Planning Commission will come to order, please. We don't have any minutes at this time, so I'll invite postponements and withdrawals. Any postponements or withdrawals? Shit. On page four. Tony, you wanna tell them who you are? I'm Tony Barrett, Barrett Partners. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Is that not who you are? I don't think I've been here for a month or two. I've forgotten the process. Yeah, hello, stranger. Did you get off- Sure thing. The, uh, on page four, uh, letter B, DP2009-27 Ramsey Sullivan property, uh, we're asking for a one-month postponement. Be November 12th. Okay. Anybody in the audience wanna speak to this? If not, the chair will entertain a motion. Hmm, volunteer. Any here? Mr. Chairman, I'll move for postponement- Go ahead. ... of DP2009-27 Ramsey Sullivan property until 11/12/2009. Says there a second? Second. Great. All right. All those in favor of the motion, vote. Doesn't come up. Thank you, Mr. Barrett. All right, thank you. That's a lot. Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, I'm Rory Keeley with EA Partners. Uh, I've got two plans I'd like to postpone to the November 12th meeting. They're both the Mayhan property. First one's on your first page, plan 2009-106P, and also bottom of page four and top of page five. This is DP2009-65, Mayhan Property Apartments. Okay. Is there anybody in the audience that wants to speak to this motion, as to this postponement? If not, the chair will entertain a motion. Is there a second? Second. Okay. Move for the motion. Vote on the motion. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Wait till people- He put them both together. Did he? Yeah. Any other postponements or withdrawals? Mr. Barlow. Good afternoon. My name's John Barlow, and I would like to postpone a preliminary development plan for Ramsey Sullivan. Do you have the, the number? Um... We do. The number is DP2009-27, which I believe Tony Barrett just did on your behalf. Oh, did, oh, I'm sorry. Yeah, that's quite all right. I couldn't get my tag out. Sorry. Thank you, sir. Any other postponements or withdrawals? Mr. Chairman- Ah. ... staff does have two items to bring to your attention. The first item is on page two of your agenda. Plan 2009-74F, the Harold R. Black property. We have received communication from that applicant that they would like to postpone for one month. Okay, so they wanna postpone 2009-74F until the L- November 12th meeting? Yes, sir. Anybody in the audience wanna speak to that motion for postponement? Okay, Ms. Richards has moved that motion. Mr. Cravens has seconded. We'll vote on the motion. The motion passes. Thank you, Mr. Martin. The final item is on page three of your agenda at the bottom. Item A under development plans, DP2009-60, Miller Byrd Commercial Park Subdivision, Block A, Unit 1, Lots 1 through 6. We have received communication from that applicant as well, requesting a one-month postponement. Anybody in the audience need to res- respond to that motion for postponement? If not, the chair will entertain a motion. Motion from Mr. Owens, second from Mr. Cravens. All those in, please vote. Motion passes to postpone to November the 12th. Any other, Mr. Martin? Any other postponements or withdrawals? Mr. Salih, do we wanna do the, uh, consent agenda? Do we at this time? Yes, sir. Uh, it is time to consider, uh, no discussion items, and those would be the items remaining on your consent agenda of today's date. There are a f- a number of items on your consent agenda. The first three are amended final subdivision plans that are recommended for conditional approval by your subdivision committee. First appears on page two, it's item B on your meeting agenda, plan 2009-107F, a plan for Beaumont Farm Unit 1, Section V, Lots 4 through 10, Amended. This is a amended final record plat for property at 3194 Beaumont Center Circle. The next item on your meeting agenda is also the next item on your consent agenda, page two, item C, plan 2009-108F, Secure Justice Property Units 2B and 4, Amended, also known as Glen Eagles, a portion of. This is for property located off Polo Club Boulevard. The next item on your consent agenda is page two, item D on your meeting agenda, plan 2009-109F, an amended final subdivision plan for Ramsey Sullivan property Unit 1B, Lots 8 through 12, Amended. This is for property, a portion of 2756, 2760, 2764, 2768, and 2772 Sullivans Trace. There is one plan recommended for approval of a one-year extension by your subdivision committee on your consent agenda. That appears on page three, item E of your meeting agenda, plan 2008-130F, a final record plat for Patch and Wilkes, Unit 1D. This is for property at a portion of 11, pardon me, 1811 Winchester Road. There is one item recommended for reapproval by your subdivision committee. It is on page three, item F of your meeting agenda, plan 2008-86F, an amended final record plat for Lakeview Acres Unit 3, Tract 10, Lot 12. This is for property at 1545 Lakeview Drive. There are a number of final development plans recommended for conditional approval by your subdivision committee. Uh, the first on your consent agenda has been postponed. That would be the Miller Bird Commercial Park. The next item on your consent agenda appears on page four, item C of your meeting agenda, DP2009-63, the Enterprise Business Center. This is for property located at 817 Winchester Road. The next development plan on your meeting agenda, page four, item D is also on your consent agenda, DP2009-64, Howard and Hayfee property, amendment number two. This is for property at 1124 Winchester Road. The final item on your consent agenda appears on page five, item F of your meeting agenda, DP2009-66, Wolf Run Industrial Park, Lots 1, 2, and 3, Amended. This is for property at 2262, 2270, and 2278 Frankfort Court. Planning staff would ask that this last item be removed from your consent agenda to allow for a full discussion. There is a floodplain issue related to the development plan. Uh, all of the other items, uh, can be considered for approval on your consent agenda at this time, Mr. Chairman, unless a member of the planning commission or a member of the audience, uh, would request a full discussion of those items. Thank you. Thank you, Mr.... Thank you, Mr. Salih. Is there anybody in the audience that wants to hear any of these that are on the consent agenda? Did Mr. Salih just read ... I'll assume you have copies of that. Anybody in the Planning Commission want to pull any of them off before we vote on the consent, consent agenda? Then we will vote on all of them except the last one, page five, item F, Wolf Run Industrial Park. We'll pull that one off, and we'll vote on the others. Chair will entertain a motion. Thank you. All right, the consent agenda's adopted. I guess we'll go to our first presentation then. Yes, sir. We'll set up and be ready to begin in just a moment. Thank you. Thank you. Chris, whenever you're ready. Okay. Uh, the first- Tell us where you are first, young man. I'm sorry? Tell us where you are on the agenda. All right. We are on page five. Uh, the first item we're going to hear is page ... on page five, item F, DP2009-66. It is Wolf Run Industrial Park, Lots 1, 2, and 3, amended. This is a final development plan for property located at 2262, 2270, and 2278 Frankfort Court. The subject property is located off of Old Frankfort Pike outside of New Circle. Barbara, can you throw that ar- area up there for me? Thanks. We are outside New Circle Road, and we are near the, the Irwin County Government Jail property, which is off-site over ... just off this direction, Irwin County Government Fleet Services, right here, Old Frankfort Pike here. And the access to Frankfort Court is- Mm-hmm. ... down in this area and curves back around. The subject property is this area, the existing storage units, and the proposed development is down in this area through here. The purpose of the amendment is to add just under 104,000 square feet of buildable area for a self-storage facility. The development plan depicts two additional gated acc- gated access points on Frankfort Court, as well as a widening of an access point on Old Frankfort Pike that is also gated. As you can see, there's two access points located here, both gated. Existing access here, as well as the widening and a gated access with some parking out front of the a- ... of the storage areas here. These are the four buildings, five buildings to be added in the existing buildings up here. The Subdivision Committee recommended approval of this plan, subject to 13 conditions, uh, the 13th condition being to resolve possible fill in the identified floodplain area. In the lower left corner, we have the Zone AE Flood Plain that runs down along the left side here and curves out towards Old Frankfort Pike. It was unclear at the time of submission, due to how heavy the line weight is, just where the floodplain was. Uh, we weren't sure if it was shown. Um, what they show up in this area, the buildings are outside of the 25-foot floodplain setback here. It's down in this area where they a- ... or the