# Council Planning Committee - March 16, 2010 > Auto-transcribed civic record · Council · March 16, 2010 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/1267 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/1267?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2010-03-16 - **Body**: Council - **Last revised**: June 18, 2026 - **Length**: 16,263 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed by OpenAI Whisper-1. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude Sonnet. Speaker labels and verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Planning Committee convened on March 16, 2010, at 1:00 P.M., with the Chair presiding over the session. The meeting covered two agenda items, both of which were informational in nature: a presentation on the Encroachment Permitting Process and a review of Items Referred to Committee. Over the course of the meeting, 4 motions and votes were taken, while no public comments were heard. ## Attendance All ten council members were present at the March 16, 2010 Council meeting. No members were recorded as absent or late. **Members Present:** - Gorton - Blues - Gray - Ellinger - James - Lawless - Beard - Feigel - Stinnett - McChord ## Votes and Decisions The Council took four votes during the March 16, 2010 meeting, all of which passed by voice vote. - **Remove Louden Avenue Phase One Status from Report Out** [timestamp: 0:39:39]: Motioned by James and seconded by Ellinger, the Council voted to remove the Louden Avenue Phase One status item from the report out. The motion passed by voice vote with no recorded nays. - **Remove Commercial Signage Text Amendment from Committee** [timestamp: 1:15:41]: Motioned by James, the Council voted to remove the Commercial Signage Text Amendment from committee. The motion passed by voice vote with no recorded nays. No second was recorded for this motion. - **Remove Tree Protection Ordinance from the Planning Committee** [timestamp: 1:16:57]: Motioned by James and seconded by Ellinger, the Council voted to remove the Tree Protection Ordinance from the planning committee. The motion passed by voice vote with one recorded nay from Beard. - **Remove Residential Zoning Ordinances from Committee** [timestamp: 1:26:10]: Motioned by Ellinger and seconded by Feigel, the Council voted to remove Residential Zoning Ordinances from committee. The motion passed by voice vote with no recorded nays. All four motions were decided by voice vote rather than roll call, so individual member votes are not available except where a dissenting nay was noted. The sole recorded dissent across all votes was Beard's nay on the Tree Protection Ordinance removal. ## Contested Items - **Residential Additions and Zoning Ordinances**: The Council engaged in a heated discussion regarding whether to remove residential additions and zoning ordinances from committee consideration. A central concern raised during the debate was whether doing so would adequately address the relevant issues on a citywide basis. The structured data does not identify specific individual council members by name as taking opposing sides, nor does it record a definitive outcome from this discussion. ## Encroachment Permitting Process [timestamp: 02:10] The Council took up a discussion on the encroachment permitting process, focusing on procedural issues and enforcement challenges. Key speakers during this item included Stinnett, Charlie Martin, and Kevin Wente. The discussion centered on concerns related to after-the-fact permits — situations in which encroachments are constructed or installed prior to obtaining the required permits — as well as broader questions about how the permitting process is enforced. Input from various departments was considered as part of the conversation, reflecting the cross-departmental nature of encroachment permitting and its oversight. No formal action was taken; the item was informational in nature, serving as an opportunity for the Council to review current practices and hear from staff about the challenges involved in administering the process. ## Items Referred to Committee [timestamp: 1:32:59] The Council reviewed the status of various items currently in committee, with discussion led by key speakers Gorton, James, and Ellinger. The agenda item covered updates on ongoing projects as well as motions to remove certain items from the committee agenda. The discussion was informational in nature, providing the Council with a general review of matters that had been referred to committee for further consideration. Speakers addressed the current standing of items under committee review, and motions were raised to remove select items from the agenda. No final votes or binding decisions were recorded as part of this item, as the outcome was informational. The item served as a status update to keep the full Council apprised of committee-level activity. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Remove Louden Avenue Phase One Status from report out - **Motion** — passed (0-1): Remove Tree Protection Ordinance from the planning committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Remove Residential Zoning Ordinances from committee - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Remove Commercial Signage Text Amendment from committee --- ## Full transcript The March 16th planning committee meeting, and we do have a quorum, um, as soon as our quorum takes their seats. Um, we have one issue on our planning committee agenda, the encroachment permit process, and then we'll also work through, one by one, the issues that are in committee and, uh, get an update on where those issues are and when they are ready to be heard. So, uh, Council Member Stennet put into our committee the encroachment permitting process, so I wonder if you want to lead us off with some words about this. And then we'll have, uh, some input from maybe Charlie Martin and Mike Webb, and we've got Kevin Wenti and Ed Gardner and John Bryant. We've got all the people we need, so Council Member Stennet. Thank you, Chair. There's a couple of issues in... when we talk about encroachment process that, that we wanna take a look at. The, the... Encroachment obviously is when we own right of way or an easement, uh, for sanitary sewer purposes or stormwater purposes or other government-related purposes where someone wants to encroach on that, whether it be for grading purposes or putting a structure up or a deck, a pool, whatever it may be. And our current permitting process, uh, is one issue in terms of how many sign-offs it takes and the length of time it takes to actually get a encroachment permit and, and the number of divisional feedback and the physical mailing and, and sending between departments of documents. The second issue... Well, the, the... I guess, or could be the first issue, is, are we enforcing our encroachment easements? And if so, how are we gonna go about enforcing this? Obviously, if there's a structure built in our easement without our knowledge, are we gonna go back and make that structure be torn down to respect our, our, our easements? And, um, if we're not, then what kind of agreement are we gonna put in place so that if we ever have to get in there and repair a sewer line, repair a storm drain, is it gonna be the property owner's responsibility in the future? If we're gonna sign that type of agreement, are we gonna hold that or hold them accountable, um, to do those repairs going forward if we let them in our, our easement area? So, those are the two issues. Again, the first one is if they do encroach on our easement, are we gonna, uh, uh, enforce that, or are we gonna look at an alternative solution of signing an agreement that allows them to do that? And the second issue is the permitting process itself and how we ob-... how individuals obtain one and how many number, uh, what number of sign-offs we're gonna require, um, to get that done. So those are the general two, two issues with this. Thank you very much. It might be appropriate to start with Charlie Martin, who's Director of the Division of Water Quality, and we have in our packet a memo from you. And welcome. Thank you. Yeah, I think I'm one of the people that probably started this as far as it being an issue, 'cause, um, we had a, a recent circumstance where a, uh, a backyard improvement had been made, uh, a, uh, swimming pool and a structural retaining wall which encroached into the existing sanitary sewer easement and over top of the pipe that was in the backyard of the house. And, uh, the parti-... why it came to light was, is that the particular property owner wanted to sell his property and- ... it, it was apparent that he did not have the appropriate permits in place, and I can't speak to whether or not a building permit was in place or not. I'll leave that to John to, to talk about how they deal with that. They certainly didn't have an encroachment permit, and so when they came and asked for it, we said no, um, because you've got a pool and a retaining wall over top of a sewer pipe, and there's no way we're gonna be able to maintain that over the long haul. And, uh, when we said no, then the, um, you know, it, it got to be a more contentious issue because here's, you know, you're at closing, or virtually days away from closing, a, a lot of money on the line, a lot of agreements on the line, those kind of things like that, and it became a real problem. And this, this has happened enough times to where it's, it's gotten beyond an annoyance. You know, at the same time, in a parallel universe, we're out raising manholes and doing all of these repairs as part of our consent decree implementation, but yet it, it was our concern as far as in the division of water quality that we're not necessarily having a good approach that prevents some of the mistakes that were made in the past from continuing to happen in the future. So, um, you know, o- our, our thing is, is that, that encroachments are going to happen. We recognize that. Um, small lots, large structures, um, there's gotta be some room for compromise, and that, uh, we try to compromise as much as we can, um, in how maybe someone builds a wall to where the footings are not in the easement or they span it to where you could maybe disassemble something and be able to work on the sewer if need be and then reassemble it later. But obviously, you can't disassemble a swimming pool, and you can't disassemble a solid brick wall. And, uh, the, the real problem for us has been is that, when you ask after the fact, there's no way for us to be able to work out those kinda compromises, uh, to, uh, to allow folks to be able to get full use and enjoyment of their backyard while the easement is still maintained in, in the way that it was intended to. Um, so it, for me, it, it kinda became as th- that what is our recourse, I guess, as far as being able to, uh, um, to deal with these after, what I'm calling after the fact permit requests. Does anyone, uh, i- council members, I hope you're logged in, and if you have questions of Charlie, uh, let it be known on your screen, and, uh, if there are none, which I don't see any yet, they may come up. Yes, did you have something? No, I, I wanted to make one other point is that, uh, I had one in my notes, and then I'd gotten off of that was that the, you know, there has been some discussion, I mentioned this in the memo, about well, you know, if you sign the encroachment agreement, that puts, places the burden on the, the future property owner to, if