items before the planning commission are study items where we will not take formal action while other items before the planning commission are public hearings. During those public hearings, we do encourage testimony if you so choose to. You can testify here at city hall by joining us in the commission chambers. You can also do so from home by following the instructions on your screen. On some items, the planning commission has final decision-making authority, while on other items, 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 currently have six, all seven commissioners here this evening, so we do have a quorum. Our first order of business this evening is the pledge of allegiance. Please stand if you're able. >> I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all. We are going to get started this evening with item number one which is final site and building plans and a type three preliminary and final plat at the addresses shown on the screen there. And Miss Emily Hespek is here with a staff report. >> Good evening commissioners. Um so item one, the applicant is proposing a 16 unit detach town home development on a 4.6 6 acre site zoned R1 which is outlined in red um in the image on the left. The image on the right shows the existing conditions of the site as of this spring. This application is the first that falls under the newly adopted missing middle housing standards and is a permitted use in the R1 zoning district. The request is for final site and building plan approval and a type three preliminary and final plat to subdivide the property into six lots and two outlots for access and storm water management. This application is code complying without need for variances or flexibility. The site which was previously three single family homes is located near the river Bottoms trail head with nearby bike access. To the north and west are town homes and to the south and east are single family dwellings. So this is the site plan. Um as I said the site is currently zoned R1 and it's guided for low density residential which allows up to 12 units per acre. The proposed density of this project is approximately 3.5 units per acre. So it is within that limit and consistent with the comprehensive plan. The development meets all setback parking open space and impervious surface requirements. The project includes eight one-story and eight twostory units, all with walkout basements, decks, and porches. Proposed materials include stone veneer and shake sighting. All units meet the 40ft height limit with heights ranging from approximately 30 to 38 ft. Taller units include tuck under twocar garages, and all garages are oriented towards the interior of the site. Um each unit is proposed to include an elevator for accessibility and the units will have shared maintenance services provided. The landscaping plan meets all city code requirements based on the site area. 66 trees and 166 shrubs are required and the applicant meets this with a mix of new and existing plantings along with additional perennials. A landscaping shy will be required to ensure proper installation and maintenance and required landscaping yards along the street frontages um have been provided. While most screening requirements are not triggered for this application, a condition of approval has been added to require screening for a small parking area adjacent to neighboring homes to reduce headlight impacts. Um lighting plans are also not required for this type of development, but any proposed fixtures must still meet city standards. A portion of the site is also within the bluff protection overlay district which is outlined in red on the left side of the screen. Um this this district limits disturbance grading and impervious surface coverage and requires environmental safeguards to protect the bluff area. The proposal complies with these standards and no trees will be removed from this area. The picture on the right shows the current conditions of the bluff area. Staff has added a condition to ensure continued compliance with the Bluff Bluff Protection Overlay District. Additionally, staff acknowledges that there are many burial mounds in this general area due to its proximity to the Minnesota River. While no confirmed burial sites have been identified on these properties um and an investigation by the state archaeologists found no recorded burial mounds or cemetery sites. City staff acts as a facilitator between the developer and the state in this instance and as an added safeguard has recommended conditions requiring completion of the review period by the Minnesota Indian Affairs Council before any grading or plat recording can occur. The applicant did formally submit the development plans to my Minnesota Indian Affairs Council for review on April 24th. Staff did not identify any significant traffic impacts associated with the proposed 16-unit development. The site is served by Bloomington Ferry Road, which is a collector road and has adequate capacity to accommodate the estimated around 160 additional daily trips. The number of curb cuts will be reduced from 4 to two. Because the driveways will cross an existing off-road trail, additional traffic safety signage or pavement markings may be required, subject to further review and approval by the city engineer prior to permitting. The preliminary and final plat meets all applicable zoning codes or zoning standards. The plat must be recorded prior to issuance of building permits and park dedication fees must be paid at that time. Estimated park dedication fees are approximately $92,000 including credit for former homes. Conditions of approval address platting requirements, park dedication, and necessary easements. Um the city received public comments on this case, actually seven pieces of correspondence um which were included in the agenda packet um or at your seat. There were some correspondents in support and some opposed uh with some of the reasons listed on the screen. With that, staff is recommending approval. Um I'm here for questions and the applicants are also here as well. >> Thank you, Miss Hesp. We will start with questions for staff. >> Commissioner Cunningham. >> Thank you, Chair. Um, this might be a question for the applicant later, but Miss Hespach, do we know if the investigation by the state archaeologist was a desktop study or an on-site study? >> Chair, Commissioner Cunningham. Um, I do not know. Um, but we can ask the applicants. >> Save it for later. Thanks. >> Uh, Miss Hespic, I have a question. Um you mentioned that this is the first application we've seen uh upon the passing of our new missing middle housing ordinances. What about these would not have been eligible prior to the passing of that ordinance? >> Um chair. So the way that they're situated on the lot um some of our standards for like setbacks for example are for the development as a whole and not each individual unit. um where like a 30-foot setback wouldn't have been able to be met in a situation like this prior. So, it kind of adds some density in a case like this. [snorts] >> Thank you. Any other questions for staff? >> If not, we'll move on to the next portion. And since we've got a a nice crowd of people here, I'll explain a little bit how the planning commission works on these public hearings, of which this is one. So, we've had an opportunity for the planning commission to ask uh questions of staff. We're then uh in just a minute here going to allow the applicant a chance to speak. Uh if they so choose, they'll come up and present their case to us for this application. And then I will open the public hearing uh after that. And so, um I will give more instructions on the public hearing uh when we get to it. So, we'll move on then to asking if the applicant would like to come forward and uh state their case on this application. >> Please come forward. And if you could introduce yourself for us, please. Okay. >> Um, I'm Christine Carlston and I'm one of the owners and the developers of the West Haven project. Um, I grew up in Bloomington on 108 Street. Um, I thank you all for coming here tonight. I understand that new development brings questions and concerns to a community. Over the past two years, we've carefully worked on this plan and made adjustments based on feedback from neighbors and the surrounding community. My goal tonight is to share the steps we've taken to be respectful of the existing neighborhood. New construction in a neighborhood can often feel disruptive. West Haven consists of 16 smaller single family homes for those who wish to downsize and remain in the community. Our aim has always been to create a small, thoughtfully designed neighborhood that complements the area while meeting today's housing needs. While construction can be inconvenient, we will comply with all city codes. Rivercrest residents feedback has shaped much of our design and we've listened carefully. This housing option enables long-term Bloomington residents to remain in the city. My goal is not just to secure approvals, but also to ensure the development fits the neighborhood as well as possible using the latest home trends in 2026. Over the last two years, we've committed to listening. In October of 2024, we held a neighborhood meeting. We recently met with the Rivercrest board, the neighboring property. We made changes to our initial plans based on feedback from the October 2024 neighborhood meeting. We no longer were attaching a road. You can change a little bit. Um and uh we were never connecting to Rivercrest utilities. Uh there were some drainage concerns. I personally walked the property and Matt Pavoc, our civil engineer, can further explain if there's questions regarding drainage issues. To ensure an attractive shared boundary, we proposed working together. Some new concerns were brought to my attention, including traffic, snow removal, trash collection, fire, delivery trucks, overflow parking, and safety issues. I feel West Haven is similar to nearby neighborhoods. Riverest has 39 units. Castel Glenn has 20 homes, and both of those have more homes than a single entrance. West Haven, by contrast, has two entrances with fewer homes. We believe this will help with traffic flow and parking. Additionally, I feel we have adequate adequate overflow parking. Trash cans, not dumpsters, happen in every neighborhood on garbage collection day. Delivery trucks are quick in and out, and I've seen them navigate the private streets in Rivercrest without an issue. We've worked extensively with Bloomington Fire Department. Our civil engineer here tonight with me, Matt, can also address uh any other questions on those issues. West Haven will have a homeowners association in place. What has changed for developers in the last decade? When creating a TR town home project to fit the needs of an owner with less maintenance, new insurance policies have driven the need for detached town homes. This allows each owner to have their own insurance policy, which helps reduce HOA fees. I do feel West Haven fits into the character of the area. This proposal continues the evolution of the housing market needs and trends. I want to be straightforward. Any development brings change, especially during construction. Our small 16-unit development, you can change to the next photo. Um, we're not high density. It's designed to fit the neighborhood and the natural setting near the river in West Bloomington. At the end of the day, my goal has not simply been to build homes. We welcome further discussion. I understand not everybody will agree with every aspect of the project. However, you should know we've listened. We've made changes and we'll continue to listen. Looking ahead, if you would we if anybody would like to receive updates or have suggestions, please contact us directly at any time. will continue to listen. We would like to work together toward a successful outcome. Our civil engineer, Matt Pavoc, is with Civil Sight Group and is with us tonight. Matt can answer any questions regarding the engineering aspects of the West Haven development. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Carlston. Mr. Pav, anything to add or you uh >> uh Mr. chair. Uh, planning commission members, I don't have anything to add at this point, but I am available for any questions should they come up. >> We appreciate that. And thank you, Miss Miss Carlson, for signing in. Mr. Pavoc, I'll ask you to sign in as well. Uh, we will ask if there's any questions for the applicant. >> I don't see any here. So, >> I do have an answer about the burial question. >> Please. Um, the site, the address on the bluff had a full study and the other two sites had a desk study. >> Thank you very much. Question. >> I'm just going to say thank you for addressing my question that I had forgotten I'd asked. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Cunningham. Okay. Uh, thank you to the applicant and we will now move on to the public hearing which I will now open. Um I will uh describe a little bit how these work since uh many folks may be new to uh the planning commission rules and procedures. So um this is a public comment period. It's not a question and answer period and I just wanted to set that expectation. So we do welcome you to an ask any questions of the planning commission as you testify. However, just know that we're not going to answer them right away. Um, and to make it a little bit more efficient, what we're going to do here is if you want to ask any questions, you can ask those to me, the chair, our planning commission is making a note of those. And after we close the public hearing, we will then choose if we want to follow up on any of those questions or seek um additional information. That keeps things just a little bit more efficient. So, it's not that we didn't hear your question, but we may not answer it until the public hearing has closed. Um, being that we've got a room full of folks here, we are going to institute um the shot clock this evening, which is up on the wall. So folks are going to have three minutes to testify on this item and we would ask that you monitor that and be respectful of the clock uh this evening. Again, that just keeps things moving a little bit further so uh no one uh and that everyone gets a chance to speak uh by doing that. Thank you. Um all comments and questions can be directed at me, the chair. Um and I do just want to make one other point. It's really um as a matter of procedure that we ask that any public testimony does not reference any members of the public. We may have some disagreement in the room this evening, which is absolutely okay, but we would ask that you don't reference the prior speaker or this person over here. That keeps um a bit more of a gentle attitude here in the commission chambers, which we do appreciate. Um and the last thing is there is a sign-in sheet up there on the deis as well. After you're done testifying, uh if you could make sure you sign in for us for the minutes, please, uh that would be appreciated. Okay, the public hearing is now open and I invite uh anyone who would like to testify in this item to step forward. [snorts] [clears throat] >> Good evening. If you could introduce yourself. >> Good evening. Uh uh chair. My name is David Axelson. I live in the RiverQuest Riverquest Town Home Association complex. I am on the board of the complex and have been for many years. [clears throat] I first well I only have three minutes so I was going to compliment the board the planning commission for all the work that you do do. My son's on the Long Lake Planning Commission and I know firsthand what you it's more negative than positive that you go through it. Thank you for your work. I have three issues. Uh one is and I'll take them in reverse order because I'm one is the uh color choice of the developer for the complex. I do not believe that it coordinates well with the community and the color schemes that are within the community. And I asked the planning commission to take a second look at the color color scheme of their complex versus the breast of the community. The second issue has to do with the height of the complex. The buildings themselves do not fit well in into the area developed around it. The houses and the town homes are not of this nature of design at all. So it looks like kind of a blemish to the community in its design. We ask you to consider looking considering alternatives to the design. And thirdly, most importantly, look at my time. I have read the I've looked at the first the the main concern I have is with the storm drainage of the community. I've looked at the engineering drawings. I can't read any of them. Probably most of the commissioners cannot either. But uh I asked this question when you're looking at a property that was essentially pvious soil almost entirely and now is being developed into an development that's probably going to be 70 80% impervious and having greater slopes towards the riverest town homes from what exists today. Uh I find it hard to believe that an engineering firm would come up and say that there will be less water storm dam flow into the river crest community than there exists today. That sounds um foolish to me as a as a conclusion unless the developer has some type of storm drainage plan to handle the storm drain water within their complex. And if they do, I would ask the commission, ask the chairman to allow them to explain to the membership here what their storm drain plan is to c to prevent excess storm water draining going into the river crest community. Time's up. >> Thank you, Mr. Axelson. And we always allow extra time for compliments to the planning commission. So, thank you very much. [laughter] No. Uh it's more negative than it is positive in all of your work and uh from firsthand experience talking to my son. I applaud you for sure your dedication and commitment to do a good work. >> Thank you very much. As he's signing in, we'll ask the next speaker to come on forward. >> Good evening. >> Hello. My name is Christopher Dorne. Um thank you for having this hearing. I appreciate it. Um, I'm a resident in Castle Glenn and I've lived there with my family for eight years. Um, I've got young children and I appreciate uh the fact that our neighborhood is quiet and that the amount of traffic seems reasonable on Bloomington Ferry Road. Um, one concern I have is safety in terms of the sidewalk that goes from DreadScott down to Bloomington Ferry is very active with pedestrians. Uh, bicycle traffic and people walking their dogs. Um, and you're going from three single family homes to 16 units that are averaging two cars, another 32 or 26 vehicles. Um, you mentioned there may be signage needed. I think it's going to be a big hiccup with the development there. Um so that you know uh kids safety is definitely I think something to consider with this. Um and yeah, I appreciate your time. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> [snorts] >> Is there anyone else in the chambers who would like to testify on this item? [snorts] Good evening. >> Good evening. Say my name is Charlie Bass. I also live in the adjacent River Westwind uh homeowners association. Uh my home is on 112th floor so what basically faces this development. And I guess I wonder about the homeowners association associated with this development. I know that uh in our association we have uh five members and they rotate through the whole variety of the community that it develops something in the community. So I understand this is a slightly different level of of uh control by the HOA. Maybe I misunderstood the the what this association is trying to do. I know that for example we have a lift station and we have a neighbor that watches it. So when it goes out it not only we need to call somebody but we have a neighbor that has the key and I have the backup key. So I wonder because we worry about the sanitary and sewage and the contaminated sewage and where this all goes and are any of these systems subject to catastrophic failure. Uh what who's going to be there? Who's in charge of making sure the all this stuff is maintained and upkeep uh regularly? Uh I think that uh we've had good conversations with the developer and hope to be able to work with them around the perimeter of this community. We hope that we can find that. For myself personally, I walk 112th Street three or four times a day to walk my dog. And on on the left side, as I walk towards Bloomington Ferry Road, I have two fairly low buildings. On the right side now, I will have eight much taller buildings. It feels like a completely different landscape to me than what I've walked around in this community and neighborhood. The eight homes and their height, even though they're set back from 112, their proximity to that street and they're on a hill above the street gives a completely different feel to the community than we're used to having. And that's going to be true for everyone in our community that comes in and out of it. And then one last thing that uh homeowner said to me, he said, he said, "Just what are those tall buildings away?" He says, he says, "I see these narrow structures with this terrible weight on sand." And he used a word called uh I'm sorry, ball bearings. He said, "I could see these on a wider, you know, platform, but all this weight on narrow things." He says, "It's inherently a concern." I'm done. Thank you very, very much for your attention. >> Thank you very much. [clears throat] [clears throat] Is there anyone else in the chambers who would like to testify? >> Miss Brown, is there anyone online who would like to testify? >> Participants online consists of one staff member and two applicants for item three. >> Thank you, Miss Brown. I will provide a last call for anyone in the chambers who wishes to testify on this item. >> I just had one other thought that I froze on when I was up here. >> Please. Uh just the location of it feels like it's something that should be more in like a commercial district where it would allow for pedestrian traffic to live there and walk to the services that you need versus putting it in a more secluded area where everywhere you go you're going to have to drive and use your car constantly to get to all of the services that you need. >> Thank you. Mr. I I had asked if the chair and the commission would allow the developer to explain in layman terms their storm containment plan for the members many people who are here and I had and I didn't see you acknowledging doing that. >> Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Axelson. Uh we're going to get through the public hearing portion first for the public to have their opportunity and if the commission wants the bring the applicant back up, we'll have an opportunity to do that. Final call for any members of the public who would like to testify on this item. Seeing none, I will look for a motion to close the public hearing. >> So moved. >> Second. We have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor say I. >> I. Opposed. That motion passes 70. And the public hearing is now closed. Uh commission. We heard a lot of um uh questions and thoughts from the public. And I think we'll before we move into discussion give another opportunity for planning commissioners to uh ask staff if they'd like to follow up on any of the items we heard either in public testimony or we also do have a a number of pieces of written correspondence uh before us if anyone wonders whether we read those or receive them. We most certainly do and they've been carefully reviewed by the planning commission. And so this is another opportunity for the commission to uh follow up on any of the items we heard during public testimony. Commissioner Cunningham. >> Thank you, Chair. Um, we got a few rapid fire ones for staff. Um, Miss Hespach, uh, concern was raised about heights of the buildings. This application complies with codes and zoning. Is that correct? As far as building heights are concerned, >> Chair Commissioner Cunningham, yes, it it meets applicable requirements. >> Excellent. And then I believe you mentioned this in the staff report, but it it meets the uh applicable zoning requirements for density um per acre per habitable unit per acre. >> Yep. It um chair Commissioner Cunningham. Um the allowable density in low density residential is up to 12 units per acre in this development is about 3.5. >> Excellent. And then um I believe it's in the packet. I didn't print off the full phone book this week, but um part of this application would have uh essentially conditions of permit where different [snorts] city departments would need to sign off before construction started. Is that correct, >> Chair? Commissioner Cunningham. Yes, there's a pretty long list of conditions. Um some including like traffic signage and stuff like that. >> Thank you. Thank you, Chair. >> Thank you, Commissioner Cunningham. Uh, Miss Hespach, we heard and saw a number of pieces of correspondence related to utilities. Can you just walk us through a little bit uh are there new utility services being added to this neighborhood? How do they tie into the existing uh network, etc.? >> Um, Chair Cookton, thank you for that question. Um, I'm going to pass that on to either Nick Johnson or someone from engineering. >> Start with Mr. Johnson. Yeah, Chair Cookton, thanks for the question. We do have uh city engineer Julie Long and Brian Hansen here if we want to dig into more details, but um effectively what's happening here is private utilities, um sanitary sewer and water that connect out to the public, uh main and Bloomington Ferry Road. So, that's kind of typical of a town home development is to have private services underneath a private roadway effectively. >> That was going to be my follow-up