[music] [music] Heat. [music] Heat. Good evening and welcome to this November 20th meeting of the Bloomington Planning Commission. The planning commission advises the city council on development proposals, development standards, long-range planning, and transportation issues. Some items before the planning commission are study items where we will not take formal action. Other items before the planning commission are public hearings where we'll take testimony and you can do so right here at city hall in the commission chambers. We welcome the members of the public to do that and I will open those public hearings when the time is ready. Some items before the planning commission uh the planning commission will have final decision-making authority. Other items before the planning commission the planning commission acts in an advisory capacity and the city council will make the final decision. The planning commission is made up of seven volunteer residents of the city of Bloomington. Each planning commissioner has been appointed to serve a three-year term with a two-term limit. We have six of those commissioners here this evening. So, we do have a quorum. As we begin this evening, I'll ask everyone in the chambers to please rise for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Item one this evening, the city of Bloomington is the applicant regarding fire station number six bunk house seeking a variance and final site and building plans. Mr. Dr. Dylan Palmer is here with a staff report. >> Thank you, Chair Kton and commissioners. Good evening. Uh my name is Dylan Palmer with planning and I'm here to present item number one, which is a uh bunk house expansion to fire station number six located at 8601 Lake View Road. So, this is a location map of the fire station and the proposed bunk house location. It's located in West Bloomington at the corner of West 86th Street and Lake View Road. It's zoned R1 residential. Surrounding zones are R1 and to the north is conservation. And this is guided public in the comprehensive plan. Uh again, this photo shows the location, the proposed bunk house there on the north side of the fire station. Just to give you a little bit of background on uh why we're here for this variance tonight, the fire department is transitioning to a full-time department, so for uh 24-hour operations, and they need a sleeping area for the firefighters in order to do that. Uh this is a temporary measure. This fire station is scheduled to be rebuilt in 20 uh 2033, excuse me. So, this is just an example of an existing bunk house. This is located at fire station number five off of Bush Lake Road. Uh the bunk house has four sleeping areas and it's connected to the fire station by a uh enclosed wood structure and you can see that there in the photo on the right between the temporary building and the permanent building. In this case, no variance was needed because all the setbacks were met. So the variance for this site for fire station number six is uh being applied for because there's a 50-foot required front yard setback for non-residential buildings in R1 zones. And in this case, the proposed setback is 15 feet for the bunk house. The variance is being requested because of site constraints. The eastern side of the property is subject to a lot of uh steep terrain and steep slopes. There's also the southern parking area which has enough of a slope where a building can't be placed on it. And the specific location uh is requested because of the importance of maintaining access to the drive-through doors for the uh firet trucks and other equipment. So there are six required findings that we need to uh make in order to have a variance or in order for staff to support a variance. In this case, we found that uh all six findings were met. So the variance is being requested for a setback reduction. That's the first finding. Second finding is that the comprehensive plan uh is it consistent with comprehensive plan? The comprehensive plan does support fire stations in residential areas in order to serve those areas. The applicant for the variance has to establish that there are practical difficulties. We found that there are practical difficulties because of site constraints again the terrain uh and the access to the fire doors. The property owner has to propose the proposes the use of the property in a reasonable manner. The fire station will continue operation in the current manner it is and again uh proposed to be rebuilt in 2033 with a full uh sleeping facility and rest facility. the plight of the land owner due to circumstances unique to the property. Again, we've made that uh finding because of the steep slopes and the access requirements and uh the variance if granted will not alter the essential character of the locality. Again, the fire station is currently existing, currently operating, and it will continue to operate. There's also a limited view from any nearby properties. The uh really the only view of it is if you're driving eastbound on 86th Street, you can see it off to the right there. So with that, staff recommends approval of the variance as well as the final site and building plans for the temporary bunk house. With that, I can take any questions that you have. >> Thank you, Mr. Palmer. Any questions for staff? Seeing none, in this case, the city is the applicant and I will ask if there's anyone here from the city who would like to speak on this item. Seeing no one stepping forward, uh, thank you, Mr. Palmer. I will then open the public hearing and ask if there's anyone in the audience who would wish to testify on this item. >> I would. >> Please step forward. >> Good evening. My name is Jay Went. I live at 8707 Lake View Circle behind the fire department. So, the original house where we live was the Blom House, which the fire station is built on from a donation when Blom donated it. Um, I have questions in regards to where you're putting that. Um, we will see it. We'll see it from our deck and it sounds like that's going to be there for at least five years. Is that correct? And uh just as a point of clarification, feel free to ask any questions to me and then we'll answer them after all of your talk. >> So so where that location is um there's yes, there's slope issues. I understood that part of it. I guess my question is why couldn't that bunk house be put on the west side on the grass part? There's a null. Doesn't look like it's going to be that big where if you had to, you're going to have to put a foundation down anyway and it would be closer to the door. um where they're putting it, we're going to see it from our deck and from our house. Um visually, we are in support of the fire department, so that's not an issue. Um understand logistics trying to get people there 24 hours a day, but um the location of it does after seeing what it was on the screen, we will see it. Um so that's a concern. >> Okay. >> And then from the value of our property, too. >> Thank you, Mr. W. Thank you so much. >> Is there anyone else in the audience who wishes to testify? >> Miss Brown, is there anyone online who wishes to testify? >> All participants online or staff. >> Great. I will look then for a motion to close the public hearing. >> So move. >> Second. Motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor say I. >> I. Opposed. That motion passes 6. Uh Mr. Palmer, if I could call you back up, please. Could you um address the location of the bunk house and uh were there other locations considered? >> Uh yep, absolutely. Chair Cook and commissioners, uh this location was identified because of the from my understanding it is the way that the uh temporary building has to be placed down on a hard cover surface. I if Chief Seal could come up, I know he has a little bit more experience uh with the other temporary structures that are located at other fire stations and what their construction is. >> Seal commission. That's correct. We It's a temporary structure and it's designed to be placed on on top of the black top on top of the puma surface. If we were trying to put it on the west side, there's actually quite a bit of slope there and we'd have to do some excavation and actually put in a foundation which changes our cost profile considerably. >> Thank you, Chief. Mr. Johnson. >> Yeah, Cher Kton, if I can also just add to that that uh the fire station is at approximately a 46 foot setback currently uh to Lake View Road. Um so citing the structure on the west side would also not prevent the need for some type of setback variance uh per the city setback requirements. So just to make that clarification as well. >> Thank you Mr. Johnson. I have a follow-up question for you. So um when we consider variances the the applicant the land owner has to prove uh hardship and that other options are unavailable to them. Uh we heard that cost is a factor. Are we allowed to, you know, is that a legitimate factor in whether we or not we are we can approve a variance? >> Chair Cookton, it says in state statute that economic considerations cannot be the sole uh factor that you consider with a variance. So in this case, there's multiple factors. As you can see on the slide, there actually is some slope in that location on the west side as well. Um uh but not to say that the cost considerations and the amount of work needed to site such a structure on the west side doesn't factor in or doesn't make a uh part of that case or that consideration. Um but that area is also um has slopes might necessitate a retaining wall additional grading work that uh would you know present um challenge to executing the project on the timeline that they need to do it. >> Thank you Mr. Johnson. Commissioner, we'll move on to discussion or any other questions you have for staff. Commissioner Len. >> Thank you, Chair. Um, and just to clar recclarify to make sure I understand correctly, [clears throat] the reason this site is desirable, the current configuration is because the concrete pad current, [clears