# Urban County Council - Zone Change Public Hearing - November 17, 2016 > Auto-transcribed civic record · November 17, 2016 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/4120 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/4120?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2016-11-17 - **Last revised**: July 15, 2026 - **Length**: 17,634 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Urban County Council met on November 17, 2016, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government. Vice Mayor Kay presided over the meeting. The council considered one agenda item, a zoning ordinance change for property located at 564 Asbury Ln. in Council District 1. The proposed ordinance would change the zone from Single Family Residential (R-1D) to Planned Neighborhood Residential (R-3) for 13.81 net acres (14.47 gross acres) of the property, submitted by Palumbo Properties, Inc. The council took three votes during the meeting and heard five public comments. The zoning ordinance was approved. ## Attendance **Present:** Vice Mayor Kay, Moloney, Plomin, Scutchfield, Stinnett, Bledsoe, F. Brown, J. Brown, Evans, Farmer, Gibbs, Henson **Absent:** Mossotti, Akers, Lamb **Late:** None ## Votes and Decisions **Motion 1171-16: Adopt the Findings of Fact and Recommendations of the Planning Commission** [timestamp: 02:07:48] Motioned by Mr. Moloney and seconded by Mr. Stinnett, this motion passed by roll call vote with 11 ayes and 1 nay. Voting in favor: Moloney, Plomin, Scutchfield, Stinnett, Bledsoe, F. Brown, Evans, Farmer, Gibbs, Henson, and Kay Voting against: J. Brown The motion included conditions for ZDP 2015-33 regarding Newtown Springs: certification must occur within two weeks of Planning Commission approval; a 20-foot tree preservation area and landscape buffer must be maintained along the eastern boundary; pole lighting is not permitted; and only ground-level and indirect lighting are allowed. **Motion 1171-16: Approve the Ordinance changing zone from R-1D to R-3 for 564 Asbury Ln.** [timestamp: 02:09:26] Motioned by Mr. Farmer and seconded by Mr. F. Brown, this motion passed by roll call vote with 11 ayes and 1 nay. Voting in favor: Moloney, Plomin, Scutchfield, Stinnett, Bledsoe, F. Brown, Evans, Farmer, Gibbs, Henson, and Kay Voting against: J. Brown This motion carried the same conditions as the previous motion regarding ZDP 2015-33 and Newtown Springs. **Adjourn the Meeting** [timestamp: 02:11:04] Motioned by Mr. Stinnett and seconded by Mr. F. Brown, the motion to adjourn passed unanimously. ## Public Comment Five members of the public provided comments during the meeting, raising concerns about connectivity, zoning, traffic, and neighborhood character. **Virgil Jones** [timestamp: 01:13:45] addressed connectivity and housing type, arguing that connectivity could be achieved without a zone change. He questioned the impact of apartment development on homeownership rates and neighborhood character. **James Lyle** [timestamp: 01:26:11] expressed concern about traffic flow resulting from the proposed development. He argued that apartment complexes do not create neighborhoods and stated a preference for single-family homes. **Joshua Samples** [timestamp: 01:27:44] claimed his neighborhood was not adequately engaged in the small area plan process. He argued that the zone change is unnecessary to meet the plan's goals. **Sheila Coles** [timestamp: 01:33:04] expressed concern about the opening of Hollow Creek Road directly in front of her home and the potential for increased traffic as a result. **Chelsea Atwater** [timestamp: 01:34:18] shared concerns about traffic congestion and the impact of apartment development on neighborhood safety. She also raised concerns about the effect on first-time homebuyers' ability to afford homes in the area. Common themes across the public comments included traffic and neighborhood impacts, questions about the necessity of zoning changes, and concerns about how apartment development would affect housing affordability and neighborhood character. ## Contested Items **Architectural Renderings** A procedural dispute emerged regarding the admissibility of architectural renderings as evidence. The Vice Mayor ruled that the renderings could not be used, determining they were not binding documents. However, Council members challenged this decision, arguing the renderings held relevance given the small area plan's design guidelines. The disagreement centered on whether visual representations should inform the Council's deliberations despite their non-binding status. A motion to permit the renderings passed with a vote of 7-5, allowing them to be considered in the discussion. [timestamp: unavailable] **Zone Change Necessity and Small Area Plan Alignment** Council members divided over whether a zone change was necessary to achieve the goals outlined in the Winburn-Russell Cave Small Area Plan. Opponents contended that the proposed zone change was unnecessary, particularly for meeting the plan's objectives regarding homeownership and neighborhood design standards. They argued these goals could be accomplished through existing mechanisms. Proponents of the zone change countered by emphasizing the collaborative process that had produced the small area plan and stressed that the zone change would ensure compliance with the plan's design standards. This fundamental disagreement about the relationship between zoning tools and planning objectives resulted in a split vote among Council members. [timestamp: unavailable] ## An Ordinance changing the zone from a Single Family Residential (R-1D) zone to a Planned Neighborhood Residential (R-3) zone The Council held a public hearing on a zone change request for a 14.47-acre parcel located at 564 Asbury Ln. The proposal sought to change the zoning from Single Family Residential (R-1D) to Planned Neighborhood Residential (R-3) for 13.81 net acres of the property, which is located in Council District 1 and is owned by Palumbo Properties, Inc. The Planning Commission had previously recommended conditional approval of the zone change, finding it aligned with both the 2013 Comprehensive Plan and the Winburn-Russell Cave Neighborhoods Small Area Plan. The petitioner presented a revised development plan that included design guidelines, a traffic study, and connectivity plans for the proposed development. Key speakers during the hearing included Mr. Bill Sallee, Mr. Richard Murphy, Mr. Charles Barnhart, Mr. Joshua Samples, Virgil Jones, James Lyle, Sheila Coles, and Chelsea Atwater [timestamp: 00:23:18]. Several residents opposed the zone change, raising concerns about potential traffic impacts, the effect on neighborhood character, and implications for homeownership in the area. These concerns reflected broader questions about how the proposed development would integrate with and affect the existing residential community. The Council ultimately approved the ordinance, allowing the zone change from R-1D to R-3 for the property. --- ## Decisions - **1171-16** — passed (11-1): Adopt the Findings of Fact and Recommendations of the Planning Commission - **1171-16** — passed (11-1): Approve the Ordinance changing zone from R-1D to R-3 for 564 Asbury Ln. - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Adjourn the meeting --- ## Full transcript music Thank you and welcome everybody this is a council So, Zone Change Public Hearing, November 17th. And the first order of business is to call the roll. Madam Clerk. Mr. Maloney? Yes, ma'am. Ms. Massadi? Yes. Ms. Plumman? Yes. Ms. Gutfield? Yes. Mr. Stinnett? Yes, ma'am. Ms. Akers? Yes. Ms. Bledsoe? Yes. Mr. Fred Brown? Here. Mr. James Brown? Here. Ms. Evans? Here. Mr. Farmer? Mr. Evans. Mr. Gibbs? Here. Ms. Henson? Here. Vice Mayor Kay? Here. And Ms. Lamb? Thank you. I'm going to have to go through a few of the ways in which we conduct these hearings before we actually get started. and one of the first orders of business is if you are planning to speak, I need to swear you in. So anybody who is planning to speak, please stand and, if you would, raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that any testimony that you give at this hearing will be true to the best of your knowledge? I do. Thank you. Thank you all. The petitioner has agreed to limit presentation to no more than 45 minutes. We hope it will be briefer. And for those of you, I understand that those in opposition do not have an attorney. Is that correct? There's no attorney to represent you. I have a sign-up sheet. If you have not signed up and you're going to speak, I need to have you on this list. otherwise when you come to speak we'll follow our usual protocol which will be a limit of three minutes per speaker the way in which this is conducted as chair and the presiding officer i have the both the obligation and the responsibility to make evidentiary decisions to exclude irrelevant or repetitious testimony. I usually don't have to exercise that. If you have a witness list, if you would submit that to me at this time, the petitioner has submitted a witness list. If you have printed materials, you can submit them at the time of making your presentations. Everyone who speaks, so each witness on the witness list, may be subject to cross-examination. So we ask that if you speak, that you stay in the public hearing until the end, so that you may be questioned if necessary. When you speak, we'd appreciate it if you'd identify yourself by name and address. And next item has to do with architectural renderings. And I'm going to read this because I'm going to make a ruling on this. It says, architectural renderings of developments will not be permitted to be introduced into evidence at council hearings for the reason that the council has no power except in H1 overlay zones to bind developers to construct the buildings as depicted. Preliminary development plans filed in conjunction with zone changes which show building footprints, parking, and other basic information may be accepted into evidence. So unless there's objection from Council, I'm going to ask Council to remove the rendering that is at the foot of the other piece of information. Mr. Vice Mayor, with all respect, I do want to register an objection to that because this case is a little unique because this is the first case you will be hearing where there are design guidelines for development outside of the downtown area. As such, we were required to submit our design renderings to the planning staff for their review. They were reviewed by the Planning Commission as part of its hearing, and they will be subject to further review by the Planning Commission, hopefully if you approve this, when we go back for our final development plan before the Planning Commission. So since we are required to submit those, and they were part of the zone change hearing at the Planning Commission, I'm registering my objection and ask that they be left in the record. Thank you. Council members, if you wish to have that rendering, you can take a motion and a vote. Otherwise, the ruling of the chair will stand. Council Member Brown. Could I ask a question from legal? Any problems on what we're dealing with here? As Dick Murphy stated, this architectural rendering or this image was a part of the Planning Commission's consideration. It is within your discretion whether or not you would like to have it during this meeting. But just understand that whatever is represented on that image is not part of this zone change hearing tonight. That's all we'd have to do as council members, just accept the fact that that's not part of the zone? Yes, as long as your decision is based on what you hear at this hearing tonight. I just wanted to state legally what our legal decision would be and not jeopardize the overall zoning, whatever ends up at the end. And so I don't know that there's any harm that we keep it in there. It sounds like we're on the safe side if we do keep it in there. Council Member Stennett. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I want to make sure we understand when we say design guidelines. This was part of the small area plan, is that correct, of the Windburn neighborhood in Russell Cave? Yes, this zone change tonight is within the Windburn small area plan area. And that small area plan area had design guidelines attached to it? There are design guidelines included in that small area plan, correct? So I think if I heard what Mr. Murphy said, it's following those guidelines and this property is within that area? That is correct. Okay, very good. I would think we'd want to keep it if they're adhering to design guidelines that we funded a small area plan through. Thank you. Councilman Farmer. Thank you, Vice Mayor. So is there anything in this proceeding that would bind them to what is pictured here? No. I think the chair is correct. Thank you. Does anybody else wish to speak to this? Well, let me turn the chair over to Council Member Stinnett for just a moment. I'll add my comment. As council members are tired of hearing me say, I served on the Planning Commission for four years. And there was often an issue about renderings and the way in which they, since they're not binding, they tend to not necessarily mislead, but they're just not reliable. And as a result, for the most part, the Commission decided to not allow renderings. Now, this is different. I hear what Mr. Murphy said, but I would still say, just for the same reasons that I've stated, that we should do without them. So at this point, unless somebody wants to make a motion to Council Member Stenner. I've got a question for our law department again. So the Planning Commission, when they approved this, they specifically referenced design guidelines as part of their approval. Am I correct on this first page? As part of their approval, they did note that the proposed zone change took into consideration some of the positive features of the Windburn Small Area Plan, but their overall decision to recommend approval was based on the law regarding granting zone changes. Very good. Thank you. Thank you. Does anybody else wish to speak on this issue? This is only for Council at this point. Council Member James Brown. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Being involved with the development of the small area plan for the Winburn-Russell Cave neighborhoods, input was taken from the neighbors and the residents about what kind of designs they would like to see on future construction and additional housing in that area. So I think it would be some value to include those renderings, But I guess we just would have to keep in mind that it's not holding the developer to those standards. But I think they ought to be included. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Councilman Maloney. Looking at the recommendation, and you get down to item E on the front page, if you all read that, it says, set of design standards were developed for multiple family development to provide framework for evaluation for the purpose of development. planning guidelines have been met and based on primary design work, many of the open space landscape has also been met. So planning is already, so really this is a small area of planning and this sounds like to me we have to keep it here because this is what they use. If I'm wrong about it, is that what that says? That's correct. What you see reflected in the recommendation for approval does discuss the small area plan but I will note that even without this architectural rendering in front of you, you will still be able to consider some of those elements of the Windburn small area plan. I'm just saying what this says, I think we should leave it up here. That's just my opinion. I mean, first time I've ever seen this happen but that's first thought until the first time I've ever read. It's required. Because everyone I've ever sat on said we're not supposed to look at this. But this here says we should look at it. So I'm going to follow what the rules say. Thank you. Anybody else wish to speak on this? Again, unless there's a motion to Council Member Stinnett. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I make a motion to keep the rendering that the Planning Commission saw at the hearing as part of the evidence of the hearing. So moved. Second. I have a motion and a second. Is there a discussion on the motion? I need a ruling from law on one thing. For everything else we need to decide tonight, we need eight votes. It's a majority of council. Is this now a majority of the body on a procedural rule, or is it eight votes, which is a majority of council? It should still take eight votes to make a decision tonight. So even on a procedural issue? Excuse me, it's going to be a majority. Okay, a majority of those present on procedural issues, eight votes on everything, on substantive issues. Does anybody else wish to, at this point, Council Member Evans? Just, I need to clarify. So the position is that since this rendering is not binding, it shouldn't really be considered. Was that the summary of what that rule was? and since we can't hold anyone to it, then it shouldn't be considered. Is that? That's basically correct. Okay. All right. Thank you. That's my understanding. Anybody else wish to? Council Member James Brown, are you still on the list? I guess I will say that part of the reason I believe that it needs to be included is because I think that could be part of the objection of anybody objecting to the zone changes, the design of the buildings. And I think during those small area plan meetings that it was communicated to the neighbors that this is how you have input onto what's coming. So to say that it's not enforceable or it should be included is almost, I think it was misleading to them in the small area process if that's the case. I'm going to ask planning staff to clarify exactly what it does and does not mean. Mr. Saleh. I'm sorry, Vice Mayor, I didn't fully understand your question. Council Member Brown basically said since that is a part of the decision-making process, since we've got a small area plan, that then if we don't have a rendering, it renders moot the input that we've had from the small area plan. I think the question is, does the Council want to consider that aspect of the small area plan? Clearly, the Planning Commission has, and I think it's very true that the Planning Commission will, if the zone change is approved at the time of the final development plan. I think both of those are accurate. I think now that we're in kind of a phase in between those two steps, perhaps, if the Council rezones, do you also want to consider the exhibit? I think what is different with this one is the fact that it is a recommendation from a small area plan, and to my knowledge, we've not had that type of thing recommended before. So I certainly understand, you know, Council Member Brown's sentiment on that. Thank you. Council Member Henson. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I guess I am reluctant to vote against or vote for this motion because I think if we, I was always told zone changes are about land use. Is this an appropriate use for this land? And nothing more. So the development plan would take up all the other issues related to the design and development. So, I mean, in my district, I recently had a zone change go through that was in opposite with the small area plan. So, I guess I just, I don't, I'm not understanding this very well. So. If this provides any clarification, I think that the chair gave a procedural order of a sort to exclude this architectural rendering based on council guidelines for zone change hearings. and Mr. Murphy can correct me if I'm wrong, but he would like to keep this architectural rendering in. He believes this is a special circumstance because whatever is depicted on the architectural rendering, in his opinion, relates closely to the small area plan, and he would like for you to see it. If I've misstated that, Dick can correct me. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Once again, Council Member Stinnett, if you'd take the chair. I've got one more comment as a participant. And this is in response to Council Member James Brown's comment. I think what is the case is that the design standards in that small area plan will need to be adhered to, no matter what the rendering looks like. I presume the rendering is consistent with that small area plan and its guidelines. But that does not mean that what we see in front of us is what will get built. And that's the underlying objection. And I'll add one other comment before I resume the chair. And that is, I don't think it's that big a deal, really, which way we go. but I'm on the side of adhering with the guidelines that we have in front of us. So thank you. And is there anybody else who would like to speak? So the motion is Council Member Maloney. If this was to fail, I'm going to ask law. And I have a question. This docket here is what we discussed like I did in planning. will I not be allowed to speak on E because that's what E is to talk about this if I were to ask the question and this is what this document here is all about and E on the front page has this design so I will not be able to speak on this has that ever happened before we had a zone change and we're supposed to discuss everything in here and then you're going to tell me we can't discuss something that they discussed it's already in here You will still be able to discuss item E because that is included in the Planning Commission's recommendation to you all. The only thing that will happen is that the rendering would be removed if the motion failed. Okay, thank you. Last call. Anybody else? We'll get to the hearing, I think. So the question, I think everybody understands the question. The motion is to overrule the ruling of the chair and to allow the rendering. If we can set up electronic voting, that would be helpful. But I'll call the motion anyway. All those in favor, please say aye. All opposed, say no. No. What happened? I don't know. That motion carries. The rendering stays put. Unfortunately, I have more to say before we begin. We're just in the middle here. All right. Just so everybody will know, here's how the order of proof at the hearing will proceed. We'll first have a presentation by the Planning Division staff, then a presentation by petitioner, then a presentation by opponents, so everybody who signed up will have time to speak at that time on the opposition side. there will be, as I said, an opportunity to cross-examine anybody who testifies as a witness. At that point, staff will have an opportunity to make additional comments. Then petitioner can present rebuttal evidence. Then there's a closing summation by anybody from the opposition and a closing summation by petitioner. At that point, we'll have questions of staff, petitioner, and opponents by council members. And then the—I'm sorry. Yes, that's correct. Questions. And at the end of that set of questions and comments, the hearing will be closed. Once the hearing is closed, there's no further evidence taken. And Council can discuss further and then take a vote first on the findings of fact, then on the adoption of the ordinance itself. And I'll repeat that when we get to that stage. So just one other point, and I already kind of made it in a sideways way, but in these hearings, it takes a majority of Council, which is eight votes, to overturn a ruling of the Planning Commission. So it's not a majority of the people present. We take eight votes to overrule. Now, having said that, unless council members have any questions, comments, I think we're actually ready to roll. And the first thing, yes, is we have to have the clerk read the ordinance. First reading. Yes, sir. Second reading. Item 1, an ordinance changing the zone from a single-family residential R1D zone to a planned neighborhood residential R3 zone for 13.81 net, 14.47 gross acres for property located at 564 Asbury Lane, a portion of Palumbo Properties, Incorporated, Council District 1. Thank you. Now I believe we're ready for Mr. Selle and the planning staff. Welcome. Thank you, Vice Mayor, members of the Council. Good evening. I'm pleased to be here tonight to present to you the Planning Commission's recommendation on this own change. Before we begin, I need to enter a number of items into the record of your hearing tonight. First is the legal notice that's been published advertising tonight's hearing. The second item is an affidavit that I have signed about the notice mailing that has been done for tonight's hearing, including a notice sent to the nearest registered neighborhood association. I need to enter in the recommendation from the Urban County Planning Commission to you on this zone change. These have been put at your place during the break. There are also extra copies at the end of the counter here for anyone in the audience that would like this document as well. Planning staff has received one written communication on this zone change. I'll circulate that to the Council so you can look at it during the hearing, and I have a copy for the clerk as well. We need to enter into the record a copy of the 2013 comprehensive plan and a copy of the 2016 Windburn-Russell Cave neighborhood small area plan. These both have been adopted by the Urban County Planning Commission. And finally, copies of the current zoning ordinance for the Urban County Government and also our land subdivision regulations. The subject property is a portion of 564 Asbury Lane. And to orient you, I'll first start with a photo and then come back to our zoning map. The subject property is south of Citation Boulevard, and it currently terminates at Silver Springs Drive, which for the audience is at this location. The subject property is just to the south of that intersection. It comprises almost 14 acres. The current zoning of the property is single-family residential, R1D, and the requested rezoning is to allow a planned neighborhood residential, R3 zone, for the entirety of this tract. Not shown on the photograph, just to the north is a new assisted living facility that has since been developed since this photograph was taken. Also, to the east and to the west of this location, we have existing single-family residential uses in the Green Acres, the Hollow Creek, and the Newtown Springs neighborhoods on either side of the subject property. There's a small townhouse development in Newtown Springs as well. And to the north of