►
Description
Bloomington Minnesota Planning Commission Meeting
A
Good,
that's
good
all
right
good
evening
and
welcome
to
the
december
17
2020
planning
commission
meeting
tonight.
The
planning
commission
is
a
little
bit
different
than
our
normal
planning
commission
standards.
We
are
in
a
study
session
tonight
and,
as
such,
the
planning
commission
will
not
be
taking
public
comment
and
will
not
be
making
any
decisions
tonight.
So
therefore,
we
won't
go
through
the
kind
of
standard
protocol
of
a
phone
call
and
that,
as
public
comment
will
be
taken
in
any
public
hearing
later
on
on
either
of
these
subjects.
A
However,
before
we
start
tonight
and
get
into
business
I'd
like
everybody
to
stand
to
say
the
pledge
of
allegiance,
if
you
can,
I
pledge
allegiance
to
the
flag
of
the
united
states
of
america
and
to
the
republic
for
which
it
stands.
One
nation,
under
god
indivisible
with
liberty
and
justice
for
all.
A
Thank
you
all
right
before
we
get
started
tonight
as
well.
I'd
like
to
make
sure
we
establish
a
quorum,
so
planning
commission
members,
as
I
call
out
your
name,
please
answer
I,
commissioner
goldsman
is
gone
tonight.
We
know
that
commissioner
corman
aye,
commissioner
roman
aye,
commissioner.
B
A
A
A
C
All
right
perfect,
then
we're
good
to
go.
I'm
julie,
farnham,
a
senior
planner
with
me
tonight,
obviously
is
glenn
markergaard
planning
manager,
as
well
as
megan
rogers
from
our
legal
department,
so
we'll
be
going
through
this
I'll,
be
going
through
it
and
they're
available
for
questions.
C
So
I
just
want
to
start
by
saying
you
know:
you've
been
considering
this
item
or
things
related
to
this
item
for
the
last
month
and
a
half
or
so
so
as
we
get
started.
I
wanted
to
give
a
little
bit
of
background
of
where,
where
we're
at
so
we're,
really
trying
what
what
is
the
purpose
of
addressing
this
temporary
pandemic
housing?
C
It
really
is
to
respond
to
this
current
issue
that
that's
going
on
that
has
been
exacerbated
by
the
pandemic,
and
that
is
the
unsheltered
homelessness
city
has
been
working
with
multiple
government
and
nonprofit
agencies
to
address
this
issue,
both
in
bloomington
as
well
as
throughout
the
county,
because
it's
not
a
bloomington
specific
issue
and
really
we've
been
focusing
fairly
narrowly
on
addressing
this
situation
and
really
focusing
on
how
best
to
regulate
this
temporary
use.
That's
currently
occurring
in
hotels.
C
We
know
that
homelessness
is
a
big
and
a
concerning
issue
and
that's
really
kind
of
a
longer
term
issue
to
address
and
and
the
interim
use
or
any
other
approach
that
we
might
take
with
regard
to
the
pandemic.
Housing
is
really
not
something
that
can
address
the
the
bigger
issues
related
to
homelessness,
and
that
is
not
the
intent,
I
would
say,
with
regard
to
the
homeless,
permanent
issue
or
larger
issue.
Currently
permanent
shelters
are
allowed
via
a
cup,
that's
the
congregate,
housing
facilities
and
moving
forward.
C
To
address
the
broader
issue
of
homelessness,
I
also
thought
it
would
be
helpful
to
just
kind
of
run
through
a
little
chronology
of
how
did
we
get
here?
So
again,
the
the
city
has
been
dealing
with
the
issue
of
hotels
being
used
to
shelter
some
homeless
people
for
the
last
six
plus
months.
C
A
few
months
back,
the
county,
hennepin
county,
approached
the
city
about
purchasing
a
hotel
and
and
converting
it
to
a
shelter
that
really
triggered
the
creation
of
this
iup
ordinance
as
a
as
a
way
to
address
that
specific
request.
C
The
county
withdrew
their
request
because
they
decided
not
to
purchase
that
property
at
that
point
in
time
that
that
literally
happened
right
before
the
ordinance
was
scheduled
to
go
for
public
hearing
in
front
of
the
planning
commission.
On
november
5th
we
had
the
ordinance
drafted.
We
felt
it
was
best
to
just
proceed
with
that.
The
ordinance
was
drafted
very
specifically
to
accommodate
the
hotel's
or
I'm
sorry,
the
county's
request.
C
So
it's
a
a
little
bit
challenging
to
to
apply
it
more
broadly
than
that,
and
we
had
public
hearings
both
at
planning,
commission
and
city
council
on
that
original
ordinance
in
november,
and
the
action
that
happened
was
that
the
original
ordinance
that
just
a
portion
of
that
was
moved
forward
for
adoption
and
that
did
get
adopted
by
city
council
november
23rd
and
at
the
last
planning
commission
meeting,
you
directed
staff
to
draft
an
ordinance
that
focused
in
on
the
interim
use.
Permit
and
the
standards.
C
So,
through
those
meetings
with
the
planning
commission,
several
issues
came
to
light
and
and
they're
kind
of
summarized
here.
Planning
commission
felt
that
the
iup
ordinance
as
as
written
was
too
restrictive.
C
You
were
looking
for
something
that
could
be
more
flexible
to
respond
to
this
immediate
need,
so
one
of
the
ideas
was
to
expand
where
it
could
be
allowed
to
allow
it
in
more
zoning
districts
than
originally
intended,
also
to
look
at
controlling
it
via
some
criteria
other
than
just
zoning
districts,
so
proximity
to
support
services,
namely
transit,
grocery
stores
and
pharmacies.
C
It
was
also
brought
up
there
were
concerns
raised
about
just
the
process
itself
to
to
go
through
and
get
an
iup,
and
also
just
to
get
an
iup
ordinance
drafted
and
and
adopted,
and
once
that
would
happen,
if
somebody
came
in,
they
would
have
to
apply
to
get
an
iep
that
whole
review
process
from
application
to
getting
it
through
city
council
approval
is
about
seven
to
eight
weeks,
and
so
there
was
concerns
raised
that
that
really
was
not
very
nimble
for
responding
to
what
is
a
fairly
urgent
need.
C
C
So
taking
those
concerns
into
consideration
staff
after
the
last
planning
commission
meeting,
we
kind
of
stepped
back
a
little
bit
and
and
thought
about.
You
know
what
would
be
the
best
way
to
address
these
issues
address
the
issue
of
the
temporary
housing
need,
but
also
the
issues
brought
up
by
the
by
the
planning
commission
and
we
looked
to
another
process
that
was
used
for
other
kind
of
emergency
related
addressing
some
things
like
patios
and
outdoor
dining,
and
so
we
looked
at
creating
a
process
that
was
much
more
streamlined.
C
So
that's
what
we're
calling
this
the
emergency
authorized
staff
review
process,
so
it's
really
a
permitting
process
that
is
less
formalized
and
cumbersome
than
an
actual
iup.
C
So
tonight
we're
going
to
kind
of
compare
these
two
different
processes
and
and
get
your
input
on
and
some
direction
from
you
on
that.
The
other
piece
is
the
standards
and-
and
we've
discussed
these
standards
with
you
primarily
back
on
the
on
november
19th.
C
C
So
in
terms
of
how
quickly
can
we
get
the
either
the
iup
ordinance
or
the
resolution
to
allow
this
emergency
permitting
process
in
place?
C
C
With
the
emergency
approach,
we
would
draft
it's,
it's
essentially
a
resolution
that
would
go
as
soon
as
we
could
get
it
on
to
a
city
council
agenda
in
january.
So
you
know,
we
view
that
process
as
being
the
more
nimble
of
the
two.
C
Similarly,
with
the
review
process,
as
I
just
mentioned,
the
iup,
you
know
you
go
through
the
application
it
gets
internally.
Reviewed
goes
through
public
hearings
at
planning,
commission
and
city
council,
and
that
overall,
is
about
a
seven
to
eight
week
process
with
the
emergency
approach.
C
They
would
submit
their
application
request
with
the
required
information,
and
that
would
be
reviewed
internally
by
staff
and
and
staff.
Can
turn
that
around
in
about
a
week
with
regard
to
decision
authority
use
again
has
to
go
through
public
hearings
at
both
planning,
commission
and
city
council?
C
The
emergency
approach
is
a
staff
authorized
review
and
and
approval
with
regard
to
public
input
opportunities,
primarily
on
the
iup.
That's
through
the
public
hearing
process.
With
the
emergency
approach,
there
isn't
a
formal
public
review
process
with
regard
to
enforcement.
It's
essentially
the
same
between
the
two
processes.
C
There's
two
things
that
are
are
different
and
would
only
apply
to
new
shelters,
and
that
is
the
locational
criteria
and
the
requirement
that
no
unrelated
use
would
be
allowed
on
the
site,
and
the
reason
these
would
only
apply
to
the
new
ones
is
because
this
was
one
of
the
things
we've
heard
back
from
some
of
the
existing
shelter
providers
is
that
they
couldn't
really
meet
some
of
those
proposed
criteria
for
location
and
also
with
the
unrelated
use
on
site.
So
all
of
the
other
standards,
so
security
management,
building
and
site
requirements,
inspections.
C
Those
would
all
apply
to
either
approach
so
with
regard
to
the
locational
criteria
of
this
is
what
was
talked
about
quite
a
bit
on
on
november
19th
and
and
planning
commission
kind
of
landed
on
two
criteria,
two
primary
criteria,
and
that
was
the
remedy
to
transit
station,
and
so
what
we're
showing
here
is
quarter
mile
to
a
transit
station,
that's
kind
of
your
typical
station
area
radius
and
then
a
half
mile
to
a
full
service
grocery
or
a
pharmacy.
And
so
that's
what
you're,
seeing
here
on
the
screen.
C
We
would
also
prohibit
the
use
within
the
runway
protection
zone.
Residential
uses
are
not
allowed
in
in
those
areas
any
already,
and
we
see
this
shelter
uses
as
something
that's
more
residential,
and
so
we
would
not
allow
it
there
and
also
would
prohibit
it
in
the
lower
density
residential
districts.
C
Here
is
a
comparison
of
the
standards
between
these
two
approaches.
Like
I
just
went
through,
the
locational
criteria
is
essentially
the
same
under
the
emergency
approach.
It
would
only
apply
to
new
shelters
that
came
into
that
somebody
who
requested
one
after
this
resolution.
If,
if
this
resolution
were,
if
that's
the
approach
once
that's
adopted,
that
would
be
the
approach,
but
it
would
not
be
required
of
the
existing
shelters
with
the
interim
use
permit.
Obviously,
anyone
that
comes
in
for
an
interim
use
permit
would
be
after
that
ordinance
would
be
adopted.
C
All
of
the
other
standards
are
the
same
except
for
duration.
So
again
we
talked
about
this
at
the
last
planning
commission
meeting
about
the
original
proposal
was
to
have
duration,
be
two
years
across
the
board.
Planning
commission
wanted
some
flexibility
there,
and
so
what
is
now
we're
looking
at
here
is
having
the
two
years
be
in
the
residential,
the
multi-family
residential
districts
and
allowing
a
one-year
duration
in
all
other
zoning
districts.
C
The
emergency
approach
would
only
be
in
effect
during
its
tied
to
an
emergency
order.
C
So
with
that
get
to
some
of
the
questions
for
input
for
from
the
planning
commission.
So
first
up
is
with
regard
to
the
process.
Staff
is
recommending
the
emergency
approach,
because
we
really
feel
that
that
that
best
meets
the
need.
The
current
need
that's
out
there,
and
it
also
addresses
the
the
concerns
that
the
planning
commission
had
has
brought
up
so
far.
C
So
that
would
be
our
recommendation,
and
so
our
question
to
you
is
whether
or
not
you
agree
with
that
or
if
you
would
rather
proceed
with
the
interim
use
approach.
So
with
that,
I
will
stop
and
and
open
it
up
for
discussion.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
commission
members,
do
you
have
any
questions
for
julie
on
this
or
thoughts?
