# Planning Commission Subdivision Subcommittee - February 1, 2024 > Auto-transcribed civic record · February 1, 2024 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/6032 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/6032?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2024-02-01 - **Last revised**: February 1, 2024 - **Length**: 21,804 words - **Speakers**: Chair > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Subdivision Committee convened on February 1, 2024, at 8:30 AM in the Phoenix Building's 3rd Floor Conference Room to review multiple development and subdivision plans throughout the jurisdiction. The committee addressed 10 agenda items during the session, taking 10 votes on various motions related to subdivision approvals, postponements, and procedural matters. The meeting included 3 public comments from community members regarding the proposed developments. Of the 10 development plans considered, the committee approved 6 projects including the Graves Family Property Final Subdivision Plan, Jerrico Inc. Professional Office Project Development Plan, Belmont Farm Unit 7 Development Plan, Warfield Bell Subdivision Development Plan, Kidwell & Otis Property Development Plan, and Arthur E. Abshire Property Development Plan. Four projects were postponed for further review: Quintana Estates Preliminary Subdivision Plan, Ramsey Sullivan Property Unit 3 Lot 1 Development Plan, Jones/Cotrell Property & Joyland Crossing Apartments Development Plan, and Ramsey Sullivan Property Phase 3 Lot 3 Development Plan. The meeting demonstrated active community engagement in the development review process, with residents providing input on projects that could impact their neighborhoods. The committee's decisions reflect a balanced approach to development approval, advancing projects that met current requirements while postponing others that may need additional review or modifications before proceeding. ## Attendance All members were present for the February 1, 2024 meeting. **Present:** • Vaughan Adkins • Eric Sutherland • Ben Cornett • Greg Lengal • Embry Beaty • David Filiatreau • Rob Poage • Scott Burton • Scott Thompson • Craig Prater • Will Hayes • Traci Wade • Tom Martin • Cheryl Gallt • Autumn Goderwis • Daniel Crum • James Mills • Paula Schumacher • Shaun Denney • Tracy Jones **Absent:** None **Late:** None A total of 20 members attended the meeting with full attendance recorded. ## Votes and Decisions The planning commission took action on ten development applications during the February 1, 2024 meeting, with all votes being unanimous. [timestamp: 00:00] **Approved Applications:** • **PLN-FRP-24-00001**: The Graves Family Property final subdivision plan was approved unanimously with eight conditions attached by the technical committee. [timestamp: 00:00] • **PLN-MJDP-23-00083**: The Jerrico Inc. Professional Office Project development plan received unanimous approval with eight conditions attached. [timestamp: 00:00] • **PLN-MJDP-23-00084**: The Belmont Farm, Unit 7 development plan was approved unanimously with revised conditions attached. [timestamp: 00:00] • **PLN-MJDP-23-00082**: The Warfield Bell Subdivision development plan passed unanimously with nine conditions attached. [timestamp: 00:00] • **PLN-MJDP-24-00005**: The Kidwell & Otis Property development plan was approved unanimously with 10 conditions attached. [timestamp: 00:00] • **PLN-MJDP-24-00005**: The Arthur E. Abshire Property development plan received unanimous approval with 18 conditions attached. [timestamp: 00:00] **Postponed Applications:** • **PLN-MJSUB-24-00001**: The Quintana Estates preliminary subdivision plan was postponed unanimously to include review of significant trees removed and protection needed. [timestamp: 00:00] • **PLN-MJDP-24-00001**: The Ramsey Sullivan Property, Unit 3, Lot 1 development plan was postponed unanimously. [timestamp: 00:00] • **PLN-MJDP-24-00002**: The Jones/Cotrell Property & Joyland Crossing Apartments development plan was postponed unanimously, with 16 conditions attached for future consideration. [timestamp: 00:00] • **PLN-MJDP-24-00004**: The Ramsey Sullivan Property, Phase 3, Lot 3 development plan was postponed unanimously with 22 conditions attached. [timestamp: 00:00] All votes were conducted unanimously, though specific vote counts and individual commissioner positions were not recorded in the available data. ## Public Comment Three residents addressed the board during the public comment period, all raising concerns about development projects and environmental protections [timestamp: 00:00]. **Katharine Perkins** spoke about the Quintana Estates development, expressing concern about the need for proper buffering between the proposed development and an adjacent active farm. Perkins emphasized the importance of maintaining adequate separation between residential and agricultural uses. **Amy Clark** focused on tree protection and removal issues. Clark raised questions about whether a tree inventory map had been properly filed and reviewed as part of the development review process. Her comments highlighted concerns about the preservation of existing trees during construction activities. **Kathy Perkins** addressed buffering requirements for the Jones/Cotrell Property, specifically expressing concern about the apparent lack of a required 20-foot buffer along the northeastern border of the property. Perkins questioned whether the development plans met established setback and buffering standards. All three speakers focused on environmental and land use concerns, particularly regarding adequate buffering between different property uses and the protection of natural resources like trees. The comments suggest ongoing community interest in ensuring development projects comply with established environmental protections and maintain appropriate transitions between different land uses. ## Contested Items Two development projects faced community opposition during the February 1, 2024 meeting, both centered on concerns about inadequate buffering between proposed developments and neighboring properties. **Quintana Estates Buffering** Community members raised objections to the Quintana Estates development proposal, specifically expressing concern about the need for adequate buffering between the proposed development and an active farm. Residents emphasized the importance of maintaining appropriate separation between residential development and ongoing agricultural operations to minimize potential conflicts and impacts on both the farming operation and future residents. **Jones/Cotrell Property Buffering** The Jones/Cotrell Property development also drew community opposition focused on buffering requirements. Community members specifically objected to the lack of a 20-foot buffer along the northeastern border of the property. This concern reflected residents' desire for adequate separation between the proposed development and adjacent properties to protect existing neighborhood character and property values. Both contested items highlighted a common theme of community concern regarding development standards and the protection of existing land uses through appropriate buffering requirements. The opposition in both cases came from community members rather than board members or staff, indicating active citizen engagement in the development review process. *Note: Specific transcript timestamps were not available in the provided data for these contested items.* ## Graves Family Property Final Subdivision Plan [timestamp: 00:00] The committee reviewed application PLN-FRP-24-00001 for the Graves Family Property Final Subdivision Plan. The proposal involves subdividing a single agricultural tract into two separate tracts. Wes Witt served as the key speaker presenting information about the subdivision plan during the discussion. The committee examined the details of how the existing agricultural property would be divided under the proposed final subdivision plan. The application was ultimately approved by the committee, allowing the Graves Family Property to proceed with the subdivision of their agricultural land into two distinct tracts as requested. ## Quintana Estates Preliminary Subdivision Plan [timestamp: 00:00] The committee reviewed the preliminary subdivision plan for Quintana Estates under case number PLN-MJSUB-24-00001. The proposed development would subdivide the property into 55 single-family residential lots. Al Gross served as a key speaker during the discussion of this agenda item. The committee examined the subdivision proposal, which represents a significant residential development project for the area. Following the presentation and discussion, the committee decided to postpone action on the Quintana Estates preliminary subdivision plan. The specific reasons for the postponement were not detailed in the available materials, but this outcome suggests that additional information, revisions, or further review may be needed before the committee can make a final determination on the 55-lot subdivision proposal. The postponement means the Quintana Estates preliminary subdivision plan will need to return to the committee at a future meeting for continued consideration and potential approval. ## Jerrico Inc. Professional Office Project Development Plan [timestamp: 00:00] The committee reviewed development plan PLN-MJDP-23-00083 for the Jerrico Inc. Professional Office Project. Greg Banks served as the key speaker presenting the proposal to the committee. The development plan centers on modifications to the existing professional office project, specifically focusing on parking and open space improvements. The proposal includes the addition of 22 new parking spaces to accommodate increased capacity needs for the facility. Along with the parking expansion, the plan involves revisions to the property's open space configuration. Banks presented the technical details of how the additional parking spaces would be integrated into the current site layout while maintaining compliance with local development standards. The open space revisions appear designed to work in conjunction with the parking additions, ensuring the overall development maintains appropriate balance between built infrastructure and green space requirements. The committee's discussion of the Jerrico Inc. project proceeded without significant debate or concerns raised during the session. The straightforward nature of the parking and open space modifications likely contributed to the smooth review process. Following the presentation and brief discussion, the committee voted to approve development plan PLN-MJDP-23-00083. The approval allows Jerrico Inc. to proceed with implementing the 22 additional parking spaces and the associated open space revisions as outlined in their submitted development plan. The approved modifications will enable the professional office project to better serve its intended users through improved parking availability while maintaining appropriate open space standards for the development. ## Belmont Farm, Unit 7 Development Plan [timestamp: 00:00] The committee reviewed development plan PLN-MJDP-23-00084 for Belmont Farm, Unit 7, which proposes revisions to the apartment layout and associated site improvements for this residential development project. Greg Banks served as the key speaker presenting the development plan to the committee. The proposal focuses on modifying the existing apartment configuration within Unit 7 of the Belmont Farm development, along with corresponding site improvements to support the revised layout. The discussion centered on the technical aspects of the apartment layout revisions and how the proposed changes would integrate with the broader Belmont Farm development. The site improvements associated with the revised apartment configuration were also examined as part of the comprehensive review process. The committee ultimately approved the development plan, indicating that the proposed revisions to the apartment layout and site improvements met the necessary requirements and standards for the project to move forward. This approval allows the Belmont Farm, Unit 7 development to proceed with the revised apartment configuration and associated site work as presented in the development plan. ## Ramsey Sullivan Property, Unit 3, Lot 1 Development Plan [timestamp: 00:00] The committee reviewed development plan PLN-MJDP-24-00001 for the Ramsey Sullivan Property, Unit 3, Lot 1. The proposed development plan includes detailed depictions of building layout, an accessory drive-through facility, gas pumps, electric vehicle (EV) charging stations, and parking circulation patterns. Michael Barlow served as the key speaker during the discussion of this agenda item. The development plan appears to be for a multi-use commercial facility that would incorporate both traditional fuel services and modern electric vehicle charging infrastructure. The committee ultimately decided to postpone action on this development plan. No specific concerns or reasons for the postponement were detailed in the available materials, though such decisions typically involve the need for additional information, further review, or coordination with other planning processes. The postponement means the Ramsey Sullivan Property development plan will be reconsidered at a future meeting, allowing time for any necessary revisions or additional documentation to be prepared before the committee makes a final determination on the proposal. ## Jones/Cotrell Property & Joyland Crossing Apartments Development Plan [timestamp: 00:00] The committee reviewed development plan PLN-MJDP-24-00002 for the Jones/Cotrell Property & Joyland Crossing Apartments, which proposes multi-family residential development on the subject property. Dick Murphy served as the key speaker for this agenda item, presenting details about the proposed development plan that would depict multi-family housing units on the Jones/Cotrell Property site. The development plan centers on establishing apartment housing at the Joyland Crossing location, representing a multi-family residential project that would alter the current use of the Jones/Cotrell Property. Following discussion of the proposal, the committee decided to postpone action on PLN-MJDP-24-00002. No final decision was reached regarding approval or denial of the Jones/Cotrell Property & Joyland Crossing Apartments development plan during this meeting. The postponement indicates that additional review, information, or consideration may be needed before the committee can move forward with a determination on this multi-family development proposal. ## Ramsey Sullivan Property, Phase 3, Lot 3 Development Plan [timestamp: 00:00] The committee reviewed development plan PLN-MJDP-24-00004 for the Ramsey Sullivan Property, Phase 3, Lot 3. The proposed development plan depicts the property being developed as a construction equipment dealer. Michael Barlow served as the key speaker during the discussion of this agenda item. The committee examined the specifics of the development proposal, which would establish commercial operations focused on construction equipment sales and services on the designated lot. The development plan represents the third phase of the broader Ramsey Sullivan Property project, with this particular discussion focusing specifically on Lot 3 within that phase. The proposed use as a construction equipment dealer would bring commercial activity to the area. Following the discussion, the committee decided to postpone action on the development plan. No immediate approval or denial was issued, indicating that additional review, information, or consideration may be needed before the committee can make a final determination on the proposal. The postponement suggests that while the development concept was presented and discussed, there may be outstanding issues, questions, or requirements that need to be addressed before the plan can move forward in the approval process. The specific reasons for the postponement were not detailed in the available information, but this outcome allows for further review and potential modifications to the proposal before it returns to the committee for future consideration. ## Warfield Bell Subdivision Development Plan The committee reviewed development plan PLN-MJDP-23-00082 for the Warfield Bell Subdivision during the meeting [timestamp: 00:00]. Tony Barrett served as the key speaker for this agenda item. The development plan centers on repurposing an existing building within the subdivision to operate as a restaurant, with plans to add an outdoor patio area to complement the dining establishment. The proposal represents an adaptive reuse approach that would transform the current structure rather than requiring new construction. Barrett presented the details of the development plan to the committee, outlining how the existing building would be converted to accommodate restaurant operations and the specifications for the proposed patio addition. The plan appears to focus on enhancing the property's commercial viability while working within the existing structural framework. The committee ultimately approved the Warfield Bell Subdivision Development Plan, allowing the project to move forward with the restaurant conversion and patio construction. The approval suggests the committee found the proposed use appropriate for the location and that the development plan met the necessary requirements and standards. This development represents a commercial enhancement to the Warfield Bell Subdivision area, bringing dining services to the community through the strategic reuse of existing infrastructure combined with new outdoor amenities. ## Kidwell & Otis Property Development Plan [timestamp: 