the photo, you'll see housing that's in the Griffin Gate neighborhood on the north side of Citation Boulevard. Going back to the zoning map, the predominant zoning in this area is R1D, as is indicated east and west of the site. The brand new assisted living facility is in an R3 zone that you see depicted in brown on the zoning map at the intersection of Silver Springs and Citation. And there's AU zoning, both north and south of this location, for portions of the Gryffindate Golf Course, for property owned by Lexmark, where they're using that land for recreational purposes. A short distance west of this location is commercial zoning. You see a B6P zone there in Newtown Springs. That property is not yet developed. This is a view of the subject property looking from Silver Springs Drive. This is looking east and shows very vacant land at that location. This is almost from the same location looking back northward along Silver Springs in the direction of Citation Boulevard further in the distance. There are single-family detached homes that would be directly across the street from the subject property. This is a view from very nearly the same location looking at vacant R1D land that is not part of this zone change, although it is part of 564 Asbury Lane. This particular property was approved by the Planning Commission for conditional use for a private club. And I'll describe that more when I present the development plan to you. Beyond that property on Dawson Springs Way, we do have single-family detached housing that has been in existence for a number of years. in this neighborhood in Newtown Springs. This is a view at the end of Dawson Springs Way, looking back at the subject property. The Lexmark property we saw in the photograph would be to the right in some distance from this location. A view of single-family homes in Dawson Springs, very near that same location. And from the Hollow Creek Road, this road stubs into the subject property as well. There are existing homes in this area also in an R1D zone. Those were developed in the 1960s and 70s, and this street does stub into the rear, the southeast portion of the subject property. The Winburn Small Area Plan has already been discussed a little bit tonight. It is an area plan that the Planning Commission has approved earlier this year. generally between Newtown Pike to the west, I-64 and 75 to the north, Russell Cave Road to the east, and New Circle Road to the south. So ironically, the location of the subject property is almost centrally located in the small area plan itself. And as has been mentioned for the first time in my recollection, this small area plan does include multifamily design guidelines to guide future development in this overall area. There are seven guiding principles in this small area plan. To briefly cover those, one of the principles was to increase transportation connectivity in the area, to increase equity for residents, to promote homeownership and improve housing conditions, to optimize vacant land to promote mixed housing, to ensure infill is well designed in accordance with nearby neighborhoods, to improve existing parks in the area, and also to improve public safety. The subject property itself was specifically reviewed in the small area plan. Newtown Springs residential area focused primarily on connectivity and access. And, of interest as well, part of the Lexmark property that we saw vacant in the photo or being used for recreational purposes also has alternate future land uses. And you'll see in this drawing in the lower right, pardon me, the lower left, residential use was also contemplated for a portion of that property in the future. Specifically, looking at the small area plan for the subject property, the core goal of the plan was to have private sector-led development to address the social equity and housing options that the plan called for. One goal was to expand affordable and quality rental opportunities through new development in the area. And then in looking at land use recommendations, a range of residential uses and a variety of housing types was a key recommendation of this small area plan. Those new developments were required by the small area plan or certainly encouraged to promote compatible intensity and to allow transition of density and intensity from new development to existing development in the area. Also, existing land features and vegetation was sited to be able to better buffer new development from existing development as well. In terms of connectivity and access, this area was recommended specifically to have Silver Springs Drive connect and extend to Hollow Creek Road and to serve these new residential developments and also provide that connectivity that the small area plan recommends. Again, there will be a development plan issue related to that particular topic. And also to provide a sense of place for the neighborhoods and to have a focal point designed in to allow open space and social interaction. The design guidelines were for multi-family development in the Windburn and Russell Cave neighborhoods, and the guidelines relate to this proposal because that is the type of housing that the applicant is proposing. These are five of those guidelines that the staff reviewed on the next two slides to illustrate how this particular review went just beyond what has been done in the past and the norm, I would say, to look at more details of the proposed development. The connectivity of the streets, centrally located amenities, and providing parking behind buildings and buildings up on the street were three of the guidelines reviewed, as well as matching heights and building size to that of adjacent neighborhoods and varying different types of residential unit types, both in scale and in function. The 2013 comprehensive plan also had several goals related to this proposed development that the staff reviewed, including expanding housing choice, supporting infill, encouraging development of underutilized land, providing for well-designed neighborhoods, and to preserve existing urban neighborhoods. These issues are important to present to you tonight because if you've looked at the packet, this zone change was filed in 2005. Originally, the planning staff recommended disapproval of this rezoning request. The zone change request has not been altered since 2005. It has been amended to add on to it a conditional use permit application for pool and clubhouse and private club facility. But what changed between 2005 and the planning staff's review in the middle of this year is, of course, the small area plan and its specific recommendations. The planning staff met with the applicant following adoption of the small area plan and discussed how their development could meet more of these new guidelines in the small area plan. Following successful discussions and a significantly revised development plan, the planning staff was able to recommend approval of this zone change to the Planning Commission. And so in our packet on the TAN sheet, you'll see our original staff report recommending disapproval, and then followed by the supplemental staff report, where the planning staff, about 18 months later or so, is now recommending or did recommend approval of this zone change to R3, including findings related to the design guidelines. The Planning Commission at their hearing on September 22nd heard not just from the planning staff and about our recommendation, they also heard from the petitioner, and they heard from several objectors who live in this general area. The Planning Commission at the conclusion of their hearing voted 9-1 to recommend conditional approval of this zone change to the Urban County Council. Their primary findings were, firstly, that the requested R3 zone is in agreement with the 2013 Comprehensive Plan and the adopted 2016 Windburn and Russell Cave Neighborhood Small Area Plan. And they provided the six reasons that appear on the very first page of the recommendation from the Commission. To briefly summarize, those are, first, that the Comprehensive Plan's goals and objectives encourage expanded housing choice, which this application promotes. Secondly, the requested zone change and proposed development will provide a development pattern that respects the adjacent single-family residential neighborhoods. Thirdly, the Winburn and Russell Cave Neighborhood Small Area Plan identifies seven guiding planning principles which this application furthers. Fourth, the petitioner's proposal addresses necessary transportation connections to adjacent properties and meets many of the design guidelines in the small area plan. Fifth, the site planning guidelines have been met, and many of the open space landscaping and architectural design guidelines will also be met. Finally, adherence to these standards should ensure agreement with many of the goals established in the 2013 plan, as well as the principles of the more recent small area plan. The Planning Commission's recommendation is made subject to the development plan that has been submitted in conjunction with the zone change. That plan is shown as an exhibit here on the wall. And to briefly give you a little flavor of what the applicant's development plan proposes, again we're at Citation Boulevard south of it on Silver Springs Drive currently terminates here turns into Dawson Springs and then again terminates at this location so the subject property before you tonight is here on the east side of an extension of Silver Springs and you'll see this plan also incorporates one lot on the west side this is the lot that was part of the amendment to add in a conditional use Let me start with that lot. It is not proposed to be rezoned. It's proposed to remain R1D. And the conditional use request is for a 3,700-square-foot clubhouse, a very small pool house of just under 1,000 square feet, an outdoor swimming pool, and an off-street parking lot to serve that area. This neighborhood amenity is to be made not just for the residents of the new development, but also for the residents of Newtown Springs, Hollow Creek, and Green Acres subdivisions as well, and perhaps even others. I think those details are not yet fully fleshed out. The area that is subject to the zone change proposes an extension of both streets, Silver Spring, all the way to the Lexmark property, and Hollow Creek. It's important to note, though, that at the intersection of Hollow Creek that we saw in the photo, It is specifically defined on this development plan that that connection, while being physically made, would still be gated or barricaded in a fashion until such time as Citation Boulevard extends further to the east over to Russell Cave Road. The idea behind that is that there is not much sentiment for having folks develop through neighborhood travel patterns ahead of that major roadway being developed. So the idea is to have the street connect, allow pedestrians, bicyclists, others to go between the neighborhoods but not vehicles until such time as this facility can be constructed. Once that happens, then the barricades can be removed, and this facility will be in place to handle that east-west traffic movement between Russell Cave and Newtown Pike. This development plan shows 252 two-bedroom apartments. Four of them are three stories in height. 