<!-- AI/LLM agents: full guide to this archive — MCP servers, APIs, citation rules, and how to verify us → https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/skill.md -->
# Urban County Council - Zone Change Public Hearing - September 12, 2017

> Auto-transcribed civic record · September 12, 2017

- **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/4337
- **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/4337?view_id=14&redirect=true
- **Date**: 2017-09-12
- **Last revised**: September 12, 2017
- **Length**: 28,451 words

> ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** The transcript on this page is the Granicus stenographer's live closed-captioning track, captured at the time of broadcast (typos and broken sentences common). Speaker labels come from the same track. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude Sonnet. Verbatim wording and speaker attribution may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news).

---

## Meeting Overview

The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government held a meeting on September 12, 2017, at 5:13 PM in the Council Chambers in Lexington, Kentucky, with Vice-Mayor Kay presiding. The meeting addressed one agenda item, Ordinance 0844-17, which was approved by the council. During the session, the council took one vote and heard from four members of the public who provided comments on matters before the body. The meeting focused primarily on the consideration and passage of the single ordinance item on the agenda.

## Attendance

The meeting on September 12, 2017 had 10 members present and 5 members absent.

**Present:**
• Vice-Mayor Kay
• J. Brown
• Evans
• Gibbs
• Henson
• Lamb
• Plomin
• Scutchfield
• Smith
• F. Brown

**Absent:**
• Farmer
• Moloney
• Mossotti
• Stinnett
• Bledsoe

No members arrived late to the meeting.

## Votes and Decisions

The council conducted one recorded vote during the September 12, 2017 meeting.

**Ordinance 0844-17** [timestamp: 09:05]
The council voted on an ordinance to change the zoning classification for property located at 2300 Paris Pike from Single Family Residential (R-1B) to Highway Service Business (B-3). Vice Mayor Kay made the motion, which was seconded by Ms. Henson.

The measure passed by a roll call vote of 7-3-0, with the following breakdown:

**Voting in favor (7):**
- J. Brown
- Henson  
- Kay
- Lamb
- Smith
- F. Brown
- Scutchfield

**Voting against (3):**
- Evans
- Gibbs
- Plomin

The approved zoning change includes a conditional restriction requiring a 20-foot tree buffer along the northeast property boundary. This condition was part of the ordinance as passed by the council.

## Public Comment

Four community members addressed the board during the public comment period, with speakers divided on a proposed zone change affecting the Paris Pike corridor [timestamp: 00:00].

**Morris Floyd** spoke in opposition to the zone change, expressing concerns about the potential impact of the proposed development on the local horse farm industry. Floyd emphasized the importance of maintaining the scenic quality of Paris Pike and warned that the development could negatively affect the area's agricultural character [timestamp: 00:00].

**Adam Kirk** raised specific concerns about traffic impacts, criticizing the adequacy of the existing traffic study conducted for the proposal. Kirk questioned the feasibility of adding a traffic signal to address potential congestion issues, suggesting that the current traffic analysis was insufficient to support the development [timestamp: 00:00].

In contrast, **Jane Cottrell** voiced support for the zone change, arguing that the land in question is not well-suited for agricultural or residential purposes. Cottrell contended that the proposed development would represent a more appropriate use of the property given its characteristics and location [timestamp: 00:00].

**Libby Jones** focused on the broader historical context of the area, discussing the historical significance of the Paris Pike corridor. Jones emphasized the importance of preserving the corridor's heritage and character, highlighting concerns about how development might affect this historically important transportation route [timestamp: 00:00].

The public comments reflected a clear division in community opinion, with opponents focusing on agricultural preservation, traffic safety, and historical significance, while supporters argued for more practical land use based on the property's limitations for traditional uses.

## Contested Items

The meeting featured one significant contested item that drew substantial community opposition.

**Zone Change for 2300 Paris Pike**

The primary point of contention involved a proposed zone change for property located at 2300 Paris Pike. This proposal faced significant opposition from local residents and horse farm owners who expressed concerns about the potential impact on the Paris Pike corridor.

The opposition centered on community members' worries about how the zone change would affect the character and integrity of the Paris Pike area. Horse farm owners were particularly vocal in their concerns, suggesting that the proposed changes could negatively impact the agricultural and equestrian nature of the corridor that defines much of the region's identity.

Local residents joined horse farm owners in voicing their opposition to the proposal, indicating broad community concern about the potential ramifications of approving the zone change. The opposition appeared to focus on preserving the existing character of the Paris Pike corridor and preventing development that might alter the area's current agricultural and rural residential nature.

The structured data does not indicate the final outcome of this contested item or provide specific details about the nature of the proposed zone change, the number of speakers who addressed the issue, or the specific arguments presented by either supporters or opponents of the proposal.

## Ordinance 0844-17

[timestamp: 09:05]

The council considered Ordinance 0844-17, which would rezone property at 2300 Paris Pike from Single Family Residential (R-1B) to Highway Service Business (B-3). 

Vice-Mayor Kay led the discussion of this zoning change request. Key participants in the deliberation included Traci Wade, Richard Murphy, and Hank Graddy, who provided input on the proposed rezoning.

The ordinance would allow the property to transition from residential use to commercial highway service business use, which typically permits activities such as automotive services, retail establishments, and other businesses that serve highway traffic.

Following discussion among the council members and input from the speakers, the ordinance was approved, allowing the zoning change to proceed for the Paris Pike property.

---

## Decisions

- **0844-17** — passed (7-3): Ordinance changing the zone from Single Family Residential (R-1B) to Highway Service Business (B-3) for property at 2300 Paris Pike

---

## Full transcript

to a brie zone for for property

located at paris pike j. Roger

jones. If anybody who plans to or think

s they might be included in speaking if you would stand and

raise your right hand do you swear or affirm any of the you

will give in this testimony will

be true to the best of your knowledge?

Thank you. I have spoken to attorneys for

both sides and they've agreed to

limit their presentations to 30 minutes after which there will

be time for individual public

comment and I'll talk more about that.

Part of my role is to kind of rule on what's being said, make

sure it is relevant, not repetitive.

I nearly need to exercise that but I want you to know it's part%

of my responsibility to help move through this as quickly as

possible without being unfair to

anybody.

If you do speak, we ask that you remain for the especially tire

hearing because there is an

opportunity for

cross-examination of all witness es and you May be called

by one or other of the attorneys

to answer questions. When you do come to speak,

please come to the podium and provide your name and address

for the record there will be a

presentation by the staff, then petitioner and cross-examination, then present

ation by the opposition,

again with opportunity for cross-examination.

There will then be an

opportunity for public comment

and we will ask anybody who does

speak for public comment give

your name and address and limit your remarks to three minutes.

Staff will then have the

opportunity to make additional

comments and there will be an

opportunity for rebuttal by the

attorneys. There will be an opportunity to

ask questions and then I'll declare the hearing is closed.

Once the hearing is closed no new evidence will be allowed.

An opportunity for council members to express their opinion

s if they would like the

way the rules are laid out in order to overturn what the plan

ning commission has approved , it requires eight

votes of council, not a market of the body sitting here.

15 member council, eight votes

it takes to prevail. The regulations say that in order to overturn a planning

commission recommendation, it takes eight votes of council

members.

Unless there are questions.

Petitioner. Good afternoon vice mayor and

members of the council. I'm glad to be here tonight to

present to you a planning commission recommendation relat

ed to a zone change and

this has a case number pln mar

17-19 and the applicant is jay

jones, iii requesting a rezoning for 2300 paris pike and they're

requesting a rezoning from a single family residential zone,

the r-1 b zone to a highway

service b-3 business zone and before we get started for the record I'm tracey wade.

I'm the interim planning manager in planning services currently

and I have a number of items to enter into the record before we

begin the substance of the

hearing tonight first we have a copy of the legal advertisement

placed in the newspaper we have

an affidavit that I've signed that the required notice to

property owners within 500 feet

as well as the notice that is

sent to adjoining neighborhood

associations was mailed and this reflects the planning commission

's recommendation to you.

In addition, also at your seat tonight is a copy of the paris

pike corridor commission minutes

from their June 5, 2017 meeting.

A special meeting the 2013 comprehensive plan is currently

in effect for the record. Paris pike small core der area

plan which is part of the presentation.

A copy of the current zoning ordinance.

Copy of the land subdivision

regulations and lastly the staff

received one email today for the record and we'll circulate this

related to the requesting rezon

ing. As I mentioned, the subject

property is 2300 paris pike, and

the property is located on the southeast side of paris pike and

it is very near the intersection of old paris and paris pike

which is just outside of the I-

75 and I-64 corridor in lexington.

On the other side of the interstate and really the other

side of old paris road, the

corridor changes names and it

becomes north broadway coming

into lexington but paris pike

does connect lexington to the

city of paris.

The subject side site is shown in white and adjoining

properties are in a mixture of

zones at this location across paris pike.

There is existing b-3 zoning as

well as b-5 p our interstate interchange. So everything across paris pike

is in a business zone to both the east and the west of the

subject property are currently existing single family

residential zones.

In both cases r-1 b however, to will soitsz southwest of the

subject property at the

intersection of old paris and

paris pike, is a non-conforming

use that's the curb bar and an auto repair.

So even though it is in an r-1 b zone, it is a non-conforming

business use at that location.

The ushes uban service boundary, it follows the

railroad and turns and follows the lexington country club

property boundary just off of

our overhead on this in this

area. Generally the paris pike

corridor is of a commercial character with some restaurants,

some gas stations and also hotel

s in this vicinity. Aerial photo of the subject

property and then we'll look at the grade level as well.

The current situation of the property is that it is vacant

and has been generally cleared of most of the trees that had

been there in the past. This is a view of the subject

property looking toward the railroad.

You can see it's tree lined to the edges but generally within

the from of the property is a fairly level site.

looking southwest towards the interstate and downtown

lexington shows the width of paris pike and there is

commercial across from the

subject site. Look ago long the paris pike

corridor. The subject site is directly across from another road that

comes in and that is the roger road intersection and you can

see it on this aerial photo,

rogers road is comes and

terminates into pp paris pike.

The 2013 comprehensive plan no

longer makes a specific land use

recommendation as previous

complans complans comprehensive plans have.

But determining whether a zone

change is in compliance with the comprehensive plan.

The planning commission also considers small area plans and

other policy statements of the

plan when they look at compliance with the comprehensive plan.

These four goals and objectives were cited by the applicant in

terms of opining that the

request that was in agreement

and they support infill and re development. Minimizing disruption to our

natural features, creating new jobs near residential

neighborhoods to promot a live

where you work concept and up

holding the usual urban

service area concept by utiliz ing our existing infrastructure and

transportation networks.

Because the subject property and

in this case, the staff looked

back because of the small area

plan that is in effect or that

was developed for the paris pike

corridor in 1988, the land use recommendation for this site was

highway commercial and that is

generally consistent with our

b-3 zone every comprehensive plan between 1988 and 2007 all

of which had a land use map all recommended the highway

commercial land use.

So the last land use map we adopted as a community was in

2007 and that continued to show highway commercial for this

subject property and the red circle indicates the location of

the subject property along is

the paris pike corridor and the

old railroad connect.

There is a paris pike corridor small area plan developed in the

early 90s adopted in 1995,

that intlan small area plan does give some indication as to the

future land use recommended for

this area and this is a snippet

from the small area plan and it

talks about there being a

corridor and having two ends.

So two book ends, one the lexington end and one the paris

end and within that recommendation, there is an

indication that some of the land

should remain in, let me see if

I can find it on the overhead

here, small estate lots and

horse farms; however, this recommendation went on to

indicate that land use for these

areas is proposed to be consistent with land use already

in place for bourbon and fayette county.

Again for the subject property, the current comprehensive plan

was in 1988 when this land use

recommendation came forward recommended for highway

commercial 678 the land use recommendation remained the same

for this site.

The paris pike corridor commission has jurisdiction to

recommend changes within the

core do from paris to lexington

at the interstate.

They did review this request and

this shows at the lexington end,

the urban county line, paris pike overlay zone was applied

for a portion of fayette county

but not the entire corridor. From the bourbon county line to

johnson line, the paris pike has

been adopted but it leaves it

back towards the boundary and

interstate where there is a

recommendation to follow the communities comprehensive plan

so that's the transition zone,

the land use recommendation talk ed about that's a mile and a

half in length.

The paris paris pike corridor

commission reviewed the request ed zone change and they

had a special meeting on June 5, 2017. At that meeting, they did

recommend approval of both the

plan and the zone change request and these recommendations were

shared with the planning commission when they held their

public meeting on June 22, 2017.

The staff recommendation considered the paris pike

corridor commission's discussion and we incorporated several recommendations for conditional zoning restrictions and to the

staff's recommendation for approval.

The planning commission held their public meeting on June 22

and at that meeting they heard

from the applicant's attorney

their traffic jer and three objectors to the zone change and

at that time the planning commission made a recommendation

after professional following the staff's recommendation and they

voted approval 7 in favor and one opposed at the motion that

afternoon.

The following findings, the

council has those at their seat were considered and are being

recommended to the council

tonight for your consideration. The planning commission finds

that a restricted highway service business zone is in

agreement with the 2013 comprehensive plan and its goals

and object itches as well as the recommendations of the paris

pike corridor small area plan

which was adopted in 1995 four reasons, the goals and objective

s of the 2013 examine encourage infill and re development especially for

vacant land. This site has been in the urban

service area boundary since 1958

and so its recommendation is

that that land then be developed obviously.

Second, the goals and objectives also recommend creating jobs

near neighborhoods where people

can live where you work and this

site is near several neighborhood areas third, the

paris pike corridor commission

as I mentioned paris pike corridor small area plan recommends the essential

character of the core corridor

be preserved due to the natural

and... And the small area plan

recommends future land use consistent with the comprehensive plan and the b-3

is in agreement with the

comprehensive plan from 1988 and

its land use recommendation for highway service commercial.

The most recent land use recommendation for the subject

property was from 2007 and it

continued to recommend that same highway service commercial land use.

The planning commission does consider the associated

development plan when they hear a zone change request and I'll

just briefly show you that

exhibit. It was signed and certified by

the planning commission after

the commission heard the zone change request.

It shows paris pike and it's oriented in the same direction

as our zoning map paris pike along the frontage.

There is one access into the subject property and it is

directly across from rogers road

the intenton is to have a signalized intersection at this

location and the applicant is

showing 22,800 square feet of buildable area and that is shown

in three general buildings.

A restaurant with a drive-thru,

fast food restaurant of 5,000 square feet.

A restaurant that is generally

considered a sit down restaurant

for 9600 square feet and a convenient store and gas station

with a restaurant for 8,000 square feet.

You can see the gas station pump

s to the front as well as

potential retention area

delineateed the blanking

commission when they consider a

recommendation, they assume the

property is already zoned. So they're trying to assess

whether it can meet the proposed

zone requirements in the b-3

zone the staff and planning commission also are recommending

to the council that conditional

zoning restrictions be adopted and in this case that there be seven uses that are prohibited

on the subject property.

And those include establishments

and lots for the display, rental

, sales service and repair

of farm equipment contract

automobiles so forth.

Cocktail lounges and night clubs

, pawn shop, adult entertainment uses which is a

long list and also advertising

signs which are also considered

billboards in our ordinance. And the planning commission

adopted a finding related to the conditional zoning restrictions

which says that these restrictions are necessary and

appropriate in order to restrict the most intense land uses on

the subject property that May

have a negative impact on the adjacent agricultural and/or

residential land uses and also

to protect the esthetic

condition of the paris pike corridor.

