Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I encourage the public to testify if they so choose. You can do so here in City Hall, respectful. We're all friends and neighbors here in Bloomington and I want all the hundreds watching at home to know that we're respectful in chambers as well. So with that, I will open the public hearing for item number two. If anyone is in chambers or online wishes to speak, please step forward and please remember to sign in on that legal pad. One last housekeeping thing I forgot to write down. Please start by stating your name. Both microphones are live, so either one is fine.

My name is Dave Kaczynski. I live at 1607 East 86th Street, so I'm right on the east side of this program that's going up. I do have a few concerns. It's a six-foot fence that's going up now between me and them, but you've got a three-story unit, and I'm only a story and a half, and I'm going to have two units looking directly over me. I do kind of have a concern about a six foot fence. I mean, I'm going from a single family house next to me to 33 units going up in there. Now all of a sudden I've got a whole bunch of neighbors that are gonna look over me. I do have my other concern that I'd like to bring up is when this first project first started, they had tree guys come in cutting down trees. Now I'm a very forgiving person. I didn't care that they started before 7 a.m. and they ran till 10 p.m. on some of those days, I let it go. I let it go when they dropped a couple of trees on my fence in the backyard. I let that go. But I got to tell you, at the meeting, they promised that they would abide by your laws and your rules. Three days later, two semis showed up on 86th Street at midnight unloading all their heavy tracked equipment for demolition and unloaded it. And on top of that, instead of going to the center buildings so that there was nobody surrounded it, you know where all that was unloaded and parked? 30 feet from my bedroom at 2 in the morning. They promised that they wouldn't do this, and they're starting off on a bad foot with me. I'm a forgiving person, but if this project is already, you're already planning to approve this as it's going through, I really want this to abide by your rules that you've already got. I mean, I'm already gonna have to live with literally three story buildings right next to me when I only had a single family home there. And my fence in the back is already gone because I had to pull it out after they dropped trees on it. Now I'm actually sitting wide open to everything out there now because of this. Just my concerns.

Thank you, Mr. Kuczynski, and please do sign in.

My name is Susan Patterson, and I live at 8615 Bloomington. With the park across the street, and then we have Wright Park there, are we gonna put crosswalks in to help protect those kids? People go screaming by on 86th and on Bloomington, and we need to protect the kids. And that's the easiest way I can think of is painting crosswalks. Where are the trees going to go? They're going to have 48 trees. Where are they going to go? They took down the woods in my backyard. What type of trees are they putting in? Is there a mixture? Is it only gonna be crab apples that doesn't take the place of the 40-foot trees that were there? And I moved in here and bought my house 30 years ago because I had the woods in the backyard. Now I'm gonna have housing development. It's not gonna be quiet anymore. Then three years ago, I had a 35-foot pit in the front of my house that was the start of the new sewer water lines going down Bloomington Avenue, and then on to 86th, and then going down to Wrights Park. My pit was there the whole entire nine months. Is that going to be enough drainage and water to add 33 units of housing? Or are they going to have to dig up in front of my yard to expand it? I want to make sure that is okay before we go on and approve anything. We went to that meeting that he had. And actually, we were kind of blindsided by what the development was. And then we all talked about it afterwards, and we're sitting there going, what is going on? And we're a zone for single-family housing. How can they do this? And they've taken all our trees down and cleared the lot, taken people's houses away, and It hasn't been approved yet. That should have been first.

Thank you, Ms. Pedersen. And just in the interest of time, since it looks like there are a lot of folks that want to speak, You're more than welcome to speak while the other person is signing in.

My name is Craig Pedersen. I'm Susan's husband. She made a good choice. There's no sidewalks on 86th. On 87th. On 87th. And so you're going to have the kids walking down the street. In the wintertime, stuff like that, or summertime, or you're going to have cars go through there. How much traffic did they plan for that? I mean, you're going to have all these housing development, all these people over here. Well, you don't know how many people are going to be driving, I mean... The kids are going to, when they get out of school, they're kids, and they don't care. They just run out and go over to the park. And there's no sidewalks anywhere. So did somebody think about that? There's no sidewalks. The kids have to walk on the street by the curb. There's no sidewalks anywhere there. And so now you're going to put a whole apartment complex full of kids. It might have a whole complex full of kids. And they're going to be running out in front of traffic. You know, it's not that much traffic, but it's still got traffic. And in the wintertime, when it's icy out and it's cold, somebody could slip. It's like I say. Nobody thought about that because there's no sidewalks on 86. There's no sidewalks on 87. Huh?

There is on 86.

Okay, there is on 86. But on Bloomington Avenue, right across from the church, the church school, there's no sidewalks.

Okay, on one side.

Okay.

It's on the church side, but not ours.

Yeah, it's on the church side, but not ours. But you're going to have kids coming from that apartment complex, and they're going to be coming down on the side of the street that there's no sidewalks. Are you going to put sidewalks in on 87th all the way down? You got to think of the kids. I drove school bus for 10 years. And you've got to be careful with them. So I think they better get that figured out because you've got people, elderly people, and that are going to be using that apartment building. And they're going to have wheelchairs and they're going to have four-wheel carts and... Somebody eventually is going to, somebody, whoever rents the apartment building, you're going to start seeing golf carts running all over town.

Mr. Pedersen, if you could cut your, abbreviate your comments until the end of the, where are your three minutes? Yeah, okay, I'm up. Thank you, Mr. Pedersen.

You didn't hear me anyway.

Hi, my name is Lana Fredine, and I live at 8548 16th Avenue, right across. My biggest concern is traffic. Overflow parking, it's going to be on my street. And this is residential. I don't need... Somebody has a party, where are they gonna park? How many extra spots are there for additional parking? And I can sit out my window and see traffic backed up on 86th Street at four in the afternoon and now you're gonna add, you know, 50 more vehicles? That's a really big concern for me. That's my number one concern. And 86th Street used to be four lanes, two going each way. Now it's one going each way and a turn. Those people aren't going to have easy access. They're going to be sitting there. And that's a big concern for me is that 87th Street can't handle people parking on 87th Street at all. So the overflow parking is a concern. The bus stop, where are the kids gonna get picked up for school? Is it gonna be on 86? Is it gonna be on... 87th and what what are you doing for that because there are going to be kids um and the three stories we've owned this house has been in my family for 72 years And there's never been a three-story building. And it's a concern. It's a concern. I'm sorry. When they were taking down the houses, They took windows out. They didn't board them up. I called, and I was concerned about people going into the houses, somebody getting hurt, and they just take windows out and leave it. I'm just concerned about the whole project because I am. It means a lot to me. I was never informed of the meeting that they had in May. So this was really a blind sight to me. You know, are there going to be fire hydrants? What happens if there's a fire? You know, can fire trucks get through there? Can, you know, is there room for emergency vehicles? There's going to be emergencies, and I'm concerned.

Ms. Ferdinand, if you could... hold your comments for the next three-minute period. I'm sorry. I'm just trying to be fair to everybody.

No, that's fine.

My name is Connie Rivard. My understanding of the missing middle housing study findings were that new housing should be compatible at the scale of the neighborhood, and this is clearly not. Most of our homes are one or one-and-a-half story with a few two-story homes, and Twin Wind wants to build three-story units, as has been mentioned, 41 feet high. The highest structure, two-story house, 28 feet, so that's quite a dramatic change to the neighborhood. Not compatible as your own goals, the study were found. Also, the study found aging population. Aging people are not looking for a three-story unit with stairs to get to every level, to go to bed, to go to any level. That doesn't make sense. Study said smaller household size. Why in the world are these units 2,500 to 3,200 square feet? Who is the actual target population that you're building for? Access to these major collector roads, as was mentioned, 86 and the Cedar both used to be four lane. Now they're two lane with a center turning lane. And yes, kids will have to cross a major road to get to Wright's Lake. If you know that area, maybe you don't. And there will be more traffic on 87th than he indicated because people will get tired of waiting to get out on 86. So they'll go to 87th. And this neighborhood that we like to walk through and our neighbors like to live on quietly, that's what they picked, is suddenly going to get turned upside down. I heard, and I don't know if this is accurate, impervious surface percent. I thought I heard it was as high as 80%. And if that's the case, that way exceeds the 45% for at least a two-family unit. So maybe, but it's going to cause drainage issues. Definitely cuts down on green space. All the renderings show trees, but we know those have all been cut down, and there's going to be little tiny trees that count, but you cut down the green space. I watched parts of city council meetings on February 23rd, March 23rd, and April 27th. I don't understand all the terminology, but I heard them say they would update the code for zoning to add five new housing types. I never heard them say let's change the zoning. The standard, they said, was not to exceed two stories or 40 feet. They said there would be a hearing for replatting. Did I miss that? Councilwoman D'Alessandro specifically said, public notice is way too late in these processes. I'll come back to that now or when I come up again. In discussion of OHO requirements, someone asked, why did they include more than 20 units? That seemed excessive. Commissioner Castendee said, well, it's a pretty low odds, 1 to 5%, that a development would actually have more than 20 units. Well, guess what? Twin Wind is doing 33 units. What are the chances? I'll come back. Thanks.

