First item of business will be approval of the minutes from the October 8th meeting. Mr. Owens? Mr. Chairman, I'll move for approval of the minutes as written, uh, from the meeting of October 8th, 2009. Second. Are there any corrections or additions? Should ask for that first. If not, all in favor of approving the minutes as presented, please vote. And we're gonna ask you today not to hit your screen until, uh, the motion's been made and you see it. And that way we won't- No. ... be jamming up the system. I know, I've told you more than I know about it, so, uh, we'll just leave it at that. Motion passes, meeting is approved. Postponements and withdrawals. Mr. Little? That's a record. No postponements, withdrawals. Where's Rory? All right, moving right along. Mr., Mr. Sally, we have any no discussion items? Mr. Chairman, I'm, uh, pleased to tell you most of the items on your agenda that are subdivision and development plans do qualify for consideration on your consent agenda. Uh, the first appears on the very first page of your agenda, item A. This is plan 2009-132F, a final record plat for Beaumont Farm Unit 1, Section 5, Lot 1. This is, involves property at 940 Midnight Pass. The next item on your agenda at the top of page two, item B, is plan 2009-133F, a final record tamp, record plat, rather, for Prahl Town, also known as the Okeson property. This involves property at 174 through 176 Prahl Street. These are both final subdivision plans recommended for conditional approval by your subdivision committee. The next two items on your meeting agenda are final subdivision plans that have been recommended for reapproval by your subdivision committee. Item C is plan 2005-277F, Guest Property, Unit 4G. The next item on your agenda is page two, item D, final record plat, plan 2005-283F, Guest Property, Unit 5F. These both involve property with an address, uh, portions of 4040 and 4044 Todds Road. There are also three final development plans that qualify for your consent agenda. The first appears on page four, item B of your meeting agenda, DP 2009-84, Hermstead Nursing Home property located at 1612 Versailles Road. Item C on that same page is DP 2009-72, a final development plan for Chevy Chase Subdivision Unit 19, Lot 7, involving property at 310 Romney Road. The final plan on your consent agenda is item D on page four, DP 2009-88. This is an amended final development plan for New Past, which is property located at 620 to 628 West Main Street. Mr. Chairman, unless a member of the audience or a member of the planning commission wishes to pull any of these items from your consent agenda, uh, your conditional approval of these can be considered at this time. Is there anybody in the audience that wants to pull either one, one of these off the consent agenda? Is there anybody on the commission that wants to pull one of these off and have a hearing in it? If not, then the chair will entertain a motion to accept the, the items that are on the consent agenda. Mr. Chairman, I move that we accept all the items on the consent agenda for December 10th. Is there a second? Second. All right. You've heard the motion. You've heard the seconds. Any discussion? If not, all in favor of accepting the consent agenda as presented, when it shows on your screen you need to vote. Mr. Sally, consent agenda passes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We do have a couple of more plans to, uh, have full presentations, and we'll be prepared to begin on those in just a moment. Thank you. Thank you. No, we can't do that. We gotta hear that one. We approve. Mr. Barton. Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, first item on today's agenda is on page three, at the top of the page. It is item E, plan 200973F, Lexington Housing Authority. This is a final record plat that was previously approved by this body on August 13th, 2009. They are proposing ... I, I'll orient you, pardon me. First of all, again, it's out on Georgetown Street. It is just s- short of New Circle Road, it's inside New Circle Road. It is on the east side of the property, near Douglas Park. Across the road, I believe you have c- some community action facilities, uh, and that and some businesses. Uh, this is a record plat that is proposing to create 17 lots, 16 are buildable. It is a portion of the Hope Six project that the housing authority, uh, is currently constructing. Uh, they have a street that comes in, as you can see, the loop street here. This area is detention and open space. Here is a green space and open space lot as well that is connected to the, the drainage system proposed for this project. They are back before you today to request a waiver. You'll find handed out a white report. As I stated before, this is a part of the Hope Six project. This property is owned by the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government, and in this situation, as a- ... part of the participation by the local government in the Hope Six Project, the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government is actually constructing the infrastructure for this subdivision. And the waiver that you're being requested to approve today is a waiver of the surety requirements on bonding or, uh, posting a surety instrument to insure the construction of the public improvements. Uh, also, an associated waiver with that is a waiver of the Urban County Engineer's Certification stating that a surety has been posted with that office. Uh, it's, uh, staff's opinion that, uh, the government is building the infrastructure and that there's really no need for the government, or in this case, the applicant, the Lexington Housing Authority, to post a bond for the construction of public improvements that the government is in fact building for the project. And, uh, with that, that you will find that staff is recommending approval of this waiver. If there's any questions... Any questions for Mr. Martin? All right. Thank you. Mr. Martin, is there a development plan to go with this? It is just this preliminary sub, uh, the, the plat that you see before you today. That's what I figured, but I wanted to be sure. All right. Any questions for Mr. Martin? Does the waiver ... And let me ask legal. Does the waiver need to be part of the motion or do we make that a separate motion? Usually it's done separate. I think it could be done either way, but usually there's a separate motion for the waiver and then for the plan. Okay. Then we'll- Just miss- ... In this case, Mr. Chairman, the waiver is really the only thing on your agenda. The plan's already been approved. Right. One motion would be sufficient. Okay, sir. