# Planning Commission Subdivision and Zoning Public Hearing - December 13, 2018 > Auto-transcribed civic record · December 13, 2018 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/4660 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/4660?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2018-12-13 - **Last revised**: December 13, 2018 - **Length**: 34,479 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** The transcript on this page is the Granicus stenographer's live closed-captioning track, captured at the time of broadcast (typos and broken sentences common). Speaker labels come from the same track. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude Sonnet. Verbatim wording and speaker attribution may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Urban County Planning Commission convened on December 13, 2018, at 1:30 PM in the Council Chamber on the 2nd Floor of the LFUCG Government Center at 200 East Main Street in Lexington, Kentucky, with Bill Wilson presiding as the meeting officer. The commission addressed three main agenda categories: Land Subdivision Items, Zoning Items, and a Comprehensive Plan Public Hearing, all of which were informational in nature. During the course of the meeting, the commission conducted 14 motions and votes on various planning matters before them. The meeting also included input from the public, with 4 public comments heard throughout the proceedings, allowing community members to provide feedback on the planning issues under consideration. ## Attendance The following members were present at the December 13, 2018 meeting: • Bill Wilson • Headley Bell • Will Berkley • Patrick Brewer • Larry Forester • Karen Mundy • Bruce Nicol • Mike Owens • Frank Penn • Carolyn Plumlee • Graham Pohl All eleven members were in attendance. No members were reported as absent or late for this meeting. ## Votes and Decisions The meeting included 14 unanimous votes, with all 11 members present voting in favor of each motion. Seven items were postponed to future meetings, while seven others were approved. **Postponements:** The commission postponed ZOTA 2018-5 amendment update to Article 15 to January 24, on motion by Frank Penn [timestamp: 00:02]. Six development plans were postponed to January 10: Willow Oak Shopping Center (PLN-MJDP-18-00075) on motion by Mike Owens [timestamp: 00:05], Blackford Property Phase 3 (PLN-MJDP-18-00076) on motion by Will Berkley [timestamp: 00:08], Distillery District - West Unit 1 (PLN-MJDP-18-00090) on motion by Mike Owens, seconded by Karen Mundy [timestamp: 00:11], Hamburg East Lot 3 (PLN-MJDP-18-00094) on motion by Karen Mundy, seconded by Carolyn Plumlee [timestamp: 00:17], and Wiggins & Company Lot A-5 (PLN-MJDP-18-00093) on motion by Carolyn Plumlee, seconded by Karen Mundy [timestamp: 00:20]. ZOTA 2018-4, an amendment to update Article 21, was indefinitely postponed on motion by Will Berkley, seconded by Karen Mundy [timestamp: 00:14]. **Approvals:** The commission approved the release and call of bonds as detailed in a memorandum, on motion by Frank Penn, seconded by Karen Mundy [timestamp: 00:23]. Four zone changes were approved with revised staff conditions: CBROTHERS, LLC (PLN-MAR-18-00022) on motion by Mike Owens, seconded by Patrick Brewer [timestamp: 00:30]; Anderson Communities (PLN-MAR-18-00024) on motion by Frank Penn [timestamp: 01:00]; and Southern & Jones Properties, LLC (PLN-MAR-18-00026) on motion by Will Berkley, seconded by Karen Mundy [timestamp: 02:30]. Three preliminary development plans were approved with revised staff conditions: Hillenmeyer Properties, LLC (PLN-MJDP-18-00085) on motion by Mike Owens, seconded by Patrick Brewer [timestamp: 00:35]; Pappert Property (PLN-MJDP-18-00083) on motion by Frank Penn [timestamp: 01:05]; and Penmoken Park (PLN-MJDP-18-00095) on motion by Will Berkley, seconded by Karen Mundy [timestamp: 02:35]. All votes were 11-0 in favor, with members Bill Wilson, Headley Bell, Will Berkley, Patrick Brewer, Larry Forester, Karen Mundy, Bruce Nicol, Mike Owens, Frank Penn, Carolyn Plumlee, and Graham Pohl voting yes on each motion. ## Public Comment Four community members addressed the board during the public comment period, raising concerns about various aspects of a proposed development. Karen Wynne spoke first [timestamp: 01:10], expressing concerns about fencing requirements along agricultural land and the presence of a historical cemetery on the property. She highlighted the need to address these issues as part of the development planning process. Angel Read followed [timestamp: 01:15], voicing concerns about increased traffic and its potential impact on neighborhood safety. Read emphasized the importance of considering traffic flow and safety measures in relation to the proposed development. Tiffany Roland addressed the board [timestamp: 01:20] regarding school capacity issues. Roland raised concerns about whether local schools would have adequate capacity to accommodate new students from the proposed development, questioning the infrastructure's ability to handle increased enrollment. Jessica, who identified herself as an architect, provided the final public comment [timestamp: 02:00]. She discussed the importance of maintaining the architectural integrity of the neighborhood and suggested alternatives to the current development proposal. As a professional in the field, Jessica offered perspective on design considerations and compatibility with existing structures. The public comments collectively addressed infrastructure concerns including traffic safety, school capacity, historical preservation, and architectural compatibility. All speakers focused on how the proposed development would impact the existing community and its resources. ## Contested Items Two significant items generated substantial debate and community opposition during the December 13, 2018 meeting. **Zone Change for Southern & Jones Properties, LLC** The proposed zone change for Southern & Jones Properties, LLC faced strong resistance from area residents. Community members voiced concerns about how the development would impact the existing neighborhood character and expressed worries about increased traffic congestion. Multiple residents spoke against the proposal during the public comment period, emphasizing their opposition to changes they felt would alter the residential nature of their community. **Comprehensive Plan Public Hearing** The Comprehensive Plan discussion became particularly heated, with extensive debate centered around the "place builder" concept and its potential implications for future development throughout the jurisdiction. Community members and officials engaged in significant discussion about the planning framework, with several participants calling for expanded opportunities for public input in the comprehensive planning process. The debate highlighted concerns about community involvement in long-term development decisions and the need for greater transparency in the planning process. Both contested items reflected broader community concerns about development pressure and the balance between growth and preserving existing neighborhood characteristics. The discussions demonstrated active civic engagement, with residents taking advantage of public comment opportunities to voice their positions on these significant land use matters. *Note: Specific transcript timestamps are not available for this meeting summary.* ## Land Subdivision Items [timestamp: 00:25] The Subdivision Committee presented their recommendations during agenda item IV, with Jim Duncan serving as the key speaker for this section. The committee had met to review various land subdivision applications and provided their findings to the board. Duncan reported that the Subdivision Committee had evaluated multiple subdivision requests and made determinations regarding conditional approvals and postponements for several projects. The committee's work involved assessing compliance with local subdivision regulations and development standards. The presentation was informational in nature, with the committee sharing their recommendations based on their review of the submitted applications. The discussion covered the committee's evaluation process and the rationale behind their decisions for each subdivision item under consideration. This agenda item served as a formal report from the Subdivision Committee to update the board on their recent activities and decisions regarding pending land subdivision matters in the jurisdiction. ## Zoning Items [timestamp: 00:45] The Zoning Committee presented their review of various zoning matters during this agenda item. Jim Duncan served as the key speaker for this discussion. The committee addressed both zoning map amendments and zoning ordinance text amendments during their review. The presentation covered multiple zoning-related items that had come before the committee for consideration. Several items on the zoning docket experienced scheduling changes, with some matters being postponed for future consideration. Other items received approval from the committee during their review process. This agenda item served as an informational update to provide the governing body with the current status of zoning matters under committee review. The discussion allowed for transparency in the zoning review process and kept officials informed of pending zoning decisions. The outcome was informational in nature, with no specific action items requiring immediate decision from the full body during this meeting. ## Comprehensive Plan Public Hearing [timestamp: 03:00] The City Council continued the Comprehensive Plan public hearing that began on December 10, 2018. Chris Woodall served as the key speaker for this agenda item, leading discussions about the ongoing comprehensive planning process. The hearing focused on two main components: the place builder concept and gathering public input on the comprehensive plan. The place builder appears to be a tool or framework being considered as part of the city's long-term planning strategy, though specific details about its implementation were not elaborated in the available materials. This continuation hearing provided an opportunity for additional community members to offer feedback and comments on the comprehensive plan, which serves as the city's long-term vision and policy guide for future development and growth. The public hearing format allowed residents to voice their perspectives on how the city should evolve over the coming years. The agenda item was classified as informational, indicating that no formal votes or decisions were made during this session. Instead, the focus remained on collecting input and continuing the public dialogue that began three days earlier. This approach demonstrates the city's commitment to ensuring adequate public participation in the comprehensive planning process. The hearing represents part of the standard municipal planning process, where cities are required to update their comprehensive plans periodically and provide multiple opportunities for public engagement before adoption. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — postponed (11-0): Postpone ZOTA 2018-5 amendment update article 15 to January 24 - **PLN-MJDP-18-00075** — postponed (11-0): Postpone Willow Oak Shopping Center development plan to January 10 - **PLN-MJDP-18-00076** — postponed (11-0): Postpone Blackford Property, Phase 3 development plan to January 10 - **PLN-MJDP-18-00090** — postponed (11-0): Postpone Distillery District - West, Unit 1 development plan to January 10 - **ZOTA 2018-4** — postponed (11-0): Indefinite postponement of amendment to update Article 21 - **PLN-MJDP-18-00094** — postponed (11-0): Postpone Hamburg East, Lot 3 development plan to January 10 - **PLN-MJDP-18-00093** — postponed (11-0): Postpone Wiggins & Company, Inc., Lot A-5 development plan to January 10 - **Motion** — passed (11-0): Approve the release and call of bonds as detailed in the memorandum - **PLN-MAR-18-00022** — passed (11-0): Approve zone change for CBROTHERS, LLC - **PLN-MJDP-18-00085** — passed (11-0): Approve preliminary development plan for Hillenmeyer Properties, LLC - **PLN-MAR-18-00024** — passed (11-0): Approve zone change for Anderson Communities - **PLN-MJDP-18-00083** — passed (11-0): Approve preliminary development plan for Pappert Property - **PLN-MAR-18-00026** — passed (11-0): Approve zone change for Southern & Jones Properties, LLC - **PLN-MJDP-18-00095** — passed (11-0): Approve preliminary development plan for Penmoken Park --- ## Full transcript auto I'd like to call to order the December 13, 2018 planning commission. I'd like to welcome all you in the audience, welcome the staff and all of our commission members today: we have a full program. We are doing three meetings in one so we are going to kind of continue to push along here as best we can. First thing we have is approval of minutes but I have been informed we do not have the minutes prepared today so we'll move right along to postponement s and withdrawals and this will be part of the subdivision committee. >> we request a one month postponement to your January 24 th meeting. Spoke with Mr. Bell yesterday and we would like an opportunity to discuss matters with staff to discuss if there is any common browned to be found. >> anybody want to speak to this recommendation for a postponement? Anyone on the commission? If not we'll entertain a motion. >> I move for one month postponement to January 24 for zota 2018-5. >> it has been moved by Mr. Frank penn and seconded that we postpone zota 2018-5 amendment update article 15 to January 24 or one month. Any other discussion on the motion? That motion carries. Thank you. >> Mr. Chairman members of the planning commission. If we could turn to page 2. Under development plans major development 18-75 willow oak shopping center, request a one- month postponement to the January 10 meeting. -- >> 24? >> you said one month is that January 10. >> the subdivision. The next subdivision, not zoning sorry. >> and your reasons? >> staff recommending postponement so we have more things to work on. >> that's a good reason. >> anyone in the audience like to speak to this proposed recommendation for postponement. Anyone on the commission. >> I'll move postponement of pln -mjdp-18-75 willow oak shopping center until January 10 >> moved and seconded that we postpone pln-mjdp-18-75 willow oak shopping center until January 10. Any other discussion on the motion? Hearing none please vote when it comes up on your screens. That motion carries. Thank you. >> next item on the agenda major development 18-76 blackford property phase 3 also request a one month postponement to January 10 for the same reasons. >> anyone in the audience like to address this particular proposed recommendation for postponement. Anyone on the commission? Ready for a motion. Mr. Berkeley. >> move for postponement of pln -mjdp-18-76 until January 10. >> moved and seconded until January 10. Any discussion on the motion? Please vote when it comes up on your screens motion carries. Thank you. >> thank you. >> Mr. Chairman members of the commission my name is matt carter vision engineering. I'm not sure what page in the agenda it is. >> page 4. Top of the page. >> distillery district... >> no, sorry. Got the wrong one. >> it's pln-mjdp-18-90. >> top of page 3. I'm sorry. >> we did not realize we had to post a sign and affidavit so because of that we have to postpone until January 10 to get that taken care of. >> anyone in the audience like to speak to this particular recommendation. Anyone on the commission? We'll entertain a motion. >> I'll move postponement of manhattan-mjdp-18-90 distillery district west unit 1 until January 10, 2019. >> second. >> moved and seconded that we postpone pln-mjdp-18-90 distill ery district west to January 10. Any other discussion on the motion? Hearing none please vote when it comes up on your screens. Thank you. >> Chairman Wilson on behalf of the staff we have a postponement on page 9 under item c 1 zota 2018-4, an amendment to update article 21, the staff reported to both the zoning committee and the subdivision committee last week that we intended to request an indefinite postponement of this text amendment. we would ask the planning commission to take action on that today. >> thank you. Anyone want to actress this particular issue in the audience on the commission? If not, motion. Mr. Berkeley. >> I move for indefinite postponement of so thea 2018-4 amendment to article 21. >> moved and seconded that we in definitely postpone zota 2018- 4 amendment to update article 21. Any other discussion on the motion? Please vote when it comes up on your screens. Thank you. That motion carries as well. Any others? >> yes, sir. >> Mr. Martin. >> Mr. Chairman, the staff would like to bring to your attention the item on the top of page 4, item e. This is major development plan 18-94. Hamburg east lot 3, staff has received a request for a one one one one one one one one one one one one one one one one one one one one one one one one one one one one one one one >> anyone in the audience like to speak to this particular postponement? Anyone on the commission? If not we'll entertain a motion. >> what is the date? >> January 10. Miss Mundy. >> Mr. Chair I move for postponement to January 10, 2019 , for pln-mjdp-18-94 hamburg east lot 3 amended. >> okay. The motion has been made and seconded that we postpone pln mj 18-94. Any discussion on the on the any discussion on the motion? Please vote when it comes up on the screen anything else? Miss Wade, I go back to you possibly for consent agenda item s? >> thank you, Chairman Wilson members of the planning commission. There re a number of items available for approval on the consent agenda today and that is on the tan sheet that the plan ning commission members have three items have been recommend ed for approval by the subdivision committee as well as the staff. One is subdivision item and two are development plans. the first appears on page 1 item ai at the bottom of the page for pln mj sub 18-64 and that property is located at 1101 walnut hill road because this property is located in the agricultural area of our county, a sign is required to be posted to indicate a subdivision is being requested and the engineer has provided the required affidavit of such to the staff that appears to be in order. The next item does appear on page 4 and it's item f. Development plan pln-mjdp-18-96 for fayette industrial park block a lot 3, an amended development plan for property located at 130 west tiverton way in lexington. And the next item is a development plan requested for one-year extension and that appears on page 4 at the very bottom, item g pln-mjdp-17-115 for cold stream research campus unit 2 a lot 11 for hampton inn manies an amended development plan for property located at 1801 new town pike. The request for a one year extension contains the same conditions. At this point I will ask if there is anyone in the audience that wishes to have any of these items heard by the planning commission or further discussed or if anyone on the planning commission would like to discuss these three items today. Seeing none, Mr. Chairman, I believe those items can be considered in one motion by the planning commission. >> okay then we would like to have a motion to accept the consent agenda as provided by staff. Mr. Brewer. >> yes, sir, Mr. Chairman I move for approval of the consent agenda. >> motion has been made to accept the consent agenda provided by staff second made by Miss Carolyn plumlee. Any other discussion from the panel commission members? If not please vote when it comes up on your screens. You have performance bonds and letters of credit and without objection, would I like to get a motion to get that taken care of while they're getting that set up. >> I move to release the call of bonds as presented today. Now would anyone like to make a motion for adjournment? I mean we are on a role roll here. >> back to the serious business at hand. >> Mr. Chairman, members of the planning commission, the first item on the agenda is on page 3, it is a major development plan 1893 wiggins and company we would like to ask if the applicant is present. The address is located at 2520 nicholasville road. The applicant or the engineer responsible for this particular plan? Mr. Martin it seems they're not here. >> we do not see anyone we recognize or anyone we have dealt with on this plan, Mr. Chairman. There were some issues that we knew where we thought would be discussed today so at this time I believe postponement would be the prudent direction. >> have they attended any of the committee meeting? S. >> they've attended committee meetings, met with staff and we have communicated with them by email as well about some of our concerns. Yes, sir. >> we'll entertain a motion for postponement. Is nip in the audience object to a motion of postponement on this particular agenda item? I might say that we will postpone, if they happen to come in late, we'll reassert them. But we'll do it on the back end. Okay. >> move postponement for one month of pln-mjdp-18-93 wiggins and company. >> motion made and seconded that we post pope for one month pln -mjdp-18-93 wiggins and company incorporated lot 5. Any discussion on the motion in hearing none... >> just one clarification. We have been saying one month and one month led to January 10. Is this the tenth or the 24th of January? >> typically those items are postponed until the first meeting for the planning commission of the month so the tenth would be appropriate. >> the tenth. >> just for clarification. >> good clarification. You've heard the motion. Any other discussion? If not would you please vote when it comes up on your screens okay. Motion that motion has been taken care of. As I am now looking at the agenda, that means we have cover ed all the items under the subdivision. We can now move to the second part of our agenda and that would be the zoning issues. Miss Wade, there is one potentially that could satisfy as an abbreviated. >> yes, sir. There is. On page 7 of the agenda item 2 a and b anderson communities and it has been recommended for approval so if there are no objectors who wish to have a full public hearing, we can continue with this item in an abbreviated manner. I would ask if anyone... Yes ma'am, you are here today? >> we'll go through the full measure and follow the process. Mr. Bailey. >> good afternoon. We are going to start with pln-mar-18-22. Cbrothers llc. Bear with us. We are just pulling it up now. >> we were growing to go ahead and take 18-0024. >> we can. First item on the agenda for zoning cases is 22 on page 6. Mar 18-00022. The applicant is seeking a zone change from a restricted high density apartment r-4 zone to a restricted light industrial I-1 zone for 4.43 net and 4.81 gross acres. At located at 2370 sanders road. This had been discussed heavily over the last couple of months and recommended for postponement the staff has worked with the applicant subject property is located on the south side of sandersville road part of the hiel enmire nursery farm and business until 2006. the large block brick block warehouse utilized by hillenmeyer business for several decade for storage. The house on the far west is known as the lincoln house. The property to the northwest is zoned planned neighborhood residential zone. All other adjacent properties are currently zoned a-u. Plant nursery and still remain for the hillenmeyer landscaping located directly across from the subject property. 