Music Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And we will begin with the approval of the minutes from October 27th. Mr. Allen. Mr. Chairman, I'll move for approval of, I believe there are corrective minutes of October 27th, 2011, which includes the conditional zoning restrictions. Okay, we have a motion for approval. Do we have a second? Second. Second by Derek. Everybody vote electronically. That motion carries. Do we have any postponements or withdrawals? Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, on page 2 of your agenda, item 2C, It's DP 2011-97 Liggett & Company located at 1211 Manchester Street. I've received an email from the applicants requesting a one-month postponement to the January 12, 2012 meeting. There were some questions raised at the subdivision committee, and the applicants are continuing to work on those questions and request a one-month postponement. Okay. Is there anyone here in the audience to speak to this? Okay. Seeing none, the Chair will entertain a motion for postponement. So moved. We have a motion by Ms. Beatty to postpone DP 2011-97. Do we have a second? Second by Mr. Wilson. Everybody vote. is hereby postponed. Thank you, sir. Any other postponements or withdrawals? All right. We will now go to Mr. Salee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There are several items on your agenda that qualify for consideration at this time on your consent agenda. Both of the final subdivision plans on your agenda are on the consent agenda as well. These are recommended for conditional approval by your subdivision subcommittee. First is on the very first page of the agenda, item A, plan 2011-128F, Loudon Park, block 17, lot 11, and a half of lot 13. This is located on Breckenridge Street. The other plat is at the top of the next page, page 2, item B, Plan 2011-129F, South Elkhorn Village. This involves property at 4379 Old Harrodsburg Road. In addition to the two subdivision plats, there are three final development plans that can be considered on your consent agenda at this time. The very first development plan is one such item. It's page 2, item A, DP 2011-95, Newtown Springs, also known as Trilogy Lexington Health Campus No. 3. This involves property located at 564 Asbury Lane, a portion of that address. The next item on your consent agenda appears on page 3, item E, of your meeting agenda. This is an amended final development plan, DP 2011-101, involving Lot 1 of the Tates Creek Center. It's also been known in the past as Bella Wood Shopping Center. This involves property at 4192 Tates Creek Center Drive. The final plan on your consent agenda is the next item on your meeting agenda, page 3, item F, DP 2011-102, Ingleside Apartments. This is an amended final development plan for property at 1035 Red Mile Road. At this time, Mr. Chairman, unless a member of the Planning Commission or a member of the audience or one of the applicants would like further discussion on these plans, the Commission can consider accepting the recommendation from your subdivision committee on these five items. Thank you. Okay, let's see what we've got. Does anyone on the Commission want to hear any of these plans? All right. Is there anyone in the audience that wants one of these plans heard? All right. Seeing none, the Chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Chairman, I move approval of the consent agenda as presented by staff. Okay. We have a motion for approval by Mr. Penn. Do we have a second? Second by Patrick Brewer. Everybody vote. Motion carries. Okay, so I guess we are going to set up for our first development plan. Good afternoon. The first item remaining on your agenda is on page 2 under number 2 development plans. It's item B. It's DP 2011-96 Shinaway Village Shopping Center, amended. This is an amended final development plan for property located at 1050 Shinaway Road. The property is located just south of Alumni Drive, just north of the New Circle Road overpass, and it is on the west side of Shinaway Road. The purpose of this amendment is to request a gas station in conjunction with... Excuse me one second, a new battery. Check. Again, the purpose of this amendment is to request a gas station in this corner of the parking area in front of the Kroger. Shinaway here. Creekwood Drive is here. And existing access points along Shinaway here and here, as well as two Creekwood Drive access points here, here. and then an additional one back here for the loading areas at the rear of the shopping center. This plan is proposing a 180-square-foot kiosk. It does include a bathroom as well as a canopy and five gas pump islands. It's ten fueling stations on the property. This plan had a previous amendment that was certified in 2002. It was certified for, I believe it was three pump islands, six fueling stations. That plan did not pull building permits within the five-year requirement under our Ordinance for Development Plans, so that plan either had to be re-approved or a new plan submitted. The applicant has chosen to resubmit a new development plan that alters the development. the subdivision committee recommended referral at its last meeting subject to the 12 conditions as shown on your agenda the primary the first seven conditions are sign-off conditions as related as they're tech normal under our technical review numbers eight and number 12 are additions to the development plan that were needed as a result of that review through the subdivision committee and through the technical process. The remaining three items, 9, 10, and 11, were three discussion items that all sort of relate to the same two issues, the first being a more simple issue, which is the access and navigation throughout the shopping center. With the addition of this canopy and the need for the tanks that hold the fuel, islands and landscape islands were coming out to make room for those, and there was a concern about the four-way stop that currently exists at this portion of the development and the need to make sure that it was very clear where traffic was supposed to go and that there wasn't a wide open area for vehicles to travel. The applicant did submit this revised plan that better delineated and improves upon the existing condition here to funnel traffic through and make very clear the points for access and circulation. The remaining aspect of the three discussion items was related to screening and buffering against the adjacent residential property on the opposite side of Creekwood Drive. There is a row of shrubs and trees that do exist on this property that you can see in the aerial photo above. The staff had to condition number eight to denote that the existing landscaping of trees along Creekwood Drive would be retained. However, there were other discussion items that were raised at the subdivision committee related to the height of the proposed canopy and the lighting restrictions related to the off hours as well as the traffic movement, the need for driver aisles, in addition to the canopy setback. This proposed plan does bring the canopy closer than what was shown on the previous development plan. There is a three-foot retaining wall that is shown here because the site does grade and slope towards the shopping center. So there is a need because of the requirement for the pumps to be constructed and put in a place where they are flat for them to go down some. So that requires a small retaining wall. There's one very similar to, I believe, the Richmond Road Crover, where it steps down slightly in order for that to meet grade. But there was additional conditions or discussion items related to the buffering, the distance, as well as the lighting adjacent to the residential property on the other side. The subdivision committee, in light of these three remaining discussion items, felt more comfortable with the referral of this plan. The applicant can address those discussion items because they were not fully resolved at the time of the subdivision committee. But if you have any questions on this development plan right now, I'd be happy to try to answer them. Are there any questions? Yes, Mr. Owens. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chris, show me again the location of the retaining wall. There is a darkened line at roughly this spot all the way to where the entrance, the existing access point is. That is basically where they will grade to flatten out the site slightly. There's contour lines. As you see, it slopes down this way, creak back in here. So they will come down right in this area about three feet. That's the height that's denoted on the plan. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Penn is next. Thank you, Mr. President. Chris, this development plan was approved how many years ago? It was approved in late 2001. It was certified in 2002. And it was certified for three pumps in the same location? It was certified for three pumps in approximately the same location. There was about 30 feet more of a setback of the canopy at that time. The previous plan had three pumps, so it had a little bit smaller canopy, and it came back in line with this building right here, straight across. And the reason for moving it forward is what? I don't know. You have to ask that. I'll do that. They could have asked for re-approval of the previous plan. In order to pull permits off of it, they chose to file a new plan that alters the development. Thank you. Chris, since this plan was approved in 2002, is that what you said? Yes. 2003, were the necessary environmental permits obtained at that time for underground storage tanks? That would be a part of the approval for building permits. I couldn't speak to what's happened post the approval of the development plan. That would all come through the permitting process for construction plans. I don't know if we ever got to the construction phase. Okay. Well, that would be something that I'd want to know. Any more questions? All right. Thank you. Next, we'll hear from the applicant. Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, my name is Bob Cornette with the Roberts Group. I'm here to represent Kroger's. If we have questions I can't answer, I do have two representatives from Kroger here as well. Just a brief history. This was a Winn-Dixie shopping center. Winn-Dixie closed at the time Kroger had us prepare an amended development plan to add on some additional areas, a pharmacy drive through, some additional loading docks. And at that time, gas stations for Kroger were still relatively new. That was 10 years ago. The original plan was a three-pump island with six dispensers. Since then, through studies, it has been realized that a five-pump island is the most efficient from a cost standpoint and return on investment. The canopy in this orientation that we've submitted would pose a shorter canopy visibility wall towards the neighbors on the opposite side of Creekwood than running lengthwise down the parking lot. It also was tucked into the corner to have the smallest impact on parking. The shopping center doesn't have an abundance of parking spaces. it does meet code. We have taken comments from the subcommittee meeting as well as some questions, possible suggestions Ms. Copeland might have passed on through planning and taken some of those into consideration. When we submitted this plan, instead of the standard prototype building with the bright red color system, We did introduce an earth tone color system with tans instead of the bright red. It does have a brick facade around the kiosk to match the existing shopping center buildings. And the canopy height is 19 feet to the top with a 3 1⁄2 foot band around it, which puts the bottom of the canopy where the lights are mounted at 15 foot 6 above the concrete pad. We did talk to Kroger's fuel special people, and they said we could lower the bottom of the canopy down one foot to 14 foot six if that was required. That would put the top of the canopy at 18 feet instead. There has expressed some concern about lighting. Our lights are not mounted on the surface of the bottom of the canopy. They're recessed up in like can lights, so the cutoff angle is not 90 degrees out. You're not looking at the light bulbs from a side view of the thing. It does shoot straight down. They are 250-watt metal halide bulbs with 70-watt spots over top of each of the dispensing units. We did go out and investigate the trees a little more, pulled some fruit, some leaves from the trees, took some more photographs, a landscape architect has verified that they are breadth repairers. They are starting the typical growing together right there in the crown where they all come out. So they're mature. They're 20 to 25 foot in height. There is a hedgerow, a burning bush that runs along Creekwood Drive. All of that is intended to remain, and we will fill in where there are voids. We have even at lunch had a discussion and have agreed that we can reduce the dry vile width between the canopy and the retaining wall five feet to generate an additional five feet of green space and protect it for the root zone, which puts it, the retaining wall would almost be at the drip edge of the tree that way. So I know Ms. Copeland was concerned about saving these mature trees, and that is an attempt to do even more. If any of these trees die, as a result of this construction, Kroger has agreed to have new three-inch trees of a more appropriate species, a shade tree and not the Bradford pears because of ice damage, wind damage, and so forth that's inherent to the Bradford pear tree. those would be replaced and be guaranteed. There was also a little bit of discussion about the possibility of noise from the pump allens. The volume on the speaker at the pump allens can be controlled inside the kiosk. So if there is a noise issue, we can control the volume, or if necessary, completely disable the speaker systems. There has been some talk about the possibility of replacing an open speaker system with a handset, and that is being investigated. I don't really have an answer for you on the handset, but we can control the volume of the speakers. behind the wall instead of just putting a handrail Kroger's has offered to also put in an ornamental fence a raw darn looking ornamental fence we need a handrail there anyway behind the the retaining wall so this would just spruce things up just a little bit more at the subcommittee meeting I made The statement that I have been advised is not 100% correct. I was asked about the lighting after hours, and I said all of the lights under the canopy are turned off, only the lights on the dispensers. We checked with SPG, who is the Kroger fuel people, and they have informed me that that was slightly wrong. There are two lights over the kiosk that remain on at nighttime after closing for security purposes, and the lights on the dispensers are actually turned off. So I wanted to correct that statement that I made at the subcommittee meeting. We feel like this is a good plan. The reason for relocating was to minimize the impact on loss of parking. We're putting the shorter side of the canopy towards the neighbors. The color scheme is more like a residential community. and we just hope that you all will give consideration. Okay. Are there any questions? Yes. How many parking spaces will you be losing as a result of this? This is a B6P neighborhood shopping center, and it really wasn't based upon the number of parking spaces. It's based on your vehicular usage area and your building square footage. I think we lost 38 parking spaces. Okay. I had one other question. There is some concern about increasing traffic. Do you, through market studies or anything, can you tell us a little bit more about people's patterns in terms of they would only be using this if they're already on the street in the Kroger, what the percentage might be of new traffic you would be introducing into the area? Well, we haven't done a traffic study of this particular store, but Shinaway is not a major arterial highway. The users of this fuel center are going to be people that normally travel Shinaway Road anyway. What we have done from the benefit of the computer and the plus card system have been able to tell that 40% of the sales made at the gas kiosk are made using the same... A sale in the store and at the gas center are made on the same day based on the plus cards. 