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Is there anyone here from the Housing Authority who wants to speak to this? Good afternoon. I'm Steve Garland. I'm an engineer with Sherman Carter Barnhart representing the Housing Authority. I have nothing to add, but I am present for any questions. Any questions? If not, thank you, sir. Thank you. Anybody in the audience wanna speak to this? Well, moving right along then, we'll turn it over to the commission. Ms. Phillips? Um, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to move approval of the, um, of the waiver request, um, 2009-73F for Lexington Housing Authority, waiving them of the requirement to post, um, bonding for the public infrastructure, um, per the staff's recommendations. Is there a second? Second. Motion has been made and seconded. Do we understand the motion? Is there any discussion on the motion? If not, when you see it on the screen, we'll vote. Motion passes. Thank you. Mr. Martin. Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, the next item to be heard on your agenda is immediate below the previous item on page three, under development plans. It is DP2009-27, Ramsey Sullivan property. This is an amended preliminary development plan. This property, again, is known as the Ramsey Sullivan property. It is located out on Georgetown Road. To the north is I75, I64, with the ramp bordering the property along the north. Here we have the Norfolk Southern Railway that borders the property along the west. Here we have Spur Road bordering the property here at the south. This is the Linley School. Here is where you recently had a zone change for the Budweiser Beer Distributor. Here is Innovation Drive. And just recently, of course, you approved a development plan for Big Ass Fans, and we discussed at length, you may recall, the timing and construction of Innovation Drive. So before you today, you have this proposed amended preliminary development plan. The area of the amendment is the multifamily area that you can see rendered for you here in the rear. This area through here and here is all single family and proposed for single family development. We have a P1 area here and a B1 area here. Uh, there are final development plans for this property here. And here, there is an apartment development with 240 approved units. You just recently approved an amended plan, Hittinjoy Circle. You may recall, with the townhouses, and we had a lot of discussion about an easement and that sort of thing here in this area, 45 townhouses. The purpose of this amendment is to add 196 multifamily units to this area, revise the parking and the access to the area. This will bring the total number of units to 1,149 units for the entire property. This plan was submitted several months ago and initially recommended for postponement. You can see on your agenda, there were a considerable number of conditions. These conditions primarily related to a lack of information on the original submission. Uh, subsequently, after various meetings and working with the applicant, we were, or we did receive revised plans. Most recently at a meeting, we received one on December 8th, and that's the one that you see before you today. Uh, we've handed out to you a pink slip, a, a pink paper. These are the revised staff recommendations on this plan. The first nine are very standard. You can see that we modified many of the others, because they were basic cleanup conditions concerning the lack of information on the original submittal. We are asking that they do provide building coverage, floor area, and floor area ratio statistics as required by Article 21. We also have several conditions that we feel are appropriate to be resolved at the time of the final development plan. Uh, these specifically, they have identified an approximate cemetery location in this part of the property. You all, of course, have adopted new standards on how those are to be treated. Uh, this, we understand from the applicant, is a very approximate location, and because of the very definite standards that now exist, we believe it would be appropriate that when a final development plan that's really, that's going to show the planning commission how they fully intend to really build the property, that would be appropriate time to deal with that cemetery. Uh, it should also give the applicant time to verify if that location is correct. In addition to that, we have a condition on this street connection that we think also would be appropriate at the time of a final development plan or preliminary subdivision plan, and that, again, based on what they finally wish to build, will dictate how they ultimately configure this. This will also require waiver of the subdivision regulations if they stay with this particular design. There is a conditional zoning requirement on this plan that remains. It concerns the area immediately at the front of this amended area in that they have to have a park that will ultimately be dedicated to the Urban County government. I'll highlight that for you. That's this area in here. Uh, two acres is what will be required, eventually be dedicated to the Urban County government. This area in here, little less than two acres or more than one. This area is greater than two acres, but they are going to have to accommodate some detention in this area, so, uh, we do feel that that can be fully delineated at the time of final development plan as well. One of the major concerns that staff had, and we met with the applicant, uh, several times and talked about this at length, was the important consideration of an access point into this development, because this amendment is increasing the density of the multifamily by 196 units. The other item that concerned us was improvements to Spur Road, and it's been on this plan from day one, that concern, and when it would be addressed has been an issue. Here's the road system as it comes in. This has been built. This is the primary street into the development, and again, it will serve the multifamily. There was considerable concern about a second entrance due to e- emergency response time. This street has been platted, in fact, and constructed, and all this platted. Everything above this pink line, with the exception of this area of the amendment, has been platted on final