Okay. That I've noticed. We have found there were some original construction building documents that had just been down in a mechanical room for years that some of the housing people knew they were there, but they had just been in a cabinet for years. Well, they were fine. So we pulled those out. It's been interesting to look at those. I think we found that even though the entire complex was built at the same time, it was really built under three contracts happening at the same time. As much as all of the details are identical to every building, it's interesting to note that there will be maybe a different material used in some of the buildings as opposed to others, and you can almost see a delineation from Kerwin 4 to Kerwin 3 where that contract stopped. So that's been interesting to see that. Different offer. Very much so, yeah. There's a little signature on that. So we were able to salvage out several things that we felt were notable historical items. There were building plaques. Yes. We've taken all those out and are holding on to those. One of the other things that we decided to do was have this contractor salvage about a pallet 500 brick and clean them up and wrap them up and turn them back over to us. people have asked about getting bricks it's an opportunity for people to get a memento from when they were here it's a fundraiser it is i mean true for so many people who have lived here the right to have one of these bricks you know this color you know what it is so we're hoping um there's uh what else what else did we find um it was interesting i will say this the the one interesting thing that I did find out is that the in the top of each tower right there were it was basically a large just a gathering room just a big open room that was a lounge for each building now for whatever reason the elevators didn't go up to that floor so you got off on the 23rd floor and walked up to the 24th but there were two grand pianos up there and nobody really can figure out how those pianos got up there because they couldn't take the elevator and they won't fit up the stairs. So that's been a little bit of a curiosity. I like that one. A little note of mystery. How did these get here? Did you leave them? No, but they were just deteriorated to the point where they were just delegated. Well, I understand. They had been there through all that time. Yeah, they had been. And so we really didn't have a need for them at that point. But it was just interesting. Like, how did this happen? So we've had some different, I did a walk through with some people with the libraries as far as doing documentation. Yes, they took some photos. They asked for several things to be salvaged for archival records. Because basically this architect designed pretty much everything that's in here, light fixtures and all, which is typically not how new construction is done now. So everything was somewhat custom. Glad you're preserving. So we're trying to preserve as many of those things as we can. So that's just a little bit about the project. You have been wonderful to talk to. Well, thank you. I appreciate your time and certainly your history here. And I don't know, we'll find a time to come back and visit when more is gone or something. And when more comes back in. I would love you to see it as well. This is what's happened in the last year kind of thing. I would be very excited to show everybody that. I think it will be beautiful. these two huge allays of trees are extremely important to us and we're very protective of those so incorporating what we have left into what the new will be will be exciting to see so please keep in touch we look forward to it thank you again you're very welcome very welcome well I'm Bill Farmer thanking you for being part of this Luxplorer we haven't had many lately during in the COVID era, but we look forward to being with you again. If there's a place or a interesting story to tell, please let me know. Bill Farmer, your 5th District Councilman. Thank you very much. What you want, baby, I got it What you need, do you know I got it All I'm asking you is for a little respect When you come home, hey, baby, when they get low Just a little bit, mister, just a little bit I ain't gonna do you wrong, why you gone? I ain't gonna do you wrong, cause I don't wanna All I'm asking for is a little response when you come home Baby, when you get home Yeah, just a little bit I'm about to give you all my money And all I'm asking in return, honey Is to give me my promise when you get home Just a, just a, just a, just a, just a little bit. Just a little bit. Ooh, your kisses. Ooh, sweeter than honey. And guess what? So is my money All I want you to do for me Give it to me when you get home Yeah, baby Whip it to me When you get home Now, just a little bit R-E-S-P-E-C-T Burn out what it means to me R-E-S-P-E-C-T Take out T-C-T Oh, little bit Little bit Little bit Little bit Little bit Just a little bit I get tired Just a little bit Keep on trying Just a little bit You're running out of food Just a little bit And I ain't lying Just a little bit Stop me when you come home For you might walk any more I gotta go Just a little bit I gotta hide Everybody loves a clown, so why don't you? Everybody laughs at the things that I say and do They all laugh when they see me coming But you don't laugh, you just go home running Everybody loves a clown, so why can't you? A clown has feelings too. I joke around at a party when you are there. If you don't laugh, you don't look, you just don't care. If you wonder why this clown is crying, Look a little closer inside I'm dying It's not easy to be in love you see When you're a clown like me I don't know how to say that I love you Cause you would smile and say, tell a joke or two Yes, I'm a clown, but I don't want to be Why can't you see the other side of me? Yes, I'll be the guy who plays the part Of a clown with a broken heart Beaming up your love and not knowing where to start I'm out. She looked so much like a lady But she was so much like a child A devil when she held me close An angel when she smiled She always held it deep inside But somehow I always knew She'd go away when the grass turned green And the sky turned baby blue Baby blue Was the color of her eyes Baby blue Like the Colorado skies Like a breath of spring she came and left And I still don't know why So here's to you and whoever holds my baby blue tonight. She brought colors to my life that my eyes had never touched. When she taught me how to care, I never cared so much. I try not to think of her But I fall asleep and do And drift off where the grass is green And the sky is baby blue Baby blue Was the color of her eyes Baby blue Like the Colorado skies Like the breath of spring she came and left And I still don't know why So here's to you and whoever holds my baby blue tonight Baby blue Was the color of her eyes Baby blue, like the Colorado skies Like a breath of spring she came and left And I still don't know why, so Here's to you and whoever holds my baby blue tonight Baby blue was the color of her eyes Baby blue, like the Colorado skies Baby blue, was the color of her eyes Baby blue, like the Colorado skies Baby blue, was the color of her eyes Baby blue Hope is an anchor and love is a ship. Time is the ocean and life is a trip. You don't know where you're going till you know where you're at. And if you can't read the stars, well, you better have a map, a compass and a conscience so you don't get lost at sea or on some old lonely island where no one wants to be. From the beginning of creation I think our maker had a plan For us to leave these shores And sail beyond the sand And let the good light guide us Through the waves and the wind To the beaches in a world Where we have never been And we'll climb up on the mountain, y'all We'll let our voices ring And those who've never tried it They'll be the first to sing Oh, my, my I see you on the other side If I make it over And it might be a long, hard ride But I'm gonna take it Sometimes it seems that I don't have a prayer Let the weather take me anywhere But I know that I wanna go The streets are gold cause you'll be there Oh, mama Thank you. Okay, we're ready to go. Good afternoon, everyone. For legality purposes, let me start with this. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, State of Emergency and Governor Brashear's executive orders regarding social distancing, this meeting is being held via teleconference pursuant to Senate Bill 150 as signed by the Governor March 30, 2020, and Attorney General Opinion 20-05, and in accordance with KRS 61-826. because it is not feasible to offer a primary physical location for the meeting. So, one, I'd like to welcome everyone back. It's been a while since we've had a hearing. So welcome to everyone. We are going to do this in as much of a normal manner as possible. Please bear with us. We have commission members and staff and citizens, I'm sure ranging from the planning office here in multiple locations to the council to, I'm sure, business offices and homes throughout Lexington. So with that, I would like to welcome everyone. And I'm going to ask how Bailey to explain a couple of things technical wise to help us move through this today. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Just a few aspects of utilizing this Zoom application for our meeting today. When the chair announces the new application, we would like the applicants to go ahead and raise their hands digitally. You can find that in the participants section or along the lower or upper bar of your screen in Zoom. That will allow us to bring you into the meeting and you can present your information. At the dedicated time for any members of the public who would like to speak about a certain application, we would also ask that they raise their hands digitally. That will allow us to bring you into the meeting and ask any questions. If you are calling in today off of any phone number, we will ask you what application you are here to talk about and if you have any comments at the beginning of the meeting after we announce the consent agenda. Thank you very much. And if you have any problems, please reach out to our staff here with the Lexington Planning Division, and we will try to get you involved in the fastest way possible. Thank you. Thank you, everyone. And as Hal said, we're glad you're here, and we're going to reach out and get you on as needed if you want to speak. So just please bear with us. First on the agenda today would be minutes for approval. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven sets of minutes have been emailed to commission members. I will recognize right off the bat that the March 12, 2020 minutes have been removed from consideration today. They're up on your screen. I've heard of no other edits or changes or corrections that need to be made. If there are any, please let it be known now. Otherwise, I'll entertain a motion for the approval of those minutes shown on the screen. Mike, I'll move for approval. Thank you. Do we have a second? Mr. Chair, will you please announce as you see? Yeah, I will. So, motion was made by Patrick Brewer for approval of the minutes that are shown on the screen. And did we catch a second? Karen Mundy seconded that motion. So, we will need a visual show of hands. So, all of those in favor, please raise your hand at this time. Thank you. That motion passes. So, could you not say it was unanimous? I'm sorry, it was a unanimous vote. Thank you. Before the motion passes, thank you, Hal. I'll try and catch up. Postponements and or withdrawals from today's agenda. I believe we had some. Members of the public, please raise your hand if you are seeking to postpone or withdraw an application. We will start with Mr. Matt Carter. We will now be allowing you to speak. Mr. Carter, go right ahead, unmute yourself, and address the Planning Commission. Thank you, Matt Carter, Vision Engineering. If you turn in your agenda to page three, item 3A, Rydell Plaza, it's PLN MJDP 19-00071. I'd like to ask for a one month postponement and I understand this has been postponed many times but we are kind of coming to the end where we need one final subdivision committee meeting that we need to go through and present to you our updated findings on our drainage study before this is heard. So we would like to be on the July 2nd subdivision committee and then also the July 9th planning commission. Thank you, Matt. I would say I appreciate the consideration to take it back before subdivision. It has been a long time just speaking personally for myself. I don't know if my memory is that long. So thank you. Do we have anyone that wish to speak in regards to this request for postponement? Sir, Ms. Mundy has her hand digitally raised. Ms. Mundy. Yeah, I was ready to make a motion. Hold on just one second. Yeah. Anyone that wished to speak on this post phone? Seeing none, Ms. Mundy. Yes. I'd like to make a motion for PLNMJDP19-00071, Rydell Plaza, Lot 3, Parker Property, amended for a one-month postponement. And I'm too slow to get to my calendar to get that date. July 9th. So to July 9th of 2020, postponing. Thank you. Second. Ms. Plumlee, second. Yes. The motion has been made by Karen Mundy for postponement of Plan MJDP 19-71, Rydolph Plaza, until July 9th. Ms. Plumlee second the motion. Any questions? If not, all those in favor, please raise your hand. Looks unanimous. Any in opposition? Motion carries with unanimous vote. So next. Thank you very much Mr. Carter. We will now be removing you from being able to speak at this time. Next is Mr. Nick Nicholson. We will be allowing you to speak now. Mr. Nicholson go ahead and unmute yourself. Hi Nick can you hear us? I can indeed. Can you all hear me? Yes we can sir go right ahead. I would request a postponement for item B on page four of your agenda, the Blackford property development plan. We are still working with staff on the density transfer and we'll have to file an amended development plan regarding access as well. So if I could have a one month postponement to the July 9th date. Thank you, Mr. Nicholson. Anyone wish to speak on this request for postponement? Seeing none, can I have a motion? Ms. Plumlee. Mr. Chair, we're postponing PLNMJDP 190074 Blackboard Property Phase 4 until July 9. Thank you. I have a second. A second. Seconded by Mr. Movelin. So the motion has been made for postponement of plan MJDP 19-74 Blackford property until July 9th. Motion made by Ms. Plumlee, seconded by Mr. DeMoglin. Any questions? If not, all those in favor, please raise your hand. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Thank you all. We will now be disabling your speaking ability, and we will be moving to Mr. Richard Murphy. Mr. Murphy, go right ahead. Okay, hopefully you can hear me. We can, sir. On page two, item 2A, MJSUB20-00001, Dotson Farm Subdivision, Haley Pike, Briar Hill Road Amendment. We are requesting a one-month postponement. As you know, we need to do a cemetery study. That is being done right now, but we don't have the report back yet to give to the staff. Thank you, Mr. Murphy. Anyone in the audience wish to speak to this request for post-ponement? Seeing none, may I have a motion, please? Yes, sir. Yes, sir. I move from post-ponement to July the 9th for CLM-MJSUB-20-1 Dodson Farm subdivision to the July 9th meeting. Thank you. Do we have a second? Second. Yes, motion's been made for postponement until July 9th for plan MJSUV 20-1 Dotson Farms. Motion was made by Mr. Penn, seconded by Mr. Heatley-Bell. If there's no further discussion, I'll call for a vote. Please raise your hand for all those in favor. Any opposed? No, the motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Sir, I think I was a bit hasty with Mr. Nicholson. I think you might have another case talked about, but before we demote Mr. Murphy, Dick, do you have any other cases that you would like to discuss today on the postponement or withdrawal? No, I think the staff is going to postpone one on page one, so I'll let them do that. All right, great. Thank you, Mr. Murphy. I'm going to demote you right now, and then we'll go back to Mr. Nicholson. Mr. Nicholson, I am sorry if I demoted you a little too hastily. Are you looking to do another application? I'm looking at the agenda. I don't believe I have one. Okay, your hand was raised. So I'm now going to lower your hand. And thank you very much. I'm going to disable your talking. Thank you. And we're going to move on to Mr. Scott Southall. Mr. Southall, we are allowing you to speak now. If you could unmute yourself, go ahead and address the commission. Mr. Chair and members of the commission, my name is Scott Southall with Earth Cycle Design. I'd like to bring your attention to page 7, item JPLNMJDP20. 0 0 0 22 distillery district west unit 1 we would like to request a one month postponement the owner is evaluating some of the interior square footage of the brick house and would like to make some other considerations for the use of that space. Thank you Mr. Southall. Any discussion anyone wish to speak on this request for postponement? If not I'll entertain a motion. Yes Miss Plumlee. Mr. Chair move postponement of PLNMJDP 20 00022 Distillery District West unit one until July the 9th. Thank you. Do we have a second? Second. Second by Mr. Forrester. So the motion was for a plan MJDP 20-22 Distillery District West for one month postponement until July 9th. Motion made by Ms. Plumlee and seconded by Mr. Forrester. All those in favor please raise your hand. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. other requests for postponements withdrawals. Mr. Scott, I will be, oh, you have another one. Go right ahead. Well, I was going to say, Hal, I just wanted to confirm staff recommended postponement for the Thistle Station, and I didn't know if you wanted me to do that or not. Yes, please, sir. Either way. Okay. All right. I'd like to address your attention to page 8, Item K, PLNMJDP20000023, Thistle Station. Would like to request a one-month postponement until July the 9th. We are still working out the details of the interior space on the building and have not fully completed the form-based study. Thank you, sir. Anyone wish to speak to this request for postponement for one month? Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Penn. Mr. Chairman, I move for one month postponement to ULTI for PLEN MJDP 20-23 Thistle Station. Okay. Second. I'll second. Okay. Motion has been made for postponement of Plan MJDP 20-23 Thistle Station until July 9th. Motion made by Mr. Penn, seconded by Ms. Lundy. All those in favor, please raise your hand. Any opposed? That motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Scott. Any other requests, postponements, or withdrawals? Sir, I am not seeing any at this time. However, we do have one caller that has dialed in. If I can, identify that individual and see what they're here to talk about today. Sure. Hello, phone number 812-369-1001. You have called in to the Planning Commission meeting. We would like just to know who you are and what case you're actually here for today. Yeah, I was just listening in. There was a sign on Polo Club Boulevard. my name is Jennifer Calado and I was just listening in the sign has 258-3160 and I was just listening in to see what was going on with that yes ma'am that will be part of today's presentations and as we go along we can bring you in if you have any questions at that time at this point in time you don't have anything that you would like to discuss for this meeting No, I don't. Great. Thank you very much. I'm going to disable your ability to talk right now and bring you back to the attendees just so that you can participate from an observer. Okay, thank you. Thank you. We also have a hand raised by Ms. Sarah Grant. I would like to allow her to speak at this time. Sure. Ms. Grant, do you have something that you would like to postpone or withdraw at this time? I'm not really sure the procedures here. I just got on. I was looking through paperwork and trying to understand the agenda. My interest is with the construction of the new Tates Creek High School in Gainesway. Yes, ma'am. That will be later on in the agenda. It is not at this point in time. So if you could hold out for a little while once we get to that agenda item, we'll ask you to raise your hand and we'll be bringing you in for public comment. Great. Thank you. Thank you very much. I'm going to disable your ability to speak at this time. You'll be able to watch as an attendee. Okay. Sir, we see one hand raised from the chamber. And Ms. Wade, go right ahead. Thank you, Chairman Owens and members of the commission. We have several other items that have requested postponement via the staff. The first one appears on page one at the bottom. the final subdivision plan that requires review by the Planning Commission PLN FRP 20-11 for high lawn extension lot 28 and a portion of 27 and they've requested a one-month postponement. Thank you I guess we'll take these one at a time. Anyone wish to discuss this request for postponement? If not, I'll entertain a motion. I'll move to postpone PLN FRP 20-11, high law and extension, lot 28, and portion of lot 27 amended. Thank you. I'll second that. Mr. Forrester, second his motion. So the request is for postponement plan FRP 20-11 high-long extension until July 9th. Mr. Poe made the motion and Mr. Forrester seconded it. May I clarify, sir? Was that Mr. Forrester who seconded it or Mr. Brewer? Brewer. Both got in there. Okay. All right. So we can have a joint second. So I'll call for a vote. All those in favor, please raise your hand. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Yes. Thank you for joining us, Mr. Wilson. Next item on our agenda on page two, item 2B towards the bottom of the agenda is PLN MJ sub dash 20 dash two for Belmont Farm Unit 7, also known as Coventry. This is an amended preliminary subdivision plan and Banks Engineering has requested a one-month postponement Anyone in the audience wish to discuss this request for postponement? Seeing none, I ask for a motion Mr. Chair Yes, ma'am I move for postponement of PLN MJSUB 20-2 Belmont Farm Unit 7 Coventry amended until July the 9th of 2020. Thank you. And who is second? Pat Brewer? Okay, thank you. So the motion was for postponement of Plan MJSUB 20-2 Belmont Farm until July 9th. Motion made by Ms. Mundy and seconded by Mr. Brewer. any discussion if not all those in favor please raise your hand any opposed no opposed motion passes unanimously thank you miss miss wade yes we do have a few more um on page four halfway down pln mjdp19-77 i was checking i don't see mr simpson on our video call today but he had indicated as well as mr eastridge with centera preparation that they wish to postpone this item winburn estates unit 3 hudson circ property and i'll remind the commission this is a an item that was started to be heard when we met in march and so it's a continuation although they've indicated they are not they're ready to propose some revisions but they weren't quite ready today they'd like to be on the agenda for july 9th okay so the request is for postponement do we have a motion Mr. Penn Mr. Chair I move for one month postponement July 9th appeal in MJDP 77 Windburner State Unit 3 until July 9th Thank you do we have a second second by Ms. Mundy So the motions for postponement of Plan MJDP 1977 Windburner States until July 9th Motion made by Mr. Penn Seconded by Ms. Mundy All those in favor, please raise your hand. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. And Ms. Wade, hopefully, I presume that would be going back to subdivision as well. Hopefully. I suppose so, yes. Okay, thank you. I'll talk to the lot department since it's a continued continuation of meeting before we started. You know, we'll want them to weigh in about whether that's appropriate. Okay, well that's fine. Do you have others? Yes, one more item. Yes, ma'am. That appears on page five. item e pln mjdp 20-12 for the hoover and philpot evangelist evangelistic association property also known as the fountains at palomar for property on harrodsburg road again mr simpson indicated our staff that he wished to have a one month postponement okay thank you any discussion on this request? Do we have a motion? Yes, Ms. Plumlee. Mr. Chair, move postponement until July 9 for PLN-MJDP-2012, Hoover and Philpott. Second. Motion made and seconded for postponement to plan MJDP-2012, Hoover and Philpott, until July 9. Motion made by Ms. Plumlee and seconded by Ms. Mundy. So all those in favor, please raise your hand. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Any others, Ms. Wade? Or anyone? Thank you. No, that's it. So any other requests, postponements or withdrawals? If not, we'll move to the consent agenda, which is found on the usual TAN sheet. paper that I would say before you, but hopefully up on the screen. This way. She will be sharing her screen momentarily to show the consent agenda for those who do not have a printed out copy. Very good. Please bear with us we're getting to it. There you go. I miss Wade you're still muted. Can you hear me now? Yes, yes, we can. Denise is shaking her head no. Now she can. Yes, we're good. The next section of our agenda are no discussion items, which we commonly refer to as our consent agenda with the Planning Commission. Those are items that have been recommended for approval by the staff, as well as by the Planning Commission subdivision committee. The commission also has no discussion items related to these development plans or plats or subdivision matters, and there's no waiver that's involved. So there are a number of items that fall within that category today. And the planning commission is able to take all of those in one motion if there's no one present at the meeting who wishes to have one of these items heard. So we'll go through each item individually and I'll read it. And I would ask that if you are present in the meeting today via the teleconference to raise your hand if you are present and wish to have one of these items discussed. And then Mr. Bailey will report to us which items do have individuals who wish to have something discussed. so the first item appears on page three of our agenda it's item c pln mj sub 20 dash three for harper woods and it only involves a number of the lots on there not the entire subdivision lots 21 and then 26 through 29 and this is an amended preliminary subdivision plan for property at 3517, 3521, 3525, 3529, and 3553 Harper Woods Lane. If there's anyone present today who wishes to have this item heard by the commission, you'll need to raise your hand via the teleconference system, the Zoom. Okay. This way of clearing up with that one. Excuse me? I'm seeing no hands raised with that. Okay. The next item on our consent agenda falls under development plans for approval. It appears on page six, item F of our agenda, and it is PLN-MJDP 20-13 for Coldstream Research Campus, Unit 2, QB, Section 1, and Lot 26, also known as the Pyramal Pharma Solution Expansion Project. This property is located at 1575 McGrathiana Parkway. I'll just ask if there's anyone present who wishes to have this item heard or speak to just raise your hand. This way I'm seeing none on that application. The next item appears on page 6 item G it's also a development plan PLN MJDP 20-15 for Delmont Gardens also known as Christian Towers this is an expansion project property is located at 1511 Versailles Road this way I am seeing no hand raised for that application Great. Next item appears on page eight of our agenda. It's item L, PLN MJDP 20-25, Christian Road Development, and this property is located at 2171 Christian Road. If there's anyone present who wishes to speak about this development. Ms. Wade, I am seeing no hands raised at this time. Ms. Wade? Yes. If I may just, we should take note that there is a compliance report that we have passed here. Oh, am I on the wrong one? No. Not on any of those so far. I'm sorry. That's okay. We're on the wrong one. Double checking there. Our next item on the consent agenda, also recommended for approval by the subdivision committee, is on page 8, item M, PLN MJDP 20-26 for Fortune Business Center, also formerly known as S&M Development. This property is located at 2300 Fortune Drive. If there's anyone present who wishes to speak about this case. Ms. Wade, I am seeing none on this application. Okay. Our next item is a re-approval, which means it was approved last year, but the applicant did not have the plan certified within the required year. They're asking to have it re-approved with no changes. It appears on page 10 of our agenda, item A, TBLN MJDP 19-13 for the PAPRT property. It's located at 2811 Spur Road. This way I'm seeing no hate raised on this application. Okay, that one did have waivers that were approved and nothing should be changing with that request as well. And then the last two items are asking for one-year extension. The first one is on page 11, item B. It's a zoning development plan from 2015-52 for the Clark property, unit 4, and it is located on a portion of 1551 Deerhaven Lane. This property did have an expansion area master plan designation and so they were required to post a sign on the property. And we do have an affidavit related to that that appears to be an order from EA Partners. See if there's anyone present who wishes to speak of that. Ms. Wade, I have one hand raised on this, a Sam Purden. I will now allow them to speak. Sam Purden, will you go ahead and explain your connection with this application? Sure. My question is if this is the sign that's located on Polo Club Boulevard. There should be actually two projects that might have signs posted on Polo Club Boulevard today. This one would appear very close to the intersection with the Brighton East Trail. Yes. Okay, this is the one that I have a question about. Okay. I was trying to get the details on this project. From what I understood, some research. I believe this is more apartments in the Polo Club area? No, sir. It's actually all single-family residential. Okay, so is there another one that is similar to that in that area that is proposed for apartments? on the blackford property there are apartments and that's closer to blackford parkway and man war boulevard okay i called the planning commission yesterday and was told that this sign in regard that is up here on polo club next to the rail trail was in regards to senior citizen townhomes and more apartments and that's why i had questions okay so that's the other item on our agenda today that appears for property at 6411 Polo Club Boulevard. Okay. That item appears on page of our agenda today. Page seven of our agenda, item I. And we will have a presentation on that in just a few minutes. Okay, perfect. Thank you. I appreciate it. You're welcome. Thank you, Mr. Perdon. I am now going to disable your ability to speak at this time and lower your hand. Miss Wade, I do not see any other hands raised for this application. Okay. And then the last item that appears on our consent agenda today is on page 11, item C, and it's PLN MJDP 16-31 for Fortune Business Center, lot 3. This is also for property located at 2300 Fortune Drive. I would just ask if there's anyone else who maybe came late that had any questions about any of those items before the commission considers approving them or re-approving them all with one motion. Ms. Wade, I'm seeing no hands raised at this time. It would be appropriate at this time for the commission to consider those. Thank you, Ms. Wade. We have the consent agenda for us. Unless a commission member wants to remove one of these, I'll ask for a motion to approve this consent agenda as presented. Chairman, I'm not going for approval of the consent agenda. Second. Second. The consent agenda was made by Patrick Brewer and seconded by Ms. Carolyn Plumlee. Please vote when it comes up on your screen. I'm sorry. Please raise your hand. There you go. Thank you. motion passes unanimously so uh we will move take the remaining items which believe it or not there are a few uh as shown on the consent agenda and i believe that takes us to the page five uh item d plan mjdp 20-10 winterwood llc stonewall terrace at that's 1812 for cell drug. We do have revisions that hopefully you will be able to pull up. Yes, sir. Mr. Scott Southall and the development team will now admit them as panelists to this so that if they need to they can make a presentation. Mr. Scott Southall, if you could go ahead and unmute yourself and start your screen. It would be appropriate for the staff to make their presentation first. Oh, I was just double checking to make sure that he's on here. Okay. Making sure. So we can double check with him after this. Yes, I am on here. All right. Thank you, Scott. Okay. So I'm going to share my screen from the council chamber, which has the development plan associated with the project. So the subject site is located at 1812 Versailles Road and it's an application by Winterwood LLC and they're developing or proposing to develop a small multi-family residential development for 26 dwelling units. So on the development plan, let's see if I can do the annotation spotlight. On the development plan there's a connection from the existing Stub Street, Rose Hill and that would be extended into an access easement to provide access to a parking lot for the clubhouse and community center as well as two dwelling units. And then that same access would curve through the site and provide access to three, one, two, and the third multifamily development building. So each of those buildings is proposed to have eight dwelling units as well as parking in front of the dwelling units. And along this access easement, there would be no parking along the back so that there would be free and clear movement from those parking spaces, as well as access to the dumpster and access for the fire and emergency services. So something that has come up since the application was filed a few months ago, Of course, the floodplain still exists to the north on this location. But something that has come up is that the site in this general vicinity at the end of the existing Hill Rose Drive has had some fail place that is not conducive to building. So the applicant has submitted a waiver associated with construction of their previously designed cul-de-sac. So currently for the development, we do have the normal conditions of approval, and those are from engineering and traffic engineering, et cetera. So you'll see those on your agenda as well as on the separate sheet that was distributed through our system. It includes the engineering and traffic engineering, landscape examiner's approval, addressing, urban forest, or all of our typical sign-offs through a development plan process. And then they have made changes to the development plan to resolve several of the conditions that did appear on the agenda. And so those have been stricken by the staff in terms of a revised recommendation. So there's no longer a need to revise lot coverage. Mr. Southall accomplished that equally he accomplished his dimensioning of sidewalks and removing zoning references with the site statistics and he's also documented compliance with the multi-family design guidelines similar to the information he submitted at the zone change earlier this year there were some discrepancies that remain though in terms of enhanced landscaping along the R2 zone the staff would ask that that be denoted on the plan and there are some errors in the tree canopy notes that need to be corrected there's a reference to a 20 coverage but in our residential zones the requirement is 30 coverage in looking at the calculations we believe they meet those especially with the floodplain as part of their site but we do need the site statistics to be correct. The next few items there are provided that the Planning Commission grants the requested waiver and as I mentioned that's related to a cul-de-sac and then the last one is to discuss the community center connection to open space at the focal point of the site. So if we go back to the development plan we can see that the community center is at the entrance to the site but it also shares a connection with the greenway or club plane to the rear of the site that allows for both a pedestrian connection as well as a visual connection outside here on their patio from the community center to the club plane area which is one of the focal points they mentioned with their zone change. In terms of the requested waiver there is a waiver report that was distributed to the Commission. They are asking for a waiver to section 6-8A and 6-8F of the land subdivision regulations. Previously we saw a development plan that showed a cul-de-sac at this location at the terminus of Hill Rise Drive. excuse me and what the applicant found when they did geotechnical surveys is that there was a fill material that was not suitable for building or for pavement and it would need to be replaced in addition the building footings would be more expensive in order to meet specifications related to the fill material because this is an affordable housing project the applicant was also a bit concerned about the cost associated with those changes and because this is not a through street they are they requested that they not be required to build the cul-de-sac at this location but rather extend the road or make an appropriate conversion from the local road to an access easement at this this juncture the staff did review this with the division of engineering and they concurred that the approval of the waiver would be appropriate in this circumstance and so the staff did recommend or does recommend approval of the requested waiver for the reduction of the required right of way and street width at this location the staff believes that granting the waiver will not adversely affect the public health welfare and safety as the proposed development will provide for safe emergency access and this granting of the waiver is consistent with the intent of the land subdivision regulations for exceptional hardship and it's also consistent with the land subdivision regulations for infill and redevelopment facilitation. I will stop sharing my screen and be available to answer any questions you may have about this application and then we can turn it over to Mr. Southall. Any questions for Ms. Wade at this point? Okay thank you. Seeing none, Mr. Southall. Mr. Southall if you would like to unmute yourself and share your start your video that would be great. Thank you. Thank you, Chair and members of the Commission. My name is Scott Southall with Earth Cycle Design, serving as a representative for this project. I would just like to add that from Mrs. Wade's presentation is that we did encounter substantial amounts of unsuitable fill material material that we're going to have to replace on the road entrance road that's coming in as well as the conditions underneath the community building as well as building number or portions of building number four which is the duplex housing and by reducing this from a cul-de-sac to just a simple entry way or entry drive, we're going to be able to reduce about 40% of the material that we would have to replace in that area. So that was the hardship that I just wanted to emphasize that we're asking for that reduction. And then other than that, we, if you recall back in the fall, we did have this as a zone change preliminary design. One of the requests was the joining property owner that's the R2 had some concerns about visual appearance of the backs of the units and we have met with them prior to the submission of the plan and he asked for a privacy fence which was already part of the requirements so we do want to bring that up that we did meet with him as requested from the preliminary plan to the final plan. And we have met his concerns with adding that privacy fence. And that's between the current R3 zone and the R2 zone that would be to, sorry, looking at the plan, it would be to the in-town side of the property. Thank you, Mr. Stoutfeld. Any questions for Mr. Southall? Seeing none, thank you. Anyone in attendance wish to speak to this place? Mr. Chair, I'm not seeing any at this time. Okay, thank you. Questions from the commission? I guess Tracy Wade mentioned anything in point of clarification on the revised recommendation. we do have number 15 is discuss community center connections with open space. Has that been resolved? Well, we just wanted to reiterate the concern or the, I guess, the place builder kind of pin we put in it at the zone change. And that was, if this community center and your floodplain are the two focal points, how do you connect those? And so they've provided like an outdoor patio at the corner. and then also a pedestrian connection from all the way up where the street is or the access easement is down to the floodplain edge of the floodplain and so the staff believes that that meets the intent of connecting the focal points and providing access to the focal points we just wanted to make sure we continue to discuss those recommendations and that they don't get lost after its own change. I believe it has been resolved. So you want it sounds like you want to leave it on but leave it on as a result? Well we can delete it. I just wanted to make sure the committee heard the discussion today. Related to number 13 if the commission feels that the enhanced landscaping or the landscaping solution that Mr. Southall mentioned in terms of the fence was adequate we could revise number 13 and just delete the first half of that and leave correct tree canopy notes but remove the note enhanced landscaping portion. Okay. If that makes sense. Thank you. Planning Commission decision for both of them. recommendation Tracy is just to revise number 13 to read correct three canopy notes and calculations and it's up to the commission as to whether we delete number 15 or leave it as a resolved item it sounds like uh Mr. Southall are you good with both of those uh yes sir I am okay thank you so any other questions from the commission if not uh no one in the audience which speaks i'll play this part of the hearing and open it up for any discussion and or motion from the commission we've got revised conditions wishes yes and the waiver would have to oh yeah yeah it was the culgysac waiver that's right thank you i got hung up on something else uh so motion would be for the uh uh mjdp the development plan we would need a separate motion for the waiver yes mr penne mr chair i move for approval of pln mjdp 2010 with revised staff conditions deleting number 15 and changing number 13 to correct the tree canopy notes and calculations indicates required 30 coverage. Okay so you've heard the motion uh this plan mjdb 20-10 uh I'll ask for a vote uh which is approval You have a second by Ms. Mundy. So I'll ask for a vote. All those in favor, please raise your hand. Any opposed? I see none. Thank you. It's unanimous. Motion passes unanimously for the waiver, which is on the white sheet of paper. Mr. Penn. Mr. Chairman, I move for approval of the waiver with PLNMJDP 2010 as presented by State. Thank you. We've got a motion for approval of the waiver and MJDB 20-10, seconded by Ms. Mundy. All those in favor, please raise your hand. Motion passes. Thank you. Unanimously it passes. Thank you. And if I may, we'll take about a five-minute recess and resume just momentarily. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Commission. Members of the Planning Commission, we are going to take a five minute recess. If you would like to mute yourself and disable your screen, you are welcome to do so at this time. We will call you back in five minutes. Thank you. plan MJDP 20-16 Perry Street. We do have a waiver associated with that. Staff. Lauren, you're still on mute just to give you the heads up. And members of the development team, I will bring you in when this application presentation has been finished by staff. Okay, thank you and good afternoon everyone. I'm Lauren Hedge, I work with the Planning Division. Our next item is the Perry Street Townhomes and this is the final development plan for the five townhome lots. I'm going to share my screen here and show the plan. can everyone see that oh yes okay harry street is located to the southwest of manchester street and like i said this is the final development plan for the five townhome lots So we have most of our typical sign-off conditions on this plan. We also have one correction item for the 11th condition, just that the Planning Commission certification meeting date needs to be revised to today's meeting. And then condition number 12, this plan's approval is contingent upon the Planning Commission granting the waiver to Article 6-8A of the land subdivision regulations. This is a waiver of the required 50-foot right-of-way width, which staff believes can be granted so that off-street parking can be provided for the townhomes. Also, the applicant is constructing curb and sidewalks within the existing right-of-way. And with that, I will open it up to the commission for any questions. Any questions for Lauren? If not, Kevin Phillips. All right. Mr. Chair, there should be two individuals on the participants that would like to be added. added. I am adding Mr. Kevin Phillips from Endris Engineering and the representative of Lexington Habitat for Humanity. If both of these members, when they join, please go ahead and both unmute yourself and share or start your video. Thank you very much Houston and Mr. Phillips if you could go ahead and unmute yourself and share your video. Thank you very much. Let's hear your voice Mr. Phillips. There we go. There you go. All right. So, Mr. Phillips, you want to go first? Sure. Yeah, Houston Royster, he's the construction director with Habitat for Humanity. He's the other person on the screen there today, in case you have any questions for him. I don't believe we have any additional comments or clarifications to the stats report. We agree with those 12 conditions and request your approval as well as the waiver of the land subregs for the street improvements. Yes, Mr. Penn's got a question. Mr. Phillips, could you talk about the need for the waiver? Sure. The street width, the existing street width does not meet the current subdivision regulations with respect to the street width or the right-of-way width. The current right-of-way width is 33 feet, and the minimum required under current regulations is 50 feet, I believe. so there would have to be a significant increase in the size of that right of way which would eliminate all of our off-street parking as well as reduce the size of the units so we are asking for that waiver of the street width however we are making improvements to the street by by means of the adding the curb and the five foot sidewalk so those improvements will be made and we will provide that also we'll be able to provide the all-street parking by not increasing the right-of-way width. Thank you. Any other questions? Mr. Royster, good afternoon. Glad you're with us. Thank you very much. I appreciate y'all's time today. Would you like to add anything? I don't see the necessary to do that. Kevin's covered it pretty well for us. Thank you. Thanks for your brevity. Anyone else wish to speak on this request? If anybody in the audience would like to speak on this request, please raise your hand now in the virtual space that you have as a participant. Sir, I am seeing none at this time. Okay, thank you. commission members any questions if not i'll close this part of the hearing and leave it to you for discussion and or a motion we need two motions again one for the plan and one for the waiver sure mr finn mr chairman i move for approval of pln mjbr 2016 perry street town homes with the 12 conditions as presented by staff. Do you want to separate? Yes, sir. In just a second, I think we need to correct number 11 to read Planning Commission certification to reflect today's state. Okay. So do we have a second? Second. Second by Mr. Wilson. So the motion has been made for approval of Plan MJDP 2016 Perry Street townhouses with the 12 conditions, taking correction of number 11 to reflect today's meeting date. So all those in favor, please raise your hand. Any opposed? That motion passes unanimously. Thank you. For the waiver. Mr. Chairman, I move for approval of the waiver presented by staff of PLNMJDP 2016. Thank you. do we have a second? Second by Mr. Wilson. So that motion is for approval of the associated waiver with Plan MJDB 2016 Perry Street Townhouses for the reasons recommended by staff. Please vote. Raise your hand if you're in favor. Any opposed? That motion passes unanimously. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you very much Kevin and Houston. We're just now going to move you back into becoming an attendee. Thank you very much. So we will move to the next item on page seven, which is Polo Club Center located 6411 Polo Club Lane. We do have 15 conditions along with a waiver on this one and EAMB compliance, I believe. So is that Laura? Lauren. Yes, sir. Thank you. Good afternoon again. Good afternoon. This next item is MJDP-20-17 Polo Club Center, also known as Secura Justice Property, Unit 6. I just want to start off by saying the applicant has submitted a notarized affidavit that they have posted the required signs and now I'm going to share my screen Okay, this is located at 6411 Polo Club Lane. So Manowar Boulevard is to the west and Polo Club Boulevard is to the south. And then we have Polo Club Lane, which you will see later on the development plan, that extends north into the property from Polo Club Boulevard. This amendment includes two buildings of elderly housing on lot five. So building one will be more of an apartment style housing and then building two is more of a townhouse style. Building one will have 18 units. Building two will have six units. We have most of our typical sign offs on the first 11 conditions. We have two conditions that are just quick fixes about making sure that the height of the retaining wall is on the plan and then correcting note number seven. And then our final two conditions have to do with the planning commission will have to make a finding that the plan complies with the expansion area master plan. And then we also still have a discussion item about the pedestrian connection to the Blackford property. So there is an EAMP compliance report for this property. all should have a copy of that. Just to start off, in the infrastructure element of that report, this slide just shows that the sanitary sewer trunk line is already existing that serves this portion of the expansion area, and Polo Club Center already has two existing manholes to the sewer line. The bulk of this compliance report has to do with the community design element. The EAMP envisioned that greenways were a unifying feature that would connect the various land uses in the expansion area. And as you can see in the zoning map, this section of the CC area is separated from the larger CC area by Manowar Boulevard. and the slope that's associated with the greenway in this area is extremely steep. So with an inability to effectively integrate the greenway, the senior housing apartments will depend on the pedestrian system for their connection, both internally and externally. The internal sidewalk system reflects the historical development of the site and is not well connected. The sidewalk and the public right-of-way are constructed along Polo Club Boulevard and nearby local streets do provide pedestrian connections to the entire area including the existing neighborhoods. However, they do not exist along Manowar Boulevard along the property's frontage. So you can see that the red arrow is pointing towards the steep slope area that we would like 6411 to connect into the Blackford property. However, we recognize that a connection will be more possible either along Manowar Boulevard or going internally through Polo Club Center out to Polo Club Boulevard. You'll see in the conclusions of the report at the very end, staff is recommending the following changes to the final development plan in order to ensure even greater compliance with the community design element. A is denoting on the final development plan that the lot will comply with article 23A-2G of the zoning ordinance to the greatest extent possible, thereby ensuring conformance with the EAMP recommendations for greenways. And B, pedestrian improvements will be made within or parallel to the Manowar Boulevard right of way to connect the Polo Club Center to the Blackford property directly. And that's for article 23A-2H of the zoning ordinance. And with that, I will open it up to the committee. All right, commission. Now we're done. Questions from the commission for Lauren? If not, we'll move on to the applicant. Applicant, if you can now raise your hand or your development team, please raise your hand. We can admit you to the meeting. Johan, we are promoting you to a panelist. And Mr. Steve Garland, we are also promoting you to a panelist. When you enter into the meeting, please go ahead and unmute yourself and start your video. Johan, can you say hi to us just real quick, just so you can check out? Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Steve, could you go ahead and say hi to everybody? Good afternoon, everyone. Coming in loud and clear. Go right ahead, guys. Good afternoon. Whichever one wants to go first. Well, once again, I said this at the subdivision committee. I'll say it again today. It was, this is an extremely difficult site. Staff has been wonderful, easy to work with. Engineering has actually come up and helped us out with some ideas. we're working with traffic engineering on a couple of items it's a hard site it's a it's a remnant cc it's the last corner of this property and um and so at this time i don't think we have any other comments to make other than accepting the conditions is that correct johan that's correct so steven you're saying that you're in agreement with pedestrian connections if needed well um we've been talking with uh rory and i cannot remember rory's last name hey hey oh believe me we do and uh about what they're going to be doing on their on their blackford property down below us they have not yet turned in for a condition to the state department so we did notice the staff said in right away or parallel to right away or some kind of sidewalk along manowar for clarification like I said roughly 15 feet below our site so we can't put a sidewalk along Manowar connecting to that sidewalk from our site is still going to be a circulation through the internal Polo Club Lane Polo Club Center development johan anything man no i mean if people want to look at the internal polo club center line i don't know if lauren would put up pull up that map again of the uh the area you can see that we're kind of a property that's at the end of the parking lot so the shell station the cvs and the bank the bank is right next to us and then the CVS is on the corner and the Shell station is on the end so the best access to the pedestrian corridor is back to Polo Club Boulevard. It is as Lauren described it Polo Club Lane kind of winds itself through there and there are sidewalks to the bank but they're interrupted about every 15 feet by driveway access to those properties. So it is what it is getting back to Polo Club Lane. So we have sidewalks on our site, but they stop at the property boundary. So we are a good 15 feet. The bank elevation will be level with the bank. We're a good 15 feet above the Manowar Road. but they've requested that we have sidewalk along man award i i don't know if i think we're just going to roll with that recommendation for now okay um lauren tracy are you all okay with that um sorry just one moment sorry i just i didn't hear did johan say they were agreeable to sidewalks for now i didn't understand well now we don't have much of a choice in order to get our development approved we're not really sure exactly the sidewalk along man of war doesn't go anywhere um so i don't know exactly the purpose but i don't know if i i don't want that to hold up our entire development plan either. So, you know, it's kind of like you take the good with the bad and we kind of make a concession and move on. Well, the purpose is to connect your CC area to the adjacent CC area that, you know, Mr. Garland spoke about with EA Partners. They have a CC zoned parcel or part of their project. And then they also have about 300 apartments that they're putting in so that's the desire in the zoning ordinance in article 23 states that all properties should have a pedestrian access way and especially those adjacent to cc zones should connect so there needs to be a connection from the cc zone to the adjoining development and the and based on the grade changes and the steep slopes of the greenway our understanding was the best way to make that connection was along Manowar Boulevard because it's the switchbacks and the stairs through the greenway were such a concern but there does need to be pedestrian connectivity that's part of the expansionary master plan it's part of the zoning ordinance for this area so it's a requirement yeah i mean i'm a little curious why our our neighbors don't have that in terms of the waterstone across the street or the bank or the cvs but i'm okay i think we just have to we can put a sidewalk in on the our frontage it just it's just a i guess a head scratcher a little bit about where it goes after it hits our property but for the waterstone location their connection to the CC zone is via crosswalks. They're connecting over to the new bank and coffee shop. And then again, they have sidewalks along Polo Club to this CC. They have the connections to the two CCs. Yours is allowing for that next connection down the way. In previous development plans, the state did not want sidewalks along Manowar. Now they've agreed that this is no longer a rural section after 20 years of development out there, and it should be an urban section. And so we're working with the state to ensure that those improvements are made as development occurs. And so the two previous development plans that have been approved in the last two years for Ball Homes do include sidewalk improvements along Manowar. so steven johan it sounds like you're willing to accept this to move your plan forward if you get to that point that's correct okay thank you uh commission members any other questions uh there i would like to point out um and lauren i think jeff neal has talked to you we are working with traffic engineering to revise note number 21 on the plan yes thank you um yep okay thank you commission members question yes sir i'll assume that we will this is question for the staff i would assume that we would change number 15 to discuss to resolve? Yes, that would be fine. Okay, any other questions? Al, anyone else around about wants to speak to this? Sir, we had one phone caller in, Ms. Jennifer, who was interested in discussing the Polo Club case. I'm going to allow her to speak at this time. Jennifer, you had called in earlier. I have now allowed you to speak to the Planning Commission if you have any questions about this application at this time. Yeah, I was wondering about the development over by the rail trail is what I was inquiring about. Okay. What was going to go in there? That was a single family household development. Okay. I live off of falling leaves, and when I moved in, I was told that there would be protected green space behind my house. I was wondering if you knew how close to falling leaves that development would go into it. Yes, ma'am. If you would like to, you can go ahead and email us at staff at the planning mailbox at lexingtonky.gov, and we could help you out with that information to show you exactly where that plan is going to go. Okay, great. I appreciate it. Great. Thank you. Thank you for sitting in on this meeting. Okay, thank you. Now, there was a gentleman earlier that had a question when I was reading the consent agenda. Yes. If anyone has any comments on this plan, please go ahead and raise your hand now. That gentleman who had raised his hand previously has is no longer in the meeting. Okay, thank you. And Mr. Chair, I'm not seeing any other hands raised at this time from the audience. Thank you. And apparently there's no questions from the commission. So I'll close this part of the hearing and leave it to the commission for motions. We do. clear. I falsely mistakenly said there was a waiver on this when I first started. There's not. There's just simply an EAMB compliance report which is noted in condition 14 and I think the staff and applicants are good at changing number 15 to resolve. So if anyone's interested in it, I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Nickel? Yes. I recommend a motion of approval for PLN-MJDP-20-00017 Polo Club Center, Secura Justice Property Unit 6, AMD, with changing condition 15 from discussed to resolved. Thank you. Do we have a second? Mr. Forrest. Mr. Forrester seconded. So the motion is made for approval of Plan MJDP 20-17 Polo Club Center with the 15 conditions, change in number 15 to resolve. The motion was made by Mr. Bruce Nickel and seconded by Mr. Forrester. All of those in favor, please raise your hand. