At the forefront of the meeting was the discussion on modifying odor mitigation standards and parking flexibility measures, both critical components of the Phase One Ordinance. The proposed change to odor mitigation standards suggested reducing the required separation distance from 250 feet to 150 feet, easing the burden on business owners who previously needed certification from a licensed engineer. Instead, the city building official would now approve odor mitigation systems, integrating the process into the standard building permit procedure without imposing additional fees. This adjustment reflects an effort to streamline business operations and reduce costs, acknowledging the practical challenges business owners face in meeting odor control requirements.

The commission also tackled parking flexibility measures, proposing to align approval authority with the entity responsible for the site plan. The ordinance introduced a seventh flexibility measure, allowing a 25% reduction in parking requirements for existing commercial and industrial buildings of 10,000 square feet or less. This measure aims to accommodate businesses that lack physical space for additional parking. Such changes are intended to support existing businesses by alleviating some of the parking regulations that can hinder growth and development.

The conversation then shifted to the proposed changes in exterior building materials, which generated debate among commissioners. The ordinance suggested allowing the painting or coating of certain primary materials, such as brick, which has been historically prohibited in Bloomington. The intention is to align the city’s exterior material ratio with other metro area cities, shifting from 85% primary materials to 65%, and increasing secondary materials to 35%. The proposal aimed to provide clarity and flexibility for business owners and architects. However, these changes sparked disagreements over potential impacts on neighborhood aesthetics and enforcement complexities.

Commissioners expressed varying opinions on the necessity and implications of these adjustments. Concerns were raised about the potential for lower-quality buildings and the perception that the changes would favor larger developers over small businesses. One commissioner argued that the variances for secondary materials often benefit big businesses more than small ones. Another commissioner questioned the cost-saving potential of using alternative materials, noting that if savings are minimal, the changes might not be justified.

The debate extended to differentiating between street-facing and non-street-facing facades regarding allowed materials, recognizing a common practice in many cities. However, no consensus was reached on implementing this differentiation in the current proposal.

One commissioner referenced a specific case where a small market struggled with parking requirements while attempting to add a café.

The commission also addressed proposed amendments to architectural concrete and metal panel systems definitions to align with modern construction trends. These changes aim to clarify allowable materials, emphasizing the versatility of concrete panels and cast-in-place concrete, which can mimic various textures, including brick. Additionally, the proposal sought to clarify the use of insulated, composite, and single skin metal panels.

A public hearing opened without any public testimony, leading to a motion to close the hearing, which passed unopposed. The commission engaged in further discussions, debating whether to recommend the City Council adopt the ordinance with or without the contentious exterior materials components. The initial motion did not pass, but a subsequent motion that included more elements of the ordinance, while excluding the controversial aspects, passed with a 6 to 1 vote. This decision allowed the ordinance to progress.

The meeting concluded with the approval of a draft synopsis from a previous session and updates on upcoming meetings, including discussions on sign code revisions and a pedestrian bridge study. As the session ended, a commissioner raised concerns about traffic safety, particularly regarding the lack of stop signs on neighborhood streets. The discussion about traffic engineering principles revealed that an overabundance of stop signs could potentially lead to safety issues, prompting a recommendation for drivers to prioritize slowing down and yielding.