We'll be holding on forever And we'll only be making it right Cause we'll never be wrong Together we can take it to the end of the life So love it like a shadow on the other side All of the time I don't know what to do but I'm always in the dark We're living in a powder keg and giving off Oh, I really need you tonight Forever's gonna start tonight Forever's gonna start tonight One time I was falling in love Now I'm only falling apart There's nothing I can do A total eclipse of the heart Once upon a time there was light in my life But now there's only love in the dark Nothing I can say A total glimpse of the heart Thank you. Every now and then I fall apart Every now and then I fall apart And I need you now tonight And I need you more than ever And if you only hold me tight We'll be holding on forever And we'll only be making it right Cause we'll never be wrong Together we've been taken to the end of the life Love is like a shadow on me all of the time I don't know what to do I'm always in the dark Living in a place I can't get lost I really need you tonight All I have is gonna start to lie All I have is gonna start to lie Just a long time I was falling in love, now I'm only falling apart Nothing I can say, a total eclipse of the heart A total eclipse of the heart A total eclipse of the heart To the better So long I've been looking too hard I've been waiting too long Sometimes I don't know what I will find I only know it's a matter of time When you love someone When you love someone It feels so right, so warm and true I need to know if I feel it too Maybe I'm wrong Won't you tell me if I'm coming on too strong This heart of mine has been hurt before This time I wanna be sure I've been waiting for a girl like you To come into my life I've been waiting For a girl like you And a love that will survive I've been waiting For someone new To make me feel alive Yeah, waiting For a girl like you You come into my life You're so good When we make love Thank you. I'm sorry. thing to start out with and that's the appointment of one of our commissioners commission usually doesn't doesn't do this but there's a 60-day time limit and we didn't get his appointment from the council within that 60 days so then it falls on to the commissioners and the council has recommended mr. William Berkeley and so what we need to do is Approve him, if we so choose. And I'll open it up to the Commission now for a motion or a discussion. Mr. Chairman, if there's no discussion, I would move for approval of Mr. Berkley as a Planning Commission member. I second. Second. Okay, good. We have a motion for approval of Mr. Berkley, and we have a second by Mr. Wilson. Everybody vote when it comes up here. You know we're letting you off pretty easy, Mr. Berkley. I think he's already been through it. Yeah. We just want to get him up here where we can work on him. All right. That motion passes. So I think you all are going to step over and get sworn in. We'll step across the hall and get Mr. Berkeley sworn in while you're dealing with postponements and withdrawals. And hopefully in a couple minutes he will join you. Yeah, he doesn't get to take a week's vacation or anything, right? He has to come right in here and go to work? Okay. Good. All right. Next, we have approval of the minutes of August 25th. Can we have a motion? So moved. I have a motion for approval by Ms. Beatty. We have a second. Second. Second by Mr. Owens for approval of the minutes. Everybody vote. That motion carries. Next, we are on to postponements and withdrawals. Are there any postponements? Afternoon, Mr. Chairman. Bruce Simpson. And page one, item number one, Lexington Hearing and Speech Center. We would like to request a one-month postponement. We met with the neighbors a couple of times. They'd ask for a postponement after we met with them the first time to the October meeting of the Planning Commission on this matter, and we would appreciate your all's honor in that request. Okay. Does anybody in the audience wish to speak to this? Okay. We have a motion. Mr. Chairman, I move postponement of the Lexington Hearing and Speech Center request, MARV 2001-12. Okay, we have a motion to postponement. Do we have a second? Second. Second by Mr. Wilson. Everybody in favor of a vote? The motion passes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, we will put that on your October 27th agenda. Thank you. Okay. All right. Any other postponements or withdrawals? Good afternoon. I'm Noxon Agui here on behalf of the Fayette Alliance. We would like to request postponement of ZODA 2011-12, an amendment of Article 8 to allow a historic house museum in the AR zone. We've worked with all of the interested parties, including the applicants, and we've agreed that we would like for this to come up for a hearing on October 13th, on the fall possible. We would like to come together and try to work to a mutually agreeable consensus on this matter. Dick, do you want to add anything? I'm Dick Murphy, representing the Kentucky Mansions Preservation Foundation, and we are agreeable. We are ready to go today, but we are agreeable with the postponement in order to meet with Ms. Van Noggle and Mr. Royce. Jack Cunningham is here with me today on behalf of the foundation. David Royce here on behalf of Millridge, and we certainly have no objection to the postponement, and we'll continue to work together with these folks and hopefully be able to come to you with a unified proposal next month. Okay. Anyone in the audience wish to speak to this? Okay. Seeing none, turn it over to the Commission for motion. Mr. Chairman, I move for postponement until October 13, ZOTA 2011-10. Okay. We have a motion for postponement. We have a second by Patrick Brewer. Everybody vote. thank you motion carries all right um i guess next we're ready for our zoning presentation We have one zoning item. We'll be setting up and prepared to begin that in just a moment. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. There's no getting out of it either. Once you're sworn in, you can... Good afternoon, Chairman Cravens, members of the Commission. The first item on our agenda today is the consideration of a zone change. MARC 2011-13, this is a request by DMK Development Group, LLC, and it's a proposal to rezone about five acres of property at 564 Asbury Lane, or a portion of that property from an R1D zone, which is our single-family residential zone, or one of them, to a planned neighborhood residential R3 zone. The subject property is located in the vicinity of Newtown Pike and Citation Boulevard. Currently, Citation Boulevard ends approximately halfway between Newtown Pike and the subject property along this area, which is about a quarter of a mile, 600 feet. In this area that was proposed for development in 2001, this is the Newtown Springs subdivision. It's a mixed-use development with business B6P and B1 zoning up along Newtown Pike with also some professional office zoning and R3, which is the land neighborhood residential zoning, closer to Newtown Pike, and then single-family zoning in this vicinity, including the subject property. You can see there are a number of single-family lots that have already been created in the subdivision, but the whole subdivision has not been subdivided into individual lots as of yet. Also in the general vicinity, the Green Acres residential subdivision is located to the southeast. Griffin Gate development is located to the north, including the golf course, which is zoned AU. and then there's also a fairly large area of land that remains zoned for agricultural urban to the east of the subject property which is actually still owned by the University of Kentucky. Between Russell Cave Road and Newtown, Citation Boulevard is only built for approximately 600 to 700 feet But it is planned to continue from where it ends currently at Newtown Springs Drive. It's planned to continue along some already given right-of-way to the urban county government all the way to Russell Cave and would come out next to the new Northside Library. The applicant today is proposing to rezone this property in order to develop a nursing home and an assisted living facility on the property. It's a combination use. They are proposing 90 beds total. Fifty-four of those would be used for nursing home or nursing beds, and the rest, 12 for memory care, and the remaining 24 or 26, somewhere in that vicinity, would be general assisted living beds. this is a conditional use in the R3 zone, and it's not a permitted use even as a conditional use in our single-family residential zones. So that's why they are requesting a rezoning. The conditional use has also been requested at this time, and will be addressed in a separate staff report today. in the vicinity currently the property is vacant and it has been vacant since the property was rezoned in 2001 actually before that obviously the area does have some existing local streets that come and stub into the subject property including Dawson Springs Way, directly to the west, as well as Asbury Lane on the east side. And then Silver Springs Drive abuts the subject property on the west as well. You can see from this aerial photo from last year that Citation Boulevard does not continue at this point along the frontage that this property would have on that road. this is a view of currently of citation boulevard as it looks to the east there's a the r3 portion of the newtown springs development has single family in the form of townhomes this is dawson springs looking from the subject property back towards what would be developed with single family residential this would be where citation boulevard would connect In the background, you can see vaguely where the townhouses are and then also the roadway. So this is that right-of-way. Yes, sir. Excuse me, Tracy. I'm sorry. Could you back up one? Sure. When you say Dawson Springs, exactly which direction is that? That's looking to Newtown Pike, so to the west. Okay. All right. Thank you. And this is at the intersection of what Citation and Silver Springs. You can see there is a little bit of a grade change where the Silver Springs Drive has been completed, but Citation has not yet been built. This is actually along Silver Springs, but toward the southwest corner of the property. And then this photo would be from Asbury Lane, where that Stub Street currently just stops. The comprehensive plan in this vicinity does recommend low-density residential development, which is in agreement with the current zoning for single-family residential R1D, and that is a recommendation for between 0 and 5 dwelling units per net acre. With 5 acres of land, this comprehensive plan recommendation would recommend up to 25 units on the subject property. Since the applicant is proposing an R3 zone, technically single family can be built in that zone, but they are not asking for a single family development or low density development precisely. So the staff wanted the planning commission to consider the appropriateness of the zoning rather than whether it was in agreement with the comprehensive plan specifically. Also in this area, well, the petitioner is proposing some conditional zoning restrictions in general that could limit the density, and the staff has put forward some restrictions that we believe the applicant is agreeable to. In considering the request for rezoning, the staff also considered whether there had been any unanticipated changes in this immediate area, and we found that there had not been any since the 2007 comprehensive plan. But in terms of considering this requested zone change, the staff did consider the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan, and there were several that were considered, including Goal 20, Goal 8, and Goal 13, and Goal 14, and specifically those relate to encouraging integration of businesses that are compatible with residential areas, identifying the desire to provide housing opportunities to meet the needs of all citizens, supporting a variety of housing in close proximity to each other, types, and Goal 20, which had to do with satisfying the community's need for private non-residential facilities such as nursing homes and other social service facilities. So the plan, the staff is recommending approval of this request for rezoning to an R3 zone. First, because the plan recommends low-density residential, future land use, and the petitioner has proposed conditional zoning restrictions that would limit the property to the density suggested by the plan, but also the goals and objectives that I just mentioned. The applicant's proposal does meet those, as well as it's proposing to add a facility to an area of the community that's not currently being served by a nursing home or assisted living facility, and that could meet the needs of Fayette County residents in this area. And then lastly, the demographics for Lexington-Fayette County demonstrate that there is a compelling need for more nursing homes and assisted living facilities for our aging population. Specifically, the number of persons between 80 and above years old has doubled or is projected to double between 2010 and 2040. And this would help to meet the needs of that population group. The staff recommendation is found in your notebook behind tab 2, but I would point you to currently the blue sheet that was handed out. And that shows a small change to what the staff recommended at the zoning committee meeting over a month ago. And that is to add just a few words so that it states, as a principal use, no more than 25 residential dwelling units should be developed on the subject property. If it was built with single-family duplexes, townhouses, or even an apartment building, it would be limited to those 25 units as recommended by the Comprehensive Plan. In addition, a restriction on lighting. And then if a conditional use is approved by either the Board of Adjustment or the Planning Commission today, that there would be several conditional uses that would be appropriate here, including hospitals, nursing homes, restrooms, orphanages, and assisted living facilities. And our understanding would be that those facilities wouldn't be subject to a limit of 25 units, nor would they be limited on age restrictions. I think there's kind of a common understanding that nursing homes are for the elderly, but in fact, and this is hopefully addressing the applicant's concern that they expressed to me earlier this week about our definition of assisted living facilities being limited to a certain age group, and I don't think that that's the intention of our definition. So happy to answer any questions you might have about this application in terms of its zoning. We do have several other staff members that need to present something to you. All right. Thank you very much. Any questions? Yes, Ms. Phillips. Yes. Tracy, if this property were currently zoned R3, the applicant could just go to the Board of Adjustment, or are there site considerations that would prohibit the application from going to the Board of Adjustment? No, they would be able to go to the Board of Adjustment and ask for this use. Okay, thank you. Tracy, given a description of the property, do you have any maps or could you show, since Dawson Springs is stubbed out right now but obviously is not going to go anywhere, what are we doing? We've talked a lot about connectivity and so forth. What are we doing to the rest of the street system there if that goes in? I believe the applicant is working with an engineer or engineering firm that did the rest of the design for this subdivision, and that engineering firm has drafted some changes to the area that would basically remove this five acres, and the local street system for the residential area would still work. So I don't think we haven't received those yet. but I wouldn't anticipate receiving those until after this application was approved. Do you have anything that shows the way that it was laid out originally? I don't. I think maybe our subdivision. May it come later? Yeah, they're going to make it. five acres was shown on a preliminary subdivision plan with 21 single-family lots thank you chris so these are platted currently and these are platted as well the rest of this lot is currently not subdivided and this area is an approximate approximately the area of the five acres being considered today and then we just counted the lots that were within that obviously this specific street configuration wouldn't work but looping the street here would be a logical change okay all right thank you all right thank you very much All right. Okay. The development plan for this zone change is located at the bottom of page 4, item C. It's ZDP 2011-70. It's the Newtown Springs amended trilogy Lexington Health Campus number 3. As Tracy has oriented you to the property, this development plan does propose a 53,000-square-foot assisted living and nursing home facility on the property. It does have 86 proposed parking spaces with a required number of 45. The proposed access off of the property is located at the intersection of Silver Springs and Dawson Springs, where Silver Springs would stub into the future proposed citation. The applicant is not proposing any access to those proposed streets at this time. the subdivision committee recommended approval at its last meeting subject to the 15 conditions as noted on your agenda the applicant did submit a revised plan yesterday afternoon to staff it did address a few of the cleanup conditions however there's number 9 would still be remaining however conditions 10, 11, and 12 have been addressed the final three conditions are the remaining discussion items on this plan. Number 13 is to discuss the plan's status. This plan has been submitted as a final development plan, meaning that the approval and certification of this development plan would allow them to pull building permits on it. It is somewhat unusual in that many of our plans for zone changes are preliminaries where a final development plan would come later. The staff had this item remaining as a discussion item due to the fact that it's a large amount of work to be done on the site and the need to acquire those sign-offs within the two-week period. That is the applicant's call, and it is something they would need to, if they wanted to bring it back to a preliminary development plan status, would need to let this commission know prior to your motion today. Number 14 is to discuss the right-of-way closure or the need for a waiver. So the applicant's proposed access point off of Dawson Springs, if you can see here this dark line, this is all already dedicated right-of-way. So the proposed street connection under the previous plan, which you see right here, when they dedicated this portion of Silver Springs, they went ahead and they dedicated the apron, which is normal when they expect the connection to go on through. This is considered an improper termination of the public street under our subdivision regulations because it is not with a cul-de-sac or a connection to another public street. The applicant is requesting a waiver for that termination to terminate the public street into the access to this property. That has been done once before recently for the Sharkey development plan at the end of Louie Place into the apartment complex for that development. You have at your place a waiver report in white. The applicant is requesting the waiver, again, to Article 6-8B of our land subdivision regulations that govern street terminations. Again, their waiver is to, they're requesting a waiver to construct that termination to Dawson Springs, approximately 50 feet from the center line of Silver Springs. It's proposed to terminate and become a private act-grade entrance into the proposed health care facility. Again, the applicant is requesting that waiver based on the hardship due to the site's already constructed and dedicated apron, which does constitute man-made physical condition. Again, that's one of the requirements that they must meet or demonstrate that hardship according to our subdivision regulations. The staff is in agreement that this is a hardship, and to remove that construction and construct a flat crossing would be a hardship on the applicant. The planning staff has determined that the termination of Dawson Springs at the intersection of Silver Springs does not negatively impact public health and safety. The staff does recommend approval of the waiver for the two reasons listed on your staff report. The recommendation is made with a condition, which again is typical when there is a public street termination dedicated into private street or into a private access easement or however that is done on private property, that they denote the physical features to be constructed at that termination. What we've done in other cases is have some sort of stamped pavement with a sign that denotes the end of the public right-of-way, something that makes it very clear to people doing maintenance where the public-private stops. The applicant is proposing some public... Okay, that takes care of 40. Number 15 is discuss the timing of the construction of the needed public facilities. The staff did have concerns as they related to the conditional use of the necessary public facilities. That does relate to the construction of Citation Boulevard. Again, that is something that the city has an agreement to construct. Mr. Martin is going to present an additional waiver report related to those necessary public facilities. But I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have on the development plan. Any questions? Okay. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, as Mr. Taylor stated, there is a second waiver request associated with the development plan that you see before you today. You have a handout. It is in pink, so you may review that. This waiver request applies to the section that I've highlighted in orange here on your plan. What you see here before you is the overall road system that is currently approved and built in this area. You can see the photo that we have up on the overhead for you that also reflects on the ground this current street system. Here we have Newtown Pike. Citation as built to this point. This is Newtown Springs. Intersection here with Newtown Pike. This is a right in and right out only. It terminates here at Citation where Citation in fact terminates. Here we have an intersection with Newtown Center Way is the name of this little street associated with the commercial property zone in this area. And again, it has its intersection with Citation Boulevard. This is Silver Springs, and how does it currently exist? This is the Asbury Lane connection, and this is the part that remains to be built. it is this area through here that is subject to a three-party agreement that requires the urban county government to build Citation Boulevard as well as Hasbury Lane. When the conditional use was reviewed for this plan, staff was concerned about the adequacy of the street system. The resolution of that, in staff's opinion, was to provide additional access through the existing citation right-of-way. The applicant's response to that concern was to propose to build a 22-foot half section of Citation Boulevard, including curb, gutter, and sidewalk, starting from this termination to here. including this little bit of intersection at this point as well. There was a brief discussion about the possibility of just a private driveway, but that presented another whole host of problems and concerns for all the parties involved. Because the interesting situation here, not only is the government required to build this portion, this right away has been dedicated. In a normal situation, the infrastructure is approved, constructed, and then dedicated. And then, at that point with street infrastructure, a warranty surety is posted. And that warranty surety is held for a year, at which time the final course of asphalt is placed and the surety is released. this waiver is asking to be relieved of posting that warranty surety. The applicant is proposing to construct the entire half section, including the final course of asphalt. In reviewing this with the Division of Engineering, staff had several concerns. two of the concerns were physical and associated with the construction of the half section. One is that we felt like there needed to be a shoulder on the north side since it's a half section. That was for vehicular safety, people coming off the pavement and that sort of thing. We thought it important that there be a shoulder provided for people to pull off if necessary and to avoid tires dropping off the edge of pavement and that sort of thing. But we also are very concerned about the transition. You can see from the photographs in this map as well that Citation, which is quite large, multiple lanes, it transitions in this area, and it transitions to a collector status to this point. It's going to continue to transition here. Therefore, we are recommending that they develop appropriate physical features to the approval of engineering to make that a safe transition and to make that intersection safe as well. The third condition that we are asking as a part of approval of this waiver is to actually move their construction entrance from here and put it here, slightly to the east on the existing right-of-way. This will accomplish the important purpose of getting construction traffic out of coming through the neighborhood, utilizing citation, and coming down here. At the time that the final pavement is approved by the Division of Engineering, we are also recommending that they remove this construction entrance to the approval of the Division of Engineering as well. The condition is contingent upon approval, again, of the Division of Engineering, and no certificate of occupancy should be issued until that final course is accepted by the Division of Engineering. That is actually a fairly standard process. The Division of Engineering does have a sign-off on the certificate of occupancy. This will allow the applicant to appropriately time his construction, put in the utilities, do the subgrade, do the normal work, bring in the heavy construction, and then towards the end of the job, which is typical, they can then put down their blacktop, both the final course, the parking lot, and similar items. With that, staff is recommending approval of the waiver, and I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. All right. Thank you, Tom. Any questions? All right. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, good afternoon. In the five minutes remaining for the staff's time allotment, I have a staff report to present to you this afternoon. Our original report appears at tab 2 of your notebook. Also, we distributed before the meeting a tan sheet with a supplemental staff report. on the conditional use portion of the request for MARC 2011-13. There are copies available in the back of the room for anyone in the audience and a few on this counter as well for anyone who did not pick that up. Those of you on the zoning committee may recall that at your August meeting, the staff originally recommended postponement of the conditional use permit portion of this request, and that recommendation of the staff is the one that appears on today's agenda. And to orient you to the request for this one-story building, I think you've already heard from Mr. Taylor and Ms. Wade that this is a one-story, 53,000-square-foot building that is designed to have a nursing home component and skilled nursing care, as well as accommodation for an Alzheimer's memory unit. There is an addition of 92 parking spaces proposed on this five-acre site. The appellant also provides adult daycare and long-term care, and those may also be accessory to their use of this property under this conditional use. The staff in its original report opined that a nursing home ordinarily would be well located on a collector street. However, as has already been explained, the Collector Street system, as well as the sidewalk system, is incomplete to the site. Not all the sidewalks have been constructed in the subdivision, and also the Collector Street, as has been mentioned, is about 600 feet to the west of this site. The applicant, in the time that this request has been postponed, has been discussing with the Division of Engineering the options available to extend Citation Boulevard to the intersection at Silver Springs Drive. And now that that is not only a possibility but is being proposed, the staff's original finding that not all of the necessary infrastructures in place for this conditional use is no longer applicable, at least at the time of the occupancy of this facility. That development led us to revise our staff report, as is shown on the tan sheet. Since the existing sidewalk and street system will be extended as far to the east as Silver Spring Drive, the staff can see to recommend approval of the requested conditional use permit for a nursing home and an assisted living facility. Our findings are that if limited in scope, the proposed use should not adversely affect the subject or surrounding properties, as this type of facility does not generally generate high volumes of traffic, and the one-story building proposed will not loom over the other existing residences in this general area. There is one correction needed to finding B under the staff's recommendation. The second word in that finding, direct, should be deleted. That would make that finding read, since access is now proposed to the property via an extension of Citation Boulevard, all necessary public services and facilities would be available and adequate for the proposed conditional use. Our recommendation is made subject to the nine conditions that appear on this report and also on the overhead. The first one is provided the Council rezones the property R3 as is being requested. The second is that should it be rezoned, that it be developed in accordance with the development plan that is before you or with an amended development plan that might ordinarily come to the Planning Commission. Conditions 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 are fairly typical of most conditional use permits, and they require reviews and approvals by different divisions of the urban county government and also adherence to different local ordinances. The last two conditions are somewhat unusual and are drafted with this particular site in mind. Condition eight is that vehicular access be within the right-of-way Citation Boulevard as far as Silver Spring Drive to the east prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit for this facility. And finally, condition nine, a continuous sidewalk also is required to Silver Spring Drive prior to occupancy of the nursing home and assisted living facility. I believe this concludes the staff reports on this zone change, fairly in the allotted time. But at this time, I'd be glad to answer any questions from the Commission about the conditional use report or any of the other reports you've heard this afternoon. Any questions? Bill, that last condition, a continuous sidewalk shall be constructed to the western right of way of Silver Spring Drive prior to occupancy of the nursing home and assisted living facility. Can you show us where that is? Yes. It is beyond the limits of the development plan, so I'll use the map. Currently, there is a sidewalk. There we go. Along this street. here and we are asking it that it be continued here to this intersection which is right here it will be part of their construction along their frontage so someone would be able to walk across the street and then walk into the facility it would be a continuous system from newtown all the way to the site under that recommendation So is the sidewalk being constructed on Silver Springs, or is it being constructed on Citation? It will be, as part of their development, constructed along their frontage on Silver Spring, and under this condition, on the half section being proposed on the southern side of Citation. Wouldn't that be the eastern side of Silver Spring, then? The condition is such that it be here. Of course, on the eastern side, that is already part of the development plan in the cross-section. Either one would be correct. Yes, Ms. Copeland. Mr. Sally, I'm puzzled about this road that they're going to build on Citation. Is that a good-to-go for the next 20 years road or a construction road? The proposal, as the staff understands it, is that it would be a complete road. One side of it. It would be complete as a half section of a collector, which ordinarily are 40 feet wide. And when I say complete, it would have 20-plus lanes of pavement, meaning two independent movements would be possible along the pavement. It would have a curb, a gutter, utility strip, and a sidewalk on the southern half. The northern half of the road would still be as it is today under the urban county government's purview for construction at a future time. Is this typical? Has this ever been done this way before where we have a private person build his own road? Not very often in an existing right-of-way, but there is also not another roadway in the county that has had this type of mutual agreement for its road construction. There is no other road such as Citation where there have been multiple parties responsible for different portions of a collector street. Most of the time, collector streets are built by developers as properties develop. Since the 1980s, that has not been the plan for Citation. All right. Mr. Owens. Thank you. Bill, let me follow up. I thought I understood, and now I'm confused. Going back to the question as far as Silver Springs and the western right-of-way of Silver Springs Drive, to me, the western right-of-way of Silver Springs Drive, looking at that map with the gray, it's on the left-hand side. Okay. So what this sidewalk, you're just saying, will come up to that point. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. That clarifies it. Thank you. I apologize for the confusion. No, no, no, no, no. That's okay. I kept looking at Silver Springs, much like Lynn was, I think, as far as on the development plan side. Thank you. All right. Very good. Thank you. Oh, yes. Okay. Go ahead. Mr. Salih, is there a potential date that the government sets for completion of a street? Not this particular street. Some projects, I think, do have completion dates, but there's none proposed that I'm aware of for citation. Anything else? All right. Thank you. Thank you. Does that conclude your hearing? That concludes all the staff reports. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. All right. Next, we're prepared to hear the petitioner's report. Do we have one hand at all? Thank you. and DMK works in partnership with Trilogy Health Services to build and operate nursing home facilities. With me today in the second row is Michael Kitchen from DMK Development Group and Ross Oberhausen from Trilogy Health Services. And our designer, of course, is Sarah Tuttle, a landscape architect with Strand Associates. Chaz Heid is here, a planner who assists me on cases. and we're very pleased to be here to be representing this proposal to you. The way these two companies work together, DMK Development Group builds the nursing home facility and then Trilogy Health Services runs the nursing home facility, so they work together and coordinate on doing these projects. Trilogy currently operates 64 locations in five states, in Kentucky, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio, and Michigan. They are headquartered in Louisville, as is DMK. And they currently operate over 6,100 beds in those 64 facilities. So right now, as we speak, there are 6,000 people living in facilities managed by Trilogy Health Services. You can see from that average they specialize in small to medium-sized facilities. Their average size is less than 100 beds, as this is here today. And I say this to mention that they have an experience and track record. They have a base of experience from running 64 different facilities throughout the Midwest. Trilogy has purchased the bed allotment from the old Kenton Health Care Center on Waller Avenue, which you all may know has been closed for a couple of years. They did not purchase the building. They purchased the bed allotment from Kenton Health Care Center. There's a great need for nursing home facilities here in Fayette County. Ten years ago, there were 1,400 certified beds here in Fayette County. 1,400 beds ten years ago. Today, there are 1,032 beds in Fayette County. That's a decrease of 26% in ten years in nursing home beds. At the same time, our population in Fayette County has increased 10%. and, of course, we have the baby boomer group coming through, choking its way up through the population sector and will increase the need for facilities for care for older people. So we have a decrease in beds, increase in population, an increase in the age group, which needs this. Also, not only is Lexington underserved, but the north part of Lexington is underserved. On the first page after the cover page of my handout, if you could put that up on the screen, we have a map showing where all the nursing home facilities are located in Lexington. And they've had to sort of skew the map a little bit to get the names in, because all the names are in the south side of town. See, here's Versailles Road. There are no nursing home facilities north of Versailles Road. and going around Main Street here coming on down. The only one north of Main is Richmond Place, way off near Richmond Road and Manowar Boulevard. So if this were a pie chart, about two-thirds of the pie would have no nursing homes. They're all grouped on the south side of town. And there have been nursing homes on the north side of Lexington before. I know there was one on North Limestone Street, which closed a few years ago, but there haven't been any new facilities in the north side of town in a long time. There's also a need for new facilities. Part of the problem with some of these facilities having to close down is that they are old and antiquated facilities. Really, sometimes the only solution is to build a new center which meets today's standards. As you can see, I'm not going to spend a lot of time talking about the development plan, but it is designed with courtyards in between looking out, so all the rooms have windows and light available on here, and it's a design which Trilogy and DMK have found works well for the nursing home and assisted living facility. I think to its credit, these companies are not just taking the beds from the place they purchased here in Lexington and doing it in one place. They're splitting up the beds from the Kenton Health Care Service in three locations. They're doing one out in Hamburg, which has been approved. They're putting some of the beds here, and they're looking for a third location in Lexington to do it because their philosophy is that they want to keep this type size facility because they think this size facility works better. As the staff mentioned, we have 90 beds planned in this facility, 54 will be skilled nursing beds. 36 will be assisted living. Out of those 36, 12 of those are going to be dedicated for memory care or Alzheimer's care beds. Ms. Wade mentioned that staff has found we do agree with the comprehensive plan. I want to just spend a couple minutes on that as well. The land use plan elements recommends low-density residential for this property, which would allow up to 25 single-family houses on this property. It's hard to find an equivalence between a house and a nursing home. 25 single-family homes could probably have 75 to 100 bedrooms. We have 90 beds total, but it's tough to find that rough equivalence under that. But as the staff mentioned, the peak traffic generation that we have is about equivalent to what the peak traffic generation of 25 single-family houses would be. To allay any fears about this, we don't want to be viewed as a Trojan horse application, which would close down and then pave the way for 90 apartment units going in here, 93 or 4 bedroom apartment units. So we don't want to do that. These people are in the business of doing nursing homes. There's absolutely no intention of doing that. And that's why we have agreed to the conditions that the staff has proposed, which means if something happens to this facility and we can't use it for this intended purpose anymore, if it's torn down or whatever, we're only allowed the underlying number of units that the comp plan allows, which is 25 single-family detached units. So we have agreed to those conditions. In addition, as Ms. Wade mentioned, we do agree with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. There's many of them. I've listed some of them on the last page of my handout there that talk specifically to nursing home facilities and facilities for older people in town. And I think it's very important that we apply quality of life issues not only to what everybody's been calling the creative class and the young professionals that we want to get here in town, but if we're going to be a community that truly applies a quality of life to all its citizens, we need to do that to its older citizens too. And we think having places of care for people as they are older and need help is part of what we do on here, and that's provided in the goals and objectives. Goal 20 is to provide and maintain a range of community facilities and services. Objective F talks about increasing the level of human and social services provided to those citizens who are in need. Objective P, which Ms. Wade read, specifically mentions nursing home facilities, which serve the public but are privately owned, developed, and maintained. Don't worry, I'm not going to read all these to you. 13b talks about fair housing principles and people with handicaps do get to have fair housing principles applied to them. And 13 is to provide for a wide range of lifestyles and economic opportunities for all residents, including the elderly, and do so in a manner which is affordable and cost effective. So I'm not going to read the rest of these to you if they apply, but I just want to let you know I agree with the staff. We do agree with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, as well as the land use objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. We are requesting a conditional use permit on this site, and Mr. Salley has gone over that application well. As I said, there's a great need for nursing home and assisted living facilities here in Fayette County, which I