One of these days I'll learn to look at a green light. When you do come back up, please restate your name just for the record. You do not need to sign in a second time.

Hello, my name's Steve Adelman. I live at 1578 East 87th Street. This project butts up to my property. I am a 49er. I work for a company. We dig houses. I've dug this very house, or this very multiple townhouse. I've got a couple big concerns about the impervious on this site. And if the filtration area is enough to handle 100-year flood. I used to live at 1578 East 87th Street. And back in the 80s, we had a storm come through and drop 12 inches of rain. If that would happen in this site, I'm afraid everybody around this is going to end up getting flooded out. And another concern is where are they going with the snow in the wintertime? I see how the snow backs up and there's virtually no area to put any snow And there's very little green area to pile anything and if they put it in the filtration area in the springtime middle plug that up so this whole thing is kind of it's crazy and going three stories and It doesn't fit the neighborhood. It blocks everything. It's going to block the sun from a lot of houses. I think it should be relooked, and it should be changed. Otherwise, there's going to be problems. I've seen it out in the field. I see houses all the time, and I see what happens afterwards when you get a big rain. It's no good. too much impervious.

So thank you. Thank you, Mr. Allen.

Hello. My name is Roger Vard. I live at 1607 East 88th Street. And I also have concerns regarding this project. First of all was just the process. Yes, there was a meeting held on May 20th, and we actually even got a letter for it, but it was handwritten. I thought it was a piece of junk mail because it was so unprofessional. THAT I COULDN'T TELL THAT HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. FINALLY, THE REAL NOTIFICATION WE GOT WAS ACTUALLY SOMETHING FROM THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON AND THAT WAS ONLY SEVERAL WEEKS AGO. ACCORDING TO WHEN I WAS LOOKING THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS THAT YOU HAD ON SITE, IT'S THE CITY'S KNOWN ABOUT THIS PROJECT FOR AT LEAST A FEW MONTHS, MAYBE EVEN A LITTLE LONGER. WHEN ARE THE RESIDENTS SUPPOSED TO FIND OUT ABOUT THIS? SO WE'VE ONLY BASICALLY HAD NOTICE FROM THE CITY FOR ONLY A COUPLE OF WEEKS. So that's a big concern. And they've already done the demolition. Some other concerns I have are that the, you know, we're trying to do affordable housing. We took down probably six of the most affordable houses in Bloomington and replaced them with three. And as far as they also have ADA, claim to have ADA units. I briefly looked through the floor plans. I did not see any elevators in those ADA units, and these are three-story stared buildings. So I don't see how anyone that needs ADA compliance is going to be able to get around in those units. Also, the concern is that ONE OF THE PLANNERS SLIDES SHE HAD THAT TOWN HOMES ARE GOOD FOR SINGLE AND TWO PERSON FAMILIES. THESE ARE FOUR AND FIVE BEDROOM UNITS. THESE ARE NOT FOR SINGLE AND TWO PERSON PEOPLE. AND THEN AS FAR AS THE TRAFFIC WAS CONCERNED, The traffic engineer was saying that the normal single-family home, which is probably less than four or five bedrooms, generates 10 traffic stops a day. So that should, you know, according to my counting, that should be 330 trips a day, not the 238 that he was talking about. So it seems like the traffic's been underestimated by at least a third if these units are truly going to be... you know, if they're going to be four- and five-bedroom units. Also, as others have expressed, the height. So we have one of the few two-story buildings around, and even from that, you can see a long ways. And these three-story ones, I mean, we're a block away. We're going to be able to see, you know, they're going to be rising by the trees that are around us. So, oh, and also during the demolition phase, I thought that was handled very unprofessionally. I mean, there was no silt fencing around as had been specified in the plans. And I think it's been addressed already as just, I hope that is not an indication of the type of work that we can expect in the future on this project. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Varden. Is there anyone else in chambers that would wish to testify? Ms. Brown, is there anyone online?

All participants online are staff.

Excellent. Is there anyone in chambers that would wish to testify for a second time? It can be your first time as well.

So just continuing, I'm Connie Rivard. So I watched those city council meetings, and I did not hear the phrase rezoning in any one of these three meetings. They talked about changing the code for the five types of housing. So I'm wondering, did I miss that? When did that happen? And I wanted to address Commissioner Dakota Castendee directly, but he's not here. But my understanding is that he said sometime in this past year that he would not recommend or promote rezoning of residential areas of bloomington i wondered if he actually said that and when did rezoning come into the conversation um And then in terms of others have already alluded to the communication and plans, the whole deal. Why, as they've already said, why was the neighborhood's first communication regarding a 33 unit, three story complex, why did that come from the developer and not our own city staff who works for us? You all work for the residents. You don't just commiserate with great plans, you work for us. Why are we finding out from unprofessionally from this developer, first of all, this major change in our neighborhood. And the first we hear is of this meeting tonight, and that was pretty late in the process. And I should mention that I did happen to talk to one of the people who sold their property to the developer, they felt very pressured to do so. And this happened to be a single mom with her teenage children who have essentially been pushed out of Bloomington and have relocated to another suburb. Is that what we're trying to do here? Is that how we treat our own people, our own residents? Why did Twin Wind proceed with the purchase and demolition of these six properties over two years up to two years ago, because the first one, I know there's another buyer involved, January of 2024, when it was still zoned R1, the residential single-family homes. Who would do that without a lucrative goal in mind? why would if they thought they could only replace it with another single family home why would they do that this raises the question if and who of the city staff communicated with twin win long before we heard about the plans and gave twin win the soft green light or assurance that this was just a formality to go through that the city would be able to accommodate this 33 unit town home are you catering i asked the city staff Are you catering to a specific developer versus what's best for your constituents? This process also raises the prospect that this is just the tip of the iceberg, that this is the camel's nose under the tent. Developers will systematically, if this happens, they'll pick off other properties and continue to create more townhome developments, reshaping all of East Bloomington. Is this your goal? to increase the population of Bloomington. Why is bigger better? Obviously there's the tax benefit, but okay, taxes is, you know, that's a whole side issue. How does this benefit the current residents? How does it benefit the people living across the street?

Mr. Rivard, if you could please Wrap up? Wrap up.

Thank you. Would you want this happening in your own neighborhood? Sure, the shadow studies, all of these things. Would each of you ask yourselves and ask the mayor, would he want this happening in his own neighborhood? Why is it okay to do it to us? Ask yourselves that. You want this happening next door to you? Thank you.

Thank you.

Steve Adelman. I'm in the construction business, and I've been watching what they've been doing, and they've left that whole area looking like a bombing site, you know, from when they started taking the trees down to when they're taking houses down. uh they've never had any erosion control silt fence there should have been silt fence all the way around that site before they started doing anything i've been on sites before where they've shut me down because there's no silt fence i've tore houses down i've done all that did they do it right i mean those houses should have been checked to see that everything was taken out that should have been taken out. Is there asbestos in there? Last house I tore down, there was two furnaces in there. I had to pull the furnaces out. I had to pull the hot water heaters out. I had to pull the range out. We had a whole list from the city of stuff that had to be pulled out of the house before I could even tear it down. And the last thing you do before you tear a house down, you go through everything and make sure that there's nobody in there. So I've tore down my share of houses. And none of that was done out here. And they got one more house to go down. I hope they do it right. So you need to look at them, go after them. They got to get that silt fence up. And they need to maintain that area. It's grown up in weeds. It still looks like a bombing site. So something needs to be done.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Adelman.

