For the soul I see the hunger in your eyes Burning out of control My love is overflowing My love and cover Girl, I know you're down But love will lift you up My love, are you ready for my love, my love? My love, my love is ready for you. If you're looking for a part that's always true, only to you. Then my love, my love, my love is ready for you. My love is overflowing Love and cover Girl, I know you're down The love will lift you up My love Are you ready for my love, my love My love, my love is ready for you If you're looking for a heart that's always true Only to you My love, my love, my love is ready for you My love, my love is ready for you My love, my love is ready for you I've been walking these streets so long Singing the same old song I know every crack in these dirty sidewalks of Broadway Where hustle's the name of the game And nice guys get washed away like the snow and the rain There's been a load of compromising On the road to my horizon But I'm gonna be where the lights are shining on me Like a rhinestone cowboy Riding out on a horse in a star-spangled rodeo Like a rhinestone cowboy Getting cards and letters from people I don't even know And awful's coming over the phone Well, I really don't mind the rain And the smile can hide all the pain But you're down when you're riding the train That's taking the long way And I dream of the things I'll do With a subway token and a dollar tucked inside my shoes There'll be a load of compromising On the road to my horizon But I'm gonna be where the lights are shining on me Like a rhinestone cowboy Riding out on a horse in a star-spangled rodeo Rhinestone cowboy Getting cards and letters from people I don't even know And offers coming over the phone Like a rhinestone cowboy Riding cows on a horse in a star-spangled rodeo Like the Rhymestong Cowboys Get your calls and letters from people I don't even know Your mama used to worry about that big muddy river Honey, do you remember? You let the screen door slam when you stepped off the front porch Tell your mama calling, don't be late I'd hear your daddy holler, son, she's my only daughter You'd stick your nose in the honeysuckle down by the gate I could still hear your mama calling, don't go near the water We fell right in way over our heads, but we didn't go near the water We loved that deep so young and sweet, and the nights got hotter and hotter We'd been sure enough getting our feet with Mama But we didn't go near the water He'd hear the rocking chair squeaking And he sneaked up the backstair Mama waiting like a grizzly bear Had to get the honeysuckle out of your house But in the morning light You look right in the eye And you look right in the eye We didn't go near the water We fell nine and way over our heads But we didn't go near the water The government's been so young and sweet And the night's got hotter and hotter We were sure enough getting our feet with Mama But we didn't go near the water Your Mama used to worry about that big money river She shouldn't worry about me Cause we were sure enough getting our feet with Mama But we didn't go near the water Didn't go near the water Didn't go near the water Yeah Thank you. I'm steady in her daddy's car She got her stereo with her baby calls And that's alright Alright I got the edge and a restless soul She's going with the wind, gonna go for all tonight Yeah, that's all night Girl, we've been waiting for this since we were born Since we were born But the problem's now, the cold sea's clear It's just the cold, the fear for the storm This must be just like living in paradise Just like paradise And I don't wanna go home And I don't wanna tell it all This must be just like living in paradise And I don't wanna go home I dig it, I dig it, I dig it. That's it, that's it. Some folks say easy come is easy go. And some folks say, when I need enough for me, girl, hang on tight, you don't let go. This must be just like living in paradise. It's just like paradise. And I don't want to go home. And I ain't never going home. This must be just like living in paradise Just for time and time And I don't want to go home Let's go Let's go This must be just like living in paradise Paradise, paradise And I don't want to go home And I don't, I don't want to go home This must be just like living in paradise Just like paradise Just like paradise Just like paradise This must be just like Just like paradise Just like paradise This must be just like Living in paradise Thank you. I Thank you. any additions or corrections to these minutes. If not, the Chair will entertain a motion to approve. Motion's been made by Mr. Wilson. Second. Second by Mr. Owen. All in favor, please say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. Next item on the agenda are the postponements and withdrawals. Do we have any at this time? Mr. Simpson. Mr. Simpson, Page 2, Item Number 1. I'd like to request a 30-day postponement or the next meeting date. My client's been looking at alternative locations. I don't know if those will be resolved, but they're moving in that direction and we'd like a postponement of one month on this particular application. Mr. Sally, what's the date of that meeting, please? Madam Chair, your date in February is the 24th for zoning item. Okay. Thank you. The Chair will, is there anyone in the audience who wants to object to that with postponement? If not, the Chair will entertain a motion. Okay. All right, there's – okay, the motion's been made to postpone for one month at February 24th. Is there a second? Motion's made by Mr. Holmes, seconded by Mr. Cravens. All in favor, please vote electronically. Motion carries. Thank you very much. Good afternoon. I'm Mark Reinhart. Page 3, item 2, SCW Newtown. Request a one-month postponement to February 24th, please. Thank you very much. Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to object to this postponement? If not, I'll turn it over to Commission members. Is there a motion to accept postponement for one month? Madam Chair, I'll move for postponement of SCW Newtown, MAR 2011-1, for one month until February 24th. Is that what I heard? Yes. Motion by Mr. Craven. So I hear a second. I mean, Mr. Owens, is there a second? Mr. Craven, second. All in favor, please vote electronically. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. Thank you. Are there other postponements or withdrawals? If not, we'll move on. To our first item then. Madam Chair, the remaining zone change appears on page 5 of your agenda. We'll be prepared to begin that hearing in just a moment. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. and only zoning item today is MARV 2011-2. This is a request by WML Properties, LLC. And it is a request to rezone property on Lawrence Street from an R1T zone, which is our townhouse residential zone, to the planned neighborhood residential zone, which is an R3 zone. I'll use the screen overhead and also the map. Actually, that reads a little bit better for you. The subject property does face along Lawrence Street in the South Hill Historic District and neighborhood. However, the subject property's address is 412 South Mill Street, So it is a portion of a property that does have frontage on Mill Street, but the property proposed for rezoning has all of its frontage on Lawrence Street. And for reference, the block is surrounded by West Maxwell to the northeast, by South Mill Street to the northwest, by Pine Street to the southwest, and then Lawrence Street to the southeast. This whole block is part of a historic district, the South Mill Historic District, which has been in place for a number of years. And this area also went through a down zoning in 1997. The current zoning is, again, R1T. You can see from the overhead that there is B1 zoning in this general vicinity along West Maxwell Street and adjacent to the subject property. It's a parking lot. There's on the other three sides of this subject property is residential land use and zoning, including R1T along Mill Street, R2 along Pine Street, and then both R2 and R1T on the opposite side of Lawrence. South Mill or South Hill neighborhood does have quite a bit of mixed use development. This block is mostly residential and of different varying densities and types, but the neighborhood also has commercial with retail uses and professional office as well as restaurants. This is an aerial view. Again, we are between the University of Kentucky and downtown. Lawrence Street runs parallel to Broadway and Upper Street. It's a little closer view of the property proposed for redevelopment. It is currently vacant, and it was formerly the rear yards of three or four structures that face onto South Mill. Those properties were brought in in 2005 for a rezoning from an R2 zone to an R1T zone. It's actually two duplexes and two single-family homes. Those structures are to remain on South Mill Street, including the one that's still part of this property, but not the subject of the rezoning, and the proposal is to redevelop the rear of the properties. 2005, the rezoning by the same applicant was brought in, and the proposal at that time was to build six townhomes. There were two groups of three and an open space in between, and the revision proposed today is to develop one single-family home and then three townhouses. And for reference for the Planning Commission, the single-family home would be closer to Pine Street, the corner of Pine and Lawrence, not at the corner, but that half of the property, and the three townhouses are closer to West Maxwell Street as proposed by the applicant. The R3 zone, I think, is proposed because it does allow more flexibility in terms of use, whereas the R1T zone does not permit a single-family detached home. This is just an unstraight view of the property along Lawrence Street, and it does show the entire frontage of the area to be rezoned. You can see there are quite a few mature trees, and the visible homes in this property are the rear of the houses facing onto Mill Street. This is a photo of the area proposed for the single-family home and the area proposed for the three townhomes. A comprehensive plan for this area does recommend high-density residential land use, and it is part of an area that was reviewed with the Newtown Pike Extension corridor extension. And so it is just outside our downtown master plan land use category, but I believe it is within the downtown master plan's overall boundary. This block, actually entire block, is recommended for high-density residential, which our comprehensive plan defines as 10 to 25 dwelling units per net acre. The applicant, although they're reducing their proposed density on this property by two units, it still does come within the range recommended by the comprehensive plan at a density of 13.38 units per acre. And the petitioner is offering at this time conditional zoning restrictions to limit the development on the property to single-family detached homes, duplexes, and townhomes. So that would, in essence, eliminate the possibility of an apartment building or multifamily building at that location. The staff typically notes when we're in an H-1 area that the Board of Architectural Review will still be reviewing the design of any development at this location. And so that would need to be in compliance with, of course, their design guidelines. And it is something that reassures the planning staff that the proposed development will be in character with what's already along Lawrence Street. The staff would refer the Planning Commission to your notebook. There is a supplemental staff report for this item. It is behind tab three. And there is a blue sheet. Originally the staff had no, not the blue sheet Tom handed out. That's okay. It's in your notebook. There is another blue sheet. Thank you. The staff's original recommendation for this zone change was for approval of half the zone change for the single family home, but disapproval of the portion where they were requesting the townhomes. And our original report made a statement that technically it doesn't appear that the townhomes could be constructed, as they were already approved on the final development plan, if rezoned to R3 because of floor area and lot coverage requirements. Since the zoning committee met three weeks ago, the staff has reevaluated that recommendation in terms of retaining the R1T zoning for those townhomes. And at this point, we reviewed the 1983 revisions to the zoning ordinance and met with the Department of Law and have determined that that longstanding interpretation is, well, it was subject to review again, and there has been a change in the interpretation at this point. The research that we conducted was the 1975 ordinance doesn't show that floor area ratio is something reviewed when townhomes are built and in an R3 zone. And the 1983 rewrite doesn't appear to have intended for that to now apply. So for this reason, the staff does support the petitioner's application in whole and has revised its recommendation, as you can see on the blue sheet. So we are recommending approval of the zone change from an R1T to an R3 zone as requested by the applicant because it is in agreement with the Comprehensive Plan in terms of its recommendation for use and density. The staff, I believe, made most of those changes on your agenda that was mailed out and at your seat, But the changes you see on the blue sheet are related to conditional zoning restrictions, and our original restrictions were just for the single-family home. So now that the area to be rezoned is the entire face of Lawrence, we're suggesting a maximum of six dwelling units be permitted on the property and the property be limited to detached single-family residential, two-family residential, or up to six single-family townhouses. And I am happy to answer any questions if you have those. And I would note that the zoning committee, although met three weeks ago, did not make a recommendation due to lack of a quorum. Thank you. Are there questions from any of the commission members? Not. Thank you very much. I thank Mr. Martin. Next. Madam Chairman, members of the Commission, at the top of page 6 on your agenda is the development plan associated with the zone change before you today, ZDP 2011-2, South Hill Garden amended. The development plan again that you see before you, this section of the plan with the area of the zone change outlined in the heavy