When I'm down and feeling sad, you always come for me. When I'm down and feeling sad, you always come for me. Baby, to love you is to love you. You smile when I see your face Cause there is no one on this earth Baby, could I ever, ever take your place? Thank you. When I'm down and feeling sad You always cover me When I'm down and feeling sad You always cover me Oh, I don't know you Is to love you Is to see you Being free As the wind Because the power Of your loving Is too strong To hold within, to know you, is to love you, to see you, blowing free in the breeze. The power of your loving I never found a woman like you That could be my lover and my best friend Thank you. Thank you. Bye-bye. Thank you. I'm sorry. I'm out. I'm out. guitar solo Thank you. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Ladies and gentlemen, with it being 1.30, we'll call this meeting to order. It is my understanding that there are still a few people downstairs signing in, so we will take care of a couple of items first. We do have two sets of minutes that have been emailed to the Commission members, dated August 9, 2012 and August 23, 2012. Does anyone have any corrections to make on these minutes? Mr. Chairman? Yes. Move approval of the minutes. Okay. We have a motion for approval and second for the approval of the minutes August 9, 2012 and August 23, 2012. Please vote when it comes up on your screen. Motion passes. Is there any request for postponements or withdrawals from today's agenda? Seeing none, unless there's an objection, we're going to take a couple of items out of order. We will move to page 2. At the bottom of the page, under C, it's ZODA 2012-4. the amend to the definition of banquet facilities, and we'll give everybody a chance to sign in downstairs and come on upstairs. Chairman Owens, members of the commission, And this first item does appear on page two of the agenda. It's ZODA 2012-4, and this is a continuation of a public hearing that the Planning Commission started in June, on June 28, 2012, actually. And the minutes from that meeting are at your place today. The full presentation was done then, but in summary, the request was to change the definition to banquet facilities to allow a banquet facility to be located in not just a residential structure but any structure. The staff was recommending approval of that change, but the staff also documented some concerns in terms of live entertainment and wanted to address those in a separate text amendment with the B-1 text amendment. since the Planning Commission has opted to postpone that text amendment, the B-1 text amendment, to Article 8, but wants or needs to move forward with this text amendment, the staff has prepared a supplemental staff report, which does appear in your notebooks, and that should be behind tab 1 in your notebook. It would just be a one-page TAN document. Since the staff originally drafted the report, the applicant did tell the staff and the Planning Commission via letter that they no longer are interested in pursuing the text amendment. However, they did not want to withdraw the application because they understood there was further interest outside of their stated interest. And I do have one letter of support from Todd Strucker of the Calumet Neighborhood Association related to this text amendment. And that was sent in after the Planning Commission first held the hearing on this. The staff is recommending approval of the staff alternative text, which does include some changes to the B1 zone, which is Article 8-16. It identifies a new accessory use, which is for indoor live entertainment and or dancing, if it is accessory to a restaurant or banquet facility, but only when located at least 100 feet from a residential zone. There's also a slight change to the existing conditional uses and an additional conditional use added to that section of the ordinance, which is to amend the live entertainment portion for restaurants, deleting that section and identifying outdoor live entertainment as what would be a conditional use, and also a new conditional use for indoor live entertainment for a restaurant or banquet facility when located less than 100 feet from a residential zone. The staff believes this would address the indoor live entertainment issue, especially when it's near residential within 100 feet, basically. Other than that, it would be an accessory use to the banquet facility or restaurant that's permitted in the zone. I'd be happy to address any questions related to the staff's supplemental report. for this text amendment. Any questions for Ms. Wade? Ms. Plumlee? Just as a matter of comment, I think it would be nice if in the rural area that would be more than 100 feet from a residential area. I know that's probably not possible, but I would like to have that in the record. Thank you. Anyone else have any questions? Thank you, Ms. Wade. Anyone in the audience wish to speak on this Zota request? Seeing none, I'll close this part of the hearing and open it up for any discussion from the Commission members and or a motion. Ms. Beatty? Mr. Chair, I move that we approve ZODA 2012-4, amending the definition of banquet facilities. The motion has been made and seconded for approval of the ZODA tax amendment 2004-4. If there are no further questions, please vote when it comes up on your screen. Motion passes. Thank you. We do have one other. Actually, we've got three other agenda items today, unless there's an objection. I'm going to stay out of order for the moment and ask that we hear the TIF application request, which is an addendum. I think you have information in front of you for this. It's a statement of compliance with the Comprehensive Plan proposed 21C Museum Hotel Lexington Development Area. I believe that will free up some of the folks that came for this one and allow them to go back to their other duties if Barb is ready. Good afternoon. This is on page 9 of your agenda. It's the addendum page, and it is item A, under commission items. We have a TIF application for what is known as the 21C Museum Hotel Lexington Development Area. And the properties that make up this development area are three. 167 West Main, which is this property right here. It's the First National Bank building and the Tower Annex. We've got 145 West Main. That's the Fayette Building. And then 110 North Upper Street, which is the Upper Street Annex. It consists of a portion of a block. It's .25 acres, and it's bounded by Main Street to the south, Ren Court to the east, which is that right there, and North Upper Street to the west. There are several eligible improvements that are all listed on page one of your staff report, several TIF-eligible improvements. There are 11 listed, and this is everything that they propose to do, but it's TIF-eligible only because it's still subject to council review and state review. and approval two of the main things that they plan to do one is a 90 room boutique hotel it'll have several amenities it'll have a ballroom a restaurant fitness center conference space and a lounge and then they're also planning to do a contemporary art museum that'll be free and open to the public seven days a week they're going to do a comprehensive restoration and rehabilitation of all the buildings all the buildings are historic one was built in 1872 that's the oldest one, and then another was built in 1933. There's a range of dates that they were constructed. And the one building, at least Fayette building, has had some improvements to the facade, and they plan to remove the 1978 improvements and take it back to very close to what was original. Then there are public improvements that would be improving the infrastructure, upgrading all the frontage sidewalks. They'll upgrade and improve the streetscape along North Upper Street, put new lighting on the exterior of the buildings and under the canopies, and then make everything ADA compliant. If you could put the pictures up, Bill, please. This is a view from across Main Street. This is the Bank Building, the Tower Annex, and then Fayette Building. And then if you could put the next one up. This shows, looking from the southwest, this is the upper street annex right there. And those are the buildings that are all included in this. The property is Zone B2B, and that's our downtown center business zone. It allows all the uses that they are proposing. And all of the zones in the zoning ordinance have an intent, and part of the intent of the B2B zone is to promote tourism and the economic health of the community. And so this project fits right in with that intent. The site is within the downtown master plan area, and that is an area on the land use map that is prime for downtown mixed uses and development. And the Downtown Master Plan is a document that is partially adopted as part of the 2007 Comprehensive Plan. It provides an analysis of downtown existing conditions at the time it was written and then general recommendations for downtown development. It was developed by a group including planning people and interested citizens and a steering committee. It has seven specific principles that are intended to guide development. One is social capital, a pedestrian-friendly environment, discernible centers and edges, architectural language based on memory and invention, local treasures, ecology and sustainability, and resources and priorities. And all of these either support or are supported by this TIP development. And as you know, the comprehensive plan, the 2012 plan goals and objectives were adopted by the Council in May, and there are several goals and objectives that apply to this project and that support it. Objectives A and B of Goal A2, Goals C1 and C2 and five of their objectives, Goal D3 and its objectives, Goal D4 and Goal E1 and its objectives, and those relate to infill and redevelopment, tourism, job creation, and preservation of the urban service area concept by keeping development contiguous and compact. And part of your review and certification of compliance with a comprehensive plan includes any recommendations that you want to make as far as text amendments or zone changes or anything that might be needed to fulfill this and get it on to the council, get it moved forward. There aren't any zone changes that are necessary or text amendments because, as I said, the B2B zone allows all of the uses that they're proposing. However, that being said, they do need 90 parking spaces for their hotel, and that's based on one space per guest room. And there is no on-site parking, which is typical of many properties in downtown. And so they're in the process of going to the Board of Adjustment. They've got an application packet to take to the Board of Adjustment for a parking variance because it's in the infill area. They want to reduce their parking by 50%, which would make them have a requirement of 45. And there's one more picture bill. What they're hoping to do is lease space right here in the library garage. This is where the property is, and then this is where the garage is. And they're hoping to lease 45 spaces from the library for that. The deadline to apply for the Board of Adjustment Variants for the October 26th meeting is October 4th, and we're hoping that they get that in. And provided that's done, we find this to be in compliance with the comprehensive plan and ask you to certify it to the council so that it can be forwarded on to the state. And if you have any questions about the staff report, I'd be happy to answer them. And we have two people from 21C Hotel in Louisville that are here to answer any other questions you might have. Thank you, Barb. I think Ms. Phelps has a question. Barb, can you discuss this TIF district compared to the Centerpoint TIF district? How are those boundaries? Do those boundaries merge? They're very close. I don't think they overlap. These properties were kind of an indentation in the boundary, and these properties were not part of that. So by approving this TIF, we're not putting it into a second? No. These properties are into a second TIF? It's a second TIF. It's not part of the courthouse area. It's a totally separate one. Okay. Thank you. Other questions? No. Any one of the fine folks from Louisville or locally have anything to add? I just want to say to the Commission, thank you for your consideration, and to Barb, thank you very much. I don't think we could do a better job describing our project than you just did, so very appreciative of your work. And if anybody has any questions, myself or Karina Tota, our development director, will be happy to answer them. Any questions? Thank you for coming. Thanks a lot. Anyone in the audience wish to speak on this request? Seeing none, I'll close this part of the hearing and open it up for any discussion from the Commission members and or motion for this request. Yes, ma'am. I'm sorry. This probably should have been for Barbara. Barbara, the 45 parking spaces in the library, does that meet the requirement given that it's a 90-room hotel? If they get the parking reduction from the Board of Adjustment, yes. They can reduce that by 50% because they're in the infill area, and so that's what they're going to bring the variance for. Okay. Thank you. Anything else? Any other questions? If not, I will entertain a motion. Don't be bashful, folks. Ms. Blanton, thank you. Move approval of a statement of compliance with the comprehensive plan for the proposed 21C Museum Hotel Lexington development area, as outlined by staff. Thank you. Motion's been made and seconded for approval of the application request. Please vote when it comes up on your screen. Motion passes. I'd like to thank the audience for allowing me to take a couple of items out of order. One, to let everyone get upstairs. I believe that has occurred. and then also to let some people return to their other jobs. Before we get started, I would like to recognize, I think we do have some students from the University of Kentucky Department of Law here. This would be from Kathy Moore's class. Hopefully, I better say this should be educational more so than entertaining. So, welcome. I will return to the normal order of agenda, page 1 at the bottom, Greer-Nicholasville Road, LLC, and Greer-Nicholasville Road 2, LLC, Zoning Amendment, and Deerfield Shopping Center Zoning Development Plan. That's MAR2012-13. And I believe Ms. Wade will be the first person to give us some information. Good afternoon, Chairman Owens, members of the Commission. The next item on our agenda. Ms. Wade, excuse me one second. I'm here. Excuse me one second. I failed to mention that there had been a request for additional time from the applicant, Mr. Bruce Simpson. which was granted. So let that be known for the record. Excuse me for interrupting. Thank you. Gave me an opportunity to grab something that I forgot. We have received many letters, both in support and opposition to this request. So I'm going to enter the originals into the record with Ms. Cunningham and then give the commission copies. I'll start one with Mr. Brewer and one with Mr. Berkley. We did receive 11 letters in support of the request and 16 in opposition. This item is found on the bottom of page 1 and can be found behind tab 1 in your notebooks. The staff does have a revised staff recommendation within your notebook, so I would ask that you do look to that tab for that information. This is MAR 2012-13, and it's a request by Greer-Nick Road, LLC and Greer-Nick Road 2, LLC. The petitioner is requesting a zone change from a neighborhood business, which is our B1 zone, to a highway service business zone, which is the B3 zone. The subject property is located along Nicholasville Road, approximately 200 feet to the north of the intersection of Nicholasville Road and Southland Drive. And it does encompass a little over two and a half acres of property. One parcel is the majority of the property, and there's a smaller parcel which actually has a Collins Lane address to the rear. Collins Lane is an easement, an access easement, or private street that runs just to the south of the subject property, and it does make a 90-degree turn and come back and intersect with Southland Drive. Other areas of interest in this area, Southland Drive is mostly zoned B1. There are a few small B3 parcels in front of Collins Bowling, Eastland Bowl here, that have not either recently been developed or planned for development, but had been vacant for a good number of years. Also in the vicinity is a good amount of professional office that starts along Southland Drive and Nicholasville Road, just to the south of where Goodrich Avenue and Edgemoor Drive intersect Nicholasville Road. Also to the north of this area, along Nicholasville Road, a majority of the area is either residential in nature or some professional office with Central Baptist. Located to the north and east, Goodrich Avenue runs parallel to Southland Drive to the north, and it is part of a neighborhood that does border the back of some of the Southland Drive business area. The subject property is bordered by four single-family residential parcels as well as a small piece of B3 zoning that is utilized by the adjacent commercial development development just to the north for a parking lot. The petitioner is proposing a B3 zone in order to develop the property with a hotel. And the proposed