40% of their sales are already shopping at the Kroger store itself. I can't tell you if it's the same trip, but I can tell you the same day they bought fuel and shopped for groceries as well. Okay, Mr. Owens. Yes, thank you. You mentioned in talking about the lighting, turning off the lighting and so forth, hours after closing time, what are the hours of operation for the gas pumps? This gas center will be open the same hours as the store. It would be 6 a.m. until 11 p.m. Any chance of this store becoming 24 hours? No. Okay. Thank you. But even if it did, the fuel center still closes at 11, doesn't it? Even if it was a 24-hour store, Beaumont is an example of a 24-hour store. That fuel center still closes at 11. Thank you. Ms. Coffman. Okay, Ms. Beatty. This is a follow-up of Ms. Blanton's question. In subdivision committee meeting, we discussed a little bit about other gas stations within the vicinity. Has there been a study to determine whether there is a need for an additional gas station in this area? We do, Kroger does market studies, and based upon the location of other Kroger fuel centers, there is a need. They wouldn't be spending this kind of money if they didn't feel like there was a need. Also, I think one of the gas stations that would be considered to serve this area would be at Tate's Creek Center. You all just approved on your consent agenda a project that basically will close a gas station at Tate's Creek Center in order to build a bank there. So we're going to be losing some pump islands in this area, so these would basically be replacing the number of pumps that are over at the existing station at Tate's Creek Center. Hello. I just have some questions. Is Kroger or your client willing to go on record limiting the foot candles, limiting the decibel level, limiting how long lights are going to be on and put it on the plan, including maintenance of the trees? which means preventive maintenance, not to mention whether you would build a brick wall or not versus a fence, like a pierced brick wall for screening. When you have a retaining wall in a public area along a sidewalk, you have to prevent people from falling over it. Right. So the fence is automatic. It's not something for the neighborhood. It's for your own legal protection. But would you take the retaining wall and use that as a footer and put a brick wall above it so that they really have some screening, like six feet of brick wall? Just something to think about as we go forward. You don't have to ask me now because I realize you've got to have a conversation with them. Well, we spent a lot of time today talking about what the possibilities are, and what we can do, or what I can authorize right now that Kroger's has agreed to, is as far as the maintenance of the trees, yes, we can certify that on the front of the development plan. The ornamental fence was something above and beyond the handrail. Now, as far as redesigning the wall from a modular wall to a cast-in-place wall with a brick wall on top of it, that's something we would have to look at. As far as the lighting goes, yes, we will put on the plan at what hours those lights are on and off, and which lights are on and off. What about foot candles? Well, the foot candles are shown. I submitted a light-level foot candle plan to this commission as part of our submittal package. And I don't remember the exact levels, but I think 22.8 was the maximum at the center of the canopy. And at the perimeter of the canopy, it was one-and-a-half foot candle or less within 15 feet of the edge of the canopy. And since the elevation change, we're going to be three feet lower than the street and being recessed lights. We're limited to those foot candle levels. And then we've got decibel level. This is just something to think about as we go forward because maybe that doesn't interest the neighborhood. Well, as I said, if we have to, we can control the volume of that speaker inside the kiosk. And if it's necessary, we could completely disable that speaker system. This is a commitment here in speaking. I'm trying to get a legal arrangement on paper. So that's why I'm saying decibel level. I don't know how that's determined. by the enforcement people, but down the road they could very well have decibel-level equipment. So let's just, rather than having a goodwill handshake agreement, I'm trying to get statistics down on the paper. We will make any of these binding elements or limitations or restrictions on the development plan. Yes. Okay, Mr. Paulson. Going back to your market studies and some of the traffic issues, my parents live very close to there, and I know Shinaway has already got a bit of traffic, people escaping from Tate's Creek coming down Shinaway. In your market studies, do you have any information about how much traffic is already coming up and down Shinaway, how many people are coming to that store, and how many more you may expect to attract because of this? I'm assuming that's one of the things you're trying to do. I know you mentioned that 40% of the people who use their Kroger cards to buy gas are buying them on that same day. Are you expecting to have more people come to the store from this, I mean, from your market studies? I am just sort of curious. And, again, what impact might this actually have on traffic? And, again, knowing this area, I know it already has that light. Alumni is already kind of, it's not kind of, it is crazy. It backs up past my parents' house daily. So that's my question. Is this going to add to that traffic issue? I know some of the neighborhood residents are very concerned about the possibility of a signal being added in that area and where that might go. Would that be attractive to you as well? As far as traffic signal goes, it's not something Kroger wants or would request. I don't anticipate that air increase. I mean, we have not taken a current traffic study and applied any increases that could be anticipated. But I guess the answer is no, we haven't really done a traffic study, especially as far out as Alumni Drive, of any impact. We would hope that we would draw more customers there. Do you guys know how many you have coming to that store right now? I know there's two other Kroger's that are fairly close. So you've got three Kroger's in a pretty close area. I'm assuming you know the counts. But I'm just curious as to how many are coming to that store already and what the expectation is. I'm assuming in the market study you have an idea of how many more people are going to come to the store. That's what I'm curious. That might give us kind of a proxy for the traffic increases. I'll let Todd answer that. Good afternoon. My name is Todd Metzmire. I'm with the Kroger Company, 1600 Armsby Station Court, Louisville, Kentucky, 40223. This store currently, based on transactions through the registers each week, averages about 13,500 customers on a weekly basis at this particular location. I apologize. I didn't look at the surrounding stores, so I don't know those off the top of my head of the other two you were asking about. We anticipate this addition of the fuel station. The main objective is to serve the existing customers who are already shoppers at the store, who are accumulating the fuel points to get the discounts, and who have to travel out of the neighborhood to other Lexington area stores to get the discounts redeemed. That is the main objective. there will also be an additional increase in customer count anywhere from 2.5% to 5%. Okay. You done, Derek? Yeah, that was my main question. I'm not the best at math, but that sounds like maybe 675 at the increase, 675 people a week, which just seems like a lot of expense to be servicing existing customers. Well, it is an additional expense to serve existing customers. However, we strongly believe in the convenience factor. we want to enable those existing customers who are already shopping with us to redeem the the valuable points right there on site rather than traveling somewhere else it is also our hope that we will increase the amount per transaction spent in the store because there is a fuel station on the parking lot because of the way the the program is set up it rewards customers for larger, you get more points based on the more you spend inside the store. So it's our hope that we drive the business that's already there and increase the sale per transaction. Okay. Ms. Copeland? Yes. Mr. Todd? Yes. What are your three biggest Kroger stores in Lexington? Are you asking about the square footage of stores? Yeah, Footprint. Footprint, the two marketplace stores are nearly identical in size, the one at Manowar and Richmond Road, and then the one over at Beaumont Farms. Third in line, I might have to defer to my engineer. I don't know exactly which one would come there. Okay, well, that's good. How many pumps are at Richmond Road? Richmond Road has seven pumps, and the Beaumont location has five pumps. When you say five pumps, does that mean five nozzles? It means five islands which you can access from both sides, so that there would be ten nozzles on a five-pump station. Equal to this one? Equal to this one, yes. And the one on Richmond Road has how many? Has seven, so there will be 14 nozzles. Okay. And those stores are roughly twice as big as this one? Actually, yeah, definitely twice as big, maybe a little bit more. Three times as big? Close to it, yes. So this is sort of overkill on pumps compared to the others or nozzles. at the Richmond Road Manowar location the outlot that was available for us to lease upon the expansion of our store to the size that it is now would only fit the seven dispenser there was basically there was no more room than to get that one on there so that's why we would have traditionally We probably built a nine dispenser, which would have had 18 nozzles. The one at Beaumont, Beaumont could be still a work in progress. When we relocated our store at Beaumont to the other side of the shopping center, we elected at that time to leave our existing fuel station, which is a five dispenser in that location. We have retained space on the other side of that shopping center to eventually move it and enlarge it. And that just has not occurred yet. Do you intend to increase your square footage or your footprint at this location of the grocery part of the store? Not at this time, no. Okay. Okay. Okay. Ms. Jones. Thank you. One other question. It might be for Mr. Cornett, I'm not for sure. Back to the retaining wall, the height of the retaining wall, do you know what the height of the retaining wall would be? Well, the preliminary grading plan showed roughly three feet. We would prefer it to be three feet or less because there are less restrictions from a building inspection permitting standpoint, as well as limiting it to three feet keeps us from having to put in geogrid, which would do more damage to the root ball system or the root system of the trees. We could go with the gravity wall system similar to what they put on Clay's Mill Road if we had to, if it had to be any higher than three feet. But no, three feet is as high as we're anticipating. Okay. All right. Thank you. Mr. Cornett, you probably can answer this. Can you speak to the permitting process for establishment of underground storage tanks for storing gasoline? Is there a state process? Is it a federal system? Is there a local approval? Well, from the local approval, we don't have to address the underground storage tanks per se, but because it is a fuel center and has the potential of a spill during filling by operators, the entire canopy area, the low end of the canopy area will be encircled with the trench drain, that the water, any runoff from underneath the pad, goes into this trench drain that goes into an oil water separator, which is approved by the environmental quality here in Lexington. That's the limit as far as fuel permitting goes locally. Then it goes to the state. The state fire marshal's office handles underground storage tanks permitting and removal. Do you have permits in hand already for this particular site? We would not even apply for them until we get through this body. Okay. And the approval process stops at the state fire marshal's office? Is there any division of water quality at the state level that requires approval? No. Okay. Are the tanks, are they single-lined? Are they double-lined? These tanks are double-lined. They're monitored 24 hours a day, seven days a week. They're not only monitored for leaks of fuel into the groundwater, They're also monitored for leaks of groundwater into the fuel system. So if there is a barrier, an air barrier between the two tank walls with sensors in there, and if any water comes in, an