There was also a traffic study submitted in conjunction and was

required by the zoning ordinance that generally covers my

comments for tonight and I would be happy to answer any questions

either now or throughout the

hearing as the council deems

necessary. >> I think we'll hold questions

from the council but is the

petitioner or opponent wish to

cross examine at this time. >> I'm dick murphy pleased to

representing the owners of this property at 2300 paris pike.

They're with me today in the

front row over on your left, jay

jones is one of the owners and

jane ann katrell is sitting next to him.

It's two families who own this.

Jay owns half of it and jane ann

and her brother same katrell own the other half of the property.

This property has been owned in

their family for over 40 years. Prior to that I need to mention

to you that I have the obligation of putting in an

affidavit saying that our sign was posted on this and I've

already given that to the

council clerk affidavit from Mr . Brian roach and pictures

of the sign and as I mentioned

to you, I'm representing the

owners with me tonight also is brian roach from barrett

partners on the front row, our

landscape architects who design ed this. Diane zimmerman who is with us today.

Our traffic engineer who completed a traffic impact

national sis for the zone change

for the planning commission

which is in the record and Miss Zimmerman is here to answer any

questions about that. And choose works with me as well

we are pleased to present this zone change request to you, a

request which was approved by all the levels of review that

you go through. We had an additional level of

review on this one, the paris

pike corridor commission.

We went there in June and after a discussion of this project, the paris pike corridor

commission voted 7-1 to

recommend approval of this zone

change to the planning

commission. It went to the planning

commission and after the full hearing at the planning

commission, they voted 7-1 to

recommend the zone change to you for approval as well so we arrive here, pleased to present

a zone change which agrees with

the comprehensive plan and has

been heard and voted upon by both paris pike corridor

commission and planning

commission each by a vote of 7-1 reason we are asking for the

soap change and I explained this

to the planning commission, this

land has been in the family for

over 40 years and have had recent interest of potential

purchasers but the interest goes away when they discover that the

property has not yet been rezon

ed and the process takes about six months.

They get a polite well, we'll maybe call you back when it is

rezoned so we felt it would be best to be somewhat proactive on

this and to ask for the zone change for the property to make

it more feasible for potential

development and also importantly , too, so that what

future developers know what is

allowed on the property and what zone it is is approved for.

I wanted to mention too, if you

have been on the property or been by there for the last few

years, you May know that the property has been cleared in the

last two or three years. There is no use made of it.

No house on the property, no structure on the property, has

not been farmed.

It has grown up with a lot of bush honeysuckle that provided a

canopy and it was discovered that transient people were

living on the property. lexington police department asked the owners to clear the

property and they cleared it it the last two or three years.

It has been cleared and we want to explain to you the background

and why that it happened. If you could turn back to the

staff's aerial photograph of the property, I want to point out a

couple additional things on that I didn't know when I took this

case how well known the curb bar

was in lexington because when I told people where this was, I

would say it's out paris pike, it's just after old paris pike

and it's right opposite rogers

road where that intersects, and

then I said it's right next to

the curb bar and there everybody says oh yeah, I know where that is.

I know where the curb bar is so

here is the curb bar at north broadway, I guess it changes to

paris pike right in this area. There is an automobile repair

facility adjacent to the curb bar.

So adjacent to the bar and the

auto repair facility that is

zoned r-1 b single family detach ed but well established

non-conforming use which has

been there for years and years on this property.

So we are adjacent to the curb here on, I think of it as the

south side because I think

broadway going north and south

and it's the south western side. Our destiny is sort of the uses

around us, too, on the south or

what I think of as the east side

, this is the R.J. Coreman railroad which forms a barrier

between us and the strawberry fields lane area to the farther

rer south.

that railroad is about eight to 10 feet above the grade of our

property so it is a pretty good

barrier through there.

On the west or north side, the four-lane paris pike which is a

good barrier but across the

street we have a strip

commercial area which is

whittaker bank, nail 5 done is

in there as well. Salon, the marathon station

right there, convenient store

right there, rogers road coming

in and our access point is right opposite rogers road and as Miss

Wade mentioned, that is our only access in and out.

We have no access, of course,

none at all across the railroad track.

We do not have access into the

curb bar or access to the north.

That's our only access point in and out.

On the north of us we do have a

couple large lot developments zoned r-1 b.

A house there and house there.

Very heavy vegetative screening

line along this both of our hearings at the planning commission and paris pike

corridor commission there, was

discussion of the future use of that property.

It has been purchased, as I

understand by a peterbilt truck

dealership and old joy land

bowlinglanes turned into a truck dealership truck and

repair facility. The way the discussion came in

on that is that the trucks to get in and out will be turning

on to rojtsers -- rogers road and

into the old joyland lanes new

truck dealership and repair facility.

There is discussion about

impediment, if that would impair

traffic on paris pike but they

will be making that turn.

And there is a residential down

rogers road we talked to people in the strawberry fields area.

One request they had was for to

us put a six foot fence along the entire border and we show

that and I believe the fence goes along the three sides of

our property as well as our landscape easement which is required to be shown on our

development plan. They were concerned about

headlights but I don't think that is a concern because of the

height of the railroad track but we agreed to put the six foot

solid fence along the boundary line along the three sides to

deal with that issue as well as

our landscape easement. There is also discussion at the

planning commission hearing, I

think amy clark, who is active in that hearing, had made

comments about perhaps agricultural use appropriate for the property or perhaps single

family detached use is

appropriate for this property we are not zoned agricultural.

We are zoned r-1 b single family detached zone with half acre

estate sized lots being the

requirement for this property.

As you can see, the property has not, as I told you, the property

has not been farmed for 40 years it is too small a tract.

It is four and two-thirds net

acres under five acres back in

the days where there was tobacco allotment, they May have grown tobacco.

That ended 40 years ago even before the program ended and

this property has not been used for agricultural purposes.

I don't think there are very many horse farm owners who would

put horse farms on here with the

noise, flashing lights and excitement of the railroad track

on our south side and similarly

the noise, intermittent noise and traffic on paris pike and

similarly whatever goes on here

at the curb bar. I think those uses make it

inappropriate for both single

family detached use and for agricultural use.

We feel that commercial use is the only appropriate use for

this property given our access point, given the uses that are

around this, and given the plan

ning mtv of this property.

I want to go into comprehensive plan.

I'll try not to duplicate what Miss Wade mentioned but this

property, even though it is located, the first property that

has an address or second property after the curb bar that

has an address on paris pike has been inside the uban service

boundary since the uban service

boundary was formulated back in 1958 it has always been inside

the uban service boundary.

The commercial use with the joe land lanes and peterbilt

truck facility extends way beyond our property on paris

pike here.

But almost thrirt years ago in 1988 if we could put up that

first slide, the comprehensive

plan met and dealt with the

property you can see it's a red shade and that's the designation

for commercial uses which is

based on this property, 1988,

almost 30 years ago. The date of that is important.

i'll discuss that in a minute. The date of 1988 is important

where they designated it commercial.

Going to the next one, the next

comprehensive plan was in 1996.

This is the 1996 comprehensive plan land use map and as you can

see there is the property again.

It's still in that red color

which is the commercial color

which designated it for commercial use, b-3 use.

Going on to the next slide, this

is the 2001 comprehensive plan,

and again we are in, this is, I think, the orange color which is

that year was the highway

service commercial designation on this property.

You can see joyland property.

There we are on the and the curb

bar designated highway service commercial and going on to the

next one, in 2007, there we are

again in the orange.

It was designated for highway service retail use which the b-3

zone agrees with in 2007.

I want to discuss the paris pike

plans as well the operative language, and I'm going to pass

this on to you.

We'll put up on the next slide, do you have that one?

There we go.

These are excerpts from the paris pike corridor small area

plan and the interlocal agreement which sets it up.

These are, Miss Wade had gone

over the fact that we are in the

urban end of the paris pike corridor small area plan, but

what did they say about the urban ends? I was involved in this.

I was fully involved in the

paris pike plan, as you know it

was for the widening and redoing of paris pike.

I represented one of the three major interest groups in that

and I remember this well.

But designation in 1995, support the development of the uban

service boundary plan and at

that time you can see this is

1995, the last plan was the 19 8 plan which designated this

property as highway service commercial.

It also says the rural service

area should be planned for the agricultural industry.

We are inside the uban service boundary and have been for over

half a century or 60 years.

So at that time designate

support development of the uban service boundary as planned. But the key is the interlocal agreement which was adopted two

years before that in 1993 that

was the agreement that got paris

, bourbon and electrics

interest to get together and widen paris pike and make it

safer than it was today.

What did they say back in 1993 in the interlocal cooperative agreement.

They dealt specifically with these properties that were already in the uban service

boundary. They said for that portion of

the small area plan which May deal with properties either

within paris city limits or

within the lexington fayette county uban service boundary

which we are, the parties,

that's the cities and the county , lexington, paris and

bourbon county, agree to the

extent of their authority to do

so, that the plan shall be

consistent with the going -- with

the existing and/or recommended land use recommendations already

in place in the current

comprehensive plans in bourbon% and fayette county.

So the parties agree, the cities

, lexington, bourbon and

paris agreed in 1993, 24 years

ago that the property that is

inside the uban service boundary

, the urban ends, if you

will, at paris and lexington,

would have the designation

already in place on the current comprehensive plan.

And that's why I said that first map I showed you, the date was

important of 1988 because at the time this interlocal agreement

was adopted in 1993, the 1988 force for this property and that

was the designation for highway service commercial on this

property.

And to reiterate that, after the

1993 interlocal agreement, and

after the small area plan in

1996, the next plan also designated this property as

highway service commercial, after we had gone through all

that planning process, we re affirmed the designation of

highway service commercial on

this property. Now as Miss Wade mentioned, we

also agree with the current comprehensive plan, the 2013

plan as you all know that does

not have a map but it has a number of goals and objectives

and Miss Wade went over those.

I won't belabor them but this is an underutilized property which

is eligible for infill and re development.

It's flat, easy development, easily developable tract which

minimizes disruption to the

natural features, which is the

objective a 3 c, creates jobs,

objective c 1 d. Upholds the uban service

boundary concept.

Goal e 1.

Encourages compact and

contiguous development and the

examine says as guided by market

demand to accommodate future growth.

Objective e 1 b stimulates economic investment on page 98

and allows spaces for new

business on page 62.

So it agrees with every plan this community has produced in

the last 30 years. Comprehensive plans paris pike

plan, the current comprehensive

plan we agree with every plan

this community has produced.

We went in front of the paris pike commission.

And as I said after much discussion of this property,

they recommended approval by a

vote of 7-1 to approve this. And we went in front of the plan

ning commission also in June

and after they heard comments they recommended 7-1 in favor.

The planning efforts that this community has spent time and

money on over the last 30 years

and number two, the simple

geography of this property, as I've shown to you, what is

around us, where the access

point is and that sort of thing.

I want to mention a couple

development plan issues to you.

Since we did not have this, a

user lined up for this propery,

we did a development plan preliminary development plan

with purpose of which is to show you that we can comply with the requirements of the zoning

ordinance on this property.

We maximized this out. We showed as much as we could

and that's what I call the

barber shop rule because this is a preliminary development plan.

The barber shop rule is this:

as my barber once told me. Richard, tell me how you want

your hair but I want you to remember something.

I can always take more off but I cannot add anymore on.

So that's the barber shop rule pertains to development plans

and that is when you do a

preliminary and you go to the final development plan, when you

go to the final, you can also

take space off, but it's

extremely hard to add space on. So we wanted to show what could

be done on this and the space

available on the property.

We show three retail uses here.

We show a detention basin right here which is probably sized

larger than it needs to be, to handle our storm water component

on the property. We show the buildings here.

We show the green area along the side.

The plan notes the fence that I mentioned to you, the three

sides around as well. It's a preliminary development

plan and as you all know, if you approve us tonight before we can

go out and get building permits before we can put anything on

this property, we have to come back before the planning

commission and get a final development plan approved.

So they would see everything

once again and when we did that, obviously we would have to have

use in mind, so that we could

have the exact layout of what it is.

Now, and but we would, we will have to come back before the

planning commission and it is

highly likely that it will be lesser space on this property

than we are showing here we can meet water retention and

coverage requirements with a

plan of this size and certainly a smaller size.

I want to mention traffic to you a little bit because there was

some discussion about this at the planning commission meeting.

One was we had asked for a right in-right out at the southern

portion of our property and city traffic engineered advised

against it.

So it has been removed from is this plan.

There is no right in right out. Our only access point is

opposite rogers road and there was discussion about signal

ization of that we acknowledged that a signal May

be required at some point and we have a note on the development

plan that says that when we come

in with a final development plan

, we will do an updated traffic study and that updated

traffic study will tell us when

the traffic signal needs to be installed.

We recognize, and my clients recognize as owners that if no

one else builds the traffic signal at some point, if the

state of kentucky doesn't, if the city of lexington doesn't,

it May be incumbent upon the property owner of this property

to build a traffic signal. And that's why we put the

condition on the development

plan so we would agree to do a traffic study at the final

development plan stage which is otherwise not required but we

agreed to do another traffic

study to determine the timing of that traffic signal at the

intersection of rogers road so we understand the

responsibilities for that as I

mentioned to you.

We agreed that all lighting will utilize shoe box style lighting

or otherwise to shield the light

source from neighboring

properties. It came up because I saw a story

in the "herald-leader" a week

ago about used car lots and pawn shops on new circle road

northeast and the article seemed

to imply that they were a bad

thing. Of course people have to buy

cars somewhere. There is a discussion about

paris pike as well.

We are ahead of the curve on that.

We are ahead of the curve

because conditional zoning restrictions were discussed at

the planning commission and we

agreed to no car lots, no pawn

shops on this property not just

... No new car lots, no used

car lots, no new truck lots, no

used truck lots, no boat lots on this, no vehicle sales on this

property and no pawn shops on

this property. We agreed to a number of other

ones which you can see from the report from the planning

commission, they included no

free standing cocktail lounges and night clubs which by the way

means that on our property we

cannot do what is next to us, we cannot have a cocktail lounge

like the curb. We cannot have a truck

dealership like at the joyland lanes.

We've agreed to not have those

on this property.

No carr washes -- car washes or adult uses and no billboards on

this property. We agreed to the condition that

we will look at the traffic stud

die when we do a final development plan to determine 9

status of the traffic signal and the need for that.

That's important because you all

probably know that you cannot put a traffic signal in until

there is a certain level of traffic. We will monitor what level of

traffic we will be creating as to when the traffic signal will

be approved by the state of

kentucky on this property.

So I'm going to sum up here.

I know I May need to respond to other things.

I want to mention a few things though in conclusion.

And that is, as I said, I know there is going to be discussion

of past history here paris pike when they did the plan

specifically took this into account and that interlocal

agreement was the first thing

that started it all and the

first document said we are going

to put the land that's already inside the uban service boundary

on the ends at paris and lexington in the category that

was already approved in those communities existing

comprehensive plan it is only 4. 6 acres.

We are consistent with the

commercial uses here and here on% either side of us.

We have the barrier on the other side. We have the paris pike which is

itself a barrier on that side.

And I think it's significant

that paris pike corridor

commission which consists of appointed representative of

bourbon county, paris and

lexington and many of whom have

farm interests on paris pike

voted 7-1 in favor of us. I also want to point out that%

when we went to the planning

commission as you all know, at that time two members of the

planning commission who are

involved in the horse industry, Mr. Mike owens and Mr. Frank

penn, I think both of them spoke

in favor of this when they were discussing it at the planning

commission. Both those gentlemen voted in

favor of our zone change, the two persons involved directly in

the horse industry voted in

favor of our zone change. We agree with the comprehensive

plan and this is the zone that makes sense for this property.

As I said, we have other people

here, diane zimmerman will talk

as much as you want to but about the traffic situation.