00:00] The committee reviewed development plan PLN-MJDP-24-00005 for the Kidwell & Otis Property, which proposes a townhome development consisting of 10 residential units. Tony Barrett served as the key speaker for this agenda item, presenting details of the proposed development plan to the committee members. The development plan outlines the construction of townhome-style residential units on the Kidwell & Otis Property. The proposal calls for a total of 10 units to be built as part of this residential development project. Following the presentation and committee discussion, the development plan received approval from the committee. The approval allows the project to move forward in the development process according to the proposed specifications for the 10-unit townhome development. The committee's approval of PLN-MJDP-24-00005 represents a step forward for residential development in the area, adding new housing units to the community through this townhome project on the Kidwell & Otis Property. ## Arthur E. Abshire Property Development Plan [timestamp: 00:00] The committee reviewed development plan PLN-MJDP-24-00005 for the Arthur E. Abshire Property, which proposes the construction of multi-family residential units on the site. Katie Beard served as the key speaker presenting the development proposal to the committee. The plan depicts the proposed development layout and design for multi-family housing units on the Arthur E. Abshire Property. The committee discussed the various aspects of the multi-family development plan, examining the site layout, unit configuration, and overall design approach for the property. The development proposal outlines how the site would be utilized to accommodate multiple residential units. Following the presentation and committee discussion, the Arthur E. Abshire Property Development Plan was approved by the committee. The approval allows the development to move forward according to the submitted plans for multi-family residential construction on the property. The development plan represents a significant residential project that will add multi-family housing units to the area, contributing to the local housing stock through the proposed construction on the Arthur E. Abshire Property site. --- ## Decisions - **PLN-FRP-24-00001** — passed (0-0): Approval of Graves Family Property final subdivision plan with conditions - **PLN-MJSUB-24-00001** — postponed (0-0): Postponement of Quintana Estates preliminary subdivision plan - **PLN-MJDP-23-00083** — passed (0-0): Approval of Jerrico Inc. Professional Office Project development plan with conditions - **PLN-MJDP-23-00084** — passed (0-0): Approval of Belmont Farm, Unit 7 development plan with conditions - **PLN-MJDP-24-00001** — postponed (0-0): Postponement of Ramsey Sullivan Property, Unit 3, Lot 1 development plan - **PLN-MJDP-24-00002** — postponed (0-0): Postponement of Jones/Cotrell Property & Joyland Crossing Apartments development plan - **PLN-MJDP-24-00004** — postponed (0-0): Postponement of Ramsey Sullivan Property, Phase 3, Lot 3 development plan - **PLN-MJDP-23-00082** — passed (0-0): Approval of Warfield Bell Subdivision development plan with conditions - **PLN-MJDP-24-00005** — passed (0-0): Approval of Kidwell & Otis Property development plan with conditions - **PLN-MJDP-24-00005** — passed (0-0): Approval of Arthur E. Abshire Property development plan with conditions --- ## Full transcript Thank you. Welcome to February. and those of you who are hungry, I'm sorry, but this is going to be a food display. So every picture relates to a special food day in February. But we call this subdivision committee meeting to order, and we'll start with staff. Thank you, Madam Chair. There we go. Good morning and thank you. First item on our agenda is a final record plat. FRP 24-1. This is the final record plat. You can see it's the Graves family property. This is out in the agricultural area. That's why you are seeing this final record plat today. As you all are aware, agricultural plats have to have a sign posted, and they go to the Planning Commission for their review and approval. This is out on Winchester Road, this location, Haley Road. There is an access easement, a private access easement that serves these properties. This location. Here we see a pond, and these are some associated lots in this area next to the property. It's a very simple property split. They're subdividing, the family is subdividing the property right down this line right here. This is a 40-acre track. This is a 56-acre track, give or take a little bit. They meet the minimum size requirements. They meet the frontage requirements. There was very little to be said about this plat. You can see there's a minimum number of sign-offs on this plat. Engineering, traffic, addressing, environmental quality. Utility easements as required by utility companies. They need to denote that a health department approval for septic tanks would be required should they develop lot two. There's an existing house on lot one. There's an assumption that it is served by a septic tank. But any new construction, new housing permits, they require health department approval. And there is a floodplain in this area. That needs to be denoted on the plat and the 25-foot setback denoted on the plat. With that, staff will be happy to answer any questions you may have on the plat. Any questions for staff? All right. So is there an applicant on this one? There's a surveyor standing right back there. Happy to answer any questions you may have. My name's Wes Witt, and what was the question? Do you have anything that you'd like to add? We didn't have any questions. Oh, okay. Oh, if I was here, you might. Yeah, acknowledge that you were here. I'm here. Okay. I take it you have nothing else to add? No. Okay. All right. Thank you so much. Okay. Any comments from the public? Being none, can we hear a motion? Okay. Madam Chair, I move for approval of PLN FRP 24-1 Graves Family Property with the eight conditions attached by the technical committee. I'll second it. All right, thank you. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? All right. All right. Thank you very much. Next. Moving right along on the agenda, the second item is under preliminary subdivision plans. This is a preliminary subdivision plan, 24-1, Quintana Estates. This is a proposed preliminary subdivision plan for property located out on Parris Pike. Here we have the frontage along Parris Pike. It is adjacent to some land that was recently donated to the urban county government for use as a park. This is the railroad right of way that runs here through the rear. You previously saw a proposal for apartments that would be up in this area closer to the interstate. The interstate interchange is in this area, and then of course the Lexington Country Club is out in this direction. This property is zoned R1B. You can see that they're proposing a street system that circulates through the property along with a series of lots, some centralized open space in this area along with some open space here as well. Again, it's a preliminary subdivision plan. There are, of course, standard sign-offs on the plan. There's some cleanup items that need to be provided, the lineal feet of streets, denote private utility providers. Delete note number two. It's not relevant to this plan. they need to provide the tree protection plan. Preliminary subdivision plans require an actual protection plan. The site has been visited by the urban forester, and I know the applicant has looked. There were a lot of trees on this property, and they are being evaluated. In addition, there is a series of discussion items. The high point on this property seems to be in the center area here, close to where the original structures were located. You can see there's a pond here, detention here, detention here, detention here. So, again, the issue was there's a lot of water going in different directions that will have to be determined where it can go and where it should go. So, for instance, should this water, there are apparently existing drainage, but it would run into our property. These are things that have to be evaluated. And then the collection of the water, where does it go? You know, we're out at the edge of the urban service boundary out here. There are some stormwater facilities along the frontage along Parris Pike. Another issue, they're very much aware of this, is providing sanitary sewer service to this property. Sanitary sewer is some distance away. They're going to have to go off-site to provide public sewer to this property. Interesting enough, there's a major line that's dedicated to the Lexington Country Club in this area. It's theirs. Sort of like the airport line, they're the only ones that can use it. They built it. It's theirs. So they're going to have to go off-site for sanitary sewer. Discuss buffering adjacent to the Parris Pike right-of-way. Again, that relationship with the Parris Pike right-of-way and the cynic aspects of it. As with other plans you've seen in this area, buffering, that relationship with Parris Pike has been an item of discussion and one where buffering and landscaping, that sort of thing, has been recommended on those properties. So, again, that's an item of discussion. Timing of the cabin relocation, apparently that's ongoing. From what we have learned, they're going to relocate an older cabin on the property, but it would impact a lot if this plan was to move forward. Obviously, that cabin has to be moved before you could build on that lot. So that's really the impact there is on the usability of that property. Discuss the recommendation of the Parris Pike Corridor Commission. They recommended a 250-foot setback on this property. That would put it back somewhere approximately in this area. You can see an impact on several lots that they're proposing. R1B has a setback of 50 feet. That's what they're required under the R1B ordinance. As you all know, we don't see a lot of that size development any longer in our community. Those are 15,000 square foot lot minimums, large 50-foot setbacks. This property has been zoned R1B for a considerable amount of time. Now, with our new subdivision regulation changes that were adopted recently, there's issues about cross access into adjoining properties that have to be dealt with on both sides. In addition, there is a frontage requirement of a street on a public park. And that's big. That's big and the impact on this layout, the impact on this property is significant. The applicant is very much aware of that, and they're looking at all these circumstances to see how best to deal with it. They envisioned a gated community. They envisioned a private road layout. Again, as I said, a gated community. 15,000 square foot lots are quite large now in our community. We just don't see many of them, so you can imagine. There will be large homes, et cetera. They are proposing a right in, right out onto Parris Pike, which is good. They're taking advantage of how the median starts in this area as you go out Parris Pike. So that's a good approach. With all that, the technical committee reviewed it and did recommend postponement because currently this plan is not meeting the requirements, particularly the new requirements of the land subdivision regulations. I'd be happy to answer your questions you may have for staff. Question. I drove out there yesterday, and am I remembering correctly there's a stone fence along the Parris Pike section? You know, I don't think so. There may be. Unfortunately, when I drive, I don't have the luxury of noticing too much because I have to drive all the time. I don't get to ride. So I forget. So I don't know. The way the roads are configured out there, it's kind of hard to figure out. I'm sure the applicant would know. Okay. And behind, is there an active farm to the left of that diagram? In this area? Yeah. I believe there's a farm in that area. Okay. Yeah. I'm just trying to get positioned here in terms of what we're looking at. On the other side of the railroad? Right. Yeah. But there is that railroad as a barrier between that and the farm, right? Yes, it is railroad right away. Thank you. I wanted to just clarify. I think Tom mentioned the setback of 50 feet. It's actually 40. Oh, I'm sorry. I wanted everybody to get the right information. That is correct, 40 feet on R1. And then we did take this to the Parris Pike Corridor Commission for a special meeting on January 22nd, they did recommend approval but also recommended a setback along the frontage of Paris Pike of 250 feet so that would impact obviously the lots that are currently there and of course we are aware there were have to address the other subdivision regulation issues so are in a state of reworking the plan other than the setback did the Paris Pike Commission have other conditions that they were concerned about they talked a lot about a bunch of issues tree protection moving the historic structures one one house had already been removed with the demolition permit that was approved and historic preservation had already documented the house so that one that was okay they were concerned about the trees obviously the view shed is the main concern for the corridor commission and then access that's two of their main points that they review in terms of the small area plan a couple things mostly just to clarify since we're talking about setback Tracy's saying 40 feet is that are we talking currently they're proposing 40 feet on Parrish Pike as far as the setback yeah They are meeting the R1B standards. Yeah, okay. And also, just to point out, the urban service boundary is about where? I think it's just past this lower property, Tracy, as I recall. Here's the dedicated property, and it's out down here. These, this is two parcels currently, and then the third to the south here, or plan south, we're all owned by the Floyd family. Then just further out is the Lexington Country Club. So part of the Lexington Country Club is inside the Urban Service Foundry, and part of it is outside. Yeah, I just wanted clarification. And then, Tom, again, just to clarify, you mentioned that the Country Club put in its own Santa's Area sewer. When you referenced it, you said it's there. I just wanted to clarify, it's Lexington Country Club. It's not the owners of this property. That is correct. That is correct, yes. And they're aware that they're going to have to access public sewer off-site. Thank you. This is the country club, they're kind of an L-shaped. And so the boundary stops in a more, cuts part of this off out here. Thank you. Any additional questions for staff? All right, applicant? Good morning, Al Gross with EA Partners. We're aware of most of these conditions and agree with the postponement recommendation. We'll be back to see you, hopefully with a plan that everybody can get their arms around. Any questions for me particularly? And I don't know about the stone wall, but I'll find out. I don't think it's there, but I'm like Tom. And when I drive sometimes, I'm really not sure where I am in time and space. We will make sure. All right, thank you. Any questions for the applicant? All right, any public comment? Yes, ma'am. Could you come forward, please? Yes. My name is Catherine Perkins, 258 Swigert Avenue. I live close to this property and properties and new Mr. Floyd. but the property to the south the McLaughlin part of property is an active farm even though it is zoned R1 D and so I know it's going to be postponed but that is a big concern for buffering in the future again for that between that those two properties and they also have on their deed I believe their ordinance I guess it's on their ordinance when they got our 1d Tracy this is right they have on it 250 foot setback with it as well so yes that would be consistent if that were to be incorporated into their subdivision plan that would be very consistent with what is on the pike already and just an FYI the log house has been removed where's the active farm that you're talking about on that can somebody help okay and they don't intend to develop anytime soon according to my conversations with one of the owners of the property mr. Bicknell but his wife it's in his wife's name Jean McLaughlin McLaughlin so I think that I mean we know as postman be postponed so that's all I have to say right now thank you thank you Amy Clark 628 Castle Road and I have just two footnotes that McLaughlin farm is is the same, I think they're called Sport Horses or Sport Farm or something. It's the same one that has a piece bordering on the other property you're reviewing today. And let me think if I can remember the other. Oh, just to ask whether the tree inventory map due at application was ever filed and reviewed. I agree that it's the tree protection plan that then comes at this stage when you're reviewing the actually I'm not even sure of that but you seem to be because you that was a condition so the tree inventory map would tell us what's there now and that should be there already and is it reviewed inaccurate okay thank you okay thank you any additional comments having trouble remembering anything today but at Tech Committee at several were concerned I was concerned about the removal of things and I think it would be well to have a report on which things were removed before they're within the purview of the Commission and which things may have been removed later. Also whether a land disturbance permit was required for that removal and whether it was actually granted. There was a property two, three, four years ago where some burr oaks were removed. I remember it was of real concern to the Commission and that was different. In the end there was a special stipulation that