alarm is given at Kroger. If any gasoline goes into that, an alarm is given at Kroger. You know, it's more than just inventory control because if you have a leaking tank, You know, when gasoline was 18 cents a gallon, you know, tanks leaked all the time, and nobody worried about it because it was so expensive to replace them, and we didn't have the environmental concerns and didn't realize what we were doing at the time, I guess. But today when you're paying $3 plus a gallon for gasoline, it also becomes an inventory control issue as well. We don't want any more leaking into the ground for environmental issues and for cost issues. So these tanks are double-wall fiberglass tanks, and they're completely embedded. The tank grave is about 15 feet deep and they're completely embedded in stone with monitoring wells in them as well. Thank you. Mr. Cornett, there was a diagram being passed around here. I think it came from you. And I'm presuming it has to do with the lighting. Yes, sir. There's a grid system, a bunch of numbers, and it works its way out. Can you briefly explain that? Well, it's a point-by-point calculation done by the lighting designer. One second. Is it possible to put it up on the camera? You don't think it's readable? Yeah, that's what I'm talking about. Every light fixture has a particular pattern of admittance, just like the difference between a floodlight that you might use to light up the whole front of your house for your Christmas decorations, or a spotlight, which limits just one area. Each of these light fixtures, the commercial light fixtures, are run through a laboratory, and they do a standard test called an IES, which can be brought into software that can do a point-to-point analysis of what the lighting levels would be emitted from a particular light fixture. These fixtures are 250 watt fixtures and the dark boxes, rectangles on each side of the pumps are the light fixtures. So it looks to me like we've got 12 250 watt fixtures. And then over each dispenser there is a 70 watt focus light, a spotlight, that just lights up the control panel where you punch in your numbers and stuff. The small numbers right in front of the kiosk where you would be talking to the kiosk operator is about 13-foot candles. It's 12.9 right next to that column. The maximum would be right between two fixtures. So I think I see a 25.9 just to the left of the kiosk. I'll be honest with you, I see a 28.2, and I think 28.2 is the maximum anywhere on the site. That would be getting some contribution from two of the 250-watt fixtures as well as those two 70-watt focus lights. So that would be the maximum light level. Then as you go out away from the light fixture, the numbers should always get a little lower. And then we don't have any distances on here, but right behind the kiosk, we've got about two-foot candles in the parking area. And over on Creekwood would be the left side of the, out at street level, At the back of the retaining wall, it would be 1.4 down to 0.9 tenths of a foot candle. So the light levels along through there are minimal. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Ms. Copeland. The direction of the traffic, if I was pulling in to get gas, could you explain that to me? on that diagram? Specifically, if I was a box truck. A box truck. Most likely you would come in off of Shinaway and come directly in here and get your fuel. And then you would exit down one of these isles and back out Creekwood, or you could exit and go back out to Shinaway the same direction. but I want to fill up my tank, drive me through where I get a nozzle. Well, you could come in off of Creekwood, either come in around here and pull into this pump or the outside pump and then go back out the same direction. Okay. It may be a bit of a challenge to bring a box truck in here, but automobiles would have no trouble at all coming in and filling up at any one of these and going back in any direction or down to the cover store. Okay. Because I think you said that the lower part of the canopy was 14 feet. Wasn't that right? 14 feet, 6 inches. Well, that's as high as this here about what it is up there. If you're 6 feet tall, there's another 6-foot person and about 2 feet above you. So why couldn't we lower the canopy except for where it's closer to Creekwood Drive, and in essence it would give more of an awning to the light? Well, there are some standards that we have to comply with. Okay. To start off with, the tanker truck will be coming in here. The tanks are right in here. We'll be coming in, and he has to go under the corner of that canopy. So the tanker truck itself has to go under the canopy at this end. Okay. If we lower this down any lower, and I can speak from family experience, you can plan a lower awning, but you can't control the pickup truck with the camper and the air conditioner on top of it. My brother had a canopy over a drive-thru window that said 12-foot clear. Well, a guy that shopped there all the time came through, and one day he had his camper on on Friday afternoon and took the canopy down. So we still have to accommodate pickup trucks. They may have a camper on them. They may have an air conditioning unit on top of that camper, which is built in. So there are some standards for the minimum height on the canopies. If you look around town, you cannot find one that's any lower. Okay, I understand your thought process, but this still seems very high. Okay. All right. At this time, we're going to hear from the citizens. How many citizens want to speak? Okay. Mr. Chairman, before you hear from the citizens, we would just point out for the record that the staff has distributed to the Commission several emails that we've received, a petition, and also a letter from the Council Office. Thank you. Very good. Okay. I don't have the sign-up sheet, but the citizens may come to the front and speak three minutes each. Give your name and address, please, before speaking. Hello, my name is Bruce Thomas. I live at 1063 Shinoahe. I believe I spoke to a lot of you last week during the meeting, the subdivision meeting. This is all about the big guy versus the little guy. Kroger has had years to prepare for this. This is looking at my retirement, my property value. I've got three minutes. So I'll try to do the best I can. I kind of get that warm and fuzzy feeling when I talk to Kroger with no disrespect about how this is going to look. They're going to lower it. The lights aren't. You can't go across the street and see these lights, obviously. It's not going to have any noise. They might put some dampers on the noise. It comes down to the fact that an elephant in your front yard is an elephant in your front yard, no matter whether you paint them beige or orange or whatever. This is my Jimmy Stewart moment here, I guess. This is going to concern our property values. I've worked my entire life. My investments are my own. Now Kroger's is going to come in. we've got a week and a half to prepare for this. They're going to come in and put a gas station. I look at all of you all, and I said it last week. I know you're appointed. You aren't elected. You do this as volunteer. You put in all your time and money. But you're here to do what's best for the citizens of Lexington and for the Lexington community. You all would not want this in your front yard. I know that. You can't say it. you're part of a membership here. But our neighborhood does not want this. There's plenty of traffic that goes through. This is just going to increase it. I'm concerned about environmental issues. I'm concerned about lighting issues, noise pollution. They haven't done any studies on the traffic. But as living across the street for 25 years, I can tell you there's a lot of wrecks in that area. You have this more traffic, there's going to be more wrecks. Then the city's going to come along and say, we're going to put up a stoplight. That stoplight's going to back up traffic. They're going to have that little tick, tick, tick, tick that you hear outside that's going to be right in my front yard and voices saying it's time to cross. Ten, nine, eight. You know, this is stuff that I don't want in my neighborhood. I don't think my neighbors want it in their neighborhood. All I ask that, you know, you talk about a need. There are six stations within a two-mile radius. If you go a neighborhood speed of 30 miles an hour, you could be at any of those in four minutes. I don't see where there is a need for an extra gas station. And ten pumps. That's as big as the one on Richmond Road, practically, or one of their other ones. We don't need that in our neighborhood. This is a quaint little shopping center. I like the shopping center. I'm all for it. I'm all for Kroger. gas pumps we don't need. When they say, well, if one of the trees die, we'll put in a three-inch diameter tree. That's that big. How high do you think that would be? Six, seven feet? It'll take another 20 years for that to grow up to protect the neighbors from staring at this gas station. Like I said, I'd like for you all to vote your heart on this. Vote what you do if If you were in our position, vote what's good for the citizens and the neighbors, not what's good for Kroger. I appreciate Kroger. They don't need the business there. They've got plenty already. Thank you all. Okay, thank you. Is Jeannie here? I've written my thoughts down because I really don't want to be passionate today, I'm going to try my very best to stay on focus here. First of all, I just want to say that I'm a mother. I'm a wife. I have two daughters. We've lived there for 12 years. This is my home that we're talking about. I live at 1065 Shinoahe, and I have lived there. I'm happy to live there. It was just two short weeks ago that we learned about this plan to put the gas pumps in. I wish we'd had more time to organize during that time of opposition because I'm concerned that a lot of the other neighbors don't know what I know here today. We try to get the word out as best we could in a very short period of time, but I don't think we've reached everybody, and I wish we'd had a little bit more time to make sure people had known. And as Bruce just mentioned, like many people, my equity is in my home. So this is a very big deal to us for many reasons, beyond the fact that it's my home. It's the fact that that's where my equity lays. And I'm a working person. I took off work to be here today. Everybody couldn't take off work to be here today, but my home is my investment. And with the economy as it is, I recognize that you'll see on Shunaway, those who drive through, there's houses that have been for sale already on Shunaway that they can't sell. What happens to me when I want to sell? And you've got other people, you know, other houses across the city, and even in that neighborhood that are for sale also. You've got a supply to choose from. Why are you going to choose to be right there? I look out my front door and there's the lights, the traffic, the gas pumps, the noise from the gas stations. It's a concern for me. And I'm asking you as this commission to consider just smart development, which should be somewhat based upon the increase of property values and trying to maintain the sustainability of neighborhoods. And that's basically what I'm here to appeal is trying to keep the charm that we feel like that we have right now Most of our neighbors, we have lived there for a large number of years, and we are concerned about our neighborhood. When I hear about Kroger talking about adding trees and bricks to help disguise it, I find it completely frustrating that for some reason they feel like this is going to be a compromise to the lights. As Bruce just mentioned, it's an elephant regardless of what color it's painted. I don't care if you recess the lights, it's still spotlights out my front porch. That's what I see. I also wanted to add about the tree situation. They've talked a lot about Crixie. I live on Shunaway. There's trees that have been there on Shunaway to block the shopping center. They've been removed many years ago. They died. They replaced them with a small crab apple. They've never been replaced. You'll drive by and you'll see the holes in the shrubs where the trees used to be. There is no camouflage for me, and I've not heard one mention today about any trees on Shunaway. In my driveway just five months ago, someone took the tire off my car on Shanaway. We have continued to see crime. My neighbor, someone took a gin bottle through her window. All I'm trying to say to you is we don't want any more deterioration of our neighborhood, and a gas station could not be good for the charm and the reputation of our neighborhood. Additionally, the health and environmental concerns that go along with this, I'm not a scientist, I can't speak to this, but everything I've seen on the Internet leads to the fact that there are links. Benzene is a carcinogen, pure and simple. It's also linked to respiratory infections. My daughter has asthma, so what do I do as a parent? I have to think about moving because I can't risk anything for my child. We had a conversation with a man from Kroger's, and he indicated that we asked him, So how many times do fires and spills happen at Kroger? And he said, oh, he said it happened once in Denver. We did a quick Google search and found all kinds of situations that were related to spills or fires just at Kroger's. We did that through a quick Google search. So I understand this is a business for them. This is my home. This is my neighborhood. And I think we deserve better answers to the questions that he gave today, a lot of very iffy answers. I think we deserve more. I did want to also address the comment he made about the 40% recurrent shoppers. That also means that that's an increase of 60%. So I appreciate the questions that the council had related to traffic because we are quite concerned about the increase in the traffic. At a minimum, I'm asking you as the council to please visit this area so you'll understand how close these houses are. And I know you saw it on a Google map, but our houses are literally right on top of this shopping center. It's a unique area in that way. So I'm asking you to first just visit the street, see what we're talking about before you make a final decision, and you'll understand the reality that we're basically, it's a very unique plan, a very big gas station on top of homes, and a very otherwise historic street in Lexington, two closest houses. and you and the Planning Commission have the opportunity to continue to enrich the charm in Lexington. This effort of Kroger is not about need. As has been said, there are six gas stations. We don't need any more gas stations. This is about greed, and I'm sorry. I have greed, too. I want to keep my home equity. I want to keep my home, my neighborhood. I want to try to maintain as it is. And I'm asking you to consider the residents who live there every day, those that may live there in the future in our neighborhood sustainability. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Next. My name is Bill Wilson. I live at 1065 Shinaway. I also appreciate the questions that you all asked. Let me walk over to the map a second. Hopefully I can speak loud. You need to take the microphone. Is this working? Okay, great. This is a nice, convenient map for Kroger's purposes, but if we were to zoom out a little bit from this picture, what we would see is homes all the way down Creekside, and we'd see my home, which is across Shinaway, Mr. Thomas' home here. So this is a nice picture of their site, but it doesn't give you all perspective of where we live in the relationship to the proposed station to us. If you all can imagine, I think Ms. Copeland rightly pointed out, that's a 7-foot doorjamb. If we do 7 and plus 7 and about another 4, we've got 18 feet. This is what the canopy is going to look like. And if your home is over there, you're going to have a set of shrubs about this size, as Mr. Copeland pointed out, and you're going to view that gas station probably about where that other podium is. So, the three-foot bushes and the 18-foot canopy creates a massive opening for not only the folks on Creekside, but the liquor stores between us and the subway and the gas station. But we're going to see it. We're going to see that light. So, when you look at that ceiling and you think about that shrub, please think about the people that live on Creekside and the people that live on Chanaway. I had a whole page of other thoughts to share with you all, and my wife and my neighbors have already shared most of those. What I would hope that you all would do is base this decision on current information. We were told in the first part of our activities that the original plan was approved in 1981. 1981. So I Googled it. What was happening in 1981? Ronald Reagan was our president. It was the first year they sold Post-it notes. And it was the first year that IBM sold their very first personal computer. Now, there has to be a lot of things that have changed in our neighborhood since they made the Post-it. And what I would like to see is a traffic impact study. I would like to see an impact on the property values. Is it going to affect the property values? and I'd like to see and would hope you all would make your decision based on the facts not on emotion necessarily but what is the reality that exists there today and what reality will we have once this is if this is put in and I'm strongly opposed to the gas station being put in thank you very much for your time okay thank you next please we're recording this that's why we ask that you always speak into a mic and give your name and address thanks My name is Betsy Carnes, and I live at 3500 Creekwood Drive. And in all honesty, I'm relieved to know that it's still Creekwood Drive, not Creekside or Creek Road. It's Creekwood Drive. And I strongly oppose a gas station in the Shinway Village Shopping Center. It would be a disaster for the area residents. Those of you familiar with this area know this is not like Heartland or Beaumont. It is a much smaller situation. Creekwood is a little bitty street, and it dead ends. There's no way out. And the traffic is already more than it should be on that little street. But Shinaway has become more and more traffic-y in the last several years. It's kind of like a little Tate's Creek some hours of the day. So I think that you need to consider this Kroger situation as unique from their other Kroger areas. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Next, sir. My name is Rick Fox. I live at 3501 Colt Mack Lane. That's two blocks from the shopping center. So unlike everybody else, I'm not going to have a direct impact with lighting and so on. I can state to you, though, several different thoughts that I have on the proposed gas station. The speed limit on Colt Mack Lane is supposed to be 25 miles an hour. People go at a minimum 35 miles an hour, which is a 40% increase over what the speed is supposed to be. And that includes squad cars not going anywhere and school buses. We constantly have people rolling a stop sign onto Shinaway, constantly. we've had mailboxes across the street and on my side of the road knocked over five or six and that's not just once but more than once we have lost light posts at the corner of my driveway which is on Shinoe no fewer than three times in the 15 and a half years that we've lived there so we're not even taking care of the problems that we have right now as the man from the Roberts Group pointed out, this is a neighborhood shopping center. This is not a gas station proposed to be on a major thoroughfare like Richmond Road or a big development like Beaumont. This is a convenience neighborhood shopping center. And I would just hope that just like was just mentioned that you all would consider what it would be like if a gas station was dropped next to your house. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Next. Hello. My name is Dimitra Kaftani. I live across the street from Kroger's on Creekwood Drive, 3516 Creekwood Drive. I was very surprised to find out about that about two weeks ago from my neighbors. I don't find that appropriate. I think as residents of this city, we need to become aware of developments of such size in our neighborhood. That is first. Then today I heard that that was approved in 2002. So that's another concern that I have, that the city is not making us aware of major changes in our neighborhood, and that's very important. Most of my neighbors express the concerns that I have. I'm going to reiterate on some of them. Major fire hazard for our neighborhood. I live across the street. If a big truck manages to make it out of the canopy, and as the truck is coming out, it's taking the canopy along with one of the gas nozzles, what tells me that the fire is not going to erupt? And I live across the street. What kind of protection do I have when that happens? I haven't heard anything from the Kroger speakers. Another concern I have that I didn't hear my neighbors talk about is the quality of the soil that the tanks will reside. Have studies been done to find out if the quality of the soil would be able to handle the weight of the whole construction plus the tanks and the gasoline? I didn't hear anything. Also, I didn't hear any studies being done on if a non-business district, because I don't consider that shopping center a business district like the Manowar and Tates Creek, Prager area. What kind of profits, I would like to hear more specifics, What kind of profits do they expect a gas station in a neighborhood like this to bring to them? Is that a step that they take recklessly in order to increase their profits because of the economic crisis we're in? Well, we need to see some more specifics on why and how they approach such an expansion in that Kroger Plaza. That's all. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. My name is Roseanne Mandia, and I have lived at 1045 Shenery Road for the past 23 years. I frequent the shopping center regularly. In fact, every other day I drive over to the GroKogo grocery stores. On a number, many occasions, as I am entering the main entrance from Shenery Road, I've had to slam on the brakes because of cars either oncoming to me or coming from behind the liquor store or from Rossi's to prevent collisions. and I'm just afraid there's going to be a real nightmare in traffic snarl and you're going to have a lot of safety accidents, a lot of accidents there from the increased traffic that's going to the gas station. And especially at this time of year at Christmas, I have experienced and heard several accidents around the holidays right in front of that main entrance. The second safety issue is I'm the neighbor that had the gin bottle thrown on her bay window last winter, through her bay window. And that is not a fun experience to go through. And I'm just afraid if you increase foot traffic and car traffic there, that it's going to become more urbanized, more populous, and there's going to be a greater risk of safety to all of us residents. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Next, please. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and Commission members. I'm John Piccolo. I'm president of the Lansdowne Merrick Neighborhood Association, and I would point out, to clarification, I'm not speaking for the Lansdowne Merrick Neighborhood Association. I'm speaking for myself. We haven't had enough time to discuss that among our membership. And I would point out that the area that Shopping Center is located on and where the previous people have spoken is not a part of our association. Shinoway is kind of the dividing line, if you will. But I'd like to support. I've lived at 3041 Monta Vesta for over 40 years, and so I'm a considerable distance away from that. I actually live about two blocks from Tate's Creek. So I'm very supportive of what the neighbors have brought up, and I would point out one other thing I think that's very important. is I think that the traffic has been underestimated. I frequently use Shinaway to avoid some of the traffic on Tate's Creek, particularly at early mornings and late afternoons. And I think if you drove down Shinaway 5 o'clock in the afternoon, 6 o'clock in the afternoon, I think you'd understand that. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak. Very well. Thank you. Anyone else? A couple more signed up, I guess. Okay. All right, very well. Next, we will have any rebuttal from the petitioner? I understand the concerns. I've listened to them and tried to figure out how we address some of these. One concern was the missing trees along Shinoahe. We didn't really address that. That wasn't even something we were aware had happened. Kroger is a tenant in this shopping center. They don't own the shopping center. But we can make commitments for Kroger as a tenant. But if there are trees missing along Chinoa that need to be replaced, we will work with a shopping center developer. If there are required trees, then they should be planted back. We don't have an issue with that. And we would work with a shopping center owner to make that commitment. I think maybe the interpretation of the 40%, 60% that I told you about, the plus cards, can be misconstrued. What I'm saying is that 40% of the people that bought gas that day also bought groceries that day. I'm not saying that it's a 60% increase in customers because you probably don't buy gas every time you buy groceries. You probably only buy gas every week or two weeks, depending upon your driving habits. And you probably may not have your shopper card with you that day, but it really is not a 60% increase in sales when you add a fuel center. As far as the concern about the stability of the tank, of the soil in the tanks, we do geotechnical borings, analyze the conditions there, the depth of the hole, the bearing pressure that's put on the hole. In fact, half the time we have to, well, every time we have to put ballast in to hold the tank in the ground because tanks have a tendency, if they're empty, to float out of the ground if it gets wet. So the soil capacity, the bearing capacity of the soil, that's not an issue. And as I said, everything around the tanks in the hole is pea gravel size with monitoring wells in it. I can't address how adding a gas station will create additional crime, and I can't really tell you about the existing traffic concerns on Shanaway or Creekwood. We haven't seen any accident reports and stuff like that, and basically it wasn't a requirement of amending a development plan. So I'm sorry we haven't addressed some of the concerns, but they weren't really a requirement that the zoning ordinance addresses for a B6P zone. And the B6P is the same zone as the Tates Creek Center. It has the same allowances for the same uses as Tates Creek Center. So a gas station is a permitted use in the B6P zone. All right. Thank you. Was there any one citizen that might want to have any rebuttal to information he's just said? They say that 40% of the people that come into the shopping center would go to Kroger's and to the gas station. To my way of thinking, that means that it's going to increase the number of trips into the shopping center if a person wants gas for the other 60%. That our shoppers at Kroger's also, but don't buy gas on Tuesday. They come back on a day they might not go shopping, but they come into the center to get gas. That's where I think a lot of the increased traffic is going to come from. I would just ask that everybody does go by this location, see the size of the shopping center and the homes around it, and go at different hours of the day. I would hope you'd be able to do that because you'll see how congested it is. It's difficult enough right now. There's a crown in the road coming from Gainesway that is difficult sometimes to see. people come speeding along going both ways, and it's very difficult to turn out of either Creekwood or the main entrance and turn left. And that's right now. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Is there any rebuttal from staff? No rebuttal. Okay. So at this time, is everyone's folk that wants to speak? Okay. At this time, we're going to close the hearing and turn it over to the Commission, and the Commission may still ask questions of authorities if they wish to. Mr. Penn. I'd like to ask staff to tell us what number 12 is. What were the original restrictions on the DP 83-151? There was a number of conditions. There were eight conditions at the time the plan was approved in 1982. It wasn't conditional zoning. There were development plan restrictions. Five of those notes are currently still on the plan. They relate to items about signage. One of them in particular talks about buildings, how to brick coordinated design on all sides. There's three left that dropped off sometime between 1983 and 2002. They're related to pylon signs, flag poles, and the front facade of the roof line that need to go back on the plan. They're not related to screening and buffering of any outlots or anything like that. But the last one was a requirement for Bradford Pears, which are now BAM Street trees, so that note probably doesn't need to go back on the plan, but the other three do. But they aren't related to screening and buffering. Thank you, Chris. Yeah. Okay, Ms. Jones. Chris, before you leave. Yeah. Go back, and as far as the original development plan that they had and the reason that they're coming, is this an amended plan? This is an amended plan? Do you mean the 2002 plan? Yeah. I heard something a moment ago that they had elected to come with an amended plan. If they did not make the changes, would the plan that was originally in place still be viable? Barbara, if you can throw that last sheet of paper I gave you. from Article 21? I think so. No, no. Okay. Article 21-4 gives timing restrictions. The first one is related to preliminary subdivision plans and the requirements within two years. The second one is about a five-year window that the developer or applicant has to pull building permits on a final development plan that's certified, or it needs to be re-approved. It's not like they need to – they could have brought back the previous plan, simply done a re-approval, or in this case they elected to bring back a new plan with changes. Okay. Thank you. If I may, I'd like to ask Traffic and, I guess, Jeff Neal to add any comments that he'd like to. since it seems like traffic is an issue here. Let's see if he can shed any light on the subject. Hello, members of the Commission. My name is Jeff Neal with Traffic Engineering. I probably can't add too much to the discussion. as it stands right now, other than our emphasis was on the internal circulation. There were some existing problems out there with the main entry off of Shinaway. We worked with the developer on to try to make it a little bit better and define who's supposed to be where inside the parking lot. We really didn't concentrate our efforts outside the development. I may be able to answer a few questions, but depending on what they are. Do you have any numbers as to usage on Shinaway? Usage of Shinaway? Vehicle usage on Shinaway trips per day. No, I do not. I can make a phone call and see what I can find out. Some of the literature we had, I think, from a neighbor indicated that there was like 9,000 trips per day. I'm just curious. Anything that you can... Yeah, add to it would be greatly appreciated, I believe. Okay, I can go see what I can find out, and also possibly the traffic generated per pump at a different location. Thank you. Okay, I'll be back in just a few minutes. All right, thank you. Ms. Beatty. This is a follow-up of Mr. Owens' question to staff. Can you clarify again, Chris, on the original development, the one that occurred in early 1980s? No, there was no gas pumps on the 1980s development plan. There was no gas? That was added in 2002. It was filed in 2001. It was certified in 2002. And in 2002, that plan was a modification of what we have now. Yes. This plan modifies the 2002 plan. The 2002 plan was they could have pulled permits from it and built them and been done. They did not do that. This plan modifies the current one. And so today they could have asked for the 2002 plan to be re-approved. Correct. It would have been the same process. They would have gone to the subdivision committee and back to this body. It would have been the same process. Now, the question that one of the residents had regarding notification of residents, can you... There would have been no change in notification requirements under the ordinance or the laws, whether it's a re-approval or a new filing. Okay. Okay, Ms. Phillips. I wanted to ask a question to Mr. Query, the tree guy. Tree. He's the urban forester. My apologies for demoting you there. Mr. Query, can you tell us about that there have been concerns about the Bradford pears and some holes in the screening? I don't know if those are street trees or if those are trees whose responsibility falls within the shopping center owner. Are we talking about Chinaway Road? I believe that they're required landscaping under Article 18 of land subdivision regulations. I don't think they're considered street trees per se because they're not located within public right-of-way. However, I can tell you that the Bradford pair, regardless of whether it's required landscaping or a street tree, is no longer acceptable. Right. I remember we took care of that a couple of years ago. But my question is, whose enforcement would it be to ensure that those trees, whether they're part of the landscaping or street trees, who would be responsible for ensuring that they come into compliance? We would have to take a look. Actually, building inspection would just review the current landscape plan to make sure that maybe it has changed from the time they were originally installed. Given that the plan comes back before the Planning Commission, there might need to be some changes made, some additions to the landscape plan. Thank you. And I don't know if you can answer this or staff, but there's a screening requirement, a zone-to-zone screening requirement on this site for the B6P zoning, and I'm wondering if the... Well, the street right-of-way would provide most of that. Thank you, Mr. Query. The only place where extra buffering was done, the zone-to-zone where the property immediately abuts, the other zone where there's not right-of-way was to the rear creek side with the residential back here. Along both these other frontages, there is the public street right-of-way already. There's no street. Okay. So any kind of screening that's provided by the landscaping is associated with the landscaping requirement for the city? Correct. In the VUA, the vehicular use area screening. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any other commissioners? Yes, Mr. Wilson. Yes, just one clarifying statement. earlier you heard a gentleman by the name of Bill Wilson make a presentation here. His full name, as I understand it, is William H. Wilson, which is my name. But just for the record, I know visually you will not be able to see these records, but you will be able to hear that we're not the same. We're not kin to one another. There is no relationship here, even though I do respect him. He is a very fine gentleman. Mr. Wilson, the staff will be sure to include those in the minutes. That's duly noted. I don't know which one is insulting by the same name. I don't know. Okay. Anyone else on the commission wish to speak? Anybody want to explain how they're going to vote? Go ahead. I don't remember whether I was involved in this in 2002 or not. There's been a few water going under the dam since that time. I can't talk about the screening and that type of thing until I get in my mind whether I know it's permitted use, but whether it's a good use or not. I've got to get past that before I can talk to Marie about the height of the canopy or all this type of thing. I'm still struggling with the fact that the limited amount of that subdivision, And the fact that they had nine years to build that and didn't gives us an opportunity to decide whether that was a good decision in 2002 or not. And so I'd like to hear from some of the other commission members about that subject before we get into the subject of screening and lights and all that type of thing. Okay. Mr. Packer. Well, as usual, when you defer to Frank, you learn something. I'm there. As far as I look at this, this is a neighborhood shopping center. The neighborhood has spoken very clearly that they don't want this. I think, having driven it many times myself, there is a serious traffic issue. I don't see the need for a gas station. If you're looking to add convenience to the customers, as I think the Kroger gentleman said, a lot of your customers are here, and they don't want it. So I make a motion for disapproval. Okay. We have a motion for disapproval. Do we have a second? Mr. Chairman, you may want to hold off just a moment before the second. Since everyone is looking at me, we had been reviewing, to a certain extent, approval of this plan as a ministerial action. and basically the standard is the commission may modify or disapprove the development plan if it finds the plan does not comply with the requirements of the zoning ordinance and when applicable the land subdivision regulations or if it finds there are existing or potential flood, drainage, traffic, topographic, health, safety, nuisance or other similar problems relating to the development of the subject property. this isn't a process that requires the adoption of formal findings like in a zone change but it does require that the reason for the disapproval shall be fully incorporated in the commission's minutes and that any plan, any development plan which seeks to amend the original development plan is also subject to these same standards of review So I guess all I'm saying is I would want to make sure that it is very clear in the motion the findings that support the disapproval based on what I just read. I need to amend my motion to include something specific out of that list. It sounded to me when you made the motion that you mentioned traffic and safety and possible nuisance issues. Those are three of the factors that can be considered, and I just wanted to make sure the minutes would be very clear as required by the ordinance. Okay. I amend my motion to include those three specific reasons for my motion. Okay. We have a motion for disapproval by those findings. Do we have a second? I'll second. Mr. Penn, you second. Okay, Frank Penn second. Okay, now is there any discussion? Yes. My question is, this is not a use consideration. The land use, gas stations are permitted use in the B6P. That's correct. So our denial of this development plan would, in effect, be a denial of that use, potentially. and the use is a permitted use. So I don't know how we can deny the gas station per se. I think the best thing that we can do to protect the citizens is to do what we can to provide for screening and to shelter the neighbors from the impacts associated with this because the use is permitted. Okay, very good. Ms. Jones? Yes, and as far as my question, I guess the question would be to Mr. Brewer, who made the motion parliamentary, I'm not sure how to go about this, but in asking traffic for some information and so forth, he did disappear momentarily, and he's back now. Would it be all right to allow him to state what he found or learned? Thank you. That's adequate, yes. I'd like to just say thank you to Rob Hammons and the NPO to give me these numbers. Basically, he confirmed that the Shinaway volumes for the average daily traffic on Shinaway is about 9,190 cars per day. So that was correct. And the trips generated by the gas station is 1,628 per day based on 10 gas filling locations. And I took the liberty of taking 60% of that based on earlier testimony. And that's about 977 trips added to the shopping center based on what's already there. And is that an appreciable increase? It's an increase. It'll probably be noticeable. I'm not sure what all else is going on there in front of the shopping center. It sounds like I need to take a trip out there and see what the site distances are and things of that nature. But we have improved the internal circulation so everything should move a little bit better after this development goes in. Okay, Ms. Beatty. I want to follow up with the motion. I'm sorry. Mr. Owen, are you finished with traffic? Thank you. Yes, for the moment. Okay, let's go ahead and finish, and then I'll come back to that. Okay, Derek. It sounds like it's about 10,000 trips a day, about a 10% increase if we do 967. Is that high for a road like Shinaway? Well, most of this is probably going to come off of Shinaway. In a neighborhood shopping center like this, people are not going to drive miles out of their way to get to this Kroger's to get gas. They'll have to pass up several other gas stations to get there. So it will be more of a community-oriented. People that are passing on Chinoahe already will decide to get gas there. So it's not going to be an appreciable increase on Chinoahe. I guess I'm not sure if I'm following. There's going to be an initial 967, but you're not sure if they're going to be coming from within the community or from where else? Well, I thought the question was, would this increase the traffic on Shinaway? Right, but my question is, I guess my biggest question is, is 10,000 trips a day on Shinaway, is that high for a road like Shinaway compared to other roads of similar size in Lexington? That depends on your perspective. That is reasonable for Shinaway, one lane in each direction. That's manageable. At times it's going to be hard to make lefts, like some of the testimonies said, but it's well under capacity. Does Shinaway have a C or E or F label? Is it not big enough street? I would have to make another phone call. Okay. Ms. Beatty. I think there's a couple of questions on traffic. Okay, I don't see her signed up here. Okay. All right, go ahead. Thank you. So just to clarify, the 900 additional trips, when I think of additional trips, I think of traffic that hasn't been on Shinoahe in the past that is going to be on Shinoahe just to go to the gas station. But you're saying that's not what's meant by that, that the people coming into the gas station most likely already are traveling on that road or at least in that vicinity anyway. That is my opinion. It's kind of hard to quantify that until people actually start showing up. But I think that is the intent of this gas station, is to capture people that are already on Shinaway. There will be more turning movements definitely out front than there are currently. Okay. Thank you. All right. Do you have a question to him? Okay. You may go ahead. Jeff, this will be a place where people can cash their Kroger points. and so it's going to, in my opinion, funnel people all the way from, if you drew a line from Beaumont to Richmond Road, it's going to take the center of that pie-shaped area and those people are going to maybe buy their groceries at Romney Road but drive to Chenoweth and cash their points to get discounted gas. So I don't think it's just the Chinoawee road traffic. I think it's going to be a magnet to Kroger shoppers who want to cash their gas points. Now, they probably are only going to come there once a month or twice a month at most, not every day. But it's a magnet distribution point for Kroger points. And