this is our version of March mad ness. I would like to welcome all of you in the audience. I would like to welcome our staff and our commission members we have a special guest, Mr. Frank cooper. Mr. Cooper, we are delighted to have you. We hope to do you honor and good by virtue of our deliberations today. Thank you, imagination ladies and gentlemen Mr. Chair I move for approval of the minutes of the February 22-, 2018. >> we did not circulate minutes. >> it's on here. >> we did not circulate minutes. >> well then never mind. >> well, we are off to a good start here. >> no minutes to approve. We'll tabling care of that for the day. Postponements and/or withdrawals >> good afternoon, nick nichol son on behalf of overbrook farm. We request a one-month postponement to the April 26 meeting. Item 3a on paim 4. We are working with staff and neighbors on the development plan and hope to present next month. >> anyone in the audience like to address this particular issue of postponement request. If not we are ready for a motion >> I move for postponement of pln-mar-18-2 overbrook farm to the April 26 meeting. >> moved by Mr. Frank penn, second that we postpone pln-mar- 18-2 until April 26 or one month. Please vote when it comes up on your screens. Motion carries. Thank you. See you later. Westchester 836 llc, we request a one-month postponement to the April 26 hearing and the reasons , two reasons, one, we are still working with the staff about some changes to the building we are proposing. Ultimately that could change the zone we are requesting. Additionally, the office of the affordable housing was supposed to meet and discuss our project and they've postponed that meeting until April so we want to be heard after that meeting occurs. >> Mr. Carter. Anyone in the audience like to speak to this particular agenda item? Anyone on the commission? If not we'll entertain a motion for postponement for one month. >> I move for postponement of winchester 836 pln-mar-17-41 until the April 26 meeting along with the associated variances. >> it has been moved with the associated variances and the development plan. >> that's okay with you so it has been moved and seconded that we postpone pln-mar-17-41 winchester 836 plan, the zone change proposal, the variances as well as the development plan. Any other discussion on the motion? Hearing none please vote when it comes up on your screens. Motion carries. Thank you. >> somebody in the audience is trying to get your attention. >> yes ma'am. >> is there a chance for folks who live in the neighborhood to discuss this... >> let me ask you this. Is it... >> the winchester llc. >> it has been postponed. >> so the next meeting is when we will talk about that? >> yes, April 26. >> thank you. >> I took off time to be able to hear it and I don't think I can do it again in April. Is there something I can do about that now? I feel this is a waste, we have a huge turnout of people who came to talk about this issue and and it was supposed to be presented and now that's not going to happen. >> I left my job to come speak today. >> yes ma'am, you know, when I made the motion, when I first openedded, I asked if anyone wanted to object to the postponement... >> I'm sorry, we can't hear. >> I'm sorry. At the beginning of the meeting at the beginning of this particular activity, I ask if there was anyone in the audience that would like to object to the ... >> I didn't hear him say that we can't hear anything back here. >> I'll bring it back to the committee as such. The committee is the one that voted on the postponement. The motion has passed and has already been approved for post postponement. Does anyone have any objection to going forward? >> they can write in. >> Mr. Penn? >> I just want to speak for myself. The rest of the commission can do whatever they want to do. We could rescind the vote or we could ask you to write or email your objections to this, special the ones that cannot come back. The applicant and the staff are still working on this, so you really want them to keep working on it. So my suggestion would be if you have things, points that you want to make, rather than open this back up and have a hearing on it because that development plan May or May not look like what it looks like today. So I would suggest that you send your suggestions in to the staff , you can email or mail them to them or you can call them. And then have a representative for those that can come back because a month can change the plan. You May be talking about something totally different a month from now. >> yes ma'am. >> contact information that would be most useful to that purpose pleases? >> for the winchester? >> yeah, so we can... >> Chairman Wilson? Mr. Martin is going to hand out his cards to anybody that is interested our office also receives emails. Ma'am, our office receives email s at a planning mail box which can be accessed off our website. Planning mail box at lexingtonky .Gov and tom will have direct contact because he is handing out his card for furthered information. >> okay. We shall move on. The first hearing that we'll have will be on page 3. Staff will be ready in a moment. Our fist item is page 3, a request by off season llc, the case number for this is pln-mar- 18-1, and they are requesting a rezoning this afternoon from a single family residential r-1 c zone to a plan ned neighborhood residential r-3 zone. The total acreage for the site is 2.0 9 acres with the gross including right of way, it's 2.6 acres. This encompasses three parcels on tates creek road. The proposal is to construct 14 town homes and associated off street parking with the town homes. The subject property is located between rebecca drive and albany road on the west side of tates creek road surrounded by other single family residential zones with a few exception seption. To the north in a single family residential zone, a church, the tbreek doax church and to the east, across tates creek road are two larger churches. Immanuel baptist and tates creek christian. But most of this side of tates creek road on the east side is family residential and on the west side of tates creek is family residential. In the east is more institution al with the church uses 6789 we have 28 pieces of communication in opposition for the planning commission to review. You can see two of the lots are currently vacant and that would be 3009 and 3013 tates creek road and on 321 there is an existing single family residential structure previously used for a very small church recently. The church has access to tates creek, the single family home has a round driveway, two access points on tates creek road for these lots. The applicant believes the request for rezoning is in agreement with the comprehensive plan. They did cite the 2018 comprehensive plan goals and objectives as well as the 2013 comprehensive plan goals and objectives and the staff cited the plan, there were minor changes to the mission statement and we have highlighted those in blue, in essence the mission statement is to provide for flexible yet focused planning guidance to ensure equitable development of our community's resources and structure that enhances our quality of life and fosters regional planning and economic development. In doing so we want to promote successful and accessible neighborhoods and protect our environment as well as our unique bluegrass. The goals and objectives that the applicant cited and the staff agrees are applicable to the requested rezoning start in theme a growing successful neighborhoods and too became part of the justification for the applicant. The first is to expand housing choices. Specifically that calls out develop developing mixed use or housing near employment and commercial areas that address all needs for our community and then in addition to that, to support growing successful neighborhoods, they also cited goal 2 which is support infill and redevelopment throughout our urban service boundary as a strategic component of growth and objective a goes into a little more detail and talks about respecting the area's context and design features. Lastly the applicant cited theme e, maintaining a balance between planning for urban uses and safeguarding our rural lands and upholding our urban service area concept. That one objective b talks about encouraging compact contiguous and mixed use sustainable development within our urban service boundary. The staff went a little further into the comprehensive plan in our staff report and mentioned in chapter 7 there is some more detail provided within that element that talks about infill sites and it breaks it down into different sized infill development, the text is relevant because it talks about infill sites that are between two and five acres and this property falls within that category and it talks about doing infill and it gave examples that would be appropriate in those situations and it included single single family -- lots and townhouses and duplexes and two dwelling units per acre density. Tates creek corridor is primar ily residential as well as the institutional uses and the applicant mentioned that there is adequate public infrastructure along the corridor to accommodate increased density. The higher density development will buffer the established neighborhood by being located along tates creek road. In that regard the higher use of townhouse use won't have to access the local roads. They'll be just simply accessing tates creek road for their use and that provides a buffer, land use buffer between the single family homes and higher intensity use along tates creek road which is the reasonable us assemblies. This is a little bit more information in terms of the 2018 comprehensive plan. There were two objects that add -- objectives that added a little more to the conversation. The first one occurs in theme a, expanding housing choice and talks about priortizing higher density and mixture of housing types within our community and then lastly in terms of up holding the usual April service -- urban service contract to maximize development on vacant land. Two of these sites are vacant but in a manner that enhances the existing form. The staff concluded that the request was in agreement with substantial agreement with our 2013 comprehensive plan and the staff recommended approval as did the zoning committee in terms of expanding housing choices, supporting infill and redevelopment and under utilized or vacant properties and the proposed towfn houses and their density are compatible with the surrounding area supported by theme a and the staff came to the conclusion that the development because it's residential in nature would be compatible and could be consider ed to respect the area's context and design features. The proposed density is higher as recommended by the comprehnsive plan than the surrounding area and the subject site is situated on a minor arterial roadway and we are trying to encourage higher densities along our corridors. Lastly, the single family attach ed dwelling units which are townhouses, the staff considers to be compattic with the surrounding zoning and land use pattern and would not de tract from the existing urban form along tates creek road and immediate vintd. The staff also found the proposal was consistent or supported by the 2018 comprehensive plan in terms of accommodating residential demand for housing in a responsible way and enhancing urban form. The staff makes this recommendation subject to approval and certification of the associated development plan which Mr. Martin will present. Happy to answer any questions about the staff. >> any questions for Miss Wade? >> Mr. Owens. >> just a comment. One of the emails, just clarification, one of these emails referencing palomar not tates creek road. >> we had quite a few combinations coming in the last few days. We'll pull that for the other case. >> okay. mr. Martin. >> Mr. Chairman, members of the planning commission. The plan you see before you is a preliminary development plan associated with the zone change and as you all are aware, should you approve this zone change,% there will be a final development plan and we would anticipated a preliminary subdivision plan on this property. And that is because, as you can see, here is tates creek road. They're proposing a full access point separated by a median at this location. They have an access easement. It serves this development with six town homes here and the remaining eight for a total of 14 in this location utilizing the access easement for circulation and you can see the guest and extra parking situated here and here at these two locations. It's a fairly straightforward two banks of town how often plan that you see before you. The proposed units, the typical units are 40 x 45. The applicant says that they will be two maybe two and a half stories tall. In r-3 you May hear some concer s about this. The maximum building height is 35 feet regardless of the unit so that's the limit and it's measured at mid gable. And by the way, in your single family home zone here, you can build a 35-foot house as well. So just wanted to make that point for you. The access again is full access. They've modified