My name is Andy Thule. I live over on 83rd and Stevens. And I just wanted to talk a little bit about this development. Silt fences, if you look at the development over on 86th and Penn, I'll tie this kind of in, that silt fence is already folded over. You know, it's been sitting that way for a long time. So stuff's just running right in the street. So the oversight by the city on this project looks like it's lacking at best. MY BIG CONCERN, LIVING IN THE CITY AS LONG AS I HAVE FOR ALMOST 55 YEARS, IS I KNOW A NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT WORK IN THE CITY. AND WHAT'S HAPPENING IS WE'RE GETTING PARKING PROBLEMS EVERYWHERE ACROSS OF OUR CITY. AND WHAT HAPPENS IS THE CITY PLOWS CANNOT COME BACK AND PLOW WHERE CARS RESIDE. AND WE'RE NOT ENFORCING, WE'RE NOT MOVING CARS WHEN THEY'RE PARKED IN THE STREET. SO THIS DEVELOPMENT ONLY HAS NINE PARKING SPOTS. And in watching the development on 86 and Penn, the developer conveniently offered parking across the street at a public park parking space to accrue overflow. The overflow is going to actually go in this property during peak holiday seasons or birthday parties or whatever. It's going to actually go in the neighborhood. People are going to be parking in the neighborhood around this development, right? And so the protections for regular resident homeowners are nil and they're non-existent, right? So a lot of our homes are ramblers. They're flat ramblers, which are very good for senior living. These townhomes don't scream senior living whatsoever. Like the people said, there's no elevators in them. Seniors don't. They want flat living. They want to pull in their garage stall, go to their kitchen, live in a main floor type living. This is going to be a lot of young families. So I'm very concerned about the parking across the city. This is going to be a mess. This thing needs to be tabled. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Thule. Is there anyone else in chambers that would wish to testify?

My name is Dave Kaczynski. I'm 1607 East 86th Street. One more thing I forgot to bring up earlier. It was kind of weird. These units that are facing 86th Street, are they going to be as far offset as the other houses or are these closer to the street? The reason I ask, it is a sightline thing, but for those of us that live on 86 and have to turn out on 86, we need as much space to look down because in the winter, all that snow off 86 ends up in our front yards. You can't see when you get to the end of your driveway. I literally have to look when I get past my house down to see what's coming. If that house is not back set, if those units aren't back set like mine, I'm gonna lose all that sightline. It is something, you know, I forgot to bring up earlier, but the snow is kind of an issue, especially now since you've changed your plan on how you, if you're even gonna plow sidewalks anymore and everything else. So that all has an effect on us as we go through all this.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Kaczynski.

I'm Susan Patterson.

And it's... I heard him say that they were not gonna have stop signs at the exits of the townhouses because it's not regulated that they should. That's part of this road access that if they're way up ahead of us, And they don't have stop signs, they can go whipping out and that, but we have to stop and wait and wait and wait because we're back further than they are. And it is gonna be an issue with parking. I've been to townhouses where they have minimal parking for guests, and I've had to park on streets. And if you have a party, where are your guests going to park? They're going to park on the streets. On 87th, on both sides, it gets pretty tight most times. but it's going to be even tighter. So... It's just, we all, I think I'm speaking for everybody that I think we feel like we've been blindsided with this. Because they tore down the trees, there's no signage that a development company's doing anything. And the kids can walk across that grass And I'm sure there's glass there the way they tore down the houses. They just took a backhoe and chopped down on it. Some of those houses had basements, some didn't. Is it packed down good where the basements were? And there's glass in there and pipe and other stuff that's left from the demolition. They need to get fencing up.

Thank you, Ms. Pedersen.

Roger Rivard again. Yeah, just highlighting in addition to what they've been saying about the quality of the demolition, I guess one of the concerns is if that's the foot they're putting forward already just in the demolition phase, what assurances do we have? you know, what the quality of the build is going to be in the construction phase and, you know, how they're going to be treating the neighborhood in the construction phase as far as following any of the rules that they haven't been following during the demolition phase. So I guess a question that I have for the staff is, you know, is there any kind of vetting process that they have to do for, well, for doing demolition, but is there any for construction of this project and, you know, when they're actually in the process of constructing? So that's my question for the staff. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Rivard, and I apologize for messing up your last name the last time you were up. Is there anyone else in chambers that would wish to testify on this item?

I'll be better this time. This is Lana Fredine, and my concern now still is there's dirt bikes, kids on dirt bikes going up there. There's no fancy, nothing to keep them out. And somebody's going to get hurt. And growing up on 86th Street, back in the 60s and 70s, we had no parking signs on 16th Avenue because of the Met Center and because people would park and walk to the center. If it gets too bad... You're going to have to put up signs. And where are all the construction vehicles going to park? I don't like it at all. So that's a concern. Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

How come they didn't? How come they didn't bring that to us before? I've been asked before, but why didn't they bring this up before they tore all them houses down and got the whole yard, screwed up our whole neighborhood? And now, so they should have let us know what was going on because nobody wants it.

Thank you, Mr. Pedersen. Is there anyone else that would like to speak on this item in chambers or online?

I'm Deb Van Open, and I live just west. So my house is the next, the two-story house just west of the properties. I am concerned that about how close they're going to be to my land. I don't know how close they're going to be, and I'm concerned about where the trees are going to be. I'm concerned about all of it. So I just want to put that out there that this is going to affect my property. It's going to affect my property when I want to sell my property, and I don't know what that's going to do for any of that. So I just want to say that.

Thank you, Ms. Van Open. Is there anyone else that would wish to testify on this item? Ms. Brown, is there anyone online?

All participants online are staff.

Hearing that, I would entertain a motion to close public hearing. Commissioner Lanay.

I move to close the public hearing.

Second. We have a motion and a second to close this public hearing. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, with Commissioner Munster remote, we'll be doing roll call voting. Ms. Brown, please call the roll.

Cunningham.

Aye.

Issei. Aye. Linné. Aye. Coleman.

Aye.

And Munster.

Aye.

that public hearing is closed all right we move then to discussion and a long list of concerns raised by residents and maybe some more food for thought would anyone like to lead us off with uh requests commissioner

Great. Thank you, Chairman. What I would like to do first is ask if the city could kind of talk through the process, two different parts of the process. Number one, if you can talk through what the process is on notification and sort of how that all works. And then the second thing is if you could educate us all on understanding what the process is for demolition. recognizing that these are privately owned properties and owners have some rights, if you could kind of talk through what those permissions have to look like.

Ms. O'Day?

Chair and Commissioner LaNae, I can speak to the notification piece and maybe if Mr. Johnson will speak to the demo piece. I'm not as familiar with those standards. As far as notification goes, these items require public hearing by Planning Commission and City Council. So whenever there is a public hearing, staff sends out a notification to property owners within 500 feet of the subject. PROPERTY LOCATION AND THOSE ARE TYPICALLY SENT OUT AND ALSO THERE'S A NEWSPAPER NOTIFICATION IN THE SUN CURRENT TEN DAYS IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING. SO THAT IS OUR NOTIFICATION PROCESS.

I MAY ADD TO THAT. MR. CHANCELLOR.

Yeah, Chair Cunningham, Commissioner Linnaeus, can you hear me okay? Sorry. Just to add on to what Liz Planner-O'Day said is that the state requires a notice boundary of 350 feet. The city of Bloomington for a long time has extended that boundary to 500 feet, so we do exceed the state requirements. State requires that the notice be mailed ten days before the public hearing for the formal public hearing we try and get that out as early as we can as soon as we have a complete application not to get super into the weeds of how development review works but oftentimes we get development applications that are incomplete they're missing core components that you need to review the application so sometimes these applications are deemed incomplete and As soon as the application is deemed complete, then we're trying to get that notice out as soon as we can to notify folks. The city of Bloomington does not have a formal neighborhood notice requirement by the applicant. However, what we do is when on projects that we kind of know or are anticipating more neighborhood interest, we do encourage the applicant to do that earlier on in the process to get that feedback so they can start that conversation earlier that did occur. In this case, it sounds like. So just giving you a little bit more feedback about public notice.