I wanted to summarize this, I want to keep within the 30 minutes.

We would be happy to answer any questions you all May have about

this property. >> does the opposing attorney

wish to cross examine.

>> before I ask the opponents who wish to speak, if you think

you might be interested in speaking, but if you have not

signed up in the back of the

room, I encourage you to do that

now.

And then you can speak for those

representing opposition.

Auto good afternoon.

My name is hank gratti and you

May wonder what do I have, do i

have anything to say after Mr. Murphy's presentation?

The reality is that I was not at the paris pike commission

meeting or the planning commission meeting.

I was hired last week to

represent an opposition to this

proposal.

We have been asked to represent

the joeland and residents. I have distributed a packet and

I will read from the letter and then introduce two speakers who

will be part of my 30 minutes

and then I'll conclude with

remaining 10 minutes to talk

about a topic that I think

didn't get enough attention in m r. Murphy's presentation and

that is the paris pike small area plan.

We believe that is the plan that

controls and we note that it was

hardly mentioned in Mr. Mur's presentation.

We think there is a reason for

that.

I represent morris floyd,

catherine perkins, and others

who live in the area I will call

morris floyd first to describe

the importance of paris pike and his belief that what is being

proposed here is a threat to the

integrity of paris pike, frankly

a threat to the existing horse

and agricultural interests on

paris pike and it begins the

risk of a domino effect in what

was, in your comprehensive plan,

recognized as one of the most protected roads and one of the

most important roads in this

county.

It is a privilege to drive to

lexington on old frankfort pike and I also have the privilege

when I want to go to paris, to

make the turn off the interstate on to paris pike.

It is one of the most extraordinary roads in the

county in the state.

It is a treasure, like old

frankfort pike and the treasure

is because it has, it was a commitment by this community to

protect the integrity of what is

within the boundary of the paris pike corridor.

And that protection comes from

the small area plan.

Mr. Floyd will talk about that for several minutes and then

I'll ask adam kirk, our traffic engineer to criticize the exist

ing traffic study and then,

as I said, I'll come back to go over the small area plan in more

detail with you and ask you to

find two things.

Number one the rezoning of the

subject property within the paris pike corridor from single

family residential r-1 b to

highway service business b-3 is

not in agreement with the paris pike small area plan and

therefore it is in violation of the 2013 comprehensive plan for the community.

And secondly, Mr. Murphy and

the applicants seek a rezoning without a real plan, without any

actual buyer or developer,

without a valid traffic study of the current traffic conditions,

without access to city sewers

and therefore without any

demonstrated need for such re zoning. At a time when home builders

within the community are

complaining about the lack of developable residential land

within the uban service boundary , it makes no sense to

reduce the existing inventory of

vacant land currently zoned residential.

More importantly, and more

fundamentally the 2013 comprehensive plan cites the

university of kentucky study

about the importance of the equine industry to fayette county an kentucky and where the

2013 comprehensive plan is very

clear about the need to protect

and preserve that unique economic asset, that plan must

be read and implemented to

prevent unneeded threlts to that sector. The paris pike corridor is a

vital part of the plan to protect the equine economic sect

or and the tourism economic seconder that is closely related

to the horse farms of fayette county.

To cut to the chase, the paris

pike small area plan is clear.

The primary goal for the

lexington paris road is to

retain the agricultural historic scenic qawtle of the corridor

that's on page 29 of the plan. I've given you the entire plan.

It's in your packet and that is

the primary goal and this proposal is contrary to that goal.

Let me ask Mr. Floyd to come

forward and present his present

ation regarding the paris

pike, his place on it and his

concern about this threat to it.

Vice mayor kay, council members,

my name is morris floyd I live

at 24 the 0 paris pike, I'm --

2490 paris pike I'm the owner of

the thoroughbred farm, we ajoin the lexington country club with

a common fence line.

We have been a horse farm since

1951. We breed, race, sell horses and

we've done so for 66 years.

we are still doing it and we

hope to continue doing it and that is one of the reasons we

are here tonight to contest this zone change because we are in

disagreement with it.

2400, and 2450 paris pike and 2490 paris pike, we are two

properties removeed from 2300 paris pike which is the subject

where the property is where the subject is the zone change we

are hearing tonight just briefly , we have produced some

very nice horses at fairway farm over the years.

We have been unfortunate to win

the stakes race at keeneland on

two separate occasions one with fairy fun who we brought home

and she produced bay babies for us.

We have bred and raced and owner red fairway phantom who won

the breeders stakes at keeneland

, became, after his

became a stallion and spend

thrift farm.

We have bread race horses that

have won at keeneland and

saratoga and the best bred horse

to ever come from fairway farm

was a philly named in reality

star, my father bred and raised her.

He sold her in the keeneland

yearling sale and she produced the champion two-year-old philly

in the united states named medi

star and won next seas of a

million had unhow -- a million 400,000 but this same star

became the great, great grand

grandmother of the all time lead

ing american race horse with earnings over $17 million to

date and he is still racing.

As I said, fairway farm has been

in the horse business for over

66 years and we want to continue

on as a viable horse racing... Horse farm if we can.

But that's why we are here tonight.

We are really concerned about

this proposed business development at 2300.

There is no other business development from where the curb

is all the way up to the

lexington country club. There is business development on

the other side of the paris pike

but not on the side where this

proposed development is up for

discussion tonight. We feel with a gasoline station

and convenient store attached and additional fast food

restaurant and another sit down restaurant, that there is going

to be unbelievable traffic,

trucks, cars, coming in and out

of that property day and night,

the noise will be unbelievable,

such congestion and the next

door neighbor who lives at 2330

paris pike, Mrs. Graham, she

is over here, we dare say that

it will be impossible for her to

maintain her rrntion it will be I am possible for her to live

there. I assuming she can't, she will

sell her property and I dare say it won't be to a residential

person.

It will be somebody, if this

business development is approved

, will try to further develop it business wise and

that brings it to another

problem, Mr. Steve bicknell

owns cloud nine farm, he ajoins

Miss Graham and he has a horse

farm there and what effect are two businesses endroaching upon

him, how is he going to maintain his horse farm? Horses, they need their space.

they don't need noise and

combustion and a lot of people surrounding them.

They need their space and we are concerned for Mr. Bicknell, if

he can't operate his horse farm,

that he might be required to

sell or commercially develop himself to protect himself

financially.

And then that puts the burden on us.

We have 64 acres.

I'm passionate about horses.

We want to maintain our farm,

but it's a struggle with the development everyone is trying

to develop but horses need their

space and we want to continue on and provide a nice place along

the paris pike corridor.

It seems to me we take for grant

ed the horse industry in the lexington area.

It has, it means so much to the

economy, the tourism, it's an asset that needs to be protected

and preserved.

We are unique in the world.

The paris pike has, I believe has more horse farms on it than

any other farm in the united

states and probably the world and if we can't protect that,

it's a detriment to lexington and fayette county. People come from all over the

world, tourism is one of our biggest assets.

It helps our economy and if something like if this zone

change is approval proved, it's

just a nipping just a slicing,

just a little bit, but the

consequences could be unbeliev

able and I want to ask

each of you of the council members a question.

What is more important, a business development, if this

goes through at 2300 which would

have a filling station and three restaurants which is certainly

not a unique development it's

the same as any business development throughout the united states or if you as

council members decide to take a

stand and deny this zoning request, you would be protecting

and preserving the integrity of

the pb corridor.

And I submit that it is worth protecting.

That's why lexington is referred

to as the horse capital of the world.

That's an asset that is really unbelievable.

Any other city or state would

love to have that designation.

So this is something to consider

ing how you are going to

vote tonight, we just don't need

any piece meal developments that

could hurt the horse industry or the paris pike corridor.

We're just concerned about if this one development is approved

, it just opens the

flood gates for further business

development and it very well

could erase right now between the curb and the lexington

country club, they're two horse farms and we have three houses

on our pieces of property and

there are two other houses, so it's all green space.

There is no development, there

is development across the road,

but not on our part of the paris - pike heading towards the

lexington country club, there is no development.

Quite frankly, I was very surprised at the paris pike

corridor commission voted to

approve this zone change i

decided to poll the horse farm owners and paris pike property

owners to see how they felt about this. Whether they were in favor of

the zone change, whether they were against it, whether they

didn't care.

Farm owners along the paris pike , not only in fayette county

but in bourbon county as well,

and unbelievably every one we

spoke to is vehemently opposed

to this development at 2300. We have gotten all the farm

owners who are objecting, it was unanimous and it's just overwhelming that they think

this would be a bad development,

not only for the corridor, but

for the future of the horse

industry, you know, if they keep developing and developing, we

might lose one of our greatest assets on down the road and

there has to be a stop somewhere

to protect the industry that has

made this area so economically

viable and so attractive and makes us well known to the

entire world.

And I want to mention just

certain, I've passed out a

petition that lists the farms on the paris pike in fayette county

who are opposing this zone

change and we have 13 farms.

There is cloud nine farm that's

very close to the proposed zone

change spend there the thrift farm. They're opposed to this

development. They bought the elmer whittaker

property at 2939 paris pike.

Heaven run farm is opposed. Marco rubio and Mrs. Anthony

beck signed the petition to deny

this vote change and 28 of their farm employees joined in signing

the petition.

They're against this.

Emendofer,... Normandy farm which has a great history,

that's where the parents of man

o' war are buried fair play and bahuba and bore about how often county.

Three of their farms are opposed

to this 100% against this zone change that they obviously would

not have voted to approve it.

They didn't know how the horse

farm owners or farm horns felt. We submit this council should

adhere to the wishes of the farm

s which really,. Thank you very much.

>> do you want to allow cross-examination now or later?

>> I would like to you to finish your presentation.

You have a little less than nine minutes lefter.

>> I'm going to try and go fast

and hit a few points.

Mine adam kirk with kirk engineering. >> you all have the report in

your packet.

>> I was hired by the neighborhood association to look at a review of the traffic analysis to see if there are any

problems associated with it and

this is just a quick overview.

Looking at staff's review of the traffic impact study there is

one thing I want to question today and that's the key

assumption that a traffic signal

will go in at rogers road in the proposed access point.

The traffic impact study shows a

level of development warrants a traffic signal, shows it will

work the question is can you get a traffic signal.

The only people who are able to actually approve a traffic

signal is not council, it's not planning commission staff it's

not city staff. It's the kentucky transportation cabinet.

There are a few things they look at.

It's not just based on volume.

When we hit a certain level of traffic we can get a traffic signal. That's not the only component they look at.

This is from the kentucky transportation permit manual.

It looks at the comprehensive study of traffic conditions, locations and looking at

conditions in the manual uniform

traffic control devices, the mut cd that gets consistency of

traffic control.

This is what they say. Upon one of the key things they

say to look at is the distance to the nearest traffic signals.

So we are not just looking at volumes.

Other conditions, geometrics as distance. Why is that important?

Because they go on to say that improper unjustified traffic

control signals can result in

one or more of the following. Excessive delay or significant

increases in the frequency of collisions.

How do we know that? This is some tables from the

federal highway administration office highway of safety.

They show that the more signals that, the denser the signals

have, you increase delay, you can see here from two signals

per mile up to eight, you are at 39% increase in delay and the

same wih safety, you almost triple your rate of crashes.

what we are looking at here currently we have four signals in about a half mile segment

looking at adding a fifth signal which is the closest one to any

of those.

You are looking at 540 feet away that is very close.

Has more room for stacking and you cannot adequately progress

traffic through some of those. What does that mean?

This is the three year crash history at rogers road.

There were three crashes. Two of those turning left out of

here and then there is one crash that is a rear end on rogers

road approach. What does the rest of the

corridor look like?

There are 369 other crashes in

the last three years from hagard lane here up to the signalized

access point at old paris pike. They're concentrated directly

along each of the traffic signal s you've got.

Adding an additional signal in there will increase the number

of crashes so these are considerations that the

transportation cabinet would take into consideration saying

can we put another signal in 3540 feet? We haven't asked that question

of the transportation cabinet. We don't have approve

professional so we don't know if a signal can go there.

What happens if we don't have a traffic signal?

We looked at a couple of things.

One, this is the warrants for traffic signals.

You can generate about 70

vehicles per hour throughout eight hours of the day.

That means in your peak hour 85 vehicles per hour.

Some uses that generate 85 uses

per hour, gas nations, hotel, high turn rove sit down

restaurants. All uses generate less than 85

trips a day. We are told this is the barber

shop develoment plan. We can still take some off the

top.

If that is reduced to something along these uses where we don't

need those warrants, we will not have a traffic signal.

If the transportation cabinet decides because of other

conditions we May not have a traffic signal so what happens?

If you have 70 left turning vehicles coming out of rogers or

coming out of the proposed

access point you have 1140 skdz worth of delay. That's 20 minutes.

That means you cannot turn left

out of the proposed access point if there is not a traffic signal

reduce the traffic more? If you have a single left

turning vehicle they're going to wait a full two minutes.

We typically design things to a level of service d.

These are all level of service f

just a single vehicle turning

left is a level service f. There are a lot of consideration

s that the need to be done as far as traffic

determining what the final development intensity is.

What the final configuration of

traffic control is there before we can say that this is a viable

alternative. I'll pause there. Hopefully there is time left.

>> thank you.

>> do I have any time left? >> I think you have a little

less than four minutes. >> let me ask you if you'll turn

back to my letter to you and

again you've got the complete

plan with you.

But in addition to the primary

goal of the small area plan, my

letter talks in more detail the interlocal agreement that is included in the small area plan in your package.

It declares the intent to develop a paris parkway that is

sensitive to preserving the best

of what currently exists on page

3 to the maximum extent possible

and that once constructed the road shall be carefully protect

ed from pressure to development to maintain the

truly unique agricultural character to the paris pike

corridor for the benefit of the public.

The interlocal agreement, and it's the one that set the stage

for the small area plan and it

instructs how that plan shall be

written and that's where it says

that as part of that process you shall look at the comprehensive

plans that the were in effect

when the plan is written.

Now I ask you to find.

And if you look at the maps the maps are very clear that there

is a distinction between what is in the plan and what is out of

the plan.

Let me ask you if you will, let

me find my plan.

If you will look at the maps

that are at the end of your plan

, the first map is the

entire area and if you look at

the second map, it's called the flood plain area and I want you

to look at that because the

useful part is the plan on the south starts with this property

and the curb.

It starts with the rj coreman

railroad but on the north, the plan, the corridor does not

start until you get past swaggert lane.

Now there was, and the reason

for that is because there was already b-3 urban development on

that side of the road.

So the corridor logically in

creating a scenic historic and agricultural corridor started

earlier on the south side, it

started with the R.J. Road than it did on the north side.

That shows an intent in 1995 to

exclude b-3 from the corridor. The b-3 was on the other side of

the road and it was not in the

corridor. But if you turn the page, you

see a couple more plans and get

to existing land use and it show s that on the other side of

the subject property, there are

industrial and commercial activities, that's the existing

land use, but not on the south side.

And if you turn to page, two

more maps, you'll see the zoning

map and this is the map where

the writers of this plan had the

opportunity to look at the 1988 plan and decide do we want to

make this property, the jones

katrell property b-3 or not?

Well, it's here as r-1 b.

They did not in this plan put

business on the south side the

plan amended the existing comp plans in the community and if

you read the plan in its entirety and I've given it to

you in its entirety. Over and over again the purpose

is to protect an agricultural

scenic and rural area and put ting b-3 in that area violate

s the plan.

I've given you findings of fact that call attention to the fact

that the b-3 on the other side of the road was not included in

the plan and ask you to follow

that logic and decide not to put b-3. He has r-1 b.

Let them develop their residential land as it is zoned.

That's what they own.