throat] excuse me, the concrete pad currently exists that the structure. So, there's no concrete work that would need to be done. could simply be built directly on top of the existing concrete. Is that correct, >> Chair Cook? Commissioner Len, yes, that is correct. There's an existing uh asphalt paved area there. >> Okay. Thank you. Mr. Palmer, can you uh walk us through the specifics one more time uh of the setback? >> Yep. Uh absolutely. Chair Cookton, let me go back to this slide. So, the there's a 50-foot required front yard setback for all non-residential buildings in R1 zoning. Uh with the fire station being a non-residential building, it's subject to that 50 foot setback. They're requesting that the setback be reduced to 15 feet in order to place the bunk house in this location. Commission. >> Um, we're in discussion phase here, right? Okay. Um, I think recognizing um that the concrete work in and of itself and particularly going into uh the winter season would be extreme could be extremely difficult depending on when the ground freezes. Um, I think it would be also helpful to know if they had to do concrete work, how significantly, for example, if it was to move to a different location, how significantly would that delay the project? Are we talking like weeks, months? Recognizing that we want to move forward on the process, I think it would be helpful to understand. Thank you. >> Yep. Chair Cooked and Commissioner Len. Uh, in my view, it would delay it significantly, most likely until the spring until you could lay concrete down. I will add that the fire department is working to transition to a 24-hour department. I believe there are some other constraints that are requiring them to have this bunk house in place in a very short time frame. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Palmer. Could you go back? I believe you had a slide on the findings. When I consider applications uh particularly in variances and other things that the planning commission is responsible for, we go back to the findings. That is our task as this commission is to make the findings. It's not always about uh what we like or what we don't like. We are required to make findings. And the way I understand findings is that if we can make all the findings, we must approve all the an application. And if we cannot make any of the findings, we may not approve an application. And so, uh, when I'm making my consideration and a final decision, I go through the findings. And so, um, I don't know if I need to go through them all one by one, but, uh, when I reviewed this application, I agreed with staff on the findings that I thought the the variance was reasonable. I think it's um a a plight that is put upon this land owner based on the characteristics of the site with steep slopes and other things. Um and obviously um we we I I think it's a prudent choice in this case. Is it is it perfect? No. Do I wish there was a fully code compliant uh location for this? Most certainly. And the city more than any applicant tries to find code compliant um uh locations and and applications. The city never comes to us before variances unless they must. And so uh I am able to make all the findings of this application and therefore I will be supporting it. Other thoughts, Commissioner Isa? >> Yeah, thank you Chair Cook. I agree. You said it best. Oh, exactly what you just said. I agree. If there are no other thoughts, I' I'd look for a motion or if still still an opportunity for comment. Commissioner Knight, >> I believe it is. No. When you're ready. >> Uh, in case PL 2022500166, having been able to make the required findings, I move to adopt a resolution approving a variance to reduce the front setback from 50 ft to 15 ft for a bunk house addition to the existing fire station number six located at 8601 Lake View Road subject to the conditions listed in the resolution. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Motion and a second for the first motion. Um, any further discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. That motion passes. 6. >> Commissioner L. >> Would anyone else like to make a motion? >> Sorry. Yes. >> Okay. Uh, in case PL 202500166, having been able to make the required findings, I move to approve final site and building plans for a bunk house expansion to fire station 6 located 8601 Lake View Road subject to the conditions and code requirements attached to the staff report. >> Is there a second? We have a motion and a second to approve final site and building plans for this bunk house at 8601 Lake View Road. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. Opposed. That motion passes. 6. This is a final decision by the planning commission. However, there is an appeals process. If you would like to appeal this, you may do so by um appealing by 4:30 p.m. on November 25th to the city council. And if I could, Mr. Went, uh if you could sign in on the sign-in sheet for me, if you didn't do that, I do appreciate it. We will move then to item number two, which is a public hearing. Dylan Palmer is back up before us with a staff report. Uh uh when you're ready, Mr. Palmer, for ABN Cannabis, a conditional use permit for uh 1091 Nesbbit Avenue. All right. Thank you, Chair Kton and commissioners. Uh again, Dylan Palmer with planning here to present item number two, which is a conditional use permit to permit cannabis manufacturing at 10901 Nesbbit Avenue South. This is a location map of where the applicant is uh the site the applicant is looking at. This is located in the West Bloomington Industrial Area. It's near the southeast corner of Nesbet Avenue and Old Shaki Road. Uh the site is zoned IP. All of the adjoining sites are also zoned IP or industrial park and the area is guided industrial in the comprehensive plan. Uh the nearest residential structure is about 800 ft away approximately. Uh this site is a multi-tenant industrial office building. It uh the proposed user will share the building with a crerematorium and a roof company. So these are the proposed floor plans. On the left side there is the first floor which is the uh main production area and uh packaging area for the cannabis products and then the second floor area. On the right hand side are uh offices associated with this. Uh there are some minor exterior improvements proposed just upgrading some of the lighting in the parking lot and around the building and then making just uh adding a couple landscaping plants in the area. So the code defines a cannabis manufacturer as an establishment engaged in the purchase, acceptance, manufacturing, packaging, and sale of cannabis, hemp, or products derived there from that has a valid approved license issued by the state of Minnesota. In this case, what the applicant is proposing to do is process cannabonoids into consumer grade products. All their sales will be made to either wholesalers or licensed dispensaries. And with this application, they have no retail sales proposed to the general public. And then just to give you a little bit more background on uh the state's licensing for cannabis, uh they are licensed or they are a prelim they have preliminary approval for a cannabis manufacturer license from the Minnesota Office of Cannabis Management or the OCM. And those products that they're permitted to uh produce under their state license are edibles, concentrates, wax, oils, and tinctures. Uh and yep, and that is uh the applicant has joined us tonight. If you have more questions about their products and uh specifics on that, we do have some recommended conditions. We have seven of them. Uh first being a building permit will need to be obtained for all changes to the building and to accommodate the proposed use. Uh parking lot and security lighting plans must satis satisfy minimum requirements. Uh an approved landscaping plan does exist for the site and uh it must be provided showing replacement of a few missing plantings and that must be approved by the planning manager. All state and local licensing must be completed prior to commencing operations. Prior to occupancy, life safety requirements must be reviewed and approved by the fire marshall. uh they're limited to the use shown on the approved plans and then all loading and unloading must occur on site in all public streets which they do have a loading area for. So staff recommends approval of the application. Uh and if you have any questions I'm available for them. >> Thank you Mr. Bulmer. Any questions for staff? Commissioner Meer and >> just I have one question from the staff report. Excuse me. Under the proposal section, it notes that it'll be sold to wholesalers and can cannabis dispensiaries. Then once all processing is complete, zero cannabonoids will remain. What does that mean exactly? Because they are going to be stored on site. Does it mean that there will be like no residual residue there or what what does that mean exactly? Uh, Chair Cook and Commissioner Monster, I think I'll have to defer that question to the applicant on the specific production measures that they use. >> Commissioner White, >> just a clarification. Um, I want to make sure that I understand the language that, um, the permit is for manufacturing only and they would not be able to do retail sales without coming back for an additional permit. Is that correct, >> Chair Copen? Commissioner White. So, it is my understanding that under the IP zoning uses, retail sales are permitted as an accessory use if they're under 10% of the floor area of the site. So they're in my view they would be able to come back without an additional conditional use permit because retail uh cannabis retail sales are by right in most of our uh anywhere you know commercial districts anything like that and that was established back with the cannabis ordinance that was passed last year I believe. Uh now I do believe and again this is something that the the applicant may have a little bit more insight to there are issues with licensing from the state that may