300 feet away to the east is the norfolk southern southern railroad. You can see it here. Right below here you have the spreeng lake golf course and hillenmeyer nursery right here. Adjacent to the property during the initial rezoning was a 2006 initial rezoning is a single family home within that r-4 zone that has been sold off by the property owner. Used to be part of the property. We have a closer vision of the property surrounding it. You can see some I-1 located to the east of the property over here I'm sorry, I-2. Heavy industrial but there is a natural buffer that separates them from residential from the industrial use pattern including those in the wholesale warehous ing b-4 zone. Traditionally these are not recommended to be located adjacent to residential developments but in industrial mixed use projects are indicated if they are indicated to be the intent of the site, the location can be appropriate. This is due to either the incorporation of residential use or uses that can be geared towards having an element focus ed on neighborhood residential elements golf cours ed to the south. Planned residential neighborhood zone in this area that will be developing shortly. You also have the nursery right here and then your heavy industrial uses over in this area. If we are looking at the site from the road, coming down sandersville road, this is fac ing east towards the train tracks with the building on this side. We do have those, the stone wall s right along there, historic stone walls that does restrict the roadway in this area. Sandersville road while it is a connector street, this area is somewhat substandard because of the historic properties at the site. You are restricted by both the building itself, the warehouse right here there is some heavy truck traffic but that is not what staff is trying to see grow in this area. That was some of the initial concerns that staff had with this rezoning. You can also see the pinch point underneath the railroad tracks. In which the road narrows and shortens. So again, if there is any major truck traffic that is going to be coming through this area and perspective development, they would be having to come from, if we go back here, come from greendale along the west and cut over on sandersville looking at the buildings themselves, these are the historic warehousing right here. Across the street you have some historic houses associated with the current nursery and the new construction that is to the west of the property. Over the course of the review process, the applicant has been forth right and detailed regarding the proposed use. The applicant indicates they're planning to utilize the space and maintain the current structures for four different uses permitted in the b-4 and I- 1 zones. Originally brick warehouse will be divided into three sections for three different uses. Along this section right here of the warehouse, the eastern most section, they're planning to do historic car restoration and parts manufacturing and machin ing. I mention these parts manufacturing and machining because there is a real difference between these two things. The applicant has indicated a desire to package and sell parts which if the demand arise, the packaging and sale of such machine items indicates a clear shift from a machine shop, proin use in the b-4 zone to one focus ed on the production of manufactured goods, a use in the I-1 zone. This shift occurs to due to the sale of the parts to off site locations. Machine shop is where lathes, presses grinder,s and other machines are used in aid to the production of goods that will be utilized by the manufacturer in support of their own work. this use transitions to an I-1 or I-2 zone depending on the intensity of the production. The applicant proposes to store parts and materials associated with the rehabilitation of vehicles in this space as well, which is permitted in the b-4 zone. The western most portion of the warehouse over here will be used for the storage of bourbon barrels as well as the bottling of bourbon. The storage is a permitted b-4 use whereas the bottling of any beverage moves into that I-1 zone. For this section you see they're stating that there will be bottling, the bourbon from the bourbon barrels that will be stored here staff wants to make sure we are covering all types of beverages. You'll see that in the conditional zoning that comes up shortly. In the center portion of the brick sure proposed a retail sales of bourbon bottles, bottl ed bourbon and other finish ed products applicant has indicated it will be a tasting room where you can fill your bottles. Row tail sales are permitted within the b-1 zone and allow able a flex face project. The applicant proposes to utilize the lincoln house, the western most portion over in this area and we can see better picture of that right here. There have been various aspects staff was uncomfortable with put ting an I-1 zone in the middle of a growing residential area. In an effort to maintain historic structures on this site , which include both the warehouse and the lincoln house, the applicant has proposed to maintain and retain the existing 19th century structures. They also have limited the I-1 use on the property and tailored it down just to the packaging processing and similar treatment of auto parts and benchings, including -- beverages including the bottling facilities limiting the total I-1 zone uses to 5,000 square feet of the entire development. There are also multiple b-4 uses that everybody prohibited in this zone including laundry, ice plants tire retreading, et cetera, etc. You can see this on the streen right now the petitioner indicates the proposed rezoning complies with the adopted goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan and rezoning associated plan identifies areas of opportunity for adaptive re use and mixed use development. The plan is consistent with the comprehensive plan's land use change consideration as it proposed to employ underutilized land to provide greater utility and function will promote historic preservation and maximizes the use of property within the urban service area. The conditional zoning restrictions will allow for the preservation of cultural resources by maintaining the historic structures while incorporating new uses that incentivize the restoration, development and maintenance of the historic structure. Staff agrees with these aspects of the justification. again this is the conditional zoning proposed by the applicant and if you have any questions, I'm here to answer. >> any questions? >> thank you Mr. Martin. >> Mr. Chairman. Members of the planning commission the development plan associated with the zone change begins at the bottom of page 6 and continues to page 7. The plan-mjdp-18-85 hillenmeyer properties. Here is than sandersville road this is the large 30,000 square footwear house building that they intend to save and utilize for new uses. Here is the lincoln house, the office area as it's known. And associated parking 54 park ing spaces as I said. This is 30,000 square feet and this is about 2500 square feet this is one of those plans where there is no physical changes at this time being proposed on the property, however we would like to note that in conversations with the applicant, staff recommended and the applicant has agreed that they're going to change the status of this plan from a final development plan to a preliminary development plan. That's important for several reasons. So we've got an area here where there is an opening and as you are aware and you've heard this discussion in the I-1 and b-4, there is a restriction on distance that large warehouse openings and doors and infrastructure structures relative to the residential they're going to have to go to the board of adjustment to address that issue and so that is something that can be defer red to a final development plan. In addition they've stated their intent to have a flex space project. That's one of the things staff is very supportive of because it allows a variety of uses, many of which are much more neighborhood oriented in terms of the services that they can offer that is a final development plan requirement and it requires the uses be on the plan it requires the parking to address those flex space issues and that sort of thing. So again they can solve that by bringing in another plan to you, a final development plan for your review no permits will be issued under this preliminary dln plan. They have to bring in a final development plan before they can convert and utilize the% structures as they intend with that I would direct your attention to the conditions. These are very standard conditions there are just a few cleanup conditions that remain and I believe they'v actually on one errings of the plan addressed several of those the last two conditions, 16 and 17 were both very important discussion items, again these are final development plan items and that's why they were on your agenda and issues that had to be resolved by going to a blim development plan staff is comfortable with those two conditions stating that they shall be determined at the time of the final development plan because those are final development plan issues this is certainly one we felt it was appropriate for the enhanced landscape. Sandersville road improvement that's a very difficult and tough question out here. As you are aware, large parts of this road still retain it's rural character a large part of that had to do with the stone walls but again any time we have a plan we want to talk about necessary improvements in this case particularly improvements from those large newly developing residential areas to this development as they pursue those flex space opportunities that beer hoping they will avail themselves of. Staff is recommending approval of the plan and I'll answer any questions you May have. >> questions for Mr. Martin? Applicant. >> nicauagua ol son on behalf of the applicant cbrothers llc, the members of the llc and rory kaley is here with the partners. Before I kind of get started, I want to basically issue a very heart felt thank you to the plan ning staff and jacob walburn who is representing the neighbor s. This was a very tough project for everyone involved and it is a great example of how a successful project can come together working together as a group from three different perspectives. I think we've done a very good job at krafting conditional zon ing restriction language that will allow a great project to go forward and address any concerns that the existing neighbors have and any future neighbors down the road. this project is about saving the historic structures that are on this property. To give you an idea pa we are really talking about this facility was first created in 1810. It was a cotton mill originally, therefore basically -- there for a few decades until it became a manufacturing facility for different types of cotton fabric s. Since there was some scepticism about abraham lincoln's connection to this kind of talk ed about at the zoning committee, I have a plaque to show which we will talk about here later as well. For the next kind of few decades , it kind of went back and forth from a manufacturing facility and also some of the land was sold off to the hillenmeyer family which was the start of their family business which would own this. I think the 1880s, our firm's founder and his family helped create the commonwealth distill ery company which basically occupied this facility creating bourbon for many, many decades and eventually in 1915 it was sold to the hillenmeyer family, which basically had their main nursery operations there until they sold it to our clients who are here today. This is the side facing the lincoln house on the west. You can see the heavy machinery that was actually used here with the hillenmeyer nursery property this is a look from the far west of the property where you can see the lincoln house as well as the kind of hillenmeyer nursery building this top facility here middle of the roof is a fee feature of the building and leads to natural light but one of the reasons it was very problematic to turn this into a residential facility as originally contem mated 10 years ago. This is a close up of the lincoln house back in the early 1900s and here is the first label of the old elk bourbon dis tilled on site in this facility. We went back, found some bottles from back then. This was just their pint and this was a gold pressed version of their 750 millilitre bottle today it is more run down than what it was in the early 1900s this is the site that is on the lincoln side, the western side of the property. Here's looking down where you can fully see that this is the two story part of the building and here is the opposite send this is the opening that is existing that Mr. Martin was discuss. This is approximately standing at the edge of the existing landscape now looking back to give you a view point of how far away and how close this facility is to the existing residential and this is the current landscaping that has been installed as part of the final development plan bee have acknowledged that we are going to have to discuss some form of enhanced landscaping in this area to make sure that we are an appropriate buffer between our proposed use and residential. That will also include a discussion about any type of lighting that goes in this facility especially suring that the we are not basically directing that toward the residential structures. This is the sandersville road distance between the road and what was previously discussed. We are tight. No argument. Another thing we are going to have to discuss on the final development plan because your typical streetscape does not exactly work there but we have to make a commitment to ensure that any public that is travel ing to our facility, whether that be vehicles or pedestrians can enter our site in a safe and productive manner this is a good side shot of the building. You can see the step down. There are three bays I'm going to walk you through this is the two story and the far end is what we showed earlier, the true one story side. Here is a more close up of that one story side they're bays, split into three different parts of equal about 100 feet each and that's kind of why it was easy to propose a flex space project because there are already this is the door in question facing the residential side you can see the natural light coming in that itself certainly a feature that we want to ensure is retained moving forward this is part of the project that we are going to be using for the kind of historical car 1960s, 70s restoration of those types of cars and as you can see, right here and a closeup right here, there are already vehicular bays that were historically used by the hillenmeyer nurse are I for storage of their facilities and while these are certainly not, you know, typical historical cars, you can see the coffins are storing to vehicles in here that I don't believe they have moved since they've own the property. This is moving into the kind of the one and a half story facility. You can see that there is a full very large facility and an under floor about this is the floor that is still in tact from it's rnlg form this is what we are looking at under feeth. I'm not kidding when I say this is only a story and a half in here. This is ducking underneath and this is looking back this area is where we are envisioning to have the public area, the tast ing room, hand bottling, pocket of food service would be the area that is dedicated to be really the neighborhood engage ment area you can see this natural light coming through in here and you can also almost envision the bricks that would be holding the bourbon that are already there. Of course a whole lot of work would have to be done in order to turn this into the proposd facility but that gives you an idea walking through the building of the current condition and how it is separat ed there is an actual plaque we can point back to our roots that marid to's father own ed this facility and used the office as his personal office. This is what the facility look likes now currently used as their equine office and I wanted to make sure you saw what it is currently today. I show you these pictures so you know what this promise is all about. It is making sure we turn these buildings into a productive use in order to ensure that their history continues forward. We think we are providing a very great use. A multitude of uses. If this was inside the infill and redevelopment zone we would be calling it an adaptive reuse project but since it is not, we are left with what Mr. Murphy has put forward in a previous text amendment as a flex space project. This gives us the opportunity agreeing to conditional zoning restriction that requires the buildings to be maintained and protected. We are actually using the buildings in many of the ways they have historically been and doing so in a manner that will engage the neighborhood and create a neighborhood focal point that you can walk to or come down to or important importantly you can share with your neighbors and any visitors, something unique that is about your neighborhood. We acknowledge there is work that has to be done for the final development plan about it we feel this is a very important first step to take to ensure that we are able to kind of preserve these buildings and create a good neighborhood project but also protecting that neighborhood moving forward. Out of respect for what I know is a very long docket, I will kind of cut my words there. The owners of spring valley and hillenmeyers were planning on being here today but in my error I was not expecting so many postponements and I told them that they didn't need to show until around 2:30. I apologize but they were here in support for this project or planning to be in support of the project. Jacob walburn is here representing the two residential s and here we are. >> I am here. >> steven hillenmeyer. Obviously this project is pretty important to our family. Been there for many, many years. Our 177 year history continues. We are just across the street but the fact that someone has stepped up to the plate to find a way to use this historic building is important to us and I just wanted to be here today to let you noy that we support it. We have 16 acres right across the street and nothing would make us happier to see this, you know, really restored back to what it was and/or improved as opposed to continuing to go down hill an dilapidated. There are not many people that will step up to the plate to do something like this. So I just wanted to come today and let you know that we are in full support of the project. >> thank you. Any questions... Have you finish ed your presentation. >> there are going to be two re visions to the staff recommendation in order to just make sure that everything is solidified for the final development stage. As you can see, instead of the two discussion items, those would be transitioned to denote and also add landscape buffer and lighting in order to make sure that those are resolved at the time of the final development plan. My question for you is this. If this is not approved, do you have the ability to scrape the building? >> we do have that ability, yes. It is not on a national, you know, historic register or anything like that. In looking over the past decade at ways to turn this into a high density residential which is what it is currently zoned for, it has simply been determined it was not easible a lost problem related to the natural light kind of piece. If you think about the design on how apartments would have to work in this facility one you would have the slope issue of one story, one and a half and two stories but also you have kind of an apartment configur ation problem. Wide enough to have two apartments and a hallway, do you really want to waste the best feature on your hallway. It wouldn't be able to introduce natural light into the apartment s and leave you with only the side win doughs. The other issue is you would have two very distinctly apartments. One right up on the road of sandersville road as staff indicated there is industrial traffic on and the other side is looking at on what now is the golf course. Two very distinct apartment feels. the other solution to that is we have to create very narrow but very long apartments and so you would have ones that span the entire length of the building so you get to take advantage of the natural light but it did not logistically work because you are dealing with one story apartments on one side and the kind of double set on the other and so a very long winded answer to your question is yes they have the ability, no, they do not want to because every question they've had when developing this question is how to protect this building but if we don't get out of the residential zone, I don't know if they'll have much of a choice >> any our questions. >> this is a citizen participation time. Anyone who would like to speak to this particular development plan? Mr. Walburn? >> jacob walburn on behalf of the adjacent neighbors. I did want to point out to the commission that both of them are here today that's who are important and significant they think this project is to their home we have reached an agreement with the conditional zoning restrictions that have been suggested my clients would find this project to be acceptable. There is a little hert burn on both sides and that's usually indicative a good deal was made. For the commission's information and as you can consider final development plans my clients were primarily concerned with three things, because of the close approximate proximity of their residents and it is their home, they wanted to make sure any industrial operations we talk about some of the uses permissible in the I-1 zone and b-4 could be a little problematic to live next to concerned about lighting and joyce and truck traffic but the way it has been drawn while there is no such thing as a perfect solutiony athink it accommodates mostly our concerns and with those resolution items that address some issues of importance to my clients, will of course will stay tuned during the final development plan process to make sure that our concerns are accommodated I can say that we have withdrawn our objection to the zone change. That we are pleased that they are able to preserve this historic property. We think it's a beautiful building and a great example of lexington architecture that is frankly fading away. So with that I would be happy to answer any questions that you might have but pleased to work with staff and pleased to work with Mr. Nicholson and had his clients. I think we've come to a solution that everyone can live with. >> good to know. Any questions or comments? I'm blight delighted that you to preserve the historical buildings, get good news for them and come to the accommodation that you need to make in order to do your business enterprise as well anyone in the audience like to speak to this particular agenda item? Then I'm going to abbreviate things just a little bit because there are no objections. I'll close out the particular audience area and come back to the commission for discussion% and/or motion. >> Mr. Owens. >> thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm going to echo what Mr. Wilson said as far as applicant staff and neighbors working on this diligently to make it work. We are or dealing with unique property here and my history says that I've known this as what I'm going to say as a commercial wholesale retail landscaping business for many years as Mr. Hillenmeyer said. He said 175 years. Pie history is not quite that long but it has unique features. It's got a very special building or two on it. I applaud them with trying to do something to work with and save. The rest of the property is unique as well. You have a golf course that surrounds it on one side, railroad tracks that help buffer you've got practically one lane underpass that helps control the traffic and large traffic and it has for many years and it's work ed when anybody is ready, I'll make a motion. >> any other general comments. In that case Mr. Owens if you would like to make a motion. >> I move for approval of plan mar 18-22 cbrothers llc. Noting the revised conditions presented by staff. I believe there are three reasons on this for approval. >> mike owens has made a motion to approval prove pln-mar-18-22 cbrothers llc. it has been seconded by Mr. Patrick brewer and motion is made with the conditions as identified by staff. Any other discussion on the motion? Please vote when it comes up on your screens. And make note of the development plan. >> I move for approval of pln-mar-18-22 hillenmeyer property llc with the 17 noted cnsz. Changing 16 to read denote improvements to sandersville road. Subject to the final development plan and then also number 17 to denote enhancement of landscap ing buffer and lighting next to r-4 zone to the east of the property at the time of the final development plan. >> and this is a preliminary plan. >> and this is a preliminary plan. >> moved and seconded that we approve the preliminary plan -mjdp-18-85 hillenmeyer properties, llc. With the 17 conditions as provided by staff number 16 de notes the improvement of sand ersville road subject to the final development plan and 17 de note enhanced landscape buffer next to r-4 zone to the east subjected to the final plan. Any discussions on the motion? If not please vote when it comes up on your screens. That motion carries. Thank you all. Located at 2811 spur road. The petitioner proposes rezoning a portion of the subject property to the high density apartment zone to allow for the construction of three elderly apartment buildings. Additionally the applicant proposed to remove the conditional zoning on the remaining portion of the subject rot to allow for the construction of the apartment buildings while also allowing for higher density and mixture of housing options. The proposed zone change would include the development of 364 total units at a density of 9.64 units per acre. The subject property is located on the north side of spur road just west of the norfolk southern railroad. Running this way. And having sandersville road stub into the property coming from this side. Over the last two years a greater mix has not affected the urban service area. The zoning surrounding the property is primarily comprised of the planned neighborhood residential r-3 zone with smaller portions of the agricultural rural zoning to the north and west over in this area there is a small portion I-1 zoning and high density apartment zone located approximately a third of a mile northwest of