And you hear me say all the time what a great place this is to work. So we're going to show you how you can have a career here. So we are going to talk to the recruiting coordinator, Officer Brandon Kennedy. Hey, and we are back and we are here with Officer Brandon Kennedy. How you doing? Thank you for joining us. Thank you, thank you. He is our recruiting coordinator, right? So before we get started, tell us a little bit about your career, your background with the Lexington Police Department. All right, so my career started in 2006. I was on patrol, where I spent approximately seven years on patrol. From there, I went to our clear unit. I was in our clear unit for about seven years, and while I was there, I did gang investigations and then our normal clear duties. And then after that, I signed up and went to our downtown entertainment district. I was down there for another six, seven years. And then at that point, I then came over to the training academy, where I have taken over the recruiting. And then on top of that, I'm also on our bomb squad, so I've been there for about six years as well. Okay. So you're the first face that a lot of people see. That's correct. Obviously, when they're applying for the Lexington Police Department. So we're going to be talking a lot about recruiting and the process today, but I guess we'll start with what are we looking for? So we're looking really for any good individuals that have met our standard that we have set, which is at least a high school degree, general education degree, GED, are some of the minimum standards you need, but we also need you to be physically active. So when you come through our process, which would be in the phase one, you're going to apply online, which the website will be on the screen, and then from there you'll come in and take a written test. After you complete the written test and pass, then you'll go into the physical test. After that is the oral board and then you move on to phase two, which is the background process. And to get a little more detailed on the written test, the written test consists of three different parts, which is a math section and then you go into a reading comprehension and then a grammar section. And then the physical test then consists of a bench press, sit-ups, and then you'll move on to a 300-meter run and push-ups and then a mile-and-a-half run. Awesome. So what would disqualify an applicant? So general disqualifications really consist of if you've used any kind of narcotics in the last year, those are automatic disqualification. And then with LFUCG, if you've been working for us within the city, then if you've been fired within a year, that would be a disqualification. Felony arrest, and there's going to be certain misdemeanor arrests that we will not accept. and a lot of it comes down to just honesty in the background process and then as long as you meet the standard that we have set, then you're going to be just fine in the process. So you mentioned a high school diploma or a GED. What about somebody that has a degree in biology? Do they have to be going down the criminal justice path or are we looking for other things? So that's the great part is we'll accept. Thank you. Go right ahead. Thank you. Good morning, Madam Chairman, members of the subdivision committee. First item on your agenda this morning is a final record plat. This is 24-8 is the new market property, Phase 1, Unit 11. Now, this is a final record plat, and we are located... out Deerhaven Lane in this area in the new market. Here is the city park, Lexington-Fedro-Irman County Park. This location interdiction is up here a little bit to the north from here. What you see here is a large last section has the development. It's been planted all through here and it's been developed in these locations. This is a large water quality and detention area, part of the overall stormwater management control in this area and part of the overall of course expansion area plan now we have a revised plan you don't see that before you today they address only one condition on that plan which is one of the discussion items staff will touch on the the new plan does not show the proposed trail in this location is the primary difference. And then the issue with this plan, and I'm going to very quickly hand something out to of course generally what you see from us from staff on a final record plat is when they are requesting a variance or waiver some aspect of the rules need to be adjusted on a plan and that requires of course Planning Commission consent In this case, we're bringing it forward to you because of the proposed lotting pattern. Right through here. Let's see. There is the final development plan, preliminary subdivision plan for this property, for Newmarket. And you can see this large area through here. It's a large open space area and it was designated as an HOA lot. You can see again, here's the lotting pattern. There's the stormwater management system, cul-de-sacs. That's all basically the same. Oops. But you go back to what they're proposing, and again, they're now proposing to lot that open space out. I mean, lot it out to Deer Haven. You can see the longer tenure of lots and some of the larger lots. Now, there's a couple of issues associated with this. First of all, the land subdivision regulations address lot shape. Now, it's not an absolute. You couldn't have an absolute in lot shapes and fit things out on the real world, on topography. It just wouldn't work. But it does have a recommended geometry. And it's roughly 2.5 to 1 being the maximum, and it references 60 feet or greater now in width. These lots range primarily from 40-something to 50 feet in width, with this one being a little bit wider. This is an access, by the way, HOA access that was being proposed. So the lot depth is over 300 feet now, so it greatly exceeds the recommended geometry. and there's no real challenge. There's no topography challenge. You know, there's no issue with the land itself or the street system that would dictate this type of geometry. So staff is concerned. Again, it's not an absolute. We want to bring it to you for your review and so they can make an appeal to you to approve this particular geometry. Now, one reason the original geometry was approved on this plan in the expansion area. Deer Haven, it's a rural scenic road designated in the comp plan expansion area plan as such. That setback was created to protect that scenic highway. It's a look. It's an aesthetic. So within that setback there are pretty strong zoning restrictions and there's a note up here, note C and they addressed it here as well as on the proposed plat that these lots will meet that requirement well that requirement states that in that zone there cannot be anything other than a stone fence it can be no structures it's all designed to protect these rural scenic roads and you know Walnut Hill Childsburg is one this is one and so that's why it was created that's why it's there that's why you approved it as a body and I've got something for you to share again this is just old school you can see a lot of patterns as it currently is this. And this is an area of destruction. And so it's been accomplished. And I think part of the issue that we face here is, as an HOA lot, enforcement of this requirement is pretty straightforward. That by having an HOA lot, then we know as a community that should there be any issues, anybody gets into that area and they're not supposed to be in there building a structure or encroaching, doing something, then it's easy to enforce that. When you lot it out and it becomes private and you have individual owners, it is much harder to enforce. It doesn't mean it can't be enforced, but it's much harder. And then if you have one person do something, pretty soon you have a domino effect. You can have a lot of other people encroaching, and pretty soon this setback and this issue is, this element of the plan is negated by these actions. So staff's concerned about that, and that's why we brought it to you, to have you take a look at it and see. Again, they're proposing that the individual lot owners can enforce this. You may recall the peninsula and the trees and the relationship with the lake, and we had real serious concerns about that, and we put notes on the plat. There were monuments placed in the ground in that development. How effective that will be remains to be seen, but again, that was designed to protect that conditional zoning for the vegetation, the vegetative buffer relative to the reservoir. Here we have Deer Haven. So we're trying to protect that relative to Deerhaven. The one other little item that they addressed that I mentioned to you on the new plan was right up in here at this cul-de-sac. These lots right through here were somewhat oddly configured. They've addressed that. They've adjusted it so that we don't have any pinch points and odd little things coming up. Just right. And that's condition 12, 58, and 60. They've addressed that on their new plan, those staff. In fact, they've provided the government with a little additional frontage along that stormwater facility, which will become ours eventually. Those are dedicated to the city per the expansion area plan. With that, turn it over to the committee for any questions, concerns you may have for staff. Any questions for staff? I just want to understand. Are you saying that the lots along Deer Haven, they're encroaching into that buffer area? They will contain that buffer area should you approve this lotting pattern. That buffer area exists. It will exist across all those lots as opposed to being one HOA lot. But the use of those lots are restricted. Right. that 200-foot distance from Deer Haven into the lot, the way they're proposing it, you wouldn't be able to put a place structure. You wouldn't be able to put a six-foot privacy fence. Really, it's meant to be open space to allow for the view shed to the rural scenic road. And staff has had a discussion just for informational purposes with HOA on the area to the south and about their desire to put facilities in this buffer. And staff said, you can't do it. Sorry, this is how it works. This is how it is. You're going to have to figure out another way to get your facilities in there. Well, that's an HOA looking for facilities. You can multiply that concern by the number of owners you have on these lots, you know, each one wanting. I mean, it's their property. It's understandable. You own a piece of property. Once they own it, there's sort of a private property almost. You feel like you can do whatever you want with it despite zoning and the rules. And a lot of times the particular homeowners don't know the rules specifically. And again, using Peninsula as an example, that was a huge issue we tried to work through. How do we make them aware? and whether it's going to be successful again or not we've actually required just like a surveyor's marker a benchmark to designate that area to help to tell them but that doesn't mean they're fully aware of it when they buy it it's on the plat it's in the deed too in that case it's in the deed but when you go to a closing and the lawyer's throwing a lot of information at you you may not read that deed or look at that plat and they may not point that out and that can be an issue so that's that staff's concern but again it's you know this geometry is not an absolute but certain things are discouraged and strongly discouraged so we just wanted to bring it to you again All right, thank you. Any other questions for staff? If not, applicant? Dick Murphy, Director of Development and Development and Development and Development and Rory Kaley is our designer with us. And I think, as Mr. Martin mentioned, I think we've narrowed down all the issues into one. just as some background this is the 200 foot setback along Deerhaven Lane which is required in the expansion area master plan the expansion area master plan requires that 200 feet be kept open and under both the expansion area master plan and the ordinance the only thing you can have in that 200 feet are driveways, transparent fences, which are defined as fences that are at least 60% open air, and stone fences. Those are the only three things you can have in the setback. And we recognize that, and I think the Clark family has done a good job of preserving the scenic resource area on their side of the road throughout the last 25 years when they've been developing. The question to us is what's the best way to preserve that because the Clark family wants to preserve that as well. I understand the staff's concern. The staff seems to feel the best way to preserve it is to put it in an HOA. We feel differently. We feel the best way to preserve it is to put these, this area, in the individual ownership and we got a couple reasons for that one is that the this is a heavily wooded area it's not an area that's going to be open to recreation there's there's not room among the trees we want to preserve the trees it's not just along Deerhaven Lane it's the entire 200 feet is heavily treed we want to preserve those people who buy the houses backing up to that are going to buy a house because they like having the trees there. They're going to see what they get when they get the house because the trees are there. They're going to buy it because they like having trees. So it's going to be self-selecting for people who want to preserve trees. Now, and it was reinforced when we found out that HOAs along this scenic resource area We're coming in and asking to put in clubhouses, active recreational areas, and that sort of thing, which is not allowed in this setback area. So we've got track record is HOAs want to put in facilities in the 200-foot setback area. We don't want them to. We feel the best way to stop that is to allow the individual owners who, yes, they will have a sense of ownership of that property behind them. They will have a sense of ownership of the trees behind them, and they will want to preserve those. We think they'll want to preserve those more than the HOA wants to preserve those. We are asking for those to be put in individual ownership. This is not a violation of the ordinance. because Well mention them not a violation of the ordinance and not a violation of the expansion area master plan the Subregs the subregs do suggest a two and a half to one ratio With the depth now our buildable area does meet that up here along along the roadway But we are adding this part to be preserved We'll put additional protections on there. We have very strong deed restrictions on these properties out here. We don't allow basketball goals in the street. We