Hey! Don't come around here no more Don't come around here no more Whatever you're looking for Hey! Don't come around here no more I'm giving up Stop I'm giving up Stop I'm giving up Stop I'm waiting any longer I'm giving up On its love Getting stronger Don't come around here no more Don't come around here no more Don't come around here no more Don't come around here no more Don't feel you anymore You're just getting around you Whatever you're looking for Don't come around here no more I'm giving up, stop I'm giving up, stop I'm giving up Stop your tango My emotion I'm giving up I ain't pleased It's been it's all I'm giving up Don't come around here no more Don't come around here no more Don't come around here no more Don't come around here no more Stop walking down my street Don't come around here no more. Who do you expect to meet? Don't come around here no more. And whatever you're looking for. Hey! Don't come around here no more. Hey! I need to Don't come around and run Whatever you're Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh I can't believe it Our song on the radio, but it don't sound the same When our friends talk about you, all it does is just tear me down Cause my heart breaks a little when I hear your name It all just sounds like ooh Too young, too dumb to realize That I should've bought you flowers And held your hand Should've gave you all my hours When I had the chance Take you to every, every party Cause all you wanted to do was dance Now my baby's dancing But she's dancing with another man My pride, my ego, my needs and my selfish ways Caused a good strong woman like you to walk out my life Now I never, never get to clean up the mess I made And it haunts me every time I close my eyes It all just sounds like ooh Too young, too dumb to realize That I should have bought you flowers And held your hand Should've gave you all my hours When I had the chance Take you to every party Cause all you wanted to do was dance Now my baby's dancing But she's dancing with another man Although it hurts I'll be the first to say that I was wrong Oh, I know I'm probably much too late To try and apologize for my mistakes But I just want you to know I hope he buys you a flower I hope he holds your hand Give you all his hours when he has the chance Take you to every party, cause I remember how much you loved to dance Do all the things I should've done when I was your man Do all the things I should've done when I was your man Two young people without a thing Say some vows and spread their wings And settle down with just what they need Living on love. She don't care about what's in style. She just likes the way he smiles. It takes more than marble and tile. Living on love. Living on love. Buying on time. Without somebody, nothing ain't worth a dime. Just like an old-fashioned storybook rhyme Living on love It sounds simple That's what you're thinking Love can walk through fire without blinking It doesn't take much When you get enough Living on love Thank you. Two old people without a thing Children gone but still they sing Side by side in that front porch swing Living on love He can't sue anymore She can barely sweep the floor Hand in hand they'll walk through that door Just living on love Living on love, buying on time Without somebody nothing ain't worth a dime Just like an old fashioned storybook ride Living on love It sounds simple, that's what you're thinking But love can walk through fire without blinking And it doesn't take much when you get enough Living on love You're living on love Buying on time without somebody Nothing ain't worth a dime Just like an old-fashioned storybook around Living on love It sounds simple That's what you're thinking But love can walk through fire Without blinking And it doesn't take much You get enough Living on love No, it doesn't take much When you get enough Living on love The End I hope that she turns out to be Someone who'll watch over me I'm a little lamb who's lost in the wood I know I could, could always be good To one who'll watch over me Although I may not be the man some girls think of As handsome, but to her heart, I'll carry the key. Won't you tell her please to put on some speed, follow my lead. Oh, how I need someone to watch over me. Won't you tell her please To put on some speed Follow my lead Oh, how I need Someone to watch over I'm a woman's man, no time to talk. Music loud, when it was a thing kicked around, just how it was gone. Never thought I'd run, that's okay. And you may look the other way But we can try to understand New York times a big, don't be Whether you're a brother or a wife Whether you're a mother You're staying alive, you're staying alive We're the city breaking and everybody shaking But you're staying alive, you're staying alive Ah, ah, ah, ah Staying alive, you're staying alive Ah, ah, ah, ah Staying alive Oh, I'm waiting for you But now I get along when I get high And if I can't get in, I'll be the tribe I'm a weak old man, but I'm on my shoes I'm a dancer man, and I just can't lose Now it's all right, it's okay I'd like to see another day Witnesses cry, wonders, baby Through your times, I'm in my man Whether you're a brother or wife Whether you're a mother, you're staying alive Stayin' alive Feel the city breaking and everybody shaking And we're stayin' alive, stayin' alive Ah, ah, ah, ah Stayin' alive, stayin' alive Ah, ah, ah, ah Stayin' alive Ah, ah, ah, ah Ah, ah, ah, ah Ah, ah, ah, ah Ah, ah, ah, ah Ah, ah, ah, ah, ah I'm not going nowhere, somebody help me, somebody help me, yeah. I'm not going nowhere, somebody help me, yeah. You can't tell by the way I use my walk, I'm a woman's man, no time to talk. Music, love, a little bit warm, I mean kick to rest Cause I was born, yeah, it's alright, it's okay You may look the other way But we can try to understand New York times are meant to fail When you're a brother or whatever you're in, you're staying alive, staying alive Feel the city breaking and everybody shaking and you're staying alive, staying alive Ah, ah, ah, ah, staying alive, staying alive Stayin' alive Somebody help me I'm not going nowhere Somebody help me Somebody help me I'm not going nowhere Somebody help me I'm going nowhere Somebody help me Somebody help me I'm going nowhere Somebody help me I'm going nowhere. Somebody help me. Somebody help me, yeah. I'm going nowhere. Somebody help me, yeah. I'm going nowhere. Thank you. Tell me gently Let me down The easy way Make me feel You still love me If it's just Just for one more day Break it to me gently So my tears, my tears won't fall to fail If you must go, then go slowly Let me love you till the end Love we share for so long It's a too big part of me You must take your loving ways Take it gradually Break it to me gently Give me time, oh give me a little time to be in the pain And you must go, then go slowly Cause I'll never, never be Oh, you must take your lovely way Make it better with me And make it to me gently Give me time Oh, give me a little time Ooh, hey Love me just Thank you. Okay. Good afternoon, everyone. This is now 132, October 8th, 2020. Welcome, everyone, to the Urban County Planning Commission Subdivision Items Meeting. We're going to call this meeting to order. First up, I just want to read the excerpt here. Due to COVID-19 pandemic, state of emergency and Governor Steve Bishere executive orders regarding social distancing, this meeting is held via teleconference pursuant to Senate Bill 150 assigned by the governor on March 30th, 2020, and Attorney General Opinion 20-05, and in accordance with KRS 61.826, because it is not feasible to offer a primary location for the meeting. Next on the agenda item, that's number two. We don't have any minutes, but I would like to kind of move through the agenda and pick up the performance bonds and letter of credits. Did everyone get a copy of those in their Google Drive? Okay. And I would need a motion for approval or questions about. I move for approval. We have a motion on the floor of Mr. Penn and second by Mr. Bell. Any discussion to that motion? All in favor please raise your hand. Thank you. Next up staff any postponements or withdrawals? I do believe we have had one request and that representative may be in the attendees currently. We have several hands raised at the moment. We will start with Mr. Murphy. Mr. Murphy, you've been promoted. If you'd like to go ahead and speak about your postponement, please. Mr. Murphy, if you can hear us, you can go ahead and start your audio and video, please. I'm back to Mr. Murphy. While we're waiting on Mr. Murphy, I will go ahead and promote Mr. Rory Kaley. Mr. Kaley, you've been promoted. If you'd like to go ahead and start your audio and video, please. Good afternoon. Rory Kaley with EA Partners for postponements. If we could start. We can start on page two under development plans. Major development plan 19-74 the Blackford property, phase four, request of one month homeless postponement to November 12th. I need to get out there and get the signs corrected. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Rod. Any questions? I will take a motion for a one-month postponement. Ms. Plumlee? Thank you. Move postponement of PLNMJDP 1974 Blackford property to November the 12th. Thank you. We have a second to that motion. Mr. Demovelin, we have a second. Any discussion? I see none. All in favor, raise your hand. Okay, unanimous. Thank you. And I also have one on another page. Bear with me here a second. All right, sorry. Page three, item B. This is Major Development Plan 20-29 Lexington Mall property. Request a one-month postponement to the November 12th meeting as well. Okay, we have a request for one month postponement for the Lexington Mall property. We have a motion for the Honorable R. Ms. Plumlee? Thank you. Move postponement of PLNMJDP 2029 Lexington Mall property until November the 12th. Motion. Second. I'm Mr. Movelin. All in favor, please raise your hand. Thank you. Thank you very much. Are those all of your postponements, Mr. Kaley? We'll be demoting you now then. Thank you. Mr. Wilson, has this name? Yes, sir. Are you on mute? The reason, did they provide a reason as to why they wanted a postponement? On the second one. On the first one. What about the second one? The same reason as the first one, but we can. Okay. That's all right. No problem. We can promote him again. Promote him. Hold on, Mr. Wilson. No, let's get that answer. That's fine. Mr. Taylor, you're muted right now. There we go. the reasons is that there's several discussion items that we're still trying to work out with the new owners. Mr. Wilson, is that satisfactory? Yeah, Mr. Chairman, that's all we just needed for the record. No, no, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Next we will promote Chris Clendenin. Mr. Clendenin, you've been promoted. If you'd like to start your audio and video, please. Okay, this is Dick Murphy. I'm using Chris Clendenin's video because I'm having technical difficulties. And so on page 8, item N, in the middle of the page, PLN MJDP 20-00060, Sand Lake and Estes Properties, Section 2, Lot 2, Amended, 109 Sand Lake Drive. We're requesting a postponement until your October 22nd meeting. The reason for that is we uncovered a couple weeks ago a note on an old development plan saying that prior to hearing any final development plan, we needed to give notice to adjoining neighbors within 400 feet. We found out that after we were closer than 21 days to today's hearing, but we have sent that out timely for the October 22nd meeting. Okay. Do we, any other questions or concerns, Mr. Wilson? No concern. I was going to make a motion if you wanted to. Yes, sir. Then in that case, Mr. Chairman, I move that we postpone PLN MJDP 20-60 Sand Lake and Estes property section 2 until October the 22nd. If we have a second on the table, Ms. Plumlee, all in favor, please raise your hand. Thank you. Thank you. Next we will promote Mr. Don Winters. Mr. Winters, you've been promoted. If you'd like to go ahead and show your audio and video, please. While we're waiting on Mr. Winters to join us, let's move on to Mr. Scott Southall. Mr. Southall, you've been promoted. If you'd like to start your audio and video, please. Yes, thank you. Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, I'd like to direct your attention to page 7, item K, PLN, MJDP, 200057, Griffingate Office Park, amended. it like to request a one month postponement. We are in discussion with the owner and with staff in terms of the best way to proceed on this project. Okay. Thank you. Any discussions to Mr. Southall's request? I seen any to obtain any motion. Mr. Chairman, I move to one month post-pandemic. It will be November the 12th. Yes, sir. That's correct. PLNNJDP 2057. I'll put it for November the 12th. Okay, we have a motion and a second by Ms. Plumlee. All in favor, please raise your hand. Okay. Unanimous. Thank you. Ms. Barstow, did you raise your hand on that one? Okay. All right. Just making sure. Thank you. Okay, Mr. Chair, at this time, if John Winters is present, if you could go ahead and start your audio and video, please. It indicated that you had your hand raised. Next we'll promote Mr. Brandon Gross. Mr. Gross, if you could go ahead and start your audio and video, please. Good afternoon, everybody. I want to direct you to page 10, item 5A, PLNMJDP18-30, Ethington and Ethington property. we'll be withdrawing our waiver request at this time. Thank you. We have a request for withdrawal. Do we have a motion? Is it just a waiver? Yeah. Yeah, just a waiver. I'm not sure if you need a motion on withdrawal. We don't want you to withdraw your plan because it's already been approved. That's right. Yeah, the plans were approved August 13th. So we're just withdrawing our subdivision waiver request at this time. Okay, thank you. I would take a motion. Mr. Wilson? Yes, Mr. Chairman. I move that for PLN, MJDP 18-20, Ethington and Ethington property that the waiver withdrawal be taken off the table. Okay, we have a motion. Second by Ms. Plumlee. All in favor, please raise your hand. Unanimous. Motion passed. Thank you, Ms. Brooks. Next we will move to Ms. Jessica Winters. Thank you, everybody. Thank you. Ms. Winters, you've been promoted. If you could start your audio, please. Good afternoon. I'm here on behalf of the Blackburn Avenue property just to voice objections to the final development plan. I don't know if now's the time to do that or if it's when you guys consider the plans later on on the agenda. No, we'll be coming to that plan later. Okay, sounds good. I just wanted to let you know that I'm here and and I had the question about whether we'd be sharing video or just audio. Objectors are allowed to share audio. Okay, that's what I thought. Okay, thank you. I'm here. Okay. Mr. Chair, next we will call on Alan Wiley. Mr. Wiley, you've been promoted. If you could start your audio and video, please. please. Hello? Yes. Hi. I'm here about item letter H on page five. It's plan 20-54, the Headley-Niven advanced property. I'd like to request a one-month postponement on that to the November 12th meeting. are working through the staff comments that we have with the adjoining property owners currently. Okay thank you. So we have a motion for a one month postponement. I need a motion for a one month postponement. Thank you. I'll move postponement for one month until November the 12th for PLNMJDP 2054, Headley, Neven, and Vance property. Thank you. Second by Mr. Mulvillain. All in favor, please raise your hand. Unanimous. Motion passes. Thank you. Thank you all. I don't have any additional answers at this time, but is it okay if I identify our one-stone column? Yes. Okay. For the person calling from phone number 859-252-9000, will we be allowed to speak now? If you could please give us your name and which case you're interested in. You should be able to go ahead and speak now. For the caller on 859-252-9000, Okay. All right. Mr. Martin in the council chambers. Did we have a request for postponement on Lexington Mall as well? Did we ever get an official request for postponement? We actually have not received an official request for postponement, no. There's an issue from the agenda, Lexington Mall Property Clinic Fitness, that the staff has recommended postponement for, and the applicant told the subdivision committee last week that they would work with the staff to address the issues of postponement. And I think they led the committee to believe that that would be postponed today. No one's here. And if no one's here, that sort of tells me they didn't intend to come and speak to us. And we have, the planning person does have 90 days to get an application. I would advise that it was fine. All right. Did everyone hear that? I guess it needs to be repeated. I might add a little something that may assist the planning commission. Okay. Thank you, Tom. It's our understanding that a staff member spoke with the representative on this plan yesterday. However, they've not responded since that conversation. They are an hour behind us in time. so perhaps there's a slight misunderstanding on the meeting time etc for them to request the postponement but they were staff did speak to them yesterday good all right well now open the floor up for discussion or postponement is recommended by staff sir yes further direction by staff We have a motion and a second by Mr. DeMoviland. All in favor, please raise your hand. It's unanimous. Motion passed. Thank you. Okay. And we have items on the consent agenda. We do. And I'll speak up because I know the microphone can be hard to hear. Thank you, Chairman Forster. There are several items that qualify for the consent agenda today. And I'm going to share that screen here so that the list is visible to the public as well. well. Our consent agenda are items that appear on the regular agenda, which have been recommended for approval by the subdivision committee. In addition, these items shouldn't have any conditions that require further discussion. If there is an item on the consent agenda today and you are in the public and wish for that item to be removed, we would ask you to raise your hand via the Zoom app to indicate that you have an interest in having something removed from the consent agenda. When I finish reading these, there's also the ability for the planning Commission or an applicant to ask for an item to be further discussed and further by the full Planning Commission. So I'll ask at the end again if there are any items that we need to pull off of the Consent Agenda. Otherwise, the Commission can act on all of these items with one motion for conditional approval. So we'll start with Item 1 on the Consent Agenda appears on Page 2 of your regular Agenda, item 1a this is a final record flat for crossroads christian church with cln frp 20-49 also known as garden estate instead of mended final record flat for property at 4176 and 4184 todd's road this did involve the posting of a sign since it's in the exaction or the expansion area and the applicant has provided that updated to the staff item two on the consent agenda appears on page three item c of our regular agenda it is cln mjdp 20-47 investment properties of lexington also known as the gamble house in for lot two amended this property is located at 1301 South Broadway. The next item that appears on our consent agenda was the item that Ms. Winters is here to speak to, so it should be removed from the consent agenda. That appears on the screen right now as number three, Yellman subdivision. She indicated she was here to talk about the Blackburn development plan, so we'll move on. The next item on the consent agenda appears on page 5, item S, PLN-MJDT 20-51 for the Queen Estate. And this is a plan for the University of Kentucky Federal Credit Union. The properties involved are located at 603, 607, 615, 617, and 619 South Broadway, as well as 405 and 411 Chair Avenue. The next item is on page 5, item G. It is PLN MJDP 20-53 Cold Spring Research Campus, Lot 1B, excuse me, Unit 1B, Lot 14B. It's an amended final development plan. This property is located at 1532 Bull Leaves Road. The next item is on page six of our agenda, item I, PLNMJDP 20-55 for the Cooper property, which is a portion of a larger original development of the Coat Mitchell Cooper property. and it is located at 1370 Deerhaven Lane. In association with this particular item there's also an EAMP memo that the staff has reviewed EAMP compliance for this particular plan and there's an affidavit as well that the sign was posted. Again this is in the expansion area so there's the need for a sign to be posted on the property so those two things are important. The next item on the consent agenda is number seven at the bottom of the screen there. It's on page six, item J, PLN, MJDP 20-56 for the Sharpie property, unit one, lot 10A, a portion of, and also unit four, section two. This is for property located at 132 and 148 Louis Place. Number eight on the consent agenda appears on page seven of our regular agenda item L, PLN MJDC 20-58 for Eastland Parkway subdivision. That property is located at 1734 Eastland Court, was formerly known as 1540 Eastland Parkway. Next PLN MJDC 20-61, this is on page eight, item O, So the James R. Massingill property, an amended final development plan. Her property located at 701 and 705 East Loudoun Avenue. And then last, on page 9 of our agenda, item P, CLN NJDT 20-62. So Bluegrass Executive Park, lot 4B, block F, unit 1B. That's for property at 2196 Thunderstick Drive. So at this point, Chairman Forrester would just ask if there's anyone in the audience that wishes to have any of the items that I mentioned in the consent agenda heard today by the Planning Commission. And I see Ms. Winters and Mr. Flar have raised their hands. I would just reiterate that I did not