# Planning Commission Subdivision Items - June 8, 2023 > Auto-transcribed civic record · June 8, 2023 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/5840 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/5840?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2023-06-08 - **Last revised**: June 8, 2023 - **Length**: 20,443 words - **Speakers**: Chair > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Urban County Planning Commission met on June 8, 2023, at 1:30 PM in the Council Chambers of the Urban County Government Building at 200 East Main Street in Lexington, Kentucky, with Larry Forester presiding. The commission addressed four agenda items during the session, including routine administrative matters and a presentation on future planning initiatives. The meeting included 14 motions and votes on various matters, with the commission approving minutes from previous meetings, performance bonds and letters of credit, and postponements and withdrawals of certain items. One member of the public provided comments during the public comment period. The commission also received an informational presentation on the Imagine New Circle Road Corridor Plan, which did not require formal action but provided updates on ongoing planning efforts for the corridor. ## Attendance The following members were present at the June 8, 2023 meeting: • Larry Forester • Judy Worth • Ivy Barksdale • Zach Davis • Robin Michler • Janice Meyer • Frank Penn • Bruce Nicol • Graham Pohl • Anthony de Movellan **Absent:** Bell No members arrived late to the meeting. ## Votes and Decisions The commission took 14 votes during the meeting, with most items receiving unanimous approval or postponement. **Administrative Items** The commission approved the May 11, 2023 minutes by roll call vote with 8 ayes, 0 nays, and 2 abstentions [timestamp: 00:30]. Judy Worth motioned and Zach Davis seconded. Performance bonds and letters of credit were unanimously approved 10-0 [timestamp: 01:30], with Frank Penn making the motion and Anthony de Movellan seconding. **Postponements** Seven development projects were postponed to future meetings: - **PLN-MJDP-23-00031** GREYLINE STATION & MARKET was postponed to June 22, 2023 [timestamp: 02:30] - **PLN-MJDP-23-00029** RED MILE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT was postponed to July 13, 2023 [timestamp: 03:30] - **PLN-MJDP-23-00030** KINGSTON HALL, UNIT 1, LOT 8 was postponed to July 13, 2023 [timestamp: 04:30] - **PLN-MJDP-18-00004** TRIPLE STARS PROPERTY was postponed to July 13, 2023 [timestamp: 05:30] - **PLN-MJDP-22-000045** DISTILLERY DISTRICT WEST was postponed to July 13, 2023 [timestamp: 06:30] - **PLN-MJDP-23-00022** GLEN CREEK (DOVE CREEK) was postponed to July 13, 2023 [timestamp: 07:30] - **PLN-MJDP-23-00032** HOMER C. RATLIFF PROPERTY was postponed to July 13, 2023 [timestamp: 08:30] All postponements passed unanimously 10-0. **Approvals** Four development projects received unanimous approval: - **PLN-MJDP-23-00023** RML - CITATION (HILLENMEYER INTEREST LTD) LOT 3 [timestamp: 09:30] - **PLN-MJDP-23-00028** HADDIX PROPERTY (A PORTION OF) AND BUCKLEY & COWGILL WAREHOUSE [timestamp: 10:30] - **PLN-MJSUB-23-00003** COLDSTREAM FARM PHASE II PROPERTY [timestamp: 11:30], with the condition that lot 12 should have an access easement to the U.K. Coldstream property - **PLN-MJDP-23-00025** ROSE H. BRIGDEN & MARK MCCLURE PROPERTY [timestamp: 12:30] The commission also unanimously adopted the Imagine New Circle Road Corridor Plan as an amendment to Imagine Lexington 2018 Comprehensive Plan [timestamp: 13:30]. ## Public Comment During the public comment portion of the meeting, one speaker addressed the council regarding local infrastructure concerns. **Council Member Gray** spoke about the New Circle Road Corridor [timestamp: 14:30], expressing concerns about the current state of New Circle Road. Gray emphasized the need for improvements to the corridor and discussed the desire to change the public perception of the area, which is currently viewed primarily as a location for car dealerships. The council member highlighted the importance of transforming this corridor to better serve the community's needs and improve its overall image. No other public comments were recorded during this portion of the meeting. ## Appointments The commission made three appointments to the Nominating Committee for Commission Officers during the June 8, 2023 meeting. The following individuals were appointed to serve on the Nominating Committee for Commission Officers: • **Bruce Nicol** - appointed • **Ivy Barksdale** - appointed • **Janice Meyer** - appointed All three appointments were approved during the meeting to establish the committee responsible for nominating commission officers. ## Approval of Minutes [timestamp: 00:30] The commission reviewed and approved the minutes from their May 11, 2023 meeting during this agenda item. Key speakers Judy Worth and Zach Davis participated in the discussion regarding the accuracy and completeness of the previously recorded meeting minutes. The minutes were ultimately approved by the commission, indicating that members found the documentation of the May 11, 2023 meeting to be satisfactory and accurate. ## Performance Bonds and Letters of Credit [timestamp: 01:30] The commission reviewed and discussed performance bonds and letters of credit during this agenda item. Staff presented the bonds and letters of credit for commission consideration. Key speakers during this discussion included Frank Penn and Anthony de Movellan, who addressed the commission regarding the performance bonds and letters of credit under review. The commission ultimately approved the performance bonds and letters of credit as presented by staff. No specific concerns or objections were noted during the discussion of this item. The approval of these financial instruments allows the associated projects or contracts to move forward with the required financial assurances in place. ## Postponements and Withdrawals [timestamp: 02:30] The commission reviewed requests for postponements and withdrawals of several development plans during this agenda item. The discussion involved three key speakers: Zach Davis, Frank Penn, and Janice Meyer. The commissioners considered multiple requests from developers and applicants seeking to either postpone their scheduled hearings or withdraw their applications entirely. While the specific details of individual cases were not provided in the available materials, this type of agenda item typically involves routine administrative matters where applicants may need additional time to prepare their proposals, address technical issues, or respond to staff comments. The commission's consideration of these requests allows for orderly management of the meeting schedule and ensures that applicants have adequate opportunity to present complete and well-prepared proposals when they do come before the commission for review. Following discussion among the commissioners, all postponement and withdrawal requests presented during this agenda item were approved. This outcome suggests that the requests were deemed reasonable and appropriate by the commission members. This administrative item helps maintain the efficiency of the commission's review process by allowing cases that are not ready for consideration to be rescheduled rather than proceeding with incomplete or inadequately prepared presentations. ## Imagine New Circle Road Corridor Plan [timestamp: 13:30] The commission received an informational presentation on the Imagine New Circle Road Corridor Plan during the June 8, 2023 meeting. The presentation was delivered by key speakers Kenzi Gleason and Lewis Johnson, who discussed potential improvements and future developments planned for the New Circle Road corridor. The presentation focused on outlining the vision and proposed enhancements for this important transportation corridor. Gleason and Johnson provided details about the planning process and shared concepts for how the corridor could be improved to better serve the community's needs. The agenda item was structured as an informational presentation, allowing commissioners to learn about the corridor planning initiative and understand the scope of potential improvements being considered. The discussion covered various aspects of future development possibilities along New Circle Road. This presentation served as an opportunity for the commission to stay informed about ongoing planning efforts for one of the area's significant transportation routes. The Imagine New Circle Road Corridor Plan represents a comprehensive approach to evaluating and improving this key infrastructure asset. The item concluded as an informational session, with no formal action required from the commission at this time. The presentation provided commissioners with important background information about the corridor planning process and the vision for future improvements along New Circle Road. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (8-0): Approval of the May 11, 2023 minutes - **Motion** — passed (10-0): Approval of performance bonds and letters of credit - **PLN-MJDP-23-00031** — postponed (10-0): Postponement of GREYLINE STATION & MARKET to June 22, 2023 - **PLN-MJDP-23-00029** — postponed (10-0): Postponement of RED MILE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT to July 13, 2023 - **PLN-MJDP-23-00030** — postponed (10-0): Postponement of KINGSTON HALL, UNIT 1, LOT 8 to July 13, 2023 - **PLN-MJDP-18-00004** — postponed (10-0): Postponement of TRIPLE STARS PROPERTY to July 13, 2023 - **PLN-MJDP-22-000045** — postponed (10-0): Postponement of DISTILLERY DISTRICT WEST to July 13, 2023 - **PLN-MJDP-23-00022** — postponed (10-0): Postponement of GLEN CREEK (DOVE CREEK) to July 13, 2023 - **PLN-MJDP-23-00032** — postponed (10-0): Postponement of HOMER C. RATLIFF PROPERTY to July 13, 2023 - **PLN-MJDP-23-00023** — passed (10-0): Approval of RML - CITATION (HILLENMEYER INTEREST LTD) LOT 3 - **PLN-MJDP-23-00028** — passed (10-0): Approval of HADDIX PROPERTY (A PORTION OF) AND BUCKLEY & COWGILL WAREHOUSE - **PLN-MJSUB-23-00003** — passed (10-0): Approval of COLDSTREAM FARM PHASE II PROPERTY - **PLN-MJDP-23-00025** — passed (10-0): Approval of ROSE H. BRIGDEN & MARK MCCLURE PROPERTY - **Motion** — passed (10-0): Adoption of the Imagine New Circle Road Corridor Plan as an amendment to Imagine Lexington 2018 Comprehensive Plan --- ## Full transcript Music 1.30, June 8, 2023. First on the agenda item, agenda item 2, I'd like to have the approval of minutes for May 11, 2023. Floor is open for a motion. Ms. Wirth? I get all my electronics working here. Mr. Chair, I move for approval of the May 11, 2023 minutes as submitted. Okay, thank you. Do we have a second to that motion? Okay, we have a second. You have it by Mr. Davis. Okay, all in favor, please vote via Granicus. Okay, motion passes with one abstention from Mr. Pohl. Oh, you got you. Okay, we have two abstentions. Okay, from Ms. Meyer. Do you want us to re-vote or you got it? Okay. All right, thank you. Thank you, thank you. Before we get to postponements and withdrawals, I would like to kind of go back through the agenda, and let's hit agenda item C, performance bonds and letters of credit. I'd like to take a motion for those. Mr. Penn? Mr. Chairman, I move for a call of all the bonds that's presented by the staff at this time. Great, thank you Mr. Penn. Do we have a second to that motion? Second. Okay, seconded by Mr. DeMoglin. Please vote via Granicus. Okay, that motion passes unanimously, thank you. Next, we'll go back to page one, agenda item three, postponements and withdrawals. Mr. Needham. Hello, Mr. Chair and board, my apologies. I would like to request a two week postponement for Grayline. And it's PLN, I'm sorry, no, I'm in the board of adjustment here. PLN, MJDP 23-31, Grayline Stations and Market. I have to have the two-week sign placed, and I delegated that to myself, and it did not get done in a timely manner. So my apologies. Okay. So that's the June 22nd meeting? That's correct. Okay, thank you. All right, thank you. All right, do we have any questions about that? Yes, Mr. Davis? Yeah, you go ahead. The floor is open. Mr. Chairman, I move for a two-week postponement of PLNMJDP 2331 to our June 22nd meeting. Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second? We have a second by Ms. Barksdale. Please vote via Granicus. Okay, the motion passes unanimously. Thank you very much. Continue to do those curls, man. Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, my name is Matt Carter with Vision Engineering. If you turn in your agenda to page 6, item G, PLN, MJDP 23-29, Red Mile, Mixed Use Development. We ran into a conflict with the small area plan that was done for Red Mile. so we're going to have a pretty major redesign on this so I would request a one month postponement to I believe it's July 13th is that right? Thank you. Any questions about the request for a one month postponement? Mr. Penn? Are you ready for a motion? The floor is open. I move for a one-month postponement to July the 13th of PLN MJDP 2329. Thank you. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. Okay, second by Ms. Meyer. Please vote via Granicus. Thank you. Okay, motion passes. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I'm Dick Murphy, also on page six item H PLN MJDP 2330 Kingston Hall unit 1 lot 8 amended 1061 Providence Place Parkway the subdivision committee wanted to see this next month we're doing making some changes to the plan so we're asking for a one month postponement okay if there's not Any questions? The floor is open for a one-month postponement for this agenda item. Ms. Meyer? Oh, sorry. Is that Mr. Poe? I'm sorry. I move to postpone PLNM and JDP 2330 until July 13th. Okay, thank you. Do we have a second to that motion? Seconded by Ms. Barksdale. Please vote via Granicus. Okay, that motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Thank you. Murphy. Okay. Staff, are we on additional postponements? Mr. Chairman, staff does have several items to bring to the Planning Commission's attention today. The first item is on page two. It is item A, Major Development Plan 18-04, Triple Stars property. Yet once again, in communicating with these people, they have requested a one-month postponement. Their optimism is never-ending. They keep saying, we're going to be ready next month for sure. Staff encouraged them to an indefinite postponement so they could bring it back on their own time frame. But they keep saying for sure one more month. So they've requested a one-month postponement. Okay. All right. There aren't any questions. The floor is open for a motion for the one-month postponement. Mr. Davis. Mr. Chairman, I move for a one-month postponement of PLNMJDP 18-4 to our June, or I'm sorry, July 13th. 13th, yes, sir. Thank you. Second. You're welcome. Second. Okay. Seconded by Ms. Wirth. Please vote via Granicus. All right, that motion passes unanimously. Mr. Chairman. Members of the committee, moving on to page three, Major Development Plan 22-45, Distillery District West, the U-Haul-Lexington amended plan. They requested another one-month postponement. They continue to evaluate their floodplain issues on this property. Okay. If there aren't any questions, the floor is open for a motion. Ms. Meyer? I move for postponement of PLNMJDP 2245 Distillery District West. Okay. Thank you. Do we have a second? Seconded by Ms. Barstow. Please vote via Granicus. The motion passes unanimously. Mr. Chairman? Yes, sir. Members of the commission, moving right on down page three to item C, Major Development Plan 23-22, Glen Creek. Once again, the applicant has requested a one-month postponement. They continue to work on the challenges of our new open space and parking regulations on this development. Okay, thank you. Mr. Penn? I move for a one-month postponement to July 13th, is that right? Yes, sir. PLN, MJDP 2322. Thank you. Do we have a second? Second. Seconded by Mr. Pohl. So please vote Villagranicus. That motion passes unanimously. Mr. Chairman, on page eight, item J, Major Development Plan 23-32, the Homer C Ratliff property. The applicant has engaged a new design professional to help them address the adaptive reuse challenges on this project. this particular property and are requesting a one-month postponement. All right, thank you. If there aren't any questions, the floor is open for a motion. Ms. Worth. Mr. Chair, I move for a one-month postponement of PLNMJDP 2332, Homer Ratliff property. Thank you. Do we have a second for that motion? Second. Seconded by Mr. DeMovillin, please vote via Granicus. Motion passes unanimously, thank you. That put us at consent agenda? Thank you. Mr. Martin took care of most of our agenda items today with all those postponements. So we do have a few more items, I think three items on the agenda, but Two of those do qualify for the consent agenda, and so I'll read them and see if anyone is present today that would like either of these two items heard. The first one appears on page four, and it's item D on the Planning Commission's agenda. PLN MJDP 23-23 for RML citation, also known as Hillmeyer Interest Limited, Lot three, and this is an amended final development plan for property located at 2650 Sandersville Road. Is there anyone present in the audience that wishes to have this item heard? Okay. Then the next item is on page five, and item F of your agenda, PLN MJDP 23-28 for the Haddocks property. It's a portion of, and the Buckley and Cowgill Warehouse, also known as Overbrook. This is also an amended final development plan for property located at 1929 and 1930 Liberty Road. Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to have this item heard? And then again, the third item on our agenda was postponed by the applicant earlier. So that leaves the two items. Okay. Thank you. All right, so we can take that, all two and one motion, correct? If there aren't any questions, the floor is open for a motion. Mr. Davis. Mr. Chairman, I move for approval of the consent agenda as presented by staff. Thank you. Seconded by Ms. Foxtel. Please vote via Granicus. All righty, that motion passes unanimously. Thank you. So we should put us on page 2, PLNMJSUB23-3, Cold Screen Farm, Phase 2 property. Mr. Chairman, members of the Planning Commission. As our chairman has stated, it is the first item on your agenda. It is a preliminary subdivision plan, PLN-MJSUB23. Thank you, sir. 23-3, this is indeed the Coldstream Farm Phase 2, also known as the Legacy Business Park. This is the dairy farm or the turkey neck, various names for the UK property that was part of the swap with the LFUCG. And here we have the preliminary subdivision plan for the property. And let's see, I'm going to try something here. There we go. I want to give you a little bit of a big picture on this. The property's up in here. In here, this is Georgetown. Here's the interstate that you can see here. This particular aerial photo shows several of the environmental features in the area. There's a sinkhole on the property dislocation. This is a small blue line stream. This is of course Cane Run which is actually a floodplain. There's no FEMA regulated floodplain in this particular area. You can see the facilities that existed on the property when it was a dairy farm. This green line is the trail as it runs on out towards the horse park in that direction and comes back down along cane run creek there so wanted you to see that i personally am a little curious about the geometry of that little piece on the property i don't know how it got created it's kind of at odd angles but anyway that's just something that i was curious about so they are proposing uh it's i1 it's been rezoned for i1 light industrial there are 23 lots in the subdivision. You can see Collector Street in this location and another collector that intersects with it, both of which come out to Georgetown Road. This is the Blue Line Stream area that I pointed out on the aerial. This is also a small little drainage area. These areas are to be protected. They are to be environmentally protected and you can see they're proposing detention in these areas as well. Detention in this area and up here we have a wetlands area, an environmentally sensitive area in this location. As you all know, again, it was part of the UK farm, so it was farmed for many years. They are proposed, it's roughly 187 net acres that will be developed. There's a little over 12 acres in the right-of-way that's being constructed. As I stated, there's 23 lots. They average about eight acres in size. So they vary from four on up to ten and twelve. And frankly, depending on the final users, some of that could change. Depending on the needs of the final user, they may desire more acres, or they may just buy several lots, depending, again, what their needs may be. Now, as I told the committee, the subdivision committee, one of the important aspects about this development that was decided up front from the very beginning is that the planning commission will see a final development plan on every one of these lots. We felt that that was very important, not just to coordinate the development and make sure they work well together, but again, this is in the Royal Springs Aquifer. You have a wetlands. You have environmental areas that were all important, and staff had recommended that. we felt that that was an important consideration because that's not normal in our I-1 areas. Historically, you create a lot with a preliminary subdivision plan. You came in, you could build one structure on that one lot, and you didn't need a final development plan. So again, that's something you will see as this property develops over time. This body will see that development. Now, there are two streets from this residential area that stub in here and down here. In the future, when they come in with final record plats, you will see these because they're going to need a waiver on those street stubs on that termination. Because they're not intended, they were to extend into this industrial area. That was to prevent that industrial traffic from going through the residential area. However, bike and ped connections are going to be maintained, so people who live in that neighborhood could certainly work at any of these new businesses that may open up here. These two lots right here, you're going to have to see those as well because, well, I take not that one because it's got Georgetown frontage with no access, but it has frontage. They're going to have to deal with the frontage issue if and when that becomes necessary. Again, there may be some changes in the future with how much acreage somebody buys and what the ultimate configuration may be. Now, if you look at item 12 on your agenda, it references a need for a waiver on access spacing on Georgetown Road. Well, the good news is it turns out they didn't need it. Staff's immediate response along our arterials is to review the regs and there's 1,600 feet spacing required on major arterials. Well, guess which one is the only minor arterial in our community that we think of as a major arterial? That's Georgetown. It is classified as a minor arterial. Harrodsburg's major, Nicholasville's major, Winshaw, these are major arterials. I think Liberty Road may be a minor arterial. But in terms of our connections to the surrounding communities, and I know the way we think about it, and the staff's kind of the same way, well, it's Georgetown, it's an arterial. But, again, take a close look at the regs. The good news is there's about 1,100 feet between this collector and this collector, and more than that, 1,200-plus down here to Spur Road. It's 1,000 feet on an arterial, a minor arterial, collector to collector. And again, they have a little over 1,100 feet in distance, so they don't need the waiver. You can strike that from the conditions on this plan. Your subdivision committee did recommend approval to you, and staff will be happy to answer any questions you may have on the preliminary subdivision plan. Okay. We've got a couple. Mr. Penn, then Mr. Davis. Tom, that being 1,100 feet between the two, both of those are entrance and exits. They're both? Yes, sir. They're full access points. Two way. Is it seen down the road that one or both of them are going to need a signal? They are already looking at this app. This is right across from Kearney Ridge. They're anticipating that that will be signalized in the future. But the other one may not? Hopefully not. That would, the spacing would be a little problematical through there. They have worked very closely with District 7 and on the plans that exist for the widening and improvements on Georgetown. Well, it being an high property, it's gonna have truck traffic more than likely. We would assume so, yes sir. Okay, thank you. Mr. Martin, for the portion of the property adjoining residential neighborhoods, I see we have a 100-foot buffer and then a, I think it's a 15-foot landscaping buffer. Do we have any lighting protection or restrictions to protect the neighbors, or would that be done a little later down the road? Mr. That's an excellent question, and that's another good example of why you're going to see a final development plan on every one of these lots so you can take a look at those circumstances and those conditions and impose restrictions if necessary. Thank you. Yes, sir. Thank you. Mr. Martin, I want to look at this from the trail system perspective and connecting these nice green spaces to the adjoining properties and communities so as we look at greenway lot five there's a proposed 12-foot shared use path to connect to the existing legacy trail and it can you describe that for me and tell me how that's going to go under or over under 75 or what that looks like it does now go the trail does go under i-75 this okay so that's existing so it's of course that's off this site but yeah they they're going to hook up to the existing trail down that runs along king run but it curls up along the old dairy road but it goes under i-75 okay great and are they going to put that infrastructure in they will do that first i guess during the development process is that correct they will have to answer that question this is a preliminary subdivision plan it allows the construction of public infrastructure streets sewers etc they will probably plan for private infrastructure is necessary the timing on the trail they'll have to answer that for you okay thank you Tom with with this having a lot of truck traffic on it was it discussed at all if there's a possible way to connect this up to Remington Way? Not Remington, although in the past, Remington, there was a lot of discussion about Remington as it kind of extended up through that development. But this particular development was so far in the future relative to Remington that no, it was not. Now, we did talk about the possibility of trying to get down here and into Coldstream, because at one time there was a road proposed through here out to Citation. So that was discussed, but not Remington. And because these, if they're developed as intensely as we hope, this would put 100% of everything onto Georgetown. Yes, sir. Yes, sir, which is one of the reasons, and it was staff who generated the discussion on trying to get back into Coldstream. but yeah remington of course correct me if i'm wrong but wasn't there some remnant of an easement down that way like a a narrow easement or no is that did that is that the one yeah that's the link there is so there is an easement that's true that's true there's a small easement that was put into place. But we're choosing to not exercise even that. It wouldn't serve the industrial traffic. They reluctantly gave us that 10 foot now that I recall and we pushed hard for something but it wouldn't be adequate to really serve this development. And we wouldn't even want to connect a narrow easement just to put that connection in place so that there is a even if it's just an emergency access onto another road than Georgetown? At this time, the emergency, the E-9-1 people and fire have not expressed any concerns with that, so I don't know. Including the section that is beyond the fork there where it would be only along that one road? Right, down through here at this time, no. We could further examine that with the final development plans if necessary. But right now, for instance, these stubs, there's been no discussion about gates or emergency access there, just bike and ped. Gotcha. Okay, thank you. Any further questions? Yes, Mr. Nickel. I do. Mr. Martin, can you point out again for me the internal trail system and what it will be connected to? So they're going to have a multi-use trail along the street system internal to the development, and then they're connecting here and then they're going to come out here and connect to the overall trail system. But they are going to have their own internal trail system. And you can see in the Greenway plot, there's a walkway trail also. Okay, I see. All right, thank you very much. There's the best principle to do with the main trail system. So that's going to end up with two nice stops along the Legacy Trail where you could pull off and have two green spaces, correct? You could. And if you're down here on King Run, where we put in the tank, the big expansion holding tank, they have restrooms and facilities right there. Wow. Great. Thank you. Any other questions? thank you applicant good afternoon i'm aaron masterson with gresham smith just to touch on a couple of topics that you all already talked about to make some further clarifications we are doing a traffic impact study currently right now on those two entrances into the property we've already met with kytc at the at the very beginning of this to talk about. So one thing to mention is that they have future plans along Georgetown in this section to widen the road from one way each way to two lanes each way with a center median. So they have controlled access along Georgetown and those are the two points where they are allowing access from this lot. They will, we're gonna continue to coordinate with them once we get the traffic impact study completed to make sure that we have the appropriate kind of connections and the controlled kind of signal there. We especially are wanting one at Kearney given the amount of housing that has developed over the years in the Kearney neighborhood. We've heard from them that they're interested and would also support a traffic signal there. So we are working on that. And of course we'll look into that further. you mentioned the 100 foot buffer and the residential side along coventry during the master plan process we had a lot of public engagement with the community to make sure that we were being good neighbors with them and and having that sort of shared boundary we wanted to be accommodating there so again as tom said each of these properties as they build out will be coming in front of you to make sure that that sensitive space there meets your standards the greenway trail and the trail connection you know from the