I've given you the advertisement it means that is the problem

with the vacant land. It is their fault, not the

public's fault.

Don't use that excuse to insert

this wrong activity in the corridor.

Thank you for your attention. I think at this time we'll have

opportunity for public comment.

Jane, you wish to speak? If you give us your name and

address and have three minutes. >> I live on tates creek road

and I have been involved in the

equine industry for years, years , 50 some odd years.

No one would want to protect it anymore.

I do know that you can't do much

equine wise with 4.Something acres and I don't think too many

residential people are going to want to live next to the curb so

we would like to see something

positive done with this property I think the restraints that have

been on it are outstanding.

I specially am very opposed to all the things that have been mentioned and would not want

anything like that on the property.

I cannot... I would love to see

financially all that proposed there. i don't think that will happen.

I think it will be one person

that buys it for one purpose and I don't see that... I think that

after all these years. I don't quite understand this

thing about how it's our fault, but I would like to see after

all these years something productive done with that land

other than see homeless people use it as a shelter.

Thank you. >> thank you, Mr. Vice mayor.

I guess there are some privilege s having sat up in

those chairs next to old fred

brown and a few others for 12

years and we always dreaded the

zone changes, especially the one

that lasted until 4:00 in the

morning but it's very important.

How many have driven by and seen

how this is really a part of the

scenic paris pike corridor.

Now residential, yes.

But for business, I say no.

Small area plan said that and we

know that the developers are moaning and growning all the

time that we don't give them

enough land in the uban service boundary.

So I think there is no reason to

change to a bn b-1 with a plan

that is just sort of thought up.

I mean none of these are a bird in the hand and I think when

that happens maybe you want to reconsider it.

But I would not want to consider something in the stage that it

is now.

I have great respect for the

planning staff and the planning commission, but have you to

remember they're hired and they're appointed.

You all are elected by the

people to do the right thing at the right time.

And I think it is the right time the paris pike corridor, I work

ed on years ago to establish

the historic quality of this area and I must say with you

that work from our office, it would never have been built and

yet we ended up with probably

the most amazing highway you

will ever ride on and it is certainly the most expensive one

in kentucky.

So let's not eat away at this great accomplishment.

It was a great accomplishment.

I believe it's important to

stick to the paris pike small

area plan, do what is right and

I sincerely hope that you will,

at this time, turn down this request for the zone change. Thank you very much.

>> thank you.

Next we have catherine alexander

and then jan guy. She passes.

Jan guy.

I'm sorry, is she coming back. >> I believe she is.

>> I'll make a note.

>> my name is patty drowse. I'm a nurse at U.K.

I have lived in that neighborhood for over 30 years.

It is, right on the border of farmland.

It's very nice and quiet out

there except for the interstate

and, you know, there are things

eating away now at this neighborhood.

I do want to say that if we look

at the need for more gas nation  -- bass stations out there

, if anyone has ever driven

on that road, there are five gas stations already.

So why do we need another gas station?

the fazolies that were there

couldn't do enough business.

There is an empty building there they have opportunities at other

exits.

I feel like my neighborhood is being chipped away at and being

treated like, you know, I don't even know the right word for it

but it's going to destroy the neighborhood.

The fact that, you know, this is this train has already left the

station, I know but we are going have diesel fumes coming into

the neighborhood next to low income housing and that affects

all of us as well and this is

just one more step.

We are not you are going to put them over here on our end of

town and I really ask that you consider some of the integrity

of the neighborhood.

I hate being pushed out of this neighborhood. I have been there a long time but I'm not going to stand for this.

I guess I'll have to live somewhere else. Thank you for your time.

>> thank you.

Next is libby jones and then

john hayes.

>> thank you Mr. Vice mayor and members of the council.

I had not, well first of all, let me introduce myself.%

I'm libby jones. I am not a fayette countian.

I live in woodford county and for that reason I had not plan

ned to speak tonight.

But there are a couple of things

that I think do need to be said

that I can give you in the

context of the history of the formation of the scenic paris

pike corridor.

i was lucky enough to be in

frankfort when all of the incredible participatory

democracy I call it began. As many of us remember very well

, this was one of the most controversial and unfortunate

conversations that this count

has ever had, including bourbon

county. People were literally fighting

about what the resolution was. We realized he would to widen

the pike, we had to make it safe

for traffic and we slowly and

surely came together with the help of many of the people in

this room and all over fayette

county bourbon county, the residents of the paris pike and

with expert help from various support groups and the community

, volunteer groups, organizations like the land and

nature trust of the bluegrass

and the absolute conviction that

we had to do something was

realized and it happened. We had one of the most beautiful roads.

One of the safest roads and one

of the most incredibly iconic

bluegrass examples to show the

world of visitorses that travel here. This is one thing I want to say

that has not been said if this

were not the keeneland horse

sales today, right now, this

room would be packed with horse

people who would say everything

that has been said here and testimony to protecting our horse industry.

And just as important, this road

is an iconic example of what

happens when neighbors like who have juflt spoken come together

because all the neighborhood

associations and the people on the pike were brought together

for this discussion, what

happens when people come

together to decide what is best.

>> which was -- after 10 years while it no, sir suitable fore

dwayne population, if the owners

came to me and said john, can you bring some of your clients

we need some horses, we need to

get some board going, today I would say absolutely, I will do

everything I can to help you out but if they can't when the

property is developed I would

look at it, the noise, around

the clock noise, lights, traffic , would I have to say I'm

very, very sorry, I can't help you.

That's all I got to say.

Next is josie jones.

>> I'm President Of joyland neighborhood association.

Thank you for allowing to us present our concerns.

As I was telling a neighbor about the potential development

on paris pike, he quoted a realtor and said that you can

tell a lot about a house by looking at the front door.

I think this is exactly what we are talking about today.

We are looking at the front door

to joyland neighborhood, to old

paris road neighbors, to lexington, the horse capital of

the world and gateway to unique paris pike corridor.

What we want our friends, neighbors and visitors to see at

our front door, the paris pike corridor has been widened with

the equine industry in mind and

according to steve beshear,

former governor safety was the

number one concern.

The development has not adequate ly addressed any

additional traffic and how that

would be handled safely. Currently paris pike is part of

the everyday life for those who work, going to work, school,

shopping and church whether they

live in joy land or paris or sintdziana.

I have over 300 signatures today

asking you to stop the zone change I hope you believe and

follow the statement on your council website that says you

are dedicated to preserving the rural character that makes

lexington the unique thriving

city that it is today this is

lexington's front door.

>> jay turner lyman.

>> Mr. Cooper. I have some slides we are going

put up here.

And we need a six-minute clock. >> thank you.

>> I'm dave cooper.

I live at 608 allen court. I have lived in the joy land

neighborhood for 14 years and

navigated the disastrous intersection of old paris pike

to park side for all those 14 years. It's really hard to understand

the traffic situation unless you

live here this is the mary todd elementary school right here and

here is the speedway gas station which has a lot of traffic turn

ing in and out.

And of course down old paris

pike is 9 bus traffic from the brian station school.

So here is mary todd elementary school on park side just a short

distance from this crazy offset intersection between old paris

pike and park side and paris pike.

It's a very poorly designed, it's a disastrously dangerous intersection already and the reason why I was passioning out

-- passing out these flyers and they say the intersection is

already so terrible, it's

already so and you

see this is a roughly 3:30 in

the afternoon as the school buss from brian station let out.

One thing that is really hard to understand about this intersection, people will be com ing off north broadway and

they want to go to the curb bar

and turn on to old paris pike

and they stop, they can't turn into the curb bar because the traffic is all stacked up, which

immediately starts stacking up

traffic on owb north broadway outbound north broadway.

It's hard to understand unless

you live there but as they say,

it's a very dangerous here is

looking under the old paris pike

at the coreman bridge and again you see the heavy bus traffic

and the traffic stacks up on old

paris pike trying to get on to paris pike.

Sometimes as far back as I-75.

That's probably at least a half mile backup at peak times so

between lee clock and 5:00 most

people know to avoid old paris pike.

This is looking up old paris pike and... I'm sorry, you seed

the speedway gas station on your

left there.

One more time, not to belabor

this but. Many people come up old paris

pike and then cut across this

sort of jogged intersection here

to get back to the densely populated joyland neighborhood.

While doing that you have cars

turning left at the speedway. It's already a disastrous

intersection and I guess one of the things I want to point out,

here is the applicant's property this is rogers road here.

Notice there is no left turn lane if people wanted to turn

left into the applicant's

property. There is not a left turn lane do that now.

And I guess that would just

stack up traffic on paris pike even more.

But it is unfortunate the traffic engineer, the slide that

we went through so quickly show

ing all the crashes up and down paris pike here and there

is a reason for that. It's a heavy traffic and I believe that this proposal would

make the traffic much worse and much more dangerous.

That's why I urge you to deny

this proposed zone change.

Shank slaing 145eu7bg

>> I'm walt gaffield.

I live at 2001 bamboo drive. I want to bring your attention

to section 820 a of the zoning ordinance for b-3 zoning.

It sz special consideration should be given to the

relationship of the uses in the

zone to the surrounding land use

s and to the adequacy of the street system to serve the

traffic needs.

Now I would say from what you've already heard, special

consideration was not given to

the agricultural uses in the

area really or to the neighborhood.

Just didn't happen.

It's a violation of the zoning

ordinance in my opinion.

This zone change sets a lot of bad precedents or counts bad

precedents. there really is no plan for development.

I mean somebody put some things

on a map and then says it's really not what we might do.

I've never seen that before. Except maybe well there is one

zone change they are the plan ning commission kind of went

a little crazy after approving

the zone change.

So I would call this a phantom plan. It doesn't really exist.

It's unusual and probably

unprecedented to deal with p

development plan. Traffic issues should be given

special consideration. Ning commission is not even hardly going to deal with it

until the final development phase.

There is a plan but they haven't decide what they're going to do

because of course the plan is

not real either.

The submitted plan continues a

trend where trees are expendable

buffers should be small and

clear cutting prior to

submitting it does not involve neighborhoods and notice was in

sufficient.

The posted sign notifying the

public was bent over and virtually illegible.

The hearing before the paris

pike corridor commission held outside fayette county including

the applicant, his legal council

, two contractors and no

neighbors or neighborhood associations.

That to us is unacceptable. The commission itself, they

notify people of a meeting by

posting it in the "herald-leader."

do any of you really glance

every day at the legal notices in the "herald-leader."

I don't think so.

Finally paris pike is a gold standard for historic properties

and scenic properties.

You'll see when you look at the 2018 comprehensive plan that is

going to be coming to you in

draft form shortly, that

development is to be enhanced in corridors and neighborhoods should expect more than this

kind of behavior towards neighborhood. The 2018 plan coming up is going

to have a study to look at urban

and rural development and this might be an appropriate place to

look at disapproval would not harm anything very much because

there is not adequate sanitary

sewer to handle the development

of this size henry alexander

vice mayor and council members.

I am henry dleax -- I'm henry alexander.

I took my first breath on the paris pike, well on the side of

it in a little house.

I was born there and later I became the Chairman Of the paris

pike corridor commission and I

was Chairman When the small area

plan was developed and as hank

has said before, I think this

zone change is np conflict with the small area plan and you

probably need to look at that

pretty close.

I remember I served a lot of

years on this paris pike project

and I was with it when it start

ed at cardome and mary wharton was involved.

I don't know if anybody knows

her or not but she is a great lady.

The thing I remember most people

talking about the paris pike,

they didn't want it to become like nicholasville roode.

I heard that at least a thousand

times and I think this certainly contributes to a project that

will look like nicholasville

road and that old paris pike

traffic problem is serious and I

think you've got to look at that

I was honored to spend so much

time on the paris pike and I

worked closely with governor

jones and was at the ribbon cutting.

So it's an important project to

>> thank you.

Next would be bonny stout. Going to pass.

Thank you.

Ann dave... Ann davies.

Going to pass.

Ben blake. With your permission, I need

need to walk around a little bit I have some circulation problems

so if that's okay with you. Let me just wander around.

By the way, I do have a letter

of affidavit here from bonny harrington.

Owns the farm, the last farm in

fayette county, like to ent this into the record.

She is totally opposed to this.

Now I'm here to speak on my

behalf as a citizen and I

believe peggy, you're my district and kathy you are

taking care of paris pike and

both of you women are trying to

do what you can for the beaut

ification and the safety.

Now let me tell you something

about what I'm seeing here. I have been a professional

engineer for 30 years.

I know a little bit about safe

design and all sorts of things.

I can tell you this; that give

me a roomful of engineers like the urban county government and

I can prove the corollary of anything.

And the point is, the point is

after all is said and done your first impulse is to say hey,

let's go back to engineering and

see what they say about safety. No. They're going to tell you their

view point and the other side

doesn't have a roomful of

engineers so they can't make a good counterclaim.

Now here's the problem.

You have contradictions on the

interpretation of the small area plan and we are not going to

solve that.

We are not going to sort that

out tonight or any other time.

At some point each and every one of you has to make that decision

deep in your heart: can I do

the right thing tonight, which

is what was the intended purpose

of paris pike?

Steve beshear gave an address a

few weeks ago with a specific

purpose of pointing out what the

founders wanted to happen and

they wanted beauty.

They wanted the heritage

preserved and a safe highway.

Now that is what the founders wanted.

So, consider that everything

else is just kind of a toss-up between engineers.

You are never going to know the truth. They're never going to be able

to tell you all the truth. The only difference between me

and dick is he gets paid.

I don't. But have you to search your own

soul at some point.

You have to say is this where I

step aside and do what is right?

and I think we are seeing the

symptoms of a cancer in this whole society growing.

I'm going to stop in just one

second because there is enormous

pressure to put on the city

employees to try to generate more income and they go and say

let's try to sell property here

and get tax revenue, yad, yad yada. You are going to get more people

coming in for the same issues.

When you go home, when you take

your vote, do what's right in your heart children.

Thank you very much.

>> next would be catherine

perkins my name is catherine perkins.

258 swaggert avenue.

Vice mayor and council I want to thank you for allowing this

hearing. The thoroughbreds are what

brought me to horse capital of the world.

Mind you I love the blue ridge mountains of virginia and the

ocean at cape cod, massachusetts but there is nowhere better than

here to watch horses prosper as

they grow.

Mares, foals, equines need what kentucky has.

Land, rich soil and protein fortified bluegrass clean air

and water.

I have worked, lived, rented and employed and in three counties,

well maybe four.

I think scott county, too.

Woodford bourbon fayette and scott.

I've traveled almost every scen ic backroad highway in this

state.

And I've been with thoroughbreds

for 40 years and farmed about 18

trust me when I say high density housing industrial or commercial

development do not live side by

side with equine as well.

And I want you to also trust me

when I tell you that the industry pays well.

We offer jobs.

This addresses the comprehensive

plan for for jobs. It pays well.

We don't discriminate except for people who don't work or steal

from us. We'll hire anybody if you'll work.

I was just in court with one of

my employees, drunk driving, the judge said how do you employ this man.

I said he works.

Yes, he is an clock but he -- alcoholic but he works. We employ them.

Do you?

He can stand up, he can walk a horse.

We pay our taxes and we are a small business we employ

anywhere from five to 25 employees depending on the month

and the day.

We employ all our local vets, fairiers, blacksmiths, whatever.

We put a lot of money into the economy.

I want to just say that I never, I wouldn't have bought a house

on swaggert if I knew that we were going to get a truck sales

and service on a residential street and I wouldn't have

bought it if I knew that our corridor would be threatened.

I thought that a national

historic corridor would never be compromised.

This is not a viable plan or

zone change for this property. Nor is it an issue that I think

we should even be discussing. i don't think it should have

gone this far. But that's only my opinion.

