►
From YouTube: July 28, 2022 Bloomington Planning Commission Meeting
Description
July 28, 2022 Bloomington Minnesota Planning Commission Meeting
0:00:00 Start
0:03:44 ITEM 1 PL2022-131
(public hearing) David Matthew Loskota (owner)
Christine Ann Loskota (owner) 11454 Zion Road
Type III preliminary and final plat to split the rear portion of the residential lot into an outlot.
0:15:08 ITEM 2 PL2022-136
(public hearing) Empire IV Bloomington LLC (owner)
3 & 4 Appletree Square
Major revisions to previously approved final development plans for the Aire Apartments.
0:35:34 ITEM 3 PL2022-127
(public hearing) Rosa Development Company (owner)
3700 and 3750 American Blvd East
Interim Use Permit for Park 'N Fly remote airport parking facility and modifications to conditions of approval.
2:21:30 ITEM 4 City of Bloomington
(study item) Consider approval of draft Planning Commission meeting synopses for May 26th and June 2nd, 2022.
2:23:11 ITEM 5 City of Bloomington
(study item) Planning Commission Policy and Issues Update.
A
Good
evening
and
welcome
to
the
july
28
2022
meeting
of
the
bloomington
planning
commission,
the
planning
commission
is
composed
of
seven
volunteer
blooming
residents
appointed
by
the
city
council.
The
commission
is
advisory
to
the
council
for
most
items.
The
commission
makes
recommendations
and
the
city
council
has
final
decision-making
authority.
A
In
certain
cases,
the
planning
commission
can
approve
or
deny
an
application
subject
to
an
appeal.
All
of
the
items
tonight
move
to
the
city
council.
There
are
no
final
decisions
this
week
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
C
D
C
A
E
E
E
E
This
is
a
arial
showing
the
existing
conditions
at
the
property,
so
you
can
see
that
it,
it
immediately
abuts
minnesota
valley,
country
club
and,
I
think,
to
address
any
issues
between
the
country
club
and
that
corner
and
the
property.
That's
the
reason
behind
this
proposed
subdivision,
so
this
map
shows
the
zoning
and
they're
both
within
the
zoning
district
r1.
E
I
believe
the
intention
is
to
sell
that
outlet
to
the
country
club
again
to
address
any
sort
of
any
property
disturbance,
issues
between
the
country
club
and
the
pro
and
the
single-family
property
and
analysis
conducted
by
staff
showed
that-
and
you
can
see
here
well
sorry,
if
there
wasn't
this
box
here.
Sorry
about
that
the
analysis
performed
by
staff
regarding
the
preliminary
plat
showed
that
there
were
well
all
the
criteria
were
met.
So
there
were
no
conflicts
with
the
comp
plan.
No
conflicts
with
city
code
provisions
and
you
can
read
the
rest.
E
F
B
Thanks,
mr
chair
question
is:
is
this
a
unique
circumstance
or
have
we
had
some
historical
situations
like
this
in
the
past,
with
this
type
of
property?
Just
thinking
is
this
unique
in
it
in
its
character?
Are
there
other
other
types
of
lots
that
could
potentially
or
have
needed
this
split
or
would
potentially
need
this
split
going
forward.
E
Chair,
commissioner,
I'm
not
I'm
not
personally
aware
of
what
other
lots
may
exhibit
this
characteristic
or
have
this
relationship
with
a
use
like
the
country
club.
If
there's
anything
that
can
be
added,
it
would
probably
have
to
be
by
the
planning
manager.
But
I'm
not
aware
of
any
other
examples
that
reflect
this.
A
G
H
A
C
H
C
H
A
A
J
A
A
K
Thank
you,
chair
planning,
commission
good
evening
yeah,
so
this
will
be
new
to
commissioner
mcgovern,
but
I
think
everyone
else
might
remember
the
air
apartments
development
it's
under
construction.
It
has
been
under
construction
for
some
time
and
actually
a
number
of
the
units
have
been
leased,
so
it's
well
underway.
K
This
is
part
of
the
american
square
planned
development,
and
that
is
a
previously
approved,
three-phase
development.
This
phase
was
originally
identified
as
phase
three,
but
it
was
first
to
be
implemented.
Other
phases
you
can
see
on
the
far
east
there's
a
surface
parking
lot,
that's
known
as
the
arter
apartments
it
it's
looking
like.
That's
gonna
be
moving
forward
very
soon
and
then
on
the
south
portion
of
the
site.
Another
housing
development,
workforce,
housing,
development
that
is
undetermined
timeline.
K
But
again
you
can
see
in
the
on
that
corner.
You
see
the
air
hotel
and
apartments,
and
that's
where
the
crown
plaza
is
located.
Obviously
a
lot
going
on
on
the
floor
plan
here.
But
you
know
as
part
of
the
application
they
submitted
the
latest
and
greatest
floor
plans
with
the
proposed
modifications,
but
I
wanted
to
include
that
because
it
did
show
a
lot
of
the
amenities
that
that
are
included
as
part
of
this
development.
K
Not
only
do
you
have
a
restaurant
that's
existing
today,
but
then
there's
also
the
application
probably
would
be
able
to
go
into
more
detail,
but
high
amenity
level
between
game
room.
You
can
see
the
bike
room
on
the
upper
left
as
well
as
a
lot
of
space.
On
the
second
floor,
which
was
a
lot
of
banquet
space
that
was
being
converted
to
common
amenity
space,
you
can
see
on
this
on
the
second
floor
again,
there's
a
some
amenity
space
and
then
you
can
see
the
storage
lockers
throughout
a
number
of
rooms.
K
So
again,
we're
talk,
we're
right
on
the
corner
of
34th
and
american
and
what
you're
seeing
here
is
an
outdoor
patio
with
some
obviously
lots
of
seating,
fireplace
grills
and
then
a
dog
run,
and
so
compare
a
an
amenity
space
like
this.
That
brings
people
to
the
outdoors
along
the
street
compared
to
what's
there
today,
there's
nothing
there
today.
So
we
thought
this
was
a
positive
change
and
they
this
has
been
approved
and
I
think
we'll
be
moving
forward
pretty
pretty
shortly.
K
K
This
is
a
floor
plan
or
a
unit
plan
view
of
the
left,
a
micro
unit,
357
square
feet.
The
blue
is
the
livable
space
and
then
to
the
right,
a
code
complying
445
square
foot
studio
unit.
So
there
was
a
significant,
affordable
component
to
this
development
without
any
city
incentives.
So
there
wasn't
a
tiff
ask
it
was.
It
was
proposed
with
a
number
of
affordable
units
and
even
though
the
total
number
of
units
would
be
reduced
to
185,
the
number
of
affordable
units
is
not
changing.
K
It
still
maintained
44,
affordable
units
between
33
units
of
affordable
to
those
making
50
area,
media
income
and
11
at
60.
Those
are
the
same
totals
that
were
approved
as
part
of
the
development
last
year
with
more
residential
units
than
what
they're
proposing
now
there
was
also
a
significant
parking
reduction.
Part
of
that
was
included
in
our
opportunity.
Housing
ordinance
based
on
the
level
of
affordability.
K
But
nonetheless,
the
total
requirement,
based
on
the
development
that's
being
proposed,
is
80
stalls
less
than
it
was
last
year,
but
they
would
still
be
providing
the
same
number
of
stalls
for
the
supply.
So
the
essentially
the
effect
is
they're
seeking
less
of
a
deviation
than
what
they
were
approved
for
last
year.
K
The
entirety
of
the
parking
supply
is
met
in
an
existing
parking
structure.
So
you
can
see
this
image,
you
see
the
hotel
to
the
right
and
then
the
parking
structure
to
the
left,
that's
where
all
the
stalls
are
being
supplied,
and
this
is
and
when
it
comes
to
enclosed
parking,
the
city
does
have
an
enclosed
parking
requirement.
K
K
K
K
Chair,
commissioner,
so
enclosed
essentially
is
covered,
not
necessarily
underground
sure,
but
so
you
can
have.
You
could
have
a
structured
stall
that
is
open
air.
So
essentially,
what
you
see
on
the
screen
that
it's
not
and
those
are
not
enclosed
stalls.
The
enclosed
stalls
are
the
stalls
you
cannot
see
because
there's
you
know
there
can't
get
rained
on
essentially
or
snowed
on
so.
K
Sure
chair,
you
know
what
the
that's
a
good
question,
especially
because
the
the
applicant
would
be
retaining
more
hotel
rooms,
but
what
we've
heard
is
that
the
actual
demand
on
this
hotel
is
very
low
in
terms
of
parking
need,
a
lot
of
folks
to
and
from
the
airport.
In
fact,
they
have
agreements
with
airlines
for
rooms
and
those
those
those
users
don't
need
stalls,
and
so
the
the
actual
usage
in
this
development
is
quite
low
from
a
parking.
H
H
All
of
that,
I
think
I'd
just
like
to
reiterate
that
we're
not
asking
for
any
reduction
in
any
of
the
affordable
provisions,
and
so
I
just
want
to
kind
of
reiterate
and
hammer
that
home
that
we're
here
for
business
purposes,
and
this
isn't
there's
no
ulterior
motives
on
the
affordable
side,
we're
still
planning
to
so
now
we
went
from
20
affordable
to
mathematically,
I
suppose
that's
23
24,
affordable,
and
so
that
was
the
only
piece
I
wanted
to
hammer
home.
I
know
you
touched
on
it.
That
was
great.
A
H
H
It
works
out
really
well.
