Thank you. Good morning, everyone. It is 10 o'clock. We're going to get started on time. All right. I want to welcome everyone this morning. This is our second meeting. We have a nice agenda today. Ms. Beth Overman will be speaking and Mr. Charlie Martin. So looking forward to hearing from those two individuals. Second on the agenda, we need a motion for the approval of the previous meeting summary minutes. Has everyone had a chance to look at those while we were here? any changes any corrections this is just a request for a supplement this is the request for a supplement we were read our charge could we get that added to the minutes so that at the end of the process we can check ourselves and see if we did what we were accountable for doing and also although this is on this pack, the address to the URL for locating these documents. Could we get that added to the minutes as well? And with those two changes, I recommend approval of the minutes. Okay, thank you. I move approval of minutes. Thank you. Second. Motion and a second. Are we still voting via the electronic? You want me to start it? I can do it. Okay. All right, that's fine. Motion in favor, please raise your hand. All right, motion passes. Thank you. Okay. Section 3, Beth Overman, Program Manager, Purchase Development Rights. Good morning. And, Mr. Chair, while Beth is coming to the lecture, I just want to remind the committee that we are being broadcast live on Lex TV. so please use your microphones when you speak so that the television can pick that up and the meeting will also be archived for viewing later on as well. Thank you. Okay, good morning. So for the members, you all have in your packets the presentation that I'm going to give. And on the top should be five maps, and you are welcome to just rip those off and use those to reference. They are in this presentation, but I provided you all larger copies so that you can see. So if you'll just take those five pages and keep them at the side, then that will help you all to see what we're going to discuss. So we will start out with the PDR program background. So the rural service area at Fayette County is comprised of some of the highest quality soils in the nation. The prime farmland soils are illustrated in green in this map to the right, and the statewide important soils are in yellow. So you all can see that they essentially, the prime farmland and statewide important cover nearly the entire rural service area, except some patches down there near the Kentucky River area. Recognizing the importance of protecting these special soils in our working farms, the PDR program was created in the year 2000. The program was created in conjunction with the comprehensive plan update and included changing the minimum lot size in the rural service area from 10 to 40 acres. The ordinance stated goal is to purchase easements on 50,000 of the approximately 128,000 acres in the rural service area. So our environmental priorities. The Rural Land Management Plan, which governs the whole rural area, not just the PDR program, recognizes five distinct focus areas and states they are especially important to conserve. They are based on watersheds. And let's see the clicker here. This is the first time I've been in this building. But how do we do the point? Okay. Well, okay. right here that might show up just a bit better okay yep okay great thank you all right so we have the south elkhorn the old frankfurt pike the north elkhorn creek this is the wellhead protection area that's the royal aquifer over here we have the boone creek focus area and down here the Kentucky River focus area so those are the five focus areas that are especially important to conserve the rural land management plan PDR applicants receive a high number of ranking points for being in a focus area or the Royal Springs aquifer wellhead protection area being in these areas also negates any negative points awarded for being in the urban service for being near the urban service boundary or in a sewer ability area PDR applicants also receive points for protecting our environmental elements as shown on the next slide so some of our ranking so any PD any parcel in the AR zone that is at least 20 acres qualifies for easement purchase parcels are ranked using a land evaluation and site assessment system provided in section 2610 of the code of ordinances that includes some of the AG supportive scoring is the size of the parcel the soil quality elimination of undeveloped non-conforming tracks which means if someone combined to 20 acre or two 10 acre tracks to qualify per PDR or anything that reached 20 or above proximity to other PDR farms, which builds critical mass, batch application, farming activities and production, and agricultural infrastructure improvements. The environmental protection scoring is for environmentally sensitive areas, designated rural greenways, designated focus areas, natural protection areas, and wildlife habitats, links to parks, nature preserves, nature sanctuaries, et cetera, and designated scenic view sheds and other scenic resources such as tree canopies. We also have historic protection scoring, the historic and cultural resources, including those designated for the National Historic Register, designated federal, state, and local scenic byways, and historic turnpikes, stone fences, and length of public road frontage. We also have negative scoring. Negative points are awarded to parcels in sewerability categories 1 through 4 and those within one mile of the urban service area, unless they are in a designated focus area or wellhead protection area, or they are deemed a community icon. So our conserved farm and acreage, PDR is nearly two-thirds of the way to the 50,000-acre goal, which is fabulous. There are nearly 31,100 acres permanently conserved, and nearly 2,100 acres are under contract. There are an additional 12 applications in the queue, and the annual PDR application cycle will take place this fall. It is a goal of both the PDR program and the federal matching program to create clusters of contiguous conserved agricultural land, and you will see that on this map. Applicants receive points for being adjacent to a PDR or bluegrass land conservancy easement and for applying with a neighboring farm. The Bluegrass Land Conservancy holds 18 easements in Fayette County, totaling 2,300 acres. The PDR program has also avoided the Emerald Choker by awarding negative points to parcels adjacent to the urban service boundary and those in a sewer ability area, unless they are in a focus area or the wellhead protection area. So I'm going to show you all a few things on this map, just to illustrate kind of what we're talking about, about the importance of building contiguous farmland and conserved areas and how that works and also with some of the, how we have avoided the areas that are right by the boundary. So, let's see. So last year, well, I'll stay here so you can hear me. So on Greenwich Pike, we closed two easements that are right in this area. And previously that was an open space. And so it connected this whole area and this section and made one big block. So the two parcels that we closed, on your all's map, they're number 518 and 22018. So you all will be able to see them easier. But that is what we are trying to do with PDR. And another example down here, and it's going to be a lot easier for the members who are here to see these, but on Old Richmond Road, you all will see on that map that we have four farms right in this area that are under contract. They're green but outlined in black, which means they're under contract. And when you look at those, you can see that they pulled that those by putting those under easement, they are connecting this area, this area and this area of conserved land. Yes. Just a question. Do you have a better copy of the map? Because I'm not able to see those numbers that you're referencing. Okay. I can get you all. Yes. The one Andy. Is it one? Okay. Okay. Yes. That should be in your packets. and I can also get a bigger copy for you all too if needed. So that is what we try to do is look at those puzzle pieces. Look at where the contiguous land or where we already have conserved land. Get those parcels that are adjacent to that, and especially when they can connect areas of conserved land, that is especially important and something we are trying to do. so if you all we wanted to share that so that you all can keep that in mind as you do your work that almost thinking of it as a puzzle piece when you look at the map if you see a lot of green and there's you know green here green here in a white space that recognize oh that's you know a good place for pdr that's that's an area that they're trying to get and i think the planning staff will talk to you all some will encourage avoiding that you know development there anyway because some of that can be called what they refer to as leapfrog development, which they would want to avoid. But I wanted to share that so you are just aware that that is one of the big goals, is building those contiguous large areas of conserved farmland. And a bonus for us is that that's one of the ranking criteria that our federal partners use, the program we use that provides the funding. But for us, it's just it provides those specific areas of conserved land. It provides buffers for the farms that are already there. So and it just makes those areas around town. And then and I don't know if all of you, some of the new people may not have heard the term Emerald Choker, but that was a term used when the program started. And to I think some in the development community hoped that that would be avoided. And so that is part of why the points, the negative points are awarded for sewer ability and for being close to the urban service boundary. And you can see when you look at the map that the only places that has happened are right here, which is Helm Place, which has a historic overlay. That is actually the only H1 district in the entire rural service area. And that was Mary Todd Lincoln's sister's home. And so it has historic designations. So that one, and then right here, this was actually purchased with ICE-T funding before the PDR program started. It was around 1999, and the LFUCG used funding from the federal ICE-T program to purchase that easement and then gave it to the PDR program. So you can see, other than that, the ranking system has worked. And we have worked on building contiguous pieces of land while avoiding the areas that are adjacent to the boundary. I understand there are areas that are under negotiation, and those have to be held in confidence. But if we follow that pattern in terms of making choices, will we avoid jeopardizing any potential negotiations for things that might be under contract? So the ones under contract are marked on your map, and that will be available. GIS has that on all the mapping. They'll be able to show you all. For the most part, the ones that are, we have seven pending on a federal application. and five others that do not currently qualify for federal funding. I do not think any of those are adjacent to the border or necessarily meet the criteria the council has given you all to follow about the areas you select. But I could always provide that information to Jim Duncan or to Commissioner Horn or that, and it could be shared with you all if that was an issue. So, yes. All right. So our next one. So the importance of conserving 50,000 acres of working farmland. The USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, with whom we partner, states it well by saying, agricultural land easements protect the long-term viability of the nation's food supply by preventing conversion of productive working lands to non-agricultural uses. Land protected by agricultural land easements provides additional public benefits, including environmental quality, historic preservation, wildlife habitat, and protection of open space. And I will share that when I started with PDR, you know, everyone is aware of the reasons. We started this, or the program was started in the year 2000. We know that it's with tourism, that it's our working farms, that the ag community, being such a large part of the economy here, and all the other reasons, the historic factors, the cultural factors. But it was interesting to me that the federal program, one of the main reasons they do this is to conserve farmland so that we always have enough land to grow food to feed our citizenry. So they see it as a homeland security issue in addition to all of the other ag benefits and environmental benefits. And that was just interesting to me because I don't think that is necessarily how we looked at it originally, but it was interesting that that is part of why this is funding, because it is regularly funded, every farm bill, with bipartisan support. And right now the Inflation Reduction Act has actually significantly increased the funding for the program for the next five years, and it's gone from around $4.5 million to I think it's like $1.5 billion per year. So they are really making an investment in conserving farmland. So that was just an interesting thing I wanted to share with you all. And though it would seem there is much land to conserve in Fayette County with nearly 120,000 acres in the rural service area, mapping provided by our GIS staff shows how much land is excluded from potential conservation due to parcel size, existing commercial usage residential use and developments government-owned