Do you want me to talk about the... Yeah, but if I can ask a follow-up question on that. So the city does not do any notification until the application package is final. Anything before that would be initiated at the developer's choice, although the city recommends that the developer do it. Am I understanding that correctly? Okay.

chair commissioner you are understanding that correctly and then also additional comments about you know how long is the city known about this process it's very common for the city to do what's called a preliminary application review very early on in the process and at that stage the application is very rudimentary it's a basic site plan it doesn't have any civil engineering behind it it doesn't have necessary even always formal architectural design behind it and the reason being is that it's very expensive to put all these plans together and so it's true that the city has received multiple pre-application reviews as part of this project and provided comments back to them in terms of what our city codes require what our comprehensive plan says all of those things but projects that go through preliminary review don't always result in a formal application being submitted So as to the question as to why the city doesn't issue a notice at the time of preliminary review, we don't have all the plans that we need to do a more thorough review at that time, and not all of those applications actually result in formal development applications.

Thank you. And then on the demolition question? Yes.

Thanks. I have a follow-up on the notification. Commissioner Coleman. Yeah. The sign that says there is a land use action in the city of Bloomington sign, when does that get added? Is that at the... When is that added in the process?

Chair, Commissioner Coleman, that gets erected. That's deployed by our public works staff when we have a complete application. So similar to us trying to get the mailed notices out as early as we can. I think in this case, the mailed notice went out on June the 26th for this July 9th hearing. June 24th was when it was mailed out of city hall. So it exceeds the 10 days required by city law or state law rather. State law requires it be postmarked 10 days before the hearing. I recognize there's a whole wide variety of different perspectives and about what is adequate notification. I just want to assure everyone that we very much at the city follow state law.

and exceed it. Thank you. Commissioner LaNae, could you repeat your question about demolition?

Sure. Thanks, Chair. If you could kind of talk through the process for demolition, are permits required? What are the city's requirements for maintaining the developer maintaining the sites? What are enforcement possibilities and actions? And who residents need to contact if there are concerns on things that are enforceable under Bloomington City Law?

Mr. Johnson. I'm going to ask. Thank you. So to get to the broader point, yes, you need a permit to do demolition on any site. And the five dwellings that have been demolished all did have demolition permits. They've all passed final inspection, except for 1606 East 87th Street, the permit is under review because that's the home that has not yet been demolished. But all of the sites did have demolition permits. In addition to that, you're required to get a utility permit to disconnect the home from the city's utilities. You have to abandon the sewer and water service, so that requires a utility permit. And then in the case of these homes, not always, but these houses also have wells on these sites, so they're required to be sealed. under state law, and so staff did find well permits associated with all these projects. In terms of the activities that are happening day to day with the demolition project, we do see a variety of different worksmanship or kind of erosion control and site control. from different contractors. Our building staff certainly tries to contact them and work with them directly on site when there are violations of the building code. So if that did not adequately happen early on in the process, that's where we do want to hear from the public. And you can call the building and inspections line at nine five two five six three eight nine three zero that's on our website we want to hear from you if things are not going according to state building code or not being handled correctly we do we do want to be sensitive to that for sure so yeah they have all the necessary permits that they need most of the permits have actually been finaled out and final inspection has passed and Me not being on site, I can't speak to the, I trust the experience of the residents in terms of what was happening. As far as, if I may, just one other thing about, there are hours of work required under city code. You can't start work that early in the morning and you can't be working past the hours that I was hearing about from one of the residents here. So that's another one of those issues that if a contractor associated with any type of project, it could be a simple single-family home renovation. If they're not abiding by our hours of construction, then we want to know that, and the building official wants to do enforcement on that, certainly.

Thank you, Mr. Johnson.

Commissioner Coleman.

No, sir. Apologies. The public hearing is closed. This item is not a final decision of the planning commission.

I just want to say, sir, please.

I'm sorry. I need you to sit down.

Commissioner Coleman. Yes, thank you, Chair. So there was a question about the types of trees. I helped staff out a little bit. It is in page L1 of the civil plans. There will be 17 river birches and 31 black hill spruces. So I just wanted to make sure that was pointed out. Also about silt fences, I don't know whether that is a factor in demolition, but I'm not a professional on that in any means, but on the civil plans, also on page L12, it says that they propose a silt fence per city standards on page L12, or C12, sorry.

And Commissioner Coleman, to that kind of point on silt fence, erosion control, stormwater pollution prevention, so we have a couple members of the engineering department. Would you guys care to comment on that at all? And once we talk about that, I've got a few other ones for you, Ms. Long.

Chair Cunningham commissioners. Um, we do require when they get to the grading stage that they have to have silt fence and other erosion control measures like inlet protection out on the streets. And one of the first things we do is we send our erosion control inspector out to make sure that that is all in place before it gets the major construction gets started on the project.

Excellent, there was a question from a member of the public about sewer and water capacity. Do you have any comments or feedback on that?

Yes, the residents along Bloomington Avenue have the patience of a saint. In 2017, we had a large sanitary sewer project that really disrupted their neighborhood for the entire year. Usually we're in for like two or three months and then we go away. We were there the whole year. That sewer is 27 feet deep and it is 24 inches in diameter. So there is enough capacity on Bloomington Avenue. But I will let you know that we do have other sanitary sewer projects in our capital improvement plan. in the area. The two closest ones to this project are on 13th Avenue from 82nd to 86th. And the year is in flux for that. We are working on how to finance some of these projects. As the commission is aware, we have been spending a lot of money in our sewer capital budgets. And the other project is on Old Cedar Avenue. So it's kind of booking ends, but there's no plans currently at this time for additional sewer in that area. The area is also served very well by a nice water main and a 60 inch storm sewer pipe that drains to Wright's Lake. So I do not anticipate any of this development causing a need for increased capacity in any of those three project or any of those three main city utilities. I will say the design standards for stormwater are continuing to evolve. There is something called the mid-century storm, which is designing our storm sewer pipes for a 2050 event that we currently have not started to design our system for. So if that becomes standard protocol in the future, there may be a storm project, not only in this area, but all of Bloomington that we would have to upsize our stormwater facilities towards.

Thank you, Ms. Long. And Commissioner Munster, I see your hand. I'll get to you right after this next one. There was a concern about the potential flooding. Can you talk a little bit about what the city does as far as reviews of these projects for stormwater infiltration on site? how it goes off-site, things along those lines?

Sure. A couple different things. We mainly look at volume and rate. So we require them to treat 1.1 inches for the volume to keep that on-site. So that's why you see that infiltration area. And then we don't permit them to increase the rate at all. So whatever the pre-development storm discharge is what the post-development storm discharge needs to be. So there shouldn't be any increase in flooding due to this site. I will also say that at the intersection of 15th Avenue and 86, there is a known flooding area on our model and that we are going to be looking at that as like I mentioned earlier with the mid-century storm, like as rainfall intensity increases and rain starts to fall really rapidly, we do need to start looking at that, but that is upstream of this development. And then the yeah, I think those are the points.

Excellent. Thank you. Commissioner Munster.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Follow up question on the demolition and then I have a separate question. For demolition permits, is it required that someone have a redevelopment plan proposed or approved before a demolition permit can be issued?

Mr.. Johnson chair commissioner Munster it is not any resident any property owner can submit a demolition permit and demo a structure an example of that is the Southgate office building along 494 the city just received a demo permit for that project without any contact from city staff So no it is not a requirement that a development plan be approved prior to taking that action

Thank you. And then sort of a very similar question on removal of trees is a permit required is anything required for somebody to remove trees on private property.

Chair, Commissioner Munster does not. The only wrinkle to that is that preliminary and final plats for projects in the R1 zoning district do require tree preservation plans. Given that this is proposed to be rezoned to R3, a tree preservation plan would not be a requirement as part of this proposal. And that tracks with all the city's historic approvals and reviews on townhome developments. Thank you.

Thank you. And thank you, Ms. Long. I think I had all of my questions for engineering answered. Anyone else have anything else for staff? Otherwise, I still got a bunch. All right, I'll go. Mr. Roberts, can you come right back up? Apologies for not knowing the answer to this one. I'm at the splash pad a block from here all the time. But I don't know, is there parking permitted on 87th Street right now?

