Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Hello. Welcome to the Bloomington City Planning Committee's meeting on September 17. The City Planning Committee provides advice on development restrictions, development standards, long-term planning and transportation issues. Some of the projects listed in the City Planning Committee include research projects that do not take official action, There is also a public opinion meeting to gather public opinion. We recommend your active participation. You can participate in the viewing conference room or participate in the audience directly according to the instructions displayed on the screen. For some cases, the City Planning Committee has the final decision, but for other cases, the City Council makes the final decision and the City Planning Committee acts as an advisor. The City Planning Committee consists of 7 Bloomington citizen resources volunteers appointed by the City Council. Each committee has a three-year term and can reach up to two seats. Today's meeting was filled with 5 members of the committee. Today's first case is a oath of allegiance. Please stand up if you can.

I swear to the United States of America, the Republic of China, the united nation under God, the indivisible nation, the nation with freedom and justice for all people.

Um, and before we start tonight's meeting, Johnson will give you a brief update. Yes, thank you. I'll let the people who attended tonight know. There was a technical problem with our screen. Therefore, if you need staff presentation data for tonight's case, please refer to the data printed on the table next to the meeting room. Everything else will work normally. Thank you. Today's evening meeting will start from the public hearing on changing some sections of Hopkins Road to Mission Road. Now, I would like to ask City Engineer Julie Long for an employee report. Thank you, Chairman of the Planning Committee.

I would like to talk about changing the name of the two houses on the intersection where Hopkins Road and Mission Road meet tonight. Um, here. There is an engineering drawing. To help you understand, Lindale Avenue is stretched to the north and south. But the drawing doesn't look like that, so you have to imagine it in your head. And Hawkins Road is similarly stretched. Mission Road is currently stretched at another angle and meets Hawkins Road to form a Y shape, which is a bit unusual. So it was difficult to know who had the priority and who had to give up. We wanted to solve the problem through a road packaging management project. So we connected Hawkins Road to Mission Road and T Jamoyang. But the unique thing about this area was that it was originally Y Jamoyang. The east side of the road near Lindale Avenue is the Mission Road address, and the west side of the road is the Hawkins Road address. In particular, after the Hawkins Road was connected to the Mission Road and the T-shaped road, it was not ideal for emergency response. So, they are trying to change the road names of the two houses from Hawkins to Mission. I'm sorry to tell you slowly, but you always have to say it slowly. Otherwise, you'll get lost. There are many ways to change the road name in Bloomington. It can be conducted through a resident vote, through a city council, or through a city engineer. Tonight, we are conducting a procedure led by a city engineer. We checked if the name-related regulations in page 17 of the period were in place. There are various guidelines. Fortunately, we are not using a new name, but we are redoing the existing name. I asked for the opinion of the Development Commission, and I presented a few opinions in the fire department, but there was no other opinion. Now it's time to hold a council meeting. We are planning to submit opinions to the City Planning Committee and the City Council. We published an announcement in the Sun Current newspaper, and we notified all real estate owners within 350 feet of the road, which is planned to be renovated. In the area affected by the Hawkins Road, there are 7 nearby fields. As I said, two of them bring their address from Hawkins Road, and the other five bring their address from Mission Road, so there are no changes. We provided $1,000 each to the two households. Because we have to complete all the necessary procedures such as driver's license, passport information update, and house number change. I'm trying to reduce the burden as much as possible. It's uncomfortable, but I hope it doesn't be a big burden to anyone. And I'll tell you about the case I suggested. Thank you, Mr. Long. Let's start with the employee question.

Thank you.

I have a simple question. I want to know if both houses are owned by themselves, or if there is a possibility of working in a rented house, and if there is a possibility of communication between the tenant and the tenant.

As far as I know, both houses are owned by themselves. Thank you. 어, 손 드신 분 있나요? 아니요, 알겠습니다. 더 이상 질문이 없으니, 이제 공개 청문회를 시작하겠습니다. 소돔 사건에 대해 증언하고 싶으신 분은 앞으로 나와 주십시오. 아무도 나오지 않으니, 브라운 씨, 온라인에 계신 분 있나요? 온라인 참가자는 모두 직원입니다. Yes, there is no one, so let's look for the final consent of the public hearing.

Chairman, I agree.

There is consent. Request Request for the end of the hearing. Please tell me who you agree with. Who do you oppose? The consent has been passed 5 to 0. Now let's move on to the debate.

If the two house owners do not strongly oppose, I think this case is quite simple. I think it's a good plan to provide financial support for changes and inconveniences, and I think it's the right thing to do. Therefore, there is no reason not to proceed with this case.

Thank you, Mr. Coleman. Also, I think the intersection will be better due to road changes, and maybe it's already better. I haven't used that road for a while. So I'm looking forward to the changes, and I think these changes are necessary. White. May I submit an agreement? If you have any other opinions, please let me know.

On the case of PL202600157, it is recommended that the case of changing the road name of some sections of Hawkins Road, located in the north of Mission Road 600, to Mission Road, which is located in Hawkins Road, be approved by the Senate. Is there anyone who agrees?

I agree. All consent opinions have been passed. If you agree, please tell me. Who is against? This case has been passed 5 to 0. Thank you. Now let's move on to the 1.2 case. This case is a public hearing on the draft of the draft. Ms. Liz O'Day is scheduled to present an employee report. Thank you to the chairman and the members.