record plats, or is governed by approved final development plans. It is this area in here that will have to be brought back to you with an amended plan before they can build this infrastructure. So this connection was very important to us and of, of great concern if they needed emergency response and this area was blocked. Now, it's, it's a very, very common concern for, uh, planning and for other, uh, divisions of the government, and so we discussed the timing of this section. We also wanted to talk about Spur Road and those improvements, and... We have come up in working with the applicant with an acceptable cross-section. It's acceptable to the traffic, uh, division of traffic engineering. It's acceptable to our pedestrian planner, and it will be subject to the approval of KDOT as well. But they've agreed to do improvements along Spur Road. Uh, there'll be a widening. There will be turn lanes provided with room within the turn lanes and along a shoulder, a paved shoulder for a bike lane and then a sidewalk as well. And again, this falls within the staff's concern about appropriate connections for both pedestrian and bicycle users in the area. The concern that staff had about having these built in a timely manner is under your new condition 14. And again, that's on your pink sheet that we handed out to you. We have reached a agreement with the applicant that at such time that they have constructed 75% of the dwelling units and that is 862 units and that covers all the remaining single family area below this pink line, as well as, uh, approximately a third of these multi-family units back here. And when they reach that number, they have to build this and they have to do the improvements to Spur Road before they can pull any more permits and build any more units. Uh, this number, the 75/25 breakdown, is very consistent with, uh, standard staff has used on other properties in the past. And, uh, at this time, with these revisions to the plan and with the many meetings and negotiations we've had with the applicant, staff, uh, does recommend approval of this plan. If you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer them. Any questions for Mr. Martin? Mr. Owens? Yeah. Uh, Mr. Martin, when you say "they" just to clarify, the improvements on Spur Road, it's going to, the improvements are going to be provided by the developer? By the developer. Yes, sir. Okay. I'm sorry. Um, do we have any sort of number as to what has been built there unit-wise so far? Not exactly. No, sir. Uh, I can, I can tell you, uh, there are quite a few single family homes have been constructed and the applicant may have a better feel for the total number. I believe there are some vacant lots that remain in the area. I can tell you that none of these apartments have been built. Mm-hmm. And, uh, I think they've permitted some of the Kit and Joy Townhouses, but not all of them, again, because they have an amended plan that you approved- Hmm. ... that is awaiting certification on this area. Though most of the single family area has been built out, but I don't believe all of it. I'm just, I'm just curious with what they're proposing as far as the multi-family development there. Wh- you know, where that will be percentage wise at, at that time. Just curious. Yes, sir. And, and that is why you'll see the number of 862 includes both single and multi-family units that the staff agreed to. Any other questions for Mr. Martin? Ms. Phillips? Um, condition 11 on the pink sheet speaks to noise abatement. Can you, can you, um, elaborate on that? Where are we talking about the need for... Thank you very much. And if you could also, um, advise as to the regulatory, um, requirements associated with it. Is there a zoning ordinance amendment? No, ma'am. Uh, this is one of these things we've tried to work with over the years. The council, at zone changes has tried to work with over the years. It's something we try to do specific to properties. You may recall that this property had a conditional zoning for a berm, which you removed through a zone change. Um, it was determined that that really wouldn't serve the purpose. Uh, those sound abatement needs to be engineered, uh, very precisely. Walls, berms, those sorts of things. They can actually make the problem worse if you're not careful. We did talk to them because one simple thing you can do and they've done this on this plan, is just orientation. And if you will orient buildings away from or put the narrow side of a building, for instance, close to the what creates the noise, that helps tremendously. By the same token, you have to look at what will work because, again, noise can be amplified by these structures as well. Uh, so it-it's a very ticklish technical problem. My, my question is are we trying to abate for the railroad tracks, I-75, I-64? I mean, it seems that this, this property is, um, is, uh, encircled on three sides by... It, it is. Do you always get shits? And we would like to do all we could for both. The most severe noise tends to come from the railroads. Um, the noise along here tends to be one of those good old steady hums. Uh, if you've ever lived near an interstate, and I have, they just kind of hum in the background considerably. Uh, but it's, it is, it is a ticklish technical problem to really do it correctly. Is, um, the... Mike is just telling me that, uh, this property is, sits at a different grade than the interstate. Is this higher or lower than the interstates? I believe this property is lower and that was one of the issues. Uh, um, pardon me, higher. This part is higher. And that also- Lower than the railroad. ... the topography of this property affected the reason the berm was determined not to be very effective along the railroad track. Mr. Martin, are, are you expecting this... In, in, as opposed to the berm, are you expecting to see some other noise abatement along the railroad tracks? We would... Hopefully at the time of the final development plan, we would like to have very serious discussions about what would work, uh, considering the size and scope of that proposal for the future residents of that area, yes. And, and again, it's a, it's, it, uh, it's a very technical issue and requires serious engineering. There are specialists in the field. Any other questions for Mr. Martin? Tom, I've got one. On the cemetery, I mean is that of any size? Is it a family cemetery? What kind of cemetery are we talking about there? Mr. Penn, that's an excellent