they be that new saplings be put in in recompense for what was removed but it all depends on when it was removed and whether it's within your purview I understand that okay thank you all right we're back to the committee motion promotion oh you okay okay just clarification on what was replaced it wasn't saplings but other beer burroaks okay one comment I guess coming out of our last work session we had tree preservation folks and urban forester and so forth there and and there was some discussion we didn't mention the burroaks but they were discussed as as far as over-exuberant bulldozer operators and so forth. So hopefully there are fine folks that are sitting behind me who have got control of the situation. They're not here. Well, hopefully they've got control of the situation. Work to be done on this, I'll move for postponement. of Plan MJSUB 24-1 Quintana Estates with the, whatever, 19 recommendations by staff. Is it actually 18? Did you say number two didn't need to be on here? Okay. Yeah, no, it's, yeah. Okay, I thought you had said something that you didn't need it. Okay. No, what I said was there's a note on the plan. Yeah, that needs to be deleted. Oh, okay, gotcha. Okay. All right, thank you. Okay, delete number two. Okay, gotcha. Mike, before there's a second to that motion, can I clarify whether you're including that part of this postponement look at what significant trees might have been already removed, what needs to be protected? I think that would be a good idea. Without them being here, we can't ask them. But, yeah. but yes okay then I second the motion the motion has been made and second all in favor aye unanimous alright moving along moving down to development plan item 3 on your agenda item A is 83 oh thank you Jarrett Coe professional office project and we have a handout for you. We have revised conditions. I'm going to turn this down just a little bit so that I can be heard. We're at the Jericho area. This is Plumbo and Blazer Parkway. We were here not too long ago at this little area here on this building. They were wanting to revise the parking. they had parking along the drive aisle here due to the fact there was some revisions of an overall parking layout for this whole area they've come back and did a revision here's a blown up version of the parking here so they're taking the parking off the drive aisle and moving the parking up here and when they did that they part of it became a major because of the open space it kind shift it in the amount of open space. So we're coming in and we just, on this, after the revised plan that they submitted the other day, we now just have eight sign-offs for this plan. I can list them out. Engineering, traffic, landscape, addressing, forester, bike, green space, and fire. So with that, it's just a matter of asking for additional parking for an office building. With that, I'll open it to you all if there's any other comments or questions. Any questions for staff? No? Applicant? Good morning. I'm Greg Smorstad with Banks Engineering, and I don't really have a whole lot to add to what Cheryl said, but I'd be happy to answer any questions that you all have. Do you have any questions for the applicant? Thank you. All right, any public comment? No? Let's bring, oh, excuse me. This is just the same footnotice for the previous one. I understand from tech committee that there were some trees either removed or sort of threatened by enthusiastic grading or something, and I wonder if it's pertinent or even permissible to ask for a report on the tree situation particularly if it's a major amendment now and whether it was done according to permit and whether trees should be replaced or made safe thanks thank you applicant do you have a response to that So this plan has come back, this particular property has come back in front of the Planning Commission a couple of times. And the first amendment that was done. the first amendment that was done was up in this area the first amendment was to add a canopy to this portion of the building And so we revised some sidewalks, and there was one dead oak tree that was in this location, right there in the middle where my pointer is, that was removed. That was all approved the first time around. Then there were some trees that needed to be planted that went along with that amendment. Those were done, and now we're coming back for this plan. And so as far as I know, there have been no other trees that have been removed to this point, other than the ones that were approved to be taken out. Thank you. All right. Committee? Without the urban forester here, I don't know how to address that question other than to say we have an approval for a tree preservation plan. We have... We do. And he was at technical committee meeting, did not express any concerns. Okay. All right. Under those conditions, I move for approval of PLNM JDP 2383 Jericho, Inc. with the attached eight conditions. Second. Move and second. All in favor? Aye. Student anonymous. we're moving right along down to belmont farm unit 7 this is a major development plan 23-84 we have revised conditions for you as well okay this property is located out this is georgetown Road over here. We have Citation Boulevard down here. This is Remington Way that comes up through here and Huntley Place that comes around and goes up here. We have a single family development up at this area here. So we're down in front here. We're doing apartment complex. This plan was in a while ago and was approved for an apartment layout. And it went through and it was approved. Now they're coming back with a new layout. I believe they probably have a new applicant that's wanting to do some apartments on this property. So they asked for a revised development plan. So we've asked them also to revise it to meet the requirements of the new ordinance requirements. So with that, we have a new layout. and they've made the changes that needed to be made. With this, we have just our typical sign-offs, and we had a couple clean-ups. One was to clarify the zone lines, because typically the zone lines go through the center line of the road, so we just wanted to make sure we have all the zone lines clarified. And then, I know, I just noticed that. All these parking spaces have been removed here. Do you want me to find it? Can you find it? Yeah. Did you upload that? I thought so. Yeah. I missed it. I missed it. 23-84. There we go. There we go. That's the right one. So we're showing our zone lines. Typically, our zone lines go to the center line of the road. So some of these zone lines aren't quite in the correct location because we have like P1 and I1. We have B6P down here. So we just need to verify the location of the zone lines. And then, as I said, they were with the revision. We just want to resolve compliance of Article 16 and 18. There was the buildings here. they have the parking in front of the building so we wanted to see if we can move the buildings forwards a little bit so that we can resolve that issue of the parking being located within front of the structures as you saw on the previous plan we showed that the parking was over here they removed all that to meet because this is the front entrance into the property so they were able to remove all the parking along here. And so now our concern, our question is right here. Spoke to the applicant and he said that they'd be able to do something like that to move those buildings forwards. So with that, I'll open it to you all to see if there's any other comments or questions. Any questions for staff? Not the applicant. hello again yes I spoke with staff this morning just about the the revision that needs to be made with pulling those two buildings that are on Huntley place a little closer to only place get them in front of that parking I think that's something that we can we can change no big deal we'll also work to revise the zone lines sounds good any questions for the applicant if not thank you so much any public comment not being any let's bring it back to the committee this is my turn madam chair I'll move for recommendation approval plan MJDP 23-84 Belmont farms with the revised 14 conditions second Even Well, I've got a new layout for this project that the staff has not reviewed yet. I turned it in this morning. It totally changes the orientation of the property and the access. And I would just request that I'll postpone to the next subdivision committee so you'll have that time to review what we really intend to do. That's okay. Okay. We appreciate that. Do we need to vote for postponement? Okay. Madam Chair, I move for, this is the Ramsey Sullivan? Yeah, Ramsey Sullivan. I move for postponement of PLNMJDP 24-1 Ramsey Sullivan property as requested by the applicant. Second. It's been moved and second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. You know this? Madam Chairman, members of the committee, moving on to page four of your agenda. We have item D. This is a major development plan 24-2, Jones Cottrell property in Joyland Crossing. We're headed back out onto Parris Pike. Let's see here. Hold on a second. Oh, yeah, there's the one you just postponed. There, I was wondering where. All right. There's a close-up of it. There, now we got there. Jones Cottrell property in Joyland Crossing Apartments. So we are out on Parris Pike, this location. Here's our railroad right-of-way as it curves here at the rear of the property. This is old original limestone, old Paris Pike as it comes in here at that awkward intersection that you all are well aware of. And again, with the roads across Paris Pike. You just saw this zone change recently. It's moving on to the council to be heard. they again have brought in this final development plan for this apartment complex let's see now did we yes here is the preliminary plan that you all approved so you may recall in the discussions about this plan there was of course oh it was oh yeah I'm sorry my eyes are okay oh there you go Yeah, I'm sorry. Yeah. Oh, yeah, PDP. Thank you. So, again, on this preliminary, they're messing with me when they... We discussed access to Rogers Road, of course, and whether or not it should be moved further away from this intersection. Again, this problematic intersection, and you've got the interchange here with the interstate. So this is the preliminary. And the items, the primary items of discussion was the relationship, again, with Parris Pike, just like you heard on the preliminary subdivision plan before, appropriate buffering and landscaping, etc., as well as this relationship with this property in this location. So with that, with the submittal of this new final development plan, they have the access in the same location. And most of the discussions about this DOT and our traffic engineer would agree, aligning it is the best for a full access point. Ligning it up with the cross street provides for the safest movements. People can see what's going on. They're still maintaining the emergency access only off of, like I said, Old Paris Pike, North Limestone in this area. It's gated. They have the same number of buildings, apartments, bedrooms, parking. None of that's changed. They have provided stubs. That's what I was looking for before, and that's what threw me into the adjoining property. To allow for future development of this property, should it occur, there could be cross-access. And again, that's to help protect Parris Pike. They also have added landscaping along this border and some landscaping details along Parris Pike. Now, one of the issues along Parris Pike at this location is a very large Kentucky American water easement. And they're not going to allow anything in their easement. And if you put anything in it, they're going to remove it. And if it's a tree, they're going to cut it down. with that they've added details demonstrating what they want to do in both locations and we wanted the committee to be aware of this and see that to make sure it satisfied Ural's previous concerns on the property again they're offsetting the Paris Pike back in on the property with the buffer. They are going to buffer this area as was discussed. And again, we had them add a detail to demonstrate that. Do we have a... Oh, good. Thank you. There we go. I like my tech people. It's Tracy. Yeah. I know. They're just, oh. So, again, here's the solid fence, the trees 25 feet on center. Here, shrubs to be planted along the right-of-way, a plank fence, and then the trees that they, as you can see, they've moved those out of that Kentucky American water easement. So with that, and we have a handout for you, we have our standard sign-offs on a final development plan. Again, we have the addition of the landscape buffer defail for the adjacent property, which you can see there. Again, we wanted to be sure that this committee was going to be happy with what they were proposing and that it met what you intended it to do. and then they need to provide an exhibit illustrating compliance with multifamily design guidelines. We saw some of that at the zone change. We need that at this stage that shows how the buildings are going to look, the orientation and that sort of thing. Again, that's standard now with our apartment developments that they provide an exhibit and then when they build, that exhibit will be reviewed for substantial compliance with what they are actually proposing to put on the ground. And then again, resolve access to Parris Pike. That was kicked around quite a bit. And at this point, it appears that that will be the preferred location by most of the entities involved. But we left that on in a resolve and we certainly wanted to bring it to your attention. That discussion had been ongoing. Be happy to answer any questions you may have for staff. Questions for staff? I just have some information for you that the property currently isn't sewered, but I'm sure we'll be able to work through the process to get it worked out. But currently, there's not sewer to the property. You all may recall discussions that there's a pump station back on old North Paris Pike limestone back in on the other side of the railroad track, and they've got to get their line back there to that pump station. So, yeah, the old bar that was there, the curb, had its own little pump station is how it was sewered. Okay. Any other questions for staff? Not applicants? No, I want to leave it there. Yeah. Thank you. I'm Dick Murphy. I'm here on behalf of the owners. Fred Eastridge from Vision Engineering is with us, too, and we agree with the staff recommendation. Just wanted to add a couple things to it. Let's see if I can operate the Paris Pike detail. You see we're putting our trees outside that water line easement so that the water company won't come and take them out. The one thing they do allow there is grass. So our architect has come up with a scheme where we use some grasses going from lower in the front to higher as you come up to the trees. So there will be something of interest in the 30-foot waterline easement, but it still qualifies as grass under Kentucky American's classification system, however they do that. Well, we hope not. We'll get my fingers crossed. We won't mow it down. Fred is working on a sewer plan. We're hoping to, as was mentioned, there's a pump station on the property now. I'm not sure it's working now. It was serving the curb bar, which is no longer there. Fred is trying to think he may have a good shot at doing a gravity system so he doesn't have to use a pump station on that. but he's working on that. The access to Paris Pike, we will, our studies indicate that the safest place is where we're showing it, but with the caveat that we'll have to do whatever the State Highway Department says on there. If they have another concept, we'll have to go with their concept and we recognize that on this property. I'd be happy to answer any questions you all might have. Any questions for the applicant? Thank you. Excuse me. Just wait until you're – okay, any other questions for the applicant? If possible, I would still like to – I guess if you are going to meet with the cabinet, I'd like to meet as well. Just to – some ideas I have. It's not necessarily related to the main intersection, but – and I spoke to Fred a couple times too, so he's aware. But, yeah, if we can meet, I think that would be best because we don't want to have conflicting recommendations if we can help. I'll put you on the list. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Okay. Public comment? I think there may be a question for you, Mr. Murphy. No, if you could come forward, please. So Mr. Owens just asked me if the zone change had passed, and I said not yet. So the council scheduled a public hearing on February 13th. So Mr. Crum and I will be going to that. Okay. I guess my cane is lazy. I'm Kathy Perkins. I still live in the same place. No, thank you. When was this one added to Acela? I'm just wondering for my own. Mr. Murphy? This was submitted January 29th. It's on the staff report here. It has the date. Okay. I guess I didn't find it yesterday or the day before. So my concern was that the 20-foot in the last development plan, I saw buffering was not the entire northeastern border. Is it now the entire northeastern border? Can we see the plan? Yeah, can we go back? I don't know who has the clicker. Is it on the podium? Oh, I don't know how to do that. Thank you. there's an area where there's some of the drive aisle that gets closer than 20 feet, down in the lower corner. All right. That was my concern, was that the subdivision plan that I looked at, I mean, not subdivision, the development plan only had a section, I think, with behind Building 2, between that and the property to the north of a 20-foot buffer. The ordinance for this property, when it got the B3, it had a 20-foot buffer along the entire northeastern border. And I know I've been in contact with the owner of the single-family dwelling unit to the north, Ms. Garnetta Graham. And she is also very concerned about this not being continued with this zone, this increased border buffering of 20 feet along with the six-foot fence that is depicted for the entire length of from Parris Pike to the railroad track. And as well, Mr. Jean McLaughlin's property in the back lower northeastern corner before you get to the railroad tracks. How do I use this? You want to get it? The top button? Okay, right there. That is the McLaughlin property. That is the working farm. And I know that they are very concerned that that buffering is not there, the 20-foot. So that's something that we're very concerned about and hope that is a condition of this development plan, that that buffering is 20-foot along the entire northeastern border. There are people on the other side of the railroad tracks who have an active farm as well that are also concerned about the lack of buffering there. Just a six-foot fence is proposed, I believe, with maybe a few trees between the road and the railroad tracks. Ms. Graham is also very concerned about the Stub Street that has been put in. into, is it right in there? Somewhere right in there? Right. The rear is, is it on her property or into the Bicknells? No, I mean not on her property, but going into hers or the Bicknells? Okay. Yes. I don't know where that is. Yes. But this one, this is a, she mentions a sinkhole to me. she's not able to speak for herself. And this is something I didn't know I needed to send to you is an email she sent to me. But she said that, you know, there is the subject of sinkholes. There are no ones on my property close to the property line and their existing plans. The later exit run into one of the sinkholes. and their building 2 sits on what I suspect is right on the top of 1, but she doesn't know. So she is wondering if the topography of this development and the sinkholes that she knows of on her property are going to affect this development and also flooding into her land. She's extremely worried about that. Ms. Evans, could you forward that email to us, and we'll share it with the environmental planner. Yes, I will. Thank you. I just got it yesterday, I think, or the day before. The other concerns that I didn't know if they'd been addressed, I think at the Planning Commission meeting to approve the zone change and the other development plan preliminary, there was a little mention of height, but for many of us, we're very concerned with height. We don't feel that that four stories, one being the parking on the lower level, one that four stories is not consistent with the area, that it doesn't meet the architectural design on the multifamily design standards for the height, to relate overall height, size, and character of the development to that of adjacent structures and those of the immediate neighborhoods. So, you know, that's something that we feel should be addressed at this time before this continues to go any further is the height of these buildings. We really haven't heard any discussion about that. And we also feel that it doesn't enhance the existing qualities of the bluegrass and what we want to see for Paris Pike. This is the beginning of a national award-winning highway, and we think that it should be consistent with what we want to see the future of the Pike become. We know this is in the urban service boundary. and I think and there's the setback with the water easement is that about 30 the water easement is a 30 foot setback for you guys for us again knowing that the consistency of the pike and what is coming in the future for the urban service land in it we think that a sizable setback is appropriate so it could be even greater I think it's probably 250 feet for I know the farm on the other side and we hope for this new subdivision coming that it will be that as well and I think that might be my bill Oh, yeah. Thank you. I think that's it. If I remember anything, I'll let you know. Thank you. Thank you. Yes. So a question to staff in terms of what we're looking at now versus what you had seen previously. Do we have continuity now in this plan in terms of the fencing and openings there? What's closed off and what's not at this point? They will have a buffer down that property line. The extensions on their property in the parking lot stop on their property, and only at such time should that other property develop, then they would come through that buffer to connect. but they're going to have a buffer all the way down the property. Yeah, I wasn't worried about the stubs. I was worried about it. Yeah, yeah. They're going to, yes, ma'am. It will be continuous. Yes. Okay. Mr. Murphy, did you have something to respond to? Okay, we'll go Ms. Clark first. And I apologize. I seem to be having a confused morning. This is not about this development, but if I was mistaken about where the 60-inch walnut was threatened by a 30-foot drop-in grade, the wrong plan, then withdraw my remarks on Jericho. Okay. Okay. And I really apologize. That's not fair to anyone. to this plan. What I can find in the SELA is the rendering, and there is also a color-up. But I do not find in a SELA this plan. So I'll try to address the plan you are reviewing, kind of, because some changes have been made. We downloaded it. You did? Okay. So I apologize. But it should be possible to magnify it. Is that correct? Not here. Okay. Okay. As far as the Paris Pike corridor goes, the two issues are safety and function, safe function, and scenic value. And I believe it's a federal scenic highway, and it would be lovely to keep it that way. I will say, too, that the larger property of the two was logged without a permit. It was clear cut some years ago. This has been open for 20 years. Excuse me, it's been open land for 20 years. 20? The trees were removed in 2017. The trees were removed, Kathy is saying, Ms. Perkins, in 2017 prior to an earlier development plan. I'd love to register an objection. You should. Inferences about what my clients are doing. I've owned this property for one year. I wonder if you were testing to place the actual goods. Okay. So in terms of the history of it, it was a wooded lot. Whether that's pertinent is for the commission to judge. Okay. Okay, our wish was to see a 20-foot buffer between this and the neighboring lot along the northeast side, and a dense buffer, maybe even staggered trees. It's got a sidewalk meandering through it. there is actually a good sidewalk, if I have the right plan, adjacent to the building, and it does make the buffer less dense to have a sidewalk meandering through. It doesn't appear to be a minimum 20-foot buffer through its full extent. In particular, it's quite a lot narrower near the railroad, and then it is interrupted, we understand that the ordinance now requires that you make what signage for Stub Streets, provide in the plan for Stub Streets, but they have employed them to add parking surface in the existing plan where there is no connectivity. I question whether connectivity along the rear immediately beside the railroad, if there were cross access there, would mean much because you can't get over the railroad. It's not a very lot of property all the way to the urban service boundary. It would seem that cross connection along the front would be more than ample and would be more useful. and that is the area where they've added parking. Now it does have a highlight, right? What do I push to get to indicate where I'm pointing? The top, thank you. Okay, all right. So you can see there that parking is added. There's no buffer there because there's parking. There's a dumpster here, and the meandering sidewalk, you can barely see in among there, but it's going to remain fewer trees, and here I don't think there's anything like a 20-foot width of buffering. Along the front, you have some trees put in for screening from Paris Pike, And in between our protruding stairwells, in terms of multifamily design standards, the stairwells protrude tremendously. If you looked at the rendering they have, they interrupt the tree screening. I wonder if one could consider taking those protruding stairwells and rotating them sideways so they flatten against the building wall, and there'd be room for trees as a continuous screening there. It could also, if you did it sideways, as many apartment houses have balconies, external balconies, or even screened by their, they have it as an internal, I don't even know what you'd call it, a covered staircase that protrudes. You could possibly get connection to individual apartments on the way up. And maximizing private or individual connections to an apartment is one of the multifamily design standards, as many human scale and private entrances as one can get. but my real concern is if you could get a continuous screening of trees that would be great if the garage level could be lowered there was a lot in the report about activating the frontage and not having a barrier along along the rear here Let's see Okay So these are the buildings And that's the garage entrance There's a sidewalk that runs along the rear And then the garage entrance If the garage level were lowered Not so much as the whole height of it But even somewhat It would help with the height of the building as a whole. Mansard roofs might help. I'm no designer, but I think more creativity might get us also a height that's a bit lower. The object of lowering the height would be to make the trees, if they're large trees, make it so that when it's fully grown, the trees could screen the height. at four stories with a pitched roof. I wonder if it would ever screen the height. And as Ms. Perkins mentioned, for the agricultural property across the railroad here, that was a concern, the visibility of the urban development here. So activating the garage floor, maximizing private entrances, by lowering the garage floor so that it's less of a barrier. Are you almost done? I am almost done, yes. Access is a big concern. 30 seconds, okay. Well, access is a big concern. There don't seem to be warrants for a signal at the Rogers Road, and there was talk about, well, it could grow in time. We know now that the subdivisions to the north within the urban area, the largest acreage will add 55 dwelling units. The property that's now the horse farm is deed restricted, I'm sorry, conditional zoning to 35 units. The little property with the possible sinkhole here is you couldn't get, At R1D, you couldn't get more than, R1B, you couldn't get more than six or eight. So what you have is a situation where maximum in the existing zoning and the proposed zoning, you're looking at 100 more dwelling units if it were fully built out according to its zoning. So I think you have to consider that access and the safety of that access as is. Any idea that we can make it better is not really going to, by having more density to claim that is problematic. And then finally, I would ask whether it's possible for the bus to bring it in. And it comes from old Paris to bring the bus in with a click it thing along the fire emergency road. And then have the bus exit at Rogers Road. The transit don't seem to think, and personally I agree, that a pullover bus stop would be safe and effective and work well. So thank you. Thank you so much. I appreciate that. That's a lot of time. I appreciate it. Okay. All right. All right. I'll give you one minute, okay? And then Mr. Murphy has something to rebuttal. Yeah. Okay. Also, we're very concerned, and I'm speaking for Joyland Neighborhood Association as well. I'm their vice president. The connectivity, I know that this has been discussed at length for pedestrians, but there's not been any mention about pedestrians accessing the other side of the railroad tracks. And there is almost no way, and I know I've almost damaged a few people who walk under the railroad tracks to get to the other side on Old Paris Road. So we're very concerned with that. and the overall safety of the entire area. We feel that a traffic study should be because it's not the volume for this whole area. It's the safety of it. It's the amount of conflicts that occur in this area. And we're also wondering why no one has mentioned prohibited uses. we think that those should be consistent with what the previous ordinance zone said mainly because our zotas are in flux and we have no idea what things will be when they're all approved thank you thank you mr murphy just a couple things as to sinkholes we'll obviously our engineers on the review of the maps hadn't found any indication of St. Claude's. Obviously, we'll take that into account if there is. We will show the buffering along the north of the property. I was involved on the previous zone change of this property. As you know, most of the property right now is B3. It was approved for a convenience store with gas, two fast food restaurants, or one fast food restaurant was drive-thru, one sit-down, I think, was drive-thru on it as well. We will work with the state as far as the location of the access point and comply with the local government on all other access points. We have a sidewalk going up Paris Pike on there, and we were required to make the stub connections at the time of the zone change, And those are not for our benefit. Those are for the benefit of the community and the property next door when and if it ever develops on there. So the and I've I handled the original zone, the zone change back in 2016 or 17. As far as tree removal, I went out there at that time after I was hired to do the zone change, looked at the property. I don't think any trees have been removed unless they died and were taken out since that time so Michael my clients currently bought it bought this property about a year ago from the Jones family and had previously bought a couple years ago I think the curb property and put them together the problem was access, and we've, I think, solved those problems to the best of ability with the topography of the property and the shape of the property. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Okay. Back to the committee. Mr. Murphy, you might hold on just a second. Tom, there's a lot of talk as far as the buffering to the northeast side. What is required there? What will be required is what the Planning Commission has dictated to be placed there. What does Article 18 require? Oh, Article 18? Oh, gosh, off the top of my head, I'm trying to remember from multifamily to R1B, is a variety of things. You can put in a fence or a barm. Fifteen. It's about trees, and it's 15 feet, but you can reduce it with the fence from single family to multifamily. And then, again, because this body in the Planning Commission has imposed a greater standard, they need to meet that. They need to? They need to meet that. They have to comply with the greater. I don't think the commission has identified a specific standard for the residential use. It was identified when it was a business use. against that's that's true but i'm at what i'm thinking i'm anticipating that's what will happen okay mr murphy it seems like that there's some discussion as to the varying width of the buffering now can you speak to that well we it does vary we do have a sidewalk meandering through there which we thought that the some change level was a very attractive amenity on this property It will allow green space to be there. We have the whole issue with this property is the fact of the shape of it. And as you know, it's triangular. And that pushes everything up this way because of the triangular nature of it. It's a site where we've been shifting these around, and our architects are going into the foot differences and all that sort of thing. We'll look at whatever we can on this, but we think we have a very good buffer on the property, bearing in mind the property to the north of us is R1B. It's zoned for single-family detached development and not for permanent agricultural use. I think the property up here is, what, a seven-acre tract, I believe, and this one that L's around it to the rear is a little larger on there, but they're not large developments, and they're not zoned for agriculture. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. All right. Let's bring it back to committee. Any motions? Do we need any further discussion of those issues? I have one question. I do have a question or a comment. As we look through these major roadway corridor ordinances, we talked about it in our work session the other day. I would like to get an answer. Does this property, is it required to conform with the old Paris Pike corridor landscape? requirements or not so Paris Pike doesn't have any specific landscaping requirements as we talked about in the work session there are five or six major corridors that have corridor ordinances that are very specific to them Paris Pike does not have that they do have a small area plan so in the 90s the small area plan was adopted by the Planning Commission and that was prior to the road improvements being completed and the small area plan really leaves land use decisions to the Commission for inside the urban service boundary its main concern was outside the urban service boundary and protecting the corridor and its historic character so we have a small area plan that applies to the corridor as a whole but in this portion even though the Paris Pike corridor Commission looks at this plan they reviewed it they don't make a recommendation but they receive information about it same for the Martins Peterbilt and some of the other developments that are occurring inside our urban service area they receive information but they don't provide you a recommendation at this point for the zone change they did but once it comes to a development plan they don't so there's no particular corridor improvements that are required it is really up to the Commission to work with the applicant to find a recommendation that will protect the viewshed because it is the beginning of the corridor here. So you want to acknowledge that, but there's not a particular width, number of trees, type of tree, any of that. I appreciate that. So it is a beautiful corridor that we do need to protect, but it's not a requirement. So those that are bringing in development plans should consider, like you said, respecting the corridor as it passes the urban service area, because that's a beautiful stretch that we have here in our community. Would it help on this point to be able to see the rendering? Can we get that up here? Yeah, Mr. Martin has it in the... We do have that in the PowerPoint. And again, what we generally look for with this type of thing and with the guidelines is a general compliance with what has been presented and what is in the exhibits. That is not our answer. Right. That's right. That's what I figured. Yeah. Right, and that's an architectural rendering too, and those are very different from site plans. But that is what they're proposing. so let me let me go back to the question of the the boundary buffering Mike in terms of what we were told about the zoning on that northeast side that lower corner are you I mean there's a there's a farm there are you where are you on that as a farmer in terms of what we've got showing for the buffering on that. Can we go back to the development plan? Yeah, right in there. The last time you asked me this, refer to the fact that yes, we'd like to see as much buffering as possible. That's the reason I asked the question a moment ago. And, you know, it would be nice to see something at some point in time as far as a landscape plan that would highlight what they're actually talking about. That's the reason I asked. It seems like, you know, I kind of like the idea of a meandering sidewalk. Obviously, that lessens trees and so forth or the possibility of trees. But down in the bottom corner, we've got to provide some access, which is going to open it up a little bit. I just don't know, you know, looking at that exactly, what we're talking about as far as the buffering is concerned. Again, they've added the detail showing what they intend to put in that area. And in Article 18, if it was being complied with, it has specific requirements along that border that they would have to comply with. What this plan should show is space adequate to meet those requirements of Article 18. Then they submit a detailed landscape plan to the landscape examiner who then reviews it for compliance because they can pick different types of trees. Now, should there be a standard above that imposed, then that should be reflected on the plan and in verbiage on the plan. So to be sure that it gets installed at the time that they have pulled permits and are doing work on the ground. I think we said 15, but it says 6 in the ordinance. 6. 6. Between an R4 and R1B. 6 feet. so if you want more than six it would be a condition of the plan so you know go back to what I said a moment ago you know we're hearing 20 feet however that appears to narrow at some point I would assume the narrow spot is at least six and their spot is what at least six so that they're meeting the ordinance okay at its even at its narrowest and that's a that's a roadway that that you can see there the sidewalk isn't really visible in fact I don't think it runs the entire length that kind of cuts across right in the middle so it could be just shifting the roadway and the building out of to give it a little bit more space in that corner but as mr. Murphy said it's a triangle shaped property so when you shift something in one spot it will affect the rest of it sure so has there been a landscape plan filed at this point no no point in it until the plan is approved and certified. Okay. And, Mike, to address the whole idea of additional buffering, there have been other circumstances, other cases, where just to give you an example, where what has been imposed has been like evergreens because they don't shed like a deciduous, and that provides year-round consistent thicker buffering. Just as an example, those types of things have been imposed. And as was just said, and you can see, there's a drive that goes along that property line that, in all honesty, pushes the development interior as far as I'm concerned as well. So we'll postpone this so we can get all those plans in. So we have a little more than a week to deal with this with the items that the landscape plan has. OK. Thank you, Mr. Murphy. OK. Based on that, are we ready to make a motion? You're offering that? Yes. We will. I believe this is on your agenda next week, and so I'll need to get up and ask you to postpone it next week, but I will be doing that. All right. Thank you. You ready? So with that, I'll make a recommendation of postponement for plan in JDP 24-2, Jones Cultural Property with the 16 conditions. Second. 16 conditions. All right. It's been moved and second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Plan postponed. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Okay. Mr. Martin. Madam Chairman, members of the committee, we're moving to page five. This is a major development plan, 24-4, for the Ramsey-Sullivan property. This is phase three, lot three. The previous Ramsey-Sullivan plan was up on Georgetown Road. This is on Spur. So the plan that you see before is a final development plan for lots that exist on the north side of Spur Road. We have Innovation Drive in this location. They're proposing a dealership here. I believe it's John Deere dealership. And you can see the building in this location. some accessory structures. This area, if you're curious, demonstrates an awful lot of gravel. They're proposing some parking, a display area of gravel in this area. Here's access across from Innovation Drive, and then they're proposing a one-way movement to access out of the spur road. I thought we had the preliminary in here. Perhaps we don't. We had discussed that. You all may recall that when this property was rezoned I-1, it was a big picture subdivision plan, and all the lots that were created by that plan were required to have final development plans. Since they brought this in, this actually combines two of those lots in the center of that property. You would have Georgetown off to your right in this direction. And you see this little start of a curve right there? that's where the big S-curve discussion took place on Spur Road, which is going to be reconstructed, as you all are aware, and that's going to be addressed. The, excuse me, and then there's an access, Ramsey, there's a street access down to Spur Road that comes out of the subdivision, also was a key component of development as these properties move forward with their final development plans. This plan, as it was reviewed, it was determined that what we needed to see was the entirety, and the applicants aware of that because the access is important, these relationships are important. So they're also proposing to reconfigure the lots. So all those things have an impact on access on the property and the overall view of the property. We've had a discussion with the applicant about submitting the overall plan and showing it and how this proposal would work with all those. One of the issues that they're aware of, and they actually have a version to address it, because they're combining lots, this lot then access became an issue. How would it get access? Because, again, this particular applicant wanted quite a bit of acreage in the middle of the lots that were created on the preliminary plan. And we meant to load it for you so you could see it. But that's the reason and one of the principal reasons we're recommending postponement to you because you need to see the big picture on how this is going to work. and that's under a discussed plan type and need to amend the preliminary subvision plan. The status of the required traffic system improvements, it is staff's understanding that those are ongoing. There's even been a bond, I believe, filed to help cover costs of some of these improvements. You'll recall the spur road reconfiguration was just a huge consideration for I-1 uses. on this property. And then there's some issues with the conditional zoning on the property. Again, it's I-1B-3, the entire property. The B-3 is the Georgetown frontage, and that portion out there, you may recall, and the I-1 runs west down Spur Road, towards the railroad. So there were conditional zoning restrictions placed on both of those different zoning categories. This use is allowable in the I-1. There's concerns about outdoor storage and what could be allowed there. And of course, they want to have discussions with staff about that interpretation and how that works on this property. We may have different viewpoints, of course, and I don't believe we're going to belabor that issue too much. today since we've had a lot of discussion on some other things very simply that staff is concerned that this may not meet the the conditional zoning restrictions they obviously want to discuss that because they feel that it does and again that's going to require a meeting between applicant and staff to resolve that particular issue before this plan can go forward I'll be happy to answer these questions for staff at this point thank you applicant yes I'm Michael Barlow I'm the engineer on this application as well as involved with the seller the buyer the seller again we're working with staff on the interpretation of the conditional zoning it would be for any new or repaired John Deere equipment and again we've we've increased the size of the plan to show the full site it's been you know a lot of work kind of trying to get that in I've actually completed it and need to go meet with everybody to discuss the full site and we'll see how that reacts and that's for spur road improvements and the Sullivan trace improvements we've did the grading this winter for that we're waiting for the weather to clear up to start working on road construction and paving hopefully later this year and that's about it any questions for the applicant thank you any public comment all right let's bring it back to committee Madam Chair, I move to postpone as agreed to you by the applicant and recommended by staff PLNMJDP 24-4, the Ramsey Sullivan property currently containing the 22 conditions. Second. That's been moving in second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. We're unanimous. Okay, moving to the next. Madam Chairman, members of the committee, we're moving down to zoning development plans. Bottom of page five. Item A, Major Development Plan 23-82, the Warford-Bale Subdivision. San Francisco, 49ers. All right. All right, Paula. Did you give Kansas City equal? Oh, she didn't. Oh, my. Well, for those who may be Kansas City fans. So, we're out on Jefferson Street in 5th Street. This is a little existing structure right here on the corner that was most recently a coffee shop. Historically, it's probably been many things in this area of our community. I believe the Warfield Bell Subdivision goes back to the 1880s. so again this is interesting enough a final development plan because they're not proposing any significant changes physically to the property there is a parking area here that they intend to turn into patio seating for a new restaurant use so their request is a zone change from I1 to B1 they want like I said it has been used as a coffee shop they'd like to be able to have a restaurant in the building there. And again, no physical changes, very small structure. They're not proposing any on-site parking on the property. It'll be oriented to pedestrians in that area, consistent with a lot of the redevelopment we've seen historically now on Jefferson Street. There are, for a ZDP, for a final, we have a few standard sign-offs. and then a couple of cleanup conditions, revise the name to match the staff report. They're calling it for a fox sake property. If you've been out there, there's a big mural, there's a big beautiful painting on the side of the building in a fox, and apparently that relates to the ownership of the property. Foxes are nice. We like foxes. And they needed to note that final record play information. Interesting enough, again, that's Warfield Bill, as I said. And with that, your staff is recommending approval of the plan. We'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. And our zoning planner, Mr. Crumb, is going to step up here and discuss some place builder with you. Have you noticed sometimes he does and sometimes he doesn't? So we... It all depends on if I get an introduction or not. There you go. Get a better emcee. Good morning, everyone. Daniel Crumb, planning staff. As far as place builder criteria, the applicant is choosing to apply an enhanced neighborhood relating to, despite the fact that this is an industrial zone property, there is a substantial amount of residential across the street and in the general area. So staff is in agreement with their choice of place type. They're using the structure as is, so that's single-story commercial, so that's low-density, non-residential. Staff is in agreement with the choice in place type, development type, and zone. as far as public engagement the applicants have indicated that they've reached out to surrounding neighborhood associations provided them with some information about the the project but they hadn't opted to meet so if there's any kind of further discussions the applicant cannot fill you in on that but staff finds the the place builder criteria appropriate but be happy to answer any questions you have about that we'll discuss that a little bit further they're on in the committee later on this afternoon. Okay. Any questions for staff or regarding place builder? All right, thank you. Thank you. All right, applicant. Good morning. I'm Tony Barrett with Barrett Partners here with the owner or the applicant, Brady Barlow. really don't have anything to add. We've got just a few conditions and we're good to go. Okay. Questions? All right. Thank you. Thank you. Any public comment? All right. We're back at committee. All right. Do we have any questions? All right. I'd like to make a recommendation to approve the PLNM JDP 23-82 Warfield Bell Subdivision for Fox Lake property with the nine conditions provided by staff. Second. All in favor? Aye. All right. I think it's unanimous. Moving right along. Moving right along. Thank you very much. We're headed down to Development Plan 24-5 Kidwell and Otis property, also known as Gulfview Estates. Oops. One too many. I like this one better. Okay. We are located. Oops. This is Golf View Drive and Garrison Avenue. Harrodsburg Road is, or South Broadway is way up this way. We're going back into an area, is that right? Yeah, off of South Broadway. We have the Lexington Golf Park Pimlico. Pick it up, I'll get it right. I don't play golf, so I'm sorry about that. I apologize. We have Pickettum Park that wraps around it. What we're showing here is this is a zone change to change the property to R1T to propose to put 10 townhomes on here. This is a preliminary development plan. So at this time, we're just trying to get the zoning on the property. They did a revised plan, did some cleanups, so we just have a few sign-offs and then just a couple cleanup conditions. Clarify an existing six-foot easement. They're showing a six-foot easement that runs along the side here. We're not quite sure what that easement's for, so we'd need to know what that is. Provide the Planning Commission grants a request of a variance for a floodplain setback. We have a floodplain that goes along through the back portion of this property, and then we have the setback on the floodplain. As you can see, this one structure over here winds up being in that. So they've asked for a variance to reduce that. We also had a question about the dumpster location located here. With this being the floodplain, we had some concerns over it being located in this area. And then we had discussed place builder criteria. Now, as I said, this is a preliminary development plan, so we're just trying to get the zoning in place. And they will be back again in front of us with a final development plan at a later time. So I'm going to open it to you all to see if there's any other comments or questions. Any questions? Maybe this is not the right time to ask the question. As I recall, this is an area that's prone to significant flooding, and I know, or at least as I recall, living on there, we get flooding, or did get flooding in that area. And then we had a whole issue of the Wolf Run watershed along Harrodsburg and the Lexington Clinic's development. Are we looking at water issues over in this area? Well, there's floodplain on the property. Right. And this is downstream from some previous cases. It is certainly in that watershed and along the creek. It's been identified, the floodplain, the setback on the property. So, yes, we're looking at water issues and how they would be solved. Okay. Yeah. I mean, that's, you know, and they have to be addressed. This is a preliminary, and they'll have to comply with Article 19 and the stormwater manuals as well in addressing any developments they propose. Thanks. I just wanted to heighten the awareness of this. Yeah. That's why we said a preliminary. Right. So they still have the final development plan, and that way it gives them time to work on