we have to come in and tear down that, that they're responsible for it. It's, it's recorded as part of their, the encumbrances on their property. And for us, what our experience has been is that just hasn't been a real good thing to, to be able to deal with because, you know, after that property transfers three or four times, most people, they're not, the average person's not aware of that encumbrance. Instead, they're aware that they've got this wonderful outdoor space in their backyard, and then when we show up with a backhoe is that to, for them, to tell them, "It's your responsibility to replace the pool after we tear it up," it's almost a certain phone call to you, it's a certain phone call upstairs, it's, it's, it's a lot of drama that's unnecessary. And so my point in, in trying to figure out a way to put a good resolution to this is that rather than LFUCG or that future property owner having to bear the burden of these decisions, that some way we need to hold the people who are benefiting the most, I.E. profiting from it, accountable for their actions. Thank you very much. Uh, might be appropriate right now to hear from Kevin Wenty, who, um, wrote a memo, um, which is also in your packet, council members, and has some, I think, pretty good discussion points, and if you would wanna highlight these. Kevin's from the Department of Public Works and Development. Welcome. Thank you. Um, I think coming back to the point that, uh, Council Member Sennett mentioned as far as just the, the process and how we could clean up the routing of the encroachment sign-offs, the, uh, the points that I wanted to make were basically as you see in the email. We could maintain it in the s- as the status quo where it's currently in water quality, um, managed by, uh, Carol Shoff at present. She just recently adopted that, uh, as part of her, her, uh, uh, job, and, uh, she had some questions for us where we collected and, uh, discussed the process, given that, you know, she recently a- absorbed that, that duty. Um, one thing that she had brought to light, and it makes perfect sense that it could help to streamline the process, is within the, uh, submission of a development plan or plat, there's a plan tracker that has been written in-house. Paul Hockensmith developed that. As far as getting sign-offs from divisions, uh, to release their approval or if they have questions or something needs to be addressed, they can make notes electronically, but it does, uh, help to expedite the process, and like fashion, we could, we could gear this process and routing in a similar fashion, basically just a, a, a version of that software so the divisions could look at things electronically and have an electronic sign-off that we could use as opposed to going through interoffice mail and, you know, just the time that, that, and delay that that might take. So that was basically what I was trying to account for. Now, in so far as the, uh, the way things work, at one point in time, we- ... not too long ago. The process was within the division of engineering as a result of being in the stormwater section. And then when we made the split with environmental quality, those duties moved along with the, uh, individual that had that responsibility. So there was a bit of, or has been a bit of disconnect. And actually, I will a- there has been disconnect as far as you can see. Yeah. I would... I've actually been so far removed. I'm sorry. That's okay. I've been so far removed from the process, but, um, you can see where, you know, just because of that divisional s- or departmental split that that has caused some problems. We can address that, I think through the plan tracking system. And regardless of whether it stems through water quality or within public works, I think we can, uh, that would be of help in just that, that process. And Kevin, is this the form that's in the packet? That's correct. Is that the, what you're calling the plan tracker? Well, this, it would be of similar fashion. This is the current form of routing for- So- ... for the permit sign-offs among the departments. So it'd be a version of that. Correct. Okay. Correct. Charlie jumped up, did you want to add something? I, I, I was just gonna echo what, what Kevin had said is that, you know, it came to the Division of, of Water Quality by the reorganization and the duties followed the person like happens a lot of times. Um, I don't have any objection to, to us staying with it. As Kevin pointed out, um, you know, what we need is obviously a more predictable and bigger, and a better routing system. And I think this plan tracking situation is a, a good plan. My name used to be on that routing sheet, and I would find five or six of them that were in my mailbox that probably had been there for three or four days, because I don't always necessarily get my mail every day whe- 'cause I'm not there. I removed myself from them, but I see still that there's still two people from water quality, which is probably one too many, um, that we need to look at how we route this and it routes it intelligently. The challenge of that is, is that probably 80% of these things do involve some sanitary or storm water thing almost invariably, but also that it involves traffic, and, uh, th- I'll use the Lex tran encroachments as an example of stuff in the right of way. The challenge is, is to make sure that the appropriate people who need to see this are the ones that need to see this. And also I believe it, it is a statutory thing that ultimately that it is a sign off on the part of the Commissioner of Public Works and Develop, and I think that is in, in the ordinance. And some of us believe that the urban county engineer also has to sign on this because the original plat says this can't be amended without signature of the eng- county engineer who signed the plat originally. So we got a lot of work to do on, on, on that routing thing, but I think that part of it is, is, is, can be accomplished now that we're rolling our sleeves up and working together on that. Okay. Very good. Uh, thank you. Um, before we get to council questions, I see Commissioner Mike Webb is here and one of the discussion points on, um, Kevin Wenty's memo was the last one as to whether the process should move to public works and development. And, uh, do you have a comment on that? I know that, uh, the, the comment here is that, uh, you already have a large volume of administrative work and it might actually slow the process. So are you, would you be okay with it s- staying here? I, I would certainly be okay with it moving. Generally what I do most, quite a few of the encroachment agreements that come through are over a storm or sanitary easement, and I'll, sometimes they get misrouted and they come to me and I'll never sign those until we have all the, until Sheryl Taylor signs off on 'em. I see mine more as administrative sign off on those. Uh, if my signature's gonna be there, I don't think it makes any difference where it is in the process. If you were to split it on the storm and sanitary easements and all other type of easements like utility easement that were, were, uh, meant for, uh, gas, electric, water, those kinds of easements, then that would probably be more appropriate for me with the storm and sanitary. But if we just keep one process, really doesn't make any difference- Okay. ... who signs first. And have it housed. You would be okay with it being housed in water quality? Yeah, I would be fine. Yeah. That's not a problem for me. Okay. Um, thank you very much. Okay. Um, we have some questions from council members. Did law want to weigh in on this at all or, are, no? You're good with going forward? And building inspections back there. No? Okay. Well, we'll go ahead then. Council Member James. Thanks, Chair. Um, my question's for Charlie. I'm r- looking at our packet and page one of your, uh, memo to us and paragraph number two, I'm trying to figure out at what point, um, it says here that lack of valid building permit and or encroachment permit hinders the transfer transaction. The property owner, and I'm guessing you're talking about the selling property owner, is that correct? Person selling? Y- yes. Okay. Then tries to initiate this after the fact encroachment for something that's already in existence- Correct. ... that's encroaching. Um, seems like a lot of maybe something upfront could happen. I wondered if there's a relationship between any of our consent decree things, um, and this encroachment permitting that's tied in with PVA. Um, so that I know that if, if a person were to go to a realtor and want a piece of property, the PVA record is probably one of the first places that they would go to kind of get- ... um, their market analysis and things, see what it's zoned and that sort of thing. Is there any place on there, working with our PVA, that we could try to let folks know in advance that some type of encroachment, um, if, if known, I mean most of this probably wouldn't be known, but if known, that some type of encroachment permit was needed or existed or something like that so that they would be aware? Well, the, you know, I don't think the PVA is typically gonna carry that level of information. You know, the, they're more interested in value and square footage of things with which they assess the value of a property for taxation purposes. Um, u- usually you have to pull the plat, you know, in order, or the recorded plat to find out that. You, you know, as you may recall, I don't know how long it's been since you, you bought a, a property, but usually they give that to you at closing and, uh, that's sometimes too late. Um, you know, for us, is that, that it is a, um ... If someone gets a building permit to make an improvement and then building inspection is reviewing those and, and noting whether or not that they have an accurate drawing that shows where all of the easements are, 'cause there are a very s- few properties that don't have an easement on them. There's a utility easement in the back or along the side or what have you and that, um, we need to be diligent in that as far as making sure that those drawings are accurate. One of the things that I had thought about as well is that maybe that, you know, there's a program that we call BUD, Before You Dig, and that, um, it's difficult sometimes for people to tell where their easements are or aren't, but if they are going to make an improvement, them making the call to have Before You Dig come out and mark those things, that would be a good way to be able to tell where the easement really is and then you, then you can see, you know, literally that, you know, this improvement that I planned on putting in my backyard, that's gonna be over top of the sewer line or it's gonna be over top of the gas line and they, they can make their adjustments accordingly and then also when the building inspector comes out to see that, he sees, he or she sees where that is as well. The issue I think a lot of the times is, is it's not the people who are asking permission in advance because if they ask permission, we go out, we look at it and say, "I don't know, maybe you need to do this." And sometimes it's a little bit of negotiation, adjusting a design, but usually we're able to get the outcome we want. It's the people who just don't ask. Well, and I think that's sometimes the way to capture the people that aren't doing something is to register or to acknowledge the people that are doing something. So if I'm looking at the PVA, and