. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. She said, no, that's not true. I don't know. She said, no. So, by the way, I don't know. Just don't throw the file. I'm not, I didn't get paid. It's just fine. It's fine. Well, it's good. All I got. It's good. Thank you. Thank you. Oh, there it is. There it is. They turned my mic on. I'm used to you all not needing a mic to hear me, so I never think of it. But we're going to move right on to the agenda. and the first item. And that very first item is the final record plat. It is final record plat 24-20, Castleton Lions Incorporated. And as you all are very much aware, the plats that this committee sees are either agricultural plats, that's exactly what this is, an agricultural plat, Or you see a plat that requires a waiver or a finding. That's the only reason we bring record plats to you now. A big part of that is very simply that they are ministerial actions, as you're all aware. You follow the rules, you meet the requirements, you subdivide. So Castle and Alliance is out on Newtown Pike, this location, and then Mount Horror. This particular property you can see has floodplain. This is FEMA floodplain right through here. They designated that and they have the setback indicated off of it as well. There are some other environmental sensitive areas. You see these areas? These are sinkholes or potential sinkholes as identified by mapping. Here's a spring site. Oops. Again, that heavy tunnel. So there is a potential spring. These are areas that will have to be designated as non-build areas. Should they want to build in a sinkhole area, they should have a geotech done at the time of they want to pull a building permit and build a house if they wanted to build a house on that particular property or in proximity to those sinkholes. Don't know why they would necessarily. There seems to be a lot of room on these properties because this is a thousand plus acre piece of property, about 1,071 acres. It's being subdivided, as you can see, into 16 lots. Very, very standard geometry, long squares. There's 16 of them. They range from a minimum of 40, which is the minimum requirement in the agricultural rural zone, up to, I think, the largest one is 83 acres. So there's a range of acreages that they're creating with this plant. The couple little cleanup items again designating the sinkholes as non-buildable and clarifying the hatched areas again as to what they are. And then there's a couple of access questions and these aren't particularly major but it's important. Staff double checked. These are state highways so access will be subject to Kentucky Department of Seven approval of the access. There's existing access. Particularly along through here. This is a little tougher. I know. She has magic things on the computer. But there are access points designated on these lots. ample access. There's access along Mount Horv Road as well. Now, there's a shared access in this location. So one of our questions is now's the time to create an easement on this plat for that shared access. That way, as you all know, then there's no conflicts in the future over maintenance, etc. So all the rest are individual accesses to the lots. Now, lots 7 through 10 and 13 through 15 don't actually at this time show an access point. So, again, we're back to the need of having Kentucky District 7 approve access. And, again, that can be done at the time they pull a permit if they need to. Again, that's assuming that someone is going to build a house on the property. Well, it's going to have to be sold most likely that somebody builds a house. and again they've already denoted on the board of health approval of septic tanks so again those can be resolved at that time in terms of access what staff would be most concerned about is making sure that easement if necessary is in place on this plat and with that your technical committee did recommend approval I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. Any questions for staff? I do, Tom. You said that this is a, because they are meeting the requirements of our ordinance, that this is a ministerial action I guess we're going to take. What are some of the things that we should be looking at other than access, which is going to be determined by the state? Very little. We have very little jurisdiction. Under our subdivision regulations, this isn't actually defined as a subdivision because there's no new infrastructure. There's no road being built. And these are? They're subdivided into parcels of property. They could be a farm, could be anything it'd like to be. Oh, yes. And they can farm. Sorry, agriculture. I meant to say agricultural for food production or whatever it needs to be. Whatever AR allows. And they can be farmed together as they are now. That lot line doesn't stop farming activity. Mike can tell you he manages a farm on two independent parcels. Well, he drives back and forth on those parcels and moves his horses back and forth and his hay and works and does whatever he needs to do. So, you know, that line that defines the property doesn't interfere with farm activities. Okay. All right. Thank you. Now, if they sell it, the new owner can throw a fence up there. And again, they meet the footage, the frontage requirements. They've established the appropriate setbacks. They meet the acreage in the AR. Just asking questions about how this is different from what we normally do. You talked about the sewers. Are there easements out there for other utilities for each of those? There will be as part of this sign-off. That is something that we always maintain utility sign-offs, even on ag plats. And what we have found is generally this is our opportunity to get an official easement. Most of them are prescribed because over the years on our farms, they've come out there. Well, they want electricity, so electricity gets run. It gets run to a barn. It gets run to a house. But there's a lot of times no easement for that other than a prescriptive easement. Occasionally, there will be deeded easements. And there may be other easements as well, you know, gas transmission lines and that sort of thing that can run through a rural area. There's none of that here. Okay. A couple questions. Maybe a comment later, but since we're asking questions, Tom, to begin with, you said Newtown and Mount Horb. I'm sorry, Ironworks. Did I say Newtown? You did. Newtown is up there. There is just a little bit of frontage there. Right, but the required frontages are along Mount Horib and Iron Woods. So Mount Horib, is that actually State Road? I double-checked because we were talking about that, and I wanted to be sure. I've been there for 50 years. That's what my information tells me. I've been running that road 50 years, didn't realize that. With Mount Horib, you're talking about access. obviously that's topography wise it's kind of up and down and so forth should be room to have access on those locks they have adequate frontage and there should be room and again with district 7 it's going to be sight distance that's what they're concerned about believe me I know just one last question I think in our ordinance subregs whatever you want to call it there's some sort of statement as to irregular lot lines? Yes. Do we have one here with lot one? Again, this really isn't a subdivision under our regs because it's agricultural. Even those really long lots don't meet the subregs ratio. But, again, this is an ag subdivision. It's not a housing, you know, literally a housing subdivision. Just trying to clarify. So, okay. All right. Do you have applicants? Tom, I feel here with the appointment. And just to clarify, Tom, I think I looked at Mount Horeb also, and I think it is a county-maintained road. It's not state-maintained. Well, see, my information seemed to indicate differently, so it's a county road. So we'll have to work with traffic engineering to get entrances, site distance permits, that kind of thing. We're agreeable to all of the conditions, and I'll be glad to ask any more questions. Any questions for the applicant? It doesn't up yourself. Thank you. any public comment all right let's bring you back to committee madam chair since this is my neighborhood and I know it very well one comment historically speaking you know it's something that I would hate to see but it's it's in our ordinance to do this and it's very allowable and as questions have come up and I've responded they actually there is a neighbor across the street across the Newtown that has done the same thing ten years ago and it's their farm is still a 400-acre farm, but it is allowable. And I've got a comment. I do have literature on Castleton Farm, historically speaking. It says that champions may come and go, but at some point they will come and go through Castleton Farm. That was a standard bread. They were probably one of three farms to start the standard bread industry itself. But at any rate, with that said, Madam Chair, I'll move. I think we can resolve. Yes. Madam Chair, I'll move for recommendation of approval plan FRP 24-20, Castle and Lines Incorporated, with the nine conditions changing eight and nine to resolve. Second. Okay, it's been moved and second. Any question to that motion? If not, all in favor? Aye. Aye. We're going to move right along down to development plans. And this is an amendment to major development plan, 24-34, South End Park, Davis Park. We're going from the horse industry to the tobacco industry had a huge impact on this neighborhood back in the day. Here we are. Oliver Lewis Way. Broadway would be over here. Versailles Road there. This is an amendment again to the South End area. This is the Community Housing Foundation, the land trust property here in this area. You most recently saw an amendment from AU Associates, affordable housing in this area and here. Here's the park, the city park right here. And so there, there's a little community center as well. They are proposing townhouses and single-family homes in this location. And again, this is part of the community housing trust activities that they are. Thank you. There's a close-up you can see they're proposing these townhouses. This plan was a they submitted a new plan and you have new conditions on it. They moved the townhouses up closer to Iowa Lewis Way to comply with the overlay requirements of that redevelopment area. Single-family home you can see they're continuing a single-family home pattern adjacent to the railroads. The little street here and lotting off that. There is a waiver request with this. It's spacing on the street access relative to this street and for this public street. You can see it's a pretty consistent pattern that they've established in the development with that. But they will be coming to you at your hearing with a waiver request. your staff recommends approval of the plan. I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have. Any questions for staff? Doesn't sound like there is. Do we have the applicant? Tony Barrett with Barrett Partners here on behalf of the owner. Really don't have any further to add or an agreement with the conditions and ask for approval. Thank you. Just for the record, I think we've talked about this before, but this is affordable housing. Is that correct? Yes. And how many units are we talking about? Well, there's eight single-family units and 13 townhouses. Tony, I just noticed something we need corrected. For lots three and six, your setback, your front yard setback, has to meet the yard requirements. So your frontage is measured at the setback line. So at the 25. I pushed the building line back. Yeah, you have to push it back behind that little throat. Yeah, I can do that. Okay. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Do we have any public comment? If not, let's bring it back to committee. Tracy, do we need a condition on that? No. So we don't need to add anything to the staff's recommendations? Well, if there are no other comments by our members, I'll make a motion to approve PLNM JDP 24-34 South End Park, Davis Park, with the updated staff's recommendation of approval with the 10 revised conditions on our second sheet. Second. We're moving second. All in favor? Aye. Do you unanimous? All righty. Thank you very much. We're going to move right on down your development plans on page two. Item B, Major Development Plan 24-35, Kidwell and Otis Property, also known as Gulf of U.S. States. Okay. We just saw this. You'll see there's revised conditions. We just saw this plan not too long ago as far as a zone change to rezone the central portion here. As you can see right here, off the Gulfview Drive, we rezoned it to R1T so that we could put the townhomes in, leaving the two existing homes already there. We have the golf course is around this part of the property. There's a floodplain on the property, which right here, and then we have the setback. So as I said, we had this plan revised. so now they submitted it in and did the two cleanup conditions because there was a question about a note that was added to the plan about we've made it a note where they don't have to come back and revise a development plan if they want to add an addition to the property because then it becomes single family homes. But we were questioning that because the way he had it, the engineer had it drawn, that was drawn right up to the floodplain. So we were like, well, you can't really add an addition going into the floodplain. So they submitted a new plan. That's why you can see condition number 14 has been deleted. So they submitted a plan, and they deleted that note about it, about the additions. So with that, right now we have revised conditions with all sign-offs and no other clean-ups. so with that I'll open it to you all to see if there's any other comments or questions you can see how it fits in these are some new aerials that we received so it shows the streets and then the existing homes and then where they're developing in between just as I recall we've seen this multiple times before right we've seen this several times before Right. Well, just recently, because they had a zone change. So this is the first time you've seen it as a final development plan. Okay. Any other questions for staff? Not? Do we have the applicant? Thank you. Tony Barrett with Barrett Partners here on behalf of Eden Properties. I don't really have anything further. I don't have a dumpster on here, so if I could get them to come off, that would just save me their sign-off. Number 10. Tony, how does the trash depart? It'll be just Lenny's. Lenny's? Or roll cards. Weiss management doesn't need to sign off on that? No, not with just five units. So do we need to keep TNR? I don't think Solid Waste needs to sign off on it. They've got very clear requirements, and they'll just set up Herbys for the residents. Bring them, drop them off. Right. Okay. Any other questions for that, Kim? So, Tony, two plans and no cleanup items? Appreciate your work. Trying to give you a holiday. All right. Thank you. Okay. Madam Chair, I'll move for one second. Hold on one second. Oh, I'm sorry. All right. Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? All right. Thank you. That's all. That's it. Okay. Any public comment? Excuse me. Excuse me. Can you come up? Right. I'm Carla Rodriguez, and I own property on Beacon Hill, which backs up to the golf course. My question is about the parking. I can't really see that plot. I know that area gets really congested. There's no required parking. They'll park in the street. Is that? Yeah. Yeah, we're on the properties located on the stub of two streets that are not anticipated to be continued because of the golf course. And there's a lot of on-street frontage that will be utilized. Okay, thank you. Just a comment about street parking. Moving forward, as we develop our infill lots, we are going to see more street parking. so I just want to make everyone aware that that's what happens when we do infill redevelopment. And public streets are public streets, and it's a good use of those streets for parking, and it also provides traffic calming, which is necessary in our communities. So I just want to make people aware we're going to see a lot more of this in everyone's neighborhood. I totally agree. It used to frustrate me when people would park on the street in front of my house and, you know, on my street. Right. But then I realized it was really slowing traffic down. So I've learned to like cars parking on the street. Okay. All right. Okay, now we're back to committee. Sorry to jump the gun, Madam Chair. You know, taking a look at that, we're going to have on-street parking, but that part of the road really doesn't go anywhere, so we've got only the residents there. Madam Chair, I'll move for recommendation approval plan MJDP 24-35 Kidwell and Otis property with the, what, now 11 conditions deleting, these are revised conditions, 11 conditions deleting number 10. Second. Okay, it's been moved and second. All in favor? Aye. Thank you. Alright. Members of the committee, we're going to move down to the bottom of page 2. Major Development Plan 24-36. Coventry, Belmont, also known as Belmont, the original name. That's it. Fireworks. So, again, this is a recent zone change. As you may recall, here we have Remington Way as it comes across Citation. Gatton Way is proposed. It's been built to about here. It's proposed here. It stubs into Coldstream. We have Huntley Place that comes in right across from the access that they're proposing into the apartment buildings here and here, and then they have access here. They're proposing seven apartment buildings, 280 units, and associated parking. I'm sure you all recall the discussion we had over the trees and the grouping through here, the burroaks, the burroaks. Here's another larger big burroak on the property that they have incorporated into their design so that they can protect these trees and utilize the open space and the advantages that offers them. They have maintained the dog park here in the rear. And again, this layout is essentially identical to the one that was approved at the zone change with the trees being added for that discussion. This is the clubhouse with the pool amenity as well. In reviewing this, you have your standard development plan sign-offs for the various divisions. and then they need to correct the zoning and the site statistics. It's no big deal. They're still referencing the old zone. It is R4. They'll need to go to the Royal Springs Aquifer Committee, get on that agenda, and have that denoted on the plan before it's certified. My experience has been with apartment complexes, they're generally looking at runoff from the parking lots and that sort of thing, and they look for separators in the detention basin to address the possibility of oil and gas runoff from vehicles that are parked on the property. They need to update their site statistics to include all the structures and total square footage. We like to verify math, and it's not that we don't believe them necessarily or trust them, but mistakes get made and we're just trying to verify their compliance. and so they need to update their site statistics to ensure that they're including the clubhouse, the maintenance building, and that sort of thing into their square footages and lot coverage. And then one small item, which is a discussion item, but again, that's just because it's a little different. We're going to bring it to your attention. Discuss the timing of the Gattonway construction. This developer is responsible to build Gatton Way, a public street, from right here. This applicant to the north built it to where they could get access into their industrial property. It needs to be built the rest of the way, and it'll have to be dedicated as well. So again, this needs to be part of their improvement plans. I mean, when they bring in their site development plans, they need to include the Gatton Way right-of-way in the construction of that street. Of course, it'll be built to public standards. But we want to be sure it's built with the site development because they're going to dedicate right away. It's technically a separate property. It could be a separate process or project. And that was not the intent of the note that required it to be built by this particular developer. That was something that came about through negotiations when the properties came in for development and subdivision. So again, we just want that stated on the plan, and that should resolve that condition. Happy to answer any questions you may have for staff. Questions for staff? Tom, I can barely see it from here. towards the end of Gatlin Way on that the side of where the property is is that access is that what is that between the two buildings that's an access point access there okay the apartment cars come straight in for our cars okay all right yes all right thanks for clarification and then all of our entrances have sidewalks required next yeah but they'll have to build it all the way to the property yeah any other questions you say all right applicant nice let's stay up it's my last one okay um tony barrett with bear partners here on behalf of uh who's my client denton out of louisville so um i really don't have anything further to add tom presented the plan it seems to me 15 could be a resolve i don't think we i think we're all in agreement that we'll build the road concurrent with the development and i think staff and i and My client can work out the detail of the note, that it just be tied to probably occupancy permits. So before we can occupy it, we'll have to dedicate Gatton Way. Staff okay with that? Yeah, if we can just change it to denote, and I think that's condition 15, number 2. So 16. Sorry about that. Oh, it is 15. Yeah, it should be 16. There's two 15s on there. Oh, yeah. Yeah. So 16 should be just, if we can change that, to denote timing of Gattonway construction. Yeah. That'd be great. Okay. Any questions for the applicant? Just one. Tony, to the, I guess, east, whose property is that adjoining property? That's Coldstream. Coldstream. Okay. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Any public comment? All right. Let's bring it back to committee. Madam Chair, I move for approval of PLNM JDP 2436 Coventry Lot 6 with the attached now 16 conditions, changing number 16, which was 15 number 2, to denote. Second. all right it's been moving second all in favor unanimous all right moving right along This property here is located out North Broadway. This being North Broadway. This property here, we had seen it some time ago. There's a sinkhole in the middle of it, and at the technical committee meeting, we had talked about there's some stormwater issues. I received an email from the applicant asking that this be postponed because she wants to continue to work on the stormwater issues with the Division of Engineering. So, we'll just... All right. Yeah, sinkhole's not a place to dump the water. Yeah. Okay. All right, so is the applicant here? No. Okay, she just sent the email. Okay. All right, well, with that, let's go on and bring it to committee. Yes. Madam Chair, I'll move for recommendation to postpone the plan MJDP 24-37 North Parkway Acres. Can we get a second? Second. Okay. All in favor? Aye. All right. All right. All right, Madam Chairman, members of the committee, we're going to move to the top of page four of your agenda. This is the SP Gross Subdivision. It's a major development plan, 24-38. It's located out on North Limestone and 6th Street. And I'm not even going to try to pronounce the owner's name. I wish I could, but I'm not going to try. So we are out. Oh, look there. Paula gives me those close-ups. That's why I was asking before. So we have North Limestone. Al's Bar, here's 6th Street, the elementary school or STEM Academy, whatever's happening here now, this area. There was a grocery store here for many, many years, set kind of here on North Limestone, and it's now been demolished. And they're proposing a little gas station kiosk right here, and you can see pumps under a canopy at this location. their access into the property off of 6 and off of North Limestone. This is a parking lot that the school apparently uses, and this is an open space area on the property. Now, they submitted this, and it's a B1 zone in an effort to try to get a convenience store and a gas station in here. They're proceeding with the kiosk and the gas station, before the convenience store part of the property would go in. We've had discussions with them about a potential zone change on this lot right here. It's residentially zoned to be one that would be the location of that convenience store. So there's kind of a lot here that's going on and a lot of moving parts. Now, staff has reviewed this along with your technical committee, and again, it's a major development plan. You have a lot of standard conditions and sign-offs. We have several small cleanup items. They need to correct the name of an alley, the old alley there. And they, too, will have to go to the Royal Springs Aquifer for review and recommendation. As you all are well aware, the committee does not care for gas stations and gas dispensing because of the potential for leaks and spills to affect the aquifer, which has happened in the past. The good news is it happened in Scott County, not in Fayette County. But we do a pretty good job here. That's what I mean by that. We've cooperated with them very well, I believe, over the years. And that also leads us to one of the, and I'll jump to it, 17, because you all are aware that we've had a couple of gas stations, Kroger's, for instance, and the Aqua come through. And what we've seen from those applicants is a demonstration of the highest level of technology available to monitor the pumps and the tanks, and they're 24-7. The standard in the industry now is, of course, they're double-laired tanks. But we've seen some of these other applicants, they go above and beyond. They line the pits. Again, they have systems to monitor. So we raised the issue on 17, is this applicant going to do similar technology and take similar steps to protect the environment and protect the aquifer? I'm sure there's a cost, of course, associated with these activities. This is a small convenience store operation. So, again, that's a question we raised there. We have some other serious issues, and that's compliance with Article 16, 8 of the ordinance. And we're talking about spacing of the gas pumps to residential, to a school, and then we have access issues. And there's some discussion about access to 6th Street relative to school access as well. All this just relates to the fact that it's a gas dispensing facility, and it generates a lot of traffic. so there's concerns about that relationship and article 16 addresses those requirements and at this time we staff has serious concerns about their ability to comply with with those standards access to Keller alley again this is the old alley right here it's created back in the day when all this was built and created and again we want to clarify if there's going to be any access to that alley. Doesn't appear that this plan is proposing any. I want to be clear how they envision that playing a role, if any, in the development of this property. And then discuss compliance to Article 18, landscaping. They need to be sure they have room at this point, although their intention is to try to come back and put a convenience store here. Until that's rezoned, that's residential. So they've got a significant buffer required through here. It looks like they can meet it. It needs to be clearly designated on the plan with that. But again, as staff has reviewed this along with the technical committee, we are at this time recommending postponement on the plan to you. Be happy to answer any questions you may have. Questions for staff? All right. We'll hear from the applicant. Good morning. I guess the biggest concern that the staff has is our compliance with Article 16-8. It has to do with the proximity of pumps if they're on a road that has a school or adjoining. there are some limitations on what we can do. So right now we're working through trying to figure out if we can file a board of adjustment to address some of these issues. Don't know if that's possible, but if we can, we're going to be filing a board of adjustment. So if we do that, that will push this back another month while we find out if the board of adjustment will approve what we're wanting to do first. But assuming that it is approved, access to Keller Alley, I think I called it Kelly on the plan, Keller Alley, we do not anticipate any connection to that alley. It's a small alley. It's probably 10 feet wide. I believe it's one way, and it's basically how the school accesses their parking. the school does have a small parking lot adjacent to our site and currently they're coming off the alley into my client's property and to access their parking i don't know if there's any agreements for that that's something we're looking into but we we want to keep You know, we don't want to block the school from using their parking lot, so we'll work with them. As for the technology on the tanks, we will be required to meet federal and state requirements for gas stations. EPA has pretty strict guidelines, so it would require double-walled tanks. and given that it is in the aquifer recharge area, we would probably do some kind of additional liner to protect the aquifer. As far as landscaping goes, we can meet the landscaping. We'll probably have to do, while we're in the process of rezoning the adjacent property, in the interim we'll have to do some temporary buffering that if zone change for the convenience store part gets approved, then we'd have to take all that landscaping out. If it doesn't get approved, it'll be permanent, but it will comply with the ordinances. Other than that, I'd be glad to answer any questions. How many pumps are there? There's four islands, so that would be a total of eight stations. Then there is a kiosk building. It'll have a bathroom. That came up at the technical committee. It's temporary. Well, it may be permanent, but if the convenience store gets approved, the kiosk would go away in the future. Question, Matt, so the convenience store, the zone change, that's still to come? It is. It's not connected with this at this time? No, this would be standalone as is. And just to give you a little bit of history, the applicant is the one that ran the small neighborhood grocery store. And they intend to do the same thing, put another small neighborhood grocery store back in. The reason they tore it down is just because it was so close to the road, a lot of cars hit it, And it got to the point where their insurance company, they couldn't get anybody to insure anymore. So plan B is to, they've already tore the building down. Plan B is to build the gas station portion of it first. And then if they can get the zoning, do the convenience store part. And really it's not a convenience store. It's going to be the same thing. It's more of a neighborhood store, a grocery store, just small. But they want to make it as big as they can fit on that property. Just historically speaking, I guess I've been driving these roads for too long. I do remember a similar gas station within a block of that. I'm trying to think if it's on Fifth Street or it wasn't there, but there was a similar gas station at one point in time in that neighborhood. Was it up the corner of Loudon? No, it was in that area. I don't think it was 4th Street, maybe 5th Street. I do remember Bob Cass there. But anyway. What