17 are two stories in height. Generally, the two stories are closer to the existing subdivisions on both sides, the three stories being more centrally located in the development. Some 508 parking spaces are depicted on this plan, independent of the ones for the conditional use that's been approved. There was a traffic impact study submitted in conjunction with the zone change. It did meet the threshold in the zoning ordinance of more than 100 peak hour trips being generated by the new development. Generally, the levels of service were very favorable in that study. Our transportation planning staff gave a favorable memorandum to the Planning Commission. And again, that's primarily because, at least today, Citation Boulevard is not open, so the intersections are just not performing to their design at this point. So there's plenty of capacity there. That concludes my prepared remarks. Of course, as you know, I'll be available for your questions later in the evening. I thank you for your kind attention. Thank you. Does either petitioner or opponent's wish to cross-examine Mr. Selle on any evidence presented? Thank you, Mr. Selle. Mr. Murphy, for petitioner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm Dick Murphy. I'm representing Palumbo Properties tonight. I'm pleased to represent them. And I have one housekeeping item I need to mention to you first, and that is that I have already given the council clerk the copy of our affidavit of the person who posted the two signs on the property with photographs of the signs. So that has been placed on the record already. As mentioned, I am representing Palumbo Properties Incorporated, which is the owner of this just under 14-acre tract. And with me today is Mr. Joe Palumbo, who is the president of Palumbo Properties. And our team includes Charlie Barnhart of Sherman Carter Barnhart Architects. He is the architect for the development. Mr. Bill McAlpin of Eagle Engineering, who is our engineer for the development. Mr. Eddie Mesta of Integrated Engineering. He's a civil engineer and he's our traffic consultant and who prepared our traffic impact study on the property. Don't worry, all of them will not be testifying, although they'd be happy to answer questions for you. Hopefully only Mr. Barnhart will be talking to you, but everybody is available for questions to you. As background on this, as Mr. Selle mentioned, this is a zone change from R1D to R3, the planned neighborhood residential zone, R3. As Mr. Selle may have mentioned, our address is a portion of 564 Asbury Lane. I just want to clarify that no portion of our property actually touches Asbury Lane. Asbury Lane is actually up here. It touches the Willows, which is the assisted living facility. Ours is a remnant left over from that tract, so we don't touch Asbury Lane at all. We touch Silver Spring Drive, which is over here, over here on the development plan. This property is currently vacant. It has not developed. And these will be what we call market rate apartments. The rents on these, we estimate, will average $1,200 to $1,300 per month. We had questions early on, are these subsidized housing or whatever? And we believe in subsidized housing, but this is not subsidized housing. This is market rate housing, which we think there is a need for in this area. We also asked for a conditional use permit, as Mr. Sully mentioned, for the private club, also on Silver Spring Drive. And I just want to explain why we asked for that. That's not up in front of you tonight. But as you all know, apartment complexes are allowed to do recreational facilities, the clubhouse, swimming pool, that sort of thing. we wouldn't have had to ask for that if this was just going to be open to members of our complex. We felt it was the right thing to do, though, to make it open to others in the neighborhood, both Green Acres, Hollow Creek, and Newtown Springs. In order to do that, it had to be classified as a private club. To get a private club, we had to ask for a conditional use permit. So the reason we asked for a conditional use permit, The simple reason is that so membership could be opened up to people on top of as well as the people who already live in this apartment complex. There will be a fee for that, although the people living in the apartment complex will pay a fee. It's part of their rent, but other people would have to pay a fee as well, but it will be open to others in the neighborhood. we originally filed this last year mr. Sully mentioned 2005 it's actually 2015 we filed this we filed this in April 2015 about 19 months ago over a year and a half ago and the history of this process is very interesting because at that point the staff came to us and mr. Palumbo and said well we'd like you to wait because we have a small area plan we'd like to do which is going to cover this area and we talked it over and to his credit mr palumbo agreed to postpone this zone change until the small area plan was approved if you all know developers 18 months delay on a zone change is monumental it's like changing the kentucky derby from may to june because as you know time is money and people need to get going on things. But he could have asked the Planning Commission to hear it. He could have said, I want you to hear it because they're obligated to hear it within 90 days unless he agrees to postponement. He agreed to the postponement a year and a half. The property went through the small area plan process. There was a number of neighborhood meetings that the staff had with people in the area. the number of study groups that were formed and talked to Mr. Chris Taylor of the planning staff this afternoon. He said at each of the meetings there were representatives of the Silver Spring, excuse me, the Newtown Springs neighborhood and the Green Acres neighborhood as well, and were vocal on their concerns. So we waited until the small area plan came out, And then we got hit with another new item, and that is that the small area plan included design guidelines. And as I mentioned to you earlier when we had the earlier discussion, this is the first time that the small area plan or comprehensive plan has called for design guidelines outside of the downtown area. So, again, Mr. Palumbo had a decision to make. What do we do? Well, I think this says a lot about our development. he retained Sherman Carter Barnhart Architects, one of the leading architecture firms in Lexington. But before they put pencil to paper, we sat down with the planning staff, especially the design planner that you now have in the Division of Planning, Ms. Peacher, and met with them, and we wanted to make sure we understood what the design guidelines were before the architects started working on this project. And it resulted in a lot of changes in our plan. The plan we have now is quite different from what we started out with. Some of the obvious differences are that we have reduced, at one point we had 333 units on this. We've reduced that 25% down to 252 units. When we originally filed, we did not show connections of Hollow Creek road to this we did not show the connection I don't think down to the Lexmark property as well and the configuration was different but I'm going to ask mr. Barnhart to come up and tell you about our design and the process we used again mr. Barnhart is with Sherman Carter Carter Barnhart architects and they are our architects on this project Thank you, Dick. Mr. Chairman, members of the Council, it's my pleasure to be here with you tonight. Many of the things I was going to talk about, maybe in a general sense, have already been commented on, but I think the most notable thing from our involvement on this project was the way we began, the process under which we started. We met with the planning staff, and they introduced us to the Windburn Small Area Plan, as well as the design guidelines that have been referenced numerous times. I mentioned to Dick Murphy just this evening that had we not had that meeting, I think this plan would be quite a bit different. There were some very substantial discussions and ideas about the development of scale in a setting such as this that led us to the resolution of the site plan that you see today. Key elements that I want to point out that I think are demonstrated in the plan as well as our future goals for architectural development, the design guidelines called for appropriate scale, both in height as well as building widths. Many of the apartment complexes that you see in Lexington, many of them that are designed by our firm are much, much wider. They're long buildings. Many of them are three stories tall. Many of them perhaps do not have as much what I would call horizontal relief, ins and outs of the exterior walls, similar to what you'd see in the single-family residential in this particular area. So that is certainly part of the design consideration. create a street presence, effectively a front door. A lot of apartments, you'll enter in one direction and then go down a hallway. One of the suggestions by your planner and the planning staff was to have all of the ground floor units that are on the two major streets enter from their own sidewalk to a front door. So when you drive down the street, you see the location just as you would in another single-family development. Following this meeting, we developed several different concepts. We developed some building elevations. We interacted with Brandy, Peacher, your planner, and others with the planning staff and exchanged ideas and then further refined the concepts that we have here with us this evening. Let me just point out a couple of things that I think are important. I'm just going to use the site plan, Bill. And it's been referenced so far this evening, But probably the most significant thing that we started to look at was how do we maintain this density of 252 units, but at the same time do not have tall and massively long buildings. These buildings, all the buildings that you see along Silver Spring Drive as well as Hollow Creek Road are two stories in height. That was done intentionally to make sure that if there was a two-story home across from it, it'd be related to the height and scale. Further, we broke the scale of the buildings down by, if you can see here, these offsets. The building line here is 20 feet. This sets back 12 feet, so we have a variety of front yard configuration. And again, that's sort of like having a garage and it's set back to a porch, a very similar intentional gesture in terms of design to help it relate to the scale of the other residential areas. These little white lines you see here are the sidewalks that come off the main right-of-way sidewalk up to the front doors of all the ground floor units. so that was probably the most significant concept that we had and also to to provide essentially side yards like you would in a single family home between the houses have that same effect even though these are multi-family developments they would they would begin to resemble similar attributes of a single family development. The parking areas are diverse. They're not one large parking area. They're broken up into more of a village kind of an idea that support the units. And as pointed out before, the three-story buildings, there's a three-story building here, a three-story building here. One of these small buildings is a three-story and the three-story building in this area. So they're all layered behind the two-story structures. As far as the architecture is concerned, and these were all very intentionally done to further break up the scale, almost like townhomes, much more like a residential feel that currently exists in that area. Some of the suggestions by the planning staff was to introduce gabled elements like you would see in a single-family home, have the separate entrance that you see here on the ground floor, vary the roof line so that you don't have one consistent long roof line like you see in many multifamily developments. So I found that the interaction with the planning staff really led to a new and different way to look at an apartment complex, multifamily development, and I feel like we've succeeded in meeting many of the design guidelines that were presented. Thank you. I might add that in my handouts that I gave you, which is this sheet with a cover sheet there, a couple other copies down at the end of the counter here in case other people want those, the first two pages are copies of that rendering, and then the second one is a closer-up detail of that rendering, same thing, just to show you a little more detail of what Mr. Barnhart was telling you about. A couple other things I wanted to mention to you about that also is that on the development plan, one of the conditions of approval on the conditional zoning restrictions that the Planning Commission imposed and that we agreed to very readily was maintaining the 20-foot landscape buffer area between us and Green Acres and Hollow Creek. If you've been out to the site, there's a very thick tree line along that line, and we want to keep that, and we agreed to a condition that will require us to keep that along that property line as well. We also agreed to a condition about the lighting, that the lighting would be lower than you would normally see an apartment complex, and that is so that we can keep our light inside the property as well. And I want to mention about what you're seeing is a preliminary development plan, and our renderings were submitted because we were required to submit those to demonstrate our ability to comply with the design guidelines. Now, what happens if you are to approve this, as we hope you will, what happens after this? Well, we have to come back to the Planning Commission with a final development plan, and we have to come back with a final set of renderings. And they will be substantially along the same lines that you have seen because we have gone over these renderings and this development plan with the designer and the design team in the Division of Planning, and this is a result of bringing plans back and forth where we say, here's what we want to do. The design planner says, well, I really think you need to do something a little different to comply with our design guidelines. And we then brought another set of plans back and came up with them. So what you have seen before you, we know agrees with the design guidelines because the planning commission has seen it. The planning designer has seen it. we will have to bring back a final version of that and a final version of our development plan in more detail. But we know to pass muster with the Planning Commission, we're going to have to be having what we show you there and what we show you here, but even more refined and with more detail. So we appreciate your indulgence with us on the renderings, but those are an important part, is we had to bring those up to show to the planning staff and the planning commission that we complied with the Windburn-Russell Cave Small Area Plan, which is a part of this community's official comprehensive plan. I want to mention something to you about traffic. As Mr. Selle mentioned, we were required to do a traffic study, and