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. so we do have a few others Mr. Graham and Steve we're going to demote you right now thank you very much for being part of our meeting today I think the next one is Crossroads if I can get to it Page 9. Page 9. Crossroads Christian Church. Plan MJ SUV 19-7. It extends over on page 10 as well with the new set of conditions. So, Ms. Wade, you're visible. Thank you. Our next item does appear on page nine and it's a continued discussion item PLNMJSUB19-7. This was an application that was approved by the Planning Commission originally on July 11, 2019, so just under a year ago. And at that time, I'm going to share my screen, the applicant proposed a single family development and now they are asking to revamp their development and actually do multi-family on this portion of property on Todd's Road so the address for the development is 4128 Todd's Road and this is just outside the interstate I-75. I'm going to click one further and show you the aerial. So you can see I-75 runs, again I'm going to annotate, because I really love that, runs along the west side of the parcel and it has quite a bit of frontage along I-75. On the other side of I-75 is the Childsburg neighborhood. In addition, their frontage is also along Todd's Road, along the north side, and I'm wondering if I can move this out of the way I can, along the north side of the parcel. But you can see on this aerial photograph that there is a significant portion of the Crossroads Christian Church property that is vacant, and that provides an opportunity for the church to develop this triangle of their property a majority of that 10 to 12 acres is located inside the urban service boundary and within expansion area 2b there is a small triangle in the northeast corner that is outside of the urban service boundary and if you recall from last year when the applicant proposed to develop 17 single family homes 16 were on a cul-de-sac within the expansion area and the 17th was a larger about two acre tract of ar that would remain in the rural service area so outside the expansion area so back to the development plan so the church is remaining in its location and they are maintaining a single family residence on their parcel as well to um get to the the subject property sidewalks do exist across the interstate along todd's road which was widened several years ago now. And then the applicant is showing sidewalks that follow along the frontage of Crossroads Christian Church to the rest of the property to be developed. And instead of the single family in this portion of the development in the eastern edge of their lot, they're proposing four multi-family buildings for a total of 90 dwelling units. So there's a 30 dwelling unit building, 224 dwelling unit buildings, and then one that's, I believe, either 12 or 16, whatever rounds out that 90 units. So 90 units does still fall within the expansion area master plan recommendation for this site. It's in an expansion area residential one zone, which allows up to three dwelling units per acre. Because the church doesn't really count towards density, the applicant is utilizing a development plan to share density over both the church property, their vacant piece on the eastern edge within the same development plan. So they're able to get 91 dwelling units within their acreage, one in the single-family home that remains on the church property, and then 90 within the multifamily development. The changes that they're proposing at this point also include a splash pad in the northeast corner of their site, an office use within the front building. They're showing entrance wall improvements at the entrance as well. The infrastructure for the site actually doesn't change much when we change land use from single family to the multi-family. A pump station is still required to pump the sanitary sewer over the ridgeline and connect to existing sewers to the north. And then also sidewalk improvements are still required and the existing streets in the area provide, excuse me, I went the wrong way provide access to the site so Polo Club Boulevard is mostly constructed and this portion is being completed hopefully within the next calendar year and it's a one of our boulevards within the expansion area it provides access to other commercial uses near Manowar and then obviously Todd's Road has been improved as well. So the applicant, the staff reviewed the changes to their development plan and we are continuing to recommend approval. The subdivision committee also recommended approval last week. The reason we needed to present this today is Mr. Cayley brought in a few additional changes which included the office use within one building and a splash pad and so the staff felt it important to present that as well as the EAMP compliance report to the Commission. So one of the are the conditions on the agenda that you see are still the conditions that the staff is recommending the Commission adopt and that includes ten conditions. So the first seven or eight are regular sign-offs required for all development plans and preliminary subdivision plans and then number nine and number ten are related to the expansion area so the first one is provided the Planning Commission makes a finding that the plan complies with the expansion area master plan and then lastly the addition of an exaction note to the approval of the division of planning so because I'll explain a little bit about the last one first and then go back to the EAMP report the church was built, I would say about 20 years ago, and they have an agreement for their exaction payments. And because of that, those exactions are being paid. Presumably the applicant or the developer on the vacant piece won't owe any additional exactions. And so we want to make sure that the note that appears on the plan correctly reflects that, but the church still has an outstanding balance to meet their contract with the government and pay their last installment for the exactions for the site. In terms of the expansion area master plan compliance statement, there is a report from the staff in the it's actually a memo from Mr. Martin which talks about their compliance with the expansionary master plan. As I mentioned earlier the infrastructure requirements for this site are actually very similar to the single-family site. The frontage improvements are being required and the pump station is still necessary for sanitary sewer. In addition, the staff found previously that the single family development met the design element and changing the land use from one residential type to another in this case does not alter the impact of the required infrastructure or the community design element. They're still providing the sidewalks connecting to the closest focal point and the community center which is actually catty corner at Polo Club is the closest community center zone and the staff at this point agrees that the applicant with the applicant that these proposed changes to the preliminary subdivision plan and final development plan do not constitute a significant change in the EAMP compliance that was previously adopted by the planning commission and those findings do appear on your agenda at the bottom of page nine and then carrying on to page 10. I'm happy to answer any questions about their development plan or their compliance statement at this time. Okay. Thank you, Tracy. Questions for Tracy at this point? Yes, Frank has a question. Tracy, on our memorandum it says now 689 apartment units in the four buildings. That's my typo. I apologize, it's actually 90. I'll change that to 90 and then thank you. Anything else for Ms. Wade at this point? If not, Mr. Kaley, good afternoon. We've said his name before, so here he is. We will be promoting him to a panelist now. Mr. Kaley, if you could unmute yourself and start your video. Hello, everybody. Good afternoon. Thank you very much. We're in agreement with Tracy's presentation and accept the 10 conditions and request approval. Thank you. Yes, 10 conditions now. Okay, so thank you, Mr. Kaley. Any questions for Mr. Kaley? Mr. Penn. Mr. Kaley, the triangle piece that's still part of the AR zone, does the applicant own that two acres or whatever that is? Yes, the developing applicant will get that as a part of the development land. there's an accompanying final record plan that has been approved and waiting all of these approvals to get recorded and then the line Tracy showed you from the parking lot west I'm sorry parking lot east all of that would go from the church to the developer that agricultural lot is able to have one residential unit on it staff says we need to show the access point being off of our off of our parking lot and not directly from Todd's Road. That's where I was going. How do you access that lot? So you're going to access it internally to your development plan? Yes. And approximately how big is that piece of AR part? It's just under two acres of AR, and the lot as we have it shown is two and a third acres. Thank you. Other questions for Mr. Cayley? If not, thank you, sir. Stick around and see if anyone... Oh, being there, Paul, did you want to... No. Okay. Anyone else in attendance today that would like to speak to this plant? Members of the public, if anybody in the attendees section has any comments, please go ahead and raise your hand digitally right now and we'll have you add to the meeting. Sir, I am seeing none at this time. Okay, thank you. Commission members, if there's no other questions, I'll close this part of the hearing and open it up for any discussions and or a motion from you all. Anyone interested? Mr. Penn. Mr. Chairman, I move for approval of TLN MJSU B197 Crossroad Christian Church with the 10 conditions. conditions. Yes. Noting the memorandums themselves. I think that's it. That's it. So we have a motion for approval. Do we have a second? Seconded by Mr. Bell. So the motion is for approval of plan MJSUB 19-7 Crossroads Christian church with the new 10 conditions. Motion is made by Mr. Penn and seconded by Mr. Bell. All those in favor, please raise your hand. Any opposed? That motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Thank you. So now we are trying to determine if we have any, Oh, no, wait a second. Let's see. Clark Property State on the consent agenda as did Fortune Business Center. So we're trying to determine if there's any letter of credit, performance bonds, letter of credit that needs approval. And so we will skip that for the moment and we will move on to commission items, which is the first one is PFR 2020-2, Tates Creek High School. Sorry, Mr. Owens, could you ask Mr. Bailey to pull up Ms. Galt's presentation and share from your location? Yes, I can. Denise forgot to put it on our thumb drive. Yes, ma'am. I will be sharing my screen now. And Ms. Galt, as you go through and you're ready for me to move through the slides, please just go ahead and say next slide. Thank you. this this golf not to take anything away from you or step on any toes I just would remind the Commission members that since this is a public facility reviewer our obligation is to determine if this is in compliance with conference plan so with that said miss golf thank you very much miss golf I'll now be sharing my screen Thank you. And please proceed when you are ready. As you can see this is Takes Creek High School. We can go next. Next. Go right ahead. Sorry Cheryl. Okay this is Takes Creek High School. It's located at 1105 Center Parkway. This was submitted to us prior to the pandemic so we've been waiting to get this to you. Carmen and Associates working with the Fayette County Public Schools to rebuild a new Takes Creek High School. They have it proposed to start this summer 2020 for a school that's approximately 358,000 square feet plus. This building will be, the school system will do this in several phases. Let's go to next. As you can see, the property to the center here is zoned AU for Agricultural Urban. That's where the school is located. And around it is Gainesway Subdivision. It kind of circles all the way around. The other AU property off to the side is Takes Creek Golf Course. In the south, near the bottom of the page, you'll see B1. This is Center Parkway's shopping area. Next. This is a Takes Creek school campus. They have three different schools. They have elementary, middle, and the high school. The high school is the one that they are going to rebuild. Next. Next. This is a blow up of Takes Creek High School. You can see there's a parking lot to the rear of the school. This is where they're putting the proposed new school that will be built. And as I said, this will be built in phases. So while they're building the new school to the rear, they're going to continue to use the existing school until it's completed in May of 2022. Next, this shows you a little bit better layout of everything that they proposed. You can see the new school, where the existing school is currently will be torn down and they will put in new parking areas. They also are going to put in new baseball, softball fields, a field house, a band practice field. The proposal with this school is going to really ultimately affect all the schools because they're going to come in with the main circle in the center for the main entrance. They're going to have a circle around about that way they can go to all the different schools that that'll help the buses and the parents for drop-offs and also for other students to be able to walk onto campus. Next, you can see the school is in multiple levels. They have ultimately a four-story high school. Due to the grade of the land, you can see that there's different elevations and some of it looks like more of it's out of the ground than others. Ultimately, they'll have a lot of open space and green areas around the school for for the students to be able to congregate and enjoy next as we said staff findings that we believe this is the public facility improvements for this high school fully serve the community they meet the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan there is no opposition at this time that we know of to the school it does meet the goals objectives and the policies and it does support the destination 2040 in order to fully address the recommendations of the comp plan we suggest that the school be considerate of the neighborhoods there's a lot of residential neighborhoods around there was a lot of trees that lined to between them and the school we would like for the school board to be kind and be able to add tree canopy and natural components along the side and rear yards for the neighbors and we also like to address the stormwater issues we're hoping that the schools can take into considerations like the green infrastructure of adding rain gardens around the perimeters of the school and with that next if you all have any other questions Any questions for Ms. Gull? Yes, Ms. Plumlee. I'm moved. Yes, ma'am. I will stop sharing now. And if you would like me to pull up any part of that presentation during your questions, feel free to just let us know. Ms. Plumlee, you're still on mute for a second. I knew you had your first hand up. Still muted. Ms. Plumlee, I'm going to try to aid you here. There we go. The question being, how can we encourage the developer to do those trees that you suggested? Well, that's a good thing. I'm not sure we can ask and hope that they're courteous to the neighborhood. They are putting in a lot of trees along the drive aisles, along different areas among the campus areas. As far as the parameters, that we're hoping that the school system will take into consideration. and because it backs up to it, it's not street frontage. We're hoping that they will be kind to them. Thank you. Another question? Seeing none, do we have a... We do have an answer, sir. If the representative from Carmen, thank you very much. We'll be promoting you to a panelist. And the representative from Carmen, if you could unmute yourself and share your screen or I'm sorry, start your video. Hello, Chris Howard with Carmen. Hi, how are you? Do you have anybody else from your development team or from the schools that you would like added to this presentation at this time? If you could add Belinda Joseph Duzarn. All right. Mr. Zarn, I'm adding you right now as a panelist. And Sabrina Oakes is the architect. Yes, Sabrina Oakes, could you please raise your hand really quickly? Thank you very much. We will be adding you as a panelist as well. If you would both go ahead and unmute yourself and share your screens. Hello. Hi, thank you very much. this Sabrina Oaks we have a nice red spot where you are there we go there you go thank you very much and applicant Chris if you would last name I'm sorry Chris your your last name please Howard Howard okay thank you go ahead Chris well I guess I would speak to the comment about the trees on the rear of the property. One thing to note is that the property line for the school system extends beyond the existing fence back there along that creek. And those trees are going to remain. The area behind the school and to the east of the school has been reserved for geothermal wells, which is kind of part of our green infrastructure to keep our energy costs down. This school will be geothermal and the nature of those wells, we can't really do anything on top of those such as plant trees, things of that nature. Okay. Thank you, sir. For a second, can we get the screen blown up? We may have to share it. Sir, I'm going to share the screen of the development plan, the colored up rendering. If you would like to describe any elements of that, go right ahead. Can I share mine so I can use the mouse? Yes, you can. Go right ahead, sir. Okay. Can you all see that? Not yet. I'm moving it out of the way. There you go. Is that good? Go ahead. Okay. So this is kind of the area in question. You're on the wrong screen, Chris. I'm on the wrong. Currently, we're looking at your email. All right. Let me pull that back over here. There you go. Okay. Okay. So this area in here, all of these areas, green space areas, even up into this area, is the geothermal well field, with the exception of where the detention basin is located. One thing I would add that wasn't mentioned is that in terms of green infrastructure, we have proposed permeable pavement in this parking lot and in this parking lot. So Chris, let me ask you this. Understanding you got geothermal wells in those areas, those wells, are they going to be that close to the property line that you would be unable to plant trees close to the property line? Yes, they'll be right up to the fence line. Okay. I would like to comment just, you know, while we did some early work to clean out some shrubbery in that area, there was a lot of trash in those areas where some of the shrubbery was removed. It's just very difficult for our operations staff to get in there and mow those areas if there's a lot of trees. Okay, thank you. Any other questions from anyone? Thank you. If not, we did have a couple of others that had joined us today that may still be here that wanted to speak. Yes, sir. Chris, would you go ahead and stop sharing your screen at this time? And we do have members of the public. Ms. Sarah Grant had spoken to us earlier today, and I will now allow her to talk. Ms. Grant, if you'd like to unmute yourself, go ahead. Okay. Hello. Can you hear me? Yes, ma'am. We can. Okay. On the footprint design that was shown, the part that you were talking about with the retaining walls, that is going to be right there by a gymnasium. and I live on Crimson King Court and there's the next court over is Coldstream. There are three areas that are going to be directly impacted by this school construction. It's going to be Coldstream Court, Crimson King Court, and Pimlico that goes from Gainesway and curves around. So the gymnasium that's going to be at the bottom of our street, which our street has an elevation when you start at the top and you go down to the creek. Above the creek, it's elevated and it goes straight up to the school. So in our opinion, there's going to be absolutely no way that they can screen this construction I mean, the building, a gymnasium, which is, I'm not even sure how many stories. We've requested this information and have never been told what the actual height of this gymnasium is going to be. But right now, when you come down our street, you see green space. And the Tates Creek High School is up on the hill. It's been that way for 50 years. So