did you pay for it? A gallon? It was very low. 20 bucks. It was very low. Because that was a nondescript station, too. Matt, since this is in a school zone, Do you all have any projections in terms of traffic volume once that gas station goes in? I have not looked at that, but we can definitely come up with some kind of projections for that and make sure that it is compatible with the school and what their traffic generates. Thank you. Any other questions for that? Thank you. Thank you. Any public comment? All right. Being none, let's bring you back to committee. Madam Chair, I'll move for recommendation postponement Plan MJDP 24-38 SP Gross Subdivision for the present time. Second. All right. It's been moved in a second. All in favor? Yes. All right. Thank you very much. And we're going to move right on that. Oops. Okay. So down page four to item F. major development plan 24-39 hamburg place farm here we are out at hamburg you can see sir barton way this location interior pavilion way through the development and we're going to this area right here This is at the end of Florofina where it kind of dead ends into the other part of the development over here. You may recall we had a zone change and an awful lot of work went into this lot and into this zone change to try to get them to meet some of the requirements of place builder and create the appropriate commercial environment here. They have access coming off Florofina into their parking here. The property, you see, has a B6P zone and a P1 zone. and there was a conditional use that was required to be approved for the parking along this restaurant. It's a two-story building. This is the second story here. We've got the first story in this location for the restaurant. It's over, it's 13,000 plus square feet in this story for the restaurant. They have a lot of pet access around the property and one of the issues, the only discussion item, you can see access through here into the adjoining property. The plan is basically similar to, almost identical to the zone change plan. Again, a lot of work went into this plan to get their orientation of the building, pedestrian facilities, that sort of thing into compliance with the plan so they could develop the property. There's a few cleanup items that they need to address, which they did with this revised plan. They did submit a multimodal plan with this. It'll have to be approved prior to certification. One drawback on this particular plan, you can see a lot of references to pedestrian areas and pedestrian access, right? At one time, we discussed where the bikes might go on the site, and they haven't really shown that. The multimodal plan has some more information on it, but that's the type of thing that could be reflected on this site plan as well. The discussion item that arose out of a lot of discussion at the zone change, you may recall the adjoining property owner had representation and came and spoke at length about their concerns about the development. So there was a discussion about the reciprocal parking and access, and there was a note put on that plan that they had resolved that at the final development plan. Now, the final record plat for this property, and this is lot M on that record plat, which includes the adjoining property, has a statement that says, reciprocal parking and access for all lots as shown on the approved development plan. So really from staff's perspective, that exists. Although there's no specific easement that was created for access on that plat for this. You can see lots of other easements, sanitary easements, storm easements. But the plan, the plat particularly, a recorded document that owners should have have and should be given to them at closing as part of their due diligence. They should understand that the plan that governs this property shows reciprocal parking and access. That being said, there was still a dispute and a disagreement. The adjoining property owner apparently had some interest in this property for additional parking. But it's being developed, as you know now, as I believe a Japanese restaurant, and they want to utilize the parking. but that was a note that was placed in the anticipation that they could report to you where they stood on that discussion with the neighbor that's a logistical operation you may recall very very high tech and they help companies all across the country with their deliveries and that sort of thing keeping them up on time and that sort of thing I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have for staff. Questions for staff? If not, applicant? Once again, good morning. as Tom said we have not changed anything on this plan we kept it exactly the way it was before and there's a reason it's just we went through a lot of iterations to get that one to work and it works so we don't want to change it as far as number 12 discuss resolution of reciprocal parking and access. The applicant has been in discussions with the neighbors. They actually presented an agreement that they wanted our applicant to sign. Our applicant would not agree to it. It was really weighted in the favor of the neighbors. But our applicant feels that the note on the plat is enough. It basically says there's reciprocal parking and access, and I don't think there's any more needs to be done. What they were wanting to do was basically assign some of our applicants' parking to their staff so they could park their staff over and they just couldn't agree. They can do it anyway. So it doesn't need to be in writing. But they're still talking, but I don't see that it's going to be any kind of resolution, and I think that the note should be enough. It says reciprocal parking, and what else can you do? So answer any questions. Questions for the applicant? That's quiet. Thank you. Thank you. Any public comment? All right, committee. So I guess the question is, is the note on the plan enough? We would generally say yes, it is enough. We would, however, generally stay out of any private disputes over that note. But we kind of think it speaks for itself. That's how the plan was set up, how it was reviewed and approved. You know, if they were to ask us, if they were to hire legal representation, we've got a lot of expertise in this room, we would say, hey, that note. But we've also seen situations arise over that. Was it Park Hills shopping center went all the way to the state Supreme Court where they argued over reciprocal parking and access and the impact on the property in that shopping center that was planted off in the different lots. So can item 12 go away? Are you comfortable with it going away? yeah we're like I say the plan speaks for itself it was always intended for cross movement we've encouraged cross movement and properties for many years just you know for that very purpose it's easier and efficient particularly out in Hamburg with its layout being kind of broken up the way is cross-movement has been pretty important for that entire development but you can't stop neighbors from disagreeing with each other getting in disputes madam chair I move for approval of PLNM JDP 2439 Hamburg Place Farm, lot M, with the associated now 11 conditions, number 12 deleted. I'll second that. All right. Move and second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. I've got to say, I think Matt's competing with Tony now. You know, there's no cleanup items on this one. Oh, yeah. okay alright so we're going to move on to page five we are at item G this is a major development plan 24-40 Pleasant Ridge subdivision now we just saw this one not too long ago for some change we have This is Liberty Road, Fortune Drive. Down here is Paradise Lane. We saw a zone change for this top portion of the property. Then we had another portion down here that at one time they were going to come in with townhomes, but they've now put it all together. So we have nine buildings. This is the final development plan. We have nine buildings, 216 dwelling units. They did do a cleanup, so we have revised conditions. So we're still looking for addition of proposed and existing easements. We have to pick a second public access point to either Paradise Lane or Wilderness Road beyond the final development plan per minutes from March 28-24. This was a condition that was added by you all at the Planning Commission meeting when the zone changed. Because we had the concern of over 100 dwelling units, you need to have a second access point. This is a fire department code. And right now they're only showing one access point here off of Liberty Road. So we were looking at Paradise Lane to be approved. They show an emergency access that comes off the rear portion here. There's a pump station located on the school's property here, which will lead... Oh, it's an LFCC? Oh, okay. I was thinking... Okay. Sorry about that. But there's a pump station, and then they had an access point that took you down to Wilderness Road down here. So that's where we were talking about where the public access would be. We have a discussion question. Discuss shifting building nine to protect three significant trees. This being building nine, they're showing three trees right here. And we're just curious if they cannot shift this over a little bit. The trees are two red oaks and an American elm, which are significant trees. We discussed the improvements to Paradise Lane. Currently, they're showing Paradise Lane an ending in a hammerhead for terminus because when you have a street stubbing into a piece of property, you have to show some type of terminus for that stub. And so they're showing a hammerhead. But, again, we came back with that question as to whether or not to improve for a second access point, egress point. And then it says discuss proposed emergency access through LFUC pump station to Wilderness Road. Like I said, that's down in this location coming off the rear portion of the property to the pump station. So with that, I will open it to you all to see if there's any other comments or questions. Any questions for staff? I do. Go ahead, Mike. No, go ahead. So technical committee has this as postponement, is that correct? Yes, sir. And also staff has this as postponement. Yes, sir. What's the reason that you all have this at postponement? Well, we're still looking for that second access point and the fact of at the meeting, the meeting at the zone change after reading the minutes over again there was a discussion over the second access point at the tech meeting and so i pulled out the minutes and i was reading through the minutes and i stated exactly what's on the minutes it's a second access point to either paradise lane or wilderness road will be on the final development plan and and emergency access. And Bruce, to further elaborate on it, Paradise Lane is a much quicker route into that property. It's shorter and more direct. So the question is really, and Wilderness Road, this access road that the city built, this driveway, will go to Wilderness Road. They reported to Tech Committee that our water quality people They are in negotiations and talking about this. But again, it's do we want our emergency response people, and they need the exit. They're going to take one. But is Willing's Road really the most appropriate one, or would Paradise Road be more appropriate because it's quicker? Now, the issue with Paradise Lane is its width and make sure that the emergency vehicles will fit on there. And so, again, it's which one's the best option. But it's also not just emergency access. It could be secondary access as well. Right. Because with fire, they asked for that second access point. So we don't have that second access without. Okay. Because I remember that there was a debate between the committee, not a debate, but a conversation between the commission and the neighbors and the owners. and I believe that the neighbors were not interested in the well we'll talk to the applicant and see what the applicant has to say thank you I was gonna say Cheryl didn't get into detail about this but Vaughn brought up at Tech Committee the stormwater issues so on-site they're not depicting a stormwater basin anywhere we know that they're again working with the school to try to figure out a modification to that FEMA floodplain and then there's the widening of Liberty Road that's also occurring yeah so maybe Vaughn can elaborate on some of that Matt probably has more information but strand is doing an improvement to Liberty Road which includes sidewalk and a part of that is revising stormwater management in that area which is doing a loamer for the basin on the school property and so that floodplain that now they're showing wasn't shown previously could be changing my comment on just seeing this now is that they're not showing a vegetated buffer which would be a requirement of having a floodplain so besides not showing stormwater there's what's happening with the floodplain and what does that need to be on this DP so just to refresh my memory is that the section of Liberty Road where they have the bus parking and it floods regularly along there so matt may have more information but i assume that liberty road as they're widening it those storm water issues are going to be addressed yeah yeah um i guess i'll start with liberty road so we obtained plans from the highway department for their proposed improvements. And so our plan reflects like where our buildings can go relative to where the road is widening and also the grading. We can make our buildings work as shown here with what they propose. So that includes giving them additional right-of-way. there is a project on the school site they're redoing the detention basin and the flood plain on it my client is in discussions with them about seeing if they can incorporate our detention on that site and I don't have an answer I can report today but we'll get that resolved before this plan And hopefully before it goes in front of you. The issue about the second entrance, I wasn't totally sure if a second entrance was required, but is that what it sounds like based on the zoning? so probably the best location for that would be Paradise Lane. The land that we have available over to Wilderness is currently owned by Lexington. It's the road to their pump station, and the width of it is just not wide enough to accept a public street. and it would be wide enough to put in an access for the fire department, but if we're going to have to put in a second entrance to the site, I don't think we need another entrance for the fire department also. So given that, I'm going to have to rework where I show the hammerhead at the end of Paradise Lane. I'm going to have to rework that and put a roundabout in there. There would be some improvements we would have to do to Paradise Lane, and what we don't have the ability to do is a full curb and gutter, storm system, sidewalks, because we don't own that property. the people on paradise lane do not want us doing anything to that but there are some within the right of way that's there we can make the road wide enough for emergency vehicles and then the cul-de-sac will be to a public standard where you know we can vehicles can turn around and it so it would be a second public access the three significant trees that are right on the edge of building nine I'll work on moving that building done and then I guess the last thing is we're we're working with sanitary sewers on taking that pump station offline we will be And our sewers will tie into a new proposed sewer that would basically take that pump station offline, and it would tie into on the other side of Liberty Road an existing main over there. So, again, we're working, we're still working with the sewer department on that. Matt, I have a follow-up question on that line. At Technical, we had talked about that pump