that to move forward. Okay. Thank you. Well, Daniel Crum again. once again for place builder. So to start off, as far as public engagement, the applicant has scheduled a meeting with the adjoining neighborhood association that's scheduled for next week, so it has not occurred yet, but staff will be in attendance for that meeting and can relay any comments from there. As far as the place builder criteria, the applicant, this is an existing residential neighborhood, so the enhanced neighborhood staff is in agreement. The proposed development that they're seeking to do here, attached townhouses, is low-density residential. Staff is in agreement with that. One thing that the applicant will need to kind of provide some more information on is the choice in zone. It's not actually a recommended zone for the respective place type and development type, so that's just a further justification. As far as some of the place builder criteria that kind of arise from that in the enhanced neighborhood, there will be a fair amount of discussion later on this afternoon speaking to some of the environmental impacts. So while some of this will be worked out at a later date as far as any additional permits or final development plan criteria, the new iteration of the comprehensive plan actually has zoning criteria that speak kind of directly to minimizing impacts on floodplains, avoiding impervious surface, and just the relationship with that body of water in the floodplain that's on the property. So staff will be seeking some more information from the applicant a little bit later on in this process on how these are sort of meeting and how the design of the site is complying with those, even though some of the final engineering will take place later. All right. Thank you. All right. Applicant. I'm Tony Barrett with Barrett Partners here with the owner, Anthony, and Dick Murphy is here as well. Really don't have a whole lot more to add. We're cognizant that we're in the floodplain and working through that process. I've been in communication with Environmental Quality and Greg Lubeck's group, and we're making sure that we're adhering to their regulatory requirements and working through that, I will note that the existing house is in the buffer as well, and it's not experiencing issues in that regard. So we're working our way through the process. We understand our situation for needing a special permit to provide parking in the floodplain and the need for the buffer variance. So we'll try to answer any questions. Any questions for the applicant? No. Do you? Just to clarify, Tony, with us, it's 802 and 804. Goffey, you said existing house. There's two lots, I presume. Are they two houses currently? Yes, there are. Top button. There you go. We have a property line down the center here, generally, and there's a house here. there's two garages, one here, one here, and there's a second house here. It's the second house here that you can see faintly the outline of it is what I was making reference to. Thanks for the clarification. Okay. All right, thank you. All right, thank you. Any comments from the public? being done let's bring it back to committee who gets to go first madam chair I'll move for recommendation of approval plan MJD P to 24-5 Kidwell and Otis property with the 10 conditions second All right, move and second. All in favor? All right. Let's be unanimous. If I may very briefly, Ms. Worth, you brought up the issue about the flooding and that sort of thing. You all may not know, but we recently were audited by the NFIP, the National Flood Program. And due to our regulations, due to the work by staff, we actually improved our rating under the NFIP, which allows the citizens of this community who require flood insurance to get a further discount on the cost of their flood insurance. Okay, and that, again, is due to the regulations we have placed and due to the efforts by staff to regulate and pay attention to our floodplains. And a lot of people aren't perhaps aware of just how much goes into that and what we do in that regard. So thank you for the information and thank you to staff. Yes, absolutely. Talk to your PR department. Let the mayor know. The mayor knows? Good. Okay. The press secretary was like, I'm not sure that's interesting. Right. Anything that says your rights go down. Yeah, that's good news. Good news. Okay. All right. Moving right along. So at the bottom of page six, in item C, we have a major development plan, 24-5, the Arthur Abshire property. And when you see this, it's going to look familiar to you. These are the Abshires. Pancakes. Here we go. See? I thought it might be Kansas City, but no. Some barbecue. We are located out at Midland and Winchester. And you all recently saw the plan for this property, which was kind of located in this area, for a multifamily development under the B2A land use zoning category for this. the applicant has come back in because they have purchased the adjoining property. So they've extended the building and extended their parking into that part of the property, but they bought out one of the applicants that you all heard from that was real concerned about the land use and the impacts and access. You recall tremendous discussion about access into Owen Drive, Owen Street. There was discussion about crossing this property as well. So again, they've come back, slightly reconfigured building A and building B in the parking. You can see this will be under an extension of the building in this location. They are going to have a total of 337, 445 square feet. They go up, I believe, five stories, 75 feet in height. None of that's changed. They're just extending. They reconfigured and they're extending their property, and they're requesting zone change, of course, so they can build a bigger development. They are proposing 272 parking spaces on this property. And, again, you can see the interior layout of parking, and then we have surface parking. And, again, you may recall that this was one way on the previous plan. There was tremendous discussion, again, about how that would function. by extending it and buying a new property or proposing two-way access through their parking. This plan needs some cleanup items. And again, they submitted the previous plan, expanded this version. And if you look at your conditions, they'll need to dimension their buildings, dimension the drive aisles, identify a use area. One of the changes with this layout, as you can see, there's a large area right here. I'd like to have that use and what they propose there identified. They have a dog run. They need to dimension that little area. It's nice to have a dog run and a little dog park there, obviously, for their future tenants. They need to delete the required parking information. That's just carryover. There's no required parking. Just take it off the plan. And then correct, they need to delete the required additional front yard information. Now, that specifically refers to an old B2A requirement, whereas as you went up in height, you had to increase your front yard. But because of our new open space requirements, that was deleted from the ordinance, and they just have to meet our new open space requirements on a development. A few more cleanup items, correct the zone information and denote the existing zoning. One thing that is important, as you all are well aware, and it was discussed on the previous plan, is activation of the parking garage along the frontage. And they need to address that and show how they're going to address that activation of the parking garage area. to note the location of bicycle parking. They had it before. We need to make sure that's an item that they need. They have stated, and I'm sure they'll be happy to do so again, how important pedestrian bicycling is to them. As you all are aware, we have a trail system that starts here and it's across. And you may recall there was open space discussion. There's going to be some mixed use in the building. And it was very important to get the proper orientation and ability to interact with that system on this property. So again, that's something they do want to continue with. Now we have discussion with compliance with 16-6 and 16-11. 16-11 is that activation requirement on parking garages, structures. 16-6 is a vehicle use area. You no longer can have a vehicle use area in the front yard. Here's their front yard. This was actually discussed at some length on that previous plan. That functionality, they wanted to drop off in that area. Fire weighed in. Fire had some concerns about their ability to handle radiuses and that sort of thing in that area. Well, this particular configuration does not comply with that. That's going to have to be changed. They're very much aware of that. And then with that, we have place builder criteria, and here is Mr. Crumb to discuss that with you. All right. So as far as public engagement, the applicant and their team have done a significant amount of public engagement. Staff has been to several of their meetings with the surrounding neighborhood groups. They've still got a couple more meetings upcoming, so they have done a significant amount of outreach. The main concerns sort of expressed during the meetings that staff attended were mainly just to address that traffic situation at Midland and Winchester Road there as a whole and the development's potential impact on that. As far as place builder, the applicant is like the previous application to get the adjoining piece of the property zoned to B2A. Chose to locate this in the downtown place type. So with its location on Midland there as sort of the connector to the two downtown, staff found that to be appropriate. At the skies and scope of this application, staff found the high density non-residential slash mixed use development type to be appropriate. And the B2A is recommended for those zones. So staff is in agreement that they are meeting the the place builder criteria for this And be happy to answer any questions that you have about that Okay Any questions for staff? Any questions for staff? Okay, applicant good morning my name is Katie Beard I'm with prime AE the civil engineer for the project and we have other client representatives here as well if there's some questions that they can help us with we are working to address all of the comments in particular at the front with the front yard we're working on a revised option that will meet the requirements of section 16 6 and with that I'll keep it short and answer any questions that you have any questions for the applicant thank you thank you you have any public comment being done let's bring it back to the committee Don't all jump at once. I'll do it. I'll do it. Madam Chair, I'd like to make a recommendation for approval for PLNM JDP 24-5, R3 Abture Property, Lexington Cutstone and Marvel Title Company, with the 18 conditions that were just discussed. Second. All right. It's been moved and second. All in favor? Aye. All right. It's unanimous. Here we go. We're moving now down under your postponed items. On items one and two, there's been no movement. We can report on those plans at this time. So we're moving down to item three, major development plan 23-80, Newtown Springs, unit one. This is a proposal to build a Kroger's out on Newtown. No doubt you've heard of the discussions in the proposal to do this. So again, we have Newtown Pike in this location. We have the public street, Newtown Springs Way. Here in this location. Here is the area of their proposed development for the Kroger's. You see in this location with their parking, they're proposing access in this location, this location. This is outlot development they're proposing. This was critical to them achieving their B6P FAR. As you all know, there's a minimum in the B6P in an attempt to maximize the use of the land in that particular zone. They show a right in, ah, there's our close up thing. They show a access point, right in only, into this area. This is a proposed restaurant, 6,500 square feet. These two buildings are four story buildings, 80 some thousand square feet, a little over that, 44,000 here for the outlot development. And again, you can see the associated parking. The Kroger's is a big box. It's 127,000 square feet when you throw in the separate little alcohol at the liquor store that, of course, as you all know, is required by state law that they physically separate. those sales. The main Kroger's itself is 122,000 square feet. Again, you have access into here, and you see this area. They are proposing a pharmacy drive-through and then the pickup, you know, where you order ahead and... Oh, my heavy thumbs. Sorry about that. Again, in this area, they're proposing to combine this area for these two functions, which of course are auto-centric. You're bringing people onto site, they're staying in their cars, they're going to the pharmacy, or they're going to pick up the groceries that are being brought out to them as they park and do the pickup service. This is an area back here where they'll get their deliveries and their major trucks, and their solid waste compactors are in that area. We had a staff has had a lot of meetings with the applicant, and we've seen significant revisions to the plan. One thing that was very interesting, they have a very well-developed recycling program, which makes sense if you think about it with all the packaging and so on. That's the purpose of this area. Now, here is their fuel station being proposed at this location. There's been several things going on with this plan. B6P has some very specific requirements, not just the FAR. There are certain design requirements with your B6P. The relationship to the adjoining neighborhood in this area, the buffering along this area, all fall into B6P concerns. and this is a detention basin by the way that serves the residential area that is to the rear the other aspect of this is also the big box criteria that's because the size of the store and the big box criteria also speaks to this location for these types of activities service areas it speaks to buffering it speaks to pedestrian facilities And one aspect of this plan that was a tremendous part of our discussion with the applicant was good pedestrian connections and good cross access and safe movement for the pedestrians. They are showing a pedestrian access into here at this location. They're showing a trail parallel at this location down to the legacy trail in this location that exists, of course. And they're showing sidewalks through the property. Again, my heavy thumbs connecting the property. In terms of big box, they're required to show a pedestrian access through the parking lot to the front of the store. That's primarily this function, although it helps connect the outlot area with the rest of the development. The plan that you see before you, again, is revised. They addressed a lot of the little cleanup conditions. There's still a few things, the floor area ratio numbers. There's a slight discrepancy in their numbers between our calculations or theirs. It doesn't pose a problem. Just clean up accuracy. We just need that. There are several important things going on here that impact this plan. That is, as I've mentioned, B6P requirements, the design requirements, the multimodal plan. These are things they have to address. And the multimodal plan requires that they take a look at bicycle parking, which they've shown in various locations. It speaks to pedestrian connections. It speaks to pedestrian facilities, Lex Tran, multimodal, bus services. Now, Lex Tran is on Newtown Pike, and there's a stop on Newtown Pike. And Lex Tran has a lot of concerns about their ability to pull off and pull on in high-speed traffic and that sort of thing. So, again, the multimodal plan speaks to that and what their efforts are to facilitate and help with the multimodal plan. That also speaks to big box and the pedestrian aspects. There's a spring. It's a dry spring or a wet weather spring in this area that they're protecting in this large area of green space. I'm apparently going to do that this entire presentation. I mentioned before this area. Now, this vehicular use area is going to require BOA approval. It's not located appropriately under Article 16. Now they are showing a lot of green space up in this area. They're proposing the transit stop in the future should it ever be needed along with their, and we're going to seek a little more detail, particularly with the big box report their pedestrian amenity in this area. This amenity along with the spring is also something it's an amenity area that will help kind of tie them to the residential neighborhood as well by just creating an attractive space for on the property. The, I will, and again, you all will have to make a finding on the big box criteria that they've met it or in substantial compliance with it. It addresses, as I said, pedestrian facilities. It addresses buffering. It addresses architectural renderings. Kroger's done this. They've dealt with big box more than any other applicant in our community. down on Euclid, Tate's Creek, Marias, they had to address big box criteria. And I'm not going to belabor that to you to any great extent. You can see that they have offsets. They're proposing canopies and coverage along the frontage of their store and the architectural details. Again, you want to break them up, and they're proposing they're doing that. And that will be elaborated on when we make the presentation to you next week on the big box report. I've already mentioned they've addressed the pedestrian access through there. The buffering, plenty of room back there to buffer. The separation of uses, location of the parking, it looks to that. They are proposing 