buildings are in the 25-foot floodplain setback. We were concerned about any additional fill that would be required. Those permits would have to come through the Division of Engineering for special uses for fill in the floodplain. However, this area would require Board of Adjustment action to vary that 25-foot floodplain. We thought that the situation deserved discussion at our Subdivision Committee, um, but it was made with an approval recommendation to resolve. So in order to certify the plan, they would either have to ... as it currently sits, would have to go to the Board of Adjustment for approval, uh, for a variance to that 25-foot floodplain setback. Uh, if you have any questions, I'd be happy to try to answer them. Ms. Phillips? Um, Chris, um, you spoke about fill in the floodplain- Yeah. ... because of the, the regulatory standard that the government, that the local government has- Correct. ... to floodplains, but what about 404 Wetlands? Um- Have you been to the site to, uh, see whether there's hydretic vegetation? There is no encroachment into the actual floodplain, so I,I'm not sure. And it, it would be probably through engineering sign-off that we'd be made aware of any need for them to go that route. Any other questions for Chris? Mike. Uh, Chris, just to clarify, there's, appears to me, uh, anyway, a large amount of fill that's already been put on the lot. Any of that getting into the floodplain at this time? Well, I think when this area was studied and the floodplain was amended, this is a Zone AE, which means there's a studied area for it. I believe that this detention basin was approved and the fill was approved at that time. I don't believe there's any f- well, I can't say for certain that there's fill going to be in this area. However, that would have to go through engineering's approval process for special use if they were to build or do any additional fill in that, in this, in the floodplain area. Does that answer your question? I'm not sure it does. Well, kind of, yeah. M- my primary question would be, you know, and, and I think you did cover it. You know, has that fill that's already been put there, has that already been approved at an earlier time? I can't answer that. I, I, I'd have to let engineering answer that question for design on the, the build of that blood- Okay. ... or that detention basin. Okay. Perhaps the applicant could answer. Okay. Thank you. I don't believe that area is, is currently governed under a development plan, only the upper portion. So this is the first time we have seen a development for the lower, development plan, I believe, for the lower portion. Okay. Okay. Mr. Copeland? Yes. Chris, the L-shaped building that has blue- Mm-hmm. It's the amount of blue that is the encroachment, right? Correct. That is the portion of the building that is in the floodplain setback. It's not in the floodplain. It's just in the, the 25-foot setback that's required. Even though it's up on a stage, it, yes. Yes. Okay. It's still within the 25-foot setback. Okay. As is the retaining... Well, what looks to be a retaining wall. It's not labeled as such, but I believe they discussed at Subdivision Committee, a retaining wall out front, uh, up here. Mm-hmm. But that area- Mm-hmm. ... all would be in that setback as well. So my question is, about what, uh, size is that encroachment? Uh, 10 to 15 feet. This is 10 to 15 feet of the building. By- Uh, a good- ... 100? 150 to 200. Yeah. So the encroachment's about the size of this room, or two-thirds the size of this room? I couldn't guess, but it, it's, it's considerable. Mr. Holmes? Yeah, Chris, uh, I guess my question is, why do they have an encroachment in it? Didn't they have enough room on the property to shift that? That is an option. They would not have to. Uh, they could resolve the, the, the condition by moving the building out of the floodplain setback, and with no need to go to the Board of Adjustment. All right. As shown, it would require a variance. Any other questions for Chris? If not, petitioner? Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, I'm Tony Barrett with Barrett Partners. Uh, with regards to the floodplain... Well, first off, I've got, uh, Burgess Carey, the, uh, the owner, and Scott Guy on, the architect, with me as well, uh, if there's questions for them. The, uh, with regards to the floodplain, we anticipate doing... Uh, we're in the process of evaluating the floodplain, and if, uh, w- we'll ask for a, uh, a letter of map amendment to, uh, eliminate the floodplain that backs up into what is essentially the, uh, uh, the roadway ditch of Old Frankfort Pike. The, the bulk of the floodplain, as you can see from the image there, is, is going up this way. Uh, the area of encroachment is this, uh, kind of this backwater that creeps up the, uh, the ditch of, of the pi- of the, the road, and, uh, that's what we're, uh, encroaching on. As, as, uh, Chris mentioned, our, our options are to, uh, request a variance from the Board of Adjustment, uh, do the, uh, letter of map amendment, or, um, cut off 10 or 15 feet of the back of the building. Uh, if the letter of map amendment, which is our first approach, is, uh, not successful, then we'll evaluate, uh, approaching the Board of Adjustment or, or, uh, trimming the back corner of that building off. So, uh, we're prepared to, to address it, um, but we think we're in, uh, based on our preliminary conversations with the Division of Water and FEMA, and the evaluation of the floodplain by the engineer, we feel pretty comfortable that, uh, the letter of map amend- amendment will be granted. So, uh, that's why we've proceeded with the, with the layout as, as we've shown. Any, any questions for Mr. Barrett? Ms. Phillips? Um, what is the proposed use of that building? Do you have an identified use? It's self-storage. Okay. Um, have you guys looked at, um, the vegetation to see if 404 wetlands are a consideration? No, I haven't looked in that particular area. The, uh, uh, the area where the building is, is a, is a steep embankment, and I don't think there'd be any, uh, wetland in that, a- along the bank. The, uh, the, the filling, uh, Mr. Owens, you asked about, uh, was that you? Yeah, I did. Yeah. Uh, Mr. Carey has owned the property for, uh, over three years. It was filled before he bought the property, and I s- ... I suspect from the delineation of the floodplain, that the filling, that the floodplain responds very closely to the, the current, uh, fill on the, on the site in that, uh, it's, it's parallel to, to the, uh, to the bank. Uh, it, it encroaches or, uh, bends up into this area where the, uh, where the, uh, stormwater, uh, headwall is. Uh, so it, it reflects very closely the, the current condition out there, so. And the, the floodplains were, were recent, maps were recently amended. Uh, I don't remember the dates of those, but not too long ago. September of '08. So, um, yeah, I would say that the, the fill is in, uh, is consistent with the study for the floodplain. Any other questions for Mr. Barry? Thank you, Tony. Is there anybody in the audience at this time that wants to speak? Did you want to speak to this? Yes. Yes, sir. Um, I'm Burgess Carey, and I'm the developer of the project. Uh, I brought Mr. Scott Gion, who's the architect I've engaged. Uh, I'd like to show some pictures of what the finished product will look like. Uh, as a resident of this community, I'm very well aware of this being a gateway property. I'm friends, personal friends, with some of the people who live just further out, uh, and I... The goal of this project is to hopefully become the first LEED-certified self-storage facility possibly in the country. Uh, I've spent quite a bit of money on design and continue to, with architects, which is unusual for a project of this nature. Um, with regard to the floodplain issue, uh, I think, if I may, what Tony is trying to say in lay terms is that the property has functioned the way it will continue to function for some time now. And, in fact, in our preliminary meetings with, uh, FEMA and the Division of Water, we'll be improving a subdivision that was installed, um, with much, uh, I guess, uh, less stringent standards than we have now. Uh, in fact, the stormwater collection will be improved, and one of the, one of the goals of this project is to hopefully use a permeable pavement, which has not been used i- in a lot of areas. So, uh, we hope to improve the stormwater runoff of this area, rather than, uh, worsening it. But I'd like to let Scott say a few words, please, about the design. I'm Scott Gion of Gion Architects. Um, could I get the, uh, the image put up on the screen? We, we have been working, uh... we're gonna show you a, kind of a... and the next one. And what we've done here is to, um, through the magic of the computer, we've collaged a, a very typical self-storage facility along the edge of that site. This is a pure fantasy that you're looking at. This is not a real photograph of that building to, to the right. And the next one. Th- this might be what the property... that's an actual foreground