# Planning Commission Zoning Public Hearing - April 28, 2022 > Auto-transcribed civic record · April 28, 2022 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/5560 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/5560?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2022-04-28 - **Last revised**: April 28, 2022 - **Length**: 17,600 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Urban County Planning Commission met on April 28, 2022, at 1:30 PM in the Council Chamber, 2nd Floor LFUCG Government Center, located at 200 East Main Street in Lexington, Kentucky. Chairman Forester presided over the meeting, which included four agenda items, four motions and votes, and four public comments. The Commission approved the minutes from the previous meeting, postponed a PUD-3 Zone Amendment, approved a Zone Map Amendment for Millennium Realty, LLC, and approved a Property Development Plan for Charles A. & Darlene Martha. Overall, the Commission took action on four matters, with three items approved and one item postponed. ## Attendance **Present:** Larry Forester, Frank Penn, Ivy Barksdale, Zach Davis, Janice Meyer, Robin Michler, Bruce Nicol, Graham Pohl, and Judy Worth. **Absent:** Headley Bell and Anthony de Movellan. **Late:** Ivy Barksdale. ## Votes and Decisions **Approval of Minutes** [timestamp: 0:24:43] The board unanimously approved the minutes of the March 24, 2022 public hearing. The motion was made by Judy Worth and seconded by Janice Meyer. All eight board members voted in favor with no opposition or abstentions. **Postponement of PUD-3 Zone Amendment (PLN-ZOTA-22-00006)** [timestamp: 0:26:22] The board unanimously voted to postpone the amendment to Article 22, Appendix C to create the Planned Unit Development 3 (PUD-3) zone. Frank Penn made the motion and Graham Pohl seconded it. All eight board members voted in favor. The matter was postponed to the May 26, 2022 meeting. **Zone Map Amendment for Millennium Realty, LLC (PLN-MAR-22-00004)** [timestamp: 0:40:17] The board unanimously approved a zone map amendment for Millennium Realty, LLC to change the zoning from B-3 and B-6P to I-1. Frank Penn made the motion and Graham Pohl seconded it. All eight board members voted in favor with no opposition or abstentions. **Development Plan for Charles A. & Darlene Martha Property (PLN-MJDP-22-00012)** [timestamp: 0:41:19] The board unanimously approved the development plan for the Charles A. & Darlene Martha Property. Frank Penn made the motion and Graham Pohl seconded it. All eight board members voted in favor. The approval included conditions: condition #14 was removed, and conditions #12 and #13 were to be resolved by the time of the final development plan. All votes cast during the meeting were unanimous, with the following board members voting on all matters: Larry Forester, Frank Penn, Zach Davis, Janice Meyer, Robin Michler, Bruce Nicol, Graham Pohl, and Judy Worth. ## Public Comment Four members of the public addressed the meeting regarding the proposed development. **Mark Amon** [timestamp: 1:43:23], president of the Dogwood Trace Neighborhood Association, raised multiple concerns about the development plan. His comments addressed lot sizes, traffic safety, neighborhood identity, water runoff, and greenway access. **Mike Cresetti** [timestamp: 2:00:42] focused on connectivity issues within the proposed development. He emphasized the need for creative solutions to address connectivity challenges and suggested alternatives to connecting all stub streets, noting that such connections could overburden certain streets. **Bennett Clark** [timestamp: 2:02:07], a realtor and resident, discussed lot sizes and their impact on the neighborhood. He advocated for lot sizes that would transition more effectively with existing neighborhoods and suggested that conditional approvals for lot sizes be considered. **Jan Geddes** [timestamp: 2:06:21] raised flooding concerns, highlighting increased flooding issues resulting from past developments in the area. She requested an independent review of the stormwater management plans proposed for the new development. ## Contested Items **Proposed Development on Old Schoolhouse Lane** Residents raised significant concerns about a proposed development project on Old Schoolhouse Lane. The community opposition centered on multiple issues: - **Lot sizes**: Residents sought larger lot sizes for the proposed development - **Traffic safety**: Concerns were raised about traffic impacts, with residents requesting traffic calming measures - **Neighborhood identity**: Community members expressed concerns about how the development would affect the character of the neighborhood - **Flooding**: Residents identified flooding as a concern related to the proposed development The residents advocated for modifications to the project, specifically requesting larger lot sizes and the implementation of traffic calming measures to address their safety and community character concerns. ## Approval of Minutes The commission discussed and approved the minutes from the March 24, 2022 meeting. [timestamp: 00:24:43] Key speakers on this agenda item included Judy Worth and Janice Meyer. The minutes were approved by the commission. ## Postponement of PUD-3 Zone Amendment **Identifier:** PLN-ZOTA-22-00006 The commission discussed the PUD-3 zone amendment and determined that additional time was needed to complete work on the proposal. [timestamp: 00:26:22] **Key Speakers:** - Frank Penn - Graham Pohl **Outcome:** The commission voted to postpone the decision on the PUD-3 zone amendment. The matter was rescheduled for consideration at the May 26, 2022 meeting, allowing the commission more time to review and develop the amendment before taking final action. ## Millennium Realty, LLC Zone Map Amendment **Identifier:** PLN-MAR-22-00004 The commission considered a zone map amendment for Millennium Realty, LLC, which proposed changing the zoning designation from B-3 and B-6P to I-1 to accommodate future light industrial use. [timestamp: 0:40:17] **Key Speakers** Frank Penn and Graham Pohl presented and discussed the amendment during the meeting. **Outcome** The commission approved the zone map amendment as presented. ## Charles A. & Darlene Martha Property Development Plan **Identifier:** PLN-MJDP-22-00012 The commission reviewed and approved the development plan for the Charles A. & Darlene Martha Property during this meeting [timestamp: 0:41:19]. **Key Participants** The discussion involved Frank Penn and Graham Pohl as primary speakers on this agenda item. **Outcome** The commission approved the development plan with conditions to be resolved by the final development plan stage. This approval allows the project to move forward, pending satisfaction of specified conditions during the final development plan phase. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (8-0): Approval of the minutes of the March 24, 2022 public hearing - **PLN-ZOTA-22-00006** — postponed (8-0): Postponement of the amendment to Article 22, Appendix C to create the Planned Unit Development 3 (PUD-3) zone - **PLN-MAR-22-00004** — passed (8-0): Zone map amendment for Millennium Realty, LLC from B-3 and B-6P to I-1 - **PLN-MJDP-22-00012** — passed (8-0): Development plan for Charles A. & Darlene Martha Property --- ## Full transcript as well, but we also just love for people to stop by because, I mean, we're different than what most people are used to as far as a batting cage goes. I mean, most people, you know, when they come in, they walk through these doors, especially the kids, like, oh, my gosh, okay, this is not what we expected. We just expected, you know, something that was going to be a little bit dingy, maybe, you know, not lit well, but then they walk in, they're like, wow, this is amazing. So, you know, that's having people come and actually walk in and see the facility is one of the best ways. And I think that from the technology side, too, from the hit tracks that we'll show you on the pitching machine to them be able to pick their ballpark that they want to hit in their major league park and see the ball flight, see where it went, play home run derby aspect back there. The kids love it. And like Leon said, from the atmosphere of the facility, the cleanliness, the brightness of it, and the technology side, I mean, kids, it's kind of a baseball, softball heaven for them. What's the most preferred field that people play on? Ooh. It's St. Fenway. He's probably right. It's St. Fenway Park in Boston. You'd think it would be Cincinnati, but I think he's right. You'd think it would be Cincinnati. I think he's right. For sure. Okay. Well, that's excellent. And we talked a little bit before this, but some scholarship or co-op opportunities that are for the community. Yeah. Would you mind diving into those? Sure. So a lot of our local juniors and seniors, Fayette County Public Schools, we offer a program. We've got a couple that come over in the afternoons after their morning classes. They're in a co-op program. They're able to learn the front desk, work in the cages here, learn the business to earn hours of credit in the co-op program. So, you know, we love to partner with a lot of the counselors and administrators at your local high schools here in Fayette County to give them job exposure and experience. So, you know, we enjoy doing that. We've had some great kids come through here that are currently here that work with us. Well, I appreciate you guys reaching out to the community and offering those opportunities for our youth. Now, we spoke about the summer camp coming up here. Do we have any dates for that? Yep. So starting on June 6th is our first week. And then from June 6th on, which is, I believe, the first week of summer, we're doing eight weeks straight of summer camp. So our camp director, Sarah, she's excited. She's got a lot of fun things planned. She wanted to do eight weeks. We're excited about it. Our camps will be 9 to 3, Monday through Friday. So we try to keep that normal school schedule for parents for drop-off and pickup, bring a sack lunch, tennis shoes, T-shirt. You don't even need your gear. We've got, as Leon mentioned, your bats and your helmets for a full day. Wear them out and have some fun. You'll see my little ones up here. Good, good, yeah. Well, gentlemen, thank you guys for having us out here today. This is excellent. Again, we are located off Georgetown Road on Mercer. This is D-Bat. And Leon and Alan, thank you, gentlemen. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thanks for coming out. Thank you. When it comes to making plans, you are the best. The same way you plan each detail for those moments. Start planning to protect you and your loved ones from a natural disaster. Protecting your family is the best plan you can make. Welcome back. Joining me is Mama Combs. Mama, thanks for joining me. Not a problem at all. Thanks for having me. Absolutely. Now, we're here to talk about a little testimonial about DBAT here. And if you mind, give a background of how you found the location and a little bit more about your background. So, really good friends with one of the owners. And so I knew DBAT was coming. Very excited about it. I have a daughter that plays travel softball. And when I say plays travel softball, like she loves it. She has her plans for college. She eats, sleeps, and breathes softball. This is what she wants to do. She doesn't like to do any other sports. Prior to DBAT, there wasn't another facility in town that I could take her to to even hit off a pitching machine that actually pitched softballs. She can hit a baseball, but that's not what she does, right? Sure. So having somewhere for her to go hit off a pitching machine that pitches softballs, being able to go in a cage that she can actually pitch softballs and it be laid out for softball instead of baseball, she didn't have that. So we put a lot of time and money into softball, and for her to have a facility that is geared towards softball and not just baseball is a huge deal. She can pull up and see softball players on the window outside. As soon as she walks here in the pro shop, she sees softball players for the Olympic team on the wall. So she knows that she's in a place that's for her as well. It's welcoming for softball players. The cover on the bathroom, you know, it's yellow softball underhand pictures, so that's pretty cool. Outside of her knowing that this is for softball, she also has access to legit instructors, instructors that are female like her, so they know changes that her body has gone through. They know changes that she will go through, and they can help her take herself to the next level, and they are collegiate players, so she looks up to them. She has somebody she can look up to, people that know more than me, more than her male softball coaches. Because although one of them thinks he knows everything, he really doesn't. So it's great that she has that. Really a one-stop shop for us. She can come for hitting. She can come for pitching. She doesn't catch, but they have instructors for catching. And that's really amazing. And that's geared towards softball. They have all that for baseball as well, but softball's not put on the back burner. It's there for softball too. So really great opportunity for her to come in and have access to