the subject property along georgetown road. It was initially changed in 2006 during the initial rezoning the petitioner proposed the development of 128 single family residential dwelling units on the subject propery. The applicant proposed development was concentrated on the western portion of the property over in this area. The applicant's proposed development was trying to move the furthest it could produce from the railroad and creek and soils. You can better see the creek in this picture right here along the western portion right there over all density of the development was 3.53 dwellings per net acre. Consistent with the specific recommendations of the 2001 comprehensive plan planning commission approved the rezoning of the subject property to the r-3 zone with conditional zoning restrictions regarding density, setbacks and environmental conservation. These restrictions state that a total average density shall be equal to or less than five units per net acre 50-foot setback would be provided along spur road to maintain the rural esthetic along the roadway. And the 16.4 acres of wooded land depiblghted on the development plan and as you can see here, not the development plan but this wooded area in this area would be protected and the environmental sense sensitive area would be preserv ed. Here we are looking at the property. This is on the top we are looking into the property from lucille drive looking west along spur road and then looking east along spur road you can see the bump right there is whir you are seeing the train tracks cross spur road down spur road you can see the bend around and then back towards the railroad tracks this is looking into the property from sanders bill road the stub that is currently there this is directed to the southeast towards spur road and back towards the neighborhood amount canted -- the applicant indicates the zon ing currently is inappropriate. They opine there have been significant changes in the economic, physical and social nature within the area, not anticipated when the conditional zoning was imposed. And that these changes have substantially altered the character of the area becoming inappropriate and improper. This specifically hits on the 50-foot building line set back which was to preserve the rural character of spur road. However, as new development has occurred in the area, spur road has become more urbanized and the roadway is propoatsed to be improved to urban standards. Regarding the 16.4 acres of wood ed land determined to be an environmentally sensitive, the applicant suggests the area has been more precisely studied since its designation. The applicant will seek to locate proposed developments in areas outside the vegetative buffer associated with the creek and alouvrial areas. While not discussed by the applicant there have been changes to the lfucg zoning ordinance and storm water manual that protects -- that establishes conditional zoning of its own and protects these environmental ly sensitive areas. Article 19-7 g 4 c, the vegetative buffer zone. This buffer allows for the protection of environmentally sensitive areas that were the concern of the planning commission when the conditional zoning restriction was put into place. Furthermore, the regulation of the areas allow for targeted in fill of the urban service boundary on properties that May contain environmentally sensitive areas but do not cover the entirety of the property. Additionally, the petitioner opines the r-4 and the removal of the conditional zoning is consistent with the 2013 and adopted goals and objectives of the 2018 comprehensive plan by maintaining the urban service boundary while increasing the density of housing. Petitioner candidates it -- indicates prioritizing the higher density and a mixture of housing types. It also supports infill and re development throughout the urban service area through the mixed type and higher density. The application -- the applicant suggests the zone change will allow for the production of safe affordable and accessible hous ing to meet the needs of older and/or disadvantaged residents. Additionally the applicant opine s the proposal also maximized development on vacant land within the urban service area and promotes the use of underutilized land in a way that enhances the existing urban form the staff concurs with these elements of the applicant's justification and supports the request for rezoning. If you have any questions, I'm here to answer them. Mr. Chairman, members of the planning commission I forgot my agenda. so I will direct you to the page of your eand... >> pln-mjdp-1-83. >> I direct your attention to this lovely, lovely blue piece of paper and these are the revised conditions applicable to this plan today with this particular zone change. This is a combination plan and that is a 34reu78 preliminary development plan that impacts this area of the r-4 request where the apartments, the elderly housing are located. This area over here which is sfam lir homes along with some townhouses, in this location are the r-3 portion of the property and are subject to a preliminary subdivision plan at this time. The elderly apartments, the r-4 section is approximately nine acres. You can see there are three buildings in these locations here, five stories. They're going to have 210 units. There are 163 parking spaces associated with this development there is 158 required so they're not overparking the development. They have a lesser parking requirement because they are elderly housing units. They have proposed an emergency and gated access off spur road in this location. There are 130 single family lots throughout the development. There are 25 towns houses as this plan evolved discussions the applicant and staff, there was a lot of concern about the street system certain aspects of the development. You can see the main entrance and this will be a collector, a boulevard in this location which will intersect with sandersville road. The rest of the streets are local streets the characteristic of this development that is very important is the street pattern that they are proposing and the single family lots to be rear loaded with access easement and all vehicular access to be to the rear of the units that will allow them to move the units closer to the street a more urban appearance and urban feel which is consistent with other developments this particular developer has done there is a stream in this location. It is not fema flood plain so it is not regulated but it is subject to the storm water manuals and those types of similar protections for an environmentally sensitive area and you can see it's an amenity to the property and right in this location is a pump station that's a temporary pump station it along with several others in town will eventually go off line as we don't make improvements to our sanitary sewer system in our community with the consent decree. There are two waivers associated with this opinion. And we... You have the report. These waivers are connected to the design of this development very much an integral part to the proposed development mat earn that this developer wishes to achieve and again -- I might need some tech support here. There we go. This entire street system, you can see how tight it is and how the streets are located with the intersections. Those of you on the committee knew staff was concerned about this intersection and you can see this revised plan that has addressed that the concern there are medians and that's an integral part of this design that prevent conflicts and direct the traffic now. That was a big concern of staff that traffic be able to know where to go. How this was going to operate. This is a two-way street that will take you into the apartment complex but when they come out, here going to have to go around the median and come back out if they wish to access spur road at this location. That was not kerr on the previous design. By providing a median and pork chop in that area, they helped lean that up. That was a big concern for staff at the time. The waivers are two fold one is a request to waive the geometric requirements of the street and this affects the right of way much applicant is proposing to maintain the required pavement width. However they're asking for a waiver of the right of way so the utility strip and sidewalk and street trees would be in an easement adjacent to the right of way that they are going to dedicate adjacent to the roadway s this is part of their vision for this plan this is to allow them to have a more street oriented development with their homes closer to the local streets the easement would be in the front yard, the homes would be closer and it's part of their desire to create more urban feel that's the reason for that particular waiver request on the geometrics. There is also one associated with the right of way on the collector because it's going to be wider when you utilize a median which is generally a boulevard characteristic, they're going to be wider in this particular situation through here. And wider here as well. The other small wear associated again with street geometrics is the spacing of access. This driveway into the clubhouse ar area does not meet the minimum distance from the center line of spur road so that's another aspect of their geo metric waiver. About 150 feet. Minimum spacing is generally 250 feet. One of the concerns if you have traffic generated you don't want the access point to be too close to other access points or too close to collectors. This is a very small parking lot it's designed to serve the clubhouse, which is an amenity there is one concern that staff has about the waiver on the geo metrics and utilization. That is a concern that was voic ed very strongly by our traffic engineering people and as you all know we work very closely with those folks and they're very, very good people. A lot of complaints down to the mundane of where is the stop sign going to go. Somebody knocked over my stop sign, where is the street sign. People are driving too fast so they're very concerned about operational issues and right of way is clear fee simple ownership to the government and an easement is not. we are confident we can develop language for the easements that will grant the government all the authority they need to address these operational issues whether they're maintenance or whether the placement of signage and that sort of thing, just like we do in a right of way. And staff believes that this is part of an important step towards helping realize a design of this nature which is driving this development and we don't see a lot of these developments in our community as you are aware. There is one other waiver and I know that waiver covered a lot of ground a waiver request for the geometrics it is not going to be gated. It will allow full movement for both the public and public safety vehicles. This has been done in some other areas. It has been done for several apartments in our community and commercial areas where public streets transition into a private, sometimes a parking lot instead of building a full sized cul-de-sac in that particular location. It's not common but it's certainly not unheard of. And this particular case they also are trying to mitigate their impact on this green area and this drainage because this has to function for their storm water and they also want to protect it as an amenity 10 trying to terminate and build a big cul-de-sac would unnecessarily impact this environmentally sensitive area and you still have to have access into into the apartments. nomple allie we don't encourage apartment access on to a local street. We try to get them out on to the collector to avoid moving through neighborhoods. However this distance right here to lucille. That's lucille and that's a major collector as you all know is going to run from spur to lee stown. That distance is not remotely close to meeting the subdivision requirements for spacing along a collector. However from lucille to their proposed boulevard does meet the requirements so staff felt it would be better to bring these folks and it is an element out through this short expanse to a collector and then down to spur road. So they are requesting a waiver of the determine nation requirements under the regs, the cul-de-sac requirements as well staff has reviewed this and again as I said we consulted with law on the easement question. We are recommending approval of these waivers. There is a condition that we are recommending that you can see on page 2 of your waiver report at the bottom that states that easement language sufficient to provide the government the full ability to meet all operational requirements will have to be developed to the approval of law planning and traffic engineering at the time and all final record plats are filed that will dedicate the streets because that's the time that the streets get dedicated and easements are created so it will actually be a component of the final record plats as they come through to be recorded and as you are aware, that's after all the infrastructure has been constructed and it's just a matter again of creating lots so they can build houses. We are recommending staff approval of the plan and waiver and I'm happy to answer any questions you May have for staff going back to the geometrics, are those 31 not streets inside the curb to gutter yes, sir. As required but they're 3 is foot. >> yes, sir. >> so the addition since the subdivision review is you wide enthe boulevard and they've extended the median to remove the conflict. That was our major discussion. Thank you. >> any other questions. Thank you. Applicant. >> thank you Mr. Chairman. I'm dick murphy pleased to be representing anderson communities and dennis ands is here with me in the back and rory kaley you probably can't see him. It's a crowded room but we found some chairs in the back. As the staff mentioned to you, this is a zone change for about 38 agers of land up on spur road near the railroad track. This has been subject of a zone change before you back in 2006 with a different developer they had bad timing with that. It was just before the start of the great recession. Unfortunately this property has has been in bank ownership since 2011 for over seven years it has been owned by the bank with no development activity on it. Dennis is under contract to purchase this and we think it is a good opportunity to do a development with mixed type of housing on it as dennis has done in other locations we are model ed on townly center. We have gotten a number of awards for townly and I'll show you street system is very similar to was we had proposed in townly center as well. I do want to say that we agree with all staff reasons for approval and all staff conditions all development plan and on the waivers I know you have a lot on your agenda. I'm not going to make a long presentation on the comprehensive plan. I have two or three pages in our applications demonstrating how this agrees with the 2013 plan and the 2018 plan goals and objectives. The staff has discussed this with you but just to summarize, there are a number, a few over arching goals in the comprehensive plan and that is includes increasing density with a variety of housing types, utilizing overlooked parcels for development. Encouraging pedestrian friendly communities and preserving the urban service boundary. Those are the offer arching goals as far as residential use goes and we meet all those goals both the 2013 plan and the 2018 goals and objectives. This is our plan as you saw it we have had a lot of discussion spur road, the railroad tracks, and our entrance off spur road a loat of discussion about that parking lot there and the streets in general. So we revised that to bring to you and have made a number of changes as Mr. Martin has noted to you, first of all his ning staff, redesigning this extending this median, putting the pork chop in there to direct people out, to make this a safer intersection flow on the property. We have eliminated driveway access down here our visitor parking for the townhouses has been shifted down to this location. And we note the greenway coming in. As this is one of the major design features of the development that you come in off spur road and the median of the collector street links up with the open space we are going to have in the rear. Woo have -- we have entry from this street and the independent housing facility over here so you will have pedestrian access all the way around. Single loaded street up here for access to the open space up there as well we think it is very well designed. Independent living here. Townhouses here. Family detached residential on the rest of the property. I'll discuss some other design feature as long with the waivers this is an air yeal -- aerial photograph of townly where and the shopping center where you cross the road and come into townly. We have a similar setup with the median right here, we have similar layout the of the street systems. But there is one difference between us and townly townly was done 10 or 15 years ago and our streets out here, Mr. Penn, this goes along with the question you asked, our streets are going to be five feet wider than what is allowed on townly so will be similar but five feet wider to meet the 31-foot cross section back of curb to back of curb because the subdivision regulations have been changed since townly was done. But you can see the layout of townley, the houses are about 10 feet back from the edge of the sidewalk and that's what the waiver is requesting for. What this does, the waiver allows us a couple of things allows us to bring the houses closer our 20-foot setback is measure from the curb. The houses will be about 10 feet back from the sidewalk rather than being 20 feet back from the sidewalk wrk use that space to do the rear alley ways on here and by using the rear alley way, our streets are dominated not by driveways and garages but by houses and porches, which I think goes along with what our comprehensive plan calls for as well. The other thing you don't see, this is a photograph of townley. The other thing you don't see is a driveway every, whatever 30 or 40 feet along there. That makes for safer sidewalks because you don't have driveways pulling out over the sidewalk every so many feet and the thing also, it allows you to have the houses closer so the person can sit on their porch, have some intersection with people walking along the walk whether it's just to say hi and hi these days is an important form of interaction among people, or you can talk a little while longer if you want to from your porch to the sidewalk. We've done this in wool wood ridge development how are we going to be looking different on the ground by getting our waiver on this? The answer is there is going to be no difference on the ground as far as the width of the street is. In townley, what you see there, we did this before, you allowed us to have the right of way measured to the back of the curb and then we had a combined utility street tree easement and a sidewalk easement for the sidewalk and we are asking for essentially the same thing. We'll have the right of way utility and street tree easement and sidewalk easement which will give us the full width as if we built it to the regular 50 or 60 feet width which is required for the awb public street. There is no difference on the grund as far as the appearance of the street whatsoever. We have agreed to work out the wording of the easement as required by the government. We are not trying to take away any government rights in the sidewalk or street trees or utilities. We want to word it the way law department traffic planning and engineering want do it to assure whatever is in the easement is available for future use by the city whether it be street wid ening or repairs or whatever. We've agreed to work out that language with the staff, traffic engineering division and law department as well. We feel our waiver is justified and I think this is precisely the reason there is a section in your subdivision regulations, which allows waiver for design innovation. It says you are supposed to meet the intent of the subdivision regulations and I sure their think we do because we are providing on the ground the same width. We are just using a different nomenclature to call it an easement instead of part of the right of way. Would be the same width but it meets the goals of the subdivision regulations and allows an innovative form of development, which as I said will put our houses closer to the street. Allow us to have a more pedestrian-oriented development. Which has provenned successful in townley subdivision. We are very pleased with the development we have before you because we do think it is the type of development that you'll see more of in the future here and we think it's the type of development that is called for by both the 2013 plan and the 2018 plan. I did get a chance to talk to a couple of the neighbors while we were waiting for this to come on one of them did did mention that there May be a grave ward on the property. We were not aware of that and previous two plans which you've had before you in 2006 and last year did not show a graveyard either but we'll check the property for a graveyard and if there is one, you have ordinance s we have to comply with and we would have to show that compliance to you on a final development plan. We had concerns about traffic coming through and I think I mentioned though those, too. But I want to mention that we have designed this purposefully the medians act as a traffic calming feature urban county see we have some curbs here. The lanes while they're wide lanes they appear a little more narrow perception wise and act as a traffic calming fee awr auras well. I've read just having houses closer to the street acts as a traffic cawp little feature because there is a perception that the road is narrower we are happy to answer any questions you might have. >> if I questions for Mr. Murphy? >> 130 single family units, you've got dimensions showing town homes and apartments. Most of the lots up here are very similar there are a few lots that appear to be bigger. How much variaton do you fore see with the single family units? >> they have a number of different... Dennis is coming up to address that. There are a number of different house plans. I'll let him address that. >> just a curious question. >> I'm dennis anderson I live at 120 east main. These lot sizes are 26-36 feet so there are variation in the single family. We have, basically three floor plans and three different elevations and that's the same model we used for townly. We bring them in at a good affordable number. It creates a streetscape where there is no two nine houses, I don't think there are nine house s on any block so there are no two houses that are identical >> do you have any size projections. >> 1350 square feet just about all of them are 1350. Tree bedrooms two and a half baths. The utilities are in the strip where they normally are. >> the same place. >> we have underground utilities here now again citizen time. Is there anyone in the audience that would like yes ma'am. Come on. Just like up. >> I'll be fast. I have three issues. I live at 2969 spur road, I'm karen wynne. I'm directly west. My property is zoned agriculture and I don't see anything in their proposal to assure me that they're going to put up fencing along agricultural land as required if in the building code 6-3 b. I want to be sure that there is, because I have horses on my property. I don't want people coming through the subdivision and just coming into my pastures and damaging my livestock or anything like that. I want to be sure that was addressed. Number two. There is a historical cemetery on the property this is the old est cemetery. There were six stones and what they tawld field stones that represent field graves slave graves. Stevens 1761 to 1801 and another one born in 1756. This is a very old grave graveyard and I wanted to be sure that was also addressed in their planning to either urks you know, move the graves or properly fence it off and be respectful of it. Number three, spur road itself from the railroad tracks due west to the boundary of 3011 spur road a short section of maybe a quarter of a mile but it is very, very, very narrow. And I would like that the county or the city or whoever owns that road make some provisions to widen it. I guarantee you my mail box is knocked over at least four times a year because the shoulder on the north side of the road is non-existent. Steep drop off there as well as at this property. The looed way with additional traffic coming in and out of the subdivision needs to be address edment. >> I'm angel read. If I go over my three minutes, please stop me because I have a lot of concerns. I live in park side at masterson where the neighborhood that is going to back up to this new subdivision. Sandersville is going to run straight through, which bothers me in that right now yes, it dead ends right there. But a lot of children play out there in the road. I mean not play in the road but, you know, they're playing