don't think anybody denies, especially if you've been in the position of having to try to find a nursing home bed for a loved one. I personally have had the occasion where I've tried to do that, and I've been told, well, there's a bed in Winchester and there's a bed in Owens. You know, you choose on that. And that's a shameful position for a community like us to be in. That's not the way it always is. Luckily, I've had other occasions when they have been available here in Fayette County. But we're in a situation where there is a great need for that. Much of the conditional use permit and much of the waivers have discussed traffic issues, and I'd like to spend a couple minutes just talking about those. At a nursing home, as I said, as the staff had determined, Our peak traffic generation peak hour is about the same as a single-family residential development would be. Now, people get concerned about shift changes and that sort of thing. Our shift changes are off peak hours of the traffic generators, Newtown Pike. Our shift changes are at 3.30 p.m., 11 p.m., and 7 a.m. in the morning. So they're off from where the peak rush hours are here in Fayette County. People have asked us about ambulance runs coming to a nursing home. Trilogy operates 64 of these facilities, as I mentioned, across the Midwest. So I asked Ross Oberhausen of Trilogy how many ambulance runs they get a week. They get three ambulance runs per week. Now, the majority of these are what they call private transport ambulance runs, and that is if there's a resident that needs to go to a doctor, and this is a fairly common occurrence, they have to be transported by private ambulance. Our LFUCG ambulances don't do private transport. You see rural, metro, and these other private services. When they come to pick up somebody at the nursing home, they do not use sirens. They do not use flashers. They, on both ends of the trip, coming and going, they obey all traffic laws. They stop at stop signs, stop at traffic lights. They don't speed. and that's the vast majority of these three ambulance runs per week. I asked Ross how many emergency runs they average. They average one emergency run about every 20 days. That's probably about 18 per year that they have emergency runs. Ross said that in their other facilities, often the emergency responders will turn off their sirens as they approach coming through residential areas. I talked to Captain Bowen here yesterday about that to see if that is the case here. I think he's probably here today. And he told me that that is up to the individual officer driving the ambulance, but it's not at all uncommon. It's actually fairly common that they get in a residential area, there's not a big traffic problem, they turn off the siren coming into the facility. But there will be occasions where there will be a siren. I know many of you all know I had an unfortunate fire at my house a couple months ago, and I had 16 emergency responders coming with sirens and flashers within a one-hour period. And I'm very thankful that they did. I had a fire at my house, and it was put off very professionally and very well by the fire department, and then the police were having it there to investigate the burglary and people who caused the fire. But I was thinking, I had 16 in one hour. This facility will take this facility about one year to equal the number of emergency responses that I had in one hour. And I was saying that to illustrate that there are emergency responses everywhere in residential areas. And that's what our fine fire department and fine police department does. We can't avoid that, but it is a problem which is not a major problem at a nursing home based upon their experience and based upon how people respond here in Fayette County. I want to talk about Citation Boulevard because that's an interesting situation. It is one that has not come up very often. And to give you background on that, there was a decision about 40 years ago here about the Manowar Boulevard right-of-way. And as it started out, the urban county government was requesting developers to dedicate Manowar Boulevard. And there was a court decision about that, and the court said, no, Manowar Boulevard is a community-wide facility. It can't be dedicated. It must be purchased by whoever's buying it, the state or the city on it. And so Manowar was purchased. and here there was, and of course Citation is sort of the northern version of Manowar Boulevard, here there was a negotiated settlement reached. I know this had been going on for 30 years. Five years ago, the city entered into a contract, an agreement, and passed an ordinance or resolution resolving whose responsibility it was to build what parts of Citation Boulevard. And the city came out really well because the developers of Newtown Springs and Griffin Gate and the owners of the golf course entered into an agreement with the city, and it ended up the entire right-of-way through this property was dedicated or given to the city. And the developer built the Citation Boulevard from Newtown Pike down to Newtown Springs. And they dedicated this portion through here. If you've been out there, you can see it's been graded. it's open, you know, sort of ready for construction to start. But the city was obligated to build the portion of Citation Boulevard starting at Newtown Springs and going up to the edge of our property, which is the edge of this development. It eventually goes on theoretically to Russell Cave Boulevard, but this, Russell Cave Road. But this agreement just dealt with this section from Asbury down to Newtown Pike. So the city is obligated to build this last section. And interestingly enough, in the agreement that they negotiated, there was no time limit placed on when the city could build that. They can take forever if they want to. I'm not sure the developers did a good job negotiating this, but the city did. There's no time limit on the city ever to do it. But there's also a provision in there that the city couldn't use the fact that Citation Boulevard wasn't built to prevent the development of the rest of Newtown Springs subdivision. Now, the only difference we're making is we're building a nursing home here instead of 25 single-family lots. I think there's no appreciable difference in traffic impact, as the staff has mentioned. And I don't think my clients were obligated to build any additional roadway, legally obligated. Nevertheless, the staff had concerns about us being on a collector. collector. This is an ideal location. It's on a collector or will be on a collector once it's built. The staff has concerns about the timing. So we talked about that, and I'm in a rare position where I'm up here asking for the approval for my client to spend more money than they really have to to get this done. So we met with the engineering division, and we were given two options if we wanted to build a connector up to where Newtown Springs comes into citation from our property down. It's about 600, 650 feet, something like through there. So we met with them. Since this is city-owned right-of-way now, it's been given and accepted by the city, how would we do this? The engineering division gave us two options. One, we could build a half section of the road. This is a very wide section. It's a wide collector here. We could build a half section of road which allows two-way traffic on a fully built road with a full subbase and surface meeting standards so that when the city goes to build citation, this is part of it. This is already built. Half of it's already built with the sidewalk and everything on there. or we could build a private driveway over that section, maintain it ourselves, and then when the city notified us that they wanted to build citation, we'd be obligated to come through and rip out the driveway that we'd built before the city was obligated to build the roadway. Now, obviously, the costlier approach is to build the public road, But we have two things that entered into our consideration in wanting to go the more expensive route, and that is, one, we want a nice gateway into this facility. We want it to be a well-done gateway into this facility. And second, in our financing, we're obligated not to have open-ended responsibility for off-site public improvements on here. So we have opted to request that we go ahead and be allowed to build the public street, which will be a very considerable cost saving for the urban county government, and will actually cost DMK or Trilogy, whichever is paying for it, more money than it would to build a private driveway over that section, and of course a lot more money than if they didn't do anything. Now, the only thing we're requesting is a waiver of the bond insurity, which, as Mr. Martin said, is for the final course of asphalt and maintenance. And that is because we're going to go ahead and do the final course of asphalt. We're not going to have to do any more utility cuts through here after we built it. There's no utilities crossing from the golf course over this highway into our property. We can go ahead and do it and finish it up and be finished with our responsibility on there. So that would be a public street, two-way traffic, plenty wide for two-way traffic. The only difference is we won't have parking on it. We can't have parking on the side of the streets coming in there. So that is the genesis of our waiver request for the surety. If we can't get the surety waiver, we're going to have to drop back and try to do the private driveway over there, which we don't think is best for us. We don't think it's best for the city. The other waiver request was for a little apron, which is now existing on Silver Springs Drive. That apron is now built to actually about where this line is, and it's theoretically a public street through here, which we're going to use as our entrance point coming in here. Now, if the waiver is not granted, what we'll have to do is we'll have to tear up the publicly constructed road and just reconstruct it ourselves and put it back in. So we don't see any benefit to be gained from that. It's not the environmental-friendly thing to do to tear up road and then put more road back down. It will save us a little bit of money on that, but we just don't see any reason for heaven to tear that little section out right now. After this line right now, there's nothing there on it. So those are the two waiver requests that we're requesting to make. I did want to mention, too, there will be job creation in here. There's about 90 full-time jobs here with full-time benefits that are provided by this in the health care sector. But the most important thing is that we feel very strongly that there's a great need for this facility. I'm fortunate to have clients who know exactly what they're doing. They know how to build these. They know what's needed. They know how it needs to be laid out. They have 6,000 people living, 6,000 residents living in their facilities right now throughout this five-state area. And I think, I hope you can see from what I've illustrated to you that they're really going above and beyond the call of what's necessary. Now, you know, a lot of people, a lot of companies in this situation will say, well, I don't want to build that road. The city's obligated to build that road. And they understand it's good for this development. I mean, there's a selfish motive there, too. But it is costing more than maybe they really had to spend. But I think it illustrates that they want to do this right. And we thank you very much for your consideration of this. I forgot to say that we agree with all the conditions on the zone change development plan and the waiver request for and on the conditional use permit. We're pleased to be able to be in agreement with all those conditions. So thank you very much, and we've got here many people who can answer questions if I can't answer them for you. Are there any questions? Mr. Owens. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Murphy, you mentioned in regards to building citation, you said no utility cuts or anything like that. As far as sewer, water, electric, what's going to happen with that? Are you there? Is it going to be built? Well, of course, this is planned as a subdivision, so the utilities are available to this. I'm not sure they're all at the property line right now, but they will all be there and adequate for this use. Sarah is here and can answer any more questions you may have about utility availability, but it's all available here. The easy answer is that Griffin Gate to the north is already developed, and so their utilities are taken care of. So Citation is on the ridge of the road, of that whole ridge, and everything drains to the south. And so the utilities, the sewers come from the south, the storm sewers, the detention basin is in, and the individual water lines will come through the subdivision. KU does have a duct bank along a portion of the southern right-of-way of Citation Boulevard. It stops at Newtown Center Drive. In the future, that may be extended parallel to the right-of-way. But at this point, other than a crossing that we're going to have to put in, when we build the half section, we will have to provide for drainage from the north side of that road. There's already a pipe in that we did when we did the first part of the subdivision. But we will have to accommodate, as a part of this half section, the drainage, which would normally go from the Crown to the north side. That has to be done as a part of this construction. Okay. Thank you. That's it right now. Okay. Mr. Wilson. Just one quick question and then one light, light observation. In terms of the map that you gave us with all the nursing homes, does Trilogy manage any of these other nursing homes? No, they are right now getting underway with that one in Hamburg. Okay, that's the Hamburg. That's the first one, and this will be the second one here in town. Okay, fine. And the light observation has to be, I don't have an issue with the citation, and I think commendable to the concessions that are being made here. Newtown Pike is my concern. I don't know if you've been on that road early in the morning or late in the afternoon. That thing is backed up all over the place. If you had an ambulance run of any serious nature, I don't know how anyone would get through there. And that's my concern, is that one time when you do need to get through there. And I don't know what the traffic people could tell us about Newtown Pike, but that is the hangout. Well, I guess I understand that concern now. I would point out that Newtown Pike and Citation is fully signalized right there. There's a traffic signal. I understand backup issues may be there. In standing in stop traffic on Nicholasville Road, the ambulances do get through there. But I would point out to you, I understand that's a concern, but whatever goes on this property, that will be a concern. Whether we put 25 houses here, there's almost as great a likelihood that there's going to be an emergency run to one of those 25 houses as there is to this nursing home. It applies to the very dense development to the north on Griffingate, to the motels we have right across the street on Newtown Pike. I mean, we have an urban service area in which we concentrate our population, which does lead to some traffic backup sometimes. But at the same time, we have fire facilities and ambulance facilities scattered out this community to cover these areas. I'm sure that the coverage situation is good now. I think fire can handle everything. When citation is built through, that will improve things as well, give another way in and out there. but I don't see that being a reason to be hesitant about this facility. If that's a reason, I don't think we'd have another building permit issued in Lexington because all streets in Lexington back up, all arterials in rush hour. As I said, our shift changes are not at rush hour, and our emergency runs are rather rare. We have one every 20 days, only 18 a year, and that's probably comparable to what another subdivision would have that is not a nursing facility. Mr. Murphy, I accept your explanation. After all, I'm headed in that direction anyhow. All right. Does that conclude your presentation, Mr. Murphy? Yes, sir. Okay. Oh, Marie, I have some questions. I have some questions. This firm, Trilogy, is that a national firm, and so where are their headquarters? Where will their payroll checks be issued from? If I have a refund on a person, do I have to work with an out-of-state office? We're also browsing Trilogy Health Services. We're based out of Louisville, and we're only in the five states, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio, and Michigan. and we're headquarters in Louisville, and so if you have an issue, we have our business office there on site. Okay, so you're going to be paying the payroll tax? Yes, yes. The 90 full-time employees will be paying the Lexington or Fayette County payroll tax. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. Now, I have a question for Ms. Tuttle. Yes, ma'am. I am real happy about this development in general, but I have concerns about the trucks that deliver food, the hearses that take away bodies, all the things that you don't expect going through a neighborhood. And I'm also looking at the plan where we have a road, a lot of roadway, paralleling another roadway. So I'm asking why did staff or did transportation try to help you with a front door entrance and a back door service entrance and not have all of that driveway all over that site? Like, for instance, you would have a visitor entrance at the front, and at the back you would have parking and the food vans and the emergency vehicles and the doctor's parking and all that sort of thing at the back, employee parking too. And in the interim, between the time that citations built, And before citations built, you have that private driveway probably on the right-of-way of citation. And then when citations built, you just open up your big back parking lot service area. Was that ever proposed, or why can't you do that? We do have two doors. Two what? doors to the two entrances to significant entrances the one in the front there are portica chairs on both ends the one in the front is for primarily visitors and some employees this is too hot tech all right there's our front door our entrance off of Silver Spring and then we have this entrance in the back, and that is one of the other entrances for both visitors and employees. And then we have this corridor here, and that's the service corridor. We have looked at truck radiuses to be able to get in the trucks and to be able to have internal circulation. The thing that we really have not focused on is the fact that Asbury Lane is not constructed. And we had a considerable amount of discussion about at such time as Asbury is constructed, there may be a need to connect there. But the only connection we're going to have to Asbury Lane is a sidewalk, and that was at the request of the staff. And what you're talking about is having a future driveway connection up to Citation. There is a note, I believe, on the development plan that limits driveways on Citation. The classification, the functional classification of Citation transitions from Newtown Pike to Russell Cave from an arterial, which does not have driveways. In this section, we're calling it a collector, but it, in fact, will function as an arterial. And so I'm not sure that driveway access is an appropriate thing to do. One of the reasons that we did propose to build Citation Boulevard is to keep traffic off the local streets. I get that, but I'm talking about leaving the back parking lot, going on to Citation. And within the last two months, across the road, from the Better Business Bureau and the Red Cross, we just entered into Citation. Did we not? We did. So we can enter Citation. There have been some driveway access points. It's a brand new one, but we did enter into Citation down about where the storm inlet is. Okay. But the issue, I think what we're talking about really is that if you extended that driveway, it's the same issues that we ran into is who owns it. If we put a driveway on a public right-of-way, that's the reason we backed off and agreed to build a half section so that it would be public street. And to build another 400 or 500 feet of public street is so. I'm not asking you to build 400 or 500. You're building down to Silver Spring. You're building from Newtown Park to Silver Spring and stopping with the construction entrance. I'm just saying along the property line put a 10-foot wide private drive that would let you access your big back parking lot, And then when Citations built, that big back parking lot would empty into Citations. And all the trucks and all the major traffic, except for visitors, that's all the neighborhood would be impacted. You know what? When Citations gets built, we'll look at it. But in the meantime, the neighbor, they could come through the construction entrance right now. We're coming in here and coming in here. Right. And when it's finished, isn't it a part of the agreement that you have to wipe out your construction entrance? Our construction entrance, but it'll come to, like, right here. Okay. Why couldn't you keep that going and use the