But there is a keep the promise and a small area plan that does

say that it shouldn't happen. Thank you.

>> thank you.

Next would be william woodward. >> Mr. Vice mayor, council

members thank you for your time today.

My name is bill woodward and

live at 282 swaggert avenue. That's the third place I've liv

ed in that neighborhood.

My family and I have have had several homes.

I still have two investment properties in that neighborhood.

Love the neighborhood.

Love the north side.

I'm from paris, kentucky, originally.

My father drove paris pike back

in the day to and from I.B.M. For 55 years. He saw the worst.

He saw everything. He finally started taking

russell cave road because paris

pike was so dangerous and so slow, he didn't even want four

lanes. He just said please widen it and

put some passing lanes in there for the farm traffic we can get

around them.

When he saw what really happened

here, he came to my home and he was not at I.B.M. Anymore.

He said this is beautiful. This is unbelievable.

I never ever, ever thought they

would do something this fantastic to this road.

They said it's beautiful.

He and my son road bicycles all

the way down paris pike when it was under construction to the

training center and back and set

on one of those rock walls eating a sack lunch.

He just loved it. He said I can't believe this finally happened. Do you know one thing he told me

, you don't have to worry.

The greatest part about this

billy is the promise.

They promised never, never, ever

, ever will there be more

commercial building on the paris

pike corridor. Period it's a promise.

You can trust them, too, he said you're safe.

I'm so glad you moved to this

part of town so you can get down

and see us when you can.

Love it.

And that's what I'm saying.

Keep the promise.

It really was a promise. The other thing I wanted to

speak to the strawberry field neighborhood.

I went and canvassed the strawberry field neighborhood

myself sunday and of the 50 houses that I hit, of course

people were at church

I had just come back from church I missed a lot of them but

everybody I talked to, 100% said

and it disagrees with they're okay as long as you can do the

lighting. That's not true.

One 100% of them said absolutely

I'll sign the petition. 100%.

Tom one that didn't said I just don't want to get involved and

that's a fact.

It's in your, we've got the documentation.

If I had had time to do the 500 houses and apartments over there

I think I would have gotten the same results.

People don't want this. They want the green space.

They want to keep it the way it is.

Mainly it just upsets me that

they're doing something they don't really they haven't even

gotten any commitments. That's part of it.

The real part of it is this shouldn't be b-3.

It should remain residential.

Please keep it that way I beg you. Do the right thing tonight.

>> thank you.

Next is adam kirk pass.

Paula singer.

I think we've got about 15 more minutes of comments.

If we can hold on, finish the comments we'll take a break if

that's okay. No.

You want to take a break. Okay. >> Mr. Vice mayor, council

members. >> just a moment.

I'm getting some... Let her speak and then we'll take a

break.

>> I'm about one minute. Okay.

My name is paula singer.

I live on hamilton park off versailles road.

In the 11th district and I'm

here as an advocate for our neighborhoods and for the

thoroughbred industry where I have earned a great living for

the past 35 years.

Those of us who live along the versailles road corridor know

what harm can be done on our residential neighborhoods by

chipping away at the boundaries

between commercial and residential areas through mis

guided zone changes.

The eighth gas station

convenient store on our corridor , it's the eighth gas

station within a two-mile area

of our core corridor is nearing completion.

This does not enhance our corridor.

Continue. Ready to get started again if

people will find their seats please.

And next to speak would be garne

tt graham.

I live at 2330 paris pike, and due to a medical conditin that

affects my speech, I have asked Mrs. Perkins to speak for me. >> thank you.

If the council and vice mayor

will allow that, is that okay? May she sit back down.

>> absolutely. I'm sorry we made you come

forward.

>> to the member of the urban

county council I'm the owner at 2330 paris pike that joins 2300

paris pike lot.

The proposed zone change of that

property from r-1 b to b-3 is of

great concern to me. To allow highway service

business to locate at the very beginning of the historic paris

pike corridor is unthinkable.

As a homeowner with property

adjacent to the 2300 property,

I'm extremely concerned... Excuse me, for the continued

security safety and value of my property.

I fear that the proposed development would greatly

devalue my property. Flooding is a huge concern as a

portion of my property lies a

bit lower than the 2300 property i'm afraid that once this

property, which wouldn't pass a

perk test for septic is paved,

that the flooding would increase since the removal of the trees

on the 2300 property the noise level has tripled.

I shudder to think of the noise

increased with the addition of

businesses on that lot, trash is already a problem in the area

but I suspect it would greatly increase with new businesses.

Traffic is already a nightmare. Without the addition of traffic

lights which May be prohibited, I cannot imagine how many

accidents there would be even

with the additional lights travel in that area would still

be very dangerous.

I realize that I'm likely a minority with a concer for the

wildlife in the area, however to

be able on most days to see deer

tbraizing in both my yard and the 2300 property is a wonderful

privilege that would continue if the property remained

residential.

I am vehemently opposed to the

zoning change for the property located at 2300 paris pike but

at the very least, I would ask

that council take the flooding, increased noise and trash

pollution into consideration and

increase the buffer, require the repliement 67 placement of

mature trees along the buffer.

That is the letter you have in fronted of you that was sent to

you and I want to show you if I

can figure out how this works.

The flooding. You can see the highlights

yellow.

That is on her property and 2300

one is completely paved over she fears will flood her property

even worse.

Her home was built in 1910.

This development is not

consistent with enhancing the existing environmental qualities

of the bluegrass encourage high

quality and new development and

it doesn't, and it's not going

to blend in, promote design, compatibility of existing

significant structures and

public and private developments. Is that my three minutes.

>> yes ma'am. >> okay.

>> thank you.

>> up next is harry cobb.

>> thank you, harry.

We have a map of what is the historic district for the

corridor. It goes from end to end as the interlocal agreement states.

I know that that is not at question here.

But it is historic and the inter local agreement does say

that the road shall be carefully protected from pressure to

develop as to maintain the

unique truly agricultural and character.

For the benefit 69 general

public tourists and area land owners.

This zone change would not do

that.

And I encourage you to look at

section 2 of the interlocal agreement where there was a

civil action that included properties along paris pike

which are within the lexington

fayette urban countiy... So nat

you -- so that you know her property and the 2300 is not included in trying to be protect

ed and I think that's all

have I to say.

The intent was already brought

up and garnetta's concerns.

>> thank you.

I asked jan guy. Has she returned?

Thank you.

Then next would be amy clark

before you speak, amy, you were

not here when we did the swear manage.

>> I affirm that... Will I will

read it and you can just affirm do you swear or affirm that any

testimony will you give will be true to the best of your knowledge.

>> yes, I do and thank you for reminding.

That's very important. Paris pike corridor has been a

balancing act since its in

accepts... Safety it would

not have come into being but for safety.

The concern for safety.

And its historic quality is what

bound this government in a tri lateral agreement to protect

it and stop the highway department from going forward

until it was assured of protection.

People have said already keep

the promise. There were promises made when

the corridor came into being and

they are still valid.

They still should bind we

believe.

The corridor should maintain its

agricultural character, its

historic character and well, I think agricultural is a central

theme here.

I want to address the claim that the land has failed to develop

for so long. The small area plan specifies

farm and estate uses.

In the last two or three years

six or 7,000, two different owners have purchased a property

in the immediate vicinity in that small triangle between the

pike and the railroad for 600 ,000 or 700,000.

I have a great many exhibits. I invite questions but it's in

the record.

And add add improvement, steve

bicknell of cloud nine farm was one, meredith lane and that

would be ed lane's daughter and kit elaine's daughter is the

other and she has signed the petition in opposition, both of

them have in fact. They have an expectation of

stability in the protection of the corridor, one for farm use and one for estate residential

which are the two uses specified

in the small area plan. There was talk of being faded or

bound by the surrounding commercial nuisance to cave into

it and make more of it. Mrs. Graham is, I believe, a

life long resident. She faces joy land which is now going to be peterbilt trucks.

She has faced that all this time Mr. Bicknell's front door, his

front drive has avis 25 of a power station.

He invested recently in this property.

It is possible to live near things and not become them and

not be of them yet to value them five acres of trees were cut

without a permit. It's in the record. I checked.

There should be a ground

disturbs tushance permit.

The mercer loam.

... >> I need you to conclude. Your three minutes is up.

>> I would say that jan guy sign ed in for three minutes to

share with me.

She was called away by a medical emergency.

>> is she here now? >> she is not.

There is someone here now who is willing to yield three minutes

but apparently the sheet is not present.

She has been present throughout. >> if there is someone who is

present who has signed up who has not spoken and would like to

yield three minutes to you, we

can do that or if anyone on

council wants to make a motion otherwise I'm going to say that

you've used your time. >> I'll make the motion and move

to give her three minutes since there were individuals who did

sign up and did not speak. They technically just said pass.

I think it's appropriate to let

one of them yield their time.

The review of the plan was perfunctory.

The sewage, if you calculate it going into the sewage bank which

is very near ca capacity already

the sewage capacity they would claim that the uses proposed

would be four fold.

What is available in the sewer

capacity under the railroad.

I want to look at... Actually practically the last slide if I

can get there right quick. People said we don't want it to

look like nicholasville road. That's a hotel complex with

restaurant and gas station on nicholasville road of about five

acres that's, okay.

Here's where I want to be to conclude. Maintaining a balance.

There are two places in your comp plan goals and objectives

where the idea of balance comes

in and the ideal, the special

idea of agricultural use.

Of the small area plan. Okay.

Let's make sure that everybody is on there. >> page 30.

>> thank you. >> the top of the page, it

directs you to table 8. But at the very bottom, it

starts with the transitional zone text. And it-toe very last thing on

page 30 says table 9.

And you flip the page. But it says small area plan land

use.

And the corridor is entirely, it looks at first glance to be

shaded in different hatchings.

So again, pairs corridor, small area plan land use.

And the legend indicates that

there is a rural a which is within the view shed. A rural b, a greenway scenic he'sment and then a view shed.

I would point you to where our

subject property is. And I'll ask chris edwards to

put this on the overhead. The area where the subject

property is not shaded.

It is not indicated for rural a.

Which is within the view shed. For the rural b, which is

indicated as the transition zone.

It is left unshaded and that

same characterrist sick true, of

the paris end where it is within paris' city limits and there is

a more urban land use designation for that area so I

want the council to understand our staff recommendation and the

planning commission's understanding of the small area

plan is, that this property falls within the area controlled

by the urban service boundary and controlled by the

comprehensive plan in terms of

the higher intensity land use.

If we refer back to the land use

maps, that we looked at from

even from 2007, this is the last

property recommended for a

commercial zone. For a commercial development.

So the trickle downis unlikely if we're following these plan

recommendations. The last thing I would mention

and maybe I have already said this but the corridor is a jewel

within fayette county and also within bourbon county and we

want to respect that's specially

within our rural service area. The urban service area is svend

development and that would conclude our comments at this point.

>> thank you. >> thank you.

>> that would bring us to an opportunity for rebuttal.

Starting with the petitioner. >>

>> could you get a rebuttal? >> you'll have rebuttal following, yes.

>> Mr. Vice mayor I have two rebuttal witnesses the first is

diane zimmerman who is a

licensed professional engineer. A specialist in trafficker.

>>ing and she's been doing this for how many years?

Maybe -- 29 years. And has been before you before

is and is a very experienced trafficker. >> she'll make a couple of comments

about the traffic items that were brought up. >>

>> good evening, members of the council.

I wanted to point out that I --

I appreciate the comments from Mr. Kirk and they are 100%

correct and we've had multiple conversations with your traffic

engineering staff and that they

feel comfortable with the traffic signal at this location

in that it May provide gaps for

the park side drive to enter and concerned about the coordination

between the old paris pike, and

the proposed signal at rogers

we did not go to the full effort

as stated by the planning staff

to do the full 8 hour warrant

until we knew exactly what

property developers would be at the site. Because, it will be critical. But I that I one of the most

important things that Mr. Kirk

pointed out is that, one vehicle. >> next is jay jones who is one

of the owners of the property.

>> I'm jay jones, and I'll try to make this brief.

I'm a full-time farmer in fayette and bourbon county.

We're in the horse and cattle business. There has been references made

to this being possibly viable for any type of agriculture due

to the size and explosion in my opinion.

It is not viable for any type of

agricultural operation. In that time there has never

been any interest expressed by anyone to develop this for any

type of residential event.

We've had numerous inquiries and several contracts over the years

for commercial applications. Those have fallen through mainly

because of the zoning. And, people did not want to go

through the process as dick

said. They said when you get it zoned.

We'll talk to you and that pretty much wraps it up. Thank you for your time.

>> >> there are a few other

rebuttal remarks and I'll save my summary until the appropriate

place after the opponent-rebuttal but just on a

couple couple of issue, on

traffic, Ms. Zimmerman did not

mention that we do show on the

plan, we'll be building turn lanes, both way, northbound on

the right, southbound on the left, and Ms. Zimmerman talked

to the transportation cabinet. Highway department, and

agreeable to allowing the left turn lane coming down so we will

have turn lanes. In addition to traffic signal

she mentioned. There has been brief discussion

of the sewer and storm water on this I think that Miss Clark

said we couldn't sewer it. Well, there was discussion of

that in the planning commission and the citier.

>> is aware of the situation.

And, what it is there is a sleeve under the railroad track

which is 12 or 14 inches in diameter.

The curb has a two-inch lane coming out of it and the sleeve

was designed with adequate room to take the line from this property, so there is sewer

availability on this property. The preliminary analysis, but

continued occasions were that there was sewer capacity for this property as well.

you know the rule. It doesn't matter what it is

zoned.

When you come in and get a billing permit or a file development plan, if there is no sewer capacity there, you can't develop it.

Regardless of how property is

zoned.

As all storm water detentions are in a rate so that the rate

of discharge is no greater from the property than the rate of

discharge is right now.

If there is flooding up here, we certainly hope that doesn't get

on our property. But if we would be.

Coming down to our storm water

detention basin right there.

I wanted to, I was criticized I

guess for claiming -- we didn't reach out to the neighborhood. Well, we reached out to

neighborhood and they told us that there was no need to have a

meeting.

But, my friend did not reach out to me and I didn't see him until

he walked in today even though he's been working on it for some

time.

We've always been open to talking to people many neighborhood about this.

The other thing that I wanted to mention is, long lines of what

was made.

What was -- wade mentioned

Mr. Gratti held up the paris plan small area plan and said

the plan recommends residential for your property. No, that's not the case.

And let me put up the slide that

he held up for you.

And that was the 19 -- and I've highlighted it.

That was the 1995 existing zoning map.

Where down here, you indicate

that the existing zoning on this property, single family detach

because that's what it was.

When do you a study like this, the staff first determines what

the existing zoning is, and says, okay, this is what we're starting with.

>> vice mayoring I'm sorry, can we call a point of order.

His rebuttal time exceeded and he's well beyond the time that's

fine if we want to past make a motion.

But -- technically, he's exceeded his time. >> fair enough.

>> there was a limit on rebuttal >>

>> I did not set a limit on the time for rebuttal when I ran

through the regulations for this.

And I was assuming that, we'd allow both sides the same amount of time.

>> I thought that there was the time clock up front.

That's what I was looking at. So --

>> time clock should not have been put up. >> I will withdraw that thank

you.

>> thank you. >> >> and this is the existing

zoning map and here is the land

use map. Which as Ms. Wade pointed out

to property is at the end and there is no designated land use

on our property.

As there is no designated inside the urban service area boundary

and that's because what we said at the beginning of the meeting

that the plan said, that the existing comprehensive plans

would be the governing plan for

those portions of lexington and paris which were inside of the

existing urban service boundary. And the rest will be summation

so I'll save that Mr. Mr. Chairman. So thank you very much.