they're proposing to move this whole school all the way down towards this residential area. And if you look at the map, you know, they talked about on the other side of the school there, it's commercial. There's the Gainesway Shopping Center. There's other, there's, it's not as residential. but anyway um you know my concern as a resident um on my street is this is this construction is going to have a major impact on our neighborhood down here and i would say that um we we just found out about this in february when they came out and they they just actually took out all the trees behind us, including a handful, which were probably old growth trees. And that started us to figure out what was going on. We had originally heard that it was going to be a $16 million renovation of the school. But then we came to find out that that plan had changed and it changed very quickly. And none of the neighbors down here were aware that this was going to happen. I went door to door and talked to all the neighbors. No one had any idea that this this construction project was going to be taking place. Now, I could say and, you know, due diligence, you know, for the school board or, you know, that they've they probably, you know, they put information in their meetings. However, how would we have ever imagined that they would construct a school right there on top of this neighborhood? And because of the topography, with our streets going down and that hill coming up, it's going to be, it's going, actually, we've asked for a rendition of how it will look from our street. We have not received that. But I only, I can say, I mean, my guess is it's going to be huge. It's going to be and there's a retaining wall and then this is going to have this school building terracing all the way up the hill. So it's going to have a major impact on this area. And we have, you know, since this process started, we have tried to speak out. We were hamstrung because of the coronavirus. We were not able to go to a school board meeting and speak up. They had virtual meetings, but we were muted on those. And we submitted questions, many of which were not answered. So, you know, as stakeholders in this project, we have been just pretty much blocked out. and so I am really really appreciative of being able to come on here today and and give my public comments because I haven't been able to do that before and so and another concern that we have is that there's the creek that runs to the bottom that runs into the West Hickman Creek three properties at the bottom of our street and Coldstream Court were demolished because of flooding issues. And with the massive downpours that we get certain times of the year, we don't know how that's going to affect our street. But, you know, that's another concern. And, you know, with the comment that was made that there was no opposition to this, I don't believe that's true. I believe that many of the neighbors here have just felt like, just blocked out of this whole process and we have older people here who have not been able to sign on to virtual meetings don't know how to do that come down and make comments because of the coronavirus so you know we requested that they stop or halt this project until we have a chance to weigh in on it but we have made no progress at all so anyway those are some of my comments and I do appreciate you letting me speak today. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Grant. Another one? Do we have another? Currently, Ms. Grant was the only one who raised her hand to speak. If there is anybody else in the audience that would like to speak on this application, please raise your hand now. Sorry, I'm seeing none. Okay, thank you. Mr. Howard, let me go back to you just for a second. and if you could share with us your plan that you had up a moment ago. Am I muted? Nope. Mr. Howard? I'm working on it. Oh, thank you, sir. You know, I'm fairly familiar more so with the football field than anything, but I've been up and down that hill many times. The white area, is that the new school? Yes, here? Yes. That's correct. And can you, I know it's not there, but can you give me a general idea of where the old school is currently? Yes, it's right here. Okay. And then the creek down, you know. It's along that dark. How much of a new school, is the new school on top of the hill still? It steps down the hill. Okay. Does it step down to the elevation of the creek? No, it does not. Any idea of what difference there is? Between the, I guess between which points? distance from the creek to the you know an elevation difference from the creek to the school Chris would it be at the level of the lower parking lot for the closer to the football field below the school level um I've been out that's that's what I'm looking at right now um I was just wondering if that was where the lower level would be So the lowest level of the school is at 960.9, roughly 961. Do you know what the creek is? The creek is roughly 940. I'm sorry, you cut out. 940. 940. Okay. All right. Thank you. I'm just curious and as much as anything trying to see if I can ease concerns a little bit. As I mentioned, when we first started, our obligation here is to determine if this is within compliance of a comprehensive plan or not. and that's our sole discretion. We can make recommendations and let you all take it and run with it what you want to. So just, yeah, I was just trying to get a better understanding myself. Other questions from the commission? Mr. Chairman, this is abnormal, but as our process is trying to make sure that all voices are included in the uh in the hearings that we have today we have received one email from an individual that has been watching the meeting uh would you like me to read said email yes please uh mr mark cornles cornolison uh living at three four two six cold stream court i am watching the live stream we have been on the local news several times saying we had problems with this high school project. So far, this meeting has not alleviated any of them. Right now, we have a flooding issue partially from the school, and now you have taken all of those trees down. We have had several meetings initiated by us with the school board because they never even told us about it, and we came home one day to see a whole hillside of trees taken down. The gym itself is going to totally alter the end of Crimson King Court. We do not or we don't want a service road along the creek line with dumpsters that will bring even more animals, rats, etc. We have already had a surge in mice and rats in the fields after the trees were taken down. None of you seem to realize the impact on Coldstream and Crimson Court. It is going to kill our streets. This school is now about 500 feet from our house and will now be less than 300 feet. It's all wrong. Mr. Mark Cornelson 3426 Coldstream Court. All I can say is thank you Mr. Cornelson for your involvement and sharing with us your concerns. Mr. Howard, I'll come back to you real quick. Can you address any of those things? I'm not sure dumpster wise, but. Well, I mean, in terms of the service drive, I mean that drive is there for deliveries only. There's no parking back here on this service drive. So it is strictly a limited use for dumpsters and for deliveries. There are, in this area, there are, I think, two recycling dumpsters and two dumpsters. Pretty typical for a high school site. And they are screened. So, I mean, I can't really speak to rodents and things of that nature, but I'm not aware of those problems at any of the other Fayette County schools. Mr. Graham Pohl has raised his hand, sir. Mr. Pohl. What is the height of the retaining wall shown on the north side of that pentagon there? Or whatever that trapezoidal parking area with the dumpsters. Bear with me so I can get my magnifying glass. A very small set of plants. It's approximately 12 feet. And do you know the elevation? At this point, it goes to zero at all the others. It's 12 feet here and goes to zero on the ends. Okay, thank you. And do you know the height of the building walls from grade adjacent to that? I think so the gym is this area here. Right. And that is, I believe it is 42 feet high from the basement level. I think it would be helpful to understand that this was mentioned actually in the presentation, but we are removing soil, you know, so we are lowering the building. The new roof height of the building will be approximately at the same level as the existing building. if that helps to kind of understand why yes it's 42 feet but we are digging down and so that new rope height is not going to be any higher than what you see out there right now and actually mr paul that that roof sets back something like something like that that's the actual gym so you have a lower roof here that helps clarify uh mr paul do you have other questions no that's all i had thank you okay thank you um questions for from any other commission members All right. Mr. Howard, if you could go ahead and stop sharing your screen. Thank you. Thank you. So anything else from any of the commission members? So if not, applicant, thank you for your presentation. and as a reminder, as I've said before, this is our obligation to determine whether it's in compliance with the conference plan or not. You've heard staff recommendations. You've heard the discussion. I'll close this part of the hearing and leave it up to the commission for motion and or discussion and or motion. Yes, Ms. Bundy. Yes, I have a question. You know, we're looking at putting in place, I guess, and I know we don't have any purview per se over the Board of Education or Fayette County Public Schools. But is there not an opportunity somewhere along the line that the neighborhood should be engaged by the school board so that the neighborhood could know? I mean, we're now asking developers to meet with the stakeholders. My concern is, and again, I know we really have no purview, but is there an opportunity that there could be a neighborhood meeting with the school board to discuss this in such a way that these concerned neighbors could get an opportunity to express their concerns? um who didn't we uh we i'm with fayette county public schools and we should have done a better job of communicating this um it was really an oversight it's been in the newspaper for actually several times um and we had a meeting scheduled due to the covet 19 we weren't able to do that. And it was actually when all this first started. So we ended up doing a Zoom meeting and really even learning how to do Zoom meetings, you know, has been a challenge when this all started. But, you know, we have been working with the school as well and developing this plan. And obviously, we want to be good neighbors. So, you know, that was, we should have done a better job with that. Thank you for at least acknowledging that. Hearing what has been said, do you think that there could be any revisions? You know, it seems like you're doing a fair amount of green infrastructure. does it seem like there's any possible revisions that could be made as far as buffering concerns? And let me say this first, with what was just said as far as the height and the fact that you're going down as well as up, but the overall height is going to be approximately the same. Personally, I don't know if that got out or not. Maybe that helps a little bit. But my question is, now, do you think there's any chance to acknowledge and give some consideration to the neighbors? You know, we looked at multiple designs with the design team in order to try to, I mean, it's obviously a very constricted site with three buildings on it. in order to keep school running and be a construction site. This was our best footprint for that. The new building footprint, while it is multiple stories, it is actually going to have a smaller roof area than the existing building that is there. So we are improving this site. We are improving this stormwater there. We have, we'll have more green space there with the permeable pavers that will help. So we have really tried our best to make this an environmentally friendly job. job. And I mean, I, we really can't change the design now. Okay. Would it be possible considering we are more advanced with Zoom and such like that, and you obviously had well intent, you were well intended to communicate. And it would appear that many of your, you know, many of your answers would relieve, potentially relieve the neighborhoods, at least you'd be communicating and well-intended. Is it possible to try again, considering the concerns that have been expressed, just to have a, try to bring the neighborhood together with yourselves, make another attempt, because we are further along than you were when you first initially attempted to communicate with the neighborhood yeah we can certainly do that again many of the items that chris and myself have pointed out have been stated previously so we we certainly can try to do that again okay thank you uh commission members anything else if if not i'd like to thank everyone and uh recognize the acknowledgement from the uh backhanded board of education on the on on some concerns sir miss grant has raised her hand again oh i don't know if you'd like to I acknowledge it. One more. Yes. Just one more minute. Ms. Graham. Ms. Graham. Thank you. Can you hear me? Yes. Okay. I just wanted to address a couple of the comments that were made about the height of this gymnasium and the impact that it's going to have on our street. And it's, well, what we've heard is that they're comparing the height of that building to what is currently there now, which really is not the issue. The current building is at the top of the hill, like 500. I'm not good with numbers, but it's very far from our street. But what's being proposed is to move this building down to the bottom of this hill. And at the same height, it's going to have a dramatic difference and impact on our street. And, you know, their comments were made that it was in the paper. the evolution of this project that we have learned about was initially a 16 million dollar renovation and then that figure was changed to 77 million dollar renovation which was determined to be above what they could spend for a renovation so they decided to build new and I've tried to get information about what all the 77 million included. Was that really necessary to spend 77 million for a renovation? And that's how the decision was made to build the new school. So, I mean, I'm concerned about how my tax dollars are being used. And if initially it was a $16 million renovation, How did it get to now tearing down a school that, you know, anyway, had a major renovation in 1993? So, you know, and then as far as bringing us on and listening to our concerns, we feel that it's it's past that because we were not brought in as stakeholders. We were never considered in this process. And even as when we did start raising our voices, we were just shut out of the process. And so I don't agree with the fact that the state county schools has tried to work with us. And we even asked the head of the school board chair, who is our district rep for Gainesway, to please come down here to our street, just drive down to our street to see how this construction project is going to affect our neighborhood. And she declined to do that. Ms. Grant, if I may, I'm sorry to interrupt. However, really and truly, I hate to say it, but a lot of your concerns are with the Bay County Board of Education. Our obligation here is simply to decide whether this meets the guidelines of comprehensive plan. we did take all including yours discussion earlier I did close the meeting and unfortunately we need to move on I did open it back up to you for as I said one minute and unfortunately we're going to have to move on so I thank you very much and I hate to cut you off okay no problem thank you thank you so Mr. Pohl Yeah. First, I'll start by saying, of course, we don't have any jurisdiction in this matter, but obviously we are concerned about what we're hearing about the Fayette County Board of Education's failure to engage the residents here. I would point out that it's very possible that a lot of the concerns that are being raised would be alleviated if there are some additional drawings that would show relative elevations and view corridors from the properties on Crimson King Court. it would be a relatively easy thing to draw a cross section showing the elevation of crimson king court the elevation of the creek and as you move toward the school the elevation of that retaining wall and then the building itself so you could actually place a little figure and show exactly what would be seen from Crimson King Court or from the homes to the south of Crimson King Court. So I just wanted to point that out because just in the hope that Fayette County schools might consider doing a few studies like that, I guess my fear is that maybe they haven't done that because they're afraid of what it will show. But I just want to encourage that kind of study it might suggest to them some simple moves that could really drastically improve the situation for those residents and it would certainly be worthwhile making a little study like that thank you thank you Graham I think unless anyone else has anything real quick I think we can move on here with with the applicant this goes to tell us on Mr. Howard and Sabrina. We appreciate what you've said here today. We've primarily got a huge recommendation, I would think, to at least try and do some of what Mr. Paul just suggested and what Mr. Bell suggested as far as reaching out one more time to hopefully alleviate some of these concerns. I understand that it sounds like this process got started when the COVID pandemic got started and as we were unable to meet, neither were you and it took us two months to figure out how to meet. So I would just simply offer to do your best to try and reach out to these folks one more time. I think I'm going to close this and ask for a motion from the commission at this point. Oh yes. if you this is for the commission members only I don't know what the time frame on this is but the only way that I can see that this does not meet the comp plan is that the comp plan the one we're operating under now stresses transparency and it stresses the fact that we need to be open we need to work with neighborhoods and we need to try to fulfill those types of relationships I'm not sure that what i've heard heard here today meets the comp plan and technically maybe it does but in the spirit of the thing i'm not sure that i'm not suggesting we do anything i'm just saying that i'd like somebody to tell me why this meets the comp plan when we've heard what we've heard today other discussion yeah i'd like to hear if the staff could comment maybe on that comment Staff? We actually did attend the public schools public meeting that was held on Zoom. And I found it very informative. Obviously, I'm not directly impacted as a property owner. But they were available to answer questions and made the information available to the public in the format that was available at that time. And again, I know, and Cheryl Galt as well, that our role here for the Division of Planning isn't to mandate changes that the school board has to make, but to consider how their improvements to their facilities impact the neighborhoods they're in and also the people that are nearby. So I was glad that they did hold that one public meeting and make the information available outside of just the newspaper articles. Thank you. But was it already a done deal at that stage? Well, the public schools get to make a decision and a feasibility analysis of whether an improvement to a school is necessary or a rebuild. So, yes, the school board had already decided that Tate's Creek needed to be rebuilt rather than renovated based on outside factors, whether that was cost benefit analysis, environmental impacts. I'm sure there's a lot of impacts that they look at for their individual facilities and do an assessment. So that decision, I believe, was made before that public meeting. But that's the opportunity for the public to chime in and participate and share their comments with the team. And I felt they listened. Myron Thompson was on that meeting as well, and he kind of facilitated it. I felt like they were listening to the comments that were made. okay thank you I'll ask for a motion again anyone interested I'll take a stab at it Mr. Penn I