You were always on my mind Tell me Tell me that your sweet love hasn't died Give me Give me one more chance To keep you satisfied Satisfied Little things I should have said and done I just never took the time Thank you. Thank you. guitar solo Thank you. guitar solo Thank you. Thank you. guitar solo If everyone take their seats, we'll get started in about one minute. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. It's a wonderful afternoon outside. We'll try and get everybody back outside. I'd like to welcome everyone to the April 10th meeting. And first on the agenda would be approval of minutes, minutes from February 13th, 2014. They were emailed to the commission members. I haven't heard of any changes. If there are any at this time, please let it be known. Otherwise, I'll entertain a motion for approval. Mr. Chairman. Yes, sir. Move approval of the minutes of February 13, 2014. Thank you. Do we have a second? Second. Motion has been made and seconded for approval of the minutes from February 13, 2014. All those in favor, please vote on the screen or otherwise. Motion passes. Thank you. Postponements or withdrawals. Yes, sir. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the commission. My name is Matt Carter with Vision Engineering. If you turn in your agenda to page 4, item B, DP 2014-13, growth properties, request a one-month postponement. Okay, thank you. Anyone in the audience wish to speak to this request for postponement? Commission members? Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion. I'll look and see what date that might be. May 8th. Mr. Chairman, I move for a one-month postponement to May 8th of Development Plan DP 2014-13. Thank you. Do we have a second? The motion has been made and seconded for a one-month postponement of DP 2014-13 growth properties. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. The motion passes. Thank you. Yes, sir. On page 5, item C, DP 2014-16, Chancellor's Subdivision, The Springs, we request a one-month postponement to the May 8th hearing. Anyone in the audience wish to speak to this request for postponement? Commission members? If not, I'll entertain a motion for postponement. Yes, ma'am. Mr. Chair, move postponement of DP 2014-16, Chancellor's Subdivision, to May 8th. Thank you. Second. Motion's been made and seconded for postponement, DP 2014-16, Chancellor's Subdivision, until May 8th. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. That motion passes. Thank you. Yes, sir. One more on page 6, item F, DP 2014-26, Kirk Levington North, Track B. Request a one-month postponement as well. Thank you. Anyone in the audience wish to speak to this request? Commission members? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Yes, ma'am. Mr. Chair, I move for postponement to May the 8th for DP 2014-26 Kirk Levington North. Second. Motion's been made and seconded for postponement DP 2014-26 Kirk Levington North until May 8th. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. That motion passes. Thank you. Thank you. others request for postponement or withdrawals good afternoon mr. Kaley mr. chairman member of the board I have three plans to postpone as well page one first item plan 2014-11 F Tuscany unit 10 quest a one month postponement to May 8th thank you anyone in the audience wish to speak to this request for postponement any Commission members if not I'll entertain a motion mr. Cravens yes move postpone plan 2014-11 F till May the 8th thank you do we have a second seconded by miss Plumlee for postponement plan 2014-11 L Tuscany unit 10 please vote when it comes up on the screen that motion passes yes sir top of Page 2, Item B, Plan 2014-17F, Greendale Hills, Unit 2, Lot 98, request a one-month postponement to the May 8th hearing. Anyone in the audience wish to speak to this request for postponement? Seeing none, any commission members? I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Finn? Mr. Chairman, I move for one-month postponement to May 8th for Plan 2014, Day 71, to May 8th. And we do have a second by Ms. Mundy for Postponent Plan 2014-17L for Greendale Hills. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. That motion passes. Yes, sir. And on page 5, item D, DP 2014-23, Greendale Hills Unit 2. This is the corresponding development plan. Requested one month. Postponent to May 8th. Thank you. Anyone in the audience wish to speak to this request for postponement? Seeing none, commission members? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chairman, I move for a one-month postponement of DB 2014-23 until May 8th. Second. The motion's been made and seconded for postponement of DB 2014-23, Greendale Hills, Unit 2. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. That motion passes. Other requests? Thank you. Mr. Martin. Mr. Chairman, members of the Planning Commission, on page 7 of your agenda, item I, DP 2014-34, the Lynn Grove Edition, Lot 79 and 80, amended. This is property located at 105 and 107 Burley Avenue. Staff has received a written request from the applicant for a one-month postponement. Anyone in the audience wish to speak to this request for postponement? Seeing none, commission members, I'll entertain a motion. Ms. Plumlee? Mr. Chair, I move postponement of DP 2014-34 Lynn Grove addition to May 8th. And the motion was seconded by Ms. Plumlee for postponement of DP 2014-34 Lynn Grove addition. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. That motion passes. Any other requests? Seeing none, Mr. Saleh, I'll ask you to walk us through the consent agenda. Gladly, Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, good afternoon. Putting this in the most positive light I can, I would like to say that most, I can't say most, many of the remaining items on your agenda also appear on your consent agenda this afternoon. The first begins on page 2, item C of your meeting agenda. This is one of two final subdivision plans that have been recommended for conditional approval by your subdivision committee. This first one is plan 2014-20F, an amended final record plat for Denton Farms, Inc., involving property at 100-174 Summersley Place, and also having an address of 3873 through 3883 Wentworth Court. Another item on your consent agenda appears on page 3, item D of your meeting agenda. This is plan 2014-21F, an amended final record plat for Center Point located at 100 West Main Street. There is one development plan that also appears on your consent agenda. It is recommended for approval by your subdivision committee. It appears on page 6, item E of your meeting agenda. This is DP 2014-24, Beaumont Farm, Unit 1, Section 1, Lot 2. This involves property at 3085 Lake Crest Circle. Mr. Chairman, at this time, the Planning Commission can consider approval as recommended by your subdivision committee for these three items, unless a member of the commission, an applicant, or a member in the audience today would ask to have one of these items pulled to allow for further discussion. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Salley. Anyone in the audience wish to pull and hear any one of these items? Any commission members? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chairman, I move it for approval of consent agenda. Thank you. Do we have a second? A motion has been made and seconded for approval of the consent agenda as read. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. That motion passes. Thank you, folks. First item on the agenda would be on page 3. It's Plan 2005-166F, Clark Properties Unit 1B. This is for reapproval. And due to the age, we will be hearing it. and we'll let the staff set up while the staff is setting up if it's already the Commission will take a the release and call of bonds mr. chairman yes move approval of release and call bonds thank you motion has been made in a second for the release and call of bonds from the memo random dated April 10, 2014. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. That motion passes. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. My name is Kelly Hunter. First one, as you said, was the Clark property, 2005-166F. This is a preliminary subdivision plan, and it was first approved in July of 2005, and again on September of 2005. The property is here. It is located. You have Polo Club above it, I-75 down here, and Man of War above here. Anyway, like I said, it was originally approved in July, and all but eight were recorded in September of that year. And every subsequent year, it has come back for re-approval and has been re-approved under the conditions which you can see listed. October 13th of 2011, it was reapproved again with the addition of some text to Urban County Foresters notes. And now is being asked again for reapproval. And staff has reviewed it and has recommended it for reapproval with the addition of two other notes that you can see on your list there. If anybody's got any questions or any questions, no, anyone applicant, I guess you're okay. Wonderful. Anyone else in the audience wish to speak on this plan? Mr. Chairman, I would just clarify. This is a final subdivision plat and not a final plat. Thank you. Okay. I guess probably should clarify that Mr. Kaley did give us thumbs up on this. so if there's no one else wishing to speak on this no commission members I'll entertain a motion on this for reapproval yes ma'am move for reapproval of plan 2005-166F Clark property with the conditions approved on October 13th 2011 and the two additional conditions Thank you. Motion's been made and seconded for re-approval plan 2005-166F within now nine conditions. There's no discussion on motion. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. Motion passes. Yes, sir. I have another one. Go for it. The next one will be planned 2007-156F Clark property, unit 1M. which is the one here. Polo Club again, Ice Houseway sits on the corner down here with 75. Man of War, this one sitting just right below it. It was originally set for approval in 2007. And then again in 2008 with the list of conditions that you can see. also on october 13th of 2011 we went up for reapproval with the original conditions but with the addition of note changes to notes three and five now lapkin is asking again for reapproval of it and staff has looked at it and is recommending it for reapproval with the addition of three notes as you can see any questions applicant another thumbs up from Mr. Kaley anyone else in the audience wish to speak on this plan seeing none if there's no questions from the commission I'll entertain a motion Ms. Blandon move approval of plan 2007-156F Clark property with the conditions approved on October 13, 2011, and the three additional conditions. Motion has been made and seconded for approval of Plan 2007-156F Clark Properties with now 10 conditions. If there's no discussion, please vote when it comes up on the screen. The motion passes. Thank you. next on on the agenda under development plans dp 2014-4 landsbrook plaza shopping center you do have revisions that should be on a salmon colored sheet maybe Hold on just a second sir. We'll let the staff go first and then get you up here. All right. Mr. Carlton. Present it first and then they'll ask you. Good afternoon Mr. Chairman, members of the commission. This is a development plan 2014-4, a Lansbrook