The Ladies and gentlemen, I believe we're ready to start our planning and public safety committee meeting. Do I have a motion to approve the February 10, 2015 committee summary? So moved. Do you have a second? Second. We have a motion to approve the 2015 committee summary meeting by Vice Mayor Kay and seconded by Council Member Bledsoe. All those in favor? Aye. Those opposed? Next, Council Member Henson. I believe this is your item on the For Sales Road Corridor study. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Just to give you a little background history on this, since I have been in council, this has been like a priority for me to upgrade the For Sale Road corridor. And many of it is due to the tremendous amount of pedestrians, bus, public transportation along the corridor, and also being a gateway into our beautiful city. We felt that it needed some major attention. Through the NPO, we were able to get a small study done that helped tremendously with pedestrian markings and signaling and things like that. But we felt like we needed more to improve the appearance of the corridor and further enhance the pedestrian traffic access and just to beautify it. So through our budget, and I believe it was 2012 or 13, that we did end up with $150,000 to do a major corridor study. And it is now complete. And I believe, Brad Frazier, are you going to come up to the podium first to kick it off? and yes ma'am thank you very much thank you the what I was just going to say real quick councilmember Henson has already hit the highlights of it this is a corridor study for US 60 there as she was saying this is something that's been in works for a while for a while and after we went ahead and had the budgeted amount and we were able to work with state folks local folks, MPO, and determine an adequate scope for council's desires for this funding. We went ahead and put a proposal on the street, and we selected EA Partners as our consultant, along with Carmen and Associates. And Tom Hatfield with EA Partners is here to go ahead and give us a presentation on this study and answer questions afterwards. Thank you, committee members. My name is Tom Hatfield. I'm with the EA Partners. As Brad said, we began this study back in June of this year. It is a 2.5 mile corridor study from Parker's Mill Road to Oliver Lewis Way. And I'm going to just kind of, we're going to take today as just really an introduction of the study. following this presentation. If you'd like, we'd be happy to address any comments. John Carman is with me. I've got three extra copies of this. Bill, I know that you did not. You can leave one at the clerk's table as well, please. And just to kind of get the PowerPoint presentation. Mr. Hatfield, let's give you a heads up. You've got 15 minutes. Okay. Thank you. I have no idea. Okay. There we go. Again, we began this study in June of 2014. We completed it in February of 2015. It's a two-point mile corridor from Parker's Mill Road to Oliver Lewis Way. As you all are aware, Versailles Road is a major arterial state primary route, part of the federal aid system, national truck system, major commuter route, and obviously It connects Lexington with Versailles, Keeneland, Bluegrass Airport, and the Bluegrass Parkway. It serves as a connector between neighborhoods, businesses, University of Kentucky, and the distillery district off of Forbes Road and Old Frankfort Pike and Manchester Street. The traffic volume for this section is 25,000 vehicles per day. It's an extremely high number. This is also the highest LexTran route of any route in Lexington, and it's also one of the highest uses of pedestrian traffic in Lexington. The study objectives, those were developed in conjunction with studies prepared by the Kentucky Transportation Center with input from the LFUCG and stakeholders meetings. Those objectives, as we moved through the project, were to provide a safer, more friendly environment for pedestrians and bicyclists, to encourage multimodal usage. At the same time, whatever we did, we wanted to maintain the current corridor capacity and level of service. We wanted to improve the roadway drainage, provide visual enhancements to the corridor, develop fundable projects, and to create a complete street. In the process of developing our proposed improvements, we divided the quarter into five distinct segments with the transition between Mason-Healy and Oxford East. We developed these typicals with the existing right-of-way in mind, trying to work within either the existing curb lines or the existing right-of-way where possible. We also recognized a significant overhead electric line or utility line that runs along the north side of the corridor, which is also the left side as you're going into town. We wanted to honor that utility and try not to disturb it if possible. So all of our work began from the north side and progressed to the south side. And because of that, we were able to make a small impact on properties for right-of-way acquisition, approximately 33 properties along the 2.5-mile corridor. These are just some of the typical sections. I'm not going to go through them, but just kind of gloss over them. This is the section from Parker's Mill to Village Drive. These are the plan sheets, taking every advantage that we can. this area has a large right-of-way, so we're trying to make the utility strips as wide as possible and create as much green space. This is the section from Village Drive to Mason-Healy, taking advantage of limited access points and putting the median back that was taken out in about 1977, putting the median back and getting the opportunity to create some beautification and some opportunities for public art. This is just a planned view of that section. This is a rendering that John Carman has created of what that would look like with the median in place. Oxford East to Red Mile, again, taking opportunity of the two-way left turn that is in there, trying to add some access management points, and taking an opportunity to put a median in there to create some beautification and an opportunity for some public art. In this section is where the right-of-way issues occur. You can see the utilities down the left side of the typical there, and we have widened. On the previous two sections, the bike path was in the right-of-way or in the curb line. In this section, we've actually moved it out to the sidewalk, and that is a shared-use sidewalk running outside the curb line. But we've added a utility strip to try to give you some separation between the traffic and the pedestrians. Again, there's a view of the plan sheet. This is a rendering of the public improvements. This is from Red Mile to Porter Place. Not much we can do in this section. This section pretty much resembles the same as it does now, except it does have the eight-foot shared use path running down the south side. Again, we've also tried to capture a utility strip, again, to give some separation. This is the overpass as you come into Oliver Lewis Way, again, taking advantage of limited access points and a wide median to create a planter across the bridge of Derudy Street and the railroad to, again, give you the opportunity for some beautification in public art. That's what that plan sheet would look like. I'm going to turn it over to John Carman and let him hit the high spots of the intersection enhancements and let him explain those. Thank you. I think the recommendations that you've been looking at, you can consider these to be systemic in that we've integrated a number of the objectives together as a whole. We've been able through the planning and engineering, we've been able to create a safe