don't allow above-ground swimming pools. We don't allow roof antennas, lots of things that are not allowed and are very effectively enforced back here. We will add this in our deed restrictions that that area must be kept the way it is. No swing sets, no horseshoe pits, no anything out there except for the trees. We will also do the items that Mr. Martin has mentioned on the peninsula. EA did the peninsula too. There are monuments in the backyard showing where the 200-foot setback is and where you cannot do anything beyond that. We'll put those in there as well, the markers. workers. We'll put the restrictions on the plat as well. We'll put those in our deed restrictions and also add that the homeowners association can enforce those against individual owners. So not only the city, but the homeowners association can enforce those. So we have the same goal that the staff does. We want to preserve those trees. My clients, to be honest about it, were very troubled when on the other side of the street up here, when they had, you have the large lot subdivision, a lot of trees were taken down in order to widen Deerhaven Lane because they felt that that was a violation of the 200-foot setback area and the scenic resource area and the concept of the rural scenic road when trees were taken down on the other side. But that's not their property. They feel very strongly about the trees here. They feel very strongly that those ought to be preserved. And again, we feel that the better way to do it is what we're proposing under these pretty unique circumstances with the fact that it's treed, the fact that the HOA in the past have wanted to build in that area. We feel this is the way to preserve it. So that's the difference we have. The goal is the same on it. goal is the same. We are having to ask you about that because on our preliminary we did put it the other way. We did put it going to the HOA. So we have a difference between the preliminary and the final. As I said, there's no violation. We don't have to have a waiver for this, but we do have to ask your approval of it because it is different than what we showed in the preliminary subdivision plan. So that's where we are. It's a pretty unique situation. My clients have preserved this setback for 25 years and they want to continue to do that. Thank you. Question, Mr. Murphy? On those deed restrictions, do the homeowners have to get permission to remove trees from their property, from the homeowners association? No. Well, out here there's some invasive species in here, so we don't want to prohibit elimination of invasive species, disease, trees, that sort of thing. But we can put something like that in the deed restrictions. Which currently don't have any. Well, we don't because we haven't encountered this situation. So we're open to suggestions And I think actually that's a good suggestion to have. I'm having a hard time seeing this in individual ownership versus an HOA lot. It seems, you know, from my understanding, driveways, see-through fences, and rock fences are the only thing allowed in this HOA lot. So that prohibits any building on the lot, on the HOA lot. And that lot could potentially have, you know, with this plat, have a note that says this lot doesn't get touched without whatever, you know, entity gets set up, you know, just if it's a committee or somebody who oversees the lot. So I don't see an advantage here for taking . Well, another item we've had, we have three homeowner associations out here. One of them disappeared. We set it up. I was involved. We recruited homeowners to be president, vice president, secretary, treasurer. They'd all agreed. They said, okay, we're going to keep it up. And then they disappeared. They just went kaput. And that is an owner's association which is supposed to be maintaining an open area like this. They're gone. Homeowner's associations can disappear. It's a violation. If it's a violation of deed restrictions, the developer can enforce it. Any other neighbor can enforce it as well. I want to point out this is also a violation of ordinance. If they get out there and cut trees in the scenic resource area, that's something the city can enforce as well. So it's, I guess, based upon practical experience with homeowners association. The fact that they could disappear. The fact that they have wanted to do things in the 200-foot setback area, which we feel it's better to leave it in private ownership, but with all these restrictions on it. And we all know the rules on it, and we just feel it's a better way to enforce the rules to do it this way. Okay, so I mean, I hear what you're saying as far as the HOA already wanting to try to put something there, but the HOA can't put anything there without coming back to the planning staff, right? Right. And they've been, it's the Blackford Neighborhood Association that has sought that approval, and they've been in communication with our staff and the council member, and they've been told no. Okay. So they have two lots that they want to purchase from Ball Homes to build their clubhouse on. They just wanted to spill over into the back 200-foot space, and they've been told, no, you need to keep within the lots that you're buying. So if you have it as an individual homeowner and say a homeowner says, oh, I believe this tree is diseased, I'd like to remove it, is there a process? I mean, what would keep them from just hiring somebody to say, hey, eliminate that tree? And, you know, before you know it, they've eliminated half of the trees or whatever the case may be. How do you enforce that or what rules are in place to prevent that? Well, we can put in a provision, for instance, saying they have to get approval of the urban forester or they have to get approval of the HOA, something like that. I don't have a whole lot of experience with multiple neighborhoods, but in my neighborhood there was a point at which the developers turned over enforcement to the homeowners association so they're no longer in the picture in terms of trying to enforce anything and i assume that would be the case here and if the neighborhood association disappears i can't see individual neighbors taking this on to sue each other as being a very practical i mean i'm not saying that they don't do it i've certainly seen that in my neighborhood but i don't think that's a practical enforcement device to rely on that i have some concerns about As a real estate attorney, unfortunately, neighbors sue each other all the time, all the time, over a twig, hanging over a fence, over anything. So from experience, that's not going to be a problem, okay? There's always one person. We've got 15 lots. Sorry, can we refocus on that? We don't need to talk about all the lawsuits that happened. So back to the really recommendation of the staff and the applicant's request. I don't have any more questions. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? All right. Do we have any comments, questions from the public? If not, we'll bring it back to committee for comments or motion first. Well, whatever you see fit first, is there any additional comments? I think to pick up on Ms. Meyer's comment, to me this is a violation. I understand the intent is a good intent, but to me this is a violation of the spirit of the scenic way and also closes off access to that space to other people if it's going to be in individual people's yards as opposed to the homeowners association. Cuts off green space that's accessible to multiple users. So I'm not a fan of this. That's actually a good point. I hadn't thought about that. the privacy of going from lot to lot. Okay. Okay, so can we get a recommendation in the form of a motion? So I am, I'm not quite sure how to word this. I'm conscious of Mr. Wilson's motions have to be made in a positive way. So I guess I would say I move that we support the staff's recommendation for, is that postponement? That was the technical committee's recommendation. I guess if we want to address conditions 13 and 14, we'd say modify lot configurations to match the approved preliminary subdivision plan. Okay. So if we did that, then we can support the... We can go forward for approval with that change, right? Yes. Okay. Right. All right. Madam Chair, I move for approval of PLN FRP 240008, New Market Property, with the 14 attached conditions, modifying number 13 to modify the lot configurations to make them consistent with the preliminary plan. Does that do it? Second. All right. It's been moved and second. Any questions for the motion? All in favor? Unanimous. Thank you. Madam Chairman, members of the committee, we're moving on to page two of your agenda. Top of the page, item B, and you should have revised conditions that were handed out to you as well for this particular plat. This is final record plat 24-9, Boonesboro Manor, Interstate Park property. This is our soccer property out on Athens, Boonesboro and the interstate. Here's Athens, Boonesboro. Interstate's out here in this location. This is Doe Run Trail. Oops. so this is a final record plat to create this lot this lot this lot and they're dedicating a right-of-way of competition drive and a little bit more of doe run trail and this intersection is the purpose of this record plat now this was brought to you because they are requesting a waiver in this particular instance. It addresses timing primarily. In this particular situation out here, for this development, you may recall when this development came through and you saw the proposal for the stadium, you saw the proposal for the development and the zone change, one of the issues was sanitary sewer and the fact that across the road there was a pump station that the city owns that was put in some years ago and constructed, and it was designed with a certain volume. And so this development, with its size, its scale, with the stadium and that sort of thing, that's a challenge for the sanitary sewer system that has to be addressed. It's got to be upgraded. It's got to be able to handle the increased sanitary sewer demand on the property. They have been meeting with engineering and with the Division of Water Quality to come up with a plan to address the timing. Because, again, you know, this takes construction. This takes work. It takes design, those sorts of things. It takes money. Yes, ma'am. That's, yes, money. And so they've been working on that. They've been aware of that from the beginning, and they're moving forward. You're going to see a development plan on this agenda as well as they move forward. And so with the PLAT, as you all are aware, you have to have public facilities. You have to have sanitary sewer. That's a requirement. It's actually not an uncommon waiver that you see that staff's presented to you before because it's a matter quite often of timing. A lot of times it's just a timing issue of getting the approval, getting the billing permits so they can start moving dirt, so they can put the lines in the ground and that sort of thing, and then time the construction. So that's really what the issue is on this particular plat, is the timing of the sanitary sewer. they want to create these properties now and that's why they're asking for the waiver so they can go ahead and create them of course you know they can create them, they can transfer them and of course transferring a lot means a sale of a lot which means money to the developer which again, they're looking at money misworth as you said, for the sanitary sewer upgrades that are absolutely necessary in this area to accommodate all the development that's proposed so again this was viewed by your tech committee and they brought in this this amended plan they made a lot of corrections you can see with your handout on the plan staff is also aware that they had a very productive meeting with the relevant agencies concerning the sanitary sewer and so at this time staff is able to recommend improvement of the plat but again that'll be subject to the waiver which will be presented to the full planning Commission at your meeting with additional information on the scope and any conditions necessary to approve the waiver be happy to answer any questions you may have any questions for staff I was gonna pick on bond but she's getting ready to go she may have information other than email from a couple weeks ago I don't have any new information, but as you're aware with the waiver, there are or is a surety that's required. And I don't know if they've talked about are they going to share any of the costs of the upgrade if they want to subdivide it right now. I mean, I don't know what that dollar amount is going to be when to record this plot. And I think that's one of the things staff would like to be able to inform the entire body about is that we think you need to hear it. Here is what they've worked out. This is how it's going to work. to go forward before it yes ma'am oh yes waivers yes waivers are presented to the full Commission yes ma'am all right thank you Good morning. My name is Stephanie Blaine with Palmer Engineering. I'm here on behalf of iVisioneering Capital Partners to talk about this proposed subdivision. As Tom alluded to, we did meet with Division of Water Quality last week, specifically about the pump station. I think some upgrades have already been in place, is my understanding is that that was done over the course of the last week, that some new pumps had been installed that could use the existing wet wells and existing infrastructure. We've submitted some updated calculations for the stadium, where we're now planning to install a pump station at the stadium that would be privately owned, it won't ever be owned by the city, that will help even further reduce the amount of flow from the stadium. so we have a holding tank at the stadium that's going to hold back that flow and the pump station will regulate a maximum amount of flow that can enter the system so I think that hopefully helps we haven't officially heard back from water quality yet we submitted the information about the pumps and all that on Monday so hopefully by the time you see this at the full Planning Commission we'll have their calculations the calculations we provided feel that they work but we I don't think they've had time to confirm that yet. In terms of the waiver, as you alluded to, this is an expensive investment. And to be able to start transferring those lots and working out how to pay for all this infrastructure that we're installing, we're aware that as part of the approvals that we have to have the roadways, the storm sewer for the stadium installed before the stadia can open. And hopefully you've seen the marketing advertisements that