Plaza Shopping Center, an amended final development plan for property located at 3501 Lansdowne Drive. It's located at the intersection of Lansdowne Drive and East Reynolds Road. The shopping plaza has been there, what, two, three decades, I would say. The U.S. Post Office is here. The intersection of East Reynolds Road and Lansdowne Drive here, Brigadoon subdivision in the back of it the purpose of this amendment was to add buildable area to building number three here on the corner and revise the parking area on that lot the Planning Commission had postponed this plan at the January 16th February 13th March 13th 2014 meetings because the plan finally did not appear to meet the limits of the variance that was approved in 2000 for this location which involved the building line here along lansdowne drive it was a board of adjustment imposed building line therefore could only be changed by the board of adjustment in order to accomplish the covering of this patio that they wished to do that building line had to be amended It was taken before the Board of Adjustment for a hearing, and it was approved on March 28th BOA hearing. The staff, we have subsequently received from the applicant a revised print on April 1st addressing certain conditions. and based upon that revised print we can now offer you a revised recommendation of approval for this plan and subject to the following conditions the urban county engineers approval traffic engineering approval building inspection addressing office urban forester division of fires approval documentation vision water qualities approval of the cap program requirements moving on to condition eight revise note number six to include a reference to article 16 of the code of ordinances number nine clarify site statistics for site acreage that is to add two and a fraction acres to the site statistics for that lot three a building three i'm sorry and finally condition 10 to note the board of adjustment approval of of the building line setback variants on the plan. So if you have any questions, comments at this time, we'll be glad to take them. Any questions at this point? No? Yes? Mr. Penn? So you do meet the parking requirements now? Yes, sir, they do. The new development plan? Yes, sir, they do. Based on the seating? Yes, sir. Mr. Penn, if I could just add to that, in this particular zone, The parking is not a space per seats or a space per square footage requirement. It is a space of paved area, vehicular use area to building floor area. It's a ratio of two to one to those two. It's somewhat unusual compared to the other zones we have. Thank you. Applicant, anything to add in agreement? I'm in agreement with the conditions and the question that you approve it. Okay. Thank you, sir. Your name? John Kingston. Thank you, Mr. Kingston. Anyone else in the audience wish to speak to this plan? Any other questions from Planning Commission? Yes, sir. No? No question? You're ready? If everybody's ready, I'm ready for a motion as well. So go right ahead. Mr. Chairman, I move approval of DP 2014-4 Landsberg Plaza Shopping Center with the conditions outlined by staff. Second. Motion's been made and seconded for approval of DP 2014-4 Landsberg Plaza Shopping Center with the revised 10 conditions. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. Motion passes. Thank you, sir. Enjoy the afternoon. Thank you. Thank you. And I believe we can move on to page 6, is it? 6. At the bottom of page 6, Kirk-Levington Hills Apartment amended, 3050 Kirk-Levington Drive. You do have a revision that is on a pink sheet before you. Ms. Gopp? Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Like you said, the copy of the new conditions are located on the pink sheet. kirk levington the property is located south of new circle roads up here and you're heading out takes creek road you have kirk levington drive and you have this property here right now they're asking for additional square footage to replace a apartment unit that was lost for fire originally this plan was recommended for postponement because they did not give us enough information to answer whether or not they met the floor area ratio. So at subdivision committee, they had that recommendation. And then between that meeting and today's meeting, they have come in with a revised plan, and we have revised conditions because they've given us the information so that they are now able to meet the floor area ratio. We are now down to nine conditions. The first eight are sign-off conditions from different governmental agencies. engineering traffic building address building inspection addressing urban forester fire waste and the division of water quality for the capacity assurance for the replacement of the new building we have one additional cleanup condition which is addition of purpose proposed and existing easements right now we know it's a large area and they should have some type of easements coming in so we'd like for them to review that and add those if there's anything else on there if there's any questions Questions from planning commission? No. Okay. Applicant? Matt Carter, Vision Engineering. We're good with the nine conditions and entertaining questions you may have. Thank you. I just like to say, I don't know, I think you and Tony Barrett might be in running for the least number of conditions on the plan. Thank you. Anything from the commission member? Mr. Wilson? Mr. Chairman, I'd like to move approval of DP 2014-27 Kirk Leffington Hills Apartment amended with the nine conditions outlined by staff. Thank you. Do we have a second? Second. Motion has been made and seconded for approval of Plan 2014-27 Kirk Leffington Hills Apartment with the revised nine conditions. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. Motion passes. Thank you. I think moving on to DP 2000 on page 7, DP 2013-33, Gardenside Cabana Club. You do have revised conditions on a yellow sheet, a proposed waiver on a white sheet, and then also findings for use of an access easement on a white sheet as well. If we need it. Mr. Martin. Mr. Chairman. Members of the Planning Commission, the next item on your agenda is item H on page 7. DP 2014-33, the Gardenside Cabana Club, amended. As your chairman stated, we have handed out revised conditions to you on a yellow sheet. This is property that was recently subject to a zone change to R3. Here is Maywick View Lane. This is a private right-of-way and utility easement. Here is Cross Keys Road, which is a public street, and this is about a block off Alexandria. is where we are located. I know many of you are very much aware of the Cabana Club location and the YWCA that was here. And this location was phase one of affordable housing development. This took advantage of the P1 zoning, which was the original zoning for the property that allows residential development above offices. And that's how this phase one of this property was developed. Today, before you, you have a final development plan on phase two of this property. They are proposing three buildings, three stories in height each. There's 35 units and 71 bedrooms, 66 parking spaces on the property. Access is through the existing access point in this location on a proposed access easement to serve both lots two and lots three. This is a preliminary subdivision plan as well that you have before you, and you've seen combined plans. They are going to lot this property off for funding reasons. Back here is lot three. This is lot one. Here is lot two. This is the utility structure, you may recall, that's on the property. The subdivision committee recommended postponement of this plan originally out of very, very strong concern about detention on this property. Now, as you all are aware, we have redevelopment policies in the stormwater manual that do allow properties to not provide detention based on previous development. However, this is a large site, two-acre site. The subdivision committee was very concerned about that. And therefore, they got the message. They are proposing underground detention in this location. So you're going to have quantity and quality improvements on this development plan that you see before you. There are standard sign-off conditions on this plan, as you can see. There are numerous cleanup conditions. A couple of the conditions that you see before you are, of course, provided that you grant a waiver. and there is a finding as well that's associated with that waiver. We have handed those out to you on white paper, both a waiver report and a finding for the access easement. As I stated before, they're proposing three lots on the property. The waiver that they're requesting is for your frontage requirement under the subdivision regulations. And again, what's interesting about this property, it was never platted. This is a remnant. Everything was platted all around it. And as I stated before, Maywick View Lane is a right-of-way easement. It's not a public or private street. It's got kind of a unique status, and it goes way back quite a few years. You may recall at the zone change, that status of that road was discussed extensively before this body. So they're requesting a waiver because they lack frontage on a public or private street along Lot 2. Lot three, as you can see, has no frontage at all on a street. So, or even a right-of-way easement, as it were. But historically, this property has been served by this access point into the parking lot, both for the Cabana Club and the Y. And they are proposing this access easement again to serve these properties. There is also a topographic issue right through here that would make access, whether it's even legally possible, physically, it would be quite a challenge to provide access. This is a very large access easement right through here coming to this established point. Staff has reviewed the waiver. We are recommending approval to you. As you know, a lot of review goes into a development plan. Our public safety folks have reviewed it. There is a note on the development plan. It's one of the conditions that they've met previously, that no development occur here until the Planning Commission approves a development plan for Lot 3. That will allow the opportunity for any access issues to be revisited by the Planning Commission and by your staff, if necessary. The finding that is associated with this waiver request is for the access easement, and staff is recommending approval of that finding as well. As I stated, this is an affordable housing project. The applicant is concerned about item 20 on your agenda, which is the review by technical committee prior to plan certification. And they presented that to your subdivision committee. they have staff's understanding in both conversations with members of our technical committee and with the applicant have been working very diligently with the technical committee folks. They've been meeting with them up front and attempting to deal with any concerns that they may have and address those concerns. It's our understanding as well, and they can elaborate on this for you, that they have already made an application to the Division of Water Quality under the Capacity Assurance Program. So staff is comfortable to report to you that they have been making an effort to deal with these standard sign-off conditions associated