whatever she needs here. And then there is the pro shop that also has stuff for softball players as well. They do have a parent lounge. I'd set up my laptop, work in the parent lounge for hours. Like literally my day would be in the office because she would be here. We'd bring my nephew with me because he plays baseball as well. and they could come together, soft toss each other in the cages, swipe their cards and start the pitching machines for each other because it's very easy to switch between baseball and softball on those. So it was really fun for them, good bonding moments for them over the summer. They got to work together. I didn't have to be out there to start the machines, so that was great as well. And then I have more kids that don't play softball or baseball, but they would come. It was just fun, like a family type of environment. So outside of the summer camps, they also host birthday parties, teen parties. There is a multipurpose room that can even be used for, there was another young man that did his signing for his college team here as well. They had the teen backdrop. The school, the room was full of parents, family members. It was honestly amazing. And just to know that these kids have access to something like this here in town, he also works here, that's a big deal. Most kids do that at their school. So for him to work here and like this place enough to do that, that's really a big deal. I will say for the instructors and the staff members, they're all very knowledgeable. I have another daughter that actually plays basketball, but she actually does her speed and agility here. So huge for me as a mom because that's two birds and one stone. It's a one-stop shop. Yes. I have one doing hitting lessons and the other doing speed and agility, and it's for basketball. But Thomas is so good, he is able to tailor that to her as well. And sitting there watching Addison do speed and agility for softball and then Isabel doing it for basketball, I see the difference. I see what he's doing, and it makes sense. I don't know, you know, all the things he knows, but it makes sense on the stuff that they're doing, and he's very knowledgeable. You do not have to call to book lessons. You don't have to be here to book lessons. I could be laying in my bed without my phone, open up the app, select my child's name, and select the lesson, and it's done. Like nothing else from there. It's already done. It's super easy, user-friendly, and it makes life really, really easy. Let me also point out that, yes, my daughter plays softball. I have to tell you all this. So Monday, she has hitting lessons with Sarah. She's absolutely amazing. Every Monday, it never fails. I hear Adam. He is a baseball instructor. working with another kid sometimes the cage is beside me sometimes the cage is not beside us but I hear him and I hear how he interacts with these boys and I just you can hear the giggles you can hear the encouragement and you can hear that he's having a good time and that child or that group of kids whoever he's with they're having an absolutely amazing time and sometimes I have to turn my attention to them because I want to watch I want to see what's going on and it's really great it's nice to have good coaching interaction it is and to be able to walk in a facility and kids are recognized as soon as they walk in by instructors that are in cages working with other kids but they take that time to acknowledge them, say hi to that child as they're walking in. That's amazing and that really I will say with the camp director she knows all these children. She knows their names. They know her. They look forward to seeing her. It's just great so it's great as well as the rest of the instructors. Everybody here honestly is great. Mama Combs, I appreciate your time. I really do appreciate you run through this testimonial for here and your background with your family and your kids. So thank you. Thank you. It's been a pleasure. And thank you all for joining us for this month's Council Comment. Crochet-toi. Attends. Yeah. Yeah Hold on tight to your dream Yeah When you see the shadows falling When you hear the cold wind calling Hold on tight to your dream Ooh yeah Hold on tight to your dream Yeah Hold on tight To your dreams You know I can't smile without you. I can't smile without you. I can't laugh and I can't sing. I'm finding it hard to do anything. You see, I feel sad when you're sad I feel glad when you're glad You only knew what I'm going through I just can't smile without you You came along just like a song and brightened my day. Who'd have believed that you were part of a dream? Now it all seems like years away. And now you know I can't smile without you. I can't smile without you I can't laugh and I can't sing I'm finding it hard to do anything You see, I feel sad when you're sad I feel glad when you're glad If you only knew what I'm going through I just can't smile Now some people say Happiness takes so very long to find What I find in a heart Leaving your love behind me And you see I can't smile without you I can't smile without you I can't laugh and I can't sing I'm finding it hard to do anything I feel glad when you're glad I feel sad when you're sad If you only knew what I'm going through I just can't smile without you I sit there with a blank expression I say you can't go on anymore It's not like me to come out and help you Maybe I've been down this road before Been living in the shadows, and you come out slow. Now you're in the saddle, got to ride along. Now the dream is shattered, these days are through. Maybe something matters, it's not just for you. So I'm gonna go far broke, because I'm gonna lay down. I've been too long, standing still. All I know is that wherever you need me, you reach out and set me in the shadow. Looking out on that long valley You're telling me I've come so far And you're the reason I finally got there You're the reason it's been so hard You've been living in the shadows Now you hear the call Now you're in the saddle You've got to ride a fall Now you push a little harder Like a shoulder to Every day you'll be calling You're gonna look to the youth Some are gonna go far from Some lay down I've been too long Stand still, all I know Whenever you need me You'll be a child That set me in motion We'll be right back. You do not stand still. I will pick you up when you stumble. You reach out and set me in motion. I'll be too fast to you I'll be too fast to you I'll be too fast to you Thank you. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, everyone. It's April 28th, 2022. Let's welcome everyone to the zoning commission meeting, public hearing. I'd like to call this meeting to order. It is now 1.30. So we have first up on the agenda, agenda item two. We have approval of minutes. I would need a motion for the approval of the March 24th, 2022 minutes. Ms. Worth. Mr. Chair, I move for approval of the minutes. I have submitted. Thank you. And we have a second by Ms. Meyer. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote via Granicus. Thank you. Okay, the motion passes. Agenda item three, any postponements and or withdrawals? Mr. Cato. Good afternoon. I'm on your agenda, page 7, item 5 at the top. That's the PUD3 zoning ordinance text amendment. Because of the nature of it, we just need more time to work on that and to meet with staff. We request a one-month postponement as we continue to work on that, please. Okay. Okay. So we're requesting a one-month postponement, and that's May 26, 2022. All right. Any commission members has any questions or concerns about the recommendation? Seeing none, the floor will be open for a motion. Mr. Chairman, I move for a one-month postponement to the May 26th meeting of PLN Zota 22.6 to the May 26th meeting. Thank you, Mr. Penn. We have a second. Second. Now, Mr. Pol. All in favor, please vote via Granicus. Okay. Mr. Cato, motion passes. Thank you. Thank you. All right. But before we get too further in, I do know we have a number of citizens here today. At 315, we will be moving over to the Phoenix Building, third floor. Just want to make sure everyone's aware of that. That's 101 East Vine Street. So at 315, we will be leaving this chamber location and going over to the Phoenix Building. So we're going to try to get as much in as possible inside the council chambers, where it's a lot more roomy. Staff? Thank you, Chairman Forrester. We do have one item on today's agenda that does qualify as an abbreviated hearing, and that happens to be the first case on your agenda for Millennium Realty, LLC, with an associated development plan for the Charles A. and Darlene Martha property, and that appears on page two. So we'll take that in an abbreviated fashion, unless there's anyone present in the audience that wishes to speak regarding that zone change. for property located at 2417 Georgetown Road. I don't see anyone here, so we'll move ahead and get ready for that presentation for you. Okay. I think we're ready now. We should be on page two. The first hearing is PLNMAR-22-4, Millennial Realty, LLC, and this is the abbreviated hearing. Thank you. Good afternoon, everyone. Daniel Crum planning staff. The first item on your agenda is PLN MAR 22-4. This is a request by Millennium Realty LLC, and it is a request to rezone a 8.837 gross acres of B3 zoning and B6P zoning to light industrial I1 zoning. This is at 2417 Georgetown Road, and the applicant is seeking this rezoning in order to accommodate a future light industrial use at this location. It's important to note that at this time, the applicant has not found a final tenant for this location, so much of this request is speculative. And so some aspects of the preliminary development plan are subject to change once the final tenant is accommodated at this site. The place type that the applicant has identified with this request is an industry and production center, and the development type is industrial and production non-residential. Staff finds that both the place type and development type can be appropriate at this location. Here we have a vicinity map showing the subject property in white, shown in the middle. The subject property fronts on Georgetown Road, which in the vicinity is a major arterial roadway, five lanes. The subject property also has frontage along a service road that runs parallel to Georgetown Road and serves the residential properties, or the B3 zone properties to the north. The subject property is located in between Innovation Drive and Spur Road and is a short distance from Citation Boulevard as well as Newtown Pike and the Interstate. The applicant has indicated that the proximity to these major freight and transportation corridors is a big selling point for why this property is applicable for light industrial uses. As we zoom in a little bit closer, we'll notice the subject property once again shown in white. along with the adjacent zoning. The subject property is currently zoned B3 and was most recently used for a motel use. That use has since been discontinued, so the property is currently vacant. There are several properties to the north that share the same B3 zoning, including the adjacent property, which is a restaurant and motel use, a storage use, and what appear to be single-family residential uses further north. Across Georgetown Road, we have a section of P1 zoning that corresponds to an existing elementary school. We have B6P zoning, which is across the Georgetown Road as well. It has yet to be developed. This portion of right-of-way to the center line of Georgetown Road that is currently zoned B6P will also be zoned B3 in this request as well. To the south and west, we have I-1 zoning with other I-1 light industrial uses. The applicant is seeking this I-1 light industrial zoning in order to attract a light industrial tenant with the aimed goal of attracting a number of high-paying jobs to this location. It should also be noted that this subject property is located within the Royal Spring Aquifer Wellhead Protection Area, and that'll factor in some of the conditions mentioned later on in this request. Here, we have an aerial view of the subject property to sort of situate yourself here. So the subject property is outlined in yellow. Here, the existing access point to Georgetown Road is shown. Ms. Galt will touch on it a little bit later in the presentation when she goes over the specifics of the development plan. But to give you a rough idea of how the site is proposed to function, there will be an access drive running from east to west across the property connecting to the rear here. In the future, that connection could potentially link the adjacent property and provide cross-access through either an easement or a shared development plan. The subject property, the proposal for the industrial use details at approximately 98,000 square foot facility located near the center of the site, being served by parking provided in the front along with landscaping as well as some stormwater management facilities, and then to the rear, additional parking as well as a loading and unloading area. Now, when examining light industrial rezonings and looking at the development criteria, there are two sort of main categories to look at are two kind of overwhelming themes. The first is the environmental impact of it, and the second