>> now there will be time for rebuttal from the opponent.

>> thank you, Mr. Vice mayor.

>> if I could say one thing.

We do have a potential buyer for the property who has come in

because we planned for this, this way, since the planning

commission action, we do have a

potential buyer, who would use it much the same way and I

wanted to clarify it for you. >> thank you.

>>

>> Mr. Chairman, vice mayor, I

wondered what would happen if I showed up here, and Mr. Murphy

announced that it had a buyer. And whether I should ask to have

the matter recessed or denied,

and have him come back with the real buyer.

But it is awfully hard to

respond to a zoning application to rezone the haircut or the

butcher shop, plan, that is not

real, and then say oh, we have a buyer.

To me that is all the more reason to turn down this

application and have him come back when he has a buyer and a

real plan that we can have in

front of us. Now, there has been some

difficulty reading the small

area plan. And, I'm going try to ask you to

follow me as you did tracy and dick murphy.

And also, Mr. Murphy suggested

that I ambushed him by showing

up by surprising hip and I was

hired last thursday, so I have

had four days to prepare. I just got into this case.

But, here is what the plan, if

you'll turn to the page that tracy asked you to turn to, page

30.

And you'll see a narrative and this is under the section land use.

So the plan, page 29, land use

plan, land use parcel study,

consummation easement, and

transitional zone. The plan as it is written, table

9 toe bottom of page 30, which

is on next page.

But the plan includes in the transitional zone three types of properties.

Property in the urban service

boundary, 148 acres.

And, rural b, 1476 and flood

plain.

And, the map that Mr. Murphy and Miss Jones asked you to look

at, the land use map, identifies

the rural b, with the cross marks and what is in white, is

in the urban service area. So, I don't think that there can

be any argument that the -- that this paris pike corridor

includes the subject property,

within its land use discussion.

Now, what does it say?

Back to page 30.

And the land uses within this

agricultural rural transition zone, should remain in

agricultural uses with only farmstead and estate-type

residential remitted as land use.

Requiring a minimum of ten acres

per dwelling unit and requiring a minimum setback of 200 feet.

This is the plan that governs

this zone change. And this is the land use

narrative and there is nothing anywhere in the plan that

contradicts this.

The reference to the plan, that

Mr. Murphy wants to use, to bishop the 1988 plan is a

reference that comes from the

interlocal agreement. And you have that in front of

you.

I think it is page 6. It is in my letter.

If you look at my letter you to,

it says, and I'm on page 4 of my letter, the interlocal

agreement, page 6. For that person of the small

area of plan which May deal with properties either within the

city limits or within the lexing

tan fayette urban services boundary, the parties agree to

the extent of their authority to

do so, that is to the extent the governmental entities at this

stage in the process, that the

plan shall be consistent with

existing and/or recommended land use designations and that was

the instruction when you're

writing the small area plan, you

need to look at the comprehensive plans of the

community and they did.

And, what happens is, the land use language I have read to you,

the land use for the lexington transition zone including the

urban service area, is for

residential, and agricultural.

They talk about b3.

And, to make it clear that the three is on the other side of

the road.

It is excluded. From the corridor.

There was b3 and it is shown on the map. existing zone.

But they designed the corridor

so that it would not have b3.

Why? Because b3 is inconsistent with

the paris pike corridor plan. Otherwise, they would have

brought joyland, it was probably historical at that point, it

would have brought jorland into

the plan. And the gas station and the b3

because it is across the road from the existing but there was

a reason they excluded it and

that is because b3 doesn't fit.

Agricultural scenic and tourism.

That testimony has been cleared. But the plan while it is difficult.

And we rate it differently but I

would ask you to read it, looking at the big picture

purpose of the paris pike.

What is the purpose? To protect the equine industry

to retain the tourism capacity

of that driveway, that drive,

and I enjoy and we all enjoy.

And to protect the historic

character of the area.

The house Mrs. Gram and the other houses on -- in the paris pike designate corridor and I

would ask you to read this, the comprehensive plan to the point

that it has been incorporated,

and, this area is designated

residential, or agricultural. , thank you and that is my rebuttal.

>> I would like to tender

conditions to staff, right now, if the zone is granted, we would

ask this to be considered. We ask it not be granted but amy

has conditions that she would like to tender as part of our

presentation, that would go on the development plan.

>> I'm -- I'm sorry, but north now I'm going to have to get

some guidance from legal and/or planning staff.

Can you repeat what the request is? >>,.

>> my request is that, Miss

Clark be allowed to tender a

one-page list of conditions, that we would like to see as

part of a development plan if a zone change is granted and it

has to do with buffering and

some other factors, that I didn't need to include in my presentation.

Against the zone change. But, if it gets to the

development stage, we would like

to go on record asking for better protections.

>> >> I haven't seen them but if

they are things that would be conditions in the development

plan, this body has no authority to act on those.

If they are conditional zoning

restrictions, consider them with

krs100, that they can only go to use in landscape buffering.

>> so, --

>> can amy clarify?

>> >> if you could show staff what

you have, and I'm not recognizing you to speak. I'm sorry.

Would like the staff to read and give us some guidance if they will.

>> and I this I that I called tracy wade tracy jones and if I

did, apologize. >> it appears to me that there

May be some items on this that could be considered as

conditional zoning restrictions if you desired to do that.

but, I'm a little perplexed as to how to do that if you have

not seen them and they haven't

been given to you before now. And we're in rebuttal so that's

up to the body.

If you want to see them, you

know, it is -- but there could be some that would be

conditional zoning restrictions but there are some that would

not be permit because the development plan issues and you

all cannot act on those. >> and procedurally.

The fact that we have not seen this and it hasn't been submit,

does that make a difference at

this point? >> you've heard, if you want to

allow them, I think that you would have to vote to present it

to you because they are not in

the record as it turn stands. >>. >> I'll express an opinion and

make a ruling as the chair and this does not suit counsel, I

would like a motion to overrule

if it doesn't seem appropriate. I believe that at this point,

that would add confusion to what

is already very difficult decision.

We've been faced with a lot of

competing facts, and I would

rule at this point, not to put that before counsel.

>>

>> excuse me. Counsel member henson.

>>

>> are these items that could be

considered in a development plan. >> yes.

Some of them could be.

Not all of them would be.

You know, but yes, development

plans can consider buffering. they could consider heights of

buildings, they could consider those types of things in the

course of how they are going to develop the project when they

come with their final development plan, the planning

commission would have to act on those.

With the input from the various divisions of staff.

>>

>> how many items are we talking about?

>> in total or -- well, let me

just say this: at least I would say there is at

least five or six that potentially could be added to

the conditional zoning restrictions that are already

proposed. Or recommended by the planning commission. >> thank you, mayor.

>> councilmember lamb.

>> I think that I want to say

this for clarification purpose

for future. And I think what needs to be

stated is when you're speaking

and addressing us during the

comment section, if you have item like this, they need be

submitted when you're speaking

to us at the time that you're speaking to us.

Because that's the proper time to introduce it and I want to

make sure that we state this now because going forward I would

haight hate for someone else to Miss The opportunity like this

but that's the proper procedure.

And I just -- I as -- I want to make sure that's understood

going forward and I respect about what the vice mayor said

as chair, but, just going

forward, knowing next time, make

sure that you present your

exhibits when you're speaking to everybody. Quay. >> also, I would like to make a

request of staff. Can we get copies made if we can

get some help from people who

May be here, helping out, and have those copies just so we can

see what it is that is being

proposed. >> we'll do without for the

moment.

>> that would bring us to closing summation first by those

by the opponents and then by the

petitioner. Do you have any further words

and summation? >>

>> Mr. Vice mayormembers of counsel, I think that you'll be

relieved and happy to know that

I feel like I -- I squeezed my

summation into my rebuttal, and if you will recall my rebuttal

and accept it as my summation,

I'll relieve you of further

argumenten at this time. >> thank you. >> Mr. Murphy, summation.

>>

>> as to how that plan is

interpreted, I think the

interpretation is clear. And that is because after these

plans were adopted in 1993 and

1995, you have had three

comprehensive plans since then all indicating what the usage

should be in this area. And every time the planning

commission continued to

designate this property for commercial purpose, if the paris

pike corridor plan had been

saying oh, keep this single

family detached or keep it agricultural they would not have

reflected that, on every land use map which was adopted in the

last 30 years. So the planning commissions knew

what they had done when they adopted the paris pike plan.

They knew the es dig nation inside the urban service bound I

have to be governed by the comprehensive plan and after

they adopted the paris pike corridor small area plan which

they were the ones who adopted that, they continued to show this as commercial on the

summary map as they showed the area outside of the urban

service line as agricultural,

all the way to the county line. They were totally consistent stent stent stent stent stent

stent stent stent stent stent stent stent stent stent stent stent stent stent stent stent

maps. We have been criticized today

for planning in advance on this property.

As I said you to when we brought

this property in, we did not have anybody any buyer lined up.

What we wanted to do because of

the lack of success in marketing this, we wanted to come in and

to get the parameters set.

We wanted it so when we got a

buyer, the buyer would know, hey, you have to build some turn

lanes up on paris pike too. You have to build one right and

you have to build one left.

We wanted the developer to know that when they got into this,

they May have to bear the expense of that traffic light.

And even though through all of

these discussions, it was

pointed of tut real need for the traffic light will be that

peterbilt dealership that serves the same intersection we do but

the developer May get hung with that cost because we were the last ones to develop.

We wanted the developer to know that.

Similarly, if we need to do

additional buffering along the single family detached zoned

property, not the agricultural property, because there is none.

But the single family detached property to the north, if we

need to do that or if we have to do more than we're showing on

this, the developer would know that in advance and know what they are doing.

We have done that and that's the way we should do because there

is planning and zoning. People get criticized up here

sometimes because they bring a user in. We have got this user and we

want to fit him in here and the people say, oh, you're just

waiting until you get a user and then you try to figure if you

can fit him in. We did that the right way and

doing the planning first.

We brought this plan up, so that potentially users would know

what the parameters are, when they come in and buy this

property.

We now know we can't do the

right in and right out at the southern line because the

planning commission said no, that's not a good idea.

And here we are, and we do have a potential buyer who is willing to live by these parameters, and

the system is working the way

that it is supposed to work. All of the summary maps have

shown that is designated for recent a as I said if we need to

do additional buffering, there

is a very dense vegetative line along that entire northern, what

I call the northern northeastern line right now.

And if it is not sufficient, you can require us to do additional

buffering through conditional

zoning restrictions. This is an important vote for

you because it involves the urban service boundary.

We're in the middle of discussions right now about,

whether we should expand the

urban service boundary or not. And you will get a lot more of

that since the planning

commission voted not to expand

the urban service boundary and send it up for the final

ratification this four and two-thirds acres is part of

everybody's figures, the home

builders figures, when they come

in and tell you this there are x number of acres that must be developed and should be

developed inside of the urban

service area before we expand.

And this is part of those acres. That should be developed before we expand.

The you were ban service line is

a two-way tool.

It was adopted many years ago, 1958 and I can't do the math in

my head right now.

Many years ago.

And it is the tool which has

resulted in the preservation of horse farm land but everybody

needs to realize that is a two-way tool.

And it doesn't just say, on the

other side of line, it says we're going to develop inside

the line and the last two comprehensive plans cycles have

made it very clear that, if we

are to avoid expanding, the only way we can do that is to develop

the land which is designated for development inside of the urban

service line. This is always been planned for

this.

As I said on the other side of

the road, we are commercial farther north of this.

And yes, there is a boundary rural land uses.

There is a boundary. That we have a much better

buffer between us, and our

neighbor's property, with our dense vegetative buffer than the

other people who have told you about the issues that they are

going to have with the peter built truck repair and

dealership facility next to them.

And the people who have talked to you about the utility

substation next to them we have a much better buffer here than

they do.

And if you want to expand it, go ahead and expand it. But it is a great buffer right

now.

This this boundary was drawn for a reason. the community made a

decisionable where development

goes and not go. They drew the boundary and we're

inside the boundary and we're designate for development, and

the planning commission has continued to uphold that concept

for the last 30 years. We feel very strongly about

this, this is important.

It goes both ways. Thank you very much. >> thank you.

>>

>> and I'll open the floor for council mens to have questions

for anyone who testified.

Sign in, please.

>> councilmember la mba I have several questions and I don't

knowfy can do it in five minutes.

Ms. Wade, if you could come

down. Ther urban service boundary I

don't know, maybe if you can

show it on the larger plan, where is the urban service

boundary as it relates to this paris pike right there in that property?

>> excellent question. The urban service boundary

follows the rear of the residential subdivisions and

comes up along the ar.

Follows the railroad out and turns here.

Along this property line on the west side and the lexington

country club so this parcel

indicates, I think it is 2550 paris pike is the main building

for the country club.

So the urban service boundary follows this line.

And then it jogs along paris

pike and follows the rear of the swagger avenue parcels. >> okay.

Thank you.

So basically the 2300 -- 2330

and 23. >> and I think the question

about the sanitary capacity is -- and I wanted to ask you as

well is that part of the process when the application comes through.

That staff does review that and to make sure that that is complete? >> yes.

We have a staff member from the division of water quality who

sits on the nickal committee.

And they provide it, input at

the technical stage of

development review.

When a final plan is brought in they provide guidance to the an

my caisse can't at the early same of the vie and they are

told whether or not there is enough capacit in the sewer

bank to handle their development. And inned cacheted at that stage

they need to seek a reservation from that office.

The capacity assurance program. We do not certify final

development plan until we receive a letter from that office.

That indicates that there is

capacity. Is it possible to tell me what

the density?

>> r1b require as 15,000 square

foot lot which is about three units per acre.

And if you have five acre, that's about 15 single family homes.

>> and, the other thing is, the

notification area. I've gone back through and I'm

shocked that I didn't see the

main ejectorsors that I'm hearing except for the people on

kingston and swaggart, they didn't show up at the planning

commission so what was the notification area of this?

>> that's standard notification, 500 feet from the subject

property including the two

parcels to the east out to par pike because they are increase a zone.

They don't receive the supplemental notification that

only occurs if you are adjacent, if your subject property is

adjacent to an agricultural zone, then there is supplemental

notification provided so in this case, they provided supplemental

notification on the other side

of the railroad tracks closer to bryant station but not out paris

pike.

>> >> if you would come to the podium.

>>

>> how did you receive notification? You were hired four days ago but

how did your clients receive notification of this?

>> I received a frantic phone

call last thursday.

Or wednesday saying you can help.

And I said, what?

Next tuesday is pretty close.

And I met with clients sunday

afternoon, and talked all

weekend with representatives.

Some of my clients did attend the planning and zoning meeting.

I think that Mrs. Graham

submitted a letter.

I'm pretty sure that, Mr. Floyd had noticed that the

planning and zoning. And I don't know.

i just know that -- okay. He did not have notice.

>> okay, all righty, well, I mean, and my time is up.

So I have to go on but thank you for that and I'll wait for my

second time so thanks. >> thank you.

Councilmember gibbs.

>> thank you, vice mayor.

Tracy, up here again.

I don't know where to start.

One of the things, at one point Mr. Murphy said this makes

sense to make the zone change. I want clarification.

He said that, one of the theme a

goals, 3c, is to make it so that you can live where you work.

And this is something that I

like to first exam in this the long run because we see this a fair amount.

But there is already a speedway there.

Right. Does anyone check these sort of claims?

>> no. There is not. >> I was curious.

But I wondered if maybe we could think about doing that in the

future to think about if we build another development, if

anybody is working there. Since we're pitching this, it

seems that there should be way too check on that.

>> it is a theoretical project with the theoretical employees

at this point. >> yes. Exactly.