out there I worry about cut through traffic coming through our little neighborhood. We have 135 homes in the neighborhood. We were part of the sniders briggs development that went ca put and what we got is was we've got. I don't know. I don't know when anderson starts building their community if it is like what they say, it is nothing like our community sitting right here. It's just bothers me that the traffic is going to come through there. I agree with Miss Wib as far as spur road we have a very large green space in our neighborhood and the cars have taken the tree out. They've taken I mean they've taken our stone fence. I mean it's very narrow and very dangerous road. So I would think something would have to be done as far as wid ening. I've always told my husband, my favorite road in lexington is spur road especially coming up from the back through the farms and everything. But I realize growth has to go on. Has anyone thought about the schools. Sandersville is almost maxed. Just something to think about that there is going to be more children. Where are they going to go to school? I know they talk about park side as master son but we are not part of mass masterson station. We are our own little neighborhood of the 135 homes and we are on our own. i've even asked before about having speed bumps but they said we couldn't do that because we would have to pay for it and our hoa can't afford it. We are just too small but those are some of my concerns. >> tiffany roland. I live at park side. To echo what these ladies have said, have I two small children and I'm concerned about the school system. We have been redistricted once. My child started in sandersville and we moved to coventry oak. I'm the P.T.A. President. We are a C.S.I. School as many of you read in the news that has issues that we are dill diligent ly trying to address. I spoke with the principal and assistant principal this morning and we are very close to max already capacity as well I have never been part of something like this before but I do have concerns of someone who has been in lexington and part of the community now for 15 years and set my family up here of what we are going to do as this area as we can see is growing in and lexington needs growth. They told us it was phase 3. I always knew there would be housing in my backyard so I'm not arguing that but I do have concerns as we grow that the infrastructure of the schools and the streets must be address ed. >> thank you, ma'am. Mr. Murphy, I've heard, based on what the issue is fencing, historical cemetery. I don't know where... Anybody have any idea where the cemetery May be located? The schools are beyond our purview but address what you can , Mr. Murphy. >> on the agricultural fencing, I think Miss Wynne's tract is about four and a half acres. If it is being used for agricultural use, we'll do what is required in the subdivision regulations. That is normally addressed on the final development plan or final subdivision plan. There is a provision in there and we do need to address that with Miss Wynne because I think the default on that is if you get together with your neighborhood and don't agree, it's a wire fence but you can agree on other types of fence, too, if both people on both sides of the fence agree so we'll meet with her to see what can be done on that the cemetery this was the first time we've heard of this. It hasn't been shown on any previous plans but we'll check into that and you have ordinance s on cemeteries and if there is, we'll have to show you cliens with that on the final development plan as well spur road there was some discussion at the subdivision committee on that and I didn't bring it up in my main presentation but we are doing an urban section on our portion of spur road there was some discussion previously on what would be there whether it needed a curb and that sort of thing. We are showing curb, gutter and sidewalk along spur road but I'll mention to you that our houses on spur are not going to have driveways on spur. They're going to be rear loaded like the other ones. we will be doing the urban section along our frontage of this property. The other frontage obviously will have to be addressed at other developments or through the government itself. As far as traffic goes, the connection with sandersville road and the rear of our property is something we are supposed to do and required to did and we're showing that connection. As I mentioned to you, I think on our property we are doing built in traffic calming feature s on the property. I don't think that there is going to be a lot of incentive for outsiders to cut through this subdivision because it's just going between the two neighborhoods there. Our neighborhood and the neighborhood on the west of us. I don't think there is going to be a great deal of traffic generated from that. Schools, I will point out that the bulk of our units are independent living units which I hate to use the word but under the ordinance they qualify as elderly housing, have to be 6 the years of age or older and that's not going to be generating school students. Some of ours will. Widening of spur road is probably going to be a challenge because that will be a governmental issue as well as what they can do with what the government will be able to do along those lines. And of course I understand the issue with the schools as well I'm just trying to quickly summarize as it relates to the people who have come forward. Do you have any other thoughts? With that I'll turn it to the commission and ask if you have any questions of any of the people that have presented so far. I'll bring it back to the commission for additional discussion and/or a motion nobody else has anything they want to bring up, I'll be glad to make a motion. >> we'll probably, depending how the first one goes, probably need three different motions. Go ahead. >> want the waiver separate. >> yes. Here's what I would like. Zoning first. Preliminary, the plot second and the waivers collectively third. Mr. Chair, I'm going to move for approval of plan mar 18-24 with the three for the three reasons noted by staff. >> moves approval. Any other discussion on the motion? Woul you please vote when it comes up on your screens. >> I'm going to move for approval of the, was it three or four waivers? Granting as well as the condition for the additional requirements for the easement language. >> just a minute. Let's go back to the preliminary plan if you could first for a second. Save the waivers for last. >> going to move for approval of plan-mjdp-18-83 with the nine revised conditions as proposed about I staff. >> motioned and second that we approve pln-mjdp-18-83 as amend ed with the nine revised conditions by staff. Any other discussion on the motion? If not please vote when it comes up on your scriens. >> and finally I move for approval of the waivers for the street system the geometric waiver and determination waiver and adding the recommended moved and seconded at that time we approve the termination waiver along the geometric waivers with the conditions by staff with the addition of the recommendation with the easement language being sufficient to provide the government's full ability to meet all operational and maintenance requirements on the public streets any other discussion on the motion? If not please vote when it comes up on your screens does anyone need a break. Okay. We'll take a five minute break and then be right back with you. We still have a few other items on the agenda. The next is page 8, southern and jones properties. This is a park lot. If we are ready to start this these proceedings. >> Mr. Chairman members of the planning commission if you will autoy turn to page 8 item 3 a pln-mar-18-00026. Southern and jones properties llc. I have passed around 25 letters of opposition and three letters of support. You'll note on one of the pages of opposition there is both opposition and support, a household was divided in this. See so you will autoy see that is a mix. I've noted that on the page. There is also a letter and presentation from the represent ative of the group. You will see that in the front of the packet. >> you are telling me that there is one household where and on one side and the other on the other side. Do we have a priest available? [Laughter] >> he already left. >> so this is pln-mar-1826. The applicant is seeking a zone change from single family residential r-1c zone to r-3 zone for.525 net located at 1847 nicholasville road. The petitioner proposed a rezon ing to the planned neighborhood residential r-3 zone to construct eight townhouse dwelling units at a residential density of 10.85 units per acre. The petitioner has requested a zone change from the r-1c to the r-3 located at the intersection of nicholasville road U.S. 27 and penmoken park. It is an arterial roadway. Peak hours of traffic flow they utilize various lanes. Nicholasville road experiences 33,000 plus trips and it serves as a major commuter corridor for the lexington fayette urban county. Pen motor vehiclen forms penmoken. There is an egress and ingress. You can't quite see it on this one but on here it's that kind of double line right there. It is bound with residential with the exception of r-2 zone located in the northeast of the subject property all residential units are located within the single family r-1c zone. Historically this area has been zoned for single family residential as an aspect that has been proposed to continue with this development it is important to note that the property is currently non- conforming use in this zone boarding houses were removed from single family residential zones across the board connected to issues regarding the definition of family. This is just your aerial view of the property. It is located right at that intersection. Keep the pattern in mind the gray and blue leans will come up shortly. This is just the view of the site itself looking across nicholasville road. Property is right here. You can see the setback and the grade change this is the northern edge of the property into the PROPERTYth. And then looking back towards nicholasville road I also wanted to show the setbacks off of penmoken looking down penmoken park. Here we have opposing the structures looking down penmoken park here as well. When looking at the lighting pattern, staff observes historical pattern whereby the subject property is more context ually associated with those properties along nicholas ville road exemplifying large lots with larger structure s much the introduction of smaller single family lots are more in context with the lot ting pattern along pen moment en and adjacent streets. while also allowing for greater density along the major arterial roadway. This is an over view again. The petition opines the zone change is consistent with the 2013 comprehensive plan and adopted goals and objectives of the 2018 comprehensive plan as it adds to the density of hous ing within lexington while supporting the maintenance of the urban service boundary. Petitioner indicates the rezon ing of the site will accommodate the demand for hous ing in lexington responsibly prioritizing higher density and a mixture of housing types. Proposed development supports in fill and redevelopment throughout the urban service area. In addition through the incorporation of single family townhouse residential along a major arterial corridor, the applicant is able to add dwelling units to the neighborhood which will help up hold the concept this proposal also promotes the use of under utilized land in a way that enhances the existing urban form and the public commitment to expand options for mixed house typing -- mixed type housing. The staff concurs with the applicant's justification. And recommends approval. Your subdivision committee also recommended approval for this plan. If you have any questions, I'm here to answer.: >> any questions from the commission. >> Mr. Martin will present the dislan development plan. S. >> Mr. Chairperson, members of the planning commission. The preliminary development plan on the top of page. Plan p pln-mjdp-18-95 penmoken park. The proposal, as you can see, is to put eight townhouses on the lot and here's your nicholas ville road frontage, penmoken park frontage in this location. They had originally proposed to utilize an access point that was , existing. This plan has been revised and they've put the access point at the rear of the property. This was a very important concern to staff and to traffic engineering to try to reduce conflicts in this area with any stacking and turning movements from nicholasville road and penmoken park. You can see that they are proposing, again, in cooperation with the staff, to set up a potential future connection to the adjoining property should they develop to allow for mutual traffic flow between the properties and that, of course, is designed to deep people from having to get back out on nicholasville road and back into the properties 69 it's something that is similar to a lot of park ing lots that are inter connected. Just to allow cross movement. The townhouses are approximately 700 squre feet in terms of their lot coverage. They're three stories. 35 feet in height. As I stated, there are 18 townhouses and they're proposing 19 bedrooms. The traffic will come in, all the parking is to the rear of the proposed townhouses. One condition that they address ed early on when they proposed an r-3 zone we asked them the status of the plan, what is your intent on what type of development you are going to have? And that is is it going to be group res education, are you going to subdivide it, and they subsequently submitted a revised plan that indicates that they will subdivide these properties. And with that, the evaluation of the standards change of course under r-3 and so they're evaluating under the r-1 hch t standards. This plan should it move forward and you approve the zone change, they will need to file with you for your review a final development plan and a combination subdivision plan that would actually create the subdifficult violation -- dub have I digs and meet the requirements of the subdivision regs at that time and subdivide the property should they wish to and of course one of the reasons it works this that pattern is that you will subdivide them down the common shared wall of the townhouses but since they are attached. This is the infill and re development area as well. There are standards for certain design features. These two are also a requirement of a final development plan. There is a note on the plan stating they will comply with those: it's in the ordinance. They have to. Generally at the time they pull permit to build, they have to document to building inspection what features they're going to employ to meet those standards that are in the ordinance. With that, I mean again it's a fairly simple plan with the townhouses as you can see or yepted -- oriented again my big thumb and I hit the wrong button here we go. For fronting on penmoken and nicholasville road. It is hard to see if you look on your screen, there is a reserv ation here. Indicate add cross the front. This area indicates a potential expansion of nick lasesville road. And that's from the 2040 transportation plan that our transportation section developed and was a party to and again it's a 2040 plan and it's just what it sounds like. It's a plan for the future. As we grow, as traffic increases , one of the recommendations of the plan is that you provide a rapid transit lane. And those things can take various forms but that was one of the reasons staff requested it. They acknowledge that on this plan so there is a little area. They're cooperating in that regard to help facilitate that lan should it ever come to fruition: with that, I would add that your subdivision committee has recommended approval of this plan, condition number 7 which says discuss access to penmoken park could be removed since they've moved it to the rear of the property per staff's recommendation. I'll be happy to answer any questions you May have. >> questions for Mr. Martin. We'll get to you. Promise. Amp cant. >> Mr. Chairman and members of the commission, I'm bruce simpson here on behalf of the applicant. David jones is the principal of the llc that filed this zone map amendment request and if we could go back to the slide last one he had up there with the development plan. A little bit of background first off. David has owned this property since about 2005. And he called me back in the summer and indicated he had been following the comprehensive plan and particularly with respect to the increase in density recommendations that have been discussed many times, of course it was also part of the 2013 comprehensive plan and was curious about what were the development options he might be able to pursue with respect to this large lot that is on the corner of penmoken and nicholas ville road. So as a typical protocol, when a client calls for something like that, I suggest that we meet with the planning staff,goat their take on it, see what they recommend, see if there are any issues or concerns that that we need to be apprised about, to make a decision whether to keep on paying me or keep on paying an engineer and if there is anything worthwhile that might be pursued in connection with the redevelopment of this property. So we had a couple meetings with the planning staff. We were favorably encouraged, particularly with respect to increasing density at this location because it was expressed to us that the staff wanted to see increased in density along nicholasville road a major arterial which this isn't the first time I've received that recommendation from the staff and it's become more and more ingrained in almost every zone change that I've been involved in the last three years. Those that participate in this city is that we do not want to expand the urban service boundary until it is absolutely necessary and you better demonstrate compelling evidence to justify that expansion. It has not been expanded since 1996 to any extent whatsoever, 22 years. We've been dealing with the same amount of land. And so typically in the past, before '96, developers wouldn't even look at this property for redevelopment because what we see today. People don't want change with respect to this house and the way it's functioned for many, many years. But the policy's changed and we've had to change with it and clearly the message to people that want to do development in this community is density is a good thing. Make it work. Listen and pay attention but we want density because the urban service boundary, we do not want to expand it except as an absolute last resort. So the staff, we got every indication they were favorably disposed to eight townhouses in lieu of the single house that's there now, which, as hal mentioned is a non-conforming use. It is zone r-1c which the minimum square footage for an r-1c lot is 8,000 square feet. This is almost a half acre. So it's well above the minimum for an r-1 contract c. In fact it's well above the next level which is r-1 b which is 15 ,000 square feet for a family residential. It has never been a single family residential for at least the last 50 years. It has been a rooming house and I will share with you some photographs in a minute that illustrate it's use, but for as far back as we can find, there were several rooming houses, tourist homes, they went by different names but it was rooms to rent and they're typically short-term rentals and they're all sij will men -- single men. 10 are currently living there. Various lengths of time. Some short-term, some have lived there a couple of years. But it's mainly a week to week month to month kind of situation and it's been going on like this for many, many years, at least 50, if not more. So that is not a permissible use in a single family zone. As hal mentioned that kind of use is not alone loued but that kind of use was going on when this property got zoned in 1969. So it was grandfathered in. It became a non-conforming use. It has never been a single family. It has basically been a 10 unit apartment building one room and they share a kitchen and they thrair bathrooms and that's the way it's operated. David said, you know, I think I can make a better use of the property. I'd like to do something really nice and came up with some conceptual drawings for all brick town homes. Average price for each of these units will be about $250,000. I'll have him explain how that price is arrived at in a little bit. But they're going to be well appointed with a lot of nice amenities and it's primarily designed to serve the professional community, medical community near central baptist, which is about 160 yards away from this site. And the university of kentucky which is less than a mile away so there will be really nice homes, oriented toward newsmakers lasville road and four towards penmoken but it's right on the corner so they will be exiting on nicholasville road and coming back off nicholas ville road all the time. Before we filed the zone change, we met, sent out a letter to all the people to get legal notice of a zone change. We wanted to introduce them to the concept before we even filed it and so we had a meeting back in September and shared with them our design and what we were growing to do with respect to the zone change that would be filed about six weeks later and we did file it about six weeks later. I will say the reaction was not favorable, which is why a lot of folks are down here today. They much prefer the house remain as it is. They expressed concerns which I'm sure you'll hear today about increased traffic from the eight townhouses compared to the 10 room boarding facility. There were several objections to our proposed design of the town homes. We explained that these, the design was conceptual at this point because we wanted to show how conceptually what we were at least thinking about in terms of these all brick town homes would fit in along the nicholasville road corridor. I will show pictures in a moment of similar kinds of structures, although I will contend ours are much nicer. Right across the street on nicholasville road these are in your material there, but right over here about 128 feet away, I think they're duplexed but they could be town homes they face nicholasville road. And then there are a couple right off the corner of johnston and nickelodeon wroa want ed to have something nice. We didn't want to hurt anybody in the neighborhood with respect to what we were going to do. And we proceeded to file the zone change. We had several meetings with the staff alorchg the way and went to the technical review committee and we got approval there. Went to the subdivision committee and got approval there went to the zoning committee and got approval there. There was never any... No one ever showed up at any of those meetings to offer any opposition but obvious obviously they're here today as is certainly their right, to express their what I expect to be their opposition to our proposal. And that's understandable because I have been doing this a while and I understand that increasing density, tearing down a house even though it's a non- conforming use, has never been used as a single family house for more than half a century, it has been a glorified apt build apartment building inappropriately used in terms of the zoning anyway and we are proposing to pay attention to the comprehensive plan that you adopted in 2013 and the goals and objectives that you all adopted for the 2018 plan understand we have to take advantage of opportunities when they arise but in the same respect, it has to fit in so we have done our best at this point to try to fit in eight town home s, they're two stories above ground, one story below ground. Two car garage. So you won't have a sea of park ing out there. Maybe parking, you you know, if there are two people living there, they will be in the garage. Which is fairly unusual for town homes because you see a lot of them that don't have a garage. These will be underground park ing and screened with wooden eight-foot fence and 10-foot ever green trees or ever green trees every 10 feet on center. 