A
Hey
I'll
start
real,
quick,
just
the
one
question
julie
and
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
I'm
not
mishearing
something
and
so
in
regard
to
the
iup
versus
emergency
options.
A
The
are
are
both
are
existing
facilities
that
are
out
there
grandfathered
in
at
this
point,
or
would
existing
facilities
have
to
come
back
for
an
iup.
C
Mr
chair,
our
discussion,
we
had
this
discussion
a
little
bit
on
the
19th
november
19th
and
I
believe
the
response
from
the
attorney
was
that
we
would
be
looking
to
have
the
existing
shelters
come
back
and
go
through
the
iup
process,
but
maybe
just
to
be
more
clear
on
that.
I
would
turn
that
over
to
megan,
rogers
and
and
she
can
either
affirm
what
I
just
said
or
or
clarify
for
you.
D
Yes,
absolutely
so
the
emergency
approach
would
be
available
to
the
existing
shelters
as
well
as
potentially
any
new
providers
that
would
come
in
the
variation
would
be
between
the
standards
for
the
new
pro.
The
new
any
new
facility
would
meet
all
of
the
standards
rather
than,
whereas
with
the
existing
providers
we're
meeting
them
where
they
are,
but
then
also
memorializing
the
security
protocols
and
those
other
issues
that
were
of
particular
importance
to
the
city.
So
the
flexibility
of
the
process
remains
for
for
all
facilities
for
use.
A
Okay,
I
think
I
I
think
I
understand
that
so
essentially,
the
new
criteria
would
be
for
new
facilities,
otherwise
they
have,
they
would
provide
all
the
other
criteria
that
was
standardized.
A
E
You,
I
guess,
we're
in
study
mode,
so
I
guess
I
don't
know
how
formal
he
wants
to
be
inside
yeah.
E
Yeah,
that's
fine
to
the
staff
question.
I
agree
with
their
recommendation
on
the
emergency
authorized
review
for
the
reasons
of
timeliness
and
I
think
if
the
criteria
are
clear
and
we
have-
I
think
this
group
has
been
pretty
consistent
on
agreeing
with
the
staff,
the
city's
recommendations
on
enforcement
and
the
things
that
we
need
to
have
to
be
able
to
do
that
safely.
So
I
think
we've
made
that
clear.
So
if
those
boundaries
are
in
place,
I'm
comfortable
with
the
staff
of
approval
on
this
okay.
D
Yeah,
I
would,
I
would
agree
with
commissioner
roman
on
that.
I
think
just
looking
at
the
timeline.
I
can't
remember
exactly
what
julie's
presentation
said,
but
between
seven
and
eight
weeks
and
under
a
week
makes
makes
a
lot
of
sense
given
how
quickly
things
we've
seen
things
change
in
our
current
situation.
So
I
I
would
agree
with
that.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
commissioner.
Abdi.
B
Thank
you
chair.
I
appreciate
steph's
recommendation
and
the
comparison
between
the
two,
the
new
idea
and
the
the
interim
use.
The
question
I
had,
and
I
know
it
was
brought
up
at
the
previous
meetings-
was:
can
facilities
go
back
to
their
old
ways
once
the
emergency
ends?
I
don't
know
right
now.
I
think,
as
part
of
the
presentation
you
mentioned,
that
a
different
use
cannot
concurrently
occur
while
the
use
is
the
facility
is
being
used
for
emergency
housing.
C
Mr
chair,
commissioner,
ogde,
if
I'm
understanding
your
question
correctly,
your
your
the
very
original
ordinance
that
we
looked
at
back
on
november
5th
was
recommending
that
the
properties
had
to
be
rezoned
to
multi-family
rm50
and
thus
returning
back
to
the
original
hotel
use,
for
instance,
would
probably
be
a
challenge
because
number
one
the
hotel
wouldn't
have
been
allowed
in
the
new
zoning
district.
C
C
So
in
the
situation
right
now,
either
with
the
iup
or
with
the
emergency
approach.
Yes,
they
could
return
back
to
there's
no
rezoning
needed,
so
the
use
the
original
use
they
could
return
back
to
the
original
use.
Does
that
answer
your
question.
A
All
right
any
any
further
questions
here:
krishna
robbie,
sorry,.
F
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I'm
a
little
torn
between
both
options,
because
there
are
aspects
of
each
that
I,
like,
certainly
with
the
emergency
approach.
I
like
the
idea
that
we
can
move
very
quickly
and
take
care
of
this
much
much
faster
than
with
the
iup
process,
but
I'm
a
little
torn
on
that
because,
although
six
weeks
is
a
long
time
in
the
short
term
in
the
long
term,
when
we're
talking
about
a
pandemic,
that's
been
going
on
for
the
better
part
of
a
year.
F
Now
we're
probably
still
going
to
be
in
this
for
a
number
of
months,
six
weeks
becomes
a
little
bit
less
consequential
and
there
are
things
about
the
iup
process
that
I
like.
There
are
really
three
things
I
have
jotted
down
here
that
I
like
better
about
the
iup
process
than
the
emergency
process,
the
first
being
that
the
iup
process
gives
the
c
council
more
flexibility
as
to
when
that
end
date
is.
F
One
thing
we
talked
about
was
that
we
need
to
be
careful
about
when
we
terminate
this
type
of
usage
because
of
kids
in
school
and
families,
and
that
can
be
really
difficult,
and
when
we
have
the
flexibility
to
terminate
this
usage
over
a
summer
break
or
even
a
winter
break
or
something
to
help
families
out,
I
think
there's
a
big
benefit
there.
So
that's
important
to
me.
The
second
thing
is,
I'm
not
wild
about
not
having
public
comments
with
the
emergency
approach.
F
F
I
I
want
the
public,
it
would
be
my
preference
to
have
the
public
involved
and
allow
them
to
provide
comments
when
one
of
these
applications
comes
before
us,
and
the
final
thing
I
have
written
down
here
is:
I'm
not
wild
that
it
doesn't
come
before
the
planning
commission
not
for
for
my
own
selfish
reason,
but
I
really
I
really
respect
the
view
of
my
fellow
commissioners.
I
think
we
have
a
lot
of
people
on
this
commission
that
care
a
lot
that
study
a
lot.
F
I
put
a
lot
of
time
into
these
applications
and
I
really
value
their
opinion,
and
I
think
that
they
can.
My
fellow
commissioners
make
a
real
difference
on
these
types
of
applications
and
guiding
us
to
making
sure
that
we're
doing
the
right
thing
for
our
residents
and
so
for
all
three
of
those
reasons.
I
prefer
the
iup
process.
A
Thank
you,
commissioner
abdi.
Do
you
have
your
hand
back
up
or.
B
Yes,
I
do
mr
chair,
I
think
just
hearing
what
commissioner
mentioned
for
staff
is
the.
Would
there
be
an
appeal
option?
Is
there
an
appeal
opportunity
for
the
authorized
staff
review
process,
because
the
other
option
would
have
had
an
appeal
option,
like
any
public
hearing,
does
just
for
clarification.
C
D
Thank
you
so
much,
mr
chair
and
commissioners.
D
I
think
that
an
appeal
process
certainly
could
be
worked
into
into
the
permitting
approach
so
that,
if
staff
found
that
a
property
was
non-compliant
with
the
set
standards
that
you've
advised
on
the
city,
council
would
ultimately
determine
that
there
could
be
an
appeal
to
a
city
body
that
certainly
could
be,
could
be
part
of
the
process,
and
I
think,
ultimately,
what's
really
what
is
similar
about
both
of
the
approaches.
Both
the
iup
approach
and
the
emergency
approach
is
that
the
standards
are
identical
in
both
processes.
D
It's
just
which
powers
the
city
is
utilizing
and
the
sort
of
permanency
of
those
powers,
and
so
they
very
much
they
mirror
each
other
in
many
ways
and
and
the
standards
are,
are
going
to
be
at
the
core
of
of
your
advice
and
counsel
on
this
matter.
In
both
processes.
B
Further,
I
I
think
I
I
heard
an
answer
that
I
thought
I
think
I
would
like
to
hear.
I
appreciate
steph's.
I
know
this
is
a
work
in
progress,
so
I
know
you
guys
are
thinking
on
your
feet
as
we
ask
these
questions
right
now,
but
my
so
then
from
my
from
what
I
heard,
then
the
simple
answer
would
be
yes
there.
B
If,
if
staff
were
to
review
and
approve
an
application
that
they
did
not
like,
how
would
they
know
about
it,
because
there
would
not
be
a
public
hearing
for
them
to
appeal
on
and
two
you
know,
would
that
maybe
maybe
just
focusing
on
number
one?
How
would
they
know
about
it
for
them
to
say
I
can
appeal
this.
I
don't
like
this.
D
So
I
think
I
I
I
approached
your
question
from
the
opposite
side.
So
what
I
was
thinking
about
is
that
an
applicant
comes
in
and
they
don't
meet
the
standards
that
have
been
set
by
the
planning,
commission
and
council
and
therefore
staff
rejects
the
application,
and
then
they
would
be
entitled
to
an
appeal.
That's
a
that
is
a
simple
process
that
we
certainly
could
incorporate
into
the
into
the
into
the
permit
application.
D
D
You
know-
and
I
think
the
issue-
that's
that
really
is
presented
in
these
cases-
is
that
we
have
ongoing
uses
that
are
not
in
compliance
with
our
existing
zoning
code
and
we're
trying
to
craft
sort
of
I
mean
just
just
in
the
very
name
of
the
iup
right,
interim
or
temporary
approaches
to
be
able
to
solve
these
sort
of
complex
and
and
springing
problems,
and
I
so
I
think,
in
terms
of
a
member
of
the
public,
appealing
the
permit
decision
of
the
of
the
planning
manager
or
the
planning
review
team.
D
That
would
be
difficult
to
incorporate,
but
something
that
is
definitely
in
place
is
that
any
member
of
the
public
would
have
the
ability
to
to
speak
with
the
city
or
file
a
complaint
about
any
violations
of
the
standards.
So
things
you
know
like
and
and
something
that
has
been
consistent
across
the
city's
approach
to
this
has.
D
That
is
that
we
have
continued
to
enforce
those
very
important
public
health
safety
and
welfare
issues,
so
ensuring
that
people
in
the
hotel
are
being
well
served
by
the
facility
and
that
people
in
the
surrounding
neighborhood
they're
also
being
well
served
as
the
hotels
being
good
neighbors.
So
there
is
that
complaint
process
that
also
could
be
utilized.
C
And
I'm
just
going
to
jump
in
also
to
say
that
another
one
of
the
standards
is
inspections,
and
this
again
is
applies
to
either
so
it
the
emergency
permit
or
the
iup
or
the
iup
allows
for
the
city.
The
issuing
authority
to
inspect
routinely
inspect
the
the
premises
to
make
sure
that
they
are
complying
with
all
those
other
standards.
The
security
plan,
the
management
operations,
the
building
and
site
requirements.
C
So
there
is
that
ability
as
well
so
there's
some
oversight.
A
Thank
you,
commissioner
abney.
It
looks
like
you
still
have
some
more
questions.
B
So
I
know
when
I
promise,
because
this,
if
we
and
I
am
leaning
more
toward
the
staff
approval
personally,
if
the
staff
approval-
and
you
figure
out
the
appeal
process
for
the
public,
is
there
going
to
be
a
public
record
or
a
map
or
something
on
the
city's
website?
B
That
shows
where
these
types
of
facilities
or
uses
are
popping
up
throughout
the
city,
for
anybody
interested
to
see
where
an
emergency
housing
is
at
if
there's
one
nearby
their
area,
so
that
they're
informed
of
where
how
this
use
where
this
use
is
at
throughout
the
city.
C
Mr
chair,
commissioner,
abdi
you
know
we
haven't
talked
about
that.
I
I
guess
I
I
don't
know
that
there
would
be
any
reason
why
we
couldn't
do
that.