back? I don't think we would have an objection to it, but the staff has asked that we take it out, and we were trying to agree to everything they wanted. Okay. Well, with that in mind, I think there's more work to be done, and we could okay this as a preliminary plan. but to keep all that roadway parallel to another roadway for the next hundred years is a lot. What roadway are you talking about? The drive, your parking. Oh, our internal circulation? Yeah, that. That doesn't need to be there if you've got an access office citation. I think it does because we want to be able to get completely around to both entrances of our building. Well, look at Mayfair Manor. They drive up to the front door, and then they go around another street and service the rear. That system works with nursing homes, and we could do it here if you just had a temporary drive until citations built down your property line. And you could even put it maybe on the right-of-way of Citation so you could scoot your building over closer to Citation. Anyway, the neighborhood would wind up a winner because they wouldn't have the heavy traffic cutting through, make the shortest distance between two points. There isn't going to be a traffic manager of manners out there saying, oh, don't go through this way, go that way. You're right, there's not. But the purpose of building Citation is so that all of the nursing home traffic will utilize Citation Boulevard. We come back over here. In order to get out, this is the signalized intersection. They were going to come right here and go that distance on the local street to get up to the collector street. If they're coming from a hospital to this nursing home, they're going to come down Newtown Pike, turn off right on Newtown Springs, and go into the nursing home. I don't think they'll go up to Citation. It's a direct shot. Okay. Anything else on that? All right. Any other questions? Okay. So that's the petitioner's report. Next, we're going to hear from the citizens. How many people want to speak? Okay, one. All right. A couple. All right. Do we have a sign-up sheet anywhere? All right. Citizens, you have three minutes each. Joel Corwin? Yes, state your name and enter. I live out there. There's a petition that was circulated to a man, to a woman, to a child. Every resident does not want this. This is the original. I don't think I can get this in three minutes. I'm going to try it. I don't see how. We can allow a little more time since there's just a... I'd appreciate it. We came last month and it was canceled on us. This is the second I had to miss what I was doing. Try to picture yourself on a creek like the Elkhorn Creek, and it winds and it turns and it goes in all directions. You're in a canoe. You get to one juncture. You see what's there, but you don't see what's around the next bend. Then picture yourself up in a helicopter, and you're up on top, and you see every bend and every nuance of what's going on. You're seeing the canoe side of this thing, their little nuance for this little bend. I'm trying to lay out, if I may, the helicopter view where you see the entire picture. In the first case, this property has a real history. Rosenstein Development years ago bought this property from a bank that had an entrust. They developed it on a certain premise. The premise was that it was going to be residential of a certain density. After that was bought and purchased, they came back later, to use Mr. Murphy's term, a Trojan horse, came back and wanted to increase the density so they could get more bang for the buck. That went on for years, as you probably know. And eventually, after many years, there was some kind of a compromise. So it went through the courts. There were lawyers on both sides. And there was a give and a take on both sides. So the density was kept. It was kept single family in the area that we live in. And then there was a multifamily, you might say, townhouse configuration towards the front. That was the tradeoff. So then later on, Palumbo comes in. Mr. Palumbo comes in and buys property from the Beezer people who bought from Rosenstein. You know, there's kind of a daisy chain going on here. And in the course of this, you know, the economy got a little weak, of course, and guess what? He couldn't sell many home sites. And the project kind of laid dormant. The grass is growing high. The sewers, the outside roads are not being once plowed. I can go on and on, but no time for that. So now he gets a chance, Palumbo, to immediately get rid of lots and increase the value by changing from a certain density That would be the single-family to the multi-use R density project that they're proposing. And then, of course, we know that that can mean not just a nursing home. It can mean a lot of things. It can mean, later on, a group home. It can mean a halfway house. It can mean a lot of things. Now, the only people that are benefiting from this, and the neighborhood hasn't been, in any case, in any point, been apprised of what's going on until after the fact. We just found out about this a few months ago. Nobody's taken into consideration that we bought into this property under the guise that it was going to be single-family detached homes. We have kids. I'm an older person in the subdivision. They're young people, too, of course. Nobody bought into this particular property because they wanted to ruin their quiet enjoyment. They bought into it because they wanted a property that kept its value and kept the character of a community that we all like to live in. Now, we get to a point where a 54,000-square-foot box-type nursing home, and I have nothing against nursing homes, I think there should be a nursing home somewhere in the city. But I don't think it needs to be on the backs of a subdivision by changing the rules in the middle of the game. Palumbo himself, and I brought some exhibits. May I show them, please? Okay. These were the principal uses that we were told we can have. Single family, detached residents, parks and playgrounds operated by the government. Period. Now, R3, you've got eight different things that they could do, boarding homes, lodging homes. I know they say, we're not going to do anything different. But then go back to the original history. When Rosenstein bought the property, he said he wasn't going to do anything different. And guess what? Down the road, somebody did something, and then all of a sudden, things changed. So here we are. Promises are one thing. But unless it's from God, I don't see how it's going to change. Promises were made to be broken. I'm not saying they're not in good faith. I don't know these folks. I just know we're hardworking people. We live out there. We don't want the light pollution. We don't want the traffic. We don't want the construction traffic. We don't want the storm drains backing up more than they do already because, I'm going to tell you, the EPA is going to be brought into this if we have to. The storm drains already back up, and we brought pictures to show about that. We can show you about how the grass has been this high. Nobody's done a darn thing out there. So all of this nicety about we're going to do this, we're going to do that, we bought into this thing that something was going to happen a certain way and the neighborhood didn't turn out that way. And this isn't sour grapes. This is just the facts. May I show the next, please? That'd be fine. Okay, these are, and we can zip through them. I just want you to see how the neighborhood has been taken care of by Palumbo. The grass is just growing. Nothing's going on. He stands to gain, obviously. He's going to sell his property for way more than it would have been. I have nothing against him, but this is the way he treated us. That's the street that they want to build on right there. You see the drain pipes still there? Please go on. That's right next to our houses. Nothing's been done. Empty lots. Please go on. More of the same. More of the same. just open, you know, untendered land. I know nobody's called 311. We're not those type of people. We just want to enjoy our property right up to the homes. Again, just unfettered, nothing going on there. Now, please, those silk fences that are supposed to be maintained, forget about it. It's a mess all the way out there. We have runoff. We have silt. It's all going into your storm sewers. And nobody's brought up the EPA from this group. about what's going on out there, what's been dumped out there, which we have seen, we've called Palumbo about some of the dumping that's gone on. We told him to get it out, he did, in all fairness to Mr. Palumbo. They had trucks dumping stuff. Please. And by the way, these pictures were taken yesterday. This is not something from two years ago. More of the same. More of the same again. Okay. And then piles of concrete just sitting up there. So here we are, Mr. Palumbo. This is almost like asking the rat to go to cheese. He's saying I'm going to do this to these people, and they in good faith want to build a development. And the only one standing to gain on this thing seems to me, by and large, is Mr. Palumbo. Now, this is another thing that's part of this whole dilemma or total puzzle to me. When he bought this property, this last sale, and you can go to the PVA record, It's number 38174320. That's the PVA records. It was last sold on 29 of 06 for $2,336,000 and change. Then all of a sudden in 2007, the fair cash value, think about this, dropped to $1,044,300. How did property drop over 50%, 60% in a year? I wonder about that. That's something that somebody ought to think about. I didn't have my property drop 50%, 60% in a year. Explain that. I really think these things need to come out. Now, the biggest concern are things like the traffic. This traffic thing has not even remotely been addressed. Please, we come up, as you all know, with Citation meets Newtown Pike. If you continue on to dead ends, you just literally get dead ends, which is fine. Now, the proposed nursing home facility at that dead-end section there, again, they say available sewage, available this, available that. I don't see any underground stuff over there. That means there's going to be traffic. There's going to be a lot of utility stuff going on. There's going to be a lot of sewer stuff going on. There's going to be a lot of roadwork going on. And then the 54,000-square-foot facility, that's not going to take from spring to fall to finish. That's going to be years of traffic. The roads are going to get messed up. There's going to be mud everywhere. There's going to be a lot of stuff going on. Nobody's addressed who's taking care of that. Is it the city? Is it them? What's happening here? The back of the subdivision, which is really the crux of the issue, and one of the staff members didn't bring it up, but one of the people on your council did, You're right. If an ambulance comes up, he's going to go the first place in or the first place out. The first place in is the bag. Guess what? That's where we all live. So there's got to be, unless you have a traffic guard there, that's going to be a big issue. And it's going to be a bigger issue with all the trucks, the cement trucks, all the big heavy stuff that comes in and cracks up the roads. Who fixes the roads? Who takes care of what? Who has to worry about their kids in the summertime walking, and you're walking with a stroller and the dust is going all over the kids and so forth. And then you've got to take your car to the car wash every other week to have it rewashed. These are things that nobody on that side of this question has addressed. And that needs addressing. I urge this council and this group, this body, to please think about if this was going on in your neighborhood, if you bought into a place under a certain premise, and then all of a sudden the rug was pulled out for you, it impacts your property values. They say it's a big asset. Well, that's their opinion, but opinions like everybody. We all have a belly button. We all have opinions. That's their opinion. That's not my opinion. Our opinion is our property values are going to go down because of all this nonsense with the construction. There's plenty of places in town. In fact, witness across the street. The University of Kentucky owns a big tract of land. That's a much better place for it. I'm also sure that Rosenstein Development up in front would love to sell him some land at the front of the road with high visibility to Newtown Pike and let us live our little peaceful life. There are several dozen people that are already suffering enough that Palumbo hasn't done a thing back there. We've been kind enough and nice enough not to bring it up and really be angry with him about it. We're just trying to live our lives. But now all of a sudden, at the middle of this game, And please show that other last thing. Okay, this is the actual indenture. Can you just bring it down and drop, please? A little more. Okay. This is the indenture that we all bought into. This is what he said when we bought in, and bees are homes who sold to him. Then he comes in, Mr. Paloma himself, and says that only single family, and it's all highlighted, every last bit, his own words, and now he wants to change it in the middle of the game. He's moving the goal line. He's moving the chain in the middle of the game. And that is totally fraudulent, and it's not right. And we, as a group, we don't intend to sit and take it anymore. It's not fair. I don't think anybody in this committee or this group or this body would buy into something, whether it's a stock or a bond or a home project. And do your due diligence, and we did. We got documents that said this is what it's going to be. And here it is a couple of years later from 2007. He's doing a money grab. He's going to sell his property by rezoning it and making a lot of money, and I wish him well. He should make all he wants, but not on the backs of us poor folks. We're just regular citizens. We're not here grandstanding. We just want to make a point that we're being treated very unfairly on this deal. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Corwin. Thank you for your time. You've used about 10 minutes of the 30 minutes that the objectors have. So are there some other speakers? Yes, come forward. State your name and address, please, for the record. I live at 1614 Grand Court. My name is Bruce Ely. I learned about this meeting through the newspaper on Tuesday, the 13th, I believe it was. And the next day, I went to some of the residents on Asbury Lane. I called residents on Asbury Lane. and 90% of them would like for the zone to stay as it is as a single-family residential zone. Two or three years ago, when they was proposing Newtown Springs, the Green Acres and Hollow Creek, and their neighborhood is already having stormwater issues. And the engineers came and talked to the neighborhoods and said that when Newtown Springs would be developed, some of the water runoff was going to come down through our neighborhoods. I've talked to about 90% of the residents on Asbury Lane. The reason why I'm concerned and they was concerned is because it said that the zone change was going to be at 564 Asbury Lane. But all I've heard today is about Newtown Springs. We are against the zone change. It's just going to cause problems. It's going to cause more traffic. you know, this DMK and this trilogy, they're interested in money. We are just interested trying to have a nice peaceful neighborhood. I don't know what else to say, but if you all lived out there And you all know, and if you all knew about the storm, drainage problems where we were having, you all would be against this zone change too. I'm concerned that I had to take off from work to come down here because I'm concerned. It would have probably been a lot more people on NASBRO lane, but they said that they had to go to work. but please don't change the results of the zone change. And that's all. And I want to thank you for your time. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Ely. Anyone else? Mr. Cravens. Yes. Could he point on the map where he lives? What area is being impacted? Mr. Sir, could you point to the map and give us some indication of what areas you think are going to have water impact, runoff impact? As a very light. Take over the other as a very light. If Asbury Lane is opened up, that's going to cause more traffic on Asbury Lane. Now Asbury Lane is going to be opened up. I heard the lady say something about Asbury Lane because right now it's a dead end. If you open up Asbury Lane, people are going to use Asbury Lane because they don't want to go around New Circle Road until you get on to Newtown Pike so that they're going to come through Asbury Lane. That's more traffic in the neighborhood. And they speed up and down there now. and the streets are not that wide, people have to, if it's a three or four car family, some cars have to park on the street. But what was the reference to the water runoff and how is it going to go over to Green Acres? The engineers told us at the neighborhood meeting that part of that development is going to run off into the neighborhood. Okay. And we're having stormwater problems now. They have, the urban county government has bought up some houses because of flooding. And I just want to add, I just like, I just like, kerosene onto the fire. Okay. Thank you very much. All right. Do we have anyone else that wishes to speak to this? I have some people signed up. A letter from an individual or actually a family that lives in the Newtown Springs subdivision that I forgot to hand out earlier. Okay, you may. Joshua and Susan Samples at 725 Dawson Springs Way. All right. Pass that around. just come right on up if we have somebody who wants to speak and state your name and address please my name is kimberly jackson i live at 573 hollow creek road we back up to the neighborhood there are a lot of issues there as far as he was talking about the storm water the urban county government has bought up a lot of houses. They have torn down some. They're in process of buying an easement. We have a creek that goes through the neighborhood. It actually starts way out Russell Cave Road and it goes through Windburn. It winds around. It goes through Green Acres and Hollow Creek. So that's what Mr. Ely was speaking of. So we're still in the process of them starting to address our issues as far as the stormwater runoff and the flooding that happens in the neighborhood at the bottom part of the neighborhood. Other issues involved, the crime issues. We have a lot of crime, a lot of random shootings and things that go on in our neighborhood. We don't feel that by opening up Asbury is going to be a solution for us because that street being a dead end, when the police have to come, it blocks people in. They can only get out two ways, the front of Green Acres or the front of Hollow Creek. If you open up that access through Asbury, they're going to be able to get away from the police by ducking out the back. They'll be able to get to Newtown. They can get to the interstate that way. Other traffic concerns, as he was saying, if you have traffic, you open up Asbury, we're going to have all that filter traffic of people that are going to come through Newtown instead of going all the way around New Circle. They're going to come through Newtown. They're down Asbury, they're going to be getting to Russell Cave. So I feel like there's going to be a lot more traffic if they open up when Citation is finished and that portion of Citation is supposed to come out by the new library, that would be two accesses to Russell Cave Road. You'd be coming down Citation past the library, you get to Russell Cave, and in less than half a mile, you could come down Asbury and get to Russell Cave. So I feel like that's going to make more traffic filter off of Newtown through their neighborhood, enter our neighborhood, because Russell Cave is a major thoroughfare for several subdivisions on the north side. So I just feel like there's got to be some other solutions than opening up roads and access. And then today, they haven't even talked a lot about Asbury Lane, the five acres that they have there. They've not even addressed what they're going to do with it. They just say it's there. So we don't need zone changing because there's eight things that could happen if they change that to R3 from R1. We can have all kind of other institutions in the neighborhood that we don't need, that don't address what we need. Yes, the Northside does need a nursing home. I'm not saying that they don't. But the only other thing that we could possibly use on the Northside besides some restaurants would be a hospital, which we don't have. I think most people on the north side are used to the facilities that we have as far as restaurants, as far as shopping centers. We're used to what we have. We would like to keep our neighborhoods closed the way that they are because it would not be fair. I just feel like it would be opening up a whole can of worms for the whole city. The people at the nursing home are not thinking about the crime that's going to come shooting through that neighborhood, past that facility, into the neighborhoods. It's better if we stay closed off because we've already lost our neighborhood officer. We don't even have a liaison at our monthly meetings because we no longer have a neighborhood officer because Urban County government has had to do some cuts with the neighborhood officers. So we've already lost that liaison. So our only liaison is to call 911. We can't talk to an officer about what's going on in our neighborhood, and the neighborhood officer was always really good about the problems and the issues with crime in the neighborhood, whether it was from the young people at the school's issues that school officers need to come out and handle, or whether it's just certain people in the neighborhood. We have that liaison. We don't have that anymore. Now you want to open up the neighborhood to something that we would have no control over because we already have no one to put those concerns to as far as safety. So that's all I have to say. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Jackson. Ms. Phillips, did you have a? Excuse me, Ms. Jackson. I had a question. The first comments that you made initially were about the urban county government condemning some properties and creating to allow for some flooding. Can you show us on the map where that is with respect to the site? Can you take the microphone, Ms. Jackson? We're recording this, and we want to get every comment. This is LaSalle Road. It's a major road in our neighborhood. It goes past our park. That creek, as I said, it comes from Windburn. and it winds around, and our park backs up to LaSalle. So the creek kind of goes through the park, kind of diagonal from LaSalle, and it goes under Hollow Creek Road, which is our next major road right here, and then it goes across the back of Grant Drive, and that's where the homes were purchased, the homes that back up to the creek at Grant Drive and homes that back up to the creek at a stair, the street that's a block over. So you had homes that were purchased down in this circle area, almost to this boundary at Lexmark. So this is the boundary road, I believe, at Lexmark that backs up to Lexmark. So you've had homes in this cul-de-sac that were purchased, and along the creek that, like I said, backs up to a stair and to Grant, they are purchasing easements to take care of our issue with the flooding. All right. Thank you very much. Thank you. I have John Higgins that signed up to speak. Is he here? Does he want to speak? He left? Okay. And I have someone. I have one other person signed up to speak. I'm Mary. I can't make out the last name. Okay. Is there anyone else? Yes, sir. My name is Joshua Samples. That letter is from me. I live on Dawson Springs Way. And I wasn't planning on speaking, but I have some questions because I design roadways for the transportation cabinet, and I know there's many different ways you can design a facility. and then in the comments that the staff had and the requirements i guess on changing the zoning it talks about building the road but it didn't talk about when of the citation part it didn't talk about when it's built and so unless it's specified up front to build that first the construction traffic doesn't necessarily have to go on that road and that could be built last which means all that construction traffic is going on saunders springs drive also the outlet of the facility is pointed towards Dawson Springs Way, which Dawson Springs Way has two different roads. This is called Dawson Springs Way as well, and this is called Dawson Springs Way. The facility outlets into this, that is not a through road. No traffic will ever go on that road except for people that live on that street. So they will come out of the facility and come to here and here. Now, granted, when they have this built, they will exit this way more than likely and go to Citation because that's where the light is. But until that roadway is built and you don't have any specific instructions in that that say it has to be built first, they're going to use this road. And like you have already said, when people are coming to this facility, they will come and come in Newtown Springs Drive. I don't, there's virtually no one will go up to Newtown's, to Citation Boulevard to come in if they're coming from the middle of town. Now, if they're coming from somewhere else, they may use that intersection. It's just traffic. I understand traffic because that's what I do for a living, and that's the way they will work. Also, one other thing about the traffic stuff, he mentioned 90 people a day. 25 houses would have at most 50 people driving per day. So the peak hour numbers may be accurate, that the peak hour would be similar to 25 homes, but the overall traffic would be almost double. It would be 90 people that work at this facility that would be driving there every day, instead of the at most for 25 homes would be 50 people at most each day driving on those same roadway facilities. And I know the design of these local streets was for this whole development to be developed, so I'm sure the design is okay. The pavement design is okay. But if we're throwing construction traffic for this would be similar to construction traffic for the rest of the houses once they get built, but probably a little bit bigger, a little more bigger equipment at some point. And it was already mentioned, but I just want to mention again that if the road deteriorates through this construction, who's going to take care of that? Because the city has not done much of anything out here, and we don't even have final surface on these roads. So that's a concern I would have as well. So thank you. Okay, thank you very much. Ms. Phillips, did you have a? Mr. Samples, I'm sorry. I'm concerned about traffic turning off of Newtown Pike onto Newtown Springs as well as onto Citation. We have a turning lane on Citation, a right turn lane on Citation. Is there one that's farther south on Newtown Springs? Yes, there is one at Newtown Springs. It is not as long as the one at Citation, but that won't stop. I mean, I take that intersection every day going back and forth. Okay, but there is a turn lane. There is a turn lane. It is. Thank you. All right. Anyone else? Yes, ma'am. Good afternoon. My name is Dorothy Haskins. I live at 495 Asbury Lane. My concern is when they start the building, are the trucks going to be coming through Asbury Lane? Once they've finished, will there be delivery trucks coming through Asbury Lane? when they start building, what effect will it have on the older houses in the neighborhood? They start building eastern state. The blasting affects the foundations of the houses in Green Acres. Then they want to know, well, when were they blasting? What time were they blasting? Who was blasting? Most people are not at home during the day when they're blasting and when they're digging. So no one can actually say, who's blasting? Who's digging? All you know as you come home, you see cracks all in the foundation of your houses. Who's going to be responsible for that? most people that live there right now are older people. And I don't see why people should be responsible for other people. Their insurance have to pay for someone else blasting and digging. Are they going to block off Asbury at the end so there won't be transportation through there? I've never heard anybody say. Are they going to block off the end of Asbury? Because at the end of Asbury at the present time, on the right-hand side it's 553. On the left-hand side it's 552. So you would have to tear down a fence to get to 564. So once they tear that fence down, are they going to block that off, close that off, so they won't be through traffic or if they're going to be through traffic. I did not hear about this until September, what, I guess the 20th, because there was a tiny article in the paper on the 13th. And somebody asked me to dig up a paper to see if it was in the paper. I walked yesterday from one end of Vesbury to the other end of Vesbury. And I only had one person to say they knew about it. And that was the lady at 553. She lives at the very end. And I just felt like that with something like that going on, everybody on Asbury should have been contacted at one point in time, and we weren't. I thank you for your time. We do not want a zone change. Thank you. Thank you very much. Anyone else? Okay. Okay. Now we'll go into the rebuttal portion petitioner first. Well, we heard a lot of comments about neighborhood conditions, which are sincerely held and we pay a lot of attention to. I want to emphasize first about Green Acre subdivision, Asbury Lane and the streets over there. This plan will not build the remaining section of Asbury Lane. We have, this is the one over here, I want to emphasize again, we are not constructing Asbury Lane. We are required to show it, show the right-of-way because the right-of-way exists and the city owns it. We are not building that. to get from the closest house we have, the Asbury Lane stubs right there. You can see the end of the pavement right there on the gray. To get from that point to our parking lot, which I don't know how many feet that is, looks about 50 feet, I'm guessing if you want to drive it, it'll be about four miles to drive to get there. there is a plan to eventually connect Asbury Lane to Citation Boulevard and to build it. And we've had a lot of discussion today about whether that's good or whether that's bad. It's the old debate between connectivity and isolation of neighborhoods. But we have nothing to do with that. Whether our facility is built or not has zero to do with when that connection is made. That is something everybody needs to talk to their council member about because it's a member, part of the budget process and all that thing, whether it's ever been built. It's been talked about for 30 years and it's never been built. We will have zero traffic going on Asbury Lane because our property cannot get there on a road and we have no connection. We will have zero construction traffic on Asbury Lane in any part of Green Acres subdivision. We heard discussion about stormwater in there. We are a good distance away from there. As this subdivision develops, the developer is required to do stormwater detention and meet the engineering manuals up here. We're not going to have any impact on that as well. We understand the concerns. We hear them. But it's a debate that has nothing to do with our property. Sometimes when zone changes come up, it's a forum. There are a lot of issues, neighborhood issues come up to you all. I want to talk about the construction traffic on this property going through Newtown Springs subdivision. Under the conditions the staff has proposed and we agree to, all our construction traffic must come along that section of Citation Boulevard right of way. None of our construction traffic is going to come on neighborhood streets. That is different from whether if this were built as 25 single-family houses and the rest is subdivision, there's going to be no connection on Citation Boulevard. All construction traffic, every bit of it is going to come through all the neighborhood streets if these are single-family houses built here. We are a one-story project here, one story, lower than many of the houses in this neighborhood. We are going to have construction traffic too, but similar to what houses would be, and every bit of ours is going to go on this, which has to be in there before we start a thing. As far as when it ends, before we can occupy this, we have to have the final base course on this connection of the roadway coming through here. We have to have our road up to snuff. we have to have the final course on it before we can move a patient in here under the restrictions that the staff imposed upon us. There were concerns about, and I can understand the neighbors, that there's tall grass out there, there's pipes laying around, there's stuff laying around that maybe shouldn't be out there. And I can understand those concerns, and I'm sure they have exercised self-restraint in not complaining about that to the city. Again, I'm not representing here Mr. Palumbo. I'm representing the two people who want to build this, the two companies that want to build this and occupy this, and they're going to do a good job with what they did. They didn't put the pipes there. They didn't let the grass grow and that sort of thing. I understand. I'm not minimizing those concerns. I understand those concerns, but the people I'm representing did not do that. I understand the concerns about the list of what's allowed in R3. We're fully concerned about that. There's a concern voiced about it might be a drug treatment center and that sort of thing, rehabilitation homes. Well, under the conditional zoning restrictions that the staff has proposed, that is off limits, that is not allowed, that is enforceable by the city government as to not having those. If it were ever changed, it would have to have a full hearing before you all to change those conditional zoning restrictions and go to the city council on it. We cannot put a rehabilitation home, drug rehabilitation home, or something like that in this. We cannot build apartments in here. We cannot build townhouses in here. All that is prohibited. If this project never gets off the ground, which it will, none of that can come in. Only what's allowed is what we're proposing, nursing home, assisted living, rest home, a couple of other things on the staff list which all relate to this type of thing. None of that can come in here. As far as sewers, infrastructure being in there, that is a force through the permitting process. We cannot get our permits. We cannot get our occupancy permit unless we have obtained all the sewer approvals, the stormwater. Now you have to go through a big process on stormwater now. All utilities have to be there. We cannot occupy this until we do. As I said, we're not opening Asbury Lane at all. Our construction entrance will be built first. And, again, we feel we're providing a facility which is very much needed, and we think it will be a good place for our residents to live. We think it will be good for this community, be good for the north end of town, and we think it will be a very good neighbor in this area. We thank you very much for listening to our application. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Murphy. Next we have the, are there any citizen objector to rebut what Mr. Murphy said? You have five minutes. Thank you very much. In all due respect, Mr. Murphy, I don't know what planet you're on right now, but you had mentioned that it would take more construction to build 25 homes, which is presently allowed in the single family, versus the project that you want to do. The economy is in a tank. Nobody is building homes anywhere. You can't even sell what you own. Nobody is going to build 25 homes on that property, not on my lifetime. So what we're dealing with, in essence, is a project that is guaranteed, guaranteed if it's allowed to go forward, to cause major construction hassles versus a what-if that some guardian angel is going to drop down out of the sky and build 25 homes on that very property that can't be sold as it is. Not one single home has been built in years over there, and I mean that. I'm not being facetious. Not one lot has been sold other than Palumbo selling to himself. He built two spec homes that are still there. So that issue, in my opinion, doesn't hold water. Secondly, I didn't hear anybody on that side of this issue talk about the EPA. I don't see how the EPA couldn't be brought into this when you're talking about five acres in an area that has a history. And the city of Lexington knows about the history, about sewers and EPA and all of this, because we're involved with issues right now that, unfortunately, my kids will probably have to pay for and your kids and your grandkids. So why are we putting more poison in the well unless we know what's going on with the EPA? I think staff should bring in EPA to find out what's going on out there, what's proposed, what's been dumped out there. I personally and my neighbors have had to call Palumbo Properties to turn back dump trucks that were dumping stuff on that back lot, in that vicinity, on his property, his people, or his subs. Nobody brought that up. In fact, I wonder if they brought it up when you were thinking about buying the land. So I think it behooves them, as well as us, to find out what's really in the ground out there. And lastly, I realize you don't represent Mr. Palumbo. And again, this isn't a vendetta against Mr. Palumbo. This is just neighbors protecting our interests, just as these folks are protecting their interests, just as you would protect your interests. We know Mr. Palumbo is not your adversary. Basically, Mr. Palumbo is, in a sense, a partner. You either both go down together or you fly together. The ship goes down together because if Palumbo doesn't sell the property to him because he can't get the zoning changed, then I'm going to buy the property. So I go back to my original premise. Why, and I'm all for growth, why can't this project be looked at from a point of feasibility where it has less impact on all our neighborhoods and all our quality of life, a quiet enjoyment of our land and raising a family or living in peace as we retire. Again, I brought to the podium an exhibit that showed exactly why we bought into this property, what the zoning was, and again, in all deference to Mr. Murphy, you say this is not a Trojan horse, and maybe so, but I've never seen a lock that couldn't be picked, and I've never seen anything that couldn't be undone. And with exception of one thing, probably, and that would be we're all going to die. So I just ask, just common sense. Common sense would tell you to please look at this from our vantage point. We're just people that want to live a quiet, peaceful life. We have nothing against these folks personally, individually, or in any other way, shape, or form. We're just asking, let them build their project. It's not the only corner in the city. There's plenty of people that would love to sell them land, and I'm sure, again, the University of Kentucky would probably love to have them as a neighbor. And they're right by that facility that's being built with a lot of infrastructure right now, the new hospital that's being built. There's plenty of laborers that would love to work for them. I'm sure there's plenty of people that could be a lot of synergy between the two aspects, health care providers, both at the state level, at the University of Kentucky, and also at the level where the mental health facility is being built. There's got to be some synergy here, both in construction, both in the infrastructure that's already out there. And, hey, Lord knows you might even buy the place for less money and not have to put up with the hassle of the neighborhood. Everybody calling, you know, that 311 every day, you know, about the dirt on the road, about this or that. It's just going to be just non-ending. We're really against it. I really mean it. I went to every neighbor. We all talked about it. We're adamant. We don't want this project, and it's not just a vendetta or anything like that. It's nothing personal. It just doesn't fit in the neighborhood. We bought into a single-family neighborhood. We want to live and pursue our quiet enjoyment. Thank you again. All right. Thank you. Now we'll have the staff's rebuttal. Five minutes. I think Mr. Murphy has an opportunity to address any of those concerns if there were comments and then the staff would go last. But I'm not sure if he has any other comments to address Mr. Corwin. I don't see that on my procedure. Okay. There were a few things that the staff did want to address. It sounded to me in Mr. Murphy's first rebuttal that he was okay with a restriction that limited the property to single-family detached dwelling units. That wasn't what the staff had originally intended to limit the property for if it were not approved as assisted living or nursing home as proposed. But certainly the Planning Commission can consider further limiting the property to just single-family detached. and we put an exhibit on the overhead for that. The other two issues I wanted to address first was where this subdivision has a detention basin. And this would be where the property is proposed for development, and this is their detention to the south and west. It should drain to that detention basin, which would mean it would be draining away from the Green Acres subdivision and into the Cane Run watershed. The third thing was the concern about notice. I'll go back to our zoning map. To the Asbury area, and although the subject property is addressed with an Asbury address, it is really a remnant property and part of the Newtown Springs development. and the area shown in yellow, green, and brown falls within our 400-foot notice. In total, there were 69 letters sent. An additional notice was sent into Griffin Gate because there's an agricultural zone adjacent to the property for a total of 118 letters, and 31 of them were in the Green Acres subdivision. So they did receive a notice as per our ordinance, and their neighborhood association also received a letter regarding the zone change. All right. Yes. I have a question for Ms. Tracy. Yes. When you were pointing out the detention basin, a retention basin, and then you said it drained into the cane ridge. Cane Run. Cane Run. Which way does Cane Run flow? It, well. Is it flowing away from Green Acres? Yes. It actually flows this way. Okay. So. Sarah. So the water would come down. This way? Into the retention basin. Yeah, over here. And have a slow outlet into Cane Run and away. Yes, in a way towards actually Coldstream. Okay. Does Green Acres currently have a retention basin? I believe they were developed prior to detention basins being required. Okay. All right. Ms. Bayes. Tracy, I just want to be sure you said communication extended in the areas that are highlighted. as well as Griffin Gate? Well, to the north, the AU property, and you can see it kind of winds up and down, that's the Gulf Coast. So any time a zone change property proposed for development, redevelopment, is adjacent to an agricultural zone, including the AU zone or AR zone, there's actually additional supplemental notice required to properties further than within the 400-foot notice. So another ring of properties were notified in Griffin Gate because this happens to be an agricultural zone. Only because it's agricultural? Yes, but there were some on Zoller Court and then Griffin Gate Drive, these townhouse developments, as well as Sugar Maple Lane that were notified in the Griffin Gate area. So homeowners, in addition, and their neighborhood association was notified too. Okay. I just want to be sure what I was hearing from the residents as well as what you were saying, but no one outside of that area, back toward the southeast, the Green Acres area, were notified. The Neighborhood Association was not notified. The neighborhood association was notified. It's a combined neighborhood association, Green Acres, Hollow Creek. I believe they have another additional name, but it covers this general vicinity, those subdivisions. But they were notified. The neighborhood association was notified. Thank you. All right. Mr. Owens. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Tracy, I've got a question in regards to access on citation, and it might be best answered by traffic if it's possible. Mr. Gallimore? Good afternoon. Good afternoon, Mr. Gallimore. There's been a lot of talk as far as citation and so forth. Where's traffic as far as citation drive? To me, if this thing goes forward, this development plan and unit is just crying for access onto Salutation Drive itself as opposed to Silver Springs, which is more of what I call a residential street. What's your thoughts on that? Probably the ultimate location would be about right in here, about halfway split in the middle of the building, having a pretty good setback in between these two roads. However, the only thing is the way that this property is laid out with their drop-off loop here and the way the circulation works, it looks like to me that this is more so going to be the permanent entrance. uh so like i said if your main entrance comes in here it doesn't work well with this drop-off area it may work well with some of these other areas but i would think like i said that would be the ultimate for traffic to maintain this loop system and this internal circulation this access point here which is closer to this local street might be an option okay so that's something there's some flexibility i would think in the location okay so you know what i've heard today you know whether it's collector street arterial street whatever that there's limited access on there but you know if if citation is built it is possible to have access direct access on the citation i think it would be possible but for this type of use if they have a access point this not being something like a retail establishment that's looking for high visibility okay i just don't know that that the prop general would ever really want to spend the additional money to to have that additional access point yeah well my my thoughts is not two access points but ideally just one access point on citation itself to go back after this if this plan were approved to go back and eliminate that access point onto silver springs and then create a new one onto citation for this type of use like i said i don't know that there would be that much incentive yeah well no much incentive That's true. Okay. Okay. That's fine. I'd like to go back to the applicants. I don't know if it would be. Yeah, go ahead. Yeah, sure, sure, sure. My understanding from the presentation earlier was that there was limitations on what they could do directly on the citation. Is that not the case as far as putting a cutout on the citation? You were talking about the feasibility and desirability. From my understanding from the presentation, it's not whether it's feasible or desirable. It's not allowed. Well, I think there was some differences of opinion on that. As Ms. Copeland brought up earlier, we just added an access point in not a very desirable location onto Citation Boulevard, which did not meet with a median cut, which I was somewhat opposed with. I'm not saying the overall decision was not a good decision because there were some safety concerns for that location. This section of citation, I think, is a somewhat different cross-section than what the other section was. So there are access points to citation. If there is going to be a median, it is better to have the access points planned. uh since citation is not built at this point it looks like to me that it could be planned for for an access point i think what you're seeing here really is is the the idea that they've already agreed to extend a half section of citation to this point to gain access here it would be considerable more to extend that half section to here and access from citation originally so i think that's part of the motivation of accessing it this way and i guess my only point is if if you don't think this is an issue accessing it this way that's fine but in my opinion that's the way it's going to stay okay well maybe i misunderstood your answer but i didn't hear what i was looking for is it allowed currently under the regulations to put a driveway where you're suggesting it straight out on the citation to my knowledge citation does not have any specific access limitations uh like man of war and certain parts of new circle road do for example the division planning also couldn't find any restrictions that would prohibit that so all right mr owens is next um i guess my my only other question would go back to I guess Mr. Murphy or Ms. Tuttle, if Mr. Gallimore is done. No. Mr. Gallimore, following up on the agreed road that's coming down to Silver Springs, the citation being built to Silver Springs, would there be a problem with a limited, just a construction road that they use coming up to their real entrance on citation, their proposed entrance on citation, would there be a problem with having something like that on the property line or even over the property line on citations right-of-way? You mean for construction purposes? Yeah. Since the city owns the right-of-way, can't we cut a deal with them, make it easy? I was understanding that the construction entrance wasn't going to be on Citation. Yeah, two Silver Springs and then in their front entrance there. They're not proposing any access on the Citation at all. I know because they thought it wasn't possible, but now we've got a possibility. Okay. But so it could happen, right, if they wanted to change their plan. Right, but I think it's always, in my opinion, it's always been an option. This has been their preference on how to develop this property. Okay. All right. Thank you. Mr. Owens. Thank you, Mr. Gallimore. I guess, Mr. Murphy, the question would be for you following up with this line of discussion. in your comments you mentioned that this was an ideal location being on a collector street you mentioned that it was a nice gateway into the facility and I think I heard Ms. Tuttle indicate that you had been working in this direction and kind of like staying off of citation because the staff I don't know if staff was pushing one way or another or whose preference it was for Silver Springs, would it be possible for your applicant to provide either access now onto Citation? I know the road's not built. Or would you be agreeable to access onto Citation at such time that Citation is completed and closing this other location? obviously I've got a real concern with this facility coming out on the residential street. Well, I want you to bear in mind there's nothing between us and Citation at that entrance at this point. I don't know what I did with my winner here. but on this stretch coming in here, it's just a sub street with nothing here right now from here on. And that's where our traffic is going to be at our permanent entrance point. Our construction point will be coming in here, so all our construction traffic will be coming directly onto the property off of Citation. Permanent, this is the way we planned it. We can talk a little bit, I suppose, but my folks are spending an enormous amount of money, which we didn't think they had to spend to make this connection up here. I'm just very concerned about this project being a viable project if they have to construct another stretch of citation down here to a major entrance point on here. I'm just not sure it's viable. And if you're asking for, if I hear your question that after it's built at some point, can we put a second entrance here? I'd need to talk, we'd need to talk to our folks about that, okay? But we can certainly not afford to do one at this point with all the off-site. I haven't been involved in a project with this much off-site improvement on it. when we went in having access to an existing public street on here. And I understand. I don't want to go. Yes, we understand all that. And I understand where you're coming from, too. Yeah, I understand what you're saying and can appreciate the fact that your willingness to get the citation started. But my real concern is a business like this having access onto a residential street. And looking at your map where other facilities are located, I'm hesitant to say that any of them have access onto a residential street, that there are larger streets than that. But I'm concerned in the fact that coming out on the Silver Springs, they really have the availability of simply turning left and not even using Citation. If the access is on Citation itself, then there's more reason to use Citation all the way out to Newtown Pike. That's where I'm coming from. And right now, I would say, Mr. Murphy, I'm not asking you to build more of citation than what you need to. I guess as much as anything, I'm asking one citation. Would you be willing to a condition one citation is built to provide the permanent access out on the citation and close up the Silver Springs one? Well, give me a minute to talk to my folks. I can't write checks for them on the spot here, okay? Let us talk. All right. Wait a minute. Carla, do you? Yeah. Lynn, did you want to go first, or did you have a question for her? I have a question. Okay. Thank you. Carla. Mr. Owens, I think, mentioned the concern about emptying out onto a residential area and that others don't, but we recently approved the Sarah Christian Village. How would you compare kind of the construction going on there, the employee traffic, the neighborhood streets, and that instance, which we've already approved, to something like this? I do think they're similar, but they're both situated in single-family residential areas, and both would be situated on collector streets. In that situation, and also the Planning Commission approved another nursing home expansion for homesteads, there were both, in those cases, demolition of single-family homes. In this case, it is vacant property, so we don't have to consider that. But the staff is proposing very similar restrictions in terms of use. And in terms of employee access, let me think, in the Sayre Christian Village situation, without the single-family homes, Both of their entrances were off local residential streets. One was a cul-de-sac and one was more of a through street, but they were situated where they didn't have direct access to the collector until the zone change was approved. So it would be similar? Yes. Thank you. Tracy, I'm concerned, as Mr. Corman suggested, taking the helicopter view, kind of the big picture view, And I'd like to know what the existing land uses and what the proposed land uses are for the vicinity. Sure. Because I'm concerned about even though a nursing home is a residence, it's a different kind of residence. Can you speak to existing land use at the intersection of Dawson Springs and Silver Springs? Are there residences there? I know we've got the golf course across the proposed Citation Boulevard. But what about that vacant tract that is farther down citation as it is being built? What's the proposed zoning? What is the existing zoning? And what does the comprehensive plan say about suggested land uses for that area? Well, the existing development in this area, there are a few homes along Dawson Springs, and then this sweep, I believe, is also Silver Springs. I don't believe there are any homes on these five lots that would be directly across from the nursing home proposal. Is this the lot you're talking about in terms of what's proposed here? Yes, as well as the tract north of that. Here, the R1E. This area is all AU? That's not what I'm concerned about. This is R1E? If you were to follow citation towards its trajectory. It's planned route. I want to know what the proposed land uses will be there. Okay, so currently it's agricultural or urban owned by the University of Kentucky. And in terms of land use, here would be Citation Boulevard as it continues through. And that tract will be cut by Citation to the north. It would be recommended for medium density residential. And on the south, it would be recommended for low density residential. This is a park. City Park. What are the densities for the residential that you described? Medium density residential is between 5 and 10 dwelling units per acre. Low density is 0 to 5 dwelling units per acre. And then the lots along Russell Cave, this is a large church, and we have the new library and then the vacated library. In terms of Newtown and Citation, we have the commercial development here and also to the north. We talked about the new access point and then Coldstream. And I believe this is the new mental health, our eastern state. The property that AU is owning is currently owned by the University of Kentucky? Yes. What is the proposed and what is the existing land use? It's just vacant land? Yeah. Okay. And what about that jigsaw puzzle-shaped tract to the north that you said is a medium density? I believe that's the continuation of the Johnson property. Is that correct? And the front portion has been subdivided and mostly completed, and this is R1E single-family residential, and it is recommended for medium-density residential. And you can see the density of this portion of the subdivision. It would be very similar. R1E can accommodate much smaller lots. Can you tell me what the minimum lot size is for R1E? 4,000. It also has a maximum of 7,500 square feet. Thank you. Okay. Does Mr. Murphy, do you have an answer? Yes. Yes. In response to Mr. Owen's question, DMK or Trilogy would be agreeable to putting an entrance into Citation Boulevard when Citation is built by the city, provided that the city, of course, provides the curb cut. We have to have the curb cut in order to be connecting in there. So when Citation is built by the city, we will be agreeable to putting an entrance onto Citation Boulevard. All right. And we did confirm also that currently there are no houses on those two lots that are up there. And the reason I make that point is because even if we hadn't agreed to do the connection onto citation, anybody buying a house there has to be aware of what's coming in when the house is built after that. Sure. No, I understand that. would your app also be agreeable if the access is on the citation that they will close off the access coming out on the Silver Springs? No, we think it's important to keep that access on the Silver Springs. Okay, thank you. All right, Mr. Corwin, did you have something? Any final observations? Yeah, to these points. Yes. Okay. wouldn't it be a win-win situation where they're not putting money into the citation thing which, by the way, he said, when citation. I heard the word when. That could be in my next lifetime. We don't know when that's going to happen. So that doesn't fly as far as our homeowners and I think I speak for all of them in that regard. There's nothing concrete about what he said. He didn't put a finality, a date, a time, an amount he's going to put in. He's a lawyer. He knows better than this. Secondly, wouldn't it be a win-win situation if they took their project and took it across the street? The University of Kentucky, I think, would love to hear from them. All the infrastructure is there, for gosh sakes. The University of Kentucky is so intertwined with the engineering departments at UK. They're intertwined with the state government in Frankfurt. Wouldn't Frank would love to have a project like this, maybe just across the street? Literally. It would probably save them quite a few thousands of dollars and a lot of legal headaches with the neighborhood. I don't see why that isn't pursued rather than can we come in this, can we come in that? Because as Mr. Owens points out, the neighborhood doesn't want that traffic through there. We don't want the light pollution. We don't want the construction. We brought into this project our homes for a reason. We want the peace and quiet enjoyment of our neighborhood. Across the street, they have the sewers, they have the underground, they have the access, for gosh sakes. They can go hit the highway, they can hit downtown, they can go citation the other way. They're not hitting a dead-end street. So, I mean, just from the traffic standpoint, the fact that we want to be good neighbors, we hope they want to be good neighbors, doesn't that make more sense, or am I missing something here? Okay. Thank you. One thing I forgot to add to that was we also would agree to require our employees to use citation. We have control over the employees and what they do. We can require them to drive citation in and out. Okay. Ms. Beatty. Mr. Murphy, can you clarify again on your statement on Citation Boulevard? When you will be willing to access that, et cetera? Well, when it's built. And I cannot put a time limit on that because the city has no time limit on when they do that. the agreement that was struck with the developers back in 2005 was that the developers had to build their section right then and they did it and they gave the right-of-way for that part and the rest of it and there was no time limit put on when the city was going to have to build theirs so we cannot force that construction but we can say that when it is built we'll put an entrance out there okay mr. Murphy when are you going to build the section that you've agreed to build uh that'll have to be built i'm trying to get the answer that oh i'm sorry i didn't understand the question the section we're agreeing to build has to be done before we have a single person living in this facility has to be done before we get a certificate of occupancy all right now our construction road we're not going to put our construction on it when it's fully fully built up we're going to use a construction on a lower level of that roadway bring it in then finish the road, put the final course on it, and then we're going to get our occupancy permit and move people in here. So that section we've agreed to build will be built before the first person moves into this building. Okay, thanks. All right, it looks like we're ready to close the hearing. It probably should have been closed, but we're ready to hereby close the hearing, and we will turn this over to the Commission for more comments and and a decision. So does anybody on the Commission have any any further comments or questions? Yes, Ms. Copeland. I understand the neighborhood's concerns, but I think this project needs to go forward. But I think at this stage of the game, this should be a preliminary design plan. We have too many loose ends. We've heard you, and I think things can be worked out now that we understand more options, et cetera, that this is a preliminary design plan, but the concept goes forward. So it's not a final design plan. for me. Ms. Copeland, they've agreed to the concession on citation. What else do you think still needs to be worked out? First of all, what we've conceived of is not graphically shown today, and it could be changed from a preliminary design plan to another final design plan, there could be changes in the cool of the night. You could come up with maybe a better design that accommodates a future access entrance and closing another access entrance. All sorts of things can happen here now that we've had this exposure of the problem and the solutions, the possible solutions. So to say that this is a final design plan is really premature. Do we need for the project to go forward? Yes. I think that we can incorporate the neighborhood's concerns in drainage, in lighting, all sorts of things, and put it in the