question and we've talked with the applicant and perhaps they can elaborate on it. Apparently when the State of Kentucky did the highway improvements for the interstate, their surveyors and designers located that, but not with any great accuracy, and to my knowledge, no one's done any research on the nature or size of it. All right, thank you. Any other questions for Mr. Martin? All right, sir. Applicant? Thank you. Tony Barrett with Barrett Partners on behalf of, uh, the applicant. The, uh, I don't know the exact number of, uh, of units built, um, but there's a, uh... Tom kinda in- or indicated that the, the condominium apartments, uh, none of those have been built, uh, but they've been a final record plat recorded, so we're counting those as buildable units within our 75/25%, uh, numbers. The, uh, uh, this area has mostly been, or it's been developed as single family homes, uh, up to here and down to the pink line, uh, but that doesn't mean... They're, they're all lots, but there's not houses on all those lots and, uh, I don't know the percent, but, uh, it hasn't been as successful a- as of late as, uh, as Arlo would have liked. Um, the road here was designed as a, uh, wide boulevard and could function, uh, up until that point as a... If, if there were a need and one side of it could be closed, there's lane enough on the other side of the median to, uh, create two-way traffic on a temporary basis and until the wreck or whatever is, is cleaned up or emergency vehicles could get around it. Uh, so that was, uh, effectively functioning as, as two roads paralleling. Um, so that, uh, allows benefit to that. Uh, my understanding of the cemetery, uh, in the, uh, the deed for the, uh, for the or- original parent track of this, which included land that became the interstate made reference to a cemetery. There's never been a cemetery found, but, um, the surveyor just kind of tagged a cemetery on there when he saw it referenced in the deed to kind of raise alertness that there is a cemetery. It could have been in the right of way for all we know, and it's been relocated at some point or perhaps it's still there, but we've never been able to actually physically locate a cemetery, so during the final development plan review when a more thorough investigation can be done, they- that may be discovered, but, uh, we've respected the, uh, the location where the cemet- where the surveyor has tagged a cemetery, but I think it was really more just, uh, an alerting that there's a cemetery on the parent tract. And, uh, I think that's about all, I, I... I wanna thank staff for, uh, bearing with us and meeting with us on multiple occasions and trading email back and forth, uh, and coming to a, uh, an agreeable, uh, solution for the, for the, uh, for the plan. And if you have any further questions... Any questions for Mr. Barrett? Tony, I've got an overarching question there. The... Oh, I turned this thing off. Excuse me. This, uh, this connection to Spur Road that's on the development plan, uh, that will be done at the time Spur Road is, uh, is upgraded? Right. That, that, that's, uh, that is, uh... Well, I guess it could be done sooner, uh, but it... We, we have a limit number of building permits that can be issued before both the connection to Spur Road and the improvements to Spur Road can be made. I don't anticipate that it would be done earlier, but Spur Road improvements could happen first and then the connection or Spur Road connection and then the improvements, but I think by the nature of the, uh, of the site, uh, and the, the mass grading, uh, requirements for the Spur Road area there, it would be practical to do both of them at the same time, the improvements and the connection. Yeah, my, my reason for asking that is, is that the, the entrance off Spur Road, as, as I see that development plan, is pretty critical to the l- lower development of that, of that property. Right. So, I would assume that, that you all, and I want to just get that out on the table, that when Spur Road i- is improved and I think there's a plan to do that, then that entrance would definitely be, be on the development plan, would definitely be part of the plan. Yes. The, uh, the... The-- the area-- this area here, um, when- when this area is being developed, uh, the- the land lies such that you gotta, uh, borrow over here and move it over here to- to make the- the gravity of the sewer system work and the- and the feasibility of the development, so it's kind of a comprehensive, uh, solution. And when- and this is being developed, uh, this connection and the Spur Road, uh, improvements will be done concurrent. Okay. That's fine. Thank you. Did that answer your- It- it did. I was just concerned about ... 'Cause we've already zoned down the other side of Spur Road, and I was concerned about how that development was gonna eventually play out. Right. Okay. Any other questions for Mr. Barrett? Thank you, Tony. Thank you. Anybody in the audience want to speak to this? Mr. Martin, do you have any rebuttals? Mr. Barrett, you got anything you want to add? All right, if there's nobody in the audience wants to speak to it, uh, you've heard the presentation. You have the staff report on the pink sheet, and we'll turn it over to the Planning Commission for their discussion and/or motion. Mr. Cravens? Yes. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion for approval of DP2009-27, uh, on the revise, staff. And that would be 12 conditions? 14 conditions? 14 conditions. Yes, sir. Okay, sure. Second. Motion has been made and second. Is there any discussion? If not, when you see it on the screen, we'll vote. Thank you, Mr. Barrett. Motion carries. Yeah. You have at your, uh, at your chair the performance bonds on the white sheet. The Chair will entertain a motion to call and release the bonds. Mr. Owens? Mr. Chairman, I'll move for approval, uh, as far as the call and release of bonds as written, dated December 10th, 2009. Second? Second. Second Ms. Richardson. A discussion? If not, the Ch- Chair will entertain a motion to approve the call of re- release of the bonds as present on the white sheet. So moved. Okay. Mr. Martin, are we ready for the Land Subdivision Regulation Amendment? Yes, sir, unless, of course, you have any commission items that you'd like to bring up at this time. Hmm, that's a good point. We don't have any commission items, do we? We'll, uh, I guess, Mr. Martin, this is a good a time as any to do this. Uh, our bylaws state that we have to have a nominating committee, and, uh, the, uh, the Chair would like to point one at this time. And so I'll just go ahead and do that, and then we'll move right on in here for this. Uh, I'd like for Ms. Phillips to- to chair the nominating committee with Mr. Cravens and Mr. Holmes, and then you all report back to us. All right. Since these are the only people left on the nominating committee . Well, I've already, I've already called them, but let's hold them. We're- we're not that late. Mr. Martin, we're ready for the ... Thank you. Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, at the bottom of page four, you will see item A under Land Subdivision, um, Regulation Amendment. You will find a report that's been handed out to you in tan, along with a letter of support with it. You have been asked by the Urban County Council to review a proposal to amend your subdivision regulations to include, as a condition for granting a waiver of these regulations, an item 1-5D, Alternate Designs for Environmental Water Quality Considerations. This would be an amendment to your regulations that would allow this body to grant waivers to the subre- reg- subdivision regulations for the express purpose of allowing developers to construct green infrastructure elements into their development. ... as you all are aware, subdivision regulations lack, uh, flexibility at times to address, uh, innovative designs or p- perhaps even existing technologies that could address some of our concerns in this community about water quality. The important thing, uh, one of the important things staff would like to point out to you is that if a developer wants to pursue this waiver, they've got to come to before this body with a written report and they're going to have to demonstrate the merits of this proposal in meeting water quality and truly being green infrastructure. Staff thinks that's very important to bring that to your attention because we'd like to note that this is not a waiver request that would encourage cheap development or inadequate infrastructure in any way, but rather exactly how you see it before you today. The intent is to help address water quality issues in our community. Staff is recommending approval. We believe that this is very consistent with the intent of the subdivision regulations. Also, the level of review and justification for this waiver is, uh, very much in- uh, consistent with the intent of protecting public health and safety. Uh, you have before you a letter of support from the Fayette Alliance and they make a comment that I think staff would, would agree with and that is that this, uh, proposal is a progressive and an accountable measure. And staff would agree. We believe this is very much an accountable and, and progressive recommendation and amendment to your sub regs. And if you have any questions, I'll be happy to try to answer 'em. Any questions for Mr. Martin? ... Mr. King, excuse me. If there are no questions, uh, from the commission, Mr. Chairman, I just would like to make one maybe minor correction. I believe Mr. Martin stated that the council initiated this amendment when in fact the planning commission had initiated this amendment pursuant to some work that was being done, uh, in government staff level on, on consent decree. Uh, the other thing I just wanted to mention, of course, I think you're familiar in your comprehensive plan, our chapter on green infrastructure, uh, certainly has a broader definition that's contained in this amendment. And as we move forward and work on more elements of green infrastructure and the green infrastructure plan, we may be coming back at some time in the future to expand this definition. But, uh, we are all very pleased with what we've got here before you today and think it will open the door, a- again, to some innovative design work in this area. All right. Any other questions for Mr. King or Mr. Martin? If not, then we will, uh, we will turn this over to the commission for your discussion and or motion. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to move, um, approval of SRA 2009-4. Um, the amendment to article 1-5D and article 1-14 to allow alternate designs for environmental water quality considerations per the staff recommendations. Is there a second? Second. Motion has been made and seconded. Any discussion on the motion? If not, when you see it on the screen, we'll vote. The motion carries. Thank you. Okay. Ms. Rikers? I think she's trying to get her thing queued up. Good afternoon. Ms. Rikers. This is on page five of your agenda, item C under Commission Items. Ms. Rikers. Yes, sir? Could you pull that mic down till we can hear? There you go. Sure. I didn't realize you couldn't. Um, it's a review of a TIF application for the Red Mile mixed-use development and they're asking for a blighted urban mixed-use redevelopment area TIF district. And the boundary of the district, you can see on this map right here, it goes, um, up to the intersection of Versailles Road and all the way around down to the intersection of South Broadway and then comes around like this. Doesn't include the harness track and doesn't include Tattersalls and it does not include the stables that are near South Broadway nor does it in- include, um, the Stable of Memories, which is right there. Originally, it was figured to be about 83 acres and now it's thought to be closer to 77. I guess they did a little bit more detailed survey of the property. But it's all of the property that was included in the zone change that you acted on a couple of weeks ago, and it also, like I said, it includes the Red Mile right of way and the intersections of South Broadway and Versailles Road. And that can be seen up here. You can see the delineation of the intersections right there. Um, the red or the Stable of Memories will not be part of the TIF district, but it will be part of the overall redevelopment of the property that they're gonna share parking with the Red Mile, so that will be considered part of the, part of the overall redevelopment of the property. And the proposed public improvements that are e- eligible for TIF funding are all listed on page two of your staff report. A lot of them are the same types of improvements as previous TIF applications that we've had. Um, this will also include the widening of Red Mile Road from Unity Drive to Versailles Road and the intersection improvements at South Broadway and Versailles. It'll also