I
think
everything
we
did
expected
that
we
were
in
here
speaking
about
a
year
ago,
is
coming
to
fruition
and
the
other
piece
that
we
have
is
is
we
took
a
hotel
that,
thanks
to
everyone's
help
here,
we
didn't
suffer
some
of
the
same
fates
that
the
other
really
big
boxes
in
bloomington
suffered
and
or
are
suffering,
and
we
have
a
vibrant
building
right
now
we
have
yeah,
we've
moved
in.
H
A
Thank
you
one
other
question
again.
This
is
more
for
us
to
understand.
At
least
for
me
to
understand.
Is
we
have
we
moved
into
something
that
wasn't?
Typically
in
our
code,
there
was
the
it
was
like
the
350
and
the
445.
Are
you
seeing
a
difference
in
people
being
drawn
still
to
the
larger
one
or
are
the
smaller
ones,
leasing
up
as
well.
H
Again,
that's
all
the
way
down
to
price
sensitivity.
I
mean
the
idea
behind
those
small
ones.
Were
it
provided
a
good
livable
space,
especially
for
those
that
you
know
make
have
been
coming
out
of
220
square
feet
square
feet
shared
with
a
dorm
partner
at
school.
You
come
out
and
350
to
yourself
feels
spacious
for
those
of
us
coming
out
of
our
houses,
perhaps
not
so
much,
but
for
the
price
sensitive
individual.
There
is
a
significant
demand
for
that
I
mean
at
the
end
of
the
day.
H
A
C
I
A
A
L
A
K
K
It
actually
is
a
little
more
complicated
of
a
question,
because
even
the
units
that
are
technically
market
rate
still
might
meet
a
certain
affordability
threshold,
especially
with
the
micro
units
they're,
just
they're
small.
So
you
you
can
only
you
can
only
get
so
much
per
square
foot
on
a
small
unit
and
the
result
is
it's
still
relatively
affordable.
Even
though
it's
market
rate.
F
Thanks,
mr
chair,
you
know
when
this
first
came
before
us
about
a
year
ago.
I
was
a
little
anxious
about
it.
You
know
we're
a
hospitality
driven
city.
Are
we
really
ready
to
take
away
from
our
hotels
and
and
what's
that
going
to
do
to
us
and
hearing
the
report
from
mr
keating,
I
think
I'm
very
satisfied
with
the
way
this
has
gone.
I'm
glad
to
hear
we
have
a
vibrant
neighborhood.
Adding
more
people
to
the
neighborhood
is
always
good
as
we
try
to
bring
service
amenities,
restaurants,
etc.
F
I
I
I
think
that
that
is
not
always
not
an
easy
thing
to
do
via
your
pro
forma,
and
I
appreciate
the
fact
that
that
that
was
that
remained
because
that
50
ami
those
50
ami
units
in
the
city
of
bloomington
are
very
much
needed,
and
so
33
of
them
is
excellent
and,
just
like
commissioner
cookton
said
a
great
option
and
a
vibrant
option
for
our
community.
So
I'm
in
support.
A
I
will
say
that
at
first
I
was
concerned
about
adding
in
heading
back
40
hotel
rooms
being
that
the
parking
was
that
the
since
the
analysis
was
that
close
to
the
line,
but
then
hearing
the
applicant
and
I
think,
staff
talk
about
the
profile
of
the
hotel
guest
and
not
being
a
car
heavy
population
of
hotel
guests,
I'm
more
comfortable
with
the
parking
situation
there.
So
I
don't
have
any
concerns
here.
Other
discussion.
A
C
A
A
K
Thank
you
chair.
We
are
moving
across
the
street
to
park
and
fly
and
that's
at
3700
and
3750
american
boulevard,
east
and
again.
This
is
this
is
a
development
that
you
know
you've
seen
a
few
times
in
the
past
several
years,
but
the
remote
airport
parking
itself
has
existed
on
the
site
for
over
30
years
and
again
so
we're
we're
literally
across
the
street.
K
K
and
3700,
is
a
surface
parking
lot
and
3750
is
a
structured.
Both
are
operate
under
park
and
fly,
but
3750
is
the
the
structured
parking
element
and
just
another
image
to
get
to
give
you
a
feel
of
of
the
overall
site,
and
you
can
see
it's
pretty
full
and-
and
I
think
it's
that's
that's
pretty
representative
of
the
conditions
out
there
today.
They
certainly
took
a
hit
during
the
pandemic,
but
I
think
from
a
parking
demand
perspective.
Things
have
recovered
for
these
this
type
of
business.
K
So
over
time
the
the
remote
airport
parking
would
be
reduced
with
each
subsequent
phase
and
phase,
one
which
is
on
the
southwest
corner,
received
final
development
plan
approval,
and
so
what
we've
been
trying
to
work
towards
is
to
get
phase
one
underway
under
construction,
another
image
of
phase
one,
and
then
you
can
see
just
the
outlines.
The
three-dimensional
outlines
of
the
phases
two
three
and
four
on
this
site.
K
And
phase
one
is
a
really
good.
Looking
building
it's
a
it's,
a
project
that
we
were
very
supportive
of,
and
it
got
really
close
to
starting
construction.
I
would
say,
but
ultimately
I
think
the
we'll
let
the
applicant
provide
more
detail,
but
it
it
really
has
become
a
cost
concern,
something
that
we
hear
quite
a
bit
in
the
office.
But
again
we're
still
hopeful
that
phase
one
moves
forward-
and
you
know
hopefully
in
the
near
in
the
near
future,
but
I
I
do
want
to
check
in
on
the
development
milestones.
K
So
in
recent
approvals,
the
interim
use
permits
were
subject
to
developed
milestones,
so
the
interview
sperms
were
approved,
but
there
was
these
other
requirements
that
were
attached
to
that
approval
and
the
applicant
has
met
most
of
those.
There
was
really
a
fly,
a
number
of
milestones
that
they
met,
and
I
just
included
the
last
few
on
the
sl
on
the
slide
here,
but
in
june
of
last
year
they
needed
to
submit
up
for
a
building
permit,
essentially
the
full
set
of
construction
documents
for
this
phase.
K
K
We
have
the
city
code,
has
a
time
limit
on
approvals
and
so
final
development
plan
plans
have
a
two-year
approval
window
and
they
have
the
ability
to
apply
for
a
one-year
extension,
and
so
the
applicant
had
applied
for
that
one-year
extension
and
it
was
approved.
So
the
the
final
development
plan
approval
expires
in
april
of
next
year,
and
so
the
the
applicant
has
communicated
that
they
don't
believe
they're
going
to
meet
that,
and
so
ultimately
that
would
require
them
to
resubmit
for
final
development.
K
K
I
Thank
you,
chair,
planner
centenario.
Can
you
go
back
just
one
slide
here,
I'm
wondering
if
you
give
us
a
little
bit
more
information
about
what
a
status
update
entails.
There's
quite
a
lot
of
time
between
february
and
october,
and
I'm
assuming
you'll
probably
will
have
a
status
update
more
often
than
between
february
and
october.
But
I'm
curious,
you
know:
what's
are
there
certain
things
that
you
would
be
looking
for
or
what
does
that
mean.
K
Certainly
chair,
commissioner
yeah,
you
know
I'll
go
back
to
the
the
slide,
that's
not
very
readable,
which
gives
us
a
little
more
detail
on
what
that
means,
but
essentially
the
status
update
with
the
resubmittal
and
going
through
a
reapproval
process.
Assuming
that
the
project
is
reapproved
that
you
know
usually
is
a
eight
nine,
maybe
ten
week
process
and
so
we're
moving
into
the
spring.
And
then,
throughout
the
summer
the
applicants
could
be
working
on
pricing.
A
D
C
D
K
K
So
about
two
years
from
now.
That
being
said,
that
approval
is
still
has
these
development
milestones
these
these
stipulations
that
have
to
be
met,
and
if
they
aren't
met,
they
are
in
default
of
the
inner
muse
permit
and
we
could
go
through
a
process
of
revocation,
but
the
applicant
is
trying
to
be.
D
Thank
you.
I
was
trying
to
connect
the
dots
in
terms
of
like,
and
I
appreciate,
the
very
cleaned
summary
you
presented
here.
I
was
trying
to
connect
the
dots
in
terms
of
like
the
current
interim
use,
permit
tied
to
commencement
of
phase
one
or
not.
If
phase
one
is
still
in
question
and
it's
being
extended
to
2024
and
2024
means
the
interim
use,
permit
is
expiring.
So
then,
what
we're
proving
today,
if
I'm
assuming
correctly,
is
we're
both
extending
the
interim
use
permit
or
I
maybe
I
missed
the.
I
apologize
sure.
K
What
you
presented
yeah,
no,
I
thank
you,
commissioner.
I
think
I
could
have
been
more
clear
on
what
what
they're
asking
for
the
request
is
for
a
new
interim
use
permit,
so
this
would
this
would
supersede
what
was
established
essentially
the
last
time
they
went
through
the
commission
council
last
year
and
create
a
new
interviews
permit
with
these
new
stipulations
that
are
on
the
screen
before
you.
F
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
mr
cincinnario
on
the
june
30th
2024
date,
the
review
of
the
port
authority
administrator.
Can
you
just
provide
a
little
more
information
on
on
what
that
is,
and
I
know
there's
something
in
the
staff
report
about
automatic
extensions
if
it
doesn't
meet
the
criteria
that's
been
laid
out
here.
Can
you
just
provide
us
a
little
more
information
there.
K
Sure
chair,
commissioner,
I
I
hope
it
can
provide
a
lot.