black line, fronts on Lawrence Street. Here is South Mill Street on the back side of the total block. Here is the single family home that they are proposing. It's two stories. The two stories comprise over 3,300 square feet. Here is a garage that is also being an attached garage being proposed. The garage is about 838 square feet approximately. These are the three townhouses previously approved on the plan that are intended to remain. There are variances associated with this request. That is to move the building line from 20 to 5 feet to allow this house to be up close to the street. The driveway and this parking area in front of the garage is also one of the variance requests that you're going to be hearing today. And the infill standards require 10 feet. They are requesting 20 feet for this driveway. And Mr. Emmons is going to describe that to you in detail, but it is related to the function of this area for cars entering and leaving the garage and the property. The subdivision committee did recommend approval of this plan. Subsequently, a new plan was submitted to staff, And that is we have revised your conditions on that pretty blue handout that you have before you today. Staff is recommending approval subject to the conditions you see there. The first, as always, are our standard sign-off conditions. We do have a few cleanup conditions, including number eight, which is remove the heavy black line from around 412 South Mill Street. This area is not part of the zone change, and we want that to be clear. In addition, you'll see condition 9, which is addressing this heavy black line, and we're asking that that line width be made smaller so that it doesn't interfere with any kind of interpretation or detail on the plan. They are also required to denote the Board of Architectural Review's approval of the residents being proposed, a single family. We're asking that they identify the sidewalks from the dwelling units to Lawrence Street. That's just a small item that they've omitted from this plan. They have at this time denoted the height of the garage. It is 15 feet 8 inches, so we have removed that condition. They added the meets and bounds to the plan. We have deleted that condition. The next one is provided the Planning Commission grants, the front and driveway width variances, the front yard and the driveway width variances, again, that Mr. Emmons is going to present to you. And that leads us to the following condition, which was discussed buffering and use of driveway. At the original submittal, staff was concerned they were requesting a 12-foot driveway. The requirement, again, is 10. So staff was concerned about the buffering and the wall and the presentation to the street. If you grant the variance today, it makes that point moot. So therefore, we struck that condition. And then we have another condition, which is to note the timing of the subdivision plan and the building permit for the single-family dwelling. This is a final development plan. They can pull permits off a final development plan. There is a plat that's been filed on the property. They have recorded one small section. The issue that's relative to this is the street improvements, curb and gutter along Lawrence, and that condition is we'd just like to have the timing of those improvements noted so that we're all basically on the same page with the provision of those particular improvements. And again, because it's a little odd now that you have a single-family home going in and it being permitted and it will be on its own lot, and then with the townhouses, it's really just a matter of timing. And staff is comfortable that that timing can be resolved with little difficulty, and we would like it denoted on the plan. There are a total of 13 conditions now on your revised staff recommendation. And, of course, should you adopt the conditional zoning, you can add a 14th condition of denote conditional zoning restrictions on this plan as well. And with that, I'll be happy to answer any questions. Okay. Thank you, Ms. Copeland. Yes, Mr. Martin. The zone change, as I understand it, allows six dwellings on this plant. Four. But it said, I thought Ms. Wade said six. I think it's up two. The development plan is just proposing four. Right. There is a limit. But let's say the house burns down. Then can they build three there? Yes, ma'am. They would have to amend their plan. Right. Not the plan, but the zoning. Well, they would have to amend the plan. Yes, the plan. Yes, ma'am. No, not the zoning. Just the plan. So the open space there would be a buildable place? It could be. Yes, ma'am. But again, subject to your body's approval. When the new plan comes in. When the new plan comes in. Yes, ma'am. Okay. There you go. Thank you. Yes, again, the spacing and that sort of thing, Board of Adjustment, I mean Board of Architectural Review also reviews as part of the H-1 overlay. Ms. Phillips. Tom, this property is currently vacant? Parts of it? I haven't driven past it in a while. I think for the most part, yes, it is vacant. How long has it been vacant for? Do you have any record of when BOA or if any approvals for demolition are on record? I do not. Someone else may, but I don't. No. Between now and 2005, there was a commercial-type garage that faced Lawrence Street in the neighborhood of right behind 412 Mill Street, and there was also a residential garage directly behind 408 Mill Street, and those were demolished. So in the last four or five years. Other than that, the property was vacant. Are there other questions? Mr. Owens. Tom, in regards to the improvements there on Lawrence Street, do you have a preference as to when carves, gutters, et cetera, go in? No. I think staff, along with the Division of Engineering, are happy to work with the developer and allow some sort of timing mechanism to kick that in because of the situations with this particular property. I have a question. Tom? Mr. Chairman. If they're going to install those improvements, curbs got it, are sidewalks included in that? The sidewalks exist. How do you tie that portion of curb and gutter into what's either existing or not existing? That's part of the discussion on the timing and who's going to do it and how that is going to be addressed. That's been a topic of discussion. It could be a long time before. Yes, sir. That occurs. Ms. Copeland. Mr. Martin, this doesn't have anything to do with the development plan, but I don't understand the graphics. We have a driveway over here on the left that goes to the tan garage. It looks like we have another driveway going up to the shade tree. Here. Right there. Yes, ma'am. And this will be a driveway to serve this unit, I believe, and then there will be driveways serving other units. This will, again, be the only driveway serving the single-family home. So the driveway that goes up to the left-hand townhouse unit is going to take down the tree? The tree currently exists and is here, and I believe this may be the existing driveway. There's no driveway there? No, I'm sorry. That's down here. Pardon me. There's an existing driveway down here. But that's the tree canopy. But, yes, the tree is located in this general area. So there