properties etc and so this is a map that I think GIS created this for us and I think it will be especially helpful to you all but so everything in green is either PDR or bluegrass land conservancy or like things like the floor cliff nature sanctuary everything in that dark gray color is unavailable for PDR conservation because it's either a rural subdivision, it's in 10-acre tracks or smaller. You know there are a lot, we'll see on the next slide, that there are a lot of parcels a lot smaller than 10 in the rural service area and you know or either it's already owned by government, it's already something like the airport, Keeneland, Fasig-Tipton, so all of these things that are already taking up the conserved land. So that kind of puts it in perspective of the areas that we will be, you know, that are important for conservation and available. So the importance of conserving 50,000 acres of working farmland continued. Additionally, further GIS mapping shows that 3,224 of the parcels in the rural service area, 76% of the parcels are less than 20 acres and therefore do not qualify for PDR easement purchase. It is therefore vital that we protect the areas buffering PDR farms so that they may someday be protected and continue the pattern of contiguous conserved working farmland and so that we honor the conservation commitment of PDR's 285 farms. It also makes us good stewards of the local, state, and federal investment in these easements by ensuring farmers can continue farming and good stewards of their environment by protecting our green space, streams, environmentally sensitive areas, and wildlife habitats. So on the map you all have, you will see that in the really kind of dark, and it's harder for the audience, but so in the really dark burgundy color, that is parcels that are 0 to 4.99 acres. There are 1,675, so that is the largest. group that is out there. Next is the 5 to 9.99 acres. There are 509 of those. And the 10 to 19.99, there are 1,040 parcels. So you can see that, as I said earlier, that over 3,000 are less than 20 acres. Then going into the 20 to 39.99 there are 276 of those parcels and the 40 to 1065 which is the largest there are 696. So that's I think this will also be helpful to you all as you do your work and Chris Dorch will have access to all of these and be able to pull these for you all as needed as you do your work. Okay, so our helpful notes that will help with you all's work that we wanted to share today and our conclusion. Both the PDR and Bluegrass Land Conservancy easements are perpetual and transfer with the land. And Margaret Graves, who is the chair of the Bluegrass Conservancy, is here today if you all have any questions for her. Our board chair, Gloria Martin, is also here if you all have any questions for her. Over half of the PDR easements have been purchased with federal matching dollars from the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. The federal easement template we use includes the following language, and it has it under the section prohibited uses. the granting of easements or rights away for power lines, gas lines, sewer lines, telecommunication towers, and wind farms. So to put that in easier to understand language, what that's saying is that some PDR farms come into the program with easements on that. We learned that in the title search, or maybe there's an old, you know, electric easement or that kind of thing. What it's saying is that new ones cannot be added. And so for your all's work in thinking in terms of can a sewer line go through our PDR farm? Can there be, you know, new infrastructure that's underground? It's our understanding right now, especially on these federal easements that have this language, that would not be available, so just so that you all are aware of that. And then it also states, due to the federal interest in the agricultural land easement, the United States must review and approve any proposed condemnation action that may affect the United States' interest in the protected property. So I'm going to show you all something that will illustrate what we're talking about or why we share that with you. So if you will look, and I'm just, there are a lot of roads in the rural area that this would impact, But let's switch. But Military Pike, because it's easy to see, it's down on the left of this map that's titled Conserved Land in Lexington-Fayette County. So if you look at Military Pike, and we all know it's two lanes and somewhat narrow, and you see there are actually nine separate PDR easements on the road. There are two that sit back here that do not have road frontage, but there are nine that do. If there was ever, if this group decided we need to expand, we want to develop that area, so it's going to need to go to four lanes, you would have to get the permission of the federal government. It is our understanding. You would have to get the permission of the federal government per the language and the easement to do so, And it is unlikely they would allow that. And it's our understanding from conversations with them and things that with them being the federal, just like the state, can sometimes override what we want to do here in the city. The feds can just say no. We have an easement there and we're not going to allow that. And then the condemnation process, if it ever did go through, is extremely expensive and requires repayment to the landowner, the federal government, and the LFUCG. and so I just wanted to that's something important for you all to know as you do this work and so that will help you in looking at areas because I will one story I will share is that one of the former council members who was in the 10th district when I first started around 10 years ago he had an idea to expand the one of the bike trails and to take it across Helm Place that is right here and it would just have gone across the front and connected. And so he had us send a letter to NRCS and say, you know, explain it. And he kind of suggested that they would also be able to allow people to see this historic house as they went by and things. And they said, no, that is not the purpose of this. This is an agricultural land easement. And we, you know, we're not going to take up space for paving for that. So I just wanted to share that to let you know how strict it is. That's our experience with it. So I think that is helpful to you all as you do your work. And so that concludes my presentation. We want to thank you for inviting us today. We greatly appreciate the opportunity to speak with you all and answer any questions throughout the process. So if you all have any questions for me, for Gloria, for Margaret, we will be happy to answer. Yes, I'm sure you have several questions. Okay. Yes, ma'am. It's louder than I thought. My question has to do, when a PDR farm is next to a non-PDR farm, do you have recommendations on buffering? Or do you actually have that in place? I mean, do you try to keep X amount? I'm thinking moving forward, if there's land that's going to be developed, there are things that would be detrimental to be right up to a PDR farm. Yes. So our first preference would be to avoid that altogether. But our board has not come up with a specific area, like whether that be a mile or things. So we can discuss that at a future meeting. That would be helpful. Okay, all right. But, yes, right now, that would just get back to what I talked about about us trying to build those contiguous, and especially when there are puzzle pieces in between two areas or three areas that would fill in and things. Thank you. Thank you, Kevin. Beth, just curious, the example you just gave of the trail going through the property that you spoke of there, the Mary Todd Lincoln sister property. Was that because it was that historic overlay, or would that apply to any PDR farms? And the reason I'm asking is you were talking about the importance of the linking and connection of all of those properties, and in your positive scoring ranking process here, links to parks, preservation, nature preserves, nature sanctuaries, and things like that would lead me to believe that there might be an interest in linking a trail through some of those properties at some point? Yes. So I'm sure the H-1 overlay would have come into play. I don't remember that it got to the point of Betty Kerr's, of the Division of Historic Preservation, being consulted. But the big thing with PDR, one of the big things with PDR farms is that since 2007, they have had an impervious surface limit in the easement. and that is generally 2%, and so that bike path would have been paved and would have caused that, and so they don't allow paving. Our easements also prohibit paving unless it is for agricultural or approved residential use. Okay. So there's probably not going to be a time where we would see these connected farms to have a trail system through them because of that paving? Not a bike trail. I don't think so. Okay. But, yeah. And one other question that I have is, like, on the funding for the state and local and federal funding that goes into paying for the PDR easements, is that paid for in total, or is the city carrying debt on any of their part, or is that – how is that funded through LFUCG with our local dollars going into that? Okay. Okay. So it is generally given through bond funding, and it is sometimes we, it is, the hope has been that for $2 million has generally been the request. The first year that the program started, the state pledged $15 million to start the PDR program, and so the first year they gave around $7 or $8 million, and the LFUCG matched that. After that, the goal has been to give $2 million a year. But in some of the leaner years that we've had with COVID and with the recession around 2008 or 2009, it's been $1 million or sometimes there was even no money given that year. And I think one year it was around $400,000. So it is generally through bond funding. We do not track that in PDR because we look at it. I think it's just like other projects that the LFUCG funds in Lexington, when they're talking about how much they spent, whether it be the old courthouse or something, they talk about the dollar amount. And so the interest part is done over there in finance. That's not something we track, but yes, it is through bond funding. Thank you. Thank you, Beth, for that presentation. Can you help me understand buffer zones a little bit better? do they only relate to PDR farms? Well, no. So, and my planning friends here may want to step in, but I believe, let me see if one of our maps shows it. Let's see. Well, and actually we do, that map is in the rural land management plan and we can send that to you. Some of them are right down here. this area that's over by jasmine county that's a buffer zone there are a few others over here but jim or chris or does anyone want to add to that vice mayor the buffer is a is both a land use and a zone and it's designated in the rural land management plan on properties where there was a concern that there would be really no control about what happens on adjacent properties or the properties were already sized and used in such a way that they would not be appropriate for necessarily for other conservation type programs so the the biggest example is along tates creek road because that's also the border with jessman county so that area is designated for agricultural buffer and then therefore it can be zoned as a for a buffer zone and that that it can be subdivided smaller than the 40 acres so that's really the big the big difference in the agricultural area, the buffer zone can be subdivided smaller and likely would not be as competitive for conservation. So in the context of us looking for expansion and development land, basically we're not looking at anything that's going to be contiguous to conserved areas than if we're considering the buffer zone, right? That's not necessarily a limitation on your part. Okay. Thank you. Beth, do you have an idea, you talked about the uses of the farmland, what the farms that are currently being conserved, if it's for agriculture, food production, or if it's equine, or if it's a cattle farm, and how that may play into buffering? Is there a way to break it down and let us know how the land's being used? Yes, so we actually started tracking that over the last year. So Charlie Farmer, who is a retired NRCS, the district conservationist, we contract with him to do the majority of our easement monitoring. And as we go to this farm, we have started writing that down. So I can gather some of that. I can tell you that the last couple of years, we are seeing a lot of cattle farms come in and a lot that are doing the general ag with the crops. There's a lot of corn and soybeans. And we've even seen a couple where they're doing horses, but also corn and soybeans. So that is interesting. And one of the big things that we are seeing change in Fayette, too, is the eventing that the sport horses. And so we see a lot of that. But I think as far as what's coming in new, we are seeing a lot of general ag and a lot of cattle farms and stuff. But I will look at how much of that data we have so that we can give you all a rough idea of that. Mr. Brown. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Beth, for the presentation. A lot of helpful, useful information. Can you – so I'm of the understanding that the PDR scoring system has been modified in certain areas to allow for more flexibility with allowing properties to be entered into the program. Can you speak a little bit about that and why that might have taken place and the benefit to the program? Okay. So it actually has not. I remember we had those conversations when we were, like, I think when we added the council seats to the ordinance for PDR a couple of years ago, the two council appointed seats and the non-voting council member. And so we were discussing some of those changes. I think that came up about farms less than 20 acres being able to apply. but that change has not been made yet. So now what they can do is if any farm has two adjacent parcels that say it's five acres and 15 or any combination that reaches 20, they can apply to PDR in that way and tell us that they're going to get those consolidated. We don't require them to actually do so until we've received federal funding for that easement and made an offer to them because we don't want them to go to that expense and get that consolidation plat until we know that they have an offer from us on the table. But we can certainly talk with you. If you'd like to talk more about that, we'd be happy to do that. Well, I guess I was talking more about, I think there was an area around the Bluegrass Station area that I think properties might have not been ranking high because of, I don't know if it's location or other factors. and I thought an adjustment might have been made to the scoring system to allow for properties to be considered or score higher that might not have scored higher. Okay. I kind of remember. I think that may have been down in the Kentucky River area. That may be what we talked about because their soil score often does not meet. The federal government requires that the prime farmland soil and the statewide important together equal 50%. 50%. And most Fayette County farms are up close to 100%. We even have some that sometimes the prime farmland soil, which is the top, is 100% itself. These farms that are down, let's see here, some of these that are right down on the river, and you can see that's why some are in white, they're not yet conserved. They do not usually meet the criteria as far as the soil goes. So we cannot submit them for federal funding or have not been able to in the past and our board has been very conscientious especially with all of the you know economic problems beginning in around 2008 or 2009 through the covet of using those matching dollars and so we have focused on the farms that do meet the federal requirements now the federal government with that they have a farm bill every five years and with the 2018 farm bill they did make some changes to allow for funding if it is of special significance because our ordinance charges our board with conserving the natural lands as you all saw on that how many like a focus area is one of the top score getters in the ranking points and environmentally sensitive areas in the rural greenways are another top point getter so there are ways now that we can apply for that i did submit some i think it was pre-covid um so maybe around 2019 2018 i did submit a few on our federal application that were down in the kentucky river area and they weren't funded but i think a lot of that is because the feds have their ranking system just like ours and even though it's now recognizing those lands of special significance and one of the criteria is that if it's part of your the entity like us like our ordinance to preserve that to try to get those it's still the prime farmland soils are at the top for them as well so if they have a limited amount of money and are handing that out in Kentucky, then those farms with the best soils are going to get funded first. So, but is that kind of what? Yeah, yeah, kind of. Okay, but you and I can also just, you and I can get together and talk about this. Well, the other thing I was going to ask too, and this is just maybe get clarification. So, any additional easements aren't allowed on PDR farms, is that just general practice or is that a fact? I mean, just thinking about making our sewer system more efficient and making connections, is that if there's a willing property owner and it's not going to disturb the operations of the farm or the property, is that something that we can consider or not? Is that just a flat-out no? It appears to us that this federal easement, that language on the last page, let's see, about, no, it's under prohibited uses, the granting of easements or right-of-ways. So I was doing some research on that last night. I saw back, as far back as 2008 or 2009 at least, that that language has been in the federal easements. So that would prohibit. It is our understanding based on this. that would prohibit any kind of new sewer infrastructure or things. And so I think that's one thing. You know, some of our easements are local. There are times when it's probably going to be a case-by-case basis with the law department reviewing. And then, as I said, it always, if there is ever a question or a request, it has to go through the chief of NRCS in Washington, D.C., if it's a federal easement. Okay. Yeah, I'd be interested in getting a legal clarification on that because if it's the difference between running a sewer line and building multiple pump stations, I think it goes into the cost of development consideration. Okay. I'll make a note. Thank you. You're welcome. Beth, just another clarification on Council Member Brown's question. So are all the farms, is it a federal, is it a package deal, or are some just local and state? Are they all part of the federal? And are these contracts for life? I mean, is there ever a time when, you know, farm ownership changes hands generationally and they may have a different opinion? Yes. So the easements are in perpetuity. And so a lot, over half of our easements are federally funded. In the beginning when the state gave that $15 million, a lot of the easements there were local easements because the state is not technically, even though they gave that money, it was more like a gift to start the program. And so they are not listed as a grantor in the easement. So we refer to those as our local easements. And so less than half are those. Now, those are what's something that the law department or different people would have to look because there's other language besides what I cited. There's language about digging, drilling, all this that's in prohibited uses throughout all of the easements. But this stronger language by the feds has been in there at least 2008 or 2009. I was able to see last night. But we can, I'll get with Commissioner Horn and Tracy, and we'll get some more guidance for you all on that. Oh, and then the perpetuity. Yes, so there are, in our ordinance, there are some ways to release the easement if that has their criteria that if it has been incorporated into the urban service boundary after a number of years or the other criteria is that if it has they can no longer farm due to development that's surrounding them it has become impossible they can request release it is a very difficult process for the property owner they have to buy property of equal value, both agriculturally, like the soil, and financial, and give it to the PDR program. The easement that they're getting, the land that they're getting released from easement, also 20% of it has to go to the LFUCG for a park. If there's any financial difference in what they are trying to give back, they have to also pay financially. And the federal easements essentially just kind of X a lot of that out. They require the permission of them and then repayment of the government. So it is a very, it would be a very challenging process for the landowners to try to undertake. Any more questions for Ms. Overman? Yes, Ms. Ware. I'm not sure this is Ms. Overman or Ms. Graves, but are the conditions that we've talked about parallel for the lands under conservancy for the Bluegrass Land Trust? Hold one second. If you're going to speak, I would ask you to come up to the podium. Thank you. Thank you. My name is Margaret Graves, and I serve as the chair of the Bluegrass Land Conservancy Board. The easement terms are similar, except for that the Bluegrass Conservancy easements are donated, not purchased, and those easements are also in perpetuity with no ability to terminate under any circumstances. And then there are also prohibitions against easements or destroying the land for laying a sewer line, for example. Thank you. Thank you. Good. Ms. Overman, thank you. Okay, thank you all. Thank you for the presentation. And I'm sure we're going to have more questions at some point. Okay. So you're going to be around throughout these meetings, correct? Yes, I will. Thank you. Thank you so much. All righty. So next we have Mr. Charlie Martin. And Director of Division of Water Quality. Mr. Chair, thank you for having me. It's my first time presenting in here as well, too. The last time I was here, they had one screen. So when I came in today and saw that they had two, I already started freaking out because I know that we're going to be talking about a lot of maps, not this week, but next week and the following week. And so I wonder how we're going to be able to navigate that. I have some people to help me figure out how to do that, though I want to start out by introducing some folks over Mr. Clark's shoulder. I've got two people here from Stantec Engineers. They are the consultant for developing this study. It was Joe Herman and then Brett Levy. Behind him is our stormwater, I'm sorry, sanitary sewer section manager, mouthful, Chris Dent. He's also working on the project as well. So they're here to help me if you stump me with a question I can't necessarily answer they're my phone friend. Basically I'm here sooner than I thought I was going to be. I thought I was going to be here at the end of August because we've been working on this report since May 4th and so there's a lot of moving parts and we've been going with the pedal to the metal this whole time and so really in order to be able to be responsive to what you asked for for today I tried to prepare at least a primer of trying to explain to you some of the assumptions that we have made in in developing the study because when we get diving into the maps and diving into the locations hopefully then some of that background information will provide some clarity to you again like I said very much of a maps driven and numbers driven type of process it's 20,000 20,000 feet is the best that we could do at this point in time as far as our analysis. This is a evaluation of how to provide sewers to specific geographic regions. It's not about whether or not we should sewer one area versus another and it's definitely not about how to pay for it. We've tried to be able to put at least some level of cost associated with it. I'll talk more about that in the course of slides but the mechanism how we paid for it is not part of the scope of this work. So the agenda we're going to talk a little bit about how the topography drives the system layout, give you a little bit of a sewer primer. As I said earlier the key points as far as the methodology that we approached in preparing this, talk about some potential regulatory obligations that may impact whatever decision is made by this group as far as on the existing system. And then the real thing I wanted out of this hopefully was during the questions comments and discussions some really solid guidance on how we can prepare future presentations that make good use of you all's work so this map that's on the left here there's a larger one in the back and so I'll be around afterwards if folks want to talk to me about it a little bit more but those are the areas at which that we studied there's 14 areas of studied this came out of the 2006 Rural Sewer Ability study that was done prior to the consent decree, we modified it to some degree because topography in our world really drives things. You know, water flows downhill and so that's how drainage works. And so from the drainage engineer's perspective, you know, contours and catchments are what really drive our world, not roads and property lines. decisions made about the urban service boundary has left us with somewhat inefficient sanitary sewer system and one of the things that me representing the Division of Water Quality we're trying to advocate is that we do this whatever we do in as efficient manner as possible. So I've had a couple people that have seen this and they liked my bathtub analogy here because I will try to explain to folks is that sewer systems operate like a bathtub. Basically everything drains from the top of the tub down to the drain or the outlet and depending on the decisions that you make it depends on how well this works. If you want to only serve this area that's here on the left you follow these blue lines which are streams to where they reach a point and then you could build a pump station there. If you decided you wanted to serve both this area and this area then you would do the same thing that you would do one at number two or you could keep playing that game working your way downstream and either building a pump station that pumps it to one of the drains a treatment plant or build a third treatment plant what you don't want to do is have a situation to where you've excluded one parcel and created a situation to where that's sitting now right in the middle of this drainage area what was going to be one pump station at point number one is now three one here one here and one here three pump stations instead of