You
know
there
is
some
separation
between
planning
staff
and
port
authority
and
how
they
operate
their
role
and
how
the
plane
division
operates
our
role.
So
we
do
not
the
planning
staff.
We
do
not
get
very
involved
in
like
contract
negotiations,
especially
if
there's
like
a
city
subsidy,
as
as
there
would
be
as
part
of
this
project.
K
So
unfortunately
I
don't
know
a
lot
of
the
the
details
on
financing.
We'd
have
to
rely
on
the
applicant
to
explain
that
for
us
tonight,
but
they're
as
part
of
the
negotiations
for
for
phase
one.
There
were
agreements
that
were
established
and
certain
return
thresholds
and
what
we
wanted
to
incorporate
is
at
least
some
port
authority
review.
Moving
forward
on.
K
You
know
not
just
you
know,
taking
the
applicant's
word
for
it,
but
then
a
city
port
authority
staff,
member,
reviewing
the
performer
reviewing
the
financing
structure
and
making
a
determination
if
they
feel
like
this
return
is
being
met.
If
it
is,
the
expectation
is
that
they
move
forward
with
construction.
K
Chair
commissioner
yeah
there
there's
a
ongoing
review.
The
port
authority
is
part
of
subsidy
package.
They
have
a
process
that
they
have
to
go
through
through
the
port
authority
board,
I
believe
and
then
through
city
council.
So
that's
not
something
that
commission,
I
think
is,
is
totally
involved
with.
But
there
is
a
lot
of
ongoing
back
and
forth
between
the
applicant
and
the
port
authority
moving
forward
and
in
the
past.
A
B
Thanks
chair,
my
question
is
really
around
the
timeline
and
and
really
just
making
sure
I've
got
the
timeline
framed
correctly
in
my
my
brain
so
the
first
time
we
we
saw
as
a
commission,
this
application
was
in
2019
for
a
five
year.
Interim
use.
Permit
2019,
we
talked
about
part
of
the
interim
use.
Permit
was
to
have
phase
one
start:
development
in
2021.
B
B
A
G
G
Also
with
me
this,
if
this
evening,
to
answer
questions
that
I
can
address
is
kristen
muir
she's,
the
managing
partner
of
the
owner
owner
of
the
the
two
sites,
rosa
development,
and
I
want
to
say
a
lot
of
great
questions.
This
has
been
a
long
run
up
and
we
all
would
prefer
that
we,
this
project
is
under
construction.
G
In
fact,
kristen
will
tell
you.
She
worked
probably
non-stop
from
last
fall
until
june
to
get
a
permit
ready
to
get
financing
ready.
Appraisals
all
had
to
be
updated.
Pricing
had
to
be
updated.
Work
on
a
guaranteed
maximum
price
with
weiss
builders
was
very
close
to
being
signed.
In
fact,
we
all
kind
of
cheered.
There
was
a
date
in
late
april
where
it
was
a
go
and
we
we
actually
sent
a
communication
to
city
staff
and
said
good
news.
G
The
project
is
a
go
the
very
next
week
with
price
escalation,
the
market
volatility
financing
conditions.
The
project
had
to
be
put
on
hold
it
increased
in
one
week,
one
million
dollars
that
was
on
top
of
a
six
million
dollar
increase
from
the
prior
year.
So,
each
year
my
client
during
kova
during
a
pandemic,
has
worked
diligently
with
city
staff
and
and
both
the
port
authority
staff
and
your
planning
staff
have
worked
many
many
hours
on
this
project
and
we're
grateful.
G
But,
having
worked
through
all
of
the
various
issues
we
get
to,
the
point
of
you
know
starting
construction,
and
it
can't
be
done
because
you
can't
you
can't
keep
increasing
the
cost
and
passing
on
risk
and
there's
been
a
a
number
of
developers
will
tell
you,
there's
been
a
risk
shift
in
the
market.
The
contractors
don't
want
to
guarantee
a
maximum
price
for
more
than
a
few
minutes.
G
Literally
I
mean
days
and
and
they're
and
they're
basically
saying
you
know,
we've
got
to
have
escalators,
we've
got
to
have
additional,
so
it's
it's
a
very
difficult
time.
There's
a
there's,
a
just
a
snapshot
in
the
finance
and
commerce
article
that
was
included
with
your
packets.
I
could
probably
give
you
hundreds
of
those
articles.
G
It's
it's
a
very
difficult
time
to
move
forward
and
yet
we're
seeing
the
the
fed
increased
the
cost
of
financing.
So
one
of
the
reasons
you
see
for
the
first
time
in
these
milestones,
financing
considerations
is
we
wanted
to
make
sure
there
was
a
safety
valve
within
these
milestones
that
recognizes
that
we
can't
control
the
cost
of
money.
We
can't
control
the
cost
of
lumber.
We
can't
control
the
cost
of
steel.
G
G
So
I
want
to
explain
a
little
bit
why
the
five
years,
which
is
really
three
and
that's,
why
it's
confusing
what
we
didn't
want
to
do
was
commit
to
a
20,
24
construction
start
and
then
immediately
have
the
iup
expire,
because
that
would
then
take
the
the
gas
out
of
phase
two.
If
you
will
phase
two
just
like
phase
one
will
likely
be
funded
from
the
proceeds
of
this
remote
airport
parking.
So
that's
the
good
news.
We
have
a
viable
holding
use,
one
that
the
planner
centenario
said.
You
know
appears
to
be
full
again.
G
So
all
of
the
pursuit
costs,
those
two
million
dollars
of
pursuit
costs
and
entitlement
costs
were
funded
by
the
owners
for
going
what
they
would
normally
receive
from
the
parking
operations
and
putting
that
into
the
development,
and
we
have
that
opportunity
again
to
do
that
with
phase
two,
but
we
need
to
get
phase
one
underway,
so
it
isn't
a
lack
of
commitment.
In
fact,
my
client
has
run
this
race
three
times
once
in
2020
once
in
21
and
again
in
2022,
and
she
wouldn't
do
that
and
her
team
wouldn't
do
that.
G
If
they
were
just
you
know
not
expecting
to
build,
you
wouldn't
spend
2
million
dollars
on
a
project,
you're
you're
not
intending
to
build.
So
the
commitment
is
there
that
the
design
is
beautiful,
as
staff
has
noted
and
you
as
commissioners
have
noted
a
lot
of
great
amenities,
a
really
great
project
in
the
right
location.
We
just
need
the
market
to
settle
down,
and-
and
frankly,
you
know-
I'm
not
an
economist,
but
that's
what
the
fed
is
intending
with
these
interest
rate
increases.
G
Those
are
things
we
we
can't
control,
and
so
the
commitment
is
the
the
project
will
be
built
when
it
can
be
built,
and
this
this
set
of
approvals-
and
this
set
of
milestones,
which
were
negotiated
again
back
and
forth,
to
get
to
a
place
that
that
made
sense
and
would
be
reasonable,
can
make
that
happen
and
and
we
we
fully
believe
it
will
happen-
appreciate
your
indulgence.
It's
been
many
meetings
before
you.
G
F
Mr
chair
thanks,
mr
griffith,
within
a
couple
of
blocks
of
here,
there
are
two
other
apartment
buildings
going
up
same
construction
site.
Can
you
help
me
understand?
Is
there
something
unique
to
this
project
that
makes
it
less
financially
feasible
than
the
other
two?
I
know
you
don't
have
the
financials
of
those,
but
perhaps
just
against
the
average
project.
Is
there
something
unique
here
that
makes
this
less
financially
feasible.
G
Mr
chair
commissioners,
there
are
a
couple
of
things
that
I
know
of
there.
There
are
obviously
things
that
I
don't
know
of,
because
I
I
don't
have
their
pro
formas
and
I
don't
you
know
I
don't
know
how
they
stack
their
financing,
it's
very
complicated
in
these
days.
One
thing
is
this:
is
a
housing
tiff?
G
I
think
it's
bloomington
central
station
is
the
official
name
we're
done
under
a
redevelopment
tiff
and
so
the
there's
a
completely
different
formula
for
the
amount
of
affordable
housing
and
and
some
of
the
considerations
there.
The
other
thing
is
our
client.
My
client
really
pushed
the
the
design,
the
amenities
and
and
still
provides
20
percent
affordable
using
that
housing
tif
district.
G
G
It
wouldn't
be
prudent
for
this
this
project
to
go
forward
to
immediately
be
in
a
position
where
it
could
be
foreclosed
because
it
it
has
inadequate
revenue
streams.
So
I
I
can't
comment
on
the
pr.
I
do
know
that
three
projects
that
I'm
working
on
have
all
gone
on
hold
in
the
last
six
months,
which
is
rather
disappointing.
G
I
know
all
of
those
applicants
and
they're,
not
all
in
bloomington,
but
all
those
applicants
would
prefer
to
be
building
and
and
have
locked
in
at
rates.
You
know
lower
than
we're
looking
at
now,
so
some
projects
are
going
forward.
Many
are
being
put
on
hold
it's
not
it's
not
just
one
or
two:
it's
it's!
A
it's!
A
market
wide
concern.
It's
a
nationwide
concern
and
some
of
it's
intentional.
A
L
L
Ahead
there
we
go.
Is
there
an
alternative
solution
if
this
project
doesn't
pan
out?
For
you
I
mean
I've
really,
you
know
spent
a
lot
of
time
and
effort
trying
to
get
it.
I
think
that
you
know
I
mean
the
obvious
solution.