goes the tree. Well, there could be some impact, certainly. I'd say so. But I don't see why we're dealing with a driveway on those three units. It is the entire area of the zone change, and the development plan governs this entire area. If I can also comment, they cannot remove a tree above, is it 10-inch caliper? I don't have the guidelines in front of me, without approval from the BOAR. So if it's a significant tree, they would have to get BOAR approval to place the driveway such that it would be removed. So there will be additional review if there's any proposal to remove a tree. This is a 30-inch caliper tree. It's a sizable tree. It's not one to hug, but it's a sizable tree. And I don't understand why we have to have that driveway there. I think that's... What? That's already there. That's not a new development plan now. That's not a change. That's right. This has not changed from the previous plan. Oh. Are there other questions from members of the committee? If not, we have one more staff member to hear from. Mr. Hammons. Mr. Hammons. As I get around the obstacle course that we have today, I am here to present to you the requested variances with this zone change application. There are two requested dimensional variances, and that is first to a front yard setback for the single-family home from 20 feet to 5 feet, and also a variance for the driveway width of the single-family home from a maximum of 10 feet, a 10-foot wide driveway to a 20-foot wide driveway. There are several reasons for this that are in your revised staff report. The findings are not on the agenda, but they are in your revised staff reports in your booklet. The reason why we have a revised staff report, as Tom mentioned, the original variance request for the driveway width was from 10 to 12 feet. The applicants had amended that to 20 feet. Our first staff report recommended postponement of that as we would look at their justification and evaluate the 20-foot proposal. That's what I'm going to present to you today. And if we can get the pictures on the PowerPoint up, it will actually keep me on track and make my presentation a lot quicker. The picture is worth a thousand words, right? Wrong presentation, the one that says variances. Oops. There we go. This, of course, is the applicant's development plan. And bring it in into some color. The first requested variance is for the building line from 20 feet to 5 feet for the single family home. Since this is a new lot being created in the infill and redevelopment area, not an existing lot, it would have the new lot standard in an R3 zone of a 20-foot building line. The staff is recommending approval of the 20-foot building line for several reasons. The primary reasons being that on the previous development plan as townhouses, we had those townhouses approved at five feet. this single family home would also match up with the proposed townhouses elsewhere on the property but whenever you go beyond just the subject property and you look at the entire area along Lawrence Street and does it show up well it shows up well enough there are existing and proposed building lines along Lawrence Street that are all right about that five foot range the proposed The proposed variance would actually make the proposed building compatible with the surrounding uses. And as we bring in the development plan on the aerial and the approved but not yet built townhouses that are a part of the cigar flats across the street, you can see that this variance is compatible with the rest of the properties. The driveway width, the actual definition of a driveway in Article 1 defines the driveway from the right-of-way to the building line. making the assumption that the five foot building line is an appropriate building line you're actually only talking about a five foot by 20 foot swath of land that would be subject to the variance as we looked at the driveway with the applicant did submit a revised justification and it was a very good revised justification for the 20 foot driveway with those reasons are in the staff report the two primary reasons for recommending approval of this is that there is an existing non-conforming 20-foot wide driveway on the subject property. As Ms. Wade mentioned, that there was an old commercial style garage on the property at one point in time. In essence, approval of this zone change will move that non-conforming driveway to the single-family home. The second primary reason why we are recommending approval of this is that based on the watt width, the double width of the lot, this lot is about twice as wide as other typical single family lots in the South Hill neighborhood. Because it's a very shallow but wide lot, we do not feel that the 20-foot driveway would be out of scale. We also have in our findings that, as it's been mentioned several times here today, this is in the historic area, and the Board of Architectural Review will get a final review on that lot width. So if they do not agree with the 20-foot width in the driveway, they would not be bound by it. They could always go less should they choose to. That concludes the staff report. Staff is recommending approval of both the driveway width and the front yard variance for the reasons listed in our staff report and that I went over with you today. If you have any questions on the variance, I'd be happy to try and answer those. Or any questions overall, the staff is available. Thank you. Are there questions from any of the Commission members? If not, thank you very much. Thank you. Commissioner? Thank you, members of the Commission. I'm Rena Wiseman. I'm here today for WML Properties, LLC. Bill Lear, who is the president of that entity, is also here, as is Roger Ladenberger. We are in agreement with all of the staff's recommendations for the zoning and the variance in the development plan. I want to give a little context to this for those of you who haven't been on the commission for the past eight years, because this is really the last phase of a significant redevelopment of Lawrence Street that began probably in 2002, 2003 by Mr. Lear and his company. If you start at Bolivar, you have Center Court, which was the first piece of Lawrence Street that has been built by Mr. Lear's company. On the 500 block of Lawrence Street, there is the one block of South Hill Crossing townhomes. That was the former site of a tobacco warehouse. Across the street, there are two single-family detached homes that were built by Mr. Lear's company. Moving up to this block of Lawrence Street, we have Cigar Flats, which he also did the balance of the Cigar Flats development that has not been built at this point. And then this last piece, the backyards of what used to be on the 400 block of South Mill Street. So this has been a long time coming, but it has significantly changed and improved the appearance of Lawrence Street, which used to be no more than a back alley and is now becoming a residential street and part of the South Hill neighborhood. With respect to the zone change, the only reason for the zone change is that the zoning that we requested in 2005 for townhouses doesn't permit single-family detached homes. It only allows duplexes and