information for that hotel is it's planned to be a five-story hotel with 105 rooms at this location. a hotel. They also plan to maintain the restaurant use along Nicholasville Road, which is currently Denny's at this location. Aerial of a view from above here, you can see to the west is the bowling alley, a car wash, several uses along Southland Drive that are neighborhood business uses, restaurants and retail, a gas station a donut shop and then Goodrich Avenue to the north single-family residential areas and then Nicholasville Road a office complex to the opposite corner across Southland Drive also an aerial looking towards the subject property the current situation on the parcel is an addition has been made to the Denny's restaurant that was the home of an office development. And so that building that you see in the aerial here is actually two uses, but does appear to be one solid building. And then there's also another current use on the property for an auto repair shop. And that's the 145 Collins Lane address. Just some on-ground photos of the site. Here's the existing Denny's restaurant that fronts along Nicholasville Road. As we look back towards Collins Bowling, Eastland Bowl, there's parking along Collins Lane. And there's a small white building, one-story building. You can see in the background, that's the auto repair shop. and then the main office use would be located in 1949 Nicholasville Road. It's a two-story building. Just a little closer view of the office, what was an office use. The office, or I guess the parcel, backs up to the Goodrich Avenue single-family residential and they've constructed a wall to provide some sort of buffer along this area that has some maintenance issues, I think. And then it does provide a small corridor between the wall and the existing business building where there was some level of access. And then this is from the subject property looking towards Southland Drive. This is the rear of a restaurant, and then you can see the medical plaza across the street and beyond that, Continental Towers on Nicholasville Road. These photos, the next few photos, are from Goodrich Avenue. This shows the vacant parcel that is part of the B3 zoned portion adjacent to the subject parcel and is part of a detention basin that's used by the adjacent businesses. You can see the existing building in the background. That's the two-story building. These are the single-family homes that would be backing up to the new development. The subject property is part of the North Nicholasville Road Small Area Plan effort, or a portion of it was, which was recommended by our 2007 comprehensive plan. I would note, however, that that plan was not completed due to stakeholder disagreement about the vision and goals for that plan. The 2007 comprehensive plan, though, does recommend retail, trade, and personal services for this property, as well as properties along Southland Drive and the one parcel to the north at the intersection of Goodrich and Nicholasville Road. And then if we were to look further down Nicholasville Road, the retail trade personal service land use actually continues for a majority of Nicholasville Road out to Manowar Boulevard. The 2007 Comprehensive Plan recommendation for retail trade is consistent with the existing B-1 zoning of the property. and it's actually considered to be in agreement with the comprehensive plan in its current status. The applicant in their proposal for a B3 zone, the B3 zone is typically considered to be in agreement with our highway commercial or interstate commercial land use designation on the comprehensive plan, which is depicted with sort of an orange color in a few places. in general the B3 zone has been found by the planning commission and the council to be in agreement with the RT or the retail trade land use category if the zone is appropriately restricted via conditional zoning restrictions. And in this way hotels have in the past been approved by limiting the commercial use of the property to neighborhood oriented businesses, offices, and a hotel. and that has been done in some what have been considered appropriate locations. The Nicholasville Road corridor does have a limited number of B3 zones, all of which have either been zoned for 40 or more years, which means they won't have conditional zoning restrictions, or they were current or recent hotel sites. The existing proposed location for this hotel, the staff would note, on a positive note, is in close proximity to the University of Kentucky, and Central Baptist Hospital. It is located along a busy corridor within Lexington and could serve the neighboring businesses along Southland Drive or Nicholasville Road as well as nearby neighborhoods. In looking at the aerial again, the staff, on the other hand, is concerned about the proposed siting of the hotel. I'll show you the existing Denny's that's going to remain shown there in kind of a green shading. There's a portion of the property where the buildings would be demolished, shown in the orange. And, of course, there is an existing relationship with those structures to the single-family residential. In one case, it's close, and the neighbors are concerned about what's been there, the wall and the two-story building. and in another case the building is much further and closer to Collins Lane and the relationship isn't as impactful to the neighbors with a one-story structure. The applicant is proposing something that does have a similar setback to one of the existing buildings in this location, but again there's been concern about that relationship to date and of probably a little bit more concern to the staff is the fact that the massing of the building, 65 feet near the residential, single-family residential, is what would create a greater impact for the single-family area. The B3 zone does establish a 3 to 1 height to yard ratio when adjacent to residential zones, and it allows for a maximum of 75 feet in height. In other locations, the staff would note that hotels have been developed and the structures have not been located so close to single-family residential, and they have not typically been five stories in height. The staff did do some research as to other hotels that have been developed or brought in for rezonings in the past decade, And we found seven cases of those. The closest hotel location to a single-family residential area was 300 feet, with an average of over 800 feet. In one case, not included in those seven cases. In another case, a planned development was brought in where a hotel was included and townhouse and multifamily was included. And the townhouse locations are across a public right-of-way from a hotel. In that case, the hotel was sited first, and the single family or townhouse and multifamily were developed at a later date. And so those property owners knew ahead of time that there was going to be a hotel when they purchased their property. In this case, the proposed use is located only 23 feet from the side property line, shared with the properties along Goodrich Avenue. and the closest single-family residence would be approximately 70 feet from the proposed five-story hotel. The height of the proposed hotel would result in a structure height almost twice the maximum height allowed in the R1C zone, which is what the zone is on Goodrich Avenue of, in that case, 35 feet, which is not nearly as compatible with the adjoining established single-family neighborhood. In addition, the applicant has provided insufficient legal justification for the zone change. Kentucky Revised Statutes 100 and Article 6-5 of our zoning ordinance require that the applicant provide evidence so that the Planning Commission and ultimately the Council can make a finding of fact that the MAP amendment is either in agreement with our comprehensive plan or in absence of that finding that the existing zoning is inappropriate and the proposed zoning is appropriate, or that there's been a major change of economic, physical, or social nature in the area that was not anticipated by our comprehensive plan. And unfortunately, the applicant's justification does not address those findings. The staff does believe that the existing zoning is appropriate at this location. The B-1 zone here is consistent with Southland Drive and Nicholasville Road zoning and uses. In addition, the applicant is proposing conditional zoning restrictions that permit B-1 zone uses, so they actually are acknowledging those B-1 uses remain appropriate at this location as well. And lastly, there's been no physical, social, or economic change in the immediate area that was not anticipated by the comprehensive plan that would justify this zone change. The staff originally recommended postponement of this application and three weeks ago presented that to the zoning committee. The zoning committee did recommend postponement, and we hoped that the applicant would work to address the concern of the proximity of this hotel to the single-family residential. Unfortunately, they did not address that, and they wished to move forward today. So the staff has prepared a revised recommendation of disapproval for this request, and the two reasons are listed on your staff report. First, the zone change and the corollary development plan do not propose the appropriate buffering needed between highway commercial land use and low-density residential land use. The proposed hotel is far too close to the single-family residential area along Goodrich Avenue, and when compared to other hotel developments in the past decade, it doesn't meet with the average or even the minimum as what has been proposed in the past. Secondly, the applicant isn't providing the sufficient legal justification to meet the requirements of KRS-100-213 and Article 6-5 of our zoning ordinance. Staff is finished. I'd be happy to entertain any questions. Questions for Ms. Wade? No? If not, thank you. Thank you. I think Mr. Martin is coming up next. Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, the preliminary development plan that is associated with this zone change request is located on page 2 of your agenda. It is ZDP 2012-76 Deerfield Shopping Center. I'd like to take a moment to do a little housekeeping and explain, as this commission is very aware, that preliminary development plans and development plans are reviewed by your staff and your subdivision committee as if the zoning was already in place. I know that's a little bit unusual for people who aren't familiar with our system and when the public attends the meetings. So we'd just like to make that clear. Again, I know you all are very aware, having been through it, but we'd like for everyone here to understand that that's how we review plans. We review them separately from the zoning in question. With that, I'd like to orient you to the plan that you see before you today. Here is Nicholasville Road. Here is the intersection with Southland Drive. We're headed towards Rosemont Garden, obviously, in that direction. Jeslyn Drive is across Nicholasville Road here. Here is Collins Lane, the access easement that Ms. Wade referred to. It runs down this part of the property. It is 30 feet in width in this location. This aspect or section of that easement is 40 feet in width at this location. The applicant is proposing a 105-room, five-story hotel in this location, 65 feet in height. Here is the front entrance. There's a canopy proposed over the front entrance in this location. The rear area that you see here is a swimming pool and those types of workout rooms, whatever is appropriate to the particular inn in question. You can see the existing access point off Nicholasville Road that currently serves Denny's and the existing parking lot at this location. They are proposing a series of access points into the proposed parking. The area highlighted here with cross-hatching and the blue stripes, those are areas of underground detention that are being proposed by the applicant. And just for information, we thought we'd highlight for you, this is an existing detention basin that was constructed some years ago in association with the Mexican restaurant and the little retail operation right here at the corner of Goodridge. The inn itself is over 61,000 square feet total. Denny's is 75,000 square feet. They're proposing 158 parking spaces. As you can see how they're distributed, there are 155 required for the two uses, so there's only an excess of three parking spaces being proposed. The plan that you do see before you is a revised plan. The applicant did submit this revision to staff, and they have addressed several of the standard basic cleanup conditions that provide the basic information that your staff requires in order to evaluate a development plan. We have handed out to you your revised conditions on this nice, pretty salmon orange paper. The staff, as I said, has revised the conditions upon review of these basic information being met. However, the revised plan has not addressed those concerns that the subdivision committee had that was the basis for their recommendation of postponement. And Ms. Wade did a very fine job of pointing those out. And on the plan, we share the same concerns as with the zoning, and that is, again, the massing and height of the proposed hotel in relationship to the single-family homes in this area, along with what appropriate landscaping should be in place, again, to buffer a proposed use such as this to the single-family residential zone. There are a few remaining conditions other than some basic ones. We have item number seven, which is to denote proposed and existing stormwater sewer locations to the approval of the Division of Water. that and number eight denote proposed stormwater detention location. Again, I pointed those out to you with the crosshatching. Staff is very aware in review of this and that there are stormwater issues in this area of our community, in this neighborhood and along Southland Drive. The discussion items, two of which that I mentioned to you, the landscaping, tree protection, and buffering along the northern border, along with the height of the proposed motel, those two discussion items, you can see those have been revised. Should you approve this plan, then those need to be denoted that they will be considered at the time of a final development plan. Again, as you all are aware, this is a preliminary plan. There will have to be a final development plan approved by the Planning Commission before what you see on this plan could be constructed. You will see a final development plan should you approve this. And we think it would be appropriate to consider both the buffering and the height and location of that building at that time. There are two other issues that were discussion issues. Number 11, which is denote the disposition of existing improvements along Nicholasville Road, a little bit of an oddity here. It's happened elsewhere, most notably along the frontage of Central Baptist Hospital and a few other places. They've done improvements, property improvements that are actually in the right-of-way. They've been like that for a very long time. Generally, at the time of a final development plan, we have them get the formal blessing of the State Department of Transportation for those types of encroachments. The final discussion item, which you see is item 12 on your revision, is to denote the timing of the revisions to the current FEMA floodplain and that that will be considered at the time of the final development plan. Again, you can't build off this plan, but at such time as you do build, they will have to resolve the conflict with the floodplain that exists. This entire area is in the FEMA regulatory floodplain, with the exception of that little green area in front of Denny. You see the little green yard next to the road. That's about the only part of this property that's not actually currently in the FEMA floodplain. However, at the time of the final development plan, they will have options. Either they will have amended the map to the approval of FEMA, or they will have to comply with Article 19 of our zoning ordinance in order to be allowed to develop the property. And with that, I'll be happy to answer any questions. Questions for Mr. Martin? Yes, Mr. Wilson? It's been a couple of weeks since we've had a chance to review this. Is there a stoplight on the Southland Drive at that exit coming out? At the intersection with Nicholsville Road in Southland, yes, sir. But there's nothing else until you get on down to Regency Road. Okay, so there's nothing there. And in the Collins Lane, did we indicate that that was a right turn only, or could someone try to make a left-hand turn? You can make a left. It's not a control decision. You can take your life in your hands if you wanted to do that. Okay, thanks, sir. Other questions for Mr. Martin? Thank you. No, thank you, sir. And we'll ask for the applicant to come forward. Thank you. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. I'm Bruce Simpson. I'm here on behalf of Greer Properties today. Greer Properties consists of Phil Greer and his son Lee Greer. They're here in the audience today. We appreciate what the staff had to share. I will point out some inaccuracies in connection with their presentation shortly, but suffice it to say we have a difference of opinion with respect to the recommendation that should come before this body this afternoon. You know, I've been privileged to be involved in a number of these cases over the years, and whether I'm representing an objector, a neighborhood, an applicant, I have learned over the years that from the standpoint of practical review and understanding these cases, as I know you all do, that each one of these applications that come before you, though there may be some initial resistance when it's filed, if you don't like it, I've encouraged folks to look at it as an opportunity, to look at this case specifically, the facts of this case specifically, in connection with the context of the property, what currently exists around the neighborhood, and examine the pros and cons objectively as you can, and then you make a fair decision on whether or not our application is worthy of approval. Today is no different. Today is an opportunity. It's an opportunity for this body to consider a $15 million investment on the corner of Southland Drive and Nicholasville Road. There hasn't been a $15 million investment in Southland Drive and Nicholasville Road since Southland Drive and Nicholasville Road first had commercial property way back in the late 50s because I grew up in this area, I know. Southland was one of the first shopping centers. And regrettably over time, it's not aged very well. Neither have I. But those of you that are familiar with the territory know of what I speak. So we have in the early beginnings, hopefully, of coming out of a recession, a family that wants to say, I'm willing to spend $15 million to really put a nice development here that is more residential in use than any of the existing commercial uses for which that property can be developed today, B1. This is a residential use. People sleep and reside in this hotel. There's no bars in this hotel. There's no restaurants except for the standard Hampton Inn warm-up type breakfast. It is primarily where people come to sleep and rest, go to their business during the day, and come back and sleep and rest until they look apart. It is very similar in use to the homes immediately to the north. You cannot say that about any of the existing commercial uses that could be put here. I'll go into that in a moment. But that's an important consideration because it bears on this question of opportunity to do something better and more compatible with the existing neighborhood. it. The property has been around this particular property that we're talking about since the early 50s, early 60s. Originally, it was part of Jericho. It was the first corporate offices of Jericho. And they were there a number of years. And then Kentucky Mortgage came in, and they were there a number of years, and then the last three or four years, Central Baptist was there for a brief period of time before they moved to other accommodations in the vicinity. The Greers bought the property about five years ago. It had been degrading over a period of time. And they looked at it as an opportunity to do something better. And they have been working on this particular project for some period of time. and they have spent a lot of time and a lot of money on architects and other fees to come up with what they believe is a benchmark for the future revitalization of Southland Drive so that other properties will see if the Greers are willing to spend $15 million and have a handsome project like this with stone and brick in terms of the veneer, to have this kind of property at the gateway to Southland Drive, then there's some encouragement for other people to upgrade their property, perhaps other investors, other purchasers, to say, you know what, it's time for this renaissance on Southland Drive that was studied about five years ago, but for reasons of the economy and lack of capital, perhaps it hasn't happened. So this is an opportunity to get that started. It is an opportunity. and it's why we're here today. Now, we're mindful that people have varying opinions about this opportunity and you're going to hear them today, and that's to be expected. We anticipated it, and so in advance of coming before you today, we sent out notices to the neighborhood, and those are under tabs 1 and 2 in your booklet, inviting them to a meeting to listen to our proposal, to answer questions, get feedback. We listened to them. Both those meetings lasted about two and a half hours each. Then subsequently, we had telephone conversations with several of the folks, of course, email exchanges. We made site visits to go in some of the neighbors' backyards to look at what they're seeing now in terms of what their view is now. I'll show you those photographs in a moment. and you'll see the basis of why four of the six people that live closest to this project are in support of it. So we also, late a couple days ago, received a concern from one of the neighbors on Goodrich that there was stormwater issues. Goodrich has had a history of stormwater issues. The urban county government about seven or eight years ago bought six houses at the very end of Goodrich. The very end of Goodrich is about 1,400 feet from the hotel site. Goodrich is a fairly long street. They bought six of those houses and basically converted the area where the houses were as part of a detention basin because all of this property on Southland Drive, all of Jesslin, Lansdowne, et cetera, It was developed back in the day when there weren't any requirements for stormwater management. You don't find any detention basins at all. There's no detention basin on this property right now. Now, I'll talk about what we're going to do in a moment, but suffice it to say there is no detention. And so Goodrich has had stormwater problems for that reason. And so we went out a couple of days ago with the neighbor to spend about two and a half hours. I'll show you photographs of her property and her concern. She has basically a concrete trough that's been there for years, dealing with the flow of water coming from neighbors to her north. The property drains from north to south. Their property drains down on top of this property. We don't drain on their property, and there's no dispute about that. But we went out and looked at the stormwater situation that currently exists on the property. It's been there since it was developed 60 years ago. because she had a complaint that water was backing up from this fence that Tracy indicated and showed a photograph of. And so we had our engineers go out and look at that, and we spent a considerable amount of time trying to track down where the storm sewer lines and all that were and came to a pretty reasoned conclusion that the infrastructure, which is owned and maintained by the Overn County government, has for years and years and years, is in serious need of repair, is in serious need of repair. Now, the government has the option to fix it, as they've had the option to fix it for a long, long time to investigate these problems. This is not the first time the folks on Goodrich have complained about the stormwater problem that we investigated two days ago. They've been complaining for years, to no avail in terms of a remedy. Now, that gets us up to today. and today we have property that zoned B1 commercial and under tabs number 5 and 6 I have indicated what the zoning ordinance provides in terms of permitted uses and they're all commercial uses of course most likely uses probably restaurants there's a lot of restaurants in the area Sports bars, as long as your square footage of your floor space doesn't exceed 20% devoted to a bar, you can have a sports bar. That's what Trump's has across the street. There's been several reiterations of that close to the railroad tracks. It's now another kind of a restaurant. Or a sit-down restaurant or a drive-thru restaurant. A number of different uses. All of those uses, there's no hotels there. Nobody sleeps there. It's strictly come in and go, come in and go. One of the first concerns expressed at our meetings was we're going to generate too much traffic on Nicholasville Road. I don't need to tell anyone about traffic on Nicholasville Road. It is the most heavily traffic corridor in our community and has been for years. So we engaged a traffic engineer, which I'll share with you in a moment, to look at the situation of what our impact will be as a hotel versus the impact that could come about right now without a zone change. We would need to be here. We would file a development plan to have any of these uses that are in the commercial designation that's in your booklet. Restaurants, beauty shops, repair of household appliances, arcades, rental equipment, indoor theaters, athletic club facilities, banquet facilities, retail places, and the like. We could have medical offices, urgent treatment centers, because the B-1 allows professional office uses. All of those are active, busy businesses, and they could go on today, and we wouldn't have a zone change. We would just file a development plan and get it done. But we believe we have a better alternative, a better opportunity than what you see today. Now, Tracy shared with you some photographs of the surrounding area. I want to share a few more because it's important that you understand the context of the property, where it sits, the uses that are around it, the other business uses, their condition, and then you'll appreciate the significant undertaking that the Greers are taking. Barbara, if you could start those. I'll go through these very quickly. This is our property, of course, and Goodrich is a fairly long street. Go ahead, Barb. Just flip through these until I tell you to stop. This is the site of the proposed hotel. This again, the significance of this is this building right here is about 25 feet tall. the average tree height that exists along Goodrich, because we had it surveyed by this surveyor, is between 60 and 80 feet all along here. Now, there's some gaps in here, and I'll talk about those in a moment, but there is a substantial existing tree stand already here. On the other side of this property here where these trees are is 108 Goodrich Avenue. This is the car wash. If you go in this gentleman's backyard, you will hear a significant amount of noise whirling from the car wash turning many hours a day. It is an active, busy use. It's also a use allowed on our property right here. We're proposing not to do that. Go ahead, Barb. This, again, is another shot. This is a proposed hotel site right here. Tom and Tracy talked about the edge of it the actual edge is only 47.5 feet wide that's the part that directly faces the neighborhood it's 47.5 feet wide it's not linear or it's not parallel to Goodrich it's the side facing Goodrich that's about 25 feet away this is the tree stand that I was talking about 60 to 80 feet tall Okay. This is what the houses look at now at 100 Goodrich Avenue. This is the back end of the existing building, air conditioning units and so forth. This is the Mexican restaurant here. this is the view of 106 Goodrich looking on her deck. This is what she sees today. She sees the back end of this auto repair place and then the car wash is over here. This is also a view from 106 and 108, the auto repair place, chopped up firewood, broken down trucks, boat, back end of where auto repair is taking place. This is from 106 Goodrich, again, next to the property. This is the existing building right now that is observed from her backyard. This is her next-door neighbor, Shirley. She's going to be here today. She has a huge amount of trees. You really can't see anything from her backyard. I mentioned the neighbor from Goodrich Avenue with the stormwater problems. She's actually on the northern side of Goodrich. This is the concrete flume, if you will, that was put in obviously years ago that drains down under Goodrich here. The next series of photos, you'll see what happens. Also, the street drain drains through the underground here to this culvert or this basin and goes on down to the detention basin, is the next photograph, should be. The detention basin was put in years ago to try to deal with the water, but then they put this grate in there when it gets blocked up, so you have a lot of backed up water this way. This is all on the property of Goodrich Avenue people, but it goes toward our property. And so we had the neighbor come over, and Jihad Halani, our engineer and a surveyor, the next slide will show, this is, again, this is a detention base and actually goes into that graded entryway. And so the neighbor came over. She was very inquisitive. We looked at every manhole on the site. We surveyed every storm sewer on the site to find out what's going on, what the problem was. and shared that with her, and I'll share their results with you. Next slide, Barb. Again, in terms of the constraints, we face the back end of all of the commercial buildings. All of the dumpsters for all of the users on Southland Drive, that's what we have to face, which makes a professional office use very unlikely, and that's why the property has degraded over the years from its professional office use that has been in existence for a number of years before that. And then the next series of slides backed it up. We got the car wash at the Shell station. Mr. Greer just bought this in an attempt to clean it up, which it will be shortly. It faces south and drive, but the previous gun shop, the dumpster was facing right toward the proposed hotel site. This is the private access easement that goes all the way down to the Bowling Alley. As you know, if you've been this way, it's barricaded off down that way. Let's see. Pull that one. We'll come back to it in a minute, Barb. There should be some more of the car wash and the auto repair place. Excuse me a minute. So there are a number of existing uses which are not very neighborhood friendly. People can look over their backyards, on the decks, and see things of a commercial nature that most residences don't want to have next to them. And those are B1 uses. And the point of all that is this. We could come in here, not have a hearing on the zoning, Come in here and file a development plan for any of the uses that are identified in the B1 and P1 zone. We would not have to put up any more screening other than maybe one or two trees. The actual screening requirement is one tree over 40 feet and a six-foot fence, and that's only if you wanted to build a 35-foot tall building, which we could do. Not have a zone change is permitted of right. We're zoned for that. We could have a 35-foot building along the entire length of Goodrich on our property. The existing building is 190 feet. Our building facing Goodrich is 47 1⁄2 feet. Now, it's five stories tall, but it does not go the length of the Goodrich Street that the current building does. So that's important. And it was an important consideration in trying to site the building. I know there's questions about the siting. we've tried to site it as best we can to limit the exposure to Goodrich in terms of what they're actually going to see. Barb, go ahead and go through these next slides. Neighbors wanted to know, well, what are we going to look at if we see this hotel? This is 102 Goodrich. This is the closest property. It's 133 feet away from where the hotel will be. We had Ted Hardwick, who has a degree in landscape architecture, he teaches at the University of Kentucky, do an actual scale rendering of what this hotel would look like. Now, these aren't windows. This is the hallway lighting. There's not going to be any bedroom windows facing Goodrich, one of our promises. But in the worst-case scenario, this is what it will look like. And just go through those bar. We're proposing to put in an 8-foot-tall fence with brick columns over 35 feet, and over a period of time it will provide a substantial buffer. Now, this is the worst-case scenario. You've seen other, there's a lot of other houses right now that are completely shielded, for the most part, with the existing 60- to 80-foot tree stand. Go ahead, Barb. This is a rendering that Mr. Hardwick did to show if we wanted to put a 35-foot building, which we could do with residential apartments on top, five feet from the property line, put up a six-foot fence, trees every 40 feet, we could do this as a matter of right on the existing zoning. This is what Amy Carrington, who lives at 106 Goodrich, would then see if that was a proposal or an option that the Greers wanted to pursue, or if they sell it to someone else wanted to pursue, under the existing zoning. No screening or buffering requirement beyond that, what I mentioned. Go ahead, Barb. Our proposal, again, is an 8-foot-tall privacy fence with brick columns and 12-foot pine trees spaced 10 feet apart. and we had projections of what the growth would be every five years. The hotel is over this way, and eventually over time it will all be covered up. Now it takes some time, but what she's looking at now is the back end of an auto repair place and a car wash. And so are a lot of other folks. So that's an important consideration of what our proposed screening is and what the existing screening is and why in context. If you look at what this body has done in approving other B3 hotel uses in formerly B1 zones, in the context this body, your predecessors, found it was appropriate. We're asking you to do the same thing. If you turn over to tab number 14, as Tracy indicated to you on her staff report, she looked at other instances where this body had considered B3 conditional. In other words, the zoning wasn't appropriate for the B1 hotel use, but you all approved B1 uses. and she made a point of saying, well, it looks like the closest was 300 feet. Actually, that's not accurate. I've got a photograph I'll share with you in a minute. There's another hotel that you all approved, single-family residential next to a hotel with no screening that's 104 feet. But she indicated that the average is about 800 feet for the entire neighborhood. So while that's not set in standard in terms of an ordinance, we did measure every house on Goodrich, every house on Wabash, every house on Lackawanna, the distance from those houses to the closest edge of the proposed hotel. And on Goodrich, 82% of the houses were greater than 300 feet away from this hotel. 