and our community. Our officers and their partners train and work tirelessly to keep Lexington safe. I think Chief Watson and Officer Martis would be proud of this new facility. We're proud of it and we're looking forward to using this space for many years to come. The canine officers that work for us, they're 24 hours a day, seven days a week. On call, whenever we need them, in any kind of adverse conditions, in any kind of weather. I think the city leaders and our community recognize that if they're going to give their best, they need the best and this facility is testament to that. So thank you. Applause Lexington's annual homeless count took place recently and with it comes some good news. Polly Ruddock explains. So the origination of the actual point in time count came back in about 2005 from the housing and urban development at the federal level. They kind of wanted to get a better snapshot of what happens on any given night in your local community. So Lexington has been doing this kind of point in time count since 2005. It's been under different groups and under different leadership, but the overall count has not changed very much since 2005. And what that gives us the ability to do, we do it on the same time every year, almost the same date. It's the last Wednesday of January of every single year. We call it the Lex count now. And you get volunteers and there's three categories of those experiencing homelessness that we can count. Unsheltered, living in a place not meant for human habitation. Emergency shelter and those transitional housing projects that are dedicated to serve people who are experiencing homelessness. Those are the only three categories we've been able to count, ever really been able to count under HUD's guidelines. So ultimately, this number affects our federal funding. If I could walk on water, would you believe in me? My love is so true. Na na na na na, na na na na na, na na na na na, na na na na na, na na na na na. Well I'm no angel now. I'll admit, I made a few bad moves that I should regret. I hurt you once, well so you say. Just one more chance is all you get. Didn't mean to do you wrong again. Worst things have been done by better men. Better, better don't, don't treat me this way. I know if I've got to pay now, I'll still pay you. Well if I could walk on water, and if I could find some way to prove. If I could walk on water, would you believe in me? My love is true. Na na na na na, na na na na na, na na na na na, na na na na na. For a year long, I told the lie to every human forgiveness divine. Don't be a fool, don't settle the score, cause I can't take it no more, I can't take it. Well if I could walk on water, and if I could find some way to prove. If I could walk on water, would you believe in me? My love is true. Well if I could walk on water, if I could, is that all that I have to do? If I could walk on water, would you believe in me? My love is so true. Na na na na na, na na na na na, na na na na na, na na na na na. Do I have to walk, walk, walk on water for you? Hey baby, baby, that's a little bit tired of spending together. We'll get over what we left behind in the future together. Come on, let's stay together. I keep walking, walking, walking for you, for you. Well if I could walk on water, and if I could find some way to prove. If I could walk on water, would you believe in me? My love is true. My love is so true. Do I have to walk, walk, walk on water for you? Baby, please. If I were to walk on water, if I were to walk on water, do I have to walk on water, walk on water for you? Do I have to walk on water, do I have to find some way to prove? Do I have to walk on water, walk on water for you? Do I have to walk on water, do I have to find some way to prove? Yeah, yeah, walk on water, walk on water for you. I know you want to leave me, but I refuse to let you go. If I have to beg, please, for your sympathy. I don't mind, cause you mean that much to me. Ain't too proud to beg, as you know it. Please don't leave me, girl. Don't you go. Ain't too proud to plead, baby, baby. Please don't leave me, girl. Don't you go. Now, I heard a crying man is half the man, with no sense of pride. But if I have to cry to keep you, I don't mind weeping. If you'll keep by my side. Ain't too proud to beg, sweet darling. Please don't leave me, girl. Don't you go. Ain't too proud to plead, baby, baby. Ain't too proud to plead, sweet darling. I'm not saying you can't be my girl. Don't you go. Ain't too proud to plead, baby, baby. Don't you go. Now, I heard a crying man is half the man, with no sense of pride. But if I have to cry to keep you, I don't mind weeping. Now, I heard a crying man is half the man, with no sense of pride. But if I have to cry to keep you, I don't mind weeping. Now, I heard a crying man is half the man, with no sense of pride. But if I have to cry to keep you, I don't mind weeping. Now, I heard a crying man is half the man, with no sense of pride. But if I have to cry to keep you, I don't mind weeping. Now, I heard a crying man is half the man, with no sense of pride. But if I have to cry to keep you, I don't mind weeping. Now, I heard a crying man is half the man, with no sense of pride. But if I have to cry to keep you, I don't mind weeping. Now, I heard a crying man is half the man, with no sense of pride. But if I have to cry to keep you, I don't mind weeping. Now, I heard a crying man is half the man, with no sense of pride. But if I have to cry to keep you, I don't mind weeping. Now, I heard a crying man is half the man, with no sense of pride. But if I have to cry to keep you, I don't mind weeping. Now, I heard a crying man is half the man, with no sense of pride. But if I have to cry to keep you, I don't mind weeping. Now, I heard a crying man is half the man, with no sense of pride. But if I have to cry to keep you, I don't mind weeping. Now, I heard a crying man is half the man, with no sense of pride. But if I have to cry to keep you, I don't mind weeping. Now, I heard a crying man is half the man, with no sense of pride. But if I have to cry to keep you, I don't mind weeping. Thank you. Move approval January 16, 2020 minutes. Second. Thank you. Motion has been made and seconded for the approval of the minutes from January 16, 2020. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. That motion passes. Thank you. Next would be any postponements and or withdrawals from today's agenda. Good afternoon, sir. Good afternoon. Nick Nicholson here on behalf of two different clients. The first being Baptist Health on page two of your agenda. Item A, MJDP 19-70. I'd like to ask a one-month postponement. I believe that puts us off to the March 12th Planning Commission meeting. As was the case last month, we are still working with the administration on a few things that need to be put in place. Thank you, Mr. Nicholson. Anyone in the audience wish to speak to this request for postponement? Commission members? If not, Ms. Bundy? I'm being noisy. Mr. Chair, I move for one-month postponement for PLN MJDP 19-00070, Hamburg East Baptist Health Care Campus amended. And that would be March 12th of 2020. Thank you. Motion's been made and seconded by Ms. Plumlee to postpone PLN MJDP 19-70, Hamburg East until March 12th, 2020. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. You're doing so. And that motion passes. Yes, sir. Thank you. Also on page three of your agenda, item D, MJDP 19-74, the Blackford property, phase four. I'd like to request a one-month postponement to the March 12th Planning Commission meeting. We are still working on the documentation for the density transfer for that matter. Thank you, sir. Anyone in the audience wish to speak to this request for postponement? Commission members? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chair? Yes, sir. I move that we postpone PLN MJDP 19-74, Blackford property, phase four until March the 12th. A motion's been made for postponement until March 12th and seconded by Ms. Plumlee. That is for PLN MJDP 19-74, Blackford properties. So please vote when it comes up on the screen. Motion passes. Thank you, Mr. Nicholson. Other requests? Mr. Chairman, members of the Planning Commission, Bruce Simpson, on behalf of LDG Development in Louisville, page four, item E, Winburn Estates, unit three. Planning staff has asked for a postponement for two weeks to work with us on resolving some remaining issues, and so we would appreciate the Planning Commission giving us two weeks to get that done. Thank you, sir. Anyone in the audience wish to speak to this request for postponement? Commission members? If not, I'll entertain a motion for a two-week postponement. That's February 27th. Ms. Plumlee? Thank you. Mr. Chair, I move postponement of PLN MJDP 19-77, Winburn Estates, until February 27th. Thank you. That motion's postponement was made by Ms. Plumlee, seconded by Mr. Forrester. That's for PLN MJDP 19-77, Winburn Estates, until February 27th. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. That motion passes. Thank you, Mr. Simpson. Other requests for postponements? Good afternoon, sir. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. My name's Matt Carter with Vision Engineering. On page three of your agenda, or page two, I'm sorry, page two of your agenda, item B, MJDP 19-71, Rydell Plaza, lot three. I request a one-month postponement to the March 12th, and we are still working on the drainage study, and we need to get that wrapped up before we present it. Thank you, Mr. Carter. Anyone in the audience wish to speak to this request for postponement? Commission members? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Pohl? Mr. Chair, I move to postpone PLN MJDP 19-71, Rydell Plaza, lot three, until March 12th. Thank you. And that was seconded by Ms. Mundy. That's for postponement, PLN MJDP 19-71, Rydell Plaza, until March the 12th. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. That motion passes. And I have one more. It's on page five of your agenda. It's a continued discussion item. Item B, MJDP 18-30, Ethington and Ethington property. We want to revise our waiver request, and we've gone over this with staff, and we'd like to postpone for two weeks to the February 20th. Give us time to finalize amending that. Okay, I think that's 27. Or 27. Okay, thank you. Anyone in the audience wish to speak to this request for postponement? Commission members? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chair? Yes, sir. I move for postponement of PLN MJDP 18-30, Ethington and Ethington property until February 27th. Thank you. The motion was made and then subsequently seconded by Mr. Forrester. Postponement of PLN MJDP 18-30, Ethington and Ethington until February 27th. So please vote when it comes up on the screen. That motion passes. Thank you. Yes, sir. Thank you. John Woodall on regard to item C on page 3 of your agenda. Staff has recommended postponement. We have a Board of Adjustment meeting on March 9th in order to obtain a variance, and I'd like this postponed to the March 12th meeting. Okay, thank you. Anyone in the audience wish to speak to this request for postponement? Commission members? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Ms. Mundy? Mr. Chair, I move for postponement. Was that one month? Yes, ma'am. So that would be to March 12th for PLN MJDP 19-73, Schroer property lots 3 and 4 for one month. Thank you. Motion was made by Ms. Mundy, seconded by Mr. Bell for postponement of PLN MJDP 19-73, Schroer property until March 12th. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. That motion passes. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Any other requests for postponements, withdrawals? Mr. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the Planning Commission. Staff has one item to bring to your attention on page 5. It is under continued discussions. Item A, this is a final record plat, plan 19-24, the George Mankell property. Staff has had a communication with the applicant requesting a one-month postponement, and in that discussion with the applicant, we are anticipating this plan will ultimately be withdrawn. Thank you. Anyone in the audience wish to speak to this request for postponement? Commission members? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Yes, sir. Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a one-month postponement to the March 12th meeting for PLN FRP-19-24, George Mankell property. Thank you. Motion was made for postponement and seconded by Ms. Plumlee of plan FRP-19-24, George Mankell property until March 12th. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. That motion passes. Thank you. Any other requests, postponements, and or withdrawals? Seeing none, and I think Ms. Waite, if I'm correct, there's no consent agenda today. So we will take the remaining items as they show up on the agenda. That would start us with the bottom of page one, final subdivision plan, PLN FRP-20-7, Marcell-Payton properties, located at 5021 Jax Creek Pike. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Okay, so this is the Marcell-Payton property. It's located at 5021 Jax Creek Pike, as you said. Oh, I have the clicker. Sorry about that. Okay. Jax Creek Pike is located off of Richmond Road, and this property is in the AR zone. The purpose of this amendment is to subdivide an 83.66 acre lot into a 40 acre lot and a 43.66 acre lot. We have most of our typical sign-offs on this plan. We also have the Board of Health approval for the septic tank locations in item number six. And items seven, eight, and nine are just cleanup conditions. We just need the order of the lot numbers reversed. And then the signature line and language corrected in two of the certifications. We have two discussion items listed in conditions 10 and 11, but item 10 can now be deleted. Both a waiver and a variance can address the issue of each lot not meeting the minimum frontage requirement in the AR zone. However, staff determined that a variance would be more appropriate based on past practices. The frontage requirement is 750 feet for each lot. Waivers are generally associated with infrastructure requirements, and variances deal with zoning dimensional requirements. So in this case, the variance would be more appropriate. And with that, I'll open it up to the committee for any questions. Questions? Doesn't look like it. Thank you. Applicant? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dick Murphy here on behalf of Sean and Kristen Foley, who are the owners of this tract. Steve Vogel is with me from Strand Associates, our designer and engineer. And this is subdividing an 83-acre lot into two 40-acre lots. And we have confirmed with the staff and we've agreed to go through the Board of Adjustment for the variance on the size of lot frontage. It's unusual because we have two separate lot frontages on this lot. So I think we can amend number 11 to require the variance prior to certification by the staff. Is that acceptable? Yeah, it's provided the Board of Adjustment approves a variance to Article 8-1. That sounds good. Thank you, Mr. Murphy. Any questions for the applicant? If not, anyone else in the audience wish to speak to this request? Anything else, Mr. Murphy? No, sir. Thank you, sir. Questions from the Commission? If not, we'll close this part of the hearing and I can ask for a motion. Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman, first question is number 11. What do we change that to? It should say provided the Board of Adjustment approves a, and then the rest would remain the same, variance to Article 8-1G of the zoning ordinance. So you're deleting the words discuss need for? Yes, okay. Just put providing the Board of Adjustments for the variance. Okay, gotcha. Delete 10. Oh yeah, I know that, but I was trying to get number 11 straightened out and what have you. Okay, Mr. Chairman, I move for approval of PLN FRP 20-7 Marcel Payton Property Section 2 with the 10 conditions provided by staff. Striking number 10, discuss need for waiver for Article 6-4, deleting that one. But changing number 11 to providing the Board of Adjustments for a variance to Article 8-1G of the zoning ordinance. Thank you. Do we have a second? Seconded by Ms. Mundy. So we do have a motion and second for the approval of PLN FRP 20-7 Marcel Payton Property. Now with 10 conditions, striking the original number 10 and changing the old 11 to number 10 to provide a Board of Adjustment approval for the variance to Article 8-11G. Any questions? If not, please vote when it comes up on the screen. Motion passes. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Murphy. So we move on to page 4. It's at the bottom. It's planned. MJDP 20-2 Manchester Development, LLC, Distillery District East, Unit 1. We do have revisions that's on a salmon colored piece of paper. And then also we do have findings that's also before you in regards to condition number 12. Mr. Owens, before we move on, the applicant did provide their affidavit about a sign posting for the agricultural tract. And then Mr. Barrett submitting one for this particular plan as well. Signs are required for an adaptive reuse project. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Martin, is that a salmon colored shirt or is that an orange shirt? Thank you for asking. It was mentioned today that this is normally my Halloween outfit. And tomorrow being Valentine's Day, I felt it appropriate to speak up for all the men, my fellow men, so that you understand how frightening the pressure of Valentine's Day can be to us. Thank you, sir. We move on now. We move on now. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the Planning Commission. We are on page 4 of your agenda. Major Development Plan 20-2 for Manchester Development. It's the Distillery District East and also a nice orange sheet to color code with revised conditions. This is an amendment to Distillery District East, which is, of course, located on Manchester Street as it comes off of the Oliver Lewis Way. And here we go up Manchester. Of course, this is the East End, Distillery District East. As you all are well aware, we recently had the townhouses approved that are under construction here. And then we have an approved development plan, multi-use building in this location as well. And this particular amendment, the applicant controls the area in red that you see as well as this proposed parking area in this location. Now, they are proposing to build here a brand new seven-story hotel. The hotel will have 120 rooms. It's proposed to be seven stories in height with a rooftop bar restaurant type of area. The applicant has filed for variance with the BOA on the height because it does exceed the height limit by 30 feet or more in this particular zone. So they are going to have to go to the board. It's a 78-foot tall building under this proposal. It's over 60,000 square feet. And in this area, there is a 4,000, just over a little 4,000 square foot restaurant proposed. Now, they do control this area as well. And it's divided into various condominiums for various uses in that building. And they are adaptive reuses in this particular instance. We met with the applicant and had discussions with them about several of the outstanding issues. They did submit this revised plan that you see before you. I have mentioned, of course, they have all the standard sign-offs for a development plan. This is a major amendment. The Board of Adjustment will be hearing at their next meeting the variance, as I mentioned. You will need to make a finding that they do meet the criteria in the zoning ordinance for an adaptive reuse. And that was one of the issues that your staff had in that we've had a series of amendments, in fact, nine amendments in this area. And when this plan came in, there was a lot of discussion about their compliance with the adaptive reuse. And they addressed pedestrian issues and some other issues in that regard to demonstrate their compliance with the adaptive reuse. Due to the nature of this development and the large size, we ask that they document their compliance as well. And they have submitted, which has been distributed to you, a statement to that effect. They've addressed the locational requirement. adaptive review using a building and this building meets the square footage requirement as well as age. This building in fact was from the late 1800s it's very old and there's other buildings in the area that date to the early 1900s. So they've met the adaptive review use criteria for age and size of the building. Non-vehicular accommodation, again that was a big discussion here, pedestrian, bike, that sort of thing. They're doing the same thing with bikes and if you look up in here it's interesting they're actually proposing electric car charging and that's new we haven't seen that proposed by a developer associated specifically with their development. The trail, town branch trail will be coming down through in this location. One of the conditions that you see of course is compliance with the town branch trail and it's going to have to fit within this area and within the right of way as it moves through here. Now it's constrained by this existing building. However in front of their new building that they're proposing there's plenty of room for them to accommodate that and work with our staff on the trail. And interesting enough I ran into the engineer on the way over here who's working with the trail and he told me that although he's not given the procedure, the work issue, the work order yet, order to proceed, but he's going to do so shortly and he anticipates this last section of town branch to be completed by the end of the year. So that was good to hear. And that trail is extremely important and it's going to benefit both this area and again the interaction. What am I doing? I need tech support. There we go. So the trail is going through, town branch trail, they are going to be able to work with our designers with town branch trail. And this will also benefit them in that the interaction with the hotel and with the trail will be a very positive potential through here. In addition they are meeting the public art requirement, they're proposing public art in this location, here as well, potential public art. And right down through there is an alley and it's going to be redeveloped as a pedestrian alley and sort of public space and space associated with development. These are all, staff would agree with the applicant, are very positive approaches to the adaptive reuse criteria. In addition, there was a condition that you can see was removed from the plan. I know you all remember this discussion, the subdivision committee, well. Along with this development. And that is this area in here and the parking and the fact that there was a parking garage proposed on that location. Staff is