Let's take a look at the process of how this case came to this point. There was a research meeting of the city planning committee in April, and a few weeks later, on May 4, there was a discussion meeting. Today's evening is a public hearing. Once this request is passed, it will be submitted to the discussion meeting on October 12. To briefly explain the background, this project was included in the City Planning Committee's business plan in 2026. And to explain in more detail, the national minimum age parking and general parking standards were adopted in the middle of the 20th century. These standards are usually limited or based on maximum demand data. The parking standard is quite high. Bloomington adopted the parking standard for the first time in 1958. At that time, the use of land was very limited. After that, Zoran has developed over time. However, this Zoran has not been re-evaluated for decades. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate the changes in this business plan. Then what effect will excessive parking have? First of all, it costs a lot to park. The cost will be added to the developers and their projects, and in the end, it will be burdensome to the residents due to the increase in the cost of repair and service we use, such as the impact of the loan or the business or the customer. Also, parking lots reduce the efficiency of land use. The space that can be used for buildings, green spaces, or other purposes is filled with parking lots. Not only that, but it also intensifies the heat wave phenomenon and causes rainwater leakage problems. As such, the parking lot has several serious impacts. In this research meeting, I proposed various solutions from minimal intervention to active intervention, and it was in the middle of the recommendation of the staff. In other words, as a result of considering both the two methods of adjusting the city permit to the appropriate size by adjusting the specific use and using all land, the City Planning Committee and the City Council agreed on the recommendation of the staff. Therefore, this approach aims to improve the efficiency of land use by promoting redevelopment while recognizing the existing infrastructure and operation while balancing the minimum health, safety, and welfare considerations. This is what we want to promote through the draft proposal for tonight. Let's take a brief look at the main contents of these changes. The first is to adjust the standard of the City Regulation to the appropriate scale throughout the land use type that can be applied, and to legally reduce the designated and approved development land of the City Regulation. It also includes raising the limit on parking flexibility requests. There are already several parking flexibility measures in the City Regulation, and we are reviewing how to raise the limit on these requests. And we're going to put a limit on the number of vehicles parked outside the parking lot in a single house and a second-generation house. We're also going to organize and clarify a few small things through this opportunity. Now let's take a closer look at the adjustment of the right size. Well, so the way the employees used it to make appropriate calculations was to look at the overall characteristics of the use of certain land in comparison with the standard comparison of previous development history and flexibility requests and other cities. As a result, we applied a small reduction of 10% to 30% for all land uses, and we also reviewed a reduction of up to 50% depending on the case. The limited standards are applied only to existing development projects that have already been approved through parking space acquisition, development plan installation, or use change approval. The existing approval content remains the same and depends on the appropriate approval conditions. Therefore, this standard is applied only to future new development projects. And other major changes include a 10% reduction in development land. So, the 86th and 98th intersection areas of South Loop, Pan American, Norman Dale Lake, and Lindale Avenue are applicable. The purpose of this change is to encourage redevelopment. Increase development density and enable more efficient land use, so that the applicant does not need to request a separate parking space reduction. To talk about the restrictions on the number of requests for parking space reduction, there are various application methods such as parking space certification, development plan, shared parking, etc. in the city. What we suggest is to limit the number of requests for parking space reduction that the applicant can apply twice. This is to prevent excessive or excessive accumulation of parking space reduction and to ensure proper parking space is secured. And finally, an important change is to increase the number of cars allowed to park outside of current single-family and second-generation homes by 4 to 6. Current standards do not consider the case of multi-generation homes or adult children living in parents' homes. Also, we changed the definition of family last year to include 6 people who have no blood relationship, and this change will be able to reflect these cases. And to briefly tell you a few small details and clarifications, we would like to simplify and integrate the land use type through this opportunity. There were land use types specialized in the Bloomington area, and we reviewed how to integrate these types into existing standards. We also reviewed how to measure various areas within parking spaces and buildings, and improved the overall form of expression, such as updating the definition of an old house. In terms of promotional activities, we conducted general newspaper ads, online public hearing ads, e-mail news, letter subscription, etc. In addition, we gathered opinions through early focus group meetings for developers. In June, we went to the Sustainability Committee and heard opinions. And I also sent an e-mail to the corporate group, real estate group, and other development-related understanding groups. Finally, I received three letters today. It's probably on the desk. The two are to express overall support for the process, and the other one is to recommend that the parking space minimum standard itself be deleted. We have time for questions. We recommend that you sign the application. Oh, I'm sorry. Mr. Nick Johnson just announced that he approved the application support letter on Tuesday night at the Sustainability Committee. It's also on the desk. Mr. Nick, thank you. Ms. Liz O'Day, thank you. Then we'll start with the employee questions.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Question 1. The chairman said that this standard is only applied to the new development. What happens if there is a large-scale redevelopment? For example, if 50% of the entire entrance space in a three-story building is fully redeveloped, will the existing standard be a new standard applied to the entire area?

That's a good question, Mr. Chairman. In my opinion, it would be good to set new standards based on newly built buildings and compare them with existing approved standards.

All right. Thank you for your answer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There are a few more questions. If you don't mind, I'll answer them one by one. In the case of reference facilities, does the reduction in parking space include a limited space? Does the reduction in parking space and parking space include a limited space? Thank you for letting me know. Please let me know anytime if you need it. If you look at the storage facility item, it is currently stored. One parking space per 50 units, but it is changed to 75. I don't think the appropriate space has been changed. I'll have to check the order again to see if it's calculated based on the appropriate space, but I don't think so. It seems to be calculated based on the number of storage units. Yes, Mr. Monster, when I reviewed or processed some facilities in the past, I admitted that the space was included in the parking supply. Did you ask that part? So, there is a designated parking space inside the building, and the space used when people lower goods or belongings through the overhead door is also included in the parking space? Yes. Thank you.

Um, the number of vehicles allowed in independent housing and second-generation housing areas has increased, but what are the restrictions on where to park the vehicle? Mr. Monster, the vehicle must be parked on a hard surface.

In other words, it must be parked on the entrance road, and it cannot be parked on the lawn. It can be parked on a hard surface with a road, entrance road, or an approved road.

Yes, thank you. Um, next is about the measurement part. This is the part that clearly shows how to measure the various uses or uses of the building. The report does not clearly show how to process the space. For example, let's assume that there is a rest area in a building that is used for any purpose, such as an office or a retail store.

Is this rest area included as a retail store? Or is it excluded from the calculation because it is not affected by the increase in demand? Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman, this change will bring some important changes. As you can see if you ask our planning staff, the existing calculation method was different. With this change, it has been identified in the law and has been able to maintain consistency under all measurement standards. It is known that a space such as a rest room is included in the main purpose as before. In addition, in the past, we have calculated the main purpose based on the total area of the building. Therefore, all spaces such as the rest room, hallway, and front door were included. Yes, that's right. I'm not sure if those purposes are excluded from the calculation because I'm not sure if the explanation for the random and random purposes is a bit unclear. It's okay. And the last question is related to senior housing. It's not a specific question about parking, it's just a question that came to mind. Do you have to make an official suggestion to develop it exclusively for people over 55 years old? Or can someone say that it is a community over 55 years old and change it? Let's check it again. 해당 검토는 인허가 단계에서 완료됩니다. 따라서 만약 모든 서류, 프로젝트의 모든 요소, 마케팅 자료, 특정, If they try to convert the building to a multi-generation house at a general market price, there may be some difficulties in applying the multi-generation housing standard. As far as I know, I have never faced such a situation in the past. However, projects that are specially designed or promoted for people over 55 years of age are all for that purpose. That's why, um, yes, there aren't many conversion cases, so I'm not very worried about that part. However, what is actually important is the stage of review and internalization. All projects designed exclusively for seniors, such as Mirror Plus 2 and Mirror Plus 2 on the Normandy Lake Office Earth, will be named for that purpose. All right. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. White.