Is
you
know
it
has
a
holding
use
which
is
basically
as
park
and
fly
if,
if
this
doesn't
pan
out,
I
mean,
I
think
that
I
think
in
that
area,
that
multifamily
makes
the
most
sense.
You
know
I
don't
know
exactly.
L
If
I'd
really
want
to
be
building
office,
there
seems
to
be
a
variety
of
hotels
already
there.
So
I
don't
really
think
of
any
other
uses
off
the
top
of
my
head.
I
think
most
multifamily
would
be
the
best
use
or
you
know
just
keeping
it
as
park
and
fly
until
that
makes
sense.
Unless
you
know,
I
think
it's
kind
of
hard
to
fit
other
uses
in
there
and
our
market
studies
kind
of
supported
that
when
we
did
that
and
thank
you
and
I
totally
agree
the
20
affordability,
affordability.
L
Is
that
what
you're
going
to
base
it
on?
Because
in
bloomington
we
struggle
with
having
affordable
housing
for
many
families.
Yes,
we
did
base
it
on
and
we
did
go
through
and
designate
the
units
in
the
plan,
and
that
was
all
within
our
set
of
construction
documents.
So,
yes,
there
is
the
affordable
units
and
they're
all
designated,
and
you
know
mike
and
glenn
helped
with
that.
All
that.
So
thank
you.
Yeah,
that's
included.
A
A
A
F
Mr
chair,
thank
you.
I'd
like
to
start
just
with
a
couple
of
further
questions
for
staff.
Can
you
walk
me
through,
so
we
are
recommending
body
tonight,
it'll
go
to
city
council,
but
so
what
happens
if
we
recommend
denial
and
ultimately
the
city
council
recommends
denial,
this
application,
what
happens.
K
K
You
know
we
we
always
give
property
owners
and
applicants
a
time
to
cure
the
issue.
You
know
we,
the
city
does
not
immediately
go
to
fines
or
more
drastic
measures,
so
it
would
really
be
working
with
the
city's
legal
staff
and
trying
to
communicate
with
the
applicant
on
what
the
next
steps
are.
But
we
don't
you
know
we
we
wouldn't
cross
that
bridge
until
we
get
to
it.
F
K
K
I
Thank
you
chair.
I
do
have
a
question
for
planner
centenario
kind
of
as
a
follow-up
to
commissioner
cooktons.
Has
there
any
been
any
precedent
in
development
milestones
where
we
have?
If
this
then
we
hold
off
or
if
that
we
hold
off?
Is
that
something
that
we
I
mean?
I'm
sure
this
isn't
a
common
occurrence
where
we're
turning
a
park
and
fly
into
an
apartment
building,
but
do
have
we
used
that
tool
in
the
past.
K
K
The
development
milestones
that
we
had
previously
looked
at
and
were
approved,
didn't
didn't
end
up
leading
to
construction
of
phase
one,
and
so
we
tried
to
think
of
what
what
an
alternative
structure
might
look
like
and
and
that's-
and
this
is
where
we
ended
up,
but
I'm
glad
I'm
not
aware
of
anything.
That's
been
structured
like
this
in
the
city.
K
Chair,
commissioner,
I
think
we
will
be
just
discussing
that
thoroughly.
In
the
future
frank,
you
know,
I
I
think
if-
and
this
is
just
me
pontificating,
but
I
think
if
the
pandemic
didn't
happen,
phase
one
would
be
nearing
completion
right
now,
and
maybe
we
would
think
that
this
structure
was
wildly
successful,
but
that's
not
that's
not
the
experience
that
we
had.
K
I
Can
be
met
and
the
project
can
be
moved
forward.
So
looking
at
these
development
milestones
and
the
the
ability
to
pull
back
without
coming
back
to
the
commission
going
through
the
whole
process,
seeing
an
extension,
it
seems
like
this
makes
a
lot
of
sense
in
my
opinion,
and
and
also
helps
because
I
I
do
believe
that
you
know
the
pandemic
is
not
over.
I
F
The
first
thing
is:
sometimes
you
read
through
this
and
you
feel
like
you:
don't
have
a
choice,
especially
when
the
alternative
given
as
well
we're
going
to
have
to
revoke
and
and
do
enforcement
actions
and
all
those
other
things.
But
I
had
to
remind
myself,
as
I
was
reviewing
this
application,
that
we
do
have
a
choice.
This
is
not
an
automatic
approval
and
we
need
to
look
at
this
critically
and
we
may
find
it's
worth
recommending
approval
and
we
may
not
find
it's
worth
recommending
approval.
F
One
of
the
things
that
stands
out
most
to
me
is:
I
live
nearby
and
I
see
every
day
the
construction
at
bloomington
central
station.
A
very
large
project
across
the
street
is
another
five
on
podium
project
that
had
some
pretty
significant
challenges
of
its
own
with
soil
retained,
edges
right
on
the
bluff,
it's
pretty
expensive,
non-amenity
providing
costs.
What
do
you
associate
with
that
project?
F
There
hasn't
been
enough
explained
to
me
that
this
is
extraordinarily
burdensome
from
a
financial
standpoint
as
compared
to
other
projects.
I
just
find
it
really
hard
to
say
that
this
project
can
pencil
out
when
there's
two
others
going
up
within
three
blocks,
that
are
the
exact
same
construction
type.
Maybe
there's
a
good
reason
and
I'm
just
not
smart
enough
to
know
it
hasn't
been
presented
to
me,
but
my
recommendation
for
staff
would
be
to
if,
if
there's
more
of
a
reason
than
I
understand
to
make
that
more
clear
to
council.
F
F
F
K
F
Reason
to
do
it
two
years
early.
If,
if
nothing
else,
we
can
wait.
There's
no
reason
to
do
today
and
tied
with
that
is
you
know
all
the
milestone
dates
that
we're
seeing
in
front
of
us-
and
I
don't
know-
we've
seen
schedules
like
this
so
many
times
and
at
a
certain
point
the
dates
just
start
to
feel
less
and
less
serious
and
having
a
hard
time
rectifying
that
this
is
the
time
like
these
dates
are
for
sure
have
a
hard
time
with
it.
I
do
because
we've
seen
it
so
many
times.
F
I
think
of
this
a
little
bit
as
an
there's,
an
agreement
happening
here
and
it's
mostly
through
the
applicant
and
the
port
which
we
don't
see,
but
there's
some.
You
know
you
give
us
something.
We
give
you
something
happening
here
and
that's
kind
of
the
ports
thing.
That's
not
us
our
thing,
but
when
I
look
at
these
revisions,
I
don't
think
the
city
is
getting
anything
in
return.
F
If
we
were
saying
okay,
we'll
extend
the
dates,
but
we're
going
to
get
if
we
were
hearing
okay,
we're
going
to
give
you
a
12
story
building
instead
of
a
five-story
building
that
would
be
more
interesting
or
if,
if
there
was
something
else
that
we
were
getting
in
return,
but
all
I
see
us
getting
in
return
is
more
airport
parking,
which
I
don't
think
I
mean.
That's,
that's
not
just
a
zero,
that's
a
less
than
zero!
That's
a
negative
for
the
city.
F
I
have
one
other
thought
about
the
port
administrator
review,
but
I'm
going
to
save
that
I'm
going
to
wrap
this
kind
of
all
of
those
things
I
just
talked
about.
It
comes
down
to
the
findings.
Mr
centenario,
I
should
have
asked
you
sooner:
do
you
have
the
findings
in
front
of
you
that
you
could
show
up?
I
apologize,
but
we
have
findings
we
need
to
make,
and
I
have
a
hard
time
making
the
findings
finding
number
one
is
that
the
proposed
application
will
not
delay
permanent
development
of
the
site.
F
I
know
you
could
look
at
this
from
a
long-term
view
standpoint,
but
if
I'm
reading
that
in
plain
speak,
the
proposed
application
will
not
delay
permanent
delay
of
the
site,
I
cannot
make
required
finding
number
one
finding
required.
Finding
number
two
says
the
proposed
use
is
not
in
conflict
with
any
adopted
district
plan.
F
I
can't
make
required
finding
number
two
required
finding
number
three
says:
the
proposed
use
will
not
be
in
conflict
with
any
of
the
provisions
of
the
city
code
on
an
ongoing
basis
and
it's
kind
of
the
same
thing
as
proposed
finding
or
required
finding
number
two.
The
this
is
owned.
Hxr
hxr
district
restricts
remote
airport
parking
to
be
an
interim
use
within
the
district.
F
Again
to
me,
that's
pretty
clear.
I
can't
make
required
finding
number
three
either
so
with
all
of
those
things
combined,
I
don't
like
the
alternative.
I
don't
like
having
to
possibly
take
enforcement
actions.
I
don't.
I
wish
this
project
would
pencil
out
better
for
the
applicant,
but
I
can't
make
the
findings
and
I
cannot
support
this
application
tonight.
B
Thanks
chair,
I
always
struggle
going
after
commissioner
cookton
because
he's
so
eloquent
in
his
in
his
findings
and-
and
I
agree
with
you
and
almost
every
point
that
you
made
we've
seen
this
application
many
times
and
the
dates
keep
changing
and
I
believe
or
feel
that
the
dates
are
starting
to
lose
their
relevance.
I
remember
back
in
2019.
I
think
it
was
commissioner
roman
said:
don't
come
back
to
us
again,
not
to
put
words
in
your
mouth.
I
apologize,
or
maybe
I
said
it.
B
This
is
the
last
one
and
for
the
iup
and
so
looking
at
this
proposal
in
front
of
us.
The
piece
that
sticks
to
me
is
the
2027
date.