is the impact on infrastructure. For the first, the applicant is proposing to maintain existing buffers, vegetative buffers, to the south and the north. They plan on preserving a significant tree at this location and are primarily keeping the development of the site to the cleared portions near the center. From an infrastructure standpoint, this site is able to be served by all relevant utilities. However, at the time of the final development plan, once an end user comes into the site, certain aspects of the site facilities, such as pedestrian infrastructure and vehicular infrastructure, specifically relating to how the property is connecting to this major arterial roadway and how pedestrians are circulating through the site, should be evaluated. Here we have some views of the subject property. So the north is a view that's taken from that service road that kind of runs parallel to Georgetown Road. Here you can see the subject property is primarily flat. You do have the significant tree at this location that is proposed to be preserved, but otherwise is generally flat and generally well-suited to industrial uses. Slightly below this image, we have views from Georgetown Road looking north and south, where you can see the access point and kind of evaluate that based on the surrounding context. Overall, staff recommends approval of this request for several reasons. The first, that this is in line with both the goals and policies of the 2018 Comprehensive Plan, as this will activate a large stretch of vacant land that has implications for providing well-paying jobs and other economic development benefits. Staff also finds that it is in keeping with the development criteria of the Comprehensive Plan, as the development is of an appropriate size. It will provide appropriate facilities for pedestrians and vehicular access to the site and has a limited environmental impact. There are, however, a couple of zoning conditions or conditional zoning that is proposed to this request relating to kind of two major aspects. The first being both the applicants and the comprehensive plan stated goals of using these types of areas for providing a high number of well-paying jobs. as well as the second kind of aspect that is figuring into these conditions, which is protection of the Royal Springs Aquifer. So the listed conditional zoning prohibits several uses that are either low employment generators or have environmental implications, such as the storage of hazardous materials. Those are shown on the screen in front of you here. But staff is recommending approval of this request, subject to approval and certification of the corresponding development plan, which is NJDP 2212, Charles A., and Darlene Martha property. At this time, staff would be happy to entertain any questions you have of staff. Ms. Galt will be on momentarily to discuss the development plan and any questions you may have with that. Any questions for staff? Thank you. Good afternoon. We will move forwards. This is MJDP 22-12 Charles A. and Darlene Martha property. And as it was pointed out, this here is Georgetown Road, Citation Boulevard is down here at the bottom. This is the access drive that Daniel was talking about that will reach all the way to the rear to the adjacent property, Kurt Singer property. This is the proposed building with parking in the front and then the loading area to the rear. This is a preliminary development plan, so we have just a few sign-offs from different governmental agencies, engineering traffic, forestry and green space, and environmental quality because this is up in the Royal Springs Aquiferate area if they should have any questions. Had some cleanup conditions, just correct some notes, remove the tree preservation plan information because that'll need to be put on the final development plan. We also want to make sure that we get all the existing and proposed easements that are on the property. We have two discussion questions 12 and 13 discuss connection to Kurt singer property to the northwest subject of the subject property which is this property here this is Kurt singer runs from the south north here then remember we had that proposal of connection through Tiffany's off of Jaggy Fox up through here there was a connection so we're hoping that this will be able to be worked out at some point sometime. So that was one of the discussion questions and the other was to discuss the access along Georgetown Road. Both of these conditions were discussed in the subdivision committee meeting and so seeing this as being a preliminary we believe that we could have it to note that these to be resolved at the time of the final development plan. Then we had the last discussion question was place builder but criteria but Daniel's gone through all that information so that one can be removed and I will leave it to you all to see if there's any other comments or questions any any further comments or questions for staff more curiosity than anything what would the who would be responsible for maintaining the access road should it connect through that's a good question i'm not sure who's going to be responsible for the access road commissioner members of the planning commission i'm fred easters with thoroughbred engineers who prepared the plan at this point in time we are looking at this thing to be a private access will be maintained by the property owners is not for say that the road at time of final development land could become a public dedicated road okay mr. Bo that access road is still owned by the state of Kentucky we tried we tried to buy it they wouldn't sell it so we have no authority to do anything on it with it to it so we really can't answer your question about that Sir, can you state your name and address? Ed Yancey, I represent my name, Realty. Thank you. Any further questions for the applicant or staff? Yes, Mr. Penn. Cheryl, are you wanting to change 12 and 13 to resolve? Is that what you're wanting to do? And eliminate 14, right? Thank you. Okay. All right. Say none. Applicant, do you have anything? Okay. Okay. That's fine. So we'll bring it back to the commission. Any further discussion? The floor is open for a motion. Yes, sir. Mr. Penn? You want a motion for the zone change and then the development plan? Yes, sir. That's the way I would like for it to be. All right. Mr. Chairman, I move for approval of PLNMAR 2214 for the reasons provided by staff. Okay. We have a motion seconded by Mr. Pohl. Any further discussion to that motion? Okay. Seeing none, please vote via Granicus. Okay. Motion passes unanimously. All right. Now the development plan. Mr. Chairman, I move for approval of PLNMJDP-2212 with the 13 conditions eliminating number 14 and changing 13 and 12 to resolve at the time of the final development plan. Thank you, Mr. Penn. Do we have a second to that motion? Second. Second. About it. Mr. Pohl. Thank you. Please vote via Granicus. Okay, thank you sir, motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Thank you, have a good evening. All right, this put us on page four. Staff PLN MER 22-5 Calgill Development LLC. That was on change and development plan with this as well. Yes, sir. And Mr. Crum is currently handing you the list of individuals who have signed up to speak today. I also do have 22 letters of objection that I will hand for your review right now. This is PLN MAR22-00005, the Calgill Development LLC. The applicant is seeking a zone change from an agricultural urban AU zone to a plant neighborhood residential zone, or the r3 zone for approximately 15 net and 15.5 gross acres for the property located at 4630 old schoolhouse road with our 2018 comprehensive plan we ask that applicants identify a place type and development type associated with their application in this case the applicant is seeking to situate their development within an enhanced neighborhood place type and a low density residential development type we'll go through a little bit more of that information as we move through this application the petitioner specifically is asking for this rezoning of the property to allow for the construction of 88 single family detached dwelling units at this location this comes out to an approximate residential density of 5.9 dwelling units per net acre looking at the site and just trying to find the location we are located out harrodsburg road located right here as we are heading out or coming back into the county we are located off of a frontage road of old schoolhouse lane which parallels with harrodsburg road as it enters into the subject property there are four stub streets that also connect with this property we have rosette way or rosette drive right here Larissa Lane located right here, Agape Drive located here, and Reema Way located at this location. We'll talk a bit more about this as we go along. However, in 2014, there was a council resolution that barricaded the end of the sub-street of Agape Drive at this location here. Jumping into the site itself, we get a better view of the zoning surrounding the subject property. There is exclusively residential zoning surrounding this property, a blend of planned neighborhood residential along the south and the west of the subject property, and then a bit to the north along English Station Drive located here. that is R1E or single family detached smaller lot size, R1D located on to the east of the subject property, and then R1C located below La Crosse Court. Jumping into the site itself, we can see the land use that has developed over time surrounding the property. As you can see, there is a significant amount of single family detached residential surrounding the subject property. There has been a bit more of density developed to the north. These are all also very representative of the time frames in which these areas were developed. This area was primarily rezoned for development starting in the late 1980s. We see a fair amount of new development come through as time expands on, including development in the 90s and then development development in the 2010s. A major component of this area is the floodplain and associated floodway. We have the drive-in tributary, which extends across the rear of the subject property, meeting with the confluence of the South Elkhorn Creek at this location. While the floodplain is located off the property the applicant is seeking to keep all residential development off of the floodplain that has been done more primarily to the north whereas there are several properties to the south that actually have floodplain on residential lots that is something that we typically steer away from these days largely because of the impact of the of flood insurance on properties. However, with all zone changes, with all developments, there is a real focus on the impact that that development might have on surrounding watersheds and surrounding developments. Water quality and quantity controls are meant to be placed or implemented at the post-development peak discharges that do not exceed the pre-development discharges. This is saying exclusively within our ordinances that you cannot make water flooding issues run off worse it must be controlled either through retention detention basins or in increases in the infrastructure in the area the applicant has indicated two areas of water retention jumping into the subject properties here or subject property here we are looking into the property from Harrodsburg Road. So this is a view just looking to the east into the property. The lower photo is looking across Harrodsburg Road at the adjacent residential developments. On the bottom left and right, you can see on the left, we are looking down Harrodsburg Road as we travel out of the county towards Jesmond County. And then the bottom right traveling in towards the county and you can see both the old schoolhouse road located at that location and we have Harrisburg Road located here. Rosetta Way, so I'll be going through the various different sub streets and surrounding areas of this property. So Rosetta Way looking into the property here, down English Station Drive towards the east, up towards the west, and then looking down Rosetta way towards the multi-family development rosette way is a collector street jumping over to larissa lane this is down english station drive we're looking down towards the stub street so this property or this roadway actually stubs located right here where you see some vehicles parked due to the location of a spring at the end of this roadway it was planned to continue on but because of the environmental factors it was stubbed and is not planned to continue here we see the two properties that border the end of larissa lane which is we see the stub into the subject property with the fence here and you can see that the the rear of these properties since they are an r1e it's a smaller lot size in which they are basically coming up to the easement to the electrical easement at that location switching sides to the southern portion of the property we are located at on agape drive on this leftmost photo you can see and i apologize to those individuals that are looking from the audience uh but you can see that uh the barricade has been established at that location that is associated with that 2014 council resolution uh we can then look at the two neighboring properties