we're playing soccer out there by the fall. And so to be able to fund that, we need to start, be able to bring in some money for that. We'd hoped that the timing would work out to be able to have the sanitary sewer, the gravity sewer that we've designed, and the roadway infrastructure installed, and not have to put a waiver on this. We had some complicated utility relocations. There was a KU overhead line that went through the property that crosses Competition Drive that we had to cut down that area by 19 feet. So there was three different utilities on that pole. And then the storms that we had about a month ago now really delayed that process. It delayed us almost a month. So we were really hoping to have this roadway the gravity sewer completed in May but it's looking like it's going to be closer to the end of June at this point so being able to transfer those lots and proceed with some of the other work to help fund the rest of that infrastructure is a really important piece to our puzzle I guess if you have any questions that I can answer be glad to I'm sorry that I haven't seen all of your design and calculations but I know there's a development plan that addresses construction on lot tract one one D yes and so all of these the infrastructure that you've designed already and the pump station designs that you proposed that include the plumbing or the sanitary sewer to lot one D yes so right now I guess my understanding from the information we've got from division of water quality is the pump station that LFUCG owns can now handle up to 175 gallons per minute of sewage the stadium is proposed to release 87 gallons per minute so we know we have the existing gas stations and the existing to the earth a proposed development on what 1d that can make up about a hundred gallons per minute so I'm also working with them right now on the table the only thing we're asking for in terms of development plan is lot 1d but we are assuming that you know we were able to get these approvals I'm gonna be working closely with Kristen so that as these other lots start to be have more defined purposes that we're working in close relation to how much capacity that existing pump station is and then working out a defined plan for how to upgrade it to the next phase because if there's like four phases of upgrades at that plant and if you I'd be happy to catch you up on afterwards if you want me to any other questions for the applicant thank you all right do we have any public comment being none we'll bring it back to the committee Madam Chair, I'd like to move for approval of PLN FRP 24-9, Boonesboro Manor, Interstate Park property, with the 13 revised conditions presented today from staff. Second. Moved and properly seconded. Any questions to the motion? If not, all in favor? It's unanimous. Thank you. Mr. Martin. Madam Chairman, members of the committee, we're moving right on down page 2 to item C. Final worker, Platte 24-12, Lucas B. Combs property. Oh my. Is that derby pie? I thought that might be derby pie. So we have before you a plat that is an agricultural plat. And as you all are aware, under our ordinances, agplats need to be approved by the Planning Commission. Sign an affidavit is also required. In this particular case, we're out on Shelby Lane. It's kind of towards the southeast part of our rural area. There's Walnut Hill Road in this location. They want to create a 64-acre lot and a 97.8-acre lot out of this particular plant. Very simple subdivision of an ag, of a farm. They meet all the requirements in terms of acreage and frontage. You can see they're not building any infrastructure, so there's very little that they need to do to satisfy our requirements. We have a few sign-offs. They need to denote a 25-foot setback off of the actual designated flood area, FEMA-designated floodplain area. There is a stream that runs through the property here. We've seen an electronic copy. We've yet to receive a paper copy when the MILR is submitted. There are two identified springs on the property. Actually, another one up above there, there's a lot of springs in this area. It's kind of interesting. But there's two on this property. One's perennial. So those have been inventoried. They have latitude, longitude designations by Kentucky Division of Water. So the applicant survey has been made aware of that. And again, staff has seen an electronic version where they've indicated those spring locations. That'll have to be added, of course, to the mylar when it's brought in for signature. with that staff is recommending approval be happy to answer questions you may have questions from staff applicants I'm Josh Guilfoyle. I'm a cam surveying. I'm in place of Gary Rowland. We have a paper copy here, if you all would like to see. And then we have the affidavit and a picture of the sign. It's already uploaded in CELA, so any other questions? Any questions for the applicant? No, thank you so much. Perfect, thank you. Okay, any public comment? If not, let's bring it back to committee. Go back and forth. Madam Chair, I move for approval of PLN FRP 2400012, Lucas Combs property on Shelby Lane, with the attached eight conditions. Second. It's been moved in a second. In question? All in favor? Aye. Aye. Unanimous. All right. We're moving right along. Madam Chairman, members of the committee, moving on down your agenda, we're going into development plans at the bottom of page 2 and continuing on to page 3. This is a major development plan 24-24 for the Margaret Kamek property. We are located out on Harrisburg Road, Old Schoolhouse Lane. Here's Old Schoolhouse Lane coming from Harrisburg Road in this location, as well as two local cross streets you can see located here and here at the rear. This is the floodplain greenway area in this particular part of our community. at the rear of this development. This is a proposed final development plan on this property that has been submitted, and you can see that it is proposing apartments. Let me check something here. There we go. Thank you. They're proposing again. You can see apartments in the front of the development. This would be recreational facilities, clubhouse, open space, that sort of thing. Again, you'll have the public street in this location extending through the property, additional apartments at this location. Then they're proposing some townhouses towards the rear and then single-family development houses along the rear portion of the property adjacent to the greenway in this location. Now, this is the original plan that was developed with the zone change, and it was a preliminary subdivision plan. And preliminary subdivision plans, you are aware, are acceptable in a zone change for single-family residential, which is what was requested, which is what was approved. And it was a total of 82 single-family. You can see them. There were 82 single-family homes, lots, that were approved on this development. They've come back in now, and they are proposing, as I said, multifamily. It's a total of 210 dwelling units. that's 156 percent increase over what was approved on the preliminary subdivision plan as part of the approved zone change on this property it would involve 190 multifamily 10 detached lots and 10 townhouses but again you can see now the property will be dominated by a high density residential they are proposing to come in off a schoolhouse and this in essence This would be a parking lot that would serve the multifamily portion of the proposed development. The ordinance addresses this sort of situation. And again, this was done in 2022. And there was a slight amendment in 2023 to the plan just to make some adjustments due to primarily to topography that impacted the development. This is such a significant plan change. It addresses the character of the original development. I mean, you can see it. I'm not going to belabor the point that you're going from a single-family development, which was quite an involved zone change, a lot of give and take, a lot of discussions about its appropriateness and its compatibility. It increased the density on this particular property compared to the surrounding property. But it was single-family homes, and there was a considerable amount of work that went into that and that approval of that zone change. This proposal and staff's review, we believe, constitutes a significant change in the character of the development. And so with that, the tech committee has recommended disapproval to you of this plan. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have for staff. Any questions for staff? Okay. If not, let's hear from the applicant. Thank you. Thank you all. John Woodall on behalf of the applicant. It's going to be one of these times when I come up here and say, what a great plan. We're happy to see it. But maybe not today. But thank you all. With me is Carson Boffman from Calgill and Kevin Warner from Carmen. Just to cut to the chase, the reason why you're seeing a different plan folks is because of the market in the last two years everybody's known knows what's happened with interest rates and that has in itself necessitated a pivot by Calgary and so what we've tried to do is come up with a plan that we thought best fits the property my participation in this process usually as Tom says involves a lot of give-and-take and we've just submitted this development plan and I feel like we've just rushed right to a recommendation to disapproval without really have given this a chance to breathe like you know it seems to me the recommendation is based in large part on the infrastructure in the area in terms of roadways and it's a little confusing to me because they're you know the report refers to the roads as being local but the GIS mapping calls Agape and Rosette Way collector streets and I suspect it's because of the width of of those roads. Mr. Martin can tell us about that, but for whatever reason, there's a discrepancy there. And in large part, it seems to me, you know, the complaints or the worries about the increased density goes back to whether the infrastructure can handle that. And based upon the discrepancy between what our government information services mapping would show and then what how the how these roads are being depicted there is a discrepancy and I'd like to be able to work through that so what I'm asking mr. Buffen is going to come up here and explain a little bit about how we got here but what I would ask you to do is instead of just going straight to a disapproval today I know there's a lot of folks that want to talk about this that instead we we postpone this from next week's meeting to give us a chance to work through some of these infrastructure issues if we can. So I'd ask you to do that because you know obviously there's a lot of red ink in the in the recommendation and I appreciate as always do staffs work on this but we want to be able to have a chance to address some of it. With that I'd like to let Mr. Boffin come up here and just address a little bit you know what they're facing in terms of the market. Good morning. As Mr. Will said, the main kind of two reasons that we are making such a different plan is over the past two years, the market has changed significantly, which for our ownership, they want to propose something with a little more density. The second reason is the changes that have been made to the comprehensive plan have really emphasized that we as a community want a mix of housing. These are two-story apartment buildings. I have some pictures so you all can see. The two-story apartment buildings maintain that size throughout. We also have a study I have to share with you that in case a infrastructure is capable of handling it. But we as a community have said we want a mix of housing types, a variety of housing opportunities. This really nails that with townhome style apartments, so everybody has a front door that's on the first level, townhomes to give kind of that true traditional townhome feel and single family homes in the back that kind of scale down to what's also surrounding it. So I'll also hand out this traffic study. We're happy to take any questions if you all have any, but... Okay, any questions for the applicant? Not yet. It's a lot to kind of digest right now. just right now. That's why, Madam Chairman, I would just ask that you all give us a recommendation of postponement so we can have a little time to work through this thing as opposed to just shutting it down. Okay. All right. Anybody else have any questions? Or not? Thank you so much. Thank you. Okay. We have public comment. Please come forward. Oh, did you have a comment? Yeah, we'll do one at a time. Several people are here from our neighborhood. I live in Dogwood Trace. Could you state your name, please? Yes, I'm Karen Springate, and I've lived in Dogwood Trace for 27 and a half years. and if it would be okay, I would like people from our neighborhood area to stand in support of this, of me and some of our other speakers. So thank you. I appreciate you all hearing us today. As I said, I've lived in Dogwood Trace for 27 and a half years commuted for most of those years to a teaching job in Richmond and you know have loved loved it and still love it I was there in of course in 22 when the cowgill developers and their attorney proposed the single family homes and the zone change was approved based on that preliminary subdivision plan so we were shocked to learn earlier this year that 200 plus higher density complex was now being proposed and honestly I'll be perfectly honest the first reaction that most of us has was that we felt like we had been baited and switched that we had fallen for. We felt we'd been taken advantage of. We'd fallen for the preliminary plan. We'd followed all the rules and now the developer was coming up with a completely different plan, which, you know, we trusted the developer to do what they would say, what that would have been approved. Them and their attorney, another attorney, did do a great job convincing everyone that of the merits of that 22 plan, and that those 88 or 82 homes, I think it was initially 88, and then it was changed to 82, would be a good idea. So without saying much more about that, we feel like we've been deceived and we are unhappy about that but more than anything it's pretty obvious that the planning staff seems to be in agreement on at least some of that and you know we appreciate the opportunity to voice our objections thank you thank you Good morning. My name is Mark Amon. I'm the president of the Dogwood Trace Neighborhood Association. As you can see, we've got a very active, involved, passionate community. We've got a lot of people here today, and