photo of the property, with the farm gate that exists and so forth. The, the buildings with the blue doors, though, are collaged into here, just to give you an idea of what w- of, of basically what we're, we're not going to do. So this would be a typical kind of storage setup. In fact, in fact, that is a collage made from original buildings located back here, which ?????? years, uh, that were built in the 1990s. Yeah. And next. Tha- that would just be kind of the entry as it might happen if, um, if we weren't going further with, uh, these aspirations. Next. There it is again. And then finally, next. Okay, this, this then is what's envisioned for the facility. Um, the, the building pedestal will be a green wall, which is, which is shown just to, below the base of the, uh, of the building to the left. Uh, the, the horse fence shown in the foreground already exists. That, that'll be retained with lots of planting, and, and the, uh, the office, the two-story structure just to the right, will be a, a, um, a LEED, uh, certifiable building. And I say that only because we're pursuing all of those elements that we possibly can. And, and next. And there are those elements that can be... you see them in the upper right. These, these are all applicable, and we're involved in implementing them as, uh, both the technical aspects and the economics of the project allow. So I wanted to share that with you because obviously Mr. Carey is concerned about the, the nature of the viewscape as people come off the roundabout and into town. And, of course, as an architect, that's what I do all the time, is I'm concerned about the visual and aesthetic integrity of the, of the city. So, um, any questions about that, I'd be glad to answer 'em. I- if you could, show us on this map over here where the roundabout is in relationship to your property. Take the mic with you, please. Yeah. Th- th- there, there's a farm here. Uh, the city's res- new recycling center, believe the total acreage is 60 acres. ... city's new recycling center is gonna be back here. The Wolf, uh, Run Creek runs along this way. And right now, there's a commercial development sign and plan right here. Essentially, the roundabout is just past that. Okay, thank you. Uh, just like to mention that I'm... My business is a bit of a paradox, and I have to admit to some misgivings when I see those original pictures, because the, the only advertisement that truly works for self-storage, and you see it all over town, are those doors. And, and that project, as shown, would be successful financially for someone. What we're trying to achieve here, though, is a mix, and something that looks like it's responsibly developed. Hopefully, you'll be able to see the doors through those windows, but in a much more subtle way. And at the same time, i- if you recall the site, there's outdoor storage of vehicles there now, which will be blocking and covering from view by the layout of the building. Essentially, up here, right now, is, uh, outdoor boat storage and so forth. It's very visible, and we're gonna be blocking all of that. Okay. Are there any questions for Ms. Phillips? So can you clarify, is there... Is there going to be a letter of map amendment requested for the floodplain? It... Uh, yes, we're in the process of preparing that, uh, right now. Any questions for them? Thank you. Thank you. Is there anybody else in the audience that wants to speak to this? Yes, would you come forward please? Hi, my name is, uh, Valon Daniel. I'm an architecture student at UK. This is my last year. And I was just curious if you guys were considering using reclaimed or recycled materials and photovoltaic array to power the structure? And also, if you're using a permeable concrete for the storage units, um, the ramifications, if someone stores like a, a toxic chemical or oils, will it be able to leak into the groundwater system? I think that's an excellent question, Scott. Do you want to answer before we move on? Thank you. We, we are, uh, considering, and you'll notice that list I showed you, we, w- we are considering, uh, using both renewable, and recycled, and salvaged materials. The, um, the porous paving, uh, design, you know, requires, uh, some protection from that occurrence that she's talking about. And, um, Tony, do you, do you have a thought on that? It's a site issue, so I'll let the landscape architect talk. The, uh, the permeable paver will not be within the unit itself. So if they're storing within their unit, there's not a worry of, of that. The, uh, it, it would be the circulation paths that... The outside, uh, paved area, that would be permeable. And, uh, uh, that would not be, uh... Just the, the filtration of the, of the sand and the gravel and the, and the underground system would, would help, uh, reduce that. And, uh, it'd be no different than as if it were a permanent or a, a, a impervious pavement. Thank you. Uh, that if it were to, uh, to drip on the impervious pavement, it would just run off, and it'd be in the same system. So, uh, there's not a lot that we can do other than just, uh, what's inherent in the, in the, uh, filtration inherent in, in how it's, uh, th- the gravel and, uh, the washing out, diluting of the, of the, through the stormwater system. Thank you. To further answer your questions, uh, using green principles, as I'm sure you know, uh, we get points towards the lead certification system and using recycled and re-salvageable materials are a large part of that. Uh, we think we can get a lead certification, at least in the frontage area. It may be difficult to obtain for the whole site, uh, but we're gonna strive to do the best we can. Thank you. Is there any other questions from the audience? If not, Mr. Barrett, do you have any rebuttal before we turn it over to the staff? I don't have anything further to say, thank you. Thank you. Chris, do you have anything? Well, we'll turn it over to the commission for their, their consideration. Any comments or a motion? Are we ready? Um, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to move approval of DP2009-66 Wolf Run Industrial Park, Lots 1, 2, and 3, amended. Um, I think that this design is consistent with the goals of the comprehensive plan, um, where we tried to encourage lead, um, construction standards. And, um, I'm hoping that the letter of map amendment, uh, process goes through. Otherwise, you all know what process you'll have to undertake through the Board of Adjustment. Need a second. Second? Second from Ms. Richardson. Any discussion? Motion passes. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Martin, I think we're ready for you. Yeah. You think- I think- ... so I, I appreciate that. ... I don't promise anything. I just think a little. Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, next item on your agenda is on page five. It is item G, DP2009-67, 10 foot ceiling, 636 Main Street. This is a late plan that was filed. And you can see at the bottom of your agenda, there were 21 conditions as originally filed. You will find in your packet this green sheet. These are the revised conditions that we have provided to you. The applicant did submit on October 5th, this revised plan that you see before you today. Now, the property is located out on West Main Street. It is a few lots west of the Jefferson Street intersection, the viaduct on the south side, the left side of the street going out. Uh, the Salvation Army and the Newtown Pike intersection is right up here, just a short distance. The area, back in here, is a Rupp Arena. The Cox Street parking lot is down here below the property. The reason you have a development plan before you today, this is a little interesting, you don't see these often, but you do see them. It's a B2P zone piece of property and the use has changed. And under article three of the zoning ordinance, when you have more than one principal structure on a lot, they're required to file a development plan that conforms with Article 21. And with this change in use, you see these three buildings here, they're commercial structures that are being converted to a residential use. It's a little over... uh, a little under 5,000 square feet total. Two units here, a single unit here, two units here. This is an accessory garage in the back. Here's the access. This is interesting in that this is a shared access with the adjoining property. We do have a copy easement, has been provided to us, stating that that is a shared access point there. Upon receiving the new plan and the revised plan, you can see the green sheet before you. Staff is recommending approval subject to those 11 conditions. Of course, it will go before your technical committee for review prior to certification. And I'd like to briefly point out again, if you look at 10, it says, "Clarify existing landscaping that will remain." And this was originally a discussion item for the staff because although it's B2B, and B2B doesn't have a, a lot of requirements per se, the change in use was a concern to the staff with the residential. So, we were concerned about the need for buffering