thank you very much uh two neighboring properties specifically the rear yards associated with those properties and then looking down agape drive as we are going out of the county agape drive is an identified collector street the final street that we're looking at is rima way this is opposing larissa lane uh looking up ream away from the point of connection with the subject property and then looking into the property here you can see also the development that has occurred on both sides of the roadway ream away is a identified local street with all zone changes we do go through the uh the practice of looking at the place type and development type associated with the place builder element of the the comprehensive plan in this case the applicant is seeking to apply the enhanced neighborhood place type this is associated with areas that have largely been built and would be incorporating a varied housing type or a new amenity into a neighborhood the applicant is seeking to apply the low density residential development type this is typically a blend of single family detached and single-family attached housing. It is meant to have a variety of different housing types in different areas to support the enhanced neighborhood place type. In this case, the applicant is seeking to apply strictly a single-family detached structure onto their site. However, they are seeking to have a varied lot size and frontage size compared to the rest of the neighborhood. Staff was in agreement with the place type and development type and how they could be appropriate for this location finally the applicant is applying for a rezoning to the planned neighborhood residential or the r3 zone which is a recommended zone within the enhanced neighborhood development or place type and the low density residential development type looking into the site itself you can see that they they are seeking to develop this along a ridge of a street, continuing old schoolhouse road along the property and connecting the street roadways. The connection of the street roadways are not only called for within the comprehensive plan, but they are required by the land subdivision regulations and the zoning ordinance. This is also an important factor when looking at the health, safety and welfare of our community. In discussions with fire and EMS, they also saw that these connections of the roadways were very important, not only to making sure that individuals could be served off of old school house lane and into the rear of the area, but off of Larissa Lane, Agape, and into the Dogwood Trace neighborhood. We see that these connections are imperative to allow for variable access points not only for users of the roadway users of the neighborhood and neighborhood residences but also for those services that are meant to support our whole community in conversations with fire they did also support staff's recommendation of not closing agape drive this was a determination of the urban county council historically do some do some variability in the widths of the roadways however the roadway is a collector street and as miss wade will present here soon has been called for for some time in review of the application staff is recommending approval of this zone change as they are in agreement with the 2018 comprehensive plans goals and objectives staff finds that the proposed rezoning will allow for the development of a vacant and underutilized track of land within the urban service area and for residential use. This is also coupled with the fact that this property is currently zoned AU, which is meant to be a placeholder zone until the urban services can be extended and are adequate to support proposed development. Additionally, the proposed rezoning will support infill and redevelopment, establishing a single-family residential area within the context of the surrounding neighborhood, and the surrounding trail and roadway networks. The proposed development will respect the design features of the area while providing a varied housing choice and with their proposed lot layout, which differs slightly from the general area, but retains a similar lot size. And specifically looking at the lot sizes of English Station and transitioning from English Station, which is a smaller lot size, to this, which is slightly larger or equivalent to English Station, and then into the established development that was really constructed in the end of the 80s, early 90s. Additionally, the proposed development will connect the Greenway and nearby park systems, providing a self- and well-designed pedestrian and bike system. This bike system and the pedestrian system from a built system may not be located on this side of the road. There is still a fair amount of research that is being done for the connectivity of these areas. We do have some planned locations, but those locations do change over time. The proposed development is also seeking not to impact that floodplain area. There are areas, this is a special floodplain hazard area. They are experiencing some flood events. This development will stay out of that floodplain and per the LFUCG stormwater manuals and other engineering manuals will not impact that floodplain negatively. The proposed rezoning will also uphold the urban service area preservation strategy by providing an appropriate and sustainable development for a long underutilized parcel. In addition to the goals and objectives, the applicant and identified a few design policies that supported the rezoning of this property, including access to trail networks, connected street systems, specifically to enhance emergency service accessibility while also creating an inviting streetscape. And then the proposed rezoning is sensitive to the surrounding land use context of single family development. The justification and the corollary development plan are in agreement with the development criteria associated with the low density development type and the enhanced neighborhood place type. They are meeting the site design, building form, and location development criteria, transportation and pedestrian connectivity, and green space and environmental health development criteria. Finally, with all zone changes, it is subject to the approval and certification, and in this case, they are seeking to do a major subdivision plan or a preliminary subdivision plan. This is PLNMJSUB 22-00001. We typically do not see these types of things unless it is a single-family detached development. This will allow an applicant to go ahead and build facilities like roadways and sidewalks. If you have any questions about the zone change, I would be happy to answer those now. Ms. Wade will be presenting the major subdivision plan here in just a moment. Thank you, Hal. Any questions on the zone change? Mr. Paul? Is there a reason why we can't access documents? There should be access to those documents, sir. I will come and check that right now. I'll switch with Ms. Wade and I'll come and give you a hand. How do you get there? Down below. Yeah. And then... Thank you, Bruce. Got it. Here we go. Everybody has access now. Yeah. Yeah. Okay, Ms. Wade. Thank you very much. I'm going to move the microphone down a little. Today we do have a preliminary subdivision plan. This indicates it's a development plan, but it's actually a preliminary subdivision plan for Margaret W. Kamek property, also previously known as W.E. Savage property. And as Hal mentioned, the location is 4630 Old Schoolhouse Road. I'm gonna this is the overall plan I'm gonna zoom in here on for you the access or the the location that Hal described again Harrodsburg Road when I orient you on our plant Harrodsburg Road is along to the you know left side of your drawing and then the greenway for the drive in tributary which is kind of a strange name but unless you know about the area the drive-in tributary in the greenway is to the right side as you can see it again shows the proposed road network on this 15 acre site with old school house being extended a few hundred feet along their frontage and then developing constructing a local street through the center of the subject property and then connecting the two cross streets and as mr. Bailey mentioned the and I think you have an aerial formula the area has been constructed over a fairly long period of time from the 1986 timeframe when development was first proposed out there until recently when the tracery oak area was built in the 2015-16 range so this area has seen quite a few pieces larger pieces of property come in at different stages and I think that is part of the reason that we have a street network that seems a bit disjointed in this area but the idea in the 1980s after that first area came in for rezoning in dogwood trace was to create a road network that paralleled harrodsburg road and what we see is that is agape drive and then rosette way into from tracery oak down to the south to the jesmond county line and the reason that we do these parallel road networks is is because if each farm that came in was allowed access to Harrodsburg Road, the traffic that you see today would be at least twice as bad. The congestion would just be more and more difficult to manage if you have too many access points along our arterial roadways. It just, in essence, if each subdivision or small piece of the subdivision comes in and can only go one direction, we just create gridlock on our arterial network. So the plans of the past identified what is Agape Drive as that connection street, the collector street, between these what used to be small farms, either 50 acres or this one's 15. I think English Station was closer to 10. So as those small pieces came in, we didn't have more connections to Harrodsburg Road. I'm going to go back a slide. So the applicant in looking to develop this property is proposing 88 single-family residences, with most of those fronting onto the local street, and six with their frontages along what would be Rima Way or Larissa, at the back of the property and adjacent to the greenway there are two detention basins that are shown by the engineer and those would be to allow for storm water drainage to occur on the site before it goes to the existing network so there is some storm water management along harrodsburg road but then the greenway also serves as storm water management within this area let's see primarily these lots are approximately 40 feet wide and 115 feet deep and that makes them about 4600 square feet in size by comparison to the adjoining subdivisions to the north in English Station all of those lots are less than 4,500 square feet because they're in an R1E zone and that's a requirement of that zone by comparison on lacrosse court which is part of the dogwood subdivision those lots are approximately 10,000 square feet so about twice as big as these obviously the the widths and lengths determine the square footage of your lot size and then also lead to you know how much house you can build on each lot I know we've heard as a staff some some concern about a few things within this area. One of those is flooding because of the creek to the back and also because this site is mostly treed at the moment. It's covered with quite a few trees. The applicant identified three significant trees on the property. Most of the property has been overgrown because they stopped farming it about 20 years ago. And so it does have a lot of volunteer trees. But the significant trees identified one here in the middle that will probably be impacted by the construction of the local street, and it's a black cherry. Another a little bit closer to the flood plain in Greenway, also a black cherry. And then one tree within the Greenway, which is a sycamore. obviously the one in the greenway we would presume would be saved and feel that it's possible that the tree the black cherry again between agape and Rima could be saved in addition the urban forester identified tree the tree lines adjacent to the adjacent properties as having some trees worth preserving and asked that the Planning Commission or with his sign off would ask for a 10-foot preservation area along the rear of all of those properties and just to note we've heard conversations about requesting some fencing between lot lines if a fence were installed that would could have conflicts most likely would have conflicts with a tree preservation area so that could be something that's they aren't compatible necessarily so I'm trying to think what else I might note the conditions associated with the development plan as you know the Commission but maybe the audience doesn't when the Planning Commission considers a zone change you are making a recommendation to the council about the zoning but you have the authority to to approve the development plan or preliminary subdivision plan and so this plan would only move forward if the zoning is approved so that's the first contingency but you evaluate it based on what's proposed the R3 zone there are several sign-off conditions that are typical for our preliminary subdivision plans and those are for engineering and traffic engineering they're accepting drainage and stormwater and floodplain information as well as street cross sections and access the landscape examiner will sign off addressing office our urban forester I mentioned he had some concerns the Department of