read Yellman's subdivision as part of the consent agenda, acknowledging that you wish to have that particular plan heard by the Planning Commission, so it will not be considered on the consent agenda. And for the commission that appeared on page one of the consent agenda, that we need to remove that. And again, it's CLN MJBP 20-49. Are there any other plans that the planning commission or other applicants wish to have heard by the commission today? I see it in advance. Okay. So with that, the planning commission can consider one motion for a conditional approval of all of the remaining items on the consent agenda. Okay. Before we do that, do we need to address Ms. Winters and Mr. Clark now since they have the hand raised or should we wait? I'm not sure what their question is. I'm not sure either. Let's ask Ms. Winters if she has additional information to share today. Ms. Winters, you should be able to speak now. Yes, I don't have anything. I raised my hand before Tracy mentioned that the Blackburn, the Yellman subdivision will be removed from the consent agenda. I just wanted to make sure that it was. And so that's all. Okay. Thank you. Should we assume the same for Mr. Farms? Or would you like to see? No, I don't want to assume. Okay. You don't reckon. Mr. Clark, are you going to be able to go ahead and speak now? Mr. Clark, we have given you permission to speak if you'd like to go ahead. Okay. All right. With that being said, the chair has opened the floor for a motion for the consent agenda as presented, and that's with the deletion of PLN-MJDP-20-49, Yellman Subdivision, Powerhouse Church of God. Ms. Plumlee. Okay, I'll do it. Thank you. Move approval of the consent agenda with the exception of PLNMJD 2049 Yellman subdivision. We have a motion and a second by Mr. Bell. All in favor, please raise your hand. Okay, unanimous. Motion is approved. Thank you. Thank you, staff. Okay. So I think we would be on page three. Actually, it's going to be page four. Oh, I got my old one. I'm sorry. I got it. We're on page four, item E, CLNMJDT-20-50, Lexington Property. No, no. Sorry. the Yelman subdivision. Oh, okay. We're on page four, item D. Thank you, Frank. I believe we might be ready. Yes, sir, staff. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen of the Planning Commission, we are, as your chairman has stated, moving to page four to Major Development Plan 20-49, Yellman Subdivision Property. This is a final development plan located on the corner of 4th and Blackburn Avenue. Here is the Blackburn frontage. Here is the 4th Street frontage. The final development plan that you see before you is basically combining these two properties. This is the existing four-story building on this portion of the property with its associated parking. This is the new proposal. This is the plan that you just recently approved with a zone change. and this will be a combined plan they are on separate lots they're going to remain on separate lots however they will now be governed by this final development plan this and this plan is virtually identical to the zoning development plan that you approved they are proposing with this new building to be three stories in height it's a step down from the four stories this will be three stories in height. It totals 8,272 square feet of space within the three floors that they're proposing. There's 36 units. You can see associated parking here with this development. The existing building, as I stated, was four stories. It has 72 units currently in the building with 103 parking spaces. Now, there's going to be some shared parking between the two properties to meet all the parking proposed on this development. They have an existing access point here that they will share at this point onto Blackburn. The plan was reviewed by staff and recommended to your subdivision committee, subject to conditions that you see on your agenda. And by the way, you should have a revised handout from staff in your Google box. As this is a slightly revised plan that has been submitted to for your review. Again, as I stated, this is the new building that they're proposing with 30 units, 36 units with 30 parking spaces. the plan is subject to the standard sign-off conditions that you can see before you. Now, there's one that, which is the very first one. I want to touch on that briefly with you, and that's provided the Urban County Council rezones the property. It has not yet been acted on by council. Now, it's not common that final development plans are filed prior to the zone change being acted on by council, but it does happen. They are certainly, applicants are certainly allowed to file and request your review of the plan. And quite often that's done because there's timing issues, particularly construction timing issues. You just approved a plan approximately two months ago on Citation Village out on Leastown. You just approved that plan under the exact same circumstances. It was a final development plan that you approved prior to council action on the zone change. Now, subsequently, council has approved that zone change. So that project is moving forward. So that is the applicant has done the same thing with this particular request today. They are just asking to have this plan approved. Should there is an element of risk on their behalf. Should the council not approve the zone change? obviously this plan cannot go forward it will not be certified they will not be able to build their project now there were several issues on this plan that have been addressed with the revision in your google file you will find emails from the division of environmental quality stating that this property in particular, which was of concern to staff, does in fact meet Article 26.5 of your tree protection ordinance. They have been out on site, they have reviewed the site and the plans, and they have stated that it complies. In addition, the landscape examiner has stated the same, that this plan does comply with Article 18. And those were of some concerns to staff in the initial review. The applicant has worked with Environmental Services and addressed Condition 14, and that is why that has been removed from your staff report. item 15 has been removed from your staff report required them to denote specific architectural elements that meet article 15 infill and redevelopment they have done so that note has been added to the plan in addition they needed to denote substantial compliance with submitted elevations there are elevations on file with planning and they'll be on file with building inspection and this is fairly standard when people make commitments to certain architectural features that they substantially comply with those renderings that they submit. I would point out that with that this plan is subject only to standard scyons. As you are aware, it was eligible for your consent agenda. Obviously, there's opposition to the plan, and they wish to speak, and that's as it should be. But with that, again, your subdivision committee recommended approval of the original plan. Staff is recommending approval of the revised plan. And I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have about the development plan. Thank you, Tom. Any questions for staff in this moment? Any commission members? I'm not seeing any. Applicant? At this time, we'd ask that representatives from the applicant, please raise your hand. We're going to promote Mr. Chris Van Denen, A representative from Carmen and Carson Bowman. You've been promoted. You should be able to go ahead and start your audio and video. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. Can everybody hear me, I hope? Yes. Thank you. Also, members of the commission and the staff, as Ms. Wade said, I'm Chris Clendenin. I'm very pleased to be here on behalf of the applicant Blackburn Development and I'm joined today with Carson by Carson Bauman from Blackburn and Mr. Kevin Warner from Carmen Engineering and he's our landscape architect on this project. As stated to you by Mr. Martin, we're aware that this final development plan is contingent on our zone change being approved. Other than that, we're also aware that the remaining conditions are what we, I guess, what you would refer to as standard conditions for sign-off for this type of plan and we're in agreement with those conditions. You know, at this point we're aware that there's opposition we would be happy to address any questions that the commission has for us right now but short of that we you know I'll reserve any comments I have for rebuttal. So does the commission have any questions for us at this point? Mr. Clinton, I'm not seeing any hands raising so we will hold back for rebuttal. Thanks for your comment. Does anyone else on your team have any comments to the application at this time? Okay, thank you. Next we'll move on to the any citizens objectors. I think Ms. Winters is here as well as Mr. Clark that was here as well. Ms. Winters, what we would like to do is in the the initial phase 15 minutes for the objection and you get a five-minute rebuttal. Okay, Ms. Winters, you've been allowed to speak. You can go ahead. Thank you. Good afternoon, Planning Commission members and staff. Can you guys hear me okay? Yes. Okay, great. So I am here today on behalf of my client, Mark Klar, to voice his objections to the final development plan here. As you know, Mr. Clark objected when he was unrepresented to the request for the zone change when it came before the commission. And I'll actually be representing Mr. Clark before the city council on this issue, and we have requested a full public hearing for the zone change during which his detailed objections will be heard. I understand that it is not typical practice for a final development plan to be approved prior to the approval of the zone change. While it is done on certain occasions, the prior example cited by planning staff was in connection with a zone change that was not, where there wasn't a full hearing requested before the city council on zone change. Basically, the city council has not yet held a full public hearing on any contentious zone change issue since the COVID restrictions went into place. I have two matters before the city council currently on zone changes where full hearings have been requested and Councilwoman Lamb had requested a 60-day extension of one on Nicholasville Road and Mr. Councilmember McCurn have requested a 60-day extension on this request zone change when it came up in work session in August, which passed, and it will come up again on the city council docket on October 22nd, and we have requested that an additional 60-day extension be granted or postponement be granted so that the city council can figure out its procedures for COVID public hearings, full public hearings on these zone change requests. So with all of that happening and with there being no certain date on which the zone change will be even