know this is a review of a proposal by the State County Board of Education and I would proposed that we pass this with concerns. The concern is we don't think there's been adequate participation by the community, specifically the subdivision that's impacted, and that therefore we would encourage them to pass with reservations that we encourage them to go forward and try to at least hear the concerns of the people that are impacted. Okay. So do we, we, we do have a motion for approval with the concern and right recommendation. Second. And motion has been made by Mr. Penn and seconded by Mr. Bell for approval of EFR 2020 Tates Creek high school. Uh, let me see here. Uh, as, as approved by the staff recommended for approval by the staff with the concern reservation and recommendation to reach out to the neighborhood. Mike, I've got a comment here before we vote. Okay. So having listened to all this and realizing that in general, we're mostly hamstrung in this situation, which is why I think Frank made the motion that he did, which is, you You know, an unorthodox one of we kind of have to pass it, but we don't like it and we think it should be more communication. I guess I just like everybody on the that's getting ready to vote to think about this. You know, I appreciate Tracy's comments. I'm not sure that I got a good sense that this meets with the comprehensive plan. So if I'm if I'm the only one that feels that way, I'm happy just to vote against or not support it. But I was just wondering if the sense of the commission, and it's hard to do by Zoom. It's much easier when you're together. You can get a read on people's faces. But is the sense of the commission that this does meet the comprehensive plan? So we're in discussion phase after motion has been made and seconded. Anyone want to share their thoughts? Yes, ma'am. I'm inclined to agree with Patrick. That's why I brought up, I mean, we are requesting heavily that the developers in our community meet with the neighborhood to help, if you will, put aside some of the fears and to give a clearer understanding for the neighbors of what is going on around them. You know, things affect property values. Things affect, you know, we've all been through mental anguish with COVID and dealing with all that. And these kinds of things also affect people's peace and happiness in their homes and in their yards and in their neighborhood. And so, you know, I'm inclined to lean with Patrick because I just don't feel it meets the comprehensive plan because this is something that we have required of other builders and other developers. We require it of infill. And so I'm really wrestling with this one. So there's my thought. I got a question. This is for the staff. Is the school board required to come and sit down with the planning staff and show them a development plan and work through connectivity issues and all the things that everybody else does? Is that what happens? No, they are not required to do that, but they do usually approach the division of planning prior to selecting a site to discuss other land uses in an area. And in fact, their facilities committee, I guess, does also have a member of our staff. Chris Woodall sits on that committee for the division of planning. And so we do have discussions consistently about population changes and student shifts for different areas where we know new schools are going to be needed. So there's an ongoing conversation about schools, but there's no specific requirement that they bring in a development plan to the division of planning or review. Are they required to meet with the neighborhood at all? that would be a board of education standard again we encourage on all levels with the zone change process encourage public engagement and we're going to have a presentation about that but it's not mandated and this development plan for their schools meets a good number of other goals and objectives and policies of our comprehensive plan. If I may, I think, Melinda, I think we've stopped discussion. This is between the planning commission members itself. But let me say to follow up with what Ms. Wade was just saying, with the transparency part of what we are thinking and talking about, that is for a zone map amendment or a zone change request. Unfortunately, this is not that. So, you know, it's not governed under those same things, unfortunately, whether you like it or not. Do I think there should be more communication and transparency? I do, and that's one reason I've been highly recommending more communication and more follow-up. and about the only thing we can do is recommend that if we go forward. And each person has their own determination as to whether this meets the comprehensive plan. So that's pretty much where we are. Any other discussion? Yes, Ms. Blumley and then Mr. Wilson. Thank you. So this is, you know, we already the carts before the horse, but could we not at this meeting, but in a future meeting, because it would be drawn by legal, pass a resolution recommending some of the suggestions that made here today about speak to neighbors, notification process. that way the neighbors would not they would be they would feel like they were part of the process they may not have it the building may not change still be tall or short or whatever and the trees would still be gone whatever but at least they would feel like they were part of the process if they just were notified and and had better communication thanks Mr. Wilson, go ahead. Sorry. Go ahead. Can you all hear me? Yes, sir. Okay. My perspective on this is my heart is with the neighborhood on this, but I think we have gone beyond the scope of what we can do. The only thing I think we could do, I think it is in compliance with the comprehensive plan. I think what we should do is approve it. But I think I like Mr. Ken's suggestion, and that is to make a recommendation that goes along with it. But I think for the most part, there's nothing that we can do legally. And I don't believe there's enough here to suggest that this is not in compliance with the comprehensive plan. okay so anyone else before uh ask for a vote i need to repeat the motion motions for approval uh with reservations and recommendation for uh revisiting with the council oh tracy what tracy jones just before you do that i just wanted to clear up something in regard to both miss plumley question and Mr. Wilson's suggestion. You all are looking as you do in all these public facility reviews to make a recommendation about the compliance with the comprehensive plan. It's not a zone change and the school board sets their own procedures and processes for how they take public input on their projects and things. So and ours are not mandated. They're reported to you. They're strongly encouraged, but I'm not sure those are the elements of the comprehensive plan that you're looking at for whether or not this is compliant. But as part of a motion to approve or find it in compliance with the comprehensive plan, you can make recommendations. You can, you know, suggest what Mr. Paul suggested. You can suggest other things. But, But bear in mind that the school board is also a sovereign entity, so they don't have to follow all those recommendations, but they can certainly be made as part of your findings. But you would need to do it today in this motion. I'm going to call for a vote. The motion was made by Mr. Penn and seconded by Mr. Bell. I do presume to think for approval that it does meet the comprehensive plan with reservation concerns and the recommendation to reach out to neighbors again. We'll call for a vote at this time. All those in favor, please raise your hand. Please keep your hand raised for as long as possible. We'll need to note all of this down in our systems. So is it. All Brewer and Monday? Yes. So thank you. All opposed? Mr. Brewer and Mr. Monday. So the motion does pass. What are we? 11 or 10? 11 of us, so it's 9 to 2. So the motion did pass. Thank you, everyone, applicants and neighbors alike. Thank you to the panelists. so you will now be removed from this hearing. Ms. Wade, would it be appropriate for us now to go back to the performance bonds and letters of credit? Yes, please. You can tell them where it is. Yes, Mr. Chair, I'm going to share the performance bonds and letters of credit on our screen now. We have three dated to the month of June, back to the month of April, and jumping over to the month of May. I apologize for the jumping around there. You should have each of these within the documents that you have received previously. They're on Google Drive. Okay. So we do have three sets from April, May, and June for the performance bonds letter of credit. I will stop sharing now. Okay. And any questions? If not, I'll entertain a motion for approval of this. Anyone? Bruce? Yes, sir. I recommend approval. I was yawning. I recommend approval for the performance bonds and letters of credit. And do we have a second? Second. Seconded by Mr. Wilson. So the motion was for approval of performance bonds letter of credit of April, May, and June. Mr. B. Nickel and seconded by Mr. Wilson. All those in favor, please raise your hand. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. We do have another item. amendments to the 2020 meeting and filing schedule. Sorry. Can you, before we get to that, which I believe falls on the next page, there's one more item. I did pass over that. Oh, we've got a couple other things. I'm sorry. At the bottom of page six, bottom of page 11, we've got a resolution for Public Engagement Toolkit, what we commonly learn affectionately as a pet project. I believe Samantha Castro may have a brief presentation. Hi. Yes, Ms. Casper is here as well as I believe Mr. Woodall is available towards the end of the presentation. um so i will go ahead and share my screen um i get the you know i get the benefit of um coming after um everything that was just said and to talk about the good feeling stuff of um meaningful engagement um and how we do meaningful engagement uh this won't necessarily be new to uh anyone on Planning Commission, but we're kind of doing this to put a nice bow on it and because we have lots of members of the public with us here today. And so again, I'm Samantha Castro. I'm a senior planner with long-range planning. So really this public engagement toolkit, the PET project, came out of the 2018 Imagine Lexington Comprehensive Plan, where we asked developers to hold meaningful engagement before they even came in with their applications. And of course, that then generated questions of what do you mean by meaningful engagement? And so as we kind of got rolling with this project of how to answer that for developers, we realized that there are really three outcomes that were going to come out of this. It was offering the developers that they needed to understand and to guide them. It was to empower residents a little bit better, on understanding our planning process. And then it was also to provide you all as the members of the planning commission with a baseline kind of what you can expect for engagement. And we did this as a relatively quick burn of a project, really kicking off last October and now kind of culminating in the resolution, which Chris Woodall will present to you in a few minutes. really because we needed to answer the developers quickly on what exactly we meant by that. So this was, we had a really great advisory panel, 19 members that came from both neighborhood interests and the development community. They were folks that were deeply embedded in our process as well as people that didn't really know much about what planning did. We had folks that were from the profit side and the nonprofit side, and they were really a very engaged group and wonderful to work with. And all of the recommendations came from them. And the Division of Planning were really just their authors, but they were the ones that were generating all of the ideas for us. So I just want to quickly run through the highlights of each section. In the first section, we're kind of asking the developer to ask themselves, you know, how much potential influence on the project are they willing to provide the public? And the counter to that is how much influence is the community expecting to have? And really what the consequences would be if they underperformed on that. The toolkit really highlights that there is no one solution to how to do engagement. And what I'm showing you here is the spectrum of public participation. It's kind of a common standard for public engagement, ranging from the inform category, which is really just providing the public with information, which is what we already do as the Division of Planning when we send out our our notification letters, all the way over to the far right, which is empowerment, which doesn't necessarily apply for planning and zoning processes, because these are still, it's still a matter of private property. So what we're asking is for the applicants to fall somewhere between consulting and collaborating, and really just fostering an open dialogue and a sense of community buy-in. Some of the factors that we really tried to think about were one of the things that came up almost immediately was the need for if you have a contentious or complex process or project to bring in an unbiased third-party facilitator which is even somebody that is outside the division of planning, somebody that is completely new and has no stake in the project. And some other things that we really drew out of this was that the community wants more access to get to speak directly to the developers and to the designers of these projects so that they can understand a little bit better where they're coming from and what the decisions were that got them to the point that they're at. In the notification section, we really focused on how to notify citizens early when projects are coming about. And, you know, as we just heard, this is really a critical issue in how we move forward is letting people know early enough that they can respond and that we really need a multi-pronged approach. So a single mailing isn't the answer. It needs to come from all different sources because that's where we get our news and our briefings from are from a variety of places. We just kind of gave a brief list of meeting notification methods from low-tech to high-tech, but really in this case it's the more the better. So just trying to get the word out in every platform that you can. And in terms of informational materials, it doesn't just end at, okay, we had our one initial engagement meeting and now we're done we check that box no it needs to be more about having the community feel like they're a part of the process throughout even once they get their application in is how to keep them involved all the way up through you know through planning commission and through council we provided the developers some ideas of how if they had a kind of more complex project, some ways that they could get their message out, as well as resources that the Division of Planning uses to get information out to the public, like our Building Eye and our SELA Citizens portal. Really, our most robust section was the in a meeting section, and we really tried to help outline, you know, soup to nuts, how to host a meeting. And we created a step-by-step guide to meeting planning for both in-person and digital formats, including providing templates for meeting materials. We wanted to give some additional considerations to people of how to make their meetings more inclusive, as well as kind of how to keep your meeting going in the direction you want it to go. and establishing etiquette rules and codes of conduct for everyone that's attending a meeting. And also, you know, in the yellow column on the right is just things, you know, a list of frequent concerns that every developer should be prepared to answer because most likely you will get asked these questions. We also came back over the past month and added a few pages that dealt specifically with online meetings and online formats, kind of how we're having to deal with everything after COVID. And so this really has to do with, I think we've all now been on Zoom calls and webinars, where you realize that it takes an entire team of people, instead of just one person to make one of these meetings run smoothly. And so it's knowing and assigning members of these teams and kind of explaining how that works. It's also thinking about how we change things based on limitations. A lot of people are viewing these online meetings now on iPads or even on their phones. So you have to even think about having less content for each slide, having them be higher contrast. It's very difficult to read the room on a Zoom meeting. So there's a tendency to ramble. We all do it. But it's, you know, just to be aware that, that you can't see faces and body language and see when people are starting to get bored or nod off or, or getting angry or might have a question. So it's working your way around that. And then it's also an issue of equity. There's some, some things that we still need to work out on the equity side, where, you know, There will be people that can't, they've run out of data for the month or they don't have access to quality Wi-Fi. So how do we ensure that we are keeping everyone involved? We have just provided a list of some options for ways that you can meet, different kinds of meeting types. and then kind of group them by what phase of the project you're in. And these are just really jumping off points, but we're hoping that it gets us past just kind of the standard meeting where somebody gets up at a podium and talks at people in the room, but really gets everyone more involved. And then this last section was turning the focus inwards on how we as the division of planning can help in this process. And so one of the first and foremost ways that we're doing this is we've started beta testing, what we're calling the development snapshots. And these are kind of in place of sending the average citizen to our Acela platform, which is geared towards the applicant and towards the developer. Instead, we're hoping that these simple, reliable, and consistent, you know, one-page handouts will allow people to glean the information that they are kind of most interested in or curious about. And then if they want to delve deeper, there will be the link to the Acella platform. And that we can use this to supplement our notification materials and, you know, it can be used at meetings and passed around. Um, we've also started creating these, I think, hopefully everybody's seen them now. We've been using one page information sheets for all of our committee meetings. So technical review committee subdivision zoning committee, as well as these planning commission meetings. and it really helps anyone that's new to a meeting they can understand you know the purpose of that specific meeting who is in the room where the meeting falls in the overall process and then kind of what what comes next in that process and then we're also really trying hard on our end to to pump up our educational component piece And so that's, we've started working on these planning frequently asked questions videos. The first one that we're tackling is how, what is Acela and how do you, how do you basically enter an application in Acela as well as kind of just a primer for the community of like, I've heard about this Acela thing. How do I use it? How do I look up a plan on there? But we have a very robust list of topics that we want to cover in these planning videos. And I think we're all really excited about that. We're also hoping to offer a lot more kind of on-demand talks to interested groups like neighborhoods and community organizations. You know, we're always open to going out into the community and meeting with anyone about whatever they want to talk about. And we have some other really interesting, I think, educational components that will be coming down the line that I'm just going to kind of hint at now, but hopefully we'll get approved and be able to roll out shortly. um but given all that planning staff will always be your best and most current and up-to-date resource so always always always reach out to planning staff if you have a pressing question um and with that i'm going to wrap up my piece and um hand it over to uh chris woodall to um to discuss the resolution with you all. All right. Thank you, Sam. Mr. Chair, members