not confident that that will be built. And interesting enough that building was going to be LEED and had a lot of good attributes associated with it. This applicant has promoted and it's on your report attached, they're going to be doing a lot of LEED features and environmentally friendly features in the construction of their hotel. And they'll be happy to elaborate with you on that but they're going to be dealing with, it's listed and I'm not going to get into details other than to talk about things like low flush toilets and water and LED lighting and a lot of things like that that they're going to incorporate into their construction. Which again is a good positive approach to adaptive reuse and something they have cited. So with that, staff does believe that they are meeting the criteria for the adaptive reuse. Now, the parking for the 120 spaces is located here, here and then across the road in this location. The number required and as you know they get a big break on parking is 185 spaces. They're providing 207 spaces. They're not greatly over parked. A lot of discussion on the last plan and on this one did concern safety, pedestrian safety. People need to cross at the crosswalk of course and undoubtedly people will cross. It's human nature. There have been and I'd like to report there have been positive talks with the Department of Transportation on addressing pedestrian issues and safety issues in this area. And that's been a long time coming and that's a positive development in our relationship and where we're headed with trying to improve pedestrian safety in that area. So we're all kind of getting now together as this area has developed and more and more is happening, we're going to be on the same page very soon and that's a good thing. But I knew you all were very much aware of that discussion and very concerned about that. So again, right here I will point out they have a drop off point and they're going to have parking, valet parking. And they've provided a report as well on their parking and I will allow them to elaborate on it but they've done an analysis where this hotel will not, the demand overnight on this hotel will not burden their parking. Generally they are in essence for demand, they're over parked for their demand and they will elaborate on that I have no doubt. With that, staff is recommending approval of the development plan. Again, we are recommending that you make a finding that they comply with the adaptive reuse criteria as required in your ordinance and staff will be happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you, Tom. Let me say real quick before we got started today, Denise and I spoke to our wonderful IT person and I don't know if you noticed a mouse up on the screen, pointer up on the screen or not, but we got him to try it on a trial basis. For me, one, sometimes I'd read laser pointers, it's hard to see and then two, if Mr. Martin is showing us on that screen, unfortunately our people out in the audience cannot see so we may employ that even more so so thank you for doing that. Questions for Tom? Yes. Quick question, Tom, is that where the current refrigerator building is? Yes, sir. Other questions? We'll just reiterate the fact that as Mr. Martin mentioned this pedestrian safety and crosswalks and access and traffic has been long discussed on Manchester Street and I'm sure it will continue and hopefully we're moving in the right direction. So any other questions? Applicant? Anything to add? Thank you, sir. Thank you. Just to clarify, Graham, your comment about this is a new building, it's not the refrigerator building, we're going to raise that building and build new. We're in agreement with the revised conditions and unless there's some specific questions you'd like me to address, we're good with the staff's report and Tom's summary. Thank you. Questions? Yes. One quick question, I understand that there's valet parking for the hotel, is there self-parking option as well? Yes, there will be self-park and valet. Other questions? Yes, sir. Tom mentioned LEED certification, is that going to be pursued in reality or is it just, are you going to have a third party certifier? Well, the EOP architects is the architect for the project and it's not been determined yet to specifically pursue LEED certification, but there will be a number of green initiatives that they are implementing in the project regardless, whether we pursue actual LEED certification or not, but we went through the summary of LEED considerations for the site and for the building and I feel confident that we'll approach a lot of those with the design of the building and the site or committed to green initiatives such as from the site specific, the electric charging parking spaces and then the building with the water and the HVAC considerations, air quality, they anticipate that they'll meet a lot of the highlights of LEED but may or may not pursue actual certification. I would just note that there's a huge difference. We recognize that. Yeah, it's night and day. Other questions? Mr. Barrett, we've got one condition, resolve compliance with town branch trail project, can you just highlight maybe what's going on with that? Our building, the proposed building is set back to accommodate the town branch trail in front of it. However, the 903 building, the bigger building, and that's phase two of the trail. The initial phase for the trail as I understand it will take place within the curb to curb of the existing Manchester street. It'll be on street improvements, they'll eliminate and already have eliminated the on street parking on our side of the street to accommodate a two-way trail on that side with a buffer between two-way