final design plan, and we can all work together as a team. But to take this is not the final design plan, in my opinion. It's the beginnings of a final design plan. This is a preliminary. Carla? But in the conditions that are listed on our sheet, it talks about outdoor lighting, that the light is shielded and directed downward to avoid disturbing and joining your nearby properties. It talks about stormwater. So I guess I'm just a little confused about it. Well, Ms. Blanton, you don't serve on the subdivision committee. This would be something we'd work out in subdivision, and staff would work on it more. And then it would come back here, and then you would hear the final development plan. Okay. Technically, that doesn't have the construction elements on it, but it could pass as a final development plan. and typically in zoning cases you wouldn't go to all the expense to go on and do the final construction drawings and all those sorts of things until you had your zone change. But it is unusual for us to see a final development plan at this stage. What did staff say about when they could change that? They had their deadline was today at the hearing to decide whether they would switch to a preliminary development plan. And I didn't hear Mr. Murphy indicate that he was interested in doing that. Is that correct? Are you asking him a question? Okay. He can speak then. We felt like it was ready to go as a final, but we'll leave that up to you all. We'll go with whatever you all want on that if you feel more comfortable with it, preliminary. Okay. Patrick. Yeah, I'm very – it's troubling to have this many people speak out against a project that, from the guidelines I think we're supposed to be following here, seems like a pretty good project. I understand and appreciate all of your all's comments and appreciate everybody coming out to be at the hearing, even if you didn't speak. I've listened to the traffic concerns, the construction noise, water issues, EPA, connection of Asbury, let's see, connection of citation to Russell Cave, lighting, traffic noise, et cetera. I think with the conditional uses that have been spelled out by staff and agreed to by the applicant, I think all of those have been addressed, at least in my mind. And I'm also having a hard time understanding the comments, and I'm sorry, sir, I don't remember your name, you made about your current neighbor as an overgrown dump. That seems to me to be much less desirable than what's probably going to be a pretty quiet nursing home. Can I address that? No, the hearing is closed. Okay, Mr. Wilson. I'm always conflicted when the neighborhood comes together for the purposes of proposing a particular project, but in my opinion, I think this is a good project. Now, let me tell you a couple of things that I've heard from the people who've called my house and who talk to me about services on the north side. It appears as that when we talk about the north side, it always gets shortchanged as it relates to services of any kind, whether it relates to library services, fire protection, and, of course, at this stage of the game, I think it was pointed out that even now we have no facilities for a nursing facility. So I think the project should go forward. But now, having said that, it is disturbing to sit here and listen to some of the issues concerning stormwater and safety and other issues. And I think that it was pointed out earlier that when you have these types of zone change issues, A lot of things come to the forefront that have actually not quite connected with the project itself. But I'm really concerned about the stormwater thing. I know that the staff talked to me about how the stormwater runs and what have you, but I feel a little uncomfortable about that. The safety issue, I'm not sure I know how to deal with that as it relates to this particular area, but I am familiar with the north side enough because I used to live there about the safety issues connected, and I understand what happens when you start moving streets around and what have you. But as it relates to the facility that is coming forward, I'm comfortable in terms of the answers that I've been given here today that this would be pretty much a positive thing for the north side. I have less issue with rezoning the property than I do issuing the conditional use because even though, Mr. Corwin, we don't have any control over the restrictive covenants, that's a private agreement between the developer and the purchasers of property within that development, I'm not sure that this site in particular is appropriate for a nontraditional residential use, especially when you consider what the existing zoning is along the citation corridor, the proposed extension of citation, what the comprehensive plan says about it. I think I would be more than willing to support this if the site were not either at the back of or in the middle of or however you want to juxtapose its geography near these single-family residences. If it were closer to Newtown's Pike, I would have no problem with it whatsoever. So I support rezoning to allow greater density and smaller lot sizes and a continuation of the single-family residences that we currently have in both of the neighborhoods that we've been describing. But I don't think that this is exactly the right site for that nursing home. All right. Thank you. Mr. Owens? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Throughout, I don't know, two hours or plus, I've been going back and forth, back and forth on this, principally as far as the zone change itself. and it is concerning as all the other members have indicated that when we have neighbors coming and expressing their concern, most of what I've heard as far as concerns are traffic and construction and a couple of things that's out of our control, simply grown-up weeds and so forth, that's not for us here. I see this property as being developed at some point in time. And with that, you're going to have construction traffic. You're going to have dust. and that simply comes with the development of any project. And this area has a lot left to go. I live on the north end. I have a Newtown Pike address. I think this is a good facility. I, too, would like to see it probably located more towards Newtown Pike and not necessarily right in the middle. However, I am leaning towards approving the zone change. I would highly suggest another condition, wherever it's appropriate, that will state that access on the citation will be built when and used, and hopefully it will be the main access point, when citation is built. I don't know when citation is going to be built. I don't think Mr. Gallimore can tell us when that's going to happen. I kind of have a feeling it will happen quicker than some think. Once again, I appreciate the neighbors. I appreciate the concern. I think it will be a good development. And I think it's maybe not in the best spot. However, I think it's a doable project in a doable situation. Okay, I might as well get in on this. See if you don't know what I might say. we've seen these nursing homes coexist in neighborhoods in several places, at least several places I know of. One was we mentioned earlier up there in Bella Woods that that's on a less collector street than this there's one in Tanbark which is on a smaller street and has some very expensive homes right across from it and even in Lansdowne Merrick over there, I forget the name of that nursing home, but it comes out on the back of Pepper Hill there, Mayfair. And the fact that they're agreeing to build 600 feet of Citation Boulevard at their expense and that the city won't have to pay for and that not only they will use it, but the residents certainly will use it to go to those Silver Springs and those other streets, too. I mean, they're going to use it, too. So it will be built for them. And the fact that this company and 90 jobs are going to be created here, probably new jobs. They're not coming from somewhere else. But this company is big enough to manage a lot of nursing homes that they can manage this traffic and they can manage their employees. They're big enough to do it. and they do it all the time. And they can certainly talk to the visitors about which way they go in and out. They have probably the same visitors all the time. So I think that's a good point. And I've just seen them coexist in these neighborhoods, and that might cause you less trouble than 25 more houses. I don't know. So that's my two cents on it. So are we ready for a motion? Ms. Beatty, are you going to do it? Okay. We have several parts to this motion, so I'm going to give it a try and then ask the other commission members to join in for this motion. I'm going to move that we accept the proposed change from ZPD 2011-70 Newtown Springs, the zone change from an R1D to an R3. can I also add the waiver and the condition are you going to do them separately yeah you need to go to the zone change first ok let's just do the zone can I is that ok with staff do the zone change I move that we accept the zone change from R1D to R3 from Newtown Springs that's MARC 2011-13 Correct. And does that also recommend the findings by staff? Yes. Okay. And the conditions as amended? Yes. With the conditionals as amended? The conditions as amended by staff. And that was MARC 2011-13, is that correct? Those amended? All right. Okay. Okay. A motion has been made by Ms. Beatty. Mr. Wilson still seconds this. Everybody vote when they can. That motion carries. Okay. Now we need a motion for the conditional zoning permit, conditional use permit. We need a motion for that. Before we go there, let me just be sure that I understood the comment earlier on the preliminary plans versus the final plans. Because I certainly support this being a preliminary plan, I'd like the subdivision to take a look at that again. So I hope that I just didn't make a motion to include it as a final plan. No, you can add that. When you make the motion for the development plan, the ZDP, you could add that as a condition. I want us to take a look at that again, if it's okay with some addition. If that's what you – okay, now, the Chair wants a motion. Do we need a motion on the conditional use permit? Separate motion for that? Yes. Okay. Okay. Are we ready for conditioning? Okay. Okay, I move that we accept the staff's report for conditional use for MARC 2011-13 with the two staff recommendations. and the nine conditions. Is that correct, staff? Okay. Yes. Okay. We have a second. Second. Second by Mr. Owens. Everybody vote when they can. Okay. That motion carries. All right. Next, we'll take a motion for the waivers. Mr. Owens. Mr. Chair, I'll move for approval of the waiver in regards to MARC 2011-13 DMK Development Group. findings that the waiver is in compliance on ZDP 2011-7 Newtown Springs. This is in reference to Article 6-8-B with the two reasons and one recommendation. Okay. One at a time. So you made a motion for both of them or one of them? The other one I can would be findings that for the waiver of land subdivision regulations, EDP 2011-70 Newtown Springs in reference to Article 4-7D-9 with staff, two reasons and four recommendations. All right. Very good. Do we have a second? Second by Ms. Blanton. Okay, anybody vote when they can. Mr. Chairman, we can take an electronic vote either on this motion or a future motion on the zoning development plan. We cannot take an electronic vote on both the way it's set up. We could do roll call or we could do show of hands. Are we out of electronics? We only have one more bullet in the holster. Okay. Let's go on and raise your hand if you're in favor of this motion. Any opposed? That motion carries. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. All right. We'll save our last electronic vote for the development plan. Mr. Chair, I'm willing to make a motion here. I do have a question first. We've got, am I correct, we've got 15 conditions listed. I think a couple of them has been resolved and can be deleted. I'll ask staff. 14 and 15, I think, can be deleted now? Yes, 14 and 15 can be deleted. Okay. And then 13, if your motion is to pass this as a preliminary development plan, 13 can be deleted as well in which your motion reflects the status of the plan. Okay. So I would recommend deleting 13, 14, and 15 and leaving this as a preliminary plan. So my motion would be for approval of ZDP 2011-70 Newtown Springs with the 12 conditions and as stated, leaving this as a preliminary plan. All right. Very good. Do we have a second? We have a second by Mr. Wilson. Everybody. Were you going to discuss the future access to citation? Oh, thank you. That would be an additional condition. Thank you, Ms. Booker. That's good. Let me add number 13 as a future access on to citation, preferably as a main access once citation is built. Yes. Okay. Would be. Is that okay with the second? Yeah, okay. Second is okay. All right. Everybody vote when they can. Whoops. All right. That motion carries. All right. Can I go? That concludes that. I'll vote it. I only have to vote if it's a tie anyway. Where's our parliamentarian? Okay, that concludes this hearing. Thank you. Thank you, everyone, for coming in. And we may take a break now. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman. The next item on our agenda can be found at the very bottom of page 4, and then it wraps to page 5. And the staff report is in tab 3 of your notebooks today. This is ZOTA 2011-9, an amendment to Article 17-7 of the zoning ordinance to allow additional wall signage, wall-mounted signage in our P1 zone. This is a request by Rector Hayden Realtors. and they are asking to have a third wall-mounted sign in a professional office project, which is permitted in a P1 zone, and only if the property itself or the building has at least two street frontages. The zoning ordinance currently permits one wall-mounted sign per street frontage for a building in a P1 zone. It also allows other types of signage, but generally that's what we're talking about today, so I'll limit my presentation to that. The staff does agree that signage has a legitimate need. There's a legitimate need for signage restrictions as well, and there's at times those interests for signage and the protection of the community in terms of not overdoing the signage can be at odds. But the applicant has, the staff believes, drafted the text amendment that they're proposing fairly succinctly to just permit these wall-mounted signs, the third wall-mounted sign for a building, only when it's located in a professional office project. And professional office projects are where a P1 zone has at least 10 acres together, and it also has to be approved or designated by the Planning Commission on a development plan. So the staff did just a map of where our P1 zones are in the community with the teal colors. And can everybody see? And then the kind of cream color looking is where there's a 10-acre tract or area for P1 development. And then the purple is where it's 10 acres and it has also already been designated. Do you want it closer? Yes. There you go. And the purple is where it's also been designated as a professional office project. So there are 10 locations within the county where professional office projects exist. and they most often have larger buildings with multiple tenants. And sometimes when it's developed all at the same time, you'll have buildings that all look similar, have similar architectural styling, and it can be confusing which building you're trying to navigate to. And the staff felt that this third wall sign could assist in identification for businesses in this situation. And so the staff is recommending approval of this request. there was some question based on the text that was presented by the applicant about where that third sign would be mounted. And the staff felt that it should be on a third face of the building rather than multiple signs on one face of a building. And so we are proposing a staff alternative text to address that concern. And there are two reasons we're recommending approval. First, we felt it was a timely relaxation, an appropriate relaxation of the wall-mounted signage restrictions in the professional office project section of our ordinance. In addition, what I just mentioned was that those professional office projects tend to have multiple buildings, many tenants, and they all tend to look, can look the same, so that this would allow for additional identification and wayfinding for those businesses. Okay, very good. Any questions? All right. Petitioner. Good afternoon. Nick Nicholson here on behalf of Stalking and Ogden with basically for Rector Hayden Realtor, the applicant. We are in complete agreeance with the staff report and also their new language. We worked with Bill and Tracy on kind of crafting this and kind of looked at several different options. We defer to them on the actual language of it, and we are A-OK with it. She stole most of my points with regards to why we need to get this done. And I will be succinct, based on the prior applicant, and simply say that science is crucial here. In order to identify where Rector Hayden is in these buildings, it's not good enough to know, yes, they have an office in Beaumont Park. Yeah, they got one out in Hamburg. You've got to know where exactly in these parks are. These buildings are all the same. And when potential tenants are looking at moving into these places that have a lot of vacancies, if the wall signages are already taken up by the current tenants, it's not that attractive of a building at that point. They cannot convey to their potential customers where they are located, and at that point they're going to start looking elsewhere. We've designated these office parks as where we want these types of uses to be, and therefore we need to do everything we can to encourage tenants to go to these places. And we think this text amendment is a perfect way to alleviate some of these problems. And therefore we would ask for your favorable approval here. And once again, we agree with everything the staff had. Happy to answer any questions. Okay, Ms. Blanton. Are we ready for a motion? I am. I like the sound of this, absolutely. You don't know which way she's making it. Mr. Chairman, there may be someone in the audience here to speak on this first. Does anyone in the audience wish to speak to this? Okay. Go ahead. I would move approval of ZOTA 2011-9 Amendment to Article 17-7 to allow additional wall signage in the P-1 zone with the staff alternative text. All right. We have a motion for approval. Do we have a second? Second. Second by Mr. Owens. How are we voting now? Oh, okay. Vote electronically when you can. All right. That motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Okay, next we're down to the goals and objectives. Mr. Duncan? Okay. Can we shift you just a minute? Sure. The chair has been asked to move down to Montclair. We're going to move down to Montclair. That issue, that's okay. Thank you. I think they're called the Neighbors of Montclair, officially, to ask the Planning Commission to initiate an amendment to their ND1 restrictions. The commission approved or recommended approval late last year of ND1 for the Montclair neighborhood and their 179 properties, and that went to the council and was approved in January of this year. Since that time, there's been an issue that came up that was unanticipated at this point last year regarding retaining walls in the neighborhood. There was not any research done for the original ND1 restrictions and wasn't really considered in drafting the restrictions any language about retaining walls. There was some language at the top of this handout I gave you, number three, related to landscaping requirements. for front yard fences, and then also it did say no walls. What the Neighborhood Association didn't anticipate was that that would include retaining walls, not just freestanding walls, which would be above the ground. Since that time, there's been interest in building retaining walls for some of the properties because of steep slopes in the front yards, and they were told by building inspection that that would be prohibited. based on these restrictions and had come to the planning staff to ask what remedies would be available. And when we laid out the options, this was the one that came to their liking in terms of asking the planning commission to be an applicant for a second time to amend the restrictions for the entire neighborhood rather than having one homeowner here or there come in and ask to change their personal restrictions on their property or to seek a different interpretation from the Board of Adjustment. So the staff has mailed out postcards, just as we do with any overlay zone, and we received 79 of the 179 postcards returned within the last week, and 73% of those returned were in support of this change. 