Music Thank you. Hello everyone. I'd like to call this meeting to order. It is April 27th, 2023. Welcome. We have a packed crowd here today, so I'd like to get this agenda moving forward and timely as possible. First on the agenda, we have approval of minutes. Commission, we're looking for a motion for the approval of the March 23rd minutes. Are there any changes to those minutes? Or the floor is open for a motion. Mr. Chair, I move for approval of the minutes, the March 23rd, 23 minutes. Okay. All right, so we have a motion and a second by Ms. Worth. We need to change that up for us. Okay, thank you. Okay, please vote via Granicus. Okay, motion passes unanimously. Any postponements and withdrawals? No, thanks, so. So we just move on, staff. Put us on page two, PLN MAR 23-01. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen of the planning commission, Mr. Chair. This is PLN MAR23-00001, Palalo, LLC. The subject application is an application to change the zoning from the Highway Service Business B3 Zone, a restricted Highway Service Business Zone, to a restricted Wholesale and Warehouse Business Zone, or a B4 Zone, for the property located at 950 Midnight Pass. This is approximately 1.16 net and 1.60 gross acres. The petitioner is seeking this zone change in hopes of constructing a multi-storied climatized self-storage warehouse. Just to locate us, we are within Beaumont Circle located here. This is just off of Harrodsburg Road which is accessed on Beaumont Center. The property is located on Midnight Pass which is a local road that connects the internal portion of Beaumont Circle to Beaumont Center Lane and then out to Harrodsburg Road as well as connects to the residential and commercial operations in this area. Jumping into the zoning itself, the subject property is currently within a restricted highway service business zone. However, this area was historically set up to be a mix of different uses. As you can see here, we have three different types of residential. You have your R1D, R1T, and R3 zoning located to the west and to the south of the subject property. Surrounding the subject property is all of the highway service business zoning on the north, east, and south portions of the site. And then there is a large portion of professional office located to the north of the subject property. Jumping into the aerial photography of the site, you get a better idea of the land use for this site. This is a somewhat older photo, so located at this portion of the property, or of Beaumont Circle, there is another hotel that is currently under construction. This portion of the property, of the Beaumont Circle is one of the remaining vacant parcels of land. However, you can see that there is a transition from the commercial operations that are occurring on the eastern portion of Beaumont Circle to the residential development as you move westward and to the south. Just in the center you can also see that is the Moon Dance Amphitheater. This is the location of various different public artistic rendering, so things like plays, there is a fair amount of screenings. There is an added park element, playground element that is planned for the area outside of the amphitheater. Jumping into the site itself, here we're looking down Midnight Pass towards Harrodsburg Road, Up Midnight Pass as it curves around in the center of the site, around Moondance Theater and towards the hotel. And then into the site itself. Just another view with our top photo of the site looking from the roadway back into the residential development. These are townhomes in the rear. There is a bank located just south of the subject property. a view across the street into the gas station that has been established there, and then a view into the Moon Dance Theater and the area proposed for the playground space. So with all zone changes, we look to the comprehensive plan for guidance as to how to address zone change applications. In this case, we are looking at the place builder element. The applicant has identified this area as being a regional center. A regional center is an area in which we have a mix of different uses that include neighborhood supporting uses, offices, as well as some of the uses that are garnered towards the traveling public within our community. Within their letter of justification, staff found that the applicant made an adequate justification for this as a regional center, center as it is and was conceived of this perspective of the circle or the egg shape in which there is a blend of different services making a focused center of a development. The applicant is seeking to apply this as a medium density, non-residential, or mixed-use development type. These are multi-storied buildings in which they include various different non-residential uses or a mix of residential and non-residential uses. In this case, looking at what the applicant was seeking to provide with a higher FAR as well as seeking to provide a multi-tiered structure, staff was in agreement that this could be met with their proposed development. However, when staff reviewed their application, the applicant sought to apply the B4 zone, which is not a recommended zone within this certain place type and development type. It is not against the comprehensive plan to request a different zone. However, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide a justification as to how that zone would fit within that area. To review this, we do look at the current zoning, the proposed zoning. The B3 zone was established in this area in the early 2000s. Initially the area was rezoned in 1989 in which it had a change of zoning as it moved into the neighborhood. Initially the areas along Harrodsburg Road were primarily highway service business zones serving the traveling public as they were going up and down Harrodsburg Road. As it transitioned back, there was more of a focus on professional office providing employment centers. In 2005, that zone or the professional office zone was changed to a restricted highway service business zone. I'll display the restrictions here in just a moment. With a focus on allowing for more commercial opportunities at that location. The intent of the highway business zone is to provide for more economic viability for these areas and a specific focus on types of uses that might be inappropriate elsewhere, which is why during the 2005 rezoning of the property, there were conditional zoning restrictions placed on the property. I will also note that there were two separate zone changes to remove some of those conditional zoning restrictions following that initial rezoning to the B3 So, just looking at the zoning restrictions, this is what is restricted on site with the B3 zoning. And it is primarily focused on some of the less appealing uses within the B3 zone, including parking lots, adult arcades, or adult uses, advertisement signs or billboards. There was a limitation of the freestanding signs, as well as some of the other uses that take up a lot of land but don't provide jobs specifically, lots for the sale, rental, or display of vehicles, farm equipment, etc. This was specifically done to provide a down step as the applicant was going into the neighborhood, but greater opportunities for retail operations at this location. In the wholesale and warehouse business zone, this is intended primarily for wholesale and warehousing. There is a focus to a lesser extent on adaptive reuse. We've had conversations about adaptive reuse of our industrial and warehousing buildings in the past. This would not be an impact on this location as there's no structure there to adaptively reuse. However, there is the primary function of the B4 zone is really focused on warehousing as well as shops of specialty trade. With the applicant's justification letter, they have recommended conditional zoning restrictions that would limit the impact of the B4 zone at this location, taking out some of the more intense land uses associated with the B4 zone. However, However, with staff's review of the application, and I'll also point this out, this is their structure, I'll come back to that in just one second. But with staff's review of the application, and due to the location of this site within an area of budding residential, and an area that was meant to provide retail opportunities and commercial opportunities to that area, specifically within a regional center mindset, found that the B4 zone was not appropriate for this location and that the applicant did not provide any information that would suggest otherwise, even with the restricted uses shown herein. That is also due to the fact that this does limit some of the flexibility of the site. So not only did the staff find that the zone itself was inappropriate for this location, as there is no adjacent industrial or warehousing, that this area was set up primarily for retail and other supportive uses of the neighborhood and traveling public. This was just an inappropriate zone to choose for this location. In addition to the review of the zone at this location, staff found some deficiencies within the place builder element, specifically the development criteria for the regional center place type and the medium density non-residential or mixed-use development type. The primary issues that staff found at this location was activation of the frontage of the property as well as surrounding the area. While the applicant has supplied an updated rendering showing their building, the vast majority of the activation of of the frontage is well above the first floor. So much of that activation, that transparency is meant to be throughout the building, making it feel like a more activated space. Additionally, self-storage warehousing is a use that is more car-centric. Individuals are not often bringing their goods to store in one of these facilities by bike or walking. This is specifically a problem for this location as it was meant to be a center point for this regional center and that transition from a neighborhood into the commercial center. Just looking at a brief perspective of the development plan, you can see some of the issues associated with the focus on the vehicular movement of the site. It is putting much of that to the rear, which is what the comprehensive plan does call for. However, it does take up quite a bit of space of that rear, not really interacting with the neighboring residential development in the way that we would want to see a non-residential development adjacent to a neighborhood. Staff is recommending disapproval of this application. Staff found that the wholesale and warehouse business zone is not in agreement with the 2018 comprehensive plan for the following reasons. The requested rezoning is not in agreement with the goals, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive plan. The proposed development does not activate the front wall plane of the structure, which gives a domineering wall frontage that is not in character with the surrounding development, both the commercial and residential development in that area. The proposed development does not provide a pedestrian-first design and development, and that the proposed use is very autocentric in nature. The proposed development does not encourage the creating of jobs and prosperity. Rather, the proposed self-storage facility would generate very few jobs in support of this policy. The wholesale and warehouse business B4 zone is not a recommended zone within the regional center place type and the medium density non-residential or mixed-use development type. And the applicant has not provided information that would have it fit into that area. Furthermore, the proposed rezoning could introduce potential nuisance uses into the area of a residential and commercial development. Finally, we get into some of those development criteria that I have described already, including the fact that this would limit job opportunities or growth and flexibility in this area. There have been no major unanticipated changes of an economic and physical nature in the area of the subject property since the adoption of the comprehensive plan and the applicant has not provided a justification regarding the inappropriateness of the current restricted highway service business zone and the appropriateness of the restricted wholesale and warehouse business zone staff concludes that the restricted highway service business zone remains appropriate in for the subject property because it is consistent and compatible with the existing development of the beaumont center development If you have any questions regarding the zone change, I'd be happy to answer them and I'll hand it off to Miss Galt here in just one moment if you have any questions. Any questions for staff? Okay, not seeing any. Thank you. Thank you. Miss Galt. I'm going to pull that down a little bit. We're going to go into the development plan. It's MJDP 23-8 Beaumont Farm, a portion of its unit 1 and 3, lot 1B. As Hal explained, we have the building frontage along Midnight Pass. There's an access easement that is there to serve both the credit union and the proposed site here. They have access off of here off of midnight and then down again here off the access easement. When we reviewed the plans, the development plan, we reviewed it as if the zoning is there. So that's why you'll see that the staff or the subdivision committee had recommended approval. This plan had been brought in and they cleaned it up. So we only have very few conditions left in their sign off conditions from engineering traffic, urban forest or green space and our environmental quality. Our last condition is about discuss place builder criteria which I believe after listening to how this condition can be removed unless you have any other questions. And with that I'll open it to you to see if there's anything else you have. Any questions? Yes. Just a quick question. The easement that's on here that's between this property and the credit union? Yes. The access easement? Yeah. Yes, it's already built. That ends just shy of the property line. That doesn't continue to where the roads connect to the residential area? No, because they have townhomes that are all along the edge here. There's nothing that was left open to join those together. So it's stubs. I believe when this was being developed, they had other ideas of what could be there. So they brought the drive further back just in case that lot comes in and they want to have a drive further back. So that's why they have that extended drive. Okay, thank you. Okay, not seeing any other questions. Hal? I apologize, ladies and gentlemen. We also do have letters of objection or opposition to this application. a total of 34. I'll pass those out now. Okay, thank you. What are you doing about Ms. Nicholson, the applicant? You got enough? Okay, thank you. come on back i'm gonna make sure she's got one for me good afternoon nick nicholson here on behalf of the applicant palolo llc for the record i'm submitting findings that i just passed out to you all and also a copy of the today's presentation. Robo Sutherland who is a one of the owners of Space Center Storage and also the property owner and also John Hunt was supposed to be here but apparently they are on a field trip and chaperoning at the zoo in Louisville right now and so I believe they have been caught up and so I'm kind of left on my own but I will do my best to answer any questions that you all may have. I know that just to kind of orient you all before I start, of course I think you all are well familiar with the area, but here is Harrodsburg Road, New Circle, this is the Beaumont Center area, this is the site in question and kind of zooming in more and Mr. Mickler to your kind of question, here's where that access is kind of pointed to and that would have been right back into kind of where those townhomes are and so that's why I think that connection was never made. So I know that multi-story indoor storage has been a topic of conversation in front of this body a fair amount over the past few years. We oftentimes hear the same concerns coming from staff and from neighbors, especially when we are talking about this particular use in close proximity to both residential uses and kind of commercial areas. In the grand scheme of bringing a commercial use close to a residential use, indoor multi-story self-storage is a dream next-door neighbor in regards to what you all typically hear. When you're worried about congestion from traffic, when you're worried about noise, when you are worried about light pollution, this type of user is actually great to have as a residential kind of neighbor. It is a very, very low traffic generation. This site is estimated at only 21 total AM, PM peak trips per day, not AM and PM total, the absolute total of 21 per day. This is a significant reduction from the surrounding B3 users or the type of B3 use that could go on this site. The two kind of hotels that are next door right across along Midnight Pass right here, their traffic generation is around 105 total trips per day, with the gas station across the street also looking at around 762 kind of peak hour trips. And so with a generation of 21 total trips, this is certainly a wonderful thing to have as far as being concerned about traffic generation. We have also put a conditional zoning restriction on there to make sure that there is no outdoor storage involved on this site, and there cannot be any type of overhead doors that go into individual units. And so, again, some of the concerns you all hear about self-storage, that you have the large kind of warehouse doors that will clank, that is not a concern in this. And we are actually prohibiting that type of use. This is only for pedestrians to access the structure just like you would any type of office building if you were going inside of it. There are no late night delivery trucks, anything of that sort. We have proposed conditionally restricting the hours to basically make sure that there are not any type of nighttime use. This is not a 24-hour facility in any way, shape, or form. You know, because of these type of aspects, I don't think it's that surprising that this body has actually approved multiple versions of this exact use in this exact type of kind of area. and i have to kind of say this i know i said it at the zoning committee um and so i i feel i kind of owe it to uh to tell everybody um you know you know this type of conversation um well before i get into that uh mr nichols specifically asked about uh the tenant mix that this type of use kind of has and so i did do the kind of research for what space center does and what also the indoor kind of self-storage does it is about an 80 20 split between residential users and commercial users and mostly small business the longer that these facilities stay and stay open the more that kind of commercial kind of creeps into that because businesses tend to stay open longer even with that the highest mix that we were able to find for any type of commercial use is 44 of total users and so it is still tending to go to residential users. Most residential users, over 60% of them, stay in their units for