considered by the city council. I don't think that it's appropriate to move forward with the approval of the final development plan. It's our position that it's premature until the zone change is approved. There's no way to know whether the change will be approved, and if so, what conditions might be placed on any zone change. um so it is unclear whether an additional 60-day postponement will be proposed at the october 22nd meeting and whether additional postponements will be considered past that at the very least a full hearing will be scheduled at some unknown future time convenient to all the parties and attorneys importantly approval by of the final development plan today constitutes final action by the planning Commission, which starts the clock running on an appeal of this decision. Mr. Klar will have 30 days to appeal any such final action, but because any decision of this body is inherently conditional on the final approval of his own change by the City Council, and because that approval is not likely to occur for some time, these conditions make any decision by this body less than final, and this effectively deprives Mr. Klar of due process because it undermines his ability to appeal this commission's final action on the application in question. These arguments aside, there are significant concerns regarding the development plan, which will directly impact Mr. Klar as the adjacent neighbor on Blackburn, and also the general public and other residents utilizing the sidewalks and the road on Blackburn Avenue. The most concerning problem with the proposed development plan is that it does not satisfy the parking requirements of the zoning ordinance. If the parking requirements are not satisfied, the final development plan cannot be approved. The project proposes the construction of 12 efficiency apartments and 24 one-bedroom units, which under the zoning ordinance are required to have 1.5 spaces per unit for a total of 54 parking spaces. In addition to the variance of five spaces previously approved, the applicant is claiming entitlement to a 15% reduction in parking space requirements, or eight spaces, based on proximity to a bus stop and the installation of bike racks. These discounts are not available. 325 Blackburn is too distant from the bus shelter to claim the 10% parking reduction. There's a 300-foot maximum. And the property at 325 Blackburn, furthermore, does not contain 50 or more parking spaces and therefore cannot claim the 5% parking reduction for furnishing bike racks pursuant to Article 1310 of the zoning ordinance, which states that an applicant can only get this reduction if the property in question has more than 50 parking spaces. 325 Blackburn only has 27 spaces and does not qualify for this reduction. Furthermore, to the extent that any spaces are being borrowed from the property at 345 Blackburn, the reciprocal parking agreement needs to be reviewed and considered by planning prior to approval. It must be determined whether the 11 additional spaces furnished to 325 Blackburn from 345 are compliant with Article 16-7 of the zoning ordinance, the provisions there for joint use of parking spaces. Conditions of the joint use to be granted by planning staff include that the applicant must submit sufficient data to the Division of Planning to demonstrate the normal and regular operating hours of the uses proposed in the joint parking arrangement do not coincide or overlap by more than one hour. And these are both residential properties where presumably the parking would be utilized at the same time frame. And also that the parties shall execute a properly drawn legal instrument for the joint use of off-street parking areas. And this instrument has to be approved as to form a manner of execution by legal counsel, and it shall be filed with the application. The publicly available parking agreement offers any, quote, undesignated spaces. and if Calgill ceases to own either property any party may terminate the agreement within 90 days it's our position that the parking agreement is therefore not sufficiently definite to be approved by planning the final development plan also entails a modification to the existing Blackburn Avenue right-of-way a waiver is needed pursuant to article 6-8a and 6-8n1 and Exhibit 6-1 and 6-3 of the land subdivision regulations, which govern street geometrics and sidewalks. The applicant essentially proposes to rebuild a section of Blackburn Avenue in front of its property to provide four public parallel parking spaces and eliminate the grass strip behind the curb and realign the public sidewalk and his property nearer to the proposed building through an easement, essentially extending the sidewalk into the property. The sidewalk standards of LSR 6-8N1 specify that sidewalks shall be placed adjacent to the street right-of-way line. Blackburn is 45 feet wide, and the sidewalk is adjacent to the street right-of-way line. The modification sets the sidewalk behind the right-of-way and introduces a meandering sidewalk alignment. Such a meander may be approved by the Planning Commission to save trees, avoid rock outcroppings, or to other physical conditions. However, the meander on this development plan, where the neighbor's lot adjoins the subject property, doesn't have any of these causes for the exception. The zoning ordinance, far from condoning extra parking that must set the pedestrian right of way into the front yard of the subject property, actually prohibits front yard parking throughout the infill and redevelopment area, not only for single family and duplex zones and uses immediately adjoining the proposed Blackburn development, but also for the multifamily zones, R3 and R4 and R5. and that's in zoning ordinance article 16-4. It is against the spirit and intent of the ordinance to punt the parking onto the sidewalk area and then into the sidewalk and then the sidewalk back into the yard of the subject property. De facto this is in fact front yard parking. Through these proposed modifications to the right-of-way the applicant has made the decision to use the right-of-way to prioritize parking over pedestrian experience and tree protection. This is not a people first, but an auto-centric design, usurping for vehicle storage and urban transportation infrastructure long dedicated and used for walking. The resulting new street cross-section is out of harmony with the long-standing sidewalk and yard design along the rest of the street on both sides. It crowds the street trees of the subject property into a front yard that was already varied six feet from the 20-foot standard yard requirement of the proposed zone. Scarcely 10 feet remain between the pavement and the building wall. This cannot enhance the pedestrian experience. The mid-block boundary with the older neighborhood makes a poor point of transition for a radically different section. In an infill situation, a variance may be granted to better affect the necessary coordination. But here, the altered section exacerbates differences and difficulties between the two different designs rather than affecting or enhancing their compatibility. An additional concern is that this application requires consideration of a development plan that encompasses all properties owned by the applicant, including the other development located at 345 Blackburn. As a result, the final development plan should include notations of minor amendments to the development plan previously approved for 345 Blackburn Avenue with requisite review. For instance, the dumpster located behind at 345 Blackburn has been enlarged. Trees have been moved and removed. Open space is differently used. The open space near the 4th Street bus stop is removed. The 4th Street fence is moved and the perimeter fence to the south is removed. in addition one thing that affects Mr. Clark personally as the adjacent neighbor on Blackburn is that he is seeking that no outdoor lighting be allowed along the entire boundary of the subject property of his residence not just alongside the building itself lighted parking of the proposed R5 zone and use is incompatible with his adjacent R2 property and he's also concerned that the subject property's front yard, which was shortened to 14 feet by a variance, holds a five-foot sidewalk and trees as well. The trees will stand at the sidewalk edge and will be located next to the building's outer wall. And overall, the tree plan shows that trees are clustered much closer than the minimum distance for the sake of meeting the canopy requirement. These and other concerns are outlined in written form in a letter that I submitted to the planning staff this afternoon. I know it wasn't submitted in advance in enough time for you all to receive it before this meeting. However, I would request that it be included in the administrative record on this application. That's all I have. Thank you. Oh, I'm sorry. For these reasons, we are actually requesting that the final consideration of the final development plan either be postponed or that approval be denied. Thank you. For the planning commission members, Ms. Winters mentioned that she emailed us a PDF of her letter, which we did receive shortly before 1.30. Mr. Bailey did put that in the Google Drive for the commission members to review. Unfortunately, Mr. Martin, our primary staff member in the council chambers, does not have that letter. So if there's anything that we need to address related to that, I can do so from the planning office. Okay. Thank you, Ms. Winters. Mr. Kalar, his hand is still risen. Mr. Kalar, we're going to allow you to speak now. You can go ahead. um i just want to uh underscore what ms waters just uh presented there's an additional question i have a technical question that i have regarding the topography of the parking lot towards the back that will adjoin my property as of now the uh current plateau that the current development stands on and that the adjacent lots have been that have been artificially created as a result of soil deposits from the original construction zone stand about i think about four feet higher than the current plane of the backyards there i'm wondering exactly how they're planning on creating a parking lot in the back that does not impede drainage. Again, just a technical question. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Carr. We will have a rebuttal stage so the applicant will have an opportunity to address that question. Does any of the commission members have any questions for Ms. Winters or Mr. Carr? this time. If not, we will move on to the low stage and Mr. Clint Denning. You're up. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Well, it's certainly a lot of information and I wasn't given Ms. Winner's speech or notes or whatever it is she wants to call that. I wasn't given that in advance so it's fine that it's fallen the record. I managed to try to follow the majority of what she was arguing the parking agreement, the right-of-way, the dumpster and the arrangement of the trees. Also she addressed final action of the planning commission and I believe the fact that There was a similar project granted approval by this Commission on a final development plan two months ago, but that there was some issue with respect to the hearing. So I'll try to address that each one of those things as quickly as I can. With respect to the hearing, as you're now aware, we do have an objector. That is why we are having a hearing. The reason that we are asking for approval on our final development plan at this time is not because of some sinister motive or untoward that we're permitted to do it. And like the other project, we have a construction schedule that we're trying to keep on because of the coronavirus. And we fill up in the air as to when there will be a hearing. Our understanding is that we'll have some sort of information on that by the 20th of this month from the council. That notwithstanding, we're trying to advance our project as best we can in the interim until there is some determination on a final hearing. That is the only reason we're doing this at this time, which is basically the same reason as the other applicant. The parking agreement, the right of way, the dumpster, the trees, all of this has been considered by the staff. It's all been found to have been within the compliant with the zoning ordinance. It's all been approved, preliminary, approved, recommended for approval by this commission previously a few months ago. Staff had no problem with it. Every division signed off on our plan. So I'm not really sure how to address the allegations that she's made with respect to the right of way, the trees, the dumpster, or our reciprocal parking agreement. Everybody at the staff and everybody in the division has signed off on it and said that it's in compliance with the zoning ordinance. So we have to rely on that. As far as any appeal, if my, you know, not to, she's an attorney and I'm an attorney. And if, you know, as far as an appeal, which I guess she's alluding to, this would not constitute final action by the planning commission if it's contingent on a zone change approval by the city council. So I doubt it would start the 30-day clock running, but I'll leave that up to a court to determine. That's really all that I have. If we have any questions from the staff, or if there's a specific question that you'd like to ask Mr. Warner about the detention basin or the drainage, I think that was Mr. Klar's issue. He'd be better suited to address that. Okay. Thank you Mr. Plendon. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Do you want to add? The one comment from Mr. Klar about drainage in his rear yard. The property, both properties currently drain toward the Onan property behind us and we still allow Mr. Klar's property to continue to do so across the corner of our lot. So we aren't impeding any drainage. from his rear yard. We are collecting our drainage and placing it in an underground detention system and discharging to the public storm sewer pipe that runs through the center of our property. Okay, thank you. Any questions? Ms. Plumlee? Thank you. I had a question about the lighting. Ms. Winters alluded to lighting in the parking lot. And if I recall, we restricted lighting on the building adjacent to the neighbor's property or the neighbor's property. So I wonder if the applicant could address a possible reduction in that request by the neighbor for reduced lighting. Ms. Plumey, I'm going to ask Mr. Baumann to address that. Right now, we do have the limitation on lighting along the length of the building. We have not designed our actual lighting layout. We've worked with the neighbors and told them that we were not planning on putting a lot of lighting in that parking lot because the flats is already pretty well lit. we want to create a safe environment and we will do our best and we've committed to doing our best to design the light so that they do not have a lot of light pollution headed that way any more questions for the applicant okay mr. Ben I don't understand your position about wanting to go forward with the building plans because if you get a 60-day extension by the council before they can have a public hearing that pretty much puts you into a situation where you're not going to do a lot for spring and I'm wondering why your client is pushing so hard to get this knowing that the council is probably not going to have a public hearing on this thing for 60 more days. Well, thanks for the question, Mr. Penn. You may know something that I don't. the last conversation that I had with the law department indicated to me that they were fairly close to some sort of logistical solution where it would be some sort of hybrid as far as Zoom and in-persons in the council chambers with respect to council hearing. And I, and I, again, And I don't know anything for certain, but I'm operating on the fact that there's not going to be another 60-day extension. I understand where you're coming from. I just don't know how you have a public hearing like this by then. I don't. I'm sorry. I'm sorry, Mr. Penn. I don't either. It's just like I said, I'm operating from a standpoint based on what I was told that we would have something that we may have a hearing or a final solution told to us in the next 10 days. Okay, well, you know more about it than I do, but I'm just asking that question because you get another 60 days and you're effective. You're not going to do much. Okay, thank you. If I may also, construction can't begin until the final architectural drawings and engineering drawings are completed. And that's a couple of months process to do that. So just once we get approval from the zone change, we're not going to start construction immediately. We have to complete the design and get bids from contractors. So that takes time. I assume that and I was just wondering what the push was because of the construction situation. Well, also, to be quite candid, with COVID-19 and the title issue, we've already suffered quite a bit of delay in what we, you know, had discussed with the applicant is that assuming and provided we do get approval on our zone change, we want to be able to have everything in place to start construction right away. We, you know, initially, you know, had been looking at this project a year ago and ran into a title issue. And this was that had to be addressed. And then with the coronavirus, it put things even further behind schedule. So the applicant has other projects, but they use a lot of the same contractors, and there's some pieces that juggle, go back and forth between other projects. But to answer your question, it's more about logistically having everything complete that we can get completed in order to be ready to go, assuming we are approved. That's really all it's about, sir. That makes sense. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, not seeing any other hand raised or questions. I'm moving back over to Ms. Wentz for rebuttal. And Mr. Carr. Mr. Carr, we're allowing you to speak now. You can go ahead. I just have a question from Mr. Martin referring to that other project where this approval is requested before the city council gives approval. Was that a contested? And if not, have any of the other exceptions that you mentioned, were any of those contested? Thank you, Mr. Clark. Okay. No, that particular zone change was not contested. This is not something, as I stated before, that we see a lot of, but over the years, we've seen it. We've seen this request. And there have been some times in the past where there were full hearings in this situation. but I can't enumerate anything from memory specifically. But again, I think staff's point would be they're allowed to request this, and it's a risk that they're willing to take that they may have issues from the council hearing. Okay, now we do have a question on this. In addition to what Mr. Martin said, if the application, if the development plan that you're seeing today would change to the point of it would need to come back to the commission, the staff can actually ask that the applicant bring the development back to you for further review. For instance, if the council adopts some conditional zoning restriction that might impact the layout of the plan, our staff would ask that it come back to the Planning Commission for review again. So there is still, and again, we would never certify it while the zone is an R2 zone. We would never certify a development plan that showed an R5 development. Okay, thank you, Mr. Wade. I'm not seeing any other hand, Ray, so I'm bringing this back to the commission. We do have a revised staff recommendation of approval based on their findings, and we refer to the opposition as well. So I'm hoping up for any further questions, commission members. Mr. Cooper, marginally. If I may, I want to be clear. Are we finished with rebuttal and it's now staff's opportunity? Yes, I was bringing it back to. Okay, it was great. Because I believe Ms. Winters would probably like to speak. Yes, Ms. Winters, you can go ahead and speak now. Thank you. Yes, I'm not going to belabor the point of our position that this is premature. in advance of the zone change. I think everybody has a pretty good grasp on that issue and why we believe that this commission's consideration of the final development plan is premature at this point. But I do want to touch back on parking. And I understand that the parking and whether it's compliant with the zoning ordinance has been considered by planning staff and the planning staff has, you know, signed off on it. But, you know, we are questioning that. We are questioning whether the applicant is entitled to the 15% parking reduction based on the proximity of the property to a bus shelter and based on the installation of the bike racks. And we're essentially saying that planning staff got it wrong and that we would like you guys to take a closer look at those issues to see if, in fact, the final development plan is compliant with the zoning ordinance on parking. If the property at 325 Blackburn is greater than 300 feet away from the bus shelter, it's my understanding that it doesn't qualify for the 10% parking reduction there. And if the property at 325 Blackburn has fewer than 50 parking spaces, it's my understanding it doesn't qualify for the additional 5% parking reduction. The parking on this is going to be an issue in the long term, particularly given the location of this development and all of the surrounding low density residential neighborhood that exists right adjacent to it. So we believe that these are important issues that deserve further consideration. Ms. Winters, thank you. I'll see if Mr. Martin can address your question, please. thank you mr chairman um first of all i will add one thing a bit of clarification