20 match up with a fence so it will be a nice complementary landscaping feature and we are certainly open to enhancing that if necessary. And with respect to the design, we share with the neighbors when we met with them in September. This was our proposal. The staff never gave us any negative feedback about it. Tom indicated hal they believe conceptually it fits in with the infill and redevelopment guidelines at this point but it's a platform development plan we are certainly open as I said we share with the neighbors in September to looking at alternative design but we haven't received any as yet. Nevertheless should you all approve this and the couple approved it, when it comes back for the final development plan, we're still open for alternative designs to see what would fit better than what we have come up with. This is a substantial investment on the part of david jones and we want to make it a top shelf development and we want the neighborhood to like it. We are not there yet but we are certainly willing to make adjust ments in terms of landscaping, in terms of looking at alternative design to make it work. The next slides now put mine on the overhead there. This is the subject property right here. The next slide you see the stone wall that will be maintained and kept as part of the project. And the next slide is you can see where it says rooms that's been there for probably 50 years or longer. And the next one this is the parking lot. Actually when you develop the whole site with the town homes and the parking, p the amount of impervious area isn't going to be appreciably much more than what is already there counting the lot with the house and the parking and the next slide. One more time. This is rose mobt garden. Hal mentioned penmoken park is a long cul-de-sac street but this is a safety valve off rosemont garden. It's like one lane and the incomes slide shows that so there is the opportunity to in degrees and egress. You can flip that over one more time. Rosemont garden has a light and pen moaningen park does not. Hype hype penmoken park does not the next one. Duplexes or townhouses 128 feet away from our property on the other side of nicolasville road we looked at ashed said we match up with that because this property orients towards nicolasville road as opposed to penmoken. A couple town homes or duplexes on johnston right close to the corner of nicolasville road. 190 feet away and the next one to it is a little bit further away from our property. 240 feet away. These are primarily brick. Parking in the rear. No garages. And then the next series of slides, this is not showing up because of the light but in the handout material are the proposed design that we shared with the neighbors. This is painted brick, was kind of a concept that the person we utilized to come up with the design, it's all brick but some of it is painted brick. Around the edges. They're all two and three bedrooms with two car garage. We believe, I mean this is one of these cases where the test is on you guys, you are either going to approve more density on the arterials or you are not. And if you are not, you know, we'll stick with the rooming house and there won't be any density. We think we've got a good alternative that's worth exploring if there is design features that need to be examin ed, as I say, we are will ing to explore those. I highlighted several fixtures and these are policies in the comprehensive plan that support our application. I've highlighted several section s. In yellow they talk about increasing density and also being sensitive to the as built environment in tomorrows of context sensitivity. And this being a preliminary development plan we are not exactly to the final plan stage to see what our design will be but we believe we've shown enough good faith efforts to warrant approval going forward with the recognition and understanding that the final development plan is going to be another level of review with respect to approval of this development process. So we think these policies under score the application you all approved a somewhat similar rezoning in March of this year on tates creek road this is of course a different arterial. it's one of the most highly trafficked in fayette county I want to have david come up and share with you his thoughts, he has been involved with a lot of home construction, he manages a lot of property in lexington, to share with you had is thoughts and ideas and aspirations with respect to how this property will function, what his intentions are in terms of of how he intends to be a contribute oar factor contribute tory factor. I do care how we develop this. I grew up right off jesselin drive, about two blocks away, half mile away from there and in the next few years I'm going to be moving back to that neighborhood so I do care. Projects like this I'm a for profit business. Certain costs are fixed. The land cost, the legal process , the engineers, getting through this process, the infrastructure. Those don't change whether you have one unit or 50, so from a purely economic standpoint, I would look at a project like this and say what's the highest zoning, what is the most number of units. But having owned this 13 years, I've come to be able to look and see how the nicolasville road corridor May or May not have expanded and how other major arteries in lexington have expanded. I've watched this community make the decision, 72%, you know, in late 2017 decided that we want to protect our horse farms. We don't want to expand the urban service boundary. We agreed as a community, we want higher density. We want inward and upward, not outward. So 10 years ago I might have looked at this project differently than today. But I look at the area and I see precedent for this. I see townhouses across the street on johnston boulevard. I see an opportunity to get eight homeowners in this property, in my vision less than 500 yards. Walkable to central baptist hospital, a mile from the U.K. Medical center. There are probably 10 to 15,000 people employed between both of those systems and I think this is an opportunity for eight new homeowners to come into this neighborhood. What we envision is going to be an asset and improvement to not just this neighborhood but the entire nicolasville road corridor. We are all familiar with nicolasville road. There are a lot of older properties there and this is one of them. It's tough to do, you know, it's tough to do a single single family road on nicolasville road nobody wants to deal with the traffic. We see something that is in between high density apartments but high enough density to make it financially viable. Is all brick townhouses we envision around a $250,000 sale price. 1500 or 1600 square feet on the two floors that are above ground you'll have a full basement for two car garage in the basement as well. we've softened the approach the streetscape from the street. We did pass out some color rend erings and I want to make very, very clear that these were just these are not even done by an architect, just preliminary renderings. The reason we do that, I did see what vision I have in my mind for this project but no one else can because we are look looking at a two dimensional piece of paper. This is just to get an idea what the streetscape might look like. We have heard a little bit in our initial meeting four or five months ago that some people were unhappy with the arc tech actual -- architectural style and people think the neighborhood deserves a craftsman style. I'm perfectly open to do that. We haven't engaged an architect. Architects are expensive and we've changed the size and layout of this project probably a dozen times working with plan ning, working with traffic. I can't afford to draw new plans every time we do that. No one does that. I'm hope to feedback as Mr. Simple simpson said. We had a meeting with the neighborhood. Courtesy meeting several months ago. We had two public meetings with the zoning subcommittee and subdivision zoning committee. Nobody showed up to those. We shared our contact information at the first meeting we said if you have questions or comments or suggestions please reach out to us and we haven't received that. This is not the first project like this that I've done and the ones that always work the best are whether the neighborhoods and yes I understand people are opposed to any change sometimes and I understand that. That's a natural human nature but these projects that work out best are when the neighborhood% and neighbors engage everyone and engage myself as a developer and, you know, we work out something that we can both live with and someone said at the other thing, both sides leave with a little heart burn that means it's successful. But we still remain open this is a project I'm looking forward to doing. It will provide much needed housing and I don't mean to say it's affordable housing but in an affordable price point for many people. We are not proposing mansions or $500,000 houses. And I think this will be a good addition to a corridor that desperately needs it. So any questions, if you have them, I'm happy to answer. >> thank you. Are you ready for any questions. >> a couple items in the handout material, Mr. Chairman and members of the commission. If you'll look under tab number 3, one of the concerns that the neighbors expressed when we met with them is that this proposal that we are sharing with you would devalue their property and we wanted to make sure that we took the appropriate steps to understand the value of their property and what we were going to do and to let them know, as we've waited you are our average starting price would be did $ 250,000 for the town holes. Tab number 3, we listed all the average pva assessed value with respect to the houses on penmoken ashed the square foot age. It is zoned r-1c, too but hate has a minimum square authority of eight,000 square feet. The average lot on penmoken is, as you can see under tab 3, 7500 square feet. So the lots on penmoken don't conform on the average to most of them anyway to the r-1c designation. And this is because in '69 there was county wide zoning, they zoned the entire county at one time. They didn't go in and pay attention to do tail, and put the rurp December I go na ition on power property and the rest of pen penmoken without looking to see whether or not they had the eight,000 square feet or not those are non-conforming lots for the most part. We are not going to put something in there that would devalue the property in term limits of a lower sale price than what their homes have been assessed and likewise we looked at all the property from penmoken to goodrich to both sides of nicolasville road, average price for the property is $238,000: the lots are very big compared to what is on penmoken. The average lot on nicolasville road from penmoken down to good rich, 17,than 0 square feet. Ours is almost a half acre. There are some that are even larger than that. We mentioned this is a non- conforming use and you have to understand this is an important governmental policy that's codified into the zoning ordinance. In other words, it's the law as opposed to the dplan which is a recommendation but the ordinance with respect to non-conforming uses like ours is pretty straightforward and if you look under 4.2, hive highlighted it for you. The intent of the zoning ordinance to permit non conformities established in article 4.1, which is this article, to continue until they are removed but, and this is the important part, but not to encourage their survival. So the policy is to get rid of non-conforming uses because they don't comply with the zoning ordinance and it makes difficult enforcement and our proposal will follow this by eliminating a non-conforming use and make it compliant with the zoning ordinance. The last section one of the few email doarms I don't know Mr. Henson but he sent an email in that I thought was very pertinent where he said I just wanted to let you know that not every resident of the area is against the development. I believe lexington is a growing city and growing cities need density on major roads and public transit routes this area of lexington is ideal for university of kentucky employees such as myself. I can easily walk, bike or take a bus to the largest employer in the county lextran route 5 provides access to the downtown core. I really hope that the planning commission prioritizes infill along the major roads including nicolasville road. Which is what we are trying to do. This is the recommendation we received from the staff. The recommendation that is in the 2013 and 2018 comprehensive plan and based on all of that, we would ask for your approval. Be happy to respond to any questions. >> any questions for Mr. Simpson? Okay. Thank you. Now it's time for citizen participation. If you'll line up, we'll get to the people who object a little bit later. Do you all have a representative >> my comment is the comment read into the record. I just wanted to say that I recently looked throug the comprehensive plan for the city of lexington posted in the facebook page for the neighborhood and it was striking how this project really fits into that comprehensive plan. I've been I'm a graduate student at the university of kentucky and have been in conferences around the country and having a dense city makes cities better, having density along the public transit route promotes the use of the public transit route so I really think that as a city we should invest in having density on the urban corridors, invest in having a city where people live in places where they can access the university of kentucky, where they can access the downtown area and the way we do that is have people live on the major roads and provide good public transit to get people from where they live to where they can do jobs. That's why I support this development. >> thank you. I own the property two doors down at 1855 nicolasville road. And I would just like to congratulate Mr. Jones on a home run development plan. It's a beautiful projec. We are taking down an eye sore, a danger zone with transient people staying in rooms. We are improving with $2 million project of all brick construction town home project that has been recommended by our lexington board, our lexington staff, you know, the zoning committee recommended it. And of course the subdivision committee recommended it. I respect their knowledge this this area and the development project this meets the comprehensive plan for infill. It's a beautiful project it will be a great improvement and enhance my property and the city and I have been a realtor for 40 years in this community and you can't buy much anymore for $250 but this will give opportunity within walking distance to to the big employers big venues. I own the property two doors down. Have owned it since 1985. I've lived there for 20 years on nicolasville road now I have it leased to a football assistant coach so we are right within 50 yards of this project I represent the neighborhood we call pens cola pensacola and this is a group of citizens that are really concerned about the development. Many wanted to be here today but since it was at least started at 1:30 on a thursday, many people couldn't make it. I don't know if we all realized it would go into the after work hours but also for that reason I'll try to keep myself under reasonable timeframe. I know you have all been here and listening to a lot of peek people speak. The residents here on the one hand very concerned that a 93 -year-old home that's over 4500 square feet is being demolished in favor of a development that is poor design and doesn't fit with the comprehensive plan. Now you've just heard from a couple residents, one of whom is , I guess both of whom are in favor of this development but one of whom frankly stands to benefit down the road financial ly. As you'll notice on the site plan, and especially the one submitted on the tenth of December, there is a future connection allowed for on the site plan that will connect presumably to a future development on a neighboring property he would be the next property over. I'm sure he is seeing this could become just a row of town homes but that's very concerning to the residents in the area. And with respect to the zoning change, there have been some changes in the plan that was submitted on the day we submit ted our response which was the tenth they submitted an update so there are some differences and I see there are some recommendations for changes by the subdivision committee, but most importantly with the zoning, it doesn't clearly meet r-3, r-1-t or article 15 from reading the text of the articles , applicable to this property. And I guess to clear up there hasn't necessarily been a back of input from the citizenry regarding the change in zoning. The neighborhood was told. Your opportunity to come and have your voice heard is going to be this meeting today. Furthermore there were people at the subdivision committee and zoning committee who were representing us so there has been no lack of input on our part. Specifically with the zone, I don't know how to word this I should mention how we see this project not meeting the A.M. Applicable sewn zoning regulations are in pages, it starts on the bottom of page 4 and goes through page 7 of our response. This figure is meant to show you with the highlighting that it doesn't meet clearly any one plan and the -- any one article and the main issue it has to do with setbacks this is an old neighborhood. It's a lot of homes that were ranging from 1920 all the way up to mostly 1930s and 40s. The setbacks along nicolasville road, as you can see, are significant. Any development is 20 feet and this was also attached to my response the regulations with respect to the setbacks show you this is not conforming to the surrounding neighborhood. it's not appropriate for single family neighborhood that has been there for nearly a century and it's a very successful neighborhood. It's a real jewel of lexington that has a lot of these crafts men bunk lows and bungalow s. The design as it stands has no real contextual sensitivity down nicolasville road or penmoken. While the residents are concern ed about tearing down a 93-year-old home, I don't think anyone here will tell you they're absolutely 100% against development for the sake of being against development the point is if there is going to be development that takes out a home like this, it should fit the comprehensive plan and use smart design and should employ an architect on the project which we've heard and knew has not been involved until now and the presentation so far makes it seem like it is not a thought out site plan. Goals two and three. We talk about the comprehensive plan indepth. So these proposed town homes are going to remove a house that's stood there this neighborhood has flourished because of things like the setback and because of things like it houses 10 people and this is going to displace 10 people and what we get for it is approximately and this is accord ing to an old site plan is 370 more square feet and maybe assuming full occupancy nine more people, eight more people and it's displacing 10 so in terms of it propose motoring high density it's not clear how this is going to further that high density plan and it comes at great cost because we are tearing down this home and because instead of trying to rehabilitate an existing property, we are building a totally new footprint which also the comprehensive plan talks about environmental sustain ability. That's not very environmentally sustainable. There are other options to do with this house for one. The house could be rehabilitated I have a specialist who is going to talk a little bit more about that and show examples but it can be reabled and get to the point where it meets almost the same level of occupancy that these proposed town homes will the developments like this one on mitchell avenue, you start to see some difficult lap days. You have the crooked columns, brick walls crumbling, hardscape inconsistent. Drastic slopes that's not A.D.A. Compliant hand rail. There are also issues with drain age, which, in this particular area on 1847 nicolasville road there are drainage mitigation issues and I see the subdivision committee has requested more information on what they're going to do with to accommodate the sanitary sewers and storm sewers on the last one to the right, you can see how the town homes on mitchell avenue completely destroy the fabric of the neighborhood. We've got two story town home there right next to a privacy fence and then eye home and some sort of industrial maybe like a water pump or something there. but as you can see on the bottom half of the slide, the town homes that are proposed look just like the tates creek town homes, just like the mitchell avenue town homes. We've heard a lot about we were trying to meet what they did on johnston. Those are town homes from the 90 s. I think that we would all like to think that we've progressed in terms of design since the 1990s. And furthermore, the comprehensive plan is a forward we shouldn't be looking back at what has been done. It should meet the fabric of the neighborhood and the comprehensive plan. This point was clarified but it's not clearly adding any affordable housing. They're priced to sell at a minimum of $250,000. There is reason to believe that that won't be the case and these will be renter occupied because other developments are renter occupied. The johnston town homes are rent er occupied. But this, the price point of $250,000 is about $180 per square foot. That is far above the median average home value for the area so we are not adding affordable housing. On a related note you are not adding any accessible housing or housing for the elderly because these are all multistory town homes that are accessible by stairs and briefly this was mentioned when you saw pictures of sophia alley but the resident s are very concerned about the traffic burden these town homes will create penmoken is a cul-de-sac. Far down on the other side is a one way alley with homes on either side very close with out lets to rosemont garden it's not like that alley is an alternate street. It's not very wide and there has been no track study that we've seen on the impact of these town homes we are asking that you delay approval until we have the opportunity to create a small area comprehensive plan so that the neighborhood can weigh in on what is appropriate design. There is no evidence the neighborhood was offered this option and we request design elements that the proposed developer must meet to ensure it's appropriate to the neighborhood and contextually sensitive and we've asked that they have bring an architect on board who can make sure that the site. To do a site plan feasibility study and including water mitigation, how the garages are going to work and also a form height slope study and soil studies I see on the subdivision committee a tree plan has been requested that was one of our request but it looks like we are in agreement there are a lot of options that could be done with the property. I'll let something with more training in architecture show you a couple of options on the slides my nape is jessica I'm an architect and we happen to live in the pensacola park neighborhood. This came to our attention because the lawyer put out the submission of 500 feet which we happen to be on and I live on nicolasville road so I'm one of those people that moved to lexington, bought a home and renovated it and put a lot of money towards it to enhance it because I actually love our neighborhood. A lot of people say why live on nicolasville road well I used to live in L.A. So I'm kind of used to traffic. But with that said I'm also really used to what is incorrect when you do infill and re development. I've read the comprehensive plan thoroughly. I was energized because I think there is stuff on there that is very important. Very important to progress lexington there are a lot of things I see that are great for growth but the idea that we need to dense phi without looking at what is appropriate. And in the comprehensive plan it clearly states that we should look at our existing neighborhoods and make sure that things are appropriate developed . Thr things that the have not been investigated. As you can see this the slide I show, the yellow line around it is the existing property. If we were going to take this and my stance on this personally being an ash tect is that the I do think that development is important but I think it it has to be appropriate in this case since we are I a historic neighborhood, pensacola park is one of the more north carolina neighborhoods of lexington. About 95% are pre-1945 homes, so we are asking is there a way that we can either integrate this... I don't think it should be an indicator that we should abandon all design reason or densification and say we must develop just because it says here we just develop it's very important that we treat our corridors as being just as approachable as the rest of everything else. We've heard about saving the urban boundary and while I agree with that, we have to realize there is an identity to lexington that we they'd to go to. There is an identity marketers that you go to and that is historic homes. So when you are driving down richmond, for example, which is almost as busy drive as nicolasville road is. You have a very different experience of that than other roads so on nicolasville road we are the small pocket between southland and going up toward penmoken that we are residential why do we have to densify it and change the identity of this? That's one docket. And if we have to change the identity of it can we be progris sive enough where we are identifying this more for people so people drive down nicolasville road and they don't feel, what is the word, uncomfortable because if you look at the plan he showed, you are pushing the pedestrian right up against the road so this idea that we want to redefine our boundaries that we have public transportation