station coming offline. where will that line be routed to relative to your property? Yeah, it would be, it would not go through the school site. It's my understanding it would just route through the driving aisles of our property and then back out. I know there were some issues with some trees right along the property line between the school and our development. So we wouldn't be in the way of those trees, if that's what you're curious about. Well, you know, if you have a lot of bends and angles and things in a line, that can be a problem. I was thinking more about any conflicts with buildings on your development to reroute that line. Well, there is currently some conflicts, And there are existing sewers that we'll have to reroute, but that's just part of the development. I mean, we understand that. And easements that are under the – or over the – or buildings, proposed buildings that are over those easements, we'll have to release the easements once the new sewers are constructed. But that's just part of the project. Any questions? for? Not really questions, but yeah, Matt, please take a tent out there and camp out near those trees. To just clarify, zone change-wise, there was a lot of discussion on that second access, and yes, we needed for emergency personnel and so forth, but with over 200 units in there and all that traffic, public access is what we were looking at needing as second access. So just work with us on that. Yeah. And I will say it's amazing how cooperative neighbors get when they realize there is a road going in and they want on-street parking. So you would probably limit it to a 20 to 24-foot wide road right now with the existing right-of-way, but if those neighbors wanted on-street parking, they may be a little bit more cooperative in allowing and dedicating right-of-way. So it may be a solution that resolves itself when they realize that they do want on-street parking, because right now they're pulling up in their front yards and things. If you can't work with the school for detention, do you have a backup plan? Yeah, the backup plan is, and I can show on the plan, maybe label it possible detention, detention, but it would be underground most definitely. And it would be. Up in that corner? Well, no, it would be in the driving aisles. We would work it. Can you show it on the. Oh, yes. Yeah. Because obviously it's that your site is draining towards the floodplain, right? So. Yeah. High end is here and it just kind of works its way that way. So probably this area, this long driving aisle here and this one here, we would work underground detention in it. And it's pretty common. A lot of the apartment sites we've done in Lexington, that's the way we handle detention. And I actually like it better underground because from a maintenance standpoint, you know, you don't have to worry about somebody getting in the basin and garbage getting in it. There is some maintenance associated with just keeping the inlets clean. But also we can address water quality. I don't think it gets better than in an underground basin filtering through limestone rock it lowers the acidity of the water I don't know if I would drink it but you probably could coming out of one of these basins but I would say please mark that as go ahead and get it on the plan so that we don't have to consider it the next time we see it, considering you've got a postponed recommendation. Yes. Okay. All right. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Any public comments? Bring it back to the committee. I'll do it, I guess. Madam Chair, I move for approval of PLNMJDP. Approval. Postponement. Oh, sorry. I'm worrying about the numbers, not what I was saying. I move for postponement of PLNMJDP, 2440, Pleasant Ribs subdivision lot 127 with the attached 16 conditions. Second. All right. It's been a movement second. All in favor? Aye. Be unanimous. Okay. Thank you. We're headed on down your agenda at item H, Major Development Plan 24-41, Masterson Station Center. We're going across town, going west. And, yes, once again, I can tell you that the applicant's not here. He sent me an e-mail this morning and said that he would like to continue on with the postponement because of this is located out Leastown Road, Citation Boulevard. they were looking at this corner here off of Robinson to put in an auto zone because the ordinance has changed a little bit and we're supposed to bring our structures up closer to the street on a corner because it's right on the corner here on Robinson and also on Lee's Town. And so he was wanting to work through. So like I said, I received an email this morning, and he's under the, he's agreement with the postponement recommendation right now until they continue to work on this. So I don't know if there's anything else I can help you with that. I guess that's it. Can we have a motion for postponement? How can I do in this one? Madam Chair, I'll move for recommendation postponement plan. MJDP 24-41 Masterson Station Center with the 24 conditions present. Second. Is it a move and second? All in favor? Aye. Your name is? Okay. Moving right along to page 6. Item I. Major development plan 24-44 Pemberton Farm Lot 3B. Okay. This property is located, we're just going around the corner here because this property is located here off of Citation in Georgetown. This is Jaggy Fox Way, Innovation Drive. This is where the cul-de-sac was being extended out to Georgetown. Right here, we're at the corner inside here. This is Webasco, and the structure actually stands there. They were wanting to come in and enclose some canopy areas, so that's additional building square footage, so that is why they're here with the development plan for revisions to add that square footage. With that, you can see we have our typical sign-offs and just a couple cleanup conditions, record-plied information, addition of note 16 that the property meet article 18 for the landscaping requirements, denote utilities, denote location of access point for construction vehicles. It's a fairly simple addition of the, like I said, they have canopies on the property, but they're wanting to enclose those for additional square footage. Any other questions? This is the staff. It's not an applicant. Hi, I'm Ashley Kratzer with Denim Blythe, and I'm here on behalf of Webasto. I don't have anything else to add except that regarding traffic, the client decided to do the one-way, not two-way, and we're just requesting approval. We're agreeable to the conditions. All right. Do you have any questions for the applicant? Just curiosity, what's in the building? Who's the tenant? It's Webasto. They do sunroofs for cars. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Any public comments? Being none, committee? I was getting ready to elbow him here. I recommend approval for PLNMJDP 24-44 Pemberton Farm Lot 3B Bluegrass Business Park with the recognizing the staff's recommendation of approval and the 14 conditions. Second. All right, move and second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Unanimous. Okay, Madam Chairman, members of the committee, We're moving down to the bottom of page 6 under Zoning Development Plans, Major Development Plan 24-42, Springhurst Subdivision Unit 2. The conditions continue on to page 7, although we do have a handout for you because this is a revised version of the plan, so we have some revised conditions for your consideration as well. So we are located out on Herdsburg Road. This is the Springs Motel site that has been redeveloped. Here we have Springhurst Drive. So here we have a close-up of the site plan itself. They're proposing right in and right out off of Harrisburg Road. There is a median in this location on Harrisburg Road which helps facilitate that. Circulation patterns, you can see they come in, they circulate around the Dutch Brothers Coffee Building at this location. This is a zone change request, a B3. We have a retail building of about 6,000 square feet per toes at this location, along with associated parking, dumpsters. And again, you can see a double drive aisle that comes around, circulates around the building, and then they have a pickup window at this location. Here's a patio area. this proposed retail building in the rear also has a patio area as well. Of course, this is a preliminary plan, and should the zone change be approved, you will see a final development plan on this property. Now, they cleaned this plan up, and as I said, this is a revised version of such. So as a preliminary, we have some pretty standard sign-offs of engineering, traffic, urban forest or green space, environmental quality. they cleaned it up a lot. Now we have some discussion items. Discuss the turn lane on Harrisburg Road. There's a turn lane into the Springs Motel that starts at their frontage in this location and there's a turn lane. We have a right in right out so there's a question as to whether or not it would be a good idea to have a desal lane in essence on Harrisburg Road into the right in right out. And, of course, again, as you look at this, as people are slowing down or turning here, there will be people slowing down as well towards this turn lane. Now, as you turn out, these people are going to be headed out. They're going to be crossing that turn lane, most likely into going straight on down Broadway, Harrodsburg Road. So, again, there's some concerns how to mitigate the conflict to the best potential that we can. they are proposing cross-access in this location into the springs. So that will be, in essence, a continuation of a service road function, as we have on the spring site. And, of course, as you know, we have a full access point into the spring site that that turn lane serves. And then we have right in, right out into the springs in a couple locations, as well as access to Mitchell at the rear. So this cross-access connection would allow people that are utilizing this site to stay off of Herdsburg Road, move through the adjoining property, and have choices, again, as to where they want to go and how they want to go. They could utilize the light. They could go to Rosemont Garden. They could go to Mitchell. They have various opportunities with that cross-access. Again, something we do like to encourage where we can for that purpose. Can you pull back to that other slide that shows that whole aerial view of that section? How about if I do that? That would be perfect. So, again, they're talking about cross-access into here, and there's the full access point they allowed to keep on springs because it existed. That is a full access point. An interesting thing, and I will own up to it, that I missed it when they brought in the plat. I'll take responsibility for it. when they brought in this plat you see our little street right here that stubs into the spring site we should have made them terminate that or connect it we missed it and again i don't mind telling you that was an oversight primarily uh on my part uh because again that would have been a very valuable asset to springhurst and allow those residents access and that was intended it's a stub street that's Stub Street. They're intended to stub into the adjoining properties and make connections and continue movement. What's interesting about this area, if you look at some of the old plats in this area and even a little bit closer and over towards Lafayette, some of those streets were never completed, never built according to how they were originally platted. The area, Springhurst, 1952 was when it was platted. That was a good year. I think Mike was born in here. Close to it. Me too. Not hardly. Yeah. But they are proposing that connection. Another question that we've had, let's see if I do this right, is, again, this is a B3 proposal, and it's adjacent to residential, back along the rear and sides of Springhurst. these areas and this area. And if you look at this area particularly, you see these rather notations and that sort of thing. They've got distances shown. 15 feet is the required landscaping width. They can go to a fence. Part of the discussion staff would like to have whether or not that's appropriate enough landscaping between that use and the rear of that building and the adjoining residential properties. However, there's an easement there which presents a conflict that's got to be resolved. particularly if staff or if really the commission decides that additional landscaping may be appropriate in this case. As you all know, there are times when that's deemed appropriate due to the requests of the neighbors and adjoining property owners that there's some additional landscaping. Well, it's got to fit. It's got to survive in that location. So that's just a concern that we have with that area and with that particular conflict. we have discussed stormwater management that's just kind of a heads up this is an acre so they have to address stormwater management this is a preliminary it will have to be done this is approved at the final development plan stage to address stormwater management with that it's been reviewed by your staff technical committee and recommended approval to you be happy to answer any questions you may have for staff. Daniel's going to talk to you. It's his own change. I almost forgot him to put us on. I don't know if this is the time to ask this, but the retail operation that's proposed there, do we have to address issues like dumpsters and that kind of stuff? There's a dumpster showing on the property. In terms of proximity and buffering to the neighborhood, that's my question. Commercial use behind there, doctor's office. All right. Good morning, everyone. So in terms of, I guess we'll start with sort of public engagement, the applicants and the neighborhood have been in contact, and staff is set to attend a meeting they're hosting on the 11th. It will include the neighborhood association that this is located in, as well as the invitation was extended to some others in the notification area as well. So they don't have anything to report at this time, but staff will be present there to answer any kind of procedural questions. Looking at the zone change side of things here, the applicant, based on its proximity and its location on Harrodsburg, has chosen to situate this as a corridor. Staff thinks that that is appropriate. However, what they're showing and what they've kind of justified is low density, non-residential. Our comp plan says that needs to be kind of median density and up. And so much of the staff report kind of revolves around sort of what is the appropriate density at this particular location. As they've built it out, it's sort of mirroring how this is developed, you know, in the historical patterns, but the comp plan is telling us, hey, on these most significant areas to try to increase that and build kind of towards the future. So staff is seeking some further information on the density, on the amount of impervious surface, tree canopy, as well as some of the relationships between that and the residential. So we'll get into that a little bit more later on this afternoon, but staff is still seeking some additional information there. But I'd be happy to answer any questions you all have on the place builder side of things. Questions? Thank you. Thank you. All right. applicant good morning all Brandon gross I'm here on behalf of the chaining family I'm the chaining families on this site for a number of decades it was their mother's home and she actually ran a beauty salon out of the basement. Currently I believe a mother-in-law or a sister owns one of the adjacent residential properties. I'm gonna... Did I do that right? Nope. Nope. There it is. Alright. I'm gonna just kind of go through some of the items. since this is my first time here i apologize for continuing to mess things up um so just want to discuss um