very beginning in the master plane phase we saw the opportunity to connect to legacy and that that was an important feature for both the this property and the future users and tenants of this property but also the neighborhoods that connect directly so kearney neighborhood and coventry to the south we saw those opportunities so if we get that signal in at Georgetown, there'll be a safe way to cross Georgetown, and then that shared use path, which is separated from the roadway, will come along that main spine road down, and connect into that greenway that then connects to the Legacy. It connects right there before it goes under I-75. So the Legacy is actually on this property, and there's an easement on top of the Legacy Trail. So we've talked with MPO about the sort of, where the trails follow and where they connect to. And so we've modified those from the very original master plan, but we're all in agreement now on how those trails lay out and connect to the legacy. The connection out in the back, I hear your concerns about, you know, once you cross that three-way intersection in the back, it's kind of a solo road without any way of getting out. During the master plan, we worked really hard to figure out how could we have another connection coventry did not want industrial traffic coming through their neighborhood and that's why we ended up with just having a pedestrian and bike connection right there at the end of one of the stubbed out streets we spoke with rimming or with the property owner at the end of remington way we've looked at their development plan they do only have 10 feet of an access easement there's really nothing we can do with that 10 feet perhaps as you suggested that the lot that's right next to that 10-foot access easement, maybe there's an access easement there, maybe there's a future, something could at least be maintained. But that would be, again, the individual lot. And then there is a lot, so at the let's see if I can use this thing to point. So this property line right here, that abuts a UK property that then goes all the way down to Citation. We spoke with UK during this process, and at this point they have no interest in allowing any kind of connection access down through that lot. They said potentially far in the future that could change, but at this point they had no interest in providing that. So unfortunately this is kind of where we ended with the roadway. but i did want to make those those kind of different points made known and happy to answer any more questions that you all have for us thank you yes mr nickel yes um just as a curiosity can you please describe to me the demographics of the end users that are going to be purchasing these 23 lots because as we're looking at this we're looking at targeting 10 acre tracks and below so 23 i'm curious as to see what was told to you is what the demographic is yeah so the the thought is that these these will obviously be light industrial the bluegrass business park just south of here along the corner of georgetown and citation very similar type of businesses that would be going in here would not be warehouse distribution it would be hopefully more active kind of larger staffing. That's the goal. And in terms of the lot layout, when we first came to staff, we showed a lot layout scheme that actually had less lots on it, thinking that there'll probably be larger lot users, but it's easier to consolidate rather than come back and ask for more subdivision. So we have more lots here than probably will be there in the end. They'll probably get consolidated based on end-user buyers. So three of those lots might be combined to be one larger lot, depending on the end-user. And the city has a real estate team helping them right now to sell and advertise the lots and the future use of this property, which Craig could speak more about. Craig Benz is here representing the city and the Industrial Authority Board, if you have any further questions about that. Okay, thank you. I would like to hear that. I'm going to ask this question, whoever wants to answer it can. Where we're having a final development plan on these industrial lots, is that just going to be specific to the dairy farm, or is that going to be on all I-1 land? Do you know the answer to that, Tom? This particular request is specifically for this property. I think Tom mentioned during his presentation, we do have a number of other industrial parks that also have that requirement, like on old Frankfurt Pike, because it's a scenic byway or scenic resource there. And so the staff has recommended final development plans in certain locations, but it's not a wholesale change in how we're doing it. if if there's i-1 land and all they need is a preliminary subdivision plan then the staff wouldn't recommend more detailed information if it's not necessary so if it's not a jump if it's not a zone change situation you wouldn't be recommending a final development plan well even in zone change situations i think um in the past we've recommended just the preliminary subdivision i know i know but i think in today's world a final development plan especially when you have property that joins it in any way you'd have it be property joining it even going forward i don't understand really and truly why that exemption was put in there to start with because the final development plan going forward i think is pretty important and i would urge that you think about that going forward because i don't see the advantage to not having one I think the exemption for I-1 was probably put in place to save time for the ultimate end user, right? Once they find their I-1 site, they don't have to do a final development plan. They can just go straight to building inspection. That would be my interpretation of that. It's a very longstanding tradition, I suppose, but I think that's probably the purpose. Times are changing. They are. Especially, this is an environmentally sensitive area. I think Tom mentioned that. obviously we have the greenways and this is um in the royal spring aquifer as well yeah thank you and mr penn if i might add you you may recall that on spur road with that recent zone change from residential back to industrial we required final development plans on all those properties Aaron, just a follow-up on those connections that aren't currently feasible to Remington Way and then basically the current farm road down that dairy road that exists through UK property that they don't want to be improved, I suppose. I mean, when we do residential subdivisions, we often, they abut farmland just like this one where we have stub outs for future use. It does seem wise to look towards at some point having a connection of such a high employee future area to more than one street was there any discussion of putting of just sort of allocating the space for a future connection no not at this time because uk was so definitive about it um but if it's something that that the If the city wants to show. If I may add, that's one of the benefits when we get a final development plan on these individual sites. We can discuss the need for that connection and perhaps establish an access easement. We actually did that in the other industrial park there off Innovation Drive through the development plan process. The reason I'm asking is so for example, you have LBX, I suppose, and you have UK. both which today would rather not have a lot of traffic through their current uses. At some point, one of those is probably either not going to be farming that plot of land or not operating on that, not necessarily predicting it. But if we have no reason to allocate the land, and then we later wouldn't have a reason to not allow a developer to sort of develop in a way that wouldn't be conducive for a connection. I guess that's what I'm hesitant about. Right. And I think the discussion is that on that lot in the back, then requiring that tenant, as they bring the development plan forward, at that time request, you know, that you need to provide an access point. there. That's my understanding. Yeah this is probably a question for staff. Is that something that we would add we could add as a note on a preliminary plan for a certain lot? I think it is absolutely. It gives some warning to someone who is interested in lot 12 or at least that rear section of the development that the planning commission's expectation is that there would be some sort of future stub whether it was an access easement or extension of a public street I think that's very fair thank you okay thank you thank you is anyone else would like to speak on this particular agenda item you can do so by stepping up to the podium if not we'll bring it back to the Commission. The floor is open. I think we may have a revision. Should be on page two. Okay. I'd like to make a motion to approve PLN MJ SUB 23-3 with the addition of the note that lot 12 should have an access easement to the UK Coldstream property. Is that reasonable wording? Thank you. We have a motion and a second by Mr. Davis. Any further discussion to that motion? Just a clarification. I'm sorry. We've got the existing item 10 to correct note 20. Do we need to clean that up? We don't have a note 20. I'm thinking recommendation 20. We're good. Sorry. Question. I thought Mr. Martin said we didn't need item 12 anymore. Is that correct? Correct. The waiver? The waiver. Okay. So my addition then is number 12 and we're striking the original number 12. Thank you. Mr. Davis, are you still supporting that second? All right. Mr. Davis is still seconding that motion. If there aren't any other discussions, please vote via Granicus. Okay, that motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Okay, now we should be on page four. agenda item E, PLN MJDP 23-25. We also have a waiver with this application as well. Mr. Chairman, members of the Planning Commission, at the bottom of page 4 is a major development plan, a preliminary subdivision plan as well. 23-25 Rose Brigden and Mark McClure property located out on Liberty Road. Here we are at Liberty Road. Here is Brighton East Trail right here. So they are butted up right against Brighton East. And here's Liberty Road. This was a recent zone change, as you all are aware, to develop 14 townhouses and two associated HOA lots with turnaround and parking. You all may recall there was considerable discussion about the orientation of these townhouses along the Brighton East Trail. Now, this plan is being brought back with you as a development plan and a preliminary subdivision plan. They do intend to subdivide these townhouses. That was part of the discussion on the orientation and the waivers at the preliminary phase of this development. They have a couple of cleanup items on your agenda and a lot of sign-offs. But most importantly is item 14, which is a waiver request, and that has been distributed to you. This plan very much matches the preliminary that you approved with the townhouse locations and, again, the orientation to Liberty and these open space areas. What's interesting about this property is its elevation. It sits considerably lower than all the surrounding properties. Let's see if we've got, here we go. This is a map of all the infrastructure that exists. Now, I've got to get myself worried. Oh, how is this baby scanned in? Ah, there we are. There we are. That's the key. That red line right there is the watershed break. So everything drains that way on that side and everything drains this way on this side. The property is right here. It's hard to see. These red dots here and these blue dots down through there, that's your sanitary sewer system. And that's the subject of the waiver request, is how to appropriately provide sanitary sewer to this property. So in working with the engineer and the applicant, they were aware that there was an elevation issue early on in this property. They proceeded with the development process, and then with further review and really getting into the design, they discovered the challenges were greater than first anticipated. Again, elevation. This site is much lower than the surrounding areas and the sanitary sewer systems. Well, staff's first reaction to the discussion, they proposed a pump station. And we, staff, planning and engineering, was extremely reluctant. said, oh, no, 14 townhouses and a private pump station. That's not a good idea. We think there's going to be problems. And quite frankly, we get hit with the problems. Now, we do turn around and tell people sorry, and they hate to hear it, but that's not our problem. That's a private problem. You're going to have to go to these people, deal with your HOA, do that. You know, nobody's ever happy. and pump stations require a lot of maintenance. There's cost. We have commercial ones. We don't have residential ones. So we were very skeptical and leery of that proposal. So we asked them, go back, take a look. Can you fill the site? That was one thing that was advocated by our Division of Engineering pretty early on. Fill. Bring that site up. It's been done in other places. You know, fill is not uncommon in construction. Well, it turns out the amount of fill was going to average three or more feet across the site. That was going to be the average. In addition, and they can get into some of the details with you. I'm not going to get into all the absolute details of the problems they ran into. But even with elevating the site, they couldn't deal with the elevation, in some cases, with Liberty Road and the way it had been built and the elevation that it was at. So trying to get the pipe under Liberty Road, they were looking at actually being up in Liberty Road. And that relates, again, back to our sewer system. They were trying to get to this red dot right here. And then they looked at getting to this blue dot because you're going downstream on the system. Well, and then you got these dots in the rear that go back through the ball homes, residential apartment development, but they had to cross the adjoining property right here. That's got a final development plan on it, controlled by another entity. There was buildings, parking lots, detention and all that on that property that that would impact, trying to get to it. They went through seven different scenarios. One of the interesting things about getting the fill on the property would be that this entrance into this access easement over the first 20 feet would be at an 11% grade. The maximum grade on our streets that we allow is 8%. So 11% doesn't sound like a whole lot, but that's a steep grade. And it would be over a short distance, so it would be like this. So they kept running in to these problems with trying to elevate and put Phil in in order to get the drop. Then again, the adjoining neighbor, they talked to the adjoining neighbor about coming across his property to try to get to that blue dot downstream. They still had great issues, and they ran into some negotiation issues with the adjoining property owner. So after several meetings with water quality engineering, planning, participated in some of those, a lot of discussions. And as I said, seven different design scenarios were developed. And ultimately, full circle, we're back to a small privately owned pump station. That'll work. Water Quality sent a memo to the applicant, to planning, to engineering, saying we will accept a private small residential pump station. We'll accept it. Early on, they were one of the first ones to raise the red flag because they get phone calls, they get the maintenance problems. We don't want a pump station