The primary focus of the meeting was the proposed amendments to the city’s sign code, following its substantial revision in February 2024. The Planning Commission, along with city staff, revisited the code as part of a commitment to evaluate its effectiveness a year after its overhaul. Since the new policy’s implementation, 6,466 sign permits have been issued, revealing several issues and opportunities for improvement. The amendments were divided into two categories: cleanup items and sign policy updates.

Cleanup amendments included clarifying definitions and adding graphics to improve comprehension of building frontage measurements. These changes also adjusted references to the Public Works Director due to organizational restructuring. Notably, the amendments clarified the City Engineer’s authority regarding traffic safety requirements and defined building frontage more explicitly.

The sign policy updates introduced changes, such as recognizing roof integral signs, which were previously unrecognized. The amendment proposed allowing these roof signs in commercial, industrial, and mixed-use districts, with a maximum height of ten feet above the roof. This development followed discussions about building height proportionality. Additionally, the amendments prohibited signs on residential fences while allowing noncommercial speech signs and home business signs under specific conditions. Another amendment proposed increasing the allowable height for freestanding directional and incidental signs from eight to twelve feet to align with building standards.

A contentious point arose over increasing the number of building signs allowed on tall office buildings. Staff recommended raising the limit from one to possibly two or three signs per elevation, but consensus was not achieved, and this amendment was not included in the ordinance. Outreach efforts regarding these changes were discussed, including a letter from Clear Channel Outdoor requesting a reduction in electronic billboard dwell time from 20 seconds to eight seconds, a move the commission had to consider amidst broader community feedback.

Turning to the issue of office conversions, the commission addressed the rising office vacancy rates in Bloomington, which have increased from 12% in late 2019 to between 17% and 20%. This rise is attributed to the growing prevalence of remote work, leading businesses to downsize their physical offices. The commission examined strategies for converting these vacant offices into residential spaces, a topic of increasing relevance given the high vacancy rates in the Twin Cities region.

Discussion highlighted the potential benefits of office-to-residential conversions, such as revitalizing underutilized buildings and providing sustainable alternatives to demolition. However, challenges were identified, including the practical and legal complexities of converting office spaces, which often feature deep floor plates and outdated mechanical systems. Zoning limitations and parking requirements further complicate these conversions.

The commission explored successful conversion strategies from other cities, such as Minneapolis and St. Paul, which have implemented policy initiatives to incentivize conversions. These include streamlining approval processes and temporarily suspending affordable housing requirements within inclusionary zoning ordinances. Despite the appeal of office conversions, the commission expressed caution in committing resources to this initiative, highlighting the need to await legislative developments that could influence regulatory frameworks.

The meeting also touched on logistical and financial considerations for conversions, such as conducting surveys of office properties to evaluate their suitability for conversion and designating a staff member to oversee conversion inquiries. Financial incentives, including Tax Increment Financing (TIF) and fee waivers, were discussed as potential tools to encourage conversions. Concerns were raised about the feasibility of these incentives, particularly regarding the sufficiency of TIF to cover development costs and the impact of fee waivers on city revenue.