townhomes. So the R3 zone for the entire property will allow single-family detached townhomes and duplexes. With the conditional zoning restriction, were something to change or this to be redeveloped beyond that plan, the most you could have would be six dwelling units, which is what's currently approved, and it could be a combination of single-family, duplex, and or townhouse. So the overall density, should this plan not go forward, but we certainly expect that it will not be altered. With respect to the variance, just one thing, a minor correction, but the 5-foot setback, the variance of the 20-foot is only necessary for the single-family home. The townhomes do have a 5-foot minimum setback, but the ordinance requires in this location single-family detached have the 20 feet. Clearly that would be out of character with the area as Jimmy has, I think, really aptly illustrated with the aerial pictures and would severely restrict the redevelopment of this property as a single-family home. We are in agreement with also the request for the variance for the driveway. One of the things the staff cited that there are two non-conforming driveways on the property and I have this one photo in response. I can hand that out to Ms. Phillips' question. This is what was on Lawrence Street. It was a commercial garage. That's the double driveway. And then there used to be a garage that served the house at 408. And I'll just. Those buildings are in the location where the three townhomes are proposed. So we are, again, the owner of the property, the purchaser of the single-family home, is planning a two-car garage with the shallowness of the lot, the constricted width at that point that Jimmy outlined would constrain the maneuverability. So that is why that's requested. Ultimately, before we get a building permit, we do have to go to the Board of Architecture review for the review of the site as well as the architecture. The last point with respect to the timing to follow up to your question, the single-family home will be proceeding first. There's no time frame for when the townhomes will be developed. There are no sidewalks, curbs, or gutters on this block until you get to the Dudley's parking lot on the northeast side. So the question is, is it better to try to do all of those at one time when the balance of the property redevelops as opposed to doing it piecemeal? So that's the timing issue that we will address with the note. Unless you have any questions, we'll be happy to answer them, And we ask that you approve this for the findings on the blue sheets for the zone change development plan and the staff report that Jimmy presented on the variance. Thanks. Thank you. Are there any questions from any members of the Commission? Ms. Copeland. Yes, Ms. Wiseman. The green space that looks like Side Yard, technically, what is it? is it's private land and it is currently now yard, but could it not become a buildable space? As the staff explained, it could if a development plan amendment was presented to the commission and a revised plan was approved by the Board of Architecture Review. Okay. Are there other questions from anyone? If not, is there anyone in the audience who would like to comment? If not, I will close the hearing and we will turn it over to Commission for we have three different – we will need three different motions. We have the zoning motion, the variances and then the development plan. So that will have to be in three different motions. Do I hear a motion? Yes. I would like to speak on two different points regarding this zone change and variance. Okay. And I have 20 photos. My sales pitch is for the open space to be somewhat viewed, to have pedestrian access viewing, for the pedestrians to view the open space, the green part. This is a corner, this is a Cardozo rendering from 1975, and it shows the character of Gratz Park. The next slide, please. This is that corner at Mechanic. And one of the nice things about these houses that sit right on the sidewalk is that we lose the front yard space, but we get side yard space, and it's open to the public to view, not to use, but just to look into it. Next slide, please. This is at the corner of Third and Market. And you'll see there's no front yard. It sits right on the sidewalk and an open space next door. Next slide. This is that open space. It's not really open-open, but you can see daffodils, birds singing, et cetera. Next one. This is on down Mill Street where there's been a major infill development, and they, too, recognize the value of pedestrians seeing into the open space, not only for security reasons, but just to stay in touch with the bigger scale of the area. Because if you don't have these open spaces, you get a tunnel, a spatial tunnel. Next slide. This is across the street from the old public library and our Carnegie Center, and it has possibly a five-foot front yard. Next slide. This is looking from about Mill Street over or from the corner of Hunt Morgan House and looking down that street, 2nd Street, and you'll see the next house over is about 20 feet back. Next slide. This is that house that's next door to the 5-foot front yard. In the front of that house, there's a 20-foot setback, and that space there from the fence to the house belongs to us. It belongs to all the public. It is part of our spatial tunnel. And that, when we grant this variance, which I'm in favor of, we give up that spatial tunnel with just 10 votes, and it's gone. But we also have the opportunity, and maybe we can come to common ground on this, have a tradeoff where we get to look into the private space of this side yard in exchange for giving up that 20-foot setback. That's what I'm asking for. Because of our zoning rules and regulations, we can build in this space into a development like on Mill Street where I showed you. But we must ask for the permission here. and I would like to have it part of the variance notations that we would ask for pedestrian viewing into the open space and it not be blocked off. Next slide, please. This is at the Bodley House, also down at Grants Park, and it has not quite a 20-foot setback. That's just my estimate. And it has a brick wall. What I am trying to do is not have a brick walled space, but keep that side yard open. This brick wall is fine because we have a setback and then we have a wall. It gives the ability for the street and the motion of the street and the space of the street to pulsate. And if all those houses that are proposed are set five foot back and we get a brick wall, that side of Lawrence Street will not have the pulsating space that is attractive to a pedestrian. Next slide. This is another small space that lends to the character of Grads Park. These spaces aren't as important on Grads Park because you've got all of Grads Park in the center. So this type of space is even more important on Lawrence Street. Next slide. This is Lawrence Street right now. And you'll see the blue pencil down there. And if we flip down all the blue tags, that's going to be the tunnel that this street's going to have. But if we flip up the private yard that we get to look into, it lets the streetscape breathe. Next slide. This street