Mr. Chairman, commissioners, there's a small section that is restricted on 87th Street just off of Bloomington Avenue. I'm not sure the reasons. There's quite a bit of parking restrictions around the Cedar Crest area just because of some of the events they've had there and regularly hold.

but generally parking on 87th is wide open it's unrestricted excellent um and then uh a concern was brought up about some uh crosswalks or other kind of traffic calming measures can you talk a little bit about the maybe the switch from 86th street from being a four-lane road to a three-lane road and then any other traffic calming that might be proactive or reactive from this uh project

Yeah Chairman and Commissioners as I was listening to those comments and thinking through this I think what was being asked for is do we need crosswalks across Bloomington Avenue perhaps similar to the way this is a side street controlled intersection on 86th Street the only difference here generally we don't put crosswalks on those side streets unless they meet specific criteria like with every traffic control device they have to meet certain specific criteria and we will study that for both Bloomington Avenue and then 14th on the other side of Cedar Crest too because that's quite the pedestrian attraction there especially in the summer with the hot summer days we have. We could have enough people using that crossing that we need to go ahead and put those marked crosswalks down and so we will study that and see if there's a need for a crosswalk across those side streets. Another comment speaking about crosswalks was thinking about the park. There is a large park to the north there PEDESTRIANS, THERE IS A SIGNAL THERE AT OLD CEDAR AVENUE FOR PEOPLE WISHING TO CROSS UP INTO RITES LAKE PARK TO THE NORTH. THERE'S ALSO A CROSSWALK OVER 86th STREET RIGHT AT CEDAR CREST PARK. YOU'LL MAYBE REMEMBER THERE USED TO BE AN OLD TRAFFIC SIGNAL THERE, A RED, YELLOW, GREEN INDICATION. THAT REACHED THE END OF ITS LIFE ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO. WE WORKED WITH THE PROPERTY TO GO AHEAD AND THE PARKS DEPARTMENT TO GO AHEAD AND IMPROVE THAT CROSSWALK. NOW YOU'LL SEE THERE'S A NICE MEDIAN ISLAND WITH A PEDESTRIAN ACTIVATED FLASHING BEACONS. SO I THINK HOPEFULLY THAT ADDRESSED ALL OF THE QUESTIONS. IF THERE'S AREAS ALONG 86th STREET WHERE WE FEEL LIKE THERE'S ENOUGH PEOPLE CROSSING TO MERIT MORE CROSSING IMPROVEMENTS, WE'RE HAPPY TO EVALUATE THOSE.

EXCELLENT. THANK YOU, MR. ROBERTS. An area of focus that I would like to enter into the record would be Bloomington Avenue and 86th heading east-west on the south side of the road over to Cedar Crest Park. I couldn't tell if you were talking about that intersection or 87th and Bloomington. So anyway, I just wanted to get that out there. A comment was made during the public hearing about trip counts and kind of commenting on your presentation earlier, the average of 10 trips a day, and then here we are at less than 330 trips. Can you talk a little bit about other trips that could happen, the mailman, the delivery person, things along those lines, and how we got to the 238 trips

Right. So when those studies are done, when we study a specific use like townhomes, that's all inclusive, the numbers that we use. And so we come up with a rate. And so for a given townhome, it'll generate, I think in this case, it's about seven trips per day per townhome. That's all inclusive of any trips coming and going to that development. So that includes the people that live there, the Amazon guy, the postal service, and pretty much everything is wrapped up into that number. And so that's how we arrive at that. And then once you have that number, it's just a simple multiplication problem to go ahead and multiply it by the number of units and that gets you your total trips. And so if you wanted to, obviously the easiest way to do it, if you want a single family residence, you know, we're taking out one, two, three, four, five, six, that's about 10 trips a day for a single family residence, that's about 60 trips. So that's the math behind it.

Excellent. Commissioner Issa.

Thank you, Chair. I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS FOR STAFF OR THE APPLICANT, BUT I WANTED TO ADDRESS CONCERNS, WELL, I WAS CURIOUS ABOUT IT, TOO, BUT ABOUT THE ADA COMPLIANCE ASPECT OF THE TOWN HOME DEVELOPMENT. IS IT THAT, YOU KNOW, THE FIRST LEVEL WILL BE GEARED TOWARDS ONE BEDROOM OF THE UNIT BEING ADA COMPLIANT AND A BATHROOM OR IF, YEAH, IF THIS CITY OR APPLICANT LATER, I GUESS, COULD TOUCH ON THAT. THANK YOU.

Mr. Johnson? Chair, Commissioner, you say I would defer to the project architect to speak to that if they're willing. I mean, it's their design. It's their building. I would suggest that they speak to that in terms of the designation of some units as ADA units.

I'd like to invite the applicant back up.

My name is for this project. Your question is? Yeah. On the we provide for units ADA compliance, the first main floor is going to be have the kitchenette, the bathroom, an 80 bathroom and the living room area, just like a function for the second floor and the third floor. So we're providing the main floor as basically the ADA compliance with our requirements. And the second floor and the third floor is going to be like regular unit apartment houses.

Definitely. That makes sense. Thank you so much.

Any other comments?

Commissioner Coleman? Kirk Roberts, I have a question about, so if the residents were to see issues with street parking, I know that they are providing double what is required in city code for parking. where it says, like, each unit will have a two-car garage plus two spots in front of the garage plus there's spots for the area. But if that were to overflow onto the street, the neighbors would be able to fill out a petition to have a parking restriction, right?

Chair Cunningham, Commissioner Coleman, they could move to modify on-street parking. However, those modifications apply to everybody. And so one important distinction about public parking is it's public. We can't reserve it or restrict it to any certain group. It has to be available for use. And we only want to do that when that's persistent. And so when the question comes up about, well, what happens if they have parties? Well, what happens now when people have parties? You know, a grad party or a wedding or whatever people do in neighborhoods on 87th, they park on the street. And so if in this townhomes, if there is overflow, that parking would be available for those people. That's a good thing. It's how our community remains vital. It's how we do the things that mark those significant moments in life, weddings, funerals, grad parties, and all the good things we do.

I definitely agree. The street parking, it's not there to just look pretty. It costs a lot to the taxpayer to maintain all of that asphalt. I see that it makes sense for the public to be able to use it and not really be you know, like shamed into using it, but obviously we have to make sure that the development has enough capacity on site.

So Mr. Johnson, anything to add?

Chair, thank you. The only thing I was going to mention about our off-street parking requirements, and yes, the project is exceeding our zoning code requirements, and I just wanted to acknowledge the concerns about parking that I was hearing. And one of the challenges that kind of follows along with off-street parking is that if you overbuild it, you're adding unnecessary impervious surface, which detracts from landscaping, trees, and it's more stormwater that has to be treated. So I just wanted to express that there's not a perfect ratio or solution to always get the parking count right, but there's kind of challenges on both sides of that equation. You build too much parking, it's bad for stormwater management, it's bad for landscaping, it's bad for heat island issues. You build too little parking, and then yes, there's more of those neighborhood impacts. WE FEEL LIKE OUR CODE IS IN A GOOD SPOT, AND JUST TO REITERATE AGAIN, THIS PROJECT IS FAR EXCEEDING WHAT OUR CODE REQUIRES.

COMMISSIONER LENAY?

I WAS GOING TO DO A FAIRLY DRAMATIC TOPIC CHANGE, IF THAT'S OKAY, CHAIR. OF COURSE. I'M WONDERING, WE HEARD SEVERAL COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ABOUT COMPATIBILITY AND SORT OF THE RELATIONSHIP TO THE MISSING MIDDLE CONVERSATION. While I don't have concerns about the quantity of housing, I would like to know more about what the city's thoughts are as it relates to the height and size of these units based on how we have described the missing middle and kind of that thought process.