it, tried to address concerns about the set back that exists. There was also some concern about the original orientation and they had proposed a wall and it was concern about the monolithic appearance of walls along these roads and arterials that we were hoping to avoid. So with that, and those concerns , they did submit this revised plan. Now there is a platted setback of 125 feet along these lots in this section of tates creek and obviously that's a rare occurrence in our community. And it's right in here. They've shown us a line. That's the 125 feet, kind of run s right through the middle of the development. The zone would allow a 20-foot building line at this location, so they're showing this first bank of townhouses at approximately, say, 65-70 feet back off of tates creek road. Now I know there is concern about access. It's been fully reviewed. It exists. We have medians. There is a break in the median here. There is the turn lane. The people who live here will be required to make a u-turn to go back towards town towards U.K. Anybody coming that direction, they're going to have to do the same thing. I mean that's a given. That's what exists now for anybody who would be living on these lots. And again we are going to have the stated additional 14 units. No traffic study was determined to be necessary. It May not be an optimum situation. It is a situation that exists in various parts of our community. With that, you can see the conditions on your agenda. The total lot coverage by the way is 37,200 square feet for these units. The standard sign-off conditions for the preliminary plan, a couple of other conditions de note the height in feet. The staff likes to know how tall the building is even though there May be a zoning limit. Sometimes there is not a limit but we want to know what they're going to be. We like to know the typical lot size they're proposing and, again, we would anticipate you'll see a preliminary subdivision plan that will have that information as well. The internal pedestrian system, woo we will like to resolve that at the next stage of the development should you approve the zone change, with an internal system. I know you are well aware of staff's concerns about internal systems so people can walk and get out to the right of way as necessary and again storm water management. Storm water management was reviewed. This is a preliminary plan. This is a design issue that will be resolved with the final development plan. Currently there is a basin in front of the greek orthodox church. This is two acres. It will be anticipated they'll have to address storm water in some fashion on this property and that will be... There is a lot of green space as you can see and that would be resolved at the time of the final development plan and then last condition 10, they will need to denote the 125-foot setback shall be resolved set of the final development plan, preliminary subdivision plan as you are all aware, maybe not all , but they cannot build off this plan. So when we have a conflict like a building line, it is very common practice, as you are aware, to just highlight that conflict and then resolve it owe a plan that they can build off of. That would be the appropriate time for that setback to be re solved relative to its impact on this proposed plan. Your subdifficult subdivision committee recommended approval of this plan and I'm happy to answer any questions you May have for staff. >> any questions for Mr. Martin? Mr. Owens. >> thank you, Mr. Chair. Tom, as far as you highlighted, I don't think you went into much detail as far as the proposed fence. Are there details as to the fence now? Height, around the development or anything? >> they have to meet the landscape ordinance and as to that detail, they've not elaborated on that. They can put up a fence and they'll have to comply with article 18. >> what is the ordinance say at the present time? >> in the front yard, I believe it's limited and it can be eight feet on the side and rear. >> thank you. They can do more if they like. >> any other questions for Mr. Martin? Applicant? >> thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. Commission, I'm dashy turner -- darby turner representing the applicant and we appreciate the time that we've spent with the staff and as you know, from, we postponed this case a month in effort to work out the development plan details and have conversations that we could with neighbors. Mr. Owens, in direct answer to your question, it's intended that a double-faced brick wall be around this entire development. I think the standards are four feet. It would be a knee wall in the front, but a six to eight-foot wall around the back and on the sides. To shield it from the neighbors. And also provide a nice wall. One of the things... We are in total agreement with the staff in terms of their recommendation and with the conditions that Mr. Martin noted and for all the reasons that tracey noted that we are basically in compliance with the comprehensive plan, not only in compliance but I think this May be the first case that comes along in terms of the new methodology or plan that has been developed through the comprehensive plan process for infill redevelopment, under utilized land along corridors. And this is exactly what this is so there will be discussions and i've seen the correspondence and it talks about precedents that this would set but it is our view that that precedent has already been set and direction already established by the, the long range planning staff indicated before you during the process, this is what the community wanted. These were the positive things that the community wanted to on a going forward basis. You all debated that, adopted those guidelines, goals and objectives, sent it on to the council. It was debated there and adopted so the precedent, it's not a precedent. It's a direction. This is how we go about developing these corridors. Now tracey indicated or excuse me, tom indicated a little bit about the development. These are 14 townhouses. Thier intended to be approximate ly 3,000 square feet each. Two-car attached garage. First floor master. All brick. Posesbly a basement. We'll check with gee yee tech and engineering to see if it is feasible. If so, there will be basements. It's going to be very generous upscale townhouses; I think in keeping with the neighborhood, and the types of structures that are there at this point. I want you to know it's not the intent to throw up cheap townhouses for U.K. Students or whatever. This is intended to be a home for the empty nesters and so forth that want to not have to take care of a large place, want to downsize but want the comfort s that they're used to in their homes. So this is what this product is designed to be. We have to go through the final development plan process, you know, again that will come into sharper focus as we get down into those engineering details. But with that, said, I will be happy to answer any questions. I know there are a number of people here to voice concerns and we certainly want to hear those. We have talked to a number of residents pro and con. We have tried to talk to the neighborhood associations but have, they have basically declined to might with us. So we did the best we could. But we are in agreement with the staff's recommendations. We are in accord and agreement with the conditions. So I'm going to, unless you all have questions of me, I'm going to sit down and we'll hear any concerns that anybody has and then I would like to respond to those. >> any questions for Mr. Turner? It is now time for the citizens to have an opportunity to voice their concern or thoughts. First of all, are there people here who are for this particular development? Are there people here who are against it? Okay. Do you all have a representative for your group to speak? I'd like the representative to speak first ashed then after your representative speaks, if you would like to come or someone would like to speak, you can come to the mic. You will be limited to three minutes. One word of thought here, if your representative says what you want them to say, there is no need of coming back and unless you just want to get your name on the record. But if it's already been said, I think we will get the idea from your representative. And if you want to add something , that would be the appropriate time to come. Is that fair enough? I think... I understand the traffic is going to be an issue but we don't need 15 people to tell us it's a traffic issue. That's not to be disrespectful, but if you want to go on record, you can still come forward and we will accommodate you. Sir. Why don't you flip a coin. This is the representative as we understand it. >> there are two. >> I am the council at the greeks orthodox church right next on the north part of it. Again, you mentioned what concerns I have from our parishioners and myself. I've been practicing physician at U.K. Now for 27 years and that's the traffic that I take from U.K. To go back to my home, which is in heartland and that is what tates creek is exactly my route. And when I read here things that is stated you know, about things that it is minor arterial roadway, I think it's a joke. I don't know what is, what defines minor... But any of you have driven this route at 5:00 or 4:00 P.M., you know what this road is about. Yeah, I go to church quite often and when I go to our church, even though we have access to tates creek from our church, I never dare this time of the day, to slow down the whole traffic as I'm going south on tates creek and have all the cars that is zooming right behind me and I'm telling you, if that's going to happen with the 14 houses sitting there and people coming back to their houses, you are go for example to have every day quite few accidents there just to slow down so they can turn to their apartment and back up all the traffic. When I turn, I go right away on rebecca because it's easy to turn there and I would not slow anything independent me. I think it's a major concern because I see it every day. Second thing I have is about this wall. I don't know esthetics. Drive through tates creek. It's all beautiful, big trees, open landscape and here we are going to have an enclosed like a jail institution or whatevr it is going to be right in the mi will of all this. Again, and that wall is pretty close to our church. So I don't know if you have enough buffer of landscaping between the church and this wall that's going to be standing. And that is a concern our parishioner has. And third point I would say, and this is really, I'm not an expert in that area but let's say you approve the change to r-3. Is there anything to prevent them later on the building would not be a 14 townhouses but it would be, I don't know, how many student housing that you can have and rent them for the student that are down the street from this property? Again, I'm not an expert and I don't want to pretend to be. So I think these are the major issues that we have with this proposal. I beg of you to look at it carefully before you make your final decision, Mr. Chairman and ladies and gentlemen. >> I'm steven white, one of the council members at large with the neighborhood association. We are the neighbrhood directly behind this piece of property on tates creek road. First, if we could, we would like to enter into evidence, I'm not really certain what the proper term is. We polled the neighborhood of approximately 400 houses and we also have responses of 255 opposed, five support and two un decided so in here cards with every single person... >> can you get that information? There is quite a bit more opposition than first indicated by the 28 emails that you all received and just to mention that, I think a lot of people would be surprised to find out that their personal correspondence with the planning commission, was it shared with these gentleman that are representing the applicant. I mean I don't think people would know that that is done. I don't know. That seems, I wasn't aware that that would happen. So when we asked people to send their comments and objections, we thought that would be entered for the staff's consideration and for your all's consideration not the applicant's consideration. So several things I would like to start off with. In going through the very many justifications for this project, this is an infill project. The lot that is infilling, the infill lot starting this whole project that is getting this all started here is not even an acre it's two lots that have never had, to my knowledge, to anyone else in the neighborhood's knowledge, any attempt to build houses on it and it's an r-1c. Residential housing. It is part of the original land owner's yard when it was sub divided. Before the church bought the land of lot 3001. There was a single house there that had an enormous yard. Those were the first four lots on the street. The church bought the first two lots. Tore down the house, so these lots have only appeared vaik lots that have drugs and abandon ed cars and heroin needles. This was a nicely manicured lawn that was clearly taken care of and still is to this day. But in 2010 was the first