isn't that wide, and you can see it because of the tire tracks. So when both sides are built up, you're going to have a pretty good tunnel. Now, true, there are tunnel streets in Annapolis and Boston and Alexandria, Virginia, and you can just go on and on with tunnel streets, but usually there's a big harbor or a big courthouse square or some common ground like the meeting grounds in Boston, and the streets just connect. The tunnel streets connect to big open spaces. We don't have big open spaces on this hill, so the little private garden parks are even more important. Next slide. This is on Mill Street, We're going to switch horses here. We're going to get off the private gardens and hope it took. And now we're going over to trees. When we get on a five-foot setback, one of the important things that our consideration in site planning is the heights or the picks of the windows. The picks is at eye level. That's another fancy way of saying eye level. If you put the windows above eye level, then not only do you stop the noise from the street, because the noise travels horizontally and it hits the wall and your room's a lot quieter, but if the bottom of the sill is at eye level or greater, then the pedestrian can only see up. He can't see into your room. He can only see the ceiling. So you get a lot more privacy. And what I'm suggesting is that when you have a five-foot setback, you're going to have possibly, depending on what historic preservation says, the window's higher than normal, and therefore the roof line's higher than normal, so it's going to make more of a tunnel. and that could be objectionable to some people because it's a 20-foot setback on Mill Street around the corner. And I'm suggesting that, see the tree way down there? We're going to go down and look at that. Next slide. These windowsills are literally at picks. I could not see over the windowsill. Next slide. and that tree is in the former side yard of that house, and it is a normal tree. Well, the temptation is to say, oh, we can't have trees. But I think that there should be some consideration for using collumer trees, because if you use collumer trees on a building of this height, You bring down the space, the human space, and you bring down the scale, and it is more pleasant. So around the corner, they did not utilize this. They did downtown. Next slide. This is a new development, and it's approximately five foot from the sidewalk. this corner. Next slide. And this is the five feet that it is from the sidewalk. Next slide. And this is downtown where they use collumer trees. They are full grown and they put a canopy over the sidewalk and it reduces the scale. I'm just suggesting that this be part of what's recommended for them to at least consider to not kick out trees but use collumer trees. Therefore, the builder of the property would have more leeway in keeping the scale of the space at a more pedestrian level. That's all I've got to say. Thank you very much. I'm not hearing, but that's new evidence, and I would like to respond to it. I have no problem with that, Mr. Lear. My lawyer is allowing me to speak, probably against her best judgment. Let me address, for the record, my name is Bill Lear. I'm the single member of WML Properties and have been the developer of this. The first overall thing I would say is I appreciate the time that Marie has put into this. That layout almost exclusively is something that under our zoning regulations should be directed at the BOAR, not at the Planning Commission because it's all design-oriented. The issue of the five-foot setback, I want to make sure everyone knows, the currently approved zoning for the property and the currently approved development plan already has a five-foot setback. We're not changing the setback from what's previously been approved. The reason that we need a variance is, frankly, one of those quirks in our zoning ordinance, and it's one of those quirks that makes downtown development very difficult. There should be no logical reason why for a single-family home you have a 20-foot setback, and for a townhome, essentially the same mass and scale, you have a five-foot. But that's the way it is, and that's one of the many things that makes downtown development very difficult. As a matter of fact, the person who plans to develop this area intends to put a waist-high wall with wrought iron above it, where you could see into the side yard. But again, that's something that would be presented to the BOAR and considered by the BOAR at the time the specific details, design details, are considered. So irrespective of all of the conversation about trees, about window heights, about looking into the private space, that's really not, with all due respect, an appropriate issue for the Planning Commission. It's all BOAR. Now, I would like to say that several of the photos of property that were presented with favorable comments are properties we've developed down there. South Hill Crossing with the garden in the middle is our development. And we did that on purpose to leave open space for the use and benefit of the owners in there, one of whom, I don't know if you realize, the house that was shown on the corner is Rena's house. So she was very proud of the fact that you put hers in there. The property across the street, Cigar Flats, is being built out with a courtyard in the middle. And if you've been down there, you've seen the gate to that is a wrought iron decorative that you can see down into the open space. And we'll ultimately see down the open space. So everything we've built is with an idea of creating that space. Center Court has about five courtyards that you can see into from various places. We build that in. But the thing that is not on any of those slides that I hope you'll take into consideration in weighing what you just saw, if you went down that stretch of Lawrence Street before we began buying those properties and began our development, you would have seen the tunnel. The backyards of all those houses had a wood stockade fence all the way out to the street. All you would have seen was a wood stockade fence. When this is developed, you'll see nice houses or townhomes fronting on that street with some wall and wrought iron, not at all unlike a bunch of the residences that are existing in Gratz Park. And don't misunderstand, don't mistake this, there are places in Gratz Park where you can't peek in the yard. There are walls that are up this high, and it's not just the Bodley Bullock House. And every one of these places that was referenced, I've been to several of them, there are places where either walls or hedges you couldn't peek in if you wanted to. So some of the so-called ideal places are walled off and don't always have that view into the courtyards. But a lot of what we've done has that. You'll have that here, and I don't think that all those slides you saw should detract from approval consistent with the recommendations. Thanks. Thank you, Mr. Lear. Are there other questions from commission members? Ms. Copeland. Mr. Lear and commissioners, I went to the historic preservation office and asked if who would control the open space there. and they said that