on timing i think it's important for your consideration that from the date of your approval on final development plan the applicant actually has one year to have that plan certified and at which time if it's not certified they will come back to you for a re-approval. So there's a lot of time frankly for the council to work out their issues on a public hearing and for this plan to be approved and to be certified within that time frame and that would include any conditions that the the council may place on the development. As regard to parking, your staff would respectfully say that we are correct and Ms. Winters is wrong. We believe that this plan does comply with the ordinance, does comply with parking, and that's why it's before you today with the recommendation that it has. and again as part of the certification process agreements and those types of things are submitted and reviewed prior to certification so again staff we don't bring plans to you if they don't comply we tell you it does comply with the parking does comply with the infill and again remember this is now a combined planning. These properties are going to be applied. As to the lighting, staff would like to say we share the Planning Commission's concern and the neighbor's concern about lighting. We bring this issue up quite often and we would recommend that we resolve the issue of that lighting with the applicant by addressing its scale. Staff frequently recommends pedestrian scale lighting. In other words, we don't want those huge light bulbs that you see along the interstate, but rather we recommend that they utilize lighting that is pedestrian and scale. And that's something that we think can actually easily be resolved with the applicant. So I would just add that to help address the lighting concern. With that again your subdivision committee recommended approval staff stands behind this recommendation of approval. Okay thank you Tom. All right so now we're going to close as part and move into discussion items from commission members if any, Ms. Plumlee? I have a question for legal. Is postponement permissible at this time as a recommendation? Or is it just approval or disapproval? She's on her way. Thank you. You all can postpone it if you want to. I mean, that's an option. That's not the recommendation of the staff, but you all have the opportunity to take other action if you want to. Thank you. Mr. DeMoviland. Ms. Jones, while you're with us. Did she do an about face, Mr. Martin? I'm sorry. I was talking with legal. Would you please repeat that? We need Ms. Jones back up to the podium. Ms. Jones, Anthony DeMovelland, there was some discussion about the 30-day appeal. Could you clarify when that time clock would start? That, I was looking at that. You know, this situation is a little unusual, and I was trying to think of a time where we've had exactly these facts before. And I can't really think of one since we've not handled this pandemic situation before. However, there's two things I would say about that. One is that the first condition says that this is approved by you all provided that the council would, you know, approve the zone change. um there might that might open the door to an argument that technically your all's approval would be in place at such time that the council approves the zone change because of that condition alternatively there is nothing that would prevent if Ms. Winters believes in her legal opinion that what you do today is final action from going ahead and filing some type of an appeal to protect her interest, I mean, that's up to her. So she wouldn't be precluded from doing that if she wanted to. And then we'd have to deal with that separately. But I will tell you that while the statute doesn't address this directly it does say in instances where you all hear like conditional zone uh question requests for conditional use permits or variances which you hear rarely but sometimes along with his own change requests because they're filed simultaneously that the period of time for appeals on those is also based on when the council makes the final decision on his own change so I can't tell you it's 100% black and white, but I do think there's some ways to make sure if the opposers or objectors concern is protecting their interest for them to do that. And there's, you know, I think there's also an argument that because your first condition says your approval is provided that the council acts and approves his own change, that that also could certainly open the door for an argument there. Thank you. Mr. Nickel. Yes, I've got a question for Mr. Martin, please. Hello there. My question is this. A lot of times when we're in our zoning committee, we look at the subdivision plans and they come to us and we are told that the subdivision committee recommended approval and the staff recommended approval of the development plan but that's all pending on the zone change would it not be practical to think about the situation i guess similarly where we can approve the of the development plan and we've got a the number and condition says that if the zone change is not approved by city council this is not approved it seems pretty similar to me am i understanding this properly it is exactly the same yes it's our conditional approval process and and this is directly applicable yes it is it is frankly the same yes okay well after questions i'll make a recommendation after everybody has their questions answered. Okay. Thank you, Mr. New. Thank you, Tom. Any further questions from commission members? I see any. Open the floor up for a motion. Oh, excuse me, Ms. Plumlee. I just have a comment. I think this would put undue pressure on council to pass this because they sit there looking at a development plan that, hey, that's okay. He's got his shovels ready. So all we have to do now is just pass this because it does not permit them to be independent thinkers. And I do not like this idea of going forward with this development plan before zone change, no matter what's written is number one. I just don't think that's correct. And I just think this is something that we need to avoid, and particularly on a plan that has been so contested. I mean, this neighborhood, they're going to be, their streets are going to be crowded with extra parking cars, and a neighbor's going to have a colossal building right up on his property line there there is so much to be considered here uh i i want to go by uh hey wait let's go by the old rules that we've always done and i'm tired of hearing about covid as everybody else is we're all affected by covid and and stop using it for an excuse just just go back to the way we should be doing things so that and have the hearing that is appropriate instead of jumping ahead of the cart. That's how I feel. Thanks. Thank you, Ms. Blumley. Mr. Bell. Carolyn, I always respect your opinion, but I'm of the opinion that staff has approved suggested approval and subdivision has suggested approval. and personally I'd be in favor sorry so I'd be in favor of Mr. Nickel if you're going to make a motion please feel free or I'm happy to make a motion before we get there I think Mr. Wilson did you have your hand raised okay no sir all right thank you they said all i wanted to say thank you all right mr nickel well i'll take this opportunity to make a motion to um take the staff's recommendation and approve pln mjdp 20-0049 yellman subdivision powerhouse church of god blackburn avenue with the 16 recommendations with the 16 conditions 13, okay, the one I says with the 13 recommendations recommendations Okay You want to take the staff revised recommendations? Yes, sir. All right, now we have a motion on the floor and there's a second by Mr. Bell and yes, I was going to ask that and we have discussion item here. Mr. Penn would like to discuss this motion. I want to agree with Ms. Plumlee on this. Historically, that's the way we've always done it. But I don't see how this development plan is going to change based on if we don't get the zone change, and it's all mute anyway, if we do get the zone change, I don't see this development plan changed so if I thought there was going to be a material change in it going forward they always have an opportunity to go to court but I don't think we're going to change the development plan much on this so I'm going to support the motion because I don't see any reason to to not other than tradition and if I thought the development plan is going to change then I would want to support Ms. Plunder's motion but Ms. Plunder's comments but I just don't see this changing Thank you. All right. Thank you, Mr. Pinn. Okay. We still have that motion and a second on the floor. Any further discussion? I'm seeing any. All in favor, please raise your hand. Okay. So, you have that half? We see that. I can tell you in a minute. I can tell you in a minute. We're going to have two that are opposed, but they haven't come up yet. Mr. Chair, Nichols, Farstel, Wilson, and Bell, Demoglin, and Mr. Penn are in favor. Any opposed? Okay, Ms. Meyer and Ms. Plumlee opposed. Okay, motion has approved. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, members. Okay. Okay. Next up, Tracy, I want you to double check with me, you and Tom. Page 8, PLN, MJDP-20-59 Gateway Law. I got a fist bump. This means I'm okay. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. It's a shame how much technical assistance I need. But we are, as the chairman has stated, on page eight of your agenda. We are looking at Major Development Plan 20-59, the Gateway Lofts, the Grogan and Grogan property. You see before you the final development plan. Here we have South Broadway. And here's Virginia Avenue. This, of course, is the proposed development that you see here. This is the lot that's right on the corner that has the old historic home that sits here. This particular plan, you all just granted a zone change on this particular site. They are proposing a six-story structure. Now, it's a six-story structure as you go back from Virginia, utilize, I mean, South Broadway, pardon me, utilizing the grade change on the property to where in this area, front and south Broadway, they have, because it is a B1 form-based home, they have their retail component, over 6,000 square feet of retail in this location. As you move back, they have a parking structure, and you can see part of it demonstrated here, and then again with this insert, you can see the parking structure. Now there's five stories of residential above this, And again, the parking structure is multi-level as well. Your only access is here off Virginia. That's two-way access into the parking garage. Here you can see an open courtyard, which is an important component of their open space that they're providing. Now, we have, and you'll find in your Google Drive, revised conditions on this plan as well. the plan is proposing 257 dwelling units. The total structure is over 205,000 square feet. As I stated, it's six stories and transitions back to five stories, including the parking structure. It is, as I stated, 205,000 square feet of building on the site. The site is basically being built out. They're provided 219 parking spaces in the garage itself, and they have utilized reductions that they're entitled to under the ordinance to meet their parking requirement, and that is what they are doing. They are meeting their parking requirement. Now, we have standard sign-offs that you can see on your revised staff report. There's several items that we want to touch on. One is the location of mass transit enhancements. They are working with LexTran presently to do an off-site bus stop. Their one currently exists, but they want to add a shelter. And they're working on the details of that with LexTran. They have agreed to a 10-foot dedication of right-of-way along South Broadway. You all may recall there were a lot of discussions about how narrow the right-of-way is at this intersection on this major arterial. So we are going to get 10 feet of additional right-of-way to help address the turn lane in this area. They're not required to do any improvements. This will be a government project sometime in the future. now they've set the building back to allow for that 10 feet and then it's just a matter of resolving with them the timing and appropriate mechanism for the dedication we had this exact same situation down on Virginia and South Limestone with that student housing development we had to work out some timing on some additional right away along along that frontage as well and Mr. Murphy was involved with that project. So with that, it's very important to note that it is before you today because it is a form-based B1 development. And that requires a finding from you. Now, we have a report. Again, should be in your Google Drive. And I hope you can find yours quicker than I'm finding mine. Hmm. Ah, here we go. It's a one page front and back report that you have in your Google Drive. And again, as I stated, you all are required to make a finding that it complies with the form based code. Now, in terms of the site, it does meet the requirements of the B1 code. It's over one acre. They've done a study. They've submitted the study, and they've submitted the area of the study. I'm not. Yeah, I was going to. Right here. Ah, so here's the area of the study that they took a look at around this area. And in essence, this area is dominated with a lot of one-story commercial buildings, some residential in certain areas within. There's some remaining neighborhoods that still have single-family homes, single-story homes, two-story homes. There are some low, when I say low, I mean low-height, smaller apartment buildings in the area. But you do find larger, larger structures, again, as you go towards the University of Kentucky and into this area of the study. You find larger buildings as you go this way towards the Lexington Clinic. And that way, again, you find taller buildings and you also find mass in the area as well. So in that regard, within the study, we believe that the plan does meet the area characteristics as required. Now, the building, as I stated, is a six story that's set back off the right of way. And very importantly, they are activating this area along South Broadway and that extra 10 feet, of course, presents them with some challenges. But they are going to place patios and I think a recessed area and benches all in an effort to activate this frontage. And this should complement the commercial space and the pedestrian experience in this location. In addition, Virginia Avenue frontage, you can see they have patios and open areas and benches and a lot of plantings and greenery and landscaping is being proposed. These are all important elements for the B1 form to help integrate them into the surrounding neighborhood. And in fact, we believe that this will help set the stage for any additional redevelopment in terms of an activation along the frontages and help enhance and further development as well. The height of the building, as I stated, is six stories, trending down to five because of grade in this location. And that's consistent with some of the larger institutional buildings and motels, hotels, pardon me, that do exist in the area. The design, and this was of some concern to your staff because you all have seen the study and you saw the photographs and the pictures. And we requested a narrative. And that narrative talks about that they're going to utilize various types of siding. They're going to use two types of brick. They're going to use concrete panels. There's going to be some vinyl. They are going to use, they have a window design that they're going to utilize some smaller windows, and they can elaborate on this, and some balconies, again, to give texture to the building. They made an interesting statement in their report that staff appreciated that the use of materials will enhance shadowing as the sun moves and as the building is hit by different angles of sunlight. So we thought that was a nice thought process with the context and the design of the building. In addition, I have talked about open space. They have an open space requirement. They're utilizing this large open patio area for their residents. And in addition, they're providing open space here. And as I stated, to a lesser extent, they have some here. That's primarily to enhance the pedestrian experience, which, again, is another requirement of the B1 form-based code. They've added landscaping in these areas. You can see the trees. And another, they're breaking up this wall. And this relationship, of course, is difficult, problematic. They don't have any access into this parking area or to Sonic. But they are presenting, you know, this structure and this mass in this direction. they are, in addition to the design elements of the building, they are breaking this up with landscaping as well. So in essence, staff believes that they have met the intent of your form-based code, and they've addressed the important elements as required by your ordinance, and staff is recommending approval of this plan, and we are recommending that you do make a finding that the plan as submitted does in fact conform to the requirements of the B-1 form-based code in your ordinance. And with that, I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have for staff. Thank you, Tom. Any questions for staff and commission members? Mr. Bell? Mr. Bell, you're on mute. yeah thank you sorry um tom i'm i'm sure this is a teardown is it not the grogan it'll be a teardown yes sir unfortunately that fine big old building cannot be saved okay and secondly we've had some questions about you know traffic has always been an issue there and if i'm not mistaken in subdivision committee we you even spoke about how it might this project might enhance the traffic a bit. Would you touch on traffic a little bit? Because, I mean, when you think about it, when I think about it, obviously there's a lot more traffic there. So would you touch on traffic, please? Yes, we're happy to. And again, they have a limited amount of frontage on South Broadway, but they are dedicating their additional right away. And there will be a public project. Staff's not aware of exactly when, but there will be a project to address widening of South Broadway. And it won't be a large widening. You're going to have to do some restriping and that sort of thing because as you're aware, left turns and left turn storage are the big issue. And so by being able to widen this and put in a right turn lane, they'll have more room for left turn storage in that area. So that should help with the traffic in that regard. And I'm glad you asked this question because I've got to touch on something on your agenda. there's an item on there that's discussed storm drainage and I wanted to touch on that and I apologize I didn't during my presentation. The subdivision committee heard this and we explained to the subdivision committee we wanted you to hear this because you are very much aware of issues of storm drainage in this area particularly further to the west in that drainage. Well we don't anticipate that this area is going to be a problem, but we still wanted you to be very much aware that staff was aware of this. We discussed it with the applicant. The Division of Engineering is very much aware, and they are going to have to meet any and all requirements to address their drainage. Now, as I stated before, this site's already virtually built out, and they're going to build out as well, but they are providing more pervious area. So that's actually going to help with quality in this particular location. And so we just wanted to let you know that's why that condition was there. So you all can hear and be aware that staff and the applicant are cognizant of the drainage problems that have existed in this part of that. Thank you, John. Okay, I got two laundry's. We're going to go with Mr. Penn first. I think you got there first. Tom, when we decided to vote on this, you want part of the motion to say that it meets form-based in the B-1? You would need to make a finding, yes, sir. And you can make that as a separate motion if you like, or include it in your approval motion. And is B1 the only area where we're doing form base? Yes, sir. You have a specific under your special provisions in B1 form base. You may be all good. B1, I didn't know about the other. No, B1 is form base. I'm trying to get up to speed. Thank you. Mr. DeMotland. Yeah, just, Mr. Martin, you mentioned that maybe there was revised conditions. Yes, sir. I'm not seeing revised conditions in drive. There are not revised conditions, the same set of conditions that are on the agenda. Okay. Thank you. I may think there's nothing important. All right. Thank you. Okay. Ms. Meyer? Thank you for that explanation about the stormwater management. That came up in the subdivision committee, so I was glad to hear that addressed. The other question I have is, you know, this is a big building, and it really seems to me it needs the landscaping to soften it and break up the building. And I'm glad to see all the landscaping. I think we need all we can get wherever we can get it. My question is, once it's in place, what mechanism to keep it looking good? I think we have issues around the city, and I'm wondering what's in place to make sure that it stays. Well, that's an excellent question. And because this is a B-1 form-based project and it is directly addressed in your zoning ordinance, zoning compliance in the planning office has the ability to address these elements to ensure compliance. And we have that ability to look at the landscaping, the building features, all those items. And it stays that way. Yes, ma'am. It keeps looking. stays. Thank you. We do have that ability. Thank you. Any further questions? Not