Thank you, Mr. White. Thank you, Mr. White. Thank you, Mr. White. Thank you, Mr. White. Thank you, Mr. White. Thank you, Mr. White. Thank you, Mr. White. Thank you, Mr. White. I didn't make it clear whether it applies to real estate units or individual units. I want to make sure I understand it properly. I don't object to having a upper limit, but I want to know for sure whether it is based on the developer or the real estate. Oh, Mr. White, let's check the request again. It seems to be called a development project or a development department. I'm sorry. Yes, it is said that the development team can choose the draft. That's right. Therefore, it seems that this draft is intended to provide a certain amount of quantity to the decision-makers. Well, in my opinion, I don't think it will prevent the flexibility of other development projects within the same department as the current draft. However, when evaluating the flexibility of supply, it should be mentioned in advance the possibility of such flexibility. This is a good question. Thank you.

Mr. Coleman. There is an additional question. For example, let's assume that it is a high-level development site. After developing one area and applying two flexibility measures, move to the next area. After establishing a preliminary development plan, proceed to the next stage. In this case, I wonder if you can choose between the two flexibility measures that have been applied before or other flexibility measures that are suitable for this stage. It's because it can include multiple projects in one area. Um, Mr. Coleman, that's a good question. Thank you. I recently thought of a gallery apartment. You're planning to build a residential building in two stages, right? As of now, if the gallery apartment is in this stage, depending on the characteristics of the northern area, it may require other flexibility in securing parking space. For example, it is possible to park in the entrance of the area, but it is impossible to park elsewhere. In my opinion, I think we can look for other flexibility methods than the first stage. Light, just now...

I was going to say that it was not a question, but an opinion. I'll take a look at it for a moment. All right.

There are more questions. Shall we talk about office use? According to the employee report, only the content that recommends reducing the parking space required for office use should be reduced by 12%. 음, 최근 사무실 용도 주차 요건에 변화가 있었나요? 아니면 팬데믹 이후로 계속 그대로인가요? 위장님, 그 수치는 제가 보기엔 수십 년 동안 변하지 않았습니다.

If I add a moment, I'm sorry. I wasn't trying to stop talking, but one thing we found while analyzing similar cities was that it was the only similar land use type when compared to similar cities. Of course, this is just one indicator, but when compared to similar cities, our parking conditions were considerably lower than that of other church cities. So maybe that's why it's a little less changeable than other cities.

Um, when I reviewed Wells Fargo Tower recently, in my memory, the existing parking space was about 33 percent, right? Yes, but I'm not sure exactly. I don't know how to compare it to the new one, but there are many cases where office buildings use much less parking space than they were designed recently. Yes, I understand. Unlike offices, retail companies have different parking conditions depending on the size of the project. Projects as large as Wells Fargo Tower take up a considerable area. So it applies the same parking conditions for an office with a size of 1,000 square feet and an office with a size of 100,000 square feet. So maybe that's a problem we need to think about or review in the future. But thank you for your opinion. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, My daily specialty is grocery stores, but when I go to grocery stores often, especially in Bloomington, the parking lot is only about 30% every day. I understand that in the past, you may have built more than the minimum standard. These days, in most cases, we try to keep it as close as possible to the minimum standard. However, it doesn't seem right to reduce it from 25% to 30% in retail to only 30% every day. Yes.

Yes, I think the parking requirements for the existing standard food and beverage stores were higher, but the proposal I proposed is a method of applying it together with the retail stores. As Mr. Johnson said, it's a progressive calculation method. Thank you for your good opinion.

This can also have a significant impact on parking calculations in the numbers on the existing table. So we are carefully considering how to measure the basic condition table. Yes, thank you. Um, there is one more question about flexibility. As far as I understand, it seems impossible for the user to share the parking lot of two completely different purposes. For example, in the case of apartment buildings, the longest parking time is the evening time for all residents to go to work. On the other hand, banks usually open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., so the longest time of the most visitors is completely different. In this case, it corresponds to flexibility. So it seems to be included in the two parking restrictions. That's right.

Chairman, parking sharing is a flexibility request.

Therefore, some facilities want to share parking spaces, but there are public transportation rights holders in the apartment, so it is possible to allow each two parking spaces to be used. They won't be able to use these. Because I believe that these are positive political results and should be incorporated. If you compare the maximum and minimum of two completely different purposes, I think it will be a point that people can easily use if you suggest two. Yes. Thank you.

Um, so what I want to tell you is, yes, this is an internal concern with our employees. To be honest, there was no difference in opinion among the employees, but I've been thinking about whether it's the right thing to do. Because there will definitely be special situations. Well, ultimately, we decided to reduce the minimum requirements required by the city to zero, as well as to make it difficult to implement and implement it in the future due to the complexity of the regulations, and to limit transparency. For example, if you consider the development area and apply the OHO Ontario Housing Act, for example, a multi-generation housing project, two additional development flexibility is added here. In other words, it is a situation where four elements must be considered. If there is no upper limit, there may be a scenario where more than five side benefits are applied to a specific project. And then I think about what kind of flexibility measures should be applied first. It would be better to apply measures with a high ratio first. That way, we can lower the standard value more. Of course, it makes sense to achieve that goal. However, basically, our conclusion is that when we considered the overall basic requirements of OHO and other tools such as developing earth reduction, we decided that two measures alone would be able to meet more than 90% of the situation. If additional flexibility is required, there is no limit to the flexibility of the development region. It is a condition that can be requested depending on the quantity. There is a limit to the amount of money that can be requested for other measures, but there is no limit to the flexibility of the development region. It can be decided by quantity depending on the situation of each development project.

Do you understand? Development The flexibility of the earth is usually a fairly thorough review,

I think it's different depending on the situation. It's different depending on the context and the expected use. For example, in the case of Seagate recently, I remember asking for a 35% reduction in the standard value. I'm looking at Brian Hansen in the back. Of course, it was a number that exceeded the standard value, and parking research was carried out to justify it. However, in my opinion, it was quite generous to reduce parking spaces through PD, planning and development tools in general. In particular, in the case of the study, it is even more so. Of course, if parking spaces are reduced, project costs and time are added, so we must carefully consider when to request them. Overall, I think that the PD flexibility tools related to parking spaces have been applied quite generously during my term of office. Mr. White, can you explain what PD is for the listeners? Yes. It's planning development.

Thank you. Mr. White, can you tell us about the flexibility of planning development? Thank you. It can be said that it is another type of sub-planning approval. Do you have any other questions? I have a question. Yes. I wonder how flexible it is. This proposal could be called a flexibility or simplification item. However, there were items that simplified the development process before. I wonder how simplified these items have been from the developer's point of view, for example, how many months have been shortened. We know how many affordable homes are supplied every year in the city and how many new affordable homes are supplied every year. However, I wonder if the development company has any statistics or statistical plans. It is important for development companies to increase affordable housing. Market price housing is also good, but it is important to supply more houses in general.

Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman, are you talking about specific details about the development flexibility request for parking? Or is it a little more general question?

This is a new proposal or a proposal, but there were cases to simplify the procedure before. So my question is, how much do these measures reduce administrative procedures? For example, I'm curious if you have a plan to track by month and month.