But
once
again
I
I
would
ask
our
attorney
if
there
is
any
legal
reason
why,
having
a
map
that
showed
where
these
permits
were
issued
would
have
if
there
were
any
legal
issues
with
that.
D
I
don't
believe
there
would
be
any
legal
issues
with
that.
Mr
chair
and
members
of
the
commission,
one
of
the
things
that
we
we
already
have
available
as
a
resource
is
that
our
city,
biz
gis
site,
allows
you
to
as
a
member
of
the
public
to
come
into
the
city's
website
and
then
click
to
see
ongoing
applications
in
your
neighborhood.
D
And
so
that's
a
mechanism
that
already
exists
and,
and
I'm
sure
that
we
could
find
you
know
we
could
create
a
page
that
would
direct
direct
folks
to
look
at
those
things
and
they
could
see
all
of
the
application
information
that
would
be
the
there
may
be
some
information
in
terms
of
the
security
plans
that
are,
that
is
protected
private
information.
But
aside
from
that
and
redacted
from
that,
the
those
documents
are
public
and
they're
already
part
of
our
our
existing
public
process.
G
Yeah
and
mr
chairman,
commissioner
abdi,
we
also
have
a
development
map.
That's
set
up
to
kind
of
show
the
public
where
all
the
future
and
coming
development
is
at.
So
we
could
easily
add
it
to
that
web
page
as
well.
B
No,
mr
chair,
I
appreciate
steph's
comments.
Yep.
A
All
right,
commissioner,
corman.
B
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
No
questions
just
to
say
thank
you
and
that
my
preference
is
the
emergency
one.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you,
yeah
I'll.
I
have
a
just
a
couple
questions
and
it
really
has
to
do
maybe
with
if
we
can
think
about
establishing
it,
and
I
think
what
you're
hearing
is
across
the
board.
I'm
hearing
support
for
establishing
it.
There
might
be
a
slight
difference
in
in
which
one
moving
forward,
but
thinking
about
the
end
and
and
julie,
if
you
can
go
back
a
slide,
I
think
you
had
that
kind
of
comparison
or
something
at
the
termination.
C
D
Yes,
mr
chair,
what
we
contemplate
here
is
expiration
of
the
governor's
emergency
order
and,
concurrently
with
the
with
the
exploration
of
the
governor's
emergency
order,
the
the
the
expiration
of
the
eviction
moratorium
as
well.
A
Okay,
all
right
and
then
I'm
gonna,
just
kind
of
continue
down
this
just
to
make
sure
I
fully
understand
so.
The
emergency
authorized
staff
review
is
during
that
emergency
order
to
to
be
able
to
review
and
approve
those
is
the
iup.
Would
that
last
beyond
any
emergency
order,
so
say
the
emergency
order
stops
next
week
and
certainly,
I
think,
we're
all
probably
aware
of
the
the
unemployment
we're
aware
of
the
fact
that
many
people's
housing
has
been
they.
A
C
Mr
chair,
the
interim
used
permit,
was
not
tied
to
the
emergency
order
and
the
timing
of
it
would
extend
potentially
up.
You
know
beyond
the
end
of
an
emergency
order.
It
would
be
the
timing
of
it
would
be
whatever
is
approved
on
the
interim
use
permit.
So
the
two
years
in
the
one
year
is
as
as
drafted,
is
a
maximum
amount.
C
So
you
know,
depending
on
what
got
approved,
you
know
if
council
approved
it
for
the
full
two
years
or
the
full
one
year
or
something
less
than
that.
That
is
the
extent
of
the
duration
of
the
interim
use
permit.
So
it's
it's
kind
of
outside
of
the
emergency
orders.
A
Okay,
so
then
I'm
gonna
kind
of
continue
down
this
a
little
bit
a
facility
comes
in
and
applies
under
and
let's
say
we
allow
the
emergency
authorized
staff
review
to
move
forward
with
those
to
move
forward
for
a
shorter
period.
A
Why
couldn't
we
also
do
an
iup
as
another
option
for
them
to
have
that
longer
period?
Maybe
after
an
emergency
authorization
is,
is
dropped
so
thinking
about
they
can
we
they
need
to
meet
the
standards.
They
do
the
emergency
authorization
that
order
ends.
We
have
a
phase-out
period,
maybe
that's
during
the
summer,
as
I
think
some
of
the
planning
commission
members
have
have
alluded
to
so
kids
aren't
disrupted
from
school,
but
those
areas
continue.
Could
they
have?
C
Sure,
mr
chair
just
kind
of
circle
back
to
some
of
my
comments
right
at
the
beginning
of
this
presentation.
How
this
interim
use
permit
is
really
not
intended
as
a
solution
to
the
longer
term,
homelessness
problem
and
by
definition,
it
is
related
to
a
pandemic,
even
though
the
duration
would
go
beyond
potentially
beyond
an
executive
or
an
emergency
order.
C
So
so,
and
the
other
thing
that
I
want
to
point
out,
one
of
the
things
that
staff
was
struggling
with
here
and
and
some
of
the
planning
commissioners
brought
it
up
at
the
last
meeting.
Was
you
know
by
the
time
you
know
you
get
around
to
getting
a
an
interim
use?
Permit
you
know
how
much
longer
is
this
going
to
last,
because,
if
you're
having
to
create
this
shelter
use
and
and
do
the
all
the
things
that
you
have
to
do,
how
long
is
that
going
to
how
many?
C
More
more
effectively
because
you
know
we
had
some
concerns
and
and
so
did
some
planning
commissioners
about
whether
or
not
there
would
be
a
lot
of
push
or
demand
for
somebody
to
actually
come
in
and
do
an
interim
youth
permit
to
convert
their
property,
their
entire
property
to
a
shelter
use
for
the
duration
of
the
permit,
especially
if
this
kind
of
emergency
situation
starts
to
wane,
because
one
of
the
things
that
was
driving
this
was
the
the
need
to
de-densify.
C
I
guess
some
of
the
traditional
shelters,
so
you
know
when
the
emergency
or
or
when
the
pandemic
is
gets
under
better
control.
You
know
that
could
that
situation
could
change
so
so
that
was
also
kind
of
in
the
back
of
our
our
minds
a
little
bit
so,
but
but
but
you're
you're
right
that
the
duration
under
the
iup
is
potentially
longer.
I
mean
we
don't
know
how
long
this
emergency
will
last
it
could
last
for
the
next
year
as
well.
A
Okay,
thank
you
and,
and
just
really
what
I'm
trying
to
understand
is
how
these
might
end
or
or
what
those
next
phases
are,
and
so
I
think
to
your
point.
The
iup
gives
that
maybe
potentially
flex
longer
flexibility,
but
then
we
still
also
have
the
congregate,
housing,
ordinance
and-
and
I
just
want
to
understand,
just
a
little
bit
as
we
think
about
this,
and
and
what
we've
given
you
guys,
staff
over
the
past
month
of
ideas
for
thinking
about
this
congregate.
A
G
Sure
so,
mr
chairman,
congregate
living
facilities
are
currently
conditional
uses
in
all
of
the
multi-family
zoning
districts
in
the
city.
So
a
more
traditional
permanent
shelter
you
know
in
the
past
or
in
the
future
would
go
through
that
conditional
use
permit
process
within
those
districts.
A
Okay,
so,
theoretically
applicant,
if-
and
I
know
we
talked
about
this
just
as
potentials-
but
would
a
entity
want
to
then
re-zone,
and
that
would
be
that
more
permanent
decision.
So
I
now
I
I'm
in
a
good
spot
with
that,
and
I
appreciate
staff's
response
to
the
questions
for
that.
So
and
then
I
think
just
one
other
question
is
talking
about
the
phase
out
period.
All
right.
A
I
think
we've
given
some
feedback
on
that
before
that,
certainly-
and
I
see
megan
kind
of
responding
here-
that
we
have
but
making
sure
that
we're
really
thinking
about
families
in
this
and
what
I
mean
boy,
the
pandemic,
stressful
enough,
let
alone
having
to
move
your
family.
So
thinking
about
that
for
potential.
A
Not
necessarily
a
time
frame,
but
maybe
connected
to
an
action.
So
with
that,
I
am
generally
in
support
of
the
emergency
authorized
staff
review.
Knowing
that
we've
done
a
lot
of
discussion,
we've
had
a
lot
of
discussion
on
this.
I
think
we're
really
trying
to
respond
to
the
environment
around
us
with
not
only
the
pandemic,
but
housing
crisis
and
unemployment,
and
so
I
could
support
that
as
it
is
as
long
as
we're
thinking
about
that
duration
with
families
in
mind.
B
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
I
don't
know
if
this
it's
not
a
question
directly
related
to
the
standards,
but
really
in
relation
to
the
families
and
as
this
plan
moves
forward,
if
the
city
has
or
if
you
have
already
considered
a
partnership
with
the
school
district
or
if
this
is
something
that
will
be
coming
along
as
the
process
continues,
because
I
think
it's
important
to
identify
it
also,
especially
those
those
families
or
students
who
are
in
desperate
need
for
a
more
stable
home
situation.
E
I
wanted
to
touch
a
little
bit
on
the
comment
that
commissioner
cooktu
made
about
public
input
and
I
think
that's
an
important
it's.
It's
often
an
important
piece
of
why
we
why
we
do
our
things
the
way
we
do
them
and
we
have
these
public
meetings.
E
E
E
I
should
say
nobody
living
near
a
facility
like
this
and
because,
if
it
was
a
permanent
thing,
you
know
if
we
were
looking
to
convert
something
long-term,
then
I
think
that
has
a
long-term
impact
on
people's
businesses,
people's
homes,
whatever
that
may
be
that's
in
proximity,
but
personally,
that's
more
of
a
short-term
use.
I
just
we've
had
a
few
things
where
we've
had
some
things
come
back
to
us
and
we
hear
kind
of
the
same
stuff
about
it's.
E
Just
I
don't
know,
I
think
people
know
kind
of
the
things
that
we've
had
in
front
of
us,
that
it's
it's
less
about
the
the
use
and
more
about
the
discomfort
with
something
that's
different,
and
I
don't
want
us
to
open
that
up
either
because
you
know
being
uncomfortable.
Something
that's
different
is
not
the
same
as
you
know
again,
a
permanent
use
that
may
cause
an
impact,
your
business
or
your
home.
A
Thoughts
I'll
talk
a
little
bit
thinking
about
the
the
kind
of
the
public
notice
side,
and
I
think
one
of
the
key
points
for
me
is
tied
to
governor's
emergency
and
emergency
authorization
and
we're
talking
about
temporary
pandemic
housing.
So
it's
a
very
limited
scope
to
and
especially
as
we
think
about
this
now
in
the
state
of
minnesota
and
what
the
temperatures
are
going
to
start
to
do
here
very
shortly,
we've
been
very
lucky
up
to
this
point.
A
Yes,
it
could
extend
to
a
longer
period,
but
I
do
think
they're
they're
extenuating
circumstances
to
that
side
of
the
house
to
say
there's
reasons
to
do
things
in
a
very
quick
manner
and
I
do
think
on
the
other
side,
we
have
the
ability
to
notify
public,
albeit
through
the
application
side
and
the
development
mapping,
but
it
does
come
back
to.
I
really
think
that
this
is
something
we're
allowing
on
a
very
limited
basis
in
the
city.
It's
it's
and
once
it
goes
to
maybe
a
more
permanent
application.
A
That's
really
the
the
opportunity
for
for
residents
and
and
neighbors
to
think
about.
How
is
that
impact
and
what
can
they?
What
are
what
are
their
comments
for
the
city
to
to
to
to
view
and
understand
so,
commissioner,
roman,
do
you
have
another
comment.
E
It
did
and
if
staff,
if
this
is
in
the
next
question
you
had
tweet
up
for
us,
I
can
wait,
but
the
phase-out
period
is
that
intended
to
be
consistent,
or
is
that
intended
to
be
variable
based
on
each
individual
applicant.
C
Mr
chair,
commissioner,
roman,
actually
that's
a
kind
of
a
good
segue
too,
into
talking
about
some
of
these
standards
again.