con- um, contain a connection to the Angliana Avenue developments that you've approved recently, including the show prop development that we had as a TIF and that we had as a development plan. And all of the things that are listed there are potential improvements, um, but it'll be up to the Irving County Council to make the final decision as to what will be sent on to the state as the, as the TIF application. Then the private improvements include residential, which will be apartments and condominiums. It'll be residential and mixed use, it'll be office and mixed use, and then there will be ho- a hotel and then also entertainment venues. We reviewed the 2000 plan, comprehensive plan relative to this development plan and many elements of the comp plan either support or in- su- or, are supported by this development plan for the Red Mile. The mission statement and the vision for Lexington, um, supply the basis for land use decisions and development, and that includes urban design. And the intent is to provide a vision for physical development in Lexington to allow Lexington to grow while maintaining all the elements that make it a good place to, to live and work. And then as part of this vision, the comp plan lays out eight themes and then six of those themes, which are listed on pages two and three of your staff report, are particularly applicable to this Red Mile TIF development plan. There's also 21 goals and then related objectives in the plan that are in the goals. Um, 16 of those are applicable to this and several objectives of each of those goals and then objectives of two additional goals all relate to this, and those are all listed on pages 3 to 13 of your staff report. The land use element supports this. Um, if you remember the downtown master planning project was done as part of the 2000 plan comp- plan update, and although the Red Mile isn't within downtown it's just beyond the area designated as the downtown master plan, which is on this side of Angliana Avenue. If you remember with the show prop development, that was part of the downtown master plan area. So, um, once this is developed and once the show prop area is developed with the connection it can be considered as, uh, as an extension of downtown and especially with the connection that they're proposing or that they're studying as part of the, um, Safe by Design study. They're proposing a pedestrian connection from downtown to the Red Mile. So that will, that will functionally extend downtown to the Red Mile property and then that'll provide a logical boundary. This will provide a logical boundary for downtown uses because the commercial uses that are farther out are getting to be more suburban in nature it seems. And then there are several principles of the downtown plan element that are embodied in the project and those are on page 14. That would be to increase residential development, invest in a pedestrian network, maximize density in vacant sites, celebrate urban entrances, and change land use. The comp plan recommends semi-public land use for this property, which is, um, it's land use that is for the benefit of the community but it's not owned by the public. Um, it also states in the comp plan that the s- that the Red Mile Racetrack should be reviewed through a small area plan, and during the summer and spring of 2009, it was a five month process, there was a working group that reviewed the issues that are related to the d- um, to the Red Mile Racetrack and possible uses that would be good and desirable and possible uses that would be undesirable for the property. And so that is another embodiment of the comprehensive plan that there are several goals and objectives that relate to and encourage public involvement in, in the comp plan d- and land use process in Lexington and so that was a perfect example of, of implementation of the comp plan. The meetings, like I said, fleshed out in- issues of concern, such as traffic and storm water, and those issues will be addressed through the redevelopment of the property. And, um, the level of work and involvement in that process, it was just, it was unbelievable the way the people, people ... some of 'em started out hostile, and they just came totally around to, you know, to seeing and, and to interacting with us, which was a really, really good thing to see. And this Red Mail Development Plan, you've all gotten a copy of this in the past, but this, um, was developed as an alternative to a more formalized smell area plan, which was one of the recommendations of the 2000 plan. And it accomplishes what a small area plan would do, which is to come up with land use options and, and, um, determine the best use of the land to, to serve the community. And one of the recommendations in that development plan was a zone change to MU3 to accommodate the uses that they're planning on doing here. And, um, that would include high density residential and mixed use, which was what was recommended in the comprehensive plan. So, this development plan is in compliance with the comp plan and it supports several goals and objectives as well as the text of the plan. And it's consistent with previous plans, such as the 1990 South Broadway Corridor Plan, which was adopted as part of the 1990, 1988 comprehensive plan and the 2000 comprehensive plan, 2001 comprehensive plan. And then part of the certification of this, and Mr. Penn, you have, I hope, the, the certification up there at your place. Okay. Yes. Um, part of that is, um, a recommendation for any zone changes or tax amendments or any other changes that might be needed to accommodate this, and we've already had the text amendment to the MU3 zone. That's already part of the zoning ordinance. And you acted on the zone change to MU3 just a few weeks ago, and that has been forwarded onto the cr- to the council. And they have given that first reading already and the second reading will probably be in January, so that is in the process. And the preliminary development plan was also recommended for approval and certified so that we could send the zone change on to the council. That's already done. There are a couple of environmental issues related to the properties within the TIFF boundary, and one is a cave, which is ... located in this area right here. And then there are some closed contours which may be sinkholes that haven't been determined positively to be sinkholes, but they're up generally in this area. And so if they are determined to be