that we have alternate transportation, bicycle routes and pedestrian, how is it that we are allowing developments that come in that don't address the pedestrian either from a neighborhood standpoint or from a walk and standpoint on any of these ideas setbacks are incredibly important to these types of neighborhoods and to the borders and nicolasville road corridors no one walks on veer sigh and we are versailles. We have infill to death and push ed everything to the edge of the street. So going back to this, the question is can we maintain this we said heck not afford to rehabilitate this and that's why we've asked for an architect to come on board and a feasibility study. What we have seen with the previous construction is the same construction over and offer again cookie cutter design and developer. I don't want that identity com ing up on the road and being presented like that. I want the unique these to show up. So then can somebody do a feasibility study to show in fact why couldn't we rehabilitate that? The neighborhood is not against development as you will hear from a lot of them but they are for appropriateness. Appropriateness would have been can we firstly maintain the existing home. Secondly how do we minimize the impact of that home on the neighborhood. And then thirdly, if we can't maintain it, can we progress it enough to be a jewel for the neighborhood. that's not a dilapidated house. That's a beautiful craftsman home. Whether you like historic homes or not, changing to that on the top left whether or not that is going to be final design, which more than likely it will be one of those, is a great loss to lexington and we have to remember there are identity mark ers in lexington that need to be saved and if we can't do rehabilitation, can we do progression? And this is a slide where, it might be a little progressive for some people but the idea is that these are all historic homes, all rehabilitated successfully and not homes, they're all town homes. So these are all multifamily units and it is a way that has pushed architecture forward. Another topic that came up from Mr. Jones is he can't afford to do something creative or that he has done something very high end. What he has proposed for the neighborhood that has come out of his lawyer's office and said up here where he cannot afford an architet to design, what you get is cookie cutter. If he had brought on an architect from the very beginning, you would have had progressive thought, a feasibility study he could have brought up and I hate to say it, but I do think there is some lying that is happening about selling these homes because from a construction standpoint, if you run through the numbers, what he is proposing, he cannot sell those homes and make a profit. he will rent these. It's a very different ideology than he is selling to you and I can tell you from a professional standpoint, I've run the numbers what he should be doing and this is why an architect should have been brought on is hooey should be thinking about progressive architecture if he wants to do town homes like these three. The top one, they're down homes built in philadelphia and they were built in a historic neighborhood. And they also will get that developer, there is only five of them on the same lot size that david jones is doing, will go it them $740,000 for each one but that is considered high end development. It's high end use of materials, high end use of interior spaces. The people have spaces to go outside, which is not the case in this one. They have a balcony. So there is thought when architects go it involved of how you integrate into the space. P and the second one is a living space that was done and these people got $375 for a smaller unit and 1.1 million for a larger unit. That is a very successful development in england and it also is an adaptable sustainable development. We hear in the comprehensive plan about sustainability. I have not seen one thing come from david jones about sustain bility. It is important that you look these projects and realities that just approving infill and redevelopment can open up a wide range of bad development and there is no going back from that it is important that we have professionals look these things over. It is important that an architect be involved in a multi-residential project. And then the last one and I'll be done soon is that last one, you know, them implementing that into their project. And what we've heard from david jones and his lawyer is what they've looked at 1990 homes. And they've tried to replicate that? When they have over 417 homes in the pensacola park that could have pulled from there has been nothing to push there forward except to give him a green light and then what. Then it's too late. So I would ask that you please at least pause this and think of a small comprehensive plan to our area or at least ask him to bring on a professional to show that he can actually develop this and not just cookie cutter it. Thank you. >> [Applause] >> I indicated if you had a question, if you want to pose it now, this is a good time to do it. If you had a question that you wanted... You can get in line right behind her if you would like. >> I had a brief question. >> your name please ma'am. Your name and address. >> I have to stand on my tip toe s. I am jodi mckee and I thank you for your time today. I live at 128 penmoken park and i have lived there for 44 years. We are a diverse neighborhood of modest closely spaced homes separated by narrow driveways. Most of our homes are single story with a detached garage and almost all are over 50 years old my own home was built in 1923 and it's 95 years old. I am opposed to the demand demolition and rezoning of the property at 1847 nicolasville road because it sets in motion the erosion of the fabric of our neighborhood. We are historically a dead end street you know we awe slides of the sophia alley some of us like to call it a lane, not an alley. That was someone's driveway really initially that frosty lived on that street and she allowed us to use her driveway to get over to rosemont just to avoid traffic. It was little used except by residents until a couple years ago. I'm not sure why the city put up a street sign. It was never labeled before. Never had a street sign at all but a few years ago the city put up the sophia alley on either end of it which alerted people on rosemont to know that it was there and they could use it and cut through. We saw a big increase in traffic because of that street sign as far as I know, nobody has an address that the U.S. Post office needs to use it as an address. I don't know why it has been labeled but it has and we notic ed a big increase in traffic from that. We are a pedestrian friend will I street where you frequently see folks of all ages walking, sometimes with a dog, sometimes with a baby carriage, sometimes with a two wheeler with training wheels. Because we have limited open space and are not near a park in spring and summer you see folks in the street throwing a softball or frisbee, sometimes nine and 10 yearolds set up a basketball hoop at the edge of the curb and practice their free throws. When we hear that a traffic study has indicated that penmoken sees 700 cars a day and can accommodate 300 more per day , we only shake our head and realize the traffic engineers don't know how neighborhood. We live here and if you live here you know that cats, dogs, parents and children and seniors use our street and we know to slow down, to smile and to wave when we add traffic that cuts through our street to avoid the light at nicolasville road and rose mopt garden we add a stress or that is not only dangerous for us but corrosive to the harmony of our neighborhood. Our homes on penmoken all face the street and most have generous front porches and well tended yards often with flower gardens. The proposed townhouses to replace an existing 93-year-old rooming house, to are me, doesn't quite smell -- doesn't pass the smell teft. We have been told that the eight three bedroom townhouse units will be sold but a similar townhouse project on mitchell avenue is all rentals. We have been assured the materials will not be vinyl sid ing but quality material but the similar project on mitchell avenue includes vinyl siding and materials that haven't been passing the test of time. Already starting to show signs of wear. Part of the charm is the human scale of our homes and especially our front porches. If you have lived in a community with front porches, you know the value they add and the promotion of neighborliness. The townhouse project is a multi story multiunit development that lacks scale and porches and is incentive to its neighbors. Without any leverage over the architectural consideration, we have concern over the compatibility of the design to our existing neighborhoods. I've got my wrong glasses on. I believe that infill is a priority and has become a trend ing topic for planning in lexington. But can we just throw down a bit and -- slow down and look at the big picture, maybe see what is happening with other sectors. Conventional resale stores are taking a beating. My daughter this christmas when I asked her what she wanted to for christmas, she said mom, I don't want anymore stuff. So we, instead of giving each other gifts for things, we are going to go see martin and martin at the rupp arena in January. Online shopping continues to increase and the younger generation like my daughter have been embracing more mip malist type lifestyles. Shopping centers like fayette mall are going to have to re invent themselves. Already there are store fronts that lie empty. Why not multistory multiunit housing at the fayette mall site there is no existing neighborhood to infringe on. It's close to restaurants, close to a bus line. Close to the movies. Turfland maul has been talking about that. I don't know the progress or status of that project but they're not invading an existing neighborhood. There is vacant store front in many prime locations, a large rite aid store not far from our neighborhood closed recently and is presently unoccupied. I understand and know that not all of the unoccupied store fronts are necessarily appropriate for residential development but the whole world of retail is reinventing itself and why not wait and see how some of this shakes out before we infringe on established neighborhoods? Developers like to develop lexington deserves development that is thoughtful, and harmonious. You, the planning commission, if you have any misgivings at all about this project, please consider holding off approval at least fo now. Wait and see. We have over 70 household on penmoken that will be negatively impacted just on penmoken and of course there will be more on wabash. When we weigh that against the net gain of four to six housing units, it just doesn't make a lot of sense. Thank you for your time. >> thank you. And ma'am, let me apologize to the rest of you. We try to put everybody on a three minute timeframe because have you other neighbors who want to make their presentation so if you could stay with the three minutes, that would be helpful.% and also if your friends have made the point and you just want to make sure that you are on the record, you can just say I agree with the preceding speaker and go on. But whatever. But let me be clear, we welcome your comments. >> thank you very much. My name is jerry gillespie. I reside at 164 penmoken park. My wife has had that property for 30 years. I've lived there are for 20 years. I didn't intentionally -- didn't intend to ask this question but martin wanted to know if anybody involved with the project is here today. I know that legal representation is here now and the developer is here. I don't know about any engineer ing staff I think it's important that you all are here to benefit from the feedback of residents instead of just the legal representation of the developer. I agree with everything this lady just said. Sophia alley is already quite a nuisance as far as people cutting through. They speed down our street causing danger to residents. it is a one lane alley, it cannot be widened without demolition of houses on either side so that's going to be a big problem. Secondly, I fully realize, Mr. Jones that business is business. I've attended two previous meetings, the first one which I met you at and complimented you for being there in a roomful of people that were probably going to be opposed to what you were planning to do. And I realize that business is business but at that meeting and again today, you are asking for us to present you with different options. I think that's your job as a developer to present us with different options. >> I think it's the developer's responsibility to present different options for construction, not our responsibility to present different ideas to a developer and a couple directions. The first meeting I attended, you were there and you stated then and today that the residents of penmoken park were notified in advance of this proposal. At the first meeting it became clear that the residents within 500 feet of this proposal were notified 245 does not include us who live at the far end of penmoken where the cul-de-sac is where sophia alley is. We will be affected as well another adepended um for you is that as far as lot size confirm ation our house was built in 1926. The plat for our property which I obtained from city hall is from 1926. It has a lot width of 45 feet and depth of 162 feet, which is obviously not compliant with the current zoning laws for lot size you can't go back 42 years and change that. So you are incorrect that everybody on penmoken park was notified of this proposal. We were not. And and I, there are a lot more things I could say but... >> your time has expired. >> we are not opposed to development and infill as long as it fits with the continuity of the existing neighborhood. That being said, as far as rehabilitating that property, which is occupied by 10 men, which, today on screen and at the first meeting I accompanied where you were, Mr. Simpson, you seem a little bit obsessed with enforcing the fact that it is 10 men that live there. I don't really get that. And I certainly don't have any understanding that there could be any documentation or historical evidence that that properties creates a danger zone for our neighborhood. I'm sorry foregoing over time. >> thank you. [Applause] >> I probably live within 500 feet but I did not receive any notification of any meetings the first I was aware of this was when the pensacola park preservation society sent out some things about what was happening. This was maybe three weeks ago. Maybe a month ago. So I did not receive any notifications whatsoever. No written, no flyers in the mail box, no post at the property that they were meeting that was talking about this significant situation that was happening right down the road from me. So I wanted to be very clear about that. I want to say we agree with our professional representatives. I applaud them they provided some excellent information and I hope that you were able to hear all of that. >> I live at 1 7 rosemont garden I purchased that home there with my family 13 years ago. It had been repossessed and abandoned and we poured blood, sweat and tears into that home to restore it and to improve the neighborhood. We've watched our other neighbor s do the same. A lot of families in the area that have spent a lot of time and invested in that neighborhood, not because they're wanting to resell their homes right away but because they wanted to settle down, put down roots and build a neighborhood and I think that this project is directly antithetical to that ideal and would be insulting and discouraging to people who are pursuing that same goal. With everyone else here, I very much the I would hopefully respectfully hope that the commission would take the advice of our professional represent atives here today. >> I grew up sn in the area. I left home and went to cleveland, ohio and pursued my career in new york city. And one place I wanted to come back to was lexington, kentucky and penmoken park and the entire area. There are young families with children in addition to wonderful senior citizens and retirees and they're buying old homes and fixing them up to the era of the neighborhood and again, I'm not opposed to re doing that home but I their we need to stay to the historical era of the neighborhood. Thank you. >> this is the second time I have been in front of this committee. The first was as an applicant. My wife and I work in property development. We think this is a comical proposal for this neighborhood. The architectural renderings presented are the blankeddest thing that -- blankeddest thing that could possibly be imagined when I stood in front of this committee and I imagine when m r. Nichols stood in front for his apartment building up on north limestone, at that time we were both represented by an architect and as a matter of fact, every time I've stood in front of a planning and zoning committee, my architect was in attendance. My architet developed a site plan, my architect communitied -- communicated with the community that we were building. If Mr. Jones doesn't respect the community enough to build a good project, he should find a developer that is willing to. This neighborhood, it will not support the project that he is proposing. Doctors, nurses, all these medical professionals are going to go buy a single amily house. they're going have a yard. They're going to play with their kids like my neighborhood who renovated their house before they moved here from michigan. They play on the street, they run on the street, we all do so if Mr. Joaps wants to develop something and wants to develop what his history suggests he will develop, he is going to be looking for a different client, not the doctors, not the nurses a developer could sell good town homes here. As a matter of fact, the represented pva values discussed are not realistic for the current sale prices of the homes the house next door to me sold for nearly $300,000. It's not much bigger than the town homes he is presenting. But I guarantee it's a lot better done tearing down things that are nearly 100 years old, not respecting our history? That's how we erase what makes lexington lexington. There are a lot of ugly buildings and a lot of beautiful buildings but that's where the developer had their feet held to the fire to do a good project. That didn't just happen because somebody said I'm going to build something great. That's consistently the case. If we look at neighborhoods up in cincinnati, or the pittsburgh proposal from earlier, these are neighborhoods where somebody was required to do good work and I suggest you at least ask an architect to look at this. >> thank you. [Applause] >> my name is rebecca glass cock I have live there had for 25 years. i support infill and re development. However, I think we should be very careful to preserve the character and as much as possible, the history of our city. The property at issue today, 1847 nicolasville road was once part of property onopenned by wallace overton when he died in 1827, his property was split among his children. Later it was part of the farm, 57.85-acre parcel which stretch ed from nicolasville road back to the railroad track was sold to louis price in 1900 and 1923 the craftsman house now occupying the site was built. A stone wall and number of mature trees add to the esthetic of the site. As was said in 1993, the geography of nowhere "community is not something you have like pizza. Nor is it something you can buy. It's a living organism based on a web of interconnectedness which is to say a local economy. It expresses itself physically as connectedness, buildings actively relating to each other into what public space exist be it the street or the chows or the village green." as a member of the penmoken park community, I ask the zoning not be approved. I wish to live in a community with character and history and connectedness. I do not wish to live in a geography of nowhere where every place is the same. [Applause] My name is michael stance field. I live on pem motor vehiclen. -- penmoken. my in-laws have lived there since 1967. I have been married to my wife for 40 years and we have lived in cleveland, ohio, harrisburg, p pennsylvania and long boat key florida and have decided to% settle here. We came here four years ago to 25ic care of her mother who has since passed away. Purchased the house and my wife said to me, I'm surprised that you wanted to live here in this little house on penmoken park. I said I have been looking at this house for 40 years. We come here for christmas. I said I've been thinking about what I'm going to do to it when I finally own it. And in the four years we've been here, we have been trying to make that house as perfect as it was the day it was built. We've redone the front porch period type tile, we have done everything we can to make the house as sharp just like chris is doing and many other neighbor s, in the neighborhood are doing. They're trying to make those old houses look like they did back in 1923. And in a few years, many of those homes are going to be 100 years old I'm striving to get the neighborhood to look and live up to it's potential rather than to... What I've seen are eight brick block house houses, very generic and I don't see how they will fit into the neighborhood. I know we did a traffic study this year. I saw the police car parked on the wrong side of the road so people, when they would see him from the nicolasville road would make sure they slowed down and or go another way because we had actually put in for speed bumps and they said it wasn't feasible as some of the folks have said, people walk their pets, there are older folks who walk bicycl ist, children who play in the streets. We want to keep that flavor alive. We understand the development is an important thing but I just pray that you take the advice of the professionals that spoke my in-laws are looking down at me and saying save this neighborhood. >> barbara and I live at 104 wabash. My family has lived here for a quarter century. We chose this neighborhood because it's safe and close to the shops, drives and restaurant s. The neighborhood has a nice mix of single family modestly priced homes with old trees. It is very safe and walkable. Speaking of emotional I remember pushing my son, now a graduate student in a stroller down was bush -- wabash. We grew up in the neighborhood and come back to settle and this cluster would start a chain reaction of 14r-6789d cookie cut ter developments we are not against development as many people pointed out but we are oppose a project that hurts our neighborhood. We will welcome a promise that remodels the current home into a multifamily one with good architecture. Thank you. >> dave alfred, my wife and I re side at 131 suburban court just like to say why I empathize with the commission's intent of having infill redevelopment and keeping the urban boundary line in tact. I don't think they intend to have that as blanket arolf for any mull if I family to be thrown up anywhere this is one of the oldest neighborhoods in the city. I mean I think if you look around, there aren't too many outside of downtown chevy chase area that look like this. While I believe the interest of investments and trying to make a profit, I myself am a real estate investor, my pa are ther in corey is here as well. Last October of 2017 we bought 1828 nicolasville road which is a 1927 single family hope converted to a mull if I family unit in the 70s or 80s. Offer the past 12 months we have dumped well over six figures of investment into that property to restore it. I really enjoys earlier when we first got here the hillenmeyer project you saw. That was a restoration project. This is a demolition project of an old home that is not too dilapidated to be restored. I find it hard to believe. So anyway I want to voice knew support of our representatives and strongly urge, I think you can tell by the people who are here that there are as very strong objection to this and I think it's the responsibility of the commission to to hear these people. I live at 120 goodrich avenue. I want to take a moment to say that unwake we are not being territorial and possessive that is not our purpose for being% here and I would like the council and commission to know that rebecca talked about how this was a single family home when it was built. It was made a boarding house and it doesn't have to remain that way. Lastly I think when we are going to allow development into our neighborhoods and we are going to densify, we do need to make sure they're held to a higher standard because when we are allowing just profit to rule the day, and when we are demolishing houses and letting profit be the guiding factor for how our neighborhoods are changing, that is nothing to speak to the positives of lexington. It's not what we into ed to be doing here. You know, there are 419 other residents that bought in to pensacola park and they need to be protected as well. I wish I had a dime