Yeah. Chair, Commissioner Linnaeus, thank you for that question. So I'll talk about kind of the whole city first and then I'll kind of drill down into this area if that's okay. And so when the missing middle housing ordinance was being discussed, it was kind of in two different categories. We were thinking about it in areas guided medium density residential and then areas that were guided low density residential. So the city adopted the City Council adopted different height standards for missing middle housing types and dwellings of any type Single-family homes are subject to the same limitations On sites that are zoned are one in areas that are guided low density residential So I want to make that very important or clear distinction that there's different height rules for sites that are guarded guided I'm sorry zones are one single-family residential That limitation is 40 feet. In Bloomington today, you can build a single-family home up to 40 feet tall. It is limited to two stories, though. We do see a number of houses on the west side of town that are as tall as 40 feet in height for some of our single-family homes. So I do want to reiterate that. As far as this site is concerned, this site has been guided medium-density residential. Whether or not all the residents have been aware of that or cognizant of that, leaving that challenge or that difficulty, I want to acknowledge that for sure. But since 1972, all these comp plan cycles, this site has been planned effectively for medium-density residential uses in Bloomington. If you recall a work plan project that was earlier this year, we evaluated our height standards. One of the changes that happened associated with that project is that all sites that were guided medium density residential increased their height allowance up to 50 feet in height effectively. We took stories out of the requirement if you recall. And so that increased the allowed structure height on medium guide, excuse me, sites guided medium density residential up to 50 feet in height. The proposed height is 41 feet in height. It is three stories. It does have a flat roof design that does mitigate some of the visual impact of that. But they're below the 50 feet of height. They're slightly exceeding what would be allowed in a single family home on an R1 site. I think some of the other issues that people experience with respect to character is that new construction tends to be taller structures than older homes that were built in the 1950s and 60s. The market, for the most part, demands taller ceiling, clear heights. It is building taller homes than it was during the area when a lot of these neighborhoods were constructed. And so whether it be a single-family home, a townhome, Multifamily we're seeing taller structures across the board because that's just simply what new construction Does I don't dismiss concerns about neighborhood compatibility or what the impacts of that are new construction looks different than? Then older homes do there's no doubt about that But it's our responsibility to review these projects according to what the codes require. And again, right now, the maximum height on this site would be, if it were to be rezoned, would be 50 feet. And they're coming in at 41 feet for these structures.

Great. Thank you for that answer.

Any other clarifications, Saad? I've got a few more if no one else has any. One I just want to put into the record a member of the public classified Dakota Castenday as a commissioner. He is a member of staff just if anyone needs to get in touch with him. And then I'm not really sure what member of staff this is for but the concern of snow storage was brought up and snow storage being stored in the infiltration pond. Anybody want to raise their hand for that one? Maybe.

Pardon me, Chair. I would defer to Julie with respect to specifically the stormwater management pond component of it. But generally, we do like to see landscaped areas where snow can be pushed. Generally on a site plan, that's another reason why landscape yard requirements exist, why setbacks exist. And so we certainly don't want to see snow piled up that encroaches into neighbors' yards or creates a drainage problem. So that's just kind of the high level. I don't know if Julie wants to add anything else.

Ms. Long, I apologize. I didn't ask you to introduce yourself to those who might not know you in chambers.

Sorry, I'm Julie Long, I'm the city engineer. It is, snow removal would be the purview of the townhome development, so I can just speculate on what they're going to do, I can't say for sure. But it is highly likely with that infiltration basin, depending on where the landscaping is, they're gonna have to jockey around a little bit, that some of that snow storage will end up there. There will also, as we know, we're in Minnesota and tight areas like this look often like an alley. You will find every snow pile and any available space until it becomes too high, depending on the winter. And then they may have to hire someone to truck the snow off and go dispose of it someplace else. Similarly, with our streets, we will plow up to a point and then often our crews will have to go back and like knock down intersections so that there is a butte triangle so that as the gentleman indicated it can get a little unsafe and you have to creep out and you have to be careful when you're doing it and it all depends on how much snow comes and when it comes and what kind of january thaw we have does that answer the question yes thank you okay uh commissioner coleman

Uh, yeah. Uh, it seems like an infiltration pond is like the perfect place to put snow. Cause it's, if you're going to have melt water, might as well put it in the place where the water is supposed to go. Right. I mean, it's six feet deep, so it, it would be weird if you couldn't put snow in it to me, but yeah.

At the, uh, at the, uh, at the risk of voicing an opinion from the chair's position, um, it is, uh, you have some odd days in the spring rains when you still have snow and it's raining and it can be a problem, but it is the responsibility of the property owner is my understanding to manage their snow and not put it into the public right of way. Any other clarifications? I think I got all my notes. Does anyone have anything else? All right, general discussion, any opinions on this application? I'm happy to- Hey, Chair. Oh, yes.

If I could just, maybe for the benefit of the public here, just remind them what we're doing. So there's three applications here. first is to rezone the property from R1 to R3. Any property owner can request rezoning or the city can initiate as well. Here the property owner themselves petitioned to rezone the property. So what the Planning Commission is doing is making a recommendation to the city council And then the City Council will hear it next month. The second approval is a final site and building plans and that's the development itself. So it's 33 townhomes and then one out lot that's the infiltration basin. Again, it's a recommendation to City Council and then City Council will take up final action next month. The third thing is the plat. So replatting changes the lot dimensions. So you have six lots now. You're going to have 34 lots, so 33 townhome lots and one out lot where the infiltration basin is if it's approved. So that's another recommendation to city council. They'll take it up next month for final action. So three approvals. One is legislative, two quasi-judicial. So we have factors in our code for final site and building plans. We have factors for preliminary and final plat. What we're doing is taking all the information from the record, applying it to those factors, and then you're making a decision. So that's kind of setting the table here, explaining what the process is.

Thank you, Mr. Kosky. You're welcome. And I do apologize. I did have one note I missed, and this one's for Ms. O'Day. Setbacks of the principal structure, are they different than a single-family home? Or are they similar as far as from right of way?

They are different. So the structure setbacks from the front property line is 20 feet and they're showing 20 feet. It's 20 feet from the rear property line and 10 feet from the side. So those are different than the single family.

Mr. Johnson, anything?

Yeah, just to add to that, to the record, is that I believe per the site plan we have now, again, code requires a 20-foot setback. To the gentleman's question about the setbacks along East 86th Street, they are showing a 20-foot setback along East 86th Street. The current site plan shows a 30-foot setback along East 87th Street back on the south side. And just to add a little bit more additional information as far as the site distances are concerned, there is, as of today, this is a GIS measurement, but there's 11 feet BEHIND THE CURB OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, THAT'S KNOWN AS THE PUBLIC BOULEVARD, SO THESE STRUCTURES EFFECTIVELY WOULD BE AT LEAST 30-PLUS FEET AWAY FROM THE ROADWAY. HOWEVER, I BELIEVE THIS, AND I'LL DEFER TO MY FRIENDS IN ENGINEERING AGAIN, I BELIEVE THIS PROJECT INVOLVES FIVE FEET OF ADDITIONAL PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION. So actually that pushes the front property line along East 86th Street further to the south, if that makes sense. That's how the city gets its public right-of-way, is through dedication of plats. And so this project includes seven additional feet of public right-of-way, so that moves the setback seven feet additionally back. So I would estimate on the basis of that, these structures are probably 38, 36, 37 feet back from the roadway. I hope my math is correct, but I think it is.

Commissioner Linnaeus.

Thank you, Chair. And Planning Manager Johnson, can you remind us what the setback is for single-family homes if a new single-family home was built on that lot?

Yep, Chair, Commissioner Linnaeus, 30 feet. Yep.

So it exceeds what it would be if a new single family house was, if it's really good. Oh, the closest. Okay. Nevermind. Scratch that second.

You can put it pretty far back if it's a deep lot like this, but it exceeds where the closest you could put a new single family home would be.

Yeah. Thank you commissioners. And thank you for that summary of our actions tonight. Uh, assistant city attorney Toski, um, ANY DISCUSSION ON THE RECOMMENDATION AND PROPOSAL IN FRONT OF US? COMMISSIONER ISAAC.

THANK YOU, CHAIR. I WAS GOING TO SAY IT'S A PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD APPLICATION, BUT IT'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS WERE ASKED AND SEEMS TO ME ALL OF THE QUESTIONS WERE ANSWERED AND WE'RE HERE TONIGHT TO VOTE ON A SPECIFIC IN REGARDS TO APPLICATIONS WITH SPECIFIC PARAMETERS, AND I THINK IT MEETS AND EXCEEDS ALL THOSE PARAMETERS. THE ONLY THING I WOULD ASK, I GUESS, IS, LIKE, WE'RE VOLUNTEERS ON THIS BOARD, RIGHT? I THINK SOMEONE HAD A QUESTION, NOT A QUESTION, BUT MENTIONED THAT. YOU KNOW, WE WORK FOR THE CITY, ALL OF US HERE, BUT I JUST I ASK FOR THE PUBLIC TO GET CLARIFICATION ON THAT.