Yes, I understand. Please let me know if my answer is not the answer to the question. According to the draft and draft of the development in 2024, some parking flexibility measures have been passed on to the staff. Not all measures are like that, but only more reasonable measures have been passed on, such as shared parking and non-parking. Yes, but the person who makes the final decision according to the size of the project will make that decision. Well, as far as I remember, there have been no cases where the decision on parking flexibility was approved for several employees. Fortunately, most of the projects that have been carried out over the past few years since the draft was adopted did not require a lot of parking flexibility. One of the additional items added to the draft is building reuse flexibility, but as far as I know, it has not been used yet. And If this policy is adopted, we hope that there will be fewer cases where flexibility is needed. Of course, that is the goal. However, it is a good thing to have tools that can be used depending on the developer and building price. Thank you. And I think I just answered your question partially. I will ask you a slightly different question. In my opinion, the question is as follows. Are there any plans to track whether the various methods we are trying to make easier and more convenient for those who want to develop, whether they are parking problems or other problems? Is there a way to collect data on whether the approval period is shortened but the approval-related protection measures are not weakened and the developers continue to develop and follow all the rules? I'm just wondering if it's normal to justify such changes, and if I should ask you a question on behalf of the chairman. If not, is there a way to make it? Can I explain it a little more clearly? Are you only talking about the parking problem? Or are you talking about the entire application for development? Yes, I'm talking about the entire application for development. We have not issued a report since the policy was adopted. Instead, we shared several cases at this week's Bloomington demonstration. I don't know if you know the report, but due to political changes, I introduced some of the projects that don't have to go through the meeting of the committee. Rather than a full report, I explained it mainly based on cases. Of course, if you want it at the planning committee, we can prepare a detailed report. Let me give you a few examples. Perk-up Kitchen, Perk-up Kitchen, and the outdoor terrace were allowed through administrative approval. T-LN Cantata and T-Run Cantata, located in France and Old Chaco-P and Old Checo-P, had to go through trial and error before they were allowed to use the conditions. That was of course allowed through administrative approval. Let me give you a few examples. And another thing I want to tell you is that when considering the loan rate, After the policy was passed, the development environment was not as favorable as it was before. Therefore, the development speed experienced in 2017, 2018, and 2019 is not completely the same as it is now. However, from my experience, there have been quite a few cases where applicants who used to have to be accepted by the board of directors of the board of directors now do not need to do so. Thank you, Mr. White. That's very helpful. And this is not to give new reports to employees. Um, um, I'll give you a suggestion. How about recording these cases and tracking specific data to record the progress? It will be much easier to go back and make it when you need it later. I don't want to tell you the specific method or reason, but efficiency and There will be people who want to know if efficiency is effective or not, so I hope the employees will think this way. And I hope you think about what indicators and data you can collect for this. Oh, I'm sorry. It's not the time to ask questions, so it's not the time to share opinions, but it's 10 million. You explained it much better than I thought.

Thank you for your good words. Yes, thank you. Do you have any other questions for the employees? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll just give you one question.

Mr. Johnson, you said that there are still no people using the flexibility to reuse the building. I wonder if the 10,000 square feet area limit has been a hindrance to people's use of work, or if there was no one who actually demolished it.

Yes, Mr. Monster, that part was not a specific barrier. When we first built the policy, we did it based on the building itself, but later, we increased the flexibility so that it could be applied to larger multi-generation buildings. But now we are only considering individual developments. So so far, I don't think that part has been a barrier. However, there have been no appropriate cases where the flexibility can still be used. Do you have any other questions for the employees, Mr. Coleman? Yes.

Uh, it's not exactly in the case, but in addition to the flexibility of parking, one of the parking options that developers can use in Bloomington is a small car-only parking space. It's in the law, but I don't think I've actually seen it. It's always seen in Minneapolis. However, I wonder if the chairman is interested in the small car-only parking space while talking to the developers, or what kind of reaction is seen when such a suggestion is received, or whether such a suggestion is not at all. Chairman, could you explain to Johnson in detail?

I think there have been several cases like that. If you can't meet the parking requirements, I've suggested a small parking space. But the size is only 8x18 inches, so it's much lower than 9x18 inches. 6x16 inches or 8x16 inches would be fine. Thank you for correcting me. Yes, so there's nothing much progress, but I've suggested that to some of the applicants.

Sometimes it is used. Especially in the urban area, parking spaces are more limited, so I think there are many cases where you have to use it. Thank you for your question. When looking at the party parking lot, you have to look at the entire parking lot. Well, there's one thing that stands out right now. I'm not trying to make a hasty decision here. Please note that the current small parking space is not applied to parking lots below 50. There will be a lot of parking spaces in Bloomington here. Only large parking spaces are allowed for small parking. Whether it's in the city or in this discussion process, I think we can review the Edney part afterwards. Another one is that there is an upper limit to the current small parking space ratio. It is set at 20% of the entire parking space. This ratio has been quite effective so far, and I think it has worked well. But if we look at the standards we are discussing, In my opinion, the standard that needs to be reviewed is that there should be more than 50 parking spaces to allow small car parking. Johnson, thank you. Do you have any more questions? Does the small car parking space include flexibility requirements for the two parking space restrictions? Yes. And to be clear, no. There is an electric car charging facility, which may not be a flexibility requirement, but it may be a bonus item, but 2 to 2. Is it included in the flexibility requirement?

The electric car charging facility standard clearly states that the parking space is included in the parking supply and offers various other performance standards, but it has nothing to do with parking flexibility.

Am I thinking of a regulation for 5HO multi-generation homes?

We have minimum electric car charging facility requirements for multi-generation homes. Well, I know it's one parking space per 50 generations, but I'll check it out and give you a more accurate answer.

그러실 필요 없습니다. 괜찮습니다. 좋습니다. 직원에게 다른 질문 있으신가요? 네, 없습니다. 감사합니다. 오데이시. 이제 공청회로 넘어가겠습니다. 공청회가 시작되었습니다. 이 안건에 대해 증언하고 싶으신 분은 앞으로 나와주십시오. Please tell me your name and sign on the registration paper. Thank you. Yes, it's okay. Please tell me your name. Hello, I'm Becky Miller. I'm concerned about securing two additional parking spaces outside the garage.

In the neighborhood where I live, if you look outside the big window, I took a picture. The car is parked up to 9 cars, 4 of them are on the road, and the rest are all on the street. To be honest, when I go to and from work, there can only be one or two cars, but in the evening, up to 9 cars are parked. So every time a new car or a road cleaning car comes, The cars are lined up in front of our house and across the street. It's like a used car store. So the places where the cars are are not cleaned. If you have to move the car later, you can clean it yourself, but the leaves or trash are not cleaned even when the road cleaner comes, so they fly to the yard of another house. So I'm curious. I know that several families live in one house, but if there are 9 families and 2 more families are allowed, will there be a total of 11 families? I'm a little worried about that. It's really bad luck. And I know I'm not the only one who thinks so. So I'm worried about parking additional cars outside the car park. As you can see from the picture, there are a lot of pictures. Thank you.