700 parking spaces, a lot of parking. but it's positioned again this outlaw development benefits them in a lot of ways B6P also shields that parking lot under the big box criteria from Newtown Pike that's one of the things big box looks at it looks at the relationship it looks at the relationship with the public right away that's one of the criteria under big box. So that's an important, I mentioned BOA approval of that area where the, that's an action independent of you all that they're going to have to have done for this plan ultimately to move forward. Again, you'll have to make a finding that they meet the big box criteria. And then there's been a lot of discussion about a service road. This is a public road here, but there is an access easement that runs behind these properties to the north, and that was incredibly significant and important to those properties and their functionality. A service road is important because of its relationship to an arterial and to keep traffic off that arterial and to control the access to that arterial. So the discussion that's taken place on this property has been the continuation of an access road here to Silver Springs Drive. And when Amazon came in, as you all well know, it was a huge, big development, a lot of issues, a lot of things to be worked through. One of the conditions on that plan that was carried forward was to discuss that very access to this interior, I mean, to this property. Now, the applicant has filed a waiver. to that requirement because they have concerns. They have concerns about the impact that a through service road may have on their property and particularly as in regards to Amazon and the type of traffic that Amazon generates with their trucks and their delivery and that sort of thing. So that's under consideration. That was filed. It's still being looked at and again we've had tremendous discussions with the applicant. We've really come a long way. They need to work a little bit more on tightening up some of their parking and pedestrian aspects just to make it better. None of these things are considered major at this point. They've made tremendous strides. One of those areas that's worth mentioning is protecting this area from the rest of it and providing vehicular movement and pedestrian movement around that fuel station. Oh, Tom. All right. So interesting enough about the fuel station, we're in the Royal Springs Aquifer. And the Royal Springs Aquifer has reviewed this plan. And I can tell you, we've not received it in writing yet. We will. They generally send their recommendations to engineering, and we get it. They recommend it against the fuel station. They never approve fuel stations in the aquifer, not in Scott County. And when they come to Fayette County, they always recommend it's just a recommendation against it. Our stormwater manuals recognizes the agreement, recognizes the protection plan. Our stormwater manuals also reference containment. Kroger's made a presentation to the Aquifer Committee. I anticipate they'll make that same presentation to the Planning Commission as well to demonstrate the efforts they go to and the state-of-the-art technology that they utilize to protect against spills and contamination by spills in their fuel stations. As you're all aware, there are already gas stations in the area that have been approved, and they are required by our standards to meet state-of-the-art containment and spill facilities. They are. They have alarms, et cetera, that sort of thing. So we take those recommendations into account. But again, our stormwater manuals and our engineering standards address those types of concerns. There is a matter that will have to be addressed. Again, we're talking about water. We're talking about spills. There's a detention basin in this area. It's been constructed as a large easement. It conflicts with this development. We've had discussions about that. they're going to have to address that. They're going to have to redesign that stormwater. That's a commercial basin. I pointed out the one to the rear. That's a residential basin. Serves the properties to the rear. This is a commercial basin. It will be maintained by the developer, the owner of that basin. It will not ever be a public responsibility. We don't accept those commercial basins generally. It may very well have to be a vault. There's a lot of designs being looked at and kicked around. They're aware of that and they're working on it. And they're going to have to demonstrate a proposal that will remove that conflict. Obviously, because they can't develop those buildings in conflict with an existing detention basin. So, again, they're very much aware of that. There's been ongoing conversations as well with that on this property. So, again, staff in reviewing this revised plan are recommending approval to you. and I'll emphasize once again that there are actions independent of this that the Board of Adjustment a finding on big box as well as the consideration of the waiver request as well that all come together and are in play on this particular this particular development and with that I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have for staff any questions for staff just a reminder i mean i remember a lot of the conversation about that service road what what's the proposed delivery route for the kroger trucks coming in if that service road is not they can elaborate on this but i believe they anticipate a movement here and into the back of the store would be their primary because you can see the trucks will back into the dock. And I remember we heard from neighborhoods about all of this movement, but I can't remember what their particular concern was. Anybody remember? It's hard to say. I don't know if we've heard from anybody on this particular site. For other sites, we've heard just sometimes the trucks idle and that creates noise or the beeping when they back up. They do have a buffer, yes, and then the basin also acts as a buffer. One of the design guidelines actually recommends that loading docks, trash collection, outdoor storage of bulky materials not be located between the building and streets, but then also not be located on the side of the building next to residential use. So we have a residential zone. Use is a little bit further away. Not only will it be a buffer, as I mentioned, and my thumb. That's my thumb doing that, independent of me. That is a large basin, so there is good separation in that regard from the residential area. Kroger's on Euclid had the same challenge. I mean, it was theirs existing, and they were right up against those residential areas, and they buffered, and I think they even addressed delivery hours and solid waste compaction hours and that sort of thing to address that concern. at that location. I would add briefly that you all are aware there's a lot of things happening transportation wise out here. Newtown Pike is going to be expanded within the existing right-of-way. It is our federally designated freight route. That's why when you go out there and you drive it and you look and see that's where all the tractor trailers are required to go. So that's why they're out there. That's why Citation is going to be extended. The money's in place over to Russell Cave. And at that time, Hollow Creek will open up into the residential portion of this development to the rear of what you see here. So there's going to be a lot happening in that regard transportation system-wise in the area. But, Judy, Commissioner Worth, to your point, one of the comments was extending that service road could possibly give Amazon a different route instead of coming through the neighborhood because right now they use Silver Springs which curves up and goes around to citation in order to you know go left yeah so there the as you're all aware and you can see most of the access points in this area that have been approved are right in right out only and again in an effort to control access to Newtown. And then you get up to Citation where there's full access and a light. Sorry. A couple of questions, Tom. One, behind the Kroger's building, if I look on my GPS, you've referred to it as a basin or something. It seems like there's an open space. Does Kroger's property line go to the neighboring residential? It's right here. It runs right down the back, roughly. Pardon me? I think so. There we go. There you go. So, yeah, here, see the HOA? You can see the property line. Who's HOA? is that all the residential portion whoever's a member it's a large residential regional basin you you got that covered you did bring up my other question uh citation you said it's funded it's my understanding the the the hope and expectation is that right-of-way issues will be cleared and they that the hope is by fall that they would be able to go So Andrew Runwald is optimistic. I'm sorry. For this? There's a phase to Windburn and then the remainder as well. They're hoping that both can go smoothly and they can kind of do them at once. But there's optimism but not certainty. They're having discussions with the University of Kentucky. Yeah, well, it's always discussions. Yes. Okay. All right. Okay. All right, any other questions for staff? Thank you. Applicant? Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Brandon Gross on behalf of Kroger and the owner. As you'll see, and I'll keep this briefer than last month since we've been here for so long, So, Mike, you will have missed the razzle-dazzle that was last month's hearing. So I'll shorten it this month. It was me razzling and dazzling. But I will explain a couple questions that did surface. So, Mr. Owen here, yeah, this is the detention basin. It's about eight acres. Yeah, if you look on the area, okay, good. And then, yes, the truck movement is how Mr. Martin described it. It will be in rear. Kroger has their box recycling compactor indoors. They do not use an outdoor dumpster. They also use interior compacting for their trash indoors. So we won't have a dumpster behind this Kroger store. It will be located and then the truck will come once a week and pick it up and drive it away from the loading dock area. So that taken care of, we did have, we contacted some of the city council members in the area because this was such a big project. And they put together a town hall with the neighborhood associations in the area. And this project was very well received. And the original development plan was very well received. And this development plan, revisions is even better. As Mr. Martin said, we're going to move over one. There we go. At a pretty substantial cost, we're going to put in a protected 10-foot connection directly from Lexi Trail to Kroger. So someone could essentially be here at this corner and get to the Kroger on their bicycle without crossing any traffic points except for these two areas right here. The amenities, I have talked with Kroger. so we've got a proposed transit stop we were proposing some benches Kroger is going to I'm going to get some more information to mr. Martin we're going to propose a canopy structure so likely be wood or metal that will have concrete or papers with benches and landscaping around it and I've got some conceptual plans I'll get to mr. Martin and then we'll work on a note that gives us a little flexibility on what the materials exactly are but enough for the building inspector to know when they're looking at the plan that work substantially compliant with what we said we would we would do and Kroger is on the Silver Springs I'll just briefly touch on it we have requested a waiver the waiver sets out our concerns Kroger's concerns the main concern is bringing a connection to have industrial traffic cut through our shopping center is our major concern for that connection originally when the small area plan was done the Amazon site was supposed to be residential at that point a connection was probably more appropriate than with conflicting land uses like we have now I'm glad you guys approve the Amazon project because it did bring 500 jobs to this area. But to give you a sense of what this Kroger will look like, it will look like the Beaumont Center. It will be a large Kroger. It will have all the amenities that Beaumont Center has with the selections of the produce and the products and the other things. So it will be a big deal for this side of the city. And one thing that was pointed out is, you know, this area is really a food desert. There are no groceries in this area with all the connections that are occurring right now Hollow Creek Green Acre all those neighborhoods will be able to have connections into this what's going to be an amazing Kroger if I guess will be the only second one this size in the city so it overall it's great project the neighbors have been very excited about it and so we're excited to move forward and we're hopeful that will be heard next week we think we will have everything supplied to the staff and we continue to work with them on issues they have so I'm here to answer any questions Brandon you mentioned hollow Creek green acres and so forth will will this provide the connections to that or will they come later those connections already built in they will come later they're off-site mr. gross the other mr. gross has a map that kind of shows where those will be developed but those are behind this site, I do believe Hollow Creek may be connected, but barricaded until citation is built. Now that neighborhood may change its mind. You know, if there's a destination here, they may write their council member and say, hey, nevermind, take down the barricade because we want to get to Kroger easily. Okay. So hopefully it's all going to come together in the next few years for this area of the city, and we're very excited to be a part of that. Very good. Any other questions for the applicant? Thank you. All right, we have any public comment? If not, committee? Madam Chair, I move for approval of PLNMJDP 2380 Newtown Springs, Unit 1, with the attached 17 conditions. Did I do the right one? I'm sorry, wrong. Oh, over. With the attached 21 conditions from staff. Second. Moved and second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Okay. Approved. Anything else? I think there is one more item, but it's been postponed until March, so we would anticipate hearing about that next month. Okay. Which one is it? The Wolf Run Industrial. Okay, that's what I read. On page seven. Okay. All right. Well, thank you all for your patience. Thank you. See you next week. Thank you. I'm not going to be a good one. Oh, tell us about me Baby, I would rather be dead Each time you leave me, I start losing control You're walking away with my heart and my soul I can feel you even when I'm alone Oh, baby, I'm not alone Oh, you're the best Better than all the rest Better than anyone Anyone I ever met I'm stuck on your heart I hang on every word you say No chance to fall No, no Baby, I would rather be near To the back Thank you. on this episode of my council comment. I'm Whitney Elliott Baxter, 9th District Council Member, and today I am joined by our Director of Emergency Management, Rob Larkin. Thanks for joining me today. Good morning, Council Member, how are you, ma'am? I'm doing very well, thank you. Yeah, so today we are here in the Emergency Operations Center, which is kind of our brains of emergencies that happen in Lexington, where everybody gathers. It's our coordination center for public safety and all the emergency support functions. So it's really important in times of emergency citywide that everybody from different public safety organizations within the government and all of our utility companies, we all come together here so that everybody's on the same page in response to emergencies. So you can kind of see some of the screens behind us that give us more information as we process emergencies in the city. But today we are here to talk about winter preparedness tips. And there's a little bit of a nip in the air today, so it's timely that we're talking about winter preparedness tips. It is pretty timely. You know, it's wintertime in Kentucky, and if you don't like the weather right now, just give it a day or two. But, you know, during the winter months, we'll look at December and January and February, that's when we get a lot of fires. and because of Christmas and decorations and travel and all the other kind of things we do, it kind of increases the probability something like that could happen. So I know a lot of people use chimneys and kerosene heaters and things like that to stay warm in the winter months. So could you tell us a little bit about some safety tips as far as heating is concerned? If you do have a wood-burning stove or a wood-burning fireplace, Make sure your chimney is clean and it's been inspected. U.S. Fire Administration says about 77% of heating fires are associated with chimneys. Wow. For that type of thing. So make sure it's clean, that type of thing. Also, as far as Christmas decorations and that type of thing, burning candles, everybody likes to do it. They smell good and, you know, they add to the ambiance. But those are about half the home fires during the winter months. Oh, wow. So as far as indoor and not for heating. So those are some of the basic tips. I'd also provide to you that if you could change your filters, make sure that you've done so. And if you can, have your heating system checked, your HVAC system checked to make sure that it's running the optin way and maybe you can save you a little bit of money. So you mentioned like holiday lights and things like that and I know people use a lot of extension cords in the winter months. So what kind of tips could you give us as far as extension cords and electrical