of the commission, good to see you all again. Can everybody hear me? Okay. I see a couple of head nods. All right, then. Okay. Good deal. Good deal. Well, going way back to the beginning stages of the formation of this comprehensive plan, public engagement has always been a really important part of what we're talking about. And so I know it's been something that's been on the Planning Commission's mind a lot. So we see this as being an exciting day and taking the next step in providing some guidance from the Planning Commission on what meaningful engagement actually means. You know, we're going to be validating the hard work of the committee. That was a very diverse committee that worked on this project. And so we're excited to bring you the resolution. Talk to you a little bit about how we got here. So this was first brought to you all as a project that was being undertaken in September of last year. And from there, our committee worked from October through February of this year to work on all these recommendations. And again, as Sam said, it was a phenomenal advisory committee made up of a very diverse set of folks, neighborhood interest, development interests, and a bunch of other folks in there too. So we're really excited about that process. We brought it to you February 20th at your work session where we sort of introduced it to you, and you heard from some of those committee members that were there. We actually had some other folks in attendance as well in support. Then COVID-19 happened. And so we took a little bit of a break, but it gave us an opportunity to look at some of our digital recommendations for our digital format meetings. And so it was pretty important for us to sort of fill out that section a little bit. And we brought that to you at your work session last month. Also, we presented to last month the draft of the resolution. You all had some really good feedback for us on that resolution. And so we've made some changes to it. You all have should have already received that and have access to it. But first, I'm going to go through a couple of the changes that we made. And then what I'd like to do is sort of read it from A to Z for the folks who are in attendance so that they could, or listening in so that they can hear the resolution. And then we'll pass it back over to you all, of course, if you have any questions for us or if you'd like to take your official action at that point. So if you look at the resolution, the whereas statements number three, four, and five relating to... Chris, would you like me to share screen the resolution or do you have that? I don't have it with me. I'll pull it up right now. That'd be fine. That'd be fine. I'll wait just a second while Hal gets that on the screen. You should be seeing it now. And just tell me when to scroll. Okay. We're going to be on page one of three. Whereas statements three, four, and five there toward the middle of the page where it says, whereas stakeholders. There we go. That's fine right there. So what we've done here is in our discussions last time we had some some language that said we the stakeholders and developers must must acknowledge. So one of the recommendations out of this commission was that we wanted to keep it in the spirit of the recommendation as opposed to a mandate, which I understand. And so instead of must acknowledge, you'll see we've got language here that says should understand. You know, we went with should understand as opposed to must acknowledge for the again, trying to emphasize that it's a recommendation. But also kind of it has a connotation of a deeper level of empathy for the different parties involved instead of just acknowledging that they have a concern. So we went with should understand as the language there. Those three statements have also been reorganized just for flow. So that's just for your information. Also, the third, let's see, the third whereas statement that says, whereas stakeholders and developers should understand that the use of individual property can have far-reaching impacts to the broader community. The statement there used to say action on an individual property can have far-reaching impacts. we decided to go with use of an individual property because that would have again it would convey that the status quo use of a property can also have broader implications on a community so we made that change as well then down at the very bottom where you get to the resolve section section one, how this will be on page two of three, section one, where it says that it has, let's see here, the Planning Commission acknowledges this public engagement toolkit to be the best practice guidance for conducting meaningful engagement as called for in Imagine Lexington and strongly recommends its use in all future development applications. That's consistent with the place builders use of strongly recommending. We moved the language from recommends to strongly recommends upon your all's recommendation at our last work session. And so that is the very last change that you should see on the document. So Hal, if you want want to go back up to the top, I will read through the resolution and I will go through this as quickly as we can. A resolution acknowledging the public engagement toolkit as best practice for conducting and or participating in meaningful engagement throughout the development process in Lexington. Whereas, infill and redevelopment discussions have become increasingly difficult across the United States, Kentucky, and Lexington. And whereas, increased communication early and often in the development process can identify issues that may be able to be resolved prior to a public hearing to the benefit of the community, stakeholders, and the developer creating a less contentious process. And whereas stakeholders and developers should understand that the use of individual property can have far-reaching impacts to the broader community. And whereas developers should understand that change is difficult for stakeholders. And whereas stakeholders should understand that developers require profitability to provide employment and economic development. And whereas theme F, goal one of Imagine Lexington in the 2018 comprehensive plan, Imagine Lexington calls for increased engagement for the residents of Lexington Fayette County in the planning process. And whereas theme D, placemaking policy seven of Imagine Lexington calls for a more collaborative pre-development process, incorporating community feedback before development is formally submitted for review. And whereas the place builder element of the of Imagine Lexington strongly encourages meaningful engagement between applicants and stakeholders for design and visioning for a development before the process begins. And whereas an advisory committee of 19 participants representing a broad range of interests including land developers, neighborhood representatives, realtors, affordable housing industry leaders. Attorneys, former council members, and others convened for four months to define meaningful engagement and make recommendations for how to achieve it within the development process. And whereas best practices from across the nation were consulted and reviewed as part of the advisory committee process, and whereas the ideas generated from the advisory committee, the research on nationwide best practices and planning staff expertise combined to produce the Public Engagement Toolkit, first presented to the Planning Commission at Work Session on February 20, 2020, and again with expanded language relating to digital media recommendations at Work Session on May 21, 2020, and finally at a public meeting on June 11, 2020. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Planning Commission Section 1 that this Planning Commission acknowledges the Public Engagement Toolkit to be best practice guidance for conducting meaningful engagement as called for in Imagine Lexington and strongly recommends its use in all future development applications. Section 2, the Director of the Division of Planning is directed to forward this resolution and the documents mentioned herein to the Lexington Fayette Urban County Council for its information and use. Section 3, that this resolution shall become effective on the date of its passage. Passed June 11, 2020. so with that mouthful then I will hand it back over to you Mr. Chair and any questions that you all might have about this process again we're looking forward to hopefully putting a bow on this thing and validating the the work of the committee thank you Chris thank you Chris um in lieu of time I'm gonna wait on any questions and hear from everybody anybody that wants to speak on this first. I think we have one or two. Ladies and gentlemen of the public, if you could please now raise your hand digitally. We will have you recognized and we will allow you to speak at this time. Mr. Walter Gaffield, I am now allowing you to speak. Please unmute yourself and go ahead and enter into the conversation. One, thank you, Walt, and anyone else. In the interest of time, I will end this to three minutes each. I'll make this quick. I want to commend staff and the committee for a lot of really good things. I think early information is something the neighborhood council has advocated for a long time. I think transparency is really important. I think the development snapshot is a significant improvement for neighborhoods to understand what is being proposed. I think expanded inclusion is a really good idea. I think one of the goals of this is to expand communication so that neighborhoods and developers don't get into fights because it's not good for neighborhoods. It's not good for developers. It's not good for the planning commission and it's not good for the city council. uh the one the one thing in it that i would at some point try to improve is that the proposal uh essentially uh suggests a really large meeting and just inviting everybody let the developer make a uh presentation on on the on the proposal and then take to and then discuss it and then proceed from there. If I were a developer with a proposal for a development, one of the first things I would do would be to go to the homeowners association or the neighborhood association, which are basically elected bodies and function in planning and zoning issues. In fact, the problems primarily that the commission has and the council has is almost all of the disputes involve neighborhoods and homeowners association and I think it would be better if it at least included that thanks very much thank you Mr. Gaffield Mr. Gaffield I am going to uh demote you back to being an attendee and then uh first we have Mr. Richard Murphy I am promoting you to talk Mr. Murphy if you could unmute yourself go right ahead okay I'm Dick Murphy I appreciate the chance to talk I have three main concerns with this. One is this is a very detailed list of items and what it is essentially is a 57-page guide as to what I as an attorney or the other attorneys have to do to present a case to you. I know there was one attorney on the advisory panel, but it recommends engagement, engaging the stakeholders. But I think I was discussing this with Mr. Nicholson this morning. We haven't been engaged in this and we haven't had a chance to talk about it until the day you're going to take the vote on it. I think it would have been better to engage us at the beginning. I think we could have had some input into this. We see some issues we disagree with. but the I don't know if this has been voted on by the advisory committee or not before it came to you but it's been vetted through an advisory committee without much input from others. Second one is that if you approve this on a resolution it elevates it to a higher official status and it moves from suggestions to almost requirements. Now maybe some of these work in some instances. In many instances though your hearings are going to deteriorate into a discussion of well how many meetings did you have? Did you go out and put door hangers on doors? Did you post a notice? Did you have an ad? Did you do it this here? Did you do it this way? This other way. I think it's too detailed. I think the idea of engagement is good, but sometimes it gets too detailed and you're going to hear a lot of those details. Third thing I have is that I'm afraid that the small property owner, small developer is getting shut out of the business here. This is a 57-page document. We've got a long, comprehensive plan. And I've talked to some smaller people who have just backed off when they hear that how long it's going to take and the cost it's going to take and it costs more through this process. So those are my concerns. I'd like to see it discussed a little bit more with maybe some more of the stakeholders and not take a vote today. But that's where I am. So thank you for hearing my comments. Thank you, Mr. Murphy. We're going to disable their function to speak, and then we'll be shifting over to Mr. Nick Nicholson. Nick, go ahead and unmute yourself and go ahead and speak. Thanks, guys. Like Dick just kind of got into, I got a whole lot of concerns regarding moving forward at this time, and I'm happy to get into those concerns. I know I couldn't do it in three minutes because I have legal concerns. I got practicality concerns. And honestly, I got, you know, concerns that there wasn't meaningful engagement on the toolkit that's supposed to define meaningful engagement. And so out of respect for your all's time, you know, I just ask that we not move forward with this today and give us a chance to kind of be able to submit written comments at the very least. Because I think everyone agrees that we're trying to do this in order to make sure that this is in the best interest of our community. And we have to have a full public discussion on what potentially are kind of wholesale changes in the planning and zoning process. and we just listened to the commission you know get after the Fayette County Public Schools for not engaging stakeholders I'd kind of like to be able to hold up a mirror right now because that's what we're asking you all to do right now I'm happy to get into some of these concerns if you want me to go into detail but you know just I'd like the opportunity to at least submit some comments and kind of work with everybody before we make this this wholesale change official thank Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Nicholson. We're going to disable your talking function. And Mr. Chair, I don't see any other individuals currently raising their hand. If there is someone in the public that would like to speak on this resolution, we have Ms. Sarah Grant raising her hand. Ms. Grant, I'm allowing you to speak at this time. If you can go ahead and unmute yourself, go right ahead. Great. Thank you. I listened to the presentation. I thought those were great ideas. I think if any of those things had been done in this situation with this new school construction, we'd be in a whole different situation. And I really agree that, you know, the way that things are done when there's not proper planning and bringing in the stakeholders, even if it takes a little bit longer, that it creates animosity among the neighbors themselves. You know, because some people are for it. Some people are against it. There hasn't been a consensus. and animosity towards the school system. So I just want to say that I thought those are some great ideas that were shared, and I appreciate that. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Grant. Thank you, Ms. Grant. I'm going to be disabling your option to speak. And then anyone else that would like to speak on this resolution, please raise your hand now. Mr. Chair, I'm not seeing any others. Thank you. questions from the commission after that i'm going to go back to chris woodall or into our samantha castro for a moment uh mr nickel okay i do have a question um can we use the public engagement toolkit without a resolution um it's explain to me what the purpose of the resolution is number one and number two make a comment on mr murphy's um thoughts that actually approving this resolution would elevate um the pet from strongly recommend maybe to something that man that's mandate mandated or require so those are my two questions with the mind hopefully you all understand i think it's a great it's a great um uh product to help people interact in this process but i'm always concerned that strongly recommended becomes mandated or required um okay before chris before you get started uh any other questions we'll collectively bring them to you any other questions uh graham uh i i'd like to hear a staff's uh response to the suggestion that the uh attorneys were left out of the process okay anyone else miss mundy Let me see. Okay, I'm unmuted. Yay. Okay, I have a couple of questions and one concern I want to throw out there. And of course, I'm always concerned about cost. When you start bringing in mediators and that, and I've had to do it a few times in my business, they expect to get paid. So when you bring in that third party that is independent, you're looking at adding to the cost of the development. And again, that in light of even Mr. Murphy's comments, that does eliminate a lot of, not a lot, but some of the smaller guys who want to do developing in that. So, you know, I'm real concerned about us, as it's been said, elevating this thing and making it more specific. The other thing I'd like to hear is, I guess I'm still in a quandary as this goes forward, is what is a stakeholder? I would like to hear that definition. And then I, too, with Bruce, would like to understand how this elevation of putting this into a resolution, how that affects the community that's going forward, you know, the commitment that that further makes. So that's where I am. Chris, I hope you're taking notes. Anyone else? if not Chris all right there was a there was an awful lot there so if I'm forgetting something you'll remind me about it and we'll come back and touch on it a couple of the things the the reason we are bringing it forward as a resolution again is to validate the work of the committee we told the committee that this was going to be something that would be useful guidance. The language in the resolution still says that it strongly recommends. That is language that mirrors the place builder's recommendation that strongly recommended meaningful engagement. Both of those recommendations come from the planning commission. You all saying we want more meaningful engagement. That was the first thing. So we put that into the place builder as something that is strongly recommended. Then shortly thereafter, the question became, well, what is meaningful engagement? That came from everybody. That came from you all as the planning commission. That came from developers. That came from the neighborhoods. You're asking us to do something. What is it that you're asking us to do? And so we decided to take that collection of folks that represented a very good cross section of the community to have a focused discussion about what that is. So what the resolution does is it basically just says from the planning commission that you all have reviewed the document, that you agree that that is what we're talking about, what we're talking about, meaningful engagement. And so it's just an affirmation of that. But it is what it is, is still a strong recommendation to follow these procedures. To get to the question, too, about the, let's see, leaving the small guy out or the difficulty on the small projects, the public engagement toolkit is very clear that every project is different. There are more complex zone changes and there are less complex zone changes, and they all depend on the different circumstances. So each project that's going to go through may have a completely different look as to what that public engagement might be. And part of the reason why that document is so long is because it lays out, again, a menu of options that folks can pursue depending on the specifics of their project, depending on the specifics of the context of the neighborhood in which they're engaging. You know, everyone is different. And so that's why that's in there. And we feel like if you've got a small project that is going to have minimal impact to the neighborhood, that there's a strategy in there for you. And it's going to be less complex than one that's a lot more controversial. Talking about, you