is
my
neighbor
going
to
do
that
I?
Don't
like?
Can
you
just
discuss
some
of
the
standards
that,
whether
it's
mobile,
not
mobile,
whatever?
K
Chair
Roman,
commissioner
cookton,
the
the
standards
right
now
that
apply
to
single-family
homes
and
to
maintain
the
quality
of
life
of
single-family
neighborhoods
would
apply
also
to
those
properties
that
construct
adus.
We
we
we
have
those
standards
in
the
proposed
language
that
obligates
adus
to
meet
the
structure,
setbacks
that
primary
dwelling
units
have
to
meet
so
hopefully
that
or
the
staff's
intention
behind
that
was
to
again
mimic
the
the
quality
that
single-family
homes
have
and
that
the
any
sort
of
impacts
on
adjacent
properties
would
be
minimized.
K
K
It's
not
really
covered
in
there
because
it's
covered
in
another
part
of
the
city
code,
so
the
the
property
would
still
be
subject
to
those
any
any
sort
of
light
or
glare
that
might
spill
on.
That
might
be
a
nuisance
to
the
neighbor
again,
that
might
be
a
Code
Enforcement
issue
and
but
other
other
issues
I
might
have
to
defer
to
the
planning
manager.
H
B
A
Think
that's
a
good
question
just
to
clarify
at
some
point
because
I
you
know
when
we
went
to
organize
collection.
I
know
one
of
the
points
of
frustration
for
selling
the
community
was
that
every
property
had
to
have
direct
service,
whereas
some
people
may
have
been
sharing
with
neighbors
or
chosen
I
know
there
is
a
way
to
move
out
of
the
trash
system
in
the
current
structure,
but
I
think
that
would
be
something
that
we
should
just
be
intentional
one
way
or
the
other
I
don't
know.
A
J
J
J
Thank
you,
I
guess.
The
question
I
had
was
for
the
single
family
districts
that
an
Adu
is
allowed
in
some
of
those
districts
allow
for
group
homes,
businesses.
So
with
the
allowance
for
an
Adu.
Now,
if
I,
rent
out
my
single
family
house
for
a
group,
home
and
I
decide
to
live
in,
the
backyard,
could
I
do
it
through
the
80?
If
it's
detached.
B
A
A
D
A
A
I,
like
I,
actually
was
pleased
to
see
that
we
are
not
proposing
something
that
disproportionately
gives
opportunity
in
one
part
of
the
community
and
not
others
I
like
the
idea
of
of
what
staff
exploring
related
to
this,
but
not
directly
about
the
idea
of
if
folks
were
to
have
more
impervious
surface,
but
the
ability
to
just
capture
and
treat
storm
water
on
site.
My
understanding
is
the
35
percent
is
because
of
the
limitations
of
our
system,
which,
of
course,
is
only
being
stressed
more
and
more
as
we
have
high
frequency
or
high
intensity
rain
events.
A
I
would
not
be
opposed
to
the
comment
from
commissioner
Albrecht
about
just
using
the
word
mobile
home.
I
know-
and
perhaps
you
know,
Mr
marker
guard
remembers
from
a
number
of
years
back
when
the
city
I
know
the
city
used
to
have
two
facilities
that
had
those
types
of
homes
and
those
have
gone
away,
and
so
there
may
be
a
historical
reason
why
that
language
was
not
used,
but
perhaps
the
the
pendulum
has
moved
and
it's
better
just
to
call
that
type
of
use.
A
If
that
is
the
model
language
from
from
the
APA
but
generally
with,
except
for
that
discussion,
I
would
not
be
in
favor
of
so
again.
The
question
I
think
we
were
asked
to
think
about
was:
should
I'll
use
the
word
mobile
home
just
because
that's
I
think
that's
what
we're
talking
about.
Should
a
mobile
home
be
allowed
as
an
Adu
and
I
think
at
this
time
I
would
say
no
and
then
again
the
question
of
the
you
know.
The
RV
thing
has
been
clarified.
A
A
H
K
H
Thank
you,
and
so
I
actually
see
this
as
an
opportunity
to
decentralize.
Some
of
you
know,
or
maybe
a
better
way.
Please
create
affordability
on
the
west
side
of
town,
so
perhaps
there's
a
way
to
look
at
that
as
a
class
half
full
as
far
as
the
language
and
the
code
about
manufactured
home
or
mobile
phone
I'm
going
to
leave
that
or
my
take
would
be
to
leave
that
at
staff
judgment.
H
As
someone
who
has
their
head
and
codes
every
day,
I
know
how
important
proper
nouns
are
and
if
it's
staff's
view
that
changing
it's
a
mobile
home
or
mobile
phone
as
I
wrote
in
my
notes,
mobile
home
is
disadvantageous.
I.
Wouldn't
recommend
that
so
I'll
use
to
ask
judgment
on
that.
As
far
as
whether
manufactured
homes
are
appropriate
for
an
Adu
I
lean
that
they're,
not
I.
Think
commissioner
Audi
rates
raised
some
excellent
points
that
it's
hard
to
enforce
that
and
they
can
move
and
all
of
a
sudden.
H
J
And
I
you
know
sometimes
when
people
see
a
picture,
they
think
whatever
it
is
you're
talking
about
will
end
up
being
that
picture,
it's
very
unfortunate
that
we
think
like
like
that,
but
it
would
have
been
I.