I think the nearest places are Beaumont, no, Regency Road and Richmond Road. Huh? And Shell Gas Stations, yeah. But it's going to be a caching place for your points. I'm sure there will be a certain percentage that would be willing to drive that far. So that's more than just Chenoweth Road traffic. Okay. Any more questions for Jeff? All right. Ms. Beatty. This is a follow-up to the motion because you had called for discussion as chair, right? Correct. And the discussion comment has to do, is directed to staff. In 2002, when this was approved initially, was there not any discussion around traffic, safety, lighting, all of the issues we're discussing now when it was approved? Are there minutes to reflect if there was the same concerns 10 years ago? I don't have the minutes with me to check at this time. And, Mr. Penn, you were the only one on the commission. Can you address that? No, I don't remember at all. Okay. This just seems a little odd to me that this was approved ten years ago, and all of the discussion, and I'm sure it wouldn't be at the same magnitude because population increase, et cetera, but the area of Shinaway is pretty much the same today as it was 10 years ago. And so I'm trying to sort of come to grips with what were these not issues then? Well, I would say, for one, that I don't think Kroger has been there that long. Kroger started there how long ago? Four or five years ago? In 2002, we changed the way that it's in over to a program. Oh, so you were there then. So there was a fuel center. All right. Okay. Okay. Mr. Penn. Ms. Beatty, I appreciate your confidence in my memory, but I don't have the confidence. I'm concerned about the fact that they could have done this for nine years. and the neighborhood has been living there by and large. The same people that were there nine years ago are probably still there now. And when I see a letter from their council person, when I see these people here that say they don't need it, then it comes down to two things with me. Does the profit center of Kroger's outweigh the concern of the neighborhood? Now, I'm a little concerned about the B6P and whether it was permitted use or that type of thing, and I'll yield to law on that. But common sense tells me that if it was really an issue for Kroger's, they wouldn't have let their development plan run out. They were renewed to us and not bring a new development plan in. And, you know, you hate to vote against business any time you do it. but I think the community's wishes outweigh the desire of Kroger. And I can be persuaded the other way if it's permitted using a B6P, and this is a missionary thing, but I don't hear a ministerial thing. I don't hear laws saying that it is a ministerial thing. I think it's a close one, but I don't read it as that, and I would certainly like to hear more about whether it is ministerial or whether we do have this latitude. All right. Mr. Berkeley. Realizing that a gas station is a use that's allowed in this zone, and we may have to deal with this in the future, to me, I do not have the answers to the questions about the traffic and about sight distance. I happen to frequent the shopping center, so I kind of know the situation. And I cannot make a decision at this point to approve it without that kind of information. All right. Would it be appropriate for us to allow these answers to be brought back to a future commission meeting without a denial and start the process over with a redesign, allow us to have a postponement, to have a traffic study performed, secure a copy of the minutes from the planning commission meeting from 2002? We have a motion on the floor, but I suppose he could withdraw and we could have a motion for postponement. If that's what you're asking us to postponement. That's what I'm offering and asking. We would rather have a postponement because we're going to try to solve the problems if it's denied today because it is an approved use. we'll figure out another way to resubmit the plan, and instead of starting all back over through TRC, Subdivision Subcommittee meeting, and then back here again, if we can take the questions and the unanswered questions from today, postpone it for a month or two months in order to perform the traffic study, in order to get a copy of the 2002 development plan, the Planning Commission minutes, bring that back with those answers. You have until the 29th of January, according to when your time is up on this. Would the motion maker want to? The applicant, that is basically a deadline for the protection of the applicant. Okay, let's use it. To tell the commission to timely act. So he can take longer. He can take longer. Right. If he wants to request a longer postponement, he can do so. Okay. All right. Well, let's see if our motion maker wants to withdraw his motion in favor of a postponement. Wait, is that further discussion? Yes. What did you say? I was asking there was further discussion. On that? I'm asking you right now. No, I understand that. I was hoping to get some feedback from my fellow commissioners whether they prefer to move on or not. Personally, I'm convinced it's not the right thing to do. I'm comfortable with my motion to move forward today. However, if the sense of the commission is that the commission members need additional information to make this decision, I don't want to force anybody's hand to decide something without adequate information. I personally think we have enough information to move. There's others that feel like we should postpone. I'd like to hear that and make a decision. We'll continue discussion. Yes. To Mr. Brewer, I think that we owe it to the applicant because this is a permitted use. And approval of the development plan is ministerial. I mean, we just heard that. And the only ways in which we can deny it is if there are some issues. The applicant has proposed to try to resolve those issues. I think we owe it to the applicant to at least withdraw the motion and contemplate postponing. I think that we can probably resolve a lot of the questions. Okay. I appreciate your concerns on that, Lynn. I was told by law that the basis that I made my motion was sufficient. You are correct. So I don't think there's a legal or ministerial reason not to. However, out of deference to my fellow members, if the majority of us want more information, I'm fine to withdraw. I just haven't heard that yet. it's not as ministerial as you might think because it's an amendment to the development plan. Well, it's what we call semi-ministerial. I mean, you have to determine whether it meets all the regs and zoning ordinance requirements. But in this case, even if it does, if you find the traffic, the health, the nuisance problems that make this site inappropriate for it, you are correct. I think that your basis for your motion is legally supportable by the standards in the ordinance. So I just wanted to clarify it's semi-ministerial. All right. Mr. Owens. Thank you. I would agree with Ms. Phillips as far as giving the opportunity to let the applicant postpone and work on the difficulties here and come back with another plan. I'm kind of of the opinion that most of the traffic that we're talking about is already on Shinaway. And it's going to be a convenience. As far as I'm concerned, it's a convenience for the entire neighborhood. I can definitely appreciate the concern of the neighbors that are here today that have expressed concern. but hearing what I have heard, it definitely sounds like the intent is to try and find another way if this way doesn't work. So I would offer to allow a postponement and see what they bring back. And in the meantime, I'm sure they'll be working with the neighbors and their concerns over the issue. Okay, Mr. Berkley. Ms. Copeland. Chris, when we had the 2000 plan, did they mention nozzles? I mean, how big was the gas station that they were talking about in 2000? It was three pump islands. That's six nozzles. Six nozzles. Correct. Just like BP on Lansdowne. So when the gas station was approved, it was a much smaller scale. It was a smaller scale plan, yes. In fact, gas stations in 2002 were smaller scale, period. I think that has got a lot to do with this. We've all been to Hilton Head or Kiowa or some other place where they have gas stations in close proximity, but it's a whole different animal than what we're seeing here. If we could get closer to that, where we're more of a neighborhood rather than a regional distribution point with a whole lot more sensitivity, then I might hop off the fence on this. But right now, I cannot support that. And I think you've got to do a lot of work and give us legal things that, even after Kroger shuts down the gas station and somebody else comes in, that would still be on the record what the foot candles, what the decibel levels are, what the height of the brick wall fence is, how high the canopy is, maybe have a two-step canopy, all sorts of things that you would have to come in to make it a neighborhood, maybe reduce some of the pumps. We're talking about scale and sensitivity. Okay. I'm going to allow one more, and then we're going to have to take some action. Frank Penn. If Mr. Weirwoffer draws motion, certainly I will draw the second, but the neighbors have come down and spent their time. I think we need to decide whether we want this gas station here or we don't. Then you make the decision of what you want it to look like. I hate for us to have to go back and start this thing all over again and start down the road of do we want it, do we not want it. And I don't know how this commission will vote, but right now I think we owe it to the neighborhood to tell them that we do want this gas station here or we don't. and then if you know that you do want it here, then you can focus your attention on what you're trying to do here. Okay. A couple of comments and then I'll make, this sounds weird to me making the decision for this to go forward. The existence or the approval of the gas station as part of this zone to me is, that's given. But if you look at this and you say, okay, a gas station is allowed here, and they decide to build the entire parking lot into a gas station, that's still technically permissible under the rules. However, we as a body have a responsibility to the city to say that's inappropriate. That would be inappropriate to put there. In my opinion, this is inappropriate. And I think that having heard with due respect to everybody, I think we should go forward with the motion. Okay. I guess I ought to get in on this a little bit. As someone that has lived on about every street in Lansdowne, Merrick, I guess, and in fact I live in a house that backed right up to the shopping center and built many houses over there even back to 1974, so I'm pretty familiar with the area. but I'm having a hard time seeing how the, that you can even see that canopy with all the trees and the landscaping and that sort of thing from way across Shinaway. I believe Creekwood would see it, but it's behind a building that's probably 16 feet high, that building on the corner, and they could build another building there. They could build a restaurant or an out parcel there. But I think the concessions that Kroger's made and that they've talked about and they seem willing, I mean, if they make everybody mad over there, they're not going to buy anybody using it anyway. So it's in their interest to work with everyone and make a nice gas station. But that's just my two cents. Okay, so let's call for the question, and the motion was to deny for the reasons that was stated, and it was seconded, and so everybody vote when you can. that motion fails I do have another motion Mr. Phillips Mr. Chair I move that we accept the applicant's request for postponement I second that okay you're moving for postponement seconded by Mr. Wilson Can we just make that a continuance so that all of this will still be part of the record? And can we have a specific date? The Commission's next. The motion's definitely yes, because it would have retired. No. Listen. Votes were five or six. Mr. Paulson claims he voted the wrong way in air. No, it's going to be, it was 6 to 5, nay, now it's going to be something else, yay. Just for clarification, could we just have a vote again so that we have it properly on the record? I have to finish it. I can read. Restate the motion. All right. Restate the Mr. Let us read the motion. Is that what you're suggesting? We have it on the screen. We can read the prior screen, and then if you want to revote, we can do that, I think, as well. Okay. As long as the record is very clear that this was an inadvertent. Ms. Phil points out that we do have a motion on the table. And we have a second. Yes, but in essence, the vote on the original motion was apparently not accurately reported. Okay. So does that take her motion? I think we need to go back. I mean, as Bill said, he can put it up on the screen. We tried to put it on the screen, and we just have to read it from the station here. Apparently it cannot get on the order. Okay. I will call for more. All right, Mr. Russell. If the motion is made and the second is made, another motion, that kills anything else, another vote. And I'm not much of a parliamentary chair, but I do know that. Is your microphone on? Sorry. Restate that, please. I'm saying that the motion now, we have another motion on the floor, which in effect takes off the motion that was originally put on the floor. So no re-vote can be taken in this sense. That is a point of order. That is not according to parliamentary procedure. All right. How many know that's right? How about it? Well, Mr. Chairman, the one way out of this is, of course, is that you could, parliamentary-wise, vote down the motion to promote, I mean to postpone. Then you can go back to your original motion, but you can't go back there now. you've got to get out of the motion that is currently sitting on the floor. Yes. We have a motion on the floor and a second, and he's saying once that's done, the other motion has to stand the way it was. I haven't the foggiest idea how you'd resolve that, but the legal just told us that we could redo the vote, so I would say that we'd redo the vote. Absolutely. All right. What does legal say? I think you could do it either way. If this motion, if you choose to decide that you want to hear this motion to continue this and it fails, I think what was the majority decision under the previous record can move that that motion be reconsidered and then the vote can be corrected. That