between zones. Now, the good news is, and if, uh, you look at the photograph, there are some trees that we'd like to clarify what's going to remain in this back area along with, you can see the, uh, there's also a, it's hard to see on that photograph, but there is a strip of lawn between the property line and the Cox Street parking lot. So there is some green at the rear. Now, in this rendering, I utilized the green to show you open space. Uh, I did not want you to think that it's all green, because there's a lot of gravel and pavement and that sort of thing, but it's towards the back. Again, it's hard to see, uh, in these photographs, but it's green back in this area at the rear of the lot. This area that I, that I showed you as open space, uh, is, uh, apparently paved. So I didn't want you to think that suddenly there was a lot of green on this property, 'cause frankly, there isn't. You know, it, it's heavily paved. But, uh, there is open space. That is one requirement in the zone when you have residential, that they have, they do provide, uh, open space, and that has been designated on the plan. With that, I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. Any questions for Mr. Martin? Mr. Holmes? I have one for T- Tom. Uh, a- are, are they taking the existing buildings and converting them? There's no additional runoff ? They are converting the buildings. There is no exterior physical changes, additions, that we are aware of. Okay. I guess there's... Are, were there any requirements for retention or, or any of those items? There are not, to our understanding, no. Any other questions? Ms. Phelps? I'm still lost as to where we are. Oh- Um, the Salvation Army, and then there's a car lot next to the Salvation Army. Where is this property with respect to the Mary Todd Lincoln house? Because I can't make out anything from that photo. Yeah. The Mary Todd Lincoln house would be back this way towards, towards us where we are now. How far? Oh, how far? About three lots I believe. This is in the middle of the block. The blocks... The lots get larger- ... when you go this way in the Salvation Army lot and the lot adjacent, it's, uh, very large. The lotting pattern through here is similar to this, long and narrow. This is approximately middle block. Do you have a photo to show us what the front of that structure looks like so that we can orient ourselves- The front of it? ... mm-hmm. I'm afraid we have several in the file. They're all top down like that, um. The applicant's engineer is here. He could perhaps elaborate on, on the physical conditions of the building. Any other questions for Mr. Martin? Mr. Banks? Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, my name is Jason Banks. I'm with Banks Engineering. Um, we're in agreement with staff's revised conditions and would request approval. Uh, maybe I can answer some of the questions that were raised, um. We don't plan on removing any of tree, any of the trees towards the rear of the property. That's not our intention. We don't think we need to and, um, the facade is, is mainly a brick facade out towards Main Street. Any other questions, Mr. Barrett? Or not Barrett, Mr. Banks? Can I just say something? Yes. We... Um, one of my fellow commissioners found it on Google Maps and we have the street view and it's, for all the other commissioners, it's the house that has the sparkly mor- uh, Horse Mania horse in front of it, isn't it? No, I don't- No? ... think so. I don't think it might, uh, be the horse. It's what? I think it's, uh ... Property used to have, like, a antique type store on it and that's, that's what the use was. Any other, any other questions while they're playing with the iPhone? I'm, I'm not smart enough to use it, so I'm really impressed y'all could do that. I was impressed that you knew what the phone was. Sit on it, Mike. Okay. We're still, we're still in session here. Any other questions for Mr. Banks on this piece of property? What we're trying to do? The question I have for you, Jason, tell me about the use, what, what you count on doing with this property. There are just gonna be five, um, individual units for, uh, rent. So there, there'll be apartments? Yeah, apartment slabs. Condos, departments, or just apartments? Yes. Apartments. Um, this first building towards main is gonna be a, a two dwelling unit. One of the units is a one bedroom. The other unit is a two bedroom unit. Building number two is gonna be a one bedroom, one dwelling unit. Basically, the whole building will be for one unit. And the third, building three, is also a two unit building. Thank you. Ms. Phillips, I'd like to help orient you a little bit more to this location. If, uh, if you look at the photo, you see all the work in the upper part of the photo? That's the new past development that you may recall, that infield development and the multi-story apartments that were constructed there and so it's two b- two lots away from the property in question. And it is, of course, on the same side of the street as the Salvation Army, as is this property. And I would add too, there is H1 overlay zoning in this area, so external changes and that sort of thing are governed by the Board of Architectural Review. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anybody in the audience that wants to respond to this? Uh... Mr. Banks, you have anything else to add? No, sir. All right. Staff, we're through? Then the chair will entertain a motion or discussion, however the Commission wants to handle it. I'd like to make a motion for approval of BP2009-67 with the 11, um, contingencies as presented. Second by Ms. Richardson. Is there any discussion? If not, we're ready to vote. Motion carries. Thank you, Mr. Banks. Mr. Salley, are we ready now for the, uh, the amend- the amendment? Um- The article amendment? Yes, sir. You may, at the bottom of page five, wish to consider the bonds and letters of credit at this time. Okay- And that will be- ... go ahead and- ... the last subdivision item. All right. That's... We have before us a, uh, memorandum to release the bond, re- recant all the bonds. Uh, those, I think you have it there at your, at your desk. Chair, I'll entertain a motion to release the call of the bonds as presented on the two-page memorandum. Mr. Chairman, I'd move, uh, for release and call of bonds, to accept the-- the memorandum, uh, from Ron St. Clair to Chris King dated October 8, 2009 for the release and call of bonds. Is there a second? Second. All right, let's vote on the motion. Motion passes. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Martin will be presenting the subdivision regulation amendment to you today. All right. Mr. Martin. Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, on page six of your agenda is the Proposed Land Subdivision Regulation Amendment that's before you today. There is a handout, just one page, nice short report on this amendment. This is a amendment that the Urban County Council asked that you initiate based on work that they have done, and they worked, uh, at a considerable amount of time with the local utilities. Uh, both, uh, members of the Urban County Council and the law department, along with the utility companies reviewed this. It is an amendment to the regulations on 6-5, which is your utility standards, and 6-5A, as you can see in your report, is specifically telephone, natural gas, and electric supply. There's actually another paragraph that governs water, for instance, and supply of water to subdivisions. And it is this paragraph that they asked to be amended. You can see the underlined words are the amendment that they developed that they have recommended to you today. To summarize it, it's, uh, an amendment that requires electric lines and the cable lines to go underground within a subdivision. Now, this doesn't include large transmission lines, the three-phase and the lines that take power to subdivisions. It, as the word states, as you can see, that it's within, they use the word, it's lines within the subdivision. Now, I'm sure there'll be exceptions when you have transmission lines that go through a subdivision, going elsewhere. Uh, in fact, that's exactly how my subdivision is. In my house, I have a very large transmission easement through my backyard, and that's a very large transmission line, and that's -- it's not what they're talking about. They are referring to underground lines that serve homes and facilities within subdivisions. And the impetus of this, as I'm sure you're aware, have been the severe weather events that we've had in recent history. Ice storms, in particular, have created a lot of concern. There was a lot of time involved, a lot of expense in bringing, uh, getting the repairs done, and so this generated this amendment. And staff has reviewed it. Uh, we spent considerable time looking at -- at collary issues. In fact, we wanted to be sure that this was appropriate in its entirety. We looked at some other issues that we're aware of, uh, to see if we thought they should be in any way connected or addressed at this time, and ultimately, we felt like