for every time bruce simpson stood up here and said we don't want to devalue our house. I wish I had a dime for every time. If you go back and look at previous council meetings you'll see where his predictions of noted devaluing things have not, that's not been the case. So thank you very much. I agree with the representation. >> peggy and I live at 127 penmoken and it is wonderful to see my neighbors here. I bought the house on the street in 1985. I thought I was buying a house to walk to work and I got a whole family and there are a lot of people who are not here and the cool thing about penmoken is when I write a check all over the city because I still write checks, people always go, penmoken park. I used to live on that street. I love that street. That's a wonderful neighborhood. So please pleats, lease listen to us and don't do this rezoning thing. We have a really good thing going and if we listen to our professionals and get some good architects in there, we can keep our little neighborhood the way it is and it's so important because we are lexington. This is lexington. This is what you are looking at. I hope all of your neighborhoods are the same. Thank you. I wanted to say something about the 10 men that live at the morgan house. As far as my understanding has always been that they're very heavily screened. They're subsidized, low income gentlemen and some have disabilities. Few, if any, have cars and so one gentleman I think walks to kroger every single day and if they get displaced, I don't know where in the world they will go. My name is dennis web and I live at 120 suburban court. I've lived there, my wife and I for 30 years. First want to read a statement by linda whitley who had to leave early. While I am not opposed to infill development in lexington, I am passionate about the buildings fitting the existing neighborhood in function and esthetics there is an irony in that the dennis anderson proposal looks just about like pensacola park. It's a newer version. It has a boulevard down the middle and no trees yet. Other than that it looks about identical to where we live right now. Why would you want to mess with perfection which is kind of was I want to read three statements that came out of the 2018 plan. Lexington citizens say build owner occupied higher density multifamily dwellings designed by architects so these are functional and attractive and worth owning. That's straight out of the 2018 comprehensive plan verbatim. This is what lexington citizens say much this is not eye rate people who live in pensacola park much these are people across the lexington spectrum. What makes a successful neighborhood diversity of home sizes and an architectural identity that reinforces good design and community engagement. Lexington citizens say create design standards. Thank you for your time and I support everything our represent atives said. I'm a faculty member at the university of kentucky and I bought on suburban court so could I walk to work, walk ability as we see in the comprhensive plan was really important to me as well. Quickly I realize I could not walk to work because the sidewalk is 18 inches from nicolasville road and I'm not going to walk to work. So I've got to turn left off suburban court. Within our neighborhood, there are six streets that come out that connect directly to nicolasville road and only one of those has a red light. So every morning me and lots of other people probably 400 of us, attempt to turn left to nicolasville road. So traffic is a major issue. A lot of times I have to wait three light cycles for cherokee park and rosemont to turn red just so I can turn left. Traffic is a major issue. I don't know if there was a traffic study on my end. I know there was one on the good rich end. Traffic is a major issue for those of us who live there. We talk about infill but to densify even more than we are, I don't know how cars backing up on to our streets are going to let out and same with pensacola park. Backing the driveway up, I would be willing to bet that during rush hour that cars back up as far or further from there. Think about the red light situation and how we are getting out of these corridors. Thank you. [Applause] >> I live at 99 goodrich avenue and I just wanted to thank mike owens for his comment on an earlier development where he said he really appreciated the people talked with the neighbors they worked with the neighbors. They were restoring the hell in mire's nursery building. Those are the things we are ask ing in the neighborhood. The same things that you applaud ed that I saw other people in this committee shaking their head yes. This is what we wanted to have happen. We want to work with the neighborhood. We want development. We want to restore buildings that are already there and not tear them down thank you. The other comment I have is I keep hearing that there has not been any study of the sewer and storm water. And unfortunately some of you really know me because I live on goodrich where it floods on a regular basis. And as per the last big rain we had, I lost my sidewalk. We are getting new storm water -- I'm sorry, we are getting storm water pipes. We don't have them in our neighborhood. We have no storm water pipes in our neighborhood. We are getting them in places. We are not getting them in our whole neighborhood. I had flooding so bad my sidewalk in the front of the house was gone with the last big rain we had. We don't need another property where somebody hasn't looked at the storm water and the sewer water and where is this water going to go because it's going to go in front of my house because I know that because it all runs down nicolasville road from wabash from penmoken all the way down to my house because my house is the low point after nicolasville road. So please at least consider postponing this until somebody has dealt with the sewer and storm water and where is it going to go in our neighborhood? >> thank you. [Applause] >> amy clark of 628 castle road and I have a great deal of respect for this neighborhood. I understand this is about a zone change today. There will be a development plan later. This will be a lot of design issues later. In a zone change you need to ask yourselves how much density, how much intensity shall we allow on this net one half acre lot that fronts on nicolasville road? And the zone you give it, the r-3 sets the parameters for set backs and open space and tree canopy and all these other things. And it helps establish what would be context sensitive and what would not. I urge you to look closely at the findings of fact, prepared for you in the event of approval by the staff. Prepared by the staff and they are quoted they're cited exclusively from the 2018 goals and objectives for the comprehensive plan. The goals and objectives are approved by council. But the plan is still in traft. It's not complete. It's not comprehensive. It's not there yet. It has some great big ideas, some good ideas, many of them were warmly welcomed by the neighbors here. Things like transit oriented development along nicolasville road. You are looking at a proposed development that has 23 parking spaces delineated for cars for single family occupancy. I need to rush. A big issue is in the new comprehensive plan in the draft, the same historic language in the goals and objectives. But in the new draft, it's say ing old isn't necessarily historic. And it's pretty much floating national register standards for deciding if a place is historic. Do you need to honor the historic context or is it historic at all? These are questions that need to be resolved but they haven't been yet. You can't use those goals and objectives to judge this proosed zone change because it is still half baked. There is nicolasville road corridor study that is actually even got funding but it hasn't happened yet. So how can you say what would be efficacious or contextually correct. I urge you to go back to page 102 of 2013 comprehensive plan where it says single parcel projects should fill in the gaps only for larger lots that is to say larger parcels up to about two acres do you conceive of increased density. It's important that single parcels respect the context and character and the small parcel is two to five acres. That's when you begin to get different sort of r-3 type densities and mixes of housing. This is a half an acre it can only hold so much and be compatible and contextually sensitive with the neighborhood and look forward toward a development of nicolasville road that is appropriate my husband and I are both in opposition of this. My neighbors on siertdz side of me could not come but said you have my permission to say we are in opposition to that and that is six more that goes to the 23 letters. I would also like to say that the characters of these homes we have four inch wood, things you can't spend $250,000 now an get that kind of quality and charm with that and the other thing I'd like to say is the town homes across the street on john ston are all rental property they're an eye sore. People get evicted from them all the time and they leave their junk out on nicolasville road. Their garbage that sits there for days and people in the neighborhood, that are walking by, pick that trash up from that rental property on johnston boulevard. I'm in support of everything else everybody else has said. [Applause] >> my name is joe miller. I live at 141 goodrich avenue and my wife and I have been in that neighborhood for 35 years now. It looks like I'm the end of the line so I'll try not to drag it out. I'm not opposed to change. Which is often sort of the accusation for people who disagree with a project like this. I'm opposed to this project. I'm not opposed to the idea of development if done appropriate ly. With all due respect to the hard working staff of the planning commission, I disagree with the assertion they make where they say the proposed development will provide well designed neighborhoods and communities that will enable existing neighborhoods to flourish. That's one of the challenges you face and everyone faces what is appropriate and what does enhance or not enhance a neighborhood? I just am very concerned that this project will not enhance the neighborhood in which I live and many share with me. I don't think it will set a good precedent for lexington. I'm very concerned about sort of the domino effect through the nicolasville road corridor. I see lots of big stately old homes between this development proposal and southland drive and goodrich is the last street before southland and I really would hope that whatever infill does happen along this corridor can serve as an exemplar for really good design and good projects. >> I'm garrett hanson I live at 135 suburban court. Sorry for dragging this out any longer but I wanted to relay to you the experience I had when I first moved to lexington six years ago. I remember driving in and coming off new circle road and heading up on nicolasville road to a rental property at 121 suburban court and just being disappoint ed frankly. It was just strip malls and I thought, God, this is not where I want to be. And I remember getting past southland and hitting what, you know, I would come to know as my neighborhood and just exhaling, seeing these homes that were on the side of the road that these were real homes and they weren't something that had been thrown up. And we moved to 121 and we met our neighbors in 119 and when they bought a house further done the road on suburban court about a year and a half later, we bought a house three months after that right across from them. And we realized what an amazing community that we have become a part of just by happenstance. And the fact that there are people who are coming from dead end streets like suburban court who are not connected to any of these other streets, we all support each other because we live in this tiny island of these beautiful craftsmen and beautiful bungalows and I just wanted to offer my voice and that experience to the committee as well. What it means to drive down nicolasville road and enter into that community is something we enjoy every day when we come home. So thank you, guys. [Applause] >> now ladies and gentlemen we have a little way to go yet because we have to get into the rebuttal phase and what we will now is the applicant to respond and we are on a timeframe for you, Mr. Simpson of five minutes I think it is. And then for the persons representing you all have an opportunity to react to what he says for five minutes then we close out with the staff. >> thank you Mr. Chairman and members of the commission. I certainly appreciate the interest by the neighbors and their neighborhood and coming down here tonight I have been involved in many of these and it's a good thing that people participate in these proceedings let me tell you a couple things that this is not about. It's never been about. It's never been about how many people can come down and protest and say I support development but not here because that's politically correct thing to say because it makes their objection a little more palatable to you all. And I understand the reason that they don't want the change. You know, this body appointed a small area plan back in 2007 to study the northern nicolasville road area, for a small area plan it was suggested by one of the representatives that we needed to do a small area plan. You all, in fact, adopted that provision in the 2007 plan and as the staff will tell you, the neighbors refused to participate and it died for lack -- mainly because of opposition. They didn't want a plan. They wanted didn't want to participate in the plan because they were happy, as are most people with the status quo. I like what I have. Don't think about changing it. I don't want to talk about a plan. So you try to plan and that went nowhere. It never got off the ground because people didn't want to participate in it. So now here we are in 2018 and everything that I've heard when we met with tom and I met with hal and tracey. We talked with jim, what do we need, what is it that you all would like to see? And I want you guys to tell me if I'm wrong. We want to see more density on this spot. Is that correct? Jim, hal, tom? Did you tell me you wanted more density on this location? >> Mr. Simpson. Go ahead... And make your rebuttal statements. It's not... >> this is rebuttal. >> it's not. I respectfully suggest go ahead and make your point and then that's it. We will listen. We are listening. >> and I appreciate your listen ing but rebuttal means that I'm entitled to put on evidence to rebutt the issues that the were raised by the other side from or own staff. And if you are going to encourage developers to read the comprehensive plan and to read this language, defending vacant and underperforming land in the urban services area to accommodate lexington's growth is a key component of safeguard ing the rural land. And if you are going to adopt language we submitted our conceptual drawings to the staff we have never received any negative feedback. On the contrary nothing but endorsements that our proposal did in fact meet the conceptual guidelines because there is no specific guidelines on approving anything. it did meet the conceptual guidelines of scale, massing and size of the surrounding buildings. It's two story, we face nicolasville road. That's our neighborhood. We are also connected to penmoken because we are on the corner. So we follow what you say you want is, increasing density on those large lots on nicolasville road. Now this is what is in the downpayment and when we talked to your staff, this is what they say they want. And when we follow it, we believe we ought to be given the green light to go to the next level. Now as within any zone change, you file conceptual preliminary applications because you are not going to bring in and have something designed because if you don't get zoning approval, you've wasted your money. That's why we have a two step process. A preliminary development plan if that gets approved in connection with the zone change, we come wak for another whole hearing on the final development plan. So with respect to the people that want to follow the plan and increase density, we've done that and that's why we believe we are entitled to get approval from this body today. Your staff has recommended it. We've met all their concerns on the development plan, the sub committees have approved it without objection. And we believe we are entitled to move forward to the next level. The details on the final development plan come with the final development plan stage.% but we've complied with the comp plan and your staff agreed with it. >> the staff will get the last word. So you can pose questions and they'll provide the answers when they get their opportunity. Now I'm going back to the community. If there is any concluding or other thoughts you May have, you have five minutes to make your final points. >> I don't need five minutes.% there is a lot in that last rebuttal that frankly I don't need to respond to. It's not really rebuttal or relevant. The only thing I want you all to know is that the we don't think the zone change is appropriate because the design doesn't currently meet the zoning regulations for the zone he applied for r-1 t and it's not supported by the comprehensive plan and thank you all for listening to all of us today. >> thank you. >> now, staff. >> I'll be very brief. In the staff's professional opinion, the plan does meet the ordinance. It didn't be before you with our recommendation of approval if it didn't because that is our job, as you know, to evaluate it and be sure that it meets the requirements of the ordinance. And now just as a side bar, to educate folks, I know how sophia alley got named. And I know why. the e 911 ordinance for emergency response is they tried to name every little road and alley and street in our community because that is how our police and fire find things. And it's all based on response time. So that's how that happened. It's named after a man's daughter by the way. So that's it. >> just a couple of extra things so within the 2013 and 2018 comprehensive plans, staff has gained the knowledge from the public that says that they do want dense if I indication along our arterial roadways in lexington, kentucky. Because that guides our process of thought, yes, staff agrees there should be be a greater densification along our arterial roadways. So along the question that was posed and the audience that asked as well, those are where staff stands. The individual that did not receive notification, she is outside of the notification area there are multiple redundancies so notification is sent out to the public including the posting of signs as well as the legal notice that is presented in the newspaper. As for single family versus mull multifamily, there was a lot of discussion of this being a multi family this is attached single family dwellings. I want that to be on the record as well. If you have any further questions for staff, we are also here to answer. >> okay. That's what we will do now. i'm going to open it up for the commission to ask questions of either the applicant, the people in the community or the staff as it relates to this particular issue. If you have questions now, the is the time to do it. Yes, sir Mr. Owens. >> thank you Mr. Chairman. This would be for Mr. Simpson. In the lends of time we have been listening to this, a lot of things everybody said but two things jump out at me. One was the question as far as home ownership versus vental -- rental. What sort of security guarantees can be placed in that to make make make make make make make make make make make make make make make make make make make >> you mean are they going to be rented or sold? >> yes. >> the same assurances that I mean there are probably what 40% of the folks on penmoken that rent, david? 3w-7 37% of the houses. His commitment is to sell the units. That's what he wants to do, david, is that correct? >> yes. >> okay. >> the second thing is I think you mentioned a couple times in your presentation that these town homes would be all brick and then lastly lately you have mentioned context sensitivity as far as the design and so forth. How can we be assured that it's going to stay as being presented within a reasonable and won't go to what we've seen as far as vinyl student housing? >> we will not submit a final development plan without it being all brick and if we do, turn it down. This is a serious commit: this is going to be a well designed project and we'll have an architect at the final development plan to be queried about every single thing as well as the construction manager. >> thank you, sir. >> first I have a question as well. You know, there has been a lot of stuff thrown around about the design and how it's going to look and what all is going to be involved and there need to be architects involved and everything else. Typically at this zoning phase, we don't have all that information. We have conceptual, so we don't have all of that information until we get to the development plan. Am I correct? >> that's correct. The ordinance and the law requires that you come forward with conceptual representation of what you intend to do. And as you all know, just to get conceptual approval from our staff is a major accomplishment. Because they go over this weeks and week and days and days and changes are made and your mission is, as a developer, you got to get staff's approval. And that's... That is what we accomplished in connection from the voor first time we met with them up to today we finally got staff approval on everything that wave' submitted. >> okay. Thank you. >> anyone else? I have one quick question and it has nothing to do with the plan and what have you. What happens to the 10 people that would be potentially dis placed? What are you going to do with that and how would you handle that? >> david has already met with those gentlemen and has given each one of them a heads up sheet, if you will, explaining that a zone change has been filed; that depending on whether it's granted or not, they May have to move elsewhere. But he has a number of houses 100 houses in lexington and will make accommodation for them to stay at the same rent or less with his representation to each of those 10 gentleman to make sure that there is a proper transition. This was done months ago. >> okay. Any other questions? Comments? >> yes. >> you know the 2018 comp plan is based on the fact that 10,000 citizens said we don't want to expand the urban service boundary. it's also based on the fact that infill, we still have places that infill can happen. When we, as a planning commission, get approval from our staff for a zone change and the preliminary development plan , and I want to emphasize the word preliminary because the final development plan will look like you want it to look like it will not look like what you have seen today. And as far as the reason Mr. Simpson enumerated he didn't know if he would bet a zone change or not. It is not our intention or not my intention to change your neighborhood. It is my intention to increase the density along nicolasville road corridor and I don't mean by commercialization that happened at the other end of nicolasville road. I mean by putting people in homes that want to stay there or housing types that want to stay there. I'm going to support this because of the zone change because we have to have more density in the corridor. We've already, as a commission, we already voted that this is what we want to happen with our goals and objectives. So I can't disapprove the zone change because what is happening here is happening according to what the plan we've adopted or at least the goals and objectives. I will tell you that I don't like the development plan. And I will tell you that most of the commissioners on here don't like the development plan. (Audience yelling don't approve it). >> if you'll let me finish. I get a chance to approve the development plan at another time all this is is a place holder. So that's why I'm going to vote to approve this because I know I'll get another bite at that apple with the development plan and it better look a lot better than it looks right now but I don't want to hold up a zone change that our staff has approved because we've got to have reasons to disapprove this and if we believe in the comp plan, we have got to uphold this zone change. You will be notified and you certainly can come and see it and you will be notified when we are going to hear it and you can come back down here and talk about the development plan then. But right now the best thing for us to do if we are going to up hold the comp plan is to approve the development plan on the -- the zone change on the faith that development plan is going to look different and you'll get an opportunity to see it. So I'm just telling you what I'm going to do thank you for being here. It has been a long afternoon we want sustainable neighborhoods but we are bound by the comprehensive plan and our commitment to corridors it's obvious you love our neighborhood. It's sustainable. But and I'm sure my colleagues up here would agree with you that they wouldn't want change in their neighborhood either. But we have to look at the big picture and that big picture is develop the corridors and hold the boundary on the so-for-that reason I would be willing to vote for this zone change. Again, thank you for coming down here. You think that you've been miserable. You think that we haven't listen ed. You think you have not gotten your way but like frank said, wait for the development plan. But your energy into that and perhaps it will be more liking for you. Thank you. >> thank you. Anyone else on the panel like to say anything? Any questions? >> I just, I guess am going to reiterate a little bit while I think there is plenty of room for improvement on the development plan, it is preliminary. I'm going to closes the process back to the commission for additional discussion and/or a motion as to how you want to proceed from here. I'm going to move for recommendation of approval of the zone change for pln-mar-18- 26 for the reasons noted by staff. We are voting. The motion is approved. >> and I'm going to move for approval of the preliminary development plan-mjdp-18-95 changing number 7 to resolve access to penmoken park. >> I think we can just eliminate that. >> I'm fine with that. So the six conditions as noted by staff. It has been moved by Mr. william berkeley and second by Miss Karen mundy that we approve the preliminary plan -mjdp-18-95 penmoken park. Hearing noun please vote when it comes up on the screen let me say, my colleagues couldn't be more eloquent in terms of where we are in this process. You will have another bite of the apple and quite frankly I agree wholeheartedly with my colleague. I don't like the development plan either but at this stage of the game, this is a zone change and these are the kinds of things that we have been struggling with. Ladies and gentlemen, let me also thank you sincerely for your patience today.