is one way to handle it. I think you can also find that it was simply a clerical inaccuracy and that actually final action, if you do a revoke, was taken on that first motion, in which case the plan, the decision is made. I think it's probably up to the chairman which way he wants to go. I'm not sure, frankly, whether Robert's Rules of Order specifically address, wait a minute, you recorded my vote wrong. You know, I think that's what I'm concerned with. It's not where someone changed his mind. It was that wasn't actually my vote. So I think you can do it either way as long as the record is clean. You can certainly decide to vote on this continuance motion, and then if it fails, that would be an indication that you want to go back to the other one. Okay, I'm going to rule in the favor of Mr. Wilson. That seems right to me. that we have a motion on the floor and that we are going to call for the question on it. And it was to postpone or to continue this hearing until some point. We were trying to get a date on this. I'm not sure what date. Mr. Chairman, if it were two months, your subdivision meeting in February would be the 9th. The 9th of February? It would be two months. One month would be January 12th. And we probably would need two months with the holiday. Okay, is February 9th okay? All right. So it continued until February the 9th is the motion. And Mr. Brew, did you have some discussion? Yeah, my comment is we made a decision to vote on my motion. had that passed, had the vote been accurately recorded, the second motion would not be on the table. So in my opinion, we're taking the wrong path here. We should vote on the original motion again. If it comes up that somebody's changed their mind and it changes, I'm fine with it. Again, I'm fine with getting more information, but we went through this before I said I'd like to continue the motion. And in respect to the neighbors who have come down here, I think we owe them the vote. That makes sense, too. Mr. Chairman, the only thing, this is not an issue of whether or not you are for or against. This is an issue of parliamentary procedure. It is clear and simple on that. If that were the case, if his argument held, that means that anyone could reclaim their vote at any particular time. There is no stipulation as to when a vote could be not reclaimed because there is no time limit as such. Having said that, the best way parliamentary procedurally out of this is to either vote down your proposed motion motion, and then you can go back and make your new motion. But right now, I would stake every poker chip I have that you cannot do essentially what is being proposed here. You can't do that. That's just out of order. Okay. And the fact that we're continuing means that at the end of that continuous, when they present a case again, that you could vote it up or down then. If the vote is to continue. My view is the number of votes were there not to. I just don't. Okay. Well, maybe not. All right. All right. Well, I'm going to call for the question on this to postpone. So your motion is to postpone. Yes. Continue until February the 9th. So let's vote. So we vote no. All right. That motion carries 7-4. so it's continued alright this time we're going to take a short recess Thank you. Today is probably so right now. Okay. My phone is not charging. My iPhone is not charging. Do you have your iPad with me? I do. I couldn't get out earlier. I found out about father's man swinging your rebote. Okay, yeah. I put it in my iPhone, but it's just chubby. I'm going to clear the courtroom and wait a minute and get some order. Go ahead. You're ready to start. If you turn to page three, we're going to look at DP 2011-98 New Market Phase 1, Unit 9. This property, when it was reviewed by the technical and the staff, we recommended postponement. We had 15 conditions. during the time when we came back to the subdivision committee the applicant came back and brought us in a new revised plan to review and since that time we've had a chance to take a look at it there should be a copy of revised conditions on a tan sheet for you all but now we've taken those 15 conditions down to 10 I was just going to let you know as far as location. We're over here. We're going to have Polo Club Boulevard heading down towards Deerhaven Lane. This is in the New Market area. We have I-75 to the west and then Polo Club. We have a street passage mound that has been developed across the road, across Polo Club. Now they're bringing it this way. What they're bringing this in for is to create two lots, preliminary for one lot for the Fayette County School Board, looking at purchasing and then purchasing, leaving this as a greenway for the regional detention basin. With that, as I said, the staff reviewed and we came up with new conditions, and we now recommend approval. The first seven conditions are truly just sign-offs. We would like to have additional condition number eight, which is denote the conditional zoning restrictions for the tree canopy adjacent to I-75. This was reviewed at the time of the original zoning, that there was considerable trees along the I-75. We want to see that information. Nine, resolve the transition, the cross section for the Passage Mountain Lane. This was discussed at subdivision from traffic, that they would like to see an additional lane in front of the school. So we want to make sure that we get the proper street cross-section in front of the school. And 10 is to provide that the Planning Commission makes a finding that the plan complies with the provisions of the EAMP. And Tom Martin is going to present that to you all. If you all have any other questions. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, as you are aware, whenever you have an expansion area plan, it is necessary that this body find that it is in compliance with the expansion area plan. You should find at your seat a white piece of paper stating the AAM compliance report. The plan that you see before you today, as explained, presents you with a 15-acre elementary school site and an 8.5-acre greenway site. The area is situated off Polka Boulevard and I-75. The elementary school is an important public facility that is recognized both in the EAMP and your comprehensive plan as necessary to our community and important facilities in the expansion area. The EAMP does not specify specific locations for schools. However, your 2007 comprehensive plan does recommend locations, and there is an elementary school recommended in this general vicinity. And, of course, the exact location ultimately depends on the ability for the school to negotiate a site with the landowner, which is what you see before you today. There is also a requirement of a community design element. because there is no residential development with this plan. There are no community design elements per se. However, there will be pedestrian linkages provided by greenways and sidewalks along with the boulevard, which has a bikeway trail. These design elements will exist today, and they will be continued with future development of the property. Passage Mound Lane, which Ms. Galt mentioned to you, will be constructed in phases along the front of the property. The first phase will be constructed to serve the school site. Traffic was concerned about the width of the street and would like to see it be a collector width to serve the school, and that is because so many people drive and drop off their children, it creates a traffic problem. The condition that you see on your plan is to resolve really the phasing of the construction of Passage Mound Lane. It is the intent to have it built to serve the school, and then the rest of the street along the frontage will be constructed in conjunction with future residential development that it is designed to serve. As I stated, Polo Club has been built in this area, has been completed in this particular area of the development. In terms of other infrastructure, the collector sewer system is in place. The local sewers will have to be constructed by the developer and hook into that system. The stormwater system that exists in the expansion area is a regional system. this plan will construct one of those required features. You see that on the screen, and it's this area right in here. That is identified in your expansionary stormwater master plan as a permanent pool. Due to safety concerns and liability concerns that the school system had, that has been redesigned to be a dry detention basin. It still functions in full compliance with the overall stormwater management plan. with that staff has recommended that you find that this is in compliance with the AMP for the conditions that you see on your plan on your report there are three conditions staff believes that it does comply with the AMP because of the public school facility does comply with the intent of the plan Polo Club Boulevard, sanitary sewers, and the stormwater feature that you see are all present or will be constructed. Therefore, this is in compliance with the plan as well as providing the required greenway, which is a required aspect of your AMP as well. If you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer them. Any questions for Mr. Martin? Okay. Thank you. Thank you. applicant. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm Dick Murphy. Rory Cayley and Chaz Height and Ralph Rochelle are here with me today on behalf of the Clark family, which is the owners of this property. I put in the record before I got up the affidavit regarding the posting of the sign and the photograph of the sign, so that's in the record. And as the staff had mentioned, since the plan which you discussed to the subdivision committee, we submitted the new plan, which has widened the pavement in front of the school from 31 feet to 36 feet. Jeff Neal has seen that and agreed to that. We will work with them on where we transition that back down to the normal width of a street. That's a condition that we have to resolve that as well. and we will work on the timing of all the construction at the final subdivision plat stage. So with that, we are in agreement with the conditions as proposed by the staff on the revised sheet of conditions of approval which they have given you. All right. Very good. Thank you. Any discussion from the Commission? If not, we'll entertain a motion. Yes. Move approval of DP 2011-98 New Market Property, Phase 1, Unit 9, for the three reasons outlined by staff along with the ten conditions. Second. Okay, we have a motion by Ms. Blanton and a second by Ms. Beatty. Everybody vote? Correct. See if you can vote right this time. I think that motion carries. I don't see anybody want to change their vote. Okay, motion carries. While they're setting up, we're going to take care of the... I don't think... Bill, did that motion include the finding that this was in compliance with the EAMP? Okay, I thought it was just approving the plan. It included the three conditions, three reasons plus the conditions. Okay. Yeah, she covered it. Okay. All right, now we're going to have a motion for the release and call bonds. Mr. Chairman, I move for approval of the release and call of bonds as noted on the memorandum dated December 8, 2011. Okay, we have a motion for approval. We have a second. Second. Second by Mr. Wilson. Anybody vote? That motion carries. Now we're back on our agenda. Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, the final plan on your agenda today is on page four. Item GDP 2011-103, Angliana Avenue and A.G. McGregor Subdivision amended. This is a final development plan, an amended final development plan, to amend a multifamily development located on Angliana Avenue. And here's Angliana Avenue right through here. Here is the Curry connection. Half section has currently been constructed. This is phase one of this development. This plan, considering your discussion about expired development plans, this is an active development plan. This has been constructed. They are amending lot one of the development plan. Again, Angliana Avenue, Furry Avenue, here is their access point. You can see the seven buildings they're proposing to construct. Here is Ham Alley located here. This is public right-of-way. It's staff's understanding that the applicant has instituted a process to have this closed. It will revert and become an access easement at that time should the council close Ham Alley. The proposal that you do see before you, as I stated, is an amendment to the existing plan. They are proposing 148 units, 320 bedrooms. There are 288 required parking spaces. They are providing 325. The buildings are four stories in height, constituting just over 182,000 square feet total. Pardon? Three stories. I'm sorry, three stories. It's your other plan, I think. Okay, pardon. three stories, pardon me. They have reduced the existing plan with this amendment in this section on Lot 1 by 88 bedrooms. However, there are 38 bedrooms. There are 13 more units, but they've actually reduced the number of bedrooms, which reduces the amount of parking required. There are 49 less parking spaces on this amendment as well. This plan was originally recommended for postponement to your subdivision committee by your staff. The primary reason was this area here. The original plan had the maintenance building encroaching into an I-2 zone that adjoins this property. The primary concern the staff had was buffering and setback requirements. The maintenance building has since been moved with this revised plan. It is completely in the I-2 zone. That is a use that is legal in the I-2 zone. We do have a condition that you see on your revised sheet where we would like a note to fully specify and clarify the purpose of the maintenance building, and again, as it relates to the proposed development. But the plan also was revised to provide emergency access to Ham Alley. That was an issue on the previous plan because the layout had great big square buildings with courtyards. The circulation was not as good as this. You can see, again, the parking layout. Now you can get around the buildings. And I will tell you that fire was very happy to receive this, although it wasn't necessary because they changed circulation to allow good room around the buildings. But we are going to have that emergency access. And again, this is the only access into it, so staff would agree that that's a good idea. There are some pedestrian improvements that will be done. They are keyed to this development. They were approved and required at the time that the overall plan was approved. They do not need to construct them until now, and so that will be a part of this plan. The revised plan also addressed many, many cleanup conditions, and they have addressed those. You can see, again, you should have a handout of revised conditions. We have standard conditions of approval. There still remain several cleanup conditions of denote building dimensions. Correct note number three, again, that's just completing the wording that's required in that note. It's the note that refers to Article 16 of the Code of Ordinances. Correct purpose of amendment note, we want it very clear that the purpose of this amendment is to amend Lot 1 only. and then it is a late plan, and this will be reviewed by your technical committee next week, as a matter of fact. We have, again, resolved the proposed use of the maintenance building. Staff is confident we can work out a note with the applicant to that effect. And then we would like for them to identify the extent of the tree protection area on the plan and have that approved under the Urban Forester's approval, of course. and I'll be happy to answer any questions. All right, I think Mr. Penn has a question. Tom, when this original plan was approved, was Ham Alley supposed to stay open to the railroad? Ham Alley never quite reached the railroad, Mr. Penn. It stops in the back of the property. It was created primarily to serve a fire hydrant that was located back there. And the plan to do the improvements on Anglin Avenue, was that the bike lanes and the curbs? There are certain requirements required along the frontage of the plan. Yes, sir. Okay. Any other questions? All right. Thank you. Next we'll hear from the applicant. Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, Charlie Schneider with Brandcenter Carroll. I'd like to say we agree with all the conditions on here. I'd just like to seek your approval at this time for this plan. If there's any questions. All right. Any questions? Okay. Chair, I'll entertain a motion. Yes. Move approval of DP 2011-103 Anglian Avenue and A.G. McGregor Subdivision with the 12 conditions outlined by staff. Okay, we have a motion for approval. Do we have a second? Excuse me, one moment. Legal has pointed out that we may have miscounted, and there may be 13 conditions. Two. Yes, we did, in fact. Number 21 that's been marked through after 11 is actually 12, and 23 would be 13. So I apologize for that, but there are 13 conditions on the plan. I'll amend my motion for 13 conditions. Very good. It seems like we're having some trouble counting and all sorts of things today. Okay, do we have a second? Second. Second by Mr. Paulson. Everybody vote. That motion carries. Mr. Chairman, do you need a motion on the compliance report, or is that necessary? Compliance report? This property is not the expansion. Okay. Not on this property. I got you. Thank you. Is that all the development plans today, Mr. Salley? It is, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. All right. We've got a couple other things to do here. First, I need to appoint a nominating committee. This is due to the bylaws the first week of December. We're at the point of nominating committee to appoint the slate for January. and those people are Carla Blanton, Chair, Patrick Brewer, and Derek Paulson. Next, we will hear about the annual report from the Purchase of Development Rights and the annual report for the courthouse area. Thank you. Thank you. both of which are required by the ordinance. So we'll start with the Purchase of Development Rights Program. Each of you have a spreadsheet and a map in front of you. From top to bottom on the spreadsheet, you'll see that we are currently at 52.33% of our goal of 50,000 acres, and that is based on the offers that have been made in the current round, which is round 10. You'll see the breakdown of the total farms, equine farms, general ag, and other, as well as the number of donated easements. I just want to note that it's not, I wouldn't be too concerned with the types of farms, but just that we are conserving the farms, the soil, and the land, because those farms could change use. General ag could go to equine. Equine could go to general ag. You'll note that in the last round, the conservation easements acquired through donation and purchase, as well as the withdrawn applications and the reasons for withdrawal, the offers that have been made on acres. In the current round, we do have one withdrawn application in this round. The number of applications in round 11, which is F513, 36 applications on 3,000 acres. If you look at your map, you'll see that the dark green and the lighter green are the farms that have been acquired either through purchase or donation to the PDR program, as well as conservation easements by others, such as the Bluegrass Conservancy, which is the bulk of that lightest green color. I think we have one easement by the state PACE program in Fayette County. I can answer any questions you have about the purchase of development rights component of this annual report at this time. All right, are there any questions? Yes, sir. I haven't had a chance to digest this, but I know that our goal is to get 50,000 acres of farmland. Is there a time frame in which you anticipate that taking place? The goal is that it would take place by the year 2020. Within 20 years of adoption, and the adoption was January of 2000, adoption of the ordinance. So we're on target to reach that goal. And as a follow-up question, in fact, we don't meet that objective by 2020. Can we extend the objective? Well, I don't think that the – I think those are goals. I don't think those are hard and fast elements of the ordinance. I think the ideal is 50,000 acres certainly of purchased easements in the rural area within 20 years. It doesn't say 2020. So, you know, you just have to look at that was the year that the ordinance was adopted, and then the board was appointed, and then there were things that had to take place after the ordinance was adopted before we could actually implement the program. But certainly we could extend it and we could go for a higher goal if that was part of an action that you took in a later comp plan update process. Yes. Is there any sense that the last 50% is going to be harder to get than the first 50%? I know when you're doing kind of fundraising campaigns, the low-hanging fruit comes first, and then it's a little bit harder. Are you seeing that at all, or does it seem to be pretty consistent throughout the years? Well, as you know, we survive on an annual appropriation from the administration and the council, and we use matching dollars for your local investment, primarily federal dollars that are awarded from the Farm and Ranch Lands Protection Program. of which we've received about $20 million and $15.5 million from the state Kentucky Agricultural Development Board, and the local government has invested $29 million. So I think we're seeing a commitment to farmland conservation here in Fayette County. I think that on the federal side, they're funding programs all over the United States. and consistently we've received a lion's share, if not all, of the federal allocation for Kentucky, and we've actually accepted additional funds as they've become available from other states that haven't been able to provide that match. So we want to stay vigilant about matching that local investment and doubling and tripling the taxpayer's investment at all times. So we're going to keep working. We're going to keep working on the donations. The donated easements actually have generated a savings of $4.4 million to the local government, and those were easements that we did not have to purchase. All right, Mr. Penn, do you have? Yeah, Bill, it might be helpful to briefly explain the point system and how we rank these phones. Sure, thank you. First of all, I'll invite any of you to attend any of our monthly Rural Land Management Board meetings. But the acquisition process is outlined in the ordinance, which is on our website, and it's completely objective. It's a point and ranking system that's based primarily on soil quality, number of acres, road frontage, farm activities, farm improvements, cultural, environmental, historic, scenic, all of those values. Points are assigned, and whichever farm gets the most points, regardless of the ownership, rises to the top of that ranking. and then we follow that order of acquisition in rank order as long as we have funds. And so we can project after we have an approved budget or we have a sense of what our approved budget is going to be based on the applications that we've received, how far we're going to be able to go down the list. If someone does not sell their easement to the board in the year that they apply, their application automatically rolls forward into the next cycle. And then all of those new applications and the ones that rolled forward are reprioritized. Everyone, we look at all the points, we look at proximity. So if someone sells an easement that's right next door, you're going to get some more points. So you're going to move up in your ranking. if someone else your next door neighbor applies and there's at least 120 acres between the two applications you're going to get some more points because it's a batch of applications that have come together so there is an opportunity to move up in the ranking and you know some people that applied in 2002 had to wait you know six or seven years before they sold their easement but they did get in and they just kept moving up in the ranking. But it's very objective and as I mentioned out of 140 some points, 30 are allocated to soil quality and that's what we're primarily interested in. The more acreage you have, the more points you get and we want to build that critical mass. So the point system is really built around building the critical mass based on soil quality, farm size, road frontage, scenic quality, environmental, cultural, historic. And Bill, let's speak about the negative points. Yes, thank you. Not all points are good points. We do give negative points. And so if you look at your map, you'll see that there are only a couple or two or three instances in which easements touch the urban services boundary. That's because we get negative points. So if you lie in direct proximity to or within a half mile or a mile of the urban services boundary, you're going to get negative points. If you're at an interstate interchange, you're going to get negative points. We don't want to create the situation where we have, as people like to say, the emerald choker around the urban services boundary. We know that we're going to expand the urban boundary at some point. It's just a matter of when, where, and how. So the program allows for expansion of the urban growth boundary, and it was set up to allow for that expansion. Did I answer your question, Mr. Penn? Yes. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions on that? Okay. With that in mind, we'll put the PowerPoint up and we'll talk about the urban side of the equation. Courthouse area design overlay review board annual report. What you see here is a 24-acre area of our core business district. And that encompasses 90 parcels, roughly from North Mill Street to Alfalfas along Main Street and from Vine to Church. Established by ordinance about 10 years ago, 90 parcels, as I said, we meet on a quarterly or an as-needed basis. our board changed a little bit recently Michael Speaks who's the dean of the College of Design at UK is now our design professional Darren Teodoro is now our property or business owner within the overlay zone Darren is affiliated with Shorty's Urban Market and Shorty's Seller 157 and the others represent the business community as well as the LFUCG. As far as approvals this year, four board approvals, two that I have issued and one preliminary board review over the last 10 years, 45 by the board and 28 by the design review officer. Some before and afters, if you haven't been up to the rooftop patio at Dudley's, that's a great project that was recently completed. This is probably the biggest change that you might have noticed on Main Street. It's hard to believe that that building looked that way before, but it did. And it's an amazing project. You should go inside because the inside is just as nice as the outside. And just down the street, this was a matter of taking all that stucco facade off of the front of that building. The glass was still in place, all the windows were in place, and the grills were in place. And it was just a matter of pulling that stucco off. Shorties, as I mentioned, that's a nice story there of a before and after. Shorties Cellar, which is very unattractive before the project was completed. And this is one that could be coming to us early next year, corner of Main and Lime, the Taste of Tide building. And this is a before, and this is an after. Huge improvement. That would be a standing seam metal roof, which would wrap the corner of the building. It's hard to see in this slide, but there were windows along the limestone frontage that were bricked up at some point in the past. And the front facade was actually changed prior to 1920. The brick on the front is different from the brick on the side, and that tile was added on the front. This is the before. This is the after. The applicant wants to reengage the pedestrian, reengage the streetscape, enliven the pedestrian activity on the street. So I think this has the potential to be a great project. I've served on the Design Excellence Task Force along with Chris. and Council Member Blues and Betty Kerr and others over the last year. And if the recommendations of the Design Excellence Task Force, or I should say when those recommendations are implemented, it will change this process. This A-review process will be in a much larger area of our downtown, and I don't want to go into too many of those details because this report will be coming to the January 24th Urban County Council Planning Committee. Questions? All right. Any questions? Very good. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Mr. King, you want to say something? All right. Are we all done today? What about this paper laying here at our desk? Initiation request? Yes. This is just for you to take with you. We'll have this on your agenda next week, and certainly if you want more time, we can present to you the future work session. All right. Very good. Can we get a motion to adjourn? Okay. We stand adjourned.