Environmental Quality our bike and pedestrian planner and our green space planner as well as water quality they assure there's enough capacity in our sanitary sewer in this area of note is one change that occurred within the last few weeks related to access to the greenway the applicant had originally denoted an access point from rima way and larissa towards the greenway upon further consultation with our bike and pedestrian planner and our green space planner as well as parks and rec the the staff of the government has indicated that another access to the greenway would not be necessary along this piece of property because there is one so close at the end of Larissa Lane currently so that is a change noted on this plan there are two conditions at the end that we needed to discuss today for the subdivision plan and the first was to discuss the street cross sections and the location at street trees the cross sections do match what our local requirements are as well as even though this is a collector street by function it's matching the current widths of the adjacent subdivisions so that has continuity what is not completed in terms of that is for the applicant to denote the location of their street trees and that usually occurs within that cross section so we just still want the tree location to be indicated within the cross section so that can resolve that and then the last condition is to discuss place builder and i believe mr bailey already addressed those comments at this point i'd be happy to answer any questions from the commission and then we can move to the next phase okay i think we got a question from mr penn and then next the subdivision committee did recommend approval of this okay mr penn you first and the next up Mr. Nickel. Mr. Wade, my question to you is, and I think it's the 800-pound gorilla in the room, by the council on their 2014 closing Agape as a northern terminus, if we recommend approval of this zone change, do they have to go back to the council to get that opened up? If we recommend that on the development plan that it go through? Yes. What's the steps here that have to be done? My understanding is that the council required the construction of a barricade at the end of Agape Drive, but they did not close the right-of-way. So that right-of-way does still exist as government right-of-way roadway. And so the council would need to make a resolution to direct the administration, streets and roads, to remove that barricade once the streets are available to be connected. And if both sides are right-of-way, then the next logical step would be to remove the barricade so obviously people could travel through on the roadway. Thank you. Yes, Ms. Wade, my question to you is, as we're looking at this, for a comment, we're looking at the development plan, the houses just to the south of Old School House Lane that are on La Crosse, those are our three lots, correct? How is that correct? Yes. Okay, so the zone directly to the south on La Crosse is the same zone as being proposed for the development we're looking at now? Yes. And so the developers have the ability to, or excuse me, the market can determine what lot sizes would work. As we're looking at this, previously you'd think when La Crosse Court was developed, the larger lot sizes were in higher demand. almost look like a hundred foot they are 100 by 100 really nice lots but by right um they would have the ability to come in and probably get two and a half lots on each lot below so we are seeing an increase in density but not an increase in the zone i just wanted to point out that the market's demanding the frontage not the zone i agree that's accurate okay thank you one of the staff findings in the recommendation for approval is that the proposed rezoning is sensitive to the surrounding context to the adjacent neighborhoods as it is proposing a similar built form as the adjacent developments and i would guess that almost everyone in this crowd would disagree with that could you explain how the staff sees that when we evaluate zoning changes there's an attempt not to really micromanage the exact house type or size of a structure on the proposed lots and concentrate on the land use recommendation which is what the comprehensive plan addresses and what from a you know planning perspective we're trying to address and then letting the the private developer and the market dictate the type of structures that are constructed on those lots and so we do take a larger view of the rezoning in terms of our three is residential they're proposing single family the neighborhood and this entire area is developed with single-family residential and so that from a planning perspective is compatible so was it fair to say that you don't look at scale relationships or relative the relationship between a built form and green space I'm not sure that I would go to that extent because the zoning ordinance allows for really a building envelope to go on each lot it dictates a front yard and a rear yard and side yards and the builder has a lot of flexibility within those boundaries and so i think those parameters are already set by our zoning ordinance and they for that reason they aren't really specifically considered on a proposal like this because the regulations are in place but doesn't that skirt your responsibility to assess context issues no i would i would again because the staff is not charged with being the developer or assessing the quality the materials that those are things that our community does not regulate other communities do but our community does not and so there is a fine line between where the staff can make a recommendation before we are exceeding our authority yeah I understand that and I you know I but I also understand how why there was this little outcry just now and um it's it's a dilemma because most most people who clap their hands um would really object to some of the um types of regulations that would be needed for you to make a different reading on that yes and um so it's a it's a very dicey issue but one that we need to be talking about so thank you thank you good question mr pole mr nickel yes when we're talking about contact sensitivity um r3 to r3 i'm confused about how let me back up is r1 a zone that is recommended by the planning staff the comprehensive plan does not recommend comprehensive plan my understanding is comprehensive plan is pointing all single-family development towards r3 zone is that correct yes okay and with rc r3 zone this development plan shows a lot size that is appropriate yes Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Nichol. Any further questions for staff? Just a clarification on how that tree protection area works. Can you go over that real quick? Article 26 of the zoning ordinance allows for a tree protection area to be placed on a preliminary subdivision plan and then that tree protection area would be identified for during construction and then once a house was built or you know occupied on the property then that tree preservation area remains on the plat and the preliminary subdivision plan but obviously trees grow and and die and so as the trees die we expect homeowners to remove them and and or remove them at will if they choose that they don't want to have that. Really the only or the best way to protect the trees for a long term and protect them hopefully from individual homeowners removing them is through a conditional zoning restriction to allow for a buffer along those edges. At this point, the staff had not recommended a conditional zoning buffer to protect the trees, but certainly that's something we can draft for you today if that's desired okay thank you Miss Wade applicant Mr. Nichol good afternoon Nick Nicholson here on behalf of Calgill development Joe Brumley and Carson Bauman are also here with me on behalf of Calgill and Mark McIntosh is here with Vision. the specific request that we are here to discuss is whether 15 acres of the existing agricultural urban zone should be zoned planned neighborhood R3 and solely for a single family development. The place builder place type that was selected was enhanced neighborhood and the development type is for low density. At this point we are proposing 88 single family lots with a dedicated access to the Greenway Trail that is shown in the Greenway Master Plan as part of a neighborhood focal point and usable open space amenity area. Before I kind of jump into the justification on this development, I want to basically kind of address one of the main areas of unease for the neighbors that, Mr. Penn, you've already kind of hit on. And that is Agape and Rima and that status. Right now, we are showing the connections to all stub streets that are on our property currently. This is required by the subdivision regulations. We did not have a choice but to show the sub-streets on this development plan. Nothing in this request today is trying to lift the barricade for Agape. Nothing on this request today is trying to argue that another road should not have a barricade. The Planning Commission does not have that authority to do that on this plan as part of a zone change. This power solely rests with the urban county council. Even when this zone change gets to the urban county council, it is my understanding as part of that specific proceeding, they could not lift a barrier, they could not add a barrier, or close right-of-way. That is not done through the division of planning. It is a separate dedicated process through the Division of Public Works that then goes through the council's planning and public safety committee. And so I wanted to basically, you know, kind of acknowledge this from the jump. We are incredibly neutral on the status of this roads. In talking with the various neighbors of Dogwood Trace and English Station, it is a very split bunch on how these roads should be treated. We have heard that both Agape and Rima should be closed. We have heard that both should be open. We have heard that if Agape is closed, then we have to either keep Rima open or close Rima. We've also heard open them both up, but close English Station to ensure apartment traffic cannot cut through Dogwood Trace. We are neutral here. We do not need these access points for this specific development. We have a dedicated access point to Old Schoolhouse Lane, which we are improving as part of this development, that has its own stoplight on Harrodsburg Road. So I wanted to just go ahead and be as crystal clear as possible with regards to these road systems because I know how much of a hot-button topic this is. Now, with regards to the comprehensive plan, the principal argument for this zone change is that R3 is in compliance with the comprehensive plan. It is a natural zone for this specific property. It will allow us to activate a tract of underutilized agricultural land that is entirely surrounded by existing residential uses. It will continue the same residential uses that are adjacent in the fact that we are adding single family lots. We believe that we are doing that at an appropriate density to remain respectful of those existing neighborhoods, but also stay true to the very clear mandate that the comprehensive plan has that we have got to add density inside the urban service area. Now, we kind of hear, have heard a lot from the neighbors, and we've already gotten the discussion so far today. Well, why aren't we coming in at R1? As Mr. Nickel kind of pointed out, Place Builder does not recommend R1 currently. It only recommends R3 for a low-density type single-family use. R3 has been by far the most used residential zone in the past 10 to 15 years, and it's used right around us. Dogwood Trace has R3. The tracery is all R3. Firebrook is a majority of R3. There are parts of Rabbit Run, there are parts of Palomar and Copperfield that are R3, and they're mixed in with R1 zoning successfully. And I'll get to this in just a second on density, But I would like to point out that the lots that we are proposing meet the R1E standards, which is exactly what the other adjacent property is zoned. So we are asking for the same zoning that is to our south. We are proposing lots that meet the zoning requirements of R1E to our north. Now, on density, there is no hiding. we are proposing lots that are smaller than dogwood trace but we are also proposing lots that are in conformance with the type of lots that are being consistently built all over lexington today just two weeks ago you all have re-approved a development plan that's been approved since 2016 that had this exact lot on there, 40 by 110s with the Coventry subdivision plan. The R3 zone is going to allow us a perfect opportunity to absorb much needed density and do so while maintaining the single family area. We're proposing the enhanced neighborhood place type because we heard during the tracery zone change that the multifamily that Ball Homes built is enough for this area. If you look from basically the residential going from the tracery all the way down to Jessamine County's line, this finishes out the residential development. And it does so, yes, by proposing a slightly different lot size, but is in conformity with existing lots that are in the area, exactly as called for in the comprehensive plan. when I first heard that this property was coming up for a zone