prohibit them from selling directly from that site. >> Thank you. Yeah, maybe you can clarify. I just was looking at the if you want to go back a slide the um conditions um saying that it use is limited to as shown on the approved plan. So I just wanted to make sure I was 100% clear on that. >> Mr. Johnson, any clarification? >> Yeah, Cher Cooken, specific to Commissioners White's question, what that has to do with is the uses that specifically are designated as conditional. If something is permitted in the code, they can seek uh approval to do so just through the issuance of a building uh permit. However, I will note um that retail sales also does require a registration with the city clerk's office. So, they would need to go through that process before uh conducting any type of retail activity. Um, but a standalone retail use would not be allowed in the industrial park zoning district. Um, our industrial zoning districts generally do not allow retail as a standalone permitted use. Any other questions for staff? Thank you, Mr. Palmer. The applicant in this case is ABN Solutions. Do they wish to step forward to state their case? Good evening. And if you could sign in for us, please. >> Good evening, commission. I'm Ryan with Planforce Architects, uh, 811 Glenwood, Minneapolis, and I'm here with >> Hi, my name is Byron Butcher. I'm the chief operations officer for ABN Solutions. [clears throat] and we're here to answer any questions that you might have whether it's a facility or operationally. >> Great. Before we ask any questions, anything you want us to know? >> Um, no. I think I think we're good. >> Very good. Any questions for the applicant? Commissioner muster >> just to follow up on my question from before um that what's written as a part of the proposal is once processing is complete zero cannabonoids will remain. What exactly is meant by that? Because they they will be stored on site under the proposal as they're processed. What exactly does that mean? >> Uh so you know basically most of the product will be used into our products return into our products but any uh waste that will be remaining will all be biodegradable. None of it will be flushed down the city sewer or uh waste lines and we will follow strict um waste um SOPs and work with licensed disposal companies um that the is designated by the OCM. >> Mr. Butcher, just for folks at home who didn't read the staff report, can you walk us through just very generally what your operations are, what you plan to be doing at this facility? >> Yes. Um, so we will um acquire um biomass from a licensed cultivation uh company here in Minnesota and we will take that material and extract the cannabis oil out of it. We will refine that oil and turn it into um a few different products. Uh for example, one would be vapes and um maybe tinctures and we might add to our menu um you know maybe edibles in the future. >> Great. Any questions for staff? Commissioner Lee. >> Thank you, Chair Kton. Um, just a basic question. How the with the lensure from the state, um, what is the expectation on time from preliminary to actual issuing of the license and how good is how long is the license good for? Is it indefinite? Um, >> so we were awarded a social equity license through the lottery program and we have 18 months from the date that it was awarded to get up and operational. And um it would from there it'll be an annual um annual license. So we'll pay annually and get um annual inspections by OPCM. >> Great. Thank you, >> Commissioner Summers. >> Thank you, Chair. I have a question that maybe I should know the answer to, but I don't know. Um so I'm going to ask it. >> I'm wondering if the processing of these raw materials smells. >> Um there will be a slight smell. I'll be honest with you, but we're uh we do have an odor mitigation plan and an SOP um that has actually been designed by an engineer and we'll be utilizing that pro that program which involves basically you know um filtration systems utilizing charcoal filters to eliminate the smells that you don't smell it from outside. >> Great. Any other questions? >> See none. Thank you. >> Thank you everybody. I will open the public hearing then and ask if there's anyone in the chambers who wishes to testify on this item. Seeing no one coming forward, I'll ask if there's anyone online who wishes to testify. >> We have one person online. >> Okay, I see a call-in user here with the area code 952884. We are going to unmute you now and I believe you can unmute on your end perhaps as well, but we will ask if you would like to testify on this item. >> Yes, I would like to testify. >> Go ahead, please. >> Um, I I live on Nesbbit Avenue about 105th Street and I have concerns first off that the location really isn't designed for the kind of manufacturing they're talking about. Um it's it's really more office type buildings. Um there is a out a clinic there. Um it's the main road to go to the dog park. Um it's it's definitely, you know, a commercial area, but it's not commercial for manufacturing. So I'm concerned about that. Number one. Number two is um now hearing that there might be odors, I'm very concerned about that. um any possibility of sale of uh what I would consider a drug um in this area is going to increase traffic and traffic is already very very heavy there um on Old Chakapi and Normandale. Um so I have concerns about the idea of using this facility for something like this. >> Thank you. And could we get your name please? Yes, Sharon Sharf. >> Thank you, Miss Sharf. Any further comments? >> No. >> Very good. Thank you, >> Miss Brown. Is there anyone else online? >> All other participants online or staff. >> Thank you. Last call for those in the chambers. Is there anyone else to testify? Seeing no one stepping forward, I'll look for a motion to close the public hearing. >> So moved. >> Is there a second? Motion and a second to close this public hearing. All those in favor say I. >> I. Opposed. Motion passes. 6. >> Um, Mr. Palmer, if I could call you back up, please, could you discuss again the surrounding land uses of this location? >> Yep. Chair Kton, uh, this is the overhead view. So, to the north there are, uh, office suites. To the northwest and to the west there are also office suites. uh the building to the south, I believe that's a a building contractor of some form. Uh and then there's also some kind of hybrid office industrial in those properties to the east there. Uh this building uh 10901, I believe it's 10905 as well. Uh it's also shared there's a roofing company in one of those suites and then there's a crerematorium that is currently operating in another one of those suites. Do we know if we've had any odor concerns with the other tenants in this building? >> Chair Cooken, not to my knowledge. Okay. >> Thank you. Uh Mr. Palmer, I have an unrelated question. Um I'm not one to follow national politics too closely, but I did read some recent headlines about the uh government funding bill has an impact on cannabis sales of some kind. Could you help clue me into on does that have any impact on this application? Uh, Chair Kton, so after my quick uh last minute cramming of all things cannabis this afternoon, I did some research. Uh, the federal farm bill issue revolves around hemp. And in this case, the applicants informed me that they will be uh buying cannabis. So, I guess they're regulated in two separate forms. They're uh two separate I don't want to say two separate plants, but they have different chemical compositions and different biology to them. >> Good enough. I didn't want to wanted to make sure we were not approving something that could go against federal law. Very good. Thank you, Mr. Palmer. Any other questions for staff or discussion? >> Commissioner White, >> I think the findings are relatively straightforward here. Um I appreciate the concerns that have been raised. I think that um as this new industry moves forward, I think there will be a a lot of attention paid to um these these first folks to come in. So um I appreciate their attention to detail with odor and uh standard operating procedures and things like that. Um but I think that that the findings in terms of the use fitting in with the the facilities and things like that, I think uh it's pretty clear and I would support it. >> Thank you, Commissioner White. I too am in support of this again uh not only because of the findings as we discussed in the last application that is our that is our role as the planning commission is to make findings and I'm able to make all those findings and furthermore uh we've seen applications somewhat like this before where there's something new that's coming up and there may be some resistance or some hesitation with something that's new and I take the viewpoint of presuming innocence until we know otherwise. I don't think it's fair to an applicant to presume something bad is going to happen. I think they've done their due diligence on their their business plan and and they have conditions of a let's see they there are there are there are conditions and other things they have to meet uh for for approval of their application and I expect them to do so. So uh I'm in support of it. Commissioner Len, >> I would echo, excuse me, I would echo the sentiments of both uh Chair Kton and Commissioner White and intend to support this. Any other thoughts? If not, I would look for a motion. Commissioner Lynette. >> Uh, in case PL 202500167, having been able to make the required findings, I am moved to adopt the resolution, a resolution approving a conditional use permit application for a cannabis manufacturer at 10901 Nesbbit Avenue South, subject to the conditions and code requirements listed in the resolution. >> Second. We >> have a motion and a second to approve this application. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. I. I. >> Opposed. That motion passes. 