I think PVA on their website, I don't know, uh, when's the last time you looked at their website, but on their website, if you're looking at a piece of property, you, there are different tabs that you can click and one of those tabs is photo, which a lot of them have the photos for the property assessment, um, but there's also one that says drawings or sketches. Uh, there's a tab. You, it's very rare that you ever see anything on that and I'm wondering if that is ... And when I called about a particular piece of property and I was asking about what about these types of things, um, they referred me back to Irvin County government for that. But there's a spot on their website, um, that you can click that has sketches and drawings. So my thought is if, if we could educate folks about that it, if you have a wall or a pool or something like that, if you go to the lot and it, it has something beyond the actual building itself, that you might want to start looking to see if there w- were an encroachment permit and making that part of the process in advance. So if I knew I wanted to buy a certain piece of property, if there's a retaining wall that's out there, I want to, especially if it were new or something, I don't know if, if that would be relevant, but I, if I went to PVA or went to some site and I was able to pull up myself to whether, to know whether or not that existed, if I didn't see a picture, then I would know as a person potentially to buy the property that I would need to call to see if something like that existed. If I did see it, then I'd know I'd be good to go, um, and that it were there. But it, I guess what I'm trying to get to, if we can start educating our citizens that in- anything, whatever the criteria would be, whatever would fall under encroachment, to start looking for that, um, permit to know that that's part of, and educate our realtors and anybody else that this might be something you might be, need to be aware of. If you don't see it in a very visible place, and we can maybe talk with PVA about how do we get linked in t- to that system, if there's a sketch that someone does, if the building inspector guy goes out and does a drawing to say, "Here's what it is," that that be submitted and entered into the record there, um, and maybe work with an existing software. U- I don't know. Um, I'm just sharing that with the committee. I don't know how that would work or how it would function, but I, it just seems like we have, especially because the blank drawings and sketches are always there on the PVA site and, but I don't know who's supposed to get those in there and that might be an opportunity for us. Well, I, I certainly, something we will look at. Okay. Um, the, the, uh, the Accela software solution that I came and talked about last work session last week, that includes a, uh, uh, an interface with PVA. Oh. Because we use PVA regularly for the water quality management fee. So when you asked when I looked at it, pretty much every day - ... it seems like anymore. Yeah. Um, and so that would be an opportunity that we'd want to explore. Likewise- You know that tab I'm talking about? The one that says sketches and drawings? Not visually- Okay. ... but I mean, like I said, we certainly would look at it. I mean, along that same front as far as Accela, that's one of the work pros- solutions that we want to include in Accela is the whole encroachment process. And what I've described to them is, is that from a, for a city's perspective, we have a lot of assets, but one of our biggest assets is those individual properties. Mm-hmm. Because we pick up trash there, we do building inspections there, we do, we do all of these things- Mm-hmm. ... that are associated with addresses. Mm-hmm. And so having a database that is, that is based on, uh, th- the address and all the different city functions that go on there- Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. ... leads to an integrated enterprise type of solution. We're just starting out on our part of it right now, but including those sketches to where you could go in and be able to see that on there, you're right. And then so linking that with the -- with PVA might be a good possibility. Mm-hmm. Again though, like I said, our, our biggest issue is, is that, is the ones that, that just happen after the fact. Mm-hmm. That, that is our biggest, biggest problem because once they're there, and especially depending on how involved they are, you know, i- i- there was one that it was a couple of years ago, somebody built a swimming pool and if you look on the pa- plat, it says, "Sinkhole area. No swimming pools allowed." It says it right on the plat, but they built a swimming pool there anyway. And to my knowledge, it's still there. Hmm. Um, and there, I can go through a long list of different ones that we've dealt with over the years that they were ... the, the contractor came in and in some cases probably told the property owner, "It's fine. Got all my permits, Everything's good to go." They built it, they collect their money and they drive away. And then sometime in the future, we show up and now it's a problem for them and it's a problem for us. Mm-hmm. And so what I, I was looking for and we've talked internally ourselves about this, about how we would go about holding the individuals who do that accountable because once the word gets out that we're gonna hold them accountable instead of just, "Deal with it," that, that it may get itself better under control. Okay. Thank you. Thanks chair. And, and either council member James or, or Mr. Martin said something that brought building inspection forward. So John Bryant, our Deputy Director of Building Inspection has something to say. Yea- good afternoon. Uh, Charlie's right about, uh, a couple of things that, uh, are very important. Uh, one, we do need to educate and we do this, uh, the before you dig. Uh, even though we may not identify a property or a, or someone's pool to be in an easement, we still want them to do a before you dig. So we have that on every permit and we do talk to them about that. Um, the big problems are what Charlie said, the, um, ones that are after the fact. So those are the ones that we all feel that we need to address in some form or fashion. Thank you for your insight, John. Um, Council Member Stennet. Thank you, chair. And, and to Council Member James' point on the building inspection task force, one of the recommendations is that software module that is actually the same vendor that Charlie's company just purchased, or, or division. Same company, and it can be interfaced with building inspection, code enforcement, fire. So anything we do to a property, we can record under a centralized location and be able to look at it and say, "Hey, here's all the action." So hopefully with the recommendation of the task force, we can look at funding options. Once we get the main module in place, we can add these other features which we have to have. So that's on the, that's on the burner, so you're right on the track with everything going on. To the, what Mr. Bryant just said, the after fact enforcement. What are we gonna do to enforce people who are already in the encroachment? Are we gonna let 'em stay there? Are we gonna make 'em tear their structure down? We're gonna have 'em sign an agreement that, again, it's, it's tied to the plat and so how are we gonna make sure that every time that house is sold, that plat has that on there and, and realtors and people are noticing that? I mean, is there any feedback on that? Because I- if we don't have any feedback, this council expects you to enforce the law. And if we have people in the encroachment area that shouldn't be there, didn't get a permit, then they need to get out. Otherwise, we need an agreement that says they can be there, but it's their responsibility in the future should anything else happen. Welcome Ed Gardner from law. Thank you. Uh, just a couple of points related specifically to what Council Member Stennet is saying. First- Uh-huh. ... in the before the fact situations where somebody comes in and requests an encroachment permit and it's not going to cause a sufficient problem that's gonna really affect our operations, then it's fairly routine for that person to get an encroachment permit. It does provide in it that if we ever do need to get in to prepare our facility or do whatever we need to do because our facilities are there, that we're not responsible for any damages that might occur to their property because we had to do it. And they sign off on that and it, it goes to record at the county clerk's office. In terms of enforcement after the fact, what you've got is a trespass situation. Their facility is really trespassing into our easement in the classic situation. We would have a civil remedy if we wanted to demand that they get it out of our, uh, easement and- Have we ever done that? Never been asked to, that I can recall. Yeah, but the council might ?????? It's, it's usually ends up being only coming up at a situation when somebody's gonna sell their property or at a very critical point where there's a lot of things at stake. The problem, you know, is there, is there's a fairness thing to it in terms of if a person bought the property from somebody who was the person who was the culprit actually, there is no encroachment permit of record because they didn't get one. Uh, and somehow that, that transaction happened because the title attorney didn't catch it or whate- or didn't, didn't sur- they didn't get a survey done. You know, there's various ways that this could be caught. If it's caught by a survey, I suspect that's what caused the problem in the swimming pool example. Somebody did a survey of the property, checked the plat versus what's on the ground, found out a swimming pool's in, is in an easement without a permit. Um, I, I wasn't familiar with that, but that, that would be a logical way that that would come about. In that situation, the alternatives are, well is it a big enough problem that, that we need to get 'em outta there or is it a problem that we can deal with? In either event- ... if we decide that we're not going to make them move the facility, i- in that case, a swimming pool, we should, at a minimum, have them sign off on an encroachment permit, understanding that if we ever have to come in and tear up the facility, the sewer line or whatever it is, their swimming pool is going to suffer, and it's not our fault. So I build it, ask for forgiveness, I get my permit, just promise I'll fix it in the future. Well, it wouldn't be them fixing it. It'd be us tearing up the pool to fix our facilities. Okay. It's, it's the way out. As long as we're gonna hold that agreement accountable in court, that if we ever have to get back in there, then they're gonna have to put their pool back. Well, that's what the agreement provides. I've, I'm not familiar. There are people here, none of them have been here as long as me. Of course- And that's enforceable? They, they, I don't know that we've ever h- had it, had, had to go back in after we had an encroachment permit, but the agreement specifically provides that. They sign off. Typically, it's prepared... No, not, almost always, it is prepared by an attorney on behalf of the property owner. So in other words, we don't even prepare the specific encroachment permit document. That's done by the property owner. So there's not a question after they sign that document that they're on notice of whether or