Think
for
me,
I
was
the
whole
time.
I
was
trying
to
visualize
what
a
mobile
home
that
would
be
permanent
or
not
permanent
to
the
site
looks
like
versus
what
a
detached
structure
looks
like
I
know
when
we're
discussing
the
Adu
at
some
point
we
used
to
have
the
different
visuals
that
we
had
for
the
attached.
J
You
know
the
blue
lines
that
kind
of
show
where
in
the
single
family
house
it
would
be
with
its
internal
in
the
in
the
basement
or
the
attic
or
you
know
attached
or
it's
detached.
Those
kind
of
visuals
helped
me
better
connect
to
the
language
of
the
revisions
that
were
proposed,
but
when
it
came
to
the
definitions
here
about
what
manufactured
went,
I
just
went
crazy
in
my
head,
so
I
think
giving
the
next
time.
The
presentation,
I
think,
would
be
helpful
to
kind
of
show.
J
So
I
guess
I'll
just
leave
it
at
that.
I
already
said
some
of
the
things
I
wanted
to
say:
making
this
structure
permanent
I
think
in
that
place,
I
think
would
be
something
that
I
would
be
in
favor
of
to
discourage
a
lot
of
that.
Would
it
would
discourage
a
lot
of
the
issues
that
might
come,
arise
and
make
the
whole
thing
less
appealing
thing
from
Bloomington.
C
Thank
you,
Mr
chair
this
I
mean.
Obviously
my
point
was
already
made
about
the
fania
manufacturer
versus
mobile
I
would
continue
to
lean
that
way.
Only
because
I
know
that
within
the
world
of
modular
construction,
that
kind
of
is
nestled
under
manufactured
homes
and
I
wouldn't
want
to
discourage
folks
who
were
just
reading
this
portion
of
it,
making
it
easier
for
folks
to
not
eliminate
the
possibility
of
them.
C
Adding
an
Adu,
so
I
would
encourage
a
change
to
mobile
home
and
defining
what
a
mobile
home
is,
and
that
could
potentially
be
one
that
is
on
a
chassis.
That
makes
it
very
clear,
but
it's
not
something
that
I'm
going
to
be
totally
hung
up
on
so
I'm
in
support,
but
I
would
encourage
just
that
slight
change.
G
You
Mr
chair
I
would
just
say
that
I
I
am
in
support
as
it
provides
opportunities
for
housing,
obviously
for
more
members
in
the
community
or
people
that
want
to
join
our
community,
but
the
one
part
that
I'm
not
comfortable
with
it's,
whatever
move
the
constant
move
in
because
I'm
thinking
you
know
just
like
the
other
Commissioners
about
the
kind
of
chaos
that
have
caused
in
our
in
our
neighborhoods
and
how
difficult
it
might
be
to
reinforce
it's
just.
It's
just
there's
a
lot
of
things
that
are
really
difficult
to
control.
G
H
Sure
I
would
like
to
get
the
temperature
of
the
the
group
here
of
those
who
are
thinking
that
they
would
like
to
see
a
change
from
manufactured
home
to
mobile
home.
In
terms
of
the
motion,
would
you
want
to
add
that,
specifically
as
a
change
or
would
it
be
more
of
Staff
should
consider
changing
it?
I
think
they've
hurt
us,
and
you
know
you
hate
to
design
from
the
Deus
and
have
unintended
consequences.
So
maybe
that's
just
a
comment
of
I.
A
F
B
B
A
A
Have
a
motion
and
a
second
to
recommend
approval
of
the
Adu
standards
in
our
city
ordinances?
Is
there
any
further
discussion,
all
those
in
favor
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed
this
item
moves
on
to
the
August
8th
city
council
meeting
where
it
will
also
be
a
public
hearing
item
number
five
is
a
interim
use
permit
for
remote
Airport
parking
facility?
We
have
a
recommendation
to
continue
this
item
to
July.
28Th
can
I
get
a
motion
to
continue
date?
Certain
commissioner
cooked
in
Mr,
chair
may.
B
A
A
B
Chair
Roman
yeah,
looking
forward
at
Future
meetings,
July
28th
is
your
next
meeting.
We
do
have
two
items
on
that
agenda.
Two
development
items
one
is
a
kind
of
a
minor
plot
and
then
the
second
one
is
a
major
revision
to
the
hotel
conversion
that
you
saw.
That
would
change
one
floor
back
to
hotel
from
the
plans
for
residential.
B
A
For
staff's
consideration
is
there
anyone
who
feels
a
need
to
have
a
meeting
just
to
go
over
organizational
business?
If
there
are
no
other
agenda
items,
I
didn't
think
so,
then,
what
we'll
probably
do
also
during
our
policy
and
issue
update,
is
at
the
next
meeting
is
look
for
folks
who
would
be
interested
in
expressing
interest
in
a
chair
or
vice
chair
role
than
in
our
first
meeting
in
August,
when
we
do
our
organizational
meeting,
whether
that's
on
the
date
August,
whatever
whether
it's
on
the
date
of.
A
8Th
or
after
that,
we
would
be
prepared,
then
to
have
an
election
for
officer
role.
So
I
would
just
put
that
in
folks
mind
if
that's
something
you're
thinking
about
well
I
it
one
of
our
processes
is
just
to
kind
of
just
gauge
a
people's
interest
in
that.
So
think
about
that.
For
the
for
two
weeks
from
now,
yeah.