longer than three years. These type of storage facilities become extensions of one's house or one's business. One of the kind of growing marketplaces that we've seen is with the rise of kind of secondary jobs in the home. The specific example that was given to me was that we've seen a lot of Etsy creators. And so the folks that are basically making things on the side are keeping those materials inside the storage facilities because they don't have the room in their houses. So they'll come to the storage facility, get those materials when the orders come in, make them at the house, and then kind of ship them out. One of the kind of misconceptions is that these type of facilities are utilized just in moving. So when you are moving from one house to another, you basically just store your stuff here for a short time period before you can get into the other house. And while that does have some market share, it is not much at all. But what does come into play a lot is downsizing. When folks are moving from one house into a townhome or into a condo or even into a senior living facility, which there is one located right here, oftentimes those are some of our highest residential users that they have accumulated a lifetime of things they are moving into a smaller location but they still do not want to get rid of those and so we do believe that specifically this area would be wonderful for that aspect and so when it comes to the actual zoning of the property we know what these conversations have kind of been as of late. Looking at the aerial, you kind of have a couple different predominant zones that you are seeing. We're basically proposing a pocket of B4 right here with a B3, a P1, B6P, R3, an R1T, and an R1. When you look at the Metathorpe development within Townley, you once again, you have your B3, you have your P1. This does have a component of neighborhood business, B6P, R3, and R1. To Mr. Bailey's point, there is an industrial component with regards to Townley. It is not technically attached to the B4 portion. This was not in current I1 operation. It was part of the main center, and you can tell it was also flanked with residential and the kind of the general commercial shopping areas. The exact same situation, you'll see that I'm kind of repeating these exact same zones over and over again. You have the B3, you have the P1, you have the B6P, you have R3, you have R1T, and then you have R1 also on the Sand Lake Drive location. Once again, it was a pocket of B4 instituted as one of the last pieces to come online, surrounded by the exact same mix of zoning that we are talking about in the Beaumont Center. And finally, on Locust Hill, this is once again a pocket of B4 with B3, B6P, P1, R3, R1T, and this is the only kind of aberration that we really saw with having a R4 development right there. But I do think that this just goes to show that there is a path forward, and we've been trying to follow the path forward that you all kind of had showed that you do think that a very restricted B4 zone can enter into these type of commercial areas that do have the residential component in very, very close proximity, if not directly next door. When it comes to the development plan, I've orientated it slightly differently just because that's where the elevation was laid out. So I didn't want to get you all confused when the elevation came. Here's where the townhomes are at the top of the page. Beacon Street, this is Midnight Pass. Here is where the gas station is. Here is where the bank, and of course, this is the kind of access driveway. I'm sure that the first thing that kind of pops out is the kind of substantial addition of landscaping and tree canopy along by the neighborhood side of things. We are proposing to add 17 new trees along Beacon Street with shrubs, bushes along the basically the dry vials to make sure that even though this will not be open at night, headlights are never going to be an issue with regards to getting through. As this is a B4 zone next to residential, we would also have to be putting in a fence as well to make sure that headlights are not an issue. We are also adding street trees in this location. And in grand kind of total, with regards to the canopy, we are required to provide 5,053 square feet of tree canopy. We are actually proposing between 13,000 and 19,800 square feet of tree canopy. I have to give a range because of what I will tell you shortly about the Beaumont design guidelines and their kind of landscape plan approvals. We have also wrapped the kind of structure in any place where pedestrians would be with sidewalk infrastructure. There is no sidewalk currently on this access aisle, and so we are adding pedestrian infrastructure. We are also adding pedestrian-level lighting along the building to make sure that right now, where it is kind of a dark spot along this path, that that will be now lit up at night. We are also limiting the egress on Midnight Pass to right out only in order to make sure that we are not trying to overload the existing infrastructure traffic system in any way, shape, or form. You will hear from the neighbors that the concern is that we are driving traffic to the back and that is close to them. As Mr. Bailey indicated, that's kind of what our comprehensive plan is calling for these days, is a removal of the drive aisle and parking to the rear of the structures and pulling the structures up to the front of the property in order to establish that vertical edge along our roadways. While I cannot say in any way, shape, or form that I am surprised that we are looking at a staff disapproval based on kind of the several year-long conversations we have had about self-storage, I am slightly disappointed based only on the fact that we felt that there was a roadmap that has really been laid out. And when you look at the supplemental staff report for the Louie Place location that we looked at, it detailed out on why exactly they had moved from disapproval to approval with regards to building changes in site kind of plan changes. And when you look at what they are, we check every single one of those boxes. Louis Place was originally five stories, and they brought it down to four stories in order to specifically keep it in line with the hotel across from Louis Place. We started from a four-story basis due to that kind of point in the staff report. We also have a hotel directly across the street with which we are 12 feet shorter than the actual hotel. It is listed at 60 feet, and we are only proposing to be 48 feet, which is also in line with the other commercial structures along Midnight Pass that I will kind of show you pictures of. The neighbors next door to us, their townhomes, based on what I can tell in subdivision plat, average around the height of 35. And so there is not much of a difference between the 48 feet in a commercial zone pulled forward and the 35 feet of the townhomes. The second factor that staff looked at is we're activating the primary street plane through the increase of windows and adhering to the B1 setback. We are also trying to adhere to that B1 setback just like requested and we have been adding windows all along Midnight Pass. If there is a desire to see more of an increase in windows we have been very open and candid with the staff we are happy to do this. It is as close as I think I've ever come to handing a blank piece of paper to staff and saying what would you like to this to look like we also were kind of limited because there is very very harsh design criteria in the beaumont design guidelines the last factor that staff pointed to was the increase in tree canopy while also restricting the proposed intensity of the allowable uses again we are likely tripling the number of required tree canopies and we are also restricting the exact same uses that was approved for Louis Place. We tried to match essentially the same type of elevation that was shown for Townley. It was a focus on making sure there are windows on every, basically every floor, that there's articulation in between the long walls, and that there are change in materials and pedestrian access points. We have added this this pedestrian access point and added this kind of entryway that you can see as well. We are somewhat limited. I think, Mr. Pol, you noticed in the committee hearings that every single building similarly looks basically the same out there. There is a reason that all of these look the same. Here are the examples of the kind of four story, three story buildings that are in close proximity in and around kind of Midnight Pass. Here is the picture of the hotel and here is the senior living facility all basically same in line with our proposed height these design guidelines are probably the most detailed i have seen in lexington and the uh at least the most uh kind of power given to the association i have a feeling they took a lot of it from our board of architectural review they require full kind of approval rights of site development, landscape plans, architectural design, lighting, signage, and graphics. It specifies exactly what we are talking about with that. You are not allowed to touch your property until you go through the full kind of design review committee. And again, I think they mirrored what Lexington does. In order to do that, you must have an initial concept meeting where you present what your plans are. The committee basically will give you suggestions. You then have to submit a formalized, basically what I'm going to call a preliminary development plan, but they even require floor plans to be included there. They give advice back to you, you make changes, and then you submit what I'm going to call basically a final development plan. And then you even have to still go back and give construction plans. And so we have kind of built in the Board of Architectural Review Planning Commission and even building inspection levels on this local committee while we would still have to comply with all of Lexington's kind of requirements as well. And so we can very, very comfortably say what these are going to look like, because if you look at the very first line of this, the predominant material throughout Beaumont Center shall be brick, and the color range shall be limited to the tan light brown range as exhibited by the pre-approved samples that are available for review in their offices. This is the exact same for stone. This is the exact same for plaster, any type of accents, any type of glass. They have full design approval of what you all are trying to do out in Beaumont. And so we do know for a fact that this building will have to be able to blend in with any type of commercial structure and appear to be an office building just like the others. There are seven pages of these plant listings that basically show where they can go, the frontage that is allowed, the retention areas in the rear, and even what is highly preferred. And so the reason why I had to give the range of 13,000 square feet to 19,800 square feet of tree canopy is because we do not know yet what they would actually approve for the individual trees that have to be planted and where they would have to be planted. But we do know that we are approximately tripling the required tree canopy from Lexington. The design guidelines even tell us what our lamps can look like, even what our signs can look like down to the square feet that there is. And so we are, you know, very confident to be able to say we know exactly what this is going to look like. It's going to be an office building, except we're just talking about a substantial less kind of trip generation. to shift gears into kind of the comprehensive plan compliance i went into the kind of initial tenant mix detail because at the end of the day what this use is is it is necessary if our community is going to believe in density if our community is going to believe in an influx in multi-family units into town homes into smaller lot sizes then this type of supportive use is necessary and that's kind of where i've kind of come along and talking about this in my head is like this is a density supportive use and that this is something that our community specifically could greatly benefit from this this site is only 1.16 acres and we have a floor area ratio of 1.58 that is an absolute dream number for people that want to push and fill in redevelopment i've had this conversation a whole lot with staff over the years And I actually am happy to say on the record, I 100% agree with staff that there is a market cap on total square footage for self-storage in any type of community. We might disagree what that cap number is, but without a doubt, there is a cap. And the more that we can push that cap square footage onto small acre sites like this, where you're doing multi-story, you're only utilizing one acre in order to take what normally would have been 15, 20 acres, the better for our community. The more likely what you are going to see is the large sprawling kind of outdoor storage that most people picture when they think of this use along our arterials, the more likely you're going to push those properties into redevelopment along our corridors and do exactly what Place Builder is talking about, what our comprehensive plan is talking about and so it somewhat surprises me that while i understand staff and neighbors general hesitancy towards self-storage as being a kind of inefficient land use policy it's real it's happening and it has to happen for kind of communities that are pushing density and this is how we should be doing it we should be doing it on smaller sites we should be doing it multi-story in order to make sure that this kind of underutilized land is able to be brought kind of back online and as far as kind of just the gap here you can see that this area right here is very much underserved with regards to the rest of lexington in the market with that kind of foundation i do want to briefly go over the goals and objectives that i've laid out in the findings if you all read the findings that are in front of you you'll probably find that language incredibly familiar you all approved it this language was basically taken from the louis place and sand lake uh developments specifically with regards to these were the goals and objectives you all pointed to as why a restricted b4 could be put into place around the exact same zones that we are proposing today theme a goal two we are meeting objective a as we are allowing for this development of a long-time vacant parcel while also decreasing the intensity of other potential B3 uses on the very restricted B4 zone. Like I said, this could be the gas station, this could be the hotel that is in close proximity, and this is a fraction of the intensity of that use. We are providing safe connections to the surrounding businesses and residents with a specific emphasis along Midnight Pass, which goes in line with the Goal 3. We have eliminated access connection. We've eliminated turn movements. We've established a B1 setback. We've tried to pull it away from the residents as much as possible. And we've also provided the pedestrian scale lighting on along the kind of public roadways. I've also spoken with several of the neighbors. There's a bit of a debate on whether or not they would actually want a pedestrian access connection to the kind of sidewalk system that we're building with the fence that we have to put up for the zone-to-zone screening. We are happy, if this is approved, to talk about that at the final development plan stage. I've gotten very mixed messages on whether or not the neighborhood would want that connection to actually go into place, but we are more than happy to accommodate it if this is approved and if the neighborhood would, in fact, actually want that. Lastly, with theme E, this is kind of getting at the point I was making with regards to the greater density. By authorizing this site, we are taking a wonderful floor area ratio and putting it to a use that's entirely focused on making sure we can absorb the required density that our community does want. Our proposed findings are in front of you all. I'm happy to answer any questions. Here are the conditional zoning restrictions that we are proposing. And again, I just want to point out that we are specifically prohibiting any type of, you know, vehicular access to the site, roll top doors, any type of outdoor storage or anything like that. I know the neighbors are here and we've had wonderful conversations throughout that entire process. I have a feeling, as I said, the main thing you're going to hear, I believe, is height and the kind of vehicular design of this site. I'm happy to answer any questions if you all have them. Any questions for the applicant? Yes, Robin. Yeah, a couple questions. One is, you talked about the, from the design guidelines sort of making it seem, you know, appear as an office building. what about some of the concerns about operational hours being 24 hours a day? So they are specifically not. We have, we put in the initial application letter, and I apologize that I do not know this off the top of my head, but I don't want to misquote. We right now have 6.30 a.m. till 10.30 p.m., And we're happy to talk about those hours. If 1030 is too late, we're happy to restrict it. We wanted to make sure from the very start, we're not talking about this being a 24-hour operation. We're not allowing people to come in in the middle of the night, accessing units, doing anything untoward. We wanted it to stick around the hours where Beaumont Center is basically functioning. And what about also with that schedule? some of the, because you're adding a lot of transparency with those windows. Office buildings sort of go dark at night, and so is there some sort of like lighting plan so that there would be some darkness on this? I don't know if you can still see, but the glass that is allowed in Beaumont does not really allow you to see the kind of the light. And we're happy to put that restriction on there, make sure all lights are off. But I think the glass that we're required to be putting in these facilities, you're not going to be able to see light in there. But we're happy to make sure lights are off and save electricity bills, that's for sure. Okay, thank you. Yes, Mr. Bill. Yeah, Nick, how long has this property been available? Since Beaumont Center was built. It has been vacant the entire time. It is the last B3 parcel in Beaumont Center, and yet it has sit there. Why, I do not know. It is a very unusual shape. You have access issues. You can't have full access on a midnight pass with where the median is. It's one of the reasons why we made sure to try to direct it. I dealt too much with Walmart on Nicholasville Road of people trying to take left out of right outs, And so we try to make sure that it basically is into the median so you can't do that movement. I'm projecting, I'm guessing on why this site has not been attractive for B3 users when you have seen Beaumont Center truly take off. Thank you. Yes, sir. Mr. Nicholson. As this new product is coming into our market, it looks like we're trying to define where it can be placed here in this forum so as many people can be as involved as possible, which I think that is a good decision. We're dealing today with a B3 property that you're requesting to be zoned B4. As I'm looking through the B3 uses, it goes through all 31 uses, and then we get to accessory uses. And number one, wholesale warehouse and storage facilities. So I would like to know the reason you wanted to present this as a zone change rather than. So self-storage is only permitted in B4 and I1. Storage as an accessory use to a business is allowed if your primary business is X, an accessory of which is you are allowed to store materials and whatnot on the property. I believe that staff is shaking their head. I did not lie to you. And so indoor self-storage is one of the difficult parts of how uses develop over time. And I understand why that self-storage has only been allowed in the B4 and I1 zones, because it is such an intensive kind of warehouse feel when you are talking about the sprawling kind of compounds. That's not what this is anymore. It is much more akin to the types of B3 uses that we see, but it is not permitted in the B3 zone. I also understand why Lexington might not want it permitted into the B3 zone, because I have a feeling if you think we've seen a proliferation of these come in to come into B4, I have a feeling that if we opened up all of the B3 zoning in Lexington to this type of use, you'd see them sprouting up all kind of along our corridors. And I don't know if that's what Lexington wants. And so this is a kind of unique use of a B4 use, But we have seen that there is a path to introduce it into a heavy residential and commercial area. Most of our tenants come from within a mile and a half range. When you basically take it out to two miles, I believe it's at 98% of the tenants come within two miles. These are the people that are utilizing these type of sites. It is the close proximity people. It is the residential users. It is the commercial users in town. I did want to make one point. And neither B3 nor B4 are recommended zones whatsoever in place builder. Not a single corridor, not a single place type, development type. They're not recommended anywhere. And so when we have these types of conversations, we are talking about a zone that is not recommended by place builder currently to another zone that is also not recommended by place builder. Thank you. Yes. I think you shared with us that the building is, the max height is 48. 