This
is
kind
of
a
work
in
progress,
and
I
hate
to
keep
throwing
everything
over
to
megan,
but
she's.
The
one
who's
been
closest
to
she's,
been
sort
of
the
the
person
in
the
middle
of
all
the
different
comments
that
have
been
coming
in
on
on
this
dra.
This
work
in
progress.
C
So
I'm
going
to
ask
her
to
maybe
spell
out
what
is
the
latest
thinking
on
that
phase-out
period
or
have
we
just?
Are
we
still
at
such
the
early
stage
that
we're
open
to
just
some
input.
D
Thank
you
julie,
mr
chair
members
of
the
commission.
D
You
know,
I
think,
that
the
phase
out
process
you
know
we
are
seeking
input
from
the
existing
providers
and-
and
I
think
it
will
be
essential
for
them
to
assist
us
with
crafting
that
language,
because
they
are
in
the
best
position
to
know
what
their,
what
their
transition
period
will
look
like,
and
I
think
that
it
will
likely
vary
based
upon
each
one
of
the
providers
and
the
specific
type
of
resources
that
are
available
to
those
providers
and
and
for
example,
the
hennepin
county
has
worked
diligently
over
the
last
several
months
to
develop
new
housing
opportunities
and
is
putting
up
about
400
units
over
the
next
next
this
month
and
then
next
month,
for
people
to
have
a
more
permanent
place
and
in
doing
so
we'll
be
transitioning
people
out
of
existing
facilities
in
the
city
of
bloomington.
D
And
so
I
think
that's
a
good
example
of
how,
when
other
needs
are
met.
In
this
larger
scope
of
trying
to
address
the
homelessness
issue
in
the
metro
area
and
statewide
that
it's
going
to
be
dependent
upon,
the
particular
group
served
and
the
existing
resources
of
the
provider
and
the
the
availability
and
sort
of
their
plan
for
the
people
that
they
serve.
And
so
I
I
would
that's
a
very
long
way
of
saying.
I
think
it
will
be
scaled
on
a
provider-based
approach.
E
I
don't
know
what
that
is,
but
some
sort
of
parameter
that
it
may
be
flexible
vibrator,
but
it
should
not
be
longer
than
x
and
it
goes
back
to
the
previous
conversation
we
had
about
which
route
do
we
go?
E
Iup
versus
I'll
call,
it
easr
for
short,
and
I
think
again,
people
knowing
that
okay
we're
going
to
go
this
route
and
let's
expect
people
to
public,
knowing
that
it's
not
going
to
last
longer
than
x
pass
fly
again,
get
that
there
may
be
individual
needs,
but
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
for
people
that
so
if
staff
is
chewing
on
this
pays
out
not
longer
than
whatever
time
period.
That
is
in
public,
and
we
can
react
to
that
when
you
have
thoughts
on
that.
A
Other
other
thoughts,
you
know,
commissioner,
roman,
I
think
it's
it's
a
good
point.
There
does
need
to
be
something-
and
I
again
I
think,
where
we're
at
now
and
what
we're
thinking
about
and
I'm
coming
from
the
side
of
having
kids
in
that,
but
there
may
there
are
certainly
individuals
and
and
programs
that
are
going
to
treat
things
differently.
So
I
I
can.
A
I
think
that
makes
sense
that
they're
the
providers
will
help
with
that,
and
I
I
think
that's
the
other
side,
though,
is
from
providers
I
think,
do
we
have
a
responsibility
to
also
then
try
and
protect
those
kids
that
might
be
in
school
already
in
bloomington
or
richfield,
and
try
and
keep
them
settled,
so
any
other
thoughts
do
well.
Let
me
ask
this
to
staff.
You
need
any
more
on
that
particular
interim
versus
emergency
authorized.
G
A
I
I
believe
so
I
I
did
hear
that
commissioner
cook
don
was
a
little
more
on
the
interim
use
side
because
of
the
public
comment.
Is
that
correct
commissioner
cook
done?
A
A
C
So,
mr
chair
and
commissioners,
so
the
other
question
was
about
the
standards,
and
so
I
think
I'll
just
stay
on
this
screen,
because
it
lays
everything
out
and
we've
kind
of
had
this
discussion
about
the
the
duration
already,
because
all
the
other
standards
are
the
same.
But
in
your
packet
you
also
got
a
draft
that
that
spells
out
the
standards
like
the
requirements
and
security
plan,
etc.
C
In
much
more
detail,
probably
the
the
one
that
we're
well,
if
you
have
any
comments
on
on
any
of
those,
but
but
the
other
one
is.
Is
that
the
question
of
the
locational
criteria?
If,
if
you
are
comfortable
with
that,
so
we're
looking
at
a
quarter
mile
or
potentially
a
half
mile
from
a
transit
stop
and
a
half
mile
from
grocery
or
pharmacy?
C
So
if
you
concur
with
the,
I
guess,
we're
looking
for
your
direction
on
on,
if
you're
good
with
the
half
mile
the
quarter
mile
half
mile
or
you
you
prefer
a
half
mile,
half
mile
or
if
you
don't
think
any
of
those
standards
should
be
included.
C
So,
just
looking
for
your
kind
of
concurrence
or
suggestions
on
the
standards
as
currently
drafted,.
A
Sure,
thank
you.
I
certainly
opened
this
up
to
everybody.
I
think,
from
my
perspective,
I
think
our
standard
distance
for
walking
we
consider
a
half
mile,
so
I'm
not
sure
why
we
would
have
difference
for
grocery
and
pharmacy
versus
a
transit,
stop
thinking.
It
might
actually
be
harder
to
to
walk
with
groceries
than
potentially
be
riding
the
bus
to
go
to
a
job
or
something
so
I'll
open.
This
up.
The
commission
members,
commissioner
roman.
E
Yeah,
I
would
agree
with
the
john
about
the
half
mile,
just
being
consistent
for
one
yeah,
what
you
know
whatever
the
number
is,
if
it's,
if
the
staff
or
the
commission
feels
like
a
half
mile,
is
right
or
a
quarter
mile
for
both,
I
mean,
I
think
a
half
feels
better.
E
I
did
have
a
question
for
staff
on
in
the
proposed
standards
document,
I'm
going
to
split
it
into
two
parts,
but
they
may
be
the
same
answer
so
I'll
ask
of
the
separate
questions,
but
you
may
find
them
to
be
the
same
in
on
page
one
in
the
security
plan.
It
talks
whether
the
applicant
must
submit
a
fire
safety
plan
approved
by
the
chief.
E
So
we've
got
that
and
then
there's
the
building
and
site
requirements,
there's
three
different
bullets
about
building
code
and
parking
and
lighting,
and
so
this
is
why
I
think
they
might
be
the
same,
but
they
might
be
different.
We're
talking
about
making
this
a
potential
use
in
hotel
housing
in
hotel
facilities.
E
Do
not
hotel
facilities
already
have
to
meet
those
standards,
and
is
there
a
reason
we
would
trigger
them
to
have
their
standards
relooked
at
versus?
If
they
had
just
continued
on
in
business,
they
would
be
subject
to
whatever
inspections
there's.
I
guess
those
those
specific
things
to
me
feel
like
something
that
they
should
have
met
anyways
when
they
were
in
the
hotel
business.
C
Mr
chair,
commissioner,
roman,
I
think
you're
you're
right.
I
think
the
practical
matter
is
that
the
existing
facilities
anyway
would
meet
those
or
a
lot
of
them
would
would
meet
those,
so
you
know
it
may
be,
but
I
think
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
just
is
make
sure
that
we
are
being
clear
about.
C
You
know
some
of
the
characteristics
of
the
sites
that
would
host
this
sort
of
a
facility.
I
I
don't
think
that
they're
that
we
think
that
they
pose
any
any
barriers.
G
E
It
makes
sense
I
just
what
I
just
don't
want
us
to
do
is
have
it
be
the
that
it's
so
onerous
that
a
facility
would
choose
not
to
do
it,
because
it's
essentially
like
getting
permitted
all
over
again.
So
I
hear
what
you're
saying-
and
I
think,
those
things
that
are
unique
nuances
to
the
this
type
of
use
makes
sense,
but
I
think
if
it's,
I
would
cautiously
be
making
it
too
broad
that
it
kind
of
comes
back
to
what
you
got
to
do
in
the
first
place
to
get
pass
through.
A
E
A
E
Or
that
you
know
the
the
solberg
suites
wants
to
do
this,
but
yeah
yeah
they're
in
compliant
with
the
standard
of
the
time,
but
this
calls
for
them
to
have
to
do
12
things
that
they
wouldn't
otherwise
have
to
do
if
they
were
still
in
business,
and
maybe
this
six
months
of
this
income
keeps
them
going
and
they
continue
to
be
an
important
part
of
our
city
versus
a
vacant
property.
So
that's
my
thought.
A
Yeah,
I
just
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
we're
on
that
we're
understanding
that,
from
the
same
side
and
and
what
julie
said
it
are,
we
are
we
understanding
that,
or
are
we
saying
no
with
this,
the
way
that
language
is
written,
that
they
would
have
to,
I
don't
know,
replace
all
their
plugins
and
add
no
drip
faucets
or
something.
G
A
E
Go
ahead,
I
think
it
makes
sense.
I
just
want
to
to
back
to
the
conversation
we
had
before.
I
don't
want
to
have
something
that
opens
a
door
to
a
number
of
the
public
being
able
to
complain,
file,
a
complaint
that,
according
to
the
wording
of
our
code,
that
they
are
non-compliant
that
they
would
be
shut
down.
So
that's
all.
A
Okay,
any
other
questions
on,
I
think
we're
still
on
standards
is
that
correct,
julie.
C
Yep,
and,
and
so
far
what
I'm
hearing
is
with
regard
to
locational
criteria,
that
folks
feel
that
the
half
mile
is
is
a
is
a
good
distance
and
it
and
they
and
you
like
the
fact
that,
having
it
be
half
mile
from
transit
and
a
half
mile
from
grocery
keep
the
keep
the
distance
criteria.
The
same.
A
I
think
consistency
was
definitely
I
don't
know.
We
only
heard
from
a
couple
commissioners
on
the
distance
is
there?
Are
there
more
thoughts
on
that,
commissioner
crookton.
F
I'm
fine
with
half
mile
mr
chair,
okay,.
A
All
right,
that's
three!
I
think
three
of
us
so
far.
If
we
get
one
more,
then
we
then
we're
over
half
that
agree
to
the
half
mile.
C
Okay,
so
back
to
the
the
question,
so
so
that's
essentially,
I
guess
to
flesh
out
this.
You
seem
okay
with
the
the
standards
as
presented
with
the
the
change
that
we
just
noted
about
the
half
mile
distance.
A
I'm
looking
through
mine
right
now
as
well
so
commissioner
roman.
E
Yeah,
the
only
one-
and
maybe
I'm
missing
again
here,
but
one
of
the
things
we
talked
about
was
density
of
use
and
maybe
that's
going
to
show
up
later
in
the
in
the
draft,
but
not
wanting.
We
want
these
somewhat
dispersed
and
not
having
four
five
six
of
them
in
the
same
cluster.
C
Mr
chair,
commissioner,
roman,
no,
we
that's
not
actually
included
in
here
the
the
spacing
distance.
What
that
we
were
talking
about.
E
Okay,
I
I
don't
know
what
the
body's
consensus,
but
it
would
be
good
to
have
something
like
that
that
I
I
seem
to
recall
that
was
one
of
the
pieces
that
was
talked
about
last
time
was
some
sort
of
spacing
distance,
whether
that
was
number
of
total
beds
or
distance
between
facilities.
I
don't
recall,
but
I
do
remember
there
was
some
talk
about
that
and
I'll
be
curious
to
know
what
others
think.
F
Yeah,
mr
chair,
to
that
point
I
too,
like
the
idea
of
some
spacing.
I
think
we've
got
to
be
a
little
careful
if
we've
got
seven
hotels
or
whatever.