corridor for both vehicles, pedestrians, and cyclists. What I think is really important and really cool about this is that this is a really important link of the whole connectivity chain that we're trying to create with downtown Lexington and the outlying areas. We've also considered this area as a gateway, and the gateway is the entire two-mile stretch of the corridor, but also there's many gateways within that corridor, and they're the important nodes of the intersections, the really important intersections, and we consider Alexandria Drive to be one of those. And we think enhancement of the gateways or these intersections is important. We have limited right-of-way, but there's other enhancements that we can do, either with public art or pavement treatments and some landscape. This would be the Red Mile Road gateway, great connectivity to the distillery district, Forbes Road, and the University of Kentucky. We feel like, again, a series of gateways is important to the visitor experience. It also, by creating these gateways, helps us to meet one of the objectives of traffic calming, which is all of the improvements will do that, but gateways will begin to slow the traffic down and create a much safer environment for both vehicles, pedestrians, and cyclists. And again, just some additional renderings of what some possible suggestions would be for gateways or intersections. And again, creating a holistic experience of the entire corridor. It's not just about little slices or little moments. It's about the entire experience on a holistic basis from one end of the corridor to the other, and also ideas that could even reach out further to the west to Kingland or the airport. So I think just in conclusion, we're attempting to put this on the six-year highway plan. This document, the conclusions of this report, will allow us to have a tool to help create funding sources to hopefully motivate people to help fund this. We've also created, looked at this to be able to implement this in different phases that make a lot of logic and sense. Just a real rough summary of what the costs are. These are really what we would expect to be a reasonable cost to create not only a visually enhanced environment, but a very functional environment that works better than it does now. just a continuation of that and again consider this as a two over a two-mile corridor when you're thinking about the cost are you finished mr. Carmen yes ma'am thank you thank you any questions from council members council member Bledsoe thank you chair I was curious if you don't mind the renderings you have of the intersections that are those painted is that What media are you using to do that? I mean, I think they're beautiful. I'm all for traffic calming and for beautification. How would you physically do that? That is a fairly typical, I won't say typical, but it is a, this is one, it is a type of surface that is impression, that is laid on, it's not as thick as asphalt, but it is a material that is used in crosswalks. so it is durable to, you know, constant traffic. This material, you see this a lot, or maybe you've seen it used in crosswalks, where crosswalks are used with different patterns or impressions. It's by no means atypical. It's somewhat unique. And I don't know if you picked up on the fact that we're trying to be sensitive to the specific location and the culture of that area. Oh, they're beautiful. I was thinking about maintenance and durability and upkeep. Well, as you go through the kind of the cost-benefit analysis of these, there is that to consider. This type of material probably would have a six- to eight- or nine-year lifespan. Wow. Okay. Not unlike a lot of enhancements that we do, whether it's our backyard or a right-of-way, there's always maintenance considerations and sustainability questions that need to be asked. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, Chair. Council Member Lamb. Thank you, Chair. I was curious about the right-of-way acquisitions. I'm not sure if this would be – are they state or local or a combination, the 33 right-of-way acquisitions? I'm just curious as to – Well, it's a state-maintained road. Okay. I don't know if the city would be responsible for acquiring the right-of-way. It's probably similar to what you've done on Todd's Road, where the city is actually making the contacts and acquiring the right-of-way. I'm not sure who's paying for that. To answer your question, Council Member, it will be dependent on how the project is laid out. If it's going to be something, for instance, that the city chooses to do on their own, I can see where we can have a hand in that, just as he was talking about with Liberty Todd's. But I would suspect, depending on what seems to be the logical route to get funding for something like this, the state would do it, since it is U.S. 60. All right. Thank you. Thanks, Chair. Vice Mayor Kaye. Thank you, Chair. This is kind of a small point, but a question for, I think, traffic engineering. I noticed in the design that all of the intersections have rounded corners, and I understand that some people, anyway, advocate squaring those off so that automobiles aren't inclined to just roll around that intersection. Is that something that you have thought about? Is that a conscious element of the design? Can you tell me a little bit about that? Council Member, what I'll do is I'll tell you that the reason that you see those radiuses, that roundness at the intersection, is turning movements of trucks. When you go ahead and square them off, it occupies more space. But if you go ahead and you round it off, then it allows those back wheels, especially on right turns, to go ahead and stay on the pavement and not come up onto the sidewalk area. What you're talking about, not saying it's not doable, but if it is, there will have to be real design considerations to be mindful of because then you will have to pull that area back further, in my mind, so that you do not have those rear wheels creeping up onto the sidewalk where pedestrians will be standing. And quite frankly, I think the current standard right now, it is for radiuses at those intersections, the curvature. So if that was explored, we'll have to take a look at it, and we probably have to be mindful of those points. Great. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Member Farmer. Thank you, Madam Chair. Broad comments. From the Corridors Commission standpoint, this is a gateway that we talk a lot about and we have a lot of input about. And to see it summed up here is really great. It's such an important part of the city that just seems to have been overlooked in so many ways. Just a couple of specifics. when we've been looking at the RFP that we're working on or working through for things related to entranceways for the Breeders' Cup. Mr. Carmen, you were successful in that. And you were showing some public art in that presentation, and I notice you have it here too, as well as in some part of this a fence down the center of the road. And I'm just, in making a presentation or working with the state, Will those things be possible? I mean, you've drawn them. They look great. I'd like to see them come to fruition, but I just wonder what the – is there a restraint in our opportunity for? There are constraints. All right. We have to meet – we have to comply with various different right-of-way conditions with the state. These are applications that we've shown that we have successfully used in other urban conditions. Right. There's some give and take, particularly with the medians, not only with fences and landscape, but even with sculpture. We're really promoting and