time anyone would have recognized this as a vacant lot that we need to infill. The original land owner, he kept hold of the four lots and then in '69 he sold to it charlie moore. charlie moore kept it for 45 years so then it got sold to the gentleman who has it now. He has previously tried to have ... He was in some relationship with the church across the way where they tried to put a parking lot in with the board of adjustment which we fought against that because we didn't want the church to get a foot hold across the street. Again these are all residential neighborhoods. And as we all know, yes, there are institutions but it's a residential neighborhood that they have a conditional use. They are the exception not the rule. This street is a corridor. Is it the same level of corridor as nicholasville road or richmond? It really is not. It is no more than four lanes at any one time and it is a much lesser road. So basically the gentleman buys the house next door. Now we are justifying the destruction of our neighborhood fabric so that he can get up to two acres, is the second lot where the new hope church is. That's a beautiful house. It epitomizes the houses through there. Beautiful stone. Really nice house. No reason it still can't be a house. Now we are potentially allowing the destruction of neighborhood fabric to justify this infill. It's not two acres of vacant land. I don't even think it's one acre it's barely under one acre. This gentleman owns this land and he is perfectly entitled to do something with it. This is america. I don't want to take this man's rights away but as a neighborhood... And this is just our neighborhood. Is there anybody else from anybody other neighborhood association? We received all kinds of information from other neighborhood associations as well. The justification for doing some , the precedent, that's the precedent that we are concerned about the comprehensive plan justifies so many of these things, you know. And that's great but they don't even have the two acres really. There is not two acres of vacant land right now. There is only one and sights not even one. So that whole justification, I'm not so sure that works. So we can talk about that or we can discuss that or something at some other day. But the precedent that that sets for this individual is he gets an r-3, tears the house down and now we have two vacant lots. How long do we have those two vacant lots? We had a whole downtown for how many years? This gentleman gets this land re zoned to r-3, it becomes much more valuable. Should this comprehensive plan, this preliminary development plan, yes it's just a proposal. He is saying he is going to do these townhouses but should there be another development plan that's really more like a consolidated plat which is really just these four lots with an open for sale sign on it?% you know, that's really a good chance that that is what this is about. This gentleman, then the guy next door sells his house. Well, you granted me r-3 when I tore this down. The precedent is there. That's the precedent we are talk ing about. It's not so much against the townhouses, it's against what else could be there we saul... Every time I talk to tom or tracey, they say this is just a dlim development plan. Exaaccountly. There is no prove that this gentleman intndz to do this does he have the financial wherewith all to build almost $9 million of proposed townhouses, which... And in their justification letter, they're saying the units will be 650,000 to $700 how,000 units. That's not fitting with the character of our neighborhood. Our neighborhood has everything that the comprehensive plan says that we need as a goal. We don't need the comprehensive plan in our neighborhood and I'm not talking about glendover. I'm talking about tates creek road between nicholasville. We can walk to the grocery store we can walk to the arboretum. We have buss. There is tons of developments% that have worked quite well on this road, starting chevy chase. And come out and go out of town, you know. We have developments, business developments with grocery stores , tons of r-3 townhouses, apartments, already. if there is a guy who works at burger king, he can live in our neighborhood. He can apord to live in our neighborhood. There are empty nesters. There are places for them to go. There is no shortage of townhouses in your neighborhood.% just behind immanuel baptist church, there are a ton of house s like that already. And fitting the justifying it with the comprehensive plan is one thing, but it, you can just say that it fits the character of the neighborhood cht it does not fit the character of our neighborhood. At one of the committee meetings , I think it was on March 1, one of the individuals representing the applicant talk ed about how it matched the depth of the houses from the street that are the houses on the backside of glendover where old mount tabor comes in at the speedway there. That's backyard fence is right up on the road and the sidewalk. Again, that is the exception, not the rule that you typically find on this really quite beautiful road, starting, you know, downtown like chevy chase and coming out. You have residents, church and schools. Mainly residents. Eats a res residential road. It is not a major corridor. Do you think tates creek road is like nicholasville road? I would think that you would probably agree that it's not. It is a road that has almost every item on the comprehensive plan in place. They will take away green space to build this. Those trees out front are probably going to be sacrificed. Their roots will be potentially covered by the pavement, retention basin will be covered. And the green space programmed going to be landscape buffer? Little trees like we see at every parking lot? I don't think that nachs the neighborhood. I think this thing should be... Not I, sorry. We as a whole, as a neighborhood , think this development is just a little too much so much so that the desire to change it to r-3 is too open ended. This gentleman is proposing a development plan for townhouses. Good for him. Why is he requesting r-3? Why don't we offer this gentleman an r-1-t? The neighborhood is less opposed to the townhouses as we are what happens if these don't get built if this gentleman folds, has an accident, has some financial issues, gets divorced or whatever and he walks away from the project, you know, the intention to do this completely goes with him and we are the ones, us citizens, every single lexingtonian that drives on this road, has to deal with the traffic. , which when I was driving around it today looking at the noifltion sign, I almost got rear ended doing a u-turn. We are all the ones that will have to live with this. And it being changed to a zone that is r-1t at least lox this gentleman's -- locks this gentleman's goals. everything meets the comprehensive plan. There are no hardships asked of this gentleman. If he intends 20 do townhouses, by all means, let's do townhouse s but let's not, you know, try to let this gentleman use the system to grain a higher property value and walk off with that sale and allow another gentleman to come in and use the sis system that we all have work ed together to produce this for completely other reason. We as the people in this neighborhood and I'm on next door, too. So I have the conversation going with lands down, merrick, shade land, south southern heights as well this system should work for everybody. And r-13 is so open, that's what we are worried about the most. This keeps happening down the street and somebody wants to re zone it for a business and a convenient store which is unnecessary, again all that stuff is well in the neighborhood within walking distance even. No more walgreen's or anything is needed. So those were some of the and was one of the conditions we were wondering could be consider ed, input on any next design steps as well and maintain the setback as much as possible. I heard some conversations in one of the meetings on March 1 nat the 150 st. Back was either expired... I don't know I hasn't personally witnessed or witness ed the evidence of that. They've pulledded it back a little bit from where they were before. Without the -- but the church that was built, they honored the setback. I think most people I will feel that 14 town homes is a lot. Would eight work or maybe town homes that are not so massive. They were med saying they were a story and a half and now tom says two and a half stories tall . Every time something changes. I asked they last meeting the jus if I caitionz letter be revised to represent what this is. What this describes is a very different thing from what is here now. So I'm trying to stay focused sheer. I'm sorry I've take everybody a lot of time... Have I missed anything? I'm going to let you guys talk it over. >> that's okay. Because sass a representative of the community as such we extend ed the time because we want to make sure that the people have their proper say. With that, is there anybody who would like to add something? In your case you are on a three- minute limit. >> I think we can handle it in that timeframe. Thank you, good afternoon, chair committee. My name is barry. I'm a candidate for council in the 4th district looking to directly represent this area on city council. I live in this area, of course. I'm the President Of ashwood townhouses of la raid owe homeowners association and one thing that we are really concern ed withings that it erode s the character. Neighborhood. Lexington does need infill but I'm not sure tates creek road is the place for that. One of the major concerns, of course, are the storm water issues in the city of lexington. We are having to do a lot of re mediation of that, incrootion ing -- increasing park ing lot area is only going to increase the need for re mediating runoff, which, I believe in particularly in this area, would be county to what the goal we are trying to achieve there as a city. One of the representatives mentioned it would create a buffer between the institutional ized areas. The church. I don't see how that could possibly create a buffer. In fact it is going to be a negative buffer making it more difficult for citizens in the area to get out there understood drive -- and drive along the roads. Most of the people opposing this would agree was that at the same time. We mentioned the comprehensive that we want higher density along the corridors and in some cases, that would be benefiial. We have seen a lot of, for example, there is a new development also in the fourth district which is over in the zandale shopping ear and that has been very productive, been a very good development. Brought a lot of new businesses so I'm excited to see that but nick lasville road is the character of that entire road. And it fits with that character. Putting in multiuse developments on tates creek road would not fit in with the existing character it would detract from it. Contrary to representation, the development of that is going to impact us in a negative way. Townhouses, as much smaller, we have three large church over there. Townhouses are much smaller and we have significantly large homes in the area which are beautiful and very attractive, much like the richmond road area , which is where our basketball coaches tend to live, and it's beautiful. Would you want to demolish one of those houses and put in some little townhouses? I don't think that would be say positive development for the henry clay estate and I don't think it is a positive development for the tates creek community. Tates creek is far from monolithic in character. We recognize that. It's like old frankfort pike in many ways. We see beautiful horse farms out that way. Tates creek is a lot of green. We don't see that on nicholas ville road or richmond road or particularly on harrods burg road or many of the other roads in many other areas in town. I ask you to consider the overwhelming response from our residents that live in our community and those of us that we represent those of us who live in the 4-9dz council district operate in an association, a group of individuals who live there. Ask with all consideration to vote in favor of the residents who live here and support you as our leadership. Thank you. >> the cons concentration concerns me. I've lived 51 years close to this neighborhood. And it is a delightful neighborhood. I cannot fight change. It is inevitable. I've asked you about the concentration. The r-1 3 is excessive in my opinion. >> jamie sleighedder. I am one house off tates creek road. I have lived along tates creek road for 50 years. Went to immanuel baptist church kindergarten so I haven't traveled very far. I'm still there. I'm a proponent of infill development but I'd like to add a qualifier and maybe it should be in our comp plan. When appropriate. I'm in favor of infill development when appropriate. I'm in favor of infill development of that site. Would I love to see a single family home construct there had with a 125-foot setback. I think that would be appropriate for that site. I'd like to cite the 2018 comprehensive plan today. The plan is designed to create a vision and strategy that will allow lexington to grow and prosper while preserving, protecting and enhancing exist ing neighborhoods. I don't see how this application preserves, protects or enhances our neighborhood. I don't see it. I'm going to follow up with a conversation and mike cravens you correct me if I say this wrong, from the subdivision committee meeting. Mike said he has been driving up and down tates creek road since he was 16 and he said this development did not feel right to him. Is that how you characterized it , mike? It doesn't feel right to me, either. When you are driving down that road, you are going to say that looks out of place. Why is this here? How did we let this happen? I think that's what we are going to say when we are driving up and down there. We've got the west side of tates creek road going all the way from cochran to lands down. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong I think there are only three structures that are not single family residential. All three are church. Faith lutheran fits the neighborhood, appropriate set backs. You have the latter day saints church. They have all the parking coming in off of alumni drive. No entrance way on to tates creek. Landscaped, set back. The greek church which was recently constructed and they honored the setback lines. I appreciate them setting it back off tates creek road. my concerns are building line setback, the density, and the change to the character of the neighborhood that will occur on that site. I'm going to wrap it up. But when you hit a bad shot in golf, you take a mulligan and you try it between. But -- again but when you hit a bad shot in planning and development, you are going to drive by that thing and look at it every single day and you are going to say why did we let this happen? And I think that's what we have going on here. I think it's going stick out like a sore thumb and inthink people are going to say why did we do this? >> you the. [Applause] >> please start the clock so they can see. >> jim. I live at 3013 shirley court, about two blocks in from the proposed development. My wife and I moved to this area about 20 years ago. One of the reasons we picked the neighborhood we are in is because it has single family homes. It was established and I do totally oppose this proposal. We feel it is inconsistent with the neighborhood character. I think the issue about the set back was very well said. I any it was somewhat telling, the early drawings that I saw, that the adjacent buildings were never shown in relationship to the what is proposed. Yet the setback is identified but it's very telling that the fact that this would be significantly closer to tates creek road. Another thing to bring up is the safety issue with the traffic. Anybody who leaves out of rebecca going on to tates creek road during rush hour trying to make a left turn and that's at a regular intersection, it gets backed up, very dangerous. I think asking or requesting people to have to make u turns is really asking for trouble. Again I'm totally opposed to this and I think it does erode the neighborhood. >> okay, thank you. [Applause] >> I'll be brief. I'm new to the neighborhood. >> what is your name. Renee: >> julie tatarre, 815. dover cove. I'm a neighbor of tom's. We are new in the neighborhood. We have only been there two years. I think the last person that moved in was like 25 years ago. The thing I would like to emphasize is that we picked this neighborhood because of the single family homes. It was developed and I agree with the gentleman. I support infill. I support the density developments and all of that. I just really want to emphasize it does not fit at all this structure that they're proposing and the density with it in our neighborhood. These are all single family homes and they're proposing they tear down a beautiful old historic home to put this property in so I would like you to take that into consideration. Thank you. >> thank you. >> my name is barry walling. We have all talked about the traffic concerns as part of this nobody has specifically mentioned as we are talking about the intersection at rebecca, basically a good portion of the people that work at U.K. Hospital, a good portion of the people that work at baptist use that as their commute. People don't come down alumni or go across albany. They cut through the neighborhood right there. So when you get to rush hour, which with the hospital is 3:00, 5:00, 7:00, all of those times, you have a tremendous amount of traffic in and out. It backs up there. You got people trying to make lefts, the church across the street is like a city on its own there is always traffic coming out of there. We are only talking about 28 parking spots xz but when you start making people make rights out of there and jump across two lanes of tates creek to make a u -turn, you are adding u-turns at the rebecca intersection. There are going to be wrecks. There are going to be problems because there is more traffic in that particular section of tates creek due to the hospital commuter traffic. More traffic right in that area than the road itself would indicate. I just want to make sure that that is considered as you guys are thinking about it. Thank you. >> thank you. You get another crack at this a little bit later. But if there is anybody else who would like to say anything, now is the time. Okay. Ladies and gentlemen, what I'm going to do now is to move and let me ix plain to those of you who are not familiar with the process. The applicant has an opportunity to come forward and to address some of the issues that you all have iz raked. After the applicant comes forward, you get another track at it. In other words, you can say well , we agree or disagree or whatever the case May be. And then after that, we give the staff an opportunity to respond. After that ends, what we'll do then is, I'll moderate this, but we'll open it up for the commission members to ask any of you any questions related to anything. Aftershock that I will close the session and then there will be a discussion among the commission members. That's the process that we use. Mr. Turner. Please noalt you are on the clock now, right? >> I'm going to move over here because I want to throw a few things up on the screen. I'm not ready yet. But also and I appreciate all the comments that everybody have made. I grew up on eldemere road and tates creek pike and montclair, when I was growing up, tates creek pike, beginning at montclair was a two-lane country road. Hindo heights was the first subdivision and everything else was farmland out there. I used to rabbit hunt where new circle road is when I was a young man, or a boy. So the point is, things change. It's changed dramatically from what it was when I grew up. It's continued to change and it's going to change some more. And we've made a decision with the comprehensive plan, that things are going to change even more in terms of density. And efficiency. These are single family homes. They're townhouses but they're single family homes. They're substantial and in character with the neighborhood. One of the things that was mentioned the hindo height restrictions and I don't know if you can see this, but this is a document that was recorded by Mr. Johnson in 1952 and, come on and in it it says it created covenants that ran with this land and this particular property and it created, it went along with a plat that created 125-foot setback and in that, it indicated that this shall run for a period of 50 years from the first day of October 1952. The undersigned so the point being is those restrictions have changed. It also had a restriction that only single family residents could be constructed on the land well, we've had church and other uses that have been constructed since the expiration of these could have vants the 125-foot setback expired some 20 years ago. The impetus on efficient development of land moves are calls for a reduction of that setback. Now in practicality, what we are talking about a 25-foot setback, the buildings are approximately 70 feet away from the road and if you take a look at this one, what you see is if you go down the road, you start out... Let me focus here. Here is tates creek pike... Excuse me. Tates creek pike and here is rebecca. There is alumni drive, 75-foot setback and the church is 60- foot setback to the building. The gas station is a 22-foot set back. You move across the street and you have an 85-foot setback from the building of this church right here. You have a foot-foot setback on the front yards of these homes. You have a 90-foot setback here. You have a 22-foot setback here and here is a 70-foot setback. So those are setbacks of the buildings from the right of way. Point being, we are, this development is very much right in the middle of those setbacks. So that was one of the things we did as we went back through the planning process, was to try to move it back off the road, which I which I we accomplished compatible with everything that's there. The house the that is on the subject property has been used as a church for about five years and so it's not been used as a single family residential property for sometime. The r-3 zone is one of the most flexible... As this body knows, is one of the most flexible zones and is used for single family housing, it's used for townhouses. It's used for duplexes. It's used for small apartments. But it is used in an effort, because of its flexibility, to deal with dense development. So that you can make the things work. Particularly in single family subdivisions. So that was the reason and in consultation with staff, it was used here because it offered the flexibility bee needed to get this type of development in so I'm going to close, but again you come down to, kind of a turning point, which I said in the beginning... This community has elected to go in a different direction than it has historical ly and it has elected to develop at a greater density on vacant... This is not... I never did make an argument this is vacant land. Underutilized land and this certainly is underutilized in view of the comprehensive plan guidelines so that's where we are. You asked us to do this. You asked us to proceed in this direction, as did the council, and that's why we are here. So again, I would be glad to answer any questions but we appreciate your support. >> thank you. We May come back to you a little bit later with questions. The citizens, you get another crack at this. You have heard what the applicant has said. If you have other thoughts, now is a good time to do that. Representing the ashwood townhouses of laredo. I wanted to make the argument that lexington is unique in character and as a result, one reason we have a comprehensive plan. Change is inevitable. We all know this. We welcome change. But it needs to make senses and it needs to fit into a longer term vision for the city of lexington. The representative's argument is that change should happen regardless of a longer term vision for the community, permitting this development offers no longer term vision for the 14th district or for lexington. Thank you. >> yes, sir. >> from rebecca or the back street. Entering from tates creek is going to be disas traws -- disastrous. The gentleman said, I cannot say it more. Create a corridor if you want between one of the side street to get to it, then perhaps you can think about it. It is underutilized land indeed because it's never put on sale and even it is something that can be really beautiful for that area. But that's why it is under utilized. >> okay, thank you. >> jason rudzic. I live at 1909 belafonte. I want to say I agree with everything the people have said. The setback is not the major issue. The major issue is the 14 town homes going in there. Also I want to say everybody here that has got up and said something is here on their own time. They're not getting paid any. They've taken time out of their jobs. They're very passionate about this. From the other standpoint, they're going to do this and they're going to be gone. We are the ones that have to live with it the rest of the time. >> thank you. >> john douglas. I live at 783 rebecca drive. I've brought up here just on monday we had a traffic accident at rebecca, right at lunch time and the only way you are going to have access, and I know you are tired of hearing it but I've lived there since 1992 on rebecca drive, same house. I'm not understanding why we can't have single family homes on this property. I'm not understanding that. I bought a single family res deng neighborhood -- residential neighborhood. I chose to buy a neighborhood that was different and had some character about it. Not a neighborhood where the houses were right on top of each other. If you all approve this, you are taking that away and setting the precedent and if the comprehensive plan that was approved in 2013 is the driver when very little development was going on because of the financial crisis, okay. Maybe you need to rethink it. But there is plenty of land, not just in fayette county, there is plenty of land, there are plenty of homes, there are plenty of housing and I just ask that you all think very strongly