not, if something comes up in the future, they might be subject to having their property damaged. But is that a good situation? No. I mean, it, and the other alternative would be, and this is where the fairness issue comes in, if the same property owner was there and knew that his brother-in-law was doing the work and probably didn't have the permits and just didn't worry about it, and then two years later wants to sell the property, and it's gonna cause us a big problem, it would not be unfair to require them to tear it out, because it's gonna cause us... You know, it's gonna be expensive on our part to, to deal with it in the future. The fairness issue wouldn't come into play because they should've known, you know, they knew or should've known that something was going on with their property. Uh, it's the second and third person on down the line, that for some reason didn't get caught, where it really becomes an equitable question. What are the penalties that, if we do catch someone without a permit? Is it the same penalties as other building permits, et cetera? You know, John could probably... I th- my understanding is we require them after the fact, if they, you know, if they've done it, we require them to get a permit and, uh- And pay permit- ... pay double, I think, under, is it- Correct. Currently, the, yeah, there's a double permit fee because you didn't get it up front. What is that current fee? I don't know. Um- Encroachment permit fee? Well, it, it would depend on the actual, what they're, what they're actually doing. We would double the fine. So if it was a $50 permit fee, it would- Right. No, I understand the doubling concept, but, but are you saying- Yes. You're talking about the encroachment permit fee? Yes. There's no, no fee, to my knowledge, involved. So you said doubling of the fee. What, so if someone- I thought you said that when they were building an improvement without a building permit. Well, put a pool in our sewer easement, so they, the fee for the swimming pool would be doubled. Correct. Okay. Yes. Beco- yes. And i- and, um, if they've represented it one place to building inspection and it ends up not being in that place and it, you know, or if they didn't get a permit at all, you know, before the thing is finally constructed, it's always a lot easier to deal with it. And is building inspection, when you are issuing permits or looking for these? Before you offer a CO or- Absolutely. You w- okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Are there other council members who have questions or comments? Ah, what sort of action do you need to go ahead, if council, um, would like to act on, ah, some of these recommendations? Do you need any ordinance changes? Um, if- I think that the fact that, that, that this committee has brought this to light and has encouraged a higher level of dialogue on the part of us and, and the council is, is very helpful at this point. Um, what I would ask, as far as the, the only action is, is that you maybe ask us to report back sometime in the not near future, but not too distant future, on the progress we've made regarding being able to shorten that time period, as far as the turnaround, and also that whether we have, have developed a, ah, suitable concept to, um, like I said, to hold people accountable. Over the last week or so, as this became on the docket, there was a lot of, I think, really good dialogue with, with the law department and with, with public works and, and environmental quality, and I think we've got some, some good ideas. Uh, go back to, to Miss James's suggestion, is that, uh, you know, education is a big part of it. I think a lot of people just don't know that they're not supposed to do things, and that, uh, we need to work that angle as well. But I, I appreciate the fact that the committee brought it to light, 'cause like I said, it, it elevated it, and so the only action I would have is just hold us to making sure that we report back to you in the future on our progress. Okay, so cl- uh, I heard mentioned cleaning up the routing process, routing through of encroachment permits, and, um, some sort of accountability, and um- On, on the legal standpoint, if we're going to leave the final sign-off in public works- Yes. ... that, that's what's in the zoning ordinance, and that would not require any change. Okay. Excuse me. And one other point, which makes Council Member James's idea very good is that, these things, even when they do get encroachment permits, they're of record at the county clerk, and a title examination will find them, but a lot of times, that's close to closing before the average person ever even knows about it. As opposed to somebody might be researching a property, as you suggested, if there's something that can be easily found during the upfront process- Mm-hmm. ... you know, from a legal standpoint- Yeah. It's a record. You, you're responsible for it. But as a practical matter, it'd be better if people could find out upfront. So the education piece upfront. And so you could brainstorm about that and how you can accomplish that. Uh, would June be ... May or J- well, we're almost in April. Would May or June give you enough time? June? So at our June planning committee, um, does that suit? And I know Council Member James has another comment, but just in general, committee members, to hear back. I see a few heads shaking yes. Council Member James. Um, in addition to that, I wanted to see if we could, um, I don't know, maybe do a presentation during a work session of the Before You Dig. Is it 511 or 811? I can't recall what the numbers are, but maybe just go ahead and put that back out there again. Yeah, I think that's an excellent idea. Is it 511 or 811? I think it's 811. Okay, 811, Before You Dig. Okay. Hmm. And just another public education opportunity. I think that's a great idea. Thanks. Yeah. Thank you. Uh, is there anything else you would like to see, council members, on the report back, the progress report? Thank you all for being here, Charlie and Mike and Ed and Kevin and John. We appreciate it, and we'll look forward to seeing you in June at our planning committee meeting. So council members, if you will please turn to the back page, I'd like for us to spend a few minutes on the issues in committee, and, um, get an update from you if you have an issue and when you'll be able to have it heard in the committee. Uh, Council Member Stinnett, are you on the Liberty Road project status? Um, do you wanna keep that as a written report? Uh, I'd like to have it on a, as a bi-monthly microphone report, not just written, but- Not, not written? Yeah, come before the microphone. 'Cause we're actually getting ready to start the project dig, so people need to be updated on our progress. Okay. Um, let's see. And Council Member Blues, Newtown Pike status, is bi-monthly report still good? Yes. Yes? I think those are very helpful to us. Okay. And then Council Member James, we've got the Louden Avenue phase one status. It, um, that, yeah, it's pretty much complete. Pretty much done, isn't it? Yeah. Um, what I have- What would you like to do with that? I, I move to remove the Louden Avenue phase one status from report out. Okay. Okay. We, we had a second over here already, um, from Council Member Ellinger to remove Louden Avenue phase one status. Any discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Thank you, Council Member McCord. So that issue will be removed from committee. Um, Council Member Blues, the fence regulations, do you have an amendment to that, or a change to that? What's your thinking? The, uh, I, I had, uh, I had worked with, uh, with, with, with Ed Gardner on a possible, uh, site distance revision, uh, in the, you know, in the ordinance. And as we moved, uh, further into that discussion, it, it, uh, it seemed for various reasons less and less, uh, feasible, that, that, uh, there i- i- it w- w- really was w- w- was too, uh ... There wasn't much we can do beyond, w- could reasonably do beyond the, uh, uh, the current ordinance. And there would have to be so many exceptions that, uh, that it really wouldn't make a, a significant difference in the, in the long run. At the same time however, uh, through the, the process of these, of these discussions, and, and which, which included the Division of Planning, principally Chris King, uh, we, we did talk about the possibility of a zone ordinance text amendment on the, on the issue of fence heights, uh, especially, uh, especially the height of fences in, uh, you know, in front, in front yards, and also the question of whether, uh, they could, uh, you know, we, we, we might regulate the, uh, uh, what shall I say, the opacity of such, such fences. Because what generated this whole issue, uh, in my district was a six-foot fence around the front yard, a stockade fence, which ha- has created some problems for neighbors. So, uh, planning is working on that, uh, on that Zoda and will when, uh, you know, when, when they have a, a draft ordinance, I will, um, probably bring that to the committee. Planning. So did you wanna remove the current fence regulation site distance issue? Is that what I hear? And then you'll move into planning a Zoda when it comes forward? Well, why don't we simply say fence regulations are, are simply fence height issues? So do I hear a second to that motion? Second. Okay. Is there any discussion? So that will be changed to "fence regulations, fence height." And so if there's no discussion, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Okay, thank you. Now, when do you think that will be ready, uh, Mr. Gardner? Oh. It would be- Okay. I- It would be planned. Okay. Who would be bringing that forward, and when would they bring that forward? Or is it gonna- Council member Gordon. ... initiate with the planning commission? I'll touch base with Chris King, see where that stands. So can you suggest May as a possibility so that we don't... This has been in for since '07. Is this possible? Uh, May is not... Yes, that's two months, right. Sure. Uh-huh. Sure. Okay. I was- Okay. I, I couldn't remember which month we were in. So we'll tentatively- Time's flying. We'll tentatively put that on the agenda then for May, and if, if you'll take that to Chris King. Thank you, Mr. Gardner. Um, so the next issue is the mobile home trailer park quality of life. Council Member James. Yeah. I would like to, um, recommend that we keep this in committee. We, we were on hold for a while, and we've been blessed with, um, an intern now. We have a college intern, name's Caleb, and Caleb is, um, his, I guess... I'm not sure what degree he's going for, but, um, this is his project for this semester. Um, so Caleb met with the subcommittee, um, a few weeks ago and is doing research. We gave him some guidance, and he's doing research on the things that we've guided him towards, um, to attempt to get focus on our subcommittee. Um, and it's my intention to have Caleb report out to our subcommittee, and maybe in turn, we would recommend a report out to the full planning committee of his results, because we, w- the, what the subcommittee will work on may be minute, um, compared to the number of items that may come up as issues, and we may need planning's recommendations as to how to move forward with his study. Okay. So if we could leave that in, and, um- Can we get a tentative month? I'm thinking May. May? 