this was -- this was a good amendment and adequate in and of itself without any need to bring any other issues to you. So with that, staff has recommended approval of this amendment. If you have any questions, I'll be happy to try to answer them. Mr. Craven. Yeah, um, does it exempt lines that are already overhead? I would, I would think ... Yeah. I mean, if you were to buy an infill lot, and the lines, say, are overhead on the property line. Once this goes into effect, then it would apply to any new subdivisions. Okay. We do anticipate there will be waiver requests in some of your smaller subdivisions. Well, but if you bought, if you bought a piece of property and had the lines overhead, and you make a new subdivision out of it, do you have to bring those down and under? You would, you would be subject to a subdivision requirement. Yes, sir. Even though they're already existing? I believe so. Yes, sir. It reads within a subdivision, and that's when, when you subdivide you fall within the realm of the subdivision regulations. Now, we do anticipate in smaller situations and infill situations that you'll be seeing waivers. A- and then, I guess, um, the, uh, secondary lines, you know, to the buildings, um, if there were an existing transmission line going through there, um, would you have to put the li- the secondary lines to the buildings underground? I think you would, again, if it was a subdivision, and it's supplying a building. I believe that's one of the major intents of this regulation change is to get those types of lines underground and away from bad weather. Well, um, what, what, uh, relief would you have, uh, if you couldn't do that? Waiver. A waiver request. A waiver. Yes, based on hardship. And of course, infill and redevelopment is another waiver justification that w- you have now adopted in your subdivision regulations. Okay. I, I guess it's just, um, uh, the, uh, electric lines, if you develop a subdivision, if you agree to, uh, let 'em be overhead, I mean, there's no charge to you by the Kentucky Utilities. And so then if you want to put 'em underground, uh, then you have to put the, um, conduit and primary lines and all that, and, uh, KU does not, uh, probably shouldn't say this, I'll get my meter pulled, I guess. But, but the Kentucky Utilities, then, there's gotta be some cost to them- ... to put the lines overhead, but they don't charge anything. But if you s- go to put them underground, they don't credit you anything either. Was any of that discussed? I was not privy to the discussions at the council committee level or with the law department. I know they did work with utility companies. Th- that is certainly an excellent point and I, I would hope that it was discussed, but I'm not aware of the specifics of the discussion. Mr. Holmes? I think, uh, Mr. Craven's addressed it. I guess my concern is when you get into the infill areas, the, the requirements that's gonna be on those, if we're talking about distribution or, or those, those lines to the individual unit, could create a potential hardship for some, some infill development and I'm not sure how that would affect the affordability issue. So I mean, I, I definitely agree as we look at subdivisions, but, uh, maybe the waiver, we'll have to see how it go- it goes with the waivers, if that'll address some of those issues of, uh, primarily infill development and how we can address that with distribution lines. Any other questions? The only thing I would have and, and living in the country I don't understand a lot of this, but, uh, uh, cable lines for, TV cable lines, those type of things, they, they'd have to be underground also? Yes, sir. They generally are now. Right. Okay. Any other questions? Yeah. Mr. Craven? This six feet, uh, to a, um, sewer line, is that something new? No, sir. No, sir. I thought it said that. And if you look in your report, we pointed that out that they took the existing standards into consideration. Okay. Any other discussion? Ms. Phillips? Um, I would anticipate because of the cost burden that there will be, um, we'll probably see a lot of requests for waivers. And it would be nice if, um, it would be very helpful if staff could come up with maybe some standards for establishing, um, you know, some criteria for granting waivers so that we're not on the hook for making the decision on the fly on a case-by-case basis. Um, because with the high cost of, uh, implementing this change to the ordinance, I, I suspect we're gonna see a lot of petitions for economic hardship. And, um, I, it would be helpful, again, if the staff could come up with something to help steer us in the right direction. Yes, ma'am. We appreciate that suggestion. Okay. And staff shares the commission's attitude we heard today. We, as we stated in the report, we anticipate, uh, that you will see some waivers. Yes, ma'am. Anything else in regard to this? If not, thank you, Mr. Martin. Thank you. We'll turn it over to the commission. Is there any audience? Did you want to speak to this, Ms. Tuttle? Excuse me, I was going to Amendments here and forgot my protocol. This is not the reason that I'm here today. All right. Well- Sarah Tuttle- Thank you. ... with Strand Associates. This is not the reason I'm here today, but I do think that the, and so I don't have a whole lot of background information, but I do believe that, uh, one of the issues that is not discussed is three-phase power. Um, because three-phase power kind of falls in the gray area between single phase, which is a typical drop in a single family subdivision and a transmission line. And we have three-phase lines in a lot of places and those are expensive to put underground. So I think that we're missing a whole set of definitions, and if somebody can clarify that, that would be helpful. And the other question that I have is, has the development community been involved in this decision, uh, or in this, um, in this discussion? Uh, because I do think that, um, as we look at affordable housing and as we look at the costs of, of trying to, of allow people to be able to buy property, I, I think it is a, an issue. Do I like underground utilities? Absolutely. Um, but, uh, there are certain circumstances that, um, that I think it may not be economically viable and I think that to subject yourselves to a bunch of waiver requests may not be what you want to do. So I, I, I think that I would suggest possibly a postponement so that the community that, that does this can look at this and then we can also maybe tighten up some definitions. Thank you. Thank you. Any other comments from the audience? Rebuttal, Mr. Martin? Then we're ready to turn it over to the commission. Mr. Owens? Mr. Martin, in, in regards to what Mrs. Tuttle just brought up, uh, three-phase, um, am, am I reading this as far as major facilities such as high voltage utilities, uh, uh, I'm sorry, electric transmission lines, distribution feeder circuits of 200 amps or greater? Would that cover the three phase? It is my understanding that the intent that it was to cover three phase, that they understood that three phase was a transmission line and was expensive and would not be subject to being placed underground. Okay. So, okay. Yes. So it wouldn't, it w- it, three phase would not be covered under this then? It would not be required- Got it. ... to go underground was my understanding. Yes. Any other discussion or questions? Mr. Cravis? Yeah, I, I guess I would- ... um, like to see that, uh, there'd be some exceptions. Y- you know, I- I agree with, I mean, if everybody's gonna come in here and want a waiver, we're gonna have to, um, decide this on the fly. Um, maybe if the lines were already existing, they ought to be exempt from, from, uh, this. Well, again, I would, I would just point out that 1-5 of your zoning, of your subdivision regulations spells out the conditions for waivers. Hardship, uh, innovative design, and now infill and redevelopment. And you do consider each case on its own basis against that criteria. And the applicant has to make his case. He has to come in and make it clear the nature of the hardship. And then you, uh- Well that, and that, and, you know, and that adds even more expense to this whole thing. Well, yes sir. There is going to be expense, undoubtedly, in placing it underground. What was the discussion on leaving the existing lines overhead in a subdivision? It- They'd already, I mean, you know, preexisting. I, I was not party, again, to the council discussions. I, I am, uh, the utility companies were involved. And it was, uh, over a course of quite a few months that all this was discussed, and, uh, the city attorneys, and I'm sure other attorneys for other interested entities were all involved in crafting this- This is probably ... subdivision regulation amendment. Any other questions? If not, then the chair wants to know what your pleasure, what you want to do with this? Um, Mr. Chairman, because, um, the planning staff apparently was not integrated in the conversation, I would, I would like to hear from someone who was a part of the discussion, um, before we take