The
number
is
that
are
currently
doing
that
I'd
hate
to
have
a
some
sort
of
a
spacing
requirement
and
then
it's
a
race
to
see
who
can
get
their
application
first
and
somebody
gets
squeezed
out,
and
so
we
just
want
to
make
sure
we're
being
careful
about
that.
G
A
Other
commission
members
and
I
do
recall
some
of
that
discussion
and
I
think,
as
I
one
of
my
comments,
was
really
more
about
the
city,
making
sure
that
we
aren't
concentrating
this
to
adversely
impact.
Maybe
some
of
our
protected
communities
protected
classes.
So
I
I
don't
know
how
to
think
about
that
right
now
and
maybe
that's
a
little
bit
more
for
staff
to
think
about.
A
And
but
I
think,
you're
hearing
there's
there's
still
some
thought
there
about
not
doing
making
unfair
burdens
on
on
any
given
population
or
or
location.
A
A
Any
other
commission
members
thoughts
again
on
standards
or
anything.
That's
missing.
F
Thanks,
mr
sharon,
I
don't
have
this
thought
fully
baked
in
my
head
yet,
but
I'm
a
little
torn
on
the
proximity,
because
I
I
think
there's
benefits
to
having
to
spread
out
and
not
concentrating
it.
But
I
again
sort
of
have
some
struggles
that
well
my
neighbor
did
this
before
I
was
ready
to
do
it
and
now
I
can't
because
my
neighbor
is,
I
feel,
that's
a
little
unjust,
so
I
I
don't
know
how
we
can
be
creative
to
avoid
some
of
the
unintended
consequences
of
of
proximity
or
density
or
whatever.
D
D
You
know
one
being
used
for
this
interim
use
and
another
being
used
for
an
intermute.
I
understand
commissioner
solberg's
chair
solberg
response,
like
I,
I
understand
not
concentrating
and
putting
an
unnecessary
burden,
but
I
do
think,
as
an
interim
youth,
it
seems
like
an
effective
thing
to
have
to
give
to
all
hotel
chains
owners
locations,
despite
what
others
are
doing
near
and
around
them.
A
A
I
kind
of
veered
off
into
long-term
duration.
There
again,
commissioner
abdi
did
you
did
you
have
a
comment.
B
Yes
and
I
feel
conflicted,
and
I
was
the
one
that
really
was
going
in
in
terms
of
the
making
sure
that
we
are
discussing
concentration
and
how
do
we
space
out
or
how
do
we
cap
the
number
if
we
were
to
go
for
an
interview,
so
whatever
the
case
may
be
with
the
new
proposal
that
we're
talking
right
now,
I
feel
like
there
is
not
even
a
time
on
it.
B
I
felt
that
the
interim
used
folks
who
had
an
understanding
that
they
that
interim
use
application
would
expire
one
to
two
years,
depending
on
whatever
the
number
ends
up
being.
But
with
this
proposal
it's
subject
to
the
governor
lifting
the
ban
or
lifting
the
or
ending
the
what
you
will
call
it.
The.
B
Emergency,
thank
you
so
because
it's
an
unknown
timeline,
I
would
assume-
or
I
would
think,
that
neighbors
or
facilities
that
have
high
concentration.
B
B
So
I
feel
like
we
are
going
to
have
to
I'm
going
to
end
with
that.
I
am
conflicted
with
the
concentration
option,
with
the
concern
that
the
pandemic
is
subject
to
the
governor's
ending
the
emergency,
and
if
there
is
not
a
specific
site
for
what
that
number
is,
I
would
like
it
to
be
more
dispersed
to
ensure
that
there
is
not
a
burden
on
surrounding
uses.
A
Okay,
all
right,
commissioner,
albrecht.
D
Yeah
thanks,
I
I
agree
with
commissioner
abdi
on
that.
However,
I
do
think
that
the
timeline
coinciding
with
the
emergency
orders
makes
to
me
makes
a
lot
of
sense
in
that
you
know.
I
do
think
there
is
in
for
this
pandemic's
sake.
As
an
example,
I
think
the
governor
generally
has
has
an
incentive
to
not
extend
the
emergency
powers
again
and
again
and
again
for
an
un
unreasonable
amount
of
time
right.
A
Okay
other
commissioner's
thoughts
on
this.
I
think
we're
there's.
It
feels
like
half
dozen
one
and
six
of
the
other
right
now
for
staff,
so
trying
to
give
them
some
thoughts.
E
I
don't
have
a
strong
opinion
on
the
topic.
I
just
raised
it
because
I
knew
it.
I
recalled
it
was
discussed
and
I
didn't
see
anything
in
there.
So
I
would
look
for
staffs
guidance
on
based
on
either
what
they've
seen
what
they've
heard
other
colleagues
other
communities
or
what
they've
heard
from
the
community
and
make
a
recommendation
there.
So
I
don't
feel
strongly
one
way
or
the
other.
A
A
I
think
we're
looking
more
just
to
make
sure
that
we're
thinking
about
this
holistically
and
I
would
trust
that
staff
has-
and
I
know
they
have
thought
about
this-
an
awful
lot
and
we'll
be
able
to
provide
additional
guidance
if
needed,
for
the
city
council
on
any
kind
of
density
or
whatever
issues
may
be.
Commissioner
corman.
B
Thanks
mr
chair
yeah,
I'm
in
the
same
spot
I
don't
have
a
specific
preference
and
I
prefer
to
trust
the
recommendation
of
the
staff
based
on
their
knowledge
and
experience
in
this.
A
Okay,
are
you
getting
a
direction,
miss
barnum.
C
Yes,
thank
you,
mr
chair
and
commissioner,
so
again,
just
to
summarize
in
terms
of
locational
standards,
half
mile
for
for
both
you're
generally
okay,
with
the
the
rest
of
the
standards,
you
want
staff
to
think
about
if
there
is
any
way
to
provide
some
some
means
to
eliminate
concentrations
of
of
these
in
in
this
in
the
set
of
standards.
C
So
we
can.
We
can
certainly
take
a
look
at
that.
A
I
think
there
was
maybe
some
indifference
to
that,
after
all
was
said
and
done,
okay
in
part,
quite
a
honestly
we're,
not
the
experts
in
it.
So
we
don't
know
if
it's
better
to
be
concentrated
or
not
to
be
so
we
would
look
to
staff
to
develop
that
if,
if
it
is
one
or
the
other
at
this
point.
C
Right,
okay,
that
sounds
good,
and
so
with
that
I
guess
I
will
kind
of
move
forward
to
I'll.
Just
there's
some
outreach
here,
our
typical
our
standard
slide
here.
Just
to
let
you
know
we
did
send
the
final
commission
packet
out
to
various
shelter
providers.
Just
so
you
know
that
you
also,
I
believe,
received
an
email
that
we
got
today
with
a
letter
from
saint
stephen's
human
services.
We
did
and
so
and
they
were,
they
had
some
comments
on
some
of
the
standards
as
well.
C
So
next
steps,
given
your
preference
to
move
forward
with
the
emergency
approach,
would
be
to
finalize
the
draft
resolution
we'll
be
doing
some
outreach
again
to
the
existing
providers,
the
convention,
vis,
visitor
bureau,
hotels,
etc
and
then
getting
this
on
a
city
council
agenda
as
soon
as
we
can
in
january
for
consideration
and
then
you
know
putting
it
into
place
so
so
that's
kind
of
what
the
timeline
looks
like
moving
forward,
and
I
believe
that
is
the
end
of
the
presentation.
C
So
unless
you
have
any
other
questions,
I
I
think
that
concludes
this
item.
A
All
right,
commissioner
kuchan,
do
you
have
a
question.
C
No,
this
is
a
resolution
that
would
go
directly
to
the
council.
We
can
certainly
provide
you
a
copy
of
that
resolution.
A
Okay
yeah,
mrs
barnum.
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
as
as
we've
planning
commission
to
to
see
what
that
resolution
is
as
a
email
or
or
information
item.
As
we've
asked
for
other
items
in
the
past.
A
A
All
right
well,
commissioner,
roman
thank.
E
E
Second,
that,
even
if
it's
just
I
know
we
all
can
have
access
to
the
public
document
for
the
council,
but
even
if
it's
just
a
heads
up
that
this
is
what
we're
sending
to
the
council
either
offer
you
feedback
or
feedback
to
the
council.
E
But
thank
you
for
your
work
on
this.
This
is
this
is
excellent.
A
Yeah
so
second,
thank
you.
It's
a
lot
of
work
under,
I
think
a
lot
of
duress
as
you
hit
a
application
in
front
of
you
and
then
dropping,
and
then
the
council
or
the
planning
commission,
giving
you
some
some
good
direction
at
some
points
and
maybe
some
very
confusing
direction.
A
All
right,
I
think
that
so
that
concludes
item
number
one
looks
like
item
number
two
is
discussion
of
the
2021
planning
commission
work
plan
and
I
believe,
julie,
long
you're,
presenting
on
this
as
as
well
as
julie,
farnham,.
C
C
Okay,
so
the
2021
planning
commission
work
plan
so
just
a
quick
overview
of
the
things
that
you
accomplished
in
2020,
so
it
was
a
busy
year
got
a
lot
done
also
wanted
to
just
do
an
update
on
the
planning
division
staff
structure.
So
probably
the
big
change
here
this
year
is
there
was
a
long-range
planner
position
that
was
vacated
back
in
2009
and
was
never
filled
but
remained
an
option
during
this
budgeting
season,
which
was,
as
you
know,
a
little
more
challenging
than
some
in
the
past.
C
That
position
was
actually
given
up
and
in
order
to
help
with
the
budget
balancing
process.
Another
thing
that
happened
is
that
we
are
dedicating
20
percent
of
one
of
the
long-range
planning
staff
to
the
hra,
and
essentially
that's
mike
palermo,
who
has
done
a
lot
of
work
with
housing,
some
of
the
housing
efforts
here
already,
so
that
was
a
natural
fit
for
him,
but
the
result
of
that
is
that
that
where
we
have
about
400
hours
less
than
we
normally
have
to
play
with
from
a
long-range
planning
staff.
C
C
Others
were
projects
that
that
got
kind
of
put
on
the
back
burner,
because
there
was
a
couple
projects
that
came
up,
including
the
one
that
we
just
talked
about
and
the
other
being
the
self
storage
facility.
Both
of
those
had
were
you
know,
a
much
shorter
time
frame
priorities
and
they
pretty
much
bumped
out
a
couple
other
projects
or
back
burnered
some
of
those
projects.
The
good
news
is,
there
was
a
fair
amount
of
progress
made
on
some
of
these
projects,
even
if
we
didn't
take
them
to
close
in
2020.
C
So
I'll
be
kind
of
going
through
all
of
the
projects,
and
these
are
the
the
buckets
that
we
we
put
them
into
and
one
of
the
new
ones
that
we
added
this
year
was
this
transportation
and
transit
updates.
There
was
a
request
by
the
planning
commission
chair
that
you
know
we
could
do
a
better
job
of
keeping
the
planning
commission
abreast
of
transportation
and
transit
projects.
C
So
that's
what
julie
long
will
be
speaking
to
later
and
we
so
we've
just
added
that
into
our
work
plan.
As
an
aside,
so
I'm
going
to
go
through
kind
of
quickly
each
of
these
projects,
and
I
guess
this
is
a
study
session.
If,
if
you
have
a
question,
maybe
just
stop
me
as
I'm
going
along
this
arrow
icon
up
in
the
corner
represents
a
carryover
project.
So
we
just
talked
about
this.
C
The
temporary
pandemic
response
housing
so
and
we
know
that
we're
going
to
move
forward
with
this
resolution,
so
so
this
going
to
planning
commission
with
an
ordinance
on
the
14th
is
no
longer
the
case.
C
One
of
the
projects
that
was
on
our
2020
and
got
a
quite
a
bit
of
work
done
almost
actually
got
it
completed
when
it
got
back.
Burnered
was
this
codifying
of
the
environmental
review
process.