6. This is a final decision by the planning commission unless an appeal is received by the city council at 4:30 p.m. on November 25th. Thank you very much. We will move then to item number three, another public hearing for remote airport parking at Park and Go. I will be recusing myself from this item to avoid a conflict of interest. Our acting chair will be Commissioner White. We'll pause for just a moment. Sounds like a party out there. >> All right. Uh I believe we are ready for uh item 3.1 on the item three on the agenda. interim use permit uh for park and go. Uh I believe you have the staff report. >> Uh good evening commissioners. Mike Sentinario uh planning supervisor with the planning division and we have an intermuse permit for remote airport parking and this is for the park and go facility uh 7901 international drive. Uh the commission probably recalls uh past meetings where we discussed uh a variety of airport related parking uh uses. Uh remote airport parking was one of them and arguably the uh most substantial in its uh impact. Uh but the uh proposal tonight is for an intermuse permit uh for the park and go facility uh that is located uh between American Boulevard and Interstate 494. And then there's uh and I my I mislabeled the map, my apologies, but it's uh just along 34th Avenue. And if you recall from our discussions about the airport parking study, uh ultimately the city council decided to retain existing remote airport parking facilities as an interim use. uh and that that didn't uh match the planning commissioner staff's uh recommendation. Uh but the city council uh correctly felt that uh they wanted a long-term permanent solution that was essentially agreeable to all parties and wanted some more time for staff to work with uh the existing operators to try and uh come up with something. [snorts] And so the the solution was to allow intermuse permits uh for remote airport parking but also establishing an expiration uh for these intermuse permits. And that's one thing that's that's very different from how we've evaluated intermuse permits before. Uh this particular facility has was originally approved in 1991 and has been operating under temporary approval since then. uh and there hasn't been any true expiration or finality into when uh these intermuse permits would expire. Well, as I included in this slide, uh that's actually in code. It was established uh via the city council approved ordinance. Uh that expiration is August 8th of 2027. So about 20 20 or so months from now. Uh and that date aligns with the intermuse permit expiration for park and fly. the other remote airport parking facility. And so the city council wanted to align uh these two expiration dates. Uh so we're kind of playing [snorts] on the same timeline uh as we continue to discuss uh alternatives uh for remote airport parking. Uh so following the city council uh adopting that ordinance and establishing this expiration this August 8th 2027 expiration uh the applicant uh from park and go uh applied for an intermuse permit to extend their existing or their former exist intermuse permit to that date. Uh so this [snorts] really is a a a step uh in furtherance of the city council's direction and so that we are recommending approval. Uh we feel that the findings for the intermuse permit are met especially because there h there is a specific uh expiration date associated with this intermuse permit. The finality of remote airport parking remains to be seen. Uh that's something that we will continue discussing with the operators and we'll be back before you at some point uh with additional recommendations, but [clears throat] that's for another meeting. Uh tonight, uh we're asking you to take action on uh the park and go intermuse permit and allowing it to be extended to August 8th of 2027. >> Thank you, Mr. Centinario. Um questions for staff. >> Commissioner Issa. >> Uh thank you, Acting Chair White. uh is there uh guidelines kind of on from the city's angle say staff angle um on how on kind of what the city wants and or any discussions taking place behind the scenes that from I guess from our initial meeting where the planning commission kind of recommended that uh IUP to be extended further >> commissioners you know we we continue to evaluate uh options um you know based on the city council's guidance We will continue to discuss uh a variety of options. You know the ultimately we feel like we still want to see permanent development uh on these sites. Exactly what form that takes at what land use intensity uh that all remains to be seen. And so this action tonight is strictly to align the different intermuse permits on the same uh the same expiration date. >> Any other questions for staff? So, just to clarify, this is not any final, we're not being asked to make any final decisions or recommendations about airport parking itself, only about this particular permit being granted through 20 August 8th of 2027. So, is that correct? >> That's correct. Yeah, it it's hard not to kind of uh expand the discussion into uh remote airport parking more broadly. Uh [snorts] we will the commission will have opportunities to do that uh in the future and we welcome your feedback. Uh but we're really narrowly narrowly focused tonight on Park and Go uh their interviews permit and aligning those expiration dates between the two existing operators. >> Thank you. I just wanted to make sure we were all clear about the scope this evening. So thank you very much Mr. Centinario. I believe next we uh have the applicant in the room. If you have anything you'd like to share, um, we'd welcome you to come up to the to the microphone and I think we know you, but if you could sign in, that would be great. >> I feel like I was just here two weeks ago. >> I It's weird how time time passes. So, >> I'm thinking that bunk house might be nice if [laughter] you >> speak for yourself. >> Hello, this is Dan Williamson with Park and Go. Um, of course, we're in support of the extension of the IUP and Commissioner Issa. We will be having lots of conversations with staff and the council over the next couple 20 months. We obviously want to resolve this just as much as all of you do and in a positive productive way. Um because every day we wait as an IUP, as I told you at the last meeting, we're [snorts] basically handcuffed in terms of financing a project. So the sooner we can resolve this is some type of a permanent zoning, the sooner we can get on with it. So that's all I have otherwise I'll answer questions. >> Thank you, Mr. Williamson. Any questions for the applicant? Have a great evening. Have a nice Thanksgiving. >> Thank you. You too. >> All right, then I believe we are going to move into opening up the public hearing portion of the meeting. So, is there anyone else in the room who would like to testify on this issue or comment on this issue? Please go ahead and come forward to the microphone. Miss Brown, is there anyone online? >> All participants online are staff. >> Thank you. All right. Then I would entertain well last call for anyone in the in the chambers. All right. I would call for a motion to close public hearing. >> So moved. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Right. It's been moved and seconded to close public hearing. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> All those opposed? Same. Motion carries. 6. All right. So, I believe then it is time for commission discussion. Oh, thank you. 5-0. Thank you for the correction. Math. Um, [laughter] >> wasn't on the test. >> It wasn't on the test. I counted myself twice. Um, all right. So, uh, anything that the commission would like to share about their thoughts on this application? Commissioner Lenny, >> I think the only comment I would make is I hardily support this if it continues to move the conversation forward, which it seems to. >> Anyone else? If not, I would uh entertain a motion. Commissioner Lenny, >> having been able to make this required findings, I move to approve an interimmuse permit for remote airport parking at 7901 International Drive with an August 8th, 2027 expiration date subject to the conditions in the staff report. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> It's been moved and seconded. Is there any additional discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. I. >> All oppose, same. >> Sorry. I >> thank you for clarifying. I believe that motion carries 50. Thank you, Mr. Centinario. All right. I believe if someone could let uh Commissioner Cookton know it's safe to come back in the room, I will gladly turn it back over to you, Commissioner White. Is that a final decision by the planning commission? >> Thank you. I knew there was something I forgot. Um, yes, this is the final decision on this issue. Um, unless it there is an appeal filed by 4:30 p.m. uh on November 25th. >> Thank you for the reminder. >> You're welcome. >> We'll move then to item number four, which is the 2026 planning commission work plan. Mr. Dakota Cassand is here with a staff report. >> All right. Uh, thank you, chair and commission. Yeah, tonight I just want to share the draft um work plan for 2026. So, u tonight really the goal is just to ask some questions of you all if there's um how you feel about how we've prioritized the projects or if you have other ideas you'd like to add and then we'll bring this back um in December at some meeting to kind of do the final recommendation or adoption to the the council and then the council um does make the kind of final adoption of of your work plan um as a commission for the city. So, just want to cover on our our draft work plan, we have um listed out 23 projects that total about um just under 4,000 staff hours that we estimate. Um we organize our projects kind of across five categories. So, code amendments, which is probably our most common um project type that you see and and kind of make a decision on. Um we have plans and special projects, regiduidings and resonings um transportation and transit projects and then any additional um city initiatives. Uh of these 23 projects um