Is there anyone who would like to testify on this case? Since there is no one, is there anyone who would like to testify online? Please wait a moment, sir. a technical problem occurred. Members, I'm sorry about the delay. There is a new participant. However, even if we fix it, we cannot confirm who it is. We are currently checking. Please wait a moment. Let's check. Yes, all marked. The participant is on the right. Yes, that's my number. Let's try again. Mr. Participant, your phone number starts with 7633. Would you like to testify against this case? Now the voice message has been deleted. Mr. Participant, your phone number starts with 7633. Would you like to testify against this case, i.e., the labor parking violation? 음소거가 해제되었습니다. 다시 시도해 보겠습니다. 전화 참여자 7633님, 음소거가 해제되었습니다. 노외 주차 조례에 대해 증언하시겠습니까? Yes, Mr. Participant. For your information, if you want to testify, there will be an additional public hearing at the meeting. Thank you. Yes, I'm sorry. Then, if there are more people who want to testify, and if there is no one, we will look for a consent to end the public hearing. Oh, I think there is.

Hello, good evening. My name is Jacqueline Ciante. I have a question about this item and the next item. I have a special question. My father runs a bakery called La Estancia Bakery. It's on 98th Street and Linde Street. Other store employees often park in the east side of the shopping mall right in front of our store. Is there a way for employees to get a parking permit and park? Most of the time, I tell you that we don't have a customer-only parking space, but many employees just park in front of the store. Our next door is a sandwich shop called Erberts & Gerberts, and we always look at each other as soon as we get that car. No, it's not my car. So what kind of help can we do for the business owners in this small mountain range? I don't know if my thoughts are clear, but when I used to live in an apartment, I had a parking permit for my car, but I didn't mention that I was the owner of the building. That's all. Thank you. Yes, I would appreciate it if you could sign it.

And one more thing to say, because it's a public meeting right now, the employees can't answer right now, but if necessary, we will answer later. I wanted to make this clear to everyone. Yes, then I will now request for the end of the meeting. Yes, I agree with the end of the meeting.

Is there anyone who agrees? Yes, I agree. The end of the meeting agreement and approval have been completed.

Please tell me who you agree with. Who do you oppose? The case has been passed from 5 to 0. Now we will move on to the debate.

Um, 제가 제안하고 싶은 것은 직원분들께서 특히 마지막 질문에 답변해 주시겠습니까? 네, 괜찮습니다.

Please tell me. I'm sorry, Mr. Ram. The problem of parking in private land is actually a civil service problem between the employees and the building owner. Therefore, we do not recommend the official signage installation of parking in a specific business. What we consider is the overall parking supply. So, um, what I want to suggest, and maybe you've already done that, and I'll give you a name card, but we'll be able to talk more about the problem later. Um, in general, this is a civil issue between the building owner and the tenant, and it is not a problem of the city. Yes.

Mr. Chairman, to add one more thing, I think this is Clover Center, but this is where the tenant is. Clover Center has a lot of parking space. In particular, there is a lot of parking space on the 98th street, and there is a lack of parking space on the 1st Avenue of Linde. However, if there is a way for customers to park and walk to the store on the 98th street, it seems to be a good choice. Thank you.

Now I will tell you a few of my thoughts. I fully agree with what the employees suggested. Well, I think I have a few things to tell you. First of all, Thank you so much for recognizing that more than four cars are needed in a household. I also know that this can be a great difficulty for homeowners. I live in a house where three adults live together and three families live together. So if there are five, six, or more cars in one house, there are more cars. But I think this is what makes the neighborhood lively. Especially in the process of adapting to the constantly changing population structure of the city. Thank you, employees. I know very well what to do so that there are not too many parking spaces in various places such as shopping malls. It is also well known that it is important to maintain as much flexibility as possible for corporate position. Recently, two restaurants in neighboring areas opened and built a small parking lot. Developers thought there would be no problem, but restaurant employees are having difficulty finding parking spaces. There is no other solution, and in the end, businesses are suffering. Therefore, I think it is important to maintain a balance that does not push companies, especially companies that want to grow and succeed, while making Bloomington a city that is convenient for pedestrians and public transportation. Especially in the case of office space. It's only been a few years since the pandemic ended, and after the pandemic, It is true that the office occupancy rate has been much lower than before the pandemic, but I don't think there is any possibility of increasing it again. I don't want to make the commercial building, especially the office space, a disadvantageous situation for rent or remittance. The office space strengthens the real estate tax base related to technology and helps to import many people during the working hours. Therefore, we are in favor of looking for ways to reduce the need for parking space in the long term, but we do not think it is desirable to stabilize the situation of the past five years in a situation 15 years later, especially in a situation where there is difficulty in getting development funds. Many commercial office spaces are competing with newly built office spaces, and one of the biggest advantages of Bloomington's commercial office space is its approachability to major traffic networks such as Highway 494, Highway 35, and Highway 35. Therefore, I think that the current draft proposal is looking for the most appropriate balance in the current situation when considering the future uncertain situation. Thank you.

Do you have any other opinions? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Excuse me. I think this proposal is very effective in adjusting parking space to the right size in many ways. Personally, I think I can reduce it a little more, but I don't want to be in a disadvantageous situation because it's too urgent, as you said. But what I want to point out is, and what I'm not necessarily worried about in these measures, is that we don't put an upper limit on parking spaces. This is just a minimum standard. Therefore, depending on the market situation, the actual space needed will be determined. It may be a problem because retail companies try to park excessively and other companies tend to secure insufficient parking space, but it is inevitable and will be solved naturally in the long term. This is my last opinion, but I would like to ask a few additional questions about parking problems in residential areas, especially in the time of citizen opinion hearing. How does the city deal with this problem? How do you investigate? In particular, if the car parking is limited to four or six cars, and some of them are parked in the car park and some are parked on the street, how do you know which car belongs to which house and suggest parking? Yes, Mr. Monster, thank you for the question.

The Environmental Health Department generally takes action to investigate the violation of the law and records the license plate number. If the vehicle is registered in the appropriate real estate, check for legal compliance and issue an order for the appropriate real estate. Thank you. Yes, I have something to add.

Thank you. What I understood was not a virtual situation, but in real life. You can park in front of your house, right? Yes, that's right. You just have to move at least 1 inch within 24 hours, and after 24 hours, that time will be calculated again. So if people want to, they can keep doing that. Yes. You said it was related to the roadside parking restriction implemented in the city.