C
So
what
this
is
is
the
mandatory
environmental
review
process
for
eaws
or
eis
is
there's
thresholds
that
get
triggered
depending
on
the
size
and
the
type
of
abuse,
and
what
the
reason
behind
this
project
was
to
include
language
in
our
code
to
clarify
what
the
process
is
and
when
those
mandatory
reviews
are
required
for
a
couple
reasons,
one
so
that
it's
in
front
of
staff,
so
that
you
know
it's
it's
on
their
radar
and
it's
also
on
the
radar
of
applicants
and
and
folks
wanting
to
do
development
in
the
city.
C
So
this
is
nearing
completion
so
hoping
to
get
this
finalized
and
in
front
of
the
planning
commission
in
the
first
quarter
of
of
the
year.
C
The
sign
ordinance
is
a
big
project.
We
did
not
anticipate.
We
would
be
able
to
finish
that
in
2020
did
get
some
good
work
done
on
it
early
on
in
in
the
year,
and
then
this
one
got
sidetracked.
C
One
of
the
things
kind
of
where
we're
at
with
this
is
we're
about
ready
to
do
some
outreach
and
given
the
complexity
and
and
just
the
sensitivity
of
sign
regulation,
we
really
want
to
do
outreach
when
we
can
do
it
face
to
face,
and
so
we're
looking
at
this,
probably
getting
going
more
on
this
in
the
last
half
of
2021,
and
this
will
very
likely
carry
over
into
2022.
Just
because
it's
a
complicated
piece
of
our
ordinance.
C
This
landscape
update
the
landscape
and
tree
preservation
standards.
This
kind
of
was
is
related
to
some
of
the
other
sustainability
projects
that
we
have
on
on
our
list
and,
and
those
other
ones
took
precedent
over
this,
and
and
we
we
decided
to-
let's-
let's
really
define
this
more
clearly
and
more
narrowly
and
and
just
get
this
part
of
it
done
because
it
it
was
getting
into
you
know,
sort
of
wholesale
looking
at
our
landscaping
and
tree
preservation
regulations.
C
This
project
is
not
that
this
project
is
really
looking
at
our
current
codes.
It's
it's
really
kind
of
like
the
miscellaneous
issues
or
the
cleanup
code
of
of
some
of
the
existing
stuff,
we're
going
to
be
looking
at
broader
sustainability
standards
and
best
practices
as
a
separate
project
here,
and
so
that
may
trigger
some
additional
changes
to
these
other
standards.
But
we
want
to
the
idea
is
that
we
want
to
get
rid
of
any
current
kind
of
low-hanging
barriers
to
doing
sustainable
best
practices
through
our
current
landscaping,
tree
preservation,
requirements.
C
The
self
storage
study
you
reviewed
this
back
in
october,
the
city
council
just
reviewed
it.
On
monday,
the
city
council
did
recommend
going
with
staff's
recommendations
on
this
planning.
Commission
had
some
slightly
different
recommendations,
so
we
will
be
moving
forward.
First
off
we're
going
to
be
doing
some
outreach
to
affected
property
owners
and
the
storage
business
owners
and
then
drafting
up
the
ordinance
and
getting
that
through
the
public
hearings.
C
We
anticipate
that
in
the
late
q1
early,
q2
kind
of
time
period,
energy,
benchmarking
and
time
of
sale
disclosure
requirements.
This
is
one
of
those
sustainability
items
that
come
to
precedent
over
that
that
landscaping
standards
that
I
just
spoke
about.
So
this
is
something
that's
being
led
by
the
sustainability
staff.
That's
housed
in
public
works
and
working
with
a
consultant
and
is
really
looking
at
various
approaches
to
doing
energy,
benchmarking
and
time
of
sale
disclosure.
C
This
project
got
slowed
down
a
little
bit,
and
you
know
the
the
pandemic
and
needing
to
go
virtual,
had
a
a
slowing
down
effect
on
a
lot
of
projects,
particularly
where
you
were
trying
to
interact
with
other
agencies
and
such,
and
this
was
one
of
those.
So
while
we
had
hoped
to
have
something
ready
to
move
forward
with,
so
the
idea
is
that
the
first
part
of
this
project,
which
is
being
led
by
public
works,
is
to
identify
what
how
to
move
forward
with
this.
C
So
it's
my
understanding
that
this
is
going
to
be
going
to
city
council
study
in
I
believe
february,
and
then
once
we
get
some
direction,
and
I
understand
that
they
want
to
do
some
outreach
before
actually
finalizing
any
kind
of
amendment.
So
so
we're
looking
at
probably
having
some
amendment
work
related
to
these
things,
maybe
mid-year
or
late
summer
kind
of
thing.
C
There's
another
sustainability
related
item.
This
actually
is
kind
of
a
carryover,
because
we
there
was
a
work
group
that
was
established.
C
Consider
consisting
of
folks
from
other
metro
area
cities
and
some
out
state
cities,
some
who
have
are
ahead
of
us
in
the
in
the
process
and
some
who
are
kind
of
where
we
are
in
trying
to
come
up
with
a
policy
and
perhaps
some
actual
standards
and
and
so
we've
been
meeting
with
a
a
this
group
and
the
idea
being
coordinating
amongst
a
group
to
share
best
practices
and
also
to
try
to
have
consistent
application
of
regulation
and
policies
kind
of
across
the
the
area
so
that
you
know
one
community
isn't
significantly
more
restrictive
than
the
other,
so
that
that's
kind
of
the
idea
behind
it.
C
C
This
is
a
a
new
project.
There's
a
several
projects
that
have
been
suggested
to
finding
staff
that
are
related
to
housing
and
housing
and
kind
of
coming
out
of
the
city
council's
interest
in
expanding
housing
opportunities,
particularly
more
affordable
choices
across
the
city.
So,
as
you
may
be
aware,
we
do
have
provisions
for
accessory
dwelling
units
in
our
code.
C
Now
we
we
haven't
really
had
many
accessory
dwelling
units
be
built
under
those
standards,
and
so
what
this
would
be
is
is
taking
a
look
at
our
standards,
maybe
comparing
to
some
other
standards
and
see
if,
if
our
standards
should
be
tweaked
in
any
way
to
perhaps.
C
Align
that
better
with
other
other
community
standards
and
also
to
meet
kind
of
where
the
current
demand
is,
but
our
original
standards
were
were
adopted,
I
believe
in
2008,
so
this
whole
business
around
80
years
and
just
the
way
they're
designed
and-
and
all
of
that
has
has
really
advanced
a
lot.
So
so
I
think,
there's
there's
it's
worth
looking
at
and
updating
our
our
standards.
Just
given
current
best
practices
have
have
changed.
C
C
Such
another
housing
one
is
looking
at
our
multi-family
parking
standards.
So,
as
you
have,
I'm
sure
noticed
in
review
of
some
of
these
residential
development
projects
that
have
come
before
you
parking
flexibility
is
one
of
is,
is
often
requested,
particularly
when
a
developer
is
trying
to
do
affordable
housing
just
because
the
cost
of
providing
parking
in
particular
structured
parking
is,
is
really
expensive.
C
So
this
project
would
involve
just
kind
of
doing
a
survey
of
other
communities
as
well,
seeing
where,
where
we
stand
and-
and
you
know
considering,
if
our
parking
standards
should
be
modified
in
any
way
and
our
annual
miscellaneous
issues
ordinance,
which
you
just
reviewed
a
month
ago-
and
so
we
always
have
that
on
our
plate
and
in
2021
we
have
no
city
initialized,
rezonings
or
re-guidings
on
our
plate.
So
far.
C
So
moving
on
to
the
category
of
plans
and
special
projects,
the
parks
master
plan
update
this
was
started
actually
back
in
late
2019,
and
it
too
was
slowed
down
a
lot
by
just
the
conversion
to
online
everything
being
online.
C
C
The
lindell
retrofit
strategy,
which
I
know
we've
given
you
some
updates
on
that
and
and
our
initial
plan
was
to
have
this
done
by
the
end
of
2020,
but
here
again
ran
into
particularly
didn't
want
to
entangle
this
project
and
review
of
the
final
draft
with
all
of
the
budget
and
all
the
other
things
that
were
going
on
at
at
the
end
of
the
year
here.
C
The
congress
for
new
urbanism,
if
you
might
recall
in
2020,
they
were
going
to
have
their
national
conference
in
the
twin
cities
and
as
part
of
that,
they
always
try
to
do
some
community
projects.
It's
kind
of
almost
like
a
pro
bono
kind
of
thing.
They
match
up
communities
with
a
national
design
consultant
and
it's
a
application
based
kind
of
thing,
and
we
submitted
an
application
with
richfield
and
we
were
selected
and
we
were
all
set
to.
C
This
is
essentially
it's
kind
of
a
quick
and
dirty
design
process
and
there's
a
design
charette
that
that
happens
and
that's
kind
of
the
culmination
of
this,
and
we
were
all
set
to
have
that
design
shred
in
march
and
the
plug
got
pulled
on
on
that.
So
our
hope
is
that
we
will
be
able
to
hold
some
sort
of
virtual
input
sessions
in
the
spring
and
we
can
just
wrap
up
this.
This
project,
the
consultant,
has
done
a
fair
amount
of
existing
conditions
and
sort
of
issues
and
opportunities
identification.
C
C
Area
so,
along
with
the
the
use
of
the
the
hotels
as
shelters
as
you've,
also
seen
and
like
the
rosa
development
and
some
other
projects
that
have
come
before
you
we're
seeing
some
interest
in
some
re,
reuse
or
conversion
of
hotels
to
other
uses,
primarily
residential
use.
So
this
project
would
be
taking
a
more
holistic
look
at
at
that
and
providing
some
some
direction
on,
perhaps
identifying
some
areas
that
maybe
seem
more
ripe
for
that
conversion.
C
A
few
years
back
2017,
I
believe
the
hra
with
planning
assistance,
did
a
study
of
the
neighborhood
commercial
nodes,
the
older
neighborhood
commercial
nodes
throughout
the
city
and
prioritized
them
that
the
the
idea
behind
the
project
was
really
to
help
the
hra
make
decisions
about
their
funding
of
of
projects
and
given
changes
again,
some
of
them
brought
on
by
the
pandemic,
but
just
changes
in
retail
and
everything
else.
C
We
thought
it
was
a
good
idea
to
maybe
take
another
look
at
revisit
those
priorities
and
see
if
anything
is,
should
be
changed
or
re-prioritized.
So
that's
what
this
project
would
involve.
C
This
is
a
project
that's
been
kind
of
around,
but
but
hasn't
gotten
any
traction
so
far
in
part.
We
we
had
it
also.
This
should
be
a
carryover,
but
we
had
this
on
our
2020,
but
nothing
happened
in
large
part
because
our
public
health
folks
were
preoccupied
animal
and
are
continued
to
be
preoccupied
with
the
pandemic,
so
this
kind
of
fell
to
the
the
wayside.
But
this
fall
later
this
just
recently
there
was
a
staff
work
group
that
was
convened
so
of
staff
from
across
the
city
organization.
C
To
start
looking
at
kind
of
a
health
lens
to
our
our
policies
and
our
actions
and
so
moving
forward
into
the
next
year,
I
guess
you
know
that'll,
be
planning.
Staff
will
participate
with
that
group.
At
this
point
it's
unclear.
We
know
what
might
come
out
of
that,
but
it
could.
What
could
come
out
of
that?
Are
some
some
code
amendments
again
to
remove
barriers
or
to
make
sure
that
we're
addressing
kind
of
healthy
community
issues
appropriately
in
our
codes.
C
Another
recurring
project
is
the
south
loop
alternative
urban
area-wide
review.
This
is
a
type
of
environmental
review.
It's
not
a
mandatory
environmental
review.
It's
an
alternative
environmental
review.
What
this
allows
is
in
a
in
a
area
where
there's
a
lot
of
development
that
could
be
subject
to
mandatory
eaws.
C
This
alternative
is
provided
for
you
to
do
a
a
kind
of
comprehensive
environmental
review
of
multiple
projects,
and
so
that's
what
this
is.