they did not. And so? What you're talking about is the development plan. That's not the same as the built. They will absolutely control what the wall or wrought iron or anything else looks like, the height of it, where it's located. All the built improvements they do control. In fact, I think they control too much, but that's just an opinion. Are there other questions? Mr. Holmes, did you have? I'm sorry. Yeah. If not, the chair will entertain a motion. As I said, we need to start with the zoning and move through in the order in which they're on your agenda. If there are no further comments. Madam Chair. Mr. Owens. I'll start these motions. I would like to say that I appreciate Ms. Copeland's pictures and I do believe there's some validity in that. what Mr. Lear was saying, if given information, sharing information, you know, some of this might not have occurred if the belief was that, you know, it was going to be open to begin with. So, you know, which sounds like it's going to be. So, you know, it's just a matter of coming together on these things. And I think we are. March motion ZDP 2011-2 South Hill Gardens, I'll move for approval subject to the three conditions including the zoning restriction. Motion's been made. Motion's been made. I want to make sure it's on the blue sheet. It is. On the blue sheet, the revised supplemental staff report, yes. By Mr. Owens. Is there a second by Mr. Cravens? Let's everyone vote electronically, please. Motion carries. Chair will now entertain a motion for the variances. I'll continue. As far as the variances, MARV 2011-2, the requested variances for front yard variance from a minimum of 20 feet to 5 feet, the driveway width variance in the front yard from a maximum of 10 feet to 20 feet. I'll move for approval subject to the five reasons and three conditions the staff has listed. The motion has been made by Mr. Owens, seconded by Mr. Cravens. Is there any further discussion? If not, please vote electronically. You're on a roll. And then lastly, I'll move for approval of ZDP 2011-2 South Hill Garden amended, subject to now the, I think, 14, adding the denote conditional zoning restrictions, is that correct? Yes. I'm citing 14 requirements as number 14 being to note the conditional zoning restrictions. Is there a second? Oh, I'm sorry. Motion's been made by Mr. Owens, seconded by Mr. Cravens. If there's no further discussion, please vote electronically. Motion carries. Thank you all very much. Thank you. Oh, good correction. We know where it is. We have one final, one more, the next item on the agenda is the Fayette County Public School, Mary Todd Elementary. There will be a presentation. We'll give staff a moment to prepare. Good afternoon. We have one, this is the first one of many this year probably, public facility review today. It's on page 6, item A of your agenda, under commission items. and it is PFR 2011-1 made by Fayette County Public Schools on behalf of Mary Todd Elementary. And Mary Todd is located at 551 Parkside Drive, which is just west of North Broadway, Parris Pike, right where it turns into Parris Pike, and just north of the interstate. The interstate would be down in this area further down, and then Broadway, Parris Pike would be over this way. The property is an R1C and has a little bit of R1T zoning on it. And most of the area around there is also R1C, but there's a small amount of R1T and R3 zoning right there to the east. Here's the R1T on the property and the rest is R1C. Everything else around here is R1C. We have the school. There's a small church right here. This is Mary Todd Park right here, and then everything else is residential. This is multifamily, and then the rest is single-family residential. With regard to existing conditions on the property, the property is about 15 acres in size, 15.01 acres. The existing square footage of the building is about 66,000, and they propose to add about 2,000 square feet. Access is off of Parkside Drive in two different locations, right there and right there. and that will remain as far as location goes, and then they have 104 parking spaces on site. The land use element of the comp plan recommends public education for this property, just as it has for all the other ones that we've had, and that is reflective of its historic and current use of the property as an elementary school, and it indicates a desire for it to remain. Public education includes all public school facilities, including the central office, and any accessory facilities that go along with any of the elementary, middle schools, or high schools. Looking through the comprehensive plan, there's nothing in opposition to this. In fact, in addition to the land use element recommendation of support, the text supports this, and several goals and objectives support this. Those are listed on page 2 and part of page 3 of your staff report. Mary Todd is another one of the schools that is listed in the comprehensive plan with a condition of fair. We've had all of the ones, I think, that were poor or poor to fair as public facility reviews already, and the construction is either underway or else it's completed, such as Cassidy Elementary. That construction is completed. That was one of the ones listed as poor. The ones that are listed as fair, such as Clay's Mill Elementary, which we had last month, and Mary Todd, and the three that were coming up in the next month, which would be Breckenridge, Cardinal Valley, and Mill Creek Elementary, Those are all listed as fair in the comprehensive plan, and they're just now starting to bring those up to the desired standards of having safe and aesthetically pleasing facilities for the students, and that is part of their overall goal of becoming a world-class school system by 2020. They are ready to begin construction on this school, and they'll be putting it out to bid next month. They anticipate construction to start June of 2011, and hopefully it'll be completed by December of 2012. They're completely renovating the school. They're also doing a small expansion, as I said, and the expansion will accommodate the relocation and expansion of the media center and the relocation and expansion of their administrative suites. They're replacing the entire roof, and it will be designed to direct runoff to their new detention basin, which will be, Bill, if you'll put the site plan up, please. Here is the building, and these are the new additions. Here's the detention basin that they're going to be putting on site. Here is access into the property. Here is access into the property. This is their bus turnaround loop. They're redesigning that. Like I said, the locations of the access will stay the same, but they are going to redesign the bus loop. And they will also have a complete system facilities renovation, which would be the mechanical and the lighting. They will be renovating storm and sanitary sewers, and like I said, the new detention basin will be included in that. They're renovating their classrooms, their gym space, their cafeteria, and their restrooms. And then, as I said, the access and parking will stay in the same place, and they're redesigning their bus drop-off. and that will require a