and we can avoid it. So they were in on the discussions. They were in on the design. And again, as I said, it's kind of gone full circle. We even had a discussion about what we would consider an innovative low-pressure system. And that seemed promising, but it developed issues. And believe me, they can get into the details with you if you want to hear them. The issue on the low-pressure system actually turns out to be a scale, to be size. You can use a low-pressure system, but you need more and more houses, more and more people utilizing it to keep the pressure on the system so that it works correctly it's so again you know you can have too big a pipe too small a pipe they've run into issues with the type of pipe ductile steel the most common that requires less grade less fill can't get it right now so you go to pvc that's their fallback that requires four feet of fill So they, again, they knew they had a problem. I don't think they understood until they really got into it the real scope of the problem. So with that, again, staff went full circle with them. And Water Quality and the Division of Engineering have both said that they can accept a private residential pump station. There's going to be some details on that design that's going to have to be worked out. The maintenance details are going to have to be worked out. It's, again, because it's only 14 townhouses, it's a small HOA. There are some devil in the details when it comes to that, when engineering is going to sit down with them and look at their plans and work this out. And with that, staff is recommending approval of the waiver to you. I'd be happy to answer what questions that we can about the development. And I probably strayed way too far into engineering already, but their engineer is here as well as ours to answer any of those types of technical questions you may have. Mr. Penn. Normally I'd wait to ask the applicant this, but being as you have given us so much information, I want to ask you. No good deed. Will the consent decree allow us to put a pump station in? Oh, yes, sir. Yes, sir. It's something that's within our purview to approve. Next part of that question is, if you were so far against it, is it worth all this for 14 townhouses? It is for them, and it is to allow the development to go forward and to get the housing. Seems like an awful lot of work to get 14 townhouses. It is, and Mr. Penn, again, part of our concern is it's going to be imposed on the private property owners. I understand that. That's, you know. I'm worried about who pays for it, and I'm worried about who maintains it. Well, that was one of our initial concerns, because what's going to happen if the HOA goes away and we inherit it? We do that with stormwater facilities. That's our most common problem with HOAs, are stormwater facilities, and we have to take them over. But we have a history of doing that with pump stations when they fail, too. Hopefully. I mean, I'm not aware of the full history. I know we have some commercial pump stations. Well, I'm just surprised that you'd go full circle and come back. There are such things as undevelopable sites. I guess if you've got enough money, you can develop anything. But the question becomes, is it worth the effort? That's just my idea. I'm just asking. I don't know the answer. Thank you. I'm just going to say I commend you to get back to that decision. We're providing 14 townhouses. That's a big deal. So it's a lot of good work on everybody's part to find a solution to get more dwelling units. We need it. So I commend the effort. Thank you. I have some engineering questions. How about you want the engineers? I'll ask you. Like I say, I was an interested listening party in all these meetings. I learned some things, and that's always good. I was on the board of the Ronald McDonald House Charities for a number of years, and we had a pump station there, which they finally were able to eliminate. But for years, it was a problem. And my engineering questions would be, will there be redundancy built in? In other words, more than one pump. And will there be alarm systems? And who responds to the alarm? And will there be an emergency generator in the case of power failure? And, Graham, those are excellent questions. and that's what I was referring to when I said they're going to have to work out these details with our design people because those are exactly the questions and concerns that exist on our end. And so who will oversee those kinds of particulars in the... Our new development in our engineering division. They will be looking at that. And I'm sure water quality will have a lot to say about that as well. And I want to make it very clear. One of the aspects of this and where we got to is the onus is on them to show that they think this is going to work. And that's, again, why they went through seven different scenarios to try to come up with something that was economical, something that worked, something that could overcome some of the physical barriers that they ran into. Liberty Road apparently in its elevation along with the sanitary sewer elevations are a tremendous obstacle that they're faced with. Okay. Seeing any other questions, we have called up the applicant at this time. Mr. Murphy. Mr. Chairman, I'm Dick Murphy. I'm representing Jeff Morgan, the developer who is with me today along with Matt Carter of Vision Engineering, the civil engineer for the project. I just wanted to amplify what Tom Martin just told you. We have worked for the last two months on coming up with a solution with this. Jeff has actually been involved with this property for several years to be able to come up with a solution to how this can be sewered. And we've met over the last, I've been involved in some of these, I've learned more about sewers than I'd ever known before in going through this. But we've met with Mr. Martin and Hillard Newman in the Division of Engineering at separate meetings with the Division of Water quality chris dent and craig prater and numerous conversations back and forth and matt carter and jihad halani of vision engineering have done pretty exhaustive work in evaluating at least severin excuse me seven different scenarios under which they wanted to look at to see if it was possible to sewer this by gravity as mr martin mentioned the primary issue is the elevation of the manholes of the sewers that surround this area and it just was impossible to get a sewer by gravity from this property to any of those manholes that would utilize that would come in at the proper elevation to be able to come into that manhole as mr martin also mentioned there there was discussion of raising the grade of this property, which I'm not sure that's any better than any other solution. It would totally change the character of the property and obviously be a very extremely expensive and difficult process to go through. So we've, I think, gone through some very exhaustive discussions with the appropriate divisions in the city, and after looking at that and after they saw the calculations that Matt Carter and Jihad Alani did, the Division of Water Quality said that they would accept a private sewage treatment or pump station on this property. We will have to obviously put it in the Homeowners Association that the Homeowners Association will maintain the private pump station. and people have asked us well what even what if the homeowners association goes defunct if it if it ceases to exist which is probably a low probability but we want to consider that so i said in my letter to you requesting the waiver that jeff would put in the deed restrictions that if the homeowners association ever goes out of business for some reason then each of the property owners here on this development would be what they call jointly and severally liable for making sure that pump station will work now that's language put in to protect the city this joint and several liability language it's taken from insurance work and if you co-sign a note if you've ever co-signed a note you the little fine print the bank puts in there says that you're jointly and severally liable with all the other with for for collection of the note to the bank what that means is that the bank can sue everybody who signed the coast the note or they can sue one person to collect the entire balance of the note now the protection for the people who sign that note is that if the if one person is sued that person is entitled to get proportionate payback from the other persons who signed the note so what we said in here we'd make it if the homeowners association ever goes away we'd make everybody jointly and severally liable that way the city can sue all 14 or they can sue one to get this fixed if they just sue the one that one person is protected by being able to collect from the other 13 homeowners here for the price of fixing that i thought we had some questions you all had some questions about the scale of this i was asking matt carter about that and he's obviously here to answer any technical questions you all may have it's going to be a relatively small uh pump station will be about five feet in diameter it's going to be below ground basically it will have redundancy and alarms in there it'll have a place to hook in a plug to hook in a generator if that is needed as well so we we thank you for your consideration of this I hope you see that this is not something that's done lightly it is the only solution that we appear we think is viable to provide service to this property and we'd be happy to answer any questions you all have thank you any Any questions for the applicant? Ms. Worth? Not for the applicant. Oh, okay. Mr. Poe? Is there a way to ensure that HOA is developing a monetary reserve adequate to replace systems as they fail? The answer is yes. This is Jeff Morgan. He'll answer that for you. I have done several developments and created several HOAs. And the trick with them is to write the documents properly and to capitalize them as you sell them so that when you sell the last one, the HOA is very healthy it has money it has good leadership and I've been successful with the several developments that I've done and they are functioning well I think we all hear the horror stories of HOA's that are written poorly managed poorly and don't have the funds to properly care for their property but with a good approach from the beginning it's very manageable it's easy to do but you have to do it the way we've done it with the proper representation and paperwork and appropriate monthly fees so that you generate a healthy capitalized company So, Mr. Murphy, is it feasible to require that a reserve be created as a part of the creation of the HOA and that a certain amount would be deposited in that reserve to cover ultimate failure of those kinds of systems? Yes, I think it is. And I've done, I've seen HOAs before where there's a sinking fund put in, for instance, for replacement of the roof. So that when the roof needs to be replaced, there's money right there to do it. They don't have to ask people for additional assessments to pay for the roof or common walls or other features like that. And there's no reason that that cannot be done for something like this as well. so that there's a sinking fund there which is budget money going in every year so that 15 years from now when something needs to be replaced or fixed the money is there already i i guess i'd i'd say that that such a reserve should be explicitly written into the language because the pump station is the kind of thing that is very easy to forget about. It sits there and works great for 12 or 15 years, and then everything starts going downhill, and no one even knows it's there. So I think that's really important that that language be explicitly included in whatever document is created. Mr. Morgan is shaking his head yes on doing that. This is not for Mr. Murphy, it's actually for Law Department. I was looking at your face while some of this was being discussed. In terms of the language proposed here, separately, I don't have it in front of me, individually and separately, severably liable. Do you have concerns about this as a protection for the city? Well, I think it's going to have to be managed through our new development and engineering and what they agree to that they're going to allow them to do and what they're going to require in that language. You know, I'm not sure that we can craft it here, but I do think something will have to be reached in terms of how engineering is dictating they want it done and how they want it to be managed and maintained, you know, because they're going to ultimately see their plans for approval to sign off. We never want to be in a situation where we have to go after somebody, but if we can set it up on the front end better and our engineering folks feel like it's a system that has got the right conditions in it to be maintained, we're in a better position if we have to do that. I've got a follow-up question to that. there's no i don't anticipate any reason why me personally should or as a member here should second guess sewer and i mean if sewers satisfied with this and i'm not going to second guess them are you satisfied with sewers um approval of this i mean they're sign off and so i would hope that i mean you know they they face all kinds of different situations as developments come through to them and so this one may be a little bit different but i would definitely trust our engineers over my legal expertise at engineering to come up with what's the right thing and what's the right thing to put in place for them to be okay to sign off and maintain it thank you very much you know they say you're never too old to learn but i common sense tells me that if you can put a pump station in and put a reserve fund in it when you sell the lots and this piece of property is so valuable it needs to be done and you can still sell it at a market rate i just have a hard time grasping that now you know more about that than i do and i don't distrust anything the engineers are saying but i've lived long enough in this community to know the pump stations has not been a good thing for us over history and whether this is a new thing that makes it work but i don't see anybody telling me it's a new one it's just another pump station and we're we are trying our best to get rid of pump stations and yet we're going to turn around and prove another one here for 14 potentially 14 people to be responsible for and i'm not going to say it's wrong or right because i don't know but it doesn't pass the smell test with me yes ma'am based on the conversation the staff just recommends at least two conditions for the waiver if that's the direction you choose to go first that the developer shall establish the homeowners association to maintain the private pump station and it should be noted on the plan so that anyone purchasing any of the units would be aware of that and then the developer shall establish a maintenance fund prior to the sale of the final townhome unit, which I believe Mr. Murphy said they're agreeing to. I do too. Go ahead. Mr. Chairman, a couple of questions. I think for condition A, I would want our engineers to be satisfied with some sort of a semblance of that language, you know, maintain the private pump station to LFUCG engineer standards. Something to that effect would make me feel more comfortable. And I do think that the maintenance fund is a very good idea. My question is, how do we, or how does LFUCG in five years, ten years, fifteen years, do Do we have the right