know, attorneys being included in this process, you know, we did have Nathan Billings, who's an attorney who represents both neighborhood interests and development interests from time to time. you see him quite frequently. So we did engage him on the process. I'm a little surprised to hear that we have some concerns from some folks that I haven't heard from during this process. You know, we've posted this online. It's been available since February of this year for about four months now online. And now is the first time we've heard any concerns or issues about that. But so that's what I have. I think I've hit on everything. But if you all have more questions, I'm happy to answer them. Karen, hold on one second. Samantha Castro, you raised your hand. Yeah, I just wanted to touch a little bit more on a couple of comments. For instance, the question about having a moderator or third-party facilitator, There is definitely a cost associated with that, but we're suggesting that on some of the most contentious projects. And I think having seen several in the past year, I think that a lot of those developers would have said that they would have rather paid the money to use a third-party mediator than have their project tanked and not go forward. um it's definitely not applicable on every project but um for some it it most certainly is to to talk through that um i think mr gaffield brought up some good points about contacting neighborhood associations and hoas but i think that there's also a much broader question of equity that we need to talk about um in the city of lexington and talk about all those folks that aren't represented by either a strong neighborhood association or HOA or one at all. And those people all deserve the same voice. So the question of who is a stakeholder, I think Mike Scanlon in our advisory group said it best, it's anyone who gives a darn about a project is a stakeholder. It's not just the three people that live on the block. It's, you know, we're all invested in this community. And the document is, it is somewhat long. And we're really trying to do that to bring in the smaller guys to bring in the one time developers or the developers that aren't familiar with our process here in Lexington. We want to bring in more national developers to help boost the economy. And so to do that, you know, this just lays out a process, but I think you've all had a chance to look at the document and see that while it might be 50 plus pages, it's very graphic. It's easy to read and get through. It is not text heavy. It is supposed to be simple and easy to use. Thank you, Samantha. I want to come back to you in just a second. Karen, hold on one moment. Nick Nicholson, one more comment. Mr. Nicholson, we are allowing you to speak at this time. Thank you. And again, I'll be very brief. I just, I wanted to kind of, you know, counter a couple different things. The first is just that I first heard that this document exists this week. I knew that the pet project had been going on and that there was advisory committee, but I first found out this document actually exists this week. It was Amy Clark who alerted it to me of all people. And she raised, I talked to her for an hour yesterday and raised great concerns. And I believe that the Fayette County Neighborhood Association has at least sent in a letter. I'm not sure, but that's at least what I heard. We shared these same concerns about this document as it exists, not the concept of it, but as it exists today. And to my knowledge, this is the first time this has ever appeared on the Planning Commission agendas. I can't find your all's work session packets anywhere online. So I didn't know about that this was going on. And some of the kind of comments that both Chris and Samantha just kind of pointed out about how broad the kind of alternatives are for different types of development, that really gets at one of my biggest concerns, is that we will hear at every zone change hearing that has oppositions that they will not feel that they were meaningful engaged because they'll be able to point out different aspects of the toolkit that were not utilized, whether that be video ads, whether that be hangers on doors or signs, they'll be able to point to something unless everything is done. And if we've now just determined that Mr. Penn was indicating that meaningful engagement is now a key factor and whether compliance with the comprehensive plan goes into it, we need to have a discussion about how we have defined unilaterally what meaningful engagement means. And I'm very respectful of the committee and their time, but that isn't meaningful engagement to all the stakeholders. That's 19 people that actually looked at this document and really gave feedback. It's the first time the public has been able to comment on this at all. So I'll stop talking. I apologize for rambling. Just like Samantha said, it's tough to read through. Thank you, Nick. Karen Mundy, you had a question. No, you're off? Okay. Samantha, if you would pull up and put up the advisory committee. I think you have it on the slide, just so that everybody can see. I think there's several people there that would recognize the names. And then also two or three of that advisory committee did come and speak to us in a work session not too terribly long ago. And we have, to my recollection is that, we have been discussing this since February and in public meetings and work sessions. So there's your list. And if you can see, there's several that come before us from time to time even. On various, various, as an applicant or an attorney representing someone or a neighborhood council member or, you know. So anyway, I just wanted to share that. so Chris Samantha anything to add not at this time okay Sam why don't you go ahead and stop share so commission members we'll close the open discussion part and open it up for you all to comment and or we'll have a motion on this resolution Carolyn hold on one second me. Thank you. I should have asked this earlier, but are these meetings part of any of a legal record? Are they entered for future reference or what's the legality of all this? Mr. Woodoff? The planning commission meetings or the advisory committee meetings? No, when you meet with stakeholders, you go out to a neighborhood. And so what happens to, are these documented and do they come up later? Sam, you might be able to speak on that. Do we have specific recommendations on documentation of meetings? I know there's record keeping that's suggested about, you know, getting contact information and names and those sorts of things, just so people can remain informed on a project. but Sam, can you speak to that? I mean, I think there's nothing legally binding, but I think it's a kind of a matter of truth to it. If you say that you met with a neighborhood and you say there were 60 people there, those 60 people are gonna know if you were there or not. And they're not afraid, obviously, to get up in front of you all and say if that happened or not. I think that in terms of Nick's comment about having, you know, having too many items in the toolkit to pick from, we're really kind of leaning on the planning commission members to also understand a little bit about, you know, to make a judgment call on how much is applicable to each project, you know, how much outreach should there be. So that's a little bit where we're at. From our perspective, there's no legal requirement at this point that there be a public outreach meeting, but we do ask them when they submit their application. I noticed Hal stood up. We ask them what they've done and to submit any documentation related to that. So if they had a meeting, what day was it? How many people came? And they're supposed to summarize that in their zone change application. and then we include that in our staff report to you. Okay, so Bruce Neckel. Yes, my comment, one of the things Chris said made a lot of sense and kind of reminded me of the purpose for putting this document out. As we are sitting in the chambers listening to applicants, we often don't have a good definition for what meaningful engagement is. So this gives a broad range of different things that can be done to show that the applicant has been either meaningfully engaged or purposely not meaningfully engaged. so I think the document does a great job with that it's well done it's informative it's instructive and it does help us define and answer the question about meaningful engagement and my thoughts are like the place builder it does not you don't need to meet all of the requirements you can choose not to meet any of them or you can choose to meet as many as you can and I think if an applicant can articulate how and why they use this document, I think would make the planning commissioner's decision a little bit easier about understanding the meaningful engagement piece. With all that being said, my only concern is that I want the document to be there for people to be used, but if Mr. Murphy is correct by making this a resolution, if it then changes from strongly recommend to mandate or required i'm not comfortable with that so that's just those are my thoughts um this way yes ma'am yes tracy jones is here in the room with me and we were chatting while that question came up and you want me to get closer the resolution is a is a method for the planning commission to speak with one voice and then the content of the resolution really dictates your thoughts so if there's something in the resolution that is inconsistent with with what we've talked about or thought about or it's too strong or too wishy-washy it's up to the planning commission to direct how they want to as a collective voice direct developers and neighborhoods and stakeholders in our community. So the resolution is just a method for the commission to speak with one voice. Otherwise we have a, and I've been there before, we've had a public meeting and we get to the end and everybody has a different opinion and we have people in the room and they say, well, whose opinion matters most? And I can't tell them, well, you know, Bruce Nichols' opinion matters most because he's done development or Mr. Bell's opinion matters most because he's lived in Lexington his whole life. There's no way to weigh those except when you can speak with one voice. So that's, I think, why the staff opted to recommend a resolution to the Planning Commission. okay thank you Mr. Bell I really I respect very much the four months and that committee was an outstanding group of people yet I respect very much Mr. Murphy and Mr. Nicholson in their roles and I think what I try to do in my role is to try to find a balance somewhere in between with where we come together. I guess I have a question to Mr. Murphy, if he would just, was he not aware, was he not actually there at the February meeting? Was he not aware also that this was going on for four months? Mr. Murphy, you've been allowed to speak. Please go ahead and unmute yourself. I attended some of your work sessions. I was there for other items. I knew this was going on. I didn't know when it was coming up. Didn't have a copy of it. Well, it's difficult because here we are, we come to the end, and all of a sudden it seems like often, again, I respect y'all so very much, yet we come to the end when we're trying to come to some kind of conclusion, and that's when we hear from you, and that's frustrating. You know, I know, Nick, you're involved in every aspect of zoning and all those people, and I respect you very well. So my balance was that I'd love to be able to hear from those guys, you know, but if Mr. Murphy's been here and was aware of it, why do we wait until now to interject? So I wanted to ask that question, and it helps me in my decision-making. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Bell. Anyone else? Mr. Poe. Mr. Poe. uh yeah i i wanted to uh agree with many of the comments that have been made i wanted to uh note that the only resolution uh that has any teeth is that uh we're saying that the public engagement toolkit is best practice guidance it's not like it's gonna kill anybody to recognize that we have said that there is a document that is best practice guidance. And, you know, to me, it's a very, very helpful document. And the Planning Commission is not a bunch of kooks and nuts who can't make intelligent determinations about whether someone is doing their due diligence with regard to reaching out to the public. So I'm fully in support of this resolution. Thank you, Graham. Anyone else? Mr. Wilson. First, can I? You are. You're now muted again, sir. I'm on now, right? Yes, sir. Okay, well, thank you. First of all, I'm always reminded of the fact that means are not in words, but means are within people. So you can get a lot of people together and they can come up with a lot of different means. But the fact that you've got 19 people who have been working on a process for four months and they can come to some form of an agreement, in my mind, that keeps a volume for the process. Again, I like to remind people that this is simply what others have said before. This is a guiding tool to what we have as a comprehensive plan. It doesn't mandate anything, there's nothing legal about it, but it does recognize the work of 19 people with divergent views and opinions that have come together and said this is a document of best practice that could be used. There's no mandate to use it. You don't have to, but it's there on the table. What is bothersome about it is that four months have gone by, and again, I have to echo the sentiment of some of my colleagues, and no one has said anything about it going through this process. Now, officials may not have been notified by this or that, but it's hard for me to believe that with everything that goes on here, when everybody knows everything we do, that somebody did not know and that was not indicated to a group of people about what was going on and how we were proceeding with this particular activity. Now, with all that said, I support this document. I think the content is strong. I think it's good. I think it's usable. I think the graphics in it are sensitive. I think that's a good thing to have done and the way it was done is laid out. It's really easy to read and to negotiate and to navigate. And I think that the committee has done a superb job of four and a half months to put together a guiding document. Now, with that said, I would favor passing this, but if people have some different issues that they still would like to bring to the table, this is not like the Ten Commandments, not cast in stone, it can be revised and revamped accordingly. We do that in publishing all the time. But to wait to try to get everybody in the whole community, 320,000 people to agree on what is a stakeholder and what is this and what is meaningful, I think we're at a lost cause. We've never had anything out there. Heaven forbid, I hate to use this religious expression, but I don't think we would have ever had the Ten Commandments that we had a discussion like this. Thank you. Thank you, Moses Wilson. um anyone else otherwise i'm going to ask for a vote commission member wise if not uh i'm going to ask for a vote at this time for the resolution to be approved or we can send it back to the drawing board anyone like to approve graham poe uh he's made a motion for the approval if i may uh graham as craig uh chris woodall read it would be your statement yes that would be right thank you okay so we have a motion for approval for the resolution as chris what i'll read do we have a second mr wilson has seconded it so i'll call for a vote all those in favor please raise your hand Those opposed? You have one opposed, sir. We have one opposed, Karen Mundy. Thank you very much. So the motion passes. Are we still at 11 to 10 to 1? So we will move on. Top of page 12, finally, nomination committee. It's pretty much outlined there. What I will do here in just a moment, moment I'll ask for three volunteers to be on the nominating committee to present a slate for consideration and discussion at the work session next week and after that the commission members will be voting on those recommendations the first meeting in June which is July 9th. so at this time anyone interested in volunteering please raise your hand Carolyn Plumlee I need two others Anthony DeMoglin that's two I need one more anyone oh there's Larry Forrester okay we've got three we will let the three of y'all get together and one of you all can the three of y'all can vote on who's going to chair this and y'all can talk and come up with officers and then come back and visit work session next week next week yes that's correct the only reason for that is to allow for any open discussion prior to moving forward so any questions I think maybe the first person that volunteered should care. Well, hey, that's up to you all. Carolyn Flumley, Larry Forrester's not on his head too, so there you go. I hope he's not on his head for that reason. Moving on. So the nominating committee is Carolyn Flumley, Anthony DeMoglin, Larry Forrester. Thank you all very much. Moving on. Amendments to the 2020 meeting and filing schedule. If you will take note, it's for a special meeting July 16th to try and take care of the workload that is currently on the various agendas. So, Mr. Duncan, do you have anything to add? Mr. Chair, we have coordinated with the other applicants and we have an agenda already scheduled for that meeting should you all choose to schedule this meeting. So he's hopeful that you all choose to agree to that. So that is a Thursday. So I will ask for a motion to amend the 2020 meeting and filing schedule to allow for that July 16th meeting. Okay, we've got hands up all over the place. So Karen Mundy and Carolyn Plumlee made the motion and seconded. And Frank Penn was joining in. I presume that's what the hands being raised was for. Yes, ma'am. Okay. Thank you. So I'll ask for a vote for the amendment of the filing scheduled to allow July 16th. All those in favor, raise your hand. That motion passes unanimously. Thank you. I have been brought to my attention that we do have a celebrity on the commission these days. We do have a Larry Forrester as a celebrity, a local billboard celebrity. So if anyone's interested, I know he's on the corner of Russell Cave and New Circle Road. he may be at other places. So, any comments, Larry? Unmove him. I'm just happy no one's reported me yet. So, he'll be signing autographed at the end of the meeting. There you go. Step items. Improvement plan process. We've got two shown there. Anything to really report there, folks? Tracy? No, those actually, it's an error. Denise thought they were supposed to be infrastructure plans related to our two expansionary plans from today. So they shouldn't have been on them. Sorry about that. Okay, so thank you very much. Mr. Duncan, do you have anything else to add? Ms. Wade can give our final report. Ms. Wade, final report? it well thank you so much to everybody for um the last month and being so flexible about getting back into our planning commission meeting i can't thank you enough and um our next meeting will be thursday again it'll be a work session and we'll be on the zoom uh platform again then that's it from us so mike mike if i may ask what the july 16th when would that start did y'all have a time for starting that or it's 1 30 1 30 and then just goes on to whatever is that the idea or no it's a brand new meeting is what you're saying yeah it is there are three zone changes that will be scheduled for that day thank you we do have work session next Thursday and our zoning hearing at the end of the month that should be rather eventful I would join in with Tracy and say thank you to everyone for their participation and their patience. I dearly missed on my thought as far as the time on this. So it's 5 p.m. almost. I appreciate everyone staying around. So thank you very much. If no one has anything else, I can declare this meeting adjourned. I guess before you adjourn, Mike, I have, again, participated in all too many of these Zoom meetings over the last couple of months, and it's no mean feat to pull it off the way the staff has. So Hal, Tracy, everybody, you guys did a great job. Thank you. Thank you. Stephanie in the mix there. So everybody's worked hard on it, I'm sure. And thank you all for your diligence. So if nothing else, meeting adjourned. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.