kind of identified the planning division staff as kind of the lead of 17 of those and then of course we're we're partnering with our um city divisions um on a number of projects as well. Uh we do have a couple of carryover projects from our 2025 work plan. Um there's still some things forthcoming here in December and January. Um so hopefully we'll um kind of refine that a little bit in the the final plan um and have a few fewer carryover projects there. Um and then um we identify some extra projects um that we could kind of pull from to either add to 2026 or are kind of anticipated for future years. Um there um in the work plan we do try to um highlight which projects kind of align with the Bloomington tomorrow together strategic plan in the the initiatives of that city strategic plan. Um and then we do estimate um a level of engagement. The city uses the um um the International Association of Public Participation kind of spectrum of engagement. So there's different levels that have different um needs. And so we kind of use that to estimate the amount of staff time um for a project, but it doesn't lock in that specific um engagement level that you see on the plan. And then the other big thing that you probably saw um in the work plan and the staff report is that we will be starting our process for the 2050 comprehensive plan. Uh but so that'll be a a pretty significant staff time and priority here for 2026 and 2027. So that's why you might see um a couple fewer new projects added maybe compared to previous years just because there is a large staff um commitment there for that comprehensive plan. Um so I'm not going to go through all of these. The specific descriptions were provided in the packet, but I'm happy to answer any questions or clarifications on on these projects, but we we identified kind of eight projects and then the ninth being the really the comprehensive plan. Um and we really see um 2026 as a key community engagement year. So lots of community events and and different engagement techniques. Um as well as um you know kind of launching our internal staff teams kind of gathering data um starting to draft some of the the plans to get ready for for community feedback in 2027. Um how we get to these projects um is really kind of a mix. So we um work within the planning division. We get input from staff across the city in our engineering division, environmental health, um the port authority, the HA, um and then as well as feedback that we hear from the planning commission and city council throughout the year. I would just highlight the that evaluation of South Loop um zoning districts and the design standards project was kind of one of those from the I think from the feedback that we heard with the South Loop district plan update. um wanting to explore a little bit more um kind of around our height limits and that floor area ratio and and some of those other um design standards. And so we included that that here um just to kind of give you a little bit of a flavor of of how we um come up with this list. And then as I mentioned, we try to um not everything kind of makes the first initial cut, but they're they're things that have come up um through staff discussions or or working with the planning commission, city council. And so we have them there as potential future projects if if we would have capacity to do them in 2026. I envision with the comp plan we probably won't. Um and so these would be something that we'd look at in 2027 and beyond. Um but part of the discussion today is if there are projects that you see on this list that you think are a higher priority than some of the ones that staff um selected um we we want that feedback to to refine this further. Um, but there's just uh kind of give you an idea of some other projects that have been floated around or topics to explore. And so really with that, I'd um just tonight was intended to to be a conversation. Um, and so I have a couple of questions there just really around if you think any projects um on on this proposed work plan should be removed or rep prioritized. Would love that feedback. or if you have any new projects from that list you want to see added or ideas of your own that you don't see reflected at all in this work plan um that you want to to highlight um we certainly want to take that feedback and and refine it for you all. So I think with that I'll turn it over to questions. >> Thank you Mr. Cassand. And as a point of clarification this is a study item before us this evening. We're not making a final decision tonight. >> Yeah Chair Cooken Commissioners uh that is correct. So it's just a study item. Um no final decisions made tonight. want to get your feedback then staff will further refine this plan, bring it to you in December kind of for that final um adoption to the council. >> Great. Thank you. We'll move to discussion. >> Commissioner White. >> Just a quick question about um the one of the projects that's on the if we have time list. Sorry, I don't remember the technical name. >> Um the indoor recreation standards. I'm just wondering with the new community center coming online at some point in the next uh few years whether that issue would impact decisions that are being made about the community center at all. >> Yeah, Chair Cooked, Commissioner White. Um I don't believe so. the this project um is really kind of intended what we see in probably more like industrial districts where we're seeing some um you know just older industrial buildings that maybe don't meet the current standard for industrial processing and so that um those building owners are trying to find uh more creative ways to to reuse that building and getting other tenants and I think we've um ran into some cases where with these definitions they kind of um can kind blur the line a little bit around if something's a a sports training facility versus a health club versus indoor recreation and and so they're allowed in different um zoning districts and things. So, it's really just trying to um kind of clean up those standards and definitions um to hopefully um reduce any inconsistencies in the code, but it's more focused on kind of the reuse of um industrial or older commercial areas. Yeah. Yep. Commissioner Muster, >> I have a question that is honestly just because I'm a nerd about these things. Um, under the urban forest master plan, it notes that there will be a detailed inventory of trees in the right of way. Does that include geoloccating and tracking those as city assets? >> Yeah. Um, Chair Kton, Commissioner Munster, I know, um, planning manager Johnson um, is kind of being is the planning liaison for that project that's being led by our parks department. So maybe he has a little bit more background on Mr. Johnson. >> Yeah, that's right folks. I don't just push papers around in a circle. Um, no. So yes, they are uh geollocating all of the uh boulevard trees as part of the process. In fact, all of that data has uh I believe substantially complete in terms of its collection. Um, in terms of tracking the health of the assets, I don't know what the plan uh will do and what the ongoing operations will entail uh for that. But I think uh this is really the city's first attempt at understanding uh its boulevard assets as well as understanding the broader canopy of the full city. So uh the re the natural resource staff and public works is really trying to make more strategic uh decisions and better investments in terms of where we plant trees um specifically targeting areas that are really underserved in terms of their existing canopy. So collecting this data is really the first step in making some of those decisions. And so it's an exciting project and I believe there's some cool communications videos about uh some of the work on the city's YouTube page if you're more interested. >> Commissioner Isa, >> uh kind of on that topic, uh I recently saw on the city page as well the facade improvement grant through the port. I thought that was really cool and you know helping give >> existing businesses a facelift. So this it's cool. Commissioner White, >> I think overall this seems like a a reasonable plan, particularly with starting work on the comprehensive plan. I think it's it's good to be um a little bit more careful about what what we're committing to. Um I just want to say I'm absolutely thrilled to see the climate action plan on here and I will look forward to many conversations about that. >> Thank you, Commissioner White. Uh a few things for me. Uh first want to say thanks to staff for uh getting the South Loop District plan uh further review on the schedule. That was something that was important to the planning commission and you heard us on that and I uh very much appreciate that we are going to review that in 2026. Um a couple things that are not on the list that I would like to make some advocacy for. Um the first is uh regarding curb walks where the sidewalk is immediately adjacent to streets. think old Shakipi road in particular where we have this tremendously questionable and dangerous situation where we have pedestrians walking immediately adjacent to old Shakipi road. I know that's a county road and every time I ask about it because I've been raising concerns about it for five and a half years on this commission, I am reminded that that's a county road and not the purview of the city and I know that. I would ask that the city continues to uh dedicate some time to advocating that Henipin County addresses that situation. It scares me tremendously that something's going to happen on that road and it's going to because we because we didn't do something about it. There are other cases where there are bad situations and no one quite knows what to do and it's this person it's not our jurisdiction and then something bad happens and then everybody wants to help and I want us to take action before something bad happens and I just think old Shakipi road is a ticking time bomb for something bad to happen with a