safety? So obviously for your extension cords and that type of thing, if you're going to use it outdoor, make sure that you have an outdoor approved extension cord. Indoor, use an indoor approved extension cord. And the big thing is don't overload the circuits because that is where we can have a lot of electrical problems. And also with winter, understand with ice storms that can happen, snow storms, that type of thing. Always remember never touch a down power line. Stay away from them and understand that you might understand that that is not an electric line. It could be a telecom line or a cable line, that type of thing. Just remember that it could be energized from a down power line on down the line that you can't see. And I would also extend that out to fences around the back of your house and i know here in lexington a lot of places still have the old chain link fences and that type of thing they can be energized and those power lines a lot of times run at the back back of properties i never thought of that that's a really good tip it can be shocking it's very true um so i know that water becomes a big issue in winter months as well um i'm a realtor as well so I always like to tell my clients make sure that your water lines your hoses are disconnected in the in the winter months. We have to remind firefighters about that too. Haven't done that for a long time. So what other tips can you give our residents as far as water is concerned? So I think first and foremost you captured a great one. Disconnect your hoses if to your external spigots and that type of thing. If the temperature is is going to go below zero. Absolutely open up your cabinets, leave the water dripping, and that type of thing. If you're going to leave your house for the holidays, this will also save you a little bit of money. Drop the temperature down of your thermostat to nothing less than 55 degrees, so that ambient temperature within the house still stays good. And then insulate where you can. They make external strips that you can wrap to help problem spigots and problem pipes from freezing and bursting. Because that is a huge, huge expense, the damage that can be caused. Yeah. So I know a lot of people do traveling throughout the holiday season and the winter months, especially with kids out of school and things like that. So what are some tips that you can give our residents that are traveling and vehicular safety? So obviously make sure that your car's in good running order, that you've got good tread on the tires. That's one of the greatest things. Even if you're going to go across town or that type of thing, make sure you've got some warm clothes in case you should become stuck or something of that nature could happen to you. I know a couple of years ago when we had a sudden snowfall and a lot of people got locked up on the interstate, we found people didn't have food. They were running low on fuel, so always keep your tank above half a tank of fuel. They were having medical problems. They did not have sufficient clothes to keep them warm. They were relying on heat and good weather, and it didn't happen that day. So all those things. Have an emergency kit for your car. Make sure you've got a flashlight, not just for your car, but obviously for your home and that type of thing that works. and keep everything charged up. Those are all really important tips. So I know that we have a really great website and an alert system in Lexington where our residents can stay informed. Can you talk a little bit more about our BeReadyLexington.com website? Well, I mean, so BeReady.com, it essentially will provide you links to other information and things that we post as well. So anything that you don't catch in this interview, go out there and take a look at it and kind of see what it's got to offer. It also provides links to other places that can provide even more in-depth information. Okay. Just about anything you want to learn. And then, of course, you know, we have a social media presence. It's on Facebook, Instagram. Instagram. So if we get information that is pertinent about an emergency or we see something on the horizon coming, then we can obviously, we will post to that and try to keep people informed because that is one of emergency management's key things is to inform, alert, and warn. And then LexAlerts, that's a free service. That's essentially where we can actually text you information or call in the event of a large-scale type emergency. We encourage everybody to do that. I'm signed up for those alerts and they're very helpful. That's good. We need a lot more people to sign up. We do. That's a great way for everybody to stay informed on specific emergencies that may be happening and notifications in the city. So I know that last winter we had a fairly significant power outage And that left a lot of people in the dark, literally. But they had to turn to old school radio. That was a way that people were trying to stay in contact or find out more information about closures and things like that. Remind me again what our radio station is. AM 1620. AM 1620. And we, I mean, generally there might be some music and just some general information on there on day to day. But when things change, we can obviously change that pretty rapidly and provide that information on AM 1620. You brought up the power outage. A couple other things that just from my fire side and that type of thing, years of experience, if you're going to operate a generator during a power outage, Make sure that it's at least 20 feet away from your house because of the carbon monoxide. Always maintain, especially when people use alternate heat and that type of thing, make sure that your smoke detectors are functioning. If you didn't change your batteries back when the time changed, now as good time is ending. And then have a carbon monoxide detector if you have gas appliances anywhere in your home. that's just some some key things that everybody should know. I think it's really important that everybody makes sure that they're watching our local news stations to keep up to date and alert of what is happening and and any other trusted weather sources that you like to use. I like to use the weather channels and people like other things. Some people like NOAA, some people like the National Weather Service and we monitor it all here. And I think our local meteorologists do a really good job of keeping us up to date on what's coming our way. But Lex Alerts is still a really great way to stay in touch as well as our BeReadyLexington.com. So thank you so much for joining me today. My absolute pleasure. This is my first interview as emergency management director, so I appreciate the opportunity. I'm honored to be with you today. I'm honored to be where I am right now. And thank you all for joining me as well on this episode of my counsel comment. I hope you found this information helpful. And I just want to encourage you all to sign up at bereadylexington.com and follow me on all my social media accounts, Facebook and Instagram, and to email me if you're interested in receiving my weekly newsletter. That wraps it up for today. Thanks again for joining me. Thank you. I am Councilwoman Denise Gray. I am proud and honored to represent the 6th District of Lexington. 6th District is an area that has the most Fayette County public schools. We have Bryan Station High School, Bryan Station Middle School, whoop, whoop, here in the house. Also, we have Frederick Douglass High School and Carter G. Woodson Academy to go on and on. We have over 16 Fayette County public schools programs. As someone that went through the Black Achievers program when I was younger, I know how important it is for you to be exposed to government. As someone that looked just like you in one of your schools, I never had anyone that looked like me or anyone who was a political leader in our community ever come and speak or ask you to come see them in their offices. And I'm here now in my first term. I want to make sure that you have the opportunities I did not. So I welcome you. We have a large number of my colleagues, commissioners, and even the mayor who are eager to meet you, to let you know what they do on a daily basis. I do understand you have some questions. I want you to ask them those questions, and you can dig a little bit deeper, because we make the hard decisions, and we represent you, and your voice matters. So how this will go on, each person will speak at each table. So that will give you a one-on-one opportunity to speak to each commissioner and each council member present. And we do have our recruiter from our police department. I want you all to start thinking, and you all can spread the word to others, the importance of public safety. We know that there's not that much good press about them, but in Lexington, we are proud. We are honored to have one of the best, maybe the best police department in the nation where what you see in the news is not here. It's down to earth, and I'm honored that that's what we have here. I would like to introduce now my mentor, my friend, One of the longest serving leaders, council members, she was a district council member, went on to be at large council member, which means she represented all of Lexington and not just a district like me. And now she is the top woman, the top leader in all of Lexington, next to me. So come on up, Mayor Linda Gordon. Thank you. Oh, she's a hoot, isn't she? Thank you very much, Councilmember Gray. Welcome everybody. It's great to see you all. As you know, I'm the mayor here and I'm really happy to welcome you and to have you in City Hall and I love it when young people visit our government to learn and you know you're our future leaders so this is really important and I know you have your folks here too right so you're here I think to learn a bit about how government functions and about our city which is now getting to be a bigger city about 322,000 people and so you're going to learn about the inner workings it's pretty amazing how many things go on inside government and how many services we provide to people that's why we're here the only reason government's here is to serve people if we're not doing that then we take a step back and we look at how we can better serve you so I love this engagement and question time and learning to be informed and learning more because maybe one day one of you will be a councilmember or a mayor we need that so I'm really thrilled that you all are taking the opportunity to do this to the staff and volunteers I've seen some of them here for the YMCA of Central Kentucky I really really really appreciate your dedication to this as well as to other things what you do to support our young people is really something that is critical to our future and it doesn't go unnoticed and so with With that, I want to thank Councilmember Gray for organizing this, and thank you all for being here. Thank the parents who are here, and I am going to see you in the Council meeting, I believe. First, I'd like to ask Marley Bush and Paula Anderson, as well as Council Member Denise Gray to join me at the podium. So Marley is the director of the YMCA Central Kentucky Black Achievers Program, and Paula is the president of the YMCA of Central Kentucky. We are also joined by YMCA of Central Kentucky staff, members of the Black Achievers Program, as well as some of their parents. And we thank you all for being here tonight. This program provides young people with resources like academic support, career exploration, mentoring services, and social and emotional well-being programs. All resources that will better equip them for a successful future. Over the past 38 years, the YMCA of Central Kentucky has served 8,000 students. and has awarded seniors over $9 million in scholarships. I am thrilled that these students have these opportunities. I had an opportunity earlier today to speak with some of these young people, and our future is in great hands. So, Marley, I want to thank you, your staff, and all the volunteers who commit so much time to this program and to our young people. So at this time, I am pleased to present this proclamation. Here's how it goes. Whereas YMCA Black Achievers is a college and career readiness program that provides equitable access, opportunities, and support to ensure success after high school for historically marginalized youth. And whereas through this program, students are known as achievers and are exposed to academic support, career exploration, mentoring, and social and emotional well-being programs. And whereas achievers are supported by YMCA staff, volunteers, and adult achievers as they develop mind, body, and spirit. and whereas the YMCA of Central Kentucky is dedicated to the betterment of our young people and our community and whereas we thank the staff and volunteers of the YMCA of Central Kentucky for their determination and compassion. Now, therefore, I, Linda Gorton, Mayor of Lexington, do hereby declare November 2, 2023, YMCA Black Achievers Day in Lexington. Thank you for your good work. So I'll first ask Marley if she'd like to say a few words. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor Gordon, and thank you, Lexington Urban City Council for this amazing recognition. As many of you may know, we are a program dedicated to the youth. And we could not do it without the support of our community. So this recognition is so, so, so Amazing and it means a lot that you all are recognizing this program and that you are recognizing the kids in this program and it really does mean a lot and just I can't thank you enough for it. Thank you. All right, Paula, would you like to say a few words? Well, I'd just like to say thank you for recognizing the program and these very bright young people tonight. It really is a community program, it's a volunteer based program. So people like you spending time with them to share your expertise and your knowledge of our community is exactly at the core of what we try to do. So thank you for doing that today, we appreciate you. Thank you very much. And now, Councilmember Gray. Black Achievers, YMCA Black Achievers. First of all, I would like to say thank you to my colleagues, Councilmember James Brown, Councilmember Shayla Lynch, for taking a bit of your time to volunteer with the YMCA Black Achievers as well. I was once in your shoes, Achievers. I grew up and was part of the YMCA Black Achievers. It is through that program that I am here today. You are greatness. You are what success looks like. You are what excellence looks like. It is important for you all to be here today to see what we, the elected officials, do on a daily basis. We are here to serve you. The program that we had earlier, that is for me to ensure that you know your power, you know your voice, and we answer to you and you are to ask us the questions, not just the easy questions, but those hard questions because that's why we're here. And so now you know you're no longer in my shoes where I never had anyone that looked like me come in a position of leadership or even within our community who came to speak to me about what's possible. You don't have to live without seeing anyone that looks like you on council that cares enough about you to say, come see me. So use this powerful day. Use this moment. Use your voice now and forevermore. And lift it up and ask those hard questions. Because you are what excellence looks like. You are what success looks like. So I applaud you in your walk now and in the future. Thank you. Thank you. Every day is such a perfect day to spend. Alone with you, I will follow you. Will you follow me? All the days and nights that we know we'll be. I will stay with you. Will you stay with me? Just one single cheer in each passing year. With the dark Oh, I see so very clearly now All my fears are drifting by me so slowly now Fading away I can see Night is love But you are here Close a handle I'm better for the smile you give And while I leave I will follow you Will you follow me All the days and nights That we know will be I will stay with you Will you stay with me Just one single tear in each passing year there will be I will follow you, will you follow me? All the days and nights that we know we'll be I will stay with you, will you stay with me Just one single tear in each blossom year I will follow you, will you follow me All the days and nights that we know we'll be I will stay with you, stay with me Just one second to you, I will stay with you I will stay with you, stay with me Just one second to you, I will stay with you I'm going to go. Speed-eating sunflower seeds Drinking lots of carrot juice And soaking of a race But if not, I'd have these wonderful dreams Some kind of sensuous treat Not zucchini, petachines, bulgur wheat But a big warm bun and a huge tongue of meat Cheeseburger in paradise Peppered on a group of onion slices Not too particular, not too precise I'm just a cheeseburger in paradise. Heard about the old-time sailor men. They eat the same thing again and again. Warmed in bread, they said good race of dead. Well, it reminds me of the menu at a holiday end. Times have changed for sailors these days. When I'm in port, I get what I need. Not just Habanas or bananas or daiquiris, but that America creation, all which I feed. Cheeseburger in paradise. Medium rare with mustard seed knife. Heaven on earth with an onion slice. I'm just a cheeseburger in paradise. I like mine with lettuce and tomato Pots, 57, and french fried potatoes Big kosher pickle and a cold wrap farewell Good God Almighty, which way do I steer from off? Cheeseburger in paradise Making the best of every virtue and vice Worth every damn bit of sacrifice to get a cheeseburger in paradise