YES, TO CLARIFY, I MENTIONED THIS AT THE START OF THE MEETING, BUT COMMISSIONER MUNSTER, MYSELF, COMMISSIONER ISAAC, COMMISSIONER LENET AND COMMISSIONER COLEMAN ARE ALL VOLUNTEERS APPOINTED BY CITY COUNCIL. AND IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN JOINING OUR BOARD, TYPICALLY APPLICATIONS OPEN IN MAY. I DON'T KNOW IF I'LL, MY SPOT MIGHT BE OPEN NEXT MAY. WITH THAT BEING SAID, Back to the task in front of us. Any further discussion, commissioners? Commissioner Coleman?

Yeah, so from what I understand, the second two, if we were to approve the first motion to recommend rezoning, then the other two would be in full compliance and we would basically have to say yes, right? There would be no basis to reject it. Mr. Toski?

Yeah, Chair, Commissioners, so there's, for final, the rezoning, yes, that is, the whole thing's contingent on rezoning, so your rules say that if you make the recommendation that the City Council not rezone the property, then you should also recommend denial for the other two. So, it's like a condition precedent, I guess, is what you might call it, or whatever, so yeah.

But as a follow-up to that question, if we recommended yes to the first, does that necessitate that we say yes to the second two? Or in the affirmative, is it not the same case?

Chair, Commissioner Lenate, no, you don't. So you could, the factors are in the final site and building plans. And then there's also factors for approval of the plat. So those are what you're stacking up the facts against are those factors. So if you can make all of those findings for each of those approvals, then you would recommend the city council approve it. But you have to make those findings, right?

you'd have to cite a specific thing that we disagree with staff on. It's like, oh, this setback isn't correct, right? That would be a, yeah.

Thank you, Commissioner Coleman. And Mr. Tosca, just so that we're fully clear on the action tonight, all of these recommendations, the rezoning, the final site and building plans, and the replat are all recommendations to the city council.

THAT'S CORRECT. YOU'RE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION, AND THEN FOR THE REZONING, THE PLANNING MANAGER CONFIRMED THIS, BUT I THINK WE RENOTICED EVERYTHING ONCE AGAIN PRIOR TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING, SO EVERYONE WILL GET A PUBLISHED NOTICE AS WELL AS A MAILED NOTICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL DATE. YOU'LL PROBABLY ANNOUNCE IT AT THE END OF THE MEETING AS WELL. SO THEY'LL GET NOTICE, YEAH. THAT'S CORRECT.

THANK YOU, MR. TOSKI AND MR. JOHNSON. ANY OTHER OPINIONS OR thoughts on the recommendation in front of us. Commissioner Linne.

Yeah, I'm happy to start the conversation. I think, first off, I really appreciate all of the input from the neighbors and the community. I think this is incredibly, incredibly important conversation to have, and I am incredibly sympathetic to the impact this is going to have on you. Having said that, I think I've been pretty vocal in my opinions on the commission that we do really need to be working on increasing the housing density. I have actually made those recommendations for the neighborhood I also live in, which is one of the neighborhoods that's also under consideration for this. And I think that the findings from staff have convinced me that this has met what needs to happen. I will say this. I would encourage the developer as you move forward to do a much better job of communicating with the neighbors. I think that that is a real concern as I've heard how this has all unfolded. And I think that to keep the neighborhood compatible, that's gonna be a really important dynamic moving forward. But I think as of right now, I think that what I see laid out here, the findings have been met.

Commissioner Coleman. Yeah. Thank you, Chair. I agree with Commissioner Linnaeus. I live in a three-story apartment building that looks fairly similar to these townhomes. And there are single-family homes in my neighborhood and also duplexes and multiplexes and other townhomes. And really, the middle housing is built around, like, how can we do low density that is better for the city, that is better for the environment, and is the most compatible with existing single family. And although I have my qualms about, you know, which use should be in which category, like, do we really need an R3? I feel like most of that could be achieved through R4, you know, that kind of stuff. But I do think that, like, townhomes and other middle housing types are really like, they seem to be what the future is going to be for low density. And I, especially when you consider that this is such a unique spot, like there's basically nowhere else in the city of Bloomington that has lots this deep that you can make a through lot. It really seems like it's a an interesting opportunity to do something that is a little bit more dense, that will have more homes for people to live in Bloomington. Obviously, like, I would love there to be more sidewalks. Absolutely. I lived on a street where I had to walk to the bus stop for school every day where there was no sidewalk, like, a full block that I was just walking the street. And it sucks during the winter, but, like, people get by and I would love for us to be able to, you know, bring in the revenue to be able to build more sidewalks so that people can be safer walking the street. And I think that I don't see anything in this application that is like a big red flag for me to say that this will be incompatible with the neighborhood, obviously. you look at a render and it looks kind of weird and off, right? Like it's gonna look different in real life, you know, once the trees are fully grown. And I think that a lot of things we just don't really think about, right? Like if this was here since the 70s, probably people wouldn't even notice it, right? Whenever something's new, it really sticks in your mind. But once you get used to it, I think that this is something that people will love. So thank you.

Thank you. I'll add my two cents in. You know, we're a volunteer commission with the city. We're here to, you know, interpret ordinances code and the findings of fact from an application. And I don't see anything on this application that would prevent me from agreeing with the recommendation of staff. That being said, is this the perfect development? I don't believe so, but I don't think that the pursuit of perfect should get in the way of good enough. And I'm also in favor of this application. Commissioner Munster?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would just like to sort of echo the sentiments of Commissioner Coleman that these types of developments are where the community seems to be going in the future. The city is built out. Housing needs across the entire metro area are high. We have to find creative ways to solve that. That said, the findings that we are required to make, I believe, are made in this situation. and I do support this proposal as well. Thank you.

Thank you. If there's no further discussion, I would entertain a motion. Commissioner Linne.

In case PL, number PL2026105, I move to recommend the City Council adopt an ordinance rezoning 1525, 1601, 1603, 1605 East 86th Street, 1604, and 1606 East 87th Street from R1 single-family residential to R3 missing middle residential. Second.

We have a motion and a second for the rezoning of the parcel stated. Any further discussion? Ms. Brown, please call the roll.

Cunningham.

Aye.

Issei. Aye. Coleman.

Aye.

Did I skip Linnaeus?

You skipped Linnaeus.

Sorry, Linnaeus. Aye. That motion. And Munster. And Munster.

All right.

That motion passes 5-0. Apologies Commissioner Munster.

In case number PL2026105, having been able to make the required findings, I move to recommend the City Council approve final site and building plans for 33-unit townhome redevelopment at 1525, 1601, 1603, 1605 East 86th Street, and 1604 and 1606 East 87th Street, subject to conditions and code requirements to the staff report. Second.

We have a motion and a second to approve the final site and building plans for this proposal. Any further discussion? Ms. Brown, please call the roll.

Cunningham.

Aye.

Issei. Aye. Linné. Aye. Coleman.

Aye.

And Munster.

Aye.

That motion passes 5-0. Commissioner Linnea, one more time.

In case PL 2026-105, I move to recommend the City Council approve a Type 3 preliminary plat. and adopt a resolution approving the final plat of 86th Bloomington Flats to subdivide 1525, 1601, 1603, and 1605 East 86th Street and 1604 and 1606 East 87th Street into 33 townhome lots and one outlot subject to conditions and code requirements attached to the staff report.

Second.

We have a motion and a second to approve the preliminary and final plat for this application. Any further discussion? Ms. Brown, please call the roll.

Cunningham.

Aye.

Issei. Aye. Lanai. Aye. Coleman.

Aye.

And Munster.

Aye. That motion carries 5-0. This case will go before the city council at 6.30 p.m. on August 3rd in these chambers. You may testify there and also reach out to your city council member if there is a concern. You can be here in person or online for that meeting as well. Mr. Johnson.

Yeah, Chair, and I would reiterate to the public that we'll continue to accept written testimony as part of this case. It can be added to the packet and for city council consideration in addition to any published public hearings.

Thank you. All right, we will move along to item three, which is a conditional use permit for a cannabis manufacturing facility at 300 West 83rd Street. Ms. O'Dea, I believe you also have the staff report for this one?