change I honestly expected that we were going to be having a very different conversation we were going to be talking about attached homes or townhomes we were going to be talking about some type of creative multifamily and quads it's the stuff that our comprehensive plan does talk about specifically and I was honestly I'll admit scared to death that that's what this plan was going to be I was ecstatic when I saw that it was single family because I went through the battle with the tracery and I knew how much this was going to be a controversial zone change not because of what's actually before you all today but because of the road connections and the concerns that dogwood trace consistently brought up during the tracery zone change about cut through traffic I very much understand it and that's why I wanted to so adamantly point out these situations with the roads at the very start of this presentation. Now, the density, I can say that is in keeping with the status quo of how Lexington has been developed over the past 10 years, because you all just found out from the Sustainable Growth Task Force that that is what status quo has been for the past 10 years. Six dwelling units per acre is what Lexington has been built out at when you're taking agricultural land and turning into residential. This was just the status quo. To keep Lexington being developed how we have been for 10 years is calling for six dwelling units per acre. We're just under it at 5.9, but that is how I can say that what we are asking for you today is exactly what has been built consistently for the past 10 years. It hasn't been built consistently for the past 30 years. I acknowledge that what we built in the late 80s in the early 90s are not what we're able to build today we do not have the land availability we do not have the just say the benefit of being able to build 100 by 100 lots anymore because of the status of our urban service boundary now uh for kind of the record I think Hal did an excellent job already going over the points of the comprehensive plan, but I do want to at least touch on the individual themes and how we are complying with them. The theme angle one, of course, is expand housing choices. I feel like I've already dwelled on that enough with regards to how these different lots are expanding the housing offerings, but we are not doing so in a way to overburden density with multifamily. If you look at the east side of Harrodsburg Road as an entire neighborhood, as called for in the comp plan, it has the multifamily, it has the different lot sizes that would be able to say that we are expanding the housing choices. Without a doubt that this is in support of the infill and redevelopment throughout the urban service area. I point to the fact that that says throughout. That does not say in the infill and redevelopment area. infill occurs throughout our entire community the only way to keep that boundary there is if we do focus on infill throughout the entire area we have a piece of property that has been inside the urban service area since the 1967 comprehensive plan for 55 years this has set as underutilized land while development has sprung up all around it. So without a doubt, this is an infill site. We propose we are having a very well-designed neighborhood. We are matching these zones, and we are matching the square footage of the zone to our north. We are providing safe interactions for pedestrian facilities, and we are protecting the natural features of this greenway. I'm going to talk about the greenway here in just a second, but I have to leave this slide up here for just just a minute because it is a very specific goal and objective we are supposed to establish and promote road network connections on protecting the environment we have ensured all of the floodplain is off of any single family lot that is being proposed miss wade was correct we have been talking with environmental planning and with bike and ped on where we should put a trail connection into the long-term uh kind of lfucg trail that is planned for this area behind uh behind the the our individual parcels in the greenway we originally had one location there was concerns about the slope in that location she asked us to remove that and then i believe just truly i think yesterday she thinks she might have found another spot that we could actually put one on this property we are happy to do so we have basically left a note on there that we will work with her on the exact location and design of a trailhead connection through the plotting process we're happy to do it but as miss wade did point out there is one that is just three single-family parcels down from this property also on the environmental side as miss wade did point out we are adding in the requested 10-foot tree protection area on both sides of these properties we are also putting a 20-foot utility easement outside of that tree protection area on both sides so we are offering a 30-foot buffer area going the entire length of our properties in order to make sure that there is a significant buffer between single family lots and single family lots and we're doing so in an effort to specifically make sure that we are going to be able to protect the perimeter trees as requested by the urban urban forester and talking with the neighborhood they also would like a barrier in between these lots we will we agree and we'll put it on the plan that we will install a six foot wooden fence between the property lines in conjunction though with the urban forester because as you all know trees don't really care about property lines especially trees that have basically been growing on camp for you know who knows how long and so while we understand and respect the need and want to have a barrier there we also understand the desire to keep those trees I think the neighbors would want to keep those trees as well and so the only thing we could kind of figure out and talking with neighbors and talking with staff and with the urban forester is we kind of need to just have that conversation as this property comes online we will agree to put up a fence so long as it's not directly interfering with a tree itself and if it does we'll figure out a solution whether you are kind of you know putting a fence around the tree or you're just stopping the fence where that tree is and picking it back up on the other side however they kind of designate that best in the field we We are happy to comply with that. On the desirable community, once again, the goals and objective reminds us that we need an effective transportation system. And that is why we are once again showing the plan that does have those stub connections, but only the council is able to actually make those occur. We have the pedestrian separation for the trail system. And also, even though we are tying in to the existing sidewalks that were built in the 90s at a much smaller width than what is currently required. We are going ahead and showing the five foot sidewalks. There will have to be a transition, and they are kind of a short distance of about, only about probably 300 total feet in width, but we are happy to actually comply with that. And then also, the goals and objectives reiterate the need to basically protect the greenway systems, which is exactly what we are showing. And I've already kind of hit on these points a couple times, but what this proposal is doing is it's what I always call a bread and butter urban service boundary zone change. We are proposing residential use next to residential use without impacting the rural area of our community. If we as a community believe that we can turn down zoning when it matches what is around there, four residential units, four single family development on just 15 acres that has just been jumped by development, then we are simply dreaming that we could think that that urban service boundary can responsibly be maintained. In summary, we believe that we are in compliance with the comprehensive plan. This is a well-designed project that upholds that urban service area preservation strategy. strategy. It's an appropriate development of an underutilized agricultural parcel that is completely surrounded by residential uses. We are providing additional housing units to complete the mix of housing to have that enhanced neighborhood as called for in the comprehensive plan. We are encouraging community interaction through proper connections. And we're doing so by respecting the neighbors with the kind of agreed upon buffers and barriers and protecting the environment through the tree protection area and making sure we are preserving that green space. As such, we certainly would say that we are in compliance with the 2018 conference plan. The other justification that we are here to discuss today is that the existing zoning is inappropriate and the proposed zoning is in fact appropriate. Agricultural urban, by its very intent in the zoning ordinance, calls for this property or calls for this basically zoning to be declared inappropriate. The intent says that land should only remain in this zone until public facilities and services are or will be adequate to serve urban uses. When LFUCG brought this property into the urban service area 55 years ago, they once again declared an intent that this property needs to be rezoned when urban services are available. That time passed a long time ago for this particular parcel. And so we certainly would say that AU is an inappropriate zoning to maintain on this property. I've kind of already hit on the reasons why we think that R3 is the appropriate zone. I mean, you are basically in conformity with the existing zoning all around. You have seen R3 work in the neighborhoods next to R1 zoning. We are right next to an existing R3, and we are developing lots that are in conformity with the R1 E zone itself, which is to our north. we know that traffic is also going to be a big major kind of point of discussion today and so we went ahead and prepared a traffic impact study this development does not come close to meeting the merits that are required to have a traffic impact study and I think you can probably tell that by the type of p.m. and a.m. peak trips you're talking about a max of 49 leaving the site in the morning and 55 coming back we studied the three intersections as called for in the traffic impact regulations first being the harrodsburg road old schoolhouse signal the dogwood trace and harrodsburg signal and then where agape dead ends dead ends into jesmond county there is not a change in the level of service due to this development and while this is unusual i kind of requested this be done we know what the concern is and it's not about stacking time at these signals it is how much cut through traffic is coming through dogwood trace i asked vision to assume the worst we have four access points that are currently not barricaded i put a 50 50 estimate on old schoolhouse lane and ream away assuming 50 of our traffic would actually go through dogwood trace i think everyone here would know that that is an unrealistic estimate lexington will be the draw in the mornings and people will be coming from Lexington in the evenings. Yes, there will be reasons to go to Jesmond County. I don't know if they will cut through dogwood trace, but yes, there will be reasons to go to Jesmond County and so that cannot be zero. But 50-50 is being an incredible overestimate. However, even in that scenario, you're talking about under two car or under a car every two minutes. This simply is not a concern from a traffic perspective on this development that we are here to talk about today. Now, as far as neighborhood engagement goes, we requested a neighborhood meeting on February 2nd. On February 15th, we met with a group of Dogwood neighbors, Dogwood Trace neighbors, that was organized by the Dogwood Trace Neighborhood Association members of planning staff were there in order to address any questions that came up a overwhelming majority of the conversation was about agape and Rima the next week we launched a neighborhood engagement website where we encourage feedback on the site comments to be made and always updated the site with the latest plans I believe at the end of the day we only had about six or seven actual comments on that website but we had much more than six or seven emails and phone conversations with members of dogwood trace uh kind of since early february as you all are well aware there was neighborhood representatives at the trc at the zoning committee and at the subcommittees and we certainly stayed after and talked to them as well and even this week we had a neighborhood zoom meeting with representatives from dogwood trace in order to talk to them about their kind of list of concerns and it was during that meeting where we were able to actually you know come to some conclusions with regards to how we are going to deal with the tree protection area how we are going to deal with the utility easement outside of the tree protection area and then that barrier with regards to the fencing and last while you all are answering or asking any questions i wanted to make sure to at least just put this up here as kind of the post construction aerial this is what this will look like once this comes online And so with that, I'm happy to answer any questions