we've talked to a lot of residents in the neighborhood as well. I'm going to represent some of those for the people that are in attendance and some of the people that weren't able to be here. The main thing I want to bring up is really just the community engagement piece of this. The comprehensive plan talks a lot about community engagement prior to zone changes and as planning staff referenced, there was a lot of that back in 2022. A lot of people in this room on all sides were involved during that process. We had a lot of meetings, we had a lot of discussion. There was a lot of compromise, a lot of back and forth to get to the original 88, 82 houses in the original plan and go forward with the zone change. All that happened in 22 to get the zone change, but really what was the point of all that community engagement if just a short time later the developers are going to come back and propose what they actually wanted? It again feels like a bait and switch, seems like a bait and switch. We're really relying on the integrity of the policy and the process to protect us from this type of stuff. There was a lot of work that just seems like it's getting thrown out the window for what the developer was wanting this whole time. Thank you. Good morning. My name is Mark Sock. I'm vice president of the Dogwood Trace Neighborhood Association. Yesterday marked 25 years when we moved into the neighborhood. I've loved every day of it. So did our boys growing up. And I've walked throughout our neighborhood, knocked on doors, have talked to a lot of our neighbors over the past 25 years especially the last two three years and I can tell you with confidence that practically no one in our neighborhood wants this development to occur this intentional bait-and-switch sets a very serious precedent confronting the planning staff and Commission and all future developments I feel will be looking at this particular scenario to see what they can possibly get away with this is not a pivot this was intentional and the entirety of the dogwood trace neighborhood ask that you soundly reject this plan thank you good morning to all the members of the committee thank you for allowing some of the public to voice their concerns about this development plan my name is Patrick Valentino. I am a resident of Dogwood Trace with my family. Unlike some of the other speakers, I have not lived here for multiple decades. My family moved down here from the northeast just a couple years ago in 2021, but we were basically here for most of this process, although it kind of started right when we first arrived and we didn't even know which way was up yet, but we sort of saw the process from the beginning. And just to echo a little bit about some of what the previous speakers have set in to highlight some of their points. Basically, having been here since this whole thing began, this is not a question of infrastructure. It's not a question of changing markets. I personally do not believe this was a surprise that needed a pivot in a plan. We have been very engaged in the neighborhood over the last couple years. As the meetings have gone on, more and more people have been showing up. There was a meeting in February of this year where a representative of the developer had mentioned that single-family dwellings was never their plan. And there was a quote from a representative that said, our organization centers around managing rental units. This is not an argument over the benefits or detriments of single-family versus rental or anything like that. it's a question of honesty and a question of whether this was some honest mistake organized by, you know, forced by market forces or whatever, or as some of the other people had mentioned, what's commonly called a bait and switch. And approval of something like that, whether it was an honest mistake of disorganization or a specific dishonest move, is not something that really should be supported by any committee. I'm happy that the technical committee has raised a concern about this and suggested disapproval. I would appeal that you echo that and request disapproval. If the developer truly wants the plan that they say they want right now, maybe they should propose that from the get-go, start a process over and reapply in an honest way to represent what their plans actually are, and we wouldn't be in the mess that we're in right now. So thank you very much. And I guess there's two more speakers. Thank you. My name is Bennett Clark. I live right here. Block 35, directly adjacent to the potential development. As evidenced by my sticker from two years ago, 4-7-22, I hadn't even closed on my house yet, but I had just gone under contract and found out the day after about the development plan. So the technical committee has provided a thorough disapproval recommendation for the proposed final development plan. Mainly the proposed changes do not align with the principal's goals and objectives and policies outlined in the comprehensive plan, which were instrumental in securing the zone change for the property. The increased density and alterations to the proposed dwelling unit type represent a departure from the intended vision for the development plan outlined in the comprehensive plan. I'm in support of the technical committee's recommendation. It's frustrating when developers don't follow through on their promises, especially when it comes to zoning and development schemes. The bait-and-switch tactics can erode trust in the planning and zoning process and undermine the integrity of the community engagement efforts. Ensuring that developers adhere to their initial proposals is essential for maintaining transparency and accountability. If developers are allowed to change their plans after gaining approval, it can lead to a lack of confidence among residents and create a sense of unfairness in the community. We now rely on this committee to address this issue by forcing developers to uphold their commitments. Revoking the development plan in this instance could help rebuild trust with the affected residents and demonstrate a commitment to upholding principles and goals outlined in the comprehensive plan. It would be great to see stricter regulations and penalties for developers who engage in bait-and-switch tactics. Improving community engagement processes can help prevent misrepresentations by developers. By actively involving residents in the planning and decision-making process from the onset, communities can hold developers accountable and ensure that their interests are represented. Ultimately, holding developers accountable to their promises is crucial for maintaining the integrity of the planning and zoning process and ensuring that development aligns with the needs and expectations of the community. Your support for the technical committee's recommendation to disapprove the proposed final development plan reflects a commitment to transparency, fairness, and community engagement. It's through efforts like these that communities can work towards creating sustainable, inclusive, and thriving neighborhoods for all residents. As a realtor for 17 years in Lexington, I can tell you that there is definite need for what was additionally proposed. As of 925 this morning, in all price ranges in Lexington, there are 293 homes available on the market. 230 under or within the general price range for that zip code 40514. There's plenty of need for single family homes. One other thing. Caught my attention during the Deerhaven property. In 2022, there's put provisions of some sort in there for a tree protection barrier and some type of buffer agreement. I would just invite you guys to come see that now. The developer has obliterated that property line and left the residence with, you know, basically a 10-foot tree protection. From this desk to this window, a thin line of old farm trees, weed trees, and invasive species, some that are now dying. Over the past couple years, there's been a lot of wind damage across Lexington and central Kentucky. That is evident across now what used to be a big field of trees now is just a thin line of scrub. So I definitely think that no matter what happens to this property, that we go back and look at what that tree protection barrier actually is and what the buffers are between the existing and adjacent properties. Thanks. Thank you. I'm bringing up the rear. Okay. Yeah. Good morning. My name is Roger Lashbrook. Nancy and I live on Rima Way. Our home is at the end of the street adjacent to this development. And first of all, I would just like to say, and I think I could speak for our neighbors, I want to thank the committee for all the service that you give to our community. We're long-time, long, long-time residents of Fayette County, We appreciate all the effort that goes in from everyone to help keep Lexington moving forward, but also maintain the character of what a wonderful place that Lexington is to live. And I would say that when we moved, we've lived there for 23, 24 years. And, you know, we bought a lot on the end of a dead-end street. so we knew that way back when that at some point that adjacent property was going to be developed and I want to be positive about what I say to you and to the developer having spent my whole career as a builder and working for developers and so just make an appeal to you and to the developer that in the in the development of this property that what be considered and maintained is what has already been said is the nature and the character of the surrounding already existing developments and certainly Nancy and I we welcome new neighbors it's not a matter of not wanting something we we welcome having new neighbors and sure that they they are going to be included and woven in to the fabric of our neighborhood that's already there so we welcome that and and we also know that increased density is just a matter of fact now in the in the time that we live in and so we're not upset or angry about that but we would appeal to you and to you that as you may propose the development to touch what's woven into that fabric is in keeping with with the nature of that and we're concerned that the new neighbors that we're going to have we want them to be able to be part of that same fabric that we have not something that is radically different and that causes whatever issues that might come from that so we thank you we thank the technical committee for their recommendation to you and we hope that you do the same thank you very much for your time Thank you. And I thank you all for keeping your comments brief. I appreciate that. Do we have a rebuttal from the applicant? Okay. All right, we'll bring it back to committee. I think I have a general question is that when a preliminary plan is proposed and then it comes back so radically different, is that really the same plan or is that a new plan? I'm kind of confused. Turn myself on here. Yes and no. I mean, it is a new plan, and this is a final development plan slash preliminary subdivision plan. And it's very different than what was originally proposed. The thing to remember is that in single-family development, preliminary subdivision plans are often the most appropriate plan for a zone change. And as a sidebar, it's true for industrial development as well. We see a lot of preliminary subdivision plans for a zone change. Normally what you would see in another type of development, apartments, commercial, you would see a preliminary development plan and a final development plan. So, yes, this is a different plan, obviously, and that's a big part of everyone's concern, the staff's concern. Yes, it's very different from the original, but the type of plan is probably not an important distinction in that regard. It is truly the differences that we see. I think this is a comment. If there's a question buried in here, I'll ask you all to find it for me. The issue for me seems to be more of applying a new set of comp plan requirements to a set of agreements that were made and approved under the old comp plan. And if we start doing that, the reliability of what we're doing in here, I think, self-destructs. So I have, if we, if this were, if, frankly, folks, if this were a proposal coming forward under the new comp plan, I might say yes to apartments there because we need increased density. But it didn't come under the new plan. It came under the old plan. And so I don't feel like I can support this. Probably one of my bigger concerns as well is that with the changes, the neighborhood wasn't engaged like they were initially. And so, you know, I can kind of empathize with the feeling of being baited and switched, if you will, just because you didn't come back and talk to them about it. But I don't know that that's a requirement, but at the same time as a good steward and a good neighbor, I think it would have helped tremendously. Right now I can't see myself approving this as well. I agree with both of my colleagues, And I also think that, as one of the neighborhood speakers said, we don't want to undermine the integrity and the community engagement of this entire process. We're trying to build trust and collaboration, and I think that that's an important aspect here, and so I can't support this either. So this is one of those, how do we word this? we word this in a positive way as move to support the technical committee's recommendation of disapproval is that okay hold on one second is there any other comments all right madam chair I move that we support the technical Committee's recommendation for disapproval of PLNMJDP 240024, Margaret Kamek Property. Second. It's been moved and second. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Aye. It's unanimous. Thank you. I'm asking the folks from the neighborhood, do you all understand what? Okay. Madam Chairman, members of the committee, we're going to move right on down your agenda to item B on page 3. This is Major Development Plan 24-25, the Givens property, lot 4. Okay. we've been seeing a lot of plans for this area where we're out off the corner of Citation and Georgetown this is the Givens property this is where the first Publix came through it's what we had proposed on this property we've seen several other we have a car wash we've seen a bank we've seen Valvoline we have dentist office last month we saw another building here now we're going to this lot here so whoever's working out here is really working hard to get them all full so you can see this this plan is a layout for a Panda Express we have Citation Boulevard up here this is the access drive going through the the area We have a driveway entrance into it. Here's our drive-through to go through around to the Panda restaurant. We also are showing connection to the adjacent lots up here at the top. They have submitted us a revised plan, so we were able to come up with revised conditions. So you should see that we have our typical sign-offs. We have a note that building inspection has now required. We just have a couple cleanup conditions left still. They did the development edition of the site statistics box, but they did not do any changes for their information. We need to replace the general notes. They had taken and pulled the notes from a previous Panda Express plan that they had done, which was out off of New Circle Road. so it was making reference to no access points to new circles so we need to make sure we get the right notes on there addition of topography information we asked for them to lighten the shading for legibility on the larger plan some of the shading it gets very hard to recopy over and over again we lose information addition of dimensions from previous plans we want to always carry all the information forward correct address of lot four and the site statistics and on plan face we need addition of notes 21 22 and 23 from the previous plan that deals with the improvements that are required as this property is being developed to note the Royal Springs aquifer review and if they have any comments with the plan with the new development on the property so I'll open it to you all to see if there's any other comments or questions. I'm a little slow this morning. Would you go back to the, yes, that, thank you. Where do they enter? Where do the cars enter? They're going to come in. They're going to come in off from? Off of here. The access road. So, right, so here is an access coming through the property, and so they're going to come in off of this access. Nobody's going to have no access to Citation, no access to Georgetown. It's all limited to where we are at this point. So their access into the property will be right here, and also for them to be able to leave the property. So it's right in, right out. Is that right? Well, no. No, it's just. Not necessarily. Not necessarily. It doesn't need to be because it's access. Yeah. So they'll be able to go in now either direction because this being an access easement through the whole development. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for staff? Okay. Thank you. Applicant? I'm not seeing. Oh, there you are. I'm sorry. I didn't see you over there. I missed you. It's all right. Thank you. Lee Pennington with Civil Engineering Services here representing Panda Express. I have no further comments on this project. Any questions for me? Any questions for the applicant? No, thank you. All right. Thank you. Okay. Any public comment? Okay. We'll bring you back to committee. Madam Chair, I'll move for approval of PLNM JDP 2425 Givens Poverty Lot 4 with the 18, no, excuse me, 21 conditions. Second. Moving second. Any questions for the motion? If not, all in favor? Aye. We're unanimous. Thank you. members of the committee we're moving on down page four to item C. This is a major development plan 24-26 for Hoover and Ford Philpott Evangelistic Association property. The fountains. Here we are and we are looking at the public site. So again we've got Manowar, Harrisburg Road. You can see the internal access system. This is the parking lot. And all this, as you all recall, there was a lot of discussion to get this public site right. Well, it's continued to evolve a little bit. And this is really a simple request in this regard. They are, they've determined operationally they need a dumpster location here. This is not an original dumpster location and this is to serve as we understand the liquor store because you all know how Kentucky law they separate the alcohol sales and the grocery sales so that's on that end of the building it's a separate kind of operation and you can see a sidewalk that they have and access out here from the building to that dumpster and of course you need to get there so they've added this access into the area. Now, this is a very small change, but because it was a reduction in approved open space, in essence, by the planning commission, it does require a major amendment to the plan. With that, there's only a few conditions really on the plan. You can see from your agenda with your sign-offs, they need to add a new note that's developed over time from building inspection. That's number seven. That's a new standard note now that goes on all plans. They need to clean up a couple of things, delete the date of the approval and the certification. It's an old date. Denote the width of the access areas. And then we do want to discuss one interesting aspect. There's a notification requirement, and it has gone out. The neighborhood's been notified. And this goes back to when this site was originally proposed for development. It wasn't a Publix. You know, there was a big box in this whole area in here. They had a development, and the access came in front of that proposed building. A tremendous amount of negotiation and work went into the neighborhood and the outreach and trying to get this development screened appropriately, and that sort of thing. Well, that process resulted in a lot of notes, and these weren't staff-generated notes. These were notes that were generated through the applicant's interaction with the neighborhood. They're all in here. One of those notes addresses service access limitations for Lot 8, and this was the area of Lot 8. And they were looking at this area, and with the original building and its association. You can see there was a lot of landscaping. There's a large easement. There's a privacy fence. All these things were designed in working with the neighborhood to mitigate the impact of this commercial development on the neighborhood. So there's a note that addresses that on the plan. So staff has that as a discussion item, something we believe needs to be resolved, and again primarily with the neighborhood who's impacted. This is a dumpster. I mean, we all know what's associated with dumpsters. It's the garbage truck coming and the beep, beep, beep and the clanking and the noise. It is for the liquor store. It wouldn't anticipate, you know, a lot of organic waste and necessarily bad odors and that sort of thing associated with it. But, again, that note is a limitation that was placed on the plan, interesting enough, kind of outside of staff or planning commission's purview, but through negotiations with the neighborhood. With that, the technical committee has recommended approval to you, and staff will be happy to answer any questions you may have for staff. Questions for staff? I need a clarification here. Are you suggesting there need to be further conversations with the neighborhood in result of the notice that's gone out to them? Well, they've notified the neighborhood, and we think, yes, we probably ought to know what they think about activities in this area because that's what generated the note and other notes. And, yes, there's a lot of landscaping, fencing, lighting restriction, but this is a change in activity in that area. Granted, it's probably a limited activity, you know, when our services go out and pick these things up and that sort of thing. I don't ever hear them picking up a dumpster, but I hear them pick up my Herbie this morning. They come by. But again, it's important to note here, they generated this note. And so we'd like to know what they've done to address it. All right, any other questions for staff? If not, let's hear from the applicant. Good morning. Matt Carter, Vision Engineering. As Tom said, we were kind of hoping this would go through as a minor, but it didn't. But here we are. We have notified the neighborhood. The owners of the development have talked to the president of the homeowners association, and they've really had no comment. I've had one landowner that lives behind, almost directly behind this. He's called and he actually works with the developer. He helps do inspections for erosion control and things like that. So he's just very familiar with the project. But he basically called just to say, you know, I'm looking at your plan. And he kind of speaks on behalf of the neighborhood. I would say we're not diminishing any of the commitments that were given to the neighborhood. The landscaping, the screening walls are all remaining intact. We're just simply adding a dumpster for the liquor store to the side of the building. So not much more than that. But if the neighbors are concerned, they're welcome to show up or they can call us. And we've made our notification, and that's where we're at now. So the person that called you, he was saying that the neighbors were okay or didn't care? To be honest, he did not say anything about the dumpster being a problem at all. He just talked about screening in other areas, if we would add a tree here or there. And, you know, I told him that's, you know, contact the owners and y'all can work that out. But the owners are really working with the neighbors probably more than any project I've ever been associated with. So there's plenty of landscaping, and like I say, all the commitments they made with the neighborhood, they're honoring. So nothing's changing by this dumpster. Would a letter submitted when we hear this at the hearing from the association or from, you know, would that be a possibility? Yeah, we can ask them to write a letter in support of it. Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant? Doesn't look like it. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Any public comment? Okay. Being none, let's bring it back to the committee. Did you know it? Yeah. Okay. That's a good idea. Can we condition number 10? Can we, if we discussed it, right, just service access? Can we put the resolve? And then could we add number 11? Number 11, we're a letter, we've requested a letter to be submitted from the neighborhood. That would be a way to resolve number 10. All right. All right. I'll move for approval of PLM, MJDP 2426, Hoover and Ford Philpott Evangelistic Association property. With the 10 conditions, with number 10 being resolved, and adding an 11th condition, requesting a letter from the Neighborhood Association regarding the note limitations for lot eight. Is that appropriate? Okay, thank you. Second. All right, it's been moved and second. Any questions? All in favor? Mr. Unanimous, thank you. Madam Chairman, members of the committee, we are moving down to the bottom of page 4. And this is item D. It's a major development plan, 24-27. And this is the interstate park property, which of course is the development plan we referenced when we were talking to you about the plat. and you do have revised conditions that have been handed out to you on this particular plan. Mint. Mint for your mint juleps on Saturday. There we go. Good job. Okay. So here we are again. Athens Boonesboro Road. Here's the interstate. Stadium is down here with the associated parking, all the athletic fields. Competition Drive is going to come in through here. Doe Run, its extension, and again, so this amended development plan is designed to show the outlot development in this location. Here's, again, we talked about that with the plant, creating this lot. Here's the access road to serve that lot. This is a detention area. This is an intermittent stream. That's an environmentally sensitive area in that location. In reviewing this new plan, it's a final development plan. Of course, we have our standard sign-offs from the various divisions. And then a couple of items, 13 and 14. One is to resolve access to the detention basin adjacent. That's this area. and again there's the detention basin this is the environmentally sensitive area right through here steep slopes intermittent stream and there's detention here there's frontage along Doe Run for this area but this again is environmentally sensitive steep slopes and could provide a challenge to maintenance of that basin it's going to be their problem it's never going to be a public basin is not going to be that our people have to go there and take care of it they have to but staff was a little concerned because the access easement doesn't actually serve that area so they're going to have to possibly access it uh and they could through this area when they develop here if they choose to but again that's a resolution in other words we're asking them but tell us how they anticipate maintaining that basin, because it will need to be maintained. And it's not obvious at this time how they intend to do that. They have options. So, again, we just would like for them to resolve that by indicating how they intend to do that. And then, no surprise, number 14, resolve availability and timing of sanitary sewer service. You heard that. You heard that discussion. They're working with Water Quality, Division of Engineering. There's work to go to upgrade the sanitary sewer. You heard they have a plan. You will hear a lot about that, hopefully with the waiver request on the plat and the timing and what they plan to do. In this particular instance, I just realized I dropped my remote. I don't really need a mic other than they seem to want to record me for posterity. But again, this is a relatively straightforward amendment to show the outlot development. Oops, wrong way. Here we go. And again, access will be off of Competition Drive into this city. You can see the restaurant's located up here at the front. Drive-through circulates around it. You may have a parking area in here. No access, of course, to Nathan's Boonsville Road. Access is limited only to the access road off of Competition Drive. It's only a 2,400-square-foot building. Coffee, I'm sure. I'll be happy to ask you a question you may have for staff any questions for the staff okay this is sort of a go for it I have never purchased Starbucks for instance never not once don't intend to I drink black coffee so hey Speedway makes great black coffee yeah they do Oh, yeah, they do. And I make better stuff at home. Okay. All right. The only thing worth putting in coffee starts with the word Irish. Raspberry chocolate's not bad. It's not coffee once you put all that stuff in. No, no, this is in the beans. It's some sort of beverage. So just sort of the broader context here of the whole development, How are we doing on the RCUT progress while we're worrying about the sewer? Oh, that's a good question. Is anyone? Yeah. Sure. Yeah, come on if you want to address that. Stephanie Blaine with Palmer Engineering again. So your question in terms of the RCUT, the state decided to release the RCUT for this development, in front of this