one pump station that's what the example I was trying to give is is it trying to choose a boundary that is around the contours makes for a longer term more efficient system and and here's the example of reality this is really kind of a confusing map but the purple lines are the trunk sewers that serve the sanitary sewer system. So if you train your eye on this is that basically this is the top of the hill and everything flows in this direction towards that green dot. You look even closer you can see that there's a disconnect between the lines as you go right through there. Basically there's a ridge that runs through the middle of Fayette County and everything drains away from the urban core which is one of the things that gives you a real challenge about trying to sewer things in this town if you think about it most cities you go to have a river that runs through it and everything drains to the middle that doesn't happen here and so that prevents us or provides a lot of challenges for us the the best watershed that we have as far as inefficiency is down here at West Hickman this is a Southland Christian Church there on Richmond Road here's the Turkey Foot Merrick area everything drains very efficiently southwards towards the Jasmine County towards the treatment very few pump stations that are in in the West Hickman drainage area over here in North Elkhorn which is Winchester Road and I-75 you see two green dots that aren't very far from one another because we drew the boundary upstream for more of those two streams joined together again like I said that's one of the things that we're trying to emphasize as we go through these maps over the next couple of weeks and walk you all through this is trying to help make the decision in a way that is a longer-term efficiency for the government. The context of efficiency I have is this, is that I have a pump station operations crew. Right now six of the ten industrial mechanics that I have, those positions are vacant. It's harder and harder to find operational people and so when you talk about how to best operate the sanitary sewer system, I go back to what my professor told me in school, is that gravity is your friend. It's free and never takes a day off and so trying to design a system around gravity is hugely important. Okay so here's some of the study methodology highlights I wanted to go through. First of all in a tabular form the colors don't mean anything other to segregate as far as which areas that we're looking at or we looked at that are the largest. The yellow ones represent the areas that gross acres are more than 2,500 acres the blue area is between a thousand and 2,500 and then the unshaded are the ones that are less than a thousand as far as gross acres I only put this in here just to illustrate that we kind of looked at a large cross-section of things you can see from the map that we basically worked all the way around the map but we also tried to look at a variety of different sized areas now gross acres is all fine and dandy but But I learned from the last time we did this in 2006 is that developable acres is really what people want to know. To add 1,000 acres and 999 of them can't be used, you really didn't add anything at all. So we went through a fairly lengthy process of trying to figure out what is developable and what is not. And you can see from the second column there that what we've determined is floodplains, parks, PDR parcels, rural residential parcels, rural settlements, and special natural protection areas are not considered to be developable. I'm gonna stop there at the rural residential parcels because this is a difficult one is that basically for this study we assume that any parcels that are 10 acres or less and zoned as residential are in fact residential. They're somebody's house with their swimming pool and their barn but it's not probably always the case some of those cases may be that it's a much older house that is in need of repair maybe it's just a barn you know there's no way we could figure that out right now but I wanted to point that out that was our assumption at this point in time we were trying to pull those smaller parcels out to where they wouldn't be considered a part of the developable metric that we were working towards I'll point your eyes to this as well because this comes in later flow contribution all some areas don't have any flow contribution but a rural residential parcel might if they're on a septic tank right now and we did decide to expand into that area someday that septic tank is going to fail and most likely they'll want to connect to the sanitary sewer system or the public system so we wanted to make sure that whatever we proposed in sizing would allow for that and so likewise was like this with the rural sediments as well. 15 people per acre that is a number that's going to be important later down the road. I know when I shared this with with Jim he was a little concerned about 15 per acre. That's what we've been using in sizing things for the consent decree to this point in time and we'll talk about a little bit here more but it's a really important number for us is that we decide what that number is and we have to stay with it. The consent decree if anything that's come out of that is is that we have capacity assurance requirements that we never had before and so changing from 15 to 25 and I just made that number up that creates a huge hardship for us because we didn't size it for 25 we sized it for 15. So there's that same table before I had to admit I my coloring gave up on me and an ironworks should have been yellow but it's not but what you see how the gross acres turned into the developable it bull acres after we went through that process and what I tried to really focus on was not was was the reduction so let's talk about the one number five that I didn't color correctly is we started out with a pretty big area but by the time you got rid of the other stuff that's not developably nearly 70 percent of that area is not considered to be developable as far as part of this study I found that to be somewhat significant because in from sewer world you're going to have to put in infrastructure that covers a large area, but if you're only serving a smaller percentage of those customers as customers and deriving revenue from them, you know, I would suggest that we ask ourselves that question about whether that makes sense. The analogy I was using with somebody here a couple minutes ago is that if you're providing a service in a neighborhood, say collecting garbage, if you're only collecting garbage from 10% of the houses, it may not be worth you driving your truck all the way through the neighborhood to try to do that. Same situation here is that if the reduction of the gross acres is so great that it doesn't seem to make economic sense, we might want to ask ourselves whether or not sewering that area is something that we would want to do. So we talked about the developable acres. Now we switch over into trying to figure out the capital cost. we used a proprietary costing tool that was developed by Hazen and Sawyer there are other consultant on this serving as a sub to to stand tech importantly is that they are the same people and it's the same costing tool that we have used for consent decree projects as well so I was comfortable that we were we were being consistent in the way that we were doing this these are capital construction cost estimates no design fees no property acquisition none of of the other administrative costs just hard construction costs that they use their proprietary tools based on I think Birmingham Alabama along with some other informations obtained from Cincinnati so what we did is we took the capital cost estimates that were plausible you know each one of these areas has multiple alternatives only step back second some only have one some have multiple ones but we tried to pare it down to where we only considered the ones that were plausible and that was based on I guess on our perspective but the idea was was to take that cost estimate and then divide it by the developable acres to try to come up with a metric that is what is the cost per developable acre again about what makes sense to you or not if something's a million dollars an acre and something else is $15,000 an acre your eyes going to go to that $15,000 an acre so what we're trying to do what you'll see in the in the final report is table that summarizes that that maybe help you make decisions about which areas you think like you want to look at closer versus that one's not worth our attention now that metric will serve a purpose of that cost benefit but it's not absolute because again I said these you'll find when we get into the maps I mean you could draw the lines all over the place you could make it bigger you can make it smaller you can do this and do that and so it's all it's changing a lot we just put a pin in the map and said that's what it's going to be but it's not an absolute likewise some of these alternatives involve a cost participation from the government in order for them to be efficient and I'm going to use this next slides to explain why you know go back to the map I had before everything drains away from us so if we add something to the urban service boundary that's contiguous with the urban service boundary then there are upstream customers from them and so in an efficient standpoint if I've got an existing pump station sitting at the edge of the boundary then I'd want to get rid of that and move it downstream with the new pump station and be able to serve the whole area with one pump station instead of two now if we did that it's it's proportional in cost because you couldn't expect the developers to pay for all of building the whole pump station for a part of it being the government's flow so you see here at the bottom this is what we've used before in expansion areas is that if X percent of the flow is us and Y percent of the flow is you then X percent of the cost of this new infrastructure is us and Y is you as well so there's got to be some type of sharing of those costs and that impacts the overall cost per developer waker so So here's my map example. This is probably as easy one as I could. This is actually Area 1, South Elkhorn Pump Station. It's funny that Beth talked about military pipe because I'm talking about military pipe too, but not for the same reasons. This is Firebrook. Here's the two ponds that are there at Firebrook. But you've got South Elkhorn Pump Station. Anything that's in the South Elkhorn Drainage Area, which is this kind of yellow shaded, all has to pass through that pump station. That's how it gets to West Hickman Treatment Plant. It all goes through that pump station. So if you add that area and you put a new pump station where that X is, clearly you would want to be able to combine those two pump stations into one where the X is. I can tell you the neighbors would really probably prefer that because this is kind of a stinky pump station. It backs up to the Palomar neighborhood. It's not one of our best ones. But, you know, why would you want to pump back to here and pump again all the way to the treatment plant? You're pumping twice. It's costly. It's inefficient. Instead, you'd want to get rid of South Elkhorn Pump Station and size the X such as it handled the existing customers and the future customers. There's that opportunity of government participation along with development participation. patient so other study methodologies of note I think I've kind of hinted at this already but you know everything that we would like to see as far as if there were any expansion is that there would be the downstream controls would either be a pump station a pump station with storage tank or a treatment plant what we don't want to see is a collection of individual small pump stations that are serving just individual parcels or sections of development. Again that is a huge operational problem for us not one that I would recommend that we do. So I've sat over there listening to Beth and angsted over this slide here at all because she and I talked yesterday so I knew this was coming. We didn't know whether or not you could put sewer infrastructure through a PDR farm We suspected that you could, we suspected that you could. At the end of the day, we came back to what we have been saying as engineers. From a drainage perspective, you should serve the whole area. But, again, if what they were talking about earlier, Beth was talking about in the earlier presentation, is in fact true, that will change the way or impact the way that we serve some of these areas and what we're proposing in these maps that you're going to see over the next couple of weeks. Some areas don't have many PDR farms. Some of them have a lot. They have a bunch. I think it was kind of reflected in that table I showed before that when it shows from gross acres to developable acres, a lot of that is PDR farms. Another methodology is that from all the time we've been spending on the consent decree the last 20 years, we have learned that systems age. And you've got to account for inflow and infiltration as that city ages. And rather than trying to go back and retrofit any expansion area that we would do, that we would advocate that we plan for in advance, because it will happen eventually. Even more importantly is that conveying wet weather flow to one of our two treatment plants is hard. One of the reasons why we've built the storage