some of the items as daniel mentioned we had reached out to the neighborhood association to try to get a meeting last month before today's meeting they asked us to postpone that meeting with them. So we're actually having it next week on the 11th to discuss with them. So we have not had the neighborhood meeting yet, but we have heard some of their concerns and the revised plan has addressed them. I'm here to talk to you today about some of those concerns. I'm going to start with first on the issue with buffering. So I believe one of these three houses is actually owned by one of the family members. But the residential zones start here. This is technically R3 even though it's run as a commercial site. And it goes around here. So my client, we've discussed this and we'd be willing to put in an 8 foot solid fence around that area. We'd be willing to put in some additional landscaping. We don't think that would be an issue. We're going to talk with the neighbors, see what what they're interested in. We do think this building, on the other hand, is a pretty good buffer. There's not going to be room to have exits out the back. Right now, the plan is that customers and product would come in through the front. And so this should be more or less a 12-foot solid wall that buffers the main activities on the site. But we think we can move through that with the neighbors and with staff. I'll let Matt talk more about the stormwater. I will just mention that this site, I'm going to that's north, west, east, south. My understanding is the water runs east to west on this site, so it does not run towards the neighbors. Currently, there is stormwater facilities here. There's a stormwater facility here. We think that we will not have an issue with capturing the water on the site and doing the water quality. And it may be we do underground retention. We won't know that until we get to the final development stage. We recognize that that's an issue, but we don't foresee us not being able to get that resolved with the Division of Engineering. But Matt could talk more about that. This project is also, we intend this to be what's called a pass-by project versus a destination project. We have not done a full traffic study just because we're not going to generate that much traffic from this site. We've talked with Stuart, and he confirmed that with MPO. But we have done a warrant on it, and we believe that what we're going to do is we anticipate during peak hours capturing 40 cars per hour off Harrodsburg Road. And then in the evening, capturing maybe 20 hours, 20 vehicles per hour. So this is not going to generate a lot of traffic during peak hours is what is anticipated. and as to the turn lane our property ends here we have an existing access we're going to move that to here to make it a right in right out it would be a protected access generally like I said the warrant study shows that we don't need a turn lane into our site we are proposing a service lane here. So if this property ever gets developed, they can tap in, and then we are proposing a service lane here, which would give us a secondary access point into the existing commercial site. And on the context regarding densities, if you see currently there is a single-family house, we're increasing our density by five times, which isn't quite as dense as some people would like. But if you look, we are in line with the context of this area in which there just are not two, three-story buildings in this area. I've not talked to the neighbors about that point, but I would guess that the neighbors would not want a two- or three-story building built here next to their houses. But that's something that we will address with neighbors, and we'll talk with Daniel on that item. And so with that, I'm going to go ahead and pass it over to Matt. Matt, is there anything you want to add that I may have missed? Similar to the previous project we discussed, detention, I'm going to show detention and call it possible or, I mean, I don't know. until we get into the final plans, I don't know the exact size it needs to be, but I do know we want it in this area. And the reason is, as Brandon said, the site, it drains. This is high, this is low. So the water all runs this way. There's an existing spring right here. It's a little small like an artesian well. It overflows and enters a pipe here, runs down that property. So everything we do drainage-wise will be downstream of this. And so our detention and water quality will be up here, and then we'll discharge into a structure here going under Harrisburg Road. we have to meet the division of engineering's requirements for for detention and water quality actually the due to the size water quality is not required but we're going to do it anyway and the reason why we're going to do it anyway is because we're doing underground detention and when you do that it's very easy to just make it a little deeper and build in some water quality and we feel like given that stream that's there we would you know we want to do our part and make improvements to the system definitely not make it any worse than it is today As far as Brandon said on the turn lane, we did do Kentucky Transportation Cabinet as a program where you put in your trips that this will generate, and it also, you put in the existing traffic on that road. and it does not warrant a turn lane, doesn't even come close to warranting it. So we just won't be generating that much traffic. So we don't feel like any turning lanes needed. We did look at Harrodsburg Road and between New Circle Road and Clay's Mill, there are only two right turn lanes on the northbound lanes. So, and I guess that just goes to show you they're not always needed. There's one at Pasadena and there's one at the Springs Inn or the Springs site. As far as the landscape buffers, there is a, the conflict with utility easement being on the property line and the landscape buffer. The utility easements are 10 feet, and they're centered on the property line, so it's five on each side. So we will have the fence that Brandon discussed. Plus, you know, we'll have some type of landscaping in there, but we'll work with the staff on what we're proposing for that. I guess at this point, that's all I've got. You got anything else? No, I don't, but we're here for you. If you have any questions on this project. Any questions from the applicant? Do you all have an agreement with the adjacent property? You're showing a drive-out pointed at a property line. You're talking about the one to the south? It's connecting over to the health clinic. Oh, no, we do not have. Right now we're still in the discussions with them, and they have not given us a written agreement yet. As you know, unfortunately, we can't make them allow us to do that. But they have told us they don't have an objection to this, and so we are moving forward with those discussions with them. But in either case, our intent is to build that service road and then when they come in for something, you guys can make them attach to us at that time. Sort of like we're doing the same thing on the south. Is that your intention? Are you proposing to build it or are you going to wait? No, we're proposing to build it and then curb it if we do not have. So essentially it would act as a turnabout spot. But our intent is to have this in place, this agreement in place. And we have no indications from them that we're not going to get this agreement from them. What we have seen with coffeehouses, they typically have two deliveries a week, and they bring a 53-foot semi to their site to make the deliveries. We're having a problem with these coffeehouses blocking roads. because of inadequate circulation for deliveries. Brand new one out there on Richmond Road, just up from the Panera where O'Charlie's used to be. They're pulling up on the frontage road and unloading typically in a three to five hours timeline. It's on Mondays and Thursdays. Every Monday and Thursday they make deliveries out there. Do you know what brand that is? I don't. Because I've got to be honest with you, I can't imagine how a 750-square-foot building would need five hours of deliveries. That just seems – but I'm not saying that's not true, but it seems – We've got plenty of photographs, trust me. But we've seen these with the coffeehouses. So I know 40 cars doesn't generate a warrant, but I think some kind of accommodations for figuring out what type of vehicle is going to be delivering here if you don't have that connection and the circulation pattern within the site for a delivery vehicle. We'll look at that. Yeah, we've done the turnaround for the fire station, so we'll do a similar. Yeah, that's not an issue. I've got a question. I guess, Matt, the property where Springs used to be, is that what's now Goodwill? No. That's Baptist Health. That's Baptist Health. I may be talking to the wrong place. I think at one time on one of the development plans, there was a Goodwill proposed in the back, and that never materialized. My question would be, not that you did it, but I'm kind of thinking that whole, when that corner got developed, the backside of it was elevated quite a bit. Is there a significant elevation change between your property and theirs now? Do you not? I don't think there was. I think when it was the Springs Inn, there may have been some grade changes in there, but I don't think now there is. All right. This area is higher than our area. Okay. But as we hear, we've looked at that. Okay. The only other thing I've got, Brandon said something on the back side. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And... I see. This is the... Right, but were you talking about the Goodwill area? Well, I was thinking that building on the side there was Goodwill. But my question just goes to the fact that... There is, but we're going to be able to. My question just goes to the fact that it seemed like there was a significant grade change when that was developed that got built up quite a bit, leaving the neighbors looking at nothing but a high elevated area. And, you know, I hate seeing that. I just don't want that to happen on down the road with, you know, your property being elevated, leaving the neighbors with a big berm to look at. Okay. And just to clarify, I didn't understand what area. I thought you were talking about the Goodwill area versus Mitchell Avenue. Yeah, we always look at things kind of one-dimensional, and I think we should look at it in a different type of manner, but that's another discussion. Brandon mentioned on the backside a possible 12-foot solid wall or fence. Oh, no, 8-foot fence, but the building would act. However, though, I mean, if the planning commission wants us to not build that building and leave it as green space because the elevations or other changes would be okay with that. The only thing I heard was I heard 12-foot fence. Yeah, yeah, no problem. Eight-foot solid fence. Okay. I heard eight-foot fence, and then I heard Mr. Martin say if the Planning Commission orders additional landscaping, And I'd like to see that as not just that back part, but heading toward Harrodsburg Road where it buffers up against those houses. I'd like to see additional landscape. So the two what appear to be houses in an aerial photograph that face Harrodsburg Road are not. They previously were houses, but they're now a daycare. So, okay, the ones on Springhurst. Yes. So any, basically... And to clarify, that was my point, is we will, those actual single-family residential units that are used for that purpose, we are open to discussions... To buffer the residential use, not zone. That's correct. Those residential uses, that's correct. I'd like to see that as a requirement, that landscaping... I guess 15 feet is what is required. the ordinance allows them to reduce it to five with a fence so if if it's your contention that the width is is very important then you can ask them to keep 15 feet and the required landscaping within there I think I think I'm probably gonna say yes but I know we have some neighbors here so maybe we should hear from them before I go back and raise that question okay thank you thank you appreciate it okay time for public comment I'm T Bergman I'm president of the neighborhood association that Spring Hearst and Spring Grove are part of, okay? And I was involved in the development of this whole piece of property where the Springs used to be, and I still live in that neighborhood. So I have some history, and I also can clarify, but I also, what Mr. Martin just passed out this morning is new to us, to me, and so I can't respond to everything, but you have brought up some areas of great concern for the neighborhood. So I'll just go over a couple of things. But one thing I think I should clarify, I'll do this also, maybe. You were just discussing what the incline is. I stood here on Sunday afternoon and I looked up and I that land here on the Baptist property is above my head the parking lot so you walk up an incline to get to that property if you were to, second point, if you were to put a connector in here, the neighborhood would go berserk. I tell you. That's not on the table. I know it's not on the table. I want you to, it should have been, whoa. We're talking about the property up here, so I think we need to direct our comments Now, let me respond to that. What you are doing, first of all, you may or may not know, this property here, this daycare center right here you have all the playground equipment all of it this is parking lot where the parents drop the children off so you're taking away the playground area then if you do this you are feeding no big deal that's not what they're proposing well they're proposing an entrance no no it's up front no all you have is this oh you're putting it here Right here? Yes, that's what's on the plane. Okay, there is access, but that's also another outlet straight on to Harrodsburg Road. So you would have an outlet here, you would have it here, and you would have it here. Seems like a disaster to me, but that's not the issue. What I want to ask is, is this connector here between Baptist, is that connector dead? It was on an initial plan that we talked last week, a technical, no longer being considered. Is that the one that they're going to put a curb until they get approval from Baptist to connect it? So they, at this point in time, this... It's on the table. It's on the table. Okay. It hasn't been approved. Okay. Yes, I understand. And so what the developer is asking you to approve this, send this forward, without that approval with Baptist. And so if I understand you, you're proposing a connector here, right here, and you'll have an in and out right here, and you'll have an in and out right here and an in and out right up here. Okay? The buffer. Oh, let me talk a little bit about stormwater. I'm glad that this is an issue that is going to be considered completely because I want to know why the city does not require more permeable parking. and this whole, when you look at that lot and how much is going to be black topped, it's amazing. I would say at least 80 to 90% is going to be building or blacktop. And that's all going to go into the existing stormwater drainage there. I don't know that if, I don't understand all the stormwater, but you're adding a lot of water. And we did have problems with Harrodsburg Road flooding when this drainage was put in. If you make the connector between Baptist and this development, you are putting that connector, I believe, right over that drainage area where that stormwater connector is. so I think the stormwater issue needs some consideration long talk I'm glad you're also talking about the buffer the developer, the engineer has talked about the fact that there are two coffee shops McDonald's and the human being down