about doing this to tates creek road. >> thank you. [Applause] >> I'm thomas reed 3033 shirley drive in the glendover neighborhood and I think the gentleman, he stressed r-3 zon ing provides flectbility -- flexibility and I think it's the flexibility that is the biggest issue here. The precedent that that r-3 zon ing sets and what that means in the future extending down the corridor. If he... If this development never takes off and the land gets sold, the r-3 is in place. What is going to be built there? If you have the precedent of that being an r-3 and people start buying houses adjacent to it down tates creek road, they now have a precedent to change their, to change the zoning on their properties and have a precedent of a residential home being torn down. In order to build something else so it's that flexibility that causes us the biggest heartache. As steve white said. He answered why an r-3. He didn't answer why not an r-1t that would stipulate townhouses. Please consider those issues when making a decision. [Applause] >> we just have one more and in the case of the time element, I've given the community a little more time because I think it's important. Go ahead. I'm going to give you your shot. >> again, tom brought up the idea of r-1t and the density. And again this is, I think it's slightly under one acre. This is not two acres of infill land, which apparently the density calculation was done on two acres. This is not two acres of vacant land. Maybe not even one acre. So that calculation, is it valid can we just tear down any structure and declare it vacant land and then use this density calculator that was used to size the number of units on here? This is a focused infill project we justified and utilized the comprehensive plan to... That's what they did to get this and it seems we are all complaiping about the density and if it was allowable on two acres of vacant land, that is not the case. Its is a really, really nice house there. Would I hate to see more houses go. And again it's the character of this particular part of the street, I think... I think it will look odd with the church being back and the other houses being back. The churches across the street don't really matter. When you are driving, that's the main thing that is going to jump out at you so thank you. >> did you. Now we'll have the staff. >> Mr. Chairman, members of the commission. Mr. Turner is right. The planning commission has adopted goals and objectives that are different from five, 10 , 15 and 20 years ago. Ones that direct for dens ification and that's a balanced approach for our community. that's what we heard the community ask for. That's what the planning commission is standing behind and what the council then in endorsed as well. He is not incorrect in asking for a higher density, especially along a corridor, and that's why the staff is recommending support and recommending approval of the requested rezon ing. Mr. White's statement about the density calculation being invalid concerns me just a little about terms of keeping the record clear. The staff calculates density based on the total acreage of land being brought in for your consideration in terms of development and the number of units proposed. So today they are proposing 14 units on 2.0 9... Can't remember off the top of my head, acres. It doesn't calculate what we are reducing in terms of density but it calculates that the number and came out as 6.7 units per acre. Mr. Martin did have something to add. >> I would just like to clarify a couple of things and that is the question was raised, why not r-1t instead of r-3. R-3 defaults to r-1t in terms of its lots requirements. If this was zoned r-1t, they could present the same plan you see before you as long as they met the lotting requirements that are defaulted to from three to r-1t. Could you still see a bank of development with an access easement with these townhouses. That's how r-3 works. that's why it is flexible. Another item I would like hopefully people understand is that you all know perfectly well in this system, there is not conducive to the bait and switch any changes in this plan due to a change in ownership or finance s, you are going to see. This body is going to see a new plan and you are going to have, and you certainly have the a authority to go why is it different. So again, any changes like that will come back before this plan ning commission before anything would ever be approved and built on this property. I just wanted to make that clear as much for a public educational outreach. >> with that I'll open it up for the commissioners to ask the applicant, the staff or people in the community any questions and we'll go from there. Miss Mundy. >> I have several questions and I guess I have three for darby. Did I understand you to say that the H.O.A. Would not meet with you? >> I'm sorry? >> did I understand you to say that the H.O.A. Would not meet with you? The neighborhood association. >> right. Would not... >> meet with you for an explanation. Is that what you said? Did I understand that or did I misunderstand that? >> I don't think I said anything about an H.O.A. >> no, no, the neighborhood association. >> the neighborhood association. the question is did we... >> did I understand you to say that the neighborhood association would not meet with you or did not meet with you. >> let me put it... We asked Mr. White or we indicated to Mr. White we would be glad to sit down with him, the neighborhood association or whoever he wanted us to sit down with. We did that several times. The last time we got an email back that said we have a meeting set. March 22. >> okay. >> so that was that. >> two more questions. You stated that these town townhouses are between 3,000, from what I'm seeing in black and white up here, between 3,000 and 3800 square feet. >> approximately 3,000 square feet and the intent is to put in a basement as well but we haven't done the engineering or geotech to determine how feasible that is. >> do you have any idea, and I probably should have done a little more home work, do you have any idea on what the average house size in that neighborhood is? >> I have seen everything from, and I'm going to say this anecdotally from my own perspective, anything from 5,000 plus down to 2000, 2500. Some of the houses on tates creek pike are large houses. But as you move back into the glendover neighborhood and so forth, the houses become smaller and it was not unusual, in that day and time with development, that on the road or on the main highway, you know, the tates creek or whatever, that the larger lots would be closer to the main road and as you went back in the subdivision, they would lk smaller and smaller homes and so forth and that's, to me, is the character of this as well. >> okay. >> my last question. I'm sure the lot was surveyed so that the data that was given to staff proved that the acreage is 2.0 9 acres. >> the net acreage is 2.0 9 and the gross acreage I think is 2. 46 or something like that. It's in your report. >> thank you very much. >> roy did the work. >> thank you very much. >> any other questions from the commission members? Okay, if not... I'm sorry. Mike. >> I guess I want to talk to disashy about this -- darby about this. >> yes, sir. >> I know this is a different plan from the one I saw that I didn't really like. Did you look at other scenarios on this? In other words, I was just sitting here calculating r-1 c and you got 365 feet, so you could divide that by 60-foot is frontage on a r-1 c that would give you six lots without any development or anything. I mean you could just go down there and tie in the sewer and build the houses. >> we could. >> did you look at that other scenario? >> I think the developer did think about what all the possibilities were, but the product that he saw as most viable for this neighborhood was nicely appointed townhouses for people that were living in nice homes but wanted to downsize. You are correct. We could go in there and put five or six piano key lots with single family lots on them and I don't think that would be very attractive, but you could do it. The thinking from the developer is this is the product I want. This is a great location for that type of product. And that's how it evolved. >> Mr. Penn. >> darby, let me follow up on mike's question. Because I heard tom martin say what he said. Why r-3 and not r-1t? >> it has a lot to do with lot coverage, some of the lot coverage issues. We were concerned with. And as we sat down with staff, we just felt for this, you could have gone to r-1t but it created some other issues which we got solved in r-3, so we were producing the same products. And as tom indicated, you know, it's very difficult to do a bait and swich on these things -- switch on these things because this is a preliminary plan. We told what you we are on the record, what we want to do, and why we want to do it this way, and if we or somebody else comes back with something totally different, I think you are going to look at it as a clean slate. You always have. >> and I agree with that, darby. I just wanted them to hear what you had to say. You know, the presentation would be different for another plan. And weed would hear it. >> right. >> Mr. Bell. >> tom or casey, it regards traffic. Whomever... Whomever is best to answer that question please. Thank you. Thank you so much. So my question with the greek church there on the corner and the traffic impact. >> yes, sir. >> of that on tates creek. I presume you took all that into consideration on your approval and would you mind just touching on the impact of the greek church on tates creek, please? >> sure. When we reviewed this plan, we reviewed the 14 town homes and their access on to tates creek. This is a preliminary development plan. The location will most likely be shifted farther away from the median cut but as far as the traffic generated, how many trips going in and out of the site, they're minimum. When you look at it compared to the amount of traffic on tates creek, residential development just doesn't produce the trips to kind of hit a threshold where it gives traffic concern. And this situation is median controlled. It is a right in-right out. They have to go to the nearest curb cut to turn around if they're trying to about in the go in the opposite direction. That spacing is what traffic will be looking at at the final development plan stage. >> before you leave. I have a question. my concern all along has been with the traffic issue, not in terms of necessarily the numbers as such but in terms of the traffic flow that cut back has really concerned me all the time are you telling me that that is still under consideration. >> absolutely. Yes. So the location they're proposing now, it is obviously a distance. It's close to the median cut which does encourage the cheat movement where someone heading downtown would want to just slip and make the left. So by shifting their entrance adjacent to the orthodox church entrance, you know, it provides that distance to, it keeps people from wanting to cheat there. It's too far for them to say hey , I can make it. They're going to go to rebecca and come back. >> thank you. Any other questions from the commission to the applicant citizens or the staff? Okay we'll close this particular portion. Committee meeting and come back to the exition for additional discussion and/or a motion. >> Miss Mundy. >> I would like to thank all of you for coming down. `it's good for us to hear your thoughts and opinions. I do wish you would have met with the applicant on this. It often times clears up things and it helps clarify things so that you May understand a little better of what is going on. But you came here today to hear and see and speak and I thank you for that but based on the fact that the 2018 goals and objectives do implement the desire more so of more density and moving towards infill and re development and based on staff 's recommendation, I'm going to have to move for approval of this plan. So this is something that the community said loudly they want ed with the goals and objectives and that so because of that, I have to, at this time , I feel, make the motion that we approve pln-mar-18-1 off season llc, for as staff has recommended and I want to put into record the reasons that they gave in their recommendation of approval. >> moved by Miss Mundy seconded by Mr. Owens that we approve pln-mar-18-1 for the reasons provided by staff. >> any other discussion. >> I'm going to support the notion and I want to you know why. I was involved with the comprehensive plan obviously. I think that if this was cut up in six lots for six individual houses, you'd have the same issues. I think what r-1t would do for you wouldn't ensure the things you are talking about either. I want you to know that when the final development plan comes, I want you to have an opportunity to take a look at it. It would be nice if you all could see it and you certainly have a right to see it and we Chad: would be. to -- we would be glad to hear from you then but the comprehensive plan 2018 that we all adopted provides for this time of thing and have you to understand that the land