tanks that we've built as part of the remedial measures plan and consent decree obligation is that upsizing the existing pipelines that run through neighborhoods is very disruptive, very, very hard. And instead, what we've chosen to do is build storage tanks, store it in the area that we have it until the storm goes away and then slowly deliver it back through the existing pipelines. that's when what we're proposing in this and almost every one of the alternatives that we have right now here is use the existing pipeline because back to my original example there of South Elkhorn that is a 36 inch pipeline that goes in Jesmond County for roughly four miles the chances of replacing that are not very good there's a lot of obstacles to that so you would overcome that by building that pump station where that X was and building a storage tank right with it that way you could still use the 36 and not over overload it all right almost done here I this is a lot of busy slide here and I put the stuff in the bottom there just to kind of characterize what I was going to say in the top during the course of this study in the preparation for it I met with a lot of different people different stakeholders and so one of the things I kept hearing from different people what about a third treatment plan you got to why don't we do the third treatment plan this question came up 20 years ago and I said this then I'm saying the same thing now if you start today you might have one 15 years from now there are a lot of regulatory obligations that you'd have to meet in order to be able to cite a third treatment plan I said 15 years then and it's 15 years now a lot of it starts with this notion of this facility plan development you know that's almost a third of the time right now I'm going to come back to that facility plan development here in just a second because it keeps popping up so what if we expanded one of the existing plans you know if we had to expand town branch or or West Hickman they're estimating a five-year effort for that well I am estimating a five-year because this wasn't stand text product this was mine same kind of thing facility plan development would be involved in that. Okay well we're not going to expand a plant and all that we're just going to increase people. Basically there is a population growth limit in the Kentucky administrative regulations that says that basically if you exceed your your existing population projection by 30% that you have to do a facility plan and so here's where that 15 acres reappears again is it 15 people per acre the developable trigger as far as be having to do a facilities plan is about 6900 acres you increase that to 21 it drops below 5,000 my advice I guess to the committee is is that we keep that in the back of our back pocket of knowing that because having to do a facilities plan is hard and it's under normal circumstances our facilities plan was last done in 2000 technically it's expired and part of the reason why it has not been renewed is that we can't get the state to make a decision about the discharge limit for Towne branch Towne branch like most all treatment plans has a wastewater discharge permit that identifies the level of pollutants in 2003 there was a study done on town branch that said you need to change the amount of phosphorus that you're dumping into the creek because it's a nutrient we still don't have that limit haven't had it for almost 20 years now I don't see the state moving very quickly it's been a real impact for us as far as being able to move forward with our facilities plan so the ones that the slides I talked about before and this slide I'm talking about here right now is is that anything that triggers a facilities plan update will most likely slow down whatever process this community wants to have regarding a expansion so my advice is is that we try to avoid that as much as possible the facilities plan situation will happen eventually it's got to but the fact that it's it's linked to this somewhat nebulous wastewater treatment plant issue that that that's a stick in the spokes and then again that it starts involving people that are not in this room or maybe not necessarily in this community I said that I stopped there to say that because here's the last trigger there is that depending on what areas that we choose and how dense that we make them it's how much flow do we send to the treatment plants in addition to the flow that's there right now there's a regulation that says that once your plant capacity reaches 95% you have to do a facilities plan you have to do an update you have to do all the things I just talked about and those red numbers at the bottom are how far we are away from each one of those plants so So whatever it is that we choose, if we decide to do a menu of areas based on that map that's back there and the ones that we're going to talk about, is that as long as we don't send more than 8 million gallons a day to one plant or 11 and a half to the other plant, we should be okay. Everybody's looking glassy-eyed. I had to finish with the hardest slide of all. Questions? Charlie, can you put that in context when you're talking about 8 million? How many people would we, is there a better way to create an example of what that might look like? It's where I phone my friends and get your calculators out and do the math for me real quick in there and stuff. Basically is that the study area, like I said, when you start getting into those large acres, You can just kind of do the math yourself is that if you're talking about 2,000 developable acres and you're talking about 15 people per acre, then that tells you a population number. And I think we use like 80 gallons per day per person in order to come up with what our number is, so they're going to do that for us. Right now, like I said, when we go through each one of these maps, we're going to hone into that more about this is the impact on the receiving treatment plant that this ultimately gets to. And I put that out there because I said what I'm going to be suggesting to this group is that however we slice and dice this, we try to make sure that we stay below those two thresholds that are right there. About 100,000 people. What was it? 100,000 people. 100,000 people is the equivalent of what? Of 8 million. Of 8 million. 100,000 people. Mr. Martin, quick question. So how is the capacity of those creeks established in the first part, and can that change? No, sir, I understand the question. So there's a rated capacity of those creeks. How is that established, and can that change over time? We're talking about the treatment plants. Yes. Yeah, the treatment plants. Okay. Those are established by the KPDS permit that is issued by the state and also reviewed by US EPA. They're based on a whole lot of technical factors. You can expand your plant, and that gets into that five-year thing that I just mentioned there. You can request a permit modification and go through the steps that are listed on there and basically spend five years expanding your plant. When I came here in 2000, they were in the process of expanding West Hickman up to the 33.8 it is right now. It can be done. It's just time. I guess a follow-up to that, though, is the flow of those streams, is that part of the equation? And so with climate change, certainly this committee doesn't want to get into climate change, but if there's a change in flows over time, does that affect what can be discharged into those creeks, those streams? No, because it's not necessarily flow-based. Town branch, for example, that is considered to be a zero-flow stream. So the permit discharge limits for that are super conservative because it's assuming there's no flow in there. During the summertime, like right now, we're most of the flow in it to begin with, to be quite honest with you. it's about the stream's ability to assimilate a pollutant loading. So when we talk about phosphorus, phosphorus is a nutrient. That's what causes algae blooms and all that. And so they want us to reduce the amount of phosphorus that is discharged into the stream. Right now, four milligrams per liter. We need to get it down below one, for example. That is just more treatment that needs to happen at the treatment plant in order to be able to reach that target number. So the changes in the stream aren't necessarily so much of the driver. It's the change at the treatment plant that removes whatever pollutant of concern that you're trying to remove. Does that make sense? Okay. Thank you, Charlie, for that presentation. It's a lot to chew on, and I have a number of questions to throw at you. When it comes to the flow contribution, what is the flow contribution of an acre inside the USA? It depends. It depends. You know, is that a school property, you know, sometimes doesn't necessarily contribute that much if it's got football fields and athletic fields and all those other kind of things like that. But typically, everything that we have been building to this point in time has been for the 15 people per acre, along with a wet weather peaking factor that keeps everything in the pipe when we have a two-inch storm. That's the density model at which that we move at. In reality, and Mr. Duncan may be better qualified to answer this than I would be or add to it, is that there might be a property over here that's pushing 20 and then another property over here that's only doing 10. And so in the aggregate of the catchment or the bathtub that I was talking about, we're still at that 15 people per acre or less. And that's what we're really focused on. Okay, gotcha. In regards to the regulatory impacts of expansion, talking about needing a new plan submitted, if we hit that 30% threshold of almost 104,000 people, Do we have, and I don't know if you can answer this question, do we have estimates on when our population increase will hit that number? Like what year? I don't know if we have, like, census projections on that. I was looking at the planning folks because I would know. Vice Mayor, we can make a calculation of that. I'm not sure we have. We may have that in the comprehensive plan, but we can certainly make that calculation. Okay. It'd be interesting to know when sort of naturally that's going to hit in relation to this We estimate the comp plan based off of Kentucky State data center projections It's been historically fairly accurate But we'd haven't done a projection of when we hit a certain threshold like that number so that's something we could probably get back with Okay, great I'll say a lot of that depends on our land use practices and our goals for the community and how you know if those Things for the future are the same as they've been in the past so it's based on those sorts of trends as well Right, gotcha. And then when, Charlie, when you're talking about the estimated time for a new plant versus like upgrading or whatever, an existing plant, and then earlier when you were talking about the maps and certain scenarios where you wouldn't want like, I might be confusing pump stations with treatment plants now, now that I think about it. When one of the maps you were talking about, I think it was out, let me find it here, excuse me. The map over like South Elkhorn. Okay, I am mixing up pump stations and treatment plants. But to move a pump station or to, you know, take one away and create a new one, what is the cost and what is the timeline? I'm doing something like that. Assuming that the land is available, that there's not a prolonged expectation of acquiring the land, typically we allow 18 to 24 months to put in the piping and a pump station necessary in order to be able to go live. That may not necessarily have all the landscaping done and all that, but it's in beneficial use. a lot of times for us the driver is is acquiring the easements and the property necessary to be able to get moving with it to step back on your thing you're not necessarily confusing them I think you've actually picked up on something here that is really important that X could be a treatment plant it could be a pump station it could be either one of those and in many of the alternatives we looked at we costed out both of them and I'll be honest with you I think you'll find that what I found was is that the treatment plan option for a small footprint like this the cost per acre doesn't make any sense economically it just doesn't doesn't add up you will pretty much need a large area one of the areas that well a combination of three areas that we looked at were along the I 64 corridor and and they kind of overlap each other to some extent but if you looked at all of them as an aggregate just as land and as drainage and basically you're talking about another West Hickman. You're talking about another town branch. I mean, basically, you're talking about tripling the capacity. The harsh realities of being able to do that are daunting and overwhelming, but when you're just drawing circles on a map and doing calculations, there's where the cost per benefit acre starts making sense with a treatment plan, to be honest with you. And I know this probably depends on sort of the size of the service area, too, is what are we talking about in terms of cost for a treatment plant and also for pump station? A pump station is fractional in cost compared to a treatment plant. We'll get into that more when we start talking about the specific acres, because I think I'm coming back next week to start really kind of peeling back the layers of the