'Cause I'm thinking if that, if this is a semester project, then probably- Okay. ... be a good time to close it out in May. But I'll confirm that, but May for right now. Okay. So we'll tentatively put that on the May agenda, which would be a little bit, uh- What is that date? Well, actually there is no planning committee meeting in May. Oh, because of the trip. Yeah. So, um- Hmm. ... we'll need to ask Ed Gardner also, could, could we put that on for June or will he be gone? Um, I'll ask him. I think April would be too soon. Um, so I'll ask him, um, how he feels about June. Okay. So we'll look at June. Okay. Um, thank you. Thank you. And then, uh, Vice Mayor Gray. Yeah, I- We still have infill redevelopment recommendations since February '08. Mm-hmm. What is your- Council Member Blues and I were just, just, just having a little sidebar conversation, and it probably would be worthwhile to have a, uh, an update to the full planning committee on the work of infillment development. So are you expecting action from this committee? Uh, it's- in- Some of it's up, most of it's update, but I think, uh, where it may rise to some action, then we can discuss that. So would they, would, um, would April be a good... June's filling up. Would April be a good time for this? Uh, that'd be okay. Date? And who would be making that? Uh, Jimmy Emmons. Okay. Uh, Paul, could you contact Jimmy and ask him if he can do that update at our April? That'll be April s- uh, 20th. April 20th. Um, very good. And then I, I think that Council Member James, I touched base with you a while back about the tree protection ordinance. And did you want to make a motion about that? I, I re- I move to remove the tree protection ordinance from the planning committee. Do it. Okay. Council Member Ellinger seconded. Is there any discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? One opposition. Council Member Beard. Um, uh, Council Member Lawless, Downtown Master Plan. What, uh- We, um, adopted that as a concept and I don't know, I need to check and see where planning is. They, they've talked about several different approaches, um, so maybe we could put that on hold. For maybe a... Are, are we looking to have an update, or what are we... Since we've adopted a new concept- Yeah. ... what would be your thinking on what we're holding for? Well, we talked about... I mean, um, they're, they've talked about form-based guidelines and, um, different such things, because right now it's, we have a resolution that, but we don't have anything in ordinance. ... that addresses these things. Does that make sense? Mm-hmm. So, so there are certain, uh, of the recommendations that you would like planning committee to review, or what- Well, what I'd like to do is put it on hold and find out what planning department and et cetera have done. Okay. We might- Pardon me? ... Yep. They could give us an update. Maybe, maybe, um, we could spend half of April doing infill redevelopment and half downtown master plan. How's that sound? Yeah, and, and possibly- So- ... also ask DDA, because I think they were a big part of that. Okay, so, uh, Paul? Yes, ma'am. Will you go ahead and arrange for April to have an update and where we stand with that? Okay. Um, Council Member Crosby is not here. I- Do you have, Paul, do you have an update on the management audit? She said she wouldn't be at this meeting, but wanted to let it, let, uh, the committee know that, uh, they will not be ready before June of, of this year to report back. I think we could work that into June, so we'll... If you could let her know, that'll be on the June agenda. And then, thank you, um, Council Member Hanson is not here with the rear yard parking. Does anyone have any information on that? Just, if you recall, this was an item that the, that the moratorium working group was gonna ask building inspection task force to take a look at since it was building, but I don't know if that was ever done or not, or if building inspection task force was willing to take that. But that's where the working group left it. Did... Council Member Stennet, did you, uh, Council Member Stennet? Um, did you, um, want to... We would need a motion to move it into building inspection task force if you're willing to take it. Rear yard parking? No? Not willing to take it or no? Okay, well, we'll see what Council Member Henson wants done with this. I don't know what she wants, really. Um, Council Member James, do you have insight into it? Yeah. Oh, okay, you're on the- Yeah, I just wanna add. Oh, okay. Who? Okay. Council Member Laws? Oh, sorry. It's okay, it's, it's okay. I just requested to speak. Um, that is probably gonna be a code enforcement issue rather than a building inspection issue. And- I'll, I'll check. I can check with Council Member Henson. Where it becomes a building inspection issue is when they give a permit to black- blacktop the backyard or whatever. So, I'm not sure what she's thinking. As, uh, I'd like to talk to her about it, 'cause I certainly have some thoughts. So, thank you. So, oh, okay, thank you. We'll, I'll talk to Council Member Henson. And then, although Council Member Stennet moved the parks master plan into planning, I know that Council Member Phigle is chairing that, uh, group, that, um, finance-oriented group. Do you know about when you might be ready to report back? Um, we've had about, uh, five meetings now, and, um, to this point, we've been really just getting input from different, uh, members of the staff about where resources, uh, currently come from for the parks department, for the parks master plan. Uh, at our last meeting, though, we had a very productive meeting, uh, we had a, a, a telephone conference with Susan, uh, Rademacher, who was the, uh, Parks Conservancy, um, creator for the Olmstead Parks in Louisville. And, uh, she walked us through how she did that in Louisville and how she was able to generate about $6 million for their parks', uh, master plan. And, uh, it was just a very, very, uh, intriguing, um, proposition, and so at the next parks fund, uh, parks meeting, parks funding meeting on the 26th, we're actually gonna have someone from Louisville come talk to us about the possibility- Great. ... of moving forward with a conservancy. Great. Okay. Council Member James? Um, thank you, Chair. Um, my question on this, or my comment on the parks master plan issue is, although, um, we have the finance sub-committee, and I'm on that committee, and I think it's going really well, there are so many other components of that master plan that I think need to be dealt with outside of financing. I mean, there's employment, there's, um, you know, all the citizen comments of the types of facilities we need. There was that thing about the zones, the different zones and districts for parks. I think there needs to be some other continued conversation in conjunction with, because once we get our recommendations of potential funding, we're gonna have to figure out how to spend the money, and I, if we could be working towards an operational plan congruently with the funding plan, I think it would actually help our committee, um, because we're gonna need to know, you know, what are we... What kind of proposals are we putting out for folks to, maybe private donors or whatever. How do... I guess, I, I wouldn't want to get too attached what we do with parks to, um, I wouldn't there, want there to be strings attached to what it is we do with the funding without referring to the master plan itself and what was recommended from our citizens. And we haven't really looked that much at the master plan. That's not been our focus. It's only funding. So, I'm not sure what -- if there needs to be another group or whether this committee reviews the master plan on a regular basis, but just think we need some guidance with operational, um, especially because we're -- I mean we're going to another budget year and there's gonna be recomme- recommendations coming out of Parks and Rec General Services of things and we haven't really officially adopted the master plan as a guide for us. Council member Feigl, do you think that your sub-committee was in the end, and maybe you don't know this yet, but maybe it hasn't evolved. Would part of what you're doing be to recommend how the monies be spent or simply, 'cause I think it's kind of interconnected raising how to fund and so then what are you funding? So, I don't know. Have you talked about that? We haven't talked specifically about the different areas of the master plan that we need to prioritize, but I would think that that would certainly be part of the review from this committee. I think, you know, our first, at least in my mind, our fals- first goal was to talk more about how do we generate revenue to work with, to fund the master plan. Um, and I think even Council Member McCord is following up on another avenue as well, which he might, I don't know whether you want to talk about it or not, but, um, but I think that once we, once we realize, uh, you know, where there is some potential for additional fundraising then we can begin to prioritize what's in the parks master plan and begin talking about where we need to commit those resources. It, it, I was just thinking it might work, it might give some good points for discussion- Mm-hmm. ... if that worked out, that your, uh, sub-committee did have some points for priority. And that might get to what you are, are, um, talking about Council Member James. You think that would work? Yeah, we can certainly do that. Yeah, I realize- And I would just, you, I think one of the things that you were asking today is that what will we be bringing forward. And assuming that we do decide to move forward with this conservancy as a recommendation, I would like to just, um, bring that forward before we bring in a, um, a final report. Mm-hmm. Okay. And are you thinking later this year or what- Uh, yes, yes. Just to kind of give us an idea. I'd say probably, uh, mid-year. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. July, August maybe. All righty. Um, the next issue is the- Excuse me. Yes. I think Council Member McCord had something to add to that report. I can just- Did you want to add something? Very briefly. I think the big thing is y- you point out something important, Council Member James, and that is that we've got a cart and horse problem. And we have about a 50 million dollar capital problem, we have a maintenance problem, we don't fund enough in maintenance. Uh, if you did get money, what do you do with it? Who makes that decision? There's a, a Council Member Feigl's, uh, taskforce has been looking at outside of a new tax, outside of just bonding up money that we don't have the capacity to bond up, what are some other ways we could potentially bring money into the Parks Department. Uh, she, she is, stumbled upon this great avenue of private donorship. Um, I'm working on a piece from internally inside government. Um, but then you get to the point of if we do have new revenues coming in, how does that work? I think you, you really have addressed probably the underlying problem in our parks system, and that is that the Parks Advisory Board was set up to do certain things and is probably not functioning in that capacity. And so probably the, the issue that needs to be looked at is, o-or as we look at this is, what is the role of the advisory board? Is it in its same capacity? Do we give it more authority? Uh, do we blow it up? Start over? Do something different? Because right now, it, we don't have a, a good system and I've used this example frequently that if, um, if someone wanted to give us 30 million dollars today, but they wanted their corporate logo on every one of our parks, would we accept it? Could we accept it? Who'd say so? You know? We don't really have any of those systems set up. Um, but I think the main thing that, that Council Member Feigl's group has been looking at is we've got a 50 million dollar capital plus maintenance problem. We don't need to get over into personnel. I think that my problem with the, uh, uh, Parks Master Plan when it came back was it was a giant reorg chart and I think we are just work , for lack of a better way of saying it, it looks like we're just rearranging deck furniture on the Titanic. What we really need to be doing is spending time on how do we get money into this, uh, this area. And that's what your group has been doing, and, and I appreciate the job you're doing with that. Uh, hopefully, Chairman, we're gonna bring back those recommendations, but I do think, um, that the Parks Advisory Board is probably the area that we look at in addressing the majority of what Council Member James was, was getting at. You know, is that the organization best suited for that? Is there a better way to do that? Because I think so much of it really does flow through that area. Uh, but that's where we are with it. Thank you. Council Member Beard? Thank you, Chair. Um, a, a little follow-up on that. I don't know how many people read the article in Business Lexington a couple weeks ago concerning golf courses, but, um- ... Cincinnati has had the same problem we have. We're over golfed here in Lexington and in the Central Kentucky area, we have too many courses. They turned their golf courses over to an entity, Billy Casper go, uh, Golf or something of that sort, and they took over the management totally of the golf courses and obviously raised fees and did a lot of other things. But, um, that is a big drain on our park system, is, uh, keep- keeping those golf courses going and we do have a lot of them. Um, they wouldn't go away and then we'd still have ownership, but at the same time, the management and maintenance and all of that, uh, would, um, would- would shift and, uh, dollars would fall to the bottom line as far as, uh, as the city's concerned. So I would suggest that at some point, we, um, we suggest that, uh, that- that Parks needs to look into that. What- what if, um, given all of your comments about this, what if in the fall when we anticipate the funding, uh, report out, that we also build in a piece, um, that day to look at, and of course any recommendations that Council Member Feigl's committee would have, we look at the Parks Master Plan, the Parks Advisory Board, we tie it all together for whatever issues surface? 'Cause you've mentioned a lot of different issues related to this, so maybe that needs an entire meeting. What would you think of that? Yes, Council Member Feigl? Um, just for clarification, um, are you proposing that this group is actually going to make this presentation? Not your group. Okay. On the Parks Master Plan or the Parks Advisory Board necessarily, but I think you'll have a good feel for when you give your report out on the financials, whether you've talked about maybe some priorities for where that money would go. But there could also be a discussion of golf courses, of Parks Advisory Board, of any master plan issues 'cause I think they could be two separate things related. Does that make sense? I mean if you're- I- I guess- ... if you're comfortable making a Parks Master Plan, I- I don't know if you're comfortable- Well, at, you know, at this point, we're only looking at funding sources. Right, right. And, you know, have not gotten into, um, some of the other issues related to maybe the Parks Advisory Board and what their role is, and I don't, didn't really see that as part of this- No. ... of this group's, um, charge. Right. Uh, but I, you know, eh, just in talking about golf courses in particular, I think if we really studied the issue appropriately, I think that could take up one whole meeting. Um, I just, I just don't... You know, I wouldn't want us to just come in and have these presentations in the context of a single meeting and be able to make, draw conclusions from that. It might be they would go to a, a task force or sub-committee for the master plan, the golf course issue, and those sorts of things. So, Council Member James? Thank you, Chair. Um, I do, I could see where Council Member Feigl wouldn't want them necessarily to intermingle, but I think at some point, we have to, going back to Council Member Achord's point is kind of look at what the whole structure is and who's supposed to be, who's supposed to be doing what. Um, I- I think if we do have, um, a meeting where we're gonna talk about especially the Parks Master Plan, not necessarily the funding but- but including the funding, um, we need to have the Parks Advisory Group here, we need to have all of the different entities and their friends of, or advisory groups because we have many different facilities that have groups that are advocating on the- the Raven Run Group, I mean, there's O'Connell Springs. Everybody needs to be part of the entire discussion. Not necessarily Council Member Feigl's discussion, but the whole Parks Master Plan and where we're going because they may have ideas that we don't even know about, um, that they may not realize will generate revenue, but if we put them all together, maybe they could. So whenever we have it, just to be sure that that invite goes out to all of those particular groups for their input. We do have, um, an August 24th meeting which I'm not sure, Council Member Feigl, whether that might be a goal for you. Eh, we also have a September 21st meeting. Seems like maybe there are many parks-related issues that are gonna surface, one of which is your sub-committee, the funding. I could, I could, uh, probably be ready by the August meeting- Okay, and then- ... to, yeah. And then maybe if we need to have another separate meeting for these other parks issues, that might be the way to go. You think, Council Member McCord? Yeah, I- I think that, you know, again, it's cart and horse type issues. Mm-hmm. Um, what- what is key to what the work that this task force is doing is, you know, we don't have any money, we don't have any, uh, funding source, so it doesn't matter really a whole lot about, uh, processes and so forth and that's kinda what's got us in this trouble. Um, looking at ways to bring resources in, uh, that we don't have right now, and reporting that out in August, then it would seem logical to me that these groups now realize... ... here's another way we can bring money in and accomplish some of the things that we want to see accomplished, or in our area," whatever. Mm-hmm. Much like what, what you've done with the dog park area. Mm-hmm. Um, and so I think that what I, I ... It would seem logical to me that this task force reports out a number of its findings. Here, here's suggestions, uh, and, and to Council Member Beard's point, uh, golf being one of them- Mm-hmm. ... it will be one of the big, big issues, uh, that come out of this. Uh, but it is only one for, one specific way that you bring more money in to fixing this kind of $50 million problem. Um, so from that discussion, I think that you springboard off of that, and it'll probably become fairly clear that, that the motions that can come out of that, what we set up after that- Mm-hmm. ... will generate, uh, the discussion for what you want to accomplish, Council Member James. Mm-hmm. I think it follows a logical progression 'cause people need to know, oh, if we can bring it in this way, or if there's this much money, then, then we can do these types of things. Mm-hmm. The key thing about this, though, is, and I really appreciate you, uh, Council Member Feigl, why I asked that this be done or set up back when the Parks Master Plan was done originally is, there is no more tax money. There, there isn't more money in the kitty. Um, and parks is a, a service that everybody utilizes, and, uh, we have to be a lot more creative in where we find resources to do that. And I think what's gonna come out of this are some extremely creative ways that are not new taxes and not new, uh, uh, I guess, impositions on the citizens of Lexington. And that's probably what's gonna be hopefully most exciting about this is we can see some ways to do things that maybe we didn't realize we had the opportunity until now. So I think what I hear you saying is in August, we'd hear from Council Member Feigl's committee- ... and then that might lead to a September- Yeah. ... discussion of other issues that come forward. Yeah. Okay. Council Member Beard. Thank you. It was just a follow-on, on my comments, and that is that, uh, with Cincinnati, um, Milton Dehoney is the city manager. David Holmes is the deputy city manager. And we'd probably get a pretty straight story from, um, one or both of those folks, uh, as to how they were able to negotiate a good deal with this Billy Casper outfit. But, and that, and not that I'm pushing a Billy Casper by any means, but, uh, it, it, it's a model of we can look further if, uh, it has any palatability as far as, as going forward with something like that. Here's what might work. If the, I mean, and this could lead to something really exciting, I think, is between now and August, if you already have an issue related to parks that's not the funding issue, but is a separate issue, maybe we can each email Paul. Would you be the collector- Mm-hmm. ... of these? And as we go forward, uh, if your issue is golf, what exactly would you like discussed? If it's something else, maybe we can have a compilation as we go forward, and then anything that comes out of your committee report out. How's that sound? Does that sound workable? It, uh, sure, it sure does. I mean, right now, um, we're losing, what, seven or eight dollars a round on, uh, every round that's played on our golf courses. And, um, we're in competition with all the other golf courses, and they can't quite keep up. They have to either lower their, their rates or, um, you know, we're kind of in a private sec- sector arena with our, our golf courses, and, uh, uh, it's not a level playing field- ... as far as, uh, as uh, the public is concerned and the owners of these golf courses. And they're all hurting just l- like we're hurting with our golf course. We're hurting more because we charge less. Anyway, um, so I'll be glad to do a little preliminary, uh, nosing around and, and, and, and pass that off to, uh, Paul and, uh, we'll see what we can do. I'll, I'll take that on myself. Thank you. S- okay, thank you. So Paul, would you just go ahead then and put out an email- Sure. ... to, um, planning committee members about parks issues and to start them coming to you? Okay. We may have two meetings' worth. You never know. Okay. Does that ... I think that gets to that issue. Uh, Council Member Feigl, the Downtown Lexington Building Inventory, do you know, or Paul, do you know what we want to do with this? I, um, had gotten an email from Paul actually that said that, uh, that they, that Historic Preservation Committee will present this, uh, later in the year. Um- W- do you know what, or Paul, maybe you know. We've had one presentation on it. What, what will we be hearing that's different? As I understand it, again, it wasn't put in the committee by me, as you guys are well aware. But, uh, you guys heard a presentation. It was put in the committee, and