to check that account? Can we audit that to make sure they have enough money to keep up with the replacement of a pump in 20 years adjusted for inflation? I mean, what authority, Tracy, does LFUCG have to enforce or at least explore that condition B is being adhered to the way we believe it should be? Well, there may be different ways to do that. I'm not 100% sure without looking into this further, which is something we typically get into when engineering looks at it for their sign-off. So whether or not they can have some kind of surety or bond or something like that. I don't know if that would for sure apply in this situation, but it might be something they could consider, and that they might when they're looking at this, depending on what the plans look like. And then if there's any kind of private agreement that the developer brings forward to them as part of the sign-off they're seeking from them, it might have terms in it that would to talk about that. I don't know that we can get into the details at this point in a condition, but I would hope before either engineering or water quality or other divisions that are going to be affected by this sign off that they have what they feel comfortable with to make sure it's going to be there. And they utilize whatever is available to them in the government, whether it might be a bond or a surety or some other method to do that. I just don't, I'm not sure what it might be until we see what they bring forward. I got a question, Mr. Murphy, and maybe the developers can answer as well. How much is the pump station? And then should we actually have a minimum amount in there to state it? And I'm not sure if we can do that or not, but that's kind of what we've done in my profession. I may be overstepping. If I am, I'm okay. to step back but you know we're not sure how much you need so at least you can maybe start the minimum amount based on the purchase price of the current one and say that balance needs to be maintained but mr carter and i were actually discussing the price of these pumps the minute ago and he said the the pumps are the cost of them is in the several few hundred dollars for these pumps so it's not a tremendously expensive expenditure a few hundred dollars yes a few hundred dollars we're not talking about the pump station cost we're talking about to replace the pump. Let me tell you the scale of this pump station. Please. Okay. Lexington has four classes of pump station. A being the big regional type, you know, that handle an entire watershed. D would be the smallest. And this one falls into the category of D. D has no telemetry. It has an alarm on it, which is basically a light that comes on if the pump dies. It doesn't have a backup generator, as you asked, but it does have means to plug a generator into it. It has a two-hour storage built into the system so that if the pump does go out in two hours, there's a tank in the bottom that would fill up, and that's how Lexington pump stations operate. As far as the size goes, the threshold for a Type D pump station is anything 75 gallons per minute or less. This one is going to generate 4 gallons per minute, 14 units. So, you know, on the scale, it can't get any smaller than this. So it's not going to require large pumps like you're used to hearing in pump stations. These are probably one horsepower pumps. It's going to be a small pump station. Excuse me. I have a generator. Is there a reason why you wouldn't have a generator that automatically came on without having to plug it in? that's wired into the system that's just an automatic generator? It's just for this type of pump station, type D, it's just not required. So any pump station built in Lexington that meets that's a type D, so it could be a neighborhood that had just not that many houses on it. It just does not require a generator. Whereas a type bay which is uh you know the biggest it'll have a separate generator um it'll be in a building and it's just the scale of it just does not require and most of the time you know you're just whoever is running this homeowner association they're going to have a plumber on call and he'll probably be every year doing maintenance on this just checking it and they're going to have this same guy on call and he'll he'll get a call our pump station's backed up he'll come out he'll pull the motor out the motor slides in he'll pull it clean it most likely it'll be something somebody flush they shouldn't have and once it's clean he'll put it back in and it'll be operating again i mean That's just the way pump stations work. If the motor's got to be replaced, we're talking a couple hours worth of work. It's just a small motor. Thank you. Mr. Morgan said that if the Division of Engineering or Water Quality required a backup generator to be part of this, he would do that. Thank you. Mr. Nickel, you got something? You sure? Okay. All right. I don't see any other questions. Good. Well, I'll just throw out this isn't a condition, but at our business, we use a pump. And we have a generator that you have to go plug in if the alarm goes off. And I have gotten that call in the middle of the night. And there's some advantages to having one that kicks on automatically. That's all I'm going to say. Okay, thank you, Mr. Murphy. Is there anyone else that would like to speak on this particular application? You can do so by standing up to the podium. if not just want to bring it back I think we had a few more questions or maybe one mr. pole this yeah I you know I think the I think the comment was made that there there would be two hours of that the tank would have two hours of storage so you get so everything failed you've got two hours before it starts backing up into the toilets? No. Two hours is the storage in the tank itself, the wet well, but there's a pipe that gravities to it and it backs up. This is the way all pump stations in Lexington work. They're required to have two hours storage. After that's full, it backs up into the pipe And there's more storage. So there's a lot of storage in the pipe before it gets backing up into a house. And when you hear backups in houses, it's not because a few houses are tied to it and are back. There's hundreds of houses, thousands. And that's why you hear these horror stories on backups. but this is only 14 units and there will never be any more. I think that's an interesting point to bring up. There's never going to be any more. I mean, the capacity of a Class D unit is 75 gallons per minute. We're looking at 4 gallons per minute for 12 units. It'll never be changed. I'm once again going to commend the effort for putting in all the engineering to make something like this happen. That's my comment. Okay. We've got some revised conditions. If anyone wants to tackle that, the floor is open or have further discussion. I would suggest additional language for condition B, and that language would be that such fund shall be increased by monthly or yearly mandated payments from members of the HOA in amounts to be determined by a reserve analysis to be conducted by a third party and to be updated biannually. I just think that there, you know, I just, I mean, I guess I lived through this, and I remember when that alarm went off, we had 24 hours before we were in trouble, and even with an organization as tight and well-managed as the Ronald McDonald House is, it raised a hair on the back of your neck. So... Could we put that up? It's written on me. I didn't write it very clearly there. You're about to get you. That's not such a big mask, really. And it's protective. applicant is Applicant is agreeable to that language. Yes. Graham, just one question. Do you think it's bi-annually means? I was thinking every two years. Two years, yeah. So, Mr. Pohl, can you read your writing one more time? for the public. Nothing wrong. Sorry. No, there's nothing wrong. I'm not talking about your handwriting. I'm not even a doctor. I don't have an excuse. Such funds shall be increased by mandated payments, monthly or yearly, from members of the HOA in amounts to be determined by a reserve analysis to be conducted by a third party and to be updated biannually, meaning every two years. Okay. Question for you, Graham. Are you seeing this as the responsibility of the HOA to contract with that third party and get the analysis done? That's what I would envision, yeah. I don't know how else you could do that. Okay. Yeah. All right. I mean, it takes a little bit of the load off of someone who's running an HOA because there's always issues, you know, like the roofing, for example, gutters and damage to the building. all those things add up and if you have a reserve analysis and you are contributing regularly you don't have these enormous shocks to the owners that are you know create a lot of contention and difficulty so okay you want to make that motion mr poe yeah I guess I guess I would need to see the a and b portion of that as well okay so I'm moving to am I am I moving on the petition for a waiver is that what I'm making a motion on okay so i move to approve pln mjdp 2323 citation uh i'm sorry pln mjdp 2325 rose h brigden and Mark McClure property. We have a motion. We have a second to that motion. Second by Mr. Davis, any further discussion? If not, please vote via Granicus. Okay. That motion passes unanimously. And now we want to do the waiver. move to approve the waiver of land subdivision regulations for PLN and GDP 2325 Rose Rigdon and Mark McClure property with the following conditions a can I see those conditions again thank you the developer shall establish a homeowners association to maintain the private pump station to LFA UCG engineering standards and it shall be noted on the plan and B the developers shall establish a maintenance fund prior to the sale of final townhome unit such funds shall be increased by mandated payments monthly or yearly from members of the HOA in amounts to be determined by a reserve analysis to be conducted by a third party and to be updated uh biannually thank you for that motion and reading your handwriting do we have a second to that motion seconded by mr nickel please vote via granicus okay motion passes unanimously thank you okay Put us on the page eight on the commission items. Imagine New Circle Road Corridor Plan. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of the commission. I'm going to shift gears dramatically here. I'm Kenzie Gleason with our transportation planning section. I'm a principal planner. also with the Metropolitan Planning Organization, the Transportation Planning Agency, for both Fayette and Jessamine County. And after a year of hard work, we're here to present to you the outcomes of the Imagine New Circle Road Study. And as you know, these corridor plans are an extension and outgrowth of the Imagine Lexington Comprehensive Plan. We've conducted one other coordinated land use and transportation plan. This is the second for one of our major arterials. And the goal of those plans is to make sure that we're guiding development and infill along our major corridors. And so that we are trying to also encourage and address any barriers to redevelopment, particularly as it relates to housing, as well as to coordinate and prioritize the transportation improvements that are needed along these major arterials. and to really just complete a plan that is unique to each major corridor because they all have their own opportunities and challenges. So for this plan, we ask residents, business owners, the development community, as well as the general public, to reimagine the signalized portion of New Circle Road that we sort of refer to as the Northeast New Circle Road corridor, and to tell us what they thought or how it could be changed and how it could evolve over time and what the future of the corridor was we use that input with the support from our consulting team gresham smith as well as the coordination between our long range planning section our transportation planning section and lextran and the kentucky transportation cabinet as well so with that introduction i'll turn it over to lewis johnson he is a landscape architect and project lead for the for the plan he's going to walk us through what we learned about new circle road through this corridor and what our residents think the future of it could be following the presentation before you consider this for adoption as an element of the 2018 comprehensive plan we'll be all available to answer any questions that you may have and to listen and consider any input that we may hear from the public that may be here to speak to this agenda item so lewis Thanks, Kenzie, and thank you all. Good afternoon. I'm Louis Johnson from Gresham Smith. I'm starting a timer just to make sure I don't go totally off the rails here. So good to see you all again. I wanted to run through, we're going to do just a little bit of background, the overview of the study area from Newtown Pike down to Richmond Road. And I think one of the ways we like to frame the conversation is this piece of Northeast New Circle Road is serving really polar opposite needs for the community, right? It's a major regional connecting roadway. It's connecting people not just within the city, but people around this region of Kentucky to other cities. It's an incredibly important road for that, for industrial services, for people getting the jobs, et cetera. It is also a roadway that's bordered by incredibly diverse neighborhoods that rely on transit, that rely on biking and walking to their jobs. And those two elements together create a sort of natural friction, and that natural friction has created over time barriers to equity, specifically around mobility. And that's something that we heard quite a bit about through the process and studied. I'm not going to go through all the existing conditions, but just to rehash a number of things that we looked at. We looked at land use and zoning. We looked in a very detailed way at how that breaks down across the corridor. We looked at pedestrian facilities, multimodal. We looked at traffic safety. We looked literally at traffic congestion level of service at both intersections and along corridor segments and did a very robust analysis that is all available through the the report and a robust amount of community engagement throughout the process. A little bit of a recap from both in-person neighborhood meetings. We did business canvassing multiple times, same on the neighborhood meetings, and online surveys. These were the sort of initial engagements where we got a lot of themes, which I know you can't read, but a lot of consistency in the feedback, a lot of concern about safety, about connectivity, a lot of, I think, desire to see the aesthetic of the corridor improve. People wanted to see a beautiful roadway, beautiful businesses. They wanted to see more activity, all those sorts of things that I think we would expect. When we broke those surveys and those responses down, we had over 1,200 total responses to the initial survey. The gray circles across the top, those are the first or second priorities for respondents who identified as living within the corridor. So what you're seeing there again, safety, creating more things to do, improving quality of housing, improving access to shopping. When we looked at folks who worked along the corridor, we saw a lot about improving how the corridor looks. And when we talked about people who traveled through the corridor, unsurprisingly, we saw a lot about reducing traffic and congestion, which was consistent throughout the process. So