with your technical committee. And I will allow them to elaborate on that for you. We also ask them to document compliance with the notification requirement with the neighbor. Again, you may recall extensive discussion at the zone change with a neighbor who was concerned about some issues with the previous development and with access through the property. They did notify that gentleman. There's been communications, and as I understand, there's been a meeting with that gentleman. They are proposing a fence on the perimeter of the property to help reduce cut-through traffic and pedestrian traffic into his property. And for those of you I know who were not on the commission and not part of that, that was a gentleman who owns this property here, and they are proposing a fence and have met with him. And, again, they can elaborate on that, but apparently he is satisfied with the efforts that they intend to make to try to reduce some of the pedestrian traffic and that sort of thing that he felt negatively impacting his property. And with that, I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. Mr. Martin, I'm always concerned about this access easement stuff. How big is the priesthood property, the third property there that we're not looking at? This is a two-acre track combined, and they're breaking up approximately in half. Oh, so it's two acres, including the white plus the three buildings. I thought the two acres was just worth it. It's the entire acre. Okay. And so the access easement is, regardless of what they develop on the other, the access easement is big enough and will handle the traffic? We believe so. Yes, sir. And again, traffic, fire, those folks are already there. Well, I mean, it depends on what you do with the rest of that property. Yes, sir. And again, I might add, and this is in your report, they are conditionally zoned and are restricted to 72 units. So they can only put the identical number here that already exists in Phase 1 and Phase 2. So there's a limited amount of future development available to them on this property. Same ownership of all three? Yes, sir, it's the same ownership, and we would anticipate affordable housing, that it will be maintained under the same ownership. Thank you. Mr. Brewer. Yeah, Tom, you mentioned the technical committee is making progress, or various parts they're making progress with. Do we still need number 20 then, review? I believe the applicant would like to request to this body a waiver of that condition. Okay. In anticipation of that, are you okay with that waiver? I can report to you that they have been working with the technical committee members. So, yes, they've done what they said they were going to do from a staff's perspective. They have been working on this diligently up front. Other questions at this time? I'll probably save a follow-up until we hear from the applicant. So if there's no other questions for Tom at this point, applicant? Good afternoon. Thank you. My name is Mary Hossain, and I represent the Klingers Group. And I'm Johan Graham. I'm the project manager for AU Associates. owner of all three of these properties um i would like to speak to the first um i believe it's 10 items on the conditional approval and tom kind of cleared that too but i have received letters emails and actually on the portal the city's provided portal sign-offs or they can't officially sign off until the board the commission approves but they have written that they have no further comments and i have email documentation if you'd like to see it i brought it um discussing the fact that that they feel like we've complied or are showing that we're doing what they need to have done including the the ones that are listed up there specifically having brought with me letters and emails showing that they have no comments on our plans as we've presented we some of the items going down are mostly drafting edits and we've taken care of quite a few of those i'm comfortable that the last couple of drafting edits will be quick and then on item numbers 13 and 19 on the new the edited one those are those are quick uh remedi remediation things that are notes on the the plans that we will add as well. And as Tom mentioned, we did add the detention in there to address the major, I think, that was the big concern at our last meeting. So I think based on that, and we're continuing to work with the technical committee members. I call them personally, sometimes on a daily basis, just to check in and make sure that we're still good. And I did so before this meeting too. I realized last time our neighbor was we had a somewhat contentious dialogue here at the Planning Commission meeting. I've sat down with him and reviewed his comments about potentials. Take a microphone with you. Oh, sorry. I've sat down with him and gone over his major concerns about basically cut-through traffic going across the site in activity in this area. And so his concern was really that we fenced the property from our property line this way to where the Clover's has already fenced the property to eliminate cut-through traffic, Thank you. Questions for the applicant? On your detention basin, which is shown on your development plan, those three lots, is it your intent that that just would handle the water on where you're doing this development plan, or do you plan to let that detention help on the other plan that you'll come in later with? Get back to the microphone. Yeah. Currently, we are planning a detention, underground detention for both phases, potentially a future phase and for this phase. So this detention basin underground handles phase two's water. So it's separate from