So the car number restriction is something else. Do you understand? The two are completely different problems. Thank you, sir. Then let's make it clear again. Does the 6th limit have nothing to do with vehicles parked on the roadside? Does the 6th limited limit apply only to vehicles parked on the roadside? Or is it also included in vehicles parked on the roadside? I want to make this part clear, so I ask. Yes.

As you said, vehicles parked on the roadside related to housing are also included. Are vehicles on the roadside also included? Yes, as of the current regulations. Thank you. There is an additional question related to it. Currently, two parking lots are allowed on the 4th floor of the residential area and the 2nd floor of the roadside, which seems to be able to reduce inconvenience caused by redevelopment work or road cleaning. However, the proposal of 4 generations includes vehicles on the roadside.

Yes, as the chairman, Chairman Coleman said, it is currently the case. Yes, the current proposal is 4 generations, which includes all vehicles temporarily parked on the roadside and on the roadside related to housing. Even if the proposal increases to 6 generations, it will be applied in the same way as the current regulations. However, that is a policy that has been implemented in the city for several years.

So, as Mr. Miller explained, the situation is beyond the range of permitting in current proceedings, and if we approve this change, it will also be a violation of current proceedings. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Coleman, that's right.

If there are 9 cars in a house, the current number of permits is more than 5, and the resident has the right to request an investigation into the violation of proceedings. And even if the number of cars changes, it will still exceed 3. Therefore, regardless of the results in this request, it seems that it will be a situation that violates the current request in any case. Yes, thank you. Yes, thank you. Do you have any other opinions?

No. I'm sorry. Well, now let's talk about the conditions for parking. Well, what I want to say first is that I generally agree with the lack of minimum parking space. In this way, I think the flexibility that developers can judge themselves for the needs of employees is much greater. In my opinion, even if the parking space is reduced by 10 to 30 percent for most purposes except for industrial use, If it fails to meet market demand, there will still be problems. And if the flexibility that developers can use is limited, I think this list of flexibility is a positive policy result. For example, it is in the same direction as placing a branch in a convenient place or placing a branch in a place where peak times or other traffic interruption times do not overlap. Of course, the 10% reduction applied in the development area does not belong to the crime, If the number of options that can be reduced after reducing 30% is reduced, I think that there may be serious problems other than flexibility in planning development. If there is an argument that planning development approval can be determined through parking research, I think it is rather an increase in burden. If you want to increase flexibility and expand what is actually possible in a specific area, you need to be able to proceed more easily. If you only allow 10-30% reduction in non-industrial areas and limit the flexibility that can be reduced additionally, serious problems can occur. Well, in my opinion, I still think it's useful to some extent. I understand the general argument that parking is the minimum standard. And if this provision is implemented in the development region without minimum standards and outside the redevelopment region in a way that follows the rules, I would agree. Because if you look at the list of redevelopment exclusion regions, because there are problems occurring on all Earths. For example, on the South Loop Earth, there are far fewer buildings around Bloomington Central Station than I expected. And, Regarding my work, I went to the Oaksenday 1 store in Minneapolis and talked to my colleagues who work at the Oaksenday 1 grocery store in St. Paul, and they say they are also having a hard time right now. Oaksenday 1 made a huge investment in Bloomington Central Station, but the surrounding area was not expected. It's really a pity. Small businesses We invested a lot of money in our vision for the future of South Loop, but we ended up making a loss. Other redevelopment regions promoted by Pan American. As you can see, only the grass fields surrounded by fences with a properly supported public transportation system are running, and you can see that there are car stores. These places cannot be called high-quality public transportation. It seems to be disappointing partners such as Metro Transit. They are building a public transportation system that strengthens the tax base through public transportation development in the city, and builds a public transportation system that facilitates the movement of facilities and citizens such as fire stations and roads, hoping that we can all succeed. If you look at the Norman Dale Lake Earth, in 2008, it was stated that these facilities would be built in the east of Norman Dale. But in fact, if you look at the buildings that were built, there is only one building built after the 2008 plan was approved. The Lindale redevelopment plan is the same. At the time, many paintings were presented with the promise to create a walking environment and ensure density that harmonizes with existing development patterns. However, in fact, the grade went up from B2 to B4. You can turn the stream mode of B2 grade 180 degrees and make it B4 grade. In the before grade, you can add another building on top of it or develop a compound. However, I think the minimum parking space standard is a big obstacle in implementing such a vision. So I think there is a problem with the vision of the four redevelopment of the earth. I think we need to work hard to solve this problem in the city. Our local residents are looking forward to a place where they can shop or have a good experience in a house, apartment, or office park. Many people in Twin Cities and the United States consider these high-quality facilities important. In particular, the younger generation prefers to have a convenience facility near their home instead of public transportation. I think reducing parking space requirements in redeveloped areas can help revitalize the regions. In particular, it is even more so in a situation where business is being delayed in the development industry. I often go to Edina's France Avenue, and I'm really busy building a building. They're doing a lot of work. Is there such a big difference between what Bloomington provides and what Edina provides? I think Bloomington should be better than Edina. I still think Bloomington is better than Edina. It's a joke. But I think we need to work harder. Yes, if the minimum parking space standard is not applied in the redevelopment area, I think we can support today's case. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Coleman. And to add, I mostly agree with what you said. I especially agree with the area where there is no minimum parking space standard. I think the market will decide. And the tenant trying to rent an apartment knows in advance that there is no parking space. Therefore, if there is demand, why not? Especially in Bloomington City, it would be even better if more housing construction was introduced. I know that a related bill has been issued, but I don't know if it has been passed. If it hadn't been passed, I would have known. Anyway, there was a discussion about eliminating the minimum standard of parking space in the parking lot, and it is known that there was a similar movement in the entire parking lot. I fully understand its economy and have actually thoroughly reviewed it. I think it's a good idea, Do you have any other opinions? Thank you.

Um, it's a difficult question. If I were to give one specific opinion to the employees, I'm not sure if the minimum parking space standard is appropriate for this individual. If you think you need an upper line, it would be good to review it again, but above all, I think it is important to re-write it so that there is no room for interpretation. As you said to Johnson, I interpret this part like this. If you want to include it in the draft, everyone should be able to understand it clearly and minimize the possibility of interpretation if possible. Furthermore, the problem with the minimum parking standard is at a difficult time. In terms of sustainability, we need to encourage people to walk or use public transportation instead of self-sufficiency. But Minnesota has not yet fully achieved that goal. The same goes for the entire Minnesota metropolitan area. In some areas of Minneapolis and St. Paul, people have switched to public transportation at the city level. Yes, I think it's still difficult to make it convenient for people to leave their cars at home. For many people, it feels unfamiliar and awkward to use public transportation without driving a car. We are trying to change generations. We are trying various ways to change the perception of people living here. I think it will be more helpful if we encourage and promote public transportation, so that it can be used at a convenient and reasonable price. It will make our neighborhood a good place to walk. I agree. It would be really nice to walk out of the house and have a delicious dinner. We're almost there. My words are getting better and better, but even going to the bus stop feels too far for me to handle. It's even harder to take a bus and go to the train station. So I think we have a lot of barriers to overcome. I agree that it is a good first step to set minimum parking spaces. I think it should be like that in the future. But I'm not sure if you're ready to do that right now. What I'm most worried about is that developers are trying not to secure enough parking space, so if there's not enough parking space, cars will gather in the neighborhood or customers will park their cars and come in right away. The shops that want to be able to take the ordered items will be disadvantaged. It's a problem that needs to be balanced. I've always been like that, and I will continue to be like that. Well, I've lived in a city where public transportation helps everyone go anywhere. Cars are a very uncomfortable thing, and no one wants a car because they're going to Costco on weekends. But it's not that stage yet. And I think we have to think about how we can move in that direction. And as I said before, if we don't give a separate benefit to new residents or businesses, we have to think about what to do. I don't know if my words helped, but I'll try to increase my thoughts for a while. I support the proposal tonight. Because I think it's a step forward in the right direction. But I agree that it may not be enough.