we took all of the data that we collected, the public engagement themes that we heard, to develop a series of recommendations based on the scope of services that the city developed, focused on redevelopment and land use scenarios. We created a series of corridor design standards and used what we're calling, which I'll walk through here in a second, catalyst sites to help sort of test fit and illustrate, and I want to be clear about that, illustrate what might be possible, how the zoning changes might impact things, illustrating what the community needs might look like someday. It was, I think, made clearly, it was made clear to us that for Northeast News Circle, we wanted to come at this with some sense of reality, some sense of action on the back end. We weren't really looking for kind of pie in the sky ideas that would never be realized, but wanted to try to have that sense about all of the recommendations that we made. So some of my team members are here from Gresham Smith, but we also had team members who are experts in market analysis. So when we talk about land use, zoning, redevelopment, and those things, we wanted to have an expert really tell us sort of their takeaways. And I'll run through a few of those here. When it comes to housing, we'll talk market rate and affordable. Some of the big picture things here were concerns about average rental rates that we're seeing in the area against rising construction costs were a concern. Limited available land, we hear that constantly. I hear that just constantly around the region and around the southeast. The role that the pedestrian-friendly environment plays in building viable market-rate housing, and obviously Northeast New Zirgle clearly struggles with that. There were some concepts about focusing a bit more on the south side, closer to Richmond Road. Just that's where the sort of higher rental rates were being seen, the more commercial uses that were already there. That felt like one piece of it, and they recommended really prioritizing walkability when thinking about market-rate housing. essentially all of those things parallel for affordable housing there are a few very distinct differences here one was just where the low-income housing tax credit boundaries are and so i think the challenge there to consider what you'll see in the recommendations is those boundaries aren't always where the available land might be for affordable housing or where maybe you want to build it and so there are some recommendations that we'll talk about in a bit but that that was one key concern about the affordable housing along the corridor and building it in that way. For retail, and I'm not going to go through every one of those bullets, I think we all know retail has shifted dramatically since the pandemic, and I think that really comes through in these recommendations. Traditional big box things are downsizing, we're not seeing as much of that, we're not seeing as much of that coming to market. That was really accelerated through the pandemic. new demands for value and convenience oriented retailers so we see a lot of that and heard a lot of that at the Eastland shopping center and others so limited potential for significant new construction and likely new construction adjacent where there's existing kind of anchor tenants and existing momentum office similar I think we're all familiar with this at this point not a lot of new class A office being built there are a couple of nodes that you see sort of in the center at Winchester around where a lot of the industrial is and then around Newtown Pike where there's a lot of larger businesses so where offices might want to pop up or adjacent to where those other things are sort of co-locating but not expecting that to be a big market. One I think surprise for us in a positive way was the interest in industrial flex space when we spoke to real estate stakeholders throughout especially again in those two nodes same as for the office There is interest in that. I think that that's one thing that is continuing to grow. And this corridor, because of its accessibility to the highway system, et cetera, and the region, is one of those key reasons. And then finally, the real takeaway on this graphic is just looking at those sort of red-orange blobs. That's really the large tracks of land along the corridor and understanding that those, we should be prioritizing those when we're thinking about how they transition over time, literally. Literally, so if somebody came in to redevelop one of those large tracts of land, they abut single-family residential neighborhoods or residential neighborhoods. And so great care should be taken in how those things work together and just making sure we're being careful with those pieces. That gets into why I believe the city wanted to prepare corridor design guidelines. Again, I won't be going through the full document here, but that is available throughout. The themes that you're seeing here were based, again, on the community dialogue that we had with folks, the survey results, etc. And so all of the corridor design guidelines sort of come back to these major goals and themes from the community about supporting a connected corridor, activating those corridors through urban info, and creating an environmentally sustainable and inviting public realm. I think those are sort of the guiding principles throughout the design guidelines. What you haven't seen, it's new to the report now, the final report is the catalyst sites themselves. So we had previously identified these three, one at Bryan Avenue, one at Woodhill at the shopping center, and one at the Eastland shopping center. And the idea, again, here was to test these recommendations, test that community vision against real sites, not to propose that these things should happen. these are privately held properties that we don't own, et cetera, but to show people and to illustrate what might be possible and to show people what those things might mean. And what you'll see in the final report is we focused a bit more on short-term, what we felt like might be a phase one type of action versus just saying, if you redevelop the entire site tomorrow, just knowing from our experience, that's not really how things work typically, especially along this corridor. There wasn't a ton of vacancy. There weren't huge shopping centers that are just totally underperforming. A lot of them still were viable and had a lot of tenants so we wanted to be responsible with those recommendations. So here at Bryan Station we selected this one frankly because it was a huge greenfield or calling it a greenfield but a big grass lot and so I wanted to look again at what that might look like in the future. Prioritizing housing, thinking about those elements, thinking about how to take the stormwater features and I know that there are challenges in and around that area, how those could be integrated as assets. Thinking about the frontages along New Circle, how multimodal facilities that could be built along the roadway can tie and connect back into the neighborhood, and how other assets and amenities could be built in both within a future potential development, but also that would be publicly accessible along new roadways. And thinking about those sort of the new block structures, new connections that could be made, which we've talked a lot about today. The second one, the parking lot infill at Woodhill at the shopping center. So again, this is one of those examples of a shopping center that was, you know, is utilized. It's been there for a long time, but that front parking lot is dramatically underutilized. And so this example is really just looking at what could happen, leaving that shopping center intact, but providing a new sort of urban framework for things like multifamily housing, for experience-based commercial to come in over time and what that could be, with longer-term looks at how the backside might look, how you might retrofit those shopping centers to better fit what we're seeing in trends with commercial, retail, office, et cetera, as we discussed before. But I think this one is really about creating a place, a place that's going to attract people to come and those sorts of ideas and illustrating how a parking lot could be used and new parking could be brought in to help offset some of those things over time. And the final one, the Eastland Shopping Center, we were fortunate enough to walk this site with the owner. And so, you know, this is a really big one. They've had a lot of success with this site. We're seeing a lot of positive momentum with their tenants. This particular, we called it the wedge, It's got a lot of topographical challenges to it, but this is one that was under their consideration for potentially changing, and so we wanted to explore what that might look like. So a few of the recommendations here, again, thinking about using both of those frontages, thinking about a more kind of vertical mix of uses, how you could keep something that is industrial, but that sort of maker space type thing where you might have both a retail front where you're selling the things that you're making downstairs, and so there's access for service and all of that off the bottom road. But also suggested to them things like green infrastructure. The city has an incredible stormwater incentive grant program. These kinds of sites would all be great places to apply those sorts of things where we could be addressing stormwater, improving sites in a way where there's funding already available, and we'll talk about that a little bit more too. So we used each of these sites to describe through the design guidelines how the urban form, the scale, the setbacks, the uses, etc. would relate throughout. The next piece, the real focus, or one of the big focuses here was on the transportation solutions. So again, there had been previous planning studies along the corridor. I think one of the big takeaways that we wanted to make was about the average daily traffic and sort of historically the amount of growth that was expected to be seen over the last 20 years. It really just hasn't come about for a lot of reasons. And so what we've seen is essentially neutral, if not negative, growth when we're looking at those historical traffic data numbers. That's, I think, just an important thing to remind ourselves of as we're making those recommendations. The other was Andrea call on our team who did the traffic analysis is when we talk about level of service. So that's, you know, how is the traffic serving the community? level F is the most congested, A is the least kind of idea. When we looked at that and looked at the segments, so not at intersections but between intersections, the level of service was generally fine with trouble spots. The real issues were literally at intersections. And so when we're trying to address congestion, really wanted to be focusing on how to address those intersections to get more cars through. There's a lot of turning movements. There are other issues about sort of regional network connectivity that are challenged by major infrastructure like bridges and railroads, and there's a lot of railroads that cut across those pieces. The big takeaway for us was that Northeast New Circle isn't just one road. It's really more than that, and we thought about it as two really distinct segments. With Winchester Road, the circle on that map being sort of the center of that, Everything to the north is where there were more neighborhoods backing up more closely, where when evaluating the safety data, we saw a lot greater challenges. And so we wanted to make recommendations on that north side that were very specific to both the congestion and pedestrian bike safety issues that we were seeing there, versus the south side, which there are neighborhoods, but they're typically separated by a development or a park or other things, so they're not kind of backing almost right up. And the safety numbers aren't, they're not nearly the same as they are on the northern section, so you'll see that in the recommendations. Here, again, for illustrative purposes, we're showing two typical cross sections. This one is on the north side, so what you're seeing here is essentially the existing condition today. so the two lanes in each direction the center turn lane slash median and the shoulders and I think well the biggest takeaway here for us was how to capture work within the space we already have so try not to move outside of that try to stay within existing right away and maybe use those shoulders where we have today bus stops you know people walking up and down trying to get to the bus stops or trying to get to businesses it's pretty unsafe and fairly oppressive if you've walked it, which we all did. And the second piece of that is access management. So literally just how the driveways are working. A lot of them are huge driveways, which can create significant safety issues, and there's a lot of them. And so what that does is people are driving fast because of the width of the roadway. They're using the shoulder. They're kind of whipping in or pulling out into traffic. So that creates both congestion issues if people are getting into wrecks, but it also creates significant safety issues. So when you look at our recommendations, on this northern section, we're proposing capitalizing on the shoulder that's already there, using that space and really trying to amplify what's possible from a bike and pedestrian facility standpoint, as well as potential landscape treatments, the things that we heard from the community, stormwater, et cetera, to make it a really nice experience when you're trying to ride the bus or walk, et cetera. really controlling those access points across the center and using that medium in a way where possible and controlling those access management features along the sides. When we look at the southern section, a bit different here, similar roadway, two lanes each way, still have the shoulder quite a bit of width here. Actually, the right-of-way is wider on the south than it was on the north. That's another consideration. And when we looked here, one of the ideas, and partly KYTC has a project in motion right now, and so that's where what they're saying, what they're looking at is utilizing that shoulder for an additional lane, and that is part of their work to address congestion along the corridor. But we still have significant space, so I think a big part of the coordination going forward is on how do we still capture that space for multimodal bike, ped facilities, landscape enhancements, et cetera, that we heard from the community. Now, when we look at the intersections, these are, again, just examples of potential treatments. So trying to slow cars down as they're moving through intersections, trying to give pedestrians more space to stand, to be visible. You'll see in these... I don't think I do. There we go. When we're looking at these intersection treatments, one of the things that you'll see is a traditional slip line has a pretty large radius, so cars can kind of stay at speed going through, which is not great for pedestrians. But what we're doing here is suggesting the idea that those come much closer to a 90 degree, so a car is having to slow down to be able to see over their left shoulder as they're making those turns. And there's also the opportunity for some of those to be raised. So there's a literal sort of topographical difference. So cars or vehicles that are running through need to slow down. They're indicated in that