I do, thank you. Chair and commissioners, this is a conditional use permit for a cannabis manufacturing facility located at 300 West 83rd Street. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS AT 300 WEST 83rd STREET. SURROUNDING LAND USES INCLUDE A MIX OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND INDUSTRIAL. IT IS ZONED I3 AND A CANNABIS MANUFACTURING FACILITY IS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THIS ZONING DISTRICT. So the floor plan consists of multiple different areas operated by separate entities. So the first is a THC manufacturing area occupied by the applicant including a kitchen, inventory, packing, shipping and the like. then there's a hemp storage and distribution area that's occupied by a separate entity used for warehousing of prepackaged hemp edible products and then a transport area that's occupied by a third entity used for dispatch and other admin duties and the last Last space is shared common space area that's accessible to all employees. That includes bathrooms, break rooms, and office space. Total building area is 19,600 square feet. So a little bit of code analysis. The overall parking supply is compliant. What they're showing on site plans is two new ADA stalls that are proposed near the building entrance. Just a note that that does require administrative final site and building plan to review that as well as a parking lot permit approval. As far as odor mitigation goes, the tenant location is more than 150 feet away from the nearest wall of protected residential use, and also this facility does not emit any odors, so odor mitigation is not required in this instance. As far as landscaping goes, what they're identifying is eight trees and 38 shrubs located around the site. They have provided a landscape plan And then lastly, lighting, just some minor revisions needed there to meet our current requirements. There's some wall packs on site that just need some replacement of fixtures. So with that, a pretty short presentation, final decision by the planning commission subject to an appeal. I have the recommendation. I don't know if the applicant is online or in person, but happy to answer any questions that you might have.

Thank you, Ms. O'Day. Any questions for staff? I've got one really quick one. Like with all of their cannabis manufacturing facilities that we've been discussing over the last six months, they're beholden to both our city code and then also any guidelines or ordinances put down by the Office of Cannabis Management. Is that correct?

That's correct. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. Is the applicant in chambers or online?

We have a number online. I am unsure if it's the applicant or not.

I believe they have their hand up.

Oh, I see that now.

Person who's calling in from their phone, if you had your hand up, you are able to be unmuted now. Or you can, we're working on it. Hang tight with us here for just a moment.

they updated it all right uh whoever is calling in uh you your microphone should be green hello chair and commission my name is sarah eddie and i am deputy general counsel for the applicant's 14 444 confections and i'm here today participating remotely on behalf of the applicant and i am here to answer any questions you may have

Thank you, Ms. Eddy. Any questions for the applicant? Commissioner Coleman?

Yeah, thank you. So I'm curious how, with a kitchen, there is no odor anticipated to be produced by this, because I'm not a weed person. So if this is definitely something that I don't understand, but it seems like even if you're bringing in maybe it's not flour right because like if you're bringing it in there would still be some kind of odor right i get that it's not within the distance that we necessarily require it but i was just curious about um why there would not be any odor at all

That is a wonderful question and you are correct. There can typically be an odor associated with cannabis. However, this business operation is essentially a confectionery or candy company with a special ingredient. That's how we like to describe it. And our production relies on kettles rather than open flame cooking. And we are just producing the edibles using a cannabis oil The oil does not smell outside of a building, and we're just using kettles inside our facility. We also use internal air quality management just through portable air scrubbers and fans for our employees that started back in COVID to improve indoor air quality, but no actual odors outside of the facility. And if you're going to smell anything, it will smell like candy.

Thank you very much. I guess it's not like a brownie. That's the extent of my knowledge, and it is through osmosis from culture. So thank you very much.

Thank you for your question.

Any other questions for the applicant? Seeing none, Ms. Eddy, thank you so much for your time. This item is a public hearing. So I will open that now. If there's anyone in chambers or online that would wish to speak on this item, please come forward. Same rules as the previous public hearing. We will have the three-minute shot clock. Anyone in chambers wishing to speak on this item? Ms. Brown, is there anyone online that wishes to speak?

All participants online are staff.

Hearing that, I would entertain a motion to close the public hearing. So moved.

Second.

We have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on item three this evening. Any further discussion? Ms. Brown, please call the roll.

Cunningham?

Aye.

Issa? Aye. Linné? Aye. Coleman?

Aye.

And Munster?

Aye.

That motion passes 5-0. The public hearing is now closed. Discussion? Any thoughts on this, commissioners? Commissioner Linnaeus.

Chair, I feel like this is pretty straightforward and in line with the previous applications we've approved and that the application meets all findings and seems like something we should be able to approve.

I tend to agree with you. Any further discussion? If not, I would entertain a motion.

Commissioner Coleman. Thank you, Chair. Having been able to make the required findings, I move to adopt a resolution approving a conditional use permit for a cannabis manufacturing facility located at an existing office slash warehouse building located at 300 West 83rd Street, subject to the conditions and code requirements listed in the resolution.

Second.

We have a motion and a second to approve the proposal in front of us. Any further discussion? Ms. Brown, please call the roll.

Cunningham.

Aye.

Issei.

Aye.

Linné. Aye. Coleman.

Aye.

And Munster. Aye.

That motion carries 5-0. This conditional use permit is a final decision of the Planning Commission subject to the appeal received in writing at City Hall by 4.30 p.m. on Tuesday, July 14th. Moving on to item four, we have the consideration of the approval of the draft planning commission meeting synopses for June 4th and June 18th. I will note for my fellow commissioners that Commissioner Lanai and I were both absent on the June 18th meeting. With that, any motion or discussion?

Yes. Can you do the first one?

Okay. I move that we approve the Planning Commission meetings for June 4th, 2026. As stated in the record.

Second.

We motion in a second to approve the June 4th draft Planning Commission meeting synopses as stated in the packet. Any further discussion? Real quick.

Kevin Tosky, I have to abstain, right? That's correct. Cool. Thank you.

All right. Ms. Brown, please call the roll.

Cunningham.

Aye.

Issei.

Aye.

Linné. Aye.

Coleman. Abstain.

And Munster. Aye.

That motion passes 4-0 with one abstination. And I'll be looking at either Commissioner Munster or Commissioner Issei to do the June 18th ones. Commissioner Munster.

Sorry, I have a question. Do we have sufficient votes to adopt this?

Chair, I'll invite Attorney Toski to correct me if I'm wrong, but there is a quorum of the Planning Commission here. There were two members who are present at that meeting. We do believe that with an affirmative vote of both of you that that can approve the meeting minutes. Yes.

Commissioner Munster, do you want to take a crack at it? June 18th?

I apologize. I don't have the script in front of me. However, I do make a motion to approve the draft meeting minutes of the June 18th meeting as presented in the packet. Second.

We have a motion and a second to approve the draft Planning Commission meeting synopsis for June 18th. Any further discussion? Ms. Brown, please call the roll.

Cunningham.

Abstain.

Issei.

Aye.

Linné. Abstain. Coleman.

Abstain.

Ann Munster.

That motion passes two to zero with three abstinations. That concludes our, excuse me, item five this evening is our regularly scheduled Planning Commission Policies and Issues Update. Mr. Johnson?

Thank you, Chair Cunningham. Just want to welcome Commissioner Coleman to his first meeting. So welcome to you and thank you for putting yourself forward in service of the community. Number one, I'll just preview the upcoming three meetings. The next two meetings in July are going to be canceled. That'd be July 16th. That meeting has already been officially canceled. And that was published earlier today. The July 23rd meeting is also likely to be canceled as a result of no development application or long-range planning items coming to that meeting. And then previewing the August 6th meeting, we will conduct the oath of office for Commissioner Summers, who is unfortunately unable to join us tonight. And we have our annual kind of organizational meeting at our first meeting in August So as part of that we will go over our annual rules of procedures Commissioners will be provided a copy of that to review they can ask questions they can propose amendments there's a process to go over our rules of procedure and And then in addition to that, the election of officers occurs at the first meeting in August. So those of you contemplating putting yourself forward for an officer position, you would certainly just want to nominate yourself at the start of that commencement of that item. And we will conduct a ballot exercise to elect your officers for the coming year, starting here in August. And then finally, the last item on the August 6th agenda that's planned to be presented as a study item. Earlier on this year, we previewed doing a Development Review 101 educational and informational session to kind of walk the Planning Commission and any interested public through our process from the very start of our process through construction and beyond. So we will provide that study item to you on August the 6th. And that's all my updates. Thank you.

Thank you. This is an opportunity for commissioners to bring up any topics that might not have been on tonight's agenda. Does anyone have anything they'd wish to discuss? Commissioner Munster? You got your hand up? That's why, apologies. All right. Seeing none, that concludes this July 9th meeting of the Bloomington Planning Commission. Good night.