on tates creek pike, these huge yards are very attractive properties and we can't tell you what you can do with your land if somebody purchases and has a legal right to come in and do, based on the zoning. And I don't think change... I asked the question, r-13 to r-1 t would solve your problem and I'm not sure cutting it up in 60 -foot lots and selling it off that way would do anything for you so I'm going to support the motion. >> Mr. Cravens. >> I'm going to state that this is a completely different plan than we originally saw in the subdivision meeting that I spoke about mildly. In the zoning committee meeting. They did a lot of work on it and redesigned it. It still wouldn't be my preference but it's the hand we are dealt. The comp plan, I mine where were you y'all when we were doing the comp plan to oppose this stuff? I've opposed a lot of the comp plan. But everybody else said this is what they wanted so I'm probably going to support this. >> Mr. Owens. >> Mr. -- thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm going to make a statement, a different approach. I agree with my colleagues as far as the comp plan is concern ed and the direction that we are going. However during this hearing today, I heard several times that the word precedent was mentioned and precedent setting. Having come down here now for 13 years serving on the board of adjustment or the planning commission, I learned a long time ago that from a colleague of mine, he said that each application, each request, each situation has a different set of circumstances and I firmly believe that and looking at each set of circumstances individually as an individual application, we don't have precedent setting. I don't see this going down the road. I don't see this going down tates creek road. I simply don't simply for that reason. Something two houses down, five houses down, eight houses down has a different set of circumstances. I'm going to support this. But hopefully there is some comfort there that this is not a domino effect that's going to go down tates creek road. Thank you. >> anyone else wish to discuss the motion that's on the floor? Call for the previous question. Without any objection motion to approve pln-mar-18-1 off season with the recommendations from the reasons provided by staff has been made by Miss Mundy, second by Mr. Owens. Please vote when it comes up on your screens. Motion carries. I, too, would like to thank the members of the community. I know this is a very painful process, but we do thank you for coming down and expressing yourselves in the manner in which you have. Would any member on the committee like to take a five- minute break? >> I would. >> we have to do the development plan. >> I'm sorry. We have to do the development plan. I'm sorry. Thank you. >> Mr. Chair, I move for pln mj dn 18-2 hinda heights subdivision, move for approval with the 10 conditions by staff. >> moved and seconded that we approve pln-mjdp-18-2 with the 10 conditions as provided by staff. Any other discussion on the motion? Please vote when it comes up on your screens. Motion carries. Thank you. Now would you like to take a five-minute break? >> yes. Five minutes. Comprehensive plan. We'd always prefer to make that finding. So the 2018 and then, of course the 2013 comprehensive plan which is adopted in whole made very similar mission statements. We highlighted the three changes in the language for the mission statement in terms of flexible, yet focused planning guidance to ensure equitable development of our community's resources and we wanted to make sure that those resources are enhancing our quality of life, fostering regional planning and economic development while still protecting our neighborhoods, and also, the bluegrass and the environment. The 2018 comprehensive plans, goals and objectives have been adopted so we utilized primarily those, although the 2013 come pregnancy plan goals and objectives are quite similar in many regards. The five themes that come into consideration for today's case, are growing successful neighborhoods, protecting the environment, prosperity and jobs and we want to make sure that those are enhancing our quality of life. Moving on to desirable communities, we want to support the complete streets concept which means connections of existing public streets through and into our other commercial areas, concentrating efforts to enhance mass transit with the applicant numerous times before they filed their request. And, they asked numerous times, what can we do to make this development better? And we as a staff, tried to encourage some things that we felt could help this development, and each time, there was no really no response to that. So, intensifying a development can occur in a number of ways. And my understanding is, that there has been some concern about residential for this site. That's really only one of the ways that you can intensify a site is with making it mixed use. But you could also do so with office structures. Or just adding in another layer of commercial like we saw in indianapolis version. The staff had some concerns about the functionality of it, and about making sure that the sidewalk system was on both sides of the proposed service roads. These are small matters, things that generally can be resolved at your final development plan. There is a need for them to denote patio. They have the parking there that I just mentioned and they are basically utilizing the square footage requirement for b-3 and that frankly can be a little more restrictive at times. But, they are going to have to ultimately define the seating required in the restaurant for us to determine which parking ratio they'll actually need. Again, final development, they meet b-3 with the current calculations that again would be something on a final development plan that would have to work out. There were discussions about landscaping. They have a note on the plan, as you all are aware, staff has been very concerned about landscaping along our major arterials. And our boulevards. And that is an item that they have agreed to and that will be addressed. Again, at the final development plan. The appropriate landscaping. We don't have an ordinance on harrisburg road. And your staff has been recommending certain standards be utilized as we did just down the road on the b-1. They enacted basically what was the man of war landscaping. This man of war doesn't street that requirement. But those will be addressed. probably, there's several items on here that minor connected and one is the access to the court, the spacing of this full access point with the light that they are proposing a traffic signal here. As well as the light in and light out access here. >> about the methodology used originally, calling this a mixed use development, and thereby able to take and internal capture discount on the total amount of traffic that is generated for this. Based off of the applicant's traffic impact study, it takes about a 34% reduction in the overall traffic on this. The staff looked at this in detail. The -- in September of 2017, the institute of trafficker. >> s adopted the tenth -- engineers adopted the tenth edition of the generation methodology and that is where this new methodology came in to play. It wasn't in there prior. It wasn't in there previously. It was all based of off of a 2011 study, for this methodology and the staff went back in and looked at this and read the studies that went into this methodology. And all of those were for very mixed use development has had millions of squire feet of retail -- square feet of retail office and recent a there are other uses such as the hotel and restaurants like the applicants are proposing but these are just some of the ones straight from that 2011 study that these were based off of. They were very large planned developments. Much greater in scale and uses and when you get in and read that study in detail, they found that the three uses that really had synergy amongst them to call it a mixed use development, was retail, office, and residential. You don't have to have all of them because there is plenty of synergy between shopping centers that have large amount of retail and a large amount of office, large amount of retail and a large amount of residential, so, when I talk about mixed use from a traffic stand point, I'm talking about those three primary categories. Still, as we looked at it and even though we disagree with the applicant's assumption that this is a mixed use development, we would categorize this as a shopping center with a motel and whatever the staff independently came one the trip generation numbers, based off of the previous methodology, we respectfully disagree with the applicant's traffic engineer, but we still can accept that the trip generation numbers now, that the applicant is proposed for their analysis, are reasonable numbers. Another thing back on the assumptions though, this traffic impact analysis assumes that there will be a signalized intersection for their main entrance. I will talk about that in much more detail later in the presentation. But, knowing that all of the traffic analysis made the assumption that there would be a signalized intersection at that. So, you kind of have to look at that. Our traffic impact analysis regulations, really only require their -- they are 30 years old and only require applicants to analyze what they are proposing. They don't -- it doesn't really require looking at lots of different options. So, we have to always kind of look at that from the staff perspective as we're presenting to you. As we looked at the vehicular levels of service, in the traffic study, there were several intersections that are highlighted there. The staff concerns are primarily along the intersections along harrodsburg road. Lion drive they are not proposing a connection through the court. So, it had not very little difference, whether this came in or out. In particular, the right in right out off of the boulevard, the staff is supportive of that we believe that that provides a nice release valve for that movement from man of war boulevard and it has no negative only positive benefits to the overall traffic impact. So, the staff comments are going to focus on those intersections along harrodsburg road. That's where the majority of the conflicts are and that's where the majority of our concern is. Tracy did a very good job of presenting and it is key to our zoning recommendation, that this site is very auto centric. It is vehicular oriented. And as you look at the. In this particular instance, transit very difficult to serve. they serve the shopping sender and because the north ward movement out of this site, is very, very difficult, it is going to be very problematic to provide transit service to both existing shopping center. So looking in to alternatives to get people over to the bus areas, it is a good thing. And as far as the walk ability, we have talked a lot about that in our presentations. There are many ways in which walk ability can be measured. Some of the measurements are very looking at the design, some people from the transportation research board, have tried to, you know, kind of get in and set standards for what is walkable. But, in this particular instance, no matter which method% that you use to measure the walk ability of the applicant's proposal, it is not walkable. And that kind of tells you the overall area. Walk score,.Com is a really good kind of litmus test a first blush look at the walk ability of an overall area. Downtown lexington hits about a 74 on the walk score scale. Lexington overall as a city has an overall score of 34. I look at the walk score for the palomar subdivision, a walk score of 13. And, in the years that I have been looking at infill and redevelopment, in the years years that I have been looking at that that's the lowest walk score that I have come upon. That tells you the most area is designed as an auto cent trick area. Concentrating on the vehicular traffic in this traffic impact study is very, very important. I've tried to summarize the consultant's primary conclusions, but, even once the staff has got over the hump of accepting the assumptions that went into the stu dirk as we get into the conclusions, the staff has three primary concerns about the proposed traffic. Those are generalized as we're concerned about the signalization, we're concerned about the connectivity. And we're concerned about the spacing and design of the entrances. A real quick demonstration on this one. Looking at the distances in this area, between palomar, there is about 2,000 of linear feet in that segment of harrodsburg road. From palomar boulevard to the signalization and the future signalization, it is about 1500 feet, and then, on the north side, of man a war boulevard, that's about 1300 feet. Our standards are about 1600 feet for a traffic signal. Because that's how much you need for the area of operation of each signal in order to kind of coordinate the timing and phasing of those signals as you progress your traffic from one signal to the next. Part of the staff's major concern is the proposed signalization of this property at around 980 