Mr. Mesta completed a 70-page traffic study, and I didn't hand that out to you because I didn't think you'd have time to read it all during the time of our hearing here, but I did pass out. I ran copies of the planning staff's four-page review of our 70-page traffic study. So I handed that out because it's four pages, and it was a good summary. If you look at page two on that, the one with the little traffic circle on it, traffic signal on that, if you can put that up on the slide. Thank you. And this was a review. We were just barely required to do a traffic study because we had a couple counts of 104 or 103. If it were 99, we wouldn't have even had to do a traffic study. But Mr. Emmons, who is your transportation planner in the Division of Planning, reviewed our study and came up with the numbers. And he has a color coding system over on the side with a traffic signal. You can see green is acceptable, yellow is concerned, red is unacceptable. And you can see in all of these categories here, it's all green. And if you look at it in more detail, every level of service that the intersection studied were either level of service A or level of service B, which are very good levels of service. Level of service A is unobstructed traffic, free flow. B is occasionally you have to slow down. It goes A to F. Nicholasville Road probably in a couple places is F. When planners do new roads, they strive to urban areas. Level of C or level of D is generally an acceptable way. but these are level of service A and B throughout. So I wanted to point that out to you. Mr. Mesta is here who conducted the traffic study. If you all have any questions about the traffic study. I do want to mention the comprehensive plan because, as you see from the Planning Commission report, that is the basis they gave for recommending approval of our zone change, and we do adhere to the comprehensive plan. On page three of my handout, I just have some excerpts of the 2013 comprehensive plan. These are the ones that the Planning Commission relied upon. If I had to do a one-sentence summary of the 2013 comprehensive plan, it is, let's do infill before we spread outward. Sometimes people say, let's go up, not out. But as you all know, the emphasis has been on infill and making the best use of our precious vacant land within the urban service boundary. This proposal does exactly that in agreement with the Windburn Small Area Plan. I mentioned the first one we mentioned is to expand housing choices. I'm not going to read all these, but I'm going to read a couple of them. plan for housing that addresses the market needs for all of the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government's residents, including but not limited to mixed-use and housing near employment and commercial areas. Second is support infill and redevelopment throughout the urban service area as a strategic component of growth. Third is uphold the urban service area, encourage compact, contiguous, and or mixed-use sustainable development within the urban service area. And I want to add especially, as guided by market demand to accommodate future growth needs. And that's exactly what we're doing. We're accommodating sustainable future development guided by market demand to accommodate the future growth needs of this county. It will allow us to help maintain the urban service area boundary, which I know is a topic which is becoming more important as we approach the big update of the comprehensive plan. and it also calls for varied housing choices. And all these, I think, were cited by the Planning Commission when they voted to recommend approval of our plan to you and our zone change to you. I also need to mention the Windburn-Russell Cave small area plan. As I mentioned to you, we held this up for a year or more for the approval of the Windburn-Russell Cave small area plan. and the staff went through, you can see on pages 6 and 7, I've copied out pages from that plan showing the process they went through, the kickoff event, the workshops, the neighborhood meetings, where people are invited to comment on their vision for this future of this area. And I have some excerpts from that on page 4 and 5. I won't read them all to you. I don't want to put you any more sleepy than you already are here. but I do need to mention a few of them to you. If I had to summarize how they impact us, the two most important things are connectivity and design on here. The first one I mentioned is to increase connectivity by improving and expanding the street network. I do want to talk about connectivity a little bit because this is an important issue out here. About four years ago, I represented the owners of the Willows, which were getting approval for their assisted living facility at the corner of Citation Boulevard and Silver Spring Drive, right up there. We had a hearing on that, and as I recall, the most important topic from the people who showed up from the neighborhood was that they did not want Asbury Lane connected at that point, and did not want the connection between the two neighborhoods. And that was not done at that point. So our initial plan, when we brought this before you, did not show connections of Hollow Creek Road here and did not show our connection into the park back here. In going through the small area plan process, though, it was determined that connections were important. As you all know, there's no connection between Newtown Pike and Russell Cave Road up between New Circle Road and the interstate. You can't get there from here. You have to take a big winding. If you want to go from here over to here, it's a long ways by car. We were puzzled as to how do we deal with this because people said, well, if you connect Hollow Creek Road, everybody's going to make a habit of that and make that the big connection between the two neighborhoods. And I think the staff and Mr. Silly mentioned to this, but I have to give credit to the staff on this. They came up with the solution for us to deal with this, And that is, we are going to build Hollow Creek Road up to where the barricade now exists, but we'll leave a barricade there. Meantime, we're going to wait until Citation Boulevard is connected. And once it's connected, and we wait a reasonable amount of time after it's connected, so people will establish the driving pattern of using Citation Boulevard to get from Newtown to Russell Cave. Then we're going to open up Hollow Creek. We're going to take the barricade out. And so that that Hollow Creek Road will be a connection, but it will not be established in people's minds as the connection between the neighborhoods. I thought that was a very elegant solution. It's one of those things where you think, why didn't I think of that? but myself. Well, the staff thought of it. They're the planners. They came up with this solution. They did put some conditions on our development plan, which we agreed to, that even now, once we get it built, we are going to have a pedestrian connection now, and we're going to have an emergency connection so that ambulances, fire department, that sort of thing, would have a gate arrangement where they can get through from one neighborhood to another on an emergency basis. So that's how the planning staff helped us, or they came up with a solution to the connectivity issue on this property. I thought it was very good. The planning staff also pointed out to us that to the south there's Lexmark property, which I've always called Lexmark Park because it's where they have the softball fields and that sort of thing. I think there's a hope on the part of the planning staff that maybe someday Lexmark would give that to the city, or maybe the city might buy it for a reasonable amount of price and make it a park as well. And the staff pointed out we ought to have the connection. We ought to connect Silver Spring Drive down there, so we do show that connection down to the Lexmark Park property as well. So we're making those connections as called for in the Windburn-Russell Cave small area plan. Just wanted to point out a few other things about the Windburn-Russell Cave small area plan. It calls for optimizing use of land to promote mixed housing types within the area. It calls for ensuring that infill development is well designed and sensitive to existing neighborhoods and surrounding uses. It calls for affordable and quality rental opportunities through preservation of existing rental units and development of new units. Here's a quote from the plan. It says, R3 zoning is encouraged to give flexibility in a variety of housing types and to maintain a scale which is comparable to the existing neighborhood fabric. And this was one of the exact properties that was referring to when it talked about the R3 category being appropriate for this property. And again, on Objective 4, it says expanding affordable and quality rental opportunities through development of new units. And it says on page 76, with focused reinvestment and land reuse efforts in the Windburn and Russell Cave neighborhoods, vacant and underutilized land can be transformed. And the last thing it came up with was the design guidelines, which are probably with connectivity the other most important element of the Windburn-Russell Cave Small Area Plan. And we've gone over with those with you, and we're proud to have a plan which complies with the design guidelines and set forth. And I think that's mainly what I wanted to cover. We're very proud to present this plan to you. We know we're the guinea pigs on having design guidelines on areas outside of downtown. And Mr. Palumbo has done it right. He has hired outstanding architects and engineers to design this. We have had a collaborative process with the planning staff and the planning designers over the last year. and we're pleased to be involved in that collaborative process and we're very pleased to have a zone change and a plan which we feel totally agrees with the recent small area plan and will be a very positive addition to this area of the community. We're here and we appreciate your hearing our zone change very much and we'd be happy to answer any questions you all might have. Thank you. does anybody wish to cross-examine on any of the evidence presented by the petitioner? Sir, if you'd come, yes, tell me your name and address. Joshua Samples, I'm at 725 Dawson Springs Way. And I'm just curious if a zone change is necessary to provide that connectivity that he talked about or if a zone change is necessary to provide some of the other things that are in the small urban area plan. I think obviously connections could be made in however this is developed, whether it's commercial or residential, whatever degree of residential use it is. but we were trying to comply with the totality of the comprehensive plan. This land has been vacant for a number of years. We don't want it to be vacant for a long period of time. In going through the comprehensive plan process, it was pointed out that in order for the commercial, as you all know, there's a lot of commercial already zoned along Newtown Pike at this point, and there's nothing out there. It was pointed out to us that in order to support that, we need two things. We need increased density in this area. And the second is we need this connection back through there. The two go hand in hand, the slight increase in density and the connections in order to support this commercial. And so the answer is, of course, if the city wanted to go out and pave those streets right now, they could probably do it right now and make those connections. But we see this as part of the integrated plan which has presented to you, and we think the plan as we have it, which complies with this comprehensive plan, is the best way to go. Thank you. Anybody else? If not, we will proceed to the folks who have signed up to speak in opposition. I have a list. I'll just take them in order. I will ask you to limit your comments to three minutes. I will also let you know that if there are people here who will want to yield their time to someone else, that's permissible so someone could speak at greater length. The first person I have on the list is Virgil Jones. And again, if you'd give us your name and address. Thank you. My name is Virgil Jones, and I live at 729 Dawson Springs Way, which will be on the little hook piece of the roadway. I was one of the members that showed up at the Planning Commission to voice opposition, and I would just like to start off and say I spent time down at the Planning Office, And as Mr. Samples has already kind of noted, my discussions showed that the planning staff wanted the roadway connections to be made regardless of whether a apartment complex was built or a housing subdivision was built. So I would just like to make sure that the council here is asking the right people the right questions to validate what I believe I heard from the planning staff during this process. Secondly, principle number three, promote strategies to increase home ownership. I find it hard to have home ownership when you have an apartment. I believe the definition of an apartment means that you cannot own it. The section of town that we are talking about has a 33% home ownership. If I read my Windburn small