development only. that has been let for construction my understanding is that construction you'll see people out there the next week or two so that contract has been awarded and it's scheduled to be completed before the stadium is open so that's not going all the way down Richmond Road they separated out just the single our cut that's in this area so that we could try to not have to alter the traffic pattern so many times it is likely that we will we do the safety concerns we want to try to get competition drive intersection open as soon as we can that's been a goal since they started practice out there for all of us ownership and all the engineering team just because we have concern about the left-handed turns off of dough run but we've actually worked extensively with KYTC to try to coordinate our our private improvements with their public improvements we've designed a temporary the temporary signal out there that we were just going to use for competition drive is now going to be used as part of the R cut you should see that signal hopefully start flashing in the next week or two the poles are up the signal heads should be in we I believe are going to request through traffic to go ahead and splash those yellow just to try to slow people people down just because we have concerns with the amount of people coming in and out of Doe run until we can get competition drive open. I can supplement that too. We got requests for detection from the contractor yesterday so it's a week or two is probably about right. So it'll be kind of three phases. There'll be a standard traffic signal intersection for a while while they build this summer. August 1st is one of the milestone completion dates where the RCUT infrastructure will be in and then the Temporary signals are if they can get the mast arms in which will be surprised It's going to be massed arm eventually but that takes so long to get that equipment that They've got a secondary completion date of December 1st when everything will be finished finished Yeah, so the the intent is by August 1st the our cut will be open Beside and be it substantially complete except for the mast arms The signal poles that are out there will be in a configuration that can work with the our cut but the final pole locations are altered from where the temporary are going to be. So we can maintain the service of those while the permanent poles are installed. Okay. Okay. So back to our development piece at hand. Did you have anything to add? I don't believe so. Do you all have any questions for me? Nope. Well, condition 13, resolve access to the detention basin. Oh, yes. Sorry. By the Planning Commission, we will have that addressed. We're working with ownership to discuss a couple different options to see if we want to access it from 1D, where this lot is, like extend the access easement onto, like basically not all the way to the dumpster, but extend it towards the dumpster so they could, you know, park a vehicle or a pump truck there to be able to clean it out there. and the other option would be to access it from 1E. So we're trying to look at potential layouts for 1E to try to figure out what would be both best for future development, but also allow easier access. And you'll have lots of information about the sanitary sewer services. Yes. So like I mentioned before, my understanding, and I'll try to get more information from water quality, for this proposed development and the stadium and then all the existing existing gas stations and Wendy's that there is now sewer capacity at that pump station for that plus excess with the upgrade of the pumps so the immediate concern I believe has been resolved but I understand there's still a lot of concern both for us in the city on how to address capacity as this goes forward because the next upgrade is a larger upgrade where we have to install new pumps a control panel a generator and so starting to plan for putting that design in motion but my understanding is is is with the work that we've done over the past week there is now capacity for this in the current system thank you all right do we have any public comment Madam Chair, I move for approval of PLNMJDP 2400027 Interstate Park property 5354 Athens Williamsboro with the attached 14 conditions. Second. Okay, moving a second. Any questions to the motion? All those in favor? Aye. Unanimous. All right. Moving right along. All right. right along okay this is an adaptive reuse that was approved there we go this is west third this is newtown pike Maryland this is the blue stallion and that whole area in there in that corner they're coming in to do some modifications to a property with a new structure well this property was here because they have artwork here but they're adding this new structure to this and increasing the adaptive reuse on on the property they submitted a revised plan and so we have a set of revised conditions we still have our typical first 12 or our typical sign offs we had the note number 13 for building inspection we had some still had some cleanup conditions remove 604 and 606 West 3rd Street from plan face and the site statistics. This property here is all zoned I1 and this property here is zoned R2. You cannot incorporate that into an adaptive reuse. It all has to be I1 before I1. So they need to remove these two lots off of here because they cannot be part of this adaptive reuse addition of topography information at 611 across the street at 611 this is a parking lot and they removed it off of the plan but we need to have it on because that's where their proposed parking is for the development addition of walkways between properties per article 16c of the zoning ordinance it's a very tight site so trying to figure out how to maneuver around it to get in and out of each of the buildings is kind of difficult they had some miscellaneous notes delete notes one eight nine clarify numbers and site statistics they started with some of the site statistics but didn't finish and complete all the information and then they added the two lots 604 and 606 So they need to be removed out of the site statistics while 611 needs to be added back in. I don't know. Addition of 611 information as proposed for the parking on the plan face and in the site statistics. Denote property boundaries with solid lines and adjacent properties with dashed lines. Provide documentation demonstrating compliance with Article 821.04D for adaptive reuse. We, they, sorry. With the revisions to the comprehensive plan, there's a list now that they have to go through and explain to us how they're meeting to meet the points. There's a point system now as far as the building type, whether or not they have residential in it, whether they're increasing tree canopy. all these different sections here they need to show us they need to present information to show us how they're meeting those requirements to get those points or outline it in a letter to us and then provided that that letter is reviewed and we can confirm that they do meet all those conditions then we'll present it to you all and that you all approve make a finding to approve the reuse again so that's another condition addition of landscape and open space from previous plan they removed they had some landscape areas in in the development itself and an open space area and all that has been removed we need to have that had it back in to note location of dumpster on plan phase per note number four they note number four talks about a dumpster and at the tech meeting they said that they wanted to remove the dumpster and just used Herbie's but our waste management guy said because of what they're doing they needed to have a dumpster so we need to show that dumpster location discuss compliance with article 16 18 and 20 and possible need for waivers this is what we've been working on as far as six you know parking landscape and open space discuss driveway access at the corner of Maryland Avenue and Newtown Pike. Down here is a corner at Newtown and Maryland. The driveway access is right here at the corner, which is kind of a question as to whether safety-wise that's the best place for it. Discuss driveway egress on 620 West 3rd Street located on adjacent property versus the layout. When this plan came in the first time, they had their driveway access was on their property inside their property line going to 3rd Street, the circulation. So what they've done is they've added parking spaces here and now they've taken their driveway access on the other side of the property line agree this is railroad right away and it's there for the railroad i'm not sure we asked they have to show us proof that they have the the easement on that property but currently they're showing the driveway going across the property boundaries onto the railroad right away instead of on their property like they had on the previous plan then remove residential zone parcels from the development plan that's what I was talking about these properties here are residential zones and we can't have them originally when they first brought it in they had this property here which was residential zone so they removed that one but then they added these two so still had a lot of questions for him so with that I'll open it to you all to see if you all have any other comments or questions questions for staff first of all just the the requirements for you that reviews point system is not in the comp plan it's in the ordinance and okay the ordinance was changed to require a point system for an adaptive reuse proposal and that was done not so much for this circumstance but we had other properties joining in on existing but the distillery district primarily national avenue another one And although there's no reason to reinvent the wheel in an adaptive reuse, we created a point system to just make sure these new properties particularly would add to and meet the criteria. Now, as Cheryl's pointed out, you know, this is Blue Stallion, and it's been successful, and that's wonderful. This parking exists. It was vital and a huge aspect of the original approval because of parking issues. This is the open space area, arts area, amenity. The key to this is they want to add this building as an activity building, which is what triggered our solid waste concerns as well to have a dumpster. This site is so tightly constrained, and here's the existing circulation. circulation and as Cheryl said, one big change is adding this parking and now here you can see they're going to be backing out across the railroad right away. The railroad is particularly, oh what's the word I want, protective of their prerogatives that go back to the 1800s by the way with the Railroad Act. So, again, that's our concern, and this is a tight site. And staff had an interesting discussion about this and about the railroad issue and the parking. And, again, Blue Stallion is successful. We appreciate that. I know everyone does. But, again, we want to avoid negative impacts on the neighborhood. So we hate to, and, again, this function. There was no parking here currently, and they could just circulate and come back out to Maryland. They're adding parking. Parking's probably needed, but it needs to function as safely as it can possibly function in this particular area. So part of that discussion that we had was we don't have parking requirements anymore, but this body has the ability to ask for a parking study. Well, you have the ability to question not only too much parking, but too little parking relative to a function. So this site is a challenge. And, again, they've done a lot of good things here, and we want to encourage that. But it's important that you all understand the concerns that we see here is the functionality of this site. Is that a suggestion or is that covered on some of the requirements in here? Staff would like for you to think about it. And they have a lot more work to do. And, Cheryl, I don't see, they're not here. The owner's not here. The design professional's not here to discuss these things with you. and again when we say submit documentation what we anticipated is that like was done on the previous adaptive reuse they would provide us with a breakdown here's what we're doing here's our what we think our points are boom staff will evaluate that and then we'll make our recommendations we'll determine whether or not they're meeting the point system for instance we talk about innovation they responded on the staff report they had a copy of the staff report they had a whole lot of they just responded and then and submitted that on a cella what addressing those comments one was well it's innovative because we're just finding uses for these old buildings well that's actually the purpose of adaptive reuse i'm not sure if just putting a use in a building is innovative. And again, these projects are challenging. And this one has certainly been a challenge. Blue Stallion has been quite a success. There's an attorney here who spends a lot of hours there, I believe, drinking. Don't you, sir? Mr. Brandon in Blue Stallion? one of your yeah uh-huh i knew it ah yeah so again uh the owner has uh interacted with staff on a lot of occasions uh with concerns and trying to make this and keep this going as a very viable adaptive reuse and so i i i want you I know the staff fully supports that, but we just have concerns about what they need to do to keep this thing going and have it function well, and so I just wanted to emphasize that. And, of course, like Cheryl and Tom mentioned, they've got to prove it, but I'll mention like Rosemont, the rail crossing at Rosemont, one of those restaurants there has an agreement with CSX to park along. It's very similar to this. But, again, like they said. Well, I don't know. It was between. So we went out there with the FRA and with CSX representative, and I guess they checked into it, and it seemed to be. But I don't know if there's anything we had on file necessarily. But people are parking there. They're telling people to park there, and CSX is aware of it. So maybe we need to be officially as well. Railroads, they can be difficult, but they do respond. Ultimately, you have to work hard at it. You can find someone. You can find someone at CSX who will ultimately address your issue, your question. But it does take some work. I was going to say, there was a development, and I don't know if any of you were on the planning commission at the time, but the one on South Broadway for the apartment complex where we have a bridge that goes over the railroad tracks. and there was a lot, a lot of discussion, a lot, a lot of work to get that access across with the elevator across over top of the