pedestrian or a child or oh my gosh I can't even imagine how bad it could be. So I would make a case that even if it's a small amount of time that city staff time is dedicated in 2026 towards advocating with Henipin County that they need to do something about the curb walks on old Shakipi road. I know it's hard. I know it's going to be expensive, but we have to do something until somebody gets seriously hurt or killed on that road. The other item I'd like to advocate for is um regarding the Minnesota Timberwolves and an NBA arena. So, the Timberwolves just sold to new ownership. They need a new arena. The ownership has indicated they're looking for a new arena in a new location somewhere. We don't know. And I think Bloomington is an excellent candidate to take a professional sports arena. We have land near the Mall of America that is available. Now, whether it could support an arena, I don't know. But I think we should be ready to have those conversations on the front end before ownership approaches us and we say, "Ah, we got to do a study." I think we I would advocate that even if it's for not, we do a study on the front end because these things can happen dynamically and fast. And I think an NBA arena at the Mall of America site would be enormous for the city of Bloomington. It's already connected to transit. There's already parking there. There's bars and restaurants there. It's on two major highways. It's right next to the airport. We are a great location for the next NBA arena. And so I would advocate that some staff time is put towards us on the front end so that we can make a proposal to ownership of the Timberwolves that we are the best place to have that arena. Commissioner Len, >> I appreciate you bringing that up. I would not limit it just to the Timberwolves though because the Wild is also looking for a significant expansion that St. Paul doesn't seem able to get together. So I would say an arena generally is maybe a better way to coach that. >> Absolutely correct. Absolutely correct. Thank you. Mr. Johnson, any thoughts on that? >> Yeah, I do. Uh, thank you, Chair Cookton, and I, you know, the first item in particular, um, Chante, I don't know if you can promote Julie Long for this next phase here. U, but to the to the point about Old Chaki Road and certainly curbwalk, um, as the city looks to make pedestrian improvements throughout the city, we certainly do not want to recreate curbwalk. We we're in complete agreement that it's not a safe, uh, condition. specific to old shakipi. Um I don't I don't believe you need to add it as a specific project to the work plan because your staff are already working on it today. Um uh next year or rather in 2027, see I am in 2026 mode now. Uh in 2027 uh the city will be leading a project reconstructing old Chakapi Road from city hall right about at the bend all the way over to Aldrich. That was part of the 98th Street area uh planning effort. And so that will include bike and pedestrian improvements. I know that's not the section that you're talking about. You're talking about further to the east. Um, but the city has been advocating for some time now with Henipin County to raise Old Chaki Road in their priority list. Not to get too far in the weeds, but one of the challenges is that the county's current cost participation policy requires the city to to pick up the tab on the bulk of the pedestrian improvements. Anything that is directly right outside the roadway. In the case of that project, that's anywhere from $6 to7 million uh of improvements that we currently don't have budgeted. Uh for that reason, Old Chaki Road is actually in the city's formal legislative strategy uh for next year. So, we are seeking bonding money uh for the project. If we were awarded that, then that would greatly accelerate um uh that project uh moving forward. Um Julie, I don't know if you want to add anything to that. Uh she also said she might have a visual to share uh about some uh kind of preliminary design work or rendering that the city has already uh completed if you're willing to do so. >> Um chair if you're interested as planning manager uh shared I do have renderings um for two future projects that we could share with the planning commission if you're interested. I'm very interested in this long. Thank you. >> Okay. >> All right. Hopefully you can see this. We can. >> Excellent. Um so like uh planning manager um Johnson shared it starts at this curve. Oh, it's a little hard to see. It's It's long, so I'm going to continue to move it. But city hall is over here to the west. This is where the railroad is. And then the curve of old Chakapi Road. Um it would build a new pedestrian facility here. It would do a better crossing um here at the railroad because that is very confusing to people. Um, we anticipate improving the bus stop here and then taking the trail all the way to the city hall parking lot. It was part of this project. We are looking at trying to figure out another project that would take it over to the new community health and wellness center. Um, it would continue to make improvements here at the interchange. Um, it would have a transit only dedicated lane for the off-ramp from 35W. And then you can see it has improved bike ped facilities on this north side as well as this south side. Um, the bridge would remain as is. That is going to be a pinch point until some point in the future when the bridge is this is the mid-range uh buildout plan until the longer term plan where we could actually have separate facilities and wider facilities across the bridge. Um those are actually two different bridge structures and they are differentiated in height by about 6 to 8 in. So moving lanes on top of that bridge is not as easy as we had hoped. Um then the project would stop here at Aldrich um with this new facility into the Clover Center. Now I'm going to switch um long-term maps. Hold on. So here's here's the bridge again. Henipin County has asked us to consider a project that would go from Aldrich over to Second Avenue. It includes better bike and pedestrian facilities along with some safety improvements. Um, in this particular location with at Lindale, it would include extending some bike ped facilities to the south to almost connect to the existing on-road facilities. There'd still be about a twob block gap. So, we'll look to fill that in in the future as well. Um, it's an interesting project. It has some potentially um controversial changes. You can see here at Pillsbury, it would be a right in right out intersection um to get some of those safety improvements and it would have a pedestrian crossing here at Pillsbury where the transit stops are. Um this Blazedale intersection becomes a 3/4 intersection again letting um traffic move but still having some safety improvements and then continuing with the bike ped facility improvements. Um, we would have a left in only here at Kennedy High School and then it would end here at Second Avenue only because we also have a project scheduled with Henipin County on Nicollet Avenue from West Old Shakape Road all the way up to American Boulevard. And if you wanted to see that layout, you can see that on the Beheard Henipin website. Thank you, Miss Long. >> If so, if I can uh add to that, Chair Cook, what I would say is that, you know, in your work plan, and there's a reason why we dedicate a certain amount of staff time to support uh transportation projects because ultimately uh planning does provide a good perspective to support our colleagues over in the engineering division in terms of some of these larger projects. Um, but what I can say is I can affirm that this work is already ongoing. Um, as I mentioned, it is in our uh legislative priorities uh for the next legislative session. We are actively seeking funding. So, in in my view, we are doing the work in order to move this forward. And I know it has been uh taken too long. I share in some of those feelings and um but I just from a standpoint of in terms of uh whether it needs to be added as a dedicated standalone project, I don't believe that's the case. Um obviously, it's your work plan. We'll present it to the city council as you deem it necessary to be, but I do want to communicate that I I do feel like staff is on top of this one. Um, go ahead. >> Uh, Mr. Johnson, I I'm satisfied with what you've presented. Uh, I too want it done as, you know, quickly and expeditiously as we can and I'm hopeful that we can go through the the bonding process and I hope we get awarded um state funding, etc. to fix uh the highest concerns area which are east as we go towards Mall of America with that curb walk there and recognizing $6 million is a lot of money but not until something bad happens and then everyone's going to be wondering why we didn't spend $6 million to save a life and put me down for the first hundred I'm I'm in. >> And Sher Cooken, if I can just add a little uh commentary on the second uh issue that you raised. So thank you for that. I do want to um uh report to the commission that the port authority is the entity at the city that actively does recruit uh to some of these signature capstone developments particularly in the south loop but you know they're focused on the citywide now but I can report that they are in active conversations with multiple different types of development both to the north and to the east of the mall America. Um we haven't talked a significant amount uh lately about the uh use restrictions that are associated with the airport zoning ordinance. there are some uh restrictions on certain types of land uses uh in the various airport safety zones as it relates to those uh north south runways on the south side of MSP International. Um so that's an ongoing conversation with uh the Metropolitan Airports Commission in terms of the interpretation and uh work around their ordinance. They've been good partners to us in trying to um identify sites that are appropriate for various different uses. What I can say is