question, Mr. Johnson. Is this pretty typical to have I I admit I'm not a public utility expert. Is it fairly typical to see private utilities around the city? And I see Mr. Hansen coming forward to provide provide some additional information as well. >> Yeah, good evening uh uh commissioners uh chair. Yes, that is correct. So that for a townhouse development, this is very typical to see private utilities. So as Mr. Johnson mentioned, uh private water, sanitary, and storm will be connecting into the city services on Bloomington Ferry Road. So all the utilities within the complex were private utilities. they'll be owned and maintained by the complex. >> Thank you, Mr. Hansen. And as these applicants come forward with applications, are you does the city work with the applicant to understand how those utilities connect into the city systems, etc.? >> Yes, we do. So, our utilities division takes a look at to make sure we have capacity to serve that. So, both from a water standpoint, from a sanitary sewer capacity standpoint, and then obviously we review the storm water report as well to make sure we have capacity for that to treat the storm water that would be generated from the site. And so on this application, the city's been working with the applicant, I imagine, for some time, make working all those details through. >> That is correct. Uh uh chair, we have had multiple conversations with the applicant prior to this evening and the application before you reflect some of the changes that have been made by the applicant in response to staff's comments in previous meetings prior to tonight. >> Great. Thank you, Mr. Hansen. Commissioner Len. >> Thank you, Chair. This is a technical question probably for staff um or a semantics question. We keep using the term town home and it looks like from the drawings that these in my vision are single family homes. Like what is the differentiation between what constitutes a town home versus a single family home? >> Chair Commissioner Len. Um in this instance, a single family home in the city of Bloomington needs a much larger like lot area, lot size. Um these detached town homes are one in a general like development and association with each other and two are um denser located closer to each other um and have different setbacks as a development. >> Chair if I may add to that just I think what um some folks are seeing from this type of product is they refer to them as villa lots and effectively how they're built or developed in other communities is typically through a plan development approval process. The Bloomington PD overlay district has limits on reductions on site area and site frontage, which is most relevant. Um, in order to create this type of product here in Bloomington prior to the missing middle ordinance, it would have had to have been an attached product, attached town homes, and they would have had to seek reszoning um as part of that uh development application package. So, um they're typic they're just villa lots. Um they're becoming more popular uh in certain communities um for multiple reasons. um association maintained I think is one of the big drivers for some folks. Um but yeah, hopefully that provides a little more uh context. >> Uh Miss Hesp, I have an additional question. Uh we saw in written correspondence and I believe from one of the speakers too concerns about the trail that's nearby. Can you just walk us through uh as the city's reviewing an application and preparing it to come to the planning commission, what type of reviews happen when there is like an existing trail nearby an application? chair. Um, yes. So, I talked with Kirk Roberts, the traffic engineer, earlier today. Um, and so he kind of walked me through [clears throat] his review. Um, so he was looking at where the proposed driveways lay, um, and how they intersect with the trail. Um, and so what he had said is that the driveways intersect with the trail and roadway at approximately 90° and there are no obvious sight obstructions that would restrict drivers view of trail users. Um, and he also provided some traffic volume information, crash information. Um, and so I think he was kind of looking through those things um, and reviewing grade and things like that. >> Thank you. So just as a matter of reassurance for the public, we have an on staff traffic department that's reviewing these types of applications before they come to the planning commission. >> That is correct, Chair. >> Thank you. Other questions for staff? Commissioner Monster. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um I have a couple of questions that are probably best going to be answered by the applicant. Um the first is what is the intention for landscaping or some sort of something on the um 112th street north side of the property? I know that there's going to be a sidewalk put there, but this does it's essentially the back of houses facing the front of other houses. Is there any accommodation for that? >> I would invite the applicant back up to answer that question. And if if I could just ask that you answer the question so we don't have another presentation or an opportunity. Just if you could answer the questions is appreciated. >> Absolutely. Thank you, chair. Uh planning commission member. Um the along 112 there is it's actually the front facade of the homes. So it will look more like a front um than a rear. So, there are foundation plantings proposed on our current plan, and there's a a couple of trees that are going to remain uh that are just off the property that will stay in place. >> Thank you. Please. Um my next question is to follow up on the comments that we've received about storm drainage from the site. If you could speak to that and and sort of address our concerns. >> Sure. Um uh so quick stormwater uh synopsis of the site. So we have to uh to meet stormwater requirements for a site like this, we have to meet rate control, volume control, and water quality control. Um and those things have to be at at or below the existing condition for rates. So anytime any water that's running off the site in the existing condition, proposed condition, we have to match that rate. The way that we achieve that is with a pond. So here we don't have an above ground pond. We have an above ground uh storm water basin chamber where we uh store the water and then let it slowly release uh so we don't increase any runoff rates to adjacent properties. Uh we also that underground storm water chamber also achieves um water quality treatment and volume abstraction. So uh due to this site being on a very sandy soil uh a lot of the storm water will actually go into this tank and it's perforated and the water will soak into the ground. So, um, those are kind of the three elements of that, but we do meet and exceed all the city standards for storm water management for the site, >> please. Um, and in terms of placement, is that what we're seeing? And, and you're not looking at what I'm looking at, certainly. Um, but there are some dashed rectangles in what I believe is parcel B or outlot B. Is that where that is going to be located? >> That is correct. in the southeast corner of the site, which is the kind of the downhill side of the site because we're working with the natural drainage pattern to get all of the storm water to that area. >> Any other questions for the applicant while we have them up here? Commissioner Cunningham. >> Thank you, Chair. Um, just to hammer home the it everything looks so wonderful on a 2D plan view, but it is a slope site. Uh page 45 of the packet shows your proposed utility plan and I believe you guys have drainage structures in the backyards to prevent runoff to the southern portion of the site. Is that accurate? >> That's correct. Um so part of the bluff management ordinance does require uh non-degradation of the bluff. So we are intentionally putting storm water all storm sewer all along the back of those um homes on the south side to pick up any roof water runoff and direct that into the storm water system. Excellent. Thank you. >> Any other questions for the applicant? >> Thank you, Mr. Pav. >> Thank you. >> Okay, commissioners, unless there's any other questions for staff, which are always welcome. I would encourage us to move into discussion, >> Commissioner Isa. All right, he's warming up. >> Commissioner Cunningham. >> Thank you, Chair. Um, overall I'm in favor of this application. I uh applaud the applicant for reaching out, working with community stakeholders, adjacent land owners, taking their feedback and bringing it back. I I realize that there are um there are some things that not everyone there's there's no way to please everyone um every stakeholder in a a project like this, but I think that you've done a commendable job of engaging and planning and working with staff and the community. Uh storm drainage was a big concern from everyone. Uh and then neighborhood safety. I have all confidence in the world in our city's traffic department for that and uh I know that uh it takes a lot to get a PE license in civil engineering and I'm sure you don't want to lose that. So um I am uh listening to the experts here. Uh some structural concerns were raised and buildings are built on sand all the time. I'm sure that those will come out in the permitting process. We have building codes for a reason. Um, and I think that it overall brings a, you know, it it helps, it doesn't necessarily, these aren't lowincome uh, buildings or homes in the missing middle, but it still adds density to the city as we need more housing for more folks. Um, I think it's an overall step in the right direction. I'm in support. Thanks. >> Thank you, Commissioner Cunningham. Commissioner Lay. >> Uh, thank you, Chair. And just to build on Commissioner Cunningham's comments, I had uh been curious in reading the read ahead material and also some of the comments from the public how this really fit into the missing middle conversation. But I think uh the applicant's point of creating space for people who want to downsize, move to more accessible living as they age in place. I think that's something that we talk about quite regularly um in our meetings. And I think uh developments like this, one of the things they hopefully will do is make it easier for people who do want to stay in Bloomington to move out of those houses, the single family houses that are maybe better suited for younger families. Um so I do see um based on everything we've seen today, um much more of a answer to the question, how does this work with the missing middle? So I'm supportive. >> Thank you, Commissioner Len. Um, I too am supportive of a new housing type um, in the city of Bloomington. It's something we don't have. We don't have houses that look like this here. You know, we're beginning to age as a community and our housing stock was built many decades ago and this type of more modern downsized housing is not something we have. And I think it's a benefit to the community to add this type of housing stock um, in our city. And um as it relates to neighborhood feel, I I don't doubt that it's going to change the feel of what's there today. We have I think three houses on very large lots that are kind of undeveloped and just sitting there. Uh this is going to densify that to be sure. But as it fits in with the rest of its surroundings, I actually think it fits in quite well. When you look at the houses just to the north and I think it's to the west, but north and sort of west of here, it's it's very similar size and scale of houses to what you're going to see here. Not exactly the same, but I I don't think it's it's quite plopping a huge amount of density in a very undense neighborhood. This is a relatively dense neighborhood to begin with, and I think it fits in actually quite well. Um, I do just want to thank the public for being here. We've got a room full of people here, which is wonderful to see and uh certainly appreciate the testimony. Um there's no better way for us to learn than to hear from our residents and especially those who live nearby and I wish we had this many people in here for for every application. So, thank you. Thank you so much for the public for being here. Um as it stands, you know, we have findings to make as we often go back to on this planning commission that the planning commission does not have unilateral authority. we can't do whatever we want or do things because we like it or don't like it. We have findings uh that we have to make on whether or not we can approve an application. And as it relates to this application, uh I'm able to make all the findings for an approval. And so therefore, I am in support of the application before us. Any other thoughts from commissioners? >> [clears throat] >> If not, I would entertain a motion. Commissioner Cunningham. >> In case PL2026-62, I move to recommend the city council approve final site and building plans for 16 detached town homes at 11216, 111208, and 11140 Bloomington Ferry Road subject to conditions and code requirements to the staff report. Is there a second? >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second to recommend the city council approve final site and building plans. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. Opposed. That motion passes 70. Commissioner Cunningham. >> Thank you, Chair. In com in case number PL2026-62, I move to recommend the city council approve a type 3 preliminary plat and adopt a resolution approving the final plat of West Haven to subdivide 11216, 11208, and 11140 Bloomington Ferry Road into 16 lots and two outlots subject to the conditions and code requirements attached to the staff report. >> Is there a second? Second. >> We have a motion and a second to recommend the city council approve this type three preliminary plat and final plat. Any final discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. Opposed. >> That motion passes 70. Uh this goes before the the city council on May 18th, 2026 on their consent agenda. Mr. Johnson. Uh being that we have a room full of people that are interested in this, uh how does an item get removed from the consent agenda and discussed in the regular meeting at city council? >> Yeah, thank you, Chair Cookton. It's at the discretion of the city council. So, um planning commission recommendations that don't necessitate a public hearing are always put on the consent agenda. Sometimes the city council pulls those items for discussion, sometimes they do not. It's at the discretion of the council. So, I would encourage folks if you'd like to hear a further discussion with the city council on this, your option would be to contact your city council member. Thank you very much. Uh, just to let folks know if you aren't as interested in the further items on our agenda, you are welcome to leave the chambers here. We'll give you a minute to do so, but we have lots of fun coming up, so you're welcome to stay. Find Item number two on our agenda this evening is for the gallery apartments, a resoning preliminary and final development plans at 7900 Xerxes Avenue South and 3,400 American Boulevard West. Our staff report is provided by Mr. Dylan Palmer. Good evening. >> Right. Good evening, Mr. chair and commission. Thank you very much. Uh again, item number two, gallery apartments, maybe [snorts] if PowerPoint wants to play nice. There we go. All right. This is the uh site of the proposed gallery apartments development. This is located at the northwest corner of American Boulevard and Xerxes Avenue uh right along I494. This is just west of the Pan-American District. Uh, also home of the Wells Fargo Tower. So, the large tower with the circular section on top to give you an idea where this is at. Uh, the site is composed of two parcels. 3,400 American, which is the Wells Fargo Tower parcel, and then 7900 Xerxes, which is the parcel to the east there on this. It's the uh big giant parking lot there directly next to Xerxes Avenue. Uh, this site is kind of unique. It has a large overhead power line that runs through the northern portion of it. Uh that's that thin little green line running through there. Uh that causes some headaches with development in other areas of that power line. So I'll explain that later why that's so important. Uh first part of this application is a resoning from CO1 to C4. Uh so CO1 is one of our legacy zoning districts. It's one of the oldest districts in the code. It's located in a lot of these parcels along I494. A lot of office buildings and related uh developments like that. Uh CO1 zoning district has a lot of restrictive setback standards and other building standards, floor area ratio standards that would really prevent a proposal like this from moving forward with those uh standards under the CO1 district. So that's why the applicant is requesting to reszone this to C4 which is the uh freeway office zoning district. The C4 district allows for uh lessen setbacks. It also permits multifamily residential uh by right in that district. These are also planned development uh overlay districts. They it was a plan development overlay district prior to this resoning application and it's expected to continue with this as well. All right. This is the preliminary development plan. So this is the entire site, both 3,400 American and 7900 Xerxes, showing both the Wells Fargo tower there on the left, and then the proposed apartment development on the right. So the gallery apartment development is composed of two phases. Uh tonight on the final development plan, we're only looking at phase one. However, with the preliminary development plan, they're showing a phase 2 future construction building uh on the very northwest or northeast corner of the property. uh if they are to move forward with the phase two construction in the future, that would need to come back for another public hearing, the planning commission, city council for a uh updated final development plan. Uh as well, uh they're in addition, they're adding a 53 uh surface stall lot to the north of the tower. That's to uh add some additional parking that will be taken away because of the apartment development. And then this is just a parking count because there is a very large parking lot there already that's going away because of this development. Uh with the new apartment building, they are proposing to have approximately 26 spaces. That's 102 spaces short of the 2,118 required. Uh the applicant and the owner of the Wells Fargo tower are in a tenative shared parking agreement for 168 shared spaces. Uh for that would be in all those surface lots. Let me go back here. All of the surface lots that you can see that are highlighted bold on this map would be part of that shared parking agreement. Staff is supportive of that agreement and we don't believe that there would be any conflict with the uh parking being under the number there. All right. And then moving on to look at the phase one of the apartment building. So this is a uh sixstory building with approximately 270 units. Uh there will be 345 enclosed parking stalls which is above our requirement for enclosed parking stalls. Uh there is a proposed amenity terrace, a pool located on that terrace, fitness centers, a roof deck, a courtyard there inside of the uh the donut hole as well as uh uh two levels of enclosed parking that will be uh one on the first floor of the building and then one as subterranean level. Uh they're also proposing bike storage inside of the building and that will be located in the garage as well and that uh meets all their bike storage requirements. All right, this is their landscape plan. It's uh code complying. They're going to be planting a lot of trees along Xerxes and American as well as planting some trees along uh Southtown Drive, which is that 494 frontage road to the north. Uh if you notice, this does not show phase two. they will uh if they do apply for phase 2 in the future, they will need to come back with an amended landscape plan for that area of the property. All right. And then these are the building elevations. One of those is from the corner of Xerxes and American and then the other is from the southwest side looking the photo on the right is from the southwest side looking at the main entrance to the building. All right. As part of the plan development overlay district, the applicant is able to request flexibility on certain standards from the zoning code. Uh in this case, they're requesting three setback reductions and one reduction to storage space requirements. Uh setback reductions are supported by staff because this will allow the building to be a little bit closer to the street, a little bit closer to Xerxes and American. And uh on the north side particularly, there's a very large boulevard. This is a very large space between the curb of Southtown Drive and the edge of the future phase 2 building that more or less meet would meet a setback if the property line were closer to the street. Uh the storage space reduction is to reduce the uh required number from 270 storage units down to 61 units. So in our zoning code, each apartment is required to have a storage space separate from the apartment. uh our OO incentives reduced that requirement to 50% so down to 135 storage spaces and the applicant is requesting further reduction due down to 61 spaces due to market conditions and again staff is supportive of that. Uh how staff gauges these flexibility requests is through a public benefits test. So compared to a variance where we have to make certain findings in this case we're looking at what are the public benefits of these reductions or these requests for reductions. Uh in this case, staff was looking at the uh for storage space example, there's more room in the building now for additional apartments, for bike storage, for parking that would otherwise be taken up by storage cages or storage lockers that aren't being used. Uh looking at the setback reductions, those are uh promoting more density on the American Boulevard corridor, promoting uh again more development, more unit development. And then the presence of the power line that runs pretty much bisects the property uh creates a very unique condition to where they have to modify the building to be very close to Xerxes and American to stay out of that uh power line easement. All right. And then they are also proping propo, excuse me, proposing affordable housing. Uh 9% of the units provided at 60% of area median income. Uh units are a mix of studios, one bedrooms, two bedrooms, and three bedrooms. Uh they're looking at using some incentives again to reduce the storage space requirement. And then the primary and secondary exterior materials on the north and west uh faces of the building. All right. And then this will uh the planning commission is the uh recommending authority. So the next step if this is recommended for approval tonight will be to go to city council on June 1st for final approval. >> Thank you Mr. Palmer. We will begin with questions for staff. >> Commissioner muster. Just want to make sure that I'm excuse me understanding the parking the surface parking spaces >> are all to serve the Wells Fargo building. Correct. >> Let me go back to the large. So the surface parking spaces on this uh map. So you'll kind of see there's a a very thin line there that runs between the Wells Fargo property and the apartment property. All of those spaces that are kind of shaded gray are proposed to serve just the Wells Fargo property. In addition, Wells Fargo also has 1,256 enclosed spaces. They have a very large parking ramp there on the western side of their property and then they have a ramp underneath the building as well. Uh, and neither of those are ever at capacity. So the spaces here that are not shaded gray, so those are all those uh the bolded spaces on the eastern side of the property. That's 168 surface stalls that are proposed to be shared use. So during the day they would be used by uh Wells Fargo tower uh customers or employees or whoever. And in the evening they would be used by apartment residents. >> Mr. Muster, >> I may just ask a follow up on that. So, I guess where where I'm trying to go with this in my mind, if at some point in the future parking requirements change and these are no longer needed, could the applicant theoretically make a larger phase 2 get rid of some of that surface parking and and put up a larger building there? >> Yep. Chair, Commissioner Monster, uh theoretically if parking requirements were to be reduced, they could do that. Again, that would just it would all come down to what the requirements would be, what the council would decide on. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Johnson. Anything to add? >> Yeah, Chair Cook, and thank you, Commissioner Munster. I think the overhead transmission line is going to be the bigger challenge than um uh compliance with the city's off- streetet parking requirements in this case, but I appreciate the um idea there for sure. >> Commissioner White, >> thank you, Chair. Um, this isn't necessarily specific to this application, but I'm just curious, what is currently, when you say 60% of the AMI for affordable housing, what is that right now, if you do happen to know, like what would that actually come out to in terms of a dollar amount? >> Uh, Chair Cooked and Commissioner White, I think I'll defer to Planning Manager Johnson on that one. >> I hear Mr. Johnson furiously clicking and typing here. Perhaps we'll give him another minute and uh get back to your question if that's okay. >> Thank you. Yes. >> Commissioner Len, you had a question. >> I think Commissioner Summers might know the answer. >> Okay, Commissioner Summers. >> Um this requested information is on page 92 of the packet. >> We'll jump to Commissioner Lite. >> Oh. Oh god, I just forgot what I was going to Oh, I know what it was. Um, thank you, chair. Um, my question is not specifically related to this, but on this overhead power line, which it sounds like it's a real obstacle for development. Uh, I also know this is an area where there's a shocking amount of construction going on right now. Uh, is there a reason why or a plan for somehow putting it underground at some point or is that just an impossibility and is something that the city will likely always have to work around? Thank you, >> Chair Cook and Commissioner Len. I know that this is again it is an issue with especially Southtown and then a lot of these properties along the north side of American Boulevard. I don't know of any plans by XL to move the line at all. I know I can defer to planning manager Johnson again if he has any more background, but I've to my knowledge there's not a lot of movement with the power company on any form of modifications to it. >> I see Julie Long coming forward, power line expert. not a power line expert by any stretch of the imagination. Um, Mr. Chair, um, planning commission, one of my very first projects when I started at the city 23 years ago was looking at undergrounding that Excel power line and it was $1.5 million for each pole at that time and didn't include all the transmission lines between poleto pole. Um, so council at that time decided it was cost prohibitive and so it it remains in its current location and I believe it will be there for its foreseeable future. >> Thank you, Miss Long. Commissioner, I know you're not going to believe this. My first job was designing high voltage power lines. And one one thing I can tell you is that even if you bury it, you still can't build on top of it. And so burying a a transmission line is great for aesthetics, but it doesn't help with development because they still need a maintenance easement for it or whatever. And so uh yeah, you still can't build on top of it even if it's buried. Commissioner White, >> thank you, Chair. Uh, so since we seem to have some we do seem to have some power line transmission experts at the table, I'm just curious um whether there's been any updates to the science regarding potential health risks for living too close to transmission lines um be they buried or above ground. >> Commissioner White, I don't have any uh update on that. >> Thank you. >> Uh Mr. Johnson, I believe you've found the answer to 60% AMI. >> Yeah, thank you Chair Cookton. So, just to confirm, as of the uh last year's affordability limits, a rent um uh at a 60% at for an efficiency would be $1389 for a one-bedroom, $1,489 and a two-bedroom, $1,788 per month. >> Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Other questions for staff? Commissioner Summers, >> is not true who this question is for. Is this part of American Boulevard? Part of the um study that we're doing to change American Boulevard? >> Uh Chair Cookton, Commissioner Summers, yes, I believe this is the western end of that study. I believe that parts of the BRT study run through this area as well, or some of the uh some of the options run along Xerxes Avenue. Uh there are bus services in this area already. I believe it's the 538, the 542, and the 686. So this uh development would support more density along those transit lines and would support uh one more uh more ridership for a potential potential BRT line and more potential to redevelop that American Boulevard corridor. >> Commissioner Summers. >> Thank you, Chair. The um what is the wall height by the pool on the outer side by the sidewalk? Chair Cook and Commissioner Summers, I believe it is, I want to say it's eight feet tall at its highest point, >> please. >> Um, is are the So, I'm looking at a picture of this building that I think is from the American Boulevard side. Is that also in your presentation? I think. Yeah. Are those trees something that could be changed in the application before between now and when the building is built? >> Uh, Chair Cook and Commissioner Summers, yes, that can change uh prior to the building permit submitt, we can look at uh altering the landscape plan. They there is a condition uh because the trees located inside of the courtyard, the exact species haven't been picked out yet. uh so that prior to building permit we can look at changing the species or the applicant can certainly work with us on uh changing the landscaping if necessary. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions for staff? >> Thank you, Mr. Palmer. I believe the applicant is here. We welcome you to step forward and tell us about your application. >> Yes. Good evening, uh commission commissioners. My name is Joe McWain. I'm a development manager and I'm an architect for Chase real estate and I've been doing multif family housing like this uh all my last 20 years or so. Um uh first I'd like to say that I'm excited to be here because I've been looking at this site for almost 5 years. Um Glenn Murkagard uh previously reached out to our office to look at this site um at that time when the current um the Wells Fargo tower was sold to Prime Financial, the current buyer about five or six years ago. And at that time um I think everybody in the city, at least the city planner at the time, always has seen this as an empty parking lot and wanted to see development there. So we have been looking at this for a long time. Um it's just not until now that uh the current owners have understood that they don't need all the parking and that um now they're reinvesting into their office users and looking at the long term of how to invest in their office tower. Um and so we've been working with Prime since last fall on our proposal and we've been working with um the Bloomington team here with the city um since last fall as well. Um about our team real quick is um Chase Real Estate in Stonebridge. We are a builder, owner, developer, all in one house. We also manage our properties. We're a small company. We do about one project a year. Um, we own them long term. So, we're very interested in the long-term uh materials and the the design, the character of these properties. Um, we own about 3,000 apartments in mostly in the south metro, a lot of stuff in St. Paul and a few hundred of those do have the affordable housing uh mixed mix in those apartment properties. So our team does know how to manage uh that part of the um the property. Um we also looked at um we have a new architect design team with this one. They're called collage architects. They do beautiful design. Um so I'm thrilled to have a new team uh be part of this property. Um, it's such a important intersection to us at at this intersection at um, Xerxes and American Boulevard. Um, so we're really looking for a timeless, intentional, long-term material um, durable materials um, building. Um, it is a significant investment in property uh, project for our office. Um, and I think it's something that we're our team's going to be certainly proud of and I'd like to have the city uh, see it to be proud of as well. Um it is all fully privately funded. Um we're not asking for any government assistance which is quite common with affordable housing. We are meeting all city um guidance and city code. Um so I'm here to I take questions better than I do present. So I'd love to take your questions. I do want to note that um I wish [snorts] all cities worked as um efficiently and as effectively as this city. It's been a pleasure to work with Michael and Dylan um and Brian back there and you Nick um in probably the largest city we've worked in. Most of our stuff is south of the river. So um to have all the stuff you have guys have going on very very quick so we know what we can do and not do. So very happy to be here and I can take your questions. >> Thank you [snorts] Mr. Mcwin. Any questions for the applicant? Commissioner Isa. >> Thank you chair. Uh, I know you said you've been looking at the area for 5 years and you also mentioned that it's a really important intersection for you guys. So, I'm just curious. >> Mhm. >> Why essentially? >> Why is it >> curiosity? Yeah. Why is it important and kind of the >> Well, it's it's on a I mean, it's one, it's close to a lot of jobs, which is a draw. Best Buy headquarters a lot. Um, you're also right across the street from all of the amenities that Adina has in Southdale. American Boulevard is a prominent road right through the what do we call the intersection of where 394 and all bends that I think it's the artery of the city really. Um there's so much activity in American Boulevard. Um and I've been trying to be in the city of Bloomington for several years. We tried your Highland Park Golf Course several years ago. Um that's why we're here. Um and I think the connectivity right off the interstate. So location, location, location, that's important. happened to be an empty parking lot. It all the things kind of squared together. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions for the applicant? Commissioner Cunningham. >> Uh thank you, Chair. Um you mentioned, uh you this is fully privately funded. So, um Chase is not planning on requesting a tiff note or some sort of other city funded vehicle for the financing. >> Correct. No, all privately financed. No government assistance. Thank you. >> Any other questions for the applicant? >> I could clarify some of those other questions you had. Um the surface parking um most of that the 170 stalls will really be for our residents. It's really our agreement with Prime and Wells Fargo is really for overflow parking. Um it's just when you're an owner of an office building, you like to have metrics. 3.8 stalls per thousand square ft. They're about 50% parked and so they just want the math equation. So some year and 10 years from now if they ever sell the property they can say hey we got these these stalls too. So it's really overflow. Um the wall height by the retaining wall is about 6 feet tall. And we're going to continue to work on that landscaping design and work on those trees. The architect probably didn't think about what the uh the exact trees were in that rendering. Um, and that's all we have. >> Great. Thank you, Mr. McWain. If you could make sure you sign in for us there on the sheet is appreciated. >> Okay. This is a public hearing which I will now open and ask if there's anyone here in the chambers who wishes to testify on this item. >> Good evening. >> I don't want to disturb your stuff. All good. >> All right. >> Uh, hello chair and planning commission. My name is Robert Coleman. Um, I think that this is a slam dunk project. uh after years that we've heard from applicants that you know you need TIFF to get anything done that you need TIFF for a big box store that we've really seen in the last few projects on American Boulevard that it is possible to do it without TIFF or even uh if uh dump notwithstanding right um that I think that uh this the uh PD flexibilities are quite minor um if you actually look at the uh how it looks from the street. It looks much more like an urban character that we would expect from American Boulevard than what the setbacks would that if it were h have to abide by the setbacks that are strictly written into the code that it would look significantly different and not like what uh American Boulevard deserves. So uh I urge you to approve this project. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Coen. Good evening. >> Hi. Uh, my name is Karen Thomas and I actually live directly across the street from this um on the corner of Xerxes and American Avenue in the summer hill condominiums. Um, and I I I think this area does need a little bit of revitalization. It's a fantastic area. I moved there eight years ago. I own my condo and it is it can't be beat for location um accessibility to pretty much everything. I work at the Mall of America straight down the road. I never even leave Bloomington. Everything I need is here. Um the one thing that I do have a concern, actually there's two things I have a concern about. Um, one is that the what the parking um, to be honest, there is a coffee shop in the Wells Fargo Tower um, on the first floor and there's also a tailor in there. So, there are actually local businesses in there and when you go over there to actually use those businesses, the parking, it's full. Like, you have to park in that big parking lot and walk all the way over. So, I'm not sure about if there's actually as much parking as they say that there is. Um, the other concern that I have or just question because I don't know anything about the um study of American Boulevard is just that when people are coming from Xerxes Avenue onto American Boulevard or out of the Wells Fargo tower onto American Boulevard, there can be a lot of traffic there right at the peak hours and it can get backed up from the stoplight at York Avenue all the way past that entrance. And I know there's a couple of other entrances to that parking lot. Um, but it would just be something to consider if there's going to be even more people whipping in and out of there um at that little sort of halfway between the two stop lightss. Um, because there's not a lot of traffic control right there. That would just be my my concern. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Thomas. >> Miss Brown, is there anyone online who wishes to testify for this item? Participants online consists of one staff member and two applicants for item three and one participant of the name of Paige. Oh god. We will make Paige available to testify. Uh you may now unmute yourself if you wish to testify on this item. Not seeing that occurring. >> Sorry, >> Paige. Do you have us? >> Oh, they muted themselves. >> I believe they've muted themselves. So perhaps just a super fan online of the planning commission. Okay. Seeing no one else ready to testify, would look for a motion to close the public hearing. >> So moved. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. >> That motion passes. 70. We'll move to discussion. Um Mr. Palmer, if I could follow up on one thing. Did this application trigger a traffic study? >> Uh Chair Cook didn't know it did not. So, when that is the case, how do we like how do we reassure the public that a new development isn't going to cause traffic problems? Are there thresholds a project needs to meet that do trigger a traffic study and this falls below that or how is that decision made? >> Uh, Chair Cookton, I think I will defer that to Brian Hansen if he's able to come up and address that. >> Very well. >> Uh, thank you, [clears throat] Mr. Chair. Yeah. So the traffic engineer will review reviews all development applications such as this one um based on the adjacent uh roadway network uh the trips uh estimated trips that would be generated from this development which are approximately 1,200 trips per day additional trips. Um one thing I will note too is the application does show the removal of a exit only onto Xerxes Avenue right now which currently exists. So that would go away. So, um, the access points would be to Southtown on the north side there, West 79th Street, I believe, or 78th, 78th or 79th and North, and then American to the south. So, we do have adequate capacity within the roadway system there. Um, there are protected left turn lanes for entering um into uh the development off of American Boulevard as well. So, uh, based on the analysis from our traffic engineer, he did not determine that additional traffic would be needed at this time for this application. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Hansen. Commissioner Lenai. >> Thank you, Chair. And this might actually be a question again for Mr. Hansen. Um, in a case like this, is the city of Edina notified also because recognizing that this gets very very close to the intersections that they have on the other side of 494 and the traffic that would come down the increased traffic likely to come down Xerxes Avenue. Thanks, >> Chair Cook. Commissioner Len, the city of Vina was not notified. However, Henipin County was notified. So Xerxes Avenue is a Henipin County road and uh their only comments were uh speaking to the removal of the well the entrance in it's an exit off of Xerxes Avenue that's being removed now and then uh just concerns about storm water which were addressed in the plan. >> Mr. Johnson, that's something we talked about years ago when we have an application that's close to one of our neighboring cities whether they're notified. Can you remind me how that works? Chair Cookton. Uh that typically is a requirement for comprehensive plan amendments. Um so affected uh adjacent jurisdiction review is a a required component under uh met council and state law for comprehensive plan amendments. There's no comp plan amendment associated with this application. >> Okay. >> Commissioner Isa. >> Thank you chair. Um, I think it was Robert that said that uh kind of bringing the this the setback requirement being removed is is a good thing in this. It looks good too on American Boulevard. I definitely agree with that. Um, I live well I own a home pretty close to here and so um, yeah, it's it's it's good to see a development like this come to this area and I think it was really cool to also see the affordable component without any in uh, incentive to do it. So I I think I I respect that a lot. So >> thank you Commissioner White. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yeah, I think this is a great use of the space. I'm sad to see the most convenient cash machine near me with a drive up go away, but uh I think it's a small price to pay for um for this kind of housing and development in what is almost always an empty parking lot as I'm in and out of there more frequently than I care to admit. Um so, um I think this is looks like a strong project. I appreciate um the the thought put into it and I think it's it's a good fit for that area and that neighborhood. Thank you, Commissioner White. I too am in support of this. It's great to see an unused or undeveloped uh lot turn into uh higher density. I think it's terrific. It's a great location. I mean, really, really good highway adjacent location and I I do like that a lot. In regards to the parking, I am comfortable with the shared parking agreement. I think that's great from a sustainability perspective as we try to reduce the amount of parking we're building all the time around here. And I also think I expect enough uh teamwork from from the office tower. They're just as interested in providing um convenient parking to either the businesses or things as as anyone. They want to protect that. And so I I'm not too worried about it. And I really like the creativity of sharing the parking as opposed to just building more parking that's going to sit empty. So, uh I am in favor of this application. Commissioner Summers, >> I am in favor of this application. This um little area does in many ways feel right now like a tower on a gigantic parking lot. Um that moving some of the parking underground underneath um this building makes sense. Then also if we are looking to create neighborhoods, creating the space for um people to live in the neighborhood makes it walkable because they will be there. Um I asked a couple of questions about American Boulevard changes and wall height just um because I want to caution against trying to create walkable neighborhoods with big walls next to the sidewalk. I feel really comfortable um with the easements that we're doing here. And just bringing up that um if we're urbanizing, it is nicer to see amenities that can be shared um on um the street, but it doesn't make sense necessarily for American Boulevard. So being really careful as the city and the applicant are navigating what that wall looks like and how close it is to the sidewalk, especially if the sidewalk is going to change shape um at some point in the following years. So that um what we are doing is being mindful of the people who are going to live in this neighborhood and that they're living in a place where they really want to walk um with their family or bike to work. >> Thank you. Any other thoughts on this application? Not I would entertain a motion. Commissioner White, [snorts] >> I move to recommend adoption of ordinance number 2026, an ordinance reszoning 7900 Xerxes Avenue South and 3,400 American Boulevard West from CO-1 PD commercial office plan development to C-4 PD freeway office plan development. And as a matter of clarification, that's 2026-61. >> Thank you. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Have a motion and a second to recommend adoption of this ordinance for reszoning. >> Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. That motion passes 70. Commissioner White, >> I move to recommend approval of a two-phase preliminary development plan for two phases of residential development with a 360 total units at 7900 Xerxes Avenue South and 3,400 American Boulevard West and final development plans for a six-story 270 unit multifamily residential building located at 7900 Xerxes Avenue South subject to the conditions and code requirements attached to the staff report. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second to recommend approval of the motion. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed? That motion passes 70. This will be a public hearing before the city council on June 1st. Thank you very much. >> Uh, Commissioner Cunningham. >> Um, I'll be recusing myself from item three due to a conflict of interest. Thank you very much. Okay, we will then move to item number three, which is Southtown sign variances. And Miss Liz OD has a staff report for us. >> Yes. Thank you, chair and commissioners. Uh the next item on the agenda is for a pair of uh variances for a proposed freestanding sign located at Southtown. [snorts] So I think we're all familiar with where um Southtown is, but if not, uh Southtown development is located um on Penn Avenue between American Boulevard and 494. Uh it's zoned C3 and it's in our uh class 3 sign district. So here's an image of the existing freestanding sign image taken this morning. Um as you can see from the image, there's um a lot of changes um that have occurred uh on site recently um with the uh 494 project that we all know about and love. Um and then the um demolition of the former Toys R Us and construction or soon to be construction of the Dicks House of Sport um is also um proposed to be located just behind um the sign there. Um so with that um construction the uh existing sign needs to be reconstructed and um moved um in order to not conflict with um that construction of the Dicks House of Sports. [snorts] So um with that there are um Krauss Anderson is requesting a setback variance. The code required setback is 20 ft from a property line along a street which is 494. Uh what they're proposing is 10 feet. Um and the reasons for um this is um in not uh being able to comply with um the 20 foot setback for reasons like uh moving it further east would conflict with future um phases of Southtown and then moving it further uh west would be um blocked by the existing Kohl's building. And so they um have landed on the proposed um location here in red. So moving from this um kind of area in uh blue, which is where kind of some of the um truck loading would be for the Dicks House of Sport over to kind of the um northeast corner of the um Dicks House of Sport at a 10-ft setback. Um, and so what you can see on the right hand side of the screen is um, an existing image showing the walls um, as part of the 494 project. Um, in the red circle or square, excuse me, you can see the um, kind of where the existing sign is located. And then on the um, left side of the screen, you can see where the proposed um, sign location would be. Um obviously the the existing um sign location is not visible behind the walls. So uh moving it closer um to the property line at a 10-ft setback um is reasonable. And then they're also requesting a sign area variance. What's required is 200 square feet. That was recently changed as part of a uh a kind of big overhaul of our sign code. Um, so that was changed to 200 square feet. Um, and what they're uh showing for the existing sign is 247 square ft and what they're proposing is 245 square ft. So not um a big change from what's um currently um exists for this sign area. So um with variances we have to meet um certain state statute findings. Um the proposed location maximizes future site redevelopment um and future phases as well as provides um freeway visibility for a large um kind of regional commercial center. And then also the 494 construction has made um kind of a big impact on their sign visibility. And then lastly the proposed sign is similar in scale and size to the existing sign. Um so with that pretty short presentation um uh variance is now our final decision by the planning commission. Um Bill Griffith um is here in the audience as well as some representatives from Krauss Anderson are online as well. >> Thank you Miss ODay. Uh we'll start with questions for staff and I have a question. So this new sign would that also be legally non-conforming or is that then a permitted sign? Uh, chair, it would be a permitted sign. The Yeah. Right. Sorry. I'll let someone else answer. >> Are you talking about the the proposed sign, right? >> Correct. >> Well, variance negates the need for like any nonconformity analysis. It's a specific permission to deviate from city code. So, it gets recorded on the property and and runs with the property. >> So, it's okay. I understand. >> Other questions for Steph? Commissioner Lenny. >> Um, would the sign be for would it also be the sign for Dixs or does Dix would they have another sign coming in with their completion? >> Uh, chair, commissioner, uh, they would likely incorporate their message on the um, proposed sign. They wouldn't have like an additional freestanding sign. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any other questions for staff? Seeing none, I'll invite the applicant to come forward. Good evening, Mr. Griffith. >> Good evening, Mr. Chair. Uh, commissioners, Bill Griffith representing Krauss Anderson. Online are Paige Ellson and Otter Williams, the general counsel. And I believe, uh, Mr. Rick Ferraro is also online from Spectrum. So, if there are technical questions that I can't answer, we have a whole crew of folks who can hopefully answer your questions. Uh, thank you um to staff for presenting the staff report. Uh we actually worked with staff uh in a couple of meetings uh kind of fine-tuning the location. We wanted to make sure it was outside of the drainage and utility easements. We wanted to make sure there weren't other locations that that would work better. And ultimately uh reached agreement and consensus that this was the best location uh to relocate and replace this sign. Uh this is uh one of those cases where I'm very comfortable saying there are unique circumstances. uh I don't have to to work hard to get there, at least from my my vantage point. Uh because of the construction and I've and I drive through that all the time. So, uh one of my favorite projects, it's been coming for about 20 years. Uh but because of the construction of those 20 foot walls, it really does necessitate um a kind of fine-tuning of th that location. And I I I recall when uh similar ramps were built around Mall of America, the uh Marriott Hotel had a very interesting presentation kind of the before and after of how you could see that hotel and see that signage and then you have to try and figure out, you know, in between all the ramps and and construction. Very similar to that case which was approved so many years ago. uh this case, you know, once we have freeway construction and all of the visibility constraints that go with that, uh you really do have a difficult case and a unique case u although obviously history has has provided some examples. I think one of the things that's really uh apparent and again uh planner OD pointed this out is that if we had in a typical setting if we had a compliance sign that sign might be 30 to 40 feet away from the roadway and very visible. In this case, even in this location, it's still 90 feet um from the roadway. And part of uh the the purpose of signage is to provide wayfinding. People want to find Southtown. Uh people want to get to Southtown and they want to be able to know that they're they're headed in the right direction. Um and and as uh as was answered, those tenant panels, so you see Southtown at the top of that sign, those tenant panels are in fact for all of the tenants. uh the major tenants, I shouldn't say there's not enough for all of the tenants in Southtown, but the major tenants like Dick's House of Sports would be on uh on that pylon sign. Um there's no impact on neighbors, right? Because the the neighbors are uh the freeway. The neighbor the neighbor is the freeway and and those using the freeway. And so there really there there really isn't any kind of detrimental impact to neighbors. And and for the traveling public, it's very much like the existing sign. So for the somebody driving by will hardly notice the difference other than it may well we would hope that it would be more visible. That is in fact the reason for the variance. Um so that's really it. I think um Krauss Anderson's very excited about this phase of the redevelopment. It's it's not the whole thing but it's the next thing and it's very exciting to see it come together. Maybe a little bit of inside baseball is uh I don't think anybody, not even myself, appreciates when you're working on a center like this that has existing cross easements and rights of anchors, how how much work goes into satisfying everybody that that we don't see here tonight. And so they've worked very very hard first with their anchors, then in discussions with city staff to get to kind of get it right. And so this is um the next thing that's needed to start that project. I believe the project will get underway shortly. Um and we're all excited to see that happen. So thanks again to staff for their very uh thorough analysis. Uh also for working with us to find the right location. Appreciate your help and approval tonight. Uh hopefully. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Griffith. Any questions for the applicant? >> Uh Commissioner Isa. >> Uh thank you, Chair. Uh so you said uh so I guess it's more of a I guess specific question in regards to the sign. >> Uh you said it's more not more of it's a wayfinding uh signage, right? Directions if you're driving by >> uh would you say it's more of that or more of an advertisement or how would you weigh the two? Like if you to compare the two? Just curious. >> Uh m Mr. Chair, Commissioner, I I think staff would probably uh beg to differ that, you know, wavefinding signs are often at key intersections and direct people to make a left or make a right. This is a commercial sign. It's trying to get people to the business. But one of the one of the effects of this type of signage is to provide wayfinding and and so it's not exclusively wayfinding, but that is certainly a public purpose behind this signage. It's also a commercial sign. It's it's to help generate business to get people to Southtown. Uh Southtown is under, you know, under redevelopment. We want to make sure people know that Southtown is open for business and and I was I just drove through there tonight and, you know, there were a lot of folks uh at Southtown, but you you want to make sure that it looks like business is going on uh behind the scenes and behind the redevelopment. So, it's it's really bold. To answer your question, >> definitely. Uh follow-up question, >> please. I'm definitely in support of the the this overall. Uh my second question is as far as timing of when the sign would be placed, would it be right when it's completed? I would assume, but um yeah, right when the actual facility is completed. >> So those online can correct me if I misstate this, but it's my understanding it it has to move because it's in the way of the project. So it's the next thing to happen, and that's why this request is fairly urgent. Uh because the sign needs to move to so they can allow the uh start of construction for the anchor >> for the new sign. >> Correct. The the old sign needs to uh I I believe the old sign needs to come down first. Yeah. >> The new sign goes up and then uh Dick's House of Sports will get underway. >> Okay. Y >> Any other questions for the applicant? >> Seeing none. Thank you, Mr. Griffith. If you could sign in for us, please. We'll do. >> I'll open the public hearing now and ask if there's anyone in the chambers who wishes to testify on this item. Seeing no one coming forward, Miss Brown, is there anyone online who wishes to testify? Participants online consist of one staff member and two of the app plans. >> Great. Final call for anyone who wishes to testify in the chambers on this item. Seeing no one stepping forward, I'll look for a motion to close the public hearing. >> Mr. White, is there a second? >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. That motion passes 60. We'll move into discussion. I think I will get us started here. Um, I gave this more thought than you might expect. Uh to me there's two parts of this application. There's a requested variance for uh the amount of square footage on the sign and then there's the variance request for the location of the sign. So I'll take them one by one. Um you know to me the the plight here is that the highways come through and you can't see the sign anymore. Not disagreeing with that. And I think it's worthy of making the applicant whole, you know. Uh so in terms of square footage, I think it's a very reasonable argument to say, "Hey, we've got this sign today, this size sign today. We're just looking to replace that with the same size sign we already have. It's not our fault that MDOT came through and put a highway here." Very reasonable. I think making them whole on that is okay. Where I start to struggle is on the setback. So they are not um they are not they're in compliance with their setback today. they're well away from the street and now they're asking for not to be 20 ft from the road but 10 ft from the road. So the request is not to be made whole but the request is to be made more than whole. And so then you start to look at well why is that and are there other opportunities? And as it's been noted a few times both in the staff report and in the applicant's uh presentation that this is the best spot for the sign because of future development. Uh well that future development is of their own choice both at Dicks House of Sports and whatever is going to go east of here. And so are we going to grant a variance because of something else the applicant wants to do? That's not grounds for something that we've granted a variance for before. If this was a new like if this was an open site and they were putting a new building there, I don't think we would I'm speaking out of term perhaps, but I don't think we would grant that variance if this was a a brand new set of construction. It and so I'm not sure the rules are different because it's existing because where else the sign could go, uh they're saying they want to put other things there. And so I'm not sure I can support the the the 20T to 10 feet because I think that's making them more than whole. And I think there are other opportunities to put a sign at at 20 ft. And it's not Mindot adding the highway there does not force them to have the sign closer to the street. The highway is not going through their property. You know that that to me is when you grant a variance is that if there's something that someone else did to you and you need to be made whole, then we'll grant you a variance. But this is not making them whole. This is making them more than whole. And I'm uncomfortable setting a precedent of going even closer to the street. And I think for me it does have to do a bit with character. Um that sign's going to be, you know, recognizing it's still reasonably far away from the road, but it's much closer than it is today. And that's going to be a very visible sign off of the highway. And that's not really something we allow anymore. We don't allow billboards in the city anymore. We have sign requirements for a reason. When Bloomington Subaru came through here and put a new development on the highway, we gave them a lot of a pain about how they were going to do that signage on the side of their building. And we were pretty firm with them about what that mural can look like, how big your sign can be, all of that stuff. And we've been pretty firm on our new signage stuff. And that's why we went through this whole effort recently over the last couple years about signage is to get this stuff right and have a clear set of rules for what people have to follow. And so again, MDOT coming through here and reducing their visibility. Totally buy it. And making them whole by giving them the same size sign, I'm here for it. But to me, this is making them more than whole. And I can't support going closer than the 20 ft code requirement. Commissioner Lick. >> Um I'm gonna uh gently disagree with you on this. Um I think given the very unique aspect of the Southtown uh space and some of the challenges that the applicant uh referenced related to how things are currently laid out. Um and the fact that 494 is coming in. I think I feel pretty I feel differently if it was almost anywhere other than 494, but I feel like there's so little character and control over the character of 494 that in a case like this, I would be willing to give the applicant the benefit of the doubt. Um, [clears throat] particularly considering there is in all likelihood a chance 20 years from now that there'll be some other change to this exact configuration of roadway and whatnot. So I'm not convinced that this is like permanent permanent when you look at all the redevelopment and changes that have happened on that site even in the last 25 years. So I personally I'm comfortable approving um the application as as currently presented. >> Thank you Commissioner Day. Commissioner must thank you Mr. Chair. Mr. Day, can you go back to the slide with the little rectangles on the interstate little There we go. Um, okay. So, this picture, the the right picture is is why I somewhat disagree with you, Mr. Chair. I think certainly on the the square footage of the sign, absolutely. That that's just sort of like for like and scooting it over fine. Um, I guess where my mind is is if the sign gets put on the site where it should be or or further into the site, then we're back