traffic. So that will occur rather quickly as I am hearing. Phase two and the ultimate design of the town branch trail from the cross section will move the trail off the street and on to the sidewalk. It'll be a combined trail pedestrian sidewalk that is anticipating a 19-foot width. We're set back 19 feet to accommodate that. However, the 903 building, the existing larger building on the plan there, varies from about 12 feet to 18 feet. So there'll either be some reconsideration of how the trail crosses there between the building but we really don't have a means of accommodating the trail in that regard. Thank you, sir. Other questions? If not, thank you. Anyone else in the audience wish to speak on this? Stand on. Any other questions? If not, I'll close this part of the hearing and open it up for any comments, questions between commission members and or a motion. Motion? Yes, sir. I move for approval of PLN MJDP 2220-2 Manchester Development LLC with the 14 conditions as noted. Mr. Bell, we've got two on the back and if you're doing this I would ask that you denote the findings as far as number 14. Well with that I'm gonna let... No, go ahead. Come on now, you learned. I didn't make my note. Just take a note of number 14 and we've got 16 instead of 14. All right, so with that the motion with the 16 conditions as so noted and the findings on on number 14. Okay, thank you, sir. You too. We do have a motion for approval and a second by Mr. Wilson for plan MJDP 20-20, no 20-2, I'm sorry, Manchester Development LLC Distillery District East with the 16 conditions taking a special note for condition number 14 and the findings. So with that, please vote when it comes up on the screen. Motion passes. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Barrett. I think we move on to page 6 at this point which is plan MJDP 19-6 it's Hamburg Place Mall, unit 1 parcel 2, outlawed 6. We do have a waiver associated with that that should be before you as well. Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. Yes, on item 6 you have major development plan 19-06, Hamburg Place Mall. It has been brought back to you because of the need for a waiver on the particular development. Now, what you see before you is the development plan for the development of this outlawed on the Meyers lot out in Hamburg Place and here is Sir Barton and the associated, what is this, John, Paul Jones Way, which is the primary frontage through here. There have been other outlaws created as you can see in the past and interesting enough this lot was actually created on a non-billed plat which allowed them to take down the property and then because of the development plan began construction. Well, during the course of construction, they discovered that this particular lot, the sanitary sewer, in order to hook up with the public line, their line was approximately, and this is over the length of the line, three feet higher than the public line. So, gravity, as we know, doesn't go uphill. It takes things downslope. Well, your subdivision regulations have a section and without going into too much detail, it's something you see on all the plats. It talks about the relationship of the manhole to the line and to the finish. That little provision says you have to have gravity sewer. Well, again, during the course of construction and discovering the problem on that particular area of where the outlot was proposed, they discovered they could not do that and so they have submitted a design. It's been reviewed. Engineering has approved it. It is their own little force main with their own little, we can call it a pump station, a grinder pump, but it's just a small low-pressure pump to allow them to sewer the building and it has been, as I said, reviewed and approved by engineering because it's just one of those cases that as they looked at the public sewer line and this difference in elevation, they continued on down and as they went on down, they discovered they could not solve the problem by going further downstream and, of course, that creates a need for a longer and longer line, potential for more design, more manholes, and it just became a complicated when the simple solution, never preferred if you can avoid it, was to put in a low-pressure force main for this particular building. It is theirs, theirs only, and it is private. It will not be public. We would not accept it as a public line. It's just to serve this particular building, which I believe is near completed, the building may be. So it's a auto facility, repair facility, and staff is recommending approval of the waiver. If you have any questions, we'll be happy to answer them. Questions? Yes, ma'am. Tom, I'm sure we've discussed this somewhere along the line, but I'm getting old and senile, and so I need a refresher course on, do those grinder pumps have battery backup or do they have an emergency something or other if the power goes out? That's an excellent question, and I'll have to defer to the to the engineer on how they back those up, because that's one reason we try to avoid them, obviously, is because if there is no backup, they quit working. Right. If there's no electric. Yes, ma'am. So, okay. Other questions before we call the engineer down? No? Who would like to answer their question? Good afternoon. Hello, thank you. Erin Hathaway with Gresham Smith. I honestly do not know the answer to your question. I would have to defer to our engineers who's not with me today. So I do not have that answer. I apologize. Okay. Thank you. We've got that covered. We'll turn to the back of the room here in just a second, see if she's got an answer. Do you have anything else that you need to add? I think Tom covered it pretty clear. The