that uh a professional sports team obviously would meet the criteria or the definition of a signature uh development or capstone development. So that very much is on the port authorities radar. Um I appreciate the planning commission advocating for that. The one thing I would add and if Kevin has anything to add there um is just to be cautious in terms of your role in that. you you potentially would be reviewing an application in terms of the zoning entitlements. And so I would just urge you not to kind of pre-forcast your um evaluation of such an application should it come before you. So that's just one of the points I would make about in terms of the different hats or different roles that uh these two entities play for the city. >> Appreciate that, Mr. Johnson. Anything to add, Mr. Tosski? >> Um yeah, thanks Chair Cookton and commissioners. Um yeah, just kind of echoing what Nick said. I was um thinking about that and um a big concern is protecting the decision-m process from bias or um any any claims of impartiality. And I think by putting if you wanted to put a specific private development attraction kind of thing in a work plan, it could kind of taint that process when someone could point out, hey, you guys are going to rubber stamp this cuz it was on your work plan. there may be residents that don't want that specific development or something that could claim that, hey, the the city wasn't being impartial on this um due to its written preference for this type of use over another use or something like that. So, just a word of caution if you want to do something like that. I would kind of maybe make it more generic and not specifically call out certain uh uses or something like that. So, something to think about. >> Thank you, Mr. Tosski. And uh I certainly am not interested in tainting the impartiality of the planning commission and I'm only interested in the city uh investigating what can be the highest and best land use uh in the land that's available to us. Other thoughts? Commissioner Isa? >> Uh yeah, this is in regards to the presentation. Thank you Julie Long for that. It was really detailed. My question is uh on the 35th offramp um kind of where n the 98th intersection in Dupont is every time I like get off the exit there especially especially during uh traffic hours it's pretty hectic. So could you uh elaborate on how how and if that will be addressed uh specifically? >> Um that made sense. Yeah. >> Chair Commissioner Issa. Um I can't I can't deliver details on that right now. Um, I can tell you that we are working in conjunction with both MDOT and Henipin County for that project and as planning commission reviews all of our transportation projects, we will definitely be before you on that project at that time. So, you can probably ask the question then. Um, we don't know enough specifics to answer that, but the goal is to improve um, safety and not cause any additional delay. So, >> okay. Definitely. Thank you. >> Mr. Cast, could you bring up your three questions for us again, please? >> Sure. >> And I'll ask the commission if there's any thoughts on these three questions. Gra. >> Thank you, chair. [clears throat] Not so much an Oh my gosh, I'm really sorry about my froggy throat tonight. uh not so much a request for something to be added, but seeing that one of the things on the proposed work plan is the review of in um institutional usage in R1 areas. Um at least from my perspective, I think I've was very interested uh when we first joined the council to hear or the commission to hear about the church, St. Mark's Church, the conversion to the residential use, which obviously I think kind of might also factor into this. It would be helpful, I think, to help guide the conversation if there are updates over the course of the few months on how that project is proceeding to help have a better understanding of how um that's being received in the neighborhood. Is it moving at the pace expected um to help guide those conversations when that comes up on the work plan also? Thank you. >> Sounds good. >> Other thoughts? Mr. Cassand, what do you need uh from us this evening? Is there a motion or anything you need from us? >> Uh Chair Cooking, Commission. Yeah, no motion at all. Really, just kind of meant to be conversational and the feedback. So, um thank you all for um your feedback so far. I've been taking some notes and um yeah, I think I got some some things I could maybe move around a little bit. But if again, if there was just anything um that stood out on here that you had questions on or you have something that you're personally interested in that you just didn't see reflected here, that was really kind of the purpose tonight, just to to vocalize those so we're aware. >> Any final thoughts? Commissioner, >> uh, not to kind of bring it up again, but I just wanted to emphasize that and kind of make it clear, it's my the point I brought up earlier, it would be Dupont um, and that 98th uh, off ramp. So like a lot of people when they're leaving Lifetime and whatnot, it's it gets hectic. So just really uh, taking a look at that area. Thank you. >> Great. >> Any final thoughts? >> Thank you, Mr. Cassin. >> All right. Thank you. We'll move then to item number five. City of Bloomington is the applicant in this case, the 2026 Planning Commission meeting schedule. Mr. Nick Johnson. >> Thank you, Chair Cookton. Um, we're hoping to get this to you a little bit earlier, but uh we're here and we have a draft schedule for your consideration. I want to point out that you should have a handout, a physical handout of the schedule here uh before you. So, I'm just going to present it to you and uh share some of the kind of ins and outs of how we pull this together. So, uh the first thing that's important to note is that the planning commission meeting schedule uh very much is uh designed around uh tracking applications to the city council uh meetings. The reason that is such is that uh private development applications are subject to the 60 and 120day agency action timeline requirements in state law. Um and so uh the design around the schedule is very much intended to get applications to the city council those that need to go there um as quickly as possible. So not only to abide by those uh statutory requirements but also in terms of just uh getting a final dispensation and a a business businessly uh uh order of time. Um so basically what that means is that most all of the planning commission meetings uh proposed for you on this uh schedule track to a city council meeting uh within 11 days after the planning commission meeting. That is the the typical shortest turnaround that we can uh process. Um so on the schedule before you um there's 28 planning commission meetings. There's seven per quarter. Um the planning commission has uh wavered in terms of its schedule over the years from anywhere between 24 meetings in a year even all the way up to uh 36 meetings in a year. Um there was a period of time during the early 2000s and late 1990s where there was a significant amount of development happening in the city um that required uh that many planning commission meetings to be held. Uh I would also add that the planning commission to that point used to be uh have a separate TTAC a transportation advisory commission. So there was there's kind of some wonkiness in there. But uh in the last few years we uh as a body or you as a body rather have uh gone with a 28 meeting schedule um that effectively is two meetings per month with one month per quarter having three meetings with it. I would note that it's not um uh uncommon to have a meeting canceled uh if no development items are tracking and we can shuffle our uh policy work around uh in order to uh give people a break once in a while. So this is the model that has uh worked for the planning commission the last few years. Um I mentioned that we also try and avoid uh planning conferences as well as major religious holidays uh things of that nature. Um uh so that that's pretty much what informs the 28 uh meeting schedule, the seven per quarter. I would note that if the planning commission if they felt like that was too many meetings uh to hold, we did identify on the schedule in the dates that are have an asterisk on them what dates staff would recommend removing. Uh in terms of if you wanted to go to a 24 uh meeting schedule, effectively two per month. Uh but staff is here to serve you. So um I'll kind of let the chair take it away. Um, I would say it is important to try and get a schedule adopted this evening because we are already starting to get development application inquiries uh that are uh targeting the first few meetings in January. >> Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Thoughts from the planning commission? I will start. And I am in favor of 28 meetings. I think that's the right number. Um, in my time here on the planning commission, we've kind of gone both above and below that number. And I think 28 is where we've settled. And I think it's a good number. Uh, for a while there, we were going with 24, I think, and our meetings started to get very long. And some of you have been here at 10:30, 11:00 at night, and all of a sudden, you're just not as effective as a commission as you you wish you were. 28 meetings, I think, strikes a good balance of not having 10-minute meetings when there's only one thing on the agenda we've got to get through, but also uh not so few that we're going deep into the evening. Uh I'm open to other thoughts, but I would start by saying I think 28 is the right number. Commissioner Isa. >> All right. Other thoughts? Commissioner White. >> Thank you, Chair. Um I agree. it it seems like a reasonable schedule. I don't think anybody's excited about three meetings in a row, but um three weeks in a row, but I think that's what works. Um and I have I will just state I have very much appreciated staff's uh forward thinking and being able to remove meetings from the calendar if we don't