% because you have stuck it out as well as any group has and I can understand why you would stick it out because you've got a lot at stake with your homes but we've all about be in the same situation in another situation another circumstance but I thank you all for coming and do indeed wish you the best. But again this is just a preliminary event here. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen we are still in session here. If you would please proceed to the hallway for additional discussion at which time you can continue to talk. Right now we are still in session. Mr. Duncan. Ladies and gentlemen. We are continuing. There is a section on our program agenda for anyone who wanted to speak about anything, they had a couple minutes to do so and there is a person here who did not get a chance to speak monday and we indicated we would allow that individual to% make a comment so is she here? Come on up to the front to the microphone and identify yourself and I'm from lexington, kentucky and as someone hob part of the comprehensive plan from the verbiage of the vision statement to today, I was looking over the final comp plan and I was wonder ing, it's filled with lots of pretty pictures and lots of pictures with pretty people in them but it's not comprehensive of the whole of lexington. There are people with mobility issues, disabilities in wheelchairs things of this nature and it doesn't represent ... It doesn't show any representation of that except for drawings. And it was just... I was just wondering if y'all could just... It has come to my attention that the resources are out there to help do that. And it would just be really nice if the comp plan represented the all not just the pretty people. Thank you. Kudos to you for making a comp plan by the people for the people. You did a great job in doing that. You tried to incorporate as many as you could and for that, I am grateful that's all. >> thank you, ma'am and appreciate with that >> thank you, Mr. Chair. The staff would like to make some sons -- response to some of the comments that you were presented with monday night so with that we'll ask chris woodall and then I will round out the staff comments based on monday night's presentation. >> >> Mr. Chairman, members of the commission. I know that you all have had a long afternoon so I appreciate your patience as we discuss this important topic. And I always appreciate the opportunity be in front of you all to speak. Today, we'll try to keep our presenting brief. But you'll be hearing as Mr. Duncan said from myself, chris taylor, and then director duncan regarding what we heard on monday,, everyone of us will be making a specific point to address some of the primary issues that were raised and the main point that I would like to address, is that, there is no legal question the comprehensive plan in its current form, can be adopted today, and implemented tomorrow. To be clear, your legal counsel will tell you the same thing. We have followed and far ex-sided -- >> excuse me. I'm going to put a marker on that because I understand that you are an outstanding planner but I want to hear from the attorney as it relates to just your statement so would you take that and make that a part of the record. >> we have looked at this, and you'll hear more from them that -- or this evening, about where -- some of the language that was talked about on monday night where the terms like, "shall" and "must" have been modified to read more in terms of "should" or more suggestive and more guidance oriented than what was being put forward as being mandatory language. Which is what you also heard a lot of monday is that the comp plan is supposed to be a guide. Sop with that in mind, and with the fact that we have put off indefinitely until we get through this process, article 281, our office feels comfortable that this can go forward as it is. >> okay, thank you. And I apologize, Mr. Woodall for that. But -- >> that's fine. >> you have the credentials for the planning. You just did not have jd behind your name. >> I'm okay with that. But, as I was saying, we -- we have followed and far ex-exceeded the minimum state standard asset out in krs for what is required for a comprehensive plan and we've done so in an inclusive and fully transparent manner. Our data collection has been robust, we've looked at national, state and local resources for that. The our research has been thorough over two years of preparation. Public input resulted in historic numbers. Over 12,000 people contributing to this plan and we've consulted with public officials and agencies, almost 70 expert advisers and our counsel unanimously approved the goals goals and objectives on this comprehensive plan is built. the place builder is the embodiment of one of only about handful of actual implementation items that are called for in the council approved goals and objectives. By moving the development criteria from an implementation to a primary objective and goals and objectives made clear from the very beginning, that imagine lexington would include a place builder. The planning and commission has called for and demanded better guidance on the zone changes. The call has been the development community. Planning has not been sigh lept on this for the last two years. We've developed a document of best practices, and concepts that make for great places. When we solicited input, the neighborhoods were not silent. We've been out educating and we've been discussing it. We've been teaching how it would be implemented and taking specific feedback along the way and incorporating it into the document. Those same opportunities have been made available to the development community, and today we haven't had a single comment in writing with changes to address the substance of what has been submitted. E-mail, planning staff is committed at every turn to the neighborhoods and citizens. To create a better tool to better discuss and evaluate zone changes. For planning to equivocate on those commitments to the public is unacceptable and it is not snag the planning feels that we can do. place builder is the balance in the comprehensive plan. It is a pro growth policies. Place builder is how we are going to reach consensus. It is how we're going to bridge the I don't individual between developers and residents. And I know that sounds idealistic, you know, I have been doing this a long time too much I've heard a lot of people complain about a lot of different things. There is optimism about this. The people who we have taken this to, they understand what the plan and place builder is trying to achieve. And so, the last point I need to make is that from the ground up, showing basically going back to the goal and and objectives the plan was developed around a simple philosophy of goals and objectives, clear policies, and a list of criteria to implement them. Place builder is not simply tacked on to the end of the imagine lexington like an appendix. It is referenced throughout the document, and it is the back bone of the plan. And it cannot be removed as far as the planning staff feels. And with that I'll turn it over to Mr. Duncan. We'll get back to you in just a minute. >> I have a question. >> hong on a minute. We'll get to you. Go ahead. >> our neighborhoods are distressed about change. And that the an understatement given what you all just went through. on the heels of yet another contentious zone change hearing. Neighborhoods are concerned that redevelopment will change the character of their neighborhoods. And they are concerned that redevelopment will cause problems for traffic and storm water. Our mains are concerned that new development takes away their open space. And causes problems with traffic and storm water. That distress is not new. Our archives are filled with files of stressful contentious zone changes but both, and after the great 1996 expansion. And no matter what process we have in place, no matter how much farmland we make available for the development, we will always have contentious zone changes in lexington. And for good or bad, some of those will end up in the courts. The 2013 and 2018 comp plans are pro growth plans. We eliminated the future land use map, and declared that infill is a strategic component of growth. The underperforming and underutilized ones. The intention in 2013 was to follow up with criteria. We ensured that was a priority for the 2018 plan. So now we find ourselves in the place where the urban county council has unanimously stated, that no farm land will be made available for urban development for the foreseeable future. And the process that they have sanctioned to consider whether and where to expand, is no guarantee of expansion. and will likely never lead to an expansion like we had in 17996. Second: people do not want new or redevelopment in their neighborhoods. They don't want it. They are satisfied with the status quo. Even if what is offered would be better they know what they know and that's where they want to b finally we know that we're still a growing community. And in part because this is where the jobs. Are this is where the services are. The educational opportunities. The university of kentucky is continuing its multi-billion dollar improvement to its campus and they wouldn't be doing that% if the they were not drawing in more people to educate, more people for research and more people to this community. We also know that people are coming to lexington because this is just a great place to be. For tangible and intangible reasons. Put those three things together. No new land, neighborhood distress about new development, and a growing community. How do we take those three desperate ideas and move this community forward? That is where place builder comes in. By the 1958 planning commission to the cost and uncertainties associated with unchecked sanitary sewer expansion. That 1958 policy of urban service area boundary, has been the lynch pin of comprehensive planning. And caused us to develop in ways that are different and more efficient. Likewise, place builder sets the stage for responsive and better outcomes. As a reminder, place builder is not a recent development. The goals and objectives that you recommended, and that council approved, called for criteria. And if you'll forgive me for using the wrong tense, place builder is criteria. The framework for place builder was introduced in August and the full criteria were offered in September. We held six input opportunities and every work session has been open. We have met with industry, and neighborhood organizations, on their terms. There have been ample opportunitiers of the past months for input and change and to date er, we have received no constructive feedback on how to improve place builder. So eliminating place builder as chris taylor said is not an option. Tans element of the comprehensive plan. But, improving it is always an option. And we have been eager to hear lou the plan could be improved. All we have really heard is, make it go away. We are prepared to move forward with the plan today. After 26 months, more than 60 open meetings, research and analysis, public input, we're ready. However, in the spirit of outreach, clarity and an ongoing interest in improvement, we offer an alternative should you wish to continue this discussion to another date. We will hold feedback and workshop sessions in January, as an opportunity for anyone developer, neighborhood, other professionals and citizens, to have additional time to discuss place builder and offer constructive recommendations for improvement. We will then reopen the public hearing on 31 to discuss the potential changes to place builder, and finalize action on the plan. Should you be interested in this path, we have just handed you a schedule of dates and times that you could reference in a motion to continue this hearing until January 31. >> Now I would like to give -- if any of the commission members have a question for any of the presenters, Mr. Berkley. We'll have two group sexes but at different times, and that will be it? Because I don't know if everything can be vetted in -- >> I agree with you. So, the first bullet point number two talks about the two focus group sessions and you're correct. Those are identical sessions held at different times and one of the daytime for folks that are working professionals that are engaged in it or whoever else wants to attend and also an evening he meeting for folks that May have to work to participate. But, we also step number four talks about a workshop for public to the proposed changes. So, we would listen in those focus groups, hear what it is, and make some proposed changes, bring it back to folks who want to attend that meeting on the January 16, and then, he would receive additinal feedback from there, and then revise even further and then bring it back to the planning commission. So there would be two opportunities for input. >> >> are we going to go on parallel lines with article 21 or how do you intend to address that? >> we're not talking about article 21 so we'll get through this plan, and including through the month of January, so we will continue to indefinitely postpone article 21 until the plan has been adopted. >> that's what I wanted to know. Thank you. >> okay. Any other comments? >> real quick. One, I appreciate this very much. And two, I'm liking what I'm seeing so far. I do appreciate a time line with an end date so that we can hopefully get this thing through with a known end date. One comment on two items that doesn't need a response, just something to look at throughout this process, month day night, and after, two things that I didn't hear about today. For you to look at would be a table of contents, and then also, take a look at the appendix that was -- there was some concern about the appendix and housing as well. So, like I said, no comments needed, but, just something to look at. >> I don't know if anybody else got copies of those, but, I did not. In my packet. And I could not print it. The appendix did not get it in the packet. And I could not print it from sew. >> so the appendix is available underneath on imagine lexington.Com. If you look there can is a link that you can click on it. >> are you talking about the one that you just put out on the fourth? >> the booklet thing? >> yes. >> you cannot print from that. >> there is a -- so if you look at the top left corner there is a little tab that should allow you to download it and once you download it, you should be able to print it. If you have trouble, let me know and I'll help you out. >> I tried. I mean, I tried. >> I did too. >> and -- it was kind of at the back and it wasn't there, but one day when I looked for it and then, the next day, it was. And, okay, so. >> well, yeah. If anybody -- if anybody has trouble accessing it or printing it, I'm a resource, so let me know. I would be happy to help. >> and okay. Anything else? >> since -- I was not there monday night. I think you guys know about some commitments that I have at home that I can't really change to come in here. I did thanks to chris, watch the whole thing. He sent me a link. And, with several cups of coffee I did go through the whole two hours and 15 minutes or whatever it was. And, it was -- >> why are you complaining, you had coffee. [Laughter] >> I'm not complaining. No, no. I'm just saying that I did share your pain. And, you know, I'm never one to want to push something off or take more time when we can do it appropriately in an efficient or a shorter timeframe. But, I thought what I heard was that there were significant questions that needed to be addressed. And, the outpour of concern about place builder and the checklist, the -- how this would turn into -- you have 14 and I've got 18, how do you balance who meets the criteria. So I'm really quite pleased to see the change in language that you put out first about changing all of the "shall" and "must" to "should." from my perspective anyway, that addresses the checklist issue. Right off the bat. As as far as the timeframe, you put forward, it's ambitious to say the least. But, this also as you pointed out, has been gestation periods of 26 months. So, we want to do it right even if we have to take a little longer to do it. I think you have done a good job of compromising on, let's get this thing done because, you all live it every day. The rest of us don't. So I can appreciate your frustration with not being able to -- when in your opinion it is done. So, I am fully supportive of the -- what I consider to be a very adequate compromise on the timeframe. And I appreciate what had to have been a lot of late hours putting together this information between monday night and tonight. So, thank you all. >> thank you. >> I want to encourage the staff to cut us a little slack here. What we saw today and what we did today, is what we're going to do many times over and over for the next four years and beyond. And the more education that we can do for ourselves, because if we don't fine tune it as a commission, we won't follow light so we wasted our 26 months, patrick. But, there comes a time when you have got to say, okay, we have got to fish or cut bait. And, if we can get to that point, by the end of January, I think that we have done a great job. But, always remember, this is just as good as a -- that you can use and I'm more concerned about us being brought into this and enforcing it and just like today, you know, four years ago, he would have been very tempted to pass the zone change and postpone the development plan. Well, we're past that know now. We go for it or we don't. But we have to have reasons and we have to understand. i'm willing to keep working on it but I think has to be an end time at some point. I mean, there's two things that can happen. You can talk to it until you paralyze it or you can decide, this is as good as we can do and go forward with it. Once we decide we're going forward with it, that just begun. And now, it is a matter of implementing it and education. So, I salute new doing this I think that the legal partner was great. We're never going to get it where everybody is very satisfied with it. It is democracy, and, it is not a perfect thing. But I salute you. >> thank you. And Ms. Plumley. >> thank you. I stated earlier, I believe that we had a good document with comp plan proposal. But I fully think that the message going forward to neighborhoods is, don't go downtown, don't bother. Because it is already cut and dried. And, as I say, I have already -- I sort of believe that. Even though I love neighborhoods, and I believe that they get the raw deal a lot of times. But, anyway, I just have to say that because I think that is going to be the message and I think it is correct. >> thank you. Anyone else? If not, the chair would entertain a motion to continue this meeting until January 31. >> so moved. >> second. >> okay, it has been moved by Mr. Frank p eppnn and seconded by Mr. Mike owens that we continue this meeting until January 31. >> I can can I make a comment or a question. >> just been -- we got the motion on the floor now. It open for discuss. Yes. >> go ahead. >> open for discussion. >> this is discussion now. >> so, if I understand this correctly, we're going to have a series of opportunities for everybody in the community to input this. Right. And at least two or three that I see on the piece of paper, right. So, then do we -- are we obliged to open up the next meeting for a full hearing again for full public comment? Because, we have got the public comment that we -- for everybody who wanted to participate we're giving them all new opportunity to provide input at three different time points, right. Already. I would hate to see us get to a situation where we have to do another three hour or four-hour meeting, to hear what -- almost assuredly be half of the same things again. Is it possible just to go with the input that we have on paper? >> I'm -- let me put it this way. Go ahead. I have my own opinion. >> we talked about this. the staff did a little bit yesterday and today. But, first off, by continuing this hearing, until the 31st of January, you are incorporating what you have heard. In other words, you're not just erasing it and starting over. Now, certainly, there is going to be some discussions at these workshops and at these sessions, and they May bring up new things. And, you know, one of the things that Mr. Woodall and Mr. Duncan and I have been talking about the last couple of days is, that -- and I don't mean this as any disrespect to the other members of the planning and zoning board, but, a lot of what we have heard and we've had meetings with different members of that, that you all haven't been in but we've all been in, and you know, if there are specific things and items that need more explanation, that we can do in those sessions, and if there are specific alternative language or alternative ways that we can modify this, it would be great to hear what those are because the message that we've been hearing is, you should take this out. And that doesn't help us modify. So, I say that to say this: if as we go forward in these sessions, if some new things come about, certainly you're all going to have to have the opportunity to discuss those. And you're going to have to have the opportunity to hear people, but, it is really up to all as a commission and to your chair if you're going to open it wide up, and hear everything that you have already heard again. I don't think that you have to do that. But I do think that if new things come online and new changes, those are going to have to be discussed. >> what I was going to say for the most part is, let's he hear what goes on and make a decision about how we deal with that. We don't have to make that decision right now. But anything and everything we do I'm hoping that we'll be able to get done, by January 31 but also agree this is am by shouse but it depends on what else we hear. And how well people react to what we have. But I'm -- I would say I wouldn't close it but I wouldn't open it up just automatically. Either. >> okay. We have a motion on the floor for continuing. >> yes, ma'am, go ahead. >> simple question. How do we get the word out? >> I'm sorry. >> how do we get the word out? >> >> we'll submit through the email list serve that includes everybody that is involved in the planning and zoning process, all the neighborhood associations that we have, we'll put it out in our social media accounts. We'll -- we have every intention of advertising this far and wide as we have everything else to get as many people to participate as possible. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> and no problem. any other comments or questions. Discussion. Motion on the table is to continue this meeting January 31. There has been properly moved motion and second. Any other discussion? Hearing none, are we still voting. All in favor, please vote when it comes up on your screens. Okay. The motion carries. Ladies and gentlemen, if there is no other public business, I wish you a very happy holiday, and thank you very much. The only thing that I want for christmas is a parking space.