48, yes sir. You shared a couple other of these properties, do you know what those heights are? So the heights were not on. Not these here, the other storage facilities. Yes, well so Sand Lake was five stories originally. It is different because a change in topography between where the residentials is in the commercial. I believe that the Townley would be at 48 feet because it was limited to four stories as well. And I do not off the top of my head remember what the centennial was on the old movie tavern site. I know it's four stories, but I do not know if that was a 48 or if there was 15 feet per story. But consistently, they're four stories. Thank you. Okay, Mr. Nicholson, I've seen any more questions. Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you. Okay, this is time for citizen comments. You can do so by stepping up to the podium, stating your name and your address. Each citizen will have three minutes to speak. And just please, if you're not, try not to repeat what the person spoke in front of you. Mr. Chair, members of the commission, I'm Walt Gaffield. I live at 2001 Bamboo Drive. I'm on the Moondance Foundation Board of Directors, and I'm on the board of the Harrods Hill Neighborhood Association. I've come to agree with the staff recommendation. I may have to ask for somebody to donate me an extra three minutes. I might not. First of all, we're not conceding time to the next, you have three minutes. Okay, that's fine. Harrods Hill was part of the initial negotiations with a Beaumont developer on the Beaumont Center. There were ten neighborhoods involved in it. Beaumont Center Circle in that entire area is heavily deed restricted and their conditional use is established in it. So it's really somewhat less than a B3 and can't be accurately described as a plain old B3. I'm familiar with storage facilities like the one proposed. They're architecturally like a big block, mostly, and they're rectangular. I've been in one in Baltimore. It didn't even have employees present that were visible. You just kind of got in using a code and left. So there's no employment opportunities there. Beaumont Center is actually an economic engine for Fayette County. There are probably more offices in Beaumont Center than downtown and in North Lexington toward I-75, so it's a major economic engine. It's very diverse in terms of the housing that's there. There's a lot of retail and use and some commercial. It's very diverse. What wasn't discussed at all, at least so far, is the Moondance Amphitheater, which is right next door to this. It's run by Lexington Parks and Recreation. And it's probably about the worst place to ever put a self-storage facility in Beaumont Center. It just doesn't work well. It doesn't fit with the other properties. It would be equivalent to building a self-storage facility on Main Street. have visualized what that would be like. It's that same sort of image. It's way out of context. Well, Moondance is going to probably be looking at an arts grant to improve the facility and has been putting in trees and all that kind of stuff. We're going to have this big storage facility next door to it that just doesn't fit. B-4 sets precedent for Beaumont Center and it's been highly successful and highly unusual and I really think that you need to protect that area. It's also on top of townhouses. It's just exactly the wrong place for it to be. Thank you very much. Thank you. Hello my name is John Ball. I live in 3307 Beacon Street which is directly adjacent to what's proposed and i have three young daughters age three five and seven and i would just ask that you please don't make them grow up next to a self-storage unit also that is exactly where the sunrise comes down down the street and putting a four-story building there would effectively delay us even being able to get sunlight significantly so i'd please ask if you take that into account when you're looking at this thank you thank you My name is Arlie Kerr, and I live at 3220 Beaumont Center Circle, one of the townhomes directly next to the proposed storage unit. I agree with the staff that this should be disapproved. Their recommendation talks about the structure of the building not being in character with the surrounding area, and that's absolutely true. It looks like a prison. And then they want to put a wall around it and light it up at night. It says prison. They talk about that it's not a pedestrian first, and it's true. It's not even auto-centric. It's truck-centric because they're going to be bringing in trucks. And as far as jobs, I've been in two self-storage places before, And there's one person there at the front desk at most, and sometimes they're not even there. So please disapprove this storage center. Thank you. Thank you. I'm Deborah Alexander and I live at 3256 Beacon Street. The lot boundary is literally less than a block from my front door from my bedroom window. And I have eight neighbors in that residential town home area that is less than a half a block to that lot. I chose to retire to Lexington a few years ago, and I chose Beaumont Center specifically after looking for a couple of years. I had served overseas. I was two years in Bosnia, two years in Iraq, Ukraine, six assignments, Somalia, two assignments, and Afghanistan, ten years. And I wanted a neighborhood where there was peace and security, and that's why I chose that area. Now, it is true that over the last few years, we've seen a lot of development. But important to remember, the pictures that you saw of the hotels and the office buildings are professional services for the most part. And those buildings are not adjacent to our properties, they're not our front yard. And so there is an important difference between the area where we live and many of the other new businesses in the area. Because of the HVAC, because of the lighting and its impact on those immediate neighbors where we would have that constant noise and light regardless of what you might try to do with the lighting. I'm opposed to it. I'm opposed to the traffic for it. I'm concerned about the quality of neighborhood. We are not anti-development, only that we want to be a part of those discussions and something that's more in keeping with the current zoning. And I think the former speaker, I look out over that lot every morning and that's where the sun rises. And to me, that is such a quality of life. It's so important for me to have. And as a senior and retired now, I don't have the luxury of just up and moving. So I would hope that you would consider disapproving this. Thank you. Thank you. Hi, my name is Nagokoli. I'm the resident of 3258 Beacon Street, which is next to the proposed joining change. Like I'm also the neighbor for Deborah. I only just want to raise one point. I don't know his name because I walked in late here. He said most of the business comes from the two miles of adjacent properties and stuff. I don't know. Whatever I know is everybody here, most of the residents and everybody out there living in the radius of two miles opposing this. So based on that, if everybody boycotts his business after he constructs the building, I don't know whether he can do any business or not. And also that structure after he builds it, I don't know, it goes slowly, like a waste. Like he got to maintain for it forever until it stands and get demolished or something like that. So I don't see any point in the staff. I respect that. Thank you. Thank you. Hello, my name is Gail Reese and my husband and I live at 3312 Beacon Street. We're about the sixth unit down from the proposed development. We downsized there during the pandemic and we chose Beaumont because of the walkability. And because you can walk to so many services in the Y and the library and I've never lived in a walkable community before and it's wonderful. Let me do make a point in my situation about downsizing. If I had had a storage facility close, I wouldn't have done the hard job I needed to do. And let me tell you, when you downsize, you need to downsize. My kids appreciate that, so I'm not sure downsizing appeals to those. Some people maybe, but not to everyone. My husband and I also intend to age in place. And we plan for that with our facility there. With the mobility that we put in, we plan to stay there. And I'm kind of in senior services and I know that at our stage in life, you've got to plan on what you're going to do next. And that is our plan. We, I oppose this building because of the scale of it. It is going to look just like a massive brick at the end of our street. Even if it has windows, it's just going to be a big massive structure, a warehouse. And I'm going to tell you what my grandson, these are his words. He said, it's going to cast a massive shadow over your neighborhood. And I thought, yep, it is. This is a 15 year old saying this. So when you consider what you're doing, I would love for you to consider other things that could be possible in that area. One thing my neighbor and I would love to see is a garden center. And I know someone on your planning commission may be able to think about gardening, but we would love something that the whole community could participate in. So thank you for considering, and we hope that you disallow it. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Is there anyone else that would like to speak? Yes, ma'am. Hello. I live at 3312 Beaumont Center Circle, and I also have a fear of safety concerns. I walk my dog around there at night. I think it's going to bring an element of people that I don't want there. So I hope you disapprove. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, Mr. Nicholson, rebut. I will be very brief as I kind of worked in most of these points already in my presentation because we have had kind of a very open dialogue with regards to what the kind of main concerns were for the neighborhood. While this does not bring jobs, it is crucial to support the surrounding commercial uses. There is a reason why the commercial users in close proximity to these facilities rely on it as an extension to their own business. And while we did not do a kind of sunlight study, we are talking about a difference in about, what, 13 feet between these two structures, between the townhomes and what we are proposing, and we have pulled it off as far away from the residents as possible. This is also an existing B3 zone. we can put an office building in this location that is even taller than the four stories. And like it is basically, you know, a kind of by right B3 type use. Again, we are not trying to light anyone out of the area. We are happy to make sure the lights are off at night. The Beaumont design guidelines also restrict the height of lights that are freestanding or that lights that are attached to buildings. And so this is not a situation where we will be blasting light over the property lines in any way, shape, or form. At the end of the day, it will not look like a prison. It is not a safety hazard. This is going to appear to be an office building just like the other office buildings that are already in existence and could go on the site today. The only difference is that you are limiting the amount of trip generation, the amount of people that could come in conflict with the area and the neighbors. Thank you all for time. Thank you. Mr. Nicholson, we have one question. Mr. Nicholson, you mentioned buy right. Can you elaborate on what other uses with the current zoning today an applicant could engage without, I mean, buy right? I mean, we would still be talking development plan because it's B3. Is that correct, Mr. Martin? Even though it's a single structure B3? Yes. I was pretty sure. So it is still development plan approval. I should have just said a principal permitted use instead of by right. But the gas station that is right next door, the hotels that have been recently approved that have gone up there, any type of office building that you really would like to be there. Like these are all the types of things, your standard B3, which is up and down the corridor of most of our arterials. That is what this current zoning is. It is restricted. So we would not be talking about a drive-thru fast food place. I believe that's the biggest kind of restriction on this site. So we're not going to be talking about ever having a Chick-fil-A there. That's for sure. Or a drive-thru coffee shop. You didn't have to say that. I don't know. I think that was a jab, guys. Ladies and gentlemen, I'll be relatively brief. I do want to kind of clarify some of the aspects, including the restrictions. We had these up briefly before. and then also Daniel gives me a hard time about all my animations so these are the current restrictions on the property that would limit what you would typically see along a highway service business zone area so it does limit some elements of development in this area I'll also say that within the B3 zone there is a height limit of 75 feet, but when it is adjacent to a residential context, there is a limitation of a three-to-one height-to-yard ratio. So those are elements of the B3 that specifically impact this area. I would also, I do want to answer Mr. DeMovilon's question about the heights of those other structures. The height of the structure located at Eastland, that is a three-story structure standing at 36 feet. The height of the Louie Place structure is four stories standing at 50 feet and the height of Sand Lake Development that is three stories standing at 40 feet. Within each of those reviews of zone changes we review them as what is in place in that area to understand the context while also reviewing it against the applicant's justification letter and how that elucidates some of the information that is unique to those different situations. In each of those different zone changes, they were unique in that they either had a higher intensity of land use or they were representative of a zone that was unrestricted. This is a restricted land use within this area, a restricted zone within this area. And that is particularly important if you look at the submitted applicants' findings. There is reference to an unrestricted B3 zone that should read restricted B3 zone. If you have any questions for staff, we'd be happy to answer them. Yes, Mr. Bill. Al, I'm struggling because I'm sensitive to the neighbors that there's nothing there now, and they like it like that. And yet, you know, it is currently zoned B3, so it has the ability to have something there. Yes, sir. Can you just educate all of us as to, if it were you, what do you think is suitable? Just so the neighbors understand that something can very well be built there. I can't come from the perspective of Hal Bailey. I can provide the perspective of staff. Currently, there are allowable uses within the B3 zone. If the applicant were to come in with a development plan showing how they were utilizing that space within the confines of the zoning ordinance and within the uses that are allowable, even with the restrictions, they would be able to provide an office or other types of uses that you would see within that restricted B3 zone. So that is what we would anticipate. it would take a final development plan or an amended final development plan in this case to come to you so that you would review it to ensure that they are meeting the requirements of the zoning ordinance and that there is appropriate association with the context of that area. And do you feel that since this has been vacant for as long as it's been vacant and such, that it's a difficult location to put something? I can't look into the specific factors as to why this is vacant, and staff typically doesn't review it in that sense. The rezoning that occurred in the 1980s went to the professional office, and then the early 2000s went to a restricted business zone, and then there have been subsequent removals of those restrictions for some of these areas. So there has been change over time, but at this point in time, I couldn't answer that question in the way it's asked. Yes, sir. There were a lot of comments both made publicly here and in the letters about the nuisance noise from HVAC units. And that is not something I think since I've been on it, we've had a lot of discussion or heard much about. What is sort of staff's take on how that falls into this and what our role would be on that? Nuisance noise or the production of noise to a nuisance level is actually outlined within the code of ordinances. It's a certain decibel level and then a certain timing of that. That's not something that is governed by the zoning ordinance. However, the zoning ordinance does govern nuisances in the essence of impacts against different land uses. So when talking about noise from an