I
do
not
feel
that
2027
is
appropriate
for
rival
airport
parking.
The
2024
date
is
one
that
we
stuck
with
and-
and
I
feel
like-
that's
that's
my
stick
in
the
mud
of
making
sure
that
development
happens
here.
If
we
could
go
back
to
the
findings
as
well
as
commissioner
cookton
was
going
through
there.
B
Number
five
is
one
that
I
can't
find
as
well.
Is
that
the
date
or
event
that
will
terminate
the
use
has
been
identified
with
certainty?
There's
no
certainty
here
on
dates.
It's
it's
changed
so
many
times,
so
that
that's
another
one
that
I
I
would
agree
with
you
on
that
statement.
So
I
appreciate
that
we
are
in
times
that
are
uncertain.
Costs
have
gone
up.
B
I
understand
that
financing
is
trouble
for
and
and
is
challenging,
but
I
also
see
that
this
property
has
been
used
for
the
sole
purpose
of
airport
parking
for
over
30
years.
It's
essentially
a
cash
making
business.
I
mean
it's,
it's
profitable,
there's
a
very
low
cost
and
it's
time
it's
time
for
us
to
do
development
with
certainty.
D
Thank
you
chair.
I
recognize
the
challenges
I'm
actually
in
support
of
the
application
as
proposed.
I
feel
like
you
know.
While
I
recognize
the
concerns
that
are
mentioned
here
by
my
colleagues
here,
I
think
commissioner
mcgraw,
I
apologize,
I'm
killing
your
last
name
here.
You
know
you
asked
the
question
to
the
applicant,
you
know
what
would
be
the
alternative
and
I
recognize
the
parking
lot
has
been
there.
So
if
this
app,
you
know
there
are
hotels
in
the
area.
D
There
are,
you
know
not
a
lot
of
housing
in
that
area.
So
I
think
bringing
a
new
use
and
working
toward
ensuring
a
new
use
in
that
area
develops
would
be
something
that
I
would
be
interested
denying.
This
application
only
means
that
the
applicant
can
come
back
and
reapply
for
a
new
application
with
a
new.
You
know
with
a
new
timeline.
You
know
the
parking
lot
will
still
be.
There
will
still
be
there,
so
you
know
what
would
be
the
alternative.
You
know
other
than
timing
right
now.
D
I
do
find
that
you
know
we
want
to
see
development
happen,
but
you
cannot
make
development
happen.
If
you're,
not
your
numbers
are
not
aligning,
you
know,
how
do
you
break
ground
if
you're
not
sure
your
lumber
is
going
to
be
there?
So
while
we
have
this
desire,
I
think
recognizing
the
challenges
that
come
with
development
is
something
unique.
I
feel
like
even
though
2020
to
2021
during
covet
times.
D
You
know
that's
when
we
were
most
hit,
but
the
economy
is
still
struggling.
So
just
recognizing
that-
and
I
feel
like
the
applicant
has
stuck
with
it.
They've
invested
some
of
their
own
money
to
continue
to
make
this
project
happen.
For
me,
as
I
hear
the
concerns,
I'm
I'm
just
looking
back
to
what
happens
to
the
project.
D
D
If
we,
if
we
want
to
go
one
by
one,
the
findings
and
kind
of
discuss,
you
know,
why
is
it
not
being
met?
The
proposed
user
will
not
delay
the
permanent
development
of
the
site.
Technically
you
know,
while
I
see
some
of
this,
my
colleagues
here
are
hesitant
about
the
dates
being
able
to
move,
but
interim
use
itself
kind
of
gives
them
that
leverage
where
they
have
within
five
five
new
more
years
to
kind
of
play
around
with
their
starting
of
their
timeline.
D
D
For
the
commission
to
say,
if
you're
not
starting
in
2024,
then
we
are
not
going
to
allow
for
additional
approvals,
but
it
makes
no
sense
for
us
to
put
our
foot
down
and
say
we're
not
going
to
allow
development
here
because
you've
been
dragging
your
feet.
So
I
don't
want
to
see
that
attitude
coming
from
the
commission
to
the
extent
where
we
can
we
have.
I
have
no
financial
backgrounds.
D
If
you,
you
can
put
a
statement
in
front
of
me
and
I'm
like
what
are
you
talking
about
so
for
if
you're,
if
you
have
financial
backgrounds
and
if
you've
seen
their
performance,
then
you
can
say
I
know
you
have
the
financing
for
for
you
to
break
ground
in
phase
one.
Why
not
do
it?
We
haven't
seen
that
and
again,
commissioner
cookton
said
the
port
authority
probably
has
more
financing
background,
but
we're
not
working
with
the
port
authority.
D
J
Thank
you,
chair
chair.
Can
I
ask
a
question
to
mr
centenario
sure,
please
remind
me
from
the
city
staff
perspective
and
as
you
bring
this
with
recommendation,
what
are
the
or
what
would
be
the
positive
consequences
and
what
would
be
the
negative
consequences
of
these
passing
or
not
passing
getting
approval.
K
That's
not
something
that
the
commission
or
the
city
controls
so
that
I
think
that's
a
big
plus
it
gives
the
applicant
more
time,
and
the
milestones
that
we
have
worked
with
the
applicant
on
are
a
little
more
flexible,
so
there's
more
flexibility
built
in
instead
of
every
year.
The
applicant
has
to
come
back
and
we
have
this
conversation
over
again.
K
You
know
you
can
think
of
the
the
extreme
is:
does
the
city
physically
not
allow
vehicles
in
park
and
fly,
and
I
mean
if,
when
you,
when
you're
you,
let
your
brain
go
in
that
direction?
You
know.
That's
not.
I
don't
think
that's
a
reasonable
thing
for
a
city
to
be
doing
based
on
a
land
use
issue,
so
I
think
the
the
negatives
of
denying
this
application
are
significant,
because
it
is
really
difficult
for
city
staff
to
to
force
a
use
to
cease
without
a
really
long,
protracted
process.
K
Sure
yeah,
you
know
we,
I
think
we're
staff
is
in
agreement
with
commissioner
cookton
of
we
don't
believe
remote
airport
parking
contributes
to
community.
It
is
a
it's
a
profitable
business.
It
is
a
business
that
is
in
need.
People
use
it.
So
it's
it's
in
demand,
but
it
doesn't.
We
don't
feel
it
adds
a
community
to
south
of
district
folks.
Aren't
you
know,
walking
the
streets
or
living
in
the
neighborhood?
Well,
they
aren't
because
they're
they're
driving
to
a
remote
airport
parking
lot.
A
I
guess
I'll
weigh
in
I
too,
you
know
I'm
not
not
not
meaning
to
suggest
that
the
applicant
is
thrilled
to
be
here
again,
but
I'm
not
thrilled
that
we're
having
this
again,
and
I
think
commissioner
goldsmith.
I
think
it
probably
was
me
who
said
I'm
sorry.
No,
I
think
it's
true,
although
I
think
I
may
have
been
casting
a
dice
and
assuming
that
I
might
not
be
here
by
the
time
it
came
back,
but
you
know
I'm.
A
I
have,
I
think,
the
the
comment
that
was
made
that,
like
constructed
you
can't
force
development
is
true,
but
I
think
it's
also
true
that
we
have
two
more
years
on
this
interim
use
permit
and
I
think
there
are
ways
to
work
within
that
we
could
recommend
a
loosening
of
the
development
milestones
or
perhaps
even
an
eliminating
of
the
development
milestones
with
a
end
result
that
we
hope
to
see
in
two
years.
I
think
for
me
that
that
2024
timeline,
I
think,
is
valuable.
I
think
it's
important.
A
I
think
it's
a
fire
that
we
have
that's
lit.
I
think
the
the
definition
of
an
interim
use
permit
is
you
don't
think
this
is
great,
but
it's
better
than
nothing
right
now,
and
I
think
the
question
that
I
wrestle
with
is:
is
it
better
than
nothing,
because
the
other
option
is
when
the
interim
use
permit
expires?
Is
it's
a
vacant
lot?
A
A
To
the
port
authority
administrator,
I
am
not
interested
in
having
that
in
there
at
all.
Personally,
even
if
we
did
put
this
forward,
I
would
prefer
that
that
remain
with
the
planning
commission
and
the
city
council
yeah.
I
think
the
port
authority
does
good
work,
but
we
have
different
different
roles
and
different
scope
of
perspective
in
our
charges.
So
I
guess
the
way
it's
presented
to
us,
I'm
not
supportive
of
it.
I'm
appreciative
of
the
challenges,
I'm
appreciative
of
the
volatility,
but
I
don't
we
haven't
the
commissioner
gold's
been
come
in
about
certainty.
A
We
don't
know.
We
don't
know
that
this
will
get
better
in
six
months
or
six
years
it
may
it
may
be
that
way
for
a
long
time.
You
know-
and
we
heard
the
you
know-
the
applicant
talked
about
there's
a
preferred
product
that
they
would
like
to
offer,
and
I
respect
that.
I
I
think
that
it's
good
to
differentiate,
especially
with
an
area
that
we're
growing
housing.
F
I
would
like
to
wholeheartedly
agree,
mr
chair,
on
not
volunteering
away
the
planning
commission's
review
of
this.
That
was
the
last
remaining
item
on
my
list.
I
wanted
to
come
back
to,
and
you
almost
said
word
for
word
what
I
wanted
to
say.
I
I
don't
understand
it.
I
I
don't
think
it's
advantageous
at
all
to
take
it
out
of
the
public
eye
or
away
from
council
or
away
from
us.
This
is
a
land
use
application.