lot is lower than the sanitary line that's out there existing, so to make our way from the building back to that line, we would be going uphill, which gravity doesn't go up to uphill, so we need the pump to make that happen. We do have a letter from the property owner, Meyer, approving this install as well. Something else to note. Thank you. Any questions? No? Thank you, ma'am. Vaughn, do you have an answer? Can you get an answer for us in the future? Assuming one way or the other this will work. I have some experience with this, but the whole thing makes me nervous because my experience with it was a long-term hassle and involved the Ronald McDonald House Charities building out on Stadium Drive there, and they had the same issue there, and there's almost inevitably another solution, which is to find the place where you can actually intersect public sewer at an elevation that works, and so we're talking about it's really an economic problem because that's what happened with us. We couldn't make it work without spending a lot of money to get to a location on the line where it was low enough for the flow to work, so it was much less expensive. Ironically, while I was involved there, which was for a long time, it was deemed to be too expensive and not feasible, and so we dealt with that grinder pump system, which was regularly a problem, but since then they've actually solved it. They've actually put a permanent line of gravity sewer in. I'm not exactly sure how they worked that out. A lot of it had to do with the politics of the site, the university's willingness to cooperate, and so on, but those grinder pumps, they fail, and then you have to have a backup, and sometimes the backup fails, and we had an alarm system, and no one knew what the alarm was. After a while, you lose your cultural memory, and so anyway, that's my experience with it. I doubt Ms. Hathaway knows, and I doubt Tom has a number either, but I'm sure there's other similar pump stations throughout Lexington. There are. They are, as Graham pointed out, they're not the preferred solution. Sometimes it is the only solution for that particular property. They are out there. This is a commercial use, and of course it will be basically seven limited hours, commercial hours, not a whole lot of demand placed on the system, which is good, but as Graham pointed out, potentially they do fail and have to be addressed, and that's one reason your regulations state you have to have gravity and why you're being asked to approve a waiver. I've seen them fail on residential properties, and that's why my question, you know, what's the backup? It's like on a sump pump. What's the backup? Yes, ma'am. In my housing days, I had to have a few installed, and it was never what we preferred to do. So, Von, at some point, just nod your head. You'll try and educate us a little bit more on this. I'm not saying right now, but if you want to come down, that's fine. I'm just saying in the future, you can try and get us an answer and educate us on this. Okay? Very good. Thank you, Ms. Hathaway. I don't think there's anyone else in the audience wishing to speak to this request, so commission members, do you have any other questions? If not, I should have asked this earlier to our legal or staff. We've approved this, but now we need to approve a waiver. Do we need to re-approve the plan itself or just approve the waiver? It didn't change. Yeah. So we just need to approve the waiver? Yes. Okay. So their request is just for the waiver, which you do have on associated paper, and I believe you do have findings or recommendations for approval as well. So anyone interested in a motion? Sure. Mr. Powell. Well, in light of the engineering support, I'm going to move to approve PLN MJDP-19-6 and replace Mall Unit 1, Parcel 2, Outlot 6 in their request for the variance. Okay. And their request for the variance. So the motion was made for approval and seconded by Mr. Forrester for the waiver associated with it. Waiver number is shown as PLN MJSUB-19-12, Hamburg Place. You okay with that, Mr. Powell? Yeah, that's right. Okay. So the motion for approval of the waiver, PLN MJSUB-19-12, Hamburg Place, Mall Unit 1, Parcel 2, Outlot 6. And I would presume for the reasons provided by the staff. Do we have a second on that? Second. Oh, it's already left. Okay. Mr. Forrester did second it. So please vote when it comes up on the screen. Motion passes. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Hathaway. We do have another plan. It's on page 6. PLN MJSUB-19-6, Hamburg Place, Mall Unit 1, Parcel. Nope, that's the same one I just talked about. Down at the bottom of the page. DP-2009-75, NDC Property, Unit 5D. Correct? I thought we were hearing the re-approval for DP-2009-75, NDC Property. We are. And I believe the applicant will be ready to address your questions in a minute after Mr. Martin presents it. Usually he comes forward, so I don't know. I didn't know who was moving what first. Yes, sir. This is a re-approval item. It is item A, DP-2009-75, NDC Property. This is a proposal that, as you can see, was originally filed in 2009. It was ultimately approved in 2011. Subsequently, it was re-approved twice as well by the Planning Commission. There was another plan filed on this property during that interim, so it's had an interesting history. And this is, of course, the triangle near the traffic circle on Wellington Way. And you may note that the address in the title of the plan lists Reynolds Road. And that's just because the original overall development had that address, but it does have a Wellington Way address, 551. The plan itself is virtually identical to the original townhouse plan that was approved and subsequently