onion. I wanted to try to make sure I had a good idea of which ones you wanted to talk about first. I know when I did goal four last year, Council Member Brown probably remembers that, you know, we started and worked our way around the clock starting at number one. I'm not so sure that was what you all wanted to do because I'm not so sure that's really a good use of your time. There's one areas that you think you really want to drill down more based on what the council's expressed desires. So if I'm hearing you correctly, this is not something you want to ballpark without having some idea of where we're looking. Well, like I said, we have ballparked all of them, okay? And so, you know, what I thought, this is what I think I know. I thought I understood that there was a desire to focus along transportation routes, the primary transportation route, 64, Athens, Boonesboro. I think there's a desire to try to make sure that we maximize the amount of developable land without introducing other things into it. And so in my mind, there's probably five or six areas that rise a little bit more to the top, where the others that after about five minutes, what I did is like, I don't want to do that. It economically doesn't make sense to me. But it's not my decision, obviously, but I can kind of help guide the group. and then my last question early in the presentation we talked about um the idea of um like cost breaker for sewer ability do you have is there such thing as a cost map is there a map that you can show us where it's more expensive and less expensive to sewer there is a a table okay so but we can convert a table into a map the problem with the map is again like with the scale of these maps to begin with they said even on a screen if i just took just that map and blew it up on the whole screen it's still pretty busy and stuff what i thought we might do again i said that's why i was hoping to get some suggestions out of how to approach this next time to make good use out of you is that we would maybe focus on that map and make sure each one of you have a copy of that spreadsheet so we can kind of walk through that a little bit but yes we have the data we have the the data great thank you so much thank you so you reference the triggers for an either a new treatment plant or the expansion of existing treatment plants for one example it's 8 million gallons per day how is that is that monitored by actual usage is the plant saying hey we've used eight million dollars a day and make 8 million gallons a day now it's time to expand is at the time in which the actual it has been population growth in a certain area or is it by virtue of an urban service area expansion automatically we have to expand these treatment plants because we know it's going to take years for some of these areas to be developed and for the actual sewer usage to become in effect the the flow is a more immediate trigger because we have to report that along with other parameters on a monthly basis to the state. So if the state's doing what they should be doing, they should be figuring that out themselves. So like with my calculation, the current three-year average, I got that from our DMRs, which are our monthly reports, and took the average of the three years. That's the most obvious one. The least obvious one is the population one because, you know, I mean, we all are sometimes not sure about our population and as far as equivalent populations and stuff. As far as allowing time for expansion if that is decided, they typically are working with you to some, they being the state, to some degree. A permit cycle is five years and they get really hung up on the permit cycle situation so they they may start us down a path and we may have to do some type of an agreed order or something like that that allowed us to expand one or the other plants under an agreed order format that doesn't result in fines or anything like that that gets them outside this five-year window because typically if you expand a plant and especially if you are trying to deal with a different pollutant you've got to make the improvements then you have to test for a period of time and then meet per minute that's hard to do in a five-year five-year window especially if it's a big expansion it may take you three years just to complete the work some of you may have heard me say this before in other contexts but working on a treatment plant is hard because you're basically working on your car while you're driving down the road you can't turn the treatment plant off and fix it and i'm sorry just so i fully understand And theoretically, if population growth was not a question, if the acreage identified by the virtue of this process was not enough to say there's a 30% population growth, when would this three- to five-year process start? Would it be at the time in which we wake up and go, okay, we've increased our sewer output into these treatment facilities, It's too much now, and then we have to start a multi-year process to fix that. Is there any risk of overloading these existing treatment plants because we didn't put enough gallons per day in there to trigger an expansion? What I would suggest that we do is that when we finally decide what we're doing expansion-wise, what we're doing density-wise and all that, and if those numbers create the trigger, then we start working on approaching the state about making the expansions as they're necessary that's not the part that worries me about it is is once you get into it and this lingering issue with town branch that they haven't seemed to be able to figure out you know we've they've advertised a new permit limit you have to do public notice for permit changes and they've done public notice based on my recollection, at least three times, and three times they've pulled it back because everybody came out of the woodwork basically challenging it. And so they just went back and didn't do anything. Except it's unusual for a treatment plant to not have a permit, an active permit, for 20 years. Any further questions? Mr. Marks? council member brown thank you director um again a lot of useful information so on the map that shows the pump stations in green are those all pump stations that lfucg controls and maintains yes those are only what we call class a and those are the larger structural um pump stations but But yeah, we don't, there's not very many pump stations that we are not responsible for. We're responsible for about anyone in the, especially in the urban service area, unless it serves one house or one building, so to speak. Okay. So that's what my next question was going to be. Because I thought last summer you had mentioned that there are some that are out there that we have, that you have requested to talk to the owners about us taking control of because they're not working efficiently. But maybe I'll... They might be in the rural area, not the urban areas. I think I said that we already did. Okay. Pretty much we already did. You know, the horse park. The horse park had a treatment plant that was failing, and we stepped in as a government, and basically they built the pump station, and we took the pump station over, and we were operating. And same thing at Spindletop. on the other side of the map blue sky was a failing treatment plant when the consent decree came along and we agreed in the context of the consent decree in order to take over blue sky and we built a pump station out there to replace that treatment plant as a supplemental environmental project along the way inside the new circle I mean inside I 75 behind Wendy's there was a treatment plant there as well the owners approached us about building a pump station and having it serviced through the blue sky thing so you know i don't recall that um council member brown as far as to my knowledge except we have stuff that is outside the air the urban service area already at the airport at the horse park out at blue sky we have those already and we take care of those the only one i can think of right now that's still private is lexington country club now that i think through that lexington country club has their own pipeline that comes down uh paris pike how that happened i don't know okay yeah and i thought it was i thought it was more out there that we weren't aware of or wasn't under our control that he just reminded me of another one see i'm waiting out here now there is one and we're going to talk about that one when we start talking about areas okay okay and then with this map you you were were talking about Lexington sits on a ridge and water flows different directions can you kind of just just generally maybe show us where that ridge is and what direction water flows because I think that may be important for us to consider if we're looking at areas and trying to determine you know where potential residential growth might take place and what treatment facility would be where that water would go to get treated. Does that make sense? I think so. I'm going to take this with me if I can. Okay. You wanted me to use my pointer that you like so much, but I've got a different one now here. If I can get it out here. I'm not using the baseball bat. That looks more like a weapon than a pointer. So here is the ridge line, basically. right there because everything that a drop of water or sewage a toilet that flushes right there goes to that green dot it follows that purple line down to that green dot same thing happens downtown here is that here's uk they've got a whole set of trunk sewers over there here's main street everything joins together and ends up at town branch town branch unfortunately though is in the middle of the drainage area because it was built in 1918 and since that time we've added all of this stuff out here including masters and station so the the trunk sewer the the toilet that flushes here has to come to this green dot which is in front of the federal medical facility and then pump back to town branch that's just the way it is and it's probably the way it's always going to be so you've got a watershed here that's controlled by this green dot that's South Elkhorn here's Wolf Run over here we've got two dots that are cane run because the joining point is actually closer out here to the horse park than here but that's where the urban service boundary stops where those pump stations are at they're there because that's where the boundary is and that historically we've not built facilities outside the urban service boundary unless we were required to under the federal situation here with the consent decree or in some cases where the state approached the government and said we need your help because we don't want to be in the treatment plant business and so there's a separate council approved agreement to serve the horse park and spindle top there's an agreement also for the pump stations that are out here at Keeneland and the airport. But basically when you add to the urban service boundary, we'll use this one as an example because this is probably one we're going to talk a lot about. You know, our interest is not whether or not how much land we add or not. Our interest is those two green dots can turn into one. That's the most efficient situation for us. So if those two can turn into one, I need less people to be able to take care of things. If I have a storage tank out there, then I'm sending less wet weather flow to one of my two treatment plants. I'm going to be sending base flow because you can't use the storage tanks for base flow. So the base flow number needs to stay low enough that it doesn't push us past the 95% that I talked about before. So just talking in round numbers is if this adds 5 million gallons a day to the mix And it pumps all the way here to town branch. Okay, well it doesn't trigger the facilities plan It doesn't really trigger any it just gets us closer to having to do that, but it's not the trigger itself Otherwise if it you've got even more room down here at West tip and because it's 11.5 So you've got it wherever you're going to serve stuff You're going to have a number that is additional base flow and you're going to have to compare that additional base flow with whatever treatment plant that it's going to because it's got to get there at some point in time the wet weather flow can be dealt with by building storage tanks and had to build them in some case another using this one as an example right here this is North Elkhorn this is Hamburg right here and though in those two green dots flow to the town branch they don't go to West Hickman they those two this one this one pumps to this one which pumps to town branch they pump because their drainage goes in this direction away from both there's no physical gravity connection between these two because of this ridgeline everything on this side of the ridge goes this way everything on this side of the ridge it goes that way or goes that way okay so I so I have another well I have another thought but it might be too premature to bring it up, but I think all that information was helpful. And Vice Mayor, I know you had a question. I didn't want to answer it. Please, something out. Sure. Thank you. My question was, you've kind of pointed out and it seems fairly obvious where the ridgeline goes inside the USA. Can you kind of point out how much further the ridgeline goes within Fayette County and into the rural area and kind of which direction it goes? I have a different map for that that you bring with me how about if I make