So
you
can
see
those
those
parcels.
There
are
the
ones
that
are
kind
of
the
key
redevelopment
sites
that
that
are
forecast
to
have
projects
that
could
be
big
enough
to
trigger
an
eaw.
C
So
those
are
part
of
the
redevelopment
scenario
which
which
is
described
in
the
aur,
and
then
it
the
aur,
looks
at
the
environmental
impacts
if
all
of
that
development
comes
to
fruition
and
in
order
to
keep
the
auar
as
a
valid
document,
meaning
with
the
aur
in
place.
C
Any
project
that
comes
in
here
that's
covered
in
this
redevelopment
scenario
essentially
would
not
have
to
do
a
separate
eaw
or
eis,
provided
the
proposed
development
is
equal
to
or
less
than
what
was
studied.
In
this
redevelopment
scenario
in
the
aur,
so
the
redevelopment
scenario
in
the
aur
kind
of
anticipates
what
we
believe
is
the
maximum
amount
of
build
out
development
at
any
rate.
C
In
order
for
this
to
remain
valid,
it
has
to
be
updated
every
five
years
it
was
last
approved
in
the
spring
of
2017,
so
it'll
need
to
be
approved
in
the
spring
of
2022.
C
So
we
need
to
start
kind
of
doing
some
of
the
background
teeing
up
of
the
work
and
trying
to
identify
if
we
need
to
get
any
consultants
to
do
say,
traffic
studies
or
utility
studies
to
to
use
them,
as
updates,
so
that
we
can
be
ready
to
hit
the
ground
running
in
early
2022
to
get
this
done.
C
We've
got
several
ongoing
initiatives,
so
housing
initiatives
are
one.
We've
got
the
oho
the
opportunity,
housing
ordinance
and
updates
to
that.
There's
data
tracking
on
affordable
housing
units
on
on
noaa
naturally
occurring
affordable
housing
initiatives.
We
have
there
is
the
bloomington
housing
action
team.
The
bee
hat
and
planning
staff
has
been
involved
in
those
meetings
with
them
when
they
meet
every
other
month
and
then
there's
various
outreach
activities
around
housing.
C
We
also
are
involved
in
with
there's
an
internal
engagement
facilitation
groups
and
recently
this
fall.
There
was
a
racial
equity
action
teams
were
created
again
across
the
city
and
community
development
has
each
each
department
has
its
own
internal
team
and
there's
a
couple
of
planners
involved
in
that
effort.
H
Thanks
julie
and
thanks
planning
commission
for
having
us
tonight,
we
appreciate
commission
chair
solberg's
invitation
to
expand
our
transportation
and
transit
items
with
planning
commission.
H
In
the
past
we
had
ttac
and
when
that
disbanded
those
roles
went
to
planning
commission
and
I
will
admit
we
have
not
done
a
really
great
job
in
keeping
you
all
up
to
date
on
various
issues.
So
here
is
our
attempt
at
2021.
So
one
of
the
things
we
want
to
do
is
to
develop
a
strategic
transportation
plan.
Now
we
understand
that
we
won't
be
able
to
fully
flesh
this
document
out
in
2021
and
it
will
extend
into
2022,
but
we
want
to
start
to
look
at
review
of
peer
community
approaches
to
transportation
planning.
H
That's
an
area
where
engineering
feels
we
could
expand
and
do
better
in
the
future.
We
want
to
talk
about
a
conversation
on
how
to
integrate
all
the
various
different
safety,
equity
sustainability,
public
health
into
transportation,
planning,
talk
about
funding
policy
guidance
and
how
we
start
to
prioritize
our
projects.
H
We
also
want
to
look
at
bikes
and
peds,
and
the
project
we
have
scoped
out
is
the
35w
parallel
bike
route.
As
you're
aware,
the
35w
bridge
over
the
minnesota
river
was
recently
constructed
and
the
orange
line
tunnel
under
494
is
currently
under
construction
right
now.
Well,
it
would
be
a
great
asset
for
bloomington
to
have
a
bike
facility
that
connected
those
two
nodes
and
we
thought
it
would
serve
our
community
well,
so
we
want
to
look
at
how
best
to
do
that
and
what
options
routes
would
go
through
the
community.
H
We
also
have
a
couple
of
different
transit
projects
with
the
orange
line
there's
going
to
be
a
connecting
bus
study
and
we're
gonna
want
some
input
from
you
on
how
the
routes
will
change
with
metro
transit
here
in
bloomington
and
how
best
to
serve
our
residents
and
the
users
of
the
transit
system,
and
then
we
also
wanted
to
provide
a
couple
updates
on
network.
Next
is
what
metro
transit
calls
their
arterial,
brt
study
and
then
the
riverview
corridor,
which
comes
from
ramsey
county
into
the
south
loop
in
bloomington.
H
So
we
wanted
to
provide
updates
on
that.
We
also
have
a
couple
different
street
layout
things
coming
your
way,
you'll
see
the
lindell
in
86
intersection
and
the
american
boulevard
in
normandale
lake
district,
probably
early
on
in
2021,
with
our
pavement
management
program
projects.
Those
are
two
areas
that
are
included
for
construction
in
2021
and
we
want
to
look
at
improving
those
and
see
if
we
can
make
more
better
connections,
for
instance
on
the
lindelon
86
intersection.
H
H
We
also
will
be
looking
at
the
intersection
of
old
cedar
and
old
shakopee.
That's
a
high
volume
intersection
with
a
skew.
That
is
a
bit
of
a
challenge,
and
we
want
to
talk
about
that.
And
then
one
of
the
things
we're
interested
in
hearing
from
you
later
is
on
our
regional
issues.
What
types
of
projects
do
you
want
to
hear
from
us
about
on
the
regional
transportation
system?
H
There
are
a
number
of
different
studies
going
on
whether
it's
the
orders
of
commerce,
494
study
or
the
trunk
highway
77
study,
and
we
just
are
happy
to
provide
you
input
and
we
want
to
provide
you
the
right
amount
of
input
at
the
right
time.
So
we'd
be
interested
in
hearing
your
opinion
on
that
and
I'll
turn
it
back
over
to
julie.
H
C
Julie,
I
I
guess
before
we
move
on,
does
anybody
have
any
comments
specific
to
the
transportation
discussion
here
with
julie.
A
So
this
is
a
chair,
solberg
and
I'd
just
like
to
thank
you
julie
for
bringing
this
forward
to
us.
I
certainly
have
a
lot
of
interest
in
this
from
my
my
position
at
work,
but
additionally,
because
of
that
that
strong
connection
between
land
use
and
transportation
and
a
lot
of
the
questions
that
you're
asking
in
the
strategic
transportation
plan
are
a
lot
of
the
things
that
we're
considering
here
when
these
land
use
decisions
are
coming
before
us.
A
A
But
thinking
about
our
pavement,
our
pavement
plan
and
when
we
reconstruct
streets,
where
are
opportunities
to
advance
sustainability,
reduce
pavement
advance
health
by
increasing
sidewalks,
those
sorts
of
things,
and
maybe
that's
in
a
larger
strategic
plan
rather
than
specifics
on
street
layouts.
But
I'll
leave
that
to
you
to
think
about.
C
Okay,
if
not,
I
will
continue
on
so
this
is
our
list
of
potential
future
projects,
and
several
of
these
have
been
on
the
docket
for
a
while.
We
just
haven't
gotten
to
them,
yet
they
just
haven't
other
things
have
been
priorities.
C
We've
got
the
98th
street
corridor,
interchange
study
and
that
again,
would
be
us
assisting
public
works.
Who
would
lead
that?
And
that
was
one-
that
kind
of
came
out
of
the
98th
street
station
area
plan
so
and
and
that
I
believe,
is
tentatively
scheduled
in
terms
of
budgeted
for
in
2023.
C
So
you
know
that's
that's
kind
of
where
that
that
is
at
at
this
point
in
time:
temporary
structure,
standards,
updating
legal
sections
in
the
code,
rezone
the
remaining
of
494
restructuring,
the
zoning
code,
moving
from
chapter
19
to
chapter
1
21.
C
This
has
been
a
decade-long
project
and
every
time
we
do
a
code
amendment,
we
move
a
little
closer
to
this,
so
this
project
keeps
getting
smaller,
which
is
good,
but
we
just
haven't
actually
just
tackled
the
whole
thing
we've
been
doing
it
by
other
projects,
food
trucks-
so
you
saw
these
this
last
year,
and
this
was
one
that
it
needs
to.
C
I
believe
the
planning
commission
held
a
public
hearing
on
on
this
and
forwarded
on
to
city
council
who
then
tabled
it
and
definitely
in
part
again
because
with
the
pandemic
and
the
closure
of
restaurants,
etc.
It
just
didn't
seem
like
a
good
time
to
be
moving
forward
with
this
food
truck
item,
so
so
that
was
one
that
got
delayed
in
indefinitely
by
by
the
city
council.
It's
similar
to
the
short-term
rental
same
kind
of
thing.
C
I
know
you
provided
some
input
in
2020
on
on
that
and
directed
us
to
kind
of
put
that
on
hold
for
the
the
time
being
reviewing
swimming
pool
standards.
This
came
up
earlier
in
the
summer
season,
with
the
one
of
the
things
with
the
pandemic
was
that
everybody
was
staying
home
and
they
all
wanted
swimming
pools.
So
we
had
a
huge
influx
of
permits
for
for
swimming
pools
and
some
issues
with
the
standards
revealed,
and
so
there
was
some
interest
in.
C
Let's
take
a
look
at
that
that
has
since
cooled
off.
So
anyway,
it's
on
our
future.
We
kept
it
on
our
future
list.
We
didn't
include
it
on
2021,
because
the
other
things
seem
to
be
a
higher
priority,
but
you
can
weigh
in
on
that.
Another
project
to
where
parks
is
identified
is
taking
a
look
at
trail
connections.
C
The
city
has
a
number
of
trail
heads
on
city
property
along
the
bluff,
essentially,
and
once
the
state
trail
is
in
making
improving
those
trail
connections
from
and
the
trailheads
that
are
located
in
the
neighborhoods.
C
C
All
the
stuff
in
green
is
carry
over,
so
most
of
that
is
scheduled
to
be
happening
at
the
beginning
of
the
year,
the
first
half
of
the
year,
the
the
key
or
the
main
exception
to
that
is
the
sign
ordinance
which
I
mentioned
before,
because
we
we
want
to
do
some
outreach,
we're
going
to
kind
of
get
through
some
of
these
other
things
first
and
then
focus
on
that
sign
orange
pick
that
back
up
mid-year
and
and
going
into
2022..
C
C
In
case
you
direct
us
to
change
the
priority
of
anything
so
with
that
it
brings
us
to
the
questions
and,
and
which
is,
should
any
of
the
projects
be
moved
from
2021
delayed
to
2022,
or
should
any
of
the
2022
projects
be
moved
up
to
2021.
C
C
Are
there
any
other
projects
that
you
think
we
should
move
forward
that
aren't
described
here
and
then
again
on
the
the
priority?
C
If
there's
any
projects
that
should
be
reprioritized
depending
on
how
much
time
is
anticipated
associated
with
that
project,
it
might,
it
might
mean
delaying
one
of
the
projects,
that's
as
proposed
as
a
higher
priority.
So
with
that,
I'm
gonna.
A
We'll
probably
have
to
go
back
and
forth,
I'm
guessing
a
little
bit
sure
just
denise,
potentially
depending
upon
planning
commission
members
thoughts.
So
I
I
just
like
to
say
a
thought
just
regarding
those
one
of
the
future
studies
that
or
processes
that
was
out
there.
A
I
think
it
was
the
next
slide
and
just
thinking
from
the
parks
lee
that
the
mississippi
river
trail
connections,
I've
just
been
blown
away
by
the
amount
of
usage
on
the
new
trail,
despite
how
maybe
contentious
it
was
to
build
it
when
I
was
down
there
a
couple
weeks
ago,
and
basically
I
was
at
the
point
of
parking
well
more
than
halfway
up
the
hill
to
get
down
to
the
trail.