your phase three? Correct. So they'd both be handled separately. Thank you. Other questions? Ms. Plumlee? Could you tell me about the fence? Yes, I guess it's per the requirements of the land, Section 18, the land use buffer, land use buffered ordinance of the land use code. So it requires a certain height fence with certain type of plantings in front of it along the entire length of the fence. So what our neighbor really wanted was not a visual barrier but a physical barrier. So we've chosen a chain link fence, which is what he wanted with tall plantings from the planting groups that were suggested in the code. Thank you. Other questions? At this point, I would offer this. I don't think we have to see your emails, but I would turn them in to the staff for official record on that. Others in the audience that wish to speak on this plan? Any other questions for the afternoon? No. Thank you. Thank you. Questions for the staff on anything? Tom, I would ask this now. and it directly goes to all the sign-offs and so forth. You made mention of the fact that you had knowledge that already turned in an application to Division of Water Quality, I believe. Yes, sir. Yes. And the way this condition reads is that water quality's got to approve it or the certification won't go forward anyway. Yes, sir. That is correct. All right. Any other questions? I've got one. Yes, sir. Tom, being as we've been on this plan as long as we have, is it prudent to waive number 20, the technical measure, when they really haven't signed off on it? I believe it's appropriate in this case. Yes, sir. They have been working very diligently with the parties involved. The technical committee will approve it? The technical committee will not see the plan at the committee meeting. But obviously all the people that are required to sign off on it have seen it, will see any revisions and sign off on them. But this is a little different than normal procedure. It is, again, yes, sir. As you know, late plans are required to go to the technical committee unless this body grants some relief from that condition. Any other questions? If not, thank you. We'll close this part of the hearing and open it up for any discussion and or motion. Any motions? I would, depending on which way you go, I would ask for two. We do have findings for the use of access easement that is mentioned in the development plan conditions. that covers that. I would need a second motion for the waiver. So, not to confuse issues, but Mr. Brewer? Okay, go for it. Do you want to clarify what you just said? We don't need a separate motion for the waiver? I would like a separate motion for the waiver. The findings for the use access is noted in condition 18 of the DP. Am I on? Yeah, there we go. Okay. Make a motion for approval of DP 2014-33 with the following current number 20 deleted and with the note including the findings for access easement. Thank you. The motion has been made for approval of DP 2014-33. Revised staff recommendations with 19 conditions deleting number 20. Do we have a second? Second. Motion has been made and seconded for approval. Any discussion on the motion? If not, please vote when it comes up on the screen. Motion passes. And then waiver. Mr. Chairman, may you motion for approval of DP 2014-33, the waiver for land use regulations. Thank you. Do we have a second? Second. Motion's been made and seconded for approval of the waiver of land subdivision regulations for DP 2014-33. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. That motion passes. Thank you, folks. Thank you for the work and effort to get it to this point and for including the stormwater detention. I believe next and maybe final would be on page 8, ZDP 2008-59, Bennett Vaughan Residential Development, located 522 and 528 East Main Street and 109 Kentucky Avenue. Mr. Chair, Mr. Martin, members of the Planning Commission, on page 8 of your agenda, item J is ZDP 2008-59, Bennett Bond Residential Development. This is a preliminary development plan that was approved as part of a zone change. And subsequently, no final development was filed on this property. And there's a two-year time limit that requires a final development plan. Otherwise, this plan is not valid without your re-approval. And they brought it back to you now at this meeting to reactivate it with your approval. It is on the corner of Kentucky Avenue and East Main Street. They are proposing a six-story building, five residential floors, two units per floor. It's about 8,600 square feet. Parking is interior to the building as well. There is a, if you'll put up the first. Again, this is a ZDP, and I know there are many people on the planning commission that were not around. This is the area that just shows you Main Street and Kentucky Avenue outlined in yellow. That is the area that is being proposed for this development. And then the next one, please. That's a rendering of the building. and you can see again with the multiple floors the large balconies on the property there was a lot of discussion about design and open space and that sort of thing on this property it was rezoned to b2b the next one please that's again another rendering to orient you to what was presented to the previous planning commission how the building would look you can see access points there off of Kentucky Avenue into the underneath into the basement area where there will be a garage for the building and the final one please this is a close-up of the type of detail that was discussed at length with the staff and with the planning commission to some change on the orientation of the building to the street you can see on your agenda that