railroad tracks. So it can be done, but her comment was, well, they said it's okay. Well, I want to get, well, I'm talking with Tom. I think we need to get something because it's just not, you know, if somebody backed up and train comes through, you know, just an issue. Okay. All right. Any other questions for staff? And the applicant is not here. Is that what I understand? Any public comment? All right. Back to committee. Okay. I guess we're ready for a motion of postponement for PLNM JDP 2428 Preston edition subdivision with the 28 conditions. Second. Move and second. Any question to the motion? All in favor? We're unanimous. I do like the color on development plans, though. It helps. All right. Moving right along. Members of the committee, we're headed to page 6, item F, major development plan 24-29, shopper's choice property. Publix. Publix is coming to Chevy Chase. This, let's see here. Oh, there we go. So we're on Romney Road. This location right through here. And then of course this is Duke Road. Right in here. And this is kind of a little commercial area that's existed over there for quite some time with various uses and that sort of thing. And this was originally a shopper's choice, then a Kroger's. May have been something else, kind of been there at different times. We had a proposal a few years ago for an IGA. Out-of-town guy was coming in. He was going to rooftop development and all that. He had a lot of big plans for it. Apparently health issues, some other things kicked in, and that plan didn't come to fruition. Publix, who wants to come in here and build a 39,900-square-foot building. access will be maintained off of romney road through the site into parking and this is an existing area of parking uh with the duke road frontage uh you can see they're proposing activation along romney road and here they're proposing a parking garage here's the entrance and i believe it's a two-level parking garage that is no small investment and that's a good thing really if you think about the grocery store in this area and the traffic is going to generate. Kroger's on Euclid, they went this way. They have that deck on top, which is fun. You know it is. Go up on the deck on top of Kroger. So they're going to have a parking garage here. You can see they've shown us there's a retaining wall in this area. There is a change in topography and elevation on this site. There was an original variance before that was granted along through here with the relationship of the property to the adjoining property. One of the significant things about this development is that they've requested numerous variances with the BOA, and they have filed with the BOA. That's being reviewed by the staff for their BOA request. You can see in terms of a development plan, it's pretty standard. We have all our various appropriate sign-offs, some engineering traffic, bike ped, division of fire, waste management. They need to add that standard good old building inspection plan now that says, hey, you've got to get individual permits for a lot of other things. That was being missed for a few years. People didn't understand they had to get permits for some of these things. So, again, that's a standard note. They need to denote the lot coverage and floor ratio per Article 21. You've heard this from staff. We like a nice, clean little thing. It says, FAR, floor, here's a number. Lot coverage, give us a number. Again, Article 21 asks for that. They need to provide it. They need to denote their B-1 setback along Duke Road. And submit an exhibit demonstrating compliance with required open space. Again, tight site. They're dealing with a tight site here with some demands on it to get this facility in here. Dimension, the parking garage entrance. Again, that dimension that demonstrated its functionality. Addition of a written scale. They have a graphic scale. Occasionally that happens. They'll miss a little something like that. But most importantly, 14 provided the Board of Adjustment grants the requested variances. They have a request for variances to reduce their vehicle use area perimeter buffer from 8 feet down to 0. Again, the challenge is the spacing through here and be able to get landscaping in here, get a drive aisle in here, get the parking. They have a retaining wall. There's easements. there's a lot of challenges on this site for its development. So they've got a variance on that. They have a variance to reduce the property perimeter buffer from 15 to 0, a variance to reduce the required vehicle use area interior landscaping, and that's from 10% to 4.5%. So, again, small site, challenges to get everything in there. The good news is they've obviously thought this through and they've identified these issues. they have a request to go from 90 feet to 110 feet in a maximum distance between the interior landscape. What you're going to find is virtually all these variances are related to landscaping in perimeter areas and interior areas to help make the parking and make this site function. And, again, there was some discussion relative to that about this crossing and the sidewalk coming in and the fact not only will traffic be coming into the garage for the public to use in the park, but trucks are going to be coming into this site, and then pedestrians. Again, it's a tough site in that regard. they've asked for a variance to decrease the minimum setback for a freestanding sign from 10 to 0. Again, tight site, a redevelopment of this site. So, again, wanted to inform you and let you know that you see a little thing that says provided the Board of Adjustment grants requested variances, there's a fair number associated with this site and with the challenges that they're facing. on this particular redevelopment. Wanted to make sure you all were aware of that. And I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have for staff. Maybe to back here. Any issues in terms of fire equipment getting in there? He's shaking his head no. Okay. He's just waiting for a chicken sandwich like everybody else. All right, thank you. We have the applicant raring the gun. Come on. Thank you, members of the committee. I'm Darby Turner here representing the applicant. And as Tom said, this is a tight site. It's a redevelopment. It's an infill site. It's very unusual, a lot with the L shape. so it does require a number of variances we are in agreement with the staff's recommendation I will say that Steve indicated to me that he's talked with Scott and they've come up with a solution for that crosswalk and we've also appeared before the landscape review committee already on the variance six or seven of the variances are related to landscaping and on motion Dr. Harry Clark, it was unanimously recommended approval for those variances. So we're going through that process and if we can answer any, Steve Vogel here with Strand is here with us, the engineer on the project and design professional and if we can answer any questions that you have, we'd be happy to. I've got a question about the surface parking. There's a parking garage that's proposed. Correct. So what do you see that surface parking, who is that going to serve? That will serve folks that don't like to park in garages, some handicapped, things of that nature, just by the nature of people. Some people don't like to go into closed spaces. So that's designed to accommodate those folks. So it's pretty minimal. It is minimal, but it could free up some space. But I'm just thinking. The delivery trucks will back into the first level. If you know the site, you've got Romney Road up here and Duke Road down here. And so the back end of the first level of the parking garage underneath the building will be kind of like a walkout basement. So that's where the delivery trucks will just back into that loading dock in there. And so some of that space in there is needed just to maneuver. Okay. Any other questions for applicants? All right. Thank you. Any public comment? Being none, back at the committee. Madam Chair, I move for approval of PLM MJDP 2400029, Shopper's Choice Property, Duke Road, Romney Road, with the 19 conditions. Move and second. Any questions for the motion? All in favor? Aye. Aye. Unanimous. Moving right along, down to item G on page 6. This is Major Development Plan 24-30, Greendale Hills, Unit 3. Okay, we are, this is Greendale. This is Malundi. We have Lucille Drive. This is out near the Masterson Station area. This is B6P Development. They came in and they put in apartment buildings not too long ago. Now they're coming in to do these two commercial buildings here on the edge of this development. With that, we have the first 11 conditions are our typical sign-offs, the note for building inspection. we had several cleanup conditions and some discussion questions addition of purpose of amendment note correct name on plan to match staff report correct plan number and lower right hand corner addition of bearings and distances for all for all property boundaries addition of dimensions for sidewalks clarify vicinity map for the area of the new development we like the vicinity maps rather small up here so it looks like it's it has the whole area addition of topography information denote access points for construction vehicles addition of dimensions with Greendale Road at the location of the cross-section line when we have cross sections the idea of varies the whole street doesn't vary whenever that line goes across the road there's a dimension there so what we like to see is that dimension for that at that point on the road remove the plus minuses for the building for square footage you ask for a certain amount of square footage you don't ask for plus minus that doesn't that doesn't work denote true height of all buildings and remove the maximum note they have maximum of the buildings could be this we want to know what that height is proposed to be additional of all information from previous plan including bearings and distances addition of tree inventory map addition of new site statistic box to clarify and to consolidate information we have we've been using a new console a new site statistic box to make sure that we carry forwards the same thing we're asking for everything as far as your open space your tree canopy your building square footage your FAR so we're asking we've been using the same box so it'll make it a lot easier to read because those site statistics are somewhat broken up and difficult to understand so correct spelling in the conditional zoning it should be instead of pay it should be day shelter it's they have pay shelter it should be day shelter additional multimodal plan article 12 8 H of the zoning ordinance like I said this is B6P and that is a requirement to show how there's connectivity throughout the development and to the streets discuss the discussion question discuss vehicular use area and the front yard on a corner lot for article 16 of the zoning ordinance we don't like to see access this is this is a corner lot this being an access drive that goes around the building. We don't like to see that with the new ordinance for Article 16. And then discuss compliance with Article 16, 18, and 20. I'm just curious how to meet those requirements for today for the new development. So with that, I'll open it to you all to see if there's any other comments or questions. Questions for staff? No. All right. Applicant. Good morning. Good morning. Kevin Warner with Carmen, and we've spoken with the developer, and they are agreeable to postpone this project until we can clarify some of these issues that need to be cleaned up. Okay. Thank you. All right. Good. Any questions for that? All right. Any public comment? Thank you. Any public comment? All right. Back to committee. Okay. Okay, Madam Chair, I'll move for approval of PLN and JV. Excuse me. I will move for a postponement of PLN and JVP 2430 Greendale Hills Unit 3 with the 30 conditions. Second. All right, it's been moved and second. All in, excuse me, any questions or motions? All in favor? All right, unanimous again. I know. Try to finish. We are moving to your re-approval items. Item A, Major Development Plan 23-17, Manowar Development. development. Sorry about that. Okay. This property is located off of Bryant Road over near the Hamburg area. We have I-75 to the rear. This is Indian Motorcycle Company, I believe is what it's called. We're just bringing it back for reapproval because we waited until the last minute to get our plan submitted and therefore they didn't get it reviewed in time before it expired so it expired prior to us like they delivered it to us and then it expired that day so we couldn't get it reviewed and signed so they had to ask for re-approval so we're just asking for a re-approval that plan that they submitted meets all the conditions it's ready to get it signed it's just they waited the 12 months and they're out of town so they don't quite understand I don't think the timeline they thought that if they submitted it they could get it signed that day and it's like no it's got to go through several reviews before anything could get signed so I'm just letting you know it's a simple plan they've met all the conditions it's ready for final review to get it moved forwards to get it signed but we have to go through this because they went over the deadline so they're not here because they're out of town so i just told my i just told tom i just explained it to you guys so you understand what's going on okay all right thank you any questions for staff okay i take we have no public comment so bring it back to the committee madam chair I may for reapproval appealing in MJDP 23 0 0 0 17 man of war development unit 2a etc as presented okay any question to the motion if not all in favor madam chairman members of the committee we're We're moving to page 8 under your postponed items. And it's item E, Major Development Plan 24-21, Ramsey Sullivan property. And you will have revised conditions for this. And you will have revised conditions, yes. This is located out off of Georgetown Road, and this is Kearney Ridge. Not too long ago, we saw a development plan for the corner here for a C-store and a drive-through. If you go down Kearney Ridge a little bit, this is Meadow Suite. Several years ago we put in senior housing. Now they're coming in for this development. They're wanting to develop this lot here. We had some concerns and issues, so now they were working with the adjacent property owner for this corner here so that these two properties can be working together. So that's why we have submitted revised conditions as now we're having both lots brought in. So with that, we have our typical sign-offs, 