the road neither one of those backs right up to a residential home. These coffee shops, the Dutch Brothers, open at 5 in the morning. And you're going to put people, two lanes of cars, coming in here and circling back out again. At 5 in the morning, they go until 10 or 11 at night. There's going to be lighting. We agreed there will be no music, fortunately. So another issue we have. Oh, one more question. What you approved today, if this is you're asking or they're proposing a single floor building, two buildings, is that going to be permanent or 10 years from now or five years from now when the coffee shop fails? Can it go to a two-story automatically? No? Yeah, amendments. It would have to come back to you, somebody. To the Division of Planning, most likely, but not necessarily the Planning Commission. Okay. I'm just suggesting maybe you could put something in here that would limit it to a single story at this point in time. One more question or one more concern I have. You've got at the retail building at the back, you've got a patio there. To me, that says food, a bar, a drink. Why do people sit outside on a patio if they're buying, I don't know, shoes or they're at a bank? Well, you've put a patio right next to the back lot there on Spring Grove. That means somebody can sit out there and talk until 10, 11 at night or play music. Those are my concerns, and I know we've got a lot. I think we have a meeting on the 11th with somebody. No, not 11 o'clock at night. I'm talking about 11 o'clock during the day, and I assume that's when we can put some of these things in more concrete. Thank you for your time. All right. Thank you. I'm Amy Clark at 628 Castle Road, and you know I'm not a neighbor in this case, although I support all that the neighbors have expressed as concerns, and I'm glad to know there's ongoing discussion. I'd like to know how far along we are on complete streets. Do we have the guidelines in place and do these meet the guidelines for complete streets? This would be a corridor and you're proposing an in and out here for a relatively high traffic use where people are not really parking and going inside. They're just grabbing coffee on the go or whatever drink. It concerns me very much that the cross-access easement is not agreed to with Baptist Health. It may happen. It may not. It should at least be a condition of approval that there be that cross-access. It concerns me that there's nothing. If you had cross-access there, you would be trying to make it function sort of like a proper B6P, something that had an integrated circulation and access. But it's very different to say, well, we can get from one lot to the next, but we each have access to the street. and to say we have organized the traffic circulation for maximum safety and traffic management of the best sort. What we're not seeing any of is residential on a major corridor. It sounds as though the building in the back is something that, if I heard him right, the applicant is willing to do. with altogether. It's just something to sort of puff up the FAR, I guess. I'm not really sure about that. It sounds like that's what I heard. But it's residential we're hurting for, and especially on major corridors. and what they're offering is a building very close to the neighboring residential on the whole corner there, two sides, and I totally agree that there should be a requirement of a 15-foot landscape buffer rather than the wall option or fence option. And I also would question how close to the rear of that building one could plant trees. And there is an issue of a utility easement and overhead electrical, and you can't plant trees there, as the applicant has already mentioned. So the buffering is looking exiguous at best, definitely not what's needed. and so that building doesn't look like the right size or placement to be part of a neighborhood here. Since there is residential all around the rear and to the south, what you have now is an opportunity to move from a neighborhood-serving serving and larger regional serving health facility, a clinic, an urgent treatment clinic, to a higher density residential and then tapering down to houses. You are concerned with only the subdivision plan, so that kind of reaches in the wrong direction. But the problems with the development plan are that the access in no way really is proper for a complete street. Thank you. Thank you. Would the applicant like to respond? Thank you very much. And based upon the last two commenters, you can see why we have a hard time, applicants, on getting everything that needs to be done and checking off all the boxes that everyone wants for every single development. I am here to answer any questions. if anything was raised from those comments that you want to hear more about I will say that we are trying to do what the Planning Commission has asked on projects we are even though we do not have necessarily right now the cross we are access agreement we are looking toward the future so that that is available in the future if those properties get redeveloped in the future which would have been helpful if when the Springs was developed that was already there it's unfortunately it is not there so we are trying to make that opportunity available as to the corridors you know we just went through the urban growth boundary Zota the urban growth boundary so does it more more or less as this type of use we want to push out of our neighborhoods and onto our highways we want to have more our more intense uses on our major corridors that's what we're trying to do and then as to the residential we had two speakers one said we need to go up with residential the other one said i want a one-story building um so we're we're trying to do play within the rules that are there trying to bring a service to the city. Right now, I can tell you, as you guys know, Dutch Brothers has tried to find every single spot possible in this city to put things. We are doing infill and redevelopment all over the city, but what that unfortunately means is it's not the best lots that are infill and refill. It is the last of the worst is what we are dealing with. We have issues with trees that need to be saved. We have issues with grade changes. We have issues with these are normally close to waterways or flooding areas. These are not pristine lots. This is not necessarily the lot that Dutch Brothers would prefer to have. It is the lot that is available on this corridor. If you go from the corner of Virginia and South Broadway where they try to get approved, You can go all the way out to Jake Reardon's lot past Man of War where the Greers and Reardon is developing. That's the next section that has any available land for redevelopment currently on the market. So if you have questions or concerns regarding the comments, I'm here to address them. We want to work with the neighbors. We want to work with you. Dutch Brothers is open to modifications on certain things if there are safety concerns or other items that you want to address. But we're just trying to push this forward within the rules of the zoning ordinance and trying to bring a service and a use to the community that we have said as a community we want on our corridors, not within our neighborhoods. you all are meeting on the 11th you're meeting with the yes ma'am i believe it's scheduled at july 11th at 6 p.m at the good food co-op and we have invited um miss bergman's neighborhood we have let ken cook know with wolf run we have um i'm not sure which neighborhood gabe knowles is with Spring Ridge. As you guys know, I live next to Lafayette High School. I'm in this shopping center once a week. So this is in my footprint of where I live. I use the CVS. I've got teenagers, so unfortunately we're at McDonald's once a week driving through for them. Not my personal taste in food, but they seem to like it. And so, you know, I grew up on Stratford. This is in my area. I've been talking with these neighbors and we're trying to come to reasonable accommodations to alleviate or mitigate their concerns. All right. Thank you. I don't know if this is for you. Do you? I've gotten confused about the number of entrances and exits onto Harrodsburg and where they're going. Can we get a restatement of what's proposed? Here's what we are currently proposing. Right now, there is a driveway that is located at this location. We want to move our entrance here. It would be a write-in, write-out only with a controlled median here. What we're proposing is we have this stubbed to act as a service road if and when these properties ever get redeveloped into a commercial use. We are going to curb this. There will not be any, with our plan, there will not be any traffic going to this neighbor's and through this existing circular driveway. So we will curb this. We are in discussions with Baptist Health. We believe we're going to get an agreement with Baptist Health. At the bare minimum, we are going to build this, curb it, so when one of these other projects come in, this can be connected into the future at a bare minimum. So worst case scenario, we would have a write-in, write-out. Best case scenario, write-in, write-out, plus we would have this cross-access. And one of the neighbors actually told me two things. Number one, they don't want this cross-access because we'll be burying the water. And they also told me they don't want this cross-access because then traffic can go to these other exits. So the neighbors aren't consistent on whether or not they want this cross-access. But that's the plan. The plan is, at the end of the day, worst-case scenario, right in, right out, with these built for future use, but we plan on having this as part of this project. Thank you for that. Any other questions? Comments? All right, thank you. Thank you very much. And we agree with the staff's revised report and the conditions set forth therein, and we look forward to talking with the staff regarding their concerns on the place builder. So thank you. Thank you. So I would like to add to the conditions that that landscape buffer be 15 feet, not the minimum, that it be the 15 feet buffer, any place where this abuts residential. Madam Chair, I know my time is up. Could I suggest that we add that as a condition to discuss so that we could sit down and look at how we can tweak our plan? But then that way we can move forward. But it will have to be addressed between now and the Planning Commission meeting in a few weeks. Discuss as in do it or not do it? Or what do you mean by discuss? Well, on discuss, I've got to make sure we've got the right distancings for, I mean, we don't mind putting in the 15, but I've got to sit down and look to see how does that affect the overall operations. and could we possibly, for example, just as an example, discuss it to where maybe we can only do 10 feet, but we could do extra landscaping within that 10 feet to give us the flexibility between now and your planning commission to talk with staff to say, okay, here are the rules. This is what we have to plant. Can we possibly achieve the same spirit of what you want, but not necessarily be stuck at the 15 foot. Or do you have the option of moving the building further into the lot so you've got enough space for the 15? And we could also try to do that. My point is I would like it to be, if you don't mind, a discussion point that we know we have to get resolved. What are you all thinking? I tend to agree with it being a discussion point. Okay. Thank you, ma'am. What have you all put down in the wording on that? Discuss Article 18, 15-foot landscape requirement, or what? Do you need to modify number eight? Yeah, I was just going to say that. Condition number eight sort of addresses some of the thoughts we had just suggested for discussion, which are towards the rear of the building but it sounds like now we're also discussing along the southern edge of the property where it adjoins residential yes yeah so I would I would suggest modifying it to discuss article 18 landscape buffer requirements and just more generically adjoining residential land use Yeah, right. Tom said the utility aspect of that would fall within the discussion. Okay. So this is a preliminary development plan, right, that we're looking at here. So there can be changes down the road. All right. Under those circumstances, then, I will move for approval of PLNMJDP 2442 Springhurst Subdivision Unit 2 with the 10 attached conditions changing number 8 to discuss Article 18 landscape buffer requirements and utility easement conflict adjacent to R1C. I can't read my writing. Adjacent to residential land or units. I can't read what I've written there. Adjoining residential land. Adjoining residential land. I think we can cross out when we start with and utility easement. I think we can strike all of that. And so it says discuss Article 18 landscape buffer requirements, adjoining residential land use. Okay. A little bit more concise. What'd she say? I'll second. All right. All in favor? Aye. Unanimous. Okay. Excuse me. Can we take like a five-minute break? Whatever your pleasure is, Madam Chairman. Tom, before we leave that, could I ask you a question? Down the road, do you all envision that being a service road that connects all the way down to that, whatever that cross street is? I can't read. If those two houses go, yeah, a service road off Cairnsburg Road going all the way down. We would. Thank you. So potentially then you've got the whole, what is that street that's, I can't read. Springhurst. From Springhurst all the way into the Baptist development. I'm going to take a picture of it. So these are the people you need to see what's in the print. If you'll ask them, they'll help you out. I'm a commission member, not a staff member. That's all right. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. . Thank you. a situation. That's all. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Thank you all. Let's get these last two. Okay, Madam Chairman, members of the committee, we are ready to move on down. Page 7, item B. This is a development plan 24-43 for Suburban Point Park expansion. Oops. The heck? I'm not doing that. I have no idea. Oh, they're in the back. I see. We got tech crews in the back. I got you. Yeah, we're going to head to Price Road. Ah, look at there. Oh, bald eagle, isn't that lovely? So here we are. We're out on Price Road, which of course runs between West Main over around the Georgetown Road. Price Road does. And there's a mobile home park that exists in the area. It's been there for quite a few years, as you all are well aware. It's been there for a long time. And this is a proposed expansion of that park. And of course, that's somewhat unusual. You don't see that. In our community, we have very specific site recommendations for mobile home parks. Most of them that exist would be non-conforming. They're in areas where they don't meet the site requirements. On the other hand, this is a nice big park, and they're requesting this expansion that you can see here. Now, they have a lot of connections they have to make. Let me have their back up. Here we go. particularly they have connections here and here from streets. They have a connection here from streets into the adjoining neighborhood. And then, of course, they have access shown here on the Price Road, which is in this location, and then maintaining access, there we are, into the existing mobile home park. They're going to tie the whole thing together. They're showing 55 double-wide lots. These are for double-wide manufactured homes. This is a community center with adjacent parking. They've got a lot of recreational facilities that they are showing. They're trying to improve the amenities through the entire park with this. This is the existing pond that they're going to utilize as part of their stormwater control system. Rumor has it there's a catfish in that pond that can eat a small child. This is an existing barn in a maintenance area. It's fenced for the development. There's a little bit of a close-up again. There are some trees in this area. There's the pond. You can see a close-up of the lotting and the pattern that they're proposing to serve the expansion of the park. Now, the technical committee reviewed this, and we have fairly standard conditions for a preliminary development plan. And, of course, with the urban county engineer traffic, urban forester, green space, department of environmental quality, they need to clarify the meets and bounds of the property area to be rezoned. And again, that's just, as we say there, clarify it's hard to read the meets and bounds along around the property that's being rezoned. Some of that is, some of that's meets and bounds is actually of the literal property as it adjoins adjacent property and then internal to the site because as you know they're required to survey the area that they're rezoning. And it's just a matter of clarifying that. That's an easy fix. They need to denote their floor area ratio and lot coverage requirements for Article 21. They're not going to actually subdivide and sell these lots, so it's not a preliminary subdivision plan. It's a final development plan or a preliminary for a mobile home park expansion. And so Article 21 requires FAR and lot coverage numbers. They just need to add that to the statistics. You can see it's pretty wide open. There should not be any kind of issue with that. It's just numbers that are required per Article 21. Denote the minimum landscaping and screening buffer dimension of 10 feet. They indicate buffers, and that's nice. They indicate areas, buffer areas, and that sort of thing. Well, they need to indicate the minimum there. Again, it's back to us to the past discussion we just had about landscaping. You have to demonstrate you can meet it, and that's what we're looking for here. They can. They should. There was a discussion about stormwater management. Again, this is a preliminary, and it's a matter of coordinating this large site, existing systems. The pond is detention. It drains out. So they'll utilize how they're going to utilize that, how they're going to utilize the system as it leaves the pond and drains across the property. These are just stormwater issues that just need to be worked out with the Division of Engineering and water quality relative to not just their functionality, but whether or not easements are required and that sort of thing. Because ultimately, a lot of this water, you know, when it enters our system, it becomes public water. And there's some question, too, again, is there public water now utilizing the existing drainage patterns? So, again, it's a technical issue of addressing how it will function. the price road improvements again it's an old rural road it's a small road without any improvements so we we'd like to discuss the possibility of adding improvements along the price road price road frontage and the impact of those types of improvements it's important to remember I think you all heard me say this before that our our streets aren't just streets for traffic, but they're also literally defined as part of our stormwater system. So, you know, you put curb and gutter in and that sort of thing, you've got to talk about the ramifications because they collect water and they take it somewhere. So, again, we have to look at what those road improvements will imply. We have place builder criteria that's going to come up here shortly. There's some discussion about the connections in the streets and whether or not they're going to be public, private. They're currently calling them private streets, which means they'll maintain them. It makes sense. The rest of the system in the park, of course, has always been a private access system to the mobile homes. There's a few issues associated with that in terms of parking along a private street, people backing into it. and those are relatively minor issues, but things would need to be addressed depending on exactly what type of street system they go forward with. They could come back and request these to be access easements, for instance, which you all would then have to act on and could impose standards and requirements if you felt that was necessary. But the technical committee did review this and recommend approval to you, and Daniel is going to talk place builder. So to start off with the public engagement on this particular site, when staff generated their staff reports, there had not been any public meetings that have taken place. Mr. Nicholson here has informed me that they have a public meeting planned for the end of the month, and so that information will be kind of forthcoming with that. As far as sort of how we're viewing this site, This is pretty much a textbook enhanced neighborhood. You've got existing residential areas that are being improved with added connectivity, sidewalk facilities. So really improving the pedestrian experience, providing low density residential, which is recommended for this type of area. And so really staff looked at the connections, the green space, the added sort of pedestrian feel, and we'll be recommending approval later on this afternoon. But we found the police type, development type, and development criteria were appropriate in this case. And happy to answer any questions relating to those. And I'll have my full song and dance at 1.30 this afternoon. Any questions for staff at all? Okay. Good morning. I will be fairly quick. Since we weren't able to get the neighborhood meeting scheduled until kind of the end of the month, we've already agreed to postpone at the end of the month to make sure that the neighborhood has plenty of time to kind of understand what is going on. In talking with them, not surprising, the biggest concern is the connections, the road connections. We did previously kind of had prepared a plan that basically put hammerheads to stub all of the streets in order for them not to be connections. But in talking with staff, it was important to go ahead and connect all of the existing sub-streets. And so I have a feeling that will be the major point of conversation when it comes from the neighborhood's perspective. As far as the improvements to Price Road, we are showing a sidewalk along Price. To the south of this property, there is not an existing sidewalk. to the immediate north it appears that someone dug up the sidewalk and because you can still see kind of where it was but they got they got rid of it but we're going to you know make sure that that a sidewalk kind of exists on our property there's concerns with regards to the curb and guttering there because it would require us to take out a lot of significant trees and we kind of you know are treating it similar to how you see us when dealing with the historic stone fences that we would rather keep the trees along this area as opposed to putting a curb and guttering system but still providing kind of a pedestrian improvements in order to make sure that we are adding to the system. I am happy to answer any kind of questions. These proposed pads are more of a kind of modernization of the types of units that are kind of currently done as opposed to what was done when this development was originally done in the 60s the property owner just purchased this property back in 2022 and has been trying to kind of essentially clean up the park and that's why one of the big deficiencies here is there wasn't any type of amenity areas whatsoever and they were kind of as you can see they're much closer together kind of this is where the existing these are the existing ones you can see they are much closer together than as opposed to what we are kind of proposing these are much larger kind of much larger lots that we are going to be hopefully installing this kind of all came about from the Department of Water Quality conversations there are a lot of existing kind of stormwater or not stormwater but sanitary overflows in this area and this is one of the last pump stations that needs to be basically upgraded and so they kind of reached out to the property owner in order to kind of start this conversation about installing kind of new infrastructure taking the existing kind of insufficient pump station offline and building a kind of new facility in order to help solve any of the sanitary overflows so that's kind of where all of this this kind of came about this parcels currently actually split zoned it's part of the mobile home park itself the actual property and that's one of the reasons why we have to clarify what exactly we are zoning because it is kind of a split zone property of this kind of more vacant area in the park itself but I'm happy to answer any questions so these are all be rental units so you you purchase the units itself but you are then renting the kind of the spot so this is actually allowing for homeownership while kind of renting the individual pads Is that the case with the original? Yes, it is. It is? Interesting. Very clean. So are these on a permanent foundation? Yes. So they build in the pads with infrastructure into the units itself. Is this what we call manufacturing housing? Basically, yes. Modular manufacture. Okay. I'm still a little confused. Yes. So I guess my question to us is, are we in a position to look at this plan and approve if you're still going to do some work on the connectivity issues? Well, I mean, this is the plan that we are kind of moving forward to. I wanted to go ahead and give you all a preview of what the biggest concern is that we have heard from the neighborhood, is that they are not a fan of these road connections. because of the use, and I certainly understand why that would be of concern. We also have put a big emphasis on connectivity. It is not the first time the Planning Commission will hear this kind of concern. It certainly won't be the last. So it looks like there's about five streets? There's three into the existing neighborhood. everything else is just the connections into the existing park. So there are three streets that are part of the St. Martin's neighborhood that we are proposing to connect. Okay, coming in from that way. Okay. Okay. All right. Any other questions for the applicant? Any public comment? Okay. Thank you. Public comment? Come forward. I just have a quick question about what is there now. Excuse me, could you kind of start over? Sorry. My only question is what is there now? Start with your name. Again, Carla Rodriguez. I live, I have two residences in this fair city. I was born here. Moved away for 30 years to practice dentistry in eastern Kentucky. came back here to care for my 90-year-old parents. So anyway, I'm just curious, what is there now? I assume it's a big green space. Are any of the neighbors in the area opposed? Well, they're having the meeting later this month. End of July. Thank you. All right, thank you. Okay. All right. We'll bring you back to committee. Madam Chair, hearing that this may get postponed anyway, but my recommendation here would be for approval of plan MJDP 24-43 suburban point park expansion with the 13 conditions. Second. Okay, we move and second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. All right. Unanimous. Hey, Jacob, your agenda. I want to hear you develop a plan 24-45 of Vernon and Ross. It's like Chicago. The theatrical production. Anyway, okay, so, okay, go right ahead, please. Okay, this property is, this is Pasadena, Stone Road. We're off the south end of Lexington, so Pasadena. Nicholson Road is down this way. Harrodsburg Road is out this way. Pasadena. They're not going to have access onto Pasadena, but off of Hillendale. Here's Hillendale that connects all the way over here. This is Sunseeker. At the end of Sunseeker off of Pasadena, you'll see there's a driveway to get in here because this is the only way to get into Sunseeker property. This being, they had a stub into this property so that when this property came in, they would connect up to the other side of Hillendale. And we also had a development here of some single family homes some years ago at the end of Eastway. So Eastway was stubbed into this piece of property also. So we'll have all these stubs now being connected together. They're coming in to create 11 townhomes. They're wanting to rezone from an R1C to an R1T so that they can create the townhomes. the townhomes. We have on this side here we had Leland. We had seven townhomes and they're under construction at the current time. I think they have several of them complete, but they're still completing the last few. But we're coming in for these down here. It's a little bit closer up of the townhomes. And then you can see where it fits into the whole neighborhood. And you can see the connection here to Sunseeker. When these connections here are made from this stub into here and into this stub, it It is on the record plat for these properties for this connection to Pasadena to be closed. And then that way, then they can create a single family home on this lot. But we're working on this here. I just wanted to say that because of the connectivity on the property. They gave us a revised plan. And so the first few conditions are our typical sign-offs and the approval of the council. We also had some cleanup conditions, addition of proposed and existing easements. Addition of building line setback on Pasadena and Hill and Dale because they do have frontages. The property has frontage on these roads, so therefore we need to show our setbacks. Modify driveway locations to achieve driveway pairing as required in Article 16-5. go back here, they show a couple of the lots being paired, but like these are missing, they're not paired here, and then down here on the bottom they paired the two in the center. Just question if there was any way to pair those other two. Discuss the purpose of the remnant tract north of Hillandale. On this the property boundaries go across and they cross back over here so Hillandale cuts through and leaves this portion here left as part of the property with it cutting being cut off by Hillandale we were just questioning what they were going to use that for like an open space a park area or something for the neighbors discuss waiver of public street frontage and providing the vehicle turnaround on site, discuss connection to adjoining townhome development on the Rolly-Bishop Carroll property, discuss timing of street connectivities. So all of these we're just curious as to when we were showing this as a stub here from Leland and we didn't know for if there was any way to to connect these through, have another alternative connection into here. The public street frontage vehicle turnaround and then I guess the street connectivity is when it's going to accomplish. It'll have to be done prior to the COs on the new townhomes. that yeah but with that I'll open it to you the committee see if there's any other comments or questions this is hold on until we have public comment okay any questions for staff okay all right Oh, sorry, place builder. Sorry, Dan. Yeah, so for this particular site, in terms of public input or comment, the applicant hasn't provided any of that information as of yet. they note in their letter that they anticipate doing so but we have not received anything on the staff's end or any indication when that meeting may be but in terms of sort of the place builder much like the last application this is sort of formatted in the same way as an existing neighborhood that is going to be provided additional connections and connectivity and then providing kind of additional housing stock within that so low density in this location is appropriate