advocating that public art or sculpture be used. Medians, there's a lot of precedence in many urban conditions for that. With the curb conditions on the median, that enhances our opportunity to use larger trees or public art, whatever that may be. It's all about the protection of the vehicle when you're considering the requirements of the transportation cabinet. The fence that you saw in the median, that is specifically used in areas of high-volume pedestrian traffic. One of the primary concerns that was brought to us by Councilperson Henson and her constituents is that there's just a lot of random crossing with no regard to going to the intersections or crosswalks. So we have seen in urban conditions that by just placing a simple fence that you cannot step over, they may get caught out there once, but hopefully they wouldn't do that. The visual deterrent would hopefully be enough. But it's a proven deterrent to prevent that kind of random crossing mid-block in between intersections. And then on the viaduct, there's room for planting down the center of it there? We've actually, there is. If you think about it, there's a full lane, what's called the, it's called a twiddle, left-hand turn lane, that about three-quarters of it is not used to turn left onto Oliver Lewis Way as you're coming into town. It's vacant real estate. It is. And actually that would even come over the crown of the bridge so that the visibility of whatever enhancements to the center of that could not only be seen coming west out of town, but coming east into town as you're approaching the bridge because it goes over that crown of the bridge. You're seeing whatever enhancements that are there. we haven't done a full structural engineering, but enough of a structural assessment that tells us that the weight of that is actually less than the weight of live loads of semi-trucks or whatever. So we've done a little due diligence on that. Excellent work for all involved. Appreciate the presentation. And I agree with Council Member Bledsoe. Those intersections are great big canvases, and you've treated them as such. And I think that that's, again, just a nice, subtle opportunity to take something that is perfectly bland and make it something better. So I don't know what action we can take here today, but I am supportive. Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Councilmember Farmer. Councilmember Lamb. I forgot I had another question. I wanted to find out. I know that it says about the funding there's various sources, federal, state, and local level. I'm just curious if any of this is included in the FY16, or do we know when to expect this? The next step in this process would be to go ahead and make this information available to the state, which we've done. As a matter of fact, we made sure that we included them in the process as far as crafting this document. We met with them several times. We got their input. but we actually tailored the study based on their recommendations and advice to help use it to solicit funding. That is where not only do we have a good source document to go ahead and do design, do the details for which you just saw, but it's also a document to which the state folks can go ahead and point to and have and say, we've already done this step. We've already done the public component. It's already been vetted. We've already done the concept. We know what we're talking about. We know what we want. Right here it is. Now the next steps will be the funding to get your design right away utility and construction. Awesome. Thank you. And I want to reiterate what Council Member Farmer said too. I think this is wonderful. It's a beautiful entrance. Another one of our beautiful entrances into our city and I appreciate all the work that you all have put into this and love the fact that we can move forward thanks and i like the intersections too so thank you councilmember lamb and councilmember henson i'll let you uh finish this up since this is your item thank you thank you chair and i just i appreciate all the comments i and i'm very thankful for the consultants that worked on this um everyone is just so wonderful, even in our engineering division. And John Carman is just the most creative man I've ever met, I believe. But it is beautiful. Okay. Do you see his head swelling? But I do think this corridor has significant importance to our economic development, to the people that live and work along this corridor. We did have a steering committee, and there's a couple people here that I see. Jan Hellebush, who lives on Hamilton Park, and Eddie Collins, who is the operations manager at Pepsi-Cola. But there were several community members, stakeholders that worked with the consultants to get this study completed. And I'm very pleased with the outcome, and thank you very much. Chair, what I would like to do, I will begin myself from my office moving forward to get funding for this project, even if it is in phase by phase by phase. But in our next committee meeting, maybe I would bring forth a resolution where the council would provide support to the state to complete these projects. Very good. Does that sound? That sounds fine. Thank you, Councilman. Thank you, ma'am. If there are no other questions, we'll move on to it. Thank you, Mr. Carman, and thank you, Mr. Hendrickson, for coming by today. appreciate your information that you provided us today. And Vice Mayor Kaye, this design excellence is your baby, so I'll let you go ahead and go forward. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Let me start by kind of running through the materials again. This has been a long and fairly complicated process. There have been a lot of materials shared with the Council over time. I want to go through what's in the packet and what was made available to you electronically. So starting with pages 33 through 41, at the last meeting, council members requested that we get data about building permits. And so that data is there. And for comparative purposes, it lists what's been done countywide, what's been done near downtown, and what's been done in the B2 zones. And what you'll see, without going through these slide by slide, is that there have been very few permits in the B2 zone, really a handful over the last four and a half years. Secondly, also as requested, there's an inventory of all the incentives that were proposed over time, both by the Infill and Redevelopment Committee and by the Design Excellence Task Force. So there's between pages 42 and 52, first there is a combined inventory that includes everything that was considered by both the infill and redevelopment and by the design excellence task force. And then for your information, there's a second one that just lists what was considered by design excellence, and a third one that lists just what was considered by infill and redevelopment. What I would suggest in those pages is that the focus really is on two economic incentives. Number three, if you look at the design excellence proposals, number three is to fund TIF applications, which we talked about briefly last. Vice Mayor, if I can interrupt you for just a second. What page are you on? on the it's at 46 I think yeah thank you I don't know what page I'm on I have the general pages but not the specifics so okay on page 46 item number three which is the funding the TIF application and number four which is a proposal that there be a pre-development fund and Councilmember Farmer who Councilmember Farmer had proposed that we consider a one million dollar fund for pre-development so that's consistent with one of the considerations that was taken up by design excellence in the process