82% were 300 feet away or greater. The average was 800 feet. Now this is the closest street. The average was 800 feet, exactly what Tracy said, the average of the other neighborhoods closest to the hotels that you all have approved before, B3 with limited condition, just like we're asking, so we fit exactly in conformance with that average. 82% above 300 feet. That's all set forth in tab 15, by the way. Every house, their address and their distance from the site for all three streets, you can see the The average for Goodrich is 797. The average for Wabash is 1,078. And the average for Lackawanna is 806. So in terms of the average, and then on Wabash and Lackawanna, the other two streets, not a single house is within 300 feet. So there's 12 houses out of three streets in this neighborhood, which Wabash, Lackawanna, and Goodrich, that is the neighborhood, that are less than 300 feet. Five of those 12 are between 260 and 290, and the other seven are between 132 and 225. So we're talking about a limited number of houses that are closer than 300 feet, which is not in the ordinance, it's not a requirement, it's not a standard. In any event, we believe we're compatible with what has historically been approved, and more importantly, in all those other cases, none of them had an existing tree stand that covered 60 to 80 feet up in the air for the majority of those houses that are now living next to a hotel in Lexington that were approved for B3 restricted use. Traffic. We dealt with traffic under tab 16. Brad Johnson's here from CDM Smith. Used to be Wilbur Smith. They're the most recognized traffic engineering firm in the state of Kentucky, if not the nation. We wanted him to look at what did the existing uses generate? What are the hotels going to generate? Under tab 16, if you look at the next column here, you will see, I've outlined in red, what those trips are. The hotel will generate on an average 858 trips a day. And then we're looking at a pharmacy drive-thru, 1,000, specialty retail, 886. And actually you can put two stories on there and go to 1,400 if you look on the next tab. Grocery store, 2,000. Medical dental, 1,445. Athletic club, 860. You can have a drive-in bank and a high turnover sit-down restaurant. That's a classification in the traffic engineering assessment. You have 1,700 trips per day there. And then, of course, the most likely use is a fast food, drive-thru restaurant, perhaps a coffee shop. In addition to that, it could generate 4,000 trips a day. Ours is 858. Even though it's a B3 zone, it is a very low-intensity use, and it's residential. And all the other B3 uses that we have asked for that could come into play, we've eliminated, including 1B1 use, which is gas station. We're saying no more gas stations on that corner. They're out, even though the existing zoning ordinance would allow us to put one in. We're taking it out in terms of our proposal. Under tab 17 is our landscaping plan. Again, Ted Hardwick, you don't see too many landscaping plans. none is required but as part of our commitment and obligation and connection with this case we've got one for the entire interior most people concerned about the view shed on Nicholasville Road, Sea of Parking, that's what you usually see because that's the minimum the minimum, this is like four times the minimum all that you see in here some of the neighbors want to know the genus and the species of these plants and I said we don't have those yet. If we get it approved for zoning, we'll do that, and if you have suggestions about the genus and the species of the plants, we'll certainly be happy to entertain them. We want to have something that matches up with the handsome design of the hotel that you see on these dry-mounted boards in front of you. We do have a landscaping plan. That's a commitment that we're going to make as a note on the development plan. We have to do it. under tab number 18 is a hotel at the corner of Pleasant Ridge and Timber Drive you see it 1951 Timber Drive it's 104 feet from 1885 Timber Creek single family residential zoned R1D 104 feet and you see that on that photograph there's not a single tree no screening whatsoever in contrast to what you have today with the existing screening. Plus, with ours, you have the 8-foot tall fence and 12-foot pine trees on our side of the property, when planted, spaced 10 feet apart, all along the border with Goodrich, and then west to help screen out that noisy car wash that the existing neighborhood has to deal with today. the neighbor said you're going to devalue our property now I've done these cases a lot I've never had an appraiser come in to respond to that kind of contention because usually it's not asked about the planning commission you all usually don't consider it nevertheless the Greer said let's make sure we're not going to hurt the value of the property so we had Keith Mays highly regarded appraiser go and look at similarly situated commercial properties with tall buildings, five stories or more, next to residential, single-family residential homes. He did that. He examined, you can see his report, all the data that he looked at in connection with sales. He applied the MAI computer appraisal analysis, and he looked at the following properties. He looked at Hiltonia next to Central Baptist Hospital. Had those properties devalued because they were next to busy hospitals and tall buildings? He looked at the GE plant near Lafayette High School off Rosemont Garden. He looked at St. Joseph Hospital and Bobolink, the houses that go down that way. He looked at the Lexington Tennis Club. If you've ever been out there, they have a 60-foot tall barn that you play tennis in. What's been the impact of those properties? And then if you go out to Alumni Park and Perimeter Center out there on the corner of Alumni and New Circle Road, There are some pretty tall buildings and single-family residences over there. He looked at that. He looked at those six areas, and as you will see in his report, and the charts and graphs that reflect the sales of properties over a period from 1967 up until 2012, the lines go up. The properties have appreciated in value, and ours will be no different. We're going to have adequate screening. We're going to have less traffic. And more importantly, for Goodrich and the properties downstream, we're doing something, again, we don't have to do that's a commitment as a part of this zone change, and that is this. Six houses got bought on Goodrich because of stormwater flooding. We're not required to put any detention in as a B1 use. We may have to deal with some water quality, but we're not required to put any detention in As long as we can show adequate capacity downstream. And even then, what they can require us to do, because we're all impervious, the entire property is asphalt today. Not required to do anything, de minimis at best. What we've committed to as an obligation, as a condition of the zone change is this. You're going to spend over $250,000 in realigning every stormwater pipe that goes under their property, brand new pipes, and we're going to put in two underground storage vaults that will detain the rate of water runoff by 50% over what it is today. What it has been for years, this entire property, including Denny's, 50%. No one's done that ever. What a benchmarking precedent. You want to talk about precedent? That's a huge precedent. That's a huge precedent for people to have to follow if they want to try something similar to what we're doing. All total, he's going to spend about $750,000 above what he would have to spend if it was just B1 property and he didn't need your approval for a zone change. Now, that's a significant contribution, not only for the people on Goodrich, but for the people on downstream of Goodrich in the Wolf Run watershed. So this is an opportunity, and it's in the context of what we're talking about, I think it's an opportunity that merits favorable consideration. We haven't had too many people come forward with this level of commitment about quality of the architecture, which we've committed as part of our application. We have to substantially comply with what we're showing on these exhibits, or we can't get an occupancy permit. We have to put in the stormwater improvements, or we can't get an occupancy permit. We have to put the fence in and the brick columns and the 12-foot pine trees, or we can't get an occupancy permit. We have to do all of those things before we can start business. Huge investment, most of which is designed to be compatible. It's a residential use. Restaurants, sports bars, athletic club facilities, drive-thru McDonald's are not residential facilities. We are. It's a very restricted, limited B1 use. We believe it's compatible, and just like you found in all of the other applications, it's in substantial conformity with the retail recommendation of the comprehensive plan. The precedent was set. You all examined those site-specific properties and found those were in compliance. Are we creating a precedent that's going to be something you can't control down the road? Who's going to come in here and spend this kind of money to be this sensitive to the neighborhood? under B3 for what? A hotel? The lowest traffic user of all the uses? Is someone else going to spend that kind of money just to have another hotel down on Southland Drive? I seriously doubt it. I seriously doubt it. If there's anything that's good about the precedent, it's then you're going to have to require someone else to match up, step up to what we've committed to as a matter of law to get this case approved and to get this wonderful facility rezoned and underway. I appreciate your attention. I understand that people have differing opinions. I think there may be some neighbors that may want to say something in favor. We haven't asked anybody or certainly tried to sweet-talk them into anything. I understand people have different points of view. It's an alternative. We believe the facts are compelling, that it's deserving of approval, but not everybody disagrees. I think a few people may want to come up and say they do agree because they live closest to the hotel. They're going to see it more than anybody. The people that live further down on Goodrich, they have the people that are going to support it as a buffer for them. Because they don't live next to it. They don't have to deal with the car wash world and the auto dealer and the junk boats and the wood shop pile and all the stuff that goes on back there. That stuff will be gone. So, again, thank you for your attention. Thank you, Mr. Simpson. Questions for Mr. Simpson at this point? Mr. Simpson, I do have one question. With your landscape rendering on wherever tab it was, 17, I think, on the property line, you know, you're showing the evergreen trees and other trees and so forth. any of those trees currently existing as far as Ted Hartwick answer that question Ted Hartwick get our landscaping plan come on up you got to come up to speak in the microphone to get on the record please give us your name sir tell him your name and what you do and tell him about the plan and effort you put into it just just one quick your name sir my name is Ted Hartwick Thank you for coming forward, Mr. Hardwick. My only question would be on that rendering, the very top of the board there, which is the property line, how many of those trees are currently existing? Currently none of them exist. None of them exist? Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for Mr. Simpson at this point? Okay. With it close to 3 o'clock, we're going to take a five-minute break, and then we'll continue at that point. Thank you. so Thank you. I love you Thank you. so Thank you. I'm sorry. Thank you. We do have several people I know that want to speak, and we're going to allow anyone that wants to speak time to do so. The rest of this part of the hearing, We're going to hear from anyone in agreement with this request first as far as citizens, and then we'll go to anyone in opposition. I know some people maybe have indicated they've got time constraints. I would ask at this time, just by a show of hands, anyone wishing to speak in favor of, please raise your hand. and those that are in opposition that wish to speak, please raise your hand. Okay, good deal. Thank you. For those at this time that wish to speak in agreement of this plan, similar to those in opposition, you would have three minutes, so please come forward, state your name, and we'll proceed. Yes, if someone could operate the timer. Yes, ma'am. My name is Shirley Tipton. I'm at 104 Goodrich. I'm one of the properties that immediately abuts the proposed project. And, you know, first I thank you all for allowing us to speak, and I respect the concerns that the other people in the neighborhood have. but I'm also speaking for Amy Carrington who was here but had to leave for a meeting that she had to go to. She wanted me to specifically say that 106 also is in favor. And so we have three of the four properties that immediately abut it. Well, it's not up here, but we're the ones who are right against it, that the fence will be between us and the property. I've lived there for 12 years, and 10 years before that, I was on University Avenue, right across from the College of Agriculture, and I did end up there. We had a neighborhood that, as you all probably well know, it began to turn into a series of barns in the back of houses. I sold that property and moved to Goodrich. I love the neighborhood, just as all the individuals who are here today love the neighborhood. But I have been there for 12 years, and for 12 years there's been nothing behind my house but an old parking lot in the back of old businesses and the car wash and trucks and all this is the only thing that's been back there the whole time. I know that many people in the neighborhood, their vision is to have a unique, quaint, walking neighborhood of businesses. But I think the reality of what would be put in with a B1 would be more like a strip mall similar to what's on Regency or the restaurants that Mr. Simpson spoke of or, you know, I don't know what else might go in there. But what this has shown me, and I mean, okay, I'm not sure about a hotel. Some of the things that the neighbors have brought up was that they wanted something there that would be useful to them, not to people coming in. But for me, I mean, all our houses are not that large. If I have people coming to visit me, it might be really nice to have a very nice hotel right next door that family or friends who come could stay at instead of across town or down next to the university or out by New Circle Road. You know, that's so, it could be a use for me, maybe. And as Mr. Simpson said, they didn't show a picture of my backyard because my backyard is full of those trees that we were talking about. And several of them are 65, 75 feet high. And as long as, but they're all deciduous. Well, no, they're not. I have some hemlocks. But it's totally screened because I've left it go because I don't want to look at what one of our neighbors call Pothole Alley. So as I said, I respect the concerns of those who are here today opposed, But I just want you to know that three of the four properties that are immediately abutted are in favor of this proposal. And the fourth property that is just to the east of me, next door to me, is a property that was owned for 35, 40 years on the original owners. They sold that after the death of the husband, and so that property was sold after having the same owners for all those years. It's now owned by another person who doesn't live there. He rents it. So the individuals who are in that house right now that are renters, I've talked with them about this, And the property, that end of the hotel that's the 47 feet wide will be exactly behind their house, which right now they're looking at that big old nasty white building. Thank you, Ms. Tiffany. Okay, sorry. I'm trying to be lenient. Yes, yes, no, I understand. Thank you. Okay, but thank you very much. Okay. Others in favor? my name is amanda hale i live at 108 goodrich avenue you saw my at the backyard uh we're the ones that hear the car wash all the time i didn't originally intend to speak today um but we'll let you know that we have my husband and i studied this very carefully um my husband is one of those that sort of right at the first goes, I'm not in favor of that. And so he has studied very carefully all the plans. We've walked the property in the back. We've evaluated what's there. We feel like the Greers have done a really nice job of putting together something that will be attractive. What's back there right now is certainly not, and it hasn't been for the 15 years that we've been on Goodrich Avenue. We love the neighborhood. We want what's best for it. we want what's best for Southland Drive. We believe that it could be fantastic and that if it was, our neighborhood would benefit from that. We don't see anything in this plan that has concerned us. And in fact, we're kind of excited about the fact that we could have that dilapidated property replaced with beautifully landscaped and beautifully planned property. So we just want to register our support for the project And note that, again, like Shirley said, those of us who are closest, you know, if you're going to make the decision based on the proximity of the single residential use, those of us who are closest to that hotel are in favor of it because we don't like what's there now. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Hale. Others? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, my name is Julie Butcher. I have two parcels of property in this affected area. Here is your 1922 and 1918 Nicholasville Road. Mr. Simpson had mentioned something about the North Nicholasville Road small area study. I was a member of the citizen committee that met one time as an entire body and then didn't meet again, and that process never was completed. Perhaps if it was, we wouldn't be here right now. But be that as it may, I am in support of this program. The house that occupies 1922, I originally purchased it to try to put in my law practice. It is now a piece of rental property. I try my very best to keep it up. It's been extremely expensive. But I'm glad that when my renters look out their front door, if this goes through, they will see all this nice landscaping. They'll see a nice piece of property as opposed to really the eyesore and deterioration that is there right now. Also, as a business owner and taxpayer, I am encouraged by the injection of financial wherewithal that is being offered here for this area of town. The tax base, jobs, I think all of those things are very important considerations, and I am in favor of this project. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Butcher. Anyone else wish to speak in favor of this request? Seeing none, I'll open it up to those in opposition. And I would ask, is there a spokesperson for the opposition? Seeing none, I would ask that anyone that wishes, someone in the back, that's fine. I would ask that person to go first. and definitely would allow some leniency as far as the time is concerned with the spokesperson. And I would simply ask anyone that wishes to speak, please do so. I just simply ask not to be repetitive. Yes, sir. I must state I'm not an official spokesman of any kind. We had an informal meeting last night, and a few of us were asked. Your name, sir? My name is Joseph Miller. Okay. And my wife and I have lived on Goodrich Avenue for 27 years. And after hearing Mr. Simpson's presentation, learning that this is all about the benefit of the neighborhood, I must not be a very good person because I'm speaking in opposition to this zoning change and to the accompanying development plan. Although I will say that I must get some of those artist renderings of my house in case I ever have to sell it, because you can certainly make it look very nice. I'm not anti-development, and Mr. Simpson referred to this being an opportunity, but it's also an opportunity cost associated with approval of this, because it will preclude any B1 neighborhood businesses that could take place there. Many of us are very excited about the opportunity that this presents for B1 development, neighborhood development. That would also be in the 25 to 35-foot scale. In his communications with the neighborhood, Mr. Simpson has frequently alluded to all the scary things that could happen with B1 and also emphasized that it could be up to 65 feet high. But of course he knows that requires a conditional B1 that would require setbacks from property lines and also hearings that would involve the neighborhood. I know there are neighbors that support this, and I respect their opinion. But I do think that some of the issues they bring up could be easily addressed by an appropriate, suitable B1 development. The fact that they are looking at a dilapidated property that Mr. Greer owns for over five years is not really an excuse to me to turn this zoning into highway business zoning. And if he's sincere in his apparent concern for the neighborhood, I would assume that a B1 development would be done with some concern about stormwater runoff and appropriate screening. My main concerns here are the visual profile of a hotel of this scale, its proximity to low-density housing, and the, I think, negative impact it will have on our entire neighborhood. I don't live right abutting this project. And so I could identify as someone who maybe doesn't have as much stake, but I think this is a neighborhood issue. And as a member of this neighborhood community, and speaking for myself, I'm opposed to this project. Regardless of the quality of the proposed building and any of the subsequent landscaping, The result would still be a towering structure, unacceptably close to residential properties, and it would alter the essential character of our neighborhood in significant ways. During this process, some of my neighbors have said, we can't change this. Developers have deep pockets. They have a lawyer. This is a done deal. But I believe the voices of citizens do matter in these procedures, and even those of us who can't afford lawyers can have our say. And I would like to say I really appreciate the opportunity to make my voice heard to this commission and to you, Mr. Chairman. And I'd also explicitly like to acknowledge what I think is the high-level professionalism of the planning staff and their responsiveness to citizens like myself who have emailed them our concerns. So I'd like to just conclude with I ask you to vote against this zoning change and the accompanying development plan. and I thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Miller. Others that would like to speak in opposition of this, please come forward. That's okay. Either one of you all can be first. Go right ahead. I might need a few more minutes. My name is Pat Lamont. We live at 116 Goodrich. We've been there three years. We've put about $40,000 in this old home. We're going to put some more. We have grand. We love our home. And so this really threw me off kilter a bit when this came up. And so if I could, I'd like to reference this. Take the wireless microphone with you. Full heart. There you go. Thank you. I would like to reference this map. I believe someone said this is a 400-foot radius. And Mr. Simpson, I believe, was giving you 800-feet examples that were, and we weren't in it. But as you can see, this goes all the way up to 122, and it comes over to these almost million dollar homes on Edgemoor and Tahoma. These are quite grand homes. It comes all the way up here. Now, my biggest issue with this is the B3 zone. I believe that this would set a precedent for bringing B3, which to use my terminology is Fayette Mall, Reynolds Road zoning, New Circle Road zoning here to Southland Drive. and if we all know B3 on the east side of Lexington all around New Circle Road that is considered one of Lexington's biggest negativities. It's one of our biggest negativities is that it was developed just willy-nilly. B3 all around New Circle Road over there. Now Southland Drive does not have a cut-through. It is just simply a short Southland Drive. It starts at Nicholasville Road. You can't come up through these small neighborhood streets. There's no throwaway. You have Southland Drive, but then it stops at Rosemont Garden, and then you have churches and single-family homes that end up over at Harrodsburg Road. Now, that really isn't the proper place for B3s to come in. It just really isn't. I mean you have Malibu, Pasadena, Alexandria you know that would be fine you have Cooper, Waller, Mason, Headley you have some B3 you know I can see that Southland Drive it doesn't go anywhere it's short and most importantly if you come down the railroad track over a little bit and catch up Rosemont Garden and come down here to the edge of Goodrich. And over here. This is the redevelopment and infill boundary. This is your historic. We were here in the 20s, these homes were. Everyone keeps you here as referring to it as a little village, our little village, as is over here around, you know, Tahoma. Very unique area of Lexington. They're historic. and you're bringing a B3 there to bump up against us. Many communities have a transition. Many have a transition zone. If you're going to let it go, it should be maybe 40 feet max. The 65, 70 feet, and that's if he built flush, and it really is only 65 feet. If it were, let's say, 70 feet, it is going to cast a shadow of 400 feet, which comes all the way down here, which means our solar shingles that we want to put on are going to be ineffective. He is taking away our solar rights, and KRS 381.200 gives us the right, If we, you know, have an addendum put to our deed, we have the right to solar energy. He's going to take that away from us. And finally, there's nothing wrong with restaurants. The people who live here are urban, sophisticated professionals, basically. We like to walk to stuff. We walk out to El Toro. We walk up to the Good Food Coal. That's what we do. We don't get in our car and drive two miles. We're not those kind of people. So when Phil Greer says he's making a residential motel, it's for transients. If you Google Hampton Inn, it is a transient business motel. I mean, it's not a local use. So it's not really a residential use. And I'm sorry, and I appreciate all your time. Thank you, Ms. Lamont. Ms. Lamont, is that correct? Yes. Thank you. Others that wish to speak, please come forward. Hi, my name is Candace Wallace. I live at 130 Goodrich Avenue. This just sort of goes along with what Pat was saying about the precedence that a B3 zoning sets for our neighborhood. Basically, by pursuing these zoning changes along Southland Drive, they are opening it up to pursuing on down. I know this is a conditional B3, but according to the developers and their FEMA application, they have already actually asked for the flood zone change to already go all the way down to where the, I guess it's the underpass, the railroad underpass. So that takes everything that backs up to Goodrich Avenue on the industrial or commercial side. Currently, that takes that all out of the flood zone area currently, which is, to me, That's one of the two items that are keeping this area from really blowing up into an industrial commercial district. So by removing, if their FEMA application is approved, it will remove that for the whole area back there. So, okay, that's one problem down for people to come in and really, superly develop this area. Two, I think permitting a B3 zoning change sets a precedent that will create a domino effect. once current property owners are armed with a B3 zoning and a lack of a flood zone, they'll be free to create an industrial commercial area that completely destroys our special neighborhood. And it is an awesome neighborhood. And I invite all of you to come walk at some time. There are neighbors that sit out. You know, there are parents that sit there and call their kids to come in and play because their kids can actually run around in this neighborhood. And I really do worry about the effect that this has on us. Thank you. Thank you. Others? Hi, I'm Sue Beard. I've been a realtor in Lexington for 30 years. You've heard the word precedent. That was the first thing that popped into my mind. From driving around and exploring similar situations in the fairly close vicinity to the Southland Drive area, I found that the motels or hotels that have been built in Beaumont, the Spring Hill Suites over by Red Mile, the Kentucky Inn, and the medical building to the south of this proposed project across Southland Drive facing Nicholasville Road, those are all three-story buildings. So whereas I was originally concerned about a precedent, it seems to me that a precedent has already been set of keeping these commercial buildings in these similar type neighborhoods to three stories. And I'd like to say our planners and our citizens have worked hard and smart to develop Luxinian's land use plan. We must all be vigilant in protecting this. I have a lot of experience in trees, but there's a person here who is the Fayette County Woody Plant Specialist who's going to speak to that. I would just like to briefly say those big trees, those are deciduous. It was shown in those pictures. They lose their leaves for about six months of the year. Pine trees, that seemed good, I guess, to the planner. But if you've looked around, if you've lived in neighborhoods with pine trees, you know that during our last ice storms, the pine trees have been damaged significantly. I have a half of a large pine tree in my own backyard, and I see that all over my neighborhood. As a realtor, I attend residential appraiser seminars and classes every year. Plus, I have my own experience with my clients. By the way, I have a lot of clients and a lot of friends in this neighborhood that's adjacent to this project. I have a lot of clients from the U.K., so you can imagine that would be the case. But just from my experience and from my education, I find it very hard to believe that, for instance, the houses on Hiltonia values are not affected by being right by the hospital. If you drive down Hiltonia or if you're a realtor and have access to all the data that we have, you will know that the houses on Hiltonia sell for far less than the houses in all that surrounding area, such as Shady Lane and Johnston Boulevard and so forth that are right there, but they're not right by the hospital. Mr. Simpson said that this hotel is more residential in use and calls it similar in use to the homes to the north. I think perhaps he's more of a wordsmith than I am, but I want you to think about that. Then he talks about the stormwater issues, and I'm certainly no expert on that, but I do know, as all of you know, that the EPA mandated an improvement or a correction of our many, many terrible stormwater issues in Lexington. The money's there. I don't know what stage of progression it's in, but that's being addressed and has been addressed and is mandated by the EPA. Ms. Beard, please wrap up. Okay. I'm happy to end it there. Thanks for listening. Let me ask you one question, Ms. Beard. Sure. I'm sorry, what? Your residence. My residence? Yes. 1854 Belafonte Drive. And I have been shopping on Southland Drive since the 1960s, so I consider that my neighborhood, too. And I believe that small, individually-owned businesses are very important to the health of any community. and my friends and I go out of our way to give our business to these small individuals. Thank you, ma'am. Sure. Next. Hi. Hi, my name is Clarissa Spahn. I live at 103 Irvin Road. Like Ms. Greer, I shop on Southland quite a bit. First, I want to say that while the likelihood of a B1, a Cheddar's-type restaurant going in, if this restaurant goes in, the likelihood at that site drops to zero. The likelihood all around there, I think, increases significantly. I want to speak that this is sort of a vision of what we want Lexington to be, and those of us who use Southland Drive certainly have a different image of what we'd like Southland to be than a bunch of chain restaurants and large hotels. When we relocated here from Charlotte 25 years ago, we had other options. We could have stayed in Charlotte with my division at IBM, or we could have taken new jobs outside Philadelphia, but we decided to come here. And it wasn't because of the downtown or the horse farms, but because of the beautiful, livable, affordable, close-in neighborhoods. And my husband and his bike commuted to Lexmark daily for 25 years, and I think that's the case in this neighborhood. These neighborhoods that we have in Lexington are not large, so degrading their boundaries has the potential to destroy their charm. And building a big non-neighborly hotel in the middle of several of these neighborhoods affects not just the neighbors, but the desirability of Lexington as a whole. And I think this is something we should all be concerned about. I believe that towns with walkable, family-friendly neighborhoods are being sought out all over the country. We have a very nice master plan that protects our neighborhoods and aims to create such a town. In this case, the zoning is very clear about what's desired at this location, and I think in the hope of preserving our neighborhoods, we need to reject this proposal. Thank you very much. Thank you, Ms. Vaughn. Yes, sir. Thank you very much. We appreciate your time today. I'm Bill Fountain. I'm a resident, along with my wife, of the neighborhood that we're talking about today. We live over on Wabash. But I want to address this today not