F
D
Apologize
if
I'm
rehashing
this
again,
we
have
two
items
before
us,
which
is
the
new
interim
use.
Permit
I
heard
questions
or
lack
of
interest
to
granting.
Possibly
a
new
interim
use
permit.
Is
that
what
I'm
hearing
and
then
the
other
application
or
recommendation
is
the
modifications
to
conditions
of
approval?
Mr
centenary,
could
you
flip
us
to.
F
Mr
cincinnario,
we
have
one
motion
before
us
this
evening
and
I
remember
when
this
came
before
us.
I
don't
know
if
it
was
last
time
or
the
time
before
that,
but
I
remember
it
was
also
one
motion.
I
think
I
called
you
and
asked
you
about
this.
We
shouldn't,
or
it's
not
recommended,
that
we
try
to
split
this
up.
We
have
one
motion
and
we
should
recommend
approval
or
denial
of
that
motion.
Is
that
a
fair
statement.
K
Jerry
commissioner,
clicked
in,
as
I
understand
it,
you're
being
asked
to
take
action
on
the
wreck
on
the
applications
that's
before
you
tonight,
and
that
application
is
for
a
five-year
interviews
permit.
With
these
new
development
milestones.
I
believe
the
you
have
to
either
recommend
approval
or
denial
on
that
application.
I
I
know
that
it's
not
part
of
the
comprehensive
plan
and
the
small
area
plan
and
how
we
want
to
move
forward
the
site,
but
typically
when
we
look
at
a
comprehensive
plan
or
a
small
area
plan,
we
are
looking
at
10
20
30
years,
and
I
would
just
like
to
go
back
to
what.
If
this
is
denied,
I
think
chair
you
mentioned,
you
know
up
an
empty
lot
being
far
worse
than
a
parking
fly.
I
absolutely
agree.
I
I
still
think
that
these
phases,
the
development
application
so
phase
two
development
application-
would
go
up
in
front
of
the
planning
commission.
You
know
the
resubmittal
goes
in
front
of
the
planning
commission.
I
think
the
financing
side
of
it
is
complicated
and
they're
I
mean
I
doubt
I
doubt
that
the
developers
willing
to
open
their
books
for
the
planning,
commission
and
the
city
council
making
all
of
that
public
knowledge,
and
so
I
understand
why
that
would
be
a
review
there,
and
rather
than
here.
I
So
I
just
in
my
head,
I
keep
thinking
what,
if
and
I
don't
think
that
the
park
and
fly
usage
is
such
a
big,
bad
wolf
that
we
need
to
be
addressing
this
immediately.
Do
I
think
it
needs
to
be
addressed?
Yes,
but
I
would
rather
be
in
it
put
us
in
a
position
where
things
are
going
to
move
forward
rather
than.
A
I'd
like
to
clarify
a
little
bit
on
hey
I'm
following
what
you're
saying,
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
it's
clear
that
my
point
was
not
that
I
want
the
planning
commission
involved
in
the
financial
approach,
but
it
was
the
authority
to
extend
I.
I
was
not
comfortable
granting
the
authority
to
make
that
decision
about
whether
or
not
to
extend
with
the
port
administrator.
So
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
that
in
case
anyone
was
unclear
on
that.
I
K
K
What
performa
is
coming
to,
because,
hopefully
they
have
a
good
understanding
of
costs
and
markets
and
on
an
annual
basis
with
an
with
an
end
date
of
2027,
can
allow.
The
project
to
you
know
essentially
wait
to
commence
construction,
but
the
port
authority.
Mister,
would
not
have
the
ability
to
extend
an
interviews
permit
beyond
the
time
period
afforded
by
city
code.
B
Thanks,
chair
roman,
so
I'm
going
to
flip
this
on
its
head
and
the
more
I'm
thinking
and
listening
to
my
fellow
commissioners
we're
talking
about
financing
which
is
really
important.
I
want
to
be
mindful
that
financing
is
super
important,
but
I
also
want
to
acknowledge
that
the
city
has
development
goals
to
build
housing
for
families
that
want
to
be
in
bloomington,
and
we
are
we're
not
close
to
meeting
those
goals.
B
But
it's
really
to
make
sure
that
we
have
adequate
housing
for
people
that
want
to
live
in
bloomington
bloomington
I
saw
was
ranked
the
34th
best
city
in
the
country
to
live
in
made
the
top
50
and
bringing
in
new
housing
can
help
us
retain
that
space
or
even
improve
that
position.
So
one
of
the
things
that
I
see
in
this
proposal
is:
is
it
helping
us
achieve
our
housing
goals?
B
Is
it
helping
us
bring
people
into
bloomington
who
want
to
live
into
bloomington,
to
be
part
of
our
community
and
help
grow
the
community
and
make
it
vibrant
and
welcoming,
and-
and
this
is
not
doing-
it's
not
achieving
those
goals
that
we've
set
out
for
ourselves?
I
know
financing
is
important.
It
drives
everything
that
we
do,
but
does
it
need
to
drive
everything,
and
I'm
I'm
saying
no.
D
D
D
If
do
you
mind
if
you
could
go
back
to
some
of
the
findings
where
you
know
you
are
using
things
that
are
you
know,
the
proposed
use
will
not
delay
permanent
development
like
what
are
we
basing
that
on
other
than
time
and
and
time
in
this
case
is
associated
to
the
the
market
and
in
if
covid
was
something
that
we
recognized
last
time,
then
you
know
what
was
it
in
our
books?
That
said,
kovid
was
okay
at
that
time.
For
us
to
say,
you
know,
the
proposed
use
will
not
be
delayed.
D
You
know
not
have
permanent
delay,
so
I
guess
it's
subjective
in
terms
of
like
how
we
are
determining
these
findings
where,
for
so
I'm
having
a
challenge
where
I
tend
to
look
at
these
findings
and
say
we're
not
meeting
it.
If
the
comprehensive
plan
says
you
know,
a
parking
lot
in
that
area
is
not
permitted
if
the
parking
lot
has
been
in
existence
for
30
years.
In
my
case
then,
based
on
the
comprehensive
plan
that
we
have
right
now,
it
would
be
legally
non-conforming,
so
it
could,
it
could
question
mark
technically
continue.
D
So
I
guess
if
this
was
a
10-year
interim
use
permit
and
they
don't
plan
to
break
ground
for
phase
one
in
2027,
then
I
would
be
concerned,
but
even
then
what
is
the
alternative?
If
they
don't
want
to
build
a
hotel,
if
they
don't
want
to
build
anything
else,
we
end
up
shutting
down
the
use.
That's
currently
there
it's
a
vacant
parking
lot.
Gated
nobody's
going
to
use
it,
so
I
guess
I'm
left
with
a
very
subjective
interpretation
of
how
I
would
make
a
finding
for
this
case
here
with
all
that
spiel.
J
J
I'm
trying
to
look
at
this
from
the
perspective
of
the
I
guess
it's
part
of
that
is.
There
is
a
perspective
of
the
educator
too,
but
I've
seen
or
I've
been
aware
of
organizations
that
have
started
projects
that
have
to
delay
those
projects
because
of
the
same
reasons
of
the
same
financial
reasons,
and
I
also
been
aware
of
what
would
have
happened
if
those
projects
had
not
had
an
extension
financially.
J
So
I'm
thinking
of
the
in
a
way
I'm
trying
to
be
empathetic
with
the
owner
on
you
know
the
last
the
the
loss
of
what
already
was
used
in
terms
of
of
money,
the
area
right
there
like
to
your
point,
commissioner,
goldman
and
yeah.
We
do
need
more
units,
we
do
need
more
space
for
housing,
but
that's
that
actually
guarantee
that
that
we're
gonna
have
that
in
there
you
know.
Is
there
a
guarantee
that
we're
gonna
be
able
to
have
a
different
kind
of
project
in
that
area?
J
And
once
again,
once
we
once
we
approve
like
more
housing.
For
example,
are
we
gonna
go
back
to
the
type
of
housing
where
only
two
people
can
live
in
there
or
are
we
gonna
have
guarantees
that
this
is
gonna,
be
a
place
where
we're
going
to
see
families,
big
families,
because
the
whole
point
here
for
me
is:
I
want
to
see
more
kids
in
family
staying
in
bloomington.
So
taking
all
that
into
consideration.
J
I
looking
into
what
mr
centenary
said
about
the
delightment
of
projects
and
how
there
is
an
awareness
there's
a
deep
awareness
in
development.
Those
projects
need
to
have
more
time.
So
that's
the
reason
why
I'm
leaning
more
towards
supporting
it,
but
at
the
same
time,
knowing
that
they
might
be
another
way,
another
option
or
a
different
path
that
might
be
need
taken
if
it
seems
like
the
owner,
is
not
going
to
be
able
to
to
finish
this
on
time
and
that
that
is
going
to
be
something
that
actually
benefits
our
community
whatever.
J
A
A
A
You
know
we'd
like
to
see
something
happening
in
that
time
period.
For
me,
what
I
don't
like
about
this
well
there's
two
parts
one
and
we
talked
about
the
ability
of
the
port
authority
administrator
to
automatically
approve
delays,
but
what
I
don't
for
me,
what
I
don't
like
about
it
is
that
it's
extending
that
time
when
we
don't
need
to
extend
it
right
now
and
I
for
me,
I
would
like
to
see
in
two
years
something
happening,
and
so
I
am
supportive
of
flexibility,
I'm
supportive
of
recognizing
that
we're
in
a
unique
situation.