HVAC, it would be of the Planning Commission's ability to regulate buffering and screening of that. You do that quite often with other elements. All too often with HVAC, we also see individuals with flat roofs or individuals that are developing properties that are larger in scale do it on top of the structure rather than at the rear. The applicant has indicated that it is required. That it be on the... And the last question here for you. The applicant has a different set of proposed restrictions than I think are currently on the B3 list. Correct. Was even though you all are recommending disapproval, was there discussion between staff and the applicant on that list? No, the applicant supplied this, and it is reflective of some of the other conditional zoning restrictions that have been applied elsewhere, with the specifically Louis Place with the shift from an I-1B-1 property to a B-4 property. So they're looking at what has been done with other unique properties and trying to apply it at this location as well. I see, but some such as like parking lots and, well, specifically like parking lots are, would also be allowed in the B4 if they were not restricted, is that? So in an unrestricted B4 zone, all of these uses would, or I'm sorry, within a restricted, unrestricted B4 use, all of these uses would be allowable. The B3 zone has a totally separate list of uses, and there isn't as much overlap between those two zones as they are meant to produce very different uses or land uses. So the B4 zone really focused in on a shops, especially trade, warehousing side of things, whereas that B3 zone focused in a little bit more on the retail restaurant side of land use as well as offices. So it's a little bit more intense from a human interaction side of view with the B3. It is more intense with the scale and use often with the B4 zone. Thank you. Any more questions for staff? Thank you. Thank you. As a commission, do we have any additional questions, concerns? This is the time. If not, the floor is open. Yes. I have issue with the context and the scale of this building. And so having said that, I'm going to make a motion. Okay. I move to support the staff's recommendation of disapproval for PLN MAR 23-1 for the reasons recommended by staff. Okay. We have a motion. We have a second to that motion. We have a second by Mr. DeMovillen. Any further discussion to that motion? If none, vote via Granicus. Okay, the ayes have it. Thank you. And then we need a motion for the preliminary development plan, too. Yep. Do we? Mm-hmm. Do we? Okay, thank you. Okay. I move to indefinitely postpone PLN-MJDP-23-8 Beaumont Farm. And we have a second by Mr. DeMovulin. Please vote via Granicus. Okay, that motion passes. Thank you. All righty. Next up, case three, PLNMAR 23-4, zone change plus a preliminary development plan. Yes, sir. Thank you very much. We are shifting to the PLNMAR 23-4, UCD Midland LLC. This is a rezoning for the properties located at 262 through 276 Midland Avenue and 604 Winchester Road for approximately 2.93 net and 3.61 gross acres. The applicant is seeking to rezone a few different zones to the downtown frame business zone, the B2A zone. Those zones they are seeking to rezone are the light industrial I-1 zone, neighborhood business B-1 zone, and the mixed use community zone or the MU-1 zone. The petitioner is seeking this rezoning to the B-2A zone to create a mixed use development that would incorporate 182 dwelling units and approximately 2,000 square feet of commercial space. The associated parking with this application would be located underneath the residential components of this site as well as be located at the rear of the area. The applicant is proposing to activate the corner of the property that would incorporate a possible connection with the Liberty Trail. Just to locate us, we're not too far from our current location, out Midland Avenue, right before it transitions into Winchester Road. We also have 3rd Street right at the intersection here. This property does have access along Midland, Winchester, right with this portion, and then Owen Street. Midland and Winchester are arterial roadways, major arterial roadways that provide connection into the downtown area as well as leading us out of town. Owen Street is a small, older, local street that provides connection into some of the industrial properties to the rear as well as provides access into this area. But jumping into the actual aerial photography of this site, we get an idea of the land use that has developed throughout the area. And I'm sorry, I do need to go back just to clarify a few things on the zoning of this area. As you can see, we have quite a few different colors, which identify quite a few different zones for this location. Located right across the street of Midland Avenue, we have B2A zoning, which is that downtown frame business. It transitions over to a fair amount of historic residential. North of 3rd Street, we get into a blend of some of our business, our warehousing zone, as well as moving into some more neighborhood-serving businesses and then into more residential. As we go out Winchester Road, we have more of the light industrial and warehousing development that had really been tied with the historic rail lines that cut across all these properties. As we get to the aerial photography, you'll see that there is still some remnant rail lines in this area associated with the C&O rail line. There was a historic rail line that cut across the front of this property, bringing you down into the downtown area historically, in which we had quite a bit of industrial development. To the rear of the property located here, we have a mixed-use community zone, which is a blend of different intensities of residential land use and can incorporate some business uses. Down into the Bell Court neighborhood right here, which it does have a historic overlay associated with it. And then as we move out of this area of light industrial, we're moving down into the Mentel Neighborhood Association, which is a blend of businesses along Walton Avenue and then into the neighborhood. it. So now jumping into the aerial photography, you can see just that portion of the old rail line extending across here onto the properties that at one point connected across the entirety of the property down towards the old Herald Leader building. The applicant has done significant amounts of work to get ownership of this portion of the land. There has been a release by the CNO rail line at this location, which connects them to Owen Street. Just below, you can see we have a little bit of warehousing, some older warehousing and production areas, then into the Midland Townhouse and Condo Association, which includes several multiple townhomes, as well as a four-story multifamily structure located here. Across the way, we have the MET development. This is that mixed-use development that incorporates several different businesses and does have a fair amount of affordable housing associated with it. We do have several parks in the area, and this is specifically important for a lot of our new development with access to open space, making sure we're activating and accessing our park system. If we move down towards this way, towards some of our National Avenue Adaptive Reuse Project. That area is zone B4 but has really transitioned from the warehousing type use to more of a neighborhood supporting use at this location. And then across Winchester we have the Jeff Peanut Butter Factory. Jumping into the site itself, this leftmost photo we're standing on the front of the property looking down Midland as it transitions into Winchester Road. The current cut stone property, the property is currently being operated as a cut stone and landscaping business. Into the property itself, you can see some of the stone that is still there. And then down Midland as we are heading into downtown. You can see that we do have a smaller sidewalk at this location. It's more representative of the historical development of this area. Next we get our panoramic views of the property and the opposing development. So just looking into the property itself on your top photo and then the Met development. As you can see associated with the Met development is our town branch trail in its completed fashion in which it is meant to bridge that connection into our area. That's a specific focus of some of the applicants justification is trying to connect to some of the trail systems within our community. And then jumping to some more photos of the property itself in the top left, looking at the Met from the intersection of Winchester, Midland, and Third. Again here, this is looking towards Third from the corner of the property, and then up Winchester Road from the edge of the portion of 604 Winchester Road. Here we have a view in the top right of Owens Street. It is a partially sidewalked area. It is located on the western portion of the site. It's looking into that warehousing business that's in the back, but also you can see that multi-storied, multi-family structure at the rear of the condo association and townhomes. And then looking down the rail line towards where this property will be developed, this is the portion that they have acquired. So with all zone changes, and of course the one that I don't have my animations on pops up first, with all zone changes we are looking at a place type, development type, and zone. The applicant is seeking to situate this within the downtown town place type. This place type is meant to be some of our more dense and intense areas of our town. It is meant to promote both commerce, office, and residential. In this case, the applicant is focusing more on the residential density. This is an area in which we have some information about location, but it has been a major discussion point as we've been trying to develop our city, and our city changes over time. They are seeking to situate this within the high-density, non-residential, or mixed-use place type. They are proposing a five-story, multi-story structure with parking being located on the first story with some of that commercial, and then residential located above. In this case, they are in, from staff's review, we are in agreement with the downtown place type. This is adjacent to other downtown zoning. It is part of this entryway into our city and is fronting on Midland Avenue, which is a major corridor into our downtown, transitioning from the development on Winchester Road. And, of course, the applicant is seeking to apply for the B2A zone or the downtown frame business zone. This zone is meant to frame the core of our downtown area. It has more restrictions than what you would see with a B2 zone. It has some limitations on height, including a need for review by the Planning Commission for any structure higher than three stories. This is a recommended zone within this place type and development type. Just to have a view of their proposed development, Mr. Martin will be reviewing this a little bit more. They are seeking to situate this along Midland Avenue with the parking located in the rear. An important aspect of all of our zone changes is making sure that we have a clear pedestrian connectivity as well as activated space. The applicant is placing a reserve along the front of their property so that they can activate that front while also providing a connection across the street to the town branch and Liberty Trails. I'm sorry, the town branch and the Legacy Trails and a possible connection to the proposed Liberty Trail. This proposed Liberty Trail would connect out towards the current Brighton East Trail, connecting us with neighboring communities. You can see that the applicant, some of the conversations that we've had in the past on this application was a direct connection over to Owen Street. This is a requirement of the zoning ordinance and is a major component of trying to get a greater amount of connectivity for pedestrians within our community. There are several aspects of this development that has led them to make the choices in how the building is oriented. Mr. Martin will go over that here shortly. One of the questions that staff had during previous meetings was how was the applicant connecting into other areas while also providing a greater amount of tree canopy. The applicant has indicated that they will have street trees that do run along the roadway here. that is particularly important to provide some of that buffer between some of the traffic that is being coming through this area. It's a heavy amount of traffic because it is our downtown area, but the roadways are capable of handling this kind of traffic. I'll let Mr. Martin go more into the development plan as we go on. However, the applicant has provided a fair amount of renderings of the property as well. This gives a fair amount of more information as to how the applicant is applying the multi-family design standards ADS 3-1 which is a development criteria within this place type and development type. You can see that the applicant has been trying to activate this space. The front corner where the applicant is proposing the connection with the trail is where they are also proposing their commercial space. This space is meant to be a little bit more active and attractive but it would only be approximately 2,000 square feet. Staff was concerned with the amount of business, especially with some of the commercial that would be going on across the street. However, with the limited scope of this, they are trying to activate that space, bring in more amenities for both members of the surrounding community and for potential residents. You can see that the applicant is seeking to provide a fair amount of relief and change along the building as they go on, which is an element of the multifamily design standards as well. Just another view of the proposed renderings of the property. Another view here. So before I do so, I also do need to pass out some letters. So we do have three letters of support for this application and one letter of concern. And I'll talk about those in just a second. Within the letters, you will see that these are primarily from neighborhood associations or business groups. The applicant has done a significant amount of community outreach with this application. And as staff was present at many of their meetings, including the Mentel Neighborhood Association, Bell Court Neighborhood Association, William Wells Brown Neighborhood Association, and they did have a meeting with the neighboring Midland Condo Association's president. With this application, staff is recommending approval of the application. The requested downtown frame business B2A zone is in agreement with the 2018 comprehensive plan. The proposed project will encourage housing choices and preference a higher density housing type by adding 182 residential dwelling units into an area that is primarily associated with single family detached residents with a smaller component of multifamily. The proposed rezoning supports infill and redevelopment by infilling an industrial area that is now more appropriate for residential or mixed use operations. This goes back to the historic character of this area, shifting from association with the rail line and that industrial nature of this area towards a more downtown framework that is focused on amenities. That connection with the town branch trail and the Liberty Trail being a major component of that. The proposed project will prioritize multimodal options for potential residents and other users to de-emphasize single occupancy vehicle dependence and support the complete streets concept, prioritizing a pedestrian first design that accommodates the needs of bicycle, mass transit, and other vehicles. The proposed development is meeting the development criteria and policies of the comprehensive plan. Specific policies include the addition of a flexible zoning category that allows the applicant to create a walkable neighborhood with amenities that help supplement the surrounding residential and commercial land uses. The proposed development creates a pedestrian-friendly atmosphere by providing greater sidewalk facilities and the connection into the proposed Liberty Trail. The request meets the livability policy by providing opportunities to accommodate more or additional residents and amenity opportunities that might appeal to young professionals. the justification and corollary development plan do are in agreement with the place builder criteria specifically for the downtown place type and the high density resident non-residential or mixed use development type the proposed location meets the recommendation for site design building form and location it intensifies this underutilized site of our corridors while creating a mixed-use opportunity that is connected. It has a fair amount of pedestrian-scale connections while also prioritizing multimodalism. It is addressing the transportation and pedestrian connectivity by connecting across the site and along all frontages and really focusing on the multimodal connections. There is a bus stop located along the frontage of the property, and the applicant has indicated that they are working with LexTran to improve this bus stop. Currently, there are no seating or sheltered areas for individuals using the bus stop, and the applicant has proposed to enhance this area. The proposed rezoning meets the criteria for green space and environmental health, as it increases the green open space at this area. Currently, the vast majority of the site is paved. It increases tree canopy. While there are trees located along the frontage of the property and along the rear, the applicant is seeking to increase the street trees at this area, as well as increase the canopy against the neighboring residential development. And then they are seeking to reduce that overall impervious surface on the site. Finally, with all zone changes, it is incumbent on the approval of the major development plan, PLN-MJDP 2315, the Arthur E. Ashabishire property, or the Lexington Cut Stone and Marble Tile Company, which Mr. Martin will review with you right now. If you have any questions for me before that, I'd be happy to answer them. Any questions? Graham? What's the status of the Winchester Road corridor plan? I am not familiar with the Winchester Road corridor plan. I ask because one of the letters specifically states that, but- I saw that, sir, as well. It may not exist. I don't believe there is a specific Winchester Road corridor plan. There is a new circle road corridor plan, which includes a portion of Winchester, but not near this property. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Hal. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, members of the Planning Commission, The preliminary development plan starts at the bottom of page 4 on your agenda with the conditions continuing on page 5 of your agenda. Arthur E. Abshire property. I believe I met Arthur Abshire E. Jr. once many, many years ago. As Hal explained, you can see the site. Here we have Midland Avenue transitions into Winchester. You can see the frontage here, the proposed buildings on the site, along with parking. This is the area of the railroad easement, and you can see how it curves, as that's exactly how the rail line curved through there. And, of course, as you all know, it went down and served the Herald-Leader building for many years. They brought in newsprint on that spur. They, excuse me, it does extend over here to Owen. This is Owen. This is a small little public street in this location. They are proposing these two structures to be 75 feet in height. I believe they're five stories. There are 208 proposed parking spaces and 182 units between the two buildings. They are going to build approximately 254,000 plus square footage that you see on this particular plan. Now, the important things to note and many of the conditions on this preliminary plan refer to being resolved at the final development plan. And much of that relates to the constraints on this site. As you can see, not only is the size odd and different, constrained historically because of Midland, Winchester Road, and the railroad. Access, as you can see, coming off Midland. This was a considerable discussion. There's two access points into the site off Midland now. They're proposing one, and it'll come down in here with two-way traffic through here. This will be one-way traffic. And this particular revised plan was important, frankly, because staff was adamant about that pedestrian connection and this area in the easement and getting to Owen with that pedestrian connection that Hal talked about and the importance of the pedestrian facilities. This, as Hal mentioned, this is an area that the applicant's proposing to complement the trail. There's open space in this area as well. Presentation to the arterial is important. In this zone, that's one of the requirements, that as you go up, you get a little more of a setback off the street, off the right-of-way. There are considerable, not just the railroad easement that exists through here, which will ultimately go away when tracks are pulled up and they go through a legal process to accomplish that. the applicant is fairly well along in that process and they could elaborate on that for you. Dealing with railroads, as you all know, can be complicated and time consuming. Several conflicts that are important to note. There's a minor one. They have a billboard right here. That's going to go away, an easement for that. You can see right here, This is a large sanitary sewer. It's a trunk line that runs through here with a 60-foot easement. That's extremely impactful on this site. That can't be really understated. In addition, we have another sanitary sewer line and a stormwater, a 54-incher, that's big, that runs up through here and over. Historically, there have been some drainage issues in the area that have been addressed by various public projects as well as private development. When the townhouses came in, they had to do quite a bit of work in dealing with some of the drainage issues in the area. The conflict, particularly with this line, staff has seen some recent communication. That has got to be accommodated. That line has got to be dealt with. Now, it is the Division of Engineering Water Quality, the government's position, that we do not build over sewer lines. That just rarely works well. Although that was one of the options that was discussed. The applicant had discussed the possibility of sleeving the sanitary sewer. Again, that's not an option that's viewed with any enthusiasm at all from the government's perspective because of potential issues. So, again, what you're looking at is going to be some solution that may very well involve the relocating of that trunk line. Again, it's important to note that it's a trunk line that serves a large portion of the community. So that conflict will have to be resolved at the final development plan. I mentioned access. You can see the internal access. It's somewhat awkward. It's based on an existing access point. FIRE has expressed some concerns about this and trying to get better movement for their big red trucks into the site. They also are going to have to exit most likely this way as well through OWEN if they bring any big red trucks into this site. So that's been a discussion item that will be further refined at the final development plan. If that access point can be moved, this, of course, is a state highway, and they would have to agree with the movement of that access point there. So, again, they're attempting to deal with it on this plan, as you can see, but it is somewhat awkward. I mentioned there's a lot of easements. There's a billing line that's going to have to be revised as well. that's going to require a final record plat. And if you look at number 16 on your conditions, that says discuss that. Well, when you develop a site, and you all have heard this before, they're going to have to have a plan to build off of, and they're going to have to start moving things around, including sewer lines and other easements, and get that built. And they're going to have to come in with a plat and dedicate those things and revise. So it's really just a timing issue where they come in and what they're allowed to do at what time. That's not uncommon in construction, and it's certainly not uncommon on a site such as this, where you have existing easements and complications. So again, that particular condition could be resolved. I wanted to bring that to your attention. Again, they revised this, the major conflicts, the major issues. They addressed this. This was the biggie from staff's perspective with this revised plan. So, again, it's a preliminary. They're aware that they've got some serious site constraints to address as this goes forward and if it gets approved and goes into the final development plan stage. There were a few little cleanup items that staff had that they still need to address on the plan in terms of lot coverage and FAR, etc. But these are just minor cleanup items on the plan. The major issues are the easement conflicts, the sewer conflicts, arranging the appropriate access into the site. And then again, just the timing to address the conflicts on the site with the various interesting conditions on this particular development. Your subdivision committee did recommend approval of this plan and be happy to answer any questions you have for staff. Any questions for staff? Yes, Mr. Moverland. I've got one question. I know we're kind of early, but was there any discussion about connectivity to the rear with any of the adjoining properties with that single entry in one way? Out the other way, 182 units? Well, again, getting the connectivity out to Owen is significant with the public right away. And that's an alternative as well for pedestrians and vehicles to get out to other facilities, public facilities. But as I think there might be some difficulty, they would have to work, of course, with the private property owners to work out any kind of agreement that they were willing to work out. That would be a private agreement to get any kind of access like that. Thank you. Mr. DeMogulon, it does require connections to public roadways, as that's Owen Street and Midland Winchester. But within that internal development, we can't force a connection into a private roadway. And this may also be an external or internal kind of question, but one of the letters referred to management of traffic to protect pedestrians and bicyclists in that area. Is that out of bounds for discussion here? That will come into play. There's a crosswalk, as there always is. They're proposing an eight-foot sidewalk, by the way. Of course, the trail. There are always design aspects of the trail or a sidewalk where you have that conflict, whether it's crosswalks or other mastic thing, built into signage, all that, to address the conflict both for drivers and the users, pedestrians and bicyclists. Thank you. All right. I don't see any more. Thank you, Tom. I don't think there are any more questions. Thank you for now. Okay, applicant. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. I'm Chris Clendenin of Murphy and Clendenin. I'm here on behalf of the applicant UCD Midland. Present with the applicant appearing with there is Mr. Scott Shapiro and Mr. Andrew Ganahl. Also I'm joined by Steve Garland, Prime AE, here's our engineer on the project. Also here with Lord Ake and Sergeant Stan Harvey and Jordan Sebastian, they work with us on this project. And although they're not here, I wanted to mention the contribution of Rinka Architects. They have been working on this as well. As Mr. Martin and Mr. Bailey mentioned, this is the old, what's known as the Arthur Absher property or the Lexington Cutstone property. This is an exciting project. I'm very pleased to be involved with it. If I can get this thing to work, here we go, hang on. There we go. Today you're going to learn about this project and the highlights are as follows. It's going to be designed to become a focal point as people enter into the downtown area along the Winchester Road corridor. Not that there's a corridor planned in the works. I heard that discussion. It's going to provide for activation along the development on a widened sidewalk. Enable connectivity with the city's trail system, as Mr. Bailey alluded to. It's going to complement the existing development across the street known as the Met. It's a textbook infill and redevelopment property. They're going to be taking what's basically a hodgepodge of zones, including industrial, where there's no residential development, and provide a dense multifamily unit housing complex. It's going to improve the tree canopy. There's basically no trees there now. They're going to be adding, as you saw on the development plan. And it's going to provide an emphasis on multimodal, including biking and enhancing the Lex Tran bus stop that's there. Okay, just some unique history of this. This goes back, as Mr. Martin alluded to, to the railroads. There was a big conflux and gathering of railroads into this site. The Louisville and Nashville Railroad, the C&O Railroad of Kentucky, which eventually merged into the C&O Railroad of Virginia, which eventually became the Chesapeake and Ohio, and then ultimately CSX Transportation. Different times at different junctures, different people owned different portions of this property. And lastly, as I can attest to, I think Mr. Bailey or Mr. Martin mentioned this, we had to do a little clean up on some of the title. There was some issues with getting some easements released by CSX and also quieting title on a small sliver of the property, which we have done in order to go forward with this project. I'm going to turn it over to Scott and Andrew. They're the best advocates for their project. I think you'll enjoy hearing from them. They're very good at articulating and selling their vision of what this is going to be. Thanks, Chris. All right. Hello, my name is Scott Shapiro. Very excited to be involved with this project. I want to say thank you to the commission for giving us time, and thank you to the planning staff and the city staff that helped us to work on this. So this is an infill mixed use development. We want to bring residential density to our cities downtown. Some of you may remember me from working in the mayor's office and when I was there, it occurred to me that Lexington has two superpowers. One is our signature thoroughbred industry and the urban services boundary that protects, in part protects it. And that compels us to focus on infill development as our comprehensive plan makes clear. But our other superpower is that we have this amazing university in our center. And that throws off young professionals, highly educated graduates who become young professionals. Some of them are our sons and daughters. And in every other city you can think of, these young professionals live downtown. That's where they like to live. They like to live in places where they can live, work, and play. But Lexington has really struggled to provide this kind of housing for these young professionals. There's not been another class A apartment building built in Lexington's downtown in the last 40 years. When I look back, our population was about 200,000 then. Now it's 325,000 people. So that was the genesis of this project. How can we provide some infill apartment buildings downtown for these young professionals? And what we discovered, one reason why there may not have been these kinds of apartment buildings built for some time, is that it's really hard. It is really hard. We've been working at this for about a year and a half now. We've been dealing with an oddly shaped property. The town branch culvert going right through it, which is why the buildings are arranged the way they are so that we don't interfere with it. There were underground storage tanks that had to be removed. There was a CSX easement all along the back of the rail line that was controlled by RJ Corman. Spent a year working on that to get that released. As Chris mentioned, there's a title issue where the railroad may or may not have owned a piece of the property, and we had to go through a quiet title action to deal with that. Extensive neighborhood outreach. When you do infill development, we're surrounded by neighbors, and as we'll talk about a bit later, we've done extensive outreach to these neighbors. But the good news is, is that we've gotten through all this and we have a viable project. The conditions we can, we've all agreed that, including moving that trunk line, that those are things that we can do. And we feel really great about having a project that'll work. I don't want to go, I think some of our presentation may be a little bit redundant with this, the great overview that Tom Martin and Hal Bailey gave. So we might rush through some of these slides, but we are talking about two five story buildings, 182 market rate apartments. And these are geared towards young professionals. And one of the reasons why we love this site is that it's just right in the middle of our city. It's the city as an amenity. of idea where we're at the confluence of three trails. We have National Avenue and the amazing development that's happened over on National Avenue and of course walkable to offices and restaurants and everything that is downtown and of course UK as well. I think Hal has gone through sort of how this conforms with the zone. But I wanted to show you some of the pictures from the site. Now, this is Lexington Cutstone. We've been working with the owner of that Lexington Cutstone for the last year and a half. It's an amazing person who's trying to wind down this business and believes that what we're planning on doing with it is a great use for the property. Here's another sort of view of the property. It is an industrial property that really wants to be something else, and I think the city deserves for it to be something else. Before I hand it over to my business partner, Andrew Ganahl, I wanted to just put a focus on the trails and the connectivity and the ability to connect to the rest of the city with or without cars. When I ran into Brandi Peacher a few weeks ago, I told her, I'm not sure our development would be possible without the Town Branch Trail coming right in front of it. We love that. We love that connectivity to downtown. We love being right next to the Legacy Trail. And when we were approached by the city to accommodate the Liberty Trail, which connects to the Brighton Trail, we jumped at that opportunity. We said, yes, we will carve out the top part of our development to accommodate that trail and really orient that space around it, which Andrew will talk about, towards the trail. Because we want people to be able to walk, bike, scooter, whatever, all around the city from the central focal points. So now I'd like to hand it over to Andrew, my partner in this development, who's going to talk a little bit about the site itself and the building. Thank you. Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Andrew Ganahl. I'm Scott's partner here. So I live in Kansas City, Missouri. Over the last 10 years, I have completed five of these sorts of mixed-use developments with apartments on top of ground floor retail and parking. And I've done that in two cities that are actually quite similar in a lot of respects to Lexington. That's Kansas City and Milwaukee. both cities the work that i did was in very similar neighborhoods where they were formerly industrial neighborhoods on the very edge of downtown but the staff and city were very excited about the idea of bringing new residents to those areas they had been previously neglected just i mean they were just dead is the best way to talk about them and this site is similar in that respect right it's completely industrial but this point in time but it's clearly an area that's changing the Met and the Midlands behind it have sort of led the way and changing from its formerly industrial character to more what the comprehensive plan of Lexington envisions. So we're going to talk a bit more about engaging with the surroundings but I'm going to skip through to this slide. So we've heard a lot appropriately so about the complexities of this site. It's definitely the most complicated project I've worked on in my career. But as the old adage says, we look at constraints as opportunities. And this presents us with a few different interesting opportunities. So one is that, make sure, is this it? Okay. So one is this space in between the two buildings. So not only does that break up the massing, what otherwise could be a very long building, but allows us to avoid that town branch creek storm sewer culvert that goes right through the property. It also serves as the primary means of ingress and egress to the site out to Midland Avenue. The first floor of each of the two different buildings is primarily parking, but also with lobby functions, package room, amenity space. And in the case of Building B, against this patio area, or this sort of future patio area that Scott talked about, plaza area, I should say, is a bit of neighborhood residential serving commercial. There was a question earlier from a committee member about connectivity to the south. So in discussions with the neighbors of the condo community here, which is made up of a number of lovely townhomes and a five-story building of condo flats, we have agreed to build a fence for security. We mutually decided that it was probably best not to mix car and pedestrian traffic between the two different neighborhoods. We are much more oriented towards Midland and Winchester, so to the north as opposed to the south. So not only would that fence provide just security so that people can't move from one property to the other, it also blocks car headlights. and then of course that fence will also have some nice landscaping along it as well. So it really does kind of separate this site, which is much more oriented towards downtown and towards Midland from the condos and the single family homes to the south. Let me go ahead and skip to one more comment here, which is because of the complexity of this project, there is a fair amount of cost involved in it. And so some of the costs that we're