just as a resident. As a resident, my wife and I are very opposed to this, but I want to address this as a green industry professional. I'm a professor in the horticulture department at the University of Kentucky. I'm a board-certified master arborist. I'm a certified tree risk assessor. And, you know, the gray hairs indicated I'm a former professor, Mr. Ted Harwick. I want to address a little bit to the landscape plan. You can see that students catch gray hair from the professors. Anyway, I want to address a couple of fallacies that have been brought forward. We've got an initial rendering of the landscape design plan. These are trees out there that are planted in a teacup. A teacup. This area is going to look exactly like Regency Center. The trees put out in the Regency Center, which is adjacent to a shopping area, have not grown in the 15 years since they were planted there. They are dying out. You've got to have soil with these. He takes 1,200 cubic feet of soil in order to have a decent tree, which is going to cover the four parking places as shown on this drawing. Mr. Simpson indicated that they would be coming in and would have the 60 to 80-foot tall trees. As soon as those construction equipment moves into this area, The clock will start to tick. Within eight to ten years, I assure you as a professional, those trees will become a liability. Are you willing to sign off on the light? Please address us. Okay. That's all right. That's okay. I'd rather you address us. As an attorney, we need to make sure that these trees are not going to become a liability for the people who are living adjacent to them. The trees that have been in that long are going to suffer the decline unless extreme measures are taken. And I'll be more than happy to work with you on this. I was going to say the same thing. I'll put you on retainer today. I can't work on retainer. I will work for free. Even better. Even better. So anyway, we're really concerned over this. Mr. Simpson also mentioned that 82% of the houses were more than 300 feet. Switching that around, that's 18% that are 300 feet or less from this structure. I would not buy a house that was that close to a hotel. And as a result of other people having that opinion, that is going to drive our property values down across the neighborhood, because these houses are going to be used for comp values. This is not a residential area that we're talking about. Hotels are not residential, and so this is something that really needs to be considered. This is a transient area. And then my final point is, it was mentioned that the hotel would not have as much traffic. It's not always the volume of traffic. is when you hit the peak volumes of traffic coming out of the hotel. People will be leaving the hotel early in the morning at the peak of rush hour. They will be coming into the hotel in the afternoon at the peak of rush hour. So you're going to really compound the traffic problems we're already suffering with early in the morning, late in the evening on Nicholasville and Southland. Thank you very much. I appreciate your time. Thank you, Mr. Fountain. Yes, sir. I'm Michael Bardo. I live at 107 Lackawanna. And we're going to go from trees to children. This was actually given to me by Allison Connell, who was here and wanted to present this to you directly. But she had to teach at UK, so she had to leave. And I'm someone who has raised children in the neighborhood, and she is currently raising children in the neighborhood. And I'm going to just read it. It's brief, and I'll read it directly from her. I live in the Wabash, Goodrich, Penmokin, Lackawanna neighborhood. We are all very fortunate to have a neighborhood, a real neighborhood. We know our neighbors. We have three streets that join that have no through streets. There's an elementary school less than a mile away. Our children can play basketball. I'll never say baseball. basketball on the street and throw a football in the street. And we as parents know that they are safe because we all know the kids by name. The businesses on Southland know me. They know our children like Donut Days, the bowling alley owned and frequented by people from Lexington. A hotel is frequented by people who are not from Lexington. We agree with the planning commissioning staff and appreciate for this to stay a B1, which is appropriate for a low-density residential land use. There is a value to having a neighborhood that is not measured in dollars. To us, our neighborhood is a treasure. Thank you for your time. Thank you, sir. Others that would like to speak? Hi, I'm Elizabeth Graves. I live at 1859 Norfolk Drive, which is in WGPL neighborhood. It's two or three houses between Wabash and Lackawanna, so it's a little strange. But from my porch, I imagine I'll be able to see the hotel. And I just wanted to say that I agree with the staff on disapproving this zone change, and I hope you'll consider it. I do think property values will go down. I don't think people are going to want to move to a neighborhood that has a big hotel that is not walk-friendly. It offers nothing for the residences. There are going to be no shops that we want to buy things from at the Hampton Inn. We can't do our laundry there. So I really hope that the vision for Southland Drive is local entrepreneurs with local businesses and not a B3. Thank you. Thank you. Any others that would like to speak? Yes, ma'am. My name is Susan Dale, and I live at 141 Goodrich. I'm sorry, if you could repeat your name for the microphone. Susan Dale, and I live at 141 Goodrich. My husband Joe talked earlier, and I work at UK. And some of the things I'd like to talk about are intangibles. When we get new people in at UK, I like to take them, and they're looking for a place to live. I like to take them to my neighborhood, show them my street, show them Tahoma and Shady Lane and Edgemore, and tell them what's so great about it. And I take them over to Southland, and we have bluegrass music in the summer that we can hear from the bowling alley every Tuesday night. We have a wonderful farmer's market on Saturday. We have the only food co-op in town. We have great restaurants like Winchell's that have the best cosmopolitan served in Lexington. And they think, wow, it's really nice to be able to come over there and do all this stuff. There are two of the best candy shops in town, and people come all over there to buy that. And when Mr. Simpson talks about a hotel is residence, corporations are not people, and hotels are not residences. They're not going to contribute to our neighborhood. And when you come to Goodrich in the summer, there are a lot of kids. And they are out playing in the streets every day. They're not inside on the computers. kids of all ages play together. And people from a hotel are going to think that's a cut through to get out, and they are going to come flying down our street. When they find out they can't get out, they're going to go up even faster. And, you know, we love South, and we would like to keep it for us. Mr. Simpson, Mr. Greer's have threatened us at every meeting that if we don't like their hotel, they're going to put in something that's so horrible we'll wish we had the hotel. And they won't consider a lower option. They won't tell us what else they're thinking about. But that hotel is not anything any of us are ever going to use. we'd love to see a restaurant, some low-rise building that we could actually show people who want to move to Lexington and say, this is a little gym in Lexington. It's kind of ugly right now, but it could be fixed up. And I would like to think that he's enough of a businessman that if he puts in a B1 development, he is going to try and make it look nice. So that's what I've got to say. Thank you, Ms. Dale. Others? My name is Amy Clark. I live on Castle Road, 628 Castle, and I have to say I'm very impressed with all the neighborhood members here from WGPL. I am speaking basically as a shopper. I'm from the other side of town, and I only get down Southland probably about once a week, and that's because of the congestion. It's tough on Nicholasville. You've got to dodge the commuter traffic. Southland is stop and go. It's pretty congested. You turn in, you turn out. There's been a lot of improvement on Southland in recent years, the Wolf Run improvements, the greening of it, the trees, working with the watershed. There's also been the Rosemont Garden bike lane is very welcome, and things are much better than they used to be. But I go down anyway, even if it's only once a week, because there are things there that you can't get anywhere else in town that I can't. I go to the co-op. I go to the farmer's market on the Sunday in front of Oleka Temple. I go to, gosh, sewing machine parts I get there. I started to make a list, and it wouldn't stop. Shoes, books, paint, curtains, crutches, wheelchair parts, used furniture, architectural elements. And it goes on and on. In a word, Chinese food, in a word, what I get there are retail, trade, and personal services. And that's exactly what the comp plan has designated this area for. The other thing it is is an incubator for businesses that begin there, that start there, that grow there. They even go on downtown. They go to other places. It's a place where you can start small, you can stay small, or you can begin to get your strength and feel your strength. These are real jobs for Lexington, and these are needed jobs, and these are jobs that we as shoppers need to have performed. I'm concerned that taking a portion of that and deeming it suitable for highway traffic kind of business, in this instance a hotel, will not support the local businesses. I think the hotel guests might go to the Chinese restaurant, but I don't think they'd look for sewing machine parts and wheelchair arms and that kind of thing. And I'm concerned that it'll drive up the property values with that precedent. Maybe we can get another B3 patch here. and it will make it hard for the B1 businesses that we need so badly as workers and as shoppers to survive and to thrive and to build on the area and continue to be all it is. It's just wonderful what Southland has done recently with all the improvements just in the last five, just in the last ten years. It's working its way upward. It's pulling together. It really is looking good. But I hope it won't turn into some awful, awful thing still worse than the neglected property that's there now if B3 use is denied. But I don't see why it should. So I look forward to your support in keeping Southland going upward as it is. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Clark. Others? Please come forward. Hi there. My name is Alicia Cox. I'm at 113 Gidridge Avenue. thank you for letting us speak today. I'd like to say that I grew up in Lexington. My husband grew up on Tahoma, and I grew up over in the Alexandria area on Athenia. And we left right after college, and we're gone for about 15, 16 years, and we recently came back. And we knew we wanted to be in the Goodrich, Tahoma, that area. And I'll tell you, I would not have bought our house on Goodrich three years ago if there had been a hotel on Southland Drive. No way. And I don't know who would look at that in the same way ever again with a hotel there. It just changes the area. It changes who comes and goes. And that's another issue that I wanted to address, the transient issue. I have a three-and-a-half-year-old son, and we let him play outside. There's other kids who play in the neighborhood. There's other children on the street. I feel that if there was a hotel that close to our street, people can come and go. People can lie and wait. Nobody wants to talk about it, but child molesters, I know where they are because I have a police email that I get sent from the police department that tells me where certain people live. So I know that these certain trial molesters or whatever sexual offenders live in a certain area. But with the hotel, they can come and go and park their car on our street and watch and go back to the hotel. And that scares me. And again, that's another reason why I would not want to buy a house on Goodrich if I had the choice now, if there was a hotel that close. Everything else that everyone mentioned that's against this, I totally agree with. My husband agrees with as far as the property value. I don't know, and Mr. Simpson saying that people have said that certain areas where hotels have been built, the property value increased or didn't affect it. I can't imagine, because any neighborhood that I've looked at that has a hotel that's even close to it, it's generally not a really nice neighborhood. but it tends to be lower end, and it's just not a place where I would want to live. So I really hope that you all vote against this. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Others? Looks like we may be winding down. Please come forward, sir. Hi. My name is Mike Early. I live at 110 Goodrich. And there's a few things I'd like to address. First of all, the size of the building. We've talked to Mr. Greer. He wants to build one of the largest Hampton Hens around this area, of the surrounding cities. So imagine you're sitting here. Third row back, you've got an eight-foot fence. Look back at that back wall and look up another four stories, and you'll see the height of your building. Now, the people that are right behind this building, most of them are Ford. I live right down the road from them, next to them. And the height of the building is just too tall. As you've seen the pictures that Mr. Simpson showed, it's not as good a covering as what his pictures show. And if there are buildings or trees that are 85 feet tall, what is their age? They're all implanted right inside the property line. So that means they're not going to live too much longer. So you're going to plant pine trees. But behind that is a KU main transmission line. So they're not going to ever let it get up too tall. So that is almost useless. So you're always going to be able to see the building down the property line. Next is the traffic. His traffic engineer says, hey, we're not going to have a problem here. Well, that's what they said about Reynolds Road and Nicholasville Road. And you know what a mess it is. Two to three hundred cars on Nicholasville Road makes a major difference. These people that are coming in are strangers here. They have no idea about these reversible lanes. And I want you to come down Nicholasville Road anytime in the afternoon and try to turn left. It's impossible. I worked one mile from my house. There are many times that it would take me a half hour just to drive from my work to my house. Sometimes I go down Regency Road, go all the way down to Rosemont, come back and come to my house. Traffic is horrid. But one thing most of the people who, if you put in a B1 business, they live here. They have a general eye to get in and out. The only main entrance there is next to Denny's. The only other way you can get out is go down the little alleyway by the donut days. And then you've got to contend with all the traffic for the car wash going in and out of there too. There's no stop sign, so it's just luck may care there. But, you know, I think that the man would have went down a little bit on his height. He wouldn't have so much stuff. and he said, I'm going to put in a traitor Joe, but I didn't think you'd want it. Well, he never asked us. I mean, he hit us between the eyes with this proposal. So I'm just against it. Thank you, Mr. Early. Anyone else wish to speak? Seeing none, what we'll do is move on to the rebuttal and closing statements. The rebuttal and closing statements will be allowed five minutes. We'll start with the petitioner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission. Mr. Simpson, excuse me, one second. As far as the neighbors and or opposition, if someone wishes to come up as a rebuttal, that would be fine. Go ahead, Mr. Simpson. I'm sorry. I got that. I appreciate what neighbors have to say. I've represented them many times. I understand people get comfortable with the status quo in South Fund Drive the way it's been for years and years. And unfortunately, we're at a time where that policy, if it's adopted, will allow this property to remain as it is. Mr. Greer brought it in as a distress condition. and I think if our land use policy is going forward in Lexington, we have to be a little more creative. We're not going to expand our boundary for many years. And so we have to look at can we come up with something creative that won't have an adverse impact on the neighborhood. They questioned at two meetings about whether we're going to hurt their property values, And so we paid an appraiser to evaluate properties in terms of impact, and he tendered a report. He's here today to respond to questions about adverse impact. His report is on the record, and some people don't want to believe it. They complained about traffic, which I understand. Traffic is always a problem. It's a consequence. We submitted a traffic engineering report to Ural's traffic engineer, Rob Hammons, He confirmed the results in terms of what was going to be generated. It's going to be the lowest of all the uses that we have indicated would likely come about on this property. Less traffic, no diminution in property values, in fact increasing because of cleaning this property up, and the improvements to the stormwater, which we don't have to do. The folks that came forward and testified, if I averaged the distance away from the property, it would probably be about 700 or 800 feet or more. several people testified from Irvin Road and Belafonte and Castle that don't live here. What's unusual is three of the four people that live the closest who are going to have the most immediate impact, the most immediate impact 24 hours a day, come forward and support it. How many neighbors come forward and support a zone change? Not many. Why? Because they understand the reality they have to deal with. And they understand the proposal that we're making. And it's a lot better than the alternatives that could be developed with the B1. The B1 has no residential type uses. That's not in dispute. The B3 does. They want to say it's a B3. The only use in the B3 that we're using, we're excluding all the rest, is the hotel. and it has the least traffic and the least noise, outdoor activity of all of the B1 uses that we could put right now. Again, it's an opportunity. You don't find too many people like the Greers that will come up to the plate and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to put in something really nice. You can turn it down and we can lose that opportunity. or you can say, you know what, I think this is worthy of considering. We're going to monitor what you're doing. We're going to hold you to your conditions and your promises, all of which I've committed to. I've set them forth in my exhibit on the last tab, conditions of approval. Everything that I've said today and in terms of writing, we're obligated to do. There's no wiggle room in terms of these promises. The stormwater improvements, we don't have to do any of that in B-1. He is a businessman. and they wouldn't have to do them and he wouldn't do them. Not because he's not nice. He's sitting on a property that needs to be developed. He thinks this is an opportunity to have a win-win situation. I hope you'll give him that opportunity. I believe we've demonstrated we're not going to have an adverse impact. We've had professionals look at this. They're here today for you to question, satisfy yourself about a comfort level. Whether they've done their homework, we've done our homework. and I'd ask you for your approval. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Simpson. Mr. Miller, you're coming forward. Spokesperson as far as rebuttal? Well, I am Joseph Miller, and I feel a little awkward with the title spokesman because I am speaking for an informal consensus of people that I've worked with on this, so I don't want to misrepresent myself. I mean, I'm not an association president or something like that. But I guess I just, you know, and I'm not a lawyer, but I am someone who's familiar with sciences, and I do understand that there are ways to present data that can make a case. In fact, there's often, you know, a common saying about how to lie with statistics. I won't debate the averages that have been presented by Mr. Simpson or his experts who say there would be no impact on property values. But you have heard from individuals here who have said that they would not have bought their home had they seen this development across from them when they went to look at that property. And I also would ask each of you, how would you feel about buying a home with a hotel that's 23 feet from your property line? And again, many of these distances were being presented as to the house, I believe, but the ordinance talks about property line, and the property line distance to the back of this project is 23 feet, which I think, you know, and again, Mr. Simpson highlights the individuals who own properties that are directly affected who are in support of this. And I respect their opinion. They are my neighbors. They're part of our community. But I think they have, shall I say, a biased perspective in the sense that they've been confronted with a dilapidated property for five years that's been owned by this property owner. Why hasn't he done something to improve the setting for those people now? I find that really disturbing that you can make the case that this is for the neighborhood when you've let a property sit unattended for five years. So I do think that's somewhat of a misleading argument. This is not a residential project in any way. I mean, this is inappropriate for this close to a neighborhood, and I believe that we should retain the B1 status of this zone. And I would hope that any developer, if Mr. Greer decides he's going to dump the property because he can't do what he wants, I would hope whoever buys it goes in knowing that it's a B-1 property and with the intent to do the best they can to make money for themselves and to protect the interests of their neighbors. I just think that he knew it was a B-1 property when he purchased it, just like all of us who bought property on Goodrich knew we had stormwater issues, knew we had traffic issues on Nicholasville Road, and people who bought those homes that are affected most directly knew there was a dilapidated property there that has been, my understanding is, unused prior to his purchase of it. So, I mean, I do not find these arguments compelling, and I don't think this is, as I said, it's an opportunity for them, but I would like to think about opportunities for a new kind of development. To me, you know, and again, there are philosophical differences that people have about these things. I see this as sort of a mini center point in microcosm. You know, some developers like the web believe tear down buildings downtown and put up a huge hotel. Others thought we should make this a pedestrian-friendly business investment that has the appropriate scale for our downtown. Now, I don't want to muddy the waters with discussion of the webs in downtown, but I do think that scale is relevant in this conversation, and it does affect our whole neighborhood. It's not just the people whose properties abut this property. And so I really would emphasize that this scale seems just wrong, the wrong kind of project, and Mr. Greer and his attorney have been unwilling to present what any of the B-1 options might be, other than sort of vaguely hinting that we won't like them. Well, to paraphrase the formal president, bring it on. I would like to see some B1 development project take place there. So thank you for your time, and I apologize for not really being prepared to do some sort of formal rebuttal. But that's my view, and I think it's a view that's shared by at least a number of people in the neighborhood. Thank you, sir. May I request the ballots at this time? There's about a minute left. Yes, sir. Come forward. I'll try and make it quick. I'm Bill Fountain. I live on Wall of Ash. I've had the opportunity to live and to work in Singapore for a number of years, for a number of different times. I've lost count of the number of times I've been over there. Singapore is an island state. It has the population of Kentucky, plus another Lexington, plus a Bowling Green, plus an Owensboro, and it's in a geographic area three-quarters the size of Fayette County. And half of that area is in Forest Preserve. My wife and I have never felt the urban pressures that we feel in Lexington. And the reason is that you live close to where you work and you shop where you live. We ask you to please help us to keep this community aspect of Southland Drive. It's not a common concept in the United States now. This neighborhood was built before World War II when it was a common concept. Singapore has mastered this in the modern age, and I think that we can learn a little lesson from that. Thank you very much. We appreciate your consideration in helping us to preserve our neighborhood. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Ms. Wade. Thank you, sir. I do have a few items. The first was that the five-story building in close proximity to single-family residences, the staff believes, cannot be fully mitigated by a vegetative buffer. More or additional separation is really necessary to lessen the impact of this land use. This is why B3 zoning is not well-situated adjacent to low-density residential land uses. Additionally, the separation can be achieved by either shifting the hotel or rotating it parallel to Collins Lane, but the applicant hasn't been willing to even consider those options at this point. Secondly, grab a few things here. The zoning ordinance, as well as the comprehensive plan, do look at hotel use, and a hotel is not, in terms of zoning or land use, considered a residential use in any way. I think the neighbors feel that intuitively, but in terms of land use and planning, it's not considered a residential use in this way. It's not defined in this way and does not function in this way. It is true in Lexington and all over the country. It is and certainly should be regulated as a commercial use. Hotel in our zoning ordinance is defined as a building or group of buildings that contain individual sleeping or living units designed for the temporary occupancy of transient guests. This includes hotels, motor courts, motor lodges. Motor hotels are auto courts, but doesn't include boarding or lodging houses. If you look at other uses in our ordinance, like boarding, lodging houses, or even extended stay hotels, they do discuss that a portion of that is a residential use because people are allowed to stay for a week or more. That's how it's defined in Lexington and in some parts of the country even longer. The comprehensive plan in terms of highway commercial and interstate commercial land use identifies hotels specifically as a use that's located within that, and it discusses retail sale of goods services, which appeal to the motorist, that is, the traveling public, the transient public, not the neighborhood. So it specifically lists hotels as a commercial or interstate commercial use. Barb, if you could go to the next one as well. I believe Mr. Simpson misrepresented the staff's data about recent zone changes and the relationship proposed between a proposed B3 hotel site and single-family residential. First, we looked at similar requested changes, that is, to B3 zones, not, as this one is, to a B5P zone. In addition, in this example, although you can't see it well, it's taken in the wintertime, there is landscaping provided there. There are deciduous trees, and that is a requirement of the zoning ordinance. between a business zone and a residential zone, they are required to put in buffering between those two uses. Additionally, it's a three-story hotel, not a five-story hotel, so close to a single-family residence. And then secondly, Barb, if you could go to the part of the data information, the staff looked for the closest single-family residence established to the seven hotels that were either planned for or built. We looked for the closest single-family residence. We didn't take the whole neighborhood and create an average of the distance. So Mr. Simpson would propose that on Goodrich Avenue, the average house is located 300 feet from this. but in our information, the closest house was located 300 feet. I think that's a big difference in terms of looking at the data that the staff provided. We looked at the closest residence to create a minimum distance and then calculated that based on seven sites. And on average, the minimum distance was 800 feet. We did not measure every house within a neighborhood, otherwise you could imagine that the distance would have been much greater. Again, the staff is recommending disapproval of this request. Thank you, Ms. Wade. At this time, I will close this part of the hearing and open it up for discussion among the commission members. That and or motion whenever anybody is ready. Discussion? I'd say, please, if it's working, I think it is, use the screen, please, so I can see everybody's request. I have a question for the applicant. Did you consider no left turn on Nicholasville Road since traffic was addressed often? Of course, Denny's is there. They have a lease. that access in left-hand turn coming out of that property. As I'm sure you're aware, there's probably 75 left-hand turn opportunities up and down Nicholasville Road between Southland Drive and Fayette Mall. What we have done in connection with our traffic engineer is we're going to put in signs on our property to encourage people that want to make a left-hand turn out of the property to go up to Southland Drive and use the signal and to make a left-hand turn at the light as part of our traffic management plan that we've committed to in connection with our application. Ms. Mundy. Thank you, Mr. Simpson. Ms. Mundy. I have a question for the applicant as well. I have not heard any discussion, although there's been a lot of discussion today, about business along Southland Drive. How many jobs will this facility provide? Phil, please. 25. Come on up to the microphone. Introduce yourself and say... Phil Greer. I live on Tate Street Road. I am the applicant, I guess, and I have a terrible voice right today. I'm sorry. The question was, how many jobs? There will be 25 full-time jobs. Thank you, Mr. Greer. Thank you, Mr. Simpson. Any other discussion? We did not ask for $10 million to build it. Thank you, sir. Mr. Wilson? Yes, let me tell you a couple of concerns that I have. And again, I think the project itself looks good and looks pretty, and I don't have any problems with that. What bothers me somewhat is the inability to seemingly come to a compromise on this because it seems to me that there are alternatives in terms of situating the building that might accommodate and could be a win-win for everyone. The ability to go from five to three stories, I'm still confused about that because I don't know whether that's a mandate of the Hampton Inn franchisor or whether or not that's simply a P&L kind of activity connected with the project as proposed. So I guess I don't know how to consolidate all that except for the fact that I'm thinking that why were the alternatives that had been proposed about the location of this on this particular site and the ability to pull it from five to three stories with maybe a new design would not be accommodating? I appreciate your question, Mr. Wilson, and we have given that serious consideration. And in terms of most cases, if it was a residential development and there was a comfort level that the objectors wanted or the staff wanted four units to the acre and the developer wanted six and there would be a compromise to five, you see that happen. In this particular instance, the property is, we have a small footprint. We also have mandatory parking that has to be in place for the Denny's restaurant. All of that's up front. So we have a limited amount of space that we could turn the building. And you want to make sure whatever you're going to do there is successful. And hotels, as they're laid out, and we have the manager of seven of the Greer hotels here who can testify, and I would encourage him to come up really and respond to your question. But just in general, the hotels are successful because the parking is out front. The guests pull around the front and they park out front. The back portion of this will be reserved primarily for employees, but the front part of most hotels is out front for safety reasons, security reasons, comfort level reasons, and that sort of thing. we've looked at trying to turn it around. In terms of the stories, the difference between what we could put there as a B1, which is 35 feet, and what we're wanting at 65, we're talking about a difference of 30 feet. And I can assure you, based upon my conversations with the Greers, if they could make it work with the kind of money they're going to spend to cut it 30 feet, they would. But it's a deal killer in terms of being able to, with the kind of $15 million investment, they have to have the 105 rooms to be successful so the property will be successful. If you drop it down less than that, the numbers just won't work. It won't make sense from a business standpoint. And if you drop it down to three stories, we can put three stories on a B1. It won't be a hotel. And so that's what this is. It's 30 feet is the difference. We think we've screened it perfectly as we can with the existing trees and the pine trees, but it's the deal killer if we can't get the five stories. Yes. And, Phil, you want to comment on that more? No, wait a second. Wait a second. We did close this part of the hearing, okay? I understand, but I want to limit as far as any new information at this point. So I would really appreciate it. Go ahead. Just be very brief. Hampton will not allow the permit near the university less than 100-room hotel as well, so that's a big part of it. So it needs to be a 100-room greater hotel. And, you know, you lower the story. All the maximum rooms are on the top floor, so you have the lobby and a lot of other services on the first floor. So really, the higher you go, the greater percentage of rooms you have per floor, the higher you go up. So that's one of the other reasons for the five-year. Yeah, if not yourself. Lee Greer. Thank you. They're on Lakewood Drive. Okay. Thank you. Now, discussion? Other questions from anyone? Mr. Cravens. Yeah, I think