to 1,000 feet where they are proposing it. That could potentially -- there is simply not 3200 feet between the palomar boulevard. Where they are proposing, it could actually jeopardize the long-term viability of putting a signal at palomar boulevard which is a much better spacing for the overall corridor. We know that, harrodsburg is one of the most congested corridors. As population goes up, we expect that it will increase in the number of cars that are there. So, what are the staff narrowed all of this down to four primary recommendations. We have listed them as a, b, c and d in the staff report. The first one, a, is that we think that it would be -- we recommend that you make the primary entrance to this site a right in and right out by using a median u-turn type of treatment. Got a quick graphic. Lots of different things, but, these types of things are, the reduced left turn conflict intersections and I know that's rcut is a very kind of sexy name but that's what the federal highway administration kind of groups all of these different types of treatments into. And they have just recently added them as proven safety counter measures. In those places where you do utilize median u-turns and other types of restricted left turn intersections, you can expect a 30 to a 50% reduction in the number of injuries and fatalities for accidents along that area. It is a recommendation that we have had for this one. And it is not an engineered but this is a conceptual, we're talking about you close off the median, for the entirety of the property, put in a median u-turn so you have a left turn lane, as you go northbound on harrodsburg road, you would get into the turn lane, make the u-turn on the access management, and then come back around. One of the things we feel like that you would need to do in order to do that is the applicant's -- the main entrance would need to be shifted to the far southwest corner of the property so that you have enough distance to be able to make those maneuvers to get into the site. That would also mean that you put the counter u-turn movement further down in the right of way. And, this type of treatment we believe would be a safer design. And in the long term, a cheaper design. And we believe that it would not prevent putting a coordinated traffic signal at palom a. R boulevard. We've looked at staff has done this, come one this recommendation in coordination with kytc district seven office, with our traffic engineering department. We believe that this would be a much better way of accessing this site than not. Looking at b, it is quite simple. We're recommending the right in ride in ride out access to harrodsburg road be removed. Partly because it is simply too close to the intersection. But it also provides -- unlike the ride in ride out on man-of-war boulevard this doesn't provide near as much benefit or the release because essentially, when someone makes the right out of this site, they have to go down and get caught at the intersection as it comes through here. What the ride in and ride out on harrods berg road does is the relief traffic, it actually creates more conflict points man than it relieves so the staff is recommending that that be removed. C and d, c for connectivity, staff is recommending that glade court be connected as a -- grade glade court and glade lane are public streets. We are recommending that the street connects through here for all users for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles. And we understand from transportation standpoint that that is a -- that there are very good reasons and there is very good reasons to connect it and there is very good reasons not to connect it. In a nutshell, the staff sided with the recommendation for connectivity because this will allow the palomar subdivision and the people that live there, the hundreds of people that live there the ability to access this shopping center, this auto cent trick shopping sent we are their cars, without having to get out on on to the arterial roads and provide more arterial traffic. We decided to recommend in favor of that and because of that connectivity. D is for design. Whether or not that road does connect through, the design, they are proposing it as a pedestrian and bicycle connection, but it is not a very pedestrian or bicycle friendly design as you come into those sweeping movements, as you come in through there there is a very large amount of traffic, coming into the back of an area that has a drive through rain lane and loading dock. We believe that, whether that road connects or not, that there should be a more pedestrian first safety -- safely designed intersection. That kind of concludes, you know, in our final thoughts, I want to -- I have thrown a lot at you. I kind of want to end with, a traditional traffic signal at this location, that should be the last available option that we look at to control traffic and safety movement in this area. Not the first. Not the first go-to solution. And, lexington has recently been selected and participating right now in the safe streets academy and it is the a federal grant and came in contact with fred kent and we heard from him that if you plan your cities for cars and traffic, you get cars and traffic. If you plan it for people and places, you get people and places. And that's kind of where we think this overall could go. It is not the total volume of traffic that we're concerned about from a transportation standpoint, it is how the applicant is proposing to handle that traffic. If you have any -- that concludes my comments. If you have any questions for me, I would be happy to try to answer them. If you -- also I believe that concludes all of the staff comments. we'll be available throughout hearing. >> any questions for Mr. Adams? >> I'm going to go back and talk about this idea of right in right out at the main entrance. It is all walkable and he'll tell you how walkable it is for all of palomar in terms of walk ability. I don't think that was scored in the scoring that jimmy came up with. The -- one of the dilemmas that we have if we follow the staff recommendation just in terms of access, is this is our property here that the church property. Jimmy says, don't put a signal here, put it way down here at palomar boulevard. The problem is we would like to do that too, I suppose, if we owned this. But this is owned by the masonic lodge. And they have no interest at the present time of doing anything with that property. So, I wonder if we came with a bcp or zoning and tried to do a mini summit, would the staff say we couldn't get a signal, wield have to do this u-turn option that jimmy described which I never heard before. I would be doubtful that would be the case. This property needs a signal. There are instances all over our community where signals have been approveed at the distance that we're talking about but the bottom line is, we got as proval from the subdivision committee. And so these access issues, we'll flush them out in more detail once the final development plan comes about. this is a long-term review process as you know, we're not here to decide access today. We have got a development that will be built that will be managed properly, will be integrated with the neighborhood, and is one that the neighborhood wants. Now, if -- you know, the proof is in the pudding, how compatible is it. If neighborhood replaces it, it seems to me you have accomplished accomplished accomplished the immediate goal, the increasing density on a vacant tract of land that is proveably compatible with the existing neighborhood, but, they are here to support it. Now, not everybody is here to support it. But, most people are. I mentioned, you know, these are other intersections that aren't 1600 feet apart in lexington. For a signal. And there are many, many times this body has approved signals all over lexington that are not 1600 feet apart. And also have right in and right outs. And I mentioned our support. These are all of the houses that are contiguous to the property, the church property. And we have all of the ones that are highlighted in yellow, are in support of the application here today. The ones to the far left, over in this, this is palomar Miss Dixon is here. We met with Miss Dixon, all of our engineers. Most strong water comes from her subdivision itself. blue we have made some additional improvements to our development plan that would keep all of the water from our property from going toward her neighborhood. And that is on our development plan. The -- this is glade lane sub street into our property. Staff wants that connected by vehicles. The problem with doing that is this: it is 571 feet from, and glade lane has 18 feet wide of pavement. 18 feet. It was approved back in the '80s, it was a private street. It meet and doesn't meet today standards. It was a private street. The home others had to take care of it but as most private streets go, they couldn't afford to do and it had to dedicate it and the city came in and now maintaining it but it does not meet public street standards. So it is only 18 feet wide. If you on both sides of the road, you're not going be able to get through it. If you drive around the neighborhood, you're going to run into situations like this where cars are parked, where you'll have the difficult time getting through. It was never intended to accommodate anything other than this private neighborhood. Despite the fact that there was a sub street there, when your predecessors approved a private street 18 feet wide, to try to force any kind of traffic through that sub street into that neighborhood, which is retirement neighborhood work be highly inappropriate. We believe we've got a very sustainable development. We've got one that is well designed. We've got one that. And rightfully so because, very rarely do you have a proposed development where you have 100% approval. Now, a couple of things: Mr. Wilson has asked me this during the zoning committee. Because, not only do we meet with the neighborhoods on four straight occasions. Separate occasions but robert wagner and other members of the development team met with all of the contiguous property owners, numerous times, and in an attempt to meet with them and say, educate them about the proposal, what is it that would be -- give you a comfort level to find this proposal acceptable? Private agreements were worked out with all but three of the contiguous property owners to fine tune exactly they would need, each was different. And so, we had three people -- one was in a nursing home, one one of one of them is moving out of town and the property is for sale and one, Ms. At the evens who you'll hear from expressed some serious concerns and rightfully so. Her house there is a numb number of houses locate close to the proposed store. It is an organic store. With he don't have a specific user. We have several stores that have expressed interest, we don't have one specific lined up. and we put a conceptual location for the grocery store to indicate where the loading dock might be. And, she is concerned about it and rightfully so. We have engaged smith management group, group, sound engineers as soon as we have a designated gross grocery store and know exactly where the loading dock will be, we'll come back with a final development plan stage with a sound mitigation program for you all to consider. We'll be coming back to final development plan stage to deal with access issues and to deal with the location of the loading dock, to deal with sound mitigation, to deal with best management practices for the entire site. And, also, deal with storm water. One of the things we found out is we met with the surrounding neighborhood is that there were folks located even outside of the palomar, over on -- in the plantation, and, that had existing storm problems. And we have come one some solution solutions to try to deal with their existing problems which we're not going contribute to. We're actually going to be helping in terms of what our proposal will be. You May hear from him and then robert wagner will discuss some of the things that we're proposing to do for him and his property. We've talked to a number of folks in glade lane who have drainage problems that came about because backyard they put in drainage swales. and whether it was a building or, the developer at the time or, original homeowners, they have covered those up and they have had drainage problems. We have proposed to fix a number of those through a drainage system that will correct problems that we're not -- did not create, and won't contribute to. All of our storm water will be going towards harrodsburg road, and the sewers down there, storm sewers. So, we believe that we've been responsive to everyone except for about three people. And, it is unusual I think, for you and retail site to have neighborhoods come down and speak in favor of a zone change but they are here today. And so, we believe that the compatiblity, walk ability, the sustainability that tracy talked about, critical elements of the comprehensive plan, are met with our proposal. Going to expand on what I had to say and talk about a few more elements of why this