they're providing kind of those connections walkability and really kind of completing this last section of roadway that's been anticipated for some time now. But staff will be kind of diving into that a little bit more detail later on this afternoon but be happy to answer any kind of questions you may have on the place builder side of things. Any questions? Okay now we're ready for the applicant. first I'd like to address neighborhood meeting we have not met with the neighborhood yet but I did before this meeting started I talked to Steve Justice and he's here today too and he'll be talking but they're having a meeting on June 18th and we would I'm sorry July 18th and we want to attend that meeting with them, and I'll let you guys know at the city for sure, and then if you all want to attend. As far as the property to the north, the little sliver, the developer, he hasn't said anything in particular he wants to do with it. So there's a couple options. One, it could just be turned into part of the HOA on the lot. The lot's too small to be a developable lot. So another option would be just make the right-of-way bigger through there. I don't know if traffic would be willing to take on more land. And another option would be they could work out some deal with the adjoining property owner and see if they were interested in it, and then they could consolidate it into their property. So we have some options, but at a minimum we could make it an HOA, and it could just be a small landscaped area. Looking at the plan Some of the items like Adjoining driveways where possible There's several places where we can do that We'll flip those units and make that change The connection the existing townhomes that are under construction, this connection here is what what staff brought up is why don't we connect it in here and then when this was designed we needed to get this area to drain out to our detention which is down in this area. So this was pitched up in elevation and you can see these contours here it drops off quite a bit so it does become difficult to get the grades to work out but it is something I might look into further see if it's possible we could we could split these units up to where they match how these are split up we wouldn't lose any units it'd still be the same but currently this is an old this is the plan we originally filed but we've uploaded a new one to Acela that has similar to a turnaround here we've got a turnaround right in here for the emergency vehicles in the garbage truck. Timing of street connections. How do you zoom out or just go back? Okay. So our street connections are existing Hillendale. Is this Eastway right here? Yeah. Here. And then is this Sunseeker here? Yeah, so we have to make this connection here and this connection here. This will be a public street with sidewalks. And the plan is as we're building the site, we'll just build the road. It'll just be part of the project. So the timing-wise, they'll all be built at the same time. And that's kind of similar to what was done up here. The first thing that was done was the road was graded out, cut to grade, and then we'll do the same thing. It'll just be part of the overall grading and construction of the project. We won't ask for any kind of COs until the road is platted and dedicated. Other than that, if you have any questions for me, I'll be glad to answer any. Any questions? Right now, Matt, did I hear you say that there's been a new plan that you uploaded onto Acela? Yes. Not this one, but a new plan. It was a new, and really the only difference is it addressed some of the, well, this has the review comments on it, so they reviewed the current plan, I mean the revised plan, and it's just not the same one, but it's just slightly different. Hopefully cleaning up some of this stuff. Oh, yeah. Yeah, that's what you're talking about. Okay, thank you. Yes. Okay, any additional questions? All right, thank you. Thank you. All right, now we'll have public comment. Yes, can I speak from back here? No, you must come in. Thank you. Steve Justice. I live on Eastway Drive. I'm speaking for the residents on Hillendale, Eastway, Sunseeker, and a couple on Pasadena. Approximately 200 flyers passed out, and so far they've asked me to talk for them. Did I hear that, number one and number two, that the property itself was changed to business already? No. Okay. Our concern, one of our concerns is that it's a very complicated property and a project. And our neighborhood on the 13th of June got notification via neighborhood meeting. And then we passed out information. I did. And we just haven't had time to discuss it. We have a meeting plan for the 18th. There's some members that are out. Traffic was out. Y'all's traffic engineers were out all last week. So we're behind on able to get information together and actually to talk about what's going on. I am hoping to get a postponement just to get that done. I have a concern. if you when was the Tom you're familiar with this area the property that was being developed right now that one when did they put grant when did they start digging on now I was thinking it was like six months been recent okay uh we want to work with the the development uh we're hoping for a three-way win neighbors neighborhood the city and the uh developer it all goes smooth but there are concessions that have to be worked out and we have to think about what do what what needs to be done to make it coherent to the neighborhood and so presently if you see next to the development i put three pictures the land that's in question is the is the green space there it's better to ask forgiveness than to ask permission this process is asking permission now that's what the property looks like now there's another one down below there that's what that green space looks like right now we've got to stop the construction being done so that as far as I know there's only permit is the water sanitary sewer systems is only project that should be working along there and I don't know what the connection is between the existing development that's that was Doug and other one but what they're doing they were using Hill and oh this is Hill and oh they're not supposed to have access to that that gate was open they were running trucks through there and everything else engineering talked to them to stop but what they're doing is coming off this driveway that you see it through the bottom right-hand corner that is the new development and they're running Bobcats up the side of the sidewalk and dumping everything on the property so they're piling up the mounds of dirts that you see and then they're well we're just cleaning up the dirt piles that we've made well no they're grading them while they're doing it did that it makes sense because kind of shifted my gears here Red River Gorge was supposed to be a daggone lake and if they'd start digging for the dam it would still be a lake but there's a process they've got to stop working uh the uh and uh okay do you have anything to add about this particular project that's being proposed uh the traffic's going to be the big issue we can work things out the traffic's going to be the big issue it's going to boil down to the eastway connection it can either be drugged out by 200 supporters or or it could easily be digging dirt as quick as the process goes the Eastway connection is going to be your big problem and there's other things to work out but we need time yes and and you'll have your meeting on the 18th the 18th we're gonna have a meeting And that will be prior to it coming back to the full commission, right? Yeah, that will be. But you know how neighborhood meetings go. You get a bunch of people together and the ideas flow in on the 18th and then we have to dig it out. I haven't even received my own letter in the mail yet. Anyway, that was it. Okay. All right. Thank you. Does the applicant want to respond to anything? I just want to clarify. They're not building anything on the adjoining site. What's going on is they literally have no room left on their site, and he's staging his construction equipment parked on the other site, so they are driving back and forth. I'm sure the guys on the have probably dumped a few bucket loads of dirt, but engineering has issued an NOV to them for that, and they're taking care of it. But there is no construction over there. It's just staging. I mean, no plans have been done. We're at the very beginning of the process. So it's just simply staging is all the staging for the townhomes that they're currently building. But, again, engineering has addressed that with the owner. Okay. All right. Thank you. All right, committee. Oh, we have another public comment. I'm sorry. No. Carla Rodriguez so I live on Sunseeker and I walk through the area every morning on my walk when it rains there's an awful lot of water that comes I don't really know where it comes from but it flows into a ditch beside Sunseeker I mean, excuse me, beside Eastway into a preserve area, a wooded preserve area. It's hard for me to imagine what's going to happen with the water when all this concrete goes in. I think it's going to flood eastway. I know that the existing, it's not really sewer, but the existing runoff water isn't really adequately being handled now. So we love our little preserve area. I would hate to see it turned into a big concrete holding tank for more sewer water. I don't know. It's going to be an issue. Thank you. Anybody want to respond to any of that? Or staff? Staff. I mean, that's... I mean, I believe what she's referring to is current conditions. There's a lot of water runoff. and I'm sure it runs down Sunseeker. But go ahead. First of all, there's a combination of storm sewers in that area when Sunseeker was built along with the extension of Eastway. There's also a surface drainage from what is known as the Eastway seep. that is a spring that rose up in the property. It is now contained within a box, a spring box, they call them, under Eastway. So the spring water flows up, and then it flows out, and it flows out into that little green area, which is intended to be dedicated to the Lexington and Urban County government. It is part of the stormwater system, but it was protected as an environmentally sensitive area. it was protected by a gentleman by the name of Tom Martin who lived right next to it for 20 years. And that was before we had environmental people. And I went and said, because I appreciate what this woman said, is I go, I don't want that area to be a big old detention basin because it works as part of the stormwater system, and yet it was also an incredible environmental area. I know this doesn't matter to a lot of people, but I had crawdad castles in my yard, and I thought that was wonderful. Okay, but that's me. I had wetland flowers that would bloom in my backyard that I just was in love with. So it's important that that area be protected. And really, their stormwater will have to be detained and then let off at a controlled rate into the stormwater system. And so there's a combination there of that. And, of course, that water from that, it was an old farm pond. It was a spring-fed farm pond. It flows out along the railroad track. What they discovered some years ago, that the flooding issues on the other side of the railroad track had to do with the basin that was built along Regency Road when the Webbs developed their office building there. In fact, I stopped a guy on my property one day because I asked him, what are you doing here? And he was a state guy, and he was looking at the spring. and then a consultant was looking at the flooding issues and they discovered the railroad had created the majority of the problems through there along with that other basin that just never seemed to hold any water. But this development shouldn't aggravate that. They follow the requirements. Right. We'll be putting in infrastructure that will intercept the water that's currently unchecked going that way. So we'll be making improvements. Great. Thank you. Matt, do you know if the developer is working with the, I mean, obviously you haven't had a meeting, but is the developer considering some kind of traffic calming to address the concerns along Eastway that this has been brought up? I would anticipate. It hasn't been brought up to us, but when we meet, if that's a concern, if we need to incorporate something into it, now's the time. Okay. All right. Thank you. Okay. Go ahead real quick. on the storm water uh situation uh southland drive and derby derby uh road is now under it connects to this and the storm sewer project and they're buying properties and everything has that been addressed with the engineering department advisor have you been in are you aware of what's going on on southland drive and derby derby drive that's connected to our storm project yeah yeah yeah oh I was gonna catch you while you were up here because it was actually a pretty simple question because okay I know it's a multi-million million dollar problem they're trying to work out if anybody knows anything about it it's been ongoing and a lot of work has been done that stormwater project was part of the money from our consent decree issues and as you may recall you had a report done about the stormwater all those stormwater projects are basically complete there is a sanitary sewer extension that's that's still being done down through that area but they have addressed a lot of the stormwater issues downstream through there in that area. And I believe it should be, if not complete, very close to completion. The work that I've seen in the area is related to the sanitary sewer replacement line that they're doing down through there. Okay. All right. Well, with that, let's bring it back to the committee. Madam Chair, everybody knows my feelings. On 22 conditions, it sounds like there's been a... Oh, wait a second. Yeah, it's revised. Yeah, that's what he... They did revise it. It's just Matt mentioned he added something else. I'm sorry. And put it in a salad, which is not part of our revision. I'm sorry. I was looking at 22 conditions. Never mind. I would, with that being said, I'll move for recommendation of approval of Plan MJDP 24-45, Vernon and Roxy Harris. property with the now 14 conditions. I would just note it's a preliminary development plan. I apologize. Our header there says final, but it's preliminary. Okay. Thanks. All right. Second. Okay. We'll move and second. All in favor? Aye. Unanimous. If I may, one follow-up, just comment. We can discuss more at a later time. but this is at least second or third under place builder criteria where, like, well, we still have not met with the neighbors. We've got a meeting set up at the end of the month. If I'm not mistaken, those meetings are supposed to be early on in the process, and I think we should provide some sort of accent to make sure that starts happening more often than not. But, like I said, we can discuss that another time. Okay. We have anything else? Tom, I don't think we had any revised plans on the postponed and continued items. Okay. So the only other thing is a staff item, and that's a text amendment for the Division of Environmental Services. And Eve does have staff reports for that if you would like to see those or discuss for a few minutes. If not, the zoning committee will discuss it this afternoon. It would just be understaffed. We normally share with you a text amendment, just so you're aware that those are coming. We can email it to you, of course. Yeah, actually, yeah, let's do that. Yeah. I can forward that. Oh, yeah. Okay. Okay. Thank you, Cheryl. All right. Well, I guess we've got it. I think we're all about done. Sorry to hold you up all this. All right. Okay. All right. Well, thank you. no other business in this meeting's adjourned. Thank you.