Can I say one thing? Yes, go ahead. Yes, Jerry. Thank you for giving me a chance to speak. Thank you for your questions and opinions. We also thought a lot about the same topics as we discussed these issues. Um, I think I had more discussions at the hearing, and Liz may correct me, but I think 2005 was the last year to discuss the parking problem more comprehensively and systematically. I remember that there was an opinion that the committee's agreement had not yet been reached when considering the minimum standard of parking in the city council. At least, their discussion went in that direction. But at the same time, they said they couldn't accept re-evaluating the policy after waiting 20 years. In a situation where technology is developing and the way cities function is changing, after introducing these changes, It is not right not to study in a dynamic time frame. So the re-evaluation time they proposed was 5 years. We have to review the problem in 5 years. So what I'm talking about is not simply to reassure someone or to make people comfortable in a specific way, but just to review the conversations we had at the meeting. I wanted to tell you that. We discussed a solution that does not put minimum parking conditions on the development land at the employee level. Although it is a more detailed part, when considering the overall parking conditions, there is a part that can be applied now or in the future. One of the elements that help increase the efficiency of land use is that multi-generation homes must secure one parking space per generation. There are some benefits through the OHO Ontario Housing Act, but parking spaces must be provided in the basement of the building. Of course, that's not always the case. People can build an independent parking lot, but what we actually experienced while conducting multi-generation housing projects is that Such an error is rather one of the factors that make development more compact and have more urban characteristics. So, if we completely eliminate the minimum parking standards in the development area, I would like to ask you a technical question. Does that mean that there is no longer the right to provide a structured or closed parking space for development? I'm just curious to ask. Yes, I am. I was discussing how actively the city should move to the development area, and thank you for mentioning the good public transportation service. Public transportation services are different for each development area. Public transportation services are not excellent in areas where the Linde 1 and 86 roads meet. The Norman Dale Lake Office Park is less popular than the Pan American South Loop 98 and especially the Orange Line. Well, that's one reason. The last thing I want to say is that it is often discussed with engineering department partners, Of course, the problem is whether the chicken or the egg comes first, but I think Bloomington's public transportation is improving. Through our conversations, Metro Transit provides more regular operation and upgraded services, and I think it is more focused on changing the route in the direction that will help the development plan in Bloomington. In particular, there was a discussion with Metro Transit about the Lindale route. But the problem is always whether the current service is efficient enough. It is our common opinion that it is not efficient enough to take measures to improve it. It may be possible in certain areas, and I agree with the ideas related to the development region. So if the employees temporarily need to reduce parking space, Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

so that it does not appear as if it is taking legal action in Wiseok. Work Plan Related to Future Development Plans Can I ask if there is any content that can be included in this parking discussion?

Yes, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Monster. It's not a very direct, neat, or organized way, but there is a project to review the area for the South Loop Development Area in the business plan. You will remember that the project was added to evaluate the development density expectation, that is, the utilization rate, and the height of the minimum building. The project is still in progress, but it is not specifically focused on parking issues.

If you agree, will you be able to add this content to your business plan next year?

Of course, it is the chairman's authority to recommend it to be included in the business plan next year. In the end, it is the assembly committee that approves the business plan. Yes, so when we submit a draft business plan, we will try to reflect the content of the conversation we have had with you for a year. Not only that, but also the situations that the employees who represent the city are prioritizing. However, you have the right to add or modify the project to the business plan to be submitted to the assembly committee.

Mr. Coleman, White. May I say one last thing to you? I fully understand that this is the same problem as chicken and egg and that there are many obstacles to achieving goals. There are many obstacles. For example, there are requirements and what developers actually want and what investors want. And There are many factors such as the detailed situation that occurs on the street, whether people want to walk or want to ride a bicycle. In my opinion, if we approach it in a way that removes the small barriers one by one, If removing the minimum parking standard of the development area is the first step in finding a better way to operate the development area, I think it is a valuable effort. So, sir, I'm going to submit a revision of the case before the vote. Would you give me some time? 가능합니까? 네, 가능합니다. 네, 존슨 씨. 네, 좋습니다. 안건을 논의하기 전에 다른 의견이 있으십니까? I'm sorry. You said you were playing the role of Kevin Pesky, who couldn't attend tonight due to a certain collision. If someone submits the basic case recommended by the employees, of course, the case can be corrected. Or you can submit a new case that starts the discussion, including the changes suggested from the beginning. Then you need a second consent, a debate, and a resolution, and if it passes, it will be a recommendation. If it fails, you can submit a follow-up consent. The procedure I prepared is to submit a general consent and then modify the request. So that's what I wrote. As an employee, I am happy to be in the position of expert White, a doctor's rule expert. Yes, we will apply for it while this process is going on. All right. I'll submit my consent. Can I start?

I submit a consent form to update the minimum parking requirements, adjust the number of cars per house, and adopt a resolution to amend the definition. As a result, the 12th and 21st resolutions are amended. Second consent. Is there? Yes. Second. Good.

Would you like to debate? First of all, I think we need to acknowledge that this consent is an appropriate consent. Yes, yes, yes. So it was an appropriate consent. It has been approved. Is there a debate? Is there a debate? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will delete the title and contents of Act 21.301.06d2 and propose a amendment to introduce a minimum-condition exemption to the development area. Minimum parking requirements are not applied to the designated development in the 86th and 98th nodes and node regions located within the 98th node region, which are listed in the Pan American Earth Plan and the Lindale Avenue Reconstruction Plan. Do you have a request? Request All right. Shall we have a brief discussion? Yes, yes, we have a request. Do you have a discussion? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, what I just mentioned is that I would like to tell you that I have brought the content of 10% of the relevant provisions as it is. As stated in the clause changing the title, it was said that the minimum parking conditions are not applied to the development area. Good. Let's move on to the vote. Yes, there is a consent and re-appointment to approve the amendment. Is it the amendment? Yes, please say yes if you agree. Say no if you disagree. Please give it to me. The consent is divided into three. It was divided into two. Two to three. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Now we will return to the discussion on the original consent. Mr. White, I...