have a robust agenda. Um and I would urge you to continue to do that. >> That's a good point, Commissioner White. usually probably find ourselves down to about 24 anyway because some get cancelceled. It's just more demand based than us trying to decide on the front end. Mr. Johnson, the one um specific of the schedule that concerns me a little bit is um December where we would have three consecutive uh weeks without a meeting recognizing there are holidays in there and perhaps uh development slows down a little bit during that time. But if you stretch that out then to 2027, you're basically going a month between when this body would meet. Um, so I'm a little concerned about that. Do you have thoughts, >> Chair Cooked? Uh, again, I don't um without knowing when the plan or when the city council is going to be meeting in January. Um, we certainly could guess, but it's hard to forecast again that 11-day uh track ahead. Um, uh, so the 10th and the third are just the dates that correspond with uh, city council meetings in December. Um, but uh, yeah, I guess that's all I'd say there. I don't have concerns. >> So, um, swapping the 10th with the 17th, is that an option for us? >> It could be. Uh, just recognizing that December 10th is what tracks to the December 21st uh, city council meeting. So, again, we try and target that 11-day turnaround. Um, skipping ahead, you know, then you would be uh, you know, potentially looking at a meeting on Christmas Eve. that's uh not likely to go forward. But the the 17th is fine. It just means that it would the 17th would track to the first meeting in January. Uh if it was any application that necessitated city council approval and your concern level with that would be high or low? >> Low. Okay. I think I would advocate for the 17th instead of the 10th, but that's just my opinion. Commissioner White, >> I understand the concern about the length of a gap in the schedule. I think if we saw that as being a problem, I think that could potentially be addressed with our January 2027 proposed calendar when the time comes. I guess I'm a little, you know, clearly the 24th and the 31st are out. I don't see that being a robust time for a lot of proposals necessarily, although I could be wrong. So, um I mean, if the will of the group is to go to the 17th, um that's fine, but I'm not sure it's necessary. >> I won't be on the commission in December, so it's really up to you all. Don't don't take don't take my advice on it. And >> I'll just tell you right now, I have a meeting that day. I won't be here [laughter] either. If you move it to the 17th that I will not >> Well, actually I will like I will could not make December I've have a wedding out of the country that weekend. So >> So that's two of us that won't be here. >> So that may be [clears throat] >> other thoughts on the schedule. Commissioner Summers, >> I am a fan of 28 meetings. I I personally don't love long meetings, but I signed up to be a public servant, so I'm going to be here. But I am aware that for people who are coming to voice their opinions or want to hear what we have to say and listen to conversations that um post 8:00 p.m. is a really hard time for a lot of people. And we're often here till 9, which is just fine. But I think if we stretch beyond that, um, are we making our best decisions and are we listening our best to the neighbors who are coming to work with us? >> Well said. >> You need a motion. >> What do you need from us, Mr. Johnson? >> I thank you, Chair Cook and Commissioners. I would need a motion. I do have a suggested motion in the slide deck. Commissioner White, >> I move to adopt the 2026 Planning Commission meeting schedule as attached in the meeting packet. >> Is there a second? And Commissioner White, that is your motion is as presented. Correct. No modifications to any dates. >> Correct. >> Okay. Any final discussion? All those in favor say I. I. Opposed. Motion passes 6. We'll move then to item number six, the planning commission policy and issues update. Mr. Johnson. >> Thank you, Chair Cookton. Uh just to preview the next couple meetings coming before you in December of 2025. So at the December 4th meeting um looking at uh a recommendation on the Bloomington Ferry Road uh corridor study. You recall the engineer Amy Marone and a consultant were before you uh presenting various preliminary design options and recommendations. So, they'll be back before you to get a formal recommendation on that project. Uh, as well as a study item on the city's fence ordinance presented by Dylan Palmer. He left. Okay. I was going to try and find him. Um, so yeah, that's what's previewing to your December 4th meeting. Uh, I would note that given the Thanksgiving Day holiday, that packet will likely be published next Wednesday. So, just one day early there. Uh, to Commissioner White's uh point around trying to consolidate items, uh, we've decided to cancel the December 11th uh, meeting. And the reason we did that is that we have no development applications tracking to that date and we were able to shuffle uh the two items planned uh for that date to the December 18th uh meeting. So coming up on December 18th, we'll have a public hearing for a daycare facility uh located at 403 East 78th Street uh along American Boulevard there. Uh a public hearing on city code amendments for commercial vehicles uh standards and residential districts. We've had a study item there. uh a public hearing for a city code amendment on the art incentives uh city code um or ordinance rather. We had a study item on that topic. Uh and then a city code amendment on the revised uh official height limits map which you recently had a study session on um at the end of October. And then finally uh adoption of the 2026 planning commission work plan which we just discussed. Um so that's what's tracking to December 18th. Uh in terms of other updates, I just want to thank the members who responded to uh the uh survey for a planning retreat uh next year. Um so we will be uh pulling those responses together and uh following up with additional information about when to schedule that uh retreat for you all. Um again, if you have if you want to get in touch with me about what would be the most helpful topics and uh things you're most interested in terms in terms of discussing as a group outside of this formal setting, uh let me know. Let Shante know. Um, in terms of an opportunity to connect with uh other members of advisory boards and commissions, there's a commission connect event. I hope you are all invited to that uh via your city email. But uh on December 1st from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. in the H conference room uh our city's uh community outreach and engagement staff are hosting an event, Commission Connect. Uh it gives you an opportunity to meet members of other advisory boards and commissions uh and get to know other uh Bloomington public servants. as uh Commissioner Summers said. So, put that on your calendar if it's of interest to you. And then finally, not something I forgot to put on the sheet, but just a reminder that the National Planning Conference is in Detroit uh in the next year. So, I'll be sending you some uh some information via email uh previewing that and trying to gauge your interest in that. uh when the uh actual uh signups are released and the mobile sessions are released, if you do plan to attend, you want to try and sign up on the earlier side because the mobile workshops and other things do tend to sell out. Chair Kton can tell you about how fast they do sell out. Um so, uh just trying to put that on your radar and a reminder that that is an opportunity that the city budgets for in terms of getting training and uh new opportunities for its planning commissioners. So, those are my updates. >> Thank you, Mr. Johnson. I'll advocate for the National Planning Conference. Um, it takes a little time off of work and and things, but I highly recommend it. I've gone to uh many of them. It's a wonderful experience. We learn a lot. Uh, they're full of great information that has really influenced the way I think about some things here at the city. And so, uh, I would strongly strongly encourage all of my fellow planning commissioners to consider attending the National Planning Conference next year. Commissioner White, >> I would uh equally advocate for the Commissioner Connect events. I've been to several of those and they're a really great way to connect with other folks serving in positions like ours across the city. So, if you can make it, it's a great opportunity. >> Great. This is an opportunity for any planning commissioner to bring up anything that was not on this evening's agenda. >> Commissioner Len, >> uh I just have a quick question for Planning Manager Johnson. in general, how far in advance and how do you like to be notified if we're going to miss a meeting? >> Mr. Johnson. >> Uh thank you, Chair uh Cookton and Commissioner Lee. I appreciate it. I've been notified the day of and that's and that's okay. Uh assuming we have a quorum, but no, if you happen to know, you know, a couple weeks out from a meeting that does help Shantae and I uh kind of prepare for the meeting and ensure that we're having a quorum. Okay. >> Um but I would say, you know, anything with uh just a few days notice is more than uh acceptable. And certainly, you know, you never can account for an emergency, so things happen. >> Thank you. >> I see Kevin uh on the screen there. >> Mr. Tosski, anything to add? >> Chair and commissioners, if I might just say uh if you know you want to be remote too, if you could tell Nick as soon as possible because we need to account for that in both the minutes and the uh agenda that gets posted. Um and then do roll call voting at night. So, it's better to know as much time ahead as we can. Thanks. >> Thank you, Mr. Fuski. Anything else for discussion? Seeing none, that concludes this November 20th meeting of the Bloomington Planning Commission. Good night.