A
It
just
kind
of
hit
on
me
that
I
think
the
city
really
needs
to
think
about
that
that
next
phase
and
next
connections-
probably
sooner
rather
than
later,
connect,
but
that's
just
some
thoughts
on
that.
That
doesn't
mean
it.
It
jumps
into
the
priority
queue
at
this
point,
but.
C
A
Yep,
okay,
thank
you
maybe
go
back
to
the
other
one
and
the
priorities
that
are
that
you
guys
that
staff
has
laid
out.
A
So
I
would,
I
would
agree
on
a
cnu
legacy
project
and
in
part
I
think,
that's
a
priority
because
of
the
I
guess,
the
work
that
the
state
is
doing
right
now
on
494
with
that
corridors
of
commerce,
potential
project
and
the
redevelopment,
I
think
we
trying
to
look
for
where
that's
the
update
on
the
commercial
redevelopment
priorities.
So
I
think
those
are
are
still
good
and
should
remain
on
here
as
well.
F
Thanks,
mr
chair,
the
one
that
stuck
out
to
me
was
the
review
of
the
multi-family
parking
standards.
I'm
happy
to
see
that
at
the
top
of
the
blue
category
there
I
think
that's
something
we
repeatedly
hear
as
a
planning
commission
that
is,
we
could
be
improved
upon
by
our
applicants
are
telling
us
that,
and
I
think,
there's
real
consequences
there.
If
we
can
reduce
those
standards,
I
think
that's
a
win-win
for
everybody,
and
so
on.
That,
for
me,
is
a
top
priority
in
the
blue.
E
I
don't
have
any
specific
thoughts.
I
think
it's
a
full
agenda
and
hopefully
that
there
are
not
major
things
that
come
up
that
derail
you
from
your
from
your
goals,
but
no,
I
don't
have
any
thoughts
one
way
or
the
other
on
this,
and
if
that's
the
priority
that
the
staff
is
seeing
for
these
things,
I'm
comfortable
with
that.
E
A
I
guess
trying
to
read
through
this:
it's
for
consideration.
Miss
farnam
is
that
that
there's
more
in
the
schedule
that
you
can
fit,
or
is
that
really
for
maybe
a
replacement
of
some
of
the
others?
Can
you
allude
on
what
that
I
don't
know?
Salmon
color
is.
C
Sure,
thank
you,
mr
chair
yeah,
and
I
apologize.
That
is
a
little
bit
confusing.
I
I
in
fact
I
might
have
taken
that
off
on
a
another
version.
I
might
have
added
the
wrong
version
into
into
this,
because
this
salmon
colored
pieces
are
slated
for
future.
They
are
not
covered
in
the
hours
estimate
for
that
we
have
available.
So
only
the
green,
blue
and
white
at
the
bottom.
C
The
ongoing
stuff
at
the
bottom
is
all
of
that
is
covered
in
the
estimate
of
hours
that
we
we
have
available
the
the
orange
ones.
Are.
You
know
those
were
ones
well,
two
of
them
that
were
kind
of
carryovers
and
then
there's
a
couple
other
ones,
but
if,
if
you
felt
like
those
should
be
a
higher
priority
than
any
of
say
the
blue
ones,
you
know
we
can
shuffle
things
around
a
little
bit
and
we'll
just
have
to
just
look
at
those
hours.
A
E
Yeah,
I
guess
julie.
Is
there
a
lot
of
work
left
to
do
on
food
trucks,
or
is
it
just
that
there
were
considerations
for
waiting
at
the
council
level?
That
may
not
be
considerations
anymore?
In
other
words,
is
it
anything
that
be
really
redone,
or
is
it
just
a
matter
of
taking
where
we're
at
and
bringing
it
to
the
council
for
their
final
approval,
because
I
could
see
where,
if
things
are
better
enough
by
the
summer,
that
could
be
a
thing.
C
Yeah,
mr
chair
commissioner,
roman
yeah,
the
draft
is,
is
pretty
well
in
place
and
in
fact
I
believe
there
was
public
hearing
held
before
the
planning
commission.
If
I'm
remembering
correctly,.
A
F
C
We
did
so
it
it
was
forwarded
to
the
city
council,
but
the
city
council
tabled
it
indefinitely
so
when,
if
there
is
some
air
and-
and
it
looks
like
there's
an
opening
and
some
appetite
to
move
this
forward,
it
could
be
moved
forward
fairly
quickly.
It's
not
a
big
hours
kind
of
thing
right.
A
Okay,
I
I'm
not
seeing
for
commission
members,
I'm
not
seeing
anything
offhand
in
that
in
the
salmon
that
would
move
up,
say
ahead
of
hotel
conversion
study
or
accessory
dwelling
units.
A
A
D
I
agree,
I
think
it
looks
great
and
very,
very
good
work
by
the
staff
thanks
for
bringing
this
forward,
and
I
think
that
this
this
makes
a
lot
of
sense
and,
like
pushing
roman
said,
I
hope
you
achieve
the
goal
here.
G
A
Motion
to
approve
the
2021
planning
commission
work
plan,
simple
enough,
correct
all
right.
Commission
members
is
there
a
motion,
commissioner.
Albrecht.
B
A
All
right
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
to
recommend
approval
of
the
2021
planning
commission
work
plan.
All
those
in
favor
say
I
buy
roll
call.
Commissioner
corman
aye,
commissioner
roman
aye,
commissioner
albrecht
aye.
A
C
Yeah-
and
I
believe
we've
got
this
slated
for
the
february
first
council
meeting,
so
we'll
get
this
finalized
and
but
that
won't
stop
us
from
getting
going
on
those
some
of
those
items
that
are
already
we're
already
working
on.
So
thank
you
very
much.
A
G
Sure,
mr
chairman,
commissioners,
quick
item
here,
which
is
your
2021
schedule,
grant
I'm
having
a
little
difficulty
on
the
graphics.
G
G
No,
that's
okay,
but
let's
just
we
can
utilize
this
view.
I
guess
so
what
we
look
at
in
the
schedule.
Yeah.
A
Are
you
guys
seeing
the
calendar
next
to
the
description,
or
are
you
just
seeing
the
2021
planning
commission
schedule
for
commissions.
G
Showing
just
a
second
he's
doing
some.
A
A
I'll
just
say
thank
you
to
the
other
planning
commission
members
for
indulging
my
transportation
desires
within
the
commission.
G
Yeah,
let's
see
what,
while
he's
working
on
that
with
the
schedule,
the
biggest
thing
we're
looking
at
is
how
items
track
between
the
planning,
commission
and
the
council,
because
you
could
imagine
a
schedule.
That's
always
the
first
and
third
or
always
is
the
second
and
fourth
thursday
of
the
month,
but
because
the
council
meetings
fluctuate
so
much,
we
try
to
get
the
planning
commission
scheduled
to
match
very
well,
and
that
is
the
11
day.
G
G
A
couple
other
things
we
always
look
to
do
are
having
two
regular
meetings
a
month
and
then
one
study
meeting
a
month,
except
when
we
have
the
apa
conference
this
year.
That
would
be
in
may.
However,
it
is
remote
this
year
and
then
in
november
and
december,
just
given
the
holidays
and
then,
as
always,
we
try
to
avoid
holidays
in
general
and
the
various
conferences,
state
and
national
apa
uli,
I
don't
think,
has
been
no,
it
has
been
scheduled.
G
The
state
conference
has
not
been
scheduled
and
then
we
try
to
avoid
the
mea
week
in
october
as
well,
just
because
there's
there's
typically
a
lot
of
conflicts
with
planning
commissioners
that
week.
So
that's
how
we
came
to
the
proposal
so
we're
tonight
we're
just
looking
for
any
input.
You
might
have
sure
and
motion
to
either
adopt
or
modify.
A
All
right-
and
I
know
last
year
we
we
moved
a
meeting
because
of
conflict
and
I
I
did
check
and
I
believe
I
was
checking
in
the
march
time
frame
for
spring
break,
or
maybe
it
was
april.
Now
I
don't
even
remember,
but
I
thought
that
was
clear,
but
I'm
sure
there's
others
there
might
be
somebody
else.
That's
influential
in
the
school
that
might
tell
us
when,
when
there's
some
conflicts
so
but
and
commission
members
are
they
and
I
can't
see
them
anymore,
yeah,
commission
members
is
there.
A
Are
there
any
comments
on
the
schedule?
I'll
give
you
a
couple
minutes
again
to
to
look
over
that.
If
we
see
any
glaring
issues.
F
Thanks
mr
chair
question
for
staff:
just
as
a
general,
I
know
we
shoot
for
the
11
day
thing.
What
is
historical
precedence,
we're
having
a
four
day
turnaround
on
a
particular
item.
I
was
just
thinking
about
this
pandemic
housing
issue.
We
just
spoke
about
on
item
number
one
where
we're
really
trying
to
push
things
through.
Does
that
ever
happen
or
how
common
is
that.
G
Yeah,
mr
chairman,
commissioner,
cooking
extremely
rare.
We
really
tried
to
avoid
that,
because
that
means
that
the
packet
for
the
city
council
goes
out
before
the
actual
planning
commission
meetings.
There's
no
way
to
convey
to
the
council
what
the
recommendation
is.
You
would
have
to
do
it
verbally
at
the
meeting.
G
However,
in
a
pinch
which
we
were
under
for
a
while
there
with
a
temporary
pandemic
housing,
given
that
there
was
scares
act,
funding
at
stake
for
the
county
that
would
have
been
lost,
we
hadn't
moved
at
light
speed.
Basically,
we
did
the
the
very
rare
approach
of
pre-advertising
and
having
that
four-day
turnaround
between
planning,
commission
and
council,
but
that's
the
only
time
I
ever
remember
doing
that,
and
it
would
have
to
be
a
very
special
event.
A
And
that
would
have
been
direct
was
that
directed
by
city
leadership.
G
A
A
Anybody
else
with
comments
on
the
calendar,
otherwise
I'd
entertain
a
motion
to
approve
or
the
2021
planning
commission
calendar
or,
as
revised
commissioner
roman
move,
to
adapt
the
calendar
as
presented
all
right.
We
have
a
motion.
Is
there
a
second
commissioner
corman.
B
A
All
right,
we
have
a
motion
to
approve
and
a
second,
the
2021
planning
commission
meeting
calendar,
all
those
in
favor,
say
aye
by
roll
call.
Commissioner
corman.
B
D
A
Commissioner
abdi
hi,
commissioner
cookton
hi
and
I
for
myself
motion
passes
the
calendar
is
approved
or
recommended,
as
approved
for
2021.
all
right,
mr
mark
garter.
Is
there
anything
else.
G
Commissioners,
nothing
else
I
want
to
thank
you
for
an
excellent
2020..
It's
been
a
a
different
year
and
a
very
busy
year
and
I'm
glad
we
had
webex
as
an
alternative.
Given
our
situation
look
forward
to
2021
and
I
just
want
to
wish
everybody
happy
holidays.
E
Nope
sorry,
well,
I
will
note
that
this
is
a
time
of
year,
where
we
usually
gather
as
a
commission
and
look
forward
to
doing
that.
Hopefully,
in
the
middle
of
the
year.
A
Yes,
let's
celebrate
christmas
or
whatever
holidays
in
july,
and
I'd
like
to
thank
staff
for
all
the
work
that
you
guys
have
done
over
the
past.
Is
this
now
15.
A
16
or
17.
online
meetings,
how
you
pulled
that
together
as
successful
as
it's
been,
ensuring
that
we
had
public
input
in
all
these
issues
that
we
were
able
to
have,
I
mean
for
considering
how
quickly
it
took
place.
The
very
limited
amount
of
technical
issues.
Staff
has
been
top
notch
like
to
thank
folks
in
the
back
room
for
all
their
work
and
helping
us
through
this,
and
with
that
like
to
conclude
the
december
17
2020
study
session
and
just
remind
planning
commissioner
commissioners.