area plan correctly on one of the pages, 33% is the lowest percentage rate in Lexington. If we're going to change this section of town or this area of town, how are we going to do that? Are we going to build more apartments? If we do, is that going to change the mix or the way that this section of town is progressing for the next 10, 15, 20 years? Or is it just going to perpetuate the status quo? I would contend that building apartments probably is going to perpetuate the status quo. At $1,300 as a $1,200 to $1,300 for rent, I do believe from my figures that is considerably higher than what the Lexington market is on average. My figures are about $755. The average for Kentucky is $678, and the average for the United States is $934. How can somebody renting an apartment for $1,300 afford to sock away money that will eventually allow them to make a down payment on a house of some means if they're having to utilize a large percentage of their monthly income in apartment rent, let alone utilities, food, or other expenses? Okay, Mr. Jones, I'm sorry, but your time has expired. Okay. I have two people that would like to yield time to me. You tell me your name. Your name? Are you on the list? And you want to yield time? depending on it because he got to speak for about 40 plus minutes so i think we should be garnered that much time between us and if it deems i might have to give it up that's why i asked how many people are on my list so to speak so if we can get 40 minutes too and it makes where i have to get my time between that people then i'll do that but that's why i asked how many more Okay. Is there anybody else who is on the list who had not planned to speak and to yield their time? And your name? I'm sorry? Thank you. And I understand your comment, and if there are people who would like to speak after the people who have signed up, even if they have yielded time, I would entertain a motion from the Council to do so. So you have not yielded your time at this point. So I can't know how many people are opposed? I'm sorry. Yes, you can. There are seven people signed up. So it said if we get 30 minutes apiece, that's 21 minutes. That's not even half of what? If you would allow me, we'll go through the list, And if there are still people who have things to say and have not had time to say it, I believe we can get a motion from Council to extend more time. We want to give you the time that you need. Mr. Jones, I think you've got six more minutes. Thank you. In addition to this one apartment complex, just a quick browsing of the newspaper and stuff, I've come up with several other apartment complexes that are being built roughly in the northern section or the center section of Lexington. We're looking at Thistle Station, Newtown Pike, and Georgetown. A 16-story complex is proposed to be built with 200 apartments. University Village, an Anderson community on Simpson Avenue, Masterson Station, an Anderson community, 474 planned apartments. University of Kentucky is building, I don't know the word to use, they are building so many apartments. Those apartments are going to transition students off campus back on campus, thus leaving apartments off campus vacant. Manowar and Polo Club, 264 apartments proposed. Manowar and Nicholasville, apartments under construction for its farm, 306 apartments. A plethora of apartment buildings are going up. At some point in time, there becomes a saturation point. I would hope that the council will look at that as a potential for slowing down the apartment need in certain sections of town and taking a look at trying to do affordable housing, whether they be one-story or duplexes in sections of town, such as our northern section. Secondly, this relates specifically to the green acres area. Several years ago, roughly about 2008, I believe that there was a sewage problem with some backing up, and the city of Lexington was forced to buy out two individual houses over in the Green Acres section of town. Those houses are connected to the same general trunk line of sewer that this proposed development is. And I'm wondering if the increase in sewage capacity is going to be a detriment to the lower end houses, specifically the last house on Dawson Springs Way, which has the manhole covered directly in its rear and stuff. If you want to see a map of the sewer manholes, I've got it and stuff. So I would hope that the council takes into effect that if we were building about 70 or 80 houses, going based on some calculations, that we're looking at the difference of 70 to 80 houses versus 250 apartments. We're looking at an increase of 72,000 gallons of sewage per day or per month, per day. When I looked in some other documents, I found a Division of Engineering review dated March 29, 2015. Division of Engineering contact, Hillard Newman, Jr., relating to the Newtown Springs plan. And one of the items they have here says, Check with Division of Water Quality concerning sanitary sewer capacity. I understand capacity for the Newtown Springs development would have been grandfathered based on the originally approved plan, which I believe was the housing subdivision. If this plan is approved, there will likely be some differences in the capacity needed versus that which has been grandfathered in. So I believe that is a technical concern and a big technical concern based on the fact that two houses were required to be purchased by the city of Lexington and condemned and bulldozed. And if I remember right, those are now just vacant lots. So I don't wish to see the same occurrence happen on my side of the tree stand that we're talking here. The, in the EHI consultants, I believe were the consultants that did the Russell Cave small area meetings with the neighborhoods and stuff. In their document entitled LFU-CG Housing Market Study, Urban Collage by EHI Consultants, it states the city's regional share of housing, this is the affordable to the broad spectrum, has been declining. Again, if we're just going to put apartments all over Lexington, how are we going to make a community? How are we going to make neighborhoods? I would propose that apartment complexes, monster apartment complexes, do not make neighborhoods. I believe houses make neighborhoods. Houses with people, with children laughing and playing on the streets, those make neighborhoods that people want to come to, want to live in, want to utilize. There has been a net migration. This also comes from that EHI consulting. There has been a net migration of households out of Lexington County to the surrounding counties. City residents spend a smaller portion of their income on housing than the national average. As a result, Lexington is comparatively affordable and attractive to in-migrants from other high-cost parts of the country. Why is this not happening? We're looking at Lexmark having been sold just recently to a Chinese company. They've now proposed a zone change. Why? Are they getting ready to sell the entire site and move completely out, vacating another section of property? And is that a piece of property that would best be served with an apartment complex versus sticking an apartment complex directly smack dab in the middle of a residential neighborhood on both sides? Mr. Jones, again, your time has expired. Do you want to wrap up? Yep, I have. One last question. As far as the Hollow Creek, this is more of a rhetorical, as far as the Hollow Creek opening or the Asbury opening, are those going to be open if and when the entire citation corridor is opened all the way to Russell Cave? Or will one or both of those open if the first segment of citation is opened? And that would be a rhetorical question. I'm not sure as to the answer for that. Thank you very much. Thank you. The next person I have on is James Lyle. He said most of it. Thank you for your time. I would just propose to Mr. Plumbo. I'm sorry. I built James Lyle, 1345 Solar Springs. Just for the record, please, your name on the. James Lyle, 1345 Solar Springs. I in my heyday I used to build and my max was 22 houses a month I would build that out I would build that section out I would spec them all out build them out and keep it a nice residential area because just as he said putting apartments in there you have townhomes right up here that you're going to rent out for whatever it is and you'll have a garage so why would somebody come down here and rent out an apartment that they won't even have a garage. And if you really want to propose a pool where I went and voted the other day on the backside of Hollow Creek, there's a big open area that you could put a pool, a private pool for those residents. So in going to the traffic flow, I guarantee you, like I said, in my heyday, I built 22 houses. So This kind of stuff is not a month, not new for me. Even once you do open those connectors up, are you going to travel all the way down Russell Cave to go to Citation when you know it's going to be really thick and heavy, or are you going to cut down Hollow Creek and cut across and try to beat that out? Thank you for your time. Thank you. Next is Mr. Joshua Samples. Is there any way I can get the minute and a half he left on the board? Absolutely. Your name and address, please. Joshua Samples, 725 Dawson Springs Way. Thank you. So I feel my wife and I wrote a letter. I hope the council members got it. We sent it off this week to you to give you some information on this before it came to you. And we'd like to appreciate this opportunity to speak before you, to give you our concerns, You know, per theme, we've talked a lot about the comprehensive plan and the small urban area plan. Theme F is, you know, primary goal is to engage residents in the planning process. So up to this point, we've talked a lot about the small urban area plan, too. And I feel like the area plan adequately covered the whole area that it was supposed to with Windburn and Russell Cave, Hollow Creek, Green Acres. but it didn't cover our neighborhood very well. Our neighborhood wasn't engaged very well in the process. I went to the first meeting, gave them my contact information. I was not contacted about any subsequent meeting. But to just go along with the urban area planning, because I think it's got some good principles, I'll start with the connectivity. As I mentioned while I go in my cross-examination, an R1 development doesn't preclude the connectivity. We can get the connectivity keeping the same zoning that it is. Second principle is to increase equity for neighborhood residents providing increased access. Again, the connectivity is still available with an R1. Besides the fact that those connections won't be available until citation is completed to Russell Cave anyway, so it's more an issue of a transportation project than it is this zone change. The third principle is to promote strategies to increase homeownership. This does not fit that principle at all. It is against that principle in that planning study. So if we're touting that small urban area plan, this goes against that small urban area plan, this proposal, as far as apartment buildings. Now, changing it to zone R3, I don't think that's the type of housing that you want. because it sandwiches our Newtown Springs subdivision in between R3's commercial, whatever Lexmark's develops, and then R3 with the townhouses up at the front. So it puts us on a little island there with no R1s connected to our neighborhood, and it excludes us. at that point we'd be outnumbered by people who aren't homeowners in that community. To go back to the comprehensive plan, it talks about Theme A, Goal 3, that's already been mentioned tonight. It talks about well-designed neighborhoods and communities. This development they're proposing is well-designed, but it does not fit because it is not a well-designed neighborhood or community. It cuts us from ever even developing a relationship with Hollow Creek because we're in between. We've got people who are renting in between us. So it's not a well-designed neighborhood. It's not a well-designed community. The fourth principle talks about promoting mixed housing types. We already have that. We already have townhomes. We already have the Willows. Then we have R1. It's not a large enough area to really fit well the R3. Lexmark property being developed as R3 would be a good fit. Having apartments there with a different access to Newtown Pike, that makes sense. One of the other things in the comprehensive plan includes the need for Lexington to shape and design its public spaces with an eye towards delivering the intangible qualities that people seek. the people in this neighborhood do not want this. The people in Olloa Creek that we have signed petitions from, and Virgil didn't mention these, but he's signed petitions from our neighborhood, their neighborhood. We do not want this to be an apartment complex. And that's not what we're seeking. Adding a large apartment building to our small neighborhood would be aesthetically unwelcome and brings in just a lot of traffic and light and noise. um as as virtual said there is no shortage of apartments around the around the area so that's if that is a need one other thing that that hadn't been talked about is that the resident the houses out there are selling quickly as soon as they get them built people are moving in so there is a need for r1 single family residential because we've had brisk sales for two years now and i know it It's been a development long coming for those kind of residential housing, and I feel sorry for Mr. Plumbo because of that, but they're selling now, so we don't need to change it. If we have those petitions, can we enter those in? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Next on the list is Sheila Coles. Again, if you would just give us your name and address for the record. Yes, my name is Sheila Coz. I'm at 649 Hollow Creek Road. And my concern is the opening, the connection. I know it's in the second phase of the development, but why are we having to open that section when you're going to have citation? Because that section is right there in front of my door. I am the last house on the street. That's my concern. Okay, thank you very much. Next on the list, Tiffany Hart Next on the list is Chelsea Atwater Hi, my name is Chelsea Atwater I am a resident of 912 Dawson Creek Way I might be the youngest person here this evening representing homeowners in the area. I'm 26 years old. I was lucky enough to buy my first home in June of this year. I'm originally from Berea, Kentucky, and I matched into residency here at UK, so I'm a first-year doctor. So I have a couple of things I'd like to say. You may have done this traffic study at 5 a.m. when I'm going to the hospital because that's the only time of day that this traffic pattern would line up. Usually it takes anywhere from three to five minutes to turn out of our neighborhood, to turn in. I have set up that light six times before I was able to cross traffic because people just kept coming on Newtown Pike and turning left from Citation Boulevard onto Newtown Pike. So traffic is actually a huge issue. I understand that maybe that was the number of cars coming out, but trying to get into our neighborhood is a big problem. So that's my first issue I'd like to raise. Secondly, as a first-time home buyer, I looked all over Lexington for several months. Actually, I really hope to be at UK. I probably set myself up for a little disappointment. But I looked all over Lexington. I looked in the south end of Lexington because that's where everybody originally thinks they want to buy because that's where the older homes are, more established neighborhoods. But then my boyfriend and I found this neighborhood. we remarked the first time we visited that it felt homey. It reminded me of Berea. And I guess in Berea, it's a small town. We have a strong sense of community, but people were friendly. They came out of their houses to greet me. The streets were quiet. I could see myself hopefully someday having children and bringing them there to raise them. The thought of having an extra 500 cars entering and exiting my neighborhood every single day to come home and bring home children to, that's kind of scary, given the fact that we have one way in, one way out of our neighborhood which is Citation Boulevard. I understand that the plan is to open up those roads but I am of the impression after talking to several people that it's going to take the city of Lexington several years to acquire the property between Dawson Springs and Russell Cave Road and it would take several years to get that road built and my impression is that they want to build this development rather quickly so what do we do in the meantime when we have 500 additional cars and still one way in and one way out of this neighborhood lastly to the point about being a first-time homeowner one more time i feel like i've achieved my american dream i have a great job and i have a great home that i enjoy coming home to every single day and i want more people to have the opportunity to be homeowners not apartment renters at 1300 a month my mortgage is 900 a month it's much more affordable and it's realistic and it's part of the american dream that more people want and i think that that's something we should be striving for in Lexington. Thank you. Thank you. That's all who have signed up to speak in opposition. If there's anybody who's already spoken who's not had a chance to complete, if there's additional information that needs to be before this council, unless there's objection, I would entertain an additional three minutes. Sir, is there objection? Any objection? Seeing none, please. I tried to center most of my remarks about the fact that the zone change is not necessary to implement the findings in the small urban area plan. It also is not necessary to – I'm not saying that their plan doesn't fit other than that one principle that it completely doesn't fit. So to go back to what the comprehensive plan and the small urban area plan say, I want to go back to planning's recommendation from January – or I guess this is maybe March – no. I think it may be March or January of 16 or March of, no, never mind, it's January of 16. The planning staff recommends disapproval for the following reasons. Number two was the requesting rezoning not in agreement with several goals and objectives of the 2013 plan, and it would not have been in agreement with the 2007 plan either. So then if that was their assessment before the small urban area plan, and then we get the smaller urban area plan and it doesn't even meet one of the principles and several other of the principles could be met by the R1 zone, then why would it be approved after that plan? It doesn't make any sense. The third point here is that there have not been any unanticipated changes in the immediate area of a social, physical, economic nature that significantly changed the immediate area since the 2013 comprehensive plan was adopted. Those changes still haven't happened. other than that the housing market in that neighborhood is doing fine. Like I said, I think their builder was looking at a vacant lot last night, so we don't have issues with filling up those spots. If it stays R1, those houses will get sold. So there is no reason to change it, and it goes against what the homeowners, the neighborhood, to have a well-designed neighborhood, it's changing that. It will not be a well-designed neighborhood at that point. Thank you. Thank you. I'll do one more thing. I've had a request for a break. Does the petitioner wish to cross-examine any of the witnesses for the opposition? In that case, if we can, take a five-minute break, and then we'll come back and finish up. On your seats. Thank you. Thank you. Where we are in the proceedings is that actually there was one thing that I haven't done we need to do before. I thought we were going to get to rebuttal, but staff has an opportunity to make additional comments, if any. Mr. Salee? Thank you, Vice Mayor Kaye. I really just have one rebuttal comment. It was to Mr. Jones' rhetorical question about opening citation and whether or not the connection would be made to Hollow Creek. If I can use the development plan. again citation exists to silver springs and here there's a forced turn to get to the subject property my understanding is through the course of the small area plan there was talk of a first stage of citation being connected further to the east to where it could connect to windburn drive which if i can use the zoning map instead here's the subject property here's its current terminus this is an alignment that's planned for windburn drive here it's currently constructed to about this location here my understanding from talking with our long-range planning staff is that if this were a first phase of citation to here that we would not at that point be comfortable in opening this up. I think the direction of the small area plan and the understanding of the staff is we want this completed all the way to Russell K before we would be comfortable opening that to vehicular traffic. So I wanted to clarify that for the Council. The other item, just very quickly, to Mr. Samples' question, the one letter I distributed at the start of the hearing, that was the letter from Mr. Samples and his wife. Thank you. Thank you. That brings us down to a petitioner's rebuttal evidence. Mr. Murphy? I just want to mention a few things. We discussed the goals and objectives of the Windburn-Russell Cave Small Area Plan. Obviously, no property complies with all of them, But I want to read this one where they cite about third principles to promote homeownership opportunities. That's true, but they don't read the second part, and to improve existing housing conditions, which we clearly are. We're providing a market segment of market rate rental housing, which is not in this corridor. Things were cited about Simpson Avenue down near UK, UK dormitories, Manowar Polo Club, Nicholasville Road. We're not after that market. We're after a market in this corridor, Newtown Pike, Russell Cave Corridor, in which there's not a market-based housing component at this time. We certainly think that is needed. The housing strategy, as you know, one of the reasons of the 2008 housing bubble was a national reason, and that is that the policies of the federal government artificially pushed up the rate of homeownership to a rate which was not sustainable. There's two factors impacting homeownership. One is that, that we cannot maintain homeownership at the rate people were pushing for in 2008. It just doesn't work. The second is a matter of choice, and that is that people are becoming renters because they want to be renters. It's not confined to older people like me who don't want to be slaves to their lawns and be mowing their lawns and shoveling snow. A lot of people in their 20s and 30s don't want that either. They don't want the burden of shoveling, mowing. They don't want to have the burden of maintaining their residence. If they rent, they get somebody to do that for them. They call the manager. The advantage of having a planned complex such as this is on-site management, which can respond to the needs and the wants of the residents there, and a lot of people want it. But most people who come to this development aren't there because they can't buy a house. They're there because they want to rent, and they want the lifestyle that renting will be able to provide them. That's not saying that there's anything wrong with owning a house. It's great for people who want to. I want to own a house right now. But a lot of people don't, not only at my age but at younger ages. They want that as an option. so the one element of the windburn russell case malaria plan is is building communities and it's building places where there are choices of housing for all people who wish them and we have situations such as that out on hayes boulevard where there's lots of apartments some of them next to single family residential, it works well. It provides a choice of type of housing for people who want whatever choice they have. We don't have that in this neighborhood right now. As far as issues about sewage or whatever that's dealt with at our final development plan, we can't get permits for whatever we're building. If that's a problem, it's a problem for single family houses as well as apartments. No matter what you approve, if you approve us today. If there's a problem out there, we won't get a permit to tap onto the sewer line. That's what happens to everybody. It's a very, very rigorous system now that is funded by the new fee on user fee, and it is very effective. I was impressed lately when we had this plan coming through. We went to the technical committee. I counted up one day at the technical committee, we had 24 government representatives around the table reviewing this one plan, 24 of them. And they represented, I think I counted up, 18 or 19 different divisions, some of them within this government and some of them outside this government. It's a very rigorous system, and everybody has their input in it. And there are many things if we don't meet them, we just can't do it, no matter what the zoning is, no matter what it's approved for. I want to talk about our plan. Yes, the planning staff did recommend approval of our initial plan. That's why we have a totally different plan before you. We have, as I said, a 25% reduction in density here. We have connections. We have a totally different design. we saw the issues that were raised by the staff they said well you wait wait and we're going to see what comes out of this small area plan process and we did that so just want to oh i wanted to mention the traffic issues the when we did our traffic study we didn't we we assumed we wanted to do what you might call the most conservative study possible. We assumed no connection of citation. We assumed no connection of Hollow Creek. We put all the traffic out this way, out to Newtown. We just wanted to make the most conservative study possible for you. And we came out with A's and B's. But, as Mr. Mista informed me that on Newtown Pike, the widening of Newtown Pike is within the six-year state plan, and we understand that at least a portion of Citation Boulevard is within the six-year state plan as well for construction. So, yes, there are issues on Newtown Pike beyond the scope of this plan, but a widening is on the six-year state plan. I guess I have a summary. I want