the size of the building is a little problematic to me, But I think all the other benefits probably outweigh the size of that building that it will do. And I was just sitting here looking at it. It looks like the top three floors, at least on that end, as they went up, they blacked out those top three floors. They used a darker material on the top of that building, which makes it less visible when you sit here and look at it. I mean, you sit here and look at it, and you see the light colors. You see them. But then when you darken that, and I guess an architect did that. I don't think I just discovered that. But it does minimize a little bit, and I hope that's carried around on the end of that building as well, that darker color. And then there's some existing screening there. Maybe some of those trees die. Maybe they don't. They're going to plant some more. That helps some. The traffic impact, to me, looks minimal. And I think you get some stormwater improvement by all this new work, these pipes and things. and I guess I understand the amount of rooms they need to get due to the price of the land that you pay. I mean, you've got to have a maximum amount of units to ratio the price of the land into the project or it doesn't work. And then I guess I'm struck by the $15 million that they're going to spend here in Lexington and the construction jobs. I hope most of that's spent on local contractors and as many materials as you can buy locally because that helps, that turns over in the economy. So that's kind of where I am with it. Thank you, Mr. Cravens. Thank you, Mr. Cravens. Ms. Phillips, and then we have others. Mr. Chair, I'm ready to make a motion, but if others would like to speak to the request. Okay. Thank you. Let's go to the others first. Ms. Blanton? I'll just be brief. Normally I do consider persuasive to look at what else could be built there and what is the impact on neighbors and what are the benefits. But I just can't get over the staff point, number one, and the closeness to the residences. And I agree with Mr. Wilson that, well, I don't believe in micromanaging sites, and I understand the need to have a certain number of rooms, but the ability to shift that building a little bit I think would have gone a long way. And, again, I think there are some great points about this, but I just can't be in support of something that's so close to the residences. Ms. Beatty. First of all, I really want to commend this number of residents coming out because I'm a big proponent of neighborhoods and trying to keep the carrot of neighborhoods. And as you know, sometimes our job gets fairly difficult when we're trying to balance those two. So watching the Southland Drive area transition, I would have to say, even though there are some real concerns about the height of the building and maybe even the closeness to the neighbors, I would have to applaud the developers in trying to begin some infusion and renovating that whole corridor there. And I do think that this may be a way on that corner of jump-starting something really phenomenal on Southland Drive, giving and understanding some of the concerns people have when we don't know, yay or nay, you know, if it will be a positive or negative long term. But I would support somehow beginning to redevelop some of the areas in Lexington that seem to have gone so long with a little neglect. Thank you. Any other thoughts? Mr. Berkley? Thank you. I just want to say, echo some of the comments that have been made by some of the other members, I think the height and the closeness to the neighborhood is a bit of a concern for me. But I'm also looking at the benefits of this project and what I think it would do for Southland Drive. I've heard a lot of comments about wanting retail, wanting office, the other types of uses. And from my experience, those are more intrusive than I think this use would be. I know at the end of Southland Drive, there's quite a bit of retail right now that's available. So that's kind of a consideration for me, as well as the fact that I think you want successful projects in your neighborhoods and in your community. And I think there is a real need for this type of use when you consider the hospitals that are in proximity to the property. The Central Baptist has decided to stay on their site versus move. They're expanding their facility. The U.K. has expanded. I see all this as being a demand generator for a project like this. And I appreciate what the neighbors have pointed out here today, but also I guess I'm kind of considering, too, the people that live closest to it and their opinions. So I'm going to be in favor of this project. Mr. Brewer. Well, I think that the staff made two good points that I have not been able to get over in this one, and their recommendation to disapprove. I also applaud the community for coming out. We clearly see, to me, an overwhelming response in opposition to this. Had it been the other direction, I may have been persuaded to go against the staff on this, but even with Mr. Simpson's excellent skills, I'm not convinced that this meets the criteria to change, so I would be in opposition. Thank you, Mr. Brewer. Others? If not, I would just simply echo what Mr. Brewer said as far as I think the staff made two very good points, and I must applaud everybody that did come out. My initial thought was that the hotel there was good, but to me, such close proximity to the neighbors, and then also the fact that for me anyway, I just haven't heard the argument that B1 is inappropriate there. I'm leaning with the staff right now. Anyone else? I think Ms. Phillips is patiently waiting. Ms. Phillips? I'm going to go ahead and I'm going to ask if the applicant would consider withdrawing or in some way taking back the application to work with the neighbors based on what you've heard from the commission? I can ask them since you asked me. ask me. The one thing I have learned is that this all comes down to compromise. And we had a problem with stormwater, so we compromised and spent a quarter of a million dollars. We had a problem with the traffic. We did a traffic study. We were right. You only have 100 cars going in now there a day. That on Nicholsville Road is not even measurable. Yeah. Mr. Rue, I don't think we need to rehash this. I'd like to answer your question. Okay, that's fine, but we don't have to rehash this. My question is, I mean, it seems to me that the issues are not so much traffic nor what you're addressing now, but it seems to be the site plan. You've heard from the commission that the building is a little too high. The one specific area about the building being too high is the only thing we can't compromise on. We did everything else. Thank you, sir. I'd say it is a compromise. We did want to do taller, but five stories is a compromise. Thank you, sir. Ms. Phillips? Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion then that we move to disapprove this rezoning request. The staff believes that this application is not consistent with the comprehensive plan. The applicant says that it is consistent with the comprehensive plan. You know, I think we can parse words there and make our own interpretations of the intent of the comprehensive plan for the area. But I do not believe that the applicant has shown that the existing zoning is inappropriate, which according to CARES 100.213 is what is supposed to have been shown. So for those reasons, I recommend that I move that we disapprove this. Thank you. Motion has been made for disapproval of MAR 2012-13. if there's no further discussion please vote when it comes up on the screen sir can you have some discussions yes sir Mr. Wilson you have a second yes maybe the hotel's okay but maybe the location isn't good is that kind of what you're thinking I mean maybe it could be moved around somewhere else and maybe then you get a zone, you approve the zone change? Something like that? Could you compromise on that? No, you didn't ask. I'm asking this more direct. We've got a motion on the table and a second. Okay, all right. I think we can respond to the question. He can respond to the question. We've tried to do that. Just yes or no. If you shove it to the front, you impede upon the parking of a restaurant that's got a lease there. And also, you put all your parking in the rear of the hotel. If you do that, you've got old people or people of my age walking from way back in the back of the parking lot and, you know, icy and things like that. It's just a nightmare. All right. So you're not willing to move it? I'm willing to. I can't do it. We've moved that thing all over that lot trying to make it work. Mr. Greer, thank you, sir. I think we got the answer. I just sense it going down. We do have, okay, we're moving on, folks. We do have a motion and a second on the floor. Let's vote when it comes up on your screen. The motion for disapproval passes. We now need a motion for postponement of the zoning development plan. Mr. Chair, I move postponement of ZDP 2012-76 to your field shopping center. Thank you. Do we have a second? Motion has been made and seconded for the postponement of ZDP 2012-76. Please vote when it comes up on your screen. That motion passes. I would like to thank everyone for coming and sharing with us. I'm sorry for the applicant that it didn't work out. Hopefully we can continue and work on something that will work there. We do have another item which is on the agenda. It is on page 3. It's item number 2, ZODA 2012-14, a request to increase the notification requirements for map amendment requests and change applications. I believe Ms. Wade will come forward. Thank you. So we can continue. I don't know. No gavel around here. Ms. Wade. Thank you, Chairman Owens. Members of the Commission, the next item on our agenda begins in the middle of page 2, I believe. And it's item 2 behind tab 3 in your notebooks. Is it on page 2? Page 3, maybe? Page 3. It's already been that kind of day, you know. Page 3. Page 3. Should be behind tab 3 in your notebooks as well. There is a handout at your place. You're going to get tired of us quoting KRS, but the KRS 100-212 is at the top, and then two other white sheets. This is a text amendment, Zota 2012-14. to amend the notification requirements for map amendment requests, that is zone change requests and applications. It was initiated by the Planning Commission earlier this year at the request of the staff. This is a change to Article 6-4 of the zoning ordinance, which regulates what are the requirements for notification when a zone change application is made. There are currently three ways that we notify people that a zone change is being applied for or has been applied for. The first is mailed notice to property owners within 400 feet. The second is a sign posted on the property. And then the third is a legal advertisement in the Herald-Leader newspaper. This text amendment would change the mailed notice requirement for first-class mail from 400 feet to 500 feet in order for it to be consistent with a recent change that the Planning Commission considered and then the council adopted to change the notification requirements for conditional use permits or applications. The staff in that case made a recommendation that it met goal one of the 2007 comprehensive plan, which endorses providing planning processes which enable citizen participation, like we just had, and benefit the community, and this, I believe, would continue to do that. And it also is supported by the 2012 Comprehensive Plan, Theme F1, which encourages engaging residents of the county in the planning process, especially through constructive communication, which certainly mail notice would be that. The change to Article 7 for the conditional use permits gave deference to those over a zone change by increasing to 500 feet, whereas a zone change remains at 400 feet. And the staff doesn't want to convey the message to neighborhoods as well as applicants that conditional use permits have more impact or are more important than a zone change. In fact, I would argue that they would have equal impact or possibly a zone change could have more impact for a neighborhood. So this proposed text amendment would equalize the notification requirements for zone changes and conditional use permits. and the other thing that the staff did create a staff alternative text which made a small change in the lower part of the paragraph to move the words or variance up from the last sentence second to last sentence to move it up a line and that change is proposed just in order to make it more consistent with what a conditional use application to the Board of Adjustment would have to do. The staff, in terms of the other two exhibits we provided, this one was the estimate of what the BOA applications with a distance of 400 feet, they have an average cost of $31 for mailing, for 500 feet it increased by 32%. If we took the same percentage increase for the zone changes that occurred last year, the staff estimates that an additional 20 letters would have to be sent with each zone change on average and that it would increase postage costs for the applicants by less than $10. So the impact is pretty minimal for an applicant in this case. And the staff is recommending approval for two reasons. First, it's supported by Goal 1 of the 2007 Comprehensive Plan and then also theme F1 of the 2012 comprehensive plan. And then this also would create an equality between conditional use permits and zone change applications in terms of regulating notice. The zoning committee did recommend approval of the staff alternative at their meeting three weeks ago. Thank you, Ms. Wade. Thank you. Do we have questions for Ms. Wade? No? Okay. If there's no questions, I don't think there's anyone in the audience that wishes to speak on this. No question. We can close this part and open it up for a motion. Thank you. Well, I might want to make a statement. Yes, you may. I don't have any questions. I don't get this. I mean, I think this extra 100 feet that the staff can differentiate between 400 feet for one type of zone change and 500 feet for another type, I don't think they have to match. I think you have to do that on a lot of text. You have to tell the difference between what kind of zone change it is. And then the people are notified by sign and by direct mail and by an ad in the newspaper. And all it does is just tighten up the zoning ordinance a little more that if you're doing a zone change, just like the one we just had, And it's just something else you've got to do. That extra 100 feet, you might have notified the wrong guy that would have come in here. I mean, you know, zone change is probably in that last case is a $50,000 crapshoot to begin with. And when you're rezoning something, you need some, you'd like to have some certainty when you file application and when you go down that process. although that doesn't always happen. So I would be opposed to it. I move disapproval of the... I think there was other discussion. Can we go with other discussion first? Ms. Plumlee? Well, actually, I was going to move approval, but if that's too early, you can talk a little more, and then I'll come back. I would add one thing, something that I did here today. Tracy, correct me if I'm wrong. If the way it is right now, a zone change requires notification within 400 feet. That's correct. If that zone change did occur and whoever was in at that zone change then came back and requested a conditional use, there would have to be a re-notification of an additional 100 feet. and those people simply may not know or had knowledge that there was a zone change ever to begin with. That's true. Is that correct? That's the situation we're in today. Yes. So, you know, whether we won't, I think we won't people down here, and I think to be consistent 500 feet in all situations would be appropriate as opposed to 401 and 500 and another. Those are my thoughts. So, Mr. Craven, do you still want to make a motion? Sure. Go for it. I didn't say all that just to... Oh, well, hey, go for it. It's probably going to be like the last vote, But anyway, I'm going to move disapproval of ZOTA 2012-14. Thank you, Mr. Cravens. Do we have a second? Motion was made and seconded for disapproval of 2012-14. If there's no further discussion, please vote when it comes up on your screen. This is for disapproval. Pretty close. Pretty close. Is everyone recorded? It looks like it. I thought I did vote. Yes, I did. Two, four, six, eight, nine. We've got one missing somewhere. Mr. Brewer. We can enter your vote. Nay. Nay. Okay. Mr. Brewer's vote was nay, so that motion for disapproval fails. Now we can entertain another motion. Yes, ma'am. I move for approval of ZODA 2012-14. Amend the notification requirements for MAP. Amend request zone change application. Would that be with the staff's alternative text? Exactly. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Motion has been made for approval. Do we have a second? And seconded. Please vote when he comes up on the screen. I think everybody registered and that motion passes. Thank you. Other commission items? I see no audience items. I don't know. So, Mr. King, do you have anything? So, entertain a motion for adjournment. Second. Thank you. All in favor? There we go. Motion. What is this? Meetings adjourned.