facing and are anticipating are moving the storm, not the storm sewer, but sanitary sewer lines that currently run underneath building A. We know we have an engineering solution for that. It just costs money. Also providing access to fire and other uses. So connectivity to Owens is very important to us, in part because we're not going to have any connectivity to the south. And so having that second means of kind of the back door is important to us. That said, in conversations with neighbors, we did agree to make it a one-way exit-only pathway. So that cuts down the traffic that could be generated by that by at least a half. And also it's the safer way as well. So we feel like that's a good way out just through the back if there needs to be like a fire truck exiting or some other issue with up here. But it's going to be out only. There's not going to be any traffic coming down Owens and into the development for that. And it also provides us an opportunity to have a pedestrian connection. Staff is very insistent upon that, and we're in full agreement with that as well. So last two slides are just the concept renderings that staff has already showed you, but a couple of the things that we emphasize in the projects that I've done in the past are enlarged windows, providing lots of light into the bedrooms. We love balconies. Balconies are a wonderful amenity, especially because all the apartments are on the upper floors. High-quality materials. We haven't decided the exact materials, but materials I've used in the past in the facade include cedar and masonry and metal, but things that last for a while, things that keep their character and look good over time with maintenance, of course. But the idea is this really is a class A market rate apartment building oriented to, we've talked about young professionals. that will probably be the majority of our demographic, but it really will serve all types. It could be people in their 40s and 50s who like to travel a lot and really just like the convenience of an apartment, empty nesters who are downsizing from nearby neighborhoods, want to stay somewhere close by, but someplace just a little bit more walkable and a little bit easier to take care of as well. And then here's one view of that patio space. It's also the connection to the Brighton Trail or the Liberty Trail. and then there will be a nice crossing right here over to the Met where there will be a wonderful coffee shop, Manchester Coffee, DVA Kitchen, and lots of a neighborhood serving retail. So in our mind, they really are complementary, but a little bit different products, but they'll work well together as this Midland-Winchester area transforms from its current industrial nature over time. okay you want to say anything else or should we skip this part all right let's skip this part because staff has already said that and scott's going to talk about neighborhood engagement thanks andrew so we've had extensive outreach to um the neighborhood associations uh we met and and hell came along and and uh some of his colleagues to um four neighborhood associations so William Wells Brown Neighborhood Association, which I believe sent a letter of support. The Bell Court Neighborhood Association is neutral, is my understanding of it. Mentel Neighborhood Association had a support letter as well. We met with just the president of the Midlands Condominium Homeowners Association. We've had several conversations with him and met at the site with them as well. And as Andrew said, came to a solution around the fence on the back of the property. Area business owners were very excited about this development, as you can imagine. So Carolyn's Crown and Glory Hair Salon, Manchester Coffee we met with, Art House Kentucky. We met with Shrout, Tate, and Wilson, which has some concerns about congestion on Owen Streets, which is primarily driven by a nearby moving company that is using the street as sort of an overflow parking. and Shroud Tate and Wilson was also concerned with the idea that cars would exit our property, our secondary entrance exit, and then instead of going out on Owen Street, might cross the CSX easement, which they use as a parking lot. And we've also spoken with area landowners as well, So the Warehouse Block National Avenue developer, Ty Walker, it's very excited to have us here. I think he has sent in a letter of support. Obviously, we love National Avenue. Many folks in Lexington love what's happened on National Avenue. And we're very excited to partner with all these businesses to help send our residents out to them to support those businesses. But that said, so we have made some adjustments based on all of these meetings. We have agreed to, at one neighborhood association, I believe it was Belcourt, there was talk about the bus stop out on Midland. So we're very happy to work with Lex Tran to improve that. There was interest in this commercial space from most from maybe three out of the four neighborhood associations. And they also told us, look, we solicited their opinions. We wanted to hear what kind of business we should attract for this space. And we heard loud and clear that they were not interested in chains, anything that a chain would provide. They wanted a local tenant, and we pledged to find that for them. As I said with the Midlands Association, their concern that they raised with us has to do with security along the back perimeter and potential headlights from cars parking that might shine up. And so we again met on site with our engineers and agreed to a six-foot fence that would resolve those two issues. So with Shrout, Tate, and Wilson, and the staff requested that we have a walking pathway out to Owen Street, so we did provide that. So Shrout, Tate, and Wilson, again, their two concerns are that there's this congestion on Owen Street, again, driven by this moving company and using it as overflow parking. And the idea that the folks who don't go out our main entrance on Midlands would come out the Owen Street exit. And instead of turning on Owen's, the concern is that they would go through his parking lot. So again, we've done two things there. We've, again, we've limited the traffic that would happen on Owen Street by making it just one, or exit one way. And then secondarily, we met on site with the owner of that business there with our landscape architects who came up with an idea that would limit, that would prevent cars from going through his parking lot. And at the time, he agreed that that would be a solution. And so we mocked that up. We had our landscape architect mock that up and sent that over to them. So we hope that that resolves the issue. There's another landowner, the Whelan family, that we've been talking with as well. They own two adjacent properties with the yellow sheds that you guys may have seen, as well as the landowner, the Fergusons. And we've actually really enjoyed meeting them and the Whelans, as well as their father, James Whelan, who owns the property, had two two-hour meetings with them, including one that was last night, and we resolved to work with them on their concerns. It's the same concerns as Charlotte Tate Wilson about congestion on Owen Street, and we pledged to work with them to figure out a solution there because we really want to be great neighbors. So we have a list of how this comports with the comprehensive plan and objectives, I think Hal went through this already, but obviously we're expanding housing choices. This is infill development, obviously. We are hoping to reduce our carbon footprint. We have enough parking spaces to accommodate everybody who would live in this apartment building. However, it is our hope that they, instead of driving downtown or driving to UK, that they use the Tao Branch Trail and that they walk or bike or just simply walk over to National Avenue for dinner. And again, this is designed to attract young professionals. So that's really a key part of how we build a thriving, vibrant economy here is by keeping these well-educated young professionals here in Lexington and providing them with the housing that they're looking for. We're really proud to be integrating into the trail, the multimodal trail system that the city has built, as well as enhancing the bus stop. Again, we want people to use these options rather than jump in their cars. And again, infill development, key to upholding the urban services boundary. So with that, I think our presentation is concluded, And we really appreciate all your time and look forward to your questions. If you have any questions, we're here to answer them before we walk away. Any questions for the applicant? Thank you. All right, thank you, Mr. Chairman. At this time, it's citizen comments. If you're a citizen and would like to have any comments, please step up. Mr. Simpson. Missing the whole, whole, whole. That wouldn't have been good. Technology and me have never been friends. That's why I use the overhead projector. I don't know what he did. I'll yell out. He'll make use of the overhead. Okay. All right, we back online. Okay. Okay. And each citizen will have every three minute comments as we did on the previous. Mr. Chairman, I'm representing two neighborhood associations. I would request at least as much time as the applicant had to rebut their presentation as well as the staff. There's fundamental issues of importance here that require additional time, and I'd appreciate getting that, please. How much time are you requesting? Fifteen minutes. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I'm Bruce Simpson. I'm here on behalf of the Midland Town Home Owners Association and the Midlands Crossing Condominium Association. Their names were mentioned earlier, and they're here today in opposition to this proposed development. After listening to the development, the proposal, there's a lot of things that are very appealing, certainly. It's a challenging site, which creates some issues, which I'll get to in a moment, that have not been addressed, that are significant problems. But there's a lot of things to like. However, there's a couple of fundamental gaps in the presentation, in the evidence that you're required to consider today before you can approve this development. One is public safety, which has to do with pedestrian connectivity and the ability of the pedestrians that will be living in this proposed apartment community and walking to and from and around the development, particularly to National Avenue with the new proposed sidewalk along the railroad track and the connection to Owen Avenue, which I'll get to in a moment. And then also the proposal, surprisingly, since the applicants have been on notice now since March the 8th, that their proposal for the sanitary sewers is not acceptable. We're now seven weeks since they were notified that building over the sanitary sewer line was not going to be approved. And as you all know, in processing development, zoning, when you get notice that you've got a major flaw like an infrastructure issue associated with sanitary sewers in particular, Given our deplorable history that led up to 2008 and the consent decree that we were sued by the federal EPA that resulted in this government spending $590 million to correct previous decisions of your predecessors and the predecessor Urban County Council in failing to take care of sanitary sewer problems and stormwater problems. despite that history, and I will tender a copy of the 95-page federal court consent decree in a moment, but I say all of that to say this. They've had seven weeks to deal with this significant infrastructure problem, and they've not changed anything. What they have tried to do is work with Division of Engineering to try to keep the building over the sanitary sewer line. And in lieu of relocating the line, which is very expensive, but they knew that when they bought this property, that that would be an expense. But they're trying to clearly save money by, instead of moving the line, put what's called a sleeve, a kind of an additional covering, if you will, around the existing line underground, under the building that they're proposing to build, the two buildings, five stories tall. So before you tonight is two stories, two buildings to five stories tall. we have the sewer underneath the building which has been expressly rejected now you're required to make a decision today based upon the evidence before you not trust me development well we'll get it worked out with the division of engineering but we don't need to hear that today we don't need to hear how you're going to solve this problem even though you've had seven weeks, seven weeks to address it, to file an amended development plan, to show how this sewer, are you going to reroute it? And then show us how you're going to reroute it. Don't come here on the day of the zone change hearing when we have to make a decision about has the applicant met its burden to satisfy this government, the comprehensive plan, and the zoning ordinance that the public's health and safety are going to be protected by the very plan that's before you today for a decision. As Hal said, this development plan is part and parcel of the zone change. And particularly since the 2018 plan was adopted, the development plan is even more important to illustrate how the applicant is complying with the comprehensive plan. And so what have they done to comply with a comprehensive plan with respect to a threshold issue sewers, sanitary sewers. Now, I mentioned that in 2008, because of years of trust me development, well, we'll take care of it. They have to address it, and we'll trust them to take care of it. Now, they may. I don't know these gentlemen. They may take care of it. But the principle that we should have learned from spending $590 million, we don't trust development. We make sure they've done their homework when they come for the zone change. Show me how you're going to deal with the sanitary sewers. Don't put it under the building when Charlie Martin, the head guy, says no, you can't do it. And before tonight, or tonight, before you, that's what they're doing. You have no legal basis under the law to approve this zone change. No policy reason to approve this zone change. $500 million, $90 million precedent. And you're going to say, trust me, development will take care of it on the final development plan? No. That is impermissible. The law says you have to consider stormwater, traffic, public safety at the time of rezoning. Now, when you all got sworn in with all due respect, I've been appearing in front of planning commissions for many years. I respect all of each one of you. You don't get paid nothing. You get a lot of grief from people like me, from neighbors that don't like what you're doing and others. It's a thankless job. It's an important job. And part of your commitment when you took it was, when I make a decision to approve a development, I'm going to make it on the basis of being fully informed that I know the consequences of my decision. that I know at the time I vote to approve this property for zoning, I know that the public safety is going to be protected based upon the evidence that the applicant has submitted for my review. And I don't have to worry or be concerned about trust me development that, well, I'll let the government people take care of it after the fact. Those days are gone. And so I suggest to you, as you sit here today, to all due respect, there is no basis to approve this zone change when you have a proposal that clearly is not acceptable for sanitary sewers. There is nothing for you to approve that is in compliance with a comprehensive plan on that. Public facilities are not proposed to be adequate to serve this development. It's a complete unqualified proposal. Now, the second thing that I'm going to talk about is pedestrian safety. Conspicuous by its absence in all of the photographs that you saw the applicant introduce. Wonderful conceptual renderings. I have no doubt it'll be a beautiful development. But you still have to solve the threshold issues. Sewers is one, pedestrian safety is another. In none of those photographs did you see a semi-tractor, trailer, truck. Not one. Most of the streets were vacant. We're talking about Midland Avenue and Winchester Road. How many times do you see those streets vacant? Now, I went out to take Wednesday, Tuesday, I'm sorry, just to see for myself, since I got retained late Tuesday, to get involved in this case to see what was going on, to understand it. And I did wait until the traffic passed, and I took a picture, which I'll show you in a minute. About 30 or 40 semi-tractor trailer right across the road from caddy corner from the subject property at the Jiff Peanut Butter Company. I think it's called Smuckers. And the truck entrance is 300 feet away, approximately from Owens Avenue, which is the new connection from this five-story apartment, 182-unit apartment building. It's going to exit. They have an exit one way. I don't know how they're going to enforce that, but it's proposed for one way onto Owen Avenue. This is where all the trucks are. You'll hear from the business that's been there for a number of years how this is going to impact his business, his family, his employees. One thing I have heard repeatedly over the years and the many different zone changes that I've been privileged to represent applicants and neighbors is that semi-tractor trailer trucks and cars do not mix. It's a bad deal. They're not compatible movements. But this is what we're talking about with this project. Now they didn't show you a single tractor trailer truck. I'm going to show you some tractor trailer trucks. And you'll hear from the owner, Price Coomer, Mr. Price, about how many trucks, Tractor trailer trucks and box trucks that he has come into his property. They stay there, tractor trailer trucks, for about an hour and a half at a time. They're stacked up on Owens Avenue, stacked up, waiting to get into his facility. Now we're going to have approximately 1,200 new trips added from 182 units. that will all, a great many of them, be exiting this new access point from the subject property for the first time in the history of this area, Owens Avenue, interfacing with all these tractor trailer trucks and box trucks. Now nothing was mentioned about that. Now they're going to add a sidewalk all along this new road connection to Owens Avenue from the apartment complex. And this new sidewalk for new pedestrian connection is going to be running dead on into the tractor-trader trucks, the box trucks, and automobiles. Now, nothing was mentioned about that. And you have to decide yourself why not. Maybe you went out and looked at the site. You can go out there every day and see what I'm going to show you in terms of photographs. It's there. And you'll hear from Mr. Price, and he will share with you in more detail, the impact that adding 1,200 trips, 600 trips, and you know, that doesn't even include the trips that are going to be generated from the 2,000 square foot commercial space. I didn't even look at that in terms of addition. The 1200 trips comes from the ITE trip generation manual for apartments. Common reference for engineers. I got it from vision engineering. That's a major conflict of public safety that you've not heard one twit of discussion or concern about. And so how are you going to approve this development when you've not heard any evidence that these people are going to be protected? It was only about a month ago, I was trying to get a coffee shop approved on Virginia Avenue and South Broadway. Dutch Brothers. And the great hue and cry was, we're going to put the pedestrians, the students, they're going to get run over by all the people going into the coffee shop. I'm not saying that's not a legitimate concern. But it was a concern that was expressed and we discussed it. Now we heard the staff present, we heard the applicant present, and I haven't heard one bit of concern expressed about pedestrians and all these trucks. And all these cars on an existing intersection that's full of semi tractor trailer trucks, box trucks and automobiles now. And now we're going to add half of the 1200 a day. 1,200 new trips a day, say half of them go out that way and maybe more. How can you make a decision when you have all of the evidence that these are fundamental threshold safety issues? Before you even get to the comp plan being a factor in compliance, you have got to make a decision. You've got a reason in your own mind that I know there may be some debate on policy of whether this applies or that applies, but I know it's at least safe. I know pedestrians are going to be protected because I've heard how they're going to be protected, and I know, or I've heard it's not going to be an issue. And I know the sanitary sewers are going to be protected because I've seen, I've heard the evidence and I've seen evidence of how that's going to be handled. You're not going to hear that, you haven't. They go first, they present their case. You haven't heard anything. So, we're concerned. We're not against development, but we want to make sure you take care of it right, because this is mainly an industrial area. If you'll put the zoning up, please, Tracy. Mr. Simpson. The zone map up. Mr. Simpson. All the zoning from property. Mr. Simpson. I'm sorry. No, you're fine. I know you're doing what you have to do. It's your turn. I need about 15 more minutes. I need as much time as, well, look, I need as much time as they presented. And under the law, I'm entitled to that. Hey, I'll go back to my lawyer on that one. You can answer that. I think it's up to your discretion, Chair. Okay. All right. Another 15 minutes is, I would think, too long. All right, I appreciate it. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. It's too long. Can you do it in 10? I can do it in 10. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate it. It's an important issue. It's an important issue for the businesses over there, for the condominium associations I represent. And it's an important issue for you, because you've got to satisfy yourself that you've got all the relevant evidence to make a decision to protect the public. And you don't have that, and you won't have it. So I passed my handout, my exhibit book, and the first under tab one, what I always like to refer to basically is the guiding law and that's the zoning ordinance. And what is the purpose of the zoning ordinance? And maybe you've seen it before, but I think it's always, particularly in cases like this where there's glaring gaps of evidence relative to public safety. The purpose of the zoning ordinance is to implement the adopted comprehensive plan And other adopted community plans of Lexington, Fayette, Urban County, promote the public health, safety, morals, I'm not sure about the morals part, and general welfare to facilitate orderly and harmonious development. Goes on for the longest sentence I've ever seen. But the thing that they talk about is promote harmonious development and public safety and the health and welfare of the community. That's what the purpose of the ordinance is. So, what kind of ordinance are we talking about? talking about they're seeking an ordinance of B2A zone. So under tab 2, the B2A zone, the purpose intent of this ordinance is the intent of this zone is to accommodate existing and proposed development in the transitional frame which surrounds the downtown core area by providing for comparable and compatible uses while anticipating including the future expansion of the downtown core area. Compatible and comparable uses. This is a radical change in uses from industrial uses, which dominates the surrounding area. If you could put up the zoning map, Tracy, please. I think you all had it the first slide maybe or something like that yeah you're all slide showing all the surrounding drums y'all have that on every presentation no it's your it's your office thank you How much time have I got, Mr. Chairman, please? All right. What you're looking at is, you know, grief. Don't ever give me a pointer. There we go. The area as you can see with the purple and the red is all light industrial or warehouse. This is a radical change with residential. So we got a conflict in uses. They're not comparable, they're not compatible. Doesn't mean they can't change, but it does mean if you're going to change them, you got to protect the public. You got to protect pedestrians that are going to be walking in the area from tractor trader trucks and box trucks. You got to protect the public, the people that live in the condominium associations from, if they're going to try to shoehorn in a sleeve around an underground sanitary sewer line, which is what they've attempted to do and work towards. You better make sure that it's done correctly, there's no human error because if any breakage in that line, There's some human error in the installation of that, whatever it is they're putting around it. And it doesn't create some unintended consequence that the sanitary sewers back up in the condominiums. Because you're not followed what Charlie Martin told you to do back in March of 2023, and you got a problem. A future, foreseeable, serious health problem. So, under the next series of slides, Mr. Chairman and members of the commission, if you look under tab three, you will see the box trucks and you will see cars pulled over on Owen Avenue. Under tab four, you'll see the semi-tractor trailer truck actually blocking the railroad where the new road is supposed to be, where the sidewalk is going to come right up to where that truck is and stop. And then the residents will have to negotiate to try to get safely across Owen Avenue to the other side. If they're coming from the new apartment complex to get to National Avenue. The next slide under tab number six is the shot of the traffic on Winchester Road. I didn't want to take it super busy, just kind of, I was out there for three hours. I said, I'm going to take an average shot, that's what you see. The photographs that I saw before my presentation, I didn't see any cars. The next slide under tab number seven is the truck pulling out from Owen Avenue, making a right-hand turn, had to go clear over into the opposite lane. Cars going in the opposite direction to make the full turn because it's a narrow turning radius. Cars are stopped, obviously. This is a regular occurrence during the day. You haven't seen any evidence of this. None. That concerns me, it concerns my clients. Another truck under tab number eight. This is where I let the cars pass under tab number nine. This is the property owned by Smucker's, Jeff Peanut Butter. There's 30 plus semi tractor trailer trucks. There's a truck entrance just 300 to 340 feet away from Owens Avenue. Both of these exit onto Winchester Road. This road is full of tractor trailer trucks that have to be navigated by cars and pedestrians that are going to be coming to this area now because of these new apartments. We haven't heard anything how those people are going to be protected. Now I mentioned Charlie Martin. Charlie Martin as a public servant and head of, he was a coordinator for the entire consent decree. He's done more to protect this community's environment in the time he's been here than any other person in the history of the urban county government. I can attest to that because I've been here longer than he has. I know how hard he's worked. And we haven't always seen eye to eye, but there's one thing I never questioned. His commitment to protecting this community's safety and health is unparalleled. And we're blessed to have him. So they contacted Charlie. Hey, we want to put a sleeve or we want to do something other than take this pipe away from underground the building. And Charlie said to Scott, one of your applicants here, Scott, honestly, we're not going to endorse building a building over an active 15-inch sanitary trunk sewer. If you want to hear me say that next Monday, 10 to 11 is open. One sentence, emphatic, don't do it. This was March the 8th. March the 8th. It's April 27th, and you have a development plan before you tonight to illustrate their intent on rezoning and developing this property, which shows the trunk line having an apartment building on top of it, five stories tall. Under tab number 11, I have outlined the complete failure of this application to comply with a comprehensive plan, particularly as regards to public safety and the sanitary sewers and pedestrian connectivity, protected pedestrians. It's a total failure. You have no evidence tonight to prove it, none. As a matter of law, you can't do it. I propose findings of fact for disapproval. I made them simple and straightforward to support the evidence that we've introduced tonight. You're going to hear from a number of people that have businesses that live nearby. I'll be happy to respond to any questions. Mr. Chairman, I thank you for the additional time. I thank you very much. You're welcome. Thank you. Any questions? Thank you all. Yes, sir. Start with asking for 15 minutes. I'm just kidding. Just kidding. Start off with that. My name is Tyler Wilson. My wife and I own the triangular property at the corner of Walton Avenue and Winchester Road. We also work every day in that building and probably, no offense to anybody here, probably the most affected by this development than anybody here. I will start off by saying I'm excited about that development, but I have one major problem with it, and that is the connection at Owen Avenue. Can't speak to the sewer issues or anything else. The property needs to be developed. I'm excited about what they've done and what they're showing. I'm not so sure about the extensive engagement with the community because I only learned about this when I received the notification in the mail for this. And I maybe spoke to one of you two who then probably put him on notice that we had concerns. That is the first time I ever had any conversations. So great that Men Tell Park is in favor of it, or if they are, or others. But it seemed noticeably absent from most of these diagrams, the people that are right there at Owen Avenue. We don't even show up on the map here. So it's a major concern. Owen Avenue or Owen Street, whatever it's called. I walked it off today. It's about 100 feet long. And you have currently four properties. Our property at 628 Winchester and the three other properties owned by the Wheelings, they all access the 100 foot long street right there. Before the truck showed up, before the current tenant moved in there, it was already a very busy street. People do not, we're sitting right on a corner, it's a blind corner at Walton and Winchester Road. If you try to exit Owen, it's nearly impossible to turn left. You've got people coming around that middle and avenue corner. It's blind, you're taking your life in your own hands, so everybody's turning right. We constantly have people coming on to Owen, outbound Winchester, cutting on to Owen and coming through our parking lot because they want to avoid that light at Walton and Winchester Road. If you look at, I don't know if you can pull it up, but if you look at the development, again, our only concern whatsoever is with the vehicular. I'm okay with the pedestrian connection. That's fine. They will walk through our parking lot because they're not going to walk down Owen, walk around Winchester Road to get to National. They're not walking out Winchester Road, let's face it. They're going to Chad's businesses on National Avenue. But our parking lot is an extension of Railroad Track, which is their access. That's how I leave my parking lot, but that's because we're the tenants and that's our prerogative. I appreciate the fact that they have made it one way. I think that will make it better. Sir. Sir. Time. Time's up? Yes, sir. Okay. Well, last comment is I just think that due to the time constraints, I'd like to see a traffic study occur. I think that's very important. Thank you. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen of the Planning Commission. My name is Kristen Curry. I'm here today along with my brother Yates Whelan on behalf of our father James Whelan who is, he just turned 92 years old on Monday and has had a couple of falls recently and is not able to come down here in person. Although I believe he's watching on TV. I am also in attendance with one of our tenant, our main tenant, a representative from Ferguson Enterprises, who is representing our parcel at 610 Winchester Road. I'm sorry, I apologize, 249 Walton Avenue. The gentleman from whom you just heard, Tyler Wilson, we have a relationship with him as our sub tenant, who leases our parking lot at 610 Winchester Road, which is directly across Owen Street from his flat iron building. In addition, the aforementioned Mr. Price, who is the owner of Price Coomer Enterprises, which is the business that is generating some of this truck traffic in which you've seen pictures, Hay had to exit the meeting because he was supposed to be in Nicholasville at 3 o'clock. So he did hand me some statistics and information for me to enter into the record today. In addition, my brother and Mr. Sell, who's the manager at Ferguson, would wish to provide me with their time. Can we do that, please? No, really? Okay, so we object to and oppose this zone plan, ZDP, and primary companion preliminary development plan. based on the existing submission because of, number one, the health and safety concerns regarding the intensity of the additional traffic generated by the mixed-use development residential units, which are adding into our tenants and subtenants' truck traffic, which include these tractor-trailers that are stacking along Owen Street creating difficulties with turning out onto Winchester Road, as well as the de facto use of the smaller side parking lots that the Flatiron Building, Shrout Trade Wilson uses and our customers at Ferguson use. That is up to eight to nine trips daily with tractor trailers that load and unload. That takes at least an hour and a half to do so, and then you have to egress and they're stacking and delaying even further. In addition, there are 20 employees there at Price Coomer that they have commuting traffic times in the morning and the evening. In addition to several will call customer pickups that create traffic there. Furriesen also has some box trucks and they have deliveries a few times a week. We are also, even though the staff is adamantly in favor of this sidewalk, we are concerned about the conflicts with pedestrians and passenger vehicles there. We are concerned about the main sewer line and also echo the concern about a sleeve and would like to see the rerouted relocation. And we are also understanding that storm water quantity and quality should be a detention situation. And we do understand from staff that the Owen Street. Excuse me. Can I finish my one sentence? You already, your time is up. Can I finish this one in the middle of my sentence? This is your last sentence. Thank you. We understand from staff that the Owen Street from Winchester Road crossing over the former railroad right away is considered public by the city. Although we don't see that on the plat or the aerial, we would like to have that noted or delineated in some way on the plan. And so in conclusion, we are opposed to this plan and ZDP has submitted with these large amount of 18 conditions. Thank you. Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Jonas Bastian. I'm speaking on behalf of the Midlands Town Home Owners Association and I guess as one of the throw off young professionals in the community. I'm a lawyer by trade and wanted to come and share some general comments from the HOA's perspective. One, I think that the applicants have worked in good faith with us to address some of our concerns. And I know Mr. Simpson who spoke earlier mentioned a couple of things with the sewer line and I'm just going to leave those comments at that. We have met on site specifically about the privacy fence. And we're happy that they have pledged to build that privacy fence. But I may add, I'm not sure if it's the appropriate time now, but we did mention some brick posts in between to kind of cut up that privacy fence. Obviously, we're concerned about traffic. There was not a traffic study done, but it is my understanding that threshold apartments doesn't require a traffic study. So in sum, I just wanted to share a couple of comments. I guess some closing points. We were concerned about the lack of commercial space. We are happy that it's going to be more of a local tenant and not necessarily a chain. But we would like to see a little bit more commercial space if that's even possible. But then again, they have engaged in good faith with us to have those discussions. So on behalf of the HOA, these are a couple of our concerns, and I'll leave it at that. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Okay. Got one more? One more. I wrote mine down, so I'll hit the three-minute mark, no problem. I'll get you guys out of here, I promise. Good afternoon. I'm Chad Walker with Walker Properties. I've been asked to speak on behalf of our 53 businesses on Walton National and North Ashland Avenue, whom we directly lease to. And our properties are about two city blocks from this development. We also own the property at 611 Winchester Road, which is directly caddy corner of this property. Those businesses are in 100% agreement in support of this project. But, you know, though traffic engineering has its work cut out for it, I have the utmost faith in that organization's ability. They've been professional and knowledgeable in all the dealings I've had with them. And I think that they'll come up with a logical and feasible plan to make sure that this property is safe for both pedestrians and vehicles. Regardless, we believe this property will hopefully achieve three major goals. It'll calm speeds on Midland Avenue, the Midland Avenue drag strip, as I call it. We have about three or four cars a year that we have to pull out of the ditch next to our property at 611 Winchester Road. The increased traffic speeds will be forced to slow down. Number two, it continues to fuel Lexington's goal of accessibility for pedestrian friendly experiences. I've walked the length of the Town Branch Trail, believe it or not. I spent my tax dollars walking down the trail. If I paid for it, I'm going to use it. that this improvement will finally, we will finally have a development that boasts non-vehicular accessibility to a myriad of services. And the third point is it looks nice. This is a massively underutilized corridor that serves as an entry point to the city. This development will aid in accommodating Lexington's growth without sprawl, without gobbling up farmland, while serving as a flag planter along with the Met, signaling continued development and improvement to the eastern entry point of our city. That's all I have today. I appreciate your all's time. Thanks for the work you do on this. Thank you. Applicant? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll be as quick as possible. First, for the record, I appreciate the commission has the discretion to run its hearing. My understanding under the rules is Mr. Simpson won 30 minutes. He needed to request that on Tuesday, so I need to object, just for the record. that he was given that time. However, going forward, I appreciate his enthusiasm and his volume in which he spoke. I got to read this email because I think his presentation with regard to the sanitary sewer issue was incomplete. This is an email from Chris Dent. Mr. Dent is, my understanding is back there, so he'll be able to verify this. This is an email that he sent Mr. Garland, our engineer, regarding the sanitary sewer issue. I want to read it into the record. Steve, the current note, number 16, on the development plan about the 15-foot sanitary sewer system is sufficient for the division of water quality for the preliminary development plan stage of this development. We have been in our continuing conversations, water quality engineer and developer, about the issue of the 15-foot sanitary line under the proposed building. From our discussions, it appears there are multiple solutions to this issue, but the final solution has not been determined yet. A final solution will need to be determined prior to approving a final development plan. If you have any other questions, please let me know best, Christopher Dent. This was April 18th, so I appreciate the fact that we were noticed on March the 8th, but the fact that Mr. Simpson's trying to give you the impression that we haven't done anything is just simply not true. We've had multiple discussions about this issue. We've already agreed to reroute the sewer line if necessary. We just don't have this entire plan 100% worked out because we're not at the final development plan stage at this point. If you'd like to verify that with water quality, feel free. Number two, which I think is the other issue I've heard about pedestrian safety. There seems to be a great concern about the traffic, the box trucks, and the semis all on Owens. Owens is a public street. Seems to me that these businesses are using it for their personal parking lot. Now, the back entrance from our proposed development onto Owens is because staff is insistent that we have connectivity from our project onto Owens. We have put on our development plan at the preliminary stage a five foot pedestrian walkway, which is what we are required to do under the ordinance. We have done that. Now, we're not going to be generating any semis or box trucks. That's all there already. And to kind of imply and for you to infer that we don't care about pedestrian safety, I think is a little bit disingenuous. I just want to make that point. I know Mr. Shapiro wants a little bit of time, as does Mr. Garland. So I'm going to have Mr. Shapiro come up and talk. That's okay, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Thanks. Can you bring up my presentation? So we agree that there's an issue on Owen Street. But the issue is one of enforcement and it's not a design issue on our part. And this is, it's interesting that I had prepared the same picture that Mr. Simpson prepared. This is a picture I took on the lot. There's a truck that's stacked, trucks are stacked up on Owen Street. And they go, and they're stacked up, you can't see this picture, but around on Winchester Avenue waiting to get into Owen Street. Here's a truck trying to get out. It can't get out because the owner of the yellow building has parked about eight feet out and is preventing the truck from going through. We saw this congestion. The only traffic issue on Owen Street is that the moving company is using Owen Street as their personal parking lot. And so this is an enforcement issue, but it has nothing to do with our development. This is something that needs to be cleaned up. We've met with the owner of the yellow building, as he said. We've met with the Weiland family and pledged to them that we would join forces to help clean up this, what clearly is an issue. But it is an enforcement issue that could be easily resolved. It's my understanding there's been some conversation with the gentleman who owns the moving company, and he has not been cooperative in terms of having his truck drivers obey the traffic laws. But we're happy to join in that conversation, and we believe there's an enforcement solution to that. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Mr. Simpson, you want to rebut? Just very briefly, representative from Charlie Martin. Hold up, Mr. Simpson. Okay, I'm sorry. Because I called Charlie Martin today. I said, Charlie, is this email that you sent on March the 8th still valid? I said, absolutely. He said, I can't be there, but I want to send two representatives to confirm. Excuse me, Chair, this is time for rebuttal, not a cross examination. So I'm going to. Thank you. I'm your buddy. I can rebut with a witness, that's what I'm doing. Hold on, hold on, hold on. Charlie confirmed the email is valid. Hold on one second, Mr. Hold on one second. Mr. Simpson. Greg, can you clarify that? Greg, don't say anything. No, it's getting out of hand. So we're going to put this to bed. So, Greg, if all due respect, will you go sit down, please? Mr. Simpson. Mr. Simpson, if I can, just for the record. I'm just, I was being very respectful. I understand you are. I'm going to continue to be very respectful. So I just ask you for your rebuttal, even though you've spoke a long time. But I'm giving you this. My rebuttal is that Charlie Martin confirmed it for me and Greg Lubeck would confirm it for you all. That under no circumstances will this sanitary sewer line be approved for a sleeve. And you don't have a plan in front of you tonight that shows an acceptable sanitary sewer option, which is required to be approved for zoning, and you don't have it. They didn't show you a truck until I showed you a truck. Now they're blaming the businesses for the problem. They don't have any evidence of anybody violating anything other than allegations. So they blame the business for their intrusion when they haven't addressed how they're going to deal with protecting the pedestrians on the sidewalk. They're going to create to a road that's overburdened with an industrial business because it's an industrial zone. There's no basis for you all to prove this. And it is serious. And I have gotten emotional because I've seen this stuff happen over the years. And this is a major mistake if you approve this. Thank you. Thank you. Hale. Mr. Chair, there's been a lot of conversation about the sanitary sewer line. I refer you to note 16, which was referenced by the attorney for the applicant, as well as the statement on the plan that says sanitary sewer to be relocated or protected. So the applicant has multiple options. is not the time for them to engineer this until the final development plan um i also want to point out several aspects of the presentation that was brought up today specifically with the zoning we have mu zoning located right here this is a residential and mixed use zoning we have b2a zoning located right here the applicant uh the opposition made a statement that there is no mixed-use zoning or residential adjacent to these properties it is only b4 or i1 that is totally incorrect. You go to the out to the streets at different parts of the time in the day there are cars and there are not cars that is an element of our roadway system the roadway system at this location is an in location is an arterial roadway. Owen Street is a public street and is required to be accessed by the applicant with any development this is a new aspect of article 16 of the zoning ordinance they do need to provide a pedestrian connection from their development to public streets it is a good thing that there is also a sidewalk along Owen Street which acts as a protective element between pedestrians and the roadways so there is a safe pedestrian conduct a connection from this development to Owen Street from Owen Street to Winchester Road on delineated pedestrian services the applicant did talk about semi trucks and them queuing into Owen Street that is a public street all individuals that are adjacent to public streets are able to access them the truck company does have direct access onto Winchester Road I'm sorry not the truck company but the warehousing has direct access to Winchester Road as well so there are multiple points of access into and out of some of those business uses the Sanitary sewer, Mr. Greg Lubeck is here for your questions. So I believe that during your question and answer period, you can ask those questions specifically about the different options that have been discussed between that division and the applicant. So I do want to stress that there are options. They don't need to be solidified at this period in time. The applicant is making incredible leaps and bounds with pedestrian safety throughout this project, specifically along Winchester Road and across Midland Avenue. They are increasing the pedestrian services here that would accommodate bike facilities as well along the frontage of their property. The Owen Street access point is also very important for fire to get in and out of the site. and there were a host of other perspectives about traffic impact. This does not reach the level of a required traffic impact study. Should the planning commission, specifically the subdivision committee, request one, you can do one at the time of the final development plan. Staff is available to answer all these questions. However, staff vehemently disagrees with Mr. Simpson's portrayal of the pedestrian safety safety at this location and the fact that a sanitary sewer line needs to have specific construction drawings at this point in time. They have been in constant contact with the various different divisions of this government, which is represented by the development plan and the sign offs for a development plan at this location. A preliminary development plan goes along with the zone change to show how something can be done should the zone change be completed. At that time, it goes on to the final development plan, construction drawings, and all of the engineering necessary. If you have any questions for staff, including the members of our other divisions, we'd be happy to answer them. Thank you, Hal. Any questions for staff? I would like to hear from Mr. Lubeck, please. Thank you, Hal. there you go uh good afternoon i'm greg lubeck i'm the deputy director of the division of water quality thank you for having me this afternoon would you tell us about the conversations you've had with the applicant regarding the the trunk line yes um i've been in one meeting with him i think it was a week ago maybe two weeks ago but we've chris dent back there is our sanitary section manager and he and i have been talking and it looks like there are a couple of options you can go really either way around the building we think you may have to modify the building at the west or south end however you got it called or maybe go around between the buildings where the other lines are that's gonna you know they're gonna have to engineer that and we you know this is just looking at like as-built that we have that it looks like it might work so so and one of the conversations was about leaving it there and putting the building and we were like no because if even if you sleeve the existing line well if we have to go do something we're either digging up midland avenue or the detention basin back in the condos which is probably a non-starter for doing that kind of work so in our opinion you know trying to sleeve that existing line and leave it there is is really not a viable option. And this is done at the expense of the developer, is that correct? Yes. Any more questions, Mr. Lubin? All right. Thank you. Just for the layperson here, what do you mean by sleeve? You have the existing pipe sitting in the ground. You can put a bigger pipe around it. so that the pipe is not just encased by soil but theoretically you can dig it up release it at both ends and pull it out and push a new new pipe through it's just a bigger pipe around the pipe that's actually carrying the sewage thank you mr wirf yeah this is a just for the record for people who are watching this uh mr um No, no, no. Let me back off. It's been asserted that we can't make this decision about moving forward with this development because it's illegal to do that at this point because we don't have absolute clearance on the sanitary sewer issue. We've also been told that the process we use is we can do a zone change with a preliminary development plan and work through the issues. Would you go on the record legally in terms of what's been asserted on that point? I believe what you need legally for a zone change is stated in KRS 100.213. And I believe that the issues that were involving sanitary sewer are developed throughout the process of a preliminary and final development plan, that's what Article 21 is also for, I wanted to point that out in the zoning ordinance. So yes, I believe you legally have what you need to do a zone change and disagree respectfully with Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Thank you. Do we have any more questions for the gentleman on the podium? Okay, thank you. Thank you. Okay, Commission, we'll bring this back. Is there any additional questions, comments, concerns? If not, the floor is open. Mr. Mickler, did you hit your? There was one comment where I had a question for the applicant, if I may. Or if you want to. No, no. We haven't moved it now. Yeah, I had one comment and question for the applicant. We are looking to do a downtown frame zone change, and we're looking at a pedestrian and bicycle corridor, as you mentioned. And the one comment from the condo association does sort of resonate that the square footage on the ground of this building is almost, both of these buildings is almost entirely dedicated to parking and very little is dedicated towards amenities or retail space. And I would like a comment on that if I could. Thank you for the question. As you can imagine, it is always a balancing act between uses and parking. One of the things we tried to accomplish with this was to achieve a parking ratio of one parking space per one unit. We're a little bit above that, not quite to one parking space per one bedroom. If you look at the surrounding area, there's really no off-street parking. available so we did try to internalize the vehicles that would be owned and used by the residents on the site one outcome of that is that a large portion of our ground floor is dedicated to that parking um what this was also a comment during the subcommittee and one of the things we said and would say again now is that over time as the city evolves the use of cars evolves that ground floor space can be fairly easily adapted and changed from parking to retail when the time is right. I think we're heading in that direction. I just don't think we're there at the moment. And then the commercial space was kept purposely small for two reasons. One was to really make a focus more on kind of like a neighborhood serving business rather than something that's drawing a lot of traffic from a far distance. It is supposed to be more of like a walk-up style. As you can see, we don't have dedicated parking for that commercial. So we do want to have some because it provides that activation and that street life that we're looking for. But at the same time, we're trying not to overburden the site in its current condition with a lot of travel trips coming and going. Is there interior parking for bicycles? I believe that's part of the code. Is that on the north side of the eastmost building? Is that what we're looking at? I know for sure we'll have a lot of exterior. Yeah, so it's in building B along the northern property, I'm sorry, building line. Yeah, okay, I thought that's what that was. So are you intending to attempt to get a LEED certification for the buildings? We have not as of yet. We've just started to explore things like MEP systems. MEP systems are often a key component of LEED certification because it has to do with energy efficiency. Being a residential building, in my experience, we haven't pursued a lot of explicit LEED certifications. Though there's many things that LEED asks for that if we pull up a checklist, we would check the box on. I just can't say right now that we would check every single box for like a lead silver type presentation. But we can certainly, as we look forward to the final development plan, explore that option. Thank you. Any more questions? Any further questions, comments? Okay. Go ahead. Floor is open. All right. Thank you very much. I would like to make a motion to recommend approval of PLNMAR 23-00004, UCD Midland LLC. And I would like to refer to the staff's recommendations, the four recommendations that they provided on with their recommendation for approval. Okay, we have a second by Mr. DeMovlin. Any further discussion to that motion? Please vote via Granicus. Okay, motion passes unanimously. All right, passes unanimously, yes. Thank you. The next step would be I would like to recommend a motion of approval for PLN MJDP 23-00015, R3 E Absher property, located at 262 and 276 Midland. And citing the 18 conditions provided by staff, which helped them, or provided by the subdivision committee, which helped them to come with an approval recommendation. And we're going to change 16 discuss to resolve. That's not, so you want to add that to your. Okay, please condition 16. Yeah. Please change discuss to resolve. Yeah, okay. Thank you. All right, thank you. We have a motion and a second by Mr. Worth. Any further discussion to that motion? Okay, seeing none, please vote via Granicus. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you, everybody, and have a good day. We're up to commission items. And I do want to say this is Mr. Bailey's last meeting. Oh, come on. What? Come on. Thank you for this long meeting today, Al, to agenda items. Is it admitting? Just sit back. Last zoning meeting. I'll still be around. But thank you, everybody, for making it an eventful one. Well, you can blame me for that one. That's fine. Mr. Duncan? Mr. Chair, all I have to say is we'll see you all next Thursday at your committees. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. This meeting is adjourned. Thank you.