suggestions and again I'm going to Page 47. Page 47. There is a proposal for an infill project manager, and that was proposed by planning but has not been included in the mayor's proposed budget. And secondly, a design excellence officer, and that is in the mayor's proposed budget. moving on to pages 53 through 84 there are first the zone text amendment that was approved by the planning commission in two versions first pages 53 through 84 gives you the strikethrough version so it shows you those two sections of the zone text and the specific changes that were made And then pages 85 through 99 gives you a clean version of that zone text amendment. And essentially, that zone text changes from courthouse overlay to design excellence and makes a number of additional adjustments that are consistent with the proposed design excellence recommendations. And finally, electronically, what we suggested is that you might want, if you didn't have your hard copy, there are the copies that we provided you last time of the actual standards and guidelines and the PowerPoint presentation that was made last time. Just briefly about the standards and guidelines, there are two pages that list the actual standards, pages 16 and 17 in that document. It provides a matrix that basically cuts two ways. It categorizes all recommendations according to whether the area is a gateway, a core area, or a neighborhood area, and it categorizes things by corridor. So there are major corridors, local connectors, neighborhood streets, and service streets. and they, so it's a little bit complicated. The reason I mention that is that any particular proposal, if I have a proposal for a particular building, I need to identify the core area and the nature of the street and then the applicable standard because they vary depending on whether you're in a core area, whether you're in an entranceway and so on and so on. So they're fairly limited. the guidelines then take up pages 25 through 45 of the rest of that document the what that brings us to i'm obviously happy to have questions comments and further conversation but the same proposal that i brought forward last time and that is that the next steps would be to put this zone text amendment on the council docket and have it up for discussion and possible approval. And in the budget process, include the two positions that are one that's in the budget and one that's not. And finally, as we go forward, to consider additional incentives from that long list of incentives that was considered both by infill and redevelopment and by the Design Excellence Task Force. so having said all of that I'm happy to open the floor for questions comments etc thank you chair you're welcome vice mayor let me ask you one quick question do you have that other document electronically do we have it here in case any of the council members have questions about boundaries and yeah if they have yes we provided it electronically and they we should be able to put up anything on the screen that I've mentioned great because I imagine there may be some questions here we go that some council members have and Maybe they don't. Obviously, they have this to refer to. So with that being said, Vice Mayor, are you pretty much finished with your presentation? Yes. Okay. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Member Gibbs. I have a question for Vice Mayor. Sure. I'm just a little bit confused on page 46 on the economic incentives, and the third one said given major consideration to fund the TIF application. I thought that was part of the proposal. Was I mistaken on that? well it's it's it was considered by design excellence but the actual guidelines and standards do not list any specific incentives okay this would be this would have to be something that the council would include in the budget in order to fund okay that clarifies it thank you councilmember Gibbs councilmember Bledsoe thank you thank you chair I was gonna piggyback on what councilor Gibbs says so are there any incentives funded in the proposed budget from the mayor I'm sorry which are any of these in the proposed budget from the mayor's incentives the design excellence officer is purpose and that's the one that's that's the yes okay and I so let me just add one thing that I'm not sure about I believe that somewhere in the details of the budget there's also a small amount of money allocated for TIF applications I think $40,000 but I don't I understood that was going in but I haven't verified that I don't know if anybody would be Commissioner Paulson can you answer that question please He didn't say that. Oh, are you? We were just discussing some of the things that are in there. I'm not sure if there is funds that are explicit. Now, that's because I'm just not sure all that's in there. What I can tell you that is in there is a million-dollar fund that is spread between a few things, which is one is economic development land, which is where this came from, but one of the areas where this would cover is downtown. What it would generally cover is bondable infrastructure, public infrastructure improvements. So this could be used for projects that would be in the downtown design excellence area, as well as other parts of the community where there is jobs related, where basically there will be jobs criteria. This is the part that we are working on right now for the economic development land work group. And so you will be seeing these more fleshed out. But the idea would be that if there are, if there is a employer or if there is a job related that has enough jobs and enough salary associated with it, that you could apply for infrastructure funds to have infrastructure put in, public infrastructure. So we see this as being done, obviously, for areas in the economic development zones, I-1 zones, but also in the downtown area as well where there would be infrastructure costs that could be associated with a new development. downtown. So that fund is out there. That is part of the mayor's proposed budget that would cover both the design excellence aspect as well as just regular jobs growth, economic development. And I will see. I don't think we have a confirmation whether or not there are any funds specifically earmarked for TIF. I would have to check with Chief Development Officer Atkins. Council Member Bledsoe, does that answer your question? I think so. I think so. I appreciate that. In a nutshell, there is a, there's going to be, there's proposed to be a million dollar fund which could be used for incentivizing or assisting in jobs growth, of which one of the areas where it can be used is downtown. They would have to be bondable infrastructure, public infrastructure projects, and there is going to be a trigger associated with jobs, the number of jobs and the amount of jobs that it would be associated with. We are, again, we are, we will have more of a proposal for you. as near as next week that we can provide as we move forward. Okay. And I just had one last question or comment, I guess, and that is I asked this of Vice Mayor Kay yesterday, and I was talking to another council member, and I can't remember who it was, so I wanted to ask it publicly, and that is that as projects move forward, if projects are already in the works, they would not be, when this moves forward and enacted, they would be kind of grandfathered in, that they would not be required to start over or go into a new agency. Yes, my understanding is that anything that's in process would be considered all the way through that process under existing regulations. This would only apply to new projects. Okay, thank you for that. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Bledsoe. Council Member Lamb, please. Thank you, Chair. I guess I'm questioning, I know that you're saying that these, the incentives have not been, they've not been put in a document to attach to the board. And I'm just curious, and I might not be phrasing this right, in how would you, in what way would you present incentives? Would it be through policy where you would present the incentives that are going to be allowed to be divvied up underneath this board? How, I mean, are there others? I know I'm struggling here. Are there other boards that are in place in other areas of the world that have something like this? And are the incentives a part? Will they be incorporated in the ordinance? or will they need to be a separate? The economic incentives specifically will not be incorporated in the ordinance. We would have to take separate action to create the ordinance and to specify how it would be managed. But there's a lot of precedents for setting up similar systems. We have them within government now, and we could do the same thing with these incentives. If I can, let me just add one other thing. That list of incentives that's in the packet includes many incentives that are not economic, that are already being worked on, some of which have already been moved forward. So I just want to be clear that this is not the only piece that would make it easier for people to develop downtown. Okay. Thank you. Has there been any discussion about, and this probably is getting too technical, as to who would be, I know the Economic Development Investment Board handles the million-dollar fund that deals with local businesses. Is there going to be, who would administer any type of loan funds or anything that would fall under this? We would have to specify that. It could be the board that's being set up to review projects. It might be that we want a separate system for evaluating, similar to what the administration set up for the $1 million job development incentive. So we would have to set that up. Okay. And then I actually have a couple of specific questions on, and I tried to write down on page 93 of the packet, where it talks, it's section 27-4, subsection C, where it addresses the ethics. And it just references Article 16 of the Code of Ethics, and I think that it should also apply Chapter 25, the Ethics Commission Ethics Act. I think that should also be considered here. And I also believe that this board, if it moves forward, I think it should be considered to be like the Planning Commission and Board of Adjustment, where it would fall under the financial interest reviews and everything under the Ethics Act. I would like to ask for that. Would you like to make an amendment? Is that what you're proposing? Sure. I'd like to make a motion to amend. Now there's not a motion on the floor, but that could be a possible amendment when we do. Or to be considered? Either when it's brought as a motion in this committee or when it's brought forward to council. Okay. And you could work with law and planning to get the language correct. Okay. I mean, since the Planning Commission and Board of Adjustment, and this seems like this would have a role in a very similar fashion, I think that would be very important. And then one other thing is on page 98 of the packet in section 27.6. It speaks about if the Board of the Design Excellence Officer fails to take action, final action, upon an application in 60 days, that the application is approved, deemed to be approved, and I'm just curious if, was that the intention because, or disapproved, I mean? I believe that's the language that was in the original ordinance. So that's the language that now governs action within that section of the text. And so it's just the same. And I believe the same thing is probably true of the ethics. Madam Chair, can we have Chris King come forward? Sure. Mr. King. Thank you. I would just answer. These rules as to the ethics and to this 60-day automatic approval, both are as for the current Courthouse Area Design Review Board. This group will take care, replace that process in that board, and will expand over a larger area. I don't know that there's an inherent problem in adding additional layers of ethics requirements to it. I just wanted to let you know that this was modeled in that part off of the current process. And as far as the 60-day thing, that just makes sure that there is due process, that something doesn't get stuck in an administrative whirlwind. I guess the other thing, I mean, I don't know that the Courthouse Area Review Design Board, did they have any dealings with incentives or anything? though? No, and the Design Excellence Board really wouldn't either. I think you need to think of them as two things on parallel tracks that support each other. Calling them carrots and sticks is wrong because we think there are a lot of carrots in the actual ordinance and, in fact, having a person with design excellence experience working with the developers. But the other part is the developers did feel that with this extra procedural interaction between government developers, having these incentives would then be a positive message to send as well. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. King. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Council Member Lamb. Council Member Stinnett. Thank you, Chair. Just a couple follow-ups on the ED money, Commissioner Paulson. Are your intentions tied to ED land or zones, I mean? No. So it's not just ED zones? It is not. So what we will be bringing next week, so this is a preview of what we will be bringing and we are working on right now, is, and this is all part of an economic development land work group that Councilmember Stanton is on, as well as various members from the community. We will be bringing forth a proposal that will not be just for the ED zones. It will be for quite a few different districts. We're going to call them economic development districts around the community, of which downtown is one. Coldstream will be another. There are places where there is land for economic development or there is economic development, vacancy or economic development land that is vacant. So along the Manchester corridor out to Alexandria are some of the proposed areas at this point. One of the things we hope to do next week is to get more guidance on the specifics of how we would make this, how this program would work, as well as where those districts would be. But we do not want to make it for any one particular zone category, but more so for areas of the community that are traditional or have a lot of land for economic development. Okay. So I don't think it, you know, going to number seven on the incentive list that the vice mayor read, this wouldn't be just for downtown design excellence. So we really aren't fulfilling that goal. This committee wanted to do is put a million dollars just to this program. So this seems like it's going to be spread across the city. And on the other item that's in the budget as well, the position, which position was funded by the mayor in the budget? The design officer position was funded. The facilitator was not funded at this time, or at least not put into the proposed budget. And what was the rationale, putting one, you don't need both of them at the same time? I think what we felt was at the very beginning of the, you know, as we start to get this program up and running, the one that we could get more use out of in the very first year would be that design officer. and that as we start to move forward with it, as the ordinance starts to take effect and as we have more things come in, I think from a facilitator