But, we don't have theoretical employees at the speedway across the street.

They are real employees. It could give us something to go

on, whether this really fits

with comprehensive plan or not.

And another point that they made

is that, sorry, it go that wrong.

Minimized disruption so,

relatively minimal disruption because it is relatively flat

and cleared. And when you look at minimal

disruption, is that during construction or thinking about

in the long term. I mean, shouldn't if they are

pitching the zone change, shouldn't there be something

advantageous about that? Residential be any more

disruptive to the property? >> I would think not in the

process itself, right? >> there are not any natural

features in terms of an environmentally sensitive area

on the site of those, that area is -- those types of areas are

not being impacted. I would point you to the

findings that the planning commission adopted.

And they did not adopt a finding

that related to that goal or

objective that the applicant

cited because, the staff did not recommend that they make that

finding. Because there wasn't enough information that backed that

finding. >> okay. But it is during the

construction process that you judged that not in the long term?

>> it is both. It is both.

>> okay.

Recent residential is much less disruptive when I comes to

surface, they are talking if I counted correctly, somewhere

around 130 car spaces for this.

I need guidance on things like that. So, I'm not necessarily against

the plan but it is like when I,

people give me things that are pro, I'm not convinced these

things are really pro. How am I doing for time?

Bad.

Well, usually I don't take my time in my classroom I'm bad but

usually I don't take my time

here.

I have to be convinced that the commercial is worse than the residential and what is wrong

with this property for residential? Can somebody answer me that?

And this is a couple of theoretical because we're not asking for the zone change but

it is zoned for big plots.

You know, a third of an acre. Could we zone this r-3.

There is an r-3 right next it to.

And again, the property owner to

make that request, but, I'm concerned as Mr. Murphy

expressed about the urban

service boundary. And I want things developed

within sight and I'm not sure that developing commercial there

is the proper thing to do.

And I feel like, I guess now I'm rambling and not asking you the

question. But what are the barriers to development other than the large plots?

>> >> I this I the traffic is

probably one of the barriers.

The exiting and entering from

paris pike. So, to Mr. Kirk's point of

people would have to wait 20

minutes to turn out, or to

minute if it is one car, and dinevillerman made the point. Oint. Oint. Oint. Oint. Oint. Oint. Oint. Oint. Oint.

Oint. Oint. There is 15 houses there.

>> definitely. They won't have a traffic figure natural.

And generally, you're having near the interchange.

So, and a railroad track too. I would consider those as

detrimental to single family. >> I'm over time and thank you, vice mayor.

>> the railroad track is very hard to develop residential

close to railroad track. Now, they might have barriers

and do things so I thought thought that was a detriment

there. Usually have commercial when you

have railroad tracks, and is that an active railroad that goes through there? >> it is.

>> no? No? No? No? No? No? No? No? No? No? No? No? No? no?

No? No? No? No? No? No? No? No? No? No? No?

(Interjection). >> if you tried to do

residential there, there May be difficulty getting a light or a

traffic to accommodate that

according to the planning.

And I might ask, Mr. Murphy, have they the owners have owned

this for a number of years and they have not had success or

have they tried to sell it for residential purposes?

Can you give me a quick answer?

>> Mr. Murphy, you -- thank

you. Sorry. I should know better.

They have not had any offers for

residential purposes on this property.

>> they have not had any offers

for residential use on this property.

>> thank you. And, -- >> tracy.

>> you showed the boundary up

there and if you'll show that

again on the -- on the urban services boundary on I guess

that map is as good as any.

>> yes this larger zoning map. >> when you're coming in, is

that where the corridor stops, the paris pike.

And I'm not talking about the corridor. >> the improvements.

>> the whole paris roads and everything. I understood that it started at

the lexington country club, we want to paris.

And am I mistaken there?

>> well, the --

>> from my experience, I believe

that the median starts in this

neighborhood before swaggart,

but the landscaping and the stone wall and improvements

begin after the country club. >> but, we're talking about the

urban service area being a boundary, is there some farms

there coming this way that are within the urban services area? >> yes.

>> are they subject to pdr? >> no. >>

>> they have to be outside, wouldn't they?

>> if they are in the urban service boundary, they would not be eligible.

>> so they are subject to -- they are eligible for

development though? >> yes.

>> those are automatically.

I mean, whatever happens to this piece of property that we're

looking at doesn't have a embargo on the other properties,

it is up to the owners to do what they want with it.

Up to the urban services area boundary.

>> yes, and there are recommendations in the previous

comprehensive plans, and current comprehensive plan that May not

lead to this same conclusion on

those properties as.

>> and the planning department

considered this best use of this piece of property?

>> that's not really what planning considers.

>> what about planning commission? Did they talk about that best use?

>> again, best use is more of a real estate term and not

`planning ideal. >> >> we're trying to find

commercial properties and we're having a very difficult time of

getting some commercial properties out there.

So, you know, it is -- I

understand the plight on both sides. It is kind of mixed but it looks

to me the planning commission

has really taken this into consideration, and, they have

the last say on the development part, and getting that flow of

traffic and everything. So, I don't think we can do

anything else unless we put some conditions on it. >> thank you. Councilmember.

>> thank you, chair. We all know this is in the urban

service area. And zoned for recent a you

mentioned marketing and that it was out there being marketing.

You have had no interest in the residential dent?

I find that we're constantly being told with our developers

that the housing needs inside of the urban service boundary are

just not there. And I wondered in the

objecttions were cost. I know you said something about

the railroad track, but, can you expound on that?

>> >>>> it is a combination of things

where we are. it is the railroad track.

That's a factor. I know other houses are near

railroad tracks, it is not --

the -- we have the bar to the

south of us and we wanted no a

an es stain-type house there.

We have the paris pike to the west of the road, and the

railroad together are going to amount to light, noise, that

sort of thing on this property as well.

Then we have the entrance

situation opposite rommers road

which is we're aloud an unsignalled location there.

And the fact that, we will be having 18 wheelers coming in and

out of there to the maintenance facility.

And the peterbilf facility.

Now, maybe none of -- not one authorize things alone might not

have made it unsatisfactory for residential.

But put them all together, and

plus the traffic issue we have

raised, that the 14 houses would

not face us up to the traffic signal level and let alone pay

for traffic signal which this property is going to have to do.

That is what makes it extremely unattractive to the residential

developers. >>

>> they could be rezoned so there are smaller-they don't have to be as large of lots.

>> we're having a devil of a

time getting it rezoned for this.

>> that's interesting. And how about the other

neighborhoods nearby, how do those neighborhoods deal with those challenges?

>> >> they are not going have all

of those issues.

>> I guess, you you go about

half a mile, a mile even a mile,

and you have so many empty restaurants, drive throughs, and

there are so much land that is blighted within almost walking

distance of this.

And I wonder since I don't know if we have a buyer why someone interested in restaurants or gas

stations, would not use the area

that is vacant very close by.

So that is an observation that I would also bring. Thank you, chair.

>> >> thank you.

>> councilmember scutchfield. >> thank you.

And I just had a couple of questions and it will be for one

of the tracys which ever can

answer.

I guess, we talked about when

we're in a zone change here and somebody talks about conditions

what conditions are we able to put on a property at this point?

>> there is three things that you can do for conditional

restrictions.

One is, conditions on the use,

one is buffering conditions. And the other which doesn't

apply in this situation is if you have an historic overlay

zone, you can put restrictions on architectural type of

features but that doesn't apply. So really just the two in this

instance. >>

>> is that through or ordinance or krs?

>> it is through krs. >> okay.

And, I guess, what is the step, what are the decisions that have

happened at the next level? what do we usually decide at the

development level that we cannot decide here? >>

>> well, they'll talk about

things like, access, access points, the traffic flow around,

and inside of the development, they'll talk about signage

probably.

They'll look at the floor area,

and the number of occupants -- well, the number of users that

would be on that and the parking. So, and there will be a lot of

different divisions divisions that will be

weighing in within their expertise at that time when that comes with its -- with the final

development plan. >> >> the development zone is

through the ordinances. >> >> okay.

>> okay.

>> >> I think that's all that I have right now.

>>

>>>> I have a question or two also, tracy. And I want if you would go back

to the map. So, we've talked about the urban

service boundary and where it -- the line runs.

Can you on that same map show us

the section a, section a and b

of the small area. Where is the defining line on

that map?

>>

>> the transitional zone. Yes.

>> I think that the staff's

interpretation the transitional

zone is the end of the corridor

here, to where the paris pike

overlay starts, that whole mile and a half plus, would be

considered the transitional area.

And, within that transitional area, there is the urban service

boundary, corner this try amongle and everything from this

line, to where the paris pike

overlay starts, would be the

transitional area where we would expect the large lots, estate

lots and agricultural uses.

>> and the lots, that are now

agricultural.

>> they are single family residential zone.

R1b and d and then r1b, past the

country club actually. There are a few lots that are

already r-1b.

>> at the moment, if someone were interested in selling any

of that property, and developing it, the small area plan says the

default position is that stays r1b, is that correct?

>> the accommodates the large

lot and I think that r1b and a, are two that accumulate large

lot development.

>> they don't have -- but they have lot size protection at this

moment.

>> yes. >> given the planning that we have in place.

>> and the existing zones. Yes.

>> there has been some question

about within the how one side is developed and the other side is

not, did that have an impact on

the small area plan.

>> I think it did the small area

plan looked at land uses along

the entire corridor. But when they drew the boundary

of where the corridor commission

would consider future development, they did exclude

the area across paris pike from here. The area that was already under development.

The joyland bowl, those properties were already developed at that time.

So they did not, I think, did

not need the paris pike corridor

commission to further consider them. >> just so I'm sure that I

understand that means that those

properties that had already been

developed, essentially were not included. They were left as is.

>> because the main point was

about the view shed. Par paris pike was all about the

view shed so when you were flying from this intersection

you and looked to your left, you

drive toward paris, you already saw commercial urban development

so the view shed had already been changed.

So there was not really a point protecting it.

>> I see. >>

>> I think three nor questions and that should be hopefully

everything that I have until --

Ms. Zimmerman, you stated that, in your discussion you

said it is relative intense development. You could explain what you mean by that.

>> generating the type of traffic that would be required

to install a traffic signal.

But, you could put to kind of

generate the similar amount of traffic, to meet the traffic

signal, you would need more land to better accommodate larger

office or apartments. >> correct mow if I misstate

this, so you're saying that, the

need for the stoplight would be

based on the relative intense -- relative intense development, is that a fair statement?

>> yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Y all right, thank you. >> yes.

>> thank you.

>> and I know that the lady, the

homeowner of the 2330 is here, I believe. And yes, ma'am.

And so, I was going to ask the lady if they wouldn't mind, do

you just have a residence on

that property and do you have

any horses or any farm, and if you wouldn't mind, the lady in

the green if you wouldn't mind speaking on her behalf.

>> >> I don't want to imposition you.

>> yes, my name is catharine

perkins and she does not have horses, she has has two -- two

and a half acres. She used to race raise dogs and

has a family pet now. Gardens and just --

>> just a single family residence. >> yes.

>> single family home built in 1910.

>> yes, ma'am, thank u and then

the owner of 2350. 2350 paris pike?

No.

Do you know if the owner of 2350, at that residence has

horses?

>> yes, he did. >> and I'm asking him if he

would come to the microphone and

answer my question, please.

>> do you know if they have horses and residences.

>> I do. >> in the red line, the subject

property, you'll see kind of a rectangle with a good deal of

trees around it and that's

Ms. Graham. And behind that, coming around

it, you'll see an l-shaped piece

of property with newly built white plank fences.

That's big nell.

And, I think that, one of the speakers previously identified

the two new purchases and one is-low purchased 12 acres and

upgraded it for a horse farm.

And the other is lane, who

purchased a one acre track, that

was formerly lived in by -- kinkade who basically lost his

front wide to the widening of paris pike but was purchaed by

owns who have redeveloped and it

brought it back into a high-value piece of property. >> all right.

>> answer to your question is. That property is owner is not

here as far as I know.

But, I am aware that he has

recently redeveloped a small

piece of property, 12 acres into a nice horse farm.

>> all right, thank you, I appreciate that. And that's all that I have. Thank you.

>> >> arm all development plans

right now theoretical coming to us?

>> >> development plans filed with

a zone change are usually preliminary development plans

and nothing is able to be built from them.

No permits are issued and no

infrastructure is built. The purpose of those development plans is to show the planning

commission and the council, by virtue of this exhibit that it

can be developed in accordance

with the proposed zone. So yes. They are very --

>> and I guess, again, coming back to the condition, when we

look at that, what are we

allowed to make a condition for

the development in that? >> you're not allowed to make

any conditions on the development plan. >> okay.

>> you can restrict the use, you can prohibit uses.

>> which they have already

agreed to several uses.

To be conditional, correct or to restrict?

>> to prohibit uses, yes, that's all in the final report. >> okay.

And, then we could say you need to have x amount of green space.

>> you can require a buffer

typically I that is phrased as a blank width landscape buffer

shall be established along and it is typically adjoining a

single family residential area.

And then, trees every so many feet.

>> okay. I mean, something, I know mine

was different. And so I guess that I'm trying

to look at the how we can, what

else we can do here, so it is

just setting that up, and then, what -- how is it enforced when

you get to the development? The development stage of it?

>> the conditional zoning restrictions that are adopt by

the council are obviously the applicant is wear of what they

are, and they are referenced in

final development plan, and, adhered to in terms of

especially in terms of buffers. >> okay.

>> so the site plan is adjusted to account for those.

>> okay, all right. Thank you.

>> councilmember evans. >> don't go anywhere.

I have a I didn't have a

question until councilmen member

scutchfield questioned about the -- the theoreticalness.

Because, what I believe normally there is someone who wants to

develop something specific on that property, and, or is it --

>> in some cases there is a user

who specifically knows what they

want. And, the intensity and the

layout and in some cases it is more theoretic.

That is nothing that requires an applicant or a property owner to

wait until they have a buyer. To seek a zone change.

So it is a mixed bag.

I would say it is probably0% no,

the user and buyer and about 40%

are doing it ahead of that decision. >> okay.

And that is the collar

clarification.

Thank you. >>

>> no one else has signed up to

speak at this point.

So, I'll last call. Seeing none.

Declare the hearing closed.

And, what that means is that, at this point there is no new

evidence to be entered.

This is a time for council to

deliberate, and to offer motions about the findings of fact first.

And then about the zone change

itself. I'll open the floor for comments

from council and/or motionsen councilmember james brown.

>> thank you, vice mayor. I would say that, I thank

everybody for coming out and

giving their opinion on this zone change and sharing facts,

whether opposed or in favor of. I think these zone changes are

hard decisions for all of us as councilmembers.

I think that, it makes it

especially hard when we have a large con continue jensen identify residents, neighborhood

folks that are affected by the zone change.

But, I will say about this one

in particular, I don't have a large -- I represent a large portion of this community but I do represent some of the

neighbors that are affected by the zone change that are here

today. And I'm familiar with this corridor.

I lived on rogers road when I was in high school, and I live

off of broadway now and travel paris pike quite a bit so I'm

real familiar with a lot of the traffic challenges in the

situations that exist on that corridor. And I think this development,

what it moves for ward or not,

some of the issues on that corridor, are still there and

have to be addressed one way or

the other whether it is from the corridor commission or from the

state or the department of transportation.

but, there are some serious

concerns on that corridor. I don't see this development

after it moves forward as a destination where people will go

out of their way, and come to it

and call I think it could be

something that could be a convenience as far as an amenity for the people that travel down

that road on the daily basis.