re-approved. Access off of Wellington Way, internal access easements to serve the townhouses. These are 15 townhouses. You can see there's a considerable amount of green in the development along this edge of the triangle as well. Here we have Vincent Way. Vincent Way is in the process of being closed. That right-of-way will be closed. That is consistent with the three-party agreement that governs this entire development. That was one of the obligations that the government had was to close that right-of-way. That's actually old Reynolds Road right-of-way is what that is a remnant of. So this is a re-approval of the 15 townhouses. It took two years to get this thing through and get it approved, and a lot of work went into it. It's worth noting that these 15 townhouses are the last available dwelling units in this area. There was a conditional zoning restriction. X number of units were allowed. They were split between two developers. That's one reason it took almost two years to get it approved. Staff went through an exhaustive exercise to document all the units and come up with a number that everyone agreed on. We vetted it with legal. This is it. So in that regard, this is the last of the residential development in this part of our NDC development. Again, this is a re-approval request. If you look at your conditions, they have actually provided a statement on number 10, document compliance with private open space per the R1T. There's ample room on what will be allotting. They will come back and lot these, and they'll have to meet their private open space on the townhouses. They have also provided a note indicating the landscape buffer. There was enhanced landscaping required along this border to protect the single-family homes and the people in this area. That was part of the original approval. And then 13, addition of a third-party commission certification. It was discussed at subdivision committee and staff agreed that all they had to do was list the dates, which they have done, the original approval, the re-approval, and now this date. There's really no need to put a lot of separate commission certifications. They all say the same thing, and they would just merely have different dates. So they have listed all the dates of approval, and that establishes a clean and clear history on this property. So that can be deleted from your conditions. And I'll be happy to answer any questions you have for staff. Questions for Mr. Martin? Thank you, sir. Applicant? Thank you for waiting around. Rory Kaley with EA Partners. Yes, I agree with Tom. Request approval. Short and sweet. Thank you, sir. I would offer anyone else in the audience to speak. Your cohort that's sitting with you, any interest? No? Okay. Questions from the commission? No? Okay. Thank you, Mr. Kaley. Thank you. We'll move on and ask for a motion on this. I believe we do have two items to delete from this. We've got 13 in the middle of the page. I would just delete the last condition. Even though he's added notes meeting those other conditions, there's no harm in allowing them to remain in your motion. Okay. So we do have conditions. We're going to have to double check that mylar when he brings it in. Okay. So we've got conditions in the middle of page 7. There's 13. Mr. Martin's saying we can delete number 13, if that's willing for the commission.  So motion? Yes, ma'am. There I am. Mr. Chair, I move for reapproval of DP 2009-75 NDC property unit 5D. I think that's phase 2 with the 12 conditions that's set forth by staff removing the 13th condition. Thank you. We have a motion for approval. And a second? Mr. Healy-Bell for plan 2009-75 NDC properties unit 5D now with 12 conditions. If there's no questions, please vote when it comes up on your screen. The motion passes. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Kaley. Next on our agenda is the performance bonds letter of credit. It is on our granicus. If anyone's interested in looking at it, we'd need approval for that or not. I think everyone's wanting to see it. Mr. Forrester? Mr. Chair, I motion that we approve the release of the performance bonds and letter of credit. Thank you. Motion's been made and seconded by Ms. Mundy for approval of the performance bonds letter of credit. Please vote when it comes up on the screen. That motion passes. Thank you. So move to commission items. Commission members have anything? No. Staff items. I do not believe there's any improvement plans. Does staff have anything else? I think we do have a work session. That should prove to be interesting next week with three or four different items to discuss. The agenda will be out shortly with that. Mr. Wilson? Oh, I was just getting ready to say, do you know what we're going to be talking about? We will hear a presentation from Sam Castro in long range planning. She's a senior planner and she will be speaking about the public engagement toolkit. So I think we had a primer on that maybe a few months ago. She'll give an update on that committee and the results that came from that project and really what the next step will be in terms of a developer's handbook. After that, I believe we're going to talk about tenant homes because the council initiated a text amendment for you all to consider. So we'll start discussing that. I believe there was something else. Floor area ratio. Oh, the floor area ratio text amendment text is ready and long range planning will be presenting that as well. So I think that pretty much covers it. So anything else? We do have a spot for audience items. No one's getting up. So I think we're OK. If there's nothing else, I can, I believe, call this meeting to an end and adjourn the meeting. So thank you. Thanks, everyone.