where that wall is essentially blocking the visibility of it or it has to go higher to get above that sight line. Um, you know, I I that is what leads me to to be okay with that 10- foot setback. Um, because the closer it gets to the street, the shorter the sign can be overall. and and still be visible. >> Thank you, Commissioner Monster. >> Commissioner Isa, >> um I had a question for staff also. Can I ask please? >> Okay. Um it's more of a technical question. So, if hypothetically if the uh property owner wanted to make a change the sign temporarily, is that allowed or they would have to stick with exactly what is on there or approved to be on there? >> Uh, chair, commissioners, we have um like face changes all the time like through a signed permit. If someone wants to just change like the if Dick's House of Sport leaves and another tenant comes in, they can apply for a sign permit to change the um [snorts] the um identification on the sign. That happens all the time. Is that what your question? Okay. >> Thank you. Uh I want to follow up with my kind of thoughts so far. >> Um I understand actually where both you chair are coming from. Um, and I agree that we should be we should we should keep consistency from [snorts] uh past applications and and and then I also understand especially with what you said, Commissioner Monster, about uh if it were to be pushed back that it could that it probably would uh lessen the vis visibility. Um, and so I'm just curious as to what other people think and I'll make my final decision then. Thank Thank you, Commissioner Isa. >> If I could for a second, chair and commissioners, if you mind, >> please. >> So, what we're looking at is practical difficulties. So, that's a it's a term of art used in statute is what you apply to look at when you grant a signed variance or a land use variance. Okay. So, there's three aspects to that. So, the first one is the property owner is proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner, not permitted by the zoning ordinance or the sign code. apply to land owner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the land owner and the variance if granted will not alter the essential character of the locality. So you know that when you do have practical diff difficulties the touchstone is reasonleness. So given all the circumstances what the site is what the site does what it is in the community all those things come into play the type of land use it is um you kind of put yourself in the shoes of that site and look at it that way. So just to add some color to what the uh what the law says on variances. So >> thank you Mr. Tosski. Commissioner Wait. >> Thank you Mr. Chair. So, I just want to make sure that I understand that looking at this diagram, if we didn't grant a variance, essentially they could move the sign over to the east, but it would have to be back at the level of basically these two truck loading, the the center truck loading where that green line begins. So, it would essentially be over where it currently says utility easement on the the little chart roughly. Is that correct? uh chair. I wish I had a like a zoomed in picture. This is seems a little farther away. So this orange line is the Oh my gosh, I can't even >> is the 10 foot. Okay, it does work if I zoom in. Okay. Um so yeah, the orange line is the 10 foot setback line. Uh the 20 foot setback isn't marked on this plan, but I imagine it's somewhere here. And then you have to have enough space. It's from the leading edge of the sign. Um, if that makes sense. So, if they were to, they would have to shift around this curb line um and redesign kind of their truck um loading in order to comply with the 20 foot setback. >> Okay. >> Commissioner White, the way I see it is that's a 12 foot tall or wide sign, right? So, the north face would be sort of where the bottom of that red square is. Mhm. Yeah. [snorts] >> Thank you, >> Commissioner Summers. >> Thank you, Chair. I think that when I um look at the staff report and the findings of the staff, I agree with their assessment of reasonleness. Um I am aware that there are um is a lot of work that goes into all of the codes for everything and um Southtown is an area where there's a lot of businesses. So people being able I know that it's wayfinding and advertisement but people being able to get to businesses brings money into Bloomington. people spending money and if they get into that area, there's more businesses to find. So, um I also agree with the applicant that this is wayfinding and assists these businesses and thriving here and that's um I think good for all of Bloomington. I think um when I look at this site and I look at the pictures of where the sign would be, it makes sense for it to be more visible than less visible. And because the sign itself is not um LED flashing or um so large as to be distracting for drivers, it makes sense to me that it would be where it is. Um, [clears throat] but I think more so than having any of um my own feelings involved, the staff I think have laid out that there is reasonleness to the changes to the um size of this and where it lines up on the property. >> Thank you, Commissioner Summers. Commissioner Isa, >> another quick question. So on I'm trying to I'm really analyzing this image here. And so we agreed that the new sign would be roughly in line with the black line on the right side, right? >> Oh, that's new sign. But then the existing one is way south. >> It's on the other side. So is that already 20 feet or is it more than 20 feet back? >> It's 69.7 feet from the property line. >> Okay. Okay, I see. Thank you, >> Commissioner White. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I I share concerns about unending signs along the the road. Um, even even though it's 494. Um, but I do think that in this particular case, I'm reluctantly okay with it. Um, I think, you know, some part of me questions like, okay, we're giving you just as big a sign, but it's 40 feet, 50 feet closer to the road than it used to be. Um, you know, I how much is this going to feel like it's towering? Is it going to feel billboardy? Um, I do share those concerns with you, Mr. Chair. Um, but I think again given the sort of unique characteristics of the this this little stretch of the corridor, um, I [clears throat] guess I'm I'm reluctantly prepared to to deal with it based on the advice we've been given about, you know, variances and and meeting qualifications for those. >> Thank you, Commissioner White. >> Any additional thoughts on this application? If not, I would entertain a motion. >> Commissioner Lenny. Uh having been having been able to make the required findings, I move to adopt a resolution adopting approving variances to reduce the setback from 20 ft to 10 ft and to increase the sign area from 200 square ft to 245 square ft for a freestanding sign located along Interstate 494 within the Southtown Shopping Center subject to the conditions and code requirements listed in the resolution. >> Is there a second? >> Second. We have a motion and a second to adopt a resolution approving these two variances. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed? No. This motion passes 51. This is a final decision of the planning commission. There is an appeal deadline of May 12th, 2026 at 4:30 p.m. Thank you very much. We will invite Commissioner Cunningham back into the chambers. and move on to item number four, which is the consideration of four draft meeting synopsis. And we will begin with the planning retreat that was held on Feb February 2nd, 2026. That was an untelvised uh meeting of the planning commission. So I will look for a motion approving those minutes. We have uh Commissioner White. >> I move approval of the meeting synopsis from February 2nd, 2026 planning retreat uh as printed. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second for the planning commission retreat mini meeting minutes from February 2nd. All those in favor say I. >> I opposed. That motion passes 70. We'll move to March 10th. Commissioner Cunningham was absent. I'll look for Commissioner Lang. >> Uh I move that we approve the March 10th, 2026 concurrent meeting synopsis with the city council, Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Planning Commission, Sustainability, and Port Authority. >> Is there a second? >> Second. I have a motion and a second for the joint meeting on March the 10th noting the absences of commissioners Cunningham and Issa. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Abstain. >> Abstain. >> That motion passes 50 with two abstinations. We'll move on to April 16th. >> Commissioner Cunningham. >> I move to adopt the planning commission meeting synopsis from April 16th, 2026 as written. >> Is there a second? Second. >> Have a motion and a second for April 16th planning commission meeting minutes. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Opposed. That motion passes 70. And we'll finish with April 23rd. Commissioner Cunningham. >> I move to adopt the planning commission meeting synopsis for April 23rd, 2026 as written. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Have a motion and a second for April the 23rd. All those in favor say I. I. Opposed. That motion passes 70. We'll move then to our final item, which is item number five, the City of Bloomington Planning Commission policies and issues update. Mr. Johnson. >> Thank you, Chair Cookton. I'll preview the next two meetings on May the 21st, 2026. There are four public hearings scheduled. Uh, one is for resoning at the Telegraph Hill Office Park uh from R1 PD to B1 PD at uh multiple addresses there on Telegraph. Second public hearing is a reguiding resoning and conditional use permit for an existing uh airport parking facility at 3700 and 3750 American Boulevard East. Uh the third public hearing is a reguiding reasonzoning and condition use permit for another existing remote airport parking facility at 7901 International Drive. Uh the fourth item is a city initiated uh ordinance on the corner lot standards. So the public hearing uh for that which has been before you at study session. Uh moving ahead to the June 4th uh 2026 meeting, we have two public hearings and one study item scheduled. The first public hearing is a conditional use permit for a type two home business, a dance school at 8924 Mount Curve Road. A public hearing for a conditional use permit for cannabis cultivation at 8200 Grand uh Avenue South. And then the study item on that meeting is uh an update um about the urban forest master plan. This is a project that is listed on the uh planning commission work plan is being led by parks and recreation staff uh in in consultation with Davy Tree. They've done a complete analysis of the city's uh urban canopy as well as right-of-way uh trees. It's some really interesting data um and some opportunities for the city that lays ahead that they'll uh present for you for your awareness. Um thinking about other updates coming ahead on uh we have two events scheduled for the launch of the Bloomington 2050 comprehensive plan. This is for community engagement for our comp plan. On May the 20th, there'll be a launch event at Bryant Park from 6:00 to 7:30 p.m. And then uh subsequently from that, there'll be an online event um on May the May 26th, sorry, at 6:00 to 7:30 p.m. These are uh designed to be kind of world cafe type formats of answering different engagement questions. And so we really are hoping to get a lot of community uh to participate and uh show up and um tell us what they love about Bloomington and what they want to see for its future. Um the other two updates I just want to provide quickly is that there was a groundbreaking for the NM Creek Corridor Renewal Project and uh Veterans Memorial uh yesterday at Moyer Park and uh that was a wonderful event to be at um uh previewing that. So that's uh fun to see. And then uh today was the ribbon cutting on the sik uh North American uh headquarters uh phase 2 uh project there in the South Loop. Um all the dignitaries from the sick company in Germany were in Bloomington today to celebrate that. So it was uh I'm sure there'll be a video about it coming out soon in the communications department. So just wanted to provide those updates. >> Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Uh this is an opportunity for planning commissioners to bring up anything that was not on the agenda this evening. Does anyone have any items they'd like to discuss? Commissioner Cunningham. >> Thank you, Chair. Uh gentle reminder, uh if you're seconding a motion, please uh you make sure the light is green. >> Uh Miss Brown reminded us last week and I've just seen, you know, just try to make it easier uh for recording the minutes. Thanks all. >> Thank you. Any other items for this evening? Seeing none, that concludes this May 7th meeting of the Bloomington Planning Commission. Good night.