seeing any. Thank you. Tom, we'll move forward over to the applicant now. I think Mr. Murphy has his hand. Mr. Murphy, we're promoting you to panelist now along with Mr. Mitchell. You should be able to go ahead and start your audio and video. And Mr. Kirk as well. And Mr. Wins. Mr. Murphy's system of work and courtesy. Thank you very much. I'm having some technical difficulties today, but finally got on. And we have with us today is Will Kirk of Gateway Lofts. The designer is Ryan Pearson of Edge Landscape Architects, along with Dean Wentz, architect, and Chris Mitchell of Palmer Engineering is here as well. I think the staff has presented the plan and the contact study very well. I would just mention a couple things that our zoning is final on this. It was granted September 3rd by the city council. As Mr. Martin mentioned, we are working with Lex Tran about enhancing the bus stop. We've just had some communications in the last couple of days and they are talking about moving it. It'll still be in front of Dairy Queen, but moving it a little closer to our property. We are dedicating 10 feet along South Broadway. We discussed storm drainage at a little greater length at the subdivision committee. I would point out that the current site is about 90, over 95% impervious surface. We will actually probably be a little less than that. So we will probably be increasing the pervious surface on that. If you have more questions about that, Mr. Mitchell can answer that. And this building is designed, I think there's some discussion of traffic, It's designed to try to maximize the ability to use Lex Tran bicycles and pedestrian use in this area, which has a lot of walkable destinations and has a lot of walkable restaurants and entertainment facilities right nearby. So at that, we do agree with the staff recommendation. And we have a lot of people here who can answer any questions and we'd be happy to answer any questions you all might have. Thank you, Mr. Murphy. Do we have any questions for the applicant at this time? I'm not seeing any. Okay. Do we have anyone in the audience that would like to speak on behalf of this application? Please do so by raising your hand or against. Please do so by raising your hand. I'm not seeing any. Okay. Not seeing any hands raised. So we'll bring this back to the commission members for further discussion. Close as part of the application off for commission conversation or motion. Okay. Mr. Penn is ready to make a motion. If there's no questions, I don't want to get in front of you. I didn't see any. No one. I think we're ready to go. Mr. Chairman, I move for approval of PLN-MJDP 2059 Gateway Laws, Grogan and Grogan. With the 15 conditions that were provided by staff, also saying that the B-1 form-based neighborhood zone has been met, all of the decisions have been met with that. I assume you want the same motion. If you want a separate motion, I can do that. No, I think we can take it all in one motion. You can, Mr. Chairman. You can take it all in one motion. Thank you, Mr. Paul. Thank you. All right. We have a motion on the floor. We have a second by Mr. DeMovlin. Any discussions of their motions? I see any. Please raise your hand. Oh, oh, oh. Mr. Martin. Mr. Penn stated 15 conditions, and I wanted to point out that one of those said discuss stormwater management. we think that can be handled under the sign-off for engineering. So you want to eliminate number 15? Yes, sir. We wanted you to hear the discussion and be aware that staff and the applicant are very much aware of the stormwater issues. I will reconfigure my motion saying 14 conditions, eliminating number 15. All right. And does the second still stand? Mr. DeMolden? Yes. Okay. All in favor, please raise your hand. And it's unanimous. Motion passes. Thank you. Thank you all very much. Thank you. Good. Okay. Keep me right here, Tracy. Phase nine. Phase nine. We're on the under re-approval, continue discussion items, extension items, PLN, MJDP 20-17 Polo Club Center staff. Thank you. Okay, so this is located at 6411 Polo Club Lane. So we have Manowar Boulevard to the west and Polo Club Boulevard to the south on this plan. Then Polo Club Lane extends north into the property from Polo Club Boulevard. The Planning Commission originally approved this plan on June 11th of this year. And this first plan on the left side is that plan that was approved back in June. So you see the two buildings on that plan. The applicant has since revised their plan and they've requested a continued discussion. So their new plan is the one on the right. And as you can see, the main change to the plan is that now we only have one building. However, I want to point out that the number of units has stayed the same. They have 24 units of elderly housing in this building. So the revised set of conditions are the second set of conditions that are listed in your agenda for today. So we have our typical sign-off still. Condition number 12, we still need the height of the proposed retaining walls. I'm going to go back to the plan. Condition 13, we need note number 6 on the plan corrected. There's just some different language that needs to be put there. Condition 14, the Planning Commission does need to make a finding that the plan still complies with the EAMP, and you all should have a memo of EAMP compliance statement in the Google Drive. We also have the pedestrian connection to Blackford property. We think that can be resolved. This plan does propose exterior stairs to a public sidewalk on Manowar Boulevard. And finally, we just need the non-residential use denoted on the actual building on the plan. Because this new building is now over 20,000 square feet, it is required to have a commercial component. And that is a requirement of the CC zone. And with that, I will open it up to the commission for any questions. Thank you, Lauren. Any questions for staff? Mr. Demovelin? I think you said correct note number six. My notes say it's note number seven. I just want to clarify. So it used to be note number seven. it's now note number six so if you look on like the second list of conditions there are two condition lists I didn't scroll far enough thank you okay any other questions for staff Okay, I see any. We have an applicant. We'll be promoting Johan Graham and Steve Garland. If you could have promoted, you should be able to start your audio and video, please. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. You're a Saints fan, I see. My cell phone rang right when you spoke, and I didn't have it on mute. I see you're a Drew Brees fan up there. Okay. So I'm opening the floor up to you, applicant. Johan? Yeah. Based on what Lauren said, Lauren, are we deleting note 15 about the pedestrian connection? Is that what I understood that you recommended? No. That note really should just stay resolved pedestrian connection so that we can make sure that's fully addressed before this plan is certified. okay i bet you're mentioning that the steps to main award could be the resolution to that note it could be yes that's possible okay okay any advocate any further questions any concerns besides that question you had no all right commission members do you have any questions for the applicant at this time Not seeing any. Does anyone in the audience want to speak on behalf or against this particular application? Please do so by raising your hand. Not seeing any hands raised. Okay. We'll bring this back to the commission members and open it up for discussion or a motion. Looks like staff has a recommendation of approval. Mr. Nickel. Yes, if we're not going to have any comment, I'll make a recommendation to approve or re-approve PLNMJDP 20-00017 Polo Club Center, Sakura Justice Property Unit 6, with the staff's recommendation for approval and the 16 notes that we're looking at on our sheet. Okay, we have a motion and a second by Mr. Bell. Mr. Chairman, I think he probably would like to include the findings also as a part of that. Yes, I would like to include the findings. Please, thank you for correcting me. Thank you, Mr. Wilson. And we have a second by Mr. Bell. any discussion to that motion? Okay. Hearing none, all in favor, please raise your hand. Right. Unanimous. Motion is approved. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Oh, yes, I was going to get to the staff items. It looks like we have the luxurious Mr. Jim Duncan with all the new locks. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you all for being with us this afternoon. I think the chair is going to get you all out in plenty of time to enjoy the rest of this beautiful day. So I'll go ahead and spoil it now by telling you about the next meetings coming up. We'll be looking forward to seeing you. We do have a Planning Commission work session scheduled for next Thursday, October 15th at 1.30. We will have several items on that agenda, including some of the ZODA updates for you. But also, we'll be getting our annual report from the PDR program. Beth Overman will be making that for us. And Tracy will have the meeting and filing schedule for you all to review for your meeting and filings for next calendar year. So we will have a full agenda next Thursday and hope you all can participate. And then we're going to go ahead and look ahead one more week to October 22nd. That's a Thursday, which is your ordinary zoning hearing. So we'll hold that meeting. And then on Friday, October 23rd, we have scheduled David Pike, Attorney David Pike, who ordinarily appears before you all representing Cell Tower applicants. But he is those of you who've been around also know that he from time to time provides training for us, an update on legal issues in Kentucky and best practices and planning. we will have him all day Friday, October 23rd and we'll be getting you all more information about that but we'll be inviting the Planning Commission and the Board of Adjustment to attend that training which will count as your required training under KRS so please look for more information in the coming days about that and then because we are asking you to or giving you the opportunity to meet with us two days in a row on the 22nd and the 23rd, we are considering canceling the Planning Commission work session that is scheduled for Thursday, October 29th. But by the time of the October 22nd zoning hearing, we will have that finalized. And so you all can take action to remove that from the calendar if you need to. But at this time, we hope to get everything we need into the work session next week, and then give you all a break on the 29th. That's all I have, Mr. Chair. keep giving us that good news like that and keep coming back. Now, does anyone have any questions for Jim while we haven't? Not seeing any. Thank you again. And thank you, staff. Tom, thank you. Thank you, Tracy. Thank you, Hal. Thank you, other Tracy. So with that being said, this meeting is adjourned. Thank you.