to make sure there's nothing else I need to respond to here, Mr. Chair, and I'll have a real brief summary when it's appropriate for me to get to that. Okay, thank you. Does anybody wish to provide a summary statement? This is not an opportunity for rehashing, but to make a closing comment on behalf of those in opposition. I guess in summary, I wouldn't disagree that they've put a lot of thought into the design of the development. but I disagree that it's well thought out within the context of the neighborhood, the surrounding areas. And also to talk about the small urban area plan again and the existing housing conditions that are talked about in there, it refers to the existing housing conditions, the existing houses that are there. So that reference is not for the undeveloped parcel, it's for the neighborhoods on either side, which it doesn't fit in between two or one neighborhoods. It does not fit well in between two or one. No matter how well designed it is, it doesn't fit very well. And so to change this zone, it is a higher impact to Newtown Springs because it puts us on an island outnumbered, surrounded by potentially no other homeowners. and it affects Hollow Creek and Green Acres, but there's a transition of some R3 housing on the Russell Cave side and they're still coming from the Russell Cave side. So it's more of an effect on us. And we have about 50 homes in that neighborhood and we have 12 different houses represented at this meeting, which to me is not quite as good as the voter turnout at the election recently, but it's not too far off. So we got a lot of concern about this change to our neighborhood, and it is not something that is sensitive to our neighborhood, which is another tenet of the comprehensive plan, for this to be changed to R3. It does not take into consideration our neighborhood, and it is not sensitive in any way. Thank you. Okay. At this point, if council members have questions for staff, petitioner, or opponent, if you would sign in electronically. Recognize you would ask those questions. Council Member Maloney. I'm sorry. Thank you. I'm sorry. Yes, you do. I skipped right over it. Summary by petitioner. I'll be real brief. The thing I want to emphasize on this is two things. One is the comprehensive plan, which we've mentioned to you, The overriding theme of the 2013 plan was let's build in before we build out. The overriding themes of the Winburn-Russell Cave Small Area Plan was two. Connectivity, which we meet, and design guided by your designers, which we meet as well. The other thing is the process we've gone through. I know we've spent a little over an hour and a half on this, and we greatly appreciate the time you spend on this. But contrast this to the year and a half that we've spent on this development. I've been there. Mr. McAlpin has been. Mr. Palumbo. Our architects have been involved, Mr. Barnhart, over a year. We've been through a process where we first came in with a plan which the planning staff didn't feel was good. We saw their reasoning. At their suggestion, we held up. We waited for this process to go through. We waited for this malaria plan process, which was a process which involved input from all the neighborhoods, Newtown Springs, Green Acres, Hollow Creek neighborhoods, and came up with this plan, which did specifically mention the possibility of R3 zoning on this property, if done under the design guidelines. And that's why we engaged Mr. Barnhart on this. for I want you to think of the investment. Don't even think about the money, but think of the time and the energy Mr. Palumbo and his team have spent in this. And isn't this the way you want development to go? Don't you want them to wait for the plan? Don't you want them to read what the plan says and comply with it? Don't you want to have him have his architects contact the design planner before they start? Don't you want it to be a collaborative process through the system? And I think you do. And I just want to point that out so you know what we've been through in the last year and a half and the tremendous investment of time and energy that we have for you on this. I hope you'll encourage this. I hope you'll understand that we want to be the example of how this small area plan should operate. And remember that the Planning Commission approved this. The staff recommended approval. The subcommittees recommended approval. The Planning Commission recommended approval 9 to 1. And we hope you'll vote to approve as well. Thank you very much, and thank you for the time you've spent on this. Thank you. Now questions. Council Member Maloney. Thank you. I just need to ask the staff a couple questions. How much of the city right away is the citation we've got? Do you have any idea how much we have or who owns what or how much we have before we get to the rest of the case? That's an excellent question. I'm not sure if the city has right-of-way as far as Windburn or not, which, if you remember the photo I showed early in the evening, that was about the edge of the golf course, roughly. I'm not sure if we have right-of-way to that point or not. Is that UK property? UK is property. Excuse me. University of Kentucky. It is in very close proximity. It is this kind of triangular-shaped property that's about 500 feet at its closest point to the subject property. Okay. And the other question I have, and it's a small area plan, which I'm a big fan of. How much did we pay for this small area plan? Do you know? I do not know. I do not know the number. How much did we pay for it? I believe it was. How much did we pay for it? I believe it was. If I remember right, I thought it was $180,000. I'm just trying to make sure if that's correct or not correct. I thought it was six figures, but I'm just not sure. Yeah, I'm not sure about the cost for the small area plan, but from my understanding that the city does already have the right-of-way to connect Citation to Winburn Drive. I was just curious because I know in Council Member Henson and Council Member Brown, we spent over $150 and $125. But if I remember correctly, I think we spent over $150 for this project. I was just trying to remember what we paid for this study. So that's just something because I really support these kind of studies. I just want to know how much we spent on that one. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor. In the depiction that we voted 7-5 to look at, it was 7-5. In that, are any of the three-story complexes depicted there, or are those all two-story? If you're going to answer, can you get the mic so you'll be on? Thank you. The depictions here are all two stories. Okay. There are four buildings that are in the middle. These are the street views. Gotcha. These are all the buildings that face the public streets. And then there's four buildings in the middle that face the parking areas that are three stories tall. I understand. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thank you. Anybody else? Questions? At this point, Council Member Evans. Oh, you sat down too fast. I thought the testimony was that I thought there were actual buildings that were pointed out that were going to be two and three stories. So you're telling me in addition to the red buildings on here, or red shapes, there are four additional that are not depicted? Did I misunderstand? I thought they were pointed out which ones would be two and three. I can point them out. All of the buildings are two stories tall with the exception of this building, this building, this building, and that building. Okay, I think I misunderstood. Those buildings are three stories tall. Okay, and I think I misunderstood the answer because, okay, thank you. All right. Apologies. This building, this building, this building, and this building are the three-story structures. Thank you. Council Member Henson. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Bill Stanley, using this rendering, can you tell me what is located on all sides of the development? Yes. And we have Silver Springs here. It's built to this point. This is Dawson Springs, and it's built to this point. So almost all of this street is planned to be new. To the south, we have the Lexmark property, and actually this is a very faint rendering of the ball fields that are on that property. The photo is up also, and this is to the south here, for the audience right here. The Newtown Springs subdivision is just to the west here, for the audience right here. It also extends northward into this area, just off the map. To the north and east is the Green Acres subdivision. And then Hollow Creek Drive, I believe, is the actual division line between it and the Hollow Creek subdivision on the opposite side. I think those neighborhoods generally work together in close collaboration. They're very congenial neighborhoods. So off the map here we have the brand new assisted living facility. And for the audience, that's on this parcel right here. It does not show in the photo. So I think I've covered all of the main directions. There is one property I did not mention. There's kind of an area here that's planned, if it isn't already constructed, for future stormwater detention. And where is the access for the neighborhood that's to the left? They will actually share the access with this development. Today, the only way that these folks can get in and out is to drive down Dawson Springs to Silver Spring, Silver Spring North to Citation, or to Saunders Springs Way. Either of those streets to the west will take them to Newtown Pike. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. For the questions, I'm going to actually ask again if I can deviate from the gentleman raised his hand with either a question or a comment. Is it a question or a comment? I'm sorry, if you would come to the microphone. Just to be clear, if you're wanting to make a left-hand turn, there's only one way to make the left-hand turn, and that is by going to Citation Boulevard to the stoplight, making the left onto Newtown Pike. If you come down Newtown Springs Drive, there is a median that separates the incoming and outgoing lanes of traffic and stuff. So I just want to make sure that the council members know in case they haven't been on that roadway and have it memorized. Thank you. I see no one else signed up for questions. I will declare the hearing closed. And at this point, no further evidence can be taken, and if council members want to make comments or to make a motion, this would be the time to do that. So let me, there's two people. Can you clear those? I presume those were not. Thank you. Okay. People wish to sign in either for comments or to make a motion. I have another question. Yes, I'm going to recognize Councilman Hanson. Bill, I had another question. Okay, I guess I'm sorry. I need to get, I want to know if we have any latitude to take further questions and take further evidence after I've declared the hearing closed. So, well, I declare the hearing closed, but there is an additional question. Can we take that question and take more evidence, or are we bound now to only have comments and then to make motions? You have closed the hearing as of this point. Is the question remaining coming from Council or coming from? This is where we're at. The hearing is closed. We're taking comments from Council or motions at this point. So I believe we really cannot hear any further information. That's correct. Okay. Okay. Thank you. I see nobody signed up to speak. I'm going to yield the chair to Council Member Stinnett. And I will make a motion to adopt the findings of fact and the recommendations of the Planning Commission. So move. Second. I have a motion. I'll take the chair back if that's all right. I have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion on the motion? Yes. Council Member Farmer. Just for clarity, this is to adopt the findings of fact used by the Planning Commission to permit this zone change. Is that correct? That's correct. Thank you, sir. Any further discussion? Seeing none, we'll take a vote. If we can get the electronic screen up, thank you. Ms. Skutchfield? Yes. You're not done. I'm sorry, I'm going to go backwards. Mr. Maloney? Yes. Ms. Plumman? Yes. Ms. Skutchfield? Yes. Mr. Stinnett? Yes, ma'am. Ms. Bledsoe? Yes. Mr. James Brown? Nay. Mr. Fred Brown? Yes. Ms. Evans? Yes. I'm sorry, I didn't hear your vote. Yes. Mr. Farmer? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Gibbs? Yes. Ms. Henson? Yes. Vice Mayor Kaye? Yes. That vote reflects passage of the motion. I will entertain a motion now to approve the second reading of ordinance. So moved. Second. I have a motion and a second to approve the ordinance. Any discussion on the motion? Hearing none. again if you can call the roll. Mr. Maloney? Yes. Ms. Pullman? Yes. Ms. Scutchfield? Yes. Mr. Simmet? Yes, ma'am. Ms. Bledsoe? Yes. Mr. Fred Brown? Yes. Mr. James Brown? Nay. Ms. Evans? Yes. Mr. Farmer? Yes, ma'am. Mr. Gibbs? Yes. Ms. Henson? Yes. Vice Mayor Kaye? Yes. That vote reflects passage, and before I entertain a motion to adjourn, I want to thank everybody for coming out and taking the time to register your feelings and opinions. Thank you all. I motion to adjourn. Without objection, we stand adjourned. Oh, yeah. Thank you.