little bit of additional paving and then a little bit of additional paving will be required for the areas that have been affected by the new additions. I don't know the population of the school right now, but when it's done it will accommodate 550 students and there should be no negative impacts on the property or on the surrounding area because they will be improving, basically improving the situation. There are storm issues in the area. There is FEMA floodplain just on the other side of these residences right here. And their site design is intended to address some of the storm issues because they have the new detention basin. We ask that they use best management practices, and chances are that they will. They are very aware of that kind of thing. And then in the permitting process, we ask that they submit a plan for storm drainage and retention to engineering. And we are recommending approval of this based on its compliance with the comprehensive plan. And as part of that recommendation, we ask that they obtain any kind of permits that they need for renovation or for construction from building inspection and that they do submit a plan for storm drainage and retention and engineering. And Mr. Tim Murphy from Murphy Graves Architects is here, and Mr. Jihad Halani from Vision Engineering is here with regard to the site design. If you have any questions about the staff report, I'd be glad to answer them. And the other two gentlemen are here in case you have specific questions about the site design for the building. Thank you very much. Does anyone have any questions? Mr. Holmes. I have something for Tim. Okay. Thank you. Come up. It won't be that bad, I promise. In terms of site design and stormwater drainage and detention, I am concerned that you look at, I guess, best management practices. If we can do some innovative or creative things in terms of permeable pavers or the grain gardens, things that I think the Fayette County School Board should lead in their efforts. I know we can only advise or ask you to do that, but you can maybe be creative in your design. I can carry that message back. Yes, sir, we can. I think it would be appreciated. Sure. Ms. Phillips? I'm not sure if this should be addressed to you or to Ms. Rackers, but I'm concerned about children being able to walk to the campus. And are there existing points of ingress, egress around the play yard, or is the only means of entering the property through the front yard that faces the street there? And under the renovation, are there plans to enhance access? For students arriving at the school, there are various points that come into the school, and the staff currently have a staff member at each of those entry points and exit points at arrival and discharge times. There are some that come from the top of your screen down, and then obviously there are two sidewalks that come from the back property. Thank you, please. sidewalk that comes here from the neighboring property and here from the neighboring property. Then we have sidewalk all along the front of the property. So all of those points are going to be maintained. Now, I cannot speak for the staff in terms of what their management plan is, but I can speak currently. That is what they do. Are there other questions? Mr. Owens? Mr. Murray, is it? Murphy. Mr. Murphy, we've said here before that being last on the agenda when we have a short meeting can be troublesome for you. But my question would be, you know, in looking at several of these reviews for schools and so forth, it's always been mentioned as far as LEED certification, you know, which, you know, environmental issues, environment issues, energy issues. You know, I didn't read anything in this that indicated that anything was going in that direction. Is there a reason? Well, I cannot speak for the school system. I know that they are attempting to seek LEED certification on a couple of new projects, and they want to see how that process goes before they go any further. This project is using some very commendable energy improvement standards, but it's not seeking LEED certification. We're replacing the windows. We're adding insulation, doing the proper things that we should do for a building that's 50 years old. but it is not seeking LEED certification. There are a number of things probably that if we were to tally them up would probably at least qualify the building for LEED certification. But again, the school system has decided not to pursue the certification on their buildings at this point. Yeah, I'm just coming from where Mr. Holmes was as far as leading by example and so forth. Absolutely. having seen the regional what I'm going to call the regional vocational school that's being built out on you know which is totally energy self-sustaining and so forth you know I'd like to see the lead by example as well absolutely you are in that education field you know thank you yes of course Ms. Phillips the there we've seen quite a few school renovation projects and is this intended to sort of lower the carbon footprint off these schools to reduce overall energy efficiency? It certainly will. Are they the result also of greater enrollments, trying to – can you kind of give us a big picture of what's going on with the school board and all these school areas? I can speak to the energy efficiency. I can't speak to the enrollment. I don't – as Ms. Racker said, I do not know the current population. The school is designed for 550 students, which is part of the long-range planning plan for Fayette County Schools. The complete replacement of the mechanical systems with a much more energy-efficient system will certainly improve the energy usage and, therefore, down the line, the carbon footprint. Same with the things we're doing to add insulation to replace the roof, to replace the windows, will all improve our performance, which goes to affect that. There are several things that we are doing, such as when we remove any ceiling tiles, there are companies that we are referring them to so those tiles can be recycled. So we are paying attention as much as possible to those aspects. Are there additional questions? Thank you very much. Thank you. Seeing no one else in the audience to make comments, this does require an approval. from us, so I, the Chair will entertain a motion at this time. I want everybody to hurry and take your time. Ms. Phillips. Madam Chair, I recommend that we accept the staff recommendation in the public facilities review report for PFR 2011-1. Is there a second? Motion's been made and seconded. All in favor, please vote electronically. Motion carries. Thank you very much. Thank you all for coming today. Are there any other commission – does anyone from the commission have something they'd like to bring up this time? Seeing is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak to the Commission at this time? Seeing no one. Are there additional staff comments or? Madam Chair, just a reminder that your two committees do meet next Thursday over in the Phoenix Building. Thank you. Thank you very much. If not, if there's nothing else, then do I hear motion we adjourn motions made second all in favor aye commissions adjourned