we have some standard sign-off conditions, and there were several cleanup conditions originally on the plan. Again, they have met those. This is a re-approval. The usable open space is always as important in a residential development. The resolved compliance with Article 15-7 of the zoning ordinance on the final development plan, those are infill, those are design requirements that they'll have to document to this body that they are complying with on their final development plan. And you can see with number 12 that there were details of great concern on the front yards, landscaping, hence this exhibit I wanted you to see, considering the pedestrian facilities, bus shelters, and the first four features. Again, those were discussed at length at the zone change. These are things that will have to be nailed down and specifically approved at the time of the final development plan. This, again, is a preliminary development plan, as I stated. And these were renderings. So again, we would, at the time that a final development plan is proposed, we will need to make sure that those types of design details are fully fleshed out and agreed upon and will be part of the project. With that, staff is recommending re-approval of the plan. We've added one condition, and again, that's a cleanup on the building inspections approval of landscaping and landscape buffers. That's a change to the ordinance since this plan was previously approved. And I'll be happy to try to answer any questions you may have. Yes, ma'am. I know we recently put into place the design excellence situation or whatever. This, because it's a reapproval, does not fall under that, right? It's not in the area either, I think, that's being looked at for design excellence. But there are design criteria that exist that will apply to this plan, and staff was very concerned and still remains concerned that we see a very good designed building with good orientation to the street. Ms. Mundy, if I could also respond to your question. This property is in a B2A zone. Not a B. and under the draft for design excellence, this could potentially fall under the new design excellence program at some future point. Mr. Penn. Mr. Martin, when this plan was certified, I assume we had a preliminary development plan when we certified the plan. This is the preliminary development plan. But, I mean, when it was certified previously, like the zone change time. Yes, sir. This plan was certified for that zone change. But there was a preliminary development plan at that time. This is the preliminary development plan, Mr. Penn, that you all approved and was certified. They just are required within two years to file a final development plan, or this one is no longer valid. So my second question is going to be, how does this match up with the other preliminary, but the same thing? It is the same plan. It is identical. Thank you. So, Mr. Martin, you're saying this is now a final development plan? No, sir. No. You are reapproving the preliminary, and if you approve and re-approve, they have two years to get a final. Okay, very good. So that was kind of leading to my next question. When you were talking about design guidelines and so forth, how are we going to get another bite of the apple if this was a final? But you've answered that. Okay. Very good. Other questions? If not, applicant, Mr. Murphy. Good afternoon. Thank you very much. I'm Dick Murphy representing Justice Enterprises, LLC, which is the owner. We're just trying to get this recertified so that we can start moving forward with the project. This is the plan which was certified with the zone change, and as Mr. Martin mentioned, since no final was filed, we have to get it recertified before we can move forward. So it's exactly the plan which was certified after the zone change was approved. Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Murphy? Anyone else in the audience wish to speak on this plan? If not, any other questions from the commission? If not, I'll close it and open it up for a motion. Anyone's available? Ms. Mundy? Mr. Chair, I move approval of ZDP, re-approval of ZDP 2008-59, Bennett Vaughn Residential Development. Second. Motion's been made and seconded for approval of ZDP, re-approval of ZDP 2008-59, Bennett Vaughn Residential Development. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. The motion passes. Thank you, Mr. Murphy. I would almost speculate and guess there are visitors in the back, maybe students from the university? Students from Dr. Roche-Phillips' class? Welcome. Welcome this afternoon. Tell her we said hello. Is she treating you good? Better than we deserve. Oh, dear. Any, back to the agenda, any items from the commission? Staff items. Yes, ma'am. I put an envelope at Eros Place if you haven't already opened it. It's the most recent lawsuit relating to Boone Creek. And so it's just for your reading. It's not. There will be a responsive answer filed sometime within the next probably 10 days. Okay. Anything else? Mr. Chairman, just a real quick reminder. We put a memorandum from the council clerk to you about some statements that are due in the very near future. Thank you. Fortunately, there's no names on it or mine would be on there. So if you have not turned it in, please do so quickly. there is a deadline. Any other items? Work session next week. I've been talking to Mr. King. Zota process, talking about small area plans. And who knows? They may be something else. Audience items. Anything? If not, I'll entertain a motion for adjournment. Any seconds? Motion's been made and seconded. All those in favor, please say aye. Any opposed? Thank you. Meetings adjourned.