25, a little bit more than 25%, were opposed. and then one property owner had no opinion. The staff did provide comments from the cards, but I think of most importance, we've discussed this at the zoning committee last month, was that building inspection, I thought, made an important comment. When you're considering a retaining wall, how high can the wall be above what they called the unbalanced fill? And that would be if you were building a wall, for instance, this is my wall, and I'd have fill on this side. How high can the structure be above the dirt on one side where it's much lower on the other? And the building inspection staff indicated that two feet seemed reasonable to them. and in doing some research, the Neighborhood Association president had told me verbally within the last week that all of the retaining walls that do exist in the neighborhood are not more than 18 inches above the unbalanced fill, and that was really in keeping with what building inspection had recommended. So the staff sent out language that you would see on the front of the blue sheet, with the line underlined being an addition to the current restrictions. On the back, the staff would recommend, if the Planning Commission wants to initiate an act as the applicant, that the text you would consider would be down here. There were some comments on this blue sheet where there were some questions as to whether the restrictions for height, setback from a sidewalk and it being parallel would apply to a wall or a fence. And so many people interpreted the language that it would apply to a retaining wall as well, and I don't think that was the intent. So this, I think, clarifies that the height of four feet, the setback of two feet, and the parallel to the right-of-way would only be for those fences that are permitted on Tates Creek and Cooper, and that retaining walls would be subject to being no taller than 18 inches above an unbalanced fill. And then any other restrictions that the zoning ordinance would normally have, but that would be the only restriction in terms of location and that sort of thing. All right. All right. Any questions? And I'm sorry, we did do a drive-through, and there were 28 retaining walls in front yards. Okay, and this is just an initiation. Yes. to amend it. So we'll have to hear it again. Yes. Okay. All right. Very good. Can you tell me the definition of front yard for somebody that lives on a corner, for instance? Well, the front yard would be the direction that the front of your house faces. So wherever the entrance would be, your front door. And typically that's where your address is as well. We do have quite a few corner lots in this neighborhood. So if I lived at the corner of Castle and Montclair, if my house, the direction of my front door faced Montclair, I would have a Montclair address, and that would be my front yard. And I think we've addressed this in terms of fences for this neighborhood already. The side street and side yard would not have those same restrictions of no fences, no walls. All right. Very good. Anyone in the audience wish to speak to this. Just real quickly, my name is Deborah Tatum. I'm the president of the Neighbors of Montclair. I live at 654 Montclair Drive. The only thing I'd like to say is, in this process of developing ND1 zoning and the overlay, we've tried very hard to do our best to investigate everything. We didn't realize that when we said no freestanding fences or walls, that would include retaining walls, and that was a decision made by building inspectors. The reason for the infill, for only to have eight inches above the infill, is so that someone couldn't use the excuse of having a two-foot infill and building a six-foot wall, thereby having a four-foot wall around the front of their house. So we're really trying to do this in the correct way, and we certainly hope you'll join with us and at least take a look at this issue make sure it's what our neighborhood wants, which I believe it is, according to their statements. All right. Very good. Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. Commission, are we ready for a motion? No, I have a comment. There's down on comments in support on the blue sheet. The Great Wall of China built on Summit, which happens to be my street, is not a retaining wall. That hill has not eroded in the 20-plus years I've observed. In fact, it's been there since 1930. They built a wall and then put the fill in behind it. That should be a comment in opposition. It's on the wrong side of the sheet. May I add that that specific wall, the people moved in, had to redo all of their cement sidewalks because the erosion had been happening on that hill. and the sidewalks had buckled so that when they were placing their sidewalk, they said, let's try and take care of this issue once and for all. So while that comment might be in opposition, it's not quite correct on why the wall was built. I thought the same thing when I read the card because the statement tends to indicate that they're in opposition to the wall, AWOL, but they did check the box for support. Okay, come forward and name an address, please. Yes, sir. I'll be very brief. My name is Chuck Eckerlein. I live at 1252 Summit, and I didn't intend to add anything to what Deb had said, but the issue regarding our wall was raised, so I wanted to address that. We did not put any fill in. We raised it up to the level of where the bank was. There were parts of the bank that were uneven. Those were filled in, but the wall in question doesn't even stick up more than it is above the bank. It meets the definition of a retaining wall. We put $3,000 into our sidewalk to repair erosion that the bank had washed down and repaired. The comments on the wall from the vast majority of people in the neighborhood have been overwhelmingly positive. Anyone on the commission is more than welcome to look at the wall themselves. But this really isn't about just our wall. It's about allowing people to put landscaping walls in, not to change or to challenge in any way the restrictions that keep you from putting a fence up high or anything that would obstruct right away. or your view. Thank you. Very good. Thanks. Okay, Commission. This is a motion to initiate the request to amend the ND overlay standards. Mr. Chair, I'd like to move to initiate the Montclair neighborhood zone change initiation for the existing ND1 overlay restrictions. All right, very good. Do we have a second? Second. Second by Mr. Owens. Everybody in favor of vote? All right, that motion carries. All right, now we're going to get back on the agenda and go to the goals and objectives. Mr. Duncan. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The staff is before you today to propose that you adopt the draft goals and objectives that we prepared at the work session last Thursday. Janice has passed out to you a revised copy of those. It is very similar to the version that we sent to you earlier last week before the end of the week. This request comes following the public hearing that this Planning Commission held on August 25th to take comment on the goals and objectives, and the work session last Thursday, the 15th, that you dedicated three very productive hours, three very long hours, to updating and changing that draft based on the public comment that you received both at the public hearing and elsewhere. Following your comments on the 15th, the staff updated the draft. We did so initially based on our written comments and got that back out to you the next day, Friday the 16th, and posted it on the website for public view on Monday the 19th. Following that, we wanted to ensure that we had this draft as accurate as possible and certainly that it reflected your intention for the goals and objectives. And so we continued to listen to the audio recording of the work session on Thursday. And on Tuesday, we discovered that one of the objectives near the end of the goals and objectives that we had left in the draft, that we had actually added to the draft, Based on your discussion on the audio, you had suggested that that not be included in the draft. And so we sent you notice about that yesterday, and I may have caused more confusion and unrest than I should have based on that. But I did want to bring that to your attention. I do believe that the objective that's included there now, based on the audio tape, was not your intention to include that. but I also believe that what is there does not significantly alter the tenor, the balance, or anything of the goals and objectives. So at this point, leaving it there would not change anything, I do not believe. Taking it out would not change anything. So I just bring that to your attention if you want to take any action on that before you consider adopting the goals and objectives. And while you're thinking about that, let me also just quickly tell you what the rest of the process is. if you do adopt these today and whatever changes, if any, you make today, then we will forward that to the council. That's the procedure. And then they will begin their work on that. Presumably this will be placed in the planning and public works committee of the council. And we will keep you apprised of the status of that as it moves through and any information that we can bring to you about that that would be helpful. All right. Very good. Commission have anything yes miss couple I would recommend removing it as I did at our last meeting mixed use is mentioned under a goal 1b redevelopment under a 2a sustainability under a 2b but I also would like to keep this process moving so if the rest of the Commission wants to leave it in that's That's fine with me as well. Okay. This one right here. Patrick. I have to admit goals and objectives fatigue on this. He says he has goals and objectives fatigue. I think we tortured this dead horse as long as we're going to. Move it. Yeah, are we waiting? I move for approval and send this on to council. Okay, we have a motion for approval and we have a second. Any discussion? We're leaving it in, right? Yes. He didn't take it out. Good. It speaks to this. Don't you have something, Mr. Owens? No questions. Thank you. Okay. I did have one thing. Oh, it's too late. We've been asked to add pedestrian back in. Pedestrian down there under 3B, where it says various modes of transportation. I don't know if a pedestrian has a various mode of transportation or not. Mr. Chair, you're talking about page 1A, 3B, I believe, at the bottom of the page? We've been asked to add pedestrian in there at some point. Would that be okay with everybody? It's not there now. If I may, Mr. Chair, I can remind what happened. That goal or that objective used to read strive for positive and safe social interactions in neighborhoods, including neighborhoods that are connected for cars and pedestrians. And then last Thursday, the discussion led to changing that from cars and pedestrians to various modes of transportation. This is the common student. Cars, pedestrians, wheelchairs. Well, that's. Well, we did, but can we just add pedestrian there? Yes, can we just put after transportation, comma, including pedestrians? Do I need to withdraw my, I think we already passed it, didn't we? We did. So do I need to withdraw it if we're going to start editing? No, we're just going to let him do it. Okay, I'm going to amend it. Can you tell me what you want me to amend? Do we have to withdraw that? Do we have to go back and cancel? It's not a withdrawal because we voted. I'm going to amend it if it makes sense. I'm going to go home if it doesn't. If we want to add pedestrians, I would suggest not saying including pedestrians because you're going to have including neighborhoods that are connected and then including pedestrians. That's right. But you could say including neighborhoods that are connected for pedestrians and various modes of transportation, or you could put including pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods that are connected for various modes of transportation. We've had both suggestions. I like the first one better. Okay. How about you all? I'll amend my motion to move forward with the addition that Rochelle just read. All right. We have a second. For pedestrians and? That's the one. Okay. We have a second by Mr. Wilson. Everybody vote when you can. We just need to. Just for order of procedure, do we need to withdraw the current motion because we have already approved it? We just amended it. This is an amendment. They did, Mr. Wilson. It's been seconded, and we're voting. Okay, well, all right. That's Terry's. All right, next. Thanks, Mr. Chair. Next, the Fayette County Public Schools facility review. Brian Station High School, a couple of alumni up here. Thank you. Maybe figure out facts. Good afternoon. We are on page 6 of the agenda, item C under commission items. So, ma'am. And this is PFR 2011-6, and it is on behalf of Fayette County Public School System. The property is located at 201 Easton Road, which is the site of Bryan Station High School and Middle School. And that is this entire almost 40-acre property right here. We've got Easton Road, and then Bryan Avenue is here, and Easton connects Bryan Avenue to Old Parris Road. This is the Ritz Station subdivision, which is going to be discussed in this public facility review. At the end of July, well, this past July, the school system sold about an acre of land in the northeast corner, right up in here, to the urban county government for the purpose of constructing a detention basin and a construction easement, a temporary construction easement. And, Randy, if you could put that second picture up, please. This darker gray is the detention basin, and then this will be the construction easement. This is the location of the detention basin on the Ritz Station subdivision. The 2007 Comprehensive Plan recommends public education for this property, as it does for most of the schools and most of the facilities for Fayette County Public Schools. and that is in recognition of both its historic use of the property and its desire to continue use as a public school. We reviewed the comprehensive plan as far as sale of the land and there is nothing in opposition to this and in fact several goals and objectives which are all listed on pages 2 to 3 of your staff report support this and then there is text in the comprehensive plan that is extremely relevant to this project. It talks about it's relevant to the neighborhood situation and therefore supports this. It talks about stormwater problems in various areas of Fayette County and things that are being done to remediate those. This area has historically suffered from stormwater problems and flood issues, and that has been for like 20 to 30 years. And it was noted in the 1983 Kanoi Report, which was an engineering report that identified problem areas in Fayette County. that this was one area that needed remediation. In September of 2006, there was a 100-year flood event in Lexington, and this area, in the area of Wickland Circle, and if you could get the map back up there, Randy, please. The map. The original. Just for a second. This area, if you could move it up just a little bit, to down in this area here, suffered severe flooding problems and overflow of the sanitary sewer system. And that's just a few hundred feet east of the school property. And then in March of 2005, even before this happened, the Laclede Avenue and the Ritz Station subdivision up in here came in for a zone change request and the neighbors came in in opposition to this zone change request. A lot of you were here and probably remember that. But they came in and opposed that because they cited the stormwater problems and the flooding issues in the area, and they said that before any new development was done, the government should remediate the problems that were existing. And so they opposed that zone change, and they said that that was basically a reason for that. The applicant at the time for the zone change, the owner of the property and the developer of the property, agreed to do a detention basin that was 20% larger than what the engineering manuals require. And even with that additional 20% detention capacity, it didn't do much to stop the flooding in 2006. And therefore, they're building this new detention basin. This is part of a three-phase project. It's called the Wickland-Aniston Project. It's a three-phase project, and this is just one small piece of the puzzle here. They're doing this detention basin that'll, okay, and if you could put the color picture up now. Thank you. This right here is the northeast corner of the school property. Here is the detention basin on the Ritz Station property. This is going to be connected to and augment the detention basin that's on Ritz Station. And then, like I said, that's just one piece of the puzzle. And then a second piece of the puzzle will be this detention basin here. this is all still part of phase one. This detention basin here, they'll take down these two houses on these properties on McLean Circle and then do a detention basin there. And that is typical, as the one lady testified in the zone change about taking the houses down and putting in detention. That's typical of the way things are done a lot of times to remediate flooding issues. But that is another piece of the puzzle. and as of November 2006 it says in the comprehensive plan as of November 2006 that engineering head completed 64 of these projects 64 of these priority projects on their list capital improvement projects and they had 8 in the design phase and then I talked to somebody, to Mr. Lubeck who's here today and he said that they've done since then 10 more projects that have been on their priority list and they're still working towards remediating flooding issues in Fayette County. That's going to be for a long time. Environmental responsibility and sustainability is one of the main themes of the Comprehensive Plan, and upgrading community facilities like they're doing here and infrastructure improvements are just inherent in that concept. It's just part of the basic concept. One of the statements in the Comprehensive Plan also says that neighborhoods are the building blocks of community, and all the residents in Fayette County have a right to experience a high quality of life. So providing these improvements and the maintenance of the infrastructure is basic to the high quality of life in Fayette County. Fortunately, Fayette County Public Schools had property available that they were willing to sell to the Irving County Government for this improvement project, and so we are recommending approval of this because it is in agreement with the Comprehensive Plan and because this will facilitate a project that's needed to be done for like 20 or 30 years. And if you have any questions about the staff report, I'd be glad to answer them. And then Greg Lubeck is here from the Division of Water Quality in the Department of Public Works and Environmental Quality. All right. Any questions? Does he want to say anything? Greg, do you want to say anything in particular? No. All right. All right. He had a lot of input in this staff report. Let's have a motion if there's no comments. Ms. Phillips. Mr. Chair, I move that we accept PFR 2011-6. for the reasons provided by staff. Very good. Do we have a second? Second by Ms. Beatty. Everybody vote. Motion passes. Thank you. Thank you very much. Ms. Beatty, you have a motion? I'm taking it now. Are we done? No, we're not done yet. Not too late. Happy to announce that this is the last item on your agenda today? Yes. Oh, no. I'm going to leave. Sorry. Chris corrected me. It's not. This is a text amendment initiation that the staff would like the commission to initiate. Just in the last few months, the planning commission initiated and acted on a text amendment to change Article 27 for the courthouse overlay district, which the change included correcting code references in our zoning ordinance. This is very similar to that. Article 29 also requires that code enforcement respond to the Planning Commission with a list of properties that have code issues on a quarterly basis and also indicates that they still use BOCA. And we know now that that's not true. The staff would ask that the Commission initiate this text amendment so we can correct Article 29 as well. All right. Very good. Are you done? Yes. Anybody in the audience want to speak to this? Seeing none, we'll take a motion or comment. Mr. Chair, I'll move for the initiation of the Zone and Ordinance Tax Amendment in regards to Article 29, Neighborhood Design Character Overlay in the D1 Zone, as the staff has recommended. All right. Very good. We have a second. Second by Carla Blanton. Everybody vote when you can. That motion carries. Thank you. Does this mean that those properties that don't have an overlay will not wind up on a list? Not a list that you see. I'm sure there is a list that code enforcement uses to track the effects. within the county but it's not something they forward to the Planning Commissioner okay we have one one other item one other item we're glad to say mr. chairman this will give yourself a vacation day next Thursday we have a fifth Thursday month next week and it was originally scheduled for a work session we are happy to report that we don't have anything to bring to you and suggest that you give yourself the day off. So we can comp our time when we stayed extra today. Do we need a motion for that? Yes, sir, you do. Okay. Yeah, you want to make it? Make a motion that we're not here next Thursday. A second. That's going to need a little work. Okay, everybody in favor say aye. Motion carries. All right, one more motion to adjourn. So moved. Second. Motion carries. Thank you.