sure that I have that at the top of the list for next week to better explain that I mean basically the the cane run is basically becomes Georgetown's water supply that's one of the things that we work really hard at is that as you go further out the cane run area Newtown Pike Russell Cave is that the stream disappears into underground and then it pops back up and mainly pops up in the Royal Springs Aquifer in downtown Georgetown. North Elkhorn actually is a stream that eventually joins in with South Elkhorn and ends up in the Kentucky River, but way outside our county. But I'll have something that illustrates the actual drainage stuff outside the urban service boundary next time. Great. Thank you. Charlie, you had asked a couple of times for us to specifically kind of tell you what would be helpful to us. I think one thing that would be helpful is if you did get with maybe the planning staff and you all agree on these corridor areas that meet the council's criteria that we're considering expansion in and put your data on those map areas for us to look at. I think for me, when we're looking at those, it would be helpful to know what in your mind would be the most efficient way to get it to which treatment plant in terms of how many pump stations you think it would require in those areas or at the minimum, which treatment plant it would flow to in any of these corridor areas that we're going to be looking at. I think that would be really helpful as we kind of go through it. and just to clarify another thing that you had talked about on the um the trigger so i'm kind of i'm i'm i kind of operate like if my meeting starts at nine o'clock i'm going to be here at like maybe a quarter or ten till it sounds like from your last comment that's why i'm asking to clarify on these triggers for the 95 capacity before you have to do something with your facilities plan at when you when you reach uh five millions of the eight million gallons that you've got to use before you get to that 95 it sounds like we're not needing to look at it any time before we get to that actual eight million gallons used is that is that right see i wouldn't wait and so i apologize if maybe misunderstood see i'm the guy who starts work at seven and i'm here at 5 30 so yeah okay Okay. I would start now because all the stuff that's in the middle of those slides I had in the spreadsheets, there's a lot going on in there. Sure. A lot. And a lot of it is not on our time frame, is that if there needs to be environmental reviews and some of the other things that need to go on. Like I said, I've been trying to get a new permit for Town Branch for 20 years. I ain't got there yet. And so that seems a little bit of a daunting task for me, and I want to start yesterday. You know, I've had that in my budget, my annual budget, three times probably in the last five years. Because as we wind down with the consent decree, we're not there yet, but we're winding down. And to me, it was really important that we had an updated facilities plan that helped guide our sewer planning for the next 20 years. I felt like that was going to be, as I walk out the door, that would be the legacy thing that I would leave for everybody else. And I still want to get that done. Yeah, well, I'm glad I asked that question to clarify. And so how does that, so you feel like that where we're at today, based on where we're at with our capacity right now at the plants, we need to be looking at the next step, whether that is an expansion of those current existing treatment plants or considering the third treatment plant starting today? Yes. Okay. Well, I'll just say for the record and for my opinion, I hope we do that before you walk out the door. Because in my opinion, you're an asset. The history you've got and the job that you've done running our sewer system here through the consent decree and everything, I would hope that you would be on point getting us at least to that before you do walk through that door. Thank you. I'll start by saying I hope we block you from walking out the door. No, that's one of the reasons why Chris Dent's here. He's much younger than I am. So I had originally planned to make the request for the map of the arterials, the things that are in the council's charge to us about where this development might occur. I think that would be helpful to get that to us as soon as we can get it. But the other thing, and I don't know that this is a question as much as something I'm just trying to think through. Y'all can tell me if there's a question in there. We're talking about this like our projected increase in population is going to go out here in this expansion area. And it may, and that means lots of miles of new sewer. but in terms of what we're doing in planning right now is for our infill and redevelopment areas and those areas that don't have anything or that can be better used, we're doing much denser planning. And how do we factor that into these conversations? And should we be factoring that into these conversations? Do we have any idea, do we have any way of projecting how much of our population growth might be in that area as opposed to out in the expansion area. And I don't have, I'm not asking for an answer right now. I'm just thinking out loud. I would like to comment on it, though, is that, as I said before, population increases are harder for a regulator to be able to determine, especially when you're not adding geographic land. You know, is that even in our capacity assurance program, I mean, it's fairly detailed, but we don't know whether six people live in one house or one person lives in a house. We just treat it as a house. There's no way you would necessarily be able to figure that out. But it kind of goes maybe into something that Todd had mentioned earlier that I thought about and then I forgot and I want to bring back up. And it has to do with that treatment plant example is that, you know, some we looked at all different alternatives that were plausible. One plausible alternative, depending on the eyes of the beholder, is that you build a treatment plant here in North Elkhorn and you send all of the flow that's in North Elkhorn to that treatment plant. You've now taken the existing North Elkhorn off of Town Branch and you've reclaimed capacity in Town Branch. That has some benefit when you start talking about infill and redevelopment. You've expanded your plant by not turning a shovel full of dirt at that plant because you took the flow away from it. And we spent a lot of time kind of going through that. And again, like I said, when we start covering some of these areas, hopefully we'll try to be able to at least articulate to you all about what the cost benefit of that outcome might be, that alternative. I got a comment to Ms. Worf's point and I think it's a very good point but I think what could help us is if we're talking about zoning, residential zoning maybe we could use numbers that are the max in regards to density for the units in the bedrooms so that could be something that we can take into consideration when identifying land or proposing spaces. We can't predict what's going to happen with the infill just because projects come and projects go. But if we're looking at residential zoning in some of these areas that we are considering, and if we look at the max in regards to density in bedrooms, then that would help us think about where to send that capacity and that water flow. Just a thought. Good point. Any further questions? Ms. Wirth? Just a clarification, we've been talking only about residential. We haven't talked about industrial out in this area. Is that something we need to think about, or are we ruling that out, or what's the game here? Well, I'm not really dictating that one way or another. I'm trying to avoid making a recommendation on anything, and instead I'm just telling you how to sewer it, but I know I won't be able to completely do that. But, again, back to my comment before, is that whatever density we choose, if it's an aggregate of the service area that you're talking about adding, I don't think there's a whole lot of risk by having 18 over here and 14 over here, as long as that number is in the middle of what or in the range of what we're talking about. I keep looking over at my capacity guy to see if he's clutching his chest over there. So, you know, you could have that mixed type of thing because a factory, a warehouse, Amazon. Amazon doesn't necessarily generate that much sewage. It takes up a huge footprint, but it doesn't generate that much sewage. It's got a few restrooms in it and stuff. Dairy, that's a completely different operation and stuff like that. So obviously when you start laying out the details of the system as far as whether there's 8-inch pipes going there or 12-inch pipes going there, it's wherever that drain is as long as it has the overall ability to serve whatever density you projected for everything that drains to it, you should be okay. And, Mr. Chair, Ms. Worth, you'll recall when you look at the direction from council, there is the requirement that we consider land use for a wide array of jobs. So I believe we will be looking at non-residential uses as well, particularly employment-type uses. Okay, Mr. Martin. Thank you. I have one question. Ask away. Okay. so for next time do you want to go in the order that it appears in the report or do you want to us to work with planning to determine which ones of those check the boxes that the charge that you were given the second option okay i just wanted to make sure i was clear on that I think there's not any more questions. Appreciate your time and your efforts, too. Thank you so much. One last thing. Yes, sir. And it's probably for the audience as well, because I know many people have asked me about this. I spent more time getting ready for this presentation when I came back from vacation than I did reviewing the report. We have the 90% report. I'm about maybe two-thirds of the way through it. I should have all my comments back to Stantec by the end of the week. Hopefully maybe by the end of next week that we will have it out there for everyone posted on our website that they can look at it because I felt like it would make a more purposeful discussion. Okay. Thanks for that. That's good information. Mr. Dunk, you know we have other business, and I wanted to just mention just the attendance piece. I know it's not mandatory or anything. but please, please, if you can, show up because these meetings are televised. But if you are not in attendance, then you cannot provide your opinion. So it's going to be a little more difficult. So thank you for the ones that have shown up today and last week. But, again, I know it's tough. We have certain folks out for different reasons, and that's fine. We kind of threw this out on them, so we'll give them a pass. but we're not taking any attendance numbers or anything like that, but please just try to come to every meeting if you can. That would be awesome. Mr. Duncan. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And just to punctuate the schedule, if you all recall, looking at the next three Tuesdays, we call that building the map. And so Charlie has mentioned that he will have his layers with our GIS layers, and that will help guide you all on that. And we will certainly be prepared to help give you a starting point next week when you do that. So as the chair stated, if you can be here particularly for the next three weeks when we're working on drafting that map, preparing that for public comment, I believe that will be very helpful. And we will certainly ask Charlie and his team to be here, and Beth and her team to be here as well to help guide us on this. And if you all can think of any additional resources besides that that we're unable, that have not been presented so far, we'll be happy to try to get those as well. And then the questions that have been posed to us, we'll have those ready for you next week as well. Thank you. Director Duncan, this might be a technology question. Is there a way, once we have all these different maps with different criteria and things happening on them is there a way to overlay the maps once we start looking so if somebody asked for like can we get the servility map with a you know PDR map all that stuff later on top of each other electronically that's absolutely possible it gets a little busy if you try to print something like that but certainly in an electric electronic version Chris storage can turn those layers off and on and show how they interact great thank you Thank you. I'm sorry I missed the first meeting because we were on break and I was physically out of town. But my question has to do, I was a little startled when I saw the schedule. I just thought it looked so fast and having served on goal four, I know we were up against, it went really fast. We wanted to have more meetings. In reading the minutes today, I did see the word flexibility. so as we're moving forward with that schedule will we have the opportunity to add more meetings mr. chair if I'll be glad to give this a try councilmember Plumman when we were talking about flexibility it was really more in the time of the meeting or the location of the meeting and that sort of thing not necessarily the schedule although I wouldn't presume to say that if you all needed more time you couldn't do that but I will tell you that we have built this around the council's schedule of addressing the expansion by December 1st 2024 