11 conditions, typical sign-offs. Then we had some cleanup. Clarify the purpose of amendment to depict the new lotting of the property and denote 15 new dwelling units on lot four. Agree they're adding it. We need to put it in the purpose of the amendment note. addition of address for the property and title block, addition of bearings and distances and general information for all properties, addition of topography information for site 2, denote review and recommendations from the Royal Springs Aquifer for sites 3 and 4 when this is located within that so every new development has to come in front of the Royal Springs so we have notes on the plan from previous developments going through the Royal Springs but when we take this through we need to just make sure we add those notes and when it was done denote need for subdivision plan prior to plan certification we want by correcting note number 21 to read recordation of final record plat prior to plan certification we need to do that because otherwise we would have to review this as a group residential with two structures on one lot and so therefore we need to have it subdivided so that it's reviewed as a single building on each lot instead of multiple structures on one lot. A resolve compliance with article 20 of the zoning ordinance. Remove labels and text over text to make it make information more legible there's some areas on this plan that they have notes over top of other notes and it's very hard to read addition of typical layout for building from site 4 to include dimensions they have an individual typical site building with dimensions here for lot 3 but we need to get one for four. Addition of adjacent zoning information. This property here is zoned B1, then this property down here is zoned I1, so we need to have that information because we have zone-to-zone screening requirements with going from residential to a business and an industrial. Addition of site insert for sites three and four for legibility and depict building line setback. We have in the past, applicants have taken and they've blown up the area of the development for like three and four, like three and four, and put a larger version of it up here. So I mean they have enough room if all those titles are moved down in here, they could put a blown up version and insert. So to make it a little more legible because we had some concerns and questions. about the building line because see it looks like this building line is going over top of the building line here so we'd like to see it an insert to make sure it's clarified so we can get a better idea to pick access easement an addition of maintenance note for the access easement they're showing the access point to get into this property is going to be right here off of meadow suite so then it goes through and then it crosses this property for these folks to be able to have access to their property which then turns around the crosses over to the access over to where the C store is so we want to see an access note an access maintenance note because all it takes for these folks not to be able to access the property of these folks turn around say no and put up a barricade or something so we want to make sure that it's an agreement between all properties like I said shift building on site 4 out of the side street side street yard along Meadowsuite clarified tree canopy required and provide it for site 4 remove site statistics for B1 zone so they have the larger site statistics box that we're talking about right here and so we need to have the tree canopy corrected in here they have a certain amount and they have a very minimal it doesn't meet the minimum requirements and then they have information for the B1 which we can remove that off of this development plan so with that I'll open it to you all to see if there's any other comments or questions questions for staff okay real quick well they will they need to show the the C store on here that plan that's a question and I'm wondering because of the access going across I think we will I just need to verify that with Tracy Okay. All right. Do we have... Oh, okay. I know we're trying to get to the end, aren't we? Okay, come on. Applicant. No problem. This is Johan Graham with AU Associates. I think we spoke last month when we postponed this the first time. We had a workable plan on the apartment lot for 24 units, but it kind of impinged on our neighbors, the Barlow's right to develop their plot their lot so we've worked together with staff to develop a development plan jointly that serves both of our purposes and allows us to develop both lots next to each other with some shared parking and access and so we're agree with agreement with all the planning staff's findings and thank you for your support great it's always good to hear people working together any public comment all right well we'll bring you back to committee okay i um chair i'll move for approval of pln mjdp 24 21 ramsey sullivan property unit 3 lot 2 with the 26 conditions second i've been moving a second any question to the motion all in favor I we're unanimous okay Madam Chairman members of the committee before Daniel does his song and dance I wanted to bring to your attention under staff items something that we're not prepared to present or show you a plan but just to give you a heads up because you're going to see it on your agenda and that is a waiver request for the Providence property out on Newtown the townhouse apartment development, you may recall. They have filed a waiver request, which will be on your agenda next week. You may recall the discussion about the access and whether it should be an easement or a public street, and it stubs into the urban service boundary at the rear. I know you remember the BOA case and all that sort of thing. They want to make that a public street, And that then creates an access issue into the development off of the public street. So they're going to be requesting a waiver for that. And obviously you have to have multiple access points into a multifamily development like that. So, again, we don't, staff doesn't see any real issues with it, but it'll be on your agenda at the next meeting. No. you morning everyone Daniel Krum planning staff what I just passed out is the staff reports and the corresponding language for the two zoning ordinance text amendments that we'll be discussing later on this afternoon the first is one that you've sort of seen before it relates to medicinal cannabis so just as a refresher on that that was recently in this past year or so approved at the state level so we are sort of putting in the foundation to allow that here in Fayette County under the framework kind of established by the state so planning staff was at the direction of the urban county planning commission has created this this staff report that kind of talks about those core components the cultivators processors producers compliance facilities and dispensary so the state's framework how does that match up with our current zoning ordinance where those should be permitted are all sort of outlined in the staff report they are trying to match them up with sort of existing character sort of businesses and kind of implementing the state's directives while kind of keeping consistent with our end. The second that you have in front of you is an applicant-initiated zoning ordinance tax amendment, and that deals with solar energy systems. This is an application from a private solar energy system provider who is seeking to locate in Fayette County. Currently, our zoning ordinance really isn't set up in a way to kind of allow for those kind of stand-alone solar energy systems uses and really hasn't contemplated in a larger way. So that zoning ordinance text amendment basically creates a whole new section of the ordinance that will deal with the different types of solar energy systems from being attached to buildings to freestanding and then kind of break stuff based up on size. This kind of creates zones that they can locate in based on the different type, much like the medicinal cannabis business, ZODA. Both of these zoning ordinance text amendments affect nearly all of our zones, so from the rural zones to the urban zones. So that's sort of a framework on that. We are going to be recommending postponement on the solar energy systems just from the pure amounts of sort of breadth that this covers. Staff needs time to really dig into this, look at best practices, get public feedback, and let you all as the Planning Commission take a look. We are recommending approval of our own staff alternative language for the medicinal cannabis, and that is actually on an expedited timeline because it's been initiated by us. So it will actually go to planning commission next week on the 9th there. The other zoning ordinance text amendment is going to go at its normally scheduled time, but we will be recommending a postponement with that. So you've got that language in front of you. We'll do the much larger song and dance about cannabis and solar energy systems a little later on this afternoon. But I just wanted to get that on you all's radar. Thank you. Thank you. Anything else? That's it. All right. Meeting adjourned. Thank you. chain of food For five long years I thought you were my man But I'm when I love I'm just a link in your chain Oh, you got me where you want me I ain't nothing but your food You're treating me me Oh, you're treating me through Change, change, change Change, change, change a fool Every chain Has got a weak link I might be weak Oh, I'm getting strength for me. You told me to leave you alone. My father said, come on home. My doctor said, take it easy. Oh, but your lovin' isn't much too strong. I'm added to your chain, chain, chain. Chin, chin, chin Chin, chin, chin, chin Chin, chin, chin, chin Chin, chin, chin, chin Chin, chin, chin, chin Chin, chin, chin, chin, chin Chin, chin, chin, chin, chin, chin Chin, chin, chin, chin, chin, chin, chin Put up what you need, yeah I'm gonna take all I can take Oh yeah Take, take, take Take, take, take Take, take, take Take, take, take Hi, I'm Liz Sheehan, 5th District Councilmember, and I am here today with Joe Farmer, one of our Recreation Manager Seniors for LFUCG. Jill, tell us a little bit about the program that you ever see. I work for Lexington Parks and Recreation. I am over the Therapeutic Recreation Division, and I offer programming, recreation and leisure programming for people who have disabilities. That could be a physical disability, it could be a cognitive disability, an intellectual disability, a learning disability, what have you, everything under the sun, and I probably have the coolest job in the city. Well, I know I have stopped by some of your activities in the past, and it always looks like a great deal of fun. What age groups do you work with? So we start as early as five. We've taken a couple of kids who are a little bit younger than that just because they were on the cusp of turning five, but we go all the way up. I think our oldest participant right now is 67, so we serve everybody. Yeah, and could you talk a little bit about some of the activities that you do with the participants in your program? So our program actually has been in place since 1955. We started our program through a grant through the Kennedy Foundation. And that was our first program was called Camp Kennedy, which is a summer camp program. So since then, obviously we've expanded over the years and offer everything from dancing classes to cooking classes, a yoga class that's getting ready to start in this very room soon. We do sports, we do fitness, and just anything that you can think of, We try to come up with a way to get people involved, keep them active, keep them healthy, keep them informed about what we offer as a city to our citizens. It seems to me like this is a great service for our community and the families in our community who are looking for these types of programs. Could you talk a little bit about, you have summer camps that you offer sometimes. Could you talk a little bit about those and how those work and where people might find information about those? Sure. We have a whole registration process. We do for our particular programs, we do registration three times a year. We'll do January. We'll do February starting for our summer camp, since you just mentioned. And then we'll also do another one in August for our fall winter programs. So anyone who wants to learn more about us can go to our website, which is lexingtonky.gov slash parks. You can learn about all of our programs, but specifically you can learn about therapeutic recreation and the programming that we offer year round. For your programming, are there costs associated with enrolling? We are a fee-based program. Some of our programs are free. We do day trips sometimes out in the community, like we might take a trip to Keeneland for the day, and they'll have to pay for their own costs there. But the majority of our programs are fee-based. We do have a scholarship program called Everybody Count Me In, and it's an opportunity for somebody who might not be able to afford the full cost of the program to at least get half off. And that includes for our summer camp programs as well. So it's a great opportunity. And for those individuals who truly, truly have a really hard hardship, we will work with them to make sure that they can get that experience as well. We're always looking for inclusive opportunities to mix and mingle our programming with another community program. We do that a lot. We do that with our dance programs. We do that already with a lot of our programs. But we're always looking for opportunities, and we're always looking for volunteers who are very interested in maybe working with these populations, but also just working for parks and giving back a little bit. And if someone is interested in volunteering, how would they communicate with you or give their information? Well, we have a volunteer coordinator. And, again, you go to our website, LexingtonKY.gov slash parks, and you'll look up for volunteer opportunities. and we do background checks on our volunteers so we know that everyone is safe and secure in all of our programming that we do. So it's a great opportunity for somebody if they're trying out working with different populations or just want to, like I said, give back to the community a little bit. It's a great opportunity to come and volunteer for our programs. Yeah, and one of the other things that I like is that you move around the community, right? So you're not always just in one place in one location. So, you know, family is from different parts of town.