I know Mr. Coleman's intentions well, and I think we must review the development and redevelopment of the earth and parking problems in the next year's business plan. I'm not ready to deal with the problem tonight. As of now, I think this proposal that we are proposing is appropriate. I think more active measures are needed, but as of now, I think it is appropriate to proceed to the extent that the employees have decided. And thank you for the promise to review the issue in five years at the City Council. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman. I agree with what Chairman White said.

I think we can move forward and we have to move forward, but we shouldn't do that right now. And I'll ask you next. 2.

The case is now moving on to the trial, but will the fact that the amendment to the trial has been restricted be delivered? Yes, you will be able to access all this content at the trial. Good. My question is up to here. I think it will be useful for us to hear how the Senate will react to the amendment. I think we can better understand whether you are interested in the topic in terms of the Senate. Thank you. We will definitely report it. Thank you. Do you have any other opinions?

If you don't have any, we will proceed with the resolution as the case has already been approved. If you agree, please say, me, me, me. If you disagree, please say, no. The case was passed 4 to 1. Now let's move on to the next case. Thank you. Next. Case 2.1 is to review the draft draft of the City Planning Committee's meeting on September 3. Five of the seven members participated, and White and I did not participate. Therefore, I approve the consent to approve the proposed resolution. In September 3, 2026, we will submit an agreement to approve the draft draft of the City Development Committee. If you agree, please say I agree. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. This case was passed with 3 votes in favor and 2 votes in opposition. 3 votes in favor, 2 votes in opposition, 3 votes in opposition, 2 votes in opposition. Thank you.

Thanks to teamwork.

Next, there is a policy issue and update from the Planning Committee. This is the third case this evening. Mr. Johnson will tell you. Thank you. Members, thank you for your deep discussion.

I will let you know the meeting that is coming up briefly this evening. On January 1, there is a petition for permission to use the conditions for installing a remote airport parking facility in the existing parking lot inside the Leverview Office Tower development unit. The address is American Blur Bad East 3601. This case is the final decision to be appealed to the Board of Directors. And there is another research case, which is a work plan. Um, Bloomington's sports training, health club, indoor recreation facilities It is scheduled to be reviewed for use. Use permit, use definition, performance standards, etc. This is the content. The October 15 meeting is currently likely to be canceled. There is no development related case scheduled for the meeting. It may be canceled due to regular adjustments to long-term cases, but we will let you know as soon as the situation progresses. I'll see you again at the next meeting. For other news, we will once again inform you of the board and commission connect, which will be held on Monday, September 21st. It is an opportunity to communicate with the councilors and other councilors and councilors. It is a good opportunity to build networking and strengthen cooperation between various decision-makers in the city. It starts at 6 p.m., so please refer to it. I will tell you the time more accurately. Rather than telling you directly.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Johnson. This is an opportunity for the board of directors to discuss the situation that was not in the case this evening. Is there anyone who wants to talk? Yes, please. I'm sorry. There is one more thing to let the citizens and the board of directors know. The public hearing on the ban on roadside parking is scheduled to be held on October 12th. I don't think I've told you this part. I'm sorry. It's okay. Thank you. Yes. So this time is an opportunity for the planning committee to discuss the things that were not in the case this evening. Is there anything you would like to discuss? Mr. Johnson. Can I ask you a question? Yes. It's okay.

I don't have any details or other questions. I live in the Chacopi area in France, and a new road packaging construction has recently been completed. Could you please briefly explain the current situation and the long-term rehabilitation plan for one of the viewers at home? Yes, I understand. Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman, Chairman

I repainted it in the third line. In the city, Johnson Street, no, at the intersection of 102nd Street and France Street, I cooperated with Hennepin County to improve the traffic light system in front of Jefferson High School, and I changed the traffic light operation method in Hennepin County. In the short term, although it is not the next business right now, traffic flow, safety, bicycle and pedestrian convenience are planned to be improved from Normandale to France. However, it is not the next business right now, but there are a few more businesses ahead. Is this the information you want? Yes, something like this.

As I said in other contexts, it's a problem of reducing unnecessary lanes related to road design. You think, why is there a rotation lane where there is nowhere to rotate when someone is driving along the road? That's what I was trying to say. I'm explaining so that people can understand why such situations occur. Yes, Mr. Winston.

In Bloomington, you can see this phenomenon more often than in other regions. It's because our area's road width is much wider than other regions. And it costs a lot to move continuous lines. It must have been about three years ago. I've been told that it costs more than $1 million to move continuous lines. It's an ideal and good idea at the demonstration, but it's too expensive. That's why we prefer to use the budget for cheaper lane painting. That's more economical. But... Just like when we built a sewer in 82nd Street last year, we build the road again with the existing width of 44 feet, but sometimes we widen the width. Thank you very much. I'm sorry to ask you this question all of a sudden. Yes. Thank you. Mr. Long, is there anything else you would like to discuss?

저도 비슷한 질문이 있습니다. 감사합니다. 위장님, 그리고 몬스터 의원님, 질문해 주셔서 감사합니다. 제가 도면을 보고 이해한 바로는 양쪽의 줄무늬로 표시된 부분은 자전거 전용 도로가 아닌 것 같은데요. 맞죠? 그냥 갓길 같은 거죠. 자전거 전용 도로라고 표시된 곳은 어디에도 없고요. 위원장님, 위치에 따라 다릅니다.

These roads are the main expressways that counties support, but they are similar to the main roads that our city supports. So the Minnesota Department of Transportation has strict regulations on the definition of bicycle-only roads. Therefore, you can install something that looks like a bicycle-only road to meet these guidelines, but if you actually mark it as a bicycle-only road, there is a risk of losing funding. Yes, I think you asked that part. Or we may have drawn a line. The regulations of the main road support system may have changed over time. So, 10 years ago, the place that was used as a bicycle road according to the regulations of the main government was no longer used as a bicycle road, or the terms of use were changed. In fact, the main government support department is reviewing the regulations for the main government support route again. Therefore, these situations are expected to continue to change. In some cases, it may have remained the same because it was not qualified to be designated as a bicycle road at the time when the first lane was drawn. But now, so-called There is a possibility that you will be able to attach a bicycle signboard to the place you called your way.

Thank you. Therefore, in fact, it depends on the location.

For example, there are seven cases like this in the city. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Song.

Yes, is there anything else you want to ask again? 현재 로서는 없습니다. 이것으로 9월 17일 블루밍턴 도시계획위원회 회의를 마치겠습니다. 안녕히 주무.