that you all may have, or we can save it for after rebuttals. Thank you, Mr. Newcomb. Does any commission member have any questions for the applicant at this time? Okay. Not seeing any. Thank you all. Thank you. Okay. Next on the agenda item, we'll be having citizen comments. First up, just want to point out two things. From the audience standpoint, we would like for you to keep your outbursts kind of down some, please. That's just out of respect for everyone. But I have been told we have one representative that's going to speak for 30 minutes. If that's okay, thank you. And then if anyone else do decide to speak, please come up, state your name. We would do two minutes per individual. but we will start off with the lead individual that's going to be speaking on behalf of the subdivisions. Yes, Bruce. I just have a quick, this is for us here. Do we want to include conversations about connectivity even though we have no authority of connectivity? I was hoping that that was presented fairly clearly, but we can make that clear now. I would like to make that clear. Since we have no authority, there's going to be opportunity for the neighbors to speak about connectivity with council. Council, not us. We don't need to have two four-hour meetings. I think one four-hour meeting is appropriate. I would agree with that. Just make sure citizens are aware of that. Yes, Ms. Wade? Well, I just want to clarify. You're talking about the Agape Barricade. Yes. Okay. You don't have any authority about whether that stays up or goes down. but you do have authority over the street network you know how the how a subdivision is laid out and designed is within the authority of the Planning Commission so the subdivision regulations call for connections and or appropriate terminations that is what the applicant has shown so I don't want you to think you don't have authority over connectivity Can we clarify preliminary development plan issues versus final development plan issues here? Not too much. Yes. So what you have today is a preliminary subdivision plan. That means that they are laying out their subdivision and it's intended for the next step to be to develop their infrastructure plans improvement plans for how to where their sewers are going where their sanitary or their storm water is going the road construction documents and then the last phase is recording final record plats so that there is preliminary development plans and final development plans but that's not what the applicant is going for when we have single-family residential we don't use development plans we use preliminary subdivision plans and final record plots. Okay. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Wade, for the clarification. Sir, sorry. Yeah, no problem. Mr. Forrester, I just want to clarify on the two minutes per resident. I know we have some people in attendance that would like to speak. It was our understanding that they'd be given three minutes to speak rather than two, so I just want to clarify. Yes, that's you taking 30. I'm not going to be using all 30, just to. That's fine. Okay. We'll make the adjustment. I'll try to be as brief as possible. I was told you were doing 30, so I was being able to show you anything. Yeah, 30 max, but yeah, we ended up being a lot shorter than that. All right, that's fine. All right, everybody. Good afternoon. My name is Mark Amon. I'm president of the Dogwood Trace Neighborhood Association, which represents about 430 homes in our neighborhood. it's kind of been I think everybody that's talked so far has kind of talked about the neighborhoods near our development but just so I can mention it as well we've got old schoolhouse in the middle there English station in the tracery to the north and Dogwood Trace which is the neighborhood that I represent to the south now we have several residents and attendants here some that are gonna be speaking and some that are not gonna be speaking and I want you to know who here is in support of the message I'm gonna be delivering So I ask that everybody in the audience in support of my message to just please stand up for just a moment. All right. Thank you. So before we get into too many of our concerns and our requests, I just want to be clear that when we've been talking about the need for affordable housing in Lexington, the planning staff report cites the need for additional single family homes. In their application, Mr. Nicholson talked about the need for that as well. Dogwood Trace is fully in support of that statement agreement that Lexington needs more affordable single-family housing in Lexington. We're not opposed to the R3 development. We're not opposed to the single-family detached housing. We have some other concerns with the specific implementation, but I just want to be clear that we are in agreement with that aspect of the application. And everybody should have a copy of these slides as well. A full copy of the slides and on the back is this slide here, a list of our specific requests. So I'll talk about them in brief detail here and then go into more detail on the following slides. So density, again, we're in agreement with the single-family detached housing. Lot size, as Mr. Nicholson mentioned, is one of our concerns. We're requesting larger lot sizes to be contextual to both English Station and to Dogwood Trace. We have concerns about traffic safety and are requesting traffic calming measures, bulb outs, electric speed monitors, to be built into the new roads as they're constructed, and to consider creative solutions to reduce traffic on Agape and REMA. We have some requests about neighborhood identity, specifically the privacy barrier, which we found out here a little while ago that Calgary has agreed to build the fence, so that's a little bit less of a point for today. and also beautification of the new entrances that are going to be coming into the neighborhood, whether that's signage or landscaping. We have some requests about water runoff and flooding and would like an opportunity to review the plans for stormwater drainage, retention, and floodplain prior to the approval by the Urban County Engineering. And on the Greenway, we're requesting an easement larger than 15 feet to allow switchbacks for bicycle access and to eliminate the need for stairs down to the Greenway. So the first thing I want to mention again is the density. The comprehensive plan talks a lot about compact single-family housing, and Calgill and their application mentioned, and as Mr. Nicholson mentioned, that the surrounding areas that they're proposing single lots and the surrounding areas already have a strong mix of single-family townhomes, apartments that provide various varied housing choices. So again, we're in complete agreement with this statement and an agreement with the proposal for single-family detached. One of our concerns, as we've already touched on a little bit, is lot size. So we've talked about the comprehensive plan and the sensitivity to the surrounding context being compatible and complementary to adjacent neighborhoods and communities, enhancing existing neighborhoods. The planning staff report made several mentions and references to similar lot size and we would like to talk about that in a little more detail. So this similar graphic was brought up in the staff's presentation and also Mr. Nicholson's presentation but I would just like to talk about it in a little more detail. We understand that this old schoolhouse 15 acres is a very oddly shaped piece of property. It's very narrow and very long so it reduces the options for housing, for lot size, for lot shape. And we also understand that the market in the 1980s versus the market today are drastically different for what the market's going to require however we would still like to focus on the being context sensitive to the surrounding developments and trying to have some transitions between neighborhoods so what i'm showing here is a screenshot from the development plan we've got old schoolhouse in the center the northern insect and southern sections of housing english station is at the top which is that that's the existing homes to the north and then dogwood trace subdivision specifically lacrosse court street is the street on in dogwood trace that borders old schoolhouse so if we're looking at the lot frontage or lot size of the proposed development versus the existing you can we've already talked about you can clearly see there's some differences lot frontage in English station is about 60 feet in lacrosse on dogwood trace is 100 feet and the proposal is 40 feet if you look at it from a square footage point of view they're roughly 4 500 square feet in english station and in the proposed development i think mr nicholson quoted 46 and 4700 square feet we're all about 10 000 in dogwood trace and we understand things are going to be different now than they were in the 80s but really our request here is for a slightly larger lot size so we can have transitions contextual to both english station and also dogwood trace Another one of our concerns is traffic safety. So the comprehensive plan talks a lot about designing streets for the desired speed and use built-in traffic calming measures. It also makes reference to adding traffic calming measures as you're building the streets because that eliminates the need for costly traffic calming retrofits down the road. The graphic here on the right, really what we're trying to show is there's going to a large increase in the number of homes served by the streets that are going to be connected so currently we've talked about agape we've talked about rima so agape is this section here on the left currently serves 64 homes rima serves 22 homes the vision engineering traffic review we appreciate the the work they did on that it helped us get some detail in terms of their expectations moving forward and everything it only covered the 88 additional homes not the existing 280 from english station and from the tracery and the other homes that are up there so as we connected these new streets rather than serving 64 homes and 22 now we're going to be serving an additional 88 and an additional 280. and just to point out it's not only about traffic that's going to be going to harrodsburg road to go to to go south or to come north to come in town our area has a lot of stuff nearby that people are going to want to be walking and driving to as well to the east we have dogwood park it's kind of well kind of can't see it here it's off to the southeast in this view and then there's also a big shopping center on bellerive boulevard to the south if you continue down agape at dead ends into a shopping center that has a kroger they just built a true value and there's a couple there's a sonic there's a gas station and a few smaller local businesses as well so there's going to be a lot of interest in driving down specifically agape to get to the shopping center and Rima primarily to get to the park so we're going to be increasing the amount of homes that we're going to be serving on those streets so as we look at traffic safety I want to talk about pedestrian bicycle and auto safety Dogma Trace has a very active bike and pedestrian population in particular because we're within walking distance to the park and to the shopping center there's always people walking up to Sonic walking to the park just going for in the neighborhood so we're requesting traffic calming measures that are included as the new streets are built for example bulb outs and electronic speed monitors so there's a picture on the bottom of one of the speed monitors there you can see those throughout town I think there's one in Winthrop and several other spots heading to the library on Harrodsburg Road as well and just to give an image of what the bulb out is it's a traffic calming measure at at an intersection to narrow the width of the road. And you can kind of see that here. It has advantages that if it's done properly, it can be aesthetically pleasing. If we do it now, then you're not really adding cost. You're actually reducing the amount of blacktop that you're putting on the ground. You're increasing the amount of green space on these lots as it is. So we're requesting that now, specifically at the new intersections that are gonna be built. we also do have a couple alternate proposals and really the request here is just consider if there's other things other creative things that we can do to help reduce the traffic on agape and rima so this graphic here what that's showing is a potential solution to the red X's are placed on on the connection between agape and rosette at the top and then rima and larissa lane so eliminating that connection so the new street would have act would be connected to agape and rima the existing housing would have the exact same traffic flow pattern it currently has uh another alternate would be doing similar but moving those red x's a little bit farther south and then not building the connections would have the advantage of reducing the traffic burden on agape and rima and also providing space for additional lots so again here our request is just to consider if there are creative solutions we can do that we can implement to reduce traffic i want to talk a little bit about neighborhood identity there's in the comprehensive