is acceptable proposal and why the staff's recommendation in terms of what they would like to see us do is not workable, not wanted and not marketable. We have tried. It is pretty rare that a developer will turn down the opportunity to add 80,000 square feet because if you can make money on it, you'll do it. But it is not there. So, bill? >> >> thank you, bruce, and I'll try of move through what I have to say fairly quickly. I do want to -- I have four or five very specific things related to the staff's recommendation of in our proposal to touch on, but first, I want to react to a little bit of what I heard, for the first time after this has been pending for a long, long time. In the staff's presentation, why not the summit? I think that you all know that, nick nickelson know about much about that development as anybody, having been involved in it from the very get go. Size does matter in this situation and you have to think through some of the parameters of what you're hearing from the staff. On the one hand, they want to put a lot more density in here. Okay. So, let's put a grocery store in there that takes up four of the ten or 12 acres that leaves you 8 acres left to do the rest of the development. Now, you're either going to have a grocery store away from the neighborhood or -- multi-story next to the neighborhood, and if you're going to put that much additional density in, you'll have to have a parking structure. And it I either going to be out by the road which we say we hate with parking structures or it is going to be back by the neighborhood. What I'm trying to tell you is, what they are saying they want more density, and the type of development that they say they would like to see, just doesn't work on this site. Second thing that I want to talk about is the access plan. Jimmy, I love you, buddy. i love you. That idea is a the dumbest thing that I have ever heard. [Laughter] And I'm getting older. My filters are coming off. The very idea, very idea that you would take a 20 acre site at a major intersection, put all of that extra density on and it hope it works so it takes up the land and helps to save the rural part that we said we don't want to expand in into and have the only access points two right in and right out and that little choke point back on glades springs, it is stunning. It is stunning. And I'm sorry. It is a very bad idea. Now, here are the specific things. B-3. Tracy did not like it when I said that there was at the zoning committee, that there must have been a visceral negative reaction to b-3. The idea for conditional zoning came in this chamber. I took that idea and wrote the conditional zoning statute at my kitchen table, TOOKth to frankfort and got it passed and why did he suggest it and why did I get that done? To allow us the flexibility to mold zones to fit the details of a particular site. What we have here, this is the b-3 zone with everything that we have taken. So if you said, okay, we'll do a b1 zone plus a hotel, you wouldn't have the immediate reaction that you sometimes have to b-3. I also heard that b-3 is not appropriate because there are only 32,000 cars a day that go by here. That's -- that is a little amazing. This zone as restricted, is what we're proposing. We're not proposing a b-3 zone, with adult arcade, massage parlors, we're not -- with car lots and sales of automobile equipment and contractors. That's not what we are proposing. And it never has been what we're proposing. This zone which is pretty much a b-1 with a hotel is what we're proposing. Second thing: the comprehensive plan and we have given you some findings of fact, and, let me just take you through some of them. One of the statements in the comprehensive plan said the ideal structure for if for neighborhood is composed of places to reside, work, shop, learn, and play. Now what we suggested in our initial filing is, think of the neighborhood as this roughly triangular shape that is bounded by man-of-war and the urban service boundary and I don't know how many -- it is more than 100 acres. I don't know how much. There is no retail in that yet unless you want to go across a major arterial. What this does is, supply neighborhood supportive retail the way it has been proposed. A grocery store. A pharmacy. A bank. A coffey shop. Sit down restaurants, and other restaurants. and that comes back to another notion that is in there in the comprehensive plan. Which says, infill and redevelopment should help neighborhoods achieve a mix of uses that support and enhance a citizen's daily life. There is a lot in there about place making and I guess you have a whole handout about place making from the staff. One of the sections sections from the comprehensive plan says three main qualities attach people to place. Social offering, openness, and aesthetic and that's all going to be in the mind of the beholder I suppose. And I'll come to that one slide in a minute because that was one that we made after I spent a lot of time walking out there. Per but, let me kind of blend a few of those things together. Place making is something that I thought a lot about and I want to see if I can get you to think about it with me today. When I hear people talk about place making and like most of you, I have been in cities all over the country and I have been about everywhere that you can go in lexinton so when I think about place making, I try to think, what is it that makes the gathering places in our community what they are today. The conclusion that I reach is this: it is a lot more about what is there. If they are the kind of restaurants that are there, that people like to be, then it necessarily is about the physical environment. I say that what's the favorite gathering thing just about on any day of the week, in southland shopping center. One of the first, it is a strip center, you know what it is? It is a sunday farmer's market. Where is it located? It is located in the parking lot of a strip center and yet, it is a wonderfully lovely environment. People go there week after week. Chevy chase starbucks. You can't stir them with a stick. In there. It is not exactly a strip center, it is a starbucks. Chevy chase, this gets to walk ability thing. I asked somebody is the other day what is the one thing that you can be can't find on wednesday, thursday, friday night in romney road in chevy chase. The one thing you can't find is a parking place. You can walk to tell but the vast majority of the people drive their cars to get to them. The distillery district. Jefferson street. The physical environment of those is no different than it was when I was a kid growing up here. What's different is, the restaurants that have moved in, the new things that have moved in and they've created an environment where people want to be. So if we create the environment where the plaza that we're showing and the uses that we're showing, it will be a gathering spot. And how do people get there? Some of them drive. a lot of them drive. Sure, they will. This is lexington. People drive. That confuse people a little bit when they look at the site and the big plans. They sort of assume this is massive place. I walked, I have done it twice, with my little phone, with my `stopwatch, from here to here, and do you know how long it takes you? Three minutes. It is a three-minute walk from this entrance here this substreet to the furthest point out here. So, what I asked -- and I have done this, myself and we also took the distances, a 15-minute walk from this much of this development, park here, palomar. And I have walked through there. They are hills. It is aptly named. A 15-minute walk from all of these places, gets you all the way to the furthest point. If the grocery store is right here, at 12-minute walk from all of these places gets you to the grocery store. Now, one of the reasons that I did that was, when we first met with the neighborhoods,ing several said when murrays was opened, lo and behold they used to walk and eat out on the patio and walk home. We believe that this is going to -- and in terms of walk ability, have we satisfied the urban county government? Obviously not on their view of walkability. We have met with their bike expert, we retained a university of kentucky bike expert to help us to design the bike paths and the ways through and around the development so we have gone the extra mile in my opinion on that. Right in right out. The ones that we propose, I know that we're talking about right in and right outs as the ultimate traffic solution, but, it almost looks like the initial reactions says to me, we still have our right in and right out phobia in fayette county yet, we have right ins and right outs at one of the committees on nicholasville road. You can say many things, negative if you want to about traffic on nicholasville road. When they were opposed to the summit. It is supposed to be 23 feet. That's the smallest that we get with a local street this one is 18. If it is a residential cul-de-sac, it is supposed to be 28 feet. It is a little bitty substreet. It is not necessary to have vehicular traffic from this development on there for the benefit of this development. And it is not necessary for the benefit of palomar hill. Blinders or blinkers on. This is one of those things where if you really think about it, if you want to encourage walking, why you don't try sometimes domain it more convenient to walk -- sometimes convenient to walk than it is to drive. And I think by limiting this to just vehicular -- just walking and bike access, you will for a big clung of this area make it more convenient for people to walk to the grocery store than to get in their car and drive to the grocery store, and you will enhance walk ability rather than inhibit it. I'll turn it over now to robert wagner, and as he's coming up, I'll sa this. I was going to say this at the outset but the staff kind -- distract disthe tracted my attention. The one case that you'll never make with the developer thats we've got here is that they are afraid to build up. Instead of out. Everybody agree? Am I -- anyone want to challenge me on that? They are not afraid to build up where it makes economic sense and it is an appropriate location. They have done that more than anybody else in this town, and they have taken more risk and spent more money at it and, in my opinion, we're better off for it. We'll talk about the target tenants. The target users as and we have% talked to all of the people that I'll tell you about. They are not long lease but nobody has said that they don't like this site. So, basically, what I'm going to do start with this plan, this is our landsscape plan. And basically, these are two restaurants. We have got one of them committed -- so this is a done deal. >> you'll have to use the mic. The lake not growing to be as big as lexington. I did that -- that was my project and I was a general manager, general partner in it. and this is what the place, the meeting place will be. And I think it has been fully described. I don't need to really tell you too much more about it. This is in another meeting slide. So I don't know what I have to do to make this move. But if it moved, it would show you this meeting place much clearer than what I can do here. So this is what we call lot 7 and 6. This is the lot 6 is the square building, it is a restaurant, it could be a bank. It could be a fast food. So we don't really know what is in there. Now, the bigger building is our target for high high yet place hotel so this is a rendering and a drawing or a photograph of the hyatt hotel. This is the existing little strip center back there. And this is also the bobby murray site you and see the bobby murray site has been vacated and become as parking lot with this fence behind and it this is a little strip center today. We have one tenant left. Will probably relocate him or work some kind of deal with him. And we want to remake that center to have a more contemporary look on the front of it. So, this is kind of the whole facade reworked very creative architecture by steve and john. And on this front three tracks, this is our pharmacy, cvs grocery is our target. The middle one is chick-fil-a, and great response from them. and the next little one is starbucks. And we think that we can make all of these deals. This is our anchor grocery store. And this is what we have targeted is organic grocery store and multiple organic grow grocery stores in our market and them are on harrodsburg road. This is a high-end corridor. We think an organic grocery store will be a great play and we think we can make that deal there. And we want to tie in the look of this strip center. This is contemporary. I'm not sure that we'll do exactly that. But, we're going to make sure that these two projects tie together and they have kind of a theme that fits the whole project. >> Mr. Wagner, I'm sorry and I have to apologize, ladies and gentlemen. We have to leave this facility because the urban county council is getting ready to meet here. So, what we'll do is go over to the -- what's the street, third floor? Phoenix building 101. Again, we apologize but unfortunately, that's is what we're getting -- you talk about