A
A
F
The
developer
took
a
risk
by
coming
to
us
before
and
asking
for
an
extension
they've
come
back
to
us
regularly
since
the
1980s
asking
for
a
risk
and
the
whole
time.
It's
been
clear
that
this
is
not
a
permanent
use
of
the
site
and
you
know
covet
stunk
stunk
for
everybody,
and
I
was
supportive
of
that
particular
okay,
we'll
let
you
off
the
hook.
It's
20
20,
we
don't
know
what's
going
on,
but
that
was
a
that
was
a
one-off
for
me.
F
There's
risk
in
development
and
if,
if
1988
was
when
this
started,
I
was
born
in
1990
longer
than
I've
been
alive.
It's
been
remote
airport
parking
and
it's
time
to
end
it
it's
time
to
end
it
and
they
took
a
risk
by
not
doing
it
last
year.
Maybe
they
would
have
paid
more
for
wood,
but
the
interest
rates
were
lower.
F
They
took
a
risk
and
didn't
work
out,
and
I
asked
mr
centenario
earlier:
is
it
the
city's
job
to
ensure
they're
going
to
maximize
their
profits?
It
is
not.
It
is
not
our
responsibility
to
do
that
and
with
the
repeated
over
and
over
again
of
okay
next
time,
we're
sure
next
time.
This
is
the
I
believe,
the
14th
time
this
has
come
before
council,
if,
if
they
took
a
risk
that
didn't
work
out
for
them,
I
don't
believe
it's
our
job
to
fix
it,
because
our
role
as
a
city
is
to
get
development.
F
I'm
not
saying
we
want
to
put
developers
out
of
business,
but
that's
really
not
what
we're
talking
about
here.
They,
the
developers,
their
role
in
life,
is
to
maximize
profit
for
their
shareholders
and
whatever
that's
I'm
totally
supportive
of
that.
Our
role
is
to
get
development,
and
so
I'm
holding
the
line
on
our
end,
because
it's
time
to
end
this
after
almost
35
years,
it's
time
to
end
this.
D
D
Does
that
make
sense
like
because
the
parking
activity
on
the
lot
the
activities
on
the
lot
has
its
own
separate
interim
use,
or
is
this
interim
used
for
this?
Is
this
proposed
interim
use
permit
or
the
new
or
the
existing
tied
to
the
development
timelines
plus
the
usage
of
the
parking
lot?
Are
those
the
same
interviews
or
two
separate
interviews.
K
They're
interlinked,
so
it's
it,
we
can't
just
separate
interviews
permit!
Oh!
Thank
you.
Sorry.
The
answer
is
the
they're
interlinked,
where
the
interviews
permit
can't
really
can't
be
separated
from
the
development
milestones,
because
the
interim
use
permit
was
approved,
subject
to
these
development
milestones.
So
there's
a
timeline.
K
D
D
Unfortunately,
every
time
I
hear
something
I'm
trying
to
like,
there
is
absolutely
going
to
be
a
need
for
an
extension
because
phase
one
is
tied
to
phase
two
approvals
because
they
have
to
have
something
planned
for
phase
two,
and
I
know
we're
looking
to
have
work
started
just
something
started
for
at
the
site,
which
I
am
totally
for
it.
If
it's
been
what
30
years
long
time
coming,
but
two
more
years,
wouldn't
hurt
I'll
stop
for
sure.
Unless
something
new
comes
up.
F
Mr
chair,
thank
you,
commission
robbie.
If
I
may,
it
kind
of
goes
back
to
what
I
asked
before.
So
you
are
correct
if
I
think
I'm
understanding
this
correctly.
The
actual
date
of
impact
on
this
application
is
september
1st
of
this
year.
They
are
going
to
be
in
breach
of
their
agreement
with
the
city
on
september
1st,
which
could
start
the
path
of
enforcement.
So
if
this
application
were
ultimately
to
be
denied,
one
path
is
that
enforcement
starts.
F
F
I
don't
like
the
two
years,
there's
a
lot
of
things
I
don't
like
about
it,
but
maybe
there's
something
more
palatable,
maybe
instead
of
breaking
ground
two
years
from
now,
they
say:
okay,
it's
going
to
be
next
spring,
we're
going
to
make
it
work
or
something
that's
more
palatable
to
us.
So
one
path
is:
oh
my
gosh,
yes,
bloomington
police
department
has
to
show
up
at
the
front
door
that
there's
an
alternative
path
that
they
come
back
to
us
with
a
more
palatable
application
that
we
may
approve.
A
A
F
Before
we
make
a
motion,
mr
chair,
I'd
like
to
discuss
a
little
bit
more
about
the
port
authority
administrator
approval.
So
let's
say
we
do
recommend
denial
that
would
kind
of
get
lost
in
the
wash
I'm
afraid
like.
Okay,
not
we
don't
like
any
of
this,
but
council
may
ultimately
approve
this,
and
I
think
we
still
at
least
you
and
I
seem
to
be
on
the
same
page.
Maybe
others
are
do
or
do
not
feel
the
same
way.
F
But
if
this
commission
were
to
feel
that
we
want
to
make
sure
this
stays
in
our
court,
not
saying
the
port
gets
taken
out,
but
that
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
stay
on
the
same
current
schedule
where,
when
they
come
back
for
this
type
of
application,
it
comes
before
us
and
we're
not
volunteering
that
away.
If
we
were
to
ultimately
recommend
denial.
I
would
like
for
some
way
to
us
to
still
send
that
message
to
council
so
that
if
they
approve
it,
they
recognize
our
desire
potential
desire
to
strike
that
language.
F
Mr
cincinnario,
mr
mark
regard,
do
you
have
any
insights
you
could
provide?
Because
if
we're
recommending
denial,
maybe
we
do
maybe
we
don't
there's
not
really
a
place
to
put
that
in
as
a
condition
or
something
is
what
we've
said
already
tonight
and
maybe
we'll
discuss
about
it
a
little
bit
more
enough
to
make
sure
that
council
gets
that
message.
Do
we
need
to
work
it
into
emotion,
somehow.
F
Mr
chair,
if
I
could
open
it
up
to
the
commission
again,
I
think
only
two
or
three
of
us
have
discussed
that.
So
I
would
like
to
hear
from
perhaps
another
commissioner
or
two
the
way
I
understand
this.
Mr
centenario
can
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
the
language
that
concerned
me
the
most
in
our
staff
report
was
on
page
four
of
six
in
the
bottom
paragraph
that
says,
if
the
port
authority
administrator
determines
that
the
returns
will
not
be
sufficient.
F
The
performa
review
milestone
will
automatically
extend
by
one
year,
and
I
have
a
lot
of
concern
about
that.
I
don't
like
the
automatic
extension
and
I
think
this
needs
to
stay
within
the
purview
of
the
planning
commission,
because
it's
a
land
use
application
and
before
we
just
if
I'm
to
make
a
motion
in
a
minute
here
before
I
just
add
that
in
I
would
like
to
hear
from
perhaps
another
commissioner
too,
before
I
make
a
motion
on
behalf
of
all
of
us.
D
L
F
Mr
chair,
I'd
like
to
make
a
motion,
but
I'd
like
to
first
make
sure
I'm
clear
and
we're
all
clear
on
this
item
of
the
port
authority
administrator
review.
I
think
it
would
make
sense
if
I
were
to
make
a
recommendation
of
approval
to
add
language
that
says
this
language
should
be
struck.
However,
if
I'm
making,
if
I
were
to
make
a
recommendation
of
denial,
a
recommendation,
a
recommendation
of
denial
says:
throw
the
thing
out.
So
it's
hard
to
sort
of
make
an
amended
motion
on
that
is
the
way
I'm
interpreting.
K
K
Second,
is
many
city
council
members
watch
these
meetings
and
they
will
be
continually
made
available,
so
they
can
be
watched.
Anytime
third
is
in
the
staff
report
we
like
to
include,
especially
for
really
challenging
applications
like
this.
We
like
to
include
a
little
bit
of
a
background
in
the
staff
report
to
the
council
what
your
feedback
was
and
that
will
be
included,
and
then
I
will
present
what
that
feedback
was.
So
I
I
think,
that'll
get
the
message
across.
A
C
H
Yeah,
I'm
just
turning
out
my
video
quick
here.
Thank
you
hold
on
one
second
sure
good
to
see
you
good
evening,
mr
chair
and
commissioners,
I
see
this
as
you
have
a
motion
before
you
right
now,
which
is
to
either
approve
or
deny
what's
before
you
right
now,
okay,
I
don't.
I
don't
advise
the
the
commission
to
parse
out
that,
what's
in
the
motion
as
it
is
or
parse
out
any
language,
that's
in
there
now
the
applicant
can
certainly
come
back.
H
Withdraw
and
maybe
you
know,
modify
some
of
that
language,
but
you
have
a
specific
task
for
you,
which
is
to
recommend
what's
in
front
of
you
or
to
deny,
what's
in
front
of
you
without
amending
anything,
that's
in
there
right
now.
So
that
would
be
my
advice
to
the
to
the
commission
as
it
stands
right
now,.
A
H
C
A
What
I'm
looking
at,
as
is
in
order
to
get
something
to
council
in
order
to
help
the
so
that
the
applicant
could
remain
compliant
with
the
current
permit
if
there
was
a
proposal
to
have
a
new
one.
So
if
it
went
to
the
fourth,
they
could
still
get
to
the
council
for
their
action
before
september
1st.
A
If,
if
we,
if
we,
if
we
continue
this
item
for
one
week,
to
have
a
more
clear
recommendation
that
addressed
our
question
about
the
port
authority,
that
would
still
make
it
to
council
in
time
for
accounts,
take
action
before
the
september
first
date.