So, I will say that, and it does

move forward, there is an opportunity here to possibly create a barrier or to increase

the buffer between the residents

that will be impacted, and maybe also an opportunity to end hans

the street frontage as far as beautification. Maybe a stone fence could be

constructed between the road and

the tension basin to enhance the way that, that property looks

and presents itself now.

So, you know, that is all the

comments that I have. I think these are not easy

decisions to make, but, I think that we're in these positions to

make them and I hope that our constituents understand that we

think that we plan and are doing

what we think is best for our whole community. And the neighbors affected.

So thank you. Thank you, vice mayor.

>> thank you. Councilmember hanssen.

>>

>> thank you, vice mayor. And I want to thank everyone

that is here and I think, I

always have a respect for side

of the fence that you're on. I think that, we care a great

deal about what where we live.

So, for you to come and set here

and listen, I think that it is commendable.

Now, I will also say that I

married a former paris citizen,

so, traveled that road, many,

many, many times, and I felt

like, when the improvements were finally made, which it was an

extremely dangerous road, it was -- there were people killed there probably at least once or

twice a month it seemed. When the improvements took

place, there were parts of fayette county to me that were

left out, so it is this part

that we're talking about tonight.

So, I think that, there's huge challenges with this particular

property. But there is, like councilmember

brown said, there is other

challenges with the inside urban series boundary.

Fayette county side of this corr

do it needs attention just like for -- and paula mentioned it

earlier, and we fight every day to preserve that.

But I think that in this case,

it is different than versailles

road and there is really no development there.

This triangle of property is

bound by paris pike, it is bound

by railroad tracks. And, there is a beginning and an

end. I sees this this as at the end

of the commercial and the

beginning with the next property.

So, we currently -- it is vacant land.

But I can't imagine that, anyone

would want to put residential

property on that.

So, my thought is to support this zone change with particular

restrictions that would allow to protect the lady's property on

the other side. And, I would in the future

support improvements to this roadway.

But, on both sides of paris pike, you have the curve on the

other side too.

So, it is commercial.

And with the curb there, it was

it is commercial.

And so I just -- I don't see

that much of a problem with this. And that's all of my comments. Thank you.

>> thank you. Councilmember lamb.

>> thank you, vice mayor.

>> I appreciate everybody coming oming oming omin we allow everybody to come in this chamber and voices are heard.

And it is very important that you all are allowed to do that

because that's how we make our

decisions. I understand both side and we're

getting ready to be faced with really tough decisions.

Without expanding the urban

service boundary, we're identifying our redevelopment within our urban service

boundary. Wich means that we're going to

have to work with the

neighborhoods very, very closely, and in order to know

what we can do with the property

or we'll have to expand the urban service boundary.

Those are tough, tough decisions and we're faced with that now.

I get precedent and I feel for the neighbors out there. And I actually when I first

moved to lexs on the I lived on

elmwood drive so I drove that downtown for the first probably

six years, I lived in lexington.

So, I know it very well. We have to know if going forward

anyone, as far as setting precedent, if shall there is

another zone change that comes

along, say if 2330 or 2350 decided to develop, it has to go

through the same process. I don't know if I'll still be

`around on the council or not but the decisions still have to be

made by the council at that time

so I sat for 20 years and

watched the farms on nicholasville and kept trying to

develop it and then, they finally got the right zoning

category and I have one of those signals intersect hundreds where

you have got a light, signal right after another on nicholas

road. And so far it is not bad.

You know. So, he would get read I do make

the decision, we hope you'll

give this the same respect. And I don't know what will

happen but this is definitely a

tough decision. And, I see where the property

has been in family since 1967 it looked like.

And so, I'm surprised it had not

been developed before now. I appreciate everybody's thoughts tonight and we'll see

where it goes but I want us to know that we can continue having

these conversations, and, these are the times to have them and

learn the process so we can all have those conversations, before

we get to the eleventh and 12th hour.

So, I appreciate and it we'll see where it goes, thank you.

>>

>> thank you, councilmember gibbs. >> thank you, vice mayor and thank you again.

You don't need to hear it again but it has been a long night.

And this is a really difficult decision for me.

I really feel for the family who opens the property, I understand

they are 51 years and would like

to turn it over, but, I'll vote against this proposal and I

can't tell you what to do your property but I would love to see

it have greater density and maybe people would be interested

in it but we have a real

pressure for residential, I can't -- I don't see the

pressures for gas stations and

so on, so, I don't make sensor

folks to develop this property in this way, and I'm not convinced that it makes sense

for the whole community so I'll vote against it.

And that's -- thank you.

>>

>> thank you, vice mayor. Obviously I represent the 12th

district which holds all of our signature horse farms which I

have said over and over again, that's what distinguishs our

community.

So, I'm looking here at a list of 13, there are even more.

There is the signatures to from probably some of our very top

horse farms that go out there.

And, I respect the wishes but I also would ask that everybody

looks at the big picture. You know, what we're looking at

is the gas station, and a fast food restaurant and sitdown restaurant.

And we're going to go ahead and

open those doors appreciate all

being here and sharing some good information.

And, that's what it is all about. Thank you, vice mayor.

>> thank you, councilmember evans?

>>

>> this is a difficult situation

for the land owners. Because you do have a tough

property and I appreciate that.

But I also appreciate and quite

frankly, I think that it would trump your situation is that I

think that, even though we have

got a property that's clearly

not supposed to be used for that purpose, I'm right next it to, I

think that it is clear that, this property was supposed to be

the beginning of this corridor and was put in it specifically.

We heard the testimony across

the street, which is my

district, clearly, that was for

development, and, it had been of -- that process already started and west when you look

at the maps that we have, you're right. The intention was for it to be

the residential or at least the

beginning of that green space.

And it puts new a tough situation. I appreciate that I really do.

But I do drive broadway and

paris pike. And there is nothing but greenery.

But once you get to that specific spot and and it is

across the interstate, it is nothing but green space with the

exception of the curb that's not

supposed to be there.

So I do find it difficult to

vote in favor of this. Especially knowing what is next it to that we don't know what it

will be. I would feel a lot more

comfortable if I had a better idea of what was actually going

to be there. But we have got properties

across the street that, that's the concern of the neighborhood

is that, you put a gas station up there, what's it going to

look like in two years? Five years?

Ten years? Because that's what happene on

the back end of town. And we need to look at those

kind of properties and those

blighted properties, and, quite frankly, my personal opinion is

that I wish you could buy those and spruce them up before we go

to another gas station. But, that is the problem that I

think that lexington has created

throughout the years.

So, I can't be in favor of this

as it is right now. So, that would be my leaning but

I truly do sympathize with the situation andth the property.

It is a tough property I do appreciate that.

>> thank you. Councilmember smith. >>

>> thank you, vice mayor. >> I would like thank all of you

for coming out and sharing their opinions even though they May be different.

I'm very familiar with the north end corridor and I used to live

over there I understand the

traffic.

It is a tough decision to make.

Changing the zoning, the own

hear the right to move forward,

and to try his best.

But it is very difficult that residential for that land to be

developed as residential as it

seems, at this point in time.

As difficult as it May seem, I'm

somewhat leading to the change

of zoning.

I think in the future, that May be the best way to go.

It May be difficult to see that now. But lexington has changed and

different quarters around town and this look like it May be a

possibility of another change

but I wish everyone the best. Thank you.

>>

>> thank you.

At the moment I have got no to speak and I have a comment.

And then, I am going to ask for

a motion on the findings of

fact. I'll first coke what everybody

else said about appreciating the effort that people have put into

this on both sides. Part of the way I look at this

is the question, the really key

question, which is whether this

is, in fact, opening the door to adverse development. Is there a domino effect.

And I served on a planning commission before I served on

council. And I saw a number of zone

change requests which I thought,

in fact, did lead to a domino effect because of what they were

adjacent to. I don't believe this is the case

here. I understand the concern and if

I thought approving this zone change would put in jeopardy

anything about the corridor, or anything about the horse farms

that line it, I would not be able to support it but when i

look at the facts, I did not see that.

As I said, I understand the

concern, and certainly, the sappest thing to do I guess is

to say no, we don't want to have this zone change.

But our job is to look at what's proposed, the land is being used

for, and what we think is the best use, for that particular

piece of land, and how that fits

into the larger question of how this entire county is

developing. I sigh the ajay center

properties have a lot of -- at a third of an achier and that

seems to me adequate. Now, it is not 100% guaranteed

and there are no 100% guarantees but it seems to me this is a

very specific piece of land, and it is zoned right now in

particular way, and it has a

better use.

So, I so despite my long standing concern for

preservation of property and

support of the horse farms, on

balance I'll have to favor the zone change.

So, I would entertain a motion at this point, if someone is

prepared to make a motion. >> I make a motion that we

approve the finding of fact as submitted by the planning commission.

And that we adopt the finding of fact as they were stated. So moved.

>> >> second.

>>

>> and I'll take the chair back.

We have a motion and a second.

Discussion on the motion, councilmember james brown.

>> would like to make a motion to amend your motion.

Can I do that before we vote on it? >> yes, sir.

>> >> >> I would like to make a motion

to add an additional zone and restriction to include a

landscape buffer, of 20 feet

shall be establish along the northeast property boundary,

trees shall be planted every 30 feet, and selected from the

large species list and the

planning manual.

>> so moved. >> a motion and a second? A motion and a second.

Discussion on the amendment. >> I think it is late and I'm

getting confused.

I would was wanting to know, does anyone have any idea what

buffer would be proposed?

Mr. Murphy would you have any idea if this development took

place, what kind of buffer would

be proposed? I would like staff to weigh in.

Do we know? >> currently on the preliminary

development plan, which is not

necessarily -- it is not what will be built but it is shown as

a five foot buffer.

>> do do you have the space or what the distance is?

I understand that there is a railroad there.

But there is a railroad the entire behind the railroad

tracks on broadway as well so I'm just curious.

>> the railroad is also elevated that location so providing a

buffer is less effective?

The railroad is about ten feet higher than the grade of the property?

>> okay.

>> so that's number that I

needed and how high. Okay, all right, thank you. >> thank you. >>

>> further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor, this

is now the councilmember lamb.

>> thank you. The buffer and I guess this

would be question for tracy and

law, once this buffer is set on

this zone change, does it stay with the property?

>> yes.

>> forever and ever? >> yes.

Unless it is removed.

>> or rezoned or something, something else. >> it would -- yes.

It would have to be removed by an official action through this

body since you all put it on there. >> okay.

All right. >> and you know, it would go

through like, it would go through a process like a zone

change basically to remove a conditional zoning restriction. >> okay.

>> otherwise it stays on there. >> okay.

And, councilmember brown, when you said can you repeat the part

about the trees that you -- or the -- >> yes, ma'am.

Trees shall be planted every 30

feet and selected from the large

species list in the planning

manual. >>

>> so now my question to one of

the two tracys, when --

referring to the large plant,

what size trees are those? not the dig in the weeds but I

need to know.

>>

>> when we're referring to the trees, yes.

>> they typically have a mature height of 40 to 60 feet.

>> 40 to 60 feet.

>> so usually, oaks and maples. >> okay. >>

>> and others. >> thank you very much. >> thank you.

>> all right. Thanks.

>> >> further discussion?

>>

>> I guess, I was wondering can

we tell them to plant trees? >> yes.

>> as part of the buffer. Okay.

>> and so, I mean, I know that we can tell them not to remove

trees. >> no, we can --

>> how will we enforce that?

>>

>> it will be noted as part of this zone change.

So when the development plan

comes back, the staff will be

looking for that to be shown on the final development plan, and

if it is not, it would have to be added.

>> okay so that is next step.

Okay.

>> thank you. Last call.

On the amendment, all in favor, please say aye.

Any opposed?

If we can have a screen, we'll vote electronically on the

amendment.

One more vote.

Can you check and see. speak for yourself.

[Laughter] That amendment passes and that

brings us back to now the motion

to accept finding of fact as amended. Further discussion on the

motion?

>> vice mayor, just for

clarification, you have amended

by adding a conditional zoning restriction. That's really not going to be

part of the findings, it is

going to be part of the ordinance when you take the vote

on that. If that makes sense. >> so you're --

>> so the discussion was more appropriate if we get to

approving the zone change itself?

>> it is fine, the order that you did it in, but when it is

really not an amendment to the findings, it is an amendment to

the ordinance.

So when you vote on the ordinance, it is as amended.

>> so we don't -- yes, okay, thank you.

So we're back to finding of fact and the motion to approve

finding of fact. Again, further discussion on the

motion? I think for this we'll need an

electronic.

I think this require as roll call vote. >> yes, sir.

>> if you'll call the roll. >> Mr. James brown.

>> yes.

>> >> Ms. --

>> you can put the screen soup

people can see the vote.

>> Ms. Evans. >> no.

>> Mr. Gibbs. >> no.

>> Ms. Henson.

>> Mr. Kay. >> yes.

>> Ms. Lamb. >> yes.

>> Ms. Ploman.

>> no. >> Ms. Scutchfield. >> no.

>> Mr. Smith. >> yes.

>> and Mr. Fred brown. >> yes.

>> that vote reflects the passage of the motion.

And I believe that since it affirms the planning commission

recommendation, we do not need 8 votes to pass that, is that correct?

>> that's correct.

>> >> thank you.

>> that's finding of fact and

now we have to vote on the zone

change itself.

Is there a motion to approve?

Have a motion and a second.

Discussion on the motion. >> council member evans.

>> I thought that you said we

May have put the cart before the horse. And in our first vote.

>> you probably did procedurally

but, it is okay because you voted on adding a conditional

zoning restricttion that you voted on.

Then, you all went back and took a vote on adopting the finding

of fact as they were recommended to by the planning commission. When you are voting on findings

of fact, as recommended by the planning commission, it does not

require vote of 8 it only require as majority.

If you were going to change them, or disapprove them, it

would require a vote of 8. So, now, that you have adopt

those finding of fact, you have voted on the adding the

conditional zoning trey stricttion. You're now voting on the

ordinance as amended?

It will reflect that conditional zoning trey stricttion.

The conditional zoning restrictions are not reflected

in the title but it will be put in the body of the ordinance.

>> so we're voting on --

>> the zone change as amended. >> with the buffer.

>> I understand that.

I just -- I feel like we messed this up every time, and I feel

like there is a better way to do

this. Because, okay, yeah, I

understand what we're doing but,

I guess maybe in future, if you would see that we're maybe

putting the cart before the horse, if perhaps you might be

able to help to stop this so it is not -- because it is

confusing to me right now and

I'm sure it is confusing to the audience.

So, okay, now I understand what we're doing.

>> I fell like you said that we were out of order at some point and we can try to fix that next time.

>> >> any further discussion on the

motion?

Seeing none, clerk, if you would put up the screen and call the roll.

>> Mr. James group. >> yes. >> Ms. Evans.

>> Mr. Gibbs. >> no.

>> Ms. Henson. >> yes.

>> Mr. Kay. >> yes.

>> Ms. Lamb. >> yes.

>> Ms. Ploman. >> no.

>> Ms. Scutchfield. >> yes.

>> Mr. Smith. >> yes.

>> and Mr. Fred brown. >> yes.

>> >> again, I believe that the

rules that vote reflects passage of the motion.

And I believe that the last

thing that I would like to do is

again, thank everyone for coming, and providing your views

and working on this, and I hope that you understand the council

is trying to do the best that it can for the entire community.

Is there anything else from the law department, staff?

Anything else?

If not, I would entertain a motion to adjourn. >> adjourn.

>> motion to adjourn. Is is there a second? >> second.

>> without objection, we stand adjourned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned.

ned. Ned. Ned. Ned.

Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned.

Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. ned. Ned.

Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned.

Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned.

Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned.

Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned.

Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned.

Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned.

Ned. Ned. Ned. Ned. ned.