standpoint, we felt my office could handle it as it starts up. The design officer will be doing a lot of other things as well, playing a bigger role within the division of planning, helping with those design elements that are kind of the small area plans that we can't really do, some of those things that are less than small area plans. So I think we felt there was more of a need in general for that design officer and that as the program ramps up, I think there will be some lag time as it gets moving, and we'll be able to propose that again for next year's budget. Okay, very good. Thank you. And then on the board piece, Vice Mayor, I brought this up at our last meeting. We discussed this item. Did the group look at merging this board with the DDA? Because I'm not sure how their functions would really be different. And I think, you know, after today, actually, we probably have four boards in downtown Lexington. That's a lot of boards to figure out what's going on in downtown. So is there an opportunity to look at the EDA structure and look at this structure, and couldn't they be one and the same? We already fund EDA. We already give them money. So why wouldn't we want to try to be more efficient? Because they're helping people every day through the process. And so why couldn't this merge with them? There was some discussion about that. There was a concern that the functions are different enough that they need separate administrative structures and that the design excellence would really be embedded within the structure of government centrally rather than a board that's funded by government but that operates semi-autonomously. I think an argument can be made that they could be merged. We would have to then, I think, staff up DDA as opposed to staffing up development. And the positions that have been suggested, proposed, really have dual functions, as the commissioner said. And so there's an argument to be made for keeping those people within planning and within the commissioner's office. Yeah, on the personnel, I understand that. But I think as a board, as a whole, we're going to be appointing those boards. We appoint DDA anyway. I think we can still have that authority, still have the same composition. And at the end of the day, it's easy for me as a business owner to come downtown and do business with one entity versus two, three, the DLC, the downtown taxi district board. I mean, we're going to keep adding more layers downtown. That's my concern. That's just my concern. and others may not share that, but I just think in a process of being more efficient and encouraging this program to work, I'd like to see that. And then last, my time's running out, on the incentive piece. What incentives non-economic have already been instituted, or what's the timeline for instituting those non-economic, like processing building permits faster, parking regulations, things like that? Where are we at on that timeline? So they vary. There have been actually over the years we've been working on this, there's been a number of changes in the way in which the process works internally in planning that provides support for people who are doing development. The Lexington Parking Authority is working on a tenure plan that will provide more garages for downtown and more parking, which is a major consideration for people who are considering development. They have one in the works. I believe they're planning, I mean, they're still in the early stages, but what they're working toward is a number of additional garages downtown to support development. Off the top of my head, I think those are the big ones. Could we get a timeline and when all these different incentives have been enacted or where they're at in their stages so we can see? because that's a big piece of this for me, is that the guidelines are great, but not having these incentives in concrete and in writing so people can see where we're working at, I think it's very important to getting this through the council. I think I'd be happy to do that. What I would like to do is, rather than give you this fairly long laundry list of everything that's been considered by the two bodies, which I think we try to get everything in there, is to highlight the ones that we think are most likely to move forward or have already moved forward and give you that timeline. I just want the ones we're going to work on and actually get done. I mean, I know they consider it a lot. I see 33 different ones. But I want to see the ones we're actually getting done and proposing to get done as part of this legislation. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Farmer. Thank you, Madam Chair. Director King, did you have comments you wanted to make pursuant to that last question before I start up. Sir, thank you. I appreciate the toss. I just wanted to comment in response to Council Member Stinnett's question about how this is proposed to be structured. That was discussed at great length by the task force, and it was decided that the function should reside in the Division of Planning to make the most seamless permitting process so you weren't having to hop outside of the urban county government and putting the architecture approval in another entity away from the core urban county group. And the architects, the business people that were on that task force all felt that that was a synergy that should be there. So that's why it was proposed to be in the division planning and the design excellence officer. Notwithstanding the fact that it's already been noticed, is that we don't feel that there is so much permitting activity currently that that person would be full-time involved in that. So we have all those other planning functions that we used to do with our strategic planning section before we lost those four staff members to the recession and attrition that we can begin to do those other kinds of things with neighborhood support, small area planning assistance, projects that aren't quite small area plans. The other question then, that deals with the administrative part of it. The other part is then the board that makes the decision. And the discussion was that the DDA board is much more of a business function, and the folks who were involved in this felt that the group that would be making any kind of appeal decisions or things that weren't handled at the staff level should have design expertise mandated as part of the ordinance, as we do now for the current Port Alceria Design Review Board. So I'm not debating you. I just wanted to let you know what the thoughts were of the participants. Please. Just to clarify, I never said to put any of the administrative functions outside of government. What I said was two boards into one board, but the administrative function, I completely agree, should be in-house. I wasn't talking about moving positions out of house. Well, that's fine. I just wanted to say that the board aspect, too, the second part I answered was, They wanted specific design expertise on that board so that since it was a design function they were looking at, and the DDA board inherently isn't structured that way, and that's all I wanted to comment. Well, we merged the jobs board and the infrastructure board together. Can we come back to you, Councilmember Stenet, and we'll let Councilmember Farmer finish up, and we'll let you come back. That's all right. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Farmer, for letting me. You're welcome, sir. So am I right that between, or help me, between the last time we discussed this issue and today, the principal difference is the mayor has proposed a budget that funds one of the two positions that was included in the legislation, and we had had a discussion about having some funds put aside for incentive, And now we understand that, again, in the proposed budget, there's some ED money that some of that money could be used in this area. Are there other changes between last time we spoke about this and today in terms of the incentive package? Commissioner Poulsen, it looks like this is your answer. I'll try. Those are the two that I know of. I'm not sure if there's – in terms of the financial, I think those are the two big ones that we do have the design officer is put into the budget as well as this fund for which it could go to downtown as well. So the mayor proposed that at a million dollars? Correct. And that's for all sorts of uses, is that? Well, it's for – it's very specific uses, but it's for all over the community. So it is for bondable public infrastructure assistance related to jobs. So that can be downtown. An example being basically things that this is one of the things we get back, and Councilmember Stenick can test, is things that we've heard when dealing with on this ED land committee about why it's difficult to do development downtown or just anywhere. One, out in the ED zones where you've got, again, considerable land costs, and then you've got to put in infrastructure. As well, downtown, we do hear it from developers that there are things that they've got to deal with in terms of getting the infrastructure fit, pipes that have to be larger, having to change sewer lines, having to fix sewer lines to put in buildings, or having to move sewer lines. So these things, if they are bonded, public, they can be bondable, and they will be dedicated to the city, they could be applied for for that assistance in putting in a building that, again, has to be tied to jobs criteria. For purposes of this legislation, would having some funds set aside specifically for these uses within the new design guidelines in the area, would that help? Or do you think that the million that is proposed would cover the need for the first year or something? I think what we're interested in seeing is how many applications we will get. I mean, one of the questions that we've had from one side is, is a million dollars enough? And in having a conversation with the folks at Coldstream today, as an example, the Tempur-Pedic building, they had to put in an access road for Tempur-Pedic. it was $400,000. So that would definitely fall into this category, which would still leave us $600,000. That's a pretty big project. So if we were to get a project such as that, where we would have to put in an access road or where we would put in an access road, if it would be $400,000, there would still be $600,000 available. I think it's really going to be dependent upon the projects and the applications that we receive. But I think a million dollars is a good place to start and to see where we get with that. I would love to think, I'll be honest with you, that we have so many applications that we don't have enough money, because that would mean that we are tying those to good jobs, well-paying jobs, and significant jobs. Just for clarification, where's the Tempur-Pedic building? It is in Coldstream. You can see it from I-7564. Thank you. Yes, sir. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you, Councilmember Farmer. Vice Chair Scutchfield, I have a couple of questions, if you wouldn't mind taking over. Yes. Thank you. I guess Director King, question for you, please. Back to what Council Member Stinnett had asked you about the different layers of bureaucracy and getting these processes done. I know that's probably one of the biggest things I hear consistently is, you know, someone goes downtown either with a development or to enhance a development, and they feel like there's so many layers that they have to go through. I don't want this to impede anyone. Can you make me feel better about this? Well, again, I think you need to go back to the things that raise these concerns. You know, the importance of our downtown iconic sites as you enter downtown and some of the development proposals that we're seeing that a vast majority of the community seem to feel were totally out of character. So what we're talking about is trying to guide those projects into a character that fits our downtown, first and foremost. And most communities our size do have an urban design review function, just as an inherent part of their ordinances. In fact, people we deal with from out of town are often very surprised when they say, okay, now who do I need to go see about my architectural approval? We say, other than in that immediate area around the new courthouse, they don't. So just, again, a little bit of context there. So what we have proposed is that, again, this is to be primarily a staff-driven rather than a board-driven for most of the types of applications that you would see except for very major projects. That's in the ordinance, and it's also in the design guidance. There is no doubt that this means there will be one more box that you have to check off if you are a developer trying to get a major project done in downtown. But we envision this is not an adversarial process, but very much a collaborative process where we would not be, for the most part, dealing with the kinds of architectural details that you do in a historic district, but more about form, shape, relationships of mass and things of that nature. I guess that was my second question, because I know in a historical district, it's going to cost someone a lot more money, because you're going to have to be in accordance with the guidelines or architectural guidelines that are specifically there. This is a lot more flexible, you're saying. A lot more flexible. And also, though, again, we don't feel that we're going to be asking for anything more than anyone who's actually developing one of these projects would have to do, in terms of building design, having an architect. In fact, you know, we're talking about downtown buildings. And again, we have tried to very much scale it to the type of project that we would see. I just don't want this to be an impediment. I know we had someone come here last time and was opposed to it because he was building something and wanted to be excluded because of the cost that was associated. And that was my concern. I don't want this to be such that it would turn potential people away from doing a development or enhancing a development because of the cost associated with it. And we don't think those costs will be necessarily significant, but we also do think, and that's what led to all the discussion about the incentives. It's important for a community to put both of those ideas forth, that we do care about the physical arrangement and character of our downtown. At the same time, we are not trying to set these barriers, and that's what the incentives are supposed to help do, is soften those perceptions, soften if there are any realities associated with that on some of these major projects to put some of those incentives at least available for projects that meet the kind of criteria that we're looking for. And I'm assuming these incentives are on a case-by-case basis, and that's how they're going to determine... Incentives, yes. Yes. And the board is going to determine that. They're going to have the ability to say, okay, you're going to come in, you're going to spend X amount of dollars, we're going to help you out in X way or Y way. Is that how that's going to be done? It's not the Design Excellence Board that's going to be making those kinds of decisions. Their actions will be totally related to the exterior character