sinkholes, then they'll have to, they'll have to, um, have, they'll have to develop that accordingly with best management practices if, you know, if they are determined to be sinkholes. Cave area is not to be developed, and that'll have to be delineated on the final development plan as a no development area. Um, but as I, as I said before, um, this encompasses and embodies several goals and objectives of the comp plan, the text of the comp plan. The property is not specifically within downtown, but it will be functionally an extension of downtown, and there are two, two statements of the comprehensive plan that once, once this property is developed, it'll be just a total embodiment of it. Says, "The need for a vibrant, dynamic, and growing downtown area continues to be one of the most important elements of the overall growth management strategy of the 2007 Comprehensive Plan. Since the adoption of the 2001 plan update, extensive efforts have been undertaken to enhance recent trends and development activity that bode well for a major renaissance of Lexington's downtown area. Recent trends and development activity have shown that downtown is an attractive place to live. This residential component of downtown is viewed as key to downtown's future, as downtown and the immediate vicinity are inherently attractive to both younger and older residents due to diversity, walkability, entertainment, proximity to major universities and many other factors. A number of recent projects are underway which will add additional living space to downtown, often in a mixed-use development." So we see that the creation of the TIFF district for this property is gonna implement, um, several parts of the do- of the comprehensive plan, the downtown master plan as well as the rest of the comprehensive plan. We ask your approval of this, and Mr. Harvey is here from Urban Collage and Mr. Duncan is here from the, he was the attorney for the Red Mile, if you have any questions that I can't answer. And I will be glad to try to answer any questions that you might have. Any questions for Ms. Riker? Mr. Riker, the- Yes, sir. You, you outlined what has been done up to this point. If this commission certifies, uh, the compliance with the comp plan, and what, what's the next stage? What happens after that? It gets sent to the Urban County Council and then they, they study it and they send it, they decide what will be included in the TIFF district, or as the improvements that they will fund or that they want funded. And then it'll be sent on to the state, and then there are multiple agencies of the state that will study this and, and make a recommendation. Once that's done, if, if they approve it, then the urban county government and the state enter into a, um, an agreement and then the TIFF district is implemented. So, so the council will determine which one of these projects that they want to include. Right, right. And it's like Mr. Tate said the last time, he said you, they include like more than, many more than might be approved just- Okay. ... because they can't add on to later. They can delete them, but they can't add on to 'em. All right. Any other questions for ... Phillips? Um, could ... I don't know a whole lot about the TIFF process, but can you explain to me what happens, um, after Frankfurt approves that, then the, the urban county government receives authority to bond the improvements, and ... I'm not sure. Mr. King can you tell me what happens? And then I want to know what happens 30 years out. Um, you know, we've, we've bonded for 30 years or whatever that time period is, and what happens if the, if the sales tax revenue doesn't assist to the ... The general operating fund. I really don't know, so any answer I would give would be speculative, but if my understanding is that their general obligation bonds, and that's why, um, you know, you don't go in all the way up that deep at first. Um, and, um, you know, and my, my recollection is that, uh, the length of the agreement is finite and at some point you stop collecting the revenues and dedicating it towards it, then it goes back into a normal situation. But, uh, we'd be glad to see if we can find someone that could, uh, give more information. That would just be, I mean, it's not, it's not imperative, but, um- We might know that answer before the next TIF application. Well, that's my concern is that we've got so many- Sure. ... TIF applications going on and, and you know, you hate to be the, you hate to say, you know- Certainly. ... four is, is, is one too many or you know, seven is one too many, but- Absolutely. ... I'm concerned that 30 years out, if we don't see these projects come to fruition, each one of them is fabulous on its own merit, but that's how it looks today. And who knows 30 years out, I would just hate for the Irvin County gov- government to be left holding the bag to cover these improvements. Yes. Having reviewed the full development plans on these, you know, that financial analysis is inherent part and is something that the Irvin County Council looks at very deeply, uh, before they, uh, approve it. And I know at the state level, um, as much or even more so of the financial issues related to that. Um, the planning commission's role again is commenting on the applications compliance with the comprehensive plan. And in fact, your statement becomes a part of that- Sure. ... development plan, uh, that then goes on to the council and to the state. But we would be glad to get that information and, uh, more details on the inner workings of the financial aspects of the TIF. We'd be glad to get that and provide that to you. We could schedule that for a work session- Yeah. ... if you'd like. I think that's a good idea, Mr. King. Any, any other question Ms. Rikers? Mr. Douglas, do you or Mr. Harvey want to speak to this? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Bob Duncan on, on behalf of, uh, the Red Mile. Uh, to Ms. Phillips' question, I, I can say to you that, uh, to, to relieve some of your concerns, the, um, there, there is no obligation on the Irvin County Council or the city to bond this project even if the TIF is, is approved. Those, those are independent determinations. So there could be an approval of the TIF, uh, without any obligation of the city to bond, then the, the bonding determination would come later. Uh, so want to clear up that distinction. Um, there was... Oh, the... With respect to this particular project, the, uh, financial forecasting that would be done, uh, I, I think would, would easily relieve your concerns in that respect because the numbers are, the, the ratio of the, the tax, uh, amount that would be expected to be derived as opposed to the public improvement cost, uh, is, is substantially different. So for this particular project, I, I, I think the numbers, uh, that the council will see on that would, would be, uh, very supportable. Uh, but again, whether they bonded or not is, is a separate determination from the TIF application. Does that help or confuse the situation? I thought that the, that once the TIF was approved in Frankfort, then basically because the Irvin County Council had supported this and sent it on up that way, that it was maybe not an official, um, um, endorsement of the project and, and willingness to bond it, but kind of an unofficial. Certainly. And to clarify and elaborate, I can give a little bit of an example of the distillery district. If I recall correctly, the state authorized potential of about 55 million dollars or so worth of projects. And if you saw what the Irvin County Council bonded toward that in this first year, it was something like two million, uh, or a little bit over that amount in terms of improvements. It's the first step in doing that. And each one is a separate decision as they move forward over time. Good, good example of that. Thank you. Any other questions for Mr. Dunk- or Mr. Harvey? Mr. Harvey, you got anything you want to add to this? All right. Any other discussion, questions? What we're doing is we're certifying the compliance and you're authorizing me to sign on your behalf that we certify this as, as being in compliance with the comp plan. The chair will entertain any discussion and or motion. Ms. Richardson. Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I move, uh, that we accept the, uh, approve the statement of compliance with comprehensive plan for the proposed Red Mile mixed use development area. Is there a second? Second. Motion has been made and seconded. When you see it on the screen, we'll vote. Thank you all very much. And, uh, before you two gentlemen leave, I want to thank publicly for your all's participation. This, uh, this whole process has been very transparent process and even the Red Mile project's exciting the way it is, and if the TIF thing goes through and works, it'll even make it expedited. But we want to thank Mr. Harvey and Mr. Duncan both for the, uh, for the effort that you all have given us and the time you've given us for these public hearings. Not only here, but the ones we had at the Red Mile. I think it's, uh, it bodes well for what we do in the future and it gives us a good example of how it can work. Thank you again. Okay, filing schedule. The next item on our agenda is the, uh, is the meeting and filing schedules for 2010. We talked about this a little bit earlier, but we have to approve it. Um, Mr. King, is there any comments you want to make on this before we vote on it? Mr. Chairman, as we developed the schedule, you will recall that we made some changes, uh, based upon some items we're implementing in regard to the management audit that was done. Um, so there were some new considerations. When we were looking at that, we, we saw an adjustment needed to be made in May. If anything further than that needs to be said, I will defer to Mr. Salie who can elaborate those details. But basically this is just a tweak of the tweak. That's the way we would look at this. Mr. Salie, do you want to tweak the tweak? Just to say, Mr. Chairman, we've highlighted all the changes in yellow on the, uh, item that's been handed out to you. We did push back the May filing one week after we got the big calendar out for the year and noticed that, uh, we'd still have three weeks ahead of the technical committee there. Also, we noticed that on your, uh, zoning listing under item number three, we had, uh, missed the Tuesday calendar days by a day each, so we've corrected that as well. Thank you. Any questions on this before we vote on it? This is always my biggest challenge, trying to figure out how to read this thing once we approve it. Those of you that are new on the commission, don't feel lost. I've been lost for eight years trying to read this thing. All right, is there a motion to approve the meetings and filing schedule for 2010? Mr. Chairman, I'd like to move for approval of the official meeting and filing schedule for 2010 as presented by staff. Second. Motion has been made and second. Any discussion? If not, when you see it on the screen, please vote. All right, so moved. Thank you. We're, uh, we're gonna go into special s- to a closed session. Before we do that, is there anything else we need to discuss before we go into closed session? Mr. Chairman, at this time, there isn't. Um, I know, I believe you may come back out of closed session to, uh, to take action, so, um, I think we need a motion to go into closed session at this time. Ms. Richardson? Mr. Chairman, um, I move that we go into closed session pursuant to KRS 61.810, Section 1C, for the purpose of discussing pending and proposed litigation. Second. Motion has been made and seconded. Any discussion? If not, we'll vote on it when you see it on the screen. We're now in closed session. ... the Department of Laws to, to pursue legal action against John, John Barlow and Commonwealth Development LLC to enforce Section 6-3of the Land Subdivision Regulations relating to fencing along the agricultural land adjoining Unit 1, Unit 1, Section 2, and Unit 1, Section 3 of the Tucker Property development. Is there a second? Second. Motion has been made and second. Any discussion? If not, vote when you see it on the screen. Motion carries. Thank you, Mr. Garner. Thank you. Very good. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Take care. Are there any staff items? No, Mr. Chairman. Uh, we would only point out, as far as the work session, we had no items, uh, that we needed to bring to you today that couldn't wait. Uh, we were hoping maybe to shift one thing from next week, but the, uh, presenter could not be here today, so we will have that at your, um, meeting next, next week- Mm-hmm. ... at the conclusion of Zoning matters. But that is it. All right. Any other items need to come before us at this time? Obviously, we don't have any in the audience. We don't have anybody but, uh- Then, uh, we'll have a motion to adjourn. So moved. All righty. We're outta here.