plan there's a lot of talk about guaranteeing existing neighborhoods are enhanced by the growth and strengthening already successful neighborhoods connecting to existing neighborhoods in a in a meaningful way that brings a higher quality of life to all the residents. So some of our ideas for this are privacy barrier between old schoolhouse and dogwood trace, which Mr. Nicholson informed us today has been agreed upon in conjunction with the tree protection area. As Mr. Nicholson said, we'll have some work to do with the urban forester and trying to figure out how exactly we interact with some of those trees. But that sounds like that'll be a great addition to the neighborhood. We're also requesting beautification. we're going to be adding two new entrances to our neighborhood. So whether that's signage or landscaping, and here's just a couple examples from around town. The top is from Clay's Crossing neighborhood, which is very close to Dogwood Trace. Just a simple sign. We could even make it dual-sided. It could say DT on one side and then whatever the new section is going to be called, OS for Old Schoolhouse, or if it's some throwback to Ms. Kammick who's owned this property for the last half century. we could do something to beautify the area and also kind of distinguish the identity of the two neighborhoods and help create some of the identity of the new neighborhood. I want to talk a little bit about water runoff and flooding. There's several mentions about conserving greenways, improving water quality, and controlling flooding. And in their application, Calgill has mentioned that the proposed development will not impact the floodplain area. So here's a picture from one of the residents on Rima from a flood back in January. Really our concerns are there's some unnamed branches of the South Elkhorn Creek that run by Rima, an old school house. The previous development that was done 10 plus years ago, as much as we try not to, it did increase the flooding frequency and the severity of the flooding that happened. And so rather than being a once or twice a year thing, it's really we get major flooding every big rainstorm. The most recent was a few weeks ago at the beginning of March. So really our concern is that the proposed retention basins or whatever is being built must be sufficient to prevent further exacerbation of this problem. So we're just being very conscious that we're not making it worse. So our specific request here is an opportunity to review the plans for stormwater drainage, retention, floodplain, anything that affects the water runoff prior to approval by the urban county engineering and lastly I'd like to talk about the greenway so the comprehensive plan mentions adequate green space we have that a lot in this in the area currently and adjacent to the development we've got a greenway that's highlighted in green in this graphic here just to the east of the proposed property so these lots here are at the very end of old schoolhouse and then this to the right is the existing greenway and again the Dogwood Park is off of this map but it's to the east and southeast from these pictures here there's some conversation earlier about the 15 foot the previous request for a 15 foot easement for greenway access that was initially added and then removed and as we heard yesterday asked to be put back in so we still have some concerns on exactly what that's going to look like current the initial proposal was for 15 foot easement with an 18 foot drop which is too steep for pedestrians without stairs and it's too steep for bicycles so we're requesting a larger easement than 15 feet to allow switchbacks for bicycle access and pedestrian without needing stairs and we acknowledge that as mr. Nicholson mentioned that Calgill said that they'll work with the environmental team to do whatever it takes so we appreciate that as well so really that's that's the points I want to bring up again we're in terms of density we're fully on board with the single-family detached lot size we are requesting a larger lot size for transitions to be contextual to both English station and Dogwood Trace rather than just English station for traffic calming measures we're asking for them to be built into the new roads bulb outs and electric speed monitors and consider if there are creative solutions we can do to reduce traffic we want to add to the neighborhood identity for Dogwood and help be enhancing our neighborhood and also creating an identity for the new neighborhood with a privacy barrier which we've already agreed to and beautifying the new entrances with landscaping and signage for water runoff we would request the opportunity to review the plans for stormwater drainage retention and floodplain prior to approval by urban county engineering and larger easement for greenway access something larger than 15 feet so we can add switchbacks for bicycle access so that's everything I would like to cover today and I'm not sure if now's the time I'm supposed to stay for questioning or? Sit down. Sir, if you have any questions of this individual, you may ask them now. Okay. Commission, do we have any questions? I prefer to go ahead and try to get the citizens up because, I mean, they've been here a little while, so preferably. So we should be able to get maybe two or three up before. Do we have to leave right at 315? Yes, sir. We've got a hard deadline from the council to move at 315 so that they can get in and do their process, sir. Okay. Thank you. Thanks. Okay. Is there no questions for me? No questions for you at this time. So we'll take the next citizens' comments. Yeah, go ahead. Oh, this is it. I do have a list here. First up, Mark Amen. That was you? Okay, sorry. Brian Gibson, 4776, Reema Way. He had to leave. Brian had to leave. He had to leave. Okay. Yeah, I was going to let him down. Sorry. Yeah, that's fine, man. Hi, I'm Mike Cresetti. I'm following Brian. Brian had to leave. And I'm a longtime resident, Dogwood Trace. Just wanted to just expound a little bit on the connectivity issue that Mr. Allman talked about, you know, being creative. I just want to say that, you know, instead of focusing on connecting all streets, stub streets, let's let's focus on the goal of the comprehensive plan. This was as stated in design policy 13 that the connection of all street stubs was meant to, and I quote, dispersing the traffic, making every street in a neighborhood desirable and none too overburdened. And I just want to point that out because currently the way the design is set, there's kind of a funnel effect which will occur, which will route all the, currently the way, like I said, the design is, all the current traffic from the tracery, from English Station to the new development, all through the Rima Way. So I just wanted to point that out just to see if we can come up, if you consider some creative ideas to maybe instead of connecting some of the stub streets, maybe having bicycle lanes or paths or something to help keep those streets dispersed. And I think if we could do that, that'll be a win for everybody. And I appreciate your time. Thank you very much. Thank you. Also, it was just brought to my attention, if someone has already said the same thing, please, you don't have to repeat it. Just want to make sure we do that, just to be cognizant of time. Thank you. Yeah, I appreciate that. I've been making notes, trying to get rid of some of the repeat things. But my name is Bennett Clark. I'm the newest addition, newest resident to Dogwood Trace and own a home on La Crosse Court adjacent to the proposed development. I've been a realtor here for 15 years, and I've been on the development side of things and served as a builder for new construction and renovation projects. I see firsthand the need for housing in our community and have played a part in that growth, rehab, and development. Everything I take part of has a common goal of finding what can be the highest and best use for a property. After receiving the proposed plan, I studied the zoning text, comprehensive plan, and the staff report for the commission the last few weeks. Throughout these references, many items appear to check the boxes for a recommendation of approval, but in reality fall short by a common theme of not being fully thought out, examined, or well planned. I initially was against the zone change, but due to the existing adjacent property zoning and proposed plan indicating they would build single-family homes over something of higher density. I can agree to the zone change if, in fact, only single-family homes will be approved and if other problems can be properly addressed or conditional items be approved. Because the proposed development is between the already established streets and neighborhoods, I'd like to see a conditional approval that the lot square footage or lot width more closely reflect that of the adjacent properties. A 40-foot-wide proposed lot doesn't transition or support the comp plan's context to sensitive development, as Mark alluded to. In a different scenario, if the similar lot lines were followed as to the adjacent properties, the development of around 50 single homes could still be achieved. I understand that's pretty unlikely. but even if the commission would at minimum consider the lots bordering lacrosse will be conditionally approved to be 50 feet wide, it would then put two homes directly bordering each instead of two and a half homes. That could at least improve the sight lines with those being 100 feet on the opposite side. Separately, the development company has proposed a 10-foot buffer, plus the new notification today of a fence, so kind of a little revision here. originally i was going to say that i'd like to see a different buffer be conditionally approved and although i like the idea of the 10 foot tree protection i'd still see like i'd like to see the development company construct a more permanent structure if they're saying they do a six foot i'd like to go to the city ordinance i think that calls for you can go to at least eight feet so i'd like to see that instead of six feet i think you'll hear from a few others regarding specific faults within the proposed plan. As you make a recommendation today, please keep in mind what I feel is the mission statement of the comprehensive plan, which states, quote, great care should be taken to guarantee existing neighborhoods are enhanced by its growth. Consciously and carefully directed growth and development will strengthen already successful neighborhoods, and it continues later. The connection of uses should be done through an appropriate scale that makes them accessible and not out of place or intrusive. Thank you. Thank you. You finished right at your time. Good job. We got really three minutes. Yes, this is the last one. Please come. Thank you. Members of the Planning Commission my name is Jan Geddes we built our home in Dogwood Trace in 1991 on a street named Rima Way which anecdotally means closer to God we have come to know it as closer to the floodplain as you see evidenced right here these prop this was taken at the same location over a number of years Our home is located on an unnamed tributary of the South Elkhorn Creek, which runs behind the houses on Rima Way and behind the proposed extension to Rima Way. The larger of these branches also runs through Dogwood Trace Park. As a result of increased development, including those of English Station and the Tracery, flooding on this stream has substantially worsened and become more frequent. This increased flooding is not unique to my street, but has impacted flooding in adjacent neighborhoods and even South Elkhorn Village businesses, including my favorite, Ramsey's Diner, which was forced to close its doors to customers due to an extensive flooding event. Previously, the stream flooded once, maybe twice a year. Now we are finding the stream floods to this extent and even greater five or six times throughout the year. Mark shared this photo earlier, but the most recent of these have occurred even more recently, and that was on March 22nd of this year. The city's restoration policy number two mandates the use of green infrastructure to bridge gaps in the green space network. specifically and I quote development within our adjacent to these greenways should consider incorporating green infrastructure as a means of creating and or maintaining connections to the network doing so will provide effective storm water mitigation habitat preservation enhancement and increased environmental quality it is therefore imperative that the proposed retention basins be sufficient to prevent further exasperation of flooding we request the opportunity to conduct an independent review of the plans for stormwater drainage and retention our alternate proposal for green space adjacent to the stream and floodplain will help mitigate the impact of additional development on flooding we look forward to an audience with cowgill development to address our very legitimate concerns regarding this flooding and to present our alternative proposal to mitigate the stormwater runoff. I thank you for your consideration. Thank you. Okay, this is right on time. So we're going to reconvene at the Phoenix Building, the third floor, right outside the end of the parking lot here, 101 East Van. Bye.