action on this. I, in, in, in principle, I think that we need to move away from overhead and, and towards underground utilities. I don't think anybody here would disagree to that. But the, um, the particulars of how to execute this policy, I think need, uh, need to have some questions answered. Okay. Any other discussion? Then is it your... Hmm? Are you looking for a postponement until we have this discussion, a work session on th- We could- Mr. Salley, let, let me, let's turn to you. What, what do you think would be an appropriate way to handle this? Well, I think rather than postpone, uh, you may want to continue, uh, this, uh, your hearing on this amendment to your next meeting, which would be November 12th. That would be your deadline for considering the amendment. But certainly you could do that if you wish to have additional information or for us to forward this to Home Builders, for instance, for review. We, we can do that over the next month. Is that the, is, is that the wish of the commission? Yes. Then I'll need a motion. So moved. Okay, Mr. Chairman, I'll move for a continuance of SRA 2009-2, um, for 30 days, I guess, until- November 12th. ... November 12th. And at that time I would ask, uh, either put it in staff's hands to, to have whoever, uh, has or was involved in the earlier discussions be here to answer questions, I guess. But I'll move for continuance until November 12th. It's been moved by Mr. Owens and seconded by Mr. Richardson. You want to comment, Ms. Richardson? I'd like to know if it's appropriate, uh, if the staff could tell me if it's appropriate to have someone from the, um, uh, that was in attendance when this was done, uh, by the council, uh, in the pla- in their planning committee, if it's appropriate for someone from that committee to come and, and discuss with us what took place, and what was or was not considered. Is that appropriate? Thank you. Ms. Richardson, I'm not sure if this was discussed by one of the council committees or not, but we can certainly research that. Where did he come from? Um, it would have been the Council Planning Committee, so I, I presume it would be council members, but, um, our impression is that members of the law department spoke with some of the different utility company representatives, and I think the continuance will allow us to get with them and try and get you as much information as we can about the formulation of this amendment. Okay. So we have a motion and we'll need a second. Ms. Richardson, will you second this? Second. Okay, motion has been made and seconded to continue this until the November 12th meeting. Is there any discussion on the motion? If not, we'll vote. It's continued till the 12th of November. That need, that need to be done. Well, mostly it's going through the whole process again, continuing to have the discussion. Okay. I guess before we go, we go into the, um, our next item, let's take a five minute recess. And we'll- And we'll, we'll let them set up for the, for the next presentation. Are you telling me to boil the water? ? We'll get back in session here. Good afternoon. Ms. Riker. This is on page 5B, or item 5B, I'm sorry, of your agenda on page six. And if you'll notice this staff report will make up for Tom's one-page staff report, and it'll kind of balance things out, 'cause it's so long. This is a tax increment financing application for Show Prop Lexington LLC. And they have applied to create a blighted urban mixed use redevelopment area, tax increment financing district. And that's for properties on Angliana Avenue. And I'll just go over this a little bit, because some of the planning commission members weren't here the last time we had a TIF review. Um, each type of TIF district has special criteria or specific criteria to meet. And so far, we have had two that have been reviewed by the planning commission. That was October of last year that we did that. Um, there are two different types of TIF districts. One was a signature TIF district, and that was for the Phoenix Park in the courthouse area downtown here. And then the other one was for the distillery district, and that... distillery district on Manchester Street, and that was for the same kind of, um, TIF district that we're reviewing today. Um, Kentucky statutes enable the process of creating a TIF district, and what it does, it provides a mechanism to allow improvements for a, um, redevelopment area, and it provides the financing upfront, and then the, um, income that's generated by the improvements allows for the money to be paid back. And so that helps to pay for the project. And part of this process, the council has to, um, have a public hearing once the planning commission has reviewed the development plan, and that is for compliance with the comprehensive plan. Their public hearing is scheduled for October 27th. Then the Irving County Council makes a recommendation to the state, and then at that level, they have a multi-agency review and that, they determine that it should either be approved or disapproved. And if it's approved, then the Irving County government will enter into a formal agreement with the state, and then the T- the TIF district is created. Um, the initial step in the process, which is where we are right now, once the application is made, the planning commission has to review the TIF district development plan and determine whether or not it's in compliance with a comprehensive plan. And if yes, you do, then you provide the certification to the Irving County Council and it goes from there. This will be known as the Show Prop Lexington LLC Development District, and it consists of both sides of Angliana Avenue, not all of it, but both sides. Can you get that up there, please? Okay, you've got, Angliana is right here, and goes out to South Broadway. This is the one property on Angliana, and then this is several properties. It goes from South Broadway all the way over to Ham Alley, which is just a little bit beyond the midpoint between South Broadway and Versailles Road. That's the, the, um, boundary of it, and it contains about 28 acres. And there will be both public and private improvements as part of this, and you can see most of them are listed up there. Um, all of them are listed on pages one and two of your staff report, and all of the improvements that are listed are proposed, and then the ones that are listed as public improvements are eligible for TIF funding. And then this exhibit will be, um, forwarded to the council as part of the, as part of the packet that goes on to the state. There are several elements of the comp plan, the 2007 comp plan, that speak to the types of projects that are proposed for this area, um, both in the goals and objectives and the text. The mission statement and the vision for Lexington provide the basis for land development, land use decisions, and that includes urban design. The mission statement is to provide a vision for physical development that will allow Lexington to grow and prosper, promoting economic development and viable job development, while preserving its quality of life, historic character, and amenities, and other elements that make Lexington a desirable place to live and work. And then as part of that vision, there are several themes that are laid out in the comp plan, and then five of those are particularly applicable, and those are listed on page two and three of your staff report. I'll just read those to you. Promoting the myriad components that strengthen the viability of downtown, including professional and commercial uses, cultural and recreational activities, and new and existing housing, implementing infill and redevelopment strategies that expand residential and commercial opportunities are appropriate in character and design, and complement and reinforce the fabric of the neighborhood. ... enabling the creation, growth, and retention of jobs that promote a strong, progressive, and diversified urban and rural economy, developing a green infrastructure system with open space, facilities, and amenities that serve all citizens and help create a sense of community. And the last one is providing infrastructure improvements to fully serve existing developments to accommodate current growth, to plan for long-term future urban needs, and to enhance the high quality of life in Lexington. And the comp plan has 21 goals, and then each of those has related objectives to help facilitate their implementation. 