sort of way. The other major change here is using those islands. The pedestrian refuges is greatly reducing the amount any single pedestrian has to walk in one chunk to get across the street. That's a really big consideration here. There is one other example of a type of intersection that the city and state are going to explore, which is called an RCUT. That's one that still needs to be evaluated throughout, but it's just another way to control how people are moving across. I think that's a pretty big, big component. When we're looking again at the access management, which I mentioned before here looking in plan, you can see on the top the number of different driveways coming onto the frontage road. You can see the recommendation at the bottom, really trying where possible to consolidate those as much as we can. And then on the bottom one, looking at trying to limit the amount of left turns you can make all the way across. Now, most of the time, fairly conveniently for us, there's not a lot of natural movement to cross the road there. So those sorts of curb enhancements or curb features there are really meant to keep people from making a kind of crazy move. And so there'd be other ways for people to move around or to U-turn further down, et cetera. We didn't get into a lot of detail on this, but felt it was important enough to discuss thinking about the Winchester intersection. It is a, we think, a pretty major equity barrier there. We know it's, you know, there's not people all the time, but there are certainly people, and especially people who rely on walking and biking who are taking the shoulder there and walking through. And we know traffic is moving at an incredibly high rate of speed through those areas. So I wanted to at least build in some recommendations to evaluate what it might look like. Here, what you're seeing with these lines are just a variety of options for how a multimodal or pedestrian bike path could work through this intersection, either crossing the on-ramps or potentially going under, like item C, the yellow line going under the road or over. So there's a lot to explore there in the future, but felt it was important enough to integrate into the plan to make sure that continues to be considered. After getting through all of these recommendations and plans, we went back out in April. Our team did more business canvassing. This past time canvassed 24 businesses. You can see there. The most popular thing that we talked about was the connectivity between non-car transportation and businesses. I think that was really well received. There was some concern expressed about the potential for needing more physical space for that infrastructure. So I think some of that is maybe not totally understanding, but also I think people just don't want to give up more space, or they don't want to give up any space at their business, those sorts of elements. And then there were also some mixed reactions about bike and pedestrians around safety and those things. I think people have felt frustrated at times with that, but also understand that a lot of the recommendations here are addressing those root cause issues. I think in general that was overall very well received. We did one final public digital online survey where we put the goals of the plan, we put those diagrams that you just saw, the typical sections out there for people to review. and to give us feedback on. We had 471 total responses that ended on May 8th. And so you can see the goals here I've summarized, to create more inviting open spaces and parks, providing safe and comfortable walking and biking facilities, adding economic activity by redeveloping underused spaces, encouraging different housing options, and increasing trees, landscaping, and lighting. And what we saw was, I think, incredibly positive through that. It's funny, the 67% stands out because all the other ones are 80s and 90s essentially, but those are just strongly like and like. So that's two-thirds of the folks still strongly liked or liked that one. To me, what stood out was that we had 95 and 90% of people strongly liking and liking the goals. I think that, having done a lot of these, that was really a positive to see from the community. So a big aspect of the plan, and Chris Taylor's here too to jump in if I say anything incorrectly, was evaluating the regulatory framework and really specifically evaluating the role of the B3 zone along this corridor. These were the findings. Our subconsultant, ZoneCo, did an audit of all the zones along the corridor and specifically did a bit of a deep dive into the B3. and they really felt like the B3, a big issue there is the prohibition on mixed-use development within the district. That it was important that this B3 is not just on this part of this corridor, it's on many corridors. And so changes or improvements that might be made to the district wouldn't just have positive impacts here on Northeast New Circle, but could have really positive impacts around the city. And I thought this was a nice point, but that the built environment, if you want to know what's going on with the B3 and what the B3 results in, the built environment reflects that. So what we have right now in the zoning is delivering what you're seeing in the image or what you see today, right? That's, I thought, a really poignant statement. So within not only sort of making improvements and adjustments to the language and suggestions for new potential uses or updating those uses, ZoneCo recommended adding in new potential options so for instance a corridor mixed B3 zone the idea for that the intent of that would be to promote a mix of higher intensity residential and commercial uses as well as the potential for a node sub area so that might be at corners or larger sites that might require a bigger redevelopment and is really focused on creating and facilitating appropriate urban form at those centers of activity and having standards that are going to foster all of that and connect adjacent areas to the corridor through cohesive design. And all of that gets incredibly detailed in the report itself. They also made recommendations for consideration. Again, there's a whole other process after this plan for everybody to consider any changes to the zone. So there would be a whole next step to this, but the considerations that were brought forward, I'm going to roll through these specifically. Considering removing minimum lot width requirements. I think one of my big takeaways having worked with Zonco was they felt like flexibility was a thing that really needed to be brought along the corridor. And I think that was a dimensional flexibility as well as land use. So things like considering removing standard 20-foot front yard setback requirements in favor of green space requirements along the primary artery, you know, thinking about how we can build in requirements that would result in things like a greenway or add to a multimodal facility, considering adding provisions that allow more than one principal building to be located on a lot as long as they meet all fire separation codes, et cetera, and considering including rear yards of bucks. You can see in this image in particular that when you are abutting those residential zones, really trying to be careful with those pieces. Thinking through a standard 20-foot yard side setback from adjacent lots, providing separation and green space in between, considering regulations for internal block sizes to promote more walkable developments. We heard a lot about that again for the multifamily and trying to really encourage those pieces that are attracting more development. Considering establishing an impervious surface maximum of 40% So that was another piece that we thought was pretty important and went back to those community themes on the environment and sustainability, et cetera. Considering locating parking areas on the side and rear yards and only up to 20% of those of the total parking to be allowed in the front. So obviously that was in the design guidelines. That's something else that was a pretty important aspect of it. And considering special standards for nodes, for those kind of high action zones, where a lot of these corridors like Limestone and Brian and others cross the corridor are logical places where we're going to have the best connectivity to the adjacent neighborhood. So if you're thinking about trying to create an environment where folks who live nearby can walk to the grocery comfortably, walk to a coffee shop, walk to a doctor's office, that those corners are going to be really high activity. Those are big opportunities for those pieces. And then considering new uses being added. So things like multi-tenant mixed commercial uses, mobile food unit vendors, that was a trend that we saw a lot. There's a lot of food trucks up and down that corridor. So finding a way to encourage that sort of entrepreneurship and allow those things to happen. And then thinking about the sort of creative, maybe more industrial pieces, things like breweries, wineries, distilleries, pop-up retail sales, things that would allow people to be really creative, again, and entrepreneurial and creating a framework for that. And then the artisanal manufacturing and makerspace type elements, kind of like what we talked about at the Eastland Shopping Center. So, again, those are things for consideration. There will be a whole process. Within the final report, there is a table and specific language about those recommendations for your consideration, for everybody's consideration. The final section was about the innovative implementation steps. So there were really four key themes here. having done a lot of these types of neighborhood and community plans I think to us our team in the community one of the if not the most important thing at the end is having somebody who's gonna wake up every day kind of thinking about how to get this stuff done community plans cannot rely on the city to go all the time and do all the things to achieve that and we felt like one of the big recommendations to really start with to build that foundation is something we were calling community coalition building. So again, working with the institutions, the organizations along the corridor, the neighborhoods, the folks who are in the council district, council leaders, on finding those people who are going to stay involved, who are really going to bird dog some of these things and try to go help make action happen. We made recommendations within the final report that maybe there's a grant, maybe we help, we being the greater good city here. We consider adding a position. I know from our standpoint, town branch commons had somebody who woke up every single day within the mayor's office who was charged with getting that project done and whether that's a short-term position here with an lfcg or it's an organization that's totally outside it's a community development corporation type model etc within each of these recommendations we tried to give examples of things that had happened similarly it's a bit different but we've worked with greater garden side which represents multiple neighborhoods there's an organization there they're taking on incremental change and improvements within their neighborhoods. That was just one example that's here locally. The second, which I thought was interesting, I spoke with the founder of the organization, is We Love Buford Highway. And it is almost identical to New Circle Road in that it's incredibly diverse. And it's incredibly sort of auto-oriented. And there's an organization that created a 501c3 that is going and finding money, that's connecting people to the corridor, that's planning events along it, you know, that's trying to create elements of improvement along the corridor. And these sorts of groups would be the ones when the city is helping go after infrastructure funding. The federal government is looking for how are you connected to the neighborhoods? Who's going to be helping shepherd these things? How are you going to do all of that? And that community coalition building will be vital for those elements. The second piece is creating pathways for public realm and infrastructure improvements. Again, these are all would be competitive discretionary grants they're incredibly competitive we know that from a lot of personal experience and i have the image of town branch commons right that's that's a great example of how multiple funding sources can come together to achieve really great improvements there we listed a number of different grant opportunities whether we're talking about raised grants that are focused on transportation safety equity and resiliency there's transit funding around areas of persistent poverty and historically disadvantaged communities of which there are some that are identified federally along this corridor. The Safe Streets for All grant, which I know is being explored right now. Things like reconnecting communities, so where there are major arterials that have disconnected neighborhoods over time is an option. And then more traditional ones that have been really successful here in Lexington, congestion mitigation and air quality and transportation alternatives. But there's a lot there and we're already, I think, working on advancing those pieces. Something that's maybe historically a little bit less clear is how the private side can get involved in finding funding and bringing action to these things beyond just development. So there are a few items here. The stormwater incentive grant program is one that we've done a number of those. There would be an incredible opportunity for a lot of the properties thinking about auto dealerships and shopping centers that have huge amounts of impervious surfaces, that these projects could help spur improvements that the community would value based on the feedback. The Corridors Commission itself has grants that could be coordinated with and be an element of this. There would also be other foundations like the Bluegrass Community Foundation and Knight Foundation that have programs that could help advance pieces, even the community coalition building elements of this. And then the Public Art Commission. And the Public Art Commission, I think, recently updated their plan and have already listed Northeast New Circle Road as a priority area for funding for public art. I thought that was an incredibly positive outcome of this process. All of those pieces can be connected to folks who want to get projects done. The final piece, innovative policy recommendations. Our consultants who did the market analysis, we asked them to take a shot at what sorts of policy elements they felt were the most important here. So again, affordable housing, we know that's a huge issue here in Lexington. That's incredibly important. Some of their recommendations, which have gone into detail in the report, are thinking about things like entitlement incentives. So how can we, through policy, incent people to do more? Thinking about the LIHTC, which there's not a lot of control. That's controlled by the state, so the low-income housing tax credits. But maybe there's concerted advocacy efforts that could be done to help improve or change those things so that those tools can work really well or work better for the city and for this corridor specifically. And they recommended prioritizing the use of CDBG and home funds for incentives that are using those LIHTC programs and those pieces. The second piece, which are the examples across the top, we're focused on small businesses. So New Circle, for all its blemishes as an urban environment, is also a place for entrepreneurial energy. A lot of people, because of those rental rates, have been able to start new businesses, been able to try things that maybe they couldn't have done in other parts of the city. And so finding other ways to support that was really important. So things like development fee waivers. And then there are successful examples of adaptive reuse and rehab programs and community investment vehicles that allow people to get connected to the funding and financing on the back ends of projects. So with that, I think we'll open it up. some of the next steps for the plan and for the city and everyone is seeking that funding for infrastructure. I know if Chris and Kenzie can speak to that and those elements. Continuing to coordinate with District 7 and KYTC on their new circle efforts as that moves forward. And then considering the advancement of those possible changes to B3, which again would have its own distinct process, but that would be one of those pieces. So with that, I'll open it up to So any questions? Any questions? Yes. I've got a couple questions. So one would be, you know, looking at this corridor, B3 is really extensive. and encompasses a large percentage of the corridor. You're talking about a few modifications to B3. Did you all discuss coming up with maybe this entire corridor of B3 is no longer appropriate or the direction of the? Yes. Well, not in those words exactly. So are you talking about recommending that the whole area be essentially rezoned? Is that sort of where you're going? Well, I mean, I haven't been through a small area plan while I've been on the commission, but I would assume that a possibility is that there would be other recommended zones that people, that could be presented as part of the report that could. So the short answer is that if we want to see change in the corridor, recommending people go through a zone change is probably not the fastest way to achieve that. And the problem is, as you know from Place Builder, when we developed that last comp plan, B3 is not a recommended zone in any location. That's because our B3 zone is pretty functionally broken and outdated and really isn't an appropriate zone in most cases. So a big part of this corridor study is about getting some solid recommendations to make the zone useful so that we can put it back in place builder as a recommended zone. It's an important zone, but it was made for the 50s and 60s when the Beltline was built. So I think if we want to spur redevelopment and something that can happen more quickly, I think the thought is that we need to modernize and improve the B3 zone and make it attractive and make it useful. Because a lot of these, as he's mentioned, these are pretty successful leased up sites that are pretty happy with what they have. So the likelihood they would want to come in for a zone change on that process is pretty low. So we think it's incumbent upon us to try to make that, to create incentives for consolidating properties and putting assembling packages of property to do something. That's what the sub-area nodes are designed to do, is create some benefits and incentives to do that. And then obviously creating new land use opportunities, again, creating market opportunities under the existing zoning, while also setting a higher standard on the floor for the B3, we think is probably the quicker path to improving the corridor. Does that answer your question? It does. Thank you. I got a follow-up for that Mr. Taylor. Okay if we're looking to do something pretty quickly is it possible to take one of these recommendations from the study that we just saw and make an adjustment to the B someone proposed a zoning ordinance text amendment to make an adjustment in the B3 zone to move to allow multi-family dwellings in the same way that principle permitted use was added to the b6p zone yes so that's a straight possibility just oh yeah one zoda yeah all of the recommendations in there are things that we worked extensively with zoneco on and you know i think they're all things that we're very eager to do to to improve the b3 zone like i said it's it's we don't take it lightly that it's not a listed zone anywhere in place builder that's an important gap in in in the zoning ordinance and the comp plan that we need to remedy and so that's why this study is really important is those recommendations are all things we think are actionable very very quickly okay and i think that i'm seeing a bunch of some nodding going on here that is something that we should really consider doing because it's an equity issue we're looking at this corridor and there's no provision for principal use multi-family dwellings i mean that was one of the first things jocelyn brought up after she did her audit i think Well, it's an equity issue, so hopefully that's something we can address quickly. Thank you. This is more an observation and a hope rather than a question. I think, as I recall in your first presentation, you talked about the fact that the people collecting data were surprised at how much economic activity was going along in that northern section. The very small restaurants, the very small shops. that sort of thing. My observation is that some of our efforts in places like North Lyme with the gentrification have driven a lot of people out of the area, caused a lot of problems. I'm looking at this with particularly like your regulatory framework recommendations, looking at what you call mobile food unit vendors. I'm thinking food truck, is that what that is? that you're building in flexibility that would give some of the people that might potentially be losing their opportunities, opportunities built into this framework. Is that a fair statement? Yeah, I think from our perspective, that was always the intent, was developing recommendations. Again, within the policy side, things that create flexibility. So adding housing while we're also encouraging affordable housing, thinking about how we can create support networks. because anytime you're potentially increasing value right you're going to have that sort of friction point that you're talking about i think that's something that certainly we discussed throughout and feels incredibly important thank you mr bent well for somebody that's living on the north side of town all of his life and driven new circle road i'm not surprised by the amount of land that's there i'm certain not surprised by the amount of car lots that are there both of those things need to be addressed and i don't think you're going to lose any economic value if you repurpose some of those lots we we're just we're taking tremendously valuable land and basically parking cars on them and sell them and that's that's pretty tough way to to use land so if you're going to do the new circle road north side of it its use has totally changed since the interstate highway came in and you got to remember new circle road was built before the interstate highway so repurposing new circle road is something that this community with except the few people that run car lots and stuff would would would embrace because there's a lot of land there that's just really not being used and i'm excited to see that we're finally going to put the attention where i hope it i hope it can do the best thank you for what you've done thanks okay any other questions okay mr michler we just had a follow-up on my uh on my one comment that i sent you after the last presentation And that was more of an observation that, you know, we had a, when I measured it on the city's GIS map, There was a three-mile section between Henry Clay Boulevard and Old Todd's Road where New Circle is the only sort of connection. And, you know, as a city, I think our lack of north-south connectivity there is causing this congestion. And I guess I wondered, you know, in your conversations with traffic where they're planning to widen the road, which seems like sort of treating the symptom that this road is the only connection for this section, And were any of these sort of connectivity issues, did they come up at all in this discussion? I'll start. I think at a high level, there are maps and recommended connectivity improvements throughout. I think what we found on the majority of those were a lot of challenges with infrastructure term and private properties kind of interrupting what would have been like a logical connection right from a neighborhood with a really well connected street grid to New Circle itself. But certainly that was looked through and we've suggested a number of those. And then I do want to be clear I think on the on the southern what I'm calling the southern section when we say road widening it's within what's already there right so it's the shoulder that's already there it's not going further out i just want to make that clarifying point but mackenzie if you want to speak to that a little bit yeah i think i wanted to echo that and i can say that we happen to be at a um a meeting with the district office just a couple weeks ago and council member gray was there as well and we talked very much about the lack of connectivity around this area and how important it is and how many opportunities were lost over time and i think the issue is connectivity is something that's sort of like death by a million small cuts and you lose the connectivity of the network overall there is one project that we do think will very much benefit the new circle corridor and that is the connection of citation boulevard so that's going to there's there's no east-west connectivity i guess between russell cave and newtown pike a lot of people are trying to get to the interstate we do think that will pull a lot of the traffic off of new circle road and that's one more reason why we don't feel like a major widening is necessary or would have any kind of major improvement to congestion along that corridor and that we don't think we're there has been almost zero in fact negative growth of traffic on new circle road over the last 15 to 20 years on the other hand the southern section it's a bit different in characteristics it is having a larger volume of cars as well as a bit bit of growth or certainly not negative growth the transportation cabinet it is their roadway they feel pretty strongly that a widening is in order so what we're trying to do is make sure that as they move forward with that project we're getting the kinds of outcomes that we want for the other infrastructure adjacent to the roadway the quality trail connections and green space landscaping beautification all of that thank you all right it was worth this is just a cleanup matter i think we had an email from christopher woodall to rachel lay forwarded from harrison fields imagine licks i don't know if this is to be read into the record or what the purpose of giving this was anybody know it was just i don't know if it's i'll just read it if it's okay improve safety by reducing the many access points in that area combine as many current access roads and share them i think you've attempted to do that yes thank you so um i know we have council member gray is here to speak podium is all yours thank you for having me I'm here to speak on behalf of my constituents who couldn't be here due to the time of this meeting but so I'll read there what I've received off first and then I'll give you some input also as well. Constituents wanted you to know that they would like for on New Circle the power lines need to be underground which they understand is massively expensive but what present a better look of New Circle. Also I've been told that the city has to purchase some of the land from owners because because owners all the land let me let me double check here the land all the way up to the actual road so you can park I believe there's a call for parking right up to the road. I'm not particularly sure about what the wording was on that one. Sorry. I should have read these before I read them. Ensure New Circle Road receives a cosmetic facelift while ensuring it's safe for pedestrians, bike riders, and of course our vehicles. Sidewalks are a must is what I've been told. So as you all know, that north side of New Circle Road, that's my district for the most part, up to where we have the old Paris Road area, all the way down to Liberty Road, north of New Circle. That's the 6th District. As someone that has lived in the 6th District or in the Bryan Station area all my life, we have seen New Circle Road become a car dealership road. I've often heard from residents who come into Lexington for shopping or what have you, that that's what they say the north side of Lexington is all about. And that's something that I would like for us to change. I am loving the fact that the plan includes some multi-family housing, which we know is a need. And also, we do have property that is unused on New Circle Road, such as behind Bryan Station Inn. I would love for us to do something about that area right there. essentially what we would like for the car dealerships to be remedied and bring in more businesses and make it so that it's more more than that and more of a place where that is cosmetically looks as good as the other side of town and currently many of my residents feel that we have forgotten them, which in hindsight, they're correct. Looking at how we have allowed the north side, new circle look at this point. So I am so grateful that we are now talking about changing what has always been. So that's essentially it. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Is there anyone else in the audience that would like to speak? I'm not seeing it. The floor is open. Then bring it back to the commission for a motion to adopt this plan. Mr. Davis. Mr. Chairman, if there's no further commission or comment, I'm prepared to make a motion. I move that the planning commission adopt the imagined New Circle Road Corridor Plan as an amendment to Imagine Lexington, the 2018 comprehensive plan. Thank you. Do we have a second to that motion? Seconded by Ms. Worth. Please vote via Granicus. Okay, motion passes unanimously. Thank you and great job. Great job. Great. Yes. Next, the commission items. We have nominating committee for commission officers. We have to choose three and Bruce Nickel, Ivy Boxdale, and Jan Meyer have agreed to be on that committee. So we will need a motion to accept those three individuals to be on the nominating committee for commission officers. Mr. Penn? I'll be glad to do that. I move that we accept them as our representatives for a nominating committee. Thank you. Do we have a second to that motion? Second. Seconded by Ms. Worth. Do we need a vote via hand? Okay, I see it. We'll vote via Granicus as it comes available. Okay, that motion passes unanimously. Mr. Duncan. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I do want to call your attention to the meeting dates. Next week is a planning commission work session, but once again, we will be in this space in the council chambers, not the third floor Phoenix, as is stated on here. So please prepare to come to the work session next week. In this room, the meeting will not be televised. It will be treated as an ordinary work session, but this is the space where we need to be. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. This meeting is adjourned. I'm going to see you through. I'm going to see you through. Yeah! You can't tell me what's up for I'll be there Come on, come on. I'm going to go all the way. Thank you. Thank you.