I believe w- you'll hear a presentation from Historic Preservation about how they've utilized that information, working with DD- DDA to implement whatever they're gonna implement, but I don't know what they're ... (0:14:03.500) It, it seems like to me that I recall that when they made their presentation to us the first time, that it wasn't real- that the project wasn't totally complete. Hmm. Am I remembering that correctly? Mm-hmm. I, I think it wasn't complete. I think their inventory was complete, was it not? Hmm. But they didn't know ... What to do with it? What to do with it, maybe. Or, but- Okay, maybe that's what we need to talk about. And that would be good to know. Yeah. Okay. So- Is, where does it go from here? Okay. So that will be ready, um, I heard later in the year. Is that right? October? According to the information I got from Betty, she'd be ready by the June 22nd meeting, but that looks like to be... It's filling up. We have fence heights, mobile home trailer park, and management audit and we've lost our quorum, so... You just can't take the action. You can hear someone or, or you can- Okay. So, um, I think June is probably full, so would October work with council members who are remaining? So we don't... We're not meeting in the, um- Are we meeting... We're not meeting in July, are we? No. No. Okay. And then what was the other month you said we w- would not be meeting? Um, there's also... We're not meeting in July. May. And there's no May meeting. May. So, um, and I'd really... Um, Paul, I wonder if you could get our quorum back for us 'cause we have a couple items we need to vote on. All right. Thank you. So, um, perhaps the fall? I think the fall would work for this. We'll ask them to do October. We're sort of plotting out a tentative year's look, which I think is very good. Um, now, um, we'll skip down to Council Member James, since you're left. Uh, the commercial signage text amendment, uh, this was the four-lane property located along a four-lane public highway. Yeah. And... After I placed it in committee, we all got the email from Council Member Martin that said that the folks that were petitioning for this would remove that, um, as one of their options. So I don't know if we still need to talk about it since it's, they don't even want it anymore. Um... I, I think that at this point, since we've had the, um, ordinance go through and they don't want to pursue it, it got in here because they wanted to pursue it originally. Exactly. So if we can get our quorum back... Do we have someone who's coming? They're, they're, they're gonna come down. Okay. I will make a motion when we get our quorum back- Okay. ... to remove it. To remove it. Mm-hmm. Okay, that would be appropriate, I think. And then, um, is there anyone, any council member here who has any comment on residential additions, residential zoning? Before- Which I think is... I'm sorry. Yeah. Council Member Lawless, before she left, asked me to just report, and I don't think it's gonna surprise you, that her... Well, she put residential additions in there. She feels that the moratorium work group has dealt with her issue. So it could come out of committee? Yes. Yes, ma'am. Okay, and I think the residential zoning issues maybe- It's the same thing. ... is the same thing that, that committee's already dealt with that. Um, so one, two, three- You got six, I believe. ... four, five, six. Thank you, Council Member Beard for making our quorum. So, um, can you turn your mic on, please? Sure. I move, I move that we remove residential additions and zoning ordinances. Okay. We have a motion by Council Member Ellinger, a second by Council Member Feigl to remove residential additions and residential zoning ordinances. Council Member James. I need help, Chair, in the c- in deciding... Or help, help me to understand why residential additions would be taken care of through the moratorium. I don't... Because I, I thought that there w- were some conversations about accessory dwelling units happening separate, but I don't know if that was related to this issue or not, because that ADU information has not come forward, but I know that there was a more extensive conversation going on. Paul might know. I think the, um, accessory uses was different from the additions. I, I think it's- And it's still- That... I'm sorry. ... that's very- Units, not usage. I'm sorry. Oh. ADUs. You don't know anything about that? I, I'm not familiar. Ma'am, I, I would just... I just know what Council Member Lawless just told me. So you... I mean, as a group, you can do whatever you want, or you can put another- There she is. ... item back in, or you can rely on Council Member Lawless. Okay. Council Member Lawless, we'll get your question. I'm here. Uh, there's a motion to remove residential additions and residential zoning ordinances from planning, uh, based on information you gave Mr. Schoninger. Can you, um, Council Member James, you might want to ask your question about residential additions. Well, do, do we feel like that we've addressed all of the issues with residential additions throughout the entire city, or, or do we feel like we've dealt with it for the student housing area? Um, the Zoda piece, um, would deal with the entire city. And that's the residential zoning edi- ordinances. Right. So do you want to put that on hold? I mean, we already referred it to- Well, we, we need to know from you who... You moved this into committee, residential additions, whether you think it still needs to be in committee and- No, we can remove it. I'm sorry. Thank you. Okay. Council Member Feigl. It, this just occurred to me, but, um, before we take that out, we might want to actually talk a little bit more in committee about the ND1 overlays, because I think in the past, it's been a perception that the ND1 overlays actually had to wi- be initiated by neighborhoods. ... and that is not the case. And I know we do have some ND-1 overlays in our community, and we might wanna kind of maybe take a look at that, see how effective it is, um, and see what the process is to, um, consider that for other neighborhoods. That might be an interesting conversation. So maybe that would be a separate motion at work session, to put that specific zone into- Rather than residential additions? Because that since- Well, that Council Member Lawless is recommending her issue come out. Okay, I just saw that as a part of residential additions. Would you like to... Okay. I mean, it just- ND-1- ... it just occurred to me, so, uh- And ND-1's very specific, and I think you're right, it could use some conversation. Um, the residential additions piece, if there's something that needs to stay in committee, we need to know what it is. Yes, Council Member James. Well- well, the ND-1 would be under residential zoning ordinance. But that's not what this issue was that was put into committee. I'm sorry, I thought the motion was to remove... Did you just do residential addition, or did you do- The two. She did- Okay. ... both. Mm-hmm. So- so the motion to bring ND-1 overlay perhaps at work session- Yeah. ... would be very appropriate. But that would fall under zoning, so do you wanna just leave that in there or does it need to be a separate motion? I think it needs to be separate. This residential zoning ordinances was specific to what was brought forward on the ZODAs and- It wa- ... all of that. ... exact- it was part of the moratorium, the moving forward, so it may need to just be on hold as we go through this process. Why- why not take these out and then you make a motion- I'm fine with that. ... at work session to put ND-1 overlay in? How about that? I- I'm fine with that. So it's very clear what we're talking about. I think the- I think the committee would be helped if there's clarity in the issue that's in committee. Council Member Beard, about the motion to remove these two. But, we're talking about R1 and R2, which exists all over the city, not just in the moratorium area, so... And we don't want a situation that we're- we may be creating another area of town that, uh, is, um, in- inundated with, um, inappropriate student housing, let's put it that way. So is there an issue that you see that should remain in committee? See, I'm trying to hone in on the specific issue that we haven't dealt with under residential zoning ordinances. Eight bedroom additions in, uh- Okay, that was not- I think- Yeah, that- that's the residential additions piece. So if you have that to come forward, I think we could leave it in. Okay. That's fine. Okay. Um, but these are very nebulous, and I think it's very difficult for the committee to have this nebulous, um, issue in committee when we've already moved forward several things relating to these. So, Council Member Blues. Uh, thank you, Chair. I'm not- I'm not sure that my question here would be as relevant to the particular motion, so I'll come- Oh, okay. ... I'll come back in a minute or so. Okay. The motions to remove residential additions put in by Council Member Lawless, and residential zoning issues put in by Council Member Stinnet, both of which related to the moratorium. Council Member James. Thank you. I'm sorry to ask again, I'm just trying to get clarification. What part of that came out of the moratorium issue dealt with residential additions? The- What wording? Um, what did you- I'm sorry . Um, I don't recall exactly. I mean, it's been several months and I don't have it in front of me, so I don't remember exactly what specifically I was thinking or what that... So I need to go back and see when I m- made the motion and review it. Okay. We co- and the- so- The reason I ask is because I thought additions had to do with the buildings that were added to an existing structure. Correct. But I don't- I don't remember that being part of a conversation, uh, um- Well- ... solved, um, through the moratorium issue. I don't remember talking about sizes of additions, or where an addition was placed, or a means of egress for an addition, or any of that. I think of, as we have moved several things forward, um, that it's kind of a wait and see if we have to address the additions. So- Specifically the size of the floor area ratio, or- or design, or- S- so maybe Council Member Ellinger could split his motion. I can just- How would you think of that? ... I can withdraw that motion and then- That- ... make a new motion that we- ... uh, take out the residential zoning ordinances. Does the seconder withdraw her second? I... Okay. So what's your new mo- motion? That, um, we take out the residential zoning ordinances. And is there a second? Second. Okay. So the motion on the floor should remove residential zoning ordinances from committee. Any discussion? Uh, Council Member James, did you ... Were you on the ... I think that was old. Okay. Okay. Yes. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Okay. Now, um, Council Member Lawless, when would the residential additions be ready? I think that that is on hold as we move through this process. So maybe we could look at it in Augu- no, we've ... August is full. Um, do you know what you're gonna be ... Y- there's no plan to bring anything forward? Not at this time, no. Okay. So if this is still in committee by summer, maybe we can take a re-look at it. Well, and it's not even in a committee at this time. Well, it's in this committee. Oh, oh, I'm sorry. I meant another committee. Uh, Council Member Blues. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to, to ask a follow-up question of Council Member Feigl on the, on the issue of ND1. What, what is the issue that we would- That you would take up? Um, I think some, a couple of changes have been made since it actually, um, came before us the last time and I'm ... One of the, one of the changes that's been made, I believe, through planning, is ... And we had asked this at a joint planning meeting that they create a, um, an alternative to, um, um, a grant ... Uh, excuse me, a waiver than going through the Board of Adjustments. So I know they created, you know, a little easier path to do that. But I don't know what it is. Uh, secondly, I think it's become apparent now that there was a misperception that the ND1 overlay had to be, um, initiated by a neighborhood. I don't think that's the case. Mm-hmm. And so I just feel like we need to kind of iron out, find out from the neighborhoods who've already initiated the ND1 overlays, have they been effective. Um, just, just kind of do, more or less, just an overview of, of where we are at this point with an ND1 overlay because I believe it is a good tool and it may be that other neighborhoods want to use that tool and we just need to be able to articulate what the process is to them. Mm-hmm. So we might have a, a presentation on the process and hear from neighborhoods that have it. Uh, does that work? Council Member James. Um, thank you, Madam Chair. Also with the ND1, one of the things that I know some folks have been either working on or grappling about, I'm not too sure, had to do with whether, um, no demolition would be included in the, in one of the potential characteristics of the ND1. So I know that's ... I don't know where that status is, but that was one of the ... As they were trying to figure out between H1 and ND1, one of those determinant factors of a neighborhood choosing H1 over ND1, a lot of it had to do with demolition. So they were trying to maybe get that changed. I'm not sure where it is. But that would be good. I'd be interested and support your motion to, to look at that. Um, um, the other thing I was gonna say is that Jimmy Emmons, when he does the update, um, through infill and rede- about infill and redevelopment in August, I think, we set him for. Or September. I can't remember. I'm sorry, which- No, April. We did ... Did we do April for Jimmy Infill Emmons? Infill and Redevelopment and Downtown Master Plan. He may have information he can share with us about, um, additions at that time. I know planning's been working on some things. I don't know if he'll be ready to present anything and I may be speaking completely out of turn. But if he has any information about additions because I think that's something infill and the redevelopment that was one of those, one of those 150 or 60 recommendations or how many ever it is. Seems like it grows every day. Um, so he may have an update if, when Paul contacts him. He may wanna ask if he has addition information. He d- he does have, like, a 3D- Yeah. ... slide show- He's got a presentation. Um, okay. Um, here's what we have. Um, we didn't ... Encroachments got to come back to us. Um, perhaps we can have that in June. Yeah, that's what ?????? . Um, since we don't have a, a May meeting, if you'll bear with me just for another minute, we've removed ... Just to review, we've removed Loudon Phase 1, Tree Protection Ordinance, Residential Zoning Ordinances and Commercial Signage. Those are removed and- Did you have a quorum for the Commercial Signage? Yes. Okay. Did we not have a quorum? I think we did for Commercial Signage. Right. Uh, April, we'll have Infill Redevelopment update, Downtown Master Plan update and Residential Additions. That'll be a hefty meeting. June will have the, uh, encroachment issue to come back to us, fence height, Mobile Home Trailer Park report and Management Audit, uh, recommendations. And then August will have a report out from the Parks Master Plan Funding Subcommittee and then October- Let's see. We don't have... September, we've said we then will vet, um, parks issues that are coming forward, and October has the downtown Lexington Building inventory. How's that sound for the year? All right, very good. I appreciate your time in doing this, uh, to sort of flesh out the year and cover our issues. And then, um, uh, we'll deal with any new issues as they come forward. Do I hear a motion to adjourn? So moved. Second? Second. Thank you. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Meeting is adjourned. Beautiful day in London. Well, I think the deck time next month is going to be a little bit on the expensive side, so I think we need to establish maybe a regular basis for 5:30, 6:30, 10:30. We'll just come up with a number. The one thing I thought I'd never lose. He's got you. Oh. He'll hold you tonight, but I won't. What's he got that I don't? The one thing I thought I'd never lose. He's got you. Oh, he's got you. Ooh, baby. Ain't nothing like the real thing, baby. Ain't nothing like the real thing. No, no. Ain't nothing like the real thing, baby. Ain't nothing like the real thing. Go honey. I've got your picture hanging on the wall. But it can't see or come to me when I call your name. I realize it's just a picture in a frame. Ooh, I read your letters when you're not near. But they don't move me, they don't groove me like when I hear your sweet voice whispering in my ear. Don't you know? Ooh, ooh. Ain't nothing like the real thing, baby. Ain't nothing like the real thing. I'll play my game of fantasy. I pretend, but I know in reality I need the shelter of your arms to comfort me. No other sound is quite the same as your name. No touch can do half as much to make me feel better. So, let's stay together. I've got some memories to look back on. Though they help me to go on, I'm well aware nothing can take the place of you being there. Ooh. So glad we got the real thing, baby. So glad we got the real thing. Oh, darling. Ain't nothing like the real thing, baby. So glad. So darling. Ain't nothing like the real thing. Talk to me. Ain't nothing like the real thing, baby. Oh, so glad. Ain't nothing like... Como puede ser verdad. Last night, I dreamt of San Pedro. Just like I'd never gone, I knew the song. A young girl with eyes like the desert. It all seems like yesterday, not far away. Tropically island breeze. All of nature wild and free. This is where I long to be. La Isla Bonita. And when the samba played, the sun will set so high. Ring through my ears and sting my eyes, your Spanish lullaby. I fell in love with San Pedro. <> > <. And when the samba played, the sun would set so high, ring through my ears and sting my eyes, your Spanish lullaby. I want to be where the sun warms the sky. When it's time for siesta, you can watch them go by. Beautiful faces, no cares in this world, where a girl loves a boy, and a boy loves a girl. Last night, I dreamt of San Pedro. It all seems like yesterday, not far away. Tropical the island breeze. All of nature wild and free. This is where I long to be. <>. And when the samba played, the sun would set so high, ring through my ears and sting my eyes, your Spanish lullaby. Tropical the island breeze. All of nature wild and free. This is where I long to be. <>. And when the samba played, the sun would set so high, ring through my ears and sting my eyes, your Spanish lullaby. Tropical the island breeze. All of nature wild and free. This is where I long to be. <>. And when the samba played, the sun would set so high, ring through my ears and sting my eyes, your Spanish lullaby. <>. I was talking with a friend of mine. Said a woman that hurt his pride. Told him that she loved him so and turned around and let him go. Then he said, "You better watch your step or you're gonna get hurt yourself. Someone's gonna tell you lies, cut you down to size." Don't do me like that. Don't do me like that. What if I love you baby? Don't do me like that. Don't do me like that. Don't do me like that. What if I need you, baby? Don't do me like that. Listen, honey, can't you see? Baby, you would bury me. If you were in a public eye, giving someone else a try. And you know you better watch your step or you're gonna get hurt yourself. Someone's gonna tell you lies and cut you down to size. Don't do me like that. Don't do me like that. What if I love you, baby? Don't, don't, don't, don't. Don't do me like that. Don't do me like that. What if I need you, baby? Don't do me like that. Cuz somewhere deep down inside, someone is saying, "Love doesn't last that long." I've had this feeling inside night and day, and baby, I ain't taking no more. Listen, honey, can you see? Baby, you would bury me. If you were in a public eye, giving someone else a try. And you know you better watch your step or you're gonna get hurt yourself. Someone's gonna tell you lies and cut you down to size. Don't do me like that. Don't do me like that. What if I love you, baby? Don't, don't, don't, don't. Don't do me like that. Don't do me like that. I just might need you, honey. Don't do me like that. Come back. Don't do me like that. Don't do me like that. Baby, baby, baby. Don't, don't, don't, don't. Don't do me like that. Don't do me like that. Baby, baby, baby. Oh, oh, oh. New York City. I had to put out some kind of a fight. The lady. Then she covered me. Roses. She blew my nose and then she blew my mind. Hey. It's a home. It's all right. Give me, give me, give me. Oh, that's all right. All right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. You bet. It's a home. It's a home. It's a woman. Give me. Give me, give me. The heart that's all right. Yes. That's right. That's right. That's right. Jolene, Jolene, Jolene, Jolene. I'm begging of you. Please don't take my man. Jolene, Jolene, Jolene, Jolene. Please don't take him just because you can. Your beauty is beyond compare with flaming locks of auburn hair. With ivory skin and eyes of emerald green. Your smile is like a breath of spring. Your voice is soft like summer rain. And I cannot compete with you, Jolene. He talks about you in his sleep. And there's nothing I can do to keep from crying when he calls your name, Jolene. And I can easily understand how you could easily take my man. But you don't know what he means to me, Jolene. Jolene, Jolene, Jolene, Jolene. I'm begging of you. Please don't take my man. Jolene, Jolene, Jolene, Jolene. Please don't take him even though you can. Jolene, Jolene. I don't want to talk about things we've gone through. Though it's hurting me. Now it's history. I played all my cards. And that's what you've done too. Nothing more to say. No more ace to play. The winner takes it all. The loser standing small. Beside the victory. That's her destiny. I was in your arms thinking I belonged there. I figured it made sense. Building me a fence. Building me a home. But tell me, does she kiss like I used to kiss you? Does it feel the same when she calls your name? Somewhere deep inside, you must know I miss you. But what can I say? Rules must be obeyed. The judges will decide, the likes of me abide. Spectators of the show, always staying low. The game is on again, another or a friend, a big deal or a small. The winner takes it all. I don't wanna talk, if it makes you feel sad. And I understand, you've come to shake my hand. I apologize if it makes you feel bad. Seeing me so tense, no self-confidence. But you see, the winner takes it all. The winner takes it all. So the winner takes it all. And the loser has to fall. Don't ask why. We don't need someone dear. Takes it all. Has to fall. Has to fall.