12 of the goals, of those 21, and then the objectives of those 12, plus two more, are either relevant to, they support the project, or the project supports their implementation. And those go from page three in your staff report, all the way over to page 10. That's why the staff report is so long. The land use element also contains text that supports the proposal, and the language of the land use element has 15, contains the 15 principles of the downtown master plan. There are four that are the most applicable of the 15, and that would be to increase residential development, invest in a pedestrian network, maximize density in vacant sites, and celebrate urban entrances. The Angliana Avenue is on the fringe of downtown, and it's part of the corridor that provides a major entrance into downtown. The northeast side of Angliana is included as part of the adopted downtown master plan, and it's got a recommendation of industrial mixed use. And this project fits within that recommendation. Once it's redeveloped, we think it'll be a true extension of downtown and it'll reflect what the downtown master plan recommends. And then there's a cornerstone of this development that is the adaptive reuse of an abandoned tobacco warehouse that's on Angliana Avenue. And that, you know, the tobacco industry was a major component of our economy until just recently, and that warehouse is representative of many of the buildings that were used for that. And so, um, u- reuse of that is, part of this project will help to preserve a link to the, to the heritage. Um, one of the things that they wanna do, in addition to the retail and the restaurant that they propose to have in there, they wanna have an exhibit area to have photos and items that were representative of the time that tobacco was, was part of the local economy. And so that will help to preserve the link to the agricultural and the cultural heritage that we have. Um, that will help to implement goal five of the comprehensive plan, which is to celebrate and preserve the cultural heritage of Lexington. And then, as part of the certification of the comprehensive plan, um, or compliance with the comprehensive plan, we have to, um, contain any recommendations for zone changes that might be needed, text amendments that might be needed, or any other changes that might be needed to accommodate the project. We don't think that there are any zone changes that are needed to accommodate this. Um, the property has R4 zoning, which will accommodate the apartments that they're planning on doing. And if they wanna change the zone, they can to accommodate other parts of the project, but they don't have to. And then the B4 and the I2 will allow the adaptive reuse, and if you remember, you just approved the, um, ShowProp Lexington Adaptive Reuse Project development plan, just within the recent past, probably about a month ago. Um, about a year ago, the adaptive reuse text amendment was requested by Pepper Distillery, and that was to accommodate their TIFF, um, project and the development that they wanted to do down there, their adaptive reuse project to proceed. And it was adopted by the council. It's now part of the zoning ordinance, and that will allow this project to go ahead, it allowed the, the Manchester Street development to go ahead, and it will allow others in the future to be done as well. As far as environmental issues associated with the property, we don't know of any, but if any are found, they're gonna have to mitigate those in an appropriate manner, and stewardship of the land is one of the tenants of the comprehensive plan, so that will be in accordance with that. And we think that if the property is developed this way, with the aid of the tax increment financing, it'll be an implementation of several goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan, as well as the text of the plan. And so, um, we ask that you recommend approval of this to the council and certify that it is in com- compliance. And if you have any questions, I'll be glad to happy to, glad to answer them. And Ms. Westover is here, and Ms. Tuttle is here, and Mr. Tate is here as well, and they may be able to answer any other questions that you would have. Any questions for, for Ms. Rikers? No. Yes? I just have a question. Yes. The pedestrian bridge, what, where is that going to? What neighborhood is that? I was just curious on, I didn't have this drawing last night, so I'm just trying to figure out what neighborhood it's connecting. It's not exactly- Neighborhood. ... neighborhoods. I think it goes more to the university campus. Chris, is that correct? Goes over to Scott Street. Scott Street. Yeah, part of the new Town Park extension, the Scott Street connector. All right, thank you. Mm-hmm. Any other questions? Mr. Holmes? Yeah, wh- when you talk about the TIFF and the, uh- I'll get you in a second. ... potential public projects, at what point do you know if those are gonna be projects certain? The council, from what I understand, the council can say they want something to be included or they don't want something to be included, and then the state has the ultimate decision on that. They make the final decision. But it can be based on what the council recommends and, or they can, I think they can probably say, you know, we don't care what the council recommended, we'll do, you know, we'll approve or not approve what we think is appropriate. Well, I mean, when we talk about the proposed projects eligible for funding, are, are, I mean, I guess all these can be eligible, but how do we know which ones are, are gonna go into this project? All of, all of the ones that are listed are gonna be included as part of the packet- Mm-hmm. ... to go to the council and then on to the state. Okay. Parking structure? Right, right. And all of those? Anything else? Mr. Owens? Thank you. Yeah. Ms. Rackers, as a follow-up to what Mr. Holmes was talking about, the eligible improvements. Uh, you know, I'm curious as to, you know, my knowledge is as far as the TIFF is mostly public-related, public facilities- Right. ... and so forth. Uh, building demolition, grading, et cetera, and then the railroad access road. You know, to me, I don't see that as a public type facility much as the, much as the, uh, uh, pedestrian bridge, or the parking structure, or anything like that. Can you explain that to- for me? I can't, but I think probably one of the other three could. I'm Harold Tape, the Downtown Development Authority, and the state statute allows you to use things such as demolition. Anything to prepare the site for the project, they do consider a type of public improvement, so they do allow you to do those as well. And then in terms of the access for the railroad, railroads have more legal ability than others do, so they are allowed to include that as part of the, uh, TIFF application as well. So what you do is you ask, generally, you ask for more, because once you submit your TIFF application, you can't go back and alter it. You can remove, but you can't add to it, so you try to add as much as you can at the top. Okay. Ms. Phillips? I, I don't know if Ms. Rackers or, or Mr. Tate might be able to answer this, but can you give us, uh, uh, an update on where the Center Point TIFF project stands? Um, excuse me, the courthouse area? Right. Is that what you would call that? Um, at the September meeting, that project was approved, um, and it was about 69 million that were allocated for the project. There's a two-year period where that project can be on hold or start. At the end of two years, you can go back and ask for a two-year extension as well. In the October meeting, which is, I think it's the 27th, the Distillery District will be, uh, voted on and move forward. Is this, is this a state body? Is this- Yes. It's through the Office of Economic Development. I'm sorry? Office of Economic Development in Frankfurt. So, so our first TIFF district just got, uh, um, its first kind of funding approval in Frankfurt? Mm-hmm. And then you expect it to be wrapped up the 27th, or whatever the date is? On the 27th is the hearing for the Distillery District. Okay. They d- they separate them head th- uh, s- the courthouse overlay first, and then the Distillery District in October. Thank you. Any other questions? Ms. Westover? Hello, I'm Chris Westover. I'm, uh, the attorney representing the developer for this project. Uh, I think Barbara has covered it all, and I won't go into the photographs or anything else unless you want to. I think her report was extremely comprehensive. One quick point, there was a question about the pedestrian bridge. I can't see it very well. You may be able to see it better behind me, but that is the rendering of the bridge that crosses the railroad track, and on the, just out of view of the frame, there will be, um, I guess a pedestal of some sort, and it will tie into Newtown Pike when Newtown Pike extension is constructed. This will allow access from UK, which is across South Broadway, um, to use the pedestrian bridge, which will be fully accessible to pedestrians as well as bicyclists. It will also allow anybody from the north side living all along the Newtown Pike route to use the pedestrian bridge to cross over as well as, I guess, you could choose from South Broadway to use it. And it will come out into, um, uh, a building. You can see it here. On the second floor will be a restaurant that will have amazing, um, visibility to the downtown skyline, because this site is very high. And then, um, uh, there will be a, a, a way, I guess an elevator to get from the bridge itself down below, and, uh, so that's how the pedestrian bridge will, will be done. It will be open to the public. It will be a public improvement. And- Any