That
is
a
sticking
point
right
now
in
the
current
iup.
Am
I
making
myself
clear
on
that
yeah.
D
That
would
be
the
only
stickler
thing
for
me,
but
otherwise
I
can
recommend
approval,
but
that
means
the
port
authority
would
have
authority
to
extend
within
the
project
timeline,
which
is
not
a
major
thing,
but
you
know
hearing
from
my
fellow
commissioners.
You
know
it's
better
just
to
keep
the
line
use
approvals
within
line
use
within
the
planning
commission,
but
again
whether
it
is
extended.
D
A
I
guess
some
of
it
is
based.
I
guess
I'm
again,
we
have
not
taken
a
vote,
but
I'm
right,
I'm
sensing
that
it's
probably
four
in
favor
of
of
the
recommendation
and
so
where
I'm
at
is
trying
to
figure
out.
How
do
we
capture
the
the
sense
of
the
commission
in
a
way
that
recognizes
that
we
support
or
the
commission
the
majority
of
the
commission?
A
F
So,
mr
chair-
and
maybe
this
is
a
question
for
mr
toski-
can
the
motion
and
quotation
marks
change
by
the
time
it
gets
to
counsel?
I
mean
we're
not
in
this
motion
and
the
words
that
we're
reading
on
the
page.
It
doesn't
talk
about
the
the
port
authority
review,
and
so
it's
you
know
to
me:
it's
not
a
substantial
part
of
the
motion.
It's
not
changing
the
address
or
something
like
that.
F
H
G
H
Would
try
to
come
up
with,
obviously
a
new
new
milestones
to
put
before?
That's
why
I
think
continuance
might
be
the
best
you
know
route
here,
it'll
give
time
for
us
to
kind
of
work
with
the
applicant
as
well
and
come
up
with
something
that
they
can
be
on
board
with
the
can
and
the
commission
can
be
on
board
with.
So
instead
of
you
know
speculating
about
what
might
change
by
the
time
it
gets
to
the
council,
everybody
being
on
the
same
page
before
that
is
more
important.
I'd,
say.
B
Thanks,
commissioner,
roman
one
thing
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
as
well
is
the
port
authority?
Is
one
sticking
point,
but
for
me
it's
the
2027
date.
That's
another
sticking
point,
so
I
I
don't
want
us
to
focus
only
on
that
the
port
authority
authority,
authority
and
and
auto
extension
is,
is
the
2027
date.
That's.
That
is
a
sticking
point
for
me
as
well.
So
it's
not
just
the
one.
It's
it's
a
couple
of
things
here
sure.
A
G
G
We
can
actually
indicate
that
by
stipulation
and
amendment
of
this
application,
that's
something
that
obviously
this
body
can't
do,
but
we
as
the
applicant
can
do
that,
and-
and
so
I
want
to
make
clear
that
if
there
is
a
motion
to
approve,
we
will
stipulate
on
the
record
that
the
language
can
be
modified
by
the
the
applicant
submitting
that
in
writing
to
the
city.
So
I
want
to
I
just.
I
just
want
to
clarify
that.
That's
not
the
most
important
thing
going
forward.
G
On
the
other
hand,
the
the
dates
are
important
and-
and
the
reason
is
for
flexibility-
we-
we
can't
be
in
a
position
in
two
years
from
now
as
we're
starting
construction
on
phase
one
that
there's
no
remote
airport
parking
on
the
balance
of
the
site,
because
that's
what
fuels
and
funds
the
rest
of
the
development
so
that
that's
not
up
for
grabs,
and
I
don't
mean
to
get
into
a
negotiation
here.
I
just
want
to
make
it
clear
that
the
applicant
would
stipulate
on
the
record
that
that
provision
can
be
stricken.
L
A
L
Yeah,
I
just
had
a
couple
quick
things
to
add
to
how
I
think
that
it
even
came
about
and
bill
can
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
we
were
kind
of
trying
to
figure
out
a
way
to
have
there
be
some
oversight
to
you
know.
Obviously
this
is
not
going
to
be.
You
know
everyone
says:
oh,
it
can
continue
for
another
30
years.
It
obviously
can't
because
there's
these
very
stringent
milestones
and
I
have
to
come.
You
know
talk
to
you
guys
and-
and
I
want
this
development
to
go
forward.
L
I
really
do
I'm
proud
of
it.
We
were
excited
to
be
doing
a
groundbreaking
and
I'd
emailed.
You
know
mike
and
glenn
and
and
then
the
pricing
just
got
completely
crazy.
Like
weiss
builders
quoted
us,
it
was
a
million
dollars
in
increases
and
when
you
go
back
to
say
well
how
you
know
financing
shouldn't
rule
like
you
cannot
break
ground
on
a
project
of
this
magnitude.
L
L
You
know
like
a
whole
giant
building
on
the
front
of
the
parking
fly
and
why
I
didn't
want
to
do
something
cookie
cutter,
and
you
know
cheaper,
obviously,
is
that's
like
the
face
of
our
development.
If
you,
if
you
put
something
that's
low
quality
on
that
site,
you
can't
take
it
back.
You
can't
renovate
it.
You
have
to
do
something.
That's
the
gateway
to
your
whole
development
and
thank.
A
L
And
the
other
thing
that
was
tied
to
the
whole
financing
package
is
the
lender
wanted
to
see
because
the
returns
were
so
tight.
The
lender
actually
asked
to
see
a
longer
iup
that
gave
them
more
security
in
fronting
the
construction
loan,
so
it's
all
tied
together
in
a
way
that
sometimes
is
not
apparent
just
from
looking
at
the
application.
Thank.
A
F
A
B
J
D
A
I
Having
been
able
to
make
the
required
findings,
I
moved
to
recommend
city
council
approval
of
an
interim
use
permit
with
modifications
to
previously
adopted
development
milestones
for
phase
development
at
3700
american
boulevard
east,
subject
to
the
conditions
of
approval
attached
to
the
staff
report.
Thank.
I
A
Thank
you.
We
have
a
motion
and
a
second
to
recommend
approval
of
an
iup
at
the
subject
property.
Is
there
any
further
discussion
seeing
none?
I
will
again
conduct
this
by
role
all
those
in
favor
of
recommending
the
iup
say.
I
all
those
opposed
to
recommending
the
iup
say.
No,
commissioner
goldsman.
B
A
A
A
H
A
A
Everyone
was
present,
except
for
I
guess
not,
commissioner
mcgovern,
who
is
not
on
the
body
yet
so
I
will
entertain
a
motion.
Actually
let
me
check
the
other
one,
and
maybe
we
can
do
both
of
them
on
motion
nope,
so
entertain
a
motion
to
approve
the
may
26th
planning
commission
snaps.
Commissioner
albrecht.
I
A
J
A
A
It's
okay.
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
we
were.
We
were
following
our
process
all
right.
We
have
also.
We
have
the
june
2nd
synopsis
to
consider
at
that
meeting.
Commissioners,
corman
and
goltzmann
were
absent,
but
that
does
leave
us
with
enough
for
a
quorum.
So
I'll
look
for
a
motion
on
that.
Commissioner,
albrecht.
A
C
C
C
A
Thank
you.
That
is
a
full
agenda
and
I
note
that
at
this
time
I
will
not
be
at
that
meeting
and
since
we
have
not
yet
had
an
election
of
officers,
our
rules
of
procedure
stipulate
that
the
chair
role
since
our
chair
is
no
longer
on
the
commission
and,
as
vice
chair,
the
next
in
line
would
be
the
most
senior
member
of
the
commission.
We
have
two
most
senior
members,
so
they
may
have
to
cast
lots
to
see
who
is
in
this
chair
on
the
18th.
A
The
other
item
on
our
list
for
tonight
was
our
rules
of
procedure.
Call
for
the
meeting
before
the
official
meeting,
where
we're
scheduled
to
hold
election
of
officers
for
members
of
the
commission
to
have
an
opportunity
to
express
interest
in
being
considered
for
either
a
chair
or
a
vice
chair
role.
There's
not
a
formal
process.
A
We
do
that,
but
it's
to
give
folks
a
little
bit
of
time
to
to
think
about
who
may
have
interest
in
that
and
if
you
want
to
ask
any
questions
of
them
or
anything
that
helps
you
make
a
decision
when
we
do
come
to
that
election
period.
So
don't
have
any
formal
process
by
way
we
do
this,
but
if
there's
anyone
who
would
like
to
express
interest
in
either
a
chair
or
a
vice
chair
being
considered
at
the
election
time.
For
that,
please
feel
free
to
speak
up.
I
A
Okay,
all
right
so
certainly
there's
no
no
guarantee
of
anyone
who
would
or
wouldn't
be
elected,
but
seeing
that
the
interest
numbers
were
where
they
are.
I
don't
know
if
you,
if
you
want
to
continue,
you
recommend
continuing
with
the
election
at
the
next
meeting
or
I
don't
feel
a
need
to
wait
until
all
of
us
are
here
unless
someone
else
feels
strongly
about
that.
B
B
A
C
A
So
unless
anyone
feels
strongly
I
and
I'm,
if
I'm
the
only
one
who
expects
to
be
gone
on
the
18th,
I
don't.
I
don't
personally
feel
a
need
to
recommend.
We
delay
that
unless
anyone
else
feels
otherwise,
is
that
what
you
need
all
right?
That's
right!
There
we
go
anything
else.
Anyone
would
like
to
raise
for
discussion
among
the
commission
or
with
staff.