of the actual structure being proposed. The incentives is a larger picture thing. And who will be in charge of that? Well, it would depend, I think, on the nature of the incentives. One of the things that we heard from the development contingent that was on the task force was help with parking. Help us with public parking downtown. Well, the parking authority would naturally be in the lead if that's the kind of thing. You've heard Commissioner Paulson talk about other kinds of incentives dealing with infrastructure. Depending on the infrastructure deficiency, whether that's roads, whether that's sewers, it could be different parts of government that actually would take the lead in being involved in helping through that. But again, all of these would end up being funding decisions that ultimately this council would basically approve. Thank you for the clarification. Council Member Stenet, do you have anything else you'd like to add? I didn't know that. I know you weren't. I just wanted to pitch again. Vice Mayor Kaye, how about you? Well, just to kind of reiterate, I think where we're at is that we've tried to move forward with both the design standards and guidelines and a variety of incentives, having the zone text amendment. and I'm personally interested in moving this forward, moving the zone text forward to council and continue to work on the incentives. So I will make a motion that we place consideration of the zone text amendment on the docket whenever the next meeting of council is, which I don't have in front of me. i think that's the second isn't it would be on the second i believe may 2nd is that correct april 30th that's right it would be april 30th so we have a motion on the floor from vice mayor in reference to putting this zota on the docket on may i'm sorry april 30th do we have a second second by council member Gibbs any questions on the motion council member lamb so if you're going to just move forward with the text do you want are you going to take the language of the board out are you going to I mean because this ordinance as it is drafted currently sets up the design excellence board and it's as i just heard your motion it would mean to me that the ordinance would be amended and just include the the um articles the amendments to the articles article 8-17 8-18 8-19 and article 27 is that your intent please i i believe that includes the description of the board to be set up and that that board would take over responsibility currently exercised by the courthouse overlay okay i'm you know i think we still have lots of questions about this so i'm not sure if i can support that thank you council member farmer i agree with council member land is there any other council members that would like to speak to the motion that being council member Gibbs I'd like to see this move along we've seen the figures for building permits and there's virtually nothing happening downtown and I think just even without the incentives added when I suppose we'll add some incentives but even without the incentives added I think would be attractive to possibly attractive to developers. They would have a clear idea of what they're getting into. They would have the advantage of having an expert to guide them through the process. So again, I would like to see it happen and have us work on the incentives. Thank you, Council Member Gibbs. Council Member Stinnett. Thank you, Chair. I just want to clarify the motion. Council Member Vizemarkay, this is to move out of committee and present to the full council prior to our next council meeting on the 30th. because you can't place where I am directly on the docket from a committee. I just want to make sure your intentions are... My intention is to have it placed on the docket. Have this committee recommend placing it on the docket. I'm sorry. Okay, so Councilor Sye will have to report out sooner rather than later. Because normally she wouldn't report out until after this meeting next to a month from now. she wouldn't be reporting out in april in the council meeting in april i mean the work session no that's what you're asking her to do though is report out sooner i just want to make sure it'd be may 12th but i can do it right by motion that's what you're asking well so i'm let me if i can modify my own motion i was not interested in moving it i was interested in having it be reported out to be placed on the docket. I don't want to accelerate that calendar. I know people still have questions. There will be time for amendments and so on at that time. So I guess what I'm asking is for this committee to approve the motion to have it reported out as a recommendation to be placed on the docket. So that would be. Whenever that is. Whenever that is. Okay. May 12th. So April 30th. That's the May. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Sinek. Councilmember Bledsoe. Thank you, Chair. I was going to ask the same timeline question, so thank you. And I guess my only commentary is, along those times, I have questions of we're in all these discussions about the budget in general and doing links and all that and wanting to make sure that we understand all the details. And so it's hard to be supportive of moving too forward until I feel like some of those things are hashed out in the next couple weeks. So my hesitancy is not on the idea or implementation, but more on the timeline for my own sake of understanding all the budgetary implications, I guess. I just wanted that to say that. Thank you. Do you want to answer that, Council Member Kaye, or go forward? Thank you. Any other Council Members that have any other comments or questions? If not, we've got a motion on the floor to place under consideration of the zone text amendment on the docket. All those in favor? Those opposed? Looks like the motion fails, Vice Mayor Kay. So we'll just stay in committee at this point. I think we've got some other items to look at as far as the items referred. Back of page 100. council member well farmer i i guess he was here he might have stepped out uh the greenway manual i believe that comes up next month i think we're good with that to go uh council member acres is not here i guess we'll leave that in committee council member gibbs we have the code enforcement fines i think we disposed of that didn't we on the last uh meeting Okay. Yeah, that's what I thought as well. As well as the building inspection civil offenses, I think those have been disposed of. Vice Mayor Kay, it looks like your design excellence is going to have another round in this committee. Councilmember Farmer, I don't see him. Councilmember Henson, I believe that's also going to be tabled until, I think it's September. looks like the public safety link and I'm not sure who that falls under as far as merging the division of emergency management into fire and emergency management services it's public safety link is there anyone here that was on that public safety link that can provide some information on that council member Scotchfield do you have any information you can provide on that the information further than we wanted to be reviewed, how that would work. I guess we'll just let that kind of just hang in there. The ride-sharing regulations, again, that goes hand-in-hand with the taxicab ordinance, and that will be dealt with in September. Looks like Council Member Farmer is not here to talk about the next two items. And then Council Member Stenet, we have the status of the small area plans. Hopefully, I'm not sure if we're on there next May or not, May or June. Is that going to work for you? I agree. already thank you the motion to adjourn motion a second we are adjourned Thank you.