questions for Ms. Westover? Ms. Westover, I've got one for you. I was reading through this. What is the Iconic Tower? The Iconic Tower, that's, that's what, for lack of a better word, that's what it's called, but you can see again, I don't think the lighting is very good, but it's that big tall thing immediately in the middle of that, um, uh, slide there. And it's meant to be, um, a, a, a beacon really. It's gonna be on a high point, and you'll be able to see it from a, a distance from downtown and all around. The, the last I heard, it was proposed to be some sort of metal, but it would be lit with some sort of LED lighting, and, um, it would be, um, a, I guess, a signpost, a gateway to not only that, um, uh, part of Newtown Pike extension, but to that whole new district that's going to be created, um, and anchored by this particular property. So it's gonna give competition to the blue building? Is that what's gonna happen? I think it will be taller than the blue building because it's on a higher piece of ground, and, uh, maybe it won't be lit blue either. Well, I'm just glad they're not calling the blue building an Iconic Tower. That's good. That's good to know. Any other questions for Ms. Westover? If not, thank you, Chris. Anybody in the audience want to comment on this? Ms. Rikers, do you have anything else for us? No, thank you. Then if you'll help me understand, w- w- if- if we choose to approve this, you will ask us to sign a statement that says that this, uh- Correct, and I have that at your place for you to sign. ... that this confirm- this, um, is part of the development that also, uh, fits in with the comprehensive plan, fits the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan. So when you vote to do this or not do this, you're asking me to sign this that says it does conform with the comprehensive plan? Yes. We do recommend this TIF district, and it'll be sent on to the council for their public hearing. Is that right, Mr. Da- Mr. Westover? Okay, you understand what we're doing here? Uh, is there any more discussion? Are we ready for a motion? Mr. Owens? Uh, yes, Mr. Chairman. I'll- I'll move for approval of this TIF district. Uh, uh, I'm sorry. I- I will move for approval of this TIF district. Um, is there any r- reason to read what you have? I'll leave that to the ... Do we need to read this into the record, or are we all right? I think if you adopt the findings and recommendations in the staff report that's been repaired- prepared, as you do with- with other motions that you have, that should be fine. So that'll be in your motion, Mr.- So moved. Second by Ms. Richardson. Any discussion? If not, we're ready to vote. Motion passes. Thank you, and good luck with the council. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thanks. Did you all do that to yourself? I sat on the floor. Did you? Give that back to me. This whole meeting's back there, man. You think? Gosh, I hope so. Okay, Chris. All right, I have one last item. It is on page six of your agenda, the bottom of page six. Under staff items, this is item B. It is Plan 2009-52F Highacre Shopping Center Amended. This is a final record plat that was approved in front of the Planning Commission on June 11th, 2009. It's for property located at 1784, 1816, and 1820 Bryan Station Road. The property is located outside of New Circle. This is Bryan Station, this is Saint Anthony Drive, and the property is three lots making up the shopping center there. The purpose of this plan was to reduce the building lines on the entirety of the property, uh, to the required building lines of the, of the B-1 zone, which is 20 feet. Uh, the plan, like I said, was approved on June 11th, uh, with condition number eight, uh, requiring that the applicant add building line information from the previous plats. Try to get that a little closer so you guys can see it. Um, the applicant or the staff has brought this back before you to remove condition number eight. Um, give you a little bit of history on that condition. It was orig- ... When the plan was originally brought in, uh, there was some confusion on our part during the review about whether or not the applicant was requesting to remove the building line on the entirety of the property or just along the frontage of Bryan Station and Saint Anthony. Condition number eight was added for technical committee as well as subdivision committee that they add the building line information along the rear and sides of the property, 'cause our understanding is they were just requesting it along the frontage of Bryan Station and Saint Anthony. At subdivision committee, the applicant made it clear that their intention was to remove the building lines th- through- throughout the rear and side, and to reduce to the zone minimum along the frontage of the road. There was discussion at subdivision committee, and the motion was made to approve the plan. However, that condition was not removed at that time. The ... This item was on the consent agenda two weeks later in front of ... on June 11th, and they now have a condition which is essentially unmeetable because they ... there is no building line information to add from the previous plats. What you see from the minutes- Oops. ... is basically where staff made the presentation in front of the Planning Commission and made it clear that the applicant's desire was to reduce that building line throughout the property. So we have brought this plan back before you to remove that condition in order to make it cer- certifiable. Uh, if you have any questions, I'd be happy to try to answer them. Any questions for Chris? I assume you're recommending approval of this? Yeah, staff is recommending approval, and deleting condition number eight. Ms. Richardson's moved approval to this. Mr. Owens has seconded it. With- with the deletion of? Number eight. Number eight. Right. The reason we brought it back. Yes, please. Any discussion on the motion? We ready to vote? Yeah, Mike did. Motion passes. Thank you, Chris. We have, um, I guess, Mr. Salley, you've got a announcement for us or a request for us. Well, there wa- is one other staff item there. I thought perhaps the commission wasn't interested in that and you just wanted to proceed on. No. Um- ... the staff, uh, would recommend that you consider canceling your work session previously scheduled for October 29th. Uh, you do have a work session scheduled next week on the 15th in this chamber, uh, at 1:30 at the usual time. I guess this is a good news/bad news, uh, issue. The good news is we think that you can get by with just one work session this month. Uh, the bad news is if you do so, next week will probably be a full afternoon. But, uh- Thank you. ... all in all, we think that, uh, you could get by with just one work session in October if the commission wishes. Uh, you would need to amend your meeting and filing schedule to do so though. Thank you. Chair will entertain a motion to delete the October 29th meeting and to get a commitment to come for the 15th meeting that, uh- ... that we'll try to get our work done on the 15th. Um, Mr. Chair. Yes, ma'am. Don't you- don't you think it's maybe more appropriate that the, um, members of the zoning committee meet that day since the members of the subdivision committee met this past Thursday and that sort of even things out? Maybe that helps. Well, to- to- to respond to your question, no I don't think so. And the other one is it sounds like sour grapes to me. And it is. All right, you heard the motion and it's been seconded. Let's vote. Mr. Chairman, can I just ask something of the staff? It would be so helpful if we could get a copy of the agenda at least in advance of our work sessions. A day or two in advance would be really helpful. Uh, I'll relay that on to, to Mr. King. He and, uh, the chair usually develop that agenda. Mr. Penn, there is one more staff item. Yes, ma'am. That I didn't get on the agenda. We have an APA audio conference next Wednesday from 4:00 to 5:30 and it's called Monetizing Sustainability and it'll count for one and a half training credits for Planning Commission and staff and Board of Adjustment members. And if anybody plans to attend, please let me know by Tuesday afternoon and I'll be glad to have everything set up. So you're looking right at me and saying I need to come to this. Whoever. It's, it's next Wednesday. What time line? Next Wednesday, from 4:00 to 5:30. How many of y'all want to join me? It does count toward your required training hours. That's the good news. And, and that'll be in the planning in conference room on seventh floor in Phoenix building. Okay, you've heard, you've heard her, uh, announcement on that. Is there anything else, Mr. Salley? Not from the staff, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Anything for the commission? If not, we'll stand adjourned. Sheriff John Brown always hated me. For what, I don't know. And every time that I plant a seed. He said kill it before it grows. He said kill it before it grows. I said- I shot the sheriff. But I swear it wasn't self-defense. I shot the-