and in order to do that and to bring a consultant in for the master plan this is the schedule that we really really need to try to stay on if we can and I know it's bold I know it's unlike most things that we do but I'd also believe that we'll certainly be responsive to get you the information and updates that you need. And I think also by meeting as frequently as we are, this will stay in the four of our minds, and so we'll be fresh when we come back and be able to make good decisions. We're going to do our best to help you all do that. And I appreciate that. I'm sure we all do. And December 1, 2024 is the completion target, correct? And you feel that we have to have this part completed so that the consultant, we don't have the consultant yet, correct? That's correct. Okay. And we hope to have a consultant on board in October of this year, and then that would give them about a year to work on the master plan, designating the land uses, designing the infrastructure and all of that, as well as any new regulatory scheme that we need for this in order to get that back for a public hearing with the Planning Commission sometime in November of 2024. for I think that again I look at I was on the group for at the goal for and I think the some of the perception with constituents out there as we just try to do too much in a quick window so I hope that we you know you will be sensitive and there is some flexibility whatever that may look like because these are important decisions very important decisions and I don't want us to look I'm using the word reckless loosely, but I just want to make sure we got our our eyes and cross our T's on this one Thank you, director. Thank you chair That's mayor. Thank you. I'm gonna echo councilmember plowman's Concerns about that and I think it is gonna be a real delicate balance with this tight deadline The amount of time we want to leave for the consultant and for me, you know in a perfect world I always like to leave a good cushion in case things go haywire. You still have a little time to fix things. But having said that, the seven weeks is definitely very, very aggressive, and I share Councilmember Cloman's sentiment on that balance of having enough information to get this right and not rush if we don't have to rush through it. So I'm here to try to hit this deadline if we can, along with the rest of us. But I wouldn't mind, as it goes forward, potentially having some flexibility. And I think that's – I assume that's a decision that this group can make if we wanted to, for example, extend time or add time to it. Right? Thank you. Yes, Council Member Brown. That's what you get when you put so many council members on a committee. No, I appreciate the clarification about the timeline. You know, I got questions or somebody asked me if the lawsuit that was filed is setting this timeline. And I think the response I got from you all when I asked yesterday is that we would have been on this timeline anyway. And I think the cushion that we're trying to set is for the planning commission and the consultant to do their work because all we're going to do is submit a recommendation. So our recommendation that's going to come out of this committee goes to the Planning Commission, right, and not the consultant? Council Member Brown, it will go first to the Planning Commission, who will then, through a mechanism, accept or respond somehow to the work of this committee in order to provide guidance in the form of a map to the consultants who will then set about on the master planning process. Okay. So with that, I think it would be helpful for this group to have a chance to look over the RFP that we have put out for the consultant, just so we know what we're looking for and what we're asking of them. So if that could be shared with this group, I think that would be beneficial going forward. So thanks for the clarification on the timeline. And I know it's aggressive, but I think we're trying to give other folks that are going to be in this decision-making process us more time to do that work as well. So thanks. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Thanks, everybody, for your comments. I was going to ask for comments and questions, but I think we had them already. Is there any additional concerns or comments or questions? Okay. All right, then. Well, if not, it is 1155. This meeting is adjourned. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. With a little love and love With a little love and luck We'll take the sky In this megalomodern world You've got to try Try a little love and luck And you'll get by Go lay, set it Go lay, set it Go lay, set it Go lay, set it Go lay, set it Go lay, set it Oh, yes, we will goodbye. Oh, yes, we will goodbye. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. I'm not sure. I really should be back at school. I know I keep you amused, but I feel I'm being used. Oh, Maggie, I couldn't have tried anymore. You led me away from home, just to save you from being alone. You stole my heart and that's what really hurts The morning sun when it's in your face really shows your age But that don't worry me none, in my eyes you're everything I laughed at all your jokes, my love you didn't need to coax Oh Maggie I couldn't have tried anymore You led me away from home Just to save you from being alone You stole my soul And that's a pain I can do without All I needed was a friend To lend a guiding hand But you turned into a lover and mother What a lover you wore me out All you did was wreck my bed And in the morning kicked me in the head Oh Maggie I couldn't have tried anymore You led me away from home Cause you didn't want to be alone You stole my heart I couldn't leave you if I tried I suppose I could collect my books and go back to school Or steal my daddy's cue and make a living out of playing pool Or find myself a rock and roll band that needs a helping hand Oh Maggie I wish I'd never seen your face You made a first class fool out of me But I'm as blind as a fool can be You stole my heart but I love you anyway Thank you. I wish that Never seen your face I'll get on that phone One of these days Oh, oh, oh Would you love me? When nights are cold Would you love me? When I grow old Would you care? Living's not easy Take me by surprise And say you're there Would you love me? Give me one more chance Would you love me? Try and understand Would you share My life and his music Show me in your eyes That you'll stay with me tonight I'm lost in love I can't live without you I'm lost in love All my dreams around you I'm lost in love And it's true I can't live without you Oh no Would you love me When I'm in doubt Would you love me Just to be around Would you share My life and this music Take me in your arms And sing my melody I'm lost in love I can't live without you I'm lost in love And all my dreams around you And I'm lost in love And it's true I can't live without you Oh no And I'm lost in love Say you really want me Love is a passion You just can't hide And I'm lost in love Simon, again it hurts me You'll be my reason For starting again Again I'm lost in love I can't live without you I'm lost in love And all my dreams around you I'm lost in love I can't live without you I'm lost in love Baby, baby, baby I'm lost in love Baby, I can't live without you I'm lost in love I'm lost in love My darling Baby, I'ma want you Baby, I'ma need you You're the only one I care enough to hurt about. Maybe I'm crazy, but I just can't live without. Your loving and affection, giving me direction. Like a guiding light to help me through my darkest hour. Lately I'm a praying That you'll always be a staying beside me Used to be my life was just emotions passing by Feeling all the while and never really knowing why I'm afraid that you'll always be a stranger beside me. Used to be my life was just emotions passing by Then you came along and made me laugh and made me cry You taught me why Baby, I'ma want you Baby, I'ma need you Oh, it took so long I'm gonna find you, baby, baby, I'm gonna want you Baby, I'm gonna get you It's a busy day I'm a busy man Got a hectic schedule And my whole week's plan People say I'm hard to wrench But she knows how to get a hold of me I can tell it's her by the way the phone rings When she calls, I drop everything Snaps her fingers and I'm there Hello, darling When and where Climbing ladders, bunching clocks Loving money, it's a paradox I'm motivated as an ex-guy But a man's got to prioritize I can tell it's her by the way the phone rings When she calls, I drop everything, snaps her fingers and I'm there. Hello, darling. When and where. Anytime, anyplace Say the word and I'm on my way Till it's her by the way the phone rings When she calls, I drop everything. Snap your fingers and I'm there. Hello, darling. When and where. The End Up tight, out of sight Really, everything is alright Up tight, out of sight I'm a poor man, sir, from across the railroad track All this shirt I own is hanging on my back But I'm the envy of every single guy Since I'm the apple of my girl's eye We go all stepping on the town for a while My money's going, my soul's all I stop But it's alright, if my clothes aren't blue I'm outside, because my heart is strewed She says, baby, everything is alright Uptight, out of sight Baby, everything is alright Uptight, clean out of sight She's a girl and a girl, I guess that's what she might say I guess all the folks brought her up that way On the right side of track, she wasn't born in late In a great big old house full of brothers and mates She says, no one is better than I, I know I'm just an average guy No football hero or smooth darn one Got an empty pocket You see, I'm a poor man, son Can't give other things that money can buy But I'll never, never, never make my baby cry And it's alright But I can't feel it out of sight Because my heart is true She said, baby, everything is alright Upside, clean on the sun, baby, everything is alright. Upside, clean on the sun, baby, everything is alright. Upside, baby, everything is alright. Upside, clean on the sun, baby, everything is alright. And I'm just clean Thank you. Relax. See the world through your cynical light You're in trouble, you're mad, I can tell You got it all in the palm of your hand But your hands wet with sweat And your head needs a rest And you're fooling yourself if you don't believe it You're kidding yourself if you don't believe it Why must you be such an angry young man When your future looks quite right to me And how can there be such a sinister plan That could hide such a lamb But you're carrying your man And you're fooling yourself You can't believe it You're killing yourself You can't believe it Get up! Get up! Get back on your feet You're the one they can't be And you know it Yeah, come on! Come on! Let's see what you got Just take a big shot and go blow it Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa guitar solo If you don't believe it You're killing yourself If you don't believe it Yeah, yeah Get back on your feet You're the one making me And you know that Come on Come on Let's see what you've got Just take your best shot And don't blow it Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh Thank you. Thank you. Fly, Robin, fly Fly, Robin, fly Fly, Robin, fly Up, up to the sky We'll be right back. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Up, up to the sky Fly, mommy, fly Fly, robbing fly Fly, robbing fly Up, up to the sky Thank you. Thank you. We'll be right back. Times have changed And times are strange Here I come But I ain't the same Mama, I'm coming home Time's gone by It seems to be You could have been A better friend to me Mama, I'm coming home I'm coming home. You took me in and you drove me out. Yeah, you had me hypnotized. Lost and found and turned around by the fire in your eyes. You made me cry. You told me lies. But I can't stand to say goodbye. Mama, I'm coming home. I could be right, I could be wrong It hurts so bad, it's been so long Mama, I'm coming home Selfish love, yeah, we're both alone Right before the fall, yeah But I'm gonna take this heart of stone I just got to have it all I've seen you face a hundred times Every day we feel apart I don't care about the sunshine, yeah Cause mama, mama I'm coming home I'm coming home I'm out. I've seen your face a thousand times Every day we've been apart I don't care about the sunshine, yeah Cause mama, mama coming home I'm coming home I'm coming home I'm coming home Thank you. How can I believe that my heart would find someone like you? You see the real me, no in-between. I had nowhere to hide. You took away the walls around me. Made me feel safe to share my truth I see the heavens open A heart that once was broken Is holding nothing back Now that I found you You hold me like a prayer You touch me everywhere A lifetime just ain't enough To love it true Now that I found you Now that I found you Believe we're meant to be Our chemistry will last forever And through the years We'll see some tears We'll conquer fears Together we will grow Looking in your eyes They tell me I no longer have to feel alone I